Asian-Americans Are Being Attacked. Why Are Hate Crime Charges So Rare?
On a cold evening last month, a Chinese man was walking home near Manhattan’s Chinatown neighborhood when a stranger suddenly ran up behind him and plunged ( ) a knife into his back.
For many Asian-Americans, the stabbing ( ) was horrifying, but not surprising. It was widely seen as just the latest example of racially targeted violence against Asians during the pandemic.
But the perpetrator ( ), a 23-year-old man from Yemen, had not said a word to the victim before the attack, investigators ( ) said. Prosecutors ( ) determined they lacked enough evidence to prove a racist ( ) motive ( ). The attacker was charged with attempted murder, but not as a hate crime ( ).
The announcement outraged ( ) Asian-American leaders in New York City. Many of them protested ( ) outside the Manhattan district attorney’s office, demanding that the stabbing be prosecuted as a hate crime. They were tired of what they saw as racist assaults being overlooked ( ) by the authorities ( ).
The rally ( ) reflected the tortured ( ) public conversation over how to confront ( ) a rise in reports of violence against Asian-Americans, who have felt increasingly vulnerable ( ) with each new attack. Many incidents have either not led to arrests or have not been charged as hate crimes, making it difficult to capture with reliable data the extent to which Asian-Americans are being targeted.
That frustration erupted on a national scale ( ) this week after Robert Aaron Long, a white man, was charged with fatally shooting eight people, including six women of Asian descent ( ), at spas in the Atlanta area on Tuesday night.
Other incidents that clearly seemed racially motivated have not resulted in arrests. The police are still searching for a man who called an Asian-American mother the “Chinese virus” and spat ( ) at her child in Queens last week.
In New York State, to charge ( ) such attacks as hate crimes, prosecutors would need to show that the victims were targeted because of their race.
But proving a racist motive can be particularly difficult with attacks against Asians, experts say. There is no widely recognized symbol of anti-Asian hate comparable to a noose ( ) or a swastika ( ). Historically, many Asian crime victims around the country were small-business owners who were robbed, complicating ( ) the question of motive.
Under New York State law, certain offenses can be upgraded to hate crimes, increasing the potential prison sentence ( ). As evidence, prosecutors often point to hateful verbal statements or social media posts by the defendant ( ).
In the past month alone, several assaults ( ) on Asian victims have been reported to the police, including an attack on an older woman who was pushed outside a bakery in Queens. None of the incidents has been charged as a hate crime.
In fact, the only person who has been prosecuted for an anti-Asian hate crime in New York City this year is Taiwanese. He was accused of writing anti-Chinese graffiti outside several businesses in Queens.
Wayne Ho, president of the Chinese-American Planning Council, a social services agency, said many of his Asian colleagues were verbally harassed ( ) during the pandemic but chose not to alert law enforcement because they worried the perpetrators, who were often people of color, could be mistreated ( ) by the police.
“I asked myself, do I want this person in jail?” said Alice Wong, one of Mr. Ho’s colleagues. “Just because you put someone in jail doesn’t make them not hate anyone anymore.”
Recognizing ( ) this challenge, some law enforcement officials have called for people who commit hate crimes to attend antiracism classes as an alternative ( ) to prison.
為何針對亞裔的暴力襲擊難以被控仇恨犯罪?
