易中天：民主非明主，言论必须自由 Freedom is Not "Good Dictators"

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

易中天的对联经过几次修改后终于将“民主”与“明主”区分开了。 但用“国际歌”去作为他的分析基点说明了共产专制对语言标像与人的精神领域控制的顽固。 我希望所有华语系的人们懂得专制语言的强大力量并逐渐创造自由的语言词汇、音乐歌曲、标像符号。 这个过程是艰辛缓慢的，但是是必须的。

Kai Chen's Words:

Mr. Yi's poem, through many corrections, finally conveys the meaning of democracy to the best of Chinese language's capacity. But in the end when he uses the song "International" as an example to demonstrate his point, he was mistaken again. I only hope the Chinese speaking people realize the powerful effect of the despotic language, vocabulary, music, songs, symbols on the formation of our mindset. We must create new songs, new symbols, new language/vocabulary to combat despotism/tyranny that has reigned our mindset for thousands of years. This process toward freedom is painstaking, slow and hard. But it is a must if we truly want to be free.

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

易中天：民主非明主，言论必须自由

Freedom is Not "Good Dictators"

发电邮者按：

中国社会和中国文化之所以深陷封建专制，且久久不能自拔（戊戌，辛亥，党国，六4，）之祸害根源，正是孔教儒术的”君君臣臣”。也正因此，历代封建统治者才把孔教儒术供奉为至尊国教来宣扬利用。

时下党国之重尊儒术当然也是这个用意。而于丹，张艺谋之流，则只是些在台面上为主子造势的太监。好在中国人不都糊涂，而且敢于说真话的也越来越多了。

http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_476e068a0100mypi.html

开明专制也不是民主

──挽蔡定剑先生

易中天

宪政即限政，公权不可膨胀；
民主非明主，言论必须自由。

2010年11月26日，是向蔡定剑先生遗体告别的日子。为铭记先生“宪政民主是我们这一代人的使命”之遗言，并寄托哀思，我于当晚在博客发表挽联云──

宪政即限政，公权不能膨胀；
民主实明主，言论终须自由。

下联的意思，本为“民主其实是透明的政治”，或者“人民应该明明白白地当家作主”。这才有了后面那一句：言论终须自由。可惜“明主”一词，古已有之，意为“英明之君主”，或“开明之君主”。这可是深入人心的理解。结果，此联一出，即在网上遭到误读。另外，“公权不能膨胀”一句，平仄也有问题。于是，我做了修改，改为──

宪政即限政，公权不可膨胀；
民主当明主，言论终须自由。

所谓“民主当明主”，可译作“民主应当是透明的政治”，意思明确一些了。然而，“明主”即“英明或开明之君主”，已经约定俗成，还是会误读。联系到下一句，更会误解为“民主就是让人说话”。让人说话，怎么是民主呢？那是“开明专制”嘛！

这当然完全不对。因此，贺卫方先生建议改为“泯主”，即“不要君主”。不过，主，可以是“君主”，也可以是“民主”。君主，即“主权在君”；民主，即“主权在民”。君主和民主的“主”，是“主权”或“做主”，不是“主人”或“主子”。君主可以不要，主权却不能泯灭。改为“泯主”，恐怕也有问题。

最后，我决定采纳网友“教书人”的建议，把下联改成“民主非明主，言论必须自由”。故此联之定稿应为──

宪政即限政，公权不可膨胀；
民主非明主，言论必须自由。

这样一来，意思就更明确：民主，不能依靠所谓“开明专制”或“开明君主”。再开明的君主，也是君主；再开明的专制，也是专制。《国际歌》云：“从来就没有什么救世主，也不靠神仙皇帝，要创造人类的幸福，全靠我们自己。” 因此，应该像蔡定剑先生所说的那样，把宪政民主当作我们这一代人的使命。

蔡定剑先生请走好！这些话，我们都记住了。

What Does North Korea Want? 如何应对北韩之黑洞？

The darkness of North Korea in comparison with South Korea

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

What Does North Korea Want?

如何应对北韩之黑洞？

By Jed Babbin on 11.29.10 @ 6:23AM

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/29/what-does-north-korea-want

North Korea's shelling of Yeonpyeong Island in the Yellow Sea is the third such incident since last November. Then, the North Koreans exchanged gunfire with South Korean naval forces resulting in two North Korean deaths. The second was North Korea's sinking of the South Korean destroyer Cheonan in March.

As you read this, the USS George Washington and its battle group are conducting exercises with South Korean forces in the southern Yellow Sea, not too far from Yeonpyeong Island. Both North Korea and China have condemned the exercises. China is pushing for a high-level meeting of the parties to the "Six-Party Talks" -- the U.S., Japan, both Koreas, and Russia -- to ease tensions in the area. But those talks are aimed at North Korea's nuclear program and have nothing to do with their attacks in the southern Yellow Sea.

The Yellow Sea is China's Caribbean: it claims a 200-mile exclusive economic zone that almost reaches Yeonpyeong Island, very near the area in which the naval exercises are taking place. China is North Korea's biggest ally and trading partner. We often say that North Korea is under China's control, and that its aggressive acts couldn't be undertaken without Chinese acquiescence or agreement. But it's not at all clear that China -- which clearly has enormous leverage over the impoverished North Koreans -- has that level of day-to-day control of North Korea's acts.

Calling North Korea impoverished is both a great understatement and a misstatement. My favorite picture of the Korean Peninsula was taken by a U.S. spy satellite on one night in early 2006. It shows South Korea ablaze with lights in every city and town. In the North, only the capital of Pyongyang is lit. The rest of the country is pitch black. Most North Koreans live cold, hungry, and in the dark, but their government lives well.

So far, China is apparently trying to calm the situation. While North Korea's press blares more threats, China's Xinhua News Agency is publishing rather bland stories about the incident and the U.S.-South Korea military exercises.

If North Korea wanted war, it could restart the Korean War in a matter of minutes by attacking with missiles or other forces across the demilitarized zone. If it sought only to provoke South Korea and America, it could mount a smaller attack off its east coast.

But the fact that the three incidents in the last year all took place in the Yellow Sea means that the three attacks are meant to draw China in as well. If the Chinese knew of the incidents before they took place and approved North Korea's actions, the Chinese would be extending their protective military umbrella over North Korea's provocations.

So what does North Korea want? And how should we and South Korea respond to its latest act of murderous aggression?

North Korea has accomplished much of what it wanted. It waited eight months after sinking the Cheonan for a response from South Korea, and didn't see one. By the latest attack, North Korea has already brought about the resignation of South Korea's defense minister and may have destabilized the South Korean government. Massive protests in Seoul by South Korean military veterans have demanded a forceful response, and at least one South Korean general has vowed revenge.

South Korea has already had one prime minister fall this year, and the new P.M., Lee Myung-bak, is perched precariously on his seat. And the effects of the latest attack are being felt in Tokyo. Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan has ordered his cabinet to remain in Tokyo for the next several days, anticipating a greater crisis.

What to do?

First, the United States should restore North Korea to its proper place as a nation designated as a state sponsor of terrorism. This would effectively interfere with -- and probably interdict -- most financial transactions with North Korea. Given North Korea's proliferation activities -- including construction of the Syrian nuclear plant that Israeli jets destroyed three years ago -- there's more than enough justification for that action.

The Bush administration lifted the designation as an incentive to North Korea in the Six-Party Talks. But those talks -- like the negotiations we've had with North Korea off and on for about fifteen years -- are an abject failure. There is no agreement we've made -- or will ever make -- with North Korea that they will abide by. Every time we receive their blood oaths to stop nuclear development and proliferation, the North Koreans proceed at full speed doing their best to conceal their actions.

Second, we should reject China's call for urgent consultations of the Six Party Talks participants, instead convening a meeting of a core group of the nations that are a party to the Proliferation Security Initiative. The PSI, begun in 2003, is aimed at enforcement of proliferation bans on nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. It proved its worth several times, intercepting -- in one case -- the shipment of nuclear materials to Libya, which precipitated Libya's surrender of its nuclear program to the United States. The PSI began with sixteen nations and has grown to ninety, an impossibly unproductive number. Let's start with a small group of six or seven and call it "PSI-Korea."

The PSI-Korea group should be called together to create and implement a plan of action designed for the sole purpose of preventing any further shipment of nuclear or missile materials from North Korea to any nation or group.

Third, and not last in importance, we should urge a regional alliance with Japan and South Korea to help them defend themselves -- and each other -- against further North Korean aggression. This would be a big step for Japan, but a necessary one because a re-armed Japan -- capable of ballistic missile defense and other measures -- would be a necessary predicate to any such agreement. Were Japan to grow in military strength, North Korea would be more effectively contained.

Will the Obama administration do any of this? Almost certainly not. Which will leave North Korea undeterred. It is probably the most dangerously unpredictable country in the world. And its next act of aggression -- and there will be one -- may result in a South Korean response that will kick off the Second Korean War.

