2012年11月1日,自由亚洲电台藏语部主任阿沛˙晋美(Jigme Ngabo)突遭辞退,引发轩然大波。藏语部绝大多数员工签署联名信,请求晋美留任。一起被辞退的藏语部记者嘉央诺布(Jamyang Norbu)连发数文,披露了一些不为外人所知的隐情。其他声援晋美的人士也纷纷撰文,针对自由亚洲电台和西藏流亡政府做出种种质疑和猜测。有论者称,晋美事件将流亡藏人中长期积压的矛盾公开化了。【该台常年顾问莫拉•莫伊尼汉(Maura Moynihan)将此称为“丑闻”,藏人作家安乐业称之为“闹剧”。】(中括号内语句在刊发时被删除,下同——作者)
毕研韬:流亡藏人的多重困境
毕研韬:流亡藏人的多重困境
2012年11月1日,自由亚洲电台藏语部主任阿沛˙晋美(Jigme Ngabo)突遭辞退,引发轩然大波。藏语部绝大多数员工签署联名信,请求晋美留任。一起被辞退的藏语部记者嘉央诺布(Jamyang Norbu)连发数文,披露了一些不为外人所知的隐情。其他声援晋美的人士也纷纷撰文,针对自由亚洲电台和西藏流亡政府做出种种质疑和猜测。有论者称,晋美事件将流亡藏人中长期积压的矛盾公开化了。【该台常年顾问莫拉•莫伊尼汉(Maura Moynihan)将此称为“丑闻”,藏人作家安乐业称之为“闹剧”。】(中括号内语句在刊发时被删除,下同——作者)
Dalai Lama, Tibet and Western Media
Factual Errors or Factual Distortions?
Continue reading »
minipost-Liu Xiaobo
1 Comment » newest
Wikipedia: “Liu Xiaobo … President of the Independent Chinese PEN Center since 2003”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Xiaobo
Grants to Liu Xiaobo, President of ICPC, “Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc.”, from the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), a US government entity:
Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc. (2009)
http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/asia/china
Scroll down to “Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc.”
$152,950
Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc. (2007)
$135,000
http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-reports/2007-annual-report/asia/description-of-2007-grants/china
Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Inc. (2006)
$135,000
http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-reports/2006-annual-report/asia/description-of-2006-grants/china
Total sum from NED for Independent Chinese PEN Centre: US $422 950
Chinese PEN Center is not the only source of money for Liu Xiaobo. He also gets money from NED for Minzhu Zhongguo, “Democratic China, Inc.”, where he is the Founder:
http://www.ned.org/where-we-work/asia/china
Scroll down to “Democratic China, Inc.”
$195,000 (2009)
$18,000 (Supplement)
Democratic China, Inc.
$145,000 (2007)
http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-reports/2007-annual-report/asia/description-of-2007-grants/china
Democratic China, Inc.
$136,000 (2005)
http://www.ned.org/publications/annual-reports/2005-annual-report/asia/description-of-2005-grants/china
Total sum Democratic China, Inc. from NED: $ 494 000
Total support from NED during the three years is US$ 916 950 which is about 7 million yuan – a huge sum of money in China – where salaries are about 20% of the level in Western countries.
NED (National Endowment for Democracy) is funded by the American government, and is subject to congressional oversight – which is a prettier word for “government control”. The purpose is to fund individuals, political parties and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) favourable to US interests.
The payment from NED to US-friendly groups is not a new thing. Eric T. Hale showed in his dissertation (2003) that during the 1990s, China and Russia were awarded the highest number of NED grants with 222 and 221, respectively. Total payment to groups in China during these ten years was astonishing US$ 20.999.229, which equals 140 million Chinese yuan.
http://etd.lsu.edu/docs/available/etd-1105103-140728/unrestricted/Hale_dis.pdf
In 1991, Allen Weinstein, who helped draft the legislation establishing NED, candidly said: “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.” In effect, the CIA launders money through NED. (Washington Post, Sept.22, 1991)
New York Times wrote on December 4, 1985: “The National Endowment for Democracy is a quasi-governmental foundation created by the Reagan Administration in 1983 to channel millions of Federal dollars into anti-Communist ‘private diplomacy.'”