上月一個寒冷的晚上,一名華裔男子在曼哈頓中國城社區附近步行回家時,一個陌生人突然跑到他身後,把刀刺進他的後背。
對許多亞裔美國人來說,這起事件令人驚恐,但並不意外。人們普遍認為,這只是在疫情期間針對亞裔的種族暴力的最新例子。
但調查人員表示,行兇者是一名23歲的葉門男子,他在襲擊前沒有對受害者說過一句話。檢察官認為缺乏足夠的證據來證明種族主義動機。襲擊者被指控謀殺未遂,而不是出於仇恨犯罪。
這一聲明激怒了紐約市的亞裔美國人領袖。他們中的許多人在曼哈頓地區檢察官辦公室外抗議,要求以仇恨犯罪的罪名起訴。他們厭倦了他們眼中的種族主義攻擊被當局忽視。
這次集會反映了對於如何應對暴力侵害亞裔美國人的報導增多,公眾開始了痛苦的討論。每一次新的襲擊都讓亞裔美國人感到越來越脆弱。許多事件要不是沒有逮捕任何人,就是沒有被指控為仇恨犯罪,因此很難用可靠的數據來了解亞裔美國人在多大程度上成為攻擊目標。
在白人男子羅伯特•亞倫•朗(Robert Aaron Long)被控週二晚在亞特蘭大地區的水療中心開槍打死八人(其中包括六名亞裔女性)後,這種不滿情緒本週在全國範圍內爆發。
其他明顯帶有種族動機的事件並沒有導致逮捕。目前警方仍在搜尋一名男子,此人上週在皇后區稱一名亞裔美國母親為「中國病毒」,並向她的孩子吐口水。
在紐約州,要指控此類襲擊為仇恨犯罪,檢察官需要證明受害者是因其種族而成為攻擊目標。
但專家表示,在針對亞裔的攻擊中,證明種族主義動機可能特別困難。沒有一種被廣泛認可的反亞裔仇恨象徵可以對應套索或納粹符號。歷史上,全國各地的許多亞裔犯罪受害者都是被搶劫的小商店業者,這使得動機問題變得更加複雜。
根據紐約州的法律,某些犯罪行為可以升級為仇恨犯罪,從而增加潛在的監禁刑期。作為證據,檢察官經常指出被告充滿仇恨的口頭聲明或社群媒體發文。
僅在過去的一個月中,警方就接到了數起針對亞裔受害者的襲擊報告,其中包括在皇后區一名老年女性被推出一家麵包店。沒有任何事件被指控為仇恨犯罪。
實際上,紐約市今年因反亞裔仇恨罪被起訴的唯一一人是台灣人。他被指控在皇后區的幾家商店外塗鴉反華內容。
社會服務機構華裔美國人規劃委員會(Chinese-American Planning Council)主席韋恩•何(Wayne Ho)表示,他的許多亞裔同事在疫情大流行期間受到了口頭騷擾,但他們選擇不向執法部門報告,因為他們擔心騷擾者(通常是有色人種)可能會受到警方的虐待。
「我問自己,我想讓這個人進監獄嗎?」韋恩•何的同事愛麗絲•黃(Alice Wong)說。「把一個人關進監獄並不會讓他們不再憎恨任何人。」
認識到這一挑戰,一些執法官員呼籲犯下仇恨罪行的人參加反種族歧視課程,以替代坐牢。
#高雄人 #學習英文 #多益達人林立英文
#高中英文 #成人英文
#多益家教班 #商用英文
#國立大學英文學系講師
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「to some extent example」的推薦目錄:
- 關於to some extent example 在 多益達人 林立英文 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於to some extent example 在 Taipei Ethereum Meetup Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於to some extent example 在 范疇文集 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於to some extent example 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於to some extent example 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於to some extent example 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於to some extent example 在 "to a degree" vs. "to an extent" - English Stack Exchange 的評價
- 關於to some extent example 在 Learn English vocabulary EXTENT meaning Hindi ... - YouTube 的評價
to some extent example 在 Taipei Ethereum Meetup Facebook 的最佳解答
📜 [專欄新文章] Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth
✍️ 田少谷 Shao
📥 歡迎投稿: https://medium.com/taipei-ethereum-meetup #徵技術分享文 #使用心得 #教學文 #medium
Once again the game-changing DEX 🦄 👑
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Outline
0. Intro1. Uniswap & AMM recap2. Ticks 3. Concentrated liquidity4. Range orders: reversible limit orders5. Impacts of v36. Conclusion
0. Intro
The announcement of Uniswap v3 is no doubt one of the most exciting news in the DeFi place recently 🔥🔥🔥
While most have talked about the impact v3 can potentially bring on the market, seldom explain the delicate implementation techniques to realize all those amazing features, such as concentrated liquidity, limit-order-like range orders, etc.