刘晓波: 金牌崇拜与独裁民族主义 Gold Medals and Despotism/Tyranny

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

金牌崇拜与独裁民族主义

Gold Medals and Despotism/Tyranny

来源：人与人权

刘晓波

一、举国体制与两极分化

中共执政后，全面抄袭苏联体制，体育也不例外。举国体制使体育变成独裁政权的垄断行业，各级体委都是政府部门，所有的教练员和运动员都靠国家来包养，即便今天的大陆体育免不了金钱的诱惑和商业的侵蚀，但执政党主导体育管理部门和重大体育活动的传统，并没有实质性改变。

自从中国射击选手许海峰在1984年洛杉矶奥运会上为中国赢得第一枚奥运金牌之后，中国参加奥运会的宏大目标就是“扬我国威”，国威的具体表现就是金牌数量的不断增加。由此，中国备战奥运的资金投入也不断翻番，据林思云先生《奥运金牌的陷阱》介绍：“体育总局科研所的研究员李力研透露了这样一个数字：1988年汉城奥运会时，体育总局事业费每年10亿元；1992年巴塞罗那奥运会时，体育总局事业费涨到每年30亿元；2000年悉尼奥运会，体育总局事业费又涨到每年50亿元。按这个数据计算，雅典奥运会备战4年，中国就要花费200亿元。如果这次中国队获得30枚金牌，那么每枚金牌的成本就差不多是7亿元，真可谓世界上最昂贵的金牌。”

作为对比，体育大国“俄罗斯为了备战雅典奥运会，2004年的体育经费增加了三倍达到33亿卢布，合计人民币约4亿元，备战雅典奥运会四年的体育开支不超过8亿人民币。俄罗斯这次夺得30枚以上的金牌应该没有问题，这样俄罗斯每枚金牌的成本差不多是2500万人民币，而中国则是7亿人民币。中国夺得一枚奥运金牌的成本为俄罗斯的28倍。"

2001年北京获得2008年奥运主办权后，举国体制下的奥运攻关便成为独裁体育的头等大事。中共政权为了在奥运上争金夺银而投入大量资金，出台了“奥运争光计划纲要”，建立一支人数高达17000名专职运动员、4900名专职教练员的庞大奥运兵团。之后，国家体委又推出“119工程”，为了在田径、游泳、水上等金牌弱项中尽快赶上。所谓“119工程”，即争取奥运119个项目上的119枚奖牌。

举国体制下的高投入，也确实带来中国金牌数的连续增长，1996年亚特兰大奥运金牌第四，悉尼奥运第三，雅典奥运第二，一届上一个台阶。雅典奥运会后，争夺2008年北京奥运的金牌第一便成为独裁体育的最大目标。经过七年举国体制的准备，中国对金牌的狂热终于如愿以偿。在北京奥运上，中国在金牌榜上取代美国而成为老大，金牌数第一（51枚），奖牌总数第二（100枚）。

然而，奥运金牌第一的中国，靠的是金钱第一的投入，为了在北京奥运上争得金牌第一，投入高达430亿美元，相当于中国2007年卫生医疗开支97亿美元的四倍、教育支出157亿美元的三倍。如此“奢侈的金牌体育”，不仅在第三世界绝无仅有，即便与发达国家相比，也堪称“豪华体育”， 肯定是奥运史上前无古人的投资，也可能是后无来者的投资。而这样的“豪华体育”，只有罔顾民众权益的独裁国家才能做到。

对北京奥运上中国金牌第一，国际舆论与国内民间舆论的基本共识是“金牌大国并不能等同于体育大国”，因为当官权向世界炫耀金牌第一的辉煌成果时，中国的亿万普通人根本享受不到这样奢侈的国家体育。在独裁中国，体育是用高墙封起来的国家化精英化的特权，而基本上与提升百姓身体健康无关，甚至与拿不到奖牌的大量普通运动员无关。金牌体育的奢侈与大众体育的贫困，金牌运动员的一夜暴富和普通运动员退役后的艰难处境，使体育资源分配的两级分化日益拉大。仅就国人人均占有体育资源的两极分化而论，国家对奥运的巨额投入超过当今世界上的任何国家，而目前中国的人均占有体育用地仅为0.006平方米。数量超过60万个的各类体育场馆，67%归教育部门所有，25%归体委等系统所有，真正的公共体育场馆不足7%.城镇百姓大都只能在公园里和马路边锻炼身体，广大农民几乎就与公共体育设施无缘。

正如GDP崇拜造就了畸形的跛足改革，让今日中国变成权贵们一夜暴富的天堂与无权无势者持续受损的地狱，金牌崇拜也只能带来精英体育的天堂和大众体育的地狱。

二、体育是独裁民族主义的工具

中共之所以巨额投入奥运金牌乃源于金牌政治的需要。1949年后的中国体育史，就是体育变成独裁政治工具的历史。无论是毛泽东时代还是改革开放以来，体育与狂热的民族主义结盟，从来都是中共政权实施统治的工具，而非国家文明水平的展示。体育被用于独裁民族主义，洗刷“东亚病夫”耻辱和重振“天朝大国”霸权。

毛泽东时代的独裁民族主义，凝缩在“中国人民从此站起来”的口号中。上世纪六十年代，原子弹的升空和乒乓球的崛起，同作为这口号的最好例证，植入每个中国人的梦境。庄则栋一代乒乓球的骄人战绩，是我们这代人摸不去的记忆，至今还能清晰的记得当年的《人民日报》头版头条的大红标题“庄则栋大胜高桥浩 李莉勇克关正子”（高和关都是日本著名选手，世乒赛冠军）。于是，乒乓球变成了“国球”，其在世界上的优势地位一直保持到今天。毛泽东想成为世界领袖的野心，靠“解放全人类”的病态乌托邦意识形态说教来支撑，他不顾国情和国际局势，对外盲目地同时对抗美、苏两个超级大国，用输出革命的外交战略来收买和支持第三世界，特别是那些“有奶便是娘”的无赖小国，直到苏联在政治上军事上对中国的挤压使毛泽东无力承受之时，他才以实用主义的态度与美国结盟。于是，当时中国最有实力的乒乓球便充当了毛泽东的外交使者。

邓小平时代的独裁民族主义，凝缩在“振兴中华”的呐喊声中。中国女排的崛起及五连冠，北京大学等高校大学生为女排的胜利而狂热，率先喊出“学习女排，振兴中华”的口号，敢于拼搏的“女排精神”立刻作为官方的意识形态教材向全国推广，成为各行各业学习的典范。在1984年洛杉矶奥运会上，中国实现了零的突破并获得15枚金牌，位列第四，使国人的民族主义狂热遽然高涨，中共媒体兴奋地高呼：“许海峰捅破了一层叫做‘东亚病夫’的纸，……一个积弱百年的大国，经历生死涅槃之后，这个东方巨人在1984年的洛杉矶宣布自己的醒来。”自此以后，奥运金牌在中国就变成了独裁民族主义的招牌，金牌的多寡象征着国力的强弱和民族精神的优劣，每届奥运中国媒体都要进行以金牌为核心的爱国主义宣传。

六四大悲剧的发生，中共政权陷入改革以来空前的内忧外困之中。对内是道义合法性急遽流失，致使政权加强政治上和思想上的控制。对外是中国与西方的关系全面倒退，人权问题成为中美关系中最醒目的冲突焦点，致使中共政权把经贸外交置于首位。与此同时，把爱国主义提升到“五热爱”之首，用煽动爱国主义情绪来一箭双雕，对内用于弥补道义合法性的急遽流失，对外用于抗衡西方的外交压力。

于是，在邓小平制定“决不当头”的韬晦外交之下，继毛泽东的“乒乓外交”之后，中共再一次打出了体育牌。对1990年的亚运会的极力张扬和之后的北京申奥，都是体育外交的重头戏，以至于，为此而释放了著名政治犯魏京生和徐文立。但由于距离六四大屠杀太近，导致1993年申奥失败，百年耻辱之上又添了新耻辱，“西方反华势力亡我之心不死”之说又有了新例证，国内掀起了改革以来的第一次民族主义思潮。从此以后，中共越来越以民族主义为意识形态的核心，不放过每一个可以提升爱国主义情绪的机会，全力宣扬和纵容从九十年代中期开始的民族主义思潮。

邓小平死后，江泽民为了个人权力的上升及巩固，不断提出新的理论来代替毛思想和邓理论。在民族主义不断高涨的鼓荡下，江核心提出了“中华民族的伟大复兴”的新口号，以代替毛时代“站起来”和邓时代“振兴中华”，在重要的公开讲话的结尾，他屡屡以突然高亢声音喊出这句誓言。于是，申奥又一次作为中共的独裁民族主义王牌被打出。对内，中共以申奥来提升威望和巩固政权；对外，宣泄由93年申奥失败开始越积越深的民族耻辱和对外仇恨。为了得到奥运主办权，中共全力出击，不但采取了一贯的以经贸牌应对政治压力的策略，而且聘请世界著名的公关公司进行策划和包装，甚至对外作了改善人权和言论自由的承诺。这种志在必得的背后是再也输不起的恐惧。2001年的北京申奥成功，同时满足的官方与民间的急切期待，官方似乎创造了巨大政绩，民众的病态民族主义虚荣得到了满足。

可以说，二战后的任何一个国家的一个城市得到奥运会的主办权，都不会象北京得到2008年奥运主办权这样，进行如此广泛的政治操作和全民动员，投入如此巨额的资金，掀起如此罕见民族主义狂潮。在申奥成功的那个夜晚，北京有一百多万人上街欢庆，全国主要大城市彻夜狂欢，江泽民等中共寡头，不但出席“中华世纪坛”的庆祝大会，并在民众狂热的感召下，江泽民还临时决定登上天安门城楼与民同乐。“实现百年梦想”、“中华民族的伟大复兴”、“西方反华势力的破产”……等口号铺天盖地。而在挥舞的国旗、激动的泪水、几乎把嗓子喊劈了的欢呼的背后，支撑着这种狂热强国心态的正是“百年耻辱”和“东亚病夫”的历史所固化的雪耻情结、自卑心理和称霸野心。

三、金牌崇拜症将使中国体育不堪重负

到了胡温办奥运，京奥已经成为最大的政治，也成为显示“万邦来朝”的天朝大国形象的机会，为此而邀请上百个国家的政要来北京参加开幕式，以至于，进入奥运年，是否出席京奥开幕式变成了一场中西外交战。与此同时，胡锦涛多次主持政治局会议讨论京奥问题，任命政治局常委习近平担任京奥负责人，还在奥运开幕前破例举行大型记者会。可以说，胡温政权为了确保京奥成功而不惜一切代价，意在向世界展示一个“奢华的北京”、“绿色的北京”、“科技的北京”、“微笑的北京”和“铜墙铁壁的北京”，但就是不要“人权的中国”和“新闻自由的中国”。

所以，无论动员多少人力、投入多少物力，京奥展示给外界的更多是警察国家的“政治奥运”和“奢华奥运”。在长达七年的奥运筹备期，中共当局并未兑现向世界作出的改善人权的承诺，致使国际社会对北京奥运的批评声不断高涨。进入奥运年，爆发了西藏危机、瓮安民变、杨佳袭警、昆明爆炸等一系列激烈官民冲突，加重了2008年8月8日这个日子的危机色彩，“共赴国难”的情绪在网络民间传递，“避运”、“受运”、“恭外运”的戏虐在市井江湖中走红。

好在，举国体制在办大型活动上还是有效的，中共的全民办奥运动员和耗费天文数字的纳税人血汗，的确为奥运提供了一流的比赛场馆、赛事组织和后勤保障，让各国运动员和贵宾得到前所未有的奢华享受，奥运期间也没有发生爆炸性事件，国际舆论的关注焦点自然转向精彩的赛事。不可否认，仅就体育赛事的奥运而言，京奥无疑是成功的。但京奥期间的中国媒体，包括以往敢于直言的开明媒体，在中宣部的严令下完全失语，而只能跟着党国奥运的主旋律起舞，则凸显中国特色奥运的内在恐惧。

