台灣最大公約數 – 反共去統不反中
The True Common Denominator of Taiwan
我察覺到一個新的台灣共識(最大公約數)正在成形,而且已經接近完成。雖然許多人還沒意識到這點,也還有一些人尚處在無感、或雖然有感但心理上拒絕的階段。
I sensed a New Taiwan Consensus is forming and near completion, although many are still not fully aware of it, some at the psychological stage of ignoring it and some even in total denial .
這新共識可以用三個原素的一句話來總結:反共、去統、不反中國平民。三元素環環相扣,構成了一個具有主旋律的直白命題:那些已經把台灣視為自己家鄉的人,已經把台灣當成一個與他方無涉的主體。
This New Consensus can be summarized in one expression with three parallel elements: opposing communism, de-unification and neutralness toward Chinese civilians. These three elements constitute an organic whole with a common theme that simply says, people who took Taiwan as their home deemed themselves as one distinct entity .
為了讓人們充分理解這三元素的意義,需要做一些進一步闡釋。我們這就開始。
I understand some elaboration may be needed to allow the three elements to be fully appreciated, especially the third one. Let me begin.
1. 反共。台灣其實並沒有那麼反對自由的社會主義;事實上,台灣社會本身在日常生活型態中就含有明顯的自由社會主義的痕跡。但是,台灣絕不會容忍社會主義精神脫序到共產主義的地步。若然,那種社會主義就是敵人,沒有討論的餘地。台灣海峽彼岸的中國共產黨(CCP),就屬於這一類。
1. Opposing Communism – Taiwan is not that much against liberal socialism. In fact,there is a rather obvious strain of it already existing in its social life. However, Taiwan would not tolerate socialism when carried away to the extent of communism, and would take it as enemy. Period. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the other end of the Strait falls into this category.
2. 去統。在台灣,不但老一輩了解中共天天掛在嘴邊玩弄的「統一」,只不過是其用來維持政權、控制已經被洗過腦平民的一種虛偽口號,而年輕一輩只會以荒謬視之。因而,此處並沒有用過去的「反統」一詞,而是用「去統」,表示了一種將「統一」概念徹底由腦中去除的意思。就像「大掃除」的意思一樣,老早就該扔掉的東西就把它扔掉。
2. De-Unification – Not only do the older generations realize that the jingling of
“unification” of the CCP is just a bogus slogan for upholding its regime’s control
over the brain-washed civilians, the young generation of Taiwan simply finds the
slogan ridiculous. Therefore, rather than using the term “anti-Unification” as people used to do in the past, I think “De-Unification” – the unshackling of the very idea of unification, as one can relate with the word “de-clutter”- is a better suited term.
3. 不反中,指的是對中國平民保持中性的態度。過去三年間,包括我自己以及國際輿論,已經破除了那個存在已久的迷思 – 中共CCP就等同中國。情況根本不是這樣的。中共不等同中國,更不用說等同中國人民了。中共是一個具有9千8百萬黨員的巨大政黨,但那只是住在那塊土地上的14億人當中的7%。
3. Neutralness towards Chinese Civilians – In the past three years, people in Taiwan including myself, as well as the international community, have debunked the long-existed myth that CCP Is China. No, far from it. CCP is NOT equivalent to China, let alone the Chinese people. CCP is a huge party of 98 million members and that accounts for only 7% of the 1.4 billion Chinese people living on that landmass.
簡單的算數就可以呈現真相。對任何國家,如果僅佔7%的人口可以在政治上完全控制100%的人口,唯一的可能就是實施殘酷暴力或通過暴力改變人的頭腦。
Simple math would tell the truth. In any nation, when 7% of the population politically controls 100% of the population, it would be an impossibility unless by brutal violence or total brain coercion.
中國平民本身就是受害者。其他的國家,不應該膝蓋反應式的把受害者視為天生就是邪惡的。因此,無論在心態上還是現實地緣政治考慮下,台灣社會都應該把「必反」這詞留給共產黨而不是受害的平民。
Therefore, considering the Chinese civilians are victims themselves, people from other parts of the world should not act in a knee-jerk way towards the ordinary, victimized Chinese Civilians as if they are born evil. Either under a proper mindset or the practicality associated with geopolitics, Taiwanese society should and is starting to understand this point. “Anti-“ is an attitude reserved for CCP and not intrinsically for the ordinary and mostly victimized civilians.