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/l/labor_role_in_politics/index.html?s=oldest&query=POLITICS%20AND%20GOVERNMENT&field=des&match=exact
Republican congressman from the Texas Gulf Coast, Dr. Ron Paul, who is more Libertarian than Republican, writes: “The misnamed National Endowment for Democracy is nothing more than a costly program that takes US taxpayer funds to promote favored politicians and political parties abroad. What the NED does in foreign countries … would be rightly illegal in the United States.”
http://www.iefd.org/articles/paying_to_make_enemies.php
Former CIA-agent Ralph McGehee writes: “… the current US policy of using (rightly or wrongly) the theme of human rights violations to alter or overthrow non-US-favored governments. In those countries emerging from the once Soviet Bloc that is forming new governmental systems; or where emerging or Third World governments resist US influence or control, the US uses ‘human rights violations,’ as an excuse for political action operations. ‘Human Rights’ replaces ‘Communist Conspiracy’ as the justification for overthrowing governments.”
Patrick French writes “The NED constitutes, so to speak, the CIA’s “civilian arm”.”
In that meaning The Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s decision becomes a political plot, and Liu Xiaobo becomes an American agent.
What to make of all the popular uprisings always going on in China
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/elizabeth-perry-on-popular-protest-china
Xinran on understanding China
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/xinran-on-understanding-china
Dissidents need to be heard more, in my view.
Here, another interview about books I’d like to post, with Laogai survivor, Harry Wu.
Sophie
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/harry-wu-on-communist-china
China coming to terms with the Cultural Revolution
He chooses the five best books on it and also says that China is in denial about it and needs to come to terms with it, that it’s not healthy:
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/rod-macfarquhar-on-cultural-revolution
The Politics of Tsering Dhondup’s tears
No Comments » newest
There are few outside of China and Tibet who have heard of Tsering Dhondup, a ten-year-old Tibetan boy who saw his home and the homes of all his neighbors completely flattened in the 6.9 quake. Since then, he’s been living with his family in a temporary shelter in the local stadium in Jyekundo, the town most affected by the disaster, where 85% of the mud-brick houses like Tsering’s were destroyed.
