關於 indefinitely中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

Cheers! Our movie ‘Babi’ has been shortlisted by the Around International Film Festival and Thai Film Festival! Kop kun krap!🙏🙏🙏

To be frank, I have completed 2 films last year, one was ‘Nasi Lemak 1.0’ which was filmed above board and another film was ‘BABI’ which was filmed secretly. We never talked openly about this project because it is a banned film (Well, it’s pretty obvious even from the film title…) and we don’t want to get into unnecessary attention…

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the release date of ‘Nasi Lemak 1.0’ has been delayed indefinitely and it has caused quite a big deal to us… While we were amidst of the dark clouds, we found our silver linings! ‘BABI’ was selected in 2 internationally famed film festivals, the ARFF Berlin (Around International Film Festival Berlin) and the International Thai Film Festival! We were really really happy about it!

‘BABI’ is a film based on a real-life event, the movie sheds light on a massive school racial riot which took place in year 2000 in a small town somewhere Southern in Malaysia. During that time Malaysia was still under the authoritarian rule of one-dominant party, abuse of power and corruption were frequent, media and news were being stringently controlled and filtered. Thus, the incident was being ‘compromised’ by relevant authority, most of Malaysians doesn’t know about this incident.

The script was actually written 7 years ago, the main reason that the film was not in production that time was because nobody would ever consider to invest on a zero-profit, must-be banned film. The second reason was I had no idea whom should I ask for help, I believed after hearing the film title, everyone would be scared off... Yet in the end, I’m still managed to finish this film with a very very very tight budget. I want to thank all the people who have contributed greatly to the movie, especially the producer Joko Toh

We decided to put the 7-year-old script in production is to tell the truth behind the story but most importantly sending a message to all Malaysians that we must be more unified disregard of our ethnicity and race. In short, we shall always lend a helping hand to each others and communicate with our hearts and souls, therefore we won’t be exploited by politicians who incite racial sentiment to reach their end goal. Otherwise, more tragic like this will happens…

The idea of be able to screen this film in Malaysia has never crossed my mind before, that’s why we never tried to register the film after the production. Rightly next, I hope that this film can be seen elsewhere other than at Thailand’s or Germany’s film festival, I wish there are better methods in exposing the film and to reach out to everyone. Currently, we are still on our lofty quest but please do cheer for us! Happy Merdeka Day in advance! Malaysia Boleh!

*Versi BM*
Tahniah! Filem kami [BABI] telah dipilih dalam Around International Film Festival dan Thai Film Festival ! Kop Kun Krap! 🙏🙏🙏

Sebenarnya pada tahun lepas kami telahpun menghasilkan dua buah filem. Yang pertama adalah filem [Nasi Lemak 1.0] yang penggambarannya dijalankan dengan berani dan terang, satu lagi adalah filem [BABI] dimana proses penggambaran dijalankan dalam keadaan yang sulit dan rahsia. Kami tidak pernah membuat apa-apa pengumuman mengenai perkara ini, kerana khuathir filem ini akan menimbulkan kontroversi (lihat sajalah nama filemnya...) Kami tidak mahu memburukkan keadaan.

Disebabkan isu pandemik Covid-19, filem [Nasi Lemak 1.0] tidak dapat ditayangkan di pawagam dan telah membawa kerugian yang teruk pada kami. Walaubagaimanapun kami menerima berita baik berkenaan pemilihan filem [BABI] dalam dua festival filem antarabangsa yang berprestij iaitu ARFF Berlin (Around International Film Festival Berlin) serta International Thai Film Festival! Kami berasa amat gembira!

Filem [BABI] adalah lakonan semula sebuah rusuhan perkauman yang berlaku di sebuah sekolah menengah yang terletak di bahagian selatan Malaysia pada tahun 2000. Pada ketika itu Malaysia masih berada di bawah kepemimpinan parti yang dominan. Pemimpin-pemimpin menyalahgunakan kuasa dan pihak media dikawal sepenuhnya oleh kerajaan. Oleh yang demikian, tragedi ini akhirnya telah 'diselesaikan' oleh pihak tertentu dan rakyat Malaysia telah 'disekat' dari peristiwa tersebut.