這才是台灣的最大公約數。然而,為了選票的政治人物及民調機構拖累了台灣。每年每月的民調都在問早已失效的問題:你偏藍還是偏綠?你贊成獨立還是統一?
Putting together the above three Elements, thus there is the New Taiwan Consensus. What’s falling behind and dragging Taiwan’s feet, are the ballot-hungry politicians and the various outdated polling agencies. They do so many so-called popular surveys every year, sometimes monthly. And they stick to the long invalid way of setting up their survey questions: Are you favoring Green (DPP) or Blue(KMT)? Are you pro-independent or Pro-unification?
這種自我設限或自我審查的問法,使得其他國家以為台灣是個分裂社會。
This kind of self-confined or self-censored surveys leave other nations the impression that Taiwan is a split society, Green or Blue, Independence or unification etc.
台灣這種導致外人認為台灣是個分裂國家的作法,實在愚蠢。如果問的問題對,台灣是沒有分裂的。例如,如果將「你贊不贊成獨立」改為「你反共不反共」,結果肯定是98%以上。
It’s such a foolish thing to do for Taiwan itself misleading outsiders into deeming Taiwan as a split country. There is absolutely no split should the right questions be asked in the surveys. For example, had the question been changed from “Are you pro-independence or anti-independence” into “Are you pro-communism or anti-communism”,then the result would have been a clear-cut 98% or even 99.5% towards “anti”.
若問「你是反中國共產黨還是反中國老百姓」,前者不會低於80%,後者不會高於20%。
Now, try this further question: “Are you anti-Chinese Communist Party, or anti-Chinese common people”, my guess is the former gets at least 80% and the latter gets 20% at most.
第三個問題:「你願不願意被共產黨統治」,保證結果是99.9%的「不願意」。
The third question: “Would you be willing to live under the Communist Rule”? That would guarantee a resounding NO answer of 99.9%.
這就是新台灣共識、社會的最大公約數,應該向世界大聲、清楚、不含糊的說出來。
This is exactly how the New Taiwan Consensus looks like – the true common denominator among a seemingly divided Taiwan. And the New Taiwan Consensus should be articulated to the rest of the world, no vagueness, no grey area and unambiguously.
不信的話,可以用上述問題做幾次民調。而且我保證,在不久的將來,所有民主國家都會端出類似「台灣共識」的政策原則。
For any surveyor or politician who still has doubts about this New Taiwan Consensus, he or she can just conduct new surveys with questions suggested as above. And, I myself am convinced, in a not-so-distant future, all democratic countries on the planet would issue national policies based on guidelines similar to the New Taiwan Consensus, for the goodness of their respective countries.
所以,台灣為什麼不這樣做呢?這可是台灣展示世界政治領導力的機會啊!
So, Hey, Taiwan! Why not put a thrust on this Taiwan Consensus to the world by publicizing it unambiguously and show some political leadership, just for once?
後記:以雙語向全球發聲,將是我接下致力的方向。所使用的這兩種文字,涵蓋了35億人口,接近地球的一半人數。這個行動,將以 「前哨預策」網站 為核心基地,其他的社交媒體,只要有傳播力道,都會被用為衛星來做整體運作。
個人的思考、判斷不一定對,您也不見得同意,但是,我保證這平台中的每一句話都是獨立的、出自內心的。而今天的台灣,乃至於世界,最缺的就是突破傳統成見、不受黨派左右、同時又知錯能改的獨立思考力量。不知您是否同意?