Tsering volunteered to work as a translator for a Chinese medical team that was treating Tibetan survivors. The state-controlled national news channel CCTV, Chinese Central Television, aired a report about him that on April 17, three days after the earthquake….
Read full article and watch the Youtube video here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-novick/chinese-media-courts-the_b_562163.html
“总体战”与国际博弈/毕研韬
No Comments » newest
就战争而言,德国军事家埃里希•冯•鲁登道夫说,“总体战不单单是军队的事,它直接涉及到参战国每个人的生活和精神。”就和平年代的国际博弈来看,“总体战”不单单是政府的事,它延伸到“参战国”的所有领域,涉及所有组织和个人。当今的国际博弈往往在传媒、政治、经济、文化、社会、外交、军事、情报等领域同步展开,以整合型传播谋求最大影响力。
美国国防部长罗伯特•盖茨说,“从长远来看,我们无法通过杀戮或俘虏来夺取胜利。在20世纪,非军事行动——劝说和激励——是赢得意识形态对抗的重要武器。在21世纪同样如此,甚至更为重要。”为此,美国人致力于提升国家“巧实力”。美国国务卿克林顿•希拉里大力推行“全民外交”和“互联网外交”。
美国主流舆论要求工商、慈善、宗教、传媒、教育、文化、NGO乃至普通公民都肩负起外交使命。政治学者迈克尔•哈特和安东尼奥•内格雷认为,当今时代的权力主体不仅有传统的民族国家,还有超国家机构、非政府组织和资本(譬如跨国公司)。相对而言,中国尚未培育出多元化的国际博弈主体,目前的政府单一模式成本高、效益低。
和平时期的国际博弈主要体现为信息博弈。“总体战”原则要求综合考虑传播主体、传播渠道、传播对象、传播内容、传播目标和传播效果。一切以成本最小化、效益最大化为指针。对此,美国前副国务卿夏洛蒂•比尔斯直言不讳:“我会选择任何传播方式,只要它有效。”这和阿道夫•希特勒的格言“我会使用一切手段击败敌人”并无二致。
国际博弈的目标是保障国家利益最大化。无论针对公众还是精英,国际传播的主要目的是影响目标国家的决策者。美国政治学者加布里埃尔•阿尔蒙德把外交决策过程中的舆论主体分为四类:普通公众、关注问题的公众、舆论精英和政策精英。要影响目标国家的政策制订,就必须洞悉对方的舆论环境和决策机制,系统考虑利益相关者之间的相互影响。
加拿大学者赵月枝指出,“美国的文化统治已经演变成跨国公司文化的统治”;“传播系统是与军事和金融力量并列的帝国的三股主要支撑力量之一”;“帝国已把自己的触角深入到非政府非商业领域,把这些组织纳入自己的轨道,将其当作可变通的实现自己目标的途径。”换言之,帝国早已把新闻媒体、跨国企业、民间组织都改造成了“前端组织”,建立起了一个无孔不入的“影子国家”。
N渠道外交是当今国际交流的常态。美国前副国务卿凯伦•休斯主张通过“四个E”,即接触(Engage)、交流(Exchange)、教育(Education)和授权(Empower),来开展公共外交、保障国家利益。西方学者坦承,交战国的新闻媒体也往往处于冲突状态。即使在和平年代,每当国家利益冲突加剧时,新闻媒体和公共舆论也会彼此对立。但在双边利益较为一致时,非官方传播主体更容易达到“润物细无声”的理想境界。新闻媒体难以超越国家利益。
“总体战”贯穿于宏观、中观和微观层次的国际交往中。从具体作业看,西方学者认为,信仰、价值观和(或)动机共同塑造态度,而态度影响行为。虽然对外传播的终极目标是影响对方的行为,但这不可强求。传播目标要根据对方的信仰、价值观、动机和态度而定。传播目标因此可分为五个层次:动摇对方、减少对抗、改变态度、强化利我态度、催生利我行为。在其它条件不变的情况下,不同的传播目标需要不同的传播内容。
每个人都是特定群体、组织中的人,都会程度不同地受信息环境的影响。所以,针对不同的目标群体,我们需要采取多元化诉求策略,需要同时影响特定目标及其周边意见领袖,以防止舆论环境与我方影响相抵触。”总体战”要求通盘考虑传播作业的时间、空间、媒介等要素整合。传播作业强调技战术配合。由相同或不同的传播者,在相同或不同场合下,针对相同或不同的目标,通过相同或不同的媒介,传递相同或不同的信息,对传播效果的影响十分明显。
传播理论和传播模式在与时俱进,“善行外交”、“公共外交2.0”、“思想战”等新概念层出不穷。西方的传播作业早已进入运用实验、统计等加以论证的精密科学时代,其结果恰如马来西亚前总理马哈蒂尔所说,美国“垄断了一切理由”。对台售武有理、进攻伊拉克有理、出兵阿富汗有理、制裁朝鲜有理、支持达赖喇嘛有理,“发动战争来终止战争”也有理。在国际博弈中,只有有效“合法化”自己的权力、政策和行为,才能保障国家利益最大化。
至于中美关系,专门探讨中国事务的境外博客网站Fool’s Mountain 上常有精辟见解。博主r v认为,中美之间自20世纪八十年代末就已处于Cold Erosion War状态。他在答复笔者询问时解释说,此处的erosion大致相当于flooding(淹没),所以Cold Erosion War可以勉强译为“冷淹战”。他认为,美国一直在试图“淹没”中国,而中国也在试图“消蚀”美国的影响力。显然,r v所指的“冷淹战”是“冷战”的一种新形式,而“冷淹战”只能是“总体战”。
(©2010 版权所有。印刷媒体转载须经作者同意。毕研韬系海南大学传播学研究中心主任、【北京】三略研究院传播学研究所所长)
What do you do if it says “No photographs and video taping” ?