Since I’ve covered Uniswap v1 & v2 (if you happen to know Mandarin, here are v1 & v2), there’s no reason for me to not cover v3 as well ✅
Thus, this article aims to guide readers through Uniswap v3, based on their official whitepaper and examples made on the announcement page. However, one needs not to be an engineer, as not many codes are involved, nor a math major, as the math involved is definitely taught in your high school, to fully understand the following content 😊😊😊
If you really make it through but still don’t get shxt, feedbacks are welcomed! 🙏
There should be another article focusing on the codebase, so stay tuned and let’s get started with some background noise!
1. Uniswap & AMM recap
Before diving in, we have to first recap the uniqueness of Uniswap and compare it to traditional order book exchanges.
Uniswap v1 & v2 are a kind of AMMs (automated market marker) that follow the constant product equation x * y = k, with x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y in a pool and k as a constant.
Comparing to order book exchanges, AMMs, such as the previous versions of Uniswap, offer quite a distinct user experience:
AMMs have pricing functions that offer the price for the two tokens, which make their users always price takers, while users of order book exchanges can be both makers or takers.
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have infinite liquidity¹, while order book exchanges don’t. The liquidity of Uniswap v1 & v2 is provided throughout the price range [0,∞]².
Uniswap as well as most AMMs have price slippage³ and it’s due to the pricing function, while there isn’t always price slippage on order book exchanges as long as an order is fulfilled within one tick.
In an order book, each price (whether in green or red) is a tick. Image source: https://ftx.com/trade/BTC-PERP
¹ though the price gets worse over time; AMM of constant sum such as mStable does not have infinite liquidity
² the range is in fact [-∞,∞], while a price in most cases won’t be negative
³ AMM of constant sum does not have price slippage
2. Tick
The whole innovation of Uniswap v3 starts from ticks.
For those unfamiliar with what is a tick:
Source: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tick.asp
By slicing the price range [0,∞] into numerous granular ticks, trading on v3 is highly similar to trading on order book exchanges, with only three differences:
The price range of each tick is predefined by the system instead of being proposed by users.
Trades that happen within a tick still follows the pricing function of the AMM, while the equation has to be updated once the price crosses the tick.
Orders can be executed with any price within the price range, instead of being fulfilled at the same one price on order book exchanges.
With the tick design, Uniswap v3 possesses most of the merits of both AMM and an order book exchange! 💯💯💯
So, how is the price range of a tick decided?
This question is actually somewhat related to the tick explanation above: the minimum tick size for stocks trading above 1$ is one cent.
The underlying meaning of a tick size traditionally being one cent is that one cent (1% of 1$) is the basis point of price changes between ticks, ex: 1.02 — 1.01 = 0.1.
Uniswap v3 employs a similar idea: compared to the previous/next price, the price change should always be 0.01% = 1 basis point.
However, notice the difference is that in the traditional basis point, the price change is defined with subtraction, while here in Uniswap it’s division.
This is how price ranges of ticks are decided⁴:
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
With the above equation, the tick/price range can be recorded in the index form [i, i+1], instead of some crazy numbers such as 1.0001¹⁰⁰ = 1.0100496621.
As each price is the multiplication of 1.0001 of the previous price, the price change is always 1.0001 — 1 = 0.0001 = 0.01%.
For example, when i=1, p(1) = 1.0001; when i=2, p(2) = 1.00020001.
p(2) / p(1) = 1.00020001 / 1.0001 = 1.0001
See the connection between the traditional basis point 1 cent (=1% of 1$) and Uniswap v3’s basis point 0.01%?
