Abusing dogs is harming people — Analysis of the Pan Hong incident
On the afternoon of January 19, 2025, internet celebrity Pan Hong, who claims to be “not a dog trainer” and “a third-generation dog owner,” live-streamed on Douyin platform washing a popular internet dog “Aite” at the request of his fans, attracting a large audience and tips. During the live broadcast, Pan Hong used zip ties to tightly bind the dog’s mouth, sealing its heat dissipation organs, and combined with the indoor high-temperature environment, which caused Aite to suffocate and die during the bath. This accident sparked widespread controversy, once again amplifying the debate about whether Pan Hong, who became extremely popular, is capable of training dogs.
In the past, Pan Hong operated the account “Pan Hong Loves Dogs,” which was known for “uncommon, somewhat cruel dog training methods” to tame extremely disobedient and highly aggressive dogs. At the same time, Pan Hong was very humble in videos and live streams, claiming he was “not a dog trainer,” but “knows dogs better than dogs themselves,” and that “no one else in China can train dogs better than him.” His videos became viral due to his “unique dog training skills and exaggerated, enthusiastic style.” As of February 2, 2025, his Douyin account had 16.486 million followers, and on Bilibili, he had 2.676 million followers, garnering high attention. Fans who watch Pan Hong’s videos believe he is a third-generation dog owner with the ability to train dogs. They not only think Pan Hong can train dogs but also show great care for aggressive dogs that harm people, even providing a retirement base for untrainable dogs, giving them a “second life.” These dogs, which should have been euthanized, now live peacefully, making Pan Hong seem like a kind-hearted person who loves and understands dogs.
However, this person, who claims to love and understand dogs, committed a very basic “mistake” during the live broadcast—one that would seem very low-level even to professional dog trainers or those familiar with dogs. So, does this “not a dog trainer” truly know how to train dogs?
“Dog trainer” Pan Hong
Can train, but trains poorly
Why do humans train dogs? The answer can be found in the history of human training of dogs. China has a long history of dog domestication. The “Shuowen Jiezi” records: “In the nomadic era, dogs were numerous; in cave dwellings, dogs were kept for guarding; for hunting, dogs were taken along; thus, humans must have domesticated dogs.” This means that in primitive nomadic tribes, humans already domesticated dogs for guarding and hunting. After thousands of years of domestication, dogs became widely used as tools in agriculture, animal husbandry, and other sectors. Therefore, the purpose of training dogs by laboring people was to enable dogs to play a role in social production. Over long-term production struggles, domesticated dogs became some of humanity’s best livestock. Today, in rural areas, farmers domesticate dogs for guarding homes and fields, catching mice, etc.
So, can Pan Hong train dogs to guard homes or participate in production? Obviously not, because his training method relies on violence and coercion. The result is only two types of dogs: one that shows no resistance to humans and is completely under human control—such dogs cannot defend against intruders; or one that is irritable and untrainable, as exemplified by Aite, who remains highly aggressive after over a year of training. These two types of dogs clearly cannot help humans in production or struggle, which is obvious. So, we must ask: if dog training is not for production, why does Pan Hong train dogs like this?
“In class society, everyone lives within a certain class, and all thoughts are stamped with class labels.” (Chairman Mao, “On Practice”) In capitalist society, the bourgeoisie is detached from production and naturally cannot train dogs for productive purposes. Their main goal in raising dogs is to satisfy their increasingly empty spiritual needs, so the dogs they raise are either extremely vicious and domineering to satisfy their psychological fetish of oppression; or they are dressed up, fed steak, to indulge their luxury. Some petty bourgeois also emulate the bourgeoisie in dog-raising, to vent their longing for bourgeois life. Therefore, these dogs only need to be obedient and serve as mascots or symbols; they do not need any other talents. From this, it seems that Pan Hong’s inability to train dogs is actually a misunderstanding—his dogs are useless and have no talents.
“Chinese people are richer and have a better life than Americans”
Why do people like to watch
From the above analysis, it is clear that Pan Hong does not know how to train dogs, because the dogs he trains are either parasites or harmful, with no utility for social production, and his fans are well aware of this. This raises the question: why do fans regard Pan Hong as a dog training master and even call him a dog lover? To answer this, let’s look at what makes “Pan Hong Loves Dogs” videos interesting.
The peak moment feature on Bilibili provides some facts, as peak moments indicate the periods with the most views and barrage comments. We find that peak moments often occur during Pan Hong’s abuse of dogs (sometimes hitting with sticks, sometimes using other methods). Moreover, at the start of dog abuse segments, many barrage comments say “Welcome back” or sarcastically name the upcoming abuse. Fans frequently discuss past and current dog abuse incidents in the comment section; dogs that require multiple abuses to be tamed are often called “Legendary X King” or similar names. This data shows that viewers most love to watch, re-watch, and discuss dog abuse; the “highlights” of the videos are about hitting and abusing dogs, not about Pan Hong’s dog training skills.
Dog abuse “set meal” and “welcome” barrage comments
Given this, another question arises—why is the process of abusing dogs so interesting and even enjoyable for Pan Hong’s viewers, to the point of wanting to watch repeatedly? Some might say it’s because some people have violent tendencies and enjoy watching pure violence against animals. If so, why isn’t the documentary “Animal World,” which depicts even more explicit violence leading to animal deaths, more popular than “Pan Hong Loves Dogs”? The reason Pan Hong is popular is not because some people have abstract violent tendencies. For his fans, the interesting part is not the animal’s suffering caused by biological movement, but the social movement that intervenes in biological processes, leading to animal death. They enjoy watching dogs scream and struggle under violence, suffocate and lie on the ground, and see dogs submit or die under human violence.