看看中国媒体关于中国队的赛事报道，给我的感觉真的是满眼金牌。在那些主持人的腔调和表情中，在前线记者对金牌运动员的提问中，我看不见运动，看不见奥运精神，更看不见人的价值，甚至看不到民族尊严，好一个“除了金牌，还是金牌！”

从北京奥运开赛的第一天，从央视到地方台的奥运报道就开始了“数金牌”的宣传；整个奥运期间，中国金牌数一直名列榜首，每个频道的奥运节目都会无数遍地播出金牌榜。奥运结束后，央视几个主要频道和地方台的体育频道，还在一遍遍地数金牌，一块块地回顾夺金过程，一个个地赞美冠军，反反复复地念叨中国终于崛起为金牌巨无霸。这种对金牌的病态热衷，如同暴发户对金币的畸形快感，不厌其烦地数口袋里的金币，金币碰撞的声音是世界上最美的音乐，金色是世界上最耀眼的色彩。

在独裁民族主义的操控下，国际性体育比赛的胜负，在中国已经变成了一个泛政治化民族化的象征性符号，奥运金牌负载了过于沉重的强国梦想。从1984年洛杉矶奥运中国获得15枚金牌开始，中国就慢慢地患上了奥运金牌崇拜症，1988年中国兵败汉城奥运会，仅获得5枚金牌，引发出整个中国的悲情，其悲怆程度不次于丧权辱国，致使中共当局加大对奥运体育的投入，制定了以争夺奥运金牌为目标的体育发展计划“奥运争光计划”，中国从此走上了“金牌崇拜”的奥运之路。

“奥运争光计划”的实施立竿见影，1992年巴塞罗那奥运中国获得16枚金牌，让党国尝到了举国体制的甘甜。1996年亚特兰大奥运，虽然中国获得的金牌数也是16枚，与巴塞罗那奥运持平，但首次参加奥运的王军霞却为中国带来狂喜。她以14分59秒88的成绩获得女子5000米金牌，还获得女子10000米银牌，实现了中国在奥运长跑项目上的金牌突破。她身披五星红旗绕场一周的画面，至今仍然是中国人最骄傲的辉煌时刻。此前，王军霞在世界性女子长跑项目上还获得过一系列崇高荣誉，特别是1993年，她先后获得多项冠军并两破世界纪录。她在德国斯图加特世界田径锦标赛上获10000米金牌，在西班牙世界杯马拉松赛中获个人和团体冠军，在北京第7届全运会获3000米和10000米两项冠军，两次（预、决赛）打破3000米世界纪录（8分12秒11、8分06秒11），一次打破女子10000米世界纪录（29分31秒78），成为世界上第一位突破女子10000米跑“30分钟大关”的运动员，她所创造的这两项世界纪录一直保持至今。1994年，她在12届亚运会上获10000米金牌，还取得北京国际马拉松赛冠军；1995年，她在印尼雅加达亚洲田径锦标赛上获得10000米和5000米两枚金牌。由此王军霞先后获得了一系列至高的荣誉，1993年，她当选全国十佳运动员之首，并获英国环球电视台“环球体育最佳运动员”、“世界十佳运动员”称号；她荣获1993年、1994年国家体育运动荣誉奖章。1994年，她在获得世界田径的最高荣誉第14届杰西。欧文斯奖，这也是亚洲运动员首次获此殊荣。那几年，“马家军”传奇和“东方神鹿”的美誉，几乎变成中国体育的代名词。

2000年悉尼奥运，中国获得28枚金牌，首次进入奥运会金牌榜前三名，实现了第一次飞跃，举国欢腾。2001年北京申奥成功和2004年雅典奥运中国金牌数排名第二的32枚，特别是刘翔获110米栏金牌，跨出12秒91的破奥运记录、平世界纪录的好成绩，成为亚洲获此殊荣的第一人，带来了“赛出一个新中国”的狂欢。之后，刘翔又在2006年瑞士洛桑田径超级大奖赛上以12秒88打破沉睡13年之久的110米栏世界纪录，“翔飞人”由此成为中国体育的代名词，也成为国人给予最大期待的民族英雄。

正因为党权和国人太在乎金牌，刘翔退赛才会在中国激起舆论狂潮。田径本来就是中国的弱项，王军霞一代女子中长跑选手退役之后，中国争夺田径金牌的最大希望就是在雅典奥运夺得110米栏金牌的刘翔了。遥想2004年雅典奥运，刘翔夺金后央视直播员的疯狂叫喊，刘翔在领奖时的夸张动作，他在接受采访时的大言不惭：“亚洲有我，中国有我”，使他瞬间变成了“民族英雄”。所以，到了北京奥运，在刘翔登场之前的宣传中，他身上的民族主义光环照耀全中国，他在鸟巢的表现已经成为最大看点，110米栏的金牌已经成为中国人心中分量最重的金牌，甚至，似乎整个鸟巢的田径赛事都是为了刘翔一个人的表演。所以，中共官方才让刘翔身背的1356号，据说象征着十三亿人和五十六个民族，但刘翔因伤退赛，让唯一的冲金希望落空，着实让爱国者们极度沮丧。

在奥运历史上，伟大运动员的因伤退赛乃平常之事，还从来没有哪个著名运动员的退赛，会引发出类似刘翔退赛的舆论狂潮。尽管中国拿到51枚金牌，已经大幅度超越美国而成为当今世界体坛的金牌老大，但刘翔退赛引发的舆论潮说明，国人的金牌狂热的背后，仍然是“输不起”的独裁民族主义。这种独裁爱国主义极为畸形，也极为蛮横，挥舞着国家利益或民族荣誉的尚方宝剑逼人低头。在刘翔退赛事件中，这柄尚方宝剑也压垮了一向骄狂的刘翔，使他不得不出面向全国人民道歉。在我看来，只有中国这样的举国体制和畸形民族主义氛围才会逼出了奥运史上的荒唐剧——因伤退赛的运动员居然要出面向全国人民道歉。

但在中国的举国体制下，要求刘翔道歉似乎理由充分：1，刘翔是党国出钱培养出来的，刘翔成名后的暴富也有党国的功劳；2，刘翔的“民族英雄”是党国和爱国民众给予的，刘翔背上了1356这个号码，就意味他与十三亿的生死与共。得到那么丰厚的经济实惠和享受到那么崇高的社会荣誉的刘翔，其成功是党国和民族的荣耀，其失败也就必然是党国和民族的耻辱，他自然要因自己的失败而道歉。

曾几何时，举国体制下的奥运金牌主义，已经让中国付出了巨大的代价。现在北京奥运的金牌第一，必将让中国体育背负“高处不胜寒”的压力。奥运结束后，中国媒体陷于没完没了的自我炫耀，并大量引述境外媒体的赞美之词，甚至把国际奥委会主席罗格的赞美（truely exceptional games）翻译成“无与伦比”，特别是举国沉浸在金牌第一的亢奋中，似乎预示着整个中国将全面超越美国而成为世界第一的辉煌前景，进一步强化了金牌崇拜综合症，让举国体制制造的大国骄狂与可怕的金牌依赖及其焦虑休戚与共。2012年，中国代表队将背负着金牌老大的沉重包袱前往伦敦。如果四年后中国的奥运金牌达不到51枚，甚至保不住金牌老大的位置，我不敢想象中国国内将陷入怎样的歇斯底里！

金牌崇拜综合症起码隐含着三重危机：1，权力操控下体育资源占有的两极分化，国家的奥运工程占有最多最优质的体育资源，而普通百姓甚至享受不到任何体育资源；金牌运动员被捧上“不胜寒”的云端，获得金钱与荣誉的双丰收，而普通运动员只能陷于双重贫困。2，极端的权力虚荣和民族虚荣所形成的畸形压力，让中国体育变形为输不起的比赛。比如，刘翔退赛引发的舆论狂潮，致使不堪重负的刘翔不得不出面道歉。中国女足输给日本队，丧失了进入四强的资格，被足协主席谢亚龙呵斥为“要精神没精神，要斗志没斗志，要技术没技术。”女足队员还要为赛后总结会提交“检查”。3，金牌第一的最大害处是加强了中共政权对举国体制的信心，不但要延缓对陈腐旧体制的改革，而且会在相当长的时间内继续强化旧体制。君不见，北京奥运金牌榜的座次基本排定之后，中共体育官员对劳民伤财的举国体制的高度肯定，北京奥组委高级顾问魏纪中在记者会上表示，四十五块金牌说明了“举国体制”是有效的。他还举出苏联解体后体育的衰落来证明中国维护举国体制的明智。

如果中国官民继续沉浸于举国体制的金牌辉煌中，不断地用中国式翻译的“无与伦比”来自我炫耀，那么中国体育就只能在政治化和奢侈化的金牌崇拜路上越走越远，中国人看奥运，享受的不是体育带来的快乐，而是民族虚荣心的满足；汲取的不是真正的体育精神，而是金牌主义的鸦片；中国也只能止步于“金牌大国”，而不可能成为“文明大国”。

2008年8月25日于北京家中

Oslo to postpone Liu Xiaobo Nobel peace prize ceremony 挪威诺奖委员会首次推迟授奖典礼

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

Oslo to postpone Liu Xiaobo Nobel peace prize ceremony

挪威诺奖委员会首次推迟授奖典礼

From: AP, AFP November 20, 2010 12:00AM

FOR the first time in the 109-year-history of the Nobel Peace Prize neither the laureate nor a representative is expected to show up to receive the award.

And following threats from Beijing of "consequences", at least six countries have turned down an invitation for their ambassadors to attend the December 10 ceremony in honour of jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo next month.

"The six who have said no are China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Morocco and Iraq," Nobel Institute director Geir Lundestad said.

China's rulers were enraged by the decision to give the 2010 prize to Liu, who was sentenced to 11 years in prison last December on subversion charges after co-authoring a manifesto calling for political reform in China.

The Chinese embassy in Oslo sent a letter to other countries' missions in the city requesting that they refrain from attending the ceremony.

Most Western countries, including the US, Britain, France and Germany have said they will attend. Norwegian media reported that the embassies of India, Pakistan and Indonesia were among those that had said they were waiting for clearance from their governments.

"For an embassy to actively try to persuade other embassies to not participate in the ceremony is something new," Mr Lundestad said.