Image source: https://tenor.com/view/coin-master-cool-gif-19748052
But sir, are prices really granular enough? There are many shitcoins with prices less than 0.000001$. Will such prices be covered as well?
Price range: max & min
To know if an extremely small price is covered or not, we have to figure out the max & min price range of v3 by looking into the spec: there is a int24 tick state variable in UniswapV3Pool.sol.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf
The reason for a signed integer int instead of an uint is that negative power represents prices less than 1 but greater than 0.
24 bits can cover the range between 1.0001 ^ (2²³ — 1) and 1.0001 ^ -(2)²³. Even Google cannot calculate such numbers, so allow me to offer smaller values to have a rough idea of the whole price range:
1.0001 ^ (2¹⁸) = 242,214,459,604.341
1.0001 ^ -(2¹⁷) = 0.000002031888943
I think it’s safe to say that with a int24 the range can cover > 99.99% of the prices of all assets in the universe 👌
⁴ For implementation concern, however, a square root is added to both sides of the equation.
How about finding out which tick does a price belong to?
Tick index from price
The answer to this question is rather easy, as we know that p(i) = 1.0001^i, simply takes a log with base 1.0001 on both sides of the equation⁴:
Image source: https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php
Let’s try this out, say we wanna find out the tick index of 1000000.
Image source: https://ncalculators.com/number-conversion/log-logarithm-calculator.htm
Now, 1.0001¹³⁸¹⁶² = 999,998.678087146. Voila!
⁵ This formula is also slightly modified to fit the real implementation usage.
3. Concentrated liquidity
Now that we know how ticks and price ranges are decided, let’s talk about how orders are executed in a tick, what is concentrated liquidity and how it enables v3 to compete with stablecoin-specialized DEXs (decentralized exchange), such as Curve, by improving the capital efficiency.
Concentrated liquidity means LPs (liquidity providers) can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish, which causes the liquidity to be imbalanced in ticks.
As each tick has a different liquidity depth, the corresponding pricing function x * y = k also won’t be the same!
Each tick has its own liquidity depth. Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Mmm… examples are always helpful for abstract descriptions 😂
Say the original pricing function is 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k), with the price of X token 1000 / 100 = 10 and we’re now in the price range [9.08, 11.08].
If the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is the same as [9.08, 11.08], we don’t have to modify the pricing function if the price goes from 10 to 11.08, which is the boundary between two ticks.
The price of X is 1052.63 / 95 = 11.08 when the equation is 1052.63 * 95 = 100000.
However, if the liquidity of the price range [11.08, 13.08] is two times that of the current range [9.08, 11.08], balances of x and y should be doubled, which makes the equation become 2105.26 * 220 = 400000, which is (1052.63 * 2) * (110 * 2) = (100000 * 2 * 2).
We can observe the following two points from the above example:
Trades always follow the pricing function x * y = k, while once the price crosses the current price range/tick, the liquidity/equation has to be updated.
√(x * y) = √k = L is how we represent the liquidity, as I say the liquidity of x * y = 400000 is two times the liquidity of x * y = 100000, as √(400000 / 100000) = 2.
What’s more, compared to liquidity on v1 & v2 is always spread across [0,∞], liquidity on v3 can be concentrated within certain price ranges and thus results in higher capital efficiency from traders’ swapping fees!
Let’s say if I provide liquidity in the range [1200, 2800], the capital efficiency will then be 4.24x higher than v2 with the range [0,∞] 😮😮😮 There’s a capital efficiency comparison calculator, make sure to try it out!
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
It’s worth noticing that the concept of concentrated liquidity was proposed and already implemented by Kyper, prior to Uniswap, which is called Automated Price Reserve in their case.⁵
⁶ Thanks to Yenwen Feng for the information.
