This is quite unwise from a power-psychophatic point of view- How can you know what people think, if they cant have illusion of anonymity? If they only talk in eye to eye conversations about "forbidden" topics, the world will unravel the day they realize how vast there network of dissent actually is. Could it be that somebody inside the Censorship apparatus of Chinas apparatus is actually trying to prepare the grounds for a revolution?
Maybe they don't see censorship the way you do. Maybe it is, in their eyes, about the ethical and honourable protection of their culture and social values.
The idea in for itself is actually quite nice, to protect and to serve a culture and the values in it. The problem is, human nature and the circumstances it creates in the short and long term are quite corrosive to culture and to the upholding of values.
You can try to enforce the honoring of the previous generations achievement, but if the previous generations has as core value "be fruitful and multiply", you will run into nr^2 < res <=> conflict.
The whole idea of discovering and searching for the new, allowing the unknown to prosper and co-exist - is based upon knowing, that the conservative approach to stabilize society is doomed to failure, as long as a surplus is not provided by a rather liberal scientific society.
Does this make dissent always meaningful? No, but if the peasant can not speak up to the chairman, how can the son of the peasant, speak up to the professor being wrong on fertilizer chemistry? Conflict avoidance in short term is just conflict concentration in the long term.
