There are always controversies, and they are like the thermometer of society, measuring whether public opinion is moderate or not. Recently, a striking incident came to my attention – the famous writer Mo Yan was sued by an ordinary citizen. This event became the focus of discussion, around which a heated debate was launched among the multidirectional forces of society.
I can't help but wonder why there is such a strong social reaction when a literary giant is suddenly under judicial scrutiny. Among them, the group we call "public knowledge" and some authors and ** people are particularly active. They have always assumed the role of enlighteners, erecting moral and intellectual walls that should be followed, trying to embed their values deeply in society. 
Until then, they have gone to great lengths to instill in us the norms of so-called civilized society, such as the importance of the rule of law, the need for pluralistic voices, and the value of free criticism. However, when the ordinary public leader challenged authority with the ready-made legal system, the wall-builders seemed to have chosen to add bricks to their walls, their defenses turning into attacks, and verbal support turning into astonishing repulsion.
The conflict and opposition at this moment opened my eyes to a deep-seated phenomenon: when teachers who have been on the podium are forced to talk to their students, can they still insist on the tolerance and freedom taught in the teachings? Is the banner of the rule of law and freedom of expression genuinely waved, or is it just a temporary convenience and window dressing? 
When I think back to the widely circulated creeds, I cannot but question their sincerity. For example, the quote that was misattributed to Beaumarchais seems to have become something of mouth in this case. While shouting that everyone has the right to express their thoughts, opinions, and interests, they show a deep intolerance for the prosecution of civilians. 
This makes me wonder if we are equally willing to accept criticism from others while speaking out for freedom of criticism. In the arena of promoting the rule of law, are the legitimate actions of every individual equally worthy of respect and protection?
It also shows a process of ideological change. The younger generation of netizens seems to be open to Mo Yan's lawsuit, as if they are announcing a challenge to traditional authority and interpreting the awakening of a new generation of ideas through this act. Those who owe Mo Yan more often than others may have been more defensive, and their contemporaneous ties seem to have made them more inclined to maintain their prestige and order.