4. Range orders: reversible limit orders
As explained in the above section, LPs of v3 can provide liquidity to any price range/tick at their wish. Depending on the current price and the targeted price range, there are three scenarios:
current price < the targeted price range
current price > the targeted price range
current price belongs to the targeted price range
The first two scenarios are called range orders. They have unique characteristics and are essentially fee-earning reversible limit orders, which will be explained later.
The last case is the exact same liquidity providing mechanism as the previous versions: LPs provide liquidity in both tokens of the same value (= amount * price).
There’s also an identical product to the case: grid trading, a very powerful investment tool for a time of consolidation. Dunno what’s grid trading? Check out Binance’s explanation on this, as this topic won’t be covered!
In fact, LPs of Uniswap v1 & v2 are grid trading with a range of [0,∞] and the entry price as the baseline.
Range orders
To understand range orders, we’d have to first revisit how price is discovered on Uniswap with the equation x * y = k, for x & y stand for the amount of two tokens X and Y and k as a constant.
The price of X compared to Y is y / x, which means how many Y one can get for 1 unit of X, and vice versa the price of Y compared to X is x / y.
For the price of X to go up, y has to increase and x decrease.
With this pricing mechanism in mind, it’s example time!
Say an LP plans to place liquidity in the price range [15.625, 17.313], higher than the current price of X 10, when 100(x) * 1000(y) = 100000(k).
The price of X is 1250 / 80 = 15.625 when the equation is 80 * 1250 = 100000.
The price of X is 1315.789 / 76 = 17.313 when the equation is 76 * 1315.789 = 100000.
If now the price of X reaches 15.625, the only way for the price of X to go even higher is to further increase y and decrease x, which means exchanging a certain amount of X for Y.
Thus, to provide liquidity in the range [15.625, 17.313], an LP needs only to prepare 80 — 76 = 4 of X. If the price exceeds 17.313, all 4 X of the LP is swapped into 1315.789 — 1250 = 65.798 Y, and then the LP has nothing more to do with the pool, as his/her liquidity is drained.
What if the price stays in the range? It’s exactly what LPs would love to see, as they can earn swapping fees for all transactions in the range! Also, the balance of X will swing between [76, 80] and the balance of Y between [1250, 1315.789].
This might not be obvious, but the example above shows an interesting insight: if the liquidity of one token is provided, only when the token becomes more valuable will it be exchanged for the less valuable one.
…wut? 🤔
Remember that if 4 X is provided within [15.625, 17.313], only when the price of X goes up from 15.625 to 17.313 is 4 X gradually swapped into Y, the less valuable one!
What if the price of X drops back immediately after reaching 17.313? As X becomes less valuable, others are going to exchange Y for X.
The below image illustrates the scenario of DAI/USDC pair with a price range of [1.001, 1.002] well: the pool is always composed entirely of one token on both sides of the tick, while in the middle 1.001499⁶ is of both tokens.
Image source: https://uniswap.org/blog/uniswap-v3/
Similarly, to provide liquidity in a price range < current price, an LP has to prepare a certain amount of Y for others to exchange Y for X within the range.
To wrap up such an interesting feature, we know that:
Only one token is required for range orders.
Only when the current price is within the range of the range order can LP earn trading fees. This is the main reason why most people believe LPs of v3 have to monitor the price more actively to maximize their income, which also means that LPs of v3 have become arbitrageurs 🤯
I will be discussing more the impacts of v3 in 5. Impacts of v3.
⁷ 1.001499988 = √(1.0001 * 1.0002) is the geometric mean of 1.0001 and 1.0002. The implication is that the geometric mean of two prices is the average execution price within the range of the two prices.
Reversible limit orders
As the example in the last section demonstrates, if there is 4 X in range [15.625, 17.313], the 4 X will be completely converted into 65.798 Y when the price goes over 17.313.
We all know that a price can stay in a wide range such as [10, 11] for quite some time, while it’s unlikely so in a narrow range such as [15.625, 15.626].