Skrip asal untuk filem [BABI] telah saya tulis sejak 7 tahun yang lalu. Namun antara sebab utama saya tidak dapat menghasilkan filem ini adalah kerana isu modal, kerana tiada yang sudi mengeluarkan modal untuk sebuah filem yang mungkin akan diharamkan dan tidak akan ditayangkan di pawagam. Sebab kedua adalah kerana saya tidak tahu siapa yang akan sudi menghasilkan filem ini bersama saya kerana saya pasti, hanya dengan mendengar namanya saja sudah tentu tiada yang akan ingin mengambil bahagian. Namun dengan segala daya usaha dari semua pihak yang sudi membantu dan menerusi modal yang teramat-amat rendah, kami akhirnya berjaya menghabiskan filem ini. Saya dengan ikhlas ingin berterima kasih pada semua krew, petugas, pelakon dan kakitangan belakang tabir yang terlibat dalam menjayakan filem ini, terutamanya penerbit Joko Toh

Tujuan utama kami merealisasikan skrip yang ditulis sejak 7 tahun yang lalu adalah untuk membongkar perkara sebenar seluruh peristiwa ini. Juga menerusi filem ini, kami ingin menyampaikan mesej betapa pentingnya perpaduan dan keharmonian diantara kaum supaya dielak dari dipergunakan oleh ahli politik demi untuk mencapai matlamat dan motif masing-masing. Jika tidak, kami percaya pasti pasti lebih banyak tragedi ngeri bakal berlalu...

Tak pernah terlintas dalam fikiran kami untuk menayangkan filem ini di Malaysia. Oleh yang demikian, kami tak pernah mohon dari mana-mana pihak berkenaan permohonan penayangan. Kami berharap selepas ini, filem ini bukan saja akan ditayangkan di festival filem Berlin dan Thailand, kami mahu supaya filem [BABI] dapat ditonton oleh lebih ramai penonton di seluruh dunia. Kami akan tetap berusaha, silalah berdoa dan sokong usaha kami! Selamat Hari Kemerdekaan untuk Malaysia! Malaysia Boleh!

*中文翻譯*
恭喜恭喜! 我們的電影【BABI/你是豬】入選了【ARFF環球國際電影節(柏林)】還有【泰國國際電影節】! Kop kun krap! 🙏🙏🙏

其實去年我在馬來西亞完成了兩部電影拍攝，一部是光明正大在拍的叫【辣死你媽-續集】，而另一部電影則是秘密進行的，叫【BABI/你是豬】。這件事情從頭到尾我們都沒有公開過，因為這是一部禁片（看戲名就知道了），我們不想節外生枝...

【辣死你媽-續集】因為疫情的緣故沒辦法上映，造成了嚴重的虧損... 當我們在愁雲慘霧之際，卻收到了天大的好消息! 就是【BABI/你是豬】入圍了國際上著名的兩大影展 【ARFF環球國際電影節(柏林)】和【泰國國際電影節】! 真的很開心!

【BABI/你是豬】真人真事改編自一起大型校園種族暴動事件，發生在2000年馬來西亞南方小鎮的一所學校裡。當時的馬來西亞處在一黨獨大，濫權腐敗，媒體被嚴格控管及消息封鎖的階段。因此這起事件在當時已被相關單位“和諧”，在馬來西亞幾乎沒有人知道。

其實這是我七年前寫的劇本，我沒拍出來的第一個原因，當然是因為沒有人會願意把錢丟進一部即將被禁，賺不回本的電影裡。第二個原因則是我當時不知道要找誰幫我拍，相信聽到這個戲名，大家應該都怕了吧... 但最後我還是以很低很低成本的方式，拜託了很多人幫忙，才完成了這部電影。真的要謝謝參與電影拍攝的每一個台前幕後的人，尤其監製 Joko Toh。

我們決定要把這部七年前的劇本拍出來的目的，就是要揭露整起暴動事件的真相，也要藉此電影提醒馬來西亞人，種族之間必須更團結，互助，交流，才不會一直被政治人物利用，以操弄種族情緒而達到政治目的。否則將會發生更多類似的悲劇...

我從來都沒有想過這部電影能夠在馬來西亞上映，所以我們拍完了之後從來都沒有拿去申請過。接下來，希望這部電影不止在泰國和德國的影展能看到，期待以後能夠以更光明正大的方式讓所有人都能看到。我們還在努力中，請為我們加油吧！預祝馬來西亞獨立日快樂! Malaysia Boleh!

