After urging to “rectify” the practice of calling each other “boss” and “second in command” within the military, the Chinese Communist Party’s military newspaper has once again published an article criticizing soldiers for addressing each other in ways considered “inappropriate and not in line with regulations.” For example, referring to a chief’s secretary as “big secretary” and calling for senior officers to take the lead in correcting these behaviors. The article from the military newspaper has once again sparked ridicule among internet users.
According to the article published on October 27 by the Chinese Communist Party’s military newspaper, during visits to grassroots units, instances were found where new soldiers would refer to older soldiers as “captain” regardless of their actual rank within the unit. Some soldiers were found to nickname a chief’s secretary as “big secretary” and referred to senior staff members as “senior staff,” among other similar instances.
The article pointed out issues such as mislabeling roles by referring to a deputy battalion commander as a battalion commander, and misrepresenting positions by calling a battalion staff officer a “department head,” etc. Other problems included randomly shortening full names, like referring to “Captain Wang” as “Captain Wang” instead of the correct form, and arbitrarily reducing the level of address by using just titles like “commander” instead of the full title “commander officer” and “assistant” instead of “assistant officer.” Another issue highlighted was the informal and colloquial language used within the military, such as addressing leaders as “boss” or “boss man” and referring to colleagues as “buddy” or “brother,” among others.
The author of the article believes that these informal forms of address, though attempting to show respect or closeness, can undermine the seriousness and formality required in military settings.
The article also emphasized that the military is a highly centralized and unified armed group, and standardized forms of address are necessary to maintain and enhance combat effectiveness. It stressed that leadership cadres should take the lead in correcting these improper forms of address.
The article published by the Chinese Communist Party’s military newspaper has led to mockery from overseas social media users:
“Should we call them servants.”
“The soldiers really don’t understand the system, they should call the Minister of National Defense, Dong Jun, as Lord Dong.”
“The characteristics of a society ruled by individuals, where laws are like toilet paper, everything revolves around relationships.”
“Officials are all called masters, secretaries are all called teachers, in the end, they are all just lords.”
“If not (a chief’s secretary), what should we call them, chief’s secret?”
“Should we call them mistresses?”
“Doing everything possible to hide among the masses.”
“What’s the signal?”
“Just like Hu Xijin reminds people in the system to make big money quietly, don’t speak out of turn.”
Previously, on July 15, the Chinese Communist Party’s military newspaper had already published an article stating the need to “rectify” the practice of calling each other “boss” and “second in command,” which also elicited ridicule from internet users.
On the overseas X platform, some internet users mocked this practice within the Chinese Communist Party’s military, believing that these reports from the military newspaper reflect the military’s fear of “warlordism” affecting Xi Jinping’s authority:
“There’s only one leader.”
“To prevent warlordism from appearing in the Chinese Communist Party’s military!”
“Accidentally exposing their bandit nature.”
“Only Xi Jinping can be called the one true leader.”
According to commentator Du Zheng’s analysis in《上報》, there have historically been factions and power struggles within the Chinese Communist Party’s military. Currently, there are relatively more high-ranking officers from Fujian, Shandong, Henan, and Shanxi provinces, forming cliques within the military.