Entanglement under chilling effect (Lee Yee)
The first line of the “Manifesto of the Communist Party” issued in 1848 said: “A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of communism”. Back then, Hong Kong was about to open for trade. And now, this “spectre of communism” has dressed in a national security law, haunting Hong Kong. Since the National Security Law taking effect last week, the ferocious voices of resistance have been fading out of the media. Chris Yeung, the Chairperson of the Hong Kong Journalists Association, has pointed out that “chilling effect” has turned up. He was asked by a reporter whether it is still at journalists’ option to interview Chris Patten. Except for Apple Daily, almost all media have drawn a veil over any affairs pertaining to the National Security Law. Even perennial contributors to the forum and finance section of the news medium have bidden farewell to readers.
In the past few days, my relatives overseas and friends in Hong Kong have been more attentive to me than usual, not asking me if I would leave Hong Kong, but telling me to leave. Will I leave off writing? Is writing with extreme caution worthwhile? I am already at an advanced age, and have already accomplished what I aspired to.
Though I encouraged readers “not to get predominated by fear” in my column last week, to say I am not scared is to deceive myself and others, not least when being confronted with a law of extreme power from a country alien to us. Hong Kongers are used to observing laws, inclusive of the evil ones. Beijing and Hong Kong government officials have asked Hong Kong people time and again not to defy the law, yet on the day of promulgation when the citizens were still digesting it, the law was enforced in a manner we are not familiar with. How could journalists and columnists not feel threatened?
The National Security Law pledges respect and protection for human rights, including freedom of speech, assembly and demonstration. The said rights are enshrined in the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China as well, but their implementation is a far cry from those implemented in Hong Kong in the past. In my lifetime career as an editor and writer, I had been able to say anything and express any opinions including those in demonstrations. Before the National Security Law coming into effect, the judicature in Hong Kong had changed already. Afterward, it will only get worse.
In legal cases of western countries with a common law system, “promoting” and ‘instigating” are not considered criminal acts because they are intents which are intangible, invisible and unprovable, and it is hardly possible to demarcate “instigating” from “appealing” , and “promoting” from “advocating”. Yet, in recent years, Hong Kong courts have been making sentences based on the offence of “inciting”. Under the National Security Law, it is barely feasible for me to talk the court out of sentencing me for “inciting” with my commentaries.
I just write to put forward my viewpoints that are open to free interpretations of which I do not have foreknowledge, whereby I can ensure my writings do not “incite” Hong Kong citizens to “loathe” the central and SAR government. However, once the sentiment is generated, the author is embroiled in a legal case.
The National Security Law states that “the HKSAR shall promote national security education in schools and through social organisations, the media, the internet and other means”. Is it a crime not to promote “national security education” in schools and through the media and the internet, inasmuch as it is a law already?
Two words “and universities” were put after “in schools” in the English edition issued three days after the promulgation of the Law. Shall we follow the Chinese or English edition? Will there be more updates coming up?
Two days ago, the Committee for Safeguarding National Security established in accordance with the National Security Law issued “Detailed Rules for Implementation” in a meeting, in which Article 5 stipulates that the authorities shall “call for information about activities relating to Hong Kong from foreign and Taiwan’s political organizations and their respective representatives.” If foreign and Taiwan’s political organizations and their representatives do not provide the police with information as required, the relevant personnel will face 6 months in jail and a fine of HKD100,000 upon conviction; if the information provided is fake, incorrect or incomplete, a 2-year jail and a fine of HKD100,000 are expected.
How is the implementation of the National Security Law enforced on overseas countries and Taiwan? How are people in those countries convicted of the crime? Will wolf warriors be dispatched to the U.S. and Taiwan to snatch them back to Hong Kong? Taiwan Executive Yuan President Su Tsengchang responded, “The law enacted in China goes so far as to exercise jurisdiction over everywhere and all the peoples around the world, even over Taiwan.”