The prestigious 10 million kronor ($1.47m) award can only be collected by the laureate or close family members. Liu's wife, Liu Xia, has been under house arrest and subject to police escort since the award was announced last month. Mr Lundestad said no other relatives had announced plans to come to Oslo.

"The way it looks now, it is not likely that someone from his close family will attend," he added. "Then we will not give out the medal and the diploma during the ceremony."

The committee's chairman, Thorbjoern Jagland, also said the prize would probably not be awarded. "But he will be present during the ceremony by a reading of his text."

Mr Lundestad said the committee had not lost hope. "If someone shows up at the last minute, it will not be a problem to change plans," he said.

Liu Xiaobo has three brothers, the best-known being Liu Xiaoxuan, the youngest. A Hong Kong-based human rights group has reported that two of the brothers, as well as Liu Xiaobo's brother-in-law, Liu Tong, have been unable to visit Liu in prison despite repeated requests.

Friends of the couple say all of Liu's closest family members are under tight police surveillance aimed at preventing them from attending the ceremony. Liu Xiaoxuan had been told by his employer not to go, the Hong Kong-based Information Centre for Human Rights and Democracy said.

When reached by phone yesterday, Liu Xiaoxuan said he was not allowed to accept interviews.

Mr Lundestad said the Chinese embassy had returned all Nobel correspondence unopened.

The peace prize program includes a banquet and a concert held in the laureate's honour.

Organisers said yesterday that the concert would be co-hosted by actors Anne Hathaway and Denzel Washington and feature performances by Barry Manilow, Jamiroquai, A.R. Rahman, Herbie Hancock and Elvis Costello among others.

Mr Lundestad, meanwhile, cautioned that "there are always some ambassadors who don't come for one reason or another . . . In 2008, for example, 10 ambassadors were not present."

He added that "there is not always a political reason" ambassadors turn down the invitation.

"We just send them a card. We just ask 'yes' or 'no'?

"They don't have to give a reason; we don't ask."

AP, AFP

At the Nobel ceremony, Liu Xiaobo's empty chair will speak volumes 刘晓波诺奖仪式缺席告诫世界良知

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

At the Nobel ceremony, Liu Xiaobo's empty chair will speak volumes

刘晓波诺奖仪式缺席告诫世界良知

JAMES BRADSHAW

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Published Monday, Nov. 22, 2010 9:21PM EST

There is every expectation that when this year’s Nobel Peace Prize is celebrated in Oslo on Dec. 10, the star of the ceremony will not be any of its powerful guests, but rather one conspicuously empty chair.

Nobel organizers and supporters have all but given up hope that close family of Liu Xiaobo, the imprisoned Peace Prize laureate, will be allowed to leave China to attend the ceremony. And though there is no playbook for such a scenario, there is wide agreement that the best course is to celebrate as usual, but not to hand out the prize itself.

2010 Nobel Peace Prize citation In theory, there is no explicit rule preventing the Nobel committee from having someone other than Mr. Liu or his immediate family accept the Nobel medal and diploma on his behalf – for instance, one of the members of International PEN, an association of writers dedicated to free expression that was instrumental in getting Mr. Liu nominated. But Nobel officials never seriously considered that possibility.

“This was not a difficult decision,” said Geir Lundestad, director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute. “We feel that we have to be absolutely certain that we hand over the medal, the diploma and certainly the cheque [for nearly $1.5-million], to the proper person.”

A dissident writer and former literary critic, Mr. Liu began serving 11 years in prison for subversion last year, and some feel his absence could make the ceremony more meaningful, not less.

Mr. Liu’s picture will be prominently displayed near his empty chair, and one of two planned speeches will consist of Liv Ullmann, a famous Norwegia actress, reading a text by Mr. Liu “so that his voice is heard,” Mr. Lundestad said. A banquet for some 250 guests will follow at Oslo’s Grand Hotel, as is the tradition, and a concert hosted by Denzel Washington and Anne Hathaway will also go ahead the following day.

Tienchi Martin-Liao, president of International PEN’s Independent Chinese Centre, will attend the prize ceremony and was in contact with Mr. Liu’s wife, Liu Xia, until she was placed under house arrest in October. Ms. Martin-Liao said she will decline if she is asked to accept the prize on Mr. Liu’s behalf.

“My personal opinion, and I'm not the only one, is that Liu Xiaobo is the only person who should receive this honour. If he cannot come out, and his wife cannot, well then let it be. And we hope that some day he can come out and he can take the award,” she said by telephone from Sweden.

Meanwhile, her Canadian colleague John Ralston Saul, the president of International PEN who will also attend the ceremony, believes China has misjudged the effect of the prize going unclaimed.

“The Chinese government is wrong to think that it is to their disadvantage to have this prize received,” he said.

Should Mr. Liu’s wife or a close family member find a way to be there, Dr. Lundestad said, “we can improvise on the spur of the moment,” but at this point “that seems unlikely.” Ms. Martin-Liao said it is apparent that Mr. Liu’s family has received “the order from the [Chinese] authorities that they are not allowed to leave the country,” she said.

Only four other Nobel Peace Prize laureates have been unable to accept the award in person as a result of conditions in their home countries: journalist and Nazi opponent Carl von Ossietzky in 1935; Soviet nuclear physicist Andrei Sakharov in 1975; Polish human rights activist Lech Walesa in 1983; and Burmese politician Aung San Suu Kyi in 1991. In the latter three cases, the medal was given to a close family member, but not in Mr. Von Ossietzky’s case. In 1936, a German lawyer accepted Mr. Von Ossietsky’s cash prize for him, but as Mr. Lundestad recalls, “[the lawyer] was a fraud, and he was convicted to two years hard labour.”

Mr. Lundestad said the Nobel committee is confident “the day will come” when Mr. Liu will be free to collect his medal and diploma, and to deliver his Nobel lecture. Until then, his empty chair may serve only to heighten his distinction.

“We are prepared to make the argument that in our 109-year history, the most significant prizes may well have been those when the laureate was not present,” Mr. Lundestad said. “This is our honour roll, so to speak.”

Perry Link: A Nobel Vision of a Better China 林培瑞：刘晓波获奖的意义

Liu Xiaobo Nobel Peace Prize Ceremony 2010 刘晓波诺贝尔和平奖仪式/视频

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

华语系人们政治文化心态的改变在于每一个在此文化中的个体真正用思维与言行改变自身。 刘晓波是这种真实改变的代表者与传播者。 我希望每一个华语系的个体人意识到这种改变的必要性并用自身脱离专制文化心态的言行加入附义这个必须的改变。

Kai Chen's Words:

To change China, every individual in the Chinese speaking population must be the change itself. (Not just join the change, but BE the change yourself.) Mr. Liu Xiaobo is one who has made a great effort to change himself, by being an integrated individual with his actions matching his words. Liu Xiaobo is the one who realizes and articulates the importance of such a change must come from each and every individual himself/herself. I urge everyone in the Chinese speaking population heed this important principle: To make change, you must be the change yourself.

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

Perry Link: A Nobel Vision of a Better China

林培瑞：刘晓波获奖的意义

With Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, China's pro-democracy movement may finally have found its leader.

By PERRY LINK

By awarding Chinese literary critic Liu Xiaobo the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday, the five-member committee in Oslo did more than recognize one of the mainland's most prominent and worthy dissidents. They endorsed the idea that "China" can be something different from, and better than, the Chinese government. They may have helped hundreds of millions of Chinese to see and feel this truth more clearly.

Mr. Liu may have trouble picking up his prize. He is currently serving an 11-year prison sentence for "incitement to subvert state power." The grounds for the charge were primarily Mr. Liu's support for Charter 08, a citizens' manifesto that was conceived in conscious admiration of Charter 77 in the former Czechoslovakia and published in December 2008 to mark the 60th anniversary of the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

It states that "the Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these years [of Communist rule], now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values."

Mr. Liu is a fearless advocate for these ideas. He dresses plainly, avoids pretense, and seems to enjoy demonstrating his belief that truth is more important than tact. He is drawn to dangerous situations as if he did not know they were dangerous. When Chinese student protests began in the spring of 1989—protests that would come to a head at Tiananmen Square—Mr. Liu, then a visiting scholar at Columbia University, flew back to Beijing to join the students and counsel them in nonviolent protest.

For this the government called him a "black hand" and imprisoned him for 18 months. In 1995, after writing essays that criticized the Chinese government, he was sentenced to three years of "re-education through labor." Mr. Liu was not involved in the original conception or drafting of Charter 08, but when friends invited him to join the effort he again chose to do what he thought was right, despite the obvious dangers.

Few people expected that his 11-year sentence for "subversion," which was announced on Christmas Day last year, would be so harsh. Four days later Mr. Liu's lawyers relayed to the world his reaction:

"The sentence violates the Chinese constitution and international human rights covenants. It cannot bear moral scrutiny and will not pass the test of history. I believe that my work has been just, and that someday China will be a free and democratic country. . . . I have long been aware that when an independent intellectual stands up to an autocratic state, step one toward freedom is often a step into prison. Now I am taking that step; and true freedom is that much nearer."

The other organizers of Charter 08 had their homes raided, computers and notes confiscated and bank accounts emptied. Many of the original 303 signatories have been watched, cajoled, threatened and harassed. But Mr. Liu was the only one sent to prison, and this raises the question of why the government chose to focus so intensely on him. It is an old tactic in Chinese Communist politics to hold up the example of one person to frighten others, but in this case there seems to have been another factor at work.

In 2005, China's President Hu Jintao issued a classified report called "Fight a Smokeless Battle: Keep 'Color Revolutions' Out of China." The report warned against allowing figures like Boris Yeltsin, Nelson Mandela, Lech Walesa or Aung San Suu Kyi to appear in China. It borrowed the Chinese idiom "blast the head off the bird that sticks its neck out" to recommend that, when troublemakers appear, "the big ones" should be arrested and "the little ones" left alone.

This formula appears to have been put into practice in November 2008. Shortly after Chinese police discovered that people were signing Charter 08 online, the Communist Party Politburo held a meeting at which Charter 08 was officially declared to be an attempt at "color revolution." Accordingly, Mr. Liu became "the big one" to target.

There is irony here. The other "color revolution" leaders named in the Hu report had strong political organizations behind them: Mr. Yeltsin was a high-ranking Soviet official, Mr. Mandela led the African National Congress, Mr. Walesa led Solidarity, and Ms. Suu Kyi led a political party that had already won a national election.