FINAS Malaysia Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) Polis Diraja Malaysia ( Royal Malaysia Police ) #LPF Lembaga Penapisan Filem

【After Winning Majority in LegCo: Beijing's Crackdown May Trigger International Intervention】

***感謝Hong Kong Columns - Translated，將我早前撰寫『議會過半想像：以「#國際攬炒」反制「臨立會2.0」』長文（https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.313299448762570/2887650867994069/）翻譯成英文，鼓勵國際社會關注立會選舉一旦過半的沙盤推演，在最惡劣形勢下的制衡策略。***

中文精簡版本：https://www.facebook.com/joshuawongchifung/photos/a.564294826996363/2888641404561682/

Hongkongers have experienced our revolution for over half a year. They no longer take a consequentialist view to the effectiveness of their movement as they did years ago, or waste time second-guessing the intentions and background of fellow activists. Following the defensive battles at CUHK and PolyU, November’s District Council election saw a great victory of unity. More marvellous is the union between peaceful and “valiant” protesters.

In the process of resisting tyranny, the people have realised that one cannot prioritize one strategy over another. This is also how the common goal of “35+” came into being—the hope that we will win over half of the seats in the Legislative Council (LegCo) this September, such that the political spectrum that represents the majority of Hongkongers is able to gain control of legislative decisions. The political clout of Hongkongers will increase if 35 or more seats are successfully secured on our side. It is certainly one vital step to achieve the five demands within the system.

The possibility of realizing legislative majority

Technically it is not unrealistic to win a majority even under the current undemocratic system. Back in the 2016 LegCo election, we already won 30 seats. In addition to the District Council (First) functional constituency seat that is already in the pocket of the pan-democrats, as long as the candidates in Kowloon East and New Territories West do not start infighting again, we could safely secure 33 seats based on the number of pan-dem votes in 2016.

The other 3 seats required to achieve a majority depend on democrats’ breakthrough among the functional constituencies by dispersing the resources of the Liaison Office. They also count on whether the turnout this September could exceed 71.2% — that of last year’s District Council elections. Some of the factors that could affect the turnout include: will the epidemic persist into the summer? Will there be potential violent repression of protests in the 2 weeks preceding the election? Will Hong Kong-US relations be affected by the downturn of the global economy?

Therefore, the ambition of “35+” is to be prioritised by the resistance as both a means and an end. I have already expressed my support for an intra-party primary at the coordination meeting. In the meantime, it is pleasing to see the ongoing debates reaching a consensus of maximising the seats among geographical constituencies in the upcoming election.

Whilst enthusiastic coordination, we should also assess the post-election landscape and gauge Beijing’s reactions: if we do not reach 35 seats, Hong Kong will be subject to tighter control and more severe repression by China; but if the democratic parties successfully form a majority in LegCo, CCP’s fears of a “constitutional crisis” would become imminent. Hence, the key questions are how the Pan-Democrats should deal with the volatile political situation in Hong Kong and how they are going to meet Beijing’s charge head-on.

Watching out for Beijing’s dismissal of LegCo after reaching majority

To take back control of LegCo such that it faithfully reflects the majority’s principles and needs is the definition of a healthy democracy. Recently, however, DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung has warned that the plan of the Pan-Dems to “usurp power” in the LegCo would only lead to Beijing’s forceful disqualification of certain members or the interpretation of the Basic Law. This proves that winning a majority in LegCo is not only a popular conception but also a realistic challenge that would get on the nerves of Beijing. Could Beijing accept a President James To in LegCo? These unknown variables must be addressed upon achieving a majority.

While there is no telltale sign as to Beijing’s exact strategy, we are already familiar with the way CCP manipulated the Basic Law in the past 4 years. Having experienced three waves of disqualifications in LegCo, twice kicked out of LegCo with my team, and thrice locked up in jail, I have no false hopes of an easy compromise from Beijing: they would not let Pan-Dems control LegCo for half a year and wait (as is the proper procedure) until after having negatived the Budget to dissolve the legislature, and thereby giving them an easy victory in the re-elections. The greater the Pan-Dems threaten Beijing’s rule in Hong Kong, the more likely that it will trigger Beijing’s repression.

Since the disqualification and arrest of lawmakers have already become “normalised”, one can even imagine the police stepping into the LegCo building to force Pan-Dems into voting. Neither is it beyond our imagination to expect the CCP to kick out all 70 lawmakers in a fit of rage and replace them with a provisional LegCo “2.0” [HKCT note: The first was from 25 Jan 1997 to 30 Jun 1998]. To depend on a majority that could lead to a chapter of a “new testament” for One Country, Two Systems is perhaps what many elites long for, but they are overly optimistic:for a ticket to the promised land will not be available at the Chief Executive election campaign a year and a half later.

