[時事討論] 程翔: 誰要為香港失去真普選而負責？

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2014-9-4 12:29 PM 編輯

程翔: 誰要為香港失去真普選而負責？公仔箱論壇1 _* Y$ @  i) }# B1 z% b8 S

人大關於香港特首“普選”方案出臺後，全港一片譁然。8 W3 _* a) ?/ ]& e" k& i: x4 r
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb2 y3 r2 }- _/ D: b% E( v: \  R4 v
8月31日下午梁振英率領一眾高官集體亮相為這個方案背書時，個個目無表情，呆若木雞，只有梁振英一個人在獨白，口沫橫飛。公仔箱論壇# p" c' ~. q5 M& a4 T/ T
我在觀看電視時，差點以為是泛民在集體見記者，因為全部人都是苦口苦面的。
6 q' X$ _9 B4 h
初時還誤會是電視臺加插畫面時弄錯了，細看才知道沒有錯。我還以為是我太挑剔，但很快就有朋友傳來這幅很異相的照片並加了很多評語，替這班高官難過。

從這張圖片可以看出，人大的決定，凡是正常的香港人都不會感覺到高興，凡是正常的香港人都隱隱感到它背後蘊含的危機。
5.39.217.769 L  F5 {: _. D3 C& y
但為什麼中共敢於強行推動一個違背了大多數人民意願、且明知會引發香港動亂（人大委員長張德江坦言說決議通過後香港會有事）的方案？# D, q" }" t5 r# r) x% u

因為它知道，願意違背良心去替它舔菊的人有的是。

正是大量這些人的存在，構成它“一黨專政”的基礎，它才敢肆無忌憚地強推政策。1 I) d* b: h7 s5 Z# |1 s
/ {. o* Y5 h, g5 O( V* w5 K, [+ F
拜讀了黎廣德兄的鴻文：“出賣香港民意3類人”，這使我想起幾個月前一位讀者寄給我一篇文章，分析人類歷史上的悲劇之所以能夠發生，往往是由於當時當地的人支援及默許錯誤而形成的。公仔箱論壇* {+ b5 _8 F. R- U$ d$ G
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb+ m. C7 \; L0 v8 `
用這位讀者的分析架構來審視中共官員、港府高官、建制派領袖、乃至種種力撐“袋住先”的文膽“智囊”、以及817遊行的群眾，把他們分類，將會是一個非常有趣的習作。- M2 T3 Y" g, ]: @
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb$ b: b$ w/ p, u1 [, H& [- K( I1 F9 G) c
由於此文很有見地，筆者得到該讀者同意，特轉錄下來供讀者參考：
7 ~' x3 x+ J4 Z# h& h
這位讀者的文章說：tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb, ~; m+ t/ W# F: [( _: Z
! g5 \& i6 q7 o5 Z
從人類歷史上歷來的悲劇/慘案看，人可分成四類。

第一類：爲數極少極少，但有超常權威/魅力/能量，可以呼風喚雨、左右大局。
" Q; l, t4 M) O. K" I# g, r
他們有條件發展成貽害萬千百姓的大魔頭，如希特勒、史達林、波爾布特、毛澤東……等。但光有第一類人，則歷史上一切人文悲劇/慘案都不會發生！最起碼要加上第二類人。沒有第二類，第一類人不足爲患。% W- i' ^5 }9 F+ R4 C9 p

! b% g: n6 O5 ]0 [* Z& V. o( ]
第二類人或出於溜鬚拍馬，撈取浮淺的好處；或出於處心積慮，謀取重大深遠的利益；或出於自保，把心一橫。

不管是哪一種，他們或鞍前馬後隨伺領袖（第一類人）左右，或退居幕後，隱沒於公衆目光之外，反正都是幕僚中核心的核心。他們起著：

（一）在內：附和、鼓勵領袖，煽風點火、出謀劃策；
5.39.217.76+ O; y' Z" X+ m, g
（二）在外：廣布綫眼、積極串連、具體策劃的作用。

任何社會的任何歷史時期，都不缺這第二類人。四人幫之於毛澤東，庶幾可作一例。7 N1 Q( p% m& ]* j
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。& i. [3 F& X# V5 Q5 Z1 L
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。& `$ K/ ~% }5 F$ _9 q; A: g
第三類人是最複雜的一個類別。粗枝大葉地說，就是“廣大群衆”。