Mr. Liu, by comparison, was a free-floating intellectual. If he turns out to be a "big one" of the kind Mr. Hu fears, then Mr. Hu can only blame himself for having made him so. By awarding him the Peace Prize, the Nobel Committee and Communist Party have become unwitting partners in producing what China's democrats and political dissenters have most needed: a leader of transcendent moral stature to rally around.

For two decades China's rulers have sought to position themselves as the embodiment of "China" and to channel all nationalist sentiment through them. The Olympics, the World's Fair now underway in Shanghai, and the periodic stimulation of anger toward Japan, Tibet and elsewhere all reveal this pattern.

What Charter 08 and Mr. Liu are saying is, "No, 'China' can be something different, something better than a worn-out, old-style authoritarian government." Giving the Peace Prize to Mr. Liu provides a huge boost to that new vision of what China can be.
-------------------------------------------------
Mr. Link teaches at the University of California, Riverside. He worked with the drafters of Charter 08 to translate the document into English.

Liu Xiaobo vs. China's Communist Government 刘晓波 vs. 中共党政

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

刘晓波获诺奖是注入华语系人群中的一剂道德与价值的清晰剂。 许多华语系人们以前不愿意面对的话题被刘的诺奖拉到了桌面上。 这是一个正向的发生。

Kai Chen's Words:

Liu Xiaobo's Nobel Peace Prize is like a dose of clarifier dropped into a murky spectrum of the Chinese spiritual/moral realm. Many issues concerning human conscience now have to be presented/forced into human consciousness, no matter how unwilling the Chinese people are with regard to their own spiritual/moral existence. This, indeed, is a positive development.

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

Liu Xiaobo vs. China's Communist Government

刘晓波 vs. 中共党政

4:50 PM, Oct 18, 2010 •

By KELLEY CURRIE - The Weekly Standard

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/liu-xiaobo-vs-chinas-communist-government_509192.html

When Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo won the Nobel Peace Prize last week, the authoritarians in Beijing responded in their typical, iron-fisted fashion. The Foreign Ministry immediately called the award "blasphemy" and a "desecration," and characterized Liu as a common criminal. They cancelled official meetings with the Norwegian government and accused countries that lauded Liu's selection of ignorance, jealousy and malice toward China's success. They also placed Liu's wife, Liu Jia, under house arrest, and detained several Chinese who attempted to celebrate the award. Other supporters of Liu have gone missing at the hands of state security, including Ding Zilin (founder the Tiananmen Mothers, an advocacy group that seeks an official reappraisal of the 1989 massacre), Ding's husband, and dissident writer Jiang Qisheng, a close friend of Liu's.

After its initial broadsides, Beijing instituted a comprehensive effort to blackout domestic coverage of, and discussion about, the prize. The "Ministry of Truth," Chinese netizens' Orwellian name for the cohort of agencies involved in managing the government's multi-layered censorship regime, moved quickly to warn all news outlets and Internet content and service providers to block any reference to Liu or his prize. Searches for Liu's name, the word "Nobel" and, according to a source who monitors censorship on Chinese user-generated content and micro-blogging sites, even the Chinese characters for the word "peace" brought up the censors' familiar warning that one had stumbled upon forbidden content.

Last Thursday, however, the Ministry of Truth sent out new instructions for media outlets and Internet portals to push a spate of articles that, alternately or in some combination, demonize the prize, demonize Liu, and accuse the West of using the prize to beat up on China. One article (in Chinese only) attacks the award by linking Lui's receipt of it to the Dalai Lama's 1989 prize, and portraying both as tools of Western imperialists bent on containing China. Another is a piece of vintage communist sophistry that quotes a useful idiot by the name of Arnulf Kolstad, a Norwegian professor of Chinese studies, who calls Liu an inappropriate choice and intimates that the Chinese president would have been a better choice for the award. A third cites a Chinese professor citing the award as evidence of a Western conspiracy to force foreign concepts of human rights on China. This last article is quite interesting, however, as it is written in such a way as to make it very easy to read between the lines and see that Liu Xiaobo was jailed for 11 years for trying to promote human rights and democracy, and that this is what he is being recognized for with the Nobel Prize. Today, the Chinese media is shrilly demanding the Nobel committee apologize to the Chinese people. The state run Global Times, sister paper to the People's Daily, cites a survey conducted by its internal "pollsters," finding that 6 out of 10 (only 6 out of 10?) Chinese believe the prize should be withdrawn and China issued an apology. Chinese media has also been highlighting the fact that Liu Xiaobo's literary magazine received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, with one website going so far as to post the grantee's tax returns online, showing that Liu is still drawing a salary despite his imprisonment.

The excellent China news aggregation and commentary site Danwei noted that what we are now seeing "suggests that the Party's propaganda apparatus is finally gearing up to 'lead public opinion,' a media control strategy used by the Party since 2005. Before 2005, the Party typically responded to negative events by suppressing all related news stories. Over the last five years, however, the Party's more common reaction to politically sensitive news has been to temporarily block all reports, craft an official version of events, and order media outlets to publish only the official version." And while Beijing is busy pushing its own narrative, contacts inside China report that efforts to search for information on Liu from non-Chinese sources remain heavily blocked.

Despite this sophisticated effort, the regime has not been able to keep all its citizens' thoughts in line, judging by some of the commentary that has leaked out through holes in the Great Firewall over the past week. China Digital Times has translated some of Chinese netizens' sarcastic and mocking posts directed at the authorities here. My personal favorite is a hilarious imagined conversation between Chinese president Hu Jintao and the prosecutor in Liu's case, in which the prosecutor explains to Hu how various "subversive" elements of Charter 08 (which Liu was jailed for co-authoring) have their roots in Chinese Communist Party documents and quotations from CCP leaders.

Chinese Dissident Detained for Planning to Write Book

And its not just snarky Chinese tweeps who are pushing back on the party's attempts to "harmonize" this issue. A group of 200 Chinese intellectuals, activists and lawyers published an open letter supporting Liu and calling for the Chinese leadership to seize this opportunity to move forward political reforms toward democratization. Perhaps more significantly, a group of 23 Chinese Communist Party "elders" has issued its own public letter that doesn't mention Liu by name but does attack the "invisible dead hand" of the propaganda system and call for dramatic expansions of freedom of expression. This letter was actually written a week before Liu received the Nobel Peace Prize and was allegedly written in response to several recent pro-reform comments by Chinese premier Wen Jiabao. China watchers are speculating that Wen, and possibly Hu, are attempting to push back against party hardliners in the ongoing leadership succession process.

The true extent and nature of what is happening in China's opaque political system right now is obviously unknown and unknowable to those of us outside its upper echelons, but it seems clear that something is fomenting and the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo is playing a role.

刘晓波: 林昭用生命写就的遗言是当代中国仅存的自由之声 Liu Xiaobo: About Lin Zhao

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

林昭用生命写就的遗言是当代中国仅存的自由之声

Liu Xiaobo: About Lin Zhao

刘晓波

林昭，丁子霖老师曾经对我说，为了表示对你的敬意和向你忏悔，她在一个清明节里，经过一番曲折，找到你在故乡苏州的墓。她献上祭奠的鲜花，还为你写过一篇迟到的祭文。

然而，那真是你的坟墓吗？谁能真的知道，这九百六十万公里的土地上，你的骨灰遗失在哪里？十三亿人口中，又有几人能够倾听你的亡灵？

你死在刑场上的年代，这片土地的每一寸都是刑场，包括你的母校——著名的北京大学。株杀你的暴君毛泽东，也曾在那里的图书馆当过临时工。后来，他以大救星的威严君临这所高等学府，那双沾满鲜血的手，被名流们的狂热赞美洗净，从郭沫若到冯友兰等社会名流的朝拜，使暴君的手显得肥硕、有力、白皙，一边写诗抒情，一边签发死刑命令。他的专政机器，在把子弹射入你的头颅之后，唯一要做的，居然是逼你的母亲上交枪毙你的子弹费。

林昭，当我对那个疯狂的年代表示愤怒时，当我对那些跪着亲吻刽子手的名流们表达轻蔑时，我又算什么！请允许我假设：如果当年，我恰好是你的同学或校友，又恰好被你的美丽所倾倒，在写给你的情书，满纸信誓旦旦的爱情，而当你对自由的热爱被屠戮之时，我对你的爱能否也被罪恶的子弹击碎？

年轻的林昭，你空荡荡的坟墓，已经给出了答案。

在这里，与权杖和钱袋相比，大学不算什么，学术和思想更不算什么。因为，爱情不是什么，真理不是什么，鲜血不是什么，背叛不是什么，遣忘也不是什么。

在虚无中喘息，我久久地注视你的美丽，胆怯的伸出手，取出你嘴里的棉团。僵硬而冰冷的手指，触碰你依然柔软的双唇。刺刀也劈不开的黑暗中，你的血是唯一的闪亮，灼伤了我的灵魂——假如在你面前，我还相信自己有灵魂的话。

春雨，是上天落下的针，格外寒冷的清明，我只能在冷雨中独坐，大自然的哀悼鄙视我，让我无资格为你悲伤。

任何人的祭奠，任何形式的坟墓，之于为自由而殉难的你，都显得过于庸俗。清明节的阴雨可以滋润干枯的土地，却无法让你的亡灵柔软，那布满雨夜的星星，也召不回你的美丽。

你几乎就是当代中国唯一的高贵。

你冷眼旁观这个世界，比卡夫卡的小说还要荒唐：当欢呼的酒杯为北大百年校庆举起时，当建设世界一流大学的喧嚣反复响起时，你发出冷冷大笑。这所中国最著名的学府，从驱逐你的那一刻起，就已经自我放逐在学术之外，变成太监传达圣旨的地方。

将这一滴注入祖国的血液里， 将这一滴向挚爱的自由献祭。 揩吧!擦吧!洗吧! 这是血呢! 殉难者的血迹， 谁能抹得去?