Admittedly, the Pan-Dems cannot unilaterally initiate “Laam-chaau” [HKCT note: mostly translated into “scorched-earth” mentality or “mutual destruction”; some even translated into “If I burn, you burn with us”]. The most they can do is to force a standstill of the government, and not for long the LegCo will have been eliminated from the equation to make the wheels turn again. It all leaves the plan of “Negativing the motion → Dissolving LegCo → Re-election after re-election → the stepping down of Carrie Lam” merely as overly positive speculation, probably resulting from their overestimate of CCP's capacity for rational calculation. The Pan-Dems must guard their frontlines and recognise what the biggest threat from Hong Kong to China could be. In this case, should LegCo sessions be disrupted or suspended, the Pan-Dems would have to be well prepared to surmount the expected obstacles and prevent the disqualification crisis 4 years ago—a Catch-22 indeed.

Productive tension from global intervention: Using Laam-chaau against the CCP

What aggravates the CCP the most is the potential threat to Hong Kong’s unique status as the one and only “separate customs territory”. Any miscalculation will compromise its role as the Chinese economy’s “white gloves”. Imagine if CCP were to disqualify all 70 elected lawmakers and convene a meeting north of the Shenzhen River to pass a resolution to Hong Kong’s affairs (much like the Provisional Legislative Council “1.0" in 1997), how great will the shock be in a world with an effective Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act? However hard it is to predict the future one thing is certain: With the US presidential election just around the corner, blows to the separation of powers would not be tolerated, and the West would necessarily effect countermeasures against the Hong Kong government.

Beijing has been relying upon Hong Kong to navigate the international community for decades. While clamping down on the political freedom of the cosmopolitan city, Beijing desires to maintain the financial centre’s economic freedom. Hence, we started lobbying for the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act four years ago, and today we are determined to promote “Laam-chaau” on an international scale.

The will of the voters must be reflected in an election. If a “35+” legislature were to be dismissed and replaced, such flagrant violation of democracy would assuredly cause a greater backlash than the infamous extradition bill. Knowing what the reality ahead of us could be, we have to combine our election and international strategies to oppose the placement of a 35+ LegCo with an “Emergency Legislative Council 2.0”, to advance an international “Laam-chaau” to Hong Kong’s status as “separate customs territory”. Only then will we stand a chance to resist the regime and to realise the five demands.

Adjusting our mindset: Overcoming the “constitutional crisis” to reach a resolution

Upon the realization of the “35+” LegCo, it is expected that the CCP will launch a devastating counterattack. The Pan-Dems should not expect LegCo to run normally; neither can the lawmakers realise their governing blueprints they have for Hong Kong. Rather, candidates will be able to compete against one another with visions of a liberated Hong Kong through popular vote. Bringing this point up has nothing to do with undermining the common goal of reaching a majority in LegCo, but rather channels the battle of LegCo to positive use upon the rule of law’s death and a “constitutional crisis” ahead. Knowing that Hongkongers have nothing to fall back on, all Pan-Dems should not miss the only way to the realization of “35+”.

Thus, be they partisans, nonpartisans, incumbent politicians, amateur politicians, or the civil society as a whole – if we stay in the political discourse of 2016 and continue to perpetuate old stereotypes, that is to deal with the divisions on the pan-democratic camp by favouring the most “local” faction; to consider only resource allocation and self-aggrandizement as the purpose of a LegCo campaign; to ignore how potential lawmakers are fitted to what specific roles; to turn a blind eye to the journey of resistance since last summer (extending indefinitely into the future)—They would lead as astray and cost us lose a precious opportunity for change by winning a 35+ majority.

The extent to which the pan-democrats can stay united in light of the political atmosphere since last summer is another problem that our side must to address. Before the watershed moment of 12th June 2019, many democratic delegates were trapped in the mentality of needing to “preserve people’s livelihood”, “be content of what we have accomplished”, and other strategies that favours stability. As the government refuses to heed to the five demands, whether the democrats, especially those in the functional constituencies, have the political will to go all-in is the real difficult question that confronts us in the upcoming LegCo election.