The ongoing talks about Mainland Chinese’s civic conscience and daily public behavior are mostly negative. But it is not always racially prejudicial nor finger pointing. All we have to do is to look at this guy Haison Jiang and listen to his friends. He defiantly sneaked through Newark’s Liberty Airport and caused a 6 hour delay and pain for several thousand people. Forget about what the US should do or do to that TSA guard who stepped away. They should improve, make changes and the guard should be reprimanded, etc, etc.. But the fingers should all point at Jiang. With people like this, what can we really do? Why he did it? Here is the interesting part:
Jiang’s friend said, “He didn’t mean anything malicious!”. That’s it! These are well educated graduate students. Not poor peasants from some rural villages. That showed how low and distorted their sense of right or wrong has become. As long as Jiang did not carry a bomb, what’s the big deal if he ignored the signs and rules? How clumsy and inefficient the Americans are.
Who said Jiang was malicious and did it have to be malicious? It all comes down to “pay no attention to the rules”, “pay no mind to other people” and “pay no mind to the signs”. I don’t think Jiang meant anything malicious. So are those who spit in front of you, talk loudly on subway trains, cutting in front of people who are waiting in line, taking pictures and videos where it is clearly prohibited, smoking where they shouldn’t ……. No wonder they said China has more freedom than the US.
My uncle spat on the rug in a restaurant in Guangzhou and said it was okay because the workers would clean the floor every night anyway. He didn’t mean to be malicious. I don’t even think that those who sold tainted baby milk meant to be malicious. They just wanted to make more money and couldn’t care less about anyone else. These are just characteristics of a people whose values had been distorted first by a brutal and destructive period of time and then by a materially rich but morally poor and intellectually stifling system. A political system that believes that by having control, censorship, a single voice, a single national ideology and a single life’s aspiration will lead to a safe and harmonious society.
At my age, I am not sad any more. China is still not free. It is a authoritative state. The crime is: it sweetens the bitterness by corrupting the mind of its people. Everyone becomes materialistic. The most rewarding and safest way to live in China is being materialistic. I don’t give a damn for the people who choose to ignore this part of China and just go for its wealth and opportunities. I don’t feel any part of this “rising great nation”. But the West is going to learn. It may not be China’s toys, drywall, tires, bogus CDs, or its money and military might that will bother and scare the West. It may well come down to someone who urinate in their streets. The latter is more realistic.
被遗忘的天空
Note: This is a submission for our bilingual essay contest
一
笔者系苏北徐州籍学生,想仅就当地的农村教育做下简单的分析。
众所周知,江苏为教育大省。而处于苏北的徐州,经济发展虽远落后于苏南,而较西北偏远地区的城市也还算可以的了。那么请跟随笔者来粗略了解下我们的农村教育现状吧。
笔者当年初中未读至一半,即有学生陆续辍学,更多的则是中考一完毕就踏入了社会。当中辍学的学生,固然有着学习压力的原因,但对于大批量读完初中就不愿继续求学的学生,我们应该作何解释呢?