「前哨預策」平台將分為三步走:內容平台 – 互動平台 – 行動平台。剛誕生的它,當前還只是個內容平台,但達到一定數量的會員支持後,將加入各種新媒體形式,與會員就重要議題互動,並以「達成不同意見之間的最大公約數」為目標。一旦在會員內部形成「最大公約數」後,就構成了行動的基礎。至於行動的形式,也由願意推動或參與的會員決定。
此平台婉拒任何政黨、政府的贊助,只接受個人會員或企業會員的贊助;所有收入及贊助,均將用於「讓台灣更好」的事務上,以及推動、發揮台灣作為東亞及世界的「關鍵少數」的槓桿角色,為人類下一波文明做出量力而為的貢獻。
我只能說,十年來的不斷保持獨立,希望能換得您對「不受任何政黨、政府左右」這一點點價值的認同。
范疇
謹上
於台灣
首頁鏈接: InsightFan.com
訂閱鏈接: https://www.insightfan.com/membershipspricing/
china population 1.4 billion 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的精選貼文
泰晤士報人物專訪【Joshua Wong interview: Xi won’t win this battle, says Hong Kong activist】
Beijing believes punitive prison sentences will put an end to pro-democracy protests. It couldn’t be more wrong, the 23-year-old says.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/joshua-wong-interview-xi-wont-win-this-battle-says-hong-kong-activist-p52wlmd0t
For Joshua Wong, activism began early and in his Hong Kong school canteen. The 13-year-old was so appalled by the bland, oily meals served for lunch at the United Christian College that he organised a petition to lobby for better fare. His precocious behaviour earned him and his parents a summons to the headmaster’s office. His mother played peacemaker, but the episode delivered a valuable message to the teenage rebel.
“It was an important lesson in political activism,” Wong concluded. “You can try as hard as you want, but until you force them to pay attention, those in power won’t listen to you.”
It was also the first stage in a remarkable journey that has transformed the bespectacled, geeky child into the globally recognised face of Hong Kong’s struggle for democracy. Wong is the most prominent international advocate for the protests that have convulsed the former British colony since last summer.
At 23, few people would have the material for a memoir. But that is certainly not a problem for Wong, whose book, #UnfreeSpeech, will be published in Britain this week.
We meet in a cafe in the Admiralty district, amid the skyscrapers of Hong Kong’s waterfront, close to the site of the most famous scenes in his decade of protest. Wong explains that he remains optimistic about his home city’s prospects in its showdown with the might of communist China under President Xi Jinping.
“It’s not enough just to be dissidents or youth activists. We really need to enter politics and make some change inside the institution,” says Wong, hinting at his own ambitions to pursue elected office.
He has been jailed twice for his activism. He could face a third stint as a result of a case now going through the courts, a possibility he treats with equanimity. “Others have been given much longer sentences,” he says. Indeed, 7,000 people have been arrested since the protests broke out some seven months ago; 1,000 of them have been charged, with many facing a sentence of as much as 10 years.
There is a widespread belief that Beijing hopes such sentences will dampen support for future protests. Wong brushes off that argument. “It’s gone too far. Who would imagine that Generation Z and the millennials would be confronting rubber bullets and teargas, and be fully engaged in politics, instead of Instagram or Snapchat? The Hong Kong government may claim the worst is over, but Hong Kong will never be peaceful as long as police violence persists.”
In Unfree Speech, Wong argues that China is not only Hong Kong’s problem (the book’s subtitle is: The Threat to Global Democracy and Why We Must Act, Now). “It is an urgent message that people need to defend their rights, against China and other authoritarians, wherever they live,” he says.
At the heart of the book are Wong’s prison writings from a summer spent behind bars in 2017. Each evening in his cell, “I sat on my hard bed and put pen to paper under dim light” to tell his story.
Wong was born in October 1996, nine months before Britain ceded control of Hong Kong to Beijing. That makes him a fire rat, the same sign of the Chinese zodiac that was celebrated on the first day of the lunar new year yesterday. Fire rats are held to be adventurous, rebellious and garrulous. Wong is a Christian and does not believe in astrology, but those personality traits seem close to the mark.
His parents are Christians — his father quit his job in IT to become a pastor, while his mother works at a community centre that provides counselling — and named their son after the prophet who led the Israelites to the promised land.
Like many young people in Hong Kong, whose housing market has been ranked as the world’s most unaffordable, he still lives at home, in South Horizons, a commuter community on the south side of the main island.