All in all, if “35+” cannot be realised, it is unsurprising to see LegCo being more heavily suppressed in the next 4 years; even if "35+" is achieved, it is questionable whether the pan-democrats are able to weather multiple attacks, verbal or physical, from the regime (judging from its power in the last four years) and utilise the international Laam-chaau strategy against the displacement of LegCo. Adhering to the motto of “we fight on, each in his own way”, I can only hope that Hongkongers in elections, street confrontations and international front can reconcile with each other, so that we may collectively compel the government to yield to our demands in the next six months. It is only by reaching a resolution before a real constitutional crisis that we can combat the institutional violence of the regime and not be devoured by it.

https://hkcolumn.blogspot.com/2020/04/joshua-wong-after-winning-majority-in.html?fbclid=IwAR216gf53pG_j9JOpDfr2GItvjLfrFSekKTPzoEs3-s9KBqvPEwz865P8vw

紐時專欄作家湯湯馬斯·佛里曼是我的偶像。

比喬治庫隆尼排名還要前面。

他昨天發出有關香港的評論，剛開始一段文字就抓住我的注意力了

“Hong Kong reminds us that people — God bless them — have both bodies and souls. And the great mistake that autocrats regularly make is thinking that they can thrive indefinitely by feeding just the first and not the second.“
”香港提醒我們，人民—上帝保佑他們—是既有肉體又有靈魂的。專制者經常犯的一個大錯誤是，他們認為只需要餵飽前者，不用理會後者，就可以永保江山千秋萬代。“

我這引的是紐時中文版自己的翻譯，但我還是鼓勵大家去看英文版，因為光標題就差很多。中文翻譯版本的標題是：“社群媒體成了香港抗議活動的雙刃劍”，但Freedman的原文是: “Hong Kong’s Protests Could Be Another Social Media Revolution That Ends in Failure。”香港抗議有可能成為另一個社群媒體革命失敗的案例。“

紐時中文版的翻譯不是錯，只是把很刺激的”failure”沒翻出來，文中佛里曼的確是在說社群媒體是雙刃劍。

佛里曼是在說，社群媒體的確是讓反抗極權的群眾更容易聚集人潮，幫助了革命，但社群媒體的特性也讓人們更無法妥協。在這個社群媒體興盛的年代，每個人都有意見，意見這麼多，就造成反抗勢力常常群龍無首，也沒有人能凝聚共識，因為妥協幾乎已不可能。只要稍微一妥協，馬上就會在網路上遭到排山倒海的攻擊。

另一個我覺得也非常強而有力的觀點，就是社群的力量能推翻的極權政府，通常是本來體質就很衰弱的極權政府，但對於效率很強的極權政府，像中國，社群媒體反而變成拿來控制民眾的工具。

其實佛理曼講的這些有關社群媒體的分析，不是沒有人講過。我佩服的是他的勇氣。他其實是在呼籲香港的年輕人要妥協，拿不到百分之百，要想想八十行不行，五十行不行?佛里曼在問，在五年前的雨傘運動之後，中國提出的妥協方式，很多朋友不能接受，但今天搞到這個地步，北京提出的方案，是會更好還是更差?

這也是困擾我自己很久的一件事。到我這年紀，我很清楚這世界就是不公平，我們能爭，但罩子也要放亮點，該妥協的時候，也還是要妥協，但跟年輕朋友講這個，有多少人能接受呢?對我來講，妥協是必要的，沒有妥協，如何做到民主核心的異中求同呢?

我在看三位反送中的代表性人物黃之鋒，何韻詩及張崑陽到美國國會參加聽證會時，我覺得很好，讓更多人知道香港的處境，一直到張崑陽說到，香港學生和香港人甚至準備好，為香港而死，一些人已經這麽做了。他們堅信，唯有一死才能打通自由的路，這是對鄉土最偉大的犧牲，我們絕不能忘記他們。

我敬佩他愛香港的情操，但”死“是不是能打通自由之路是我的疑問。這條路硬走下去，又怎麼妥協?

很多朋友還有這種想法，不會搞那麼嚴重的啦，國際社會一定會基於人道因素出手干預的。本週的琪斐大放送就是要談這個議題，什麼是人道干預?什麼時候國際社會會干預?干預的結果又是如何?

本周動眼神經選的是枋寮鄉鄉政顧問李孟居被中國依危害國家安全罪被逮補，仔細一看原來被中國逮捕的各國人士還真不少。

張嘉玲選的是阿里巴巴的創辦人馬雲退休了。盤點馬雲的作為，我最有興趣的是在越來鉗得越緊的習近平政府領導下，阿里巴巴在自由市場機制下，還能有原有的競爭力嗎?

📰紐約時報原文
https://reurl.cc/qDmQWq

--------------------------------------

《#范琪斐ㄉ寰宇漫遊》每週四晚間十點在 #寰宇新聞台 播出，沒跟上的也沒關係，歡迎訂閱我們的 YouTube 頻道 🔔#范琪斐ㄉ寰宇漫遊 🔔https://reurl.cc/ZvKM3 1030pm準時上傳完整版！