在此之前,请允许我想说下这些辍学或者接受完初中教育的学生,大都从事的工作。以笔者所在村子和附近村庄为例,初中结业的学生,多在附近作坊式的工厂从事车床或气焊工作,或跟随长辈或投靠亲友学习手艺。工作作业时间长、劳动量的繁重使得部分人选择了外出务工,还有小部分走上了不务正业的道路。(笔者当年的同学,就有一些被捕入狱的。这委实不能不让人感到心痛。)
还有一些学生在读完初中初中之后,读了技校,再之后的谋生手段也就因人而异了。至于念完高中并顺利完成大学本科教育的,究竟是少数。更多的则是如上所述,而且及早地(结婚法定年龄在这里不作数)就已结婚生子。初中成了一个分水岭,教育的链条自此开裂。
二
这其中的原因,依笔者浅见有三。一为学费高昂。高中三年所需学杂费大体要接近三万,再加上两万元就可以盖一栋小楼了。正是基于这种所谓小农经济心理,很多人放弃了教育的投资,另谋出路。二来是读书无用论的流行。大量大学毕业生找不到工作或者工资低下的传闻,让农民们心灰意冷,完全看不到了出路。身处这种影响之下的孩子们的心境,我们也可想而知。一方面是家境的贫寒,另一方面是高中学习的重压和读书无用论的作祟,两面夹击,放弃成了非常合理的选择。
三是农村教师教育方式上的简单粗暴。这点在小学和初中表现得尤为突出。欧打学生者有之,谩骂学生者有之,讽刺学生者亦有之。身体上的伤害和心理上侮辱,严重伤了孩子们纯真的心,使他们及早地埋下了愤恨的种子,视残酷为正常。笔者当年就曾亲睹初中同学因被老师用黑板擦砸到眼镜,而和老师大打出手,事后毅然决然地将课桌搬回家,再也没返回校园。
三
面对这样的教育现状,笔者以为可以采取以下措施来谋求改变。首先政府切实减轻农村学生负担:九年义务教育期间课本公用,杂费减少,这使得他们可以选择继续投资更高的教育;像宣传计划生育一样加强知识改变命运的宣传,强调教育的重要性,给农民们一个希望,哪怕它很遥远。
第二,提高农村教育者工资(相对城市教师严重低下的工资,又如何不让他们感到生活的重压呢?);定期对农村教师进行教育心理学等相关培训,学习和理解温柔地对待学生、呵护学生。能被老师温暖的学生,都是有福的。
这点最重要。
第三,初中课程开设阅读课,提供书籍,让农村的学生了解世界,放眼世界,坚定学习知识的心。
四
在今天这样的体制之下,笔者上述几点建议实行起来似乎也是困难重重。然而这并意味着这样的现状还要继续维持下去,并且完全没有改观的可能。笔者在此希望更多的有心之士,能够向所有的农村孩子多投注一点的目光,多增加一份关怀。
被遗忘的天空
Note: This is a submission for our bilingual essay contest
一
笔者系苏北徐州籍学生,想仅就当地的农村教育做下简单的分析。
众所周知,江苏为教育大省。而处于苏北的徐州,经济发展虽远落后于苏南,而较西北偏远地区的城市也还算可以的了。那么请跟随笔者来粗略了解下我们的农村教育现状吧。
笔者当年初中未读至一半,即有学生陆续辍学,更多的则是中考一完毕就踏入了社会。当中辍学的学生,固然有着学习压力的原因,但对于大批量读完初中就不愿继续求学的学生,我们应该作何解释呢?