林昭，这是你在狱中用血写下的诗句。然而，这个吸尽了你的血的祖国，至今没有长出自由的萌芽。

在你的爱被践踏、你的血被出卖的地方，这块丑陋不堪的土地，还不配你的高贵和美丽，不值得你用血泪来滋养。

林昭，堵塞你嘴唇的棉团，象骷髅一样卡住我的咽喉，在失语时听你诉说，是我仅有的资格，因为你用生命写就的遗言，是当代中国仅存的自由之声。

2004年4月4日于北京家中

作者为独立中文作家笔会主席

---《观察》首发：http://guancha.org(5/3/2004 12:42)

从比谁最“忠毛”到比谁最“反共” Chinese Pathology – Pursuing Power by Creating Enemies

从比谁最“忠毛”到比谁最“反共”

从反刘晓波获诺奖中看华人反人性专制文化心态的顽固

Chinese Pathology – Pursuing Power by Creating Enemies

陈凯 Kai Chen 11/15/2010 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

“敌友”、“内外”、“强弱”、“亲疏”从史至今都是华语系人们反自身人性的伪价值的标准。 从反刘晓波获诺奖的各种病态噪音中，我不难看出专制文化心态在华语系人们身上的顽固与延续。 没有敌人，华语系的人们便手足无措、失去重心。 殊不知，真正的敌人就是人们自身的原弊，就是人们自身的无自知、无反省的道德混乱与虚无。 真正的“共产党”、真正的“邪恶”并不在身外而在身内： 没有人可以任意压迫虐待任何其他人，只有一个人由于自身的恐惧、混乱与腐败允许其他人任意压迫虐待自己，只有一个没有正义感的人群在看到有人任意压迫与虐待时袖手旁观、庆幸每个人自己的一时走运。

突然间，刘晓波在或诺奖前后成了众多“比刘晓波更反共”的人的敌人。 刘晓波被这些人们指责为“软骨头”、“西方/美国走狗”、言行不一、两面三刀，甚至有人指责刘晓波与中共政府一唱一和玩双簧。 在刘晓波在押服刑、不能为自己辩护、说明的时候，用歇斯底里的癫狂攻击一个因为良知入狱的人实在令人恶心反胃。

从比谁更“革命”到比谁更“忠毛”到比谁更“爱国”到今天的比谁更“反共”，华语系的人们从不反省自身的原弊，也因而从不发掘自身的“英雄”与“伟大”。 他们自身的伪价值是从他人的认同与反对，是从“寻友”与“树敌”的幻觉中树立的。 人类的普世终极价值与对人性中的原弊的认知是与被专制文化心态奴役的华语系人们绝缘的。 一个从不与自身、与神对话的群体中的侏儒是一定要与“敌人”吵架和向“朋友”献媚的。 “捧”与“贬”便成了华语系人们与他人交流的精髓焦点。 我很少在华语系人们中看到有谁关心“我想要什么”、“我能做什么”、“我到底是个什么人”、“我想做一个什么样的人”。 似乎他人是什么、他人要什么、他人做了什么是人们最关心的题目。 由此比较他人更如何以确立自身的（伪）价值便成了华语系人们迷恋的心态情结。

华语系人们的道德参照系并不是自我与神/良知的一体与完整。 华语系人们自觉是好人一定要在比较他人中感到。 他人的不足、错误与缺陷就是华语系人们个体自我幻觉到优越的基点。 他人的成就与优秀就是华语系人们自感渺小的嫉妒心态之源。 拼命挖掘他人的瑕疵与过失成了华语系人们原地打转、停滞不前的习惯行为与基点原因： 如果你说自由的西方好，他们会拼命挖掘西方以前怎么不好，或拼命挖掘中国的王朝们是怎么的好。 如果你说你感到痛苦，他们马上会找出有人或自己比你还痛苦。 如果你说你看到什么东西美，他们会立刻证明有比你说的东西更美的。 如果你说你认为什么发生很伟大，他们会即时指出有比你说的更伟大的。

普世终极的价值是一个“方向”与“质”的选择。 在这种选择中是黑白分明的、没有中间道路的与不可能有“有一点儿怀孕”的病态心理的。 专制虚无的伪价值是一个“等级”与“量”的比较。 习惯于用“比较”去决定自身是否存在与自身的价值是华语系人们专制虚无心态的外在表露。 当华语系的人们在不得不面对普世终极价值的时候，他们对什么是真假、是非、好坏、对错，正义与邪恶，自由与奴役也会习惯地用专制的“等级”与“量”的衡量去看待“方向”与“质”的代价性、责任性选择。 本来一个正常的、有价值的人会认可与褒扬所有他能意识到的伟大的闪光，但一个华语系的人的道德虚无与精神的扭曲会让他用“比较”去否认与贬低任何伟大的闪光。 他会说：“他也有过什么什么卑鄙与渺小，或什么其他人比他要伟大。” 在这种专制虚无的“比较”病态心理中，伟大与渺小被混为一谈，强权、虚无与谎言成为这些专制怪物们的迷恋追求。 毛泽东就在这种病态心理下，由于杀人超过秦始皇、超过斯大林与希特勒，被浸染了“比较”的爱滋病毒的华语系人们推上了“伟大”的宝座。

邪恶的人是在自己作恶犯错后没有自省，反思与忏悔的人。 刘晓波本人在他的作品中有着许多令人深思的自省、反思与忏悔。 在刘晓波获奖后去查他的三十年历史去寻找他不该获奖的瑕疵，并用“比较”他人的优秀去贬低刘晓波灵魂中伟大的闪光只暴露了他们本人的专制虚无心态。 当你看到一个伟大的闪光时，你能用“还有比这更伟大的”去抹杀贬低那闪光的伟大吗？ 当你看到一个邪恶的时候，你会用“还有比这更邪恶的”去逃避你个体的正义感与道德责任吗？

在那些所谓“比”任何人都“更反共”的人对刘晓波的攻击中，我将刘晓波所写过发表过的文章再贴到我的博客与论坛里，让人们重新在他的原话中看到与欣赏那些伟大的闪光。 看到刘晓波内在的英雄并不是为了寻找专制心态中的“救星”，而是去发掘，承认与表达我们每一个个体内在的英雄。 刘晓波获奖是一个从专制虚无的文化心态走向个体心灵自由的重要转折点。 那些反共而不反自身专制虚无心态情结的人们本应该在刘获奖后深深地反省自身，并在刘晓波身上看到自由的可能与专制虚无文化解体的可能。 但令人失望与愤怒的是人们仍被自身的专制虚无文化所奴役：造谣、谎言、无中生有、贴标签、树敌拉友，在“比谁最反共里”寻找道德高度、追求强权、感知自身的伪存在与伪价值。

如果你真的懂得普世终极的价值：真实、正义、自由与尊严，你用不着比较其他存在就可以知道你自己是否在说谎、是否在争权、是否在嫉妒、是否在依靠、是否在虚无中寻找意义与价值、、。 用比较去衡量的一定不可能是普世终极的价值。 普世终极的价值只能被发现、被传播、被人们选择而去指导自己的言行。 真的就是真的，并没有什么“更”真的。 正义的就是正义的，并没有什么“更”正义的。 自由的就是自由的，并没有什么“更”自由的。 有尊严的就是有尊严的，并没有什么“更”有尊严的。 用比较去衡量确定价值的人一定是一个“物化”的人而绝非“精神”的人。 物化的人是行尸走肉，是最容易被奴役的人。 精神的人是有真实价值、与自我的内在、与神/上苍对话沟通的人。 精神的人绝不会奴役他人，也绝不会被他人所奴役。 “物”是可以用“量”比较与衡量的。 “精神”的价值只能在“质”与“方向”的概念中被认知与选择。

用比较而得到的自由是伪自由；用比较而感到的存在是伪存在；用比较而发现的真理是伪真理；用比较而获取的正义是伪正义；用比较而品尝到的尊严是伪尊严；用比较而颂扬的伟大是伪伟大；用比较而享受到的幸福是伪幸福。 用比较才能鉴别邪恶只说明比较者的麻木、混乱与虚无。

你想感知什么是伟大吗？ 不要到身外去寻找。 那伟大就在你自己身上，在你的灵魂里。 当你发现、承认与表达自身的伟大的时候，你也会发现你周围的人们身上与灵魂中伟大的闪光。 当你看到那伟大的闪光的时候，不要沉默、不要畏缩、不要恐惧、不要退缩、不要虐虐捏捏地走中庸。 鼓起你的勇气、拿出你的良知去承认、褒扬并完整地拥抱那伟大的闪光，因为只有在你完整地、无畏地去拥抱那伟大的闪光的一刻，你将不再是一个被自身的原弊、自身的恐惧、自身的混乱与专制祖宗强加于你的专制虚无心态所奴役的“文化奴”与“环境奴”。 你将走上一条“自由人”的路。 在那充满未知与艰险的、同时充满着欢乐与幸福的、永不停息探索的自由之路上，你会真正懂得人的价值。

Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel – the World Finally Says “No” to China 刘晓波获诺奖 – 自由世界对中共党朝说“不”

Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel – the World Finally Says “No” to China

刘晓波获诺奖 – 自由世界对中共党朝说“不”

By Kai Chen 陈凯 11/14/2010

www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

When I met John Yoo, a law professor from U.C. Berkeley, I told him about the nature of the Chinese society: In the West, people worship someone (Jesus) who was murdered. In China, people worship someone (Mao) who murdered millions. Mr. Yoo smiled in agreement and promised me he would relay my message to his students.

For decades since China reentered the world stage after Mao’s death, a tacit agreement on a silent “appeasement” policy by the Western world toward China has been the norm. A quiet resignation over a large country with 1.3 billion people under a brutal communist regime somehow has become the only option by the free world. In America, the right, with an illusion that “an open door” changes everything, wants to use “free trade” with China to tap into the huge market under rhetoric that a rising standard of living will change the Chinese regime toward democracy, while the left has always been eager to grab something other than freedom to denigrate American exceptionalism. While in the Richard Nixon Presidential Library there is a Mao statue sitting among the likes of Winston Churchill, Thomas Friedman of New York Times wrote articles openly admiring the Chinese communist system putting on a spectacle in the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics. President Bush attending the Beijing Olympics with other world dignitaries further solidified the Red Dynasty’s world status as something not only to be recognized, but to be emulated with moral tribute. Somehow “using end to justify means” is no longer a vice when China is referred.

American society today and Western world in general, is infested with a sense of opportunistic passivity when the issues are related to China. Mao’s diners, Mao’s portraits, Mao’s statues, Mao’s T-shirts can be seen in many places. The image of the biggest mass murderer in human history even had a place in Obama’s White House’s Christmas tree, 2009. When I protested the statue of Mao in the Nixon Library, a museum recently transitioned from under a private foundation to the National Archive, the Library authority put up a sign by the Mao statue to say that the U.S. government does not take any moral position on Mao. I wonder maybe the U.S. Government also has no moral position on Hitler and Stalin. Something is terribly wrong. I always thought America stood for something – something meaningful, something good and great.