他們是第一、第二類人種種惡行之受衆——他們之“受”惡行，是躲無可躲、避無可避的。但關鍵是：受是受了，你作何反應？
5.39.217.767 u1 A0 e/ c0 p  L) D! @2 }1 D
第三類人之所以複雜，在於它的光譜很寬：

由真心實意擁護領袖的“革命群衆”（文革期間的紅衛兵是一例。當中呃飲呃食享受大串連的種種特權和優待的，當屬例外），到雖對領袖深惡痛絕但選擇逆來順受的100%順民（這些人不單在皇帝/國家機器或他們的代理人面前噤若寒蟬，尤甚者連在家裏議論都怕隔墻有耳……）。
光有第一、第二類人加起來，也不足爲患。但“絕大部分人甘當寒蟬、順民”，才是歷史上歷次人文慘案的足夠條件。3 a) a# t: l! n8 F: w3 V; G

客觀上，存在著大量這些人，大魔頭和他們的嘍囉們才可以爲所欲爲。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb; u4 A0 N. f2 Q
由是觀之，面對惡行，長期沉默不作爲，的確是在默許邪惡。
' G- A9 \6 H8 P3 y4 N+ D. J

: x! H0 {) Q5 j# s( a7 i1 l5.39.217.76第四類人是最可敬佩的、極少數的一群。他們冒著危險，試圖改變看來不可能改變的現實。# e0 B4 M/ k% ?4 Q0 o

以什麽行動？tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb* R2 W( M& j! f+ {& n# P+ z: W

控訴：搜集材料、羅列理據，直截了當地非其非；公仔箱論壇: d  V1 a' i" e$ ^0 o! M5 I* P$ x/ z& P
5.39.217.76/ O. k- U- q6 w; F
發聲：梳理思路、推敲話語內容，然後公開宣之於筆、於口；tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb+ l2 e& o+ B9 n

抗爭：向群衆進行理念宣播，組織串連，形成力量，等等。* y/ K4 z1 c9 E( E  w5 G8 Y. J' l- Z6 Y( X

第四類人之所以最可敬佩，在於嘴上說說容易，付諸行動極難。
" B8 M# `6 m  Y, h
理由顯而易見：犧牲私人時間、影響正常生活，不在話下；
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。* T+ }2 \# s, w, M. N& P0 H# R
與強權對抗，輕則犧牲事業前途，重則喪失人身自由，乃至寶貴生命……。但這還不止。

對第四類人最慘無人道的“懲罰”，也是最讓“準第四類人”卻步的，不是他們個人的得失榮辱生死，而是對連累家人的忌憚。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb/ j5 H3 T4 g5 I) V* z4 u0 l
這包括：影響家人的事業前途（因此，文革期間，大陸上湧現“與父母劃清界綫、斷絕夫妻關係”的案例）、被迫與家人天隔一方（吾爾開希不惜闖大陸關“自首”，但求與老父老母見上一面，亦竟成奢望）、連累家人失去人身自由（劉霞犯了什麽罪被軟禁？有一個被政府視爲眼中釘的政治犯老公！）等等，不論是奪去本人生命令家人悲痛欲絕，還是家人遭殘害令本人歉疚終身，都是極端殘忍的精神折磨！

而偏偏，喪盡天良的當權者最擅長在這上面使力。: D- ~5 x- r  Q' y' v9 G7 h+ g
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。  F* Q: u) ^* {! z
經思前想後、痛下決心，寧可拋開親情牽掛，爲公義爲歷史，在抗爭的不歸路上走到底的，是卓絕超凡的英雄。（讀者文章引述到此）TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。" D* n1 w: {) }4 s( R0 ~  b