在此之前,请允许我想说下这些辍学或者接受完初中教育的学生,大都从事的工作。以笔者所在村子和附近村庄为例,初中结业的学生,多在附近作坊式的工厂从事车床或气焊工作,或跟随长辈或投靠亲友学习手艺。工作作业时间长、劳动量的繁重使得部分人选择了外出务工,还有小部分走上了不务正业的道路。(笔者当年的同学,就有一些被捕入狱的。这委实不能不让人感到心痛。)
还有一些学生在读完初中初中之后,读了技校,再之后的谋生手段也就因人而异了。至于念完高中并顺利完成大学本科教育的,究竟是少数。更多的则是如上所述,而且及早地(结婚法定年龄在这里不作数)就已结婚生子。初中成了一个分水岭,教育的链条自此开裂。
二
这其中的原因,依笔者浅见有三。一为学费高昂。高中三年所需学杂费大体要接近三万,再加上两万元就可以盖一栋小楼了。正是基于这种所谓小农经济心理,很多人放弃了教育的投资,另谋出路。二来是读书无用论的流行。大量大学毕业生找不到工作或者工资低下的传闻,让农民们心灰意冷,完全看不到了出路。身处这种影响之下的孩子们的心境,我们也可想而知。一方面是家境的贫寒,另一方面是高中学习的重压和读书无用论的作祟,两面夹击,放弃成了非常合理的选择。
三是农村教师教育方式上的简单粗暴。这点在小学和初中表现得尤为突出。欧打学生者有之,谩骂学生者有之,讽刺学生者亦有之。身体上的伤害和心理上侮辱,严重伤了孩子们纯真的心,使他们及早地埋下了愤恨的种子,视残酷为正常。笔者当年就曾亲睹初中同学因被老师用黑板擦砸到眼镜,而和老师大打出手,事后毅然决然地将课桌搬回家,再也没返回校园。
三
面对这样的教育现状,笔者以为可以采取以下措施来谋求改变。首先政府切实减轻农村学生负担:九年义务教育期间课本公用,杂费减少,这使得他们可以选择继续投资更高的教育;像宣传计划生育一样加强知识改变命运的宣传,强调教育的重要性,给农民们一个希望,哪怕它很遥远。
第二,提高农村教育者工资(相对城市教师严重低下的工资,又如何不让他们感到生活的重压呢?);定期对农村教师进行教育心理学等相关培训,学习和理解温柔地对待学生、呵护学生。能被老师温暖的学生,都是有福的。
这点最重要。
第三,初中课程开设阅读课,提供书籍,让农村的学生了解世界,放眼世界,坚定学习知识的心。
四
在今天这样的体制之下,笔者上述几点建议实行起来似乎也是困难重重。然而这并意味着这样的现状还要继续维持下去,并且完全没有改观的可能。笔者在此希望更多的有心之士,能够向所有的农村孩子多投注一点的目光,多增加一份关怀。
minipost-Films are Powerful Connector Among Culturally Different People – AMBASSADOR OF TAIWAN
No Comments » newest
minipost-[Translation] The Chairman’s Clothes Can Not Be Patched?
No Comments » newest
A day in the Summer of 1963, I went to Zhongnanhai’s laundry to fetch the Chairman’s clothes. The comrad at the laundry said the Chairman’s pajama is too old, can’t be washed, and is it time for new one? Few days later, I was eating with the Chairman. He was wearing the very pajama.
I said: “Chairman, time to change your pajama this year?”
The Chairman casually said: “The nation is going thru some difficulties, patching will do!”
I hushed a complaint: “But you’re the Chairman.”
“Oh, I’m the Chairman, Chairman’s closthes can’t be patched? Aren’t you wearing patched clothes?”
“Chairman, you and I are different.” I explained.
“How are we different, because I’m the Chairman? Aren’t I but one among the People?”
美国博客抗议纽约帝国大厦庆祝中国60周年
No Comments » newest
根据纽约村庄之声博客 Roy Edroso, 红黄楼灯引起了美国博客们的义愤:
“帝国大厦腥血浸渗” – “Empire State Building, Drenched in Blood”
“先, 2/20/09 中共马克思主义标志飞在白宫…现在帝国大厦加入共产党…” – “First, we had the Red Chinese COMMUNIST government Flag flying at the Marxist House on 2.20.09…Now we have the Empire State building in NYC going all communist…”
“以后马克思、列宁、托洛茨基生日也要庆祝?” – “What’s next, Marx, Lenin and Trotsky’s birthday’s too?”
