Around June 4, rallies of various scales took place in Hong Kong, Taipei and New York. Participants raised radical demands over the political turmoil that happened 26 years ago in Beijing. Two US lawmakers also issued an open letter, demanding the Chinese government reassess the incident.

However, things are quiet on the Chinese mainland. The public has again followed the political tradition formed these years, which is no comment and no debate over the incident.

There is already an official conclusion over the upheaval, known in China as the "1989 political turmoil." The Chinese public's perception of the incident has weathered various changes and events in and out of the country. Although officials and the media seldom openly talk about the 1989 turmoil, an agreement has gradually taken shape.

The 1989 political turmoil happened not long before the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the drastic changes in Eastern Europe. Most of the Chinese people believe the ending of the 1989 turmoil was a watershed that marked the different destinations of China and the Soviet Union. Many feel lucky that China took a different path and avoided the fate of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.

On the Chinese mainland, the fierce emotions of many students and other activists of the 1989 incident have been dissolved by the country's later development and prosperity. Keeping quiet in public places about the 1989 turmoil has been accepted by the public as a political strategy to maintain social unity. Many are willing to keep this tradition.

Of course, in a society of China's size, it is inevitable that some people do not want to follow this rule. They are either political challengers or are eager to show their anti-mainstream stances. However, they are not necessarily people who represent the conscience of society, as they have claimed. They often have strong awareness of their individual interests.

The US, Hong Kong and Taiwan are the places where such "commemorations" take place most frequently.

Activists in recent "commemoration" rallies of the 1989 incident often comprise several groups. One group mainly includes "student leaders" who fled to the US and overseas political dissidents.

Their number has been dwindling, as many fugitives either began to lose interest in politics, or have changed their mind. Few people insist on their radical political ideas like 26 years ago.

The second group is a hodgepodge of those against the Chinese political system, including members of the Falun Gong cult, Tibetan separatists and Xinjiang separatists. They ally with those earlier political fugitives who sought a "democratic movement."

The third group consists of radicals in Hong Kong and Taiwan, and younger people who were born after the 1989 turmoil and consider street politics fashionable.

All in all, the progress China has made in the past 26 years is an undeniable fact, contrasted to a multitude of political tragedies that have taken place elsewhere in the world. That serves as a powerful reference frame to judge the political turmoil of 1989. It is taking effect by subtly influencing the public opinion on the turmoil. Radical voices from the West, Hong Kong and Taiwan can't compete with this frame of reference at all.

From Hong Kong and Taiwan to New York, addicts of June 4 apparently amused themselves by holding "commemorative activities" in the past few days, but they don't have any actual influence on the Chinese mainland. The organizers have parochial motivations, which are related to their own vested interests.

The Chinese public has seen through these people.