這位讀者的文章，使我想起另外兩本研究人類在災難中的立場、取態和對災難要複上什麼責任的文態。
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。6 o+ }4 S6 U! W
第一本是易中天教授2013年的新作：《斯文:幫忙、幫閒、幫腔、幫兇及其他》。2 X  V/ d' ?4 q

這本書談文化界人士的嘴臉。通過考量風骨、氣節、擔當、性情、學養和理想，排列出文化人的人格光譜，反映了中國歷史上和當前社會裏的文人所扮演的”四幫角色”，即幫忙、幫閒、幫腔、幫兇等角色。根據易中天教授的分析，中國絕大多數的所謂知識份子是在不同程度上扮演了幫閒、幫腔、幫兇的角色。

另一本是德國哲學家卡爾.雅斯佩斯（Karl Jaspers）在1946年寫的書：《德國人的罪責問題》（The Question of the German Guilt）。二次大戰時，他目睹納粹殘殺猶太民族的種種暴行，戰後他出版了此書，分析德國人（包括每個平凡的德國人）對此災難應付上什麼責任。他在書中把罪行分為四種：
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb* Q6 d1 f: U/ u( w8 B
一、刑事罪：需由法庭解決
3 T0 ?( C( ?" o/ K( q
二、政治罪：要求征服者用武力和權力強行解決
公仔箱論壇4 R8 ]! F0 `0 W; u
三、道德罪：要求人們反思、懺悔，以便得到新生

四、抽象罪：由於人類是休戚與共的整體，每個人都應為他人受到的不公正待遇負起責任。

這位讀者、易中天和雅思佩斯三人，所處時、空不同，政治背景亦迥異，但大家心中對某些人在政治災難中所扮演的角色，卻有著非常驚人的相似，說明人類內心測度良知的尺基本上還是一樣的。筆者嘗試把三個人的分析架構匯在一起，並作出自己的評點，供讀者參考。歡迎所有讀者，根據這個架構，把一些政治人物的名字填上您認為最適合貼切的欄目中去。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb" \3 {! E/ y5 f: h2 C
李飛說過一句話，如果2017年香港沒有普選，則泛民應該為此負上歷史責任。我在想，這四類人中，那一類人更應該為毀了香港的普選而負上歷史責任呢？
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb& x) X9 T& O- C. U! H! s

收藏分享評分

回復引用

訂閱 TOP

felicity2010

親王

Rank: 17

2^#

發表於 2014-9-5 12:17 AM | 只看該作者

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2014-9-5 12:23 AM 編輯 1 e5 }% [" k% O/ n8 @
! p1 x9 u) A: A* ]9 V9 h
即時關注│經濟學人：佔中行動宜改策略
: b5 t' @+ t. J9 z$ \

公仔箱論壇1 f/ q2 z& H$ d6 h5 T3 f
                                    5.39.217.760 j- |0 Y3 T+ I$ a- g* X5 K
人大悍然落閘，佔中一觸即發；最新一期的《經濟學人》，也就以〈為香港奮鬥〉（The struggle for Hong Kong）為封面主題發表文章，副題則更為明白的寫道：「區內市民一定不可以放棄要求全面的民主：為了自己和中國」（The territory’s citizens must not give up demanding full democracy－for their sake and for China’s）。然而，有關文章卻對當前和平佔中行動的策略，有所質疑。
文章坦言，人大今次強勢落閘，或會帶來最壞的結果是，泛民將一次又一次作出形形式式的抗議行動，以至當局最終可能會訴諸警察清場、大規模拘捕，甚至出動解放軍介入。屆時，不但令香港長年的和平政改歷程付諸流水，亦勢令中國跟西方世界再一次關係破裂，對中國及香港都只有害無益。就算這種情況僥倖未發生，中國卻已自行放棄，以香港作為全國民主試點的一次大好機會。公仔箱論壇" E) ^' c* r+ R+ C" H( O