Then I learned that many powerful people in the U.S. government have extensive business connections and interests in China: Diane Feinstein, Henry Kissinger, Edward Nixon (brother of the former President) and many others have large stake in their businesses making a huge profit in China. President Obama also has a half brother living in China with a Chinese wife. Knowing what I know about China and the communist regime, I can guarantee you that the Chinese government, with their system of Party-State mercantilism (Everything is of the government, by the government and for the government.), these powerful people with U.S. governmental connections will never be allowed to fail. They will be used as mouth pieces and pawns for the communist regime’s interests.

Lately I have been engaged in a battle against a Chinese government funded Confucius Classroom in Hacienda La Puente Unified School District, California. There have already been many dozens of Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms with funding from the Chinese government in the U.S. colleges and high schools. The communist regime’s scheme to infiltrate and contaminate America is very simple yet very effective: Corruption works and works well, because human beings are sinful beings. They invite the U.S. educational officials, most likely School/College Board members, to go to China on free trips with all the perks legal and illegal. After the U.S. officials taste the dubious yet sweet personal benefit they would otherwise never have a chance to sample in America as an elected public official, they will essentially become the agents of the Chinese regime, under the threat of blackmail and the lure of bigger and grander future benefit to themselves, their families and friends.

The difference between a free nation and a despotic tyranny is that in a free nation, corruption is viewed and punished as corruption, while in a despotic tyranny corruption is viewed and rewarded as resourcefulness, wisdom and even virtue.

The gradual deterioration and corruption of American political and civic culture with the influence of the Chinese regime has done extensive damage to the U.S. diplomatically, politically and economically. And the corrosion is deepening. It seems that no one has the will and ability to stop the Chinese political infiltration, economic expansion and moral corruption upon the world, until now…

A tiny nation of Norway with its annual award of Nobel Prizes to the prominent achievers in the world reversed this insidious trend set by the Chinese regime to pollute and annihilate the world conscience. By awarding Liu Xiaobo, a prisoner of conscience languishing in a Chinese jail simply because he spoke the truth, the 2010 Novel Peace Prize, suddenly the world has found its voice of conscience, a voice silenced for decades by fear, by moral confusion, by political correctness.., a voice though still small and weak but nonetheless representing eternal, universal human values. Indeed, this Nobel Peace Prize, awarded for the first time to a Chinese citizen, is the world conscience saying “No” to the Chinese regime. Since the years of President Ronald Reagan, the world has not been able to find someone with courage and vision to articulate the moral values of freedom, justice and human dignity, to point the direction of human progress. Everything everybody is concerned with is money, wealth and economy. People seem to have forgotten what America is all about: America is rich not because Americans pursue money; America is rich because Americans treasure individual freedom to create. By the same token, America is diverse not because Americans pursue diversity; America is diverse because Americans cherish individual freedom to express.

Yet today some Americans are actively promoting fake American values such as economic well being and diversity. Some even use these fake values to woo, kowtow and emulate China – a despotic tyranny, a criminal enterprise that has murdered 80 millions of its own citizens and continues to torture, persecute and kill those who yearn and struggle to be free. A moral and intellectual perversion is happening in America and in the Western world in general: People start to see government as the solution of their problems. People forget that freedom implies individual virtue and responsibility. People start treating freedom as some kind of tool to achieve wealth, power and diversity. They are putting the wagon before the horse: Individual freedom with limited government is never some kind of tool to pursue wealth and power. Individual freedom with limited government is a moral proposition for a just society. It is an end in and to itself and everything else is only the result, never the goal.

Being an American by choice, not by birth, I am painfully aware that many native born Americans have no idea what this greatest country in the world truly means to mankind, to a freedom-yearning, freedom-loving person like me. I often feel like I am more American than most Americans. And I feel morally obligated and even destined to tell those who were born in America:

America is the single most exceptional country in the world and the greatest human society ever envisioned and achieved on earth by those who love individual freedom. America is the culmination of human knowledge about mankind itself through centuries of trials and tribulations. America is not a nation of God, not a nation above God, but a nation under God. America, with its limited power but unlimited moral resources from God, must stand up in the world for those who are still enslaved and oppressed. America must articulate tirelessly on the world stage the values of freedom, justice and human dignity. America must eliminate its own fear and moral confusion and return to what the founders originally intended, enunciated in the Declaration of Independence and the American Constitution. America must stand up to all despotisms and tyrannies in the world. America must call evil by its name. America must face down China – a mortal threat to world peace, a sworn enemy of freedom and say “No”.

New Book - Mao's Great Famine 新书介绍：毛的大饥荒

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

毛共的反人类罪行一定要被完整的揭露与正视。 所有的共产罪犯一定要被推上历史与道德的法庭。 上苍是绝不会允许道德上的瞎子与健忘症患者抹杀真实历史、纵容罪犯屠夫的。 道德与真知的赤字已在华语系群体中越积越大。 华语系人们偿还道德债、历史债的日子不会太远了。

Kai Chen's Words:

The anti-humanity crimes by Mao and the Chinese communist party, with acquiescence from the Chinese people, must be revealed and faced squarely in their entirety. All communist criminals must be put to trial in the court of history and human conscience. God will never allow a group of morally blind amnesiacs to continue as if nothing has happened. History must be returned to its true and integrated content. Crimes must be viewed as crimes. Moral corruption must be viewed as moral corruption. Today the moral deficit in China has been accumulating fast without curb. The Chinese will have to pay soon for all the debt caused by their own zombification.

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

Book Review 书评

A shocking tale of the Chinese draconian hell

中国大饥荒的骇人真相

September 28, 2010

By Paul Gelman "PAUL Y. GELMAN" (HAIFA , ISRAEL)

Video by NTDTV: http://www.ntdtv.com/xtr/gb/2010/11/13/a455321.html#video

Book Link: http://www.amazon.com/Maos-Great-Famine-Devastating-Catastrophe/dp/0802777686/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289665610&sr=8-1

This review is from: Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-1962 (Hardcover)

Frank Dikotter has written a masterpiece about history's greatest monster amd mass murderer ever to have lived.

To be precise, he describes the massed and forcible collectivization of the Chinese peasants who paid a horrible price in the process: over 45 million of them died in addition to the many more tens of millions who perished as well because of one man's mad scheme to bring change to his country,no matter what the price ought to be. This was the so-called Great Leap Forward and it happened during 4 years,between 1958-1962. To quote Dikotter: "China descended into hell. Mao Zedong threw his country into a frenzy...(which was)an attempt to catch up with and overtake Britain in less than fifteen years. In pursuit of a utopian paradise,everything was collectivized and people in the countryside were robbed of their work,their homes,their land,their belongings and their livelihood."(See Introduction)

To write this book,thousands of new documents hitherto classified were used. These came from many sources, mainly from the Office of Foreign Affairs and other provincial archives. These brutal acts caused the greatest demolition of real estate in history and one third of all housing was turned into rubble. "Homes were pulled down to make fertilizers,to build canteens,to relocate villagers,to straighten roads,to make place for a better future beckoning ahead or simply to punish thier owners".

But not all the people died of hunger. Many would suffer from common illnesses such as diarrhoea,dysentery and typhus. "Suicide reached epidemic proportions and in Puning,Guangdong,suicides were described as 'ceaseless' ;some people ended their lives out of shame for having stolen from fellow villagers."(p.304) What's more,"human flesh was traded on the black market. "A farmer who bartered a pair of shoes for a kilo of meat at the Zhangye railway station found that the package contained a human nose and several ears."(p.321) "One elderly man quietly sobbed when he recounted how,as a young boy,he and the other villagers had been forced to beat a grandmother,tied up in the local temple for having taken wood from the forest. Others were intimidated by mock trials and mock burials. People were given yin and yang hair cuts,as one half of the head was shaved off,the other not"(p.296)

Mao,albeit strong words of criticism,did not care at all about how history would judge him. To exemplify,one of his strongest critics,Liu Shaoqi,who had been totally shocked by what he had seen in his village,tried to stop the sheer madness of the Chairman. Mao had,at this point, decided to launch a reconstruction campaign also known as the Cultural Revolution,but he made sure to hound his opponent by using the Red Guards until Liu died in 1969,deprived of his medicines.

This is a tale of madness,of horror and shows to what extent dictators can use their untrammelled power in order to wreak havoc not only on others but also on their own people without even flinching. It shows how some of the leaders have lost their reason completely and have used their super-megalomanic aspirations without thinking about the price that others would pay. The names of Stalin, Ceausescu, Hitler, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and the worst monster of them, Mao, will always reside in history's hall of infamy.

This book is a stunning achievement and extremely important. It reads like a thriller and the narrative will keep you breathless! Hats off,Mr.Dikotter!