“令人作呕.” – “This is disgusting.”
“我们应该庆祝美国的共产革命, 庆祝有一天将拥有我们的中国 – “It’s only fitting we celebrate America’s own recent communist revolution by honoring the Chinese who will someday be our overlords”
“纪念现代邪恶帝国中国的谋杀犯和强奸犯令人作呕” – “Disgusting to honor the mudders and rapests of mordern evil empire China.”
minipost-Buffett praise for Chinese suits
12 Comments » newest
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8262477.stm
This is free advertising for Made-in-China corp. – different from another bad story on bad quality on Chinese products.
The story has a kind, warm human touch too. Thanks Buffett!
minipost-The Chinese Female Army: a liability or an asset.
19 Comments » newest
This is also the reason China has been invaded so many times.
You be the judge and let me know whether yours is a male’s point of view or a female’s.
郭宝锋, 你妈妈叫你不要诽谤警察
5 Comments » newest
她也说你不应该翻发假证据, 指责警察轮奸, 尸奸, 并涵盖了轮奸. 据美国计划生育组织这案件于宫外孕是一致的. 警方调查严晓玲的男朋友,他们的朋友,尸检,也证明她的死亡原因是子宫外孕, 卵管破裂,大量出血,休克.
你指责验尸官拔出子宫毁灭证据,但是,你知道拔出器官是尸检标准?你 Google 一下 “Rokitanski metnod” 好不好? 这和你认为严重轮奸可以打破卵管显示你缺乏基本知识.
郭宝锋, 你妈妈叫你不要诽谤警察.
minipost-Letter: Wen’s secret diary
No Comments » newest
参加88岁老太太的生日聚会却还要象小学生一样端端正正的坐着,她还真把自己当成我亲娘了,我亲娘也不会让人如此憎恨。我也不小了,70多岁人的身子骨,又不是铁人贝卢斯科尼,这样直着腰坐2个小时真是快要人命了。
CCTV的镜头像一双婴儿的眼睛盯着我,但我又不能有任何感情的流露,这种场合又不需要我哭。我只好逼直腰板,凝视前方,我觉得我的肉笑了,但是皮可能没有笑。
有时候我真的很想不明白的事情是岳敏君的那些笑脸真的有那么值钱吗?我把我这辈子锻炼下来的表情,随便拍张照都比他的强,还需要小辈们在水泥砖头里面原始积累吗?不过话又说回来积累都是很原始的。说实话除了卖卖鞋子衬衫这些,我们也想不出哪些地方能来钱。当然房地产除外了。
说起房地产我这几天右眼就跳个不停,上海那幢楼难道是个征兆?今年银根已经松得不能再松了,用近平同志的话就是比小姐的裤带还松了,大家还不是想齐心把楼市给救起来?确实也看到了些小成绩,全国楼价5月开始大幅回升,江还用短信给我发了好几个赞字,老狐狸永远不忘赶时髦,不知道贝卢斯科尼有没有请他,还是把该给我的请帖给他了?唉!各扫门前雪,莫管他人风流事。上海是他的地盘,看他怎么处理了。顶多再给他们数落北京无能的一次机会吧,去年把杨同学揍成性无能,我就觉得是个征兆。
我还是忍不住去出事的小区的网上论坛看了下,我感觉我们的民意支持率已经连布朗首相的工党都赶不上了,甚至还赶不上新纳粹党,不知道布朗还愿不愿意和我换?不过也只有他或许还能在中国政坛有的混,看来他还是接受了我今年春天和他私下谈话的建议,死不下台是我们两党的最大共同点,只可惜他们马上还有大选。我记得当时他给我的建议是让我们也来次大选,说是“合法化进程”。当时我还觉得可行,我想以我的人气要打败习公子之流就如探囊取物。不过出了伊朗的事情,现在没人再提这件事情了,他没内衣对英国恨之入骨,还问我们要不要向英国宣战,还真把我们当红军了。
不过网上现在很多脏水是泼到我身上的,弄得我里外不是人,老百姓骂我炒房总理,房产商骂我想孟姜女哭倒长城。最让我受不了的是竟然有人恶搞我的地震名言为“多难兴楼市”,想我一句“多难兴邦”迷倒了多少教授、专家、学者、作家、记者、主持人?不知道教育部的同志有没有安排把这句话写进小学生课本?最好放在比江打油诗高一年级的课本。
好了,闲言碎语了那么多,已经是明天的日记了。今天总算过完了。
minipost-Honduras, Iran, and China, Part Deux, Detractors missing basic point
But the detractors of the current “new government” of Honduras miss the fundamental contradictions of their own arguments.
