"heroes and martyrs" is the English translation of 英雄烈士, which is not a generic term of praise in Chinese but specifically applies to someone who died in battle

"heroes and martyrs" is the English translation of 英雄烈士, which is not a generic term of praise in Chinese but specifically applies to someone who died in battle (or some similar act of bravery) — think acts worthy of Victoria Cross in UK or Purple Heart in US. Even people who worship Mao do not think of him as one of the "heroes and martyrs". In China you certainly can point out, even criticize, Mao's role in the Great Leap Forward. Even "Official History" criticizes Mao! You can't be too "over the top" about it, such as comparing him to Hitler or accuse him of being a mass murderer, lest you get cancelled. But the reason you can't has nothing to do with the draft laws being proposed here. > The closest you'd come is laws against Holocaust denial--but notice the key difference between a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a "good" person might have done something bad versus a law that makes it a crime to suggest that a bad deed never happened. If you make the first kind of claim and you are wrong, you falsely accuse an innocent person. If you make the second kind of claim and you are wrong, you unjustly exonerate a guilty person. Which is worse? I don't think there's a clear answer! So I fail to see the "key difference" you are trying to highlight between these kinds of claims. Of course, if one of them is true and the other false, then there's a clearly worse claim, but then the worse claim is worse because it's false, not because of the objectionable/offensive nature of its content.