Thus, if an LP provides liquidity in [15.625, 15.626], we can expect that once the price of X goes over 15.625 and immediately also 15.626, and does not drop back, all X are then forever converted into Y.
The concept of having a targeted price and the order will be executed after the price is crossed is exactly the concept of limit orders! The only difference is that if the range of a range order is not narrow enough, it’s highly possible that the conversion of tokens will be reverted once the price falls back to the range.
As price ranges follow the equation p(i) = 1.0001 ^ i, the range can be quite narrow and a range order can thus effectively serve as a limit order:
When i = 27490, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹⁰ = 15.6248.⁸
When i = 27491, 1.0001²⁷⁴⁹¹ = 15.6264.⁸
A range of 0.0016 is not THAT narrow but can certainly satisfy most limit order use cases!
⁸ As mentioned previously in note #4, there is a square root in the equation of the price and index, thus the numbers here are for explantion only.
5. Impacts of v3
Higher capital efficiency, LPs become arbitrageurs… as v3 has made tons of radical changes, I’d like to summarize my personal takes of the impacts of v3:
Higher capital efficiency makes one of the most frequently considered indices in DeFi: TVL, total value locked, becomes less meaningful, as 1$ on Uniswap v3 might have the same effect as 100$ or even 2000$ on v2.
The ease of spot exchanging between spot exchanges used to be a huge advantage of spot markets over derivative markets. As LPs will take up the role of arbitrageurs and arbitraging is more likely to happen on v3 itself other than between DEXs, this gap is narrowed … to what extent? No idea though.
LP strategies and the aggregation of NFT of Uniswap v3 liquidity token are becoming the blue ocean for new DeFi startups: see Visor and Lixir. In fact, this might be the turning point for both DeFi and NFT: the two main reasons of blockchain going mainstream now come to the alignment of interest: solving the $$ problem 😏😏😏
In the right venue, which means a place where transaction fees are low enough, such as Optimism, we might see Algo trading firms coming in to share the market of designing LP strategies on Uniswap v3, as I believe Algo trading is way stronger than on-chain strategies or DAO voting to add liquidity that sort of thing.
After reading this article by Parsec.finance: The Dex to Rule Them All, I cannot help but wonder: maybe there is going to be centralized crypto exchanges adopting v3’s approach. The reason is that since orders of LPs in the same tick are executed pro-rata, the endless front-running speeding-competition issue in the Algo trading world, to some degree, is… solved? 🤔
Anyway, personal opinions can be biased and seriously wrong 🙈 I’m merely throwing out a sprat to catch a whale. Having a different voice? Leave your comment down below!
6. Conclusion
That was kinda tough, isn’t it? Glad you make it through here 🥂🥂🥂
There are actually many more details and also a huge section of Oracle yet to be covered. However, since this article is more about features and targeting normal DeFi users, I’ll leave those to the next one; hope there is one 😅
If you have any doubt or find any mistake, please feel free to reach out to me and I’d try to reply AFAP!
Stay tuned and in the meantime let’s wait and see how Uniswap v3 is again pioneering the innovation of DeFi 🌟
Uniswap v3 Features Explained in Depth was originally published in Taipei Ethereum Meetup on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
👏 歡迎轉載分享鼓掌
to some extent example 在 范疇文集 Facebook 的最讚貼文
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/
to some extent example 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳貼文
to some extent example 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳貼文
to some extent example 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的精選貼文
to some extent example 在 Learn English vocabulary EXTENT meaning Hindi ... - YouTube 的推薦與評價
Learn what does Extent means in English through Hindi, Urdu. ... EXTENT meaning Hindi, Example sentences with word Extent with translation. ... <看更多>
to some extent example 在 "to a degree" vs. "to an extent" - English Stack Exchange 的推薦與評價
Examples : To [some degree / some extent] that is a better solution. To [a degree / an extent], she is correct. ... <看更多>