The National Security Law and its enforcement is too elusive for ordinary people to understand, and impalpable for writers to manoeuvre. If it is too precarious for one to tread a tightrope, staying away from it is an easy way out. Is it the writing or the person that should stay away from it? This is exactly the entanglement a lot of writers and I cannot stay away from for now.
if there is anything incorrect 在 莊逸希 Facebook 的最佳貼文
Recently I’ve seen many rumors circulating about me and enormous amounts of hate. This is no surprise to me. I know that since most people are not aware of the full meaning of the climate crisis (which is understandable since it has never been treated as a crisis) a school strike for the climate would seem very strange to people in general.
So let me make some things clear about my school strike.
In may 2018 I was one of the winners in a writing competition about the environment held by Svenska Dagbladet, a Swedish newspaper. I got my article published and some people contacted me, among others was Bo Thorén from Fossil Free Dalsland. He had some kind of group with people, especially youth, who wanted to do something about the climate crisis.
I had a few phone meetings with other activists. The purpose was to come up with ideas of new projects that would bring attention to the climate crisis. Bo had a few ideas of things we could do. Everything from marches to a loose idea of some kind of a school strike (that school children would do something on the schoolyards or in the classrooms). That idea was inspired by the Parkland Students, who had refused to go to school after the school shootings.
I liked the idea of a school strike. So I developed that idea and tried to get the other young people to join me, but no one was really interested. They thought that a Swedish version of the Zero Hour march was going to have a bigger impact. So I went on planning the school strike all by myself and after that I didn’t participate in any more meetings.
When I told my parents about my plans they weren’t very fond of it. They did not support the idea of school striking and they said that if I were to do this I would have to do it completely by myself and with no support from them.
On the 20 of august I sat down outside the Swedish Parliament. I handed out fliers with a long list of facts about the climate crisis and explanations on why I was striking. The first thing I did was to post on Twitter and Instagram what I was doing and it soon went viral. Then journalists and newspapers started to come. A Swedish entrepreneur and business man active in the climate movement, Ingmar Rentzhog, was among the first to arrive. He spoke with me and took pictures that he posted on Facebook. That was the first time I had ever met or spoken with him. I had not communicated or encountered with him ever before.
Many people love to spread rumors saying that I have people ”behind me” or that I’m being ”paid” or ”used” to do what I’m doing. But there is no one ”behind” me except for myself. My parents were as far from climate activists as possible before I made them aware of the situation.
I am not part of any organization. I sometimes support and cooperate with several NGOs that work with the climate and environment. But I am absolutely independent and I only represent myself. And I do what I do completely for free, I have not received any money or any promise of future payments in any form at all. And nor has anyone linked to me or my family done so.
And of course it will stay this way. I have not met one single climate activist who is fighting for the climate for money. That idea is completely absurd.
Furthermore I only travel with permission from my school and my parents pay for tickets and accommodations.
My family has written a book together about our family and how me and my sister Beata have influenced my parents way of thinking and seeing the world, especially when it comes to the climate. And about our diagnoses.
That book was due to be released in May. But since there was a major disagreement with the book company, we ended up changing to a new publisher and so the book was released in august instead.
Before the book was released my parents made it clear that their possible profits from the book ”Scener ur hjärtat” will be going to 8 different charities working with environment, children with diagnoses and animal rights.
And yes, I write my own speeches. But since I know that what I say is going to reach many, many people I often ask for input. I also have a few scientists that I frequently ask for help on how to express certain complicated matters. I want everything to be absolutely correct so that I don’t spread incorrect facts, or things that can be misunderstood.
Some people mock me for my diagnosis. But Asperger is not a disease, it’s a gift. People also say that since I have Asperger I couldn’t possibly have put myself in this position. But that’s exactly why I did this. Because if I would have been ”normal” and social I would have organized myself in an organisation, or started an organisation by myself. But since I am not that good at socializing I did this instead. I was so frustrated that nothing was being done about the climate crisis and I felt like I had to do something, anything. And sometimes NOT doing things - like just sitting down outside the parliament - speaks much louder than doing things. Just like a whisper sometimes is louder than shouting.