文章批評，人大常委今次政改框架，根本形同移植當前大陸式民主到香港：即讓人民投票選舉的前提，候選人卻是先經中共欽點。香港在主權移交後的事實已證明，歷任特首的管治都可謂相當不受市民歡迎，法治與言論自由亦日受威脅。今次人大更為政改落閘，也終於迫使和平佔中行動行將爆發。
" l% j5 O/ @! |; q2 r$ b
但《經濟學人》質疑，佔中行動若堅持訴諸癱瘓交通要道，會更大機會失控，以至給當局出動軍警介入的口實。文章認為，市民仍應訴諸過往大規模和平抗議的傳統，泛民立法會議員亦要一致否決政府政改草案。5.39.217.767 s5 i1 Z0 [/ L! i

文章解釋，中國縱或一時間仍會對港人這些大規模和平抗議行動反應冷淡，但只要持之以恒，有可能會觸動新疆與西藏分離主義人士，亦會在當地訴諸同類活動，這便足以挑動北京當前的最大顧忌；再加上國內龐大的新中產階級，也會受港人這種做法影響，更大機會公開表達他們對當局種種管治及政策的不滿，令中國會對香港民主鬆手。
/ O. u% R$ @% {
# w) v, w0 `6 E5 P) c1 Y
The Economist: The struggle for Hong Kong
9 h& V$ e0 l* J! T) ?8 E) I

The territory’s citizens must not give up demanding full democracy—for their sake and for China’s公仔箱論壇) ?$ m# N6 }0 a3 O

CHINESE officials have called it a “leap forward” for democracy in Hong Kong. Yet their announcement on August 31st of plans to allow, for the first time, every Hong Kong citizen to vote for the territory’s leader has met only anger and indifference.Joy was conspicuously absent. This is not because Hong Kong’s citizens care little for the right to vote, but because China has made it abundantly clear that the next election for Hong Kong’s chief executive, due in 2017, will be rigged. The only candidates allowed to stand will be those approved by the Communist Party in Beijing, half a continent away.9 j" y- n% Q: j% I4 ?8 b5 F( Z
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb9 j: |0 {6 l/ T$ t5 |
At its worst, this risks provoking a disaster which even China cannot want. Democrats are planning protests. It is unclear how many people will join in, but the fear is that the territory’s long history of peaceful campaigning for political reform will give way to skirmishes with police, mass arrests and possibly even intervention by the People’s Liberation Army. That would disrupt one of Asia’s wealthiest and most orderly economies, and set China against the West. But even if, as is likely, such a calamity is avoided, this leap sideways is a huge missed opportunity not just for Hong Kong but also for the mainland. A chance to experiment with the sort of local democracy that might have benefited all of China has been missed.5.39.217.76$ L; m7 O7 [5 V2 v# h0 ?
9 k& p  x' ?$ P9 C9 m

One country, one-and-a-half systems公仔箱論壇$ k2 e2 F' r2 S7 `; {

China’s announcement marks the end of an era.No longer is it possible to argue that the development of democracy in Hong Kong can forge ahead even in the absence of political reform in Beijing (see article). The arrangements, set out by China’s party-controlled parliament, the National People’s Congress, were needed because of a pledge to grant the territory a“high degree of autonomy” and eventually “universal suffrage” when it took over from Britain in 1997. To most people, that meant having the right to choose their leader themselves.TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。1 A& f2 [, M( c  W1 c9 U

