Chinese internet regulators have imposed a one-year ban on the influential ultranationalist blogger Sima Nan, whose inflammatory content and controversial critiques have stirred fierce debates on China’s social media landscape. The prohibition on Sima’s posting activities across major Chinese platforms underscores the Chinese government’s intensifying regulation of social media voices, both conservative and nationalist, in a bid to balance online discourse.
Two sources with knowledge of the decision confirmed to The South China Morning Post that Sima Nan, known for his strident anti-West commentary, will be barred from posting on his social media accounts for the next year. Both sources declined to reveal specifics about what led to the ban, though the suspension follows closely after a year of heightened online restrictions.
“He was banned across the platforms for a year. But I can’t talk about what triggered the ban,” one source stated. Sima Nan did not respond to requests for comment on the matter.
Sima Nan, whose real name is Yu Li, emerged as a cultural figure in the 1990s with his outspoken critiques of Falun Gong, a spiritual group later outlawed by Beijing. Over time, his voice grew louder and more prominent on the nationalist front, with a social media following exceeding 44 million across Chinese platforms like Weibo, Douyin, and WeChat. Often regarded as a symbolic figure representing the left-wing nationalistic segment of Chinese social media, Sima Nan has never held an official position within the government or the Communist Party. However, his alignment with state ideologies and constant references to Mao Zedong Thought have led many to view him as a de facto spokesperson for a certain strain of nationalistic ideology.
In recent years, Sima has criticized a range of targets, from international corporations and pro-Western intellectuals to Chinese businesses and liberal ideologies. He frequently accuses people of betraying China’s interests, labeling them as traitors who collude with the United States. This characteristic style earned him the nickname “the anti-US fighter.”
One of Sima Nan’s most high-profile controversies erupted in 2021 when he accused Lenovo, a prominent Chinese technology company, of “selling out” state assets and overpaying executives. Lenovo’s parent company, Legend Holdings, responded by affirming that the 2009 sale of its equity stake was fully legal and complied with regulations. Nonetheless, the accusation gained significant traction on social media, as Sima published over 50 videos and articles criticizing Lenovo, alleging that the company’s actions led to a “loss of state assets.” His criticism prompted intense debate, yet the Chinese government did not pursue an investigation into Lenovo.
More recently, Sima made headlines for his remarks on the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Hours before the U.S. election commenced, he posted on Douyin, humorously referring to himself as “the deputy head of Trump’s presidential campaign office in Beijing” and expressing a preference for former President Donald Trump. In a Weibo post, he suggested that Trump’s “transactional mentality” might eventually work in China’s favor regarding Taiwan, theorizing that Trump could be swayed to abandon U.S. support for Taipei in exchange for other benefits. These statements drew both amusement and criticism online, and it was his last known public commentary before the ban.
Sima Nan’s ban reflects the current environment of tightening controls on Chinese social media as authorities aim to moderate discussions perceived as harmful to the nation’s image or that interfere with official objectives. In recent months, Beijing has demonstrated a willingness to silence voices that either excessively promote Western ideologies or take ultranationalistic stances deemed “too extreme.”
For instance, in June, social media platforms actively moderated comments following a knife attack on a Japanese school bus in Suzhou, which led to an outpouring of anti-Japanese sentiments online. The Chinese government made clear its intention to curb hate speech directed at other nations to foster diplomatic stability, particularly with neighboring countries.
Likewise, earlier this year, Hu Xijin, the former editor-in-chief of the Global Times, vanished from social media for more than three months after publishing an article that stirred controversy. In his post, Hu highlighted the omission of the phrase “public ownership playing a dominant role” in an important Party document, which he interpreted as a shift toward equality between private and public sectors. His interpretation attracted backlash from conservative factions, who accused him of undermining the Communist Party’s foundational principles. Hu returned to social media after his articles were removed and officials issued no further explanation on the incident.
Similarly, Lao Dongyan, a law professor from Tsinghua University, faced suspension from social media after publicly criticizing Beijing’s proposed cybersecurity ID system. Following attacks from nationalists, Lao’s account went silent for two months. Her criticisms reflected growing concerns among Chinese intellectuals about increased state surveillance, yet were ultimately deemed sensitive enough to warrant restrictions.
Sima Nan’s suspension highlights the complex relationship between the Chinese government and nationalistic influencers. Over recent years, ultranationalist figures like Sima Nan have gained substantial influence among Chinese internet users. Their messages, which often reinforce government policies or denounce Western powers, can serve as unofficial channels for the dissemination of state-endorsed perspectives. However, as China seeks to encourage a more favorable environment for private businesses and to convince international stakeholders of its commitment to reform and market openness, voices perceived as too radical have come under scrutiny.
A media professor in Hong Kong noted that the aggressive rhetoric from figures like Sima Nan might have adverse effects on both domestic and international perceptions of China. “If you continue to allow such people to talk nonsense, it will definitely make investors doubt China’s determination to reform and open up,” the professor said, requesting anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the topic. “So if China is serious about this, the simplest and most practical signalling is to rein in people like Sima Nan.”
China’s struggle to reconcile nationalist rhetoric with its economic ambitions has led authorities to censor not only liberal critiques but also excessive nationalist speech. Sima’s ban signifies a balancing act: one that requires promoting national pride and confidence in the Chinese system while ensuring stability for foreign investments and the private sector.
China’s economic reforms over the past four decades have been largely credited for transforming the country into one of the world’s largest economies, attracting significant foreign investment. However, nationalist rhetoric has occasionally disrupted investor confidence, creating apprehensions about China’s true commitment to reform and the security of foreign businesses operating in the country.
As one observer pointed out, voices like Sima’s may foster skepticism about China’s long-term economic strategy. Nationalist bloggers often accuse companies, particularly those with international ties, of betraying Chinese interests—a message that resonates with segments of the public but can concern international investors wary of regulatory unpredictability.
Chinese regulators have recently intensified scrutiny on domestic technology companies and financial firms, raising concerns among multinational corporations and prompting speculation about increased government intervention. While state media outlets emphasize a stable, growth-friendly China, nationalist influencers like Sima Nan contribute an alternate narrative—one that can be seen as conflicting with official efforts to project stability and reform.