Also there is one complaint that I ”sound and write like an adult”. And to that I can only say; don’t you think that a 16-year old can speak for herself? There’s also some people who say that I oversimplify things. For example when I say that "the climate crisis is a black and white issue”, ”we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases” and ”I want you to panic”. But that I only say because it’s true. Yes, the climate crisis is the most complex issue that we have ever faced and it’s going to take everything from our part to ”stop it”. But the solution is black and white; we need to stop the emissions of greenhouse gases.
Because either we limit the warming to 1,5 degrees C over pre industrial levels, or we don’t. Either we reach a tipping point where we start a chain reaction with events way beyond human control, or we don’t. Either we go on as a civilization, or we don’t. There are no gray areas when it comes to survival.
And when I say that I want you to panic I mean that we need to treat the crisis as a crisis. When your house is on fire you don’t sit down and talk about how nice you can rebuild it once you put out the fire. If your house is on fire you run outside and make sure that everyone is out while you call the fire department. That requires some level of panic.
There is one other argument that I can’t do anything about. And that is the fact that I’m ”just a child and we shouldn’t be listening to children.” But that is easily fixed - just start to listen to the rock solid science instead. Because if everyone listened to the scientists and the facts that I constantly refer to - then no one would have to listen to me or any of the other hundreds of thousands of school children on strike for the climate across the world. Then we could all go back to school.
I am just a messenger, and yet I get all this hate. I am not saying anything new, I am just saying what scientists have repeatedly said for decades. And I agree with you, I’m too young to do this. We children shouldn’t have to do this. But since almost no one is doing anything, and our very future is at risk, we feel like we have to continue.
And if you have any other concern or doubt about me, then you can listen to my TED talk ( https://www.ted.com/…/greta_thunberg_the_disarming_…/up-next ), in which I talk about how my interest for the climate and environment began.
And thank you everyone for you kind support! It brings me hope.
/Greta
Ps I was briefly a youth advisor for the board of the non profit foundation “We don’t have time”. It turns out they used my name as part of another branch of their organisation that is a start up business. They have admitted clearly that they did so without the knowledge of me or my family. I no longer have any connection to “We don’t have time”. Nor has anyone in my family. They have deeply apologised and I have accepted their apology.
if there is anything incorrect 在 Sascha Heusermann 賀少俠 Facebook 的精選貼文
It’s been a while since I’ve posted something introspective, but now is a good time.
I went on a vacation to Bali and it was wonderful. It soothed my soul and helped me look differently at some things. I feel more fulfilled now. I needed the time off to just get away, spend time with an old friend and only do the things I want to do.
Now, after my short hiatus from social media, I feel responsible to let everyone know a few things.
Being a celebrity is not easy, even just being a minor one in a small country like Taiwan. One gets criticized a lot for all kinds of things, mostly for things that aren’t even true. Some people say “Why do you care what the haters say? Just ignore them.” My answer to that is this: I honestly do not emotionally care if a stranger doesn’t like me and talks badly about me. If anything, I pity those people who have to make themselves feel better by talking negatively about someone they don’t know at all. BUT - and this is where things get complicated - I HAVE to care what people think for the sake of my career. My success is directly dependent on how many people know me and like me. On a personal level it doesn’t matter to me if you don’t like me, but on a professional level it does.
I sometimes get very negative comments on social media, incorrect assumptions and offensive questions. There are many ways of how I could handle such interactions with people on social media. In the past, I used to reply to every comment. But I can’t do that anymore. It was too time consuming and emotionally exhausting when I realized that many times negative people don’t even want to know what I really think. And even if they did know, they wouldn’t agree with me on everything because they are not me. Another way to deal with this would be to just ignore all negative comments. But I don’t feel like that is the right thing to do either. I want people to know that I do listen to criticism. I don’t believe that every negative person is a hater and I’m willing to listen to all sides. I want people to know that I am grateful for the support they give me, so I couldn’t in good conscience ignore all those people who take their precious time to follow my life and comment on it.
So I have to find a healthy middle ground of interacting with fans and haters and minding my own business. Sometimes, when I feel it’s necessary to set some things straight, I will do it. Other times, when I don’t reply to someone’s comment, please don’t think it’s because I don’t read it, don’t care or want to save face. I just can’t reply to everyone and oftentimes no reply will suffice.