China has stuck to the letter of its promise,but not the spirit. In 2012 the chief executive was appointed by a 1,200-strongcommittee stacked with the party’s yes-men from among Hong Kong’s business and political elite. The proposal for 2017 is that a similar committee will select candidates who will then be presented to all Hong Kong’s voters for election.In theory the committee could allow through candidates of many political stripes. In practice, pessimism is more than justified. Only two or three candidates will be allowed, and each must win the support of at least half of the committee. Under this arrangement, democracy will mean little more in Hong Kong than it does elsewhere in China, where every adult citizen can vote for local legislators—as long as the party approves.
6 y, Y( X9 X/ V2 L' c  B* X
This is bad for Hong Kong. The territory’s four leaders since the handover in 1997 were all chosen in Beijing and rubber-stamped into office. All of them, including the incumbent Leung Chun-ying, proved highly unpopular. Under a government in thrall to Beijing, the press has been subdued by intimidation and by pressure from advertisers. The judiciary fears that it may face a test of loyalty to the mainland. Some Hong Kongers complain that even the postal service is compromised—it refused to deliver leaflets urging civil disobedience.

The story may not be over. Activists in Hong Kong have vowed to launch a campaign of civil disobedience which they call,disarmingly, “Occupy Central with Love and Peace”, but whose declared mission is to paralyse the territory’s main financial district with sit-ins. This would be the first large-scale flouting of the law by the pro-democracy camp.

The activists’ aim is correct and their courage impressive, but their tactics may be mistaken.If the unrest gets out of control and troops are deployed, it would be a calamity for Hong Kong—and would probably set back the activists’ cause. Better to stick to what the democrats have always done best: staging the kind of peaceful protests that have made the territory a model of rational political discourse in a part of the world where it is often sorely lacking. And there is another form of peaceful protest available:Hong Kong’s legislators can reject China’s proposals, even though that would mean reverting to the equally undemocratic system used in 2012. Only a few dozen democrats now sit in the electoral college. They should, in future, boycott it. There is no point in propagating a falsehood.公仔箱論壇9 h' y1 z* U/ e' y
! H# g- x7 ]9 B' o% R. o) B: f
If Hong Kong’s people keep marching without damaging the territory’s economy, China may well simply shrug. But not necessarily.It was thanks in part to a huge and orderly protest in 2003 that Hong Kong’s puppet government shelved plans to introduce an anti-subversion bill and that the hapless chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, stepped down. Rather than break the law, Hong Kong’s democrats would do better to wield the weapon of embarrassment.
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。7 M2 K* N3 N1 F+ Y% u% X

He’s blown it公仔箱論壇8 }3 A. ~8 X7 e7 a; @. i
5.39.217.76/ H- d7 `& r1 Y$ r6 G" {8 y
But it is not only in Hong Kong that China’s decision to strangle the territory’s democratic aspirations will be felt.China’s government has alienated opinion in Taiwan, which it dreams of bringing under its umbrella in the same way. The party appears to have concluded that the damage done to the prospects of union with Taiwan is less important than the threat that one of its opponents might win an election in Hong Kong and stoke demands across China for political reform. The territory would also become independent in all but name. That, the government worries, would encourage separatists around China’s periphery, from Tibet to Xinjiang.
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。$ w, j) d7 U9 ~! _6 l/ O
But discontent is growing all over China, and Beijing cannot just sit on it. The huge new middle class is becoming increasingly frustrated with its powerlessness over issues such as education,health care, the environment and property rights. In terms of their day-to-day worries, mainlanders have a lot in common with Hong Kong’s citizens. China’s government is going to have to work out a way of satisfying their aspirations for more control over their lives. Hong Kong would have been a good place to start.公仔箱論壇' E$ L3 i# ^. B6 `. g/ Z

Xi Jinping, the party chief and president,had the opportunity to use Hong Kong as a test-bed for political change in China. Had he taken this opportunity, he might have gone down in history as atrue reformer. Instead, he has squandered it.5.39.217.76, }* V& i2 r: s

This analysis is rather myopic and incomprehensive, or more frankly wishful thinking. The strong stance of China against the election of Hong Kong Chief Executive in accordance with the international standard is manifest of the current political situation inside China and her diplomatic strategy. Damage control is the only way left.TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。3 Y' R8 g2 i- x5 |- T4 x
5.39.217.763 u: [/ O1 e- w: v, ?8 Q

回復引用

TOP

返回列表