Wong was a dyslexic but talkative child, telling jokes in church groups and bombarding his elders with questions about their faith. “By speaking confidently, I was able to make up for my weaknesses,” he writes. “The microphone loved me and I loved it even more.”
In 2011, he and a group of friends, some of whom are his fellow activists today, launched Scholarism, a student activist group, to oppose the introduction of “moral and national education” to their school curriculum — code for communist brainwashing, critics believed. “I lived the life of Peter Parker,” he says. “Like Spider-Man’s alter-ego, I went to class during the day and rushed out to fight evil after school.”
The next year, the authorities issued a teaching manual that hailed the Chinese Communist Party as an “advanced and selfless regime”. For Wong, “it confirmed all our suspicions and fears about communist propaganda”.
In August 2012, members of Scholarism launched an occupation protest outside the Hong Kong government’s headquarters. Wong told a crowd of 120,000 students and parents: “Tonight we have one message and one message only: withdraw the brainwashing curriculum. We’ve had enough of this government. Hong Kongers will prevail.”
Remarkably, the kids won. Leung Chun-ying, the territory’s chief executive at the time, backed down. Buoyed by their success, the youngsters of Scholarism joined forces with other civil rights groups to protest about the lack of progress towards electing the next chief executive by universal suffrage — laid out as a goal in the Basic Law, Hong Kong’s constitution. Their protests culminated in the “umbrella movement” occupation of central Hong Kong for 79 days in 2014.
Two years later, Wong and other leaders set up a political group, Demosisto. He has always been at pains to emphasise he is not calling for independence — a complete red line for Beijing. Demosisto has even dropped the words “self-determination” from its stated goals — perhaps to ease prospects for its candidates in elections to Legco, the territory’s legislative council, in September.
Wong won’t say whether he will stand himself, but he is emphatically political, making a plea for change from within — not simply for anger on the streets — and for stepping up international pressure: “I am one of the facilitators to let the voices of Hong Kong people be heard in the international community, especially since 2016.”
There are tensions between moderates and radicals. Some of the hardliners on the streets last year considered Wong already to be part of the Establishment, a backer of the failed protests of the past.
So why bother? What’s the point of a city of seven million taking on one of the world’s nastiest authoritarian states, with a population of about 1.4 billion? And in any case, won’t it all be over in 2047, the end of the “one country, two systems” deal agreed between China and Britain, which was supposed to guarantee a high degree of autonomy for another 50 years? Does he fear tanks and a repetition of the Tiananmen Square killings?
Wong acknowledges there are gloomy scenarios but remains a robust optimist. “Freedom and democracy can prevail in the same way that they did in eastern Europe, even though before the Berlin Wall fell, few people believed it would happen.”
He is tired of the predictions of think-tank pundits, journalists and the like. Three decades ago, with the implosion of communism in the Soviet bloc, many were confidently saying that the demise of the people’s republic was only a matter of time. Jump forward 20 years, amid the enthusiasm after the Beijing Olympics, and they were predicting market reforms and a growing middle class would presage liberalisation.
Neither scenario has unfolded, Wong notes. “They are pretending to hold the crystal ball to predict the future, but look at their record and it is clear no one knows what will happen by 2047. Will the Communist Party even still exist?”
https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/111/1119445/unfree-speech
china population 1.4 billion 在 Kristie Lu Stout Facebook 的最佳貼文
"I don't think it's going to have a dramatic effect on the actual trajectory of China's population... almost 1.4 billion, and more or less stabilized."
- Economist Jeffrey Sachs
#China #OneChildPolicy #Demographics
china population 1.4 billion 在 China Population (2022) - Worldometer 的相關結果
Population of China: current, historical, and projected population, growth rate, immigration, median age, total fertility rate (TFR), population density, ... ... <看更多>
china population 1.4 billion 在 China's population grows by the slowest pace in decades 的相關結果
China's natural population growth rate of 0.034% for 2021 was the lowest ... and the total population will likely remain above 1.4 billion ... ... <看更多>
china population 1.4 billion 在 China population holds at 1.4 billion, growth close to zero 的相關結果
The numbers reported Thursday reflect a gain of 11.8 million people, or 0.8%, over the official estimate for 2019, when the government says the ... ... <看更多>