“Training dogs” to the point of breaking sticks, “training” actually means the dog “dies”
Abusing dogs — direct practice of fascist ideology
So far, some might object, arguing that dog abuse is not as severe as human abuse. Therefore, condemning dog abusers is just a moral condemnation. This seems somewhat reasonable; our discussion so far is more detailed and concrete than animal protectionists’ arguments, with more logic, but not much practical progress. However, the reason why the Pan Hong incident has attracted widespread attention is not only because Pan Hong himself is high-profile but also because it exposes the hypocritical mask of “dog love” used by his fans to comfort themselves. Under the struggle between animal protectionists and Pan Hong’s fans, the event’s attention continues to rise. But they overlook—or wrongly interpret—the fundamental cause of this incident.
“In Chinese society, the petty bourgeoisie as the middle class originally had a foundation of individualism, and influenced by decadent imperialist culture, their backward tendencies have been reinforced.” (Fenghuo Flame, “China’s Future Revolutionary Road”) After the re-establishment of capitalism in socialist China, the Chinese bureaucratic monopoly bourgeoisie has implemented open fascist rule, producing and spreading fascist ideology and works with fascist elements. Therefore, the petty bourgeoisie in China is prone to fascist ideas, especially among right-wing petty bourgeois. These fascist-minded petty bourgeois, on one hand, want to exploit, oppress, and enslave people; on the other hand, they are limited by their class status—afraid of legal sanctions or other restrictions—and cannot carry out direct social oppression. Instead, they use animals—especially cats and dogs with complex nervous systems, capable of low-level emotional responses like fear, anger, and anxiety—to simulate oppression and vent their desire to dominate and exploit. Because of this, the petty bourgeois enjoy watching Pan Hong’s videos, even more so the explicit abuse. Unlike “Love Cats TV,” which directly shows cat abuse, Pan Hong’s videos are not because he is a conscience person or because of lenient platform moderation, but because of the class characteristics of the petty bourgeois. If these characteristics are not satisfied, Pan Hong’s videos cannot spread widely. Lu Xun’s “Blessing” describes this trait: when the protagonist, a member of the bourgeoisie, doubts whether he caused Xianglin Sao’s despair and death, he tries to comfort himself. Pan Hong’s malicious intent is here—he openly helps his viewers find an excuse to feel better: “It’s just watching a dog-beating video, and the dog is so vicious, it deserves to be beaten!”
“Family portrait”
Must reform and reform quickly
Through the analysis of Pan Hong’s videos, we see how vile the ideas contained in so-called “dog training videos” are. The petty bourgeoisie uses these seemingly unrelated cultural works to secretly promote ideas of oppression and violence, which form the ideological basis for their rule. As mentioned earlier, petty bourgeois with fascist ideas may not directly oppress people under certain conditions, but once these conditions change—due to excessive drug use, distorted morality, or fear of losing class status—they will turn to direct violence. The Xu Jiajin incident is a typical example.
Xu Jiajin, armed with a knife, stormed into a female dormitory, brutally attacking innocent female students, causing 8 deaths and 17 injuries. Before the attack, Xu Jiajin had long immersed himself in Telegram groups with reactionary, anti-women pornography and violent literature. In this decadent activity, he absorbed fascist male chauvinist ideas as his worldview. Later, after being sent to a factory as cheap labor by the school, he suffered brutal oppression from the bourgeoisie, destroying his dream of “climbing to the top of life” through opportunistic studies. Realizing his petty bourgeois class status was insecure, Xu Jiajin fell into despair, and “the morally, courageously, and intelligently corrupted Xu Jiajin could only think of attacking female students, and dared not touch the ruling class that oppressed him” (LSEP editorial, “Uncovering the Last Shame of the Chinese Left Circle—Xu Jiajin”).
Although there are differences between pornography and “dog training videos,” both contain fascist ideas of oppression and abuse. If a person continues to indulge in this spiritual opium, he is inevitably on the path to becoming a rapist and murderer. After the controversy, Pan Hong’s short video account “Pan Hong Loves Dogs” was banned (though his personal account remains active), but similar ideological works continue to be produced. They constantly promote ideas that turn people into criminals and petty bourgeoisie into extreme individualists who harm the people.
People whose morality has become worse due to long-term consumption of cat-abuse videos
“But the petty bourgeoisie is not an useless class,” “The petty bourgeoisie must reform itself to become a revolutionary class, and to do so, it must free itself from moral corruption.” (Fenghuo Flame, “China’s Future Revolutionary Road”) Only through ideological struggle and revolutionary participation can the petty bourgeoisie be truly transformed and reverse this dark reality. As Hong Xiuquan mentioned in “The Song of the Original Way to Save the World”: “Who supports the devil’s harm? But we must reform and reform quickly. Only after changing can we avoid faults; I earnestly teach and admonish.”[1]
Bourgeois ideas seep in from all directions like demons; if not carefully resisted through ideological struggle, who can firmly oppose wrong ideas surrounded by them? Previously, errors were caused by a lack of scientific worldview, but now, we need to focus on ideological transformation to become Marxist newcomers. Although there were mistakes in the past, correcting them makes one a steadfast member who no longer errs easily. It is precisely to make comrades who have not consciously transformed their worldview understand this truth that we tirelessly carry out persuasion and education. ↩︎