They argue that “this is not a coup, because ex-President Zelaya was removed for a good reason”. But that is simply an “end justifies the means” argument. Military Coups are wrong, not because we judged upon the justifications of the coups, but because we recognize that use of military force to change a government is simply the wrong means. It cannot be a Constitutional method.
They argue that “this is not a coup, because the military acted under the order of the Supreme Court of Honduras.” But they simply miss the point of even having a Supreme Court. A Supreme Court cannot simply make an order legal, when the Articles of Constitution of Honduras clearly does not prescribe “exile”. “Removal” simply means removal from official authority. After that, Zelaya would be powerless to act upon anything, but he should still be able to rally his supporters as legitimate politcal expression. “Arrest” or “Exile” are fundamentally beyond the scope of “removal” as written in the Constitution of Honduras.
In this, I am reminded of the foundational principle of “Separation of Power”, and “Judicial restraint” in many Democracies.
In US history, a case was decided by the US Supreme Court, Marbury v. Madison, where the justices refused to sanction President Thomas Jefferson for ordering non-delivery of “appointment letters” for several judges. Thomas Jefferson had essentially refused to execute laws and appointments passed by the US Congress on the previous term. The US Supreme Court avoided the confrontation with the Executive body by dismissing the case on a “standing” issue.
The US Supreme Court believed that such issues would work themselves out by the People over the long term. And “judicial restraint” means that the court should refrain from making any orders to compel the other 2 political branches in show downs. Let alone use the military or side with the military in any arguments with the President.
They speak of the “unconstitutional referendum”, and how unpopular Zelaya is. But if he is indeed unpopular, then why worry about the “referendum”? Even if he won the “referendum”, it would not legally change the “Constitution”. The Honduran high court has already ruled that the “referendum” would have no legal effect on the Constitution.
The detractors have simply missed the whole point. The fundamental wrongfulness of “military coup” is in the madness of the “method”. Undoubtedly, many previous military coups listed similar “justifications”, but we do not look up the “justifications”, only the process of law. Whether Zelaya should be removed is not the question, but whether the Supreme Court of Honduras had the legal authority order “exile”, and whether the military of Honduras could legally execute such an order.
For such an order, and such justifications, the Supreme Court and the Military of Honduras, have done far more damage to the Democratic process of Honduras than a single Zelaya could possibly do with his “referendum”.
Had Zelaya succeeded in his “referendum”, it would at least be representative of the People’s will, and political branches of Honduran government can reach compromises, or even stand firm and refuse to accept Zelaya as President for a new term. (Surly that cannot be that difficult, if Zelaya is so unpopular.)
But now, we have a precedent of Honduran Supreme Court ordering the military to “remove” a president into “exile”.
The damage to the credibility of the Court’s impartiality and the military’s non-involvement in politics is untold.
And now, the Supreme Court of Honduras will have to deal with the consequential question, can they now be “removed into exile” by the foreign and domestic supporters of Zelaya? Whatif tomorrow, 1 of the generals use his troops to “remove” the Justices into “exile” on the order of Congress?
*
I for one, now finally and fully appreciate the wisdom of Justice Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, and the principle of Judicial restraint.
Recent Comments