“爱独立自由主义”vs. “爱国/民族主义” Patriotism vs. Nationalism

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

“爱独立自由主义”vs. “爱国/民族主义”

Patriotism vs. Nationalism

中文语言文字的浑浊腐败导致华语系人们精神与理性上与真实绝缘

陈凯 Kai Chen 11/12/2010 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

“用麻绳绑电线”去启动在专制文化中被动麻木了两千年的华语系人们自由的精灵犹如“用榔头做手术”一样，是一个脑残的、非理性的、懦弱胆怯的人逃避自由人的责任的懒人恶人之举。 说语言是中性的而不是人认知、发现价值与真实的工具、不是价值与道德的载体暴露了华语系人们至今不能与人类普世终极价值沟通与认同的基点原因。 不管那根麻绳有多粗，自由，正义与尊严的电流是永远不会复燃华语系人们眼中的向往幸福与欢乐的、上苍所赋予的“原火”的。

“国”这一中文字有如我曾剖析过的“人”字一样，是对真实绝缘的一道华语系人们精心炮制的、与人性价值隔开的“文字的万里长城”上的一块精神虚无的砖。 英文中的“country, nation, state, regime..”在中文中都被译为“国”（有如英文中的“man, human being, human, individual, person… 都被译为“人”一样）。 这样混义与反义的文字将华语系人们与世界的普世终极价值永远隔绝开来。 我常说如果中国是一个“国”，美国就不可能是一个“国”。 如果美国是一个“国”，中国也不可能是一个“国”。 “One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” – 美国是一个在上苍之下的、完整的、将自由与正义带到人间的国度。 在这一定义下，所谓的“中国”是一个什么样的存在实体呢？ “中国”从来就不是“国”(Nation): 中国的过去是循环的“王朝”(Dynasties)；“中国”的现在是一个“党政”(Party-State)。 “中国”的政府在过去是皇帝的工具，在今天是共产党的工具。 “中国”的国不具有任何的真实与合法的意义 – 政府必须拥有民众的同意（选举）并被民众与政体的分权监督并作为工具。 “中国”的“国”是与真实意义上的“国”背道而驰的，是对真实价值与意义的完全异化。 “中国”是反人类普世终极价值的罪犯/邪恶实体。

“Patriotism” 被华语系人们误译为“爱国主义”。 殊不知在美国人们对“国”的理解是与其它社会截然不同甚至相反的。 美国是一个因为人类的普世终极价值而建立的国度，而绝非因为边界、语言、文化、祖宗、种族、地域的原因。 奥巴马曾说美国并不特殊是因为奥巴马本人不懂、抵制或否认美国“独立宣言”与“美国宪法”所代表与阐述的自由的价值。 所以我可以说奥巴马虽然是美国总统，但他并不代表美国的价值。 我热爱美国，并不因为美国的领土、强大、福利、机会等表象。 我热爱美国，是因为美国所代表的人类的普世终极价值 – 生命、自由与对幸福的向往与追求(life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness)。 美国是世界上唯一的基人类的普世终极价值建立的国度。 我来到美国，并不是想用我的肤色，文化背景，长相，口音，种族等外在表象来加入这个“大酱缸”。 我来美国是来追求我在东亚大陆所被拒绝的、所不可能得到的普世终极的人的价值 – 个体的自由与尊严。

“Patriots” （爱国者们）是美国独立战争时描述那些拥护独立与自由的原则价值的十三个英属殖民地的人们的英文字。 那时候美洲大陆并没有什么“国”，因此也根本就无所谓“爱国者们”（中文对历史的混义反义在此略见一斑）。 “Patriots” 是定义那些热爱美洲大陆的人们所向往、所追求的价值（独立与自由）。 那时的所谓的“爱国”严格地说是“爱独立与自由的价值”。 用那时美洲大陆人们对独立与自由的崇尚与追求去比较，而不是对照今天东亚大陆人们的“爱国与民族主义”有如用营养的食品去比较，而不是对照毒素病菌一样，本身就是一个精神理智的病态。 (“Being patriotic is never being nationalistic”. 这句英文语是不能被用中文表达的。 你要懂英文才能懂得我的原义。Patriotism 意味着人对真实价值的热爱；Nationalism意味着人对价值/生命虚无的无奈。)

毋庸置疑的，用“中国”一词去并列、比较“美国”是一个让人哭笑不得的悲哀现象。 “爱国”在华语系人的理解中是“爱土地、爱祖宗、爱政府、爱虚荣、爱财富、爱强权、爱虚无、、”。 在一个崇尚虚无与虐待的文化群体中（中文本身的虚无性质有其助虐的必然性），人们不知道也不关心什么是“价值”。 人们只生活在祖宗定好的程序与互虐自虐之中。 没有一个华语系的人去询问“什么是中国？ 什么代表中国？ 中国与‘人的价值’是否冲突？” 似乎“中国”与“美国”都是“国”（中文的虚无混乱在此略见一斑），没有什么两样。 “中国”的民族主义也就与“爱国”的虚无概念一起，在中共强权的宣传搅拌机的高速旋转中被混淆为一体，成为了中共党奴朝“维稳维政”的万金油。

用“繁荣富强”去定义“伟大”，用“党政王朝”去定义“国”，用“混乱虚无”去定义“意义、存在与价值”是华语系人们至今在病语中难以自拔的状态。 用助长专制的语言去试图自由于专制是病态扭曲的“揪发助飞”。 华语系的人们要想过上有自由与尊严的人的生活，一定要懂得中文本身的病态病理。 采用英文去发现真实、理解人性、追求价值是一个“建国、立国”的必要途径。 1+1在谁的脑子里都是2。 将华语系的人们与人性、与普世终极的价值绝缘的状态暴露、分析、抛弃与杜绝是每一个崇尚自由与尊严的个体的道德责任。

愿在东亚大陆有一个新的“国”出现： 她将在上苍之下，完整地保障、弘扬人的普世终极价值 – 真实、正义、自由与尊严。

刘晓波：从消极自由到逃避自由 Liu Xiaobo: Freedom in China - From Passivity to Escape

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

刘晓波：从消极自由到逃避自由

Liu Xiaobo: Freedom in China - From Passivity to Escape

2009-08-13 00:17

读过《两种自由概念》，再看关于当代自由主义哲学的代表人物伊赛亚·柏林的纪念专集，西方人夸起死人来也挺肉麻，只不过他们的语言更个性化，不同于中国的程序化夸人，用我的话说，一旦开始夸，想叫他停下来都不可能，他必欲按固定程序完成预定的演说，往死里夸。

巧了，电视中正在播出一期文化视点栏目的清明节专集，夸的是冰心，那种令人作呕的赞美，即使是冰心的亡灵也不会接受，这样夸她，她的天堂就再无安宁。

当然，把死者的生活细节拿出来示众是不公正的，每个人的生活都经不起用显微镜一寸一寸地观察和审视，但人要有起码的自知。 冰清玉洁之人是神话，是特定时代的需要。这种信念来自某种先验的幻觉，是专制化思维方式的产物。有人言之凿凿地声称知道完美的人格和完美的生活是什么，柏拉图、黑格尔、马克思、列宁、毛泽东都知道，而康德、哈耶克和波普尔不知道，现在的我也不知道。

人类为塑造完美的偶像所付出的代价太惨烈了。中外哲学史上充满了这类美丽的谎言，而实际上，这些名人名言只是些什么也没有 说的语言游戏，它们的代代流传，甚至因过于玄虚而变得神圣。人类对自己的智力和道德的迷恋，即使在后现代的时尚中，仍然顽强地表现着自己。柏拉图的理想国和东方的专制主义，仅仅是一种人性狂妄和制度幻觉。

想读哲学，或研究哲学，最好别去碰黑格尔，他身处启蒙时代，却扮演着中世纪的巫士，躲在一个见不到底的黑洞中，以神秘主义的咒语引诱众人，一旦踏进去，就再无返回的可能。在我的阅读经验中，黑格尔哲学是最剧烈的毒药，表面上的那层糖衣却眩人眼目。马克思就中了黑格尔的毒—— 独断论的决定论的狂妄之毒。根据黑格尔的三段论逻辑，人类精神史的发展也经历着否定之否定的过程，日尔曼是人类精神的顶峰，肩负拯救世界的重任；他的哲学 又是日尔曼精神的顶峰，不但在德国被钦定为“国家哲学”，而且被黑格尔自封为“人类精神的终结”。哲学史会接受黑格尔这样的巫师和骗子，实在是对人类智慧 和良知的嘲弄。黑格尔是思想史上的希特勒，正如海德格尔是坐在讲台上的希特勒一样，他进行了一场至今还遗害人类的思想史的种族灭绝。

还是谈谈伯林的自由主义理论吧。按照伯林的理解，自由主义传统中有“消极自由”与“积极自由”之分，前者是“不做什么”的自由，后者是“主动做什么”的自由。自由的真义是由英美传统的“消极自由”提供的，当然也包括德国、法国与英美传统相近的思想资源，如康德的个人主义自由观、贡斯当的古代自由与现代自由之分，托克维尔对美国式民主的推崇。积极自由的传统来自大陆的政治思想，主要源于卢梭的“人民主权论”和“公意论”。 积极自由的滥用，导致了雅各宾专制，亦导致了法西斯主义和共产主义的现代极权。 积极自由的提倡者说：如果你们服从具有理性的人，就等于服从你们自己，使你们摆脱无知、本能和情欲的摆弄。所以，你们必须服从理性的权威——执政者及法律 或公意。正像卢梭所说：“我把我自己奉献给所有的人，等于没有把我奉献给任何人一样。”

柏林认为，正是卢梭的“积极自由”，使暴政、强权和奴役具有了迷人的意识形态外表。与此不同的是，消极自由意味着：“如果我要保障我的自由，我就不能仅发表这样的声明，就算了事。我必须建立一个自由的社会：在这个社会中，自由具有某种疆界，任何人都不能逾越这个 疆界，来侵犯到我的自由。我们可以用各种不同的名称或性质，来称呼决定这种疆界的规则，我们可以称这些规则为‘天赋人权’(natural right)、‘上帝圣渝’(the word of God)、‘自然法则’、‘功利要求’或‘人类的永久利益’等。我可以认为这些规则，都是‘先验地’(apriori)有效，或主张它们本是我自己的终极 目的，或是我的社会或文化的目的。其实，这些规则所共同具有的特点是：它们已经广为众人接受，而且在人类的历史发展过程中，也一直深植在人的实际本性之 中。现在看来，它们恰构成了我们所谓‘一个正常人’的基本部分。”

自由意味着界限，特别是私人领域和公共领域的界限，这界限首先是约束公共权力的，其次才是约束个人行为的。 对于公共权力而 言，这界限要求政府不能以任何理由、特别是不能以公益或整体利益（国家、民族、政党、阶级、多数……）来强制个人偏离自己的目标；对于个人而言，这界限要 求任何人不得以实现自身自由的借口来干预或强迫他人的生活。 换言之，在政府不得以任何名义侵犯个人自由的法治下，我的自由与他人的自由互不干涉、和平共处、共享共荣。

积极自由的传统强调天赋人权、主权在民、人人平等等观念，是人类基本自由的积极价值，但是，必须以消极自由的原则加以约束，任何人的权利和自由的实现都要有一条明确的界限；己所不欲勿施于人，己所欲亦不可强制地施于人。 正如康德所言：“人类最大的问题，是建立一 个普遍依循法律而运用权利的文明社会。人类的本性，迫使人类必须解决此—问题。惟有在一个拥有最大自由的社会中，惟有以严格的决心与界限之保证，来限制个人自由，使它能够和别人的自由共存共荣，大自然的最高目的，即大自然全部能力之发展，才能在人类社会中实现。”

个人之间对自由的共享共荣的首要前提，是法治社会对公权力作出刚性限制，保障个人权利的自由制度才有可能；一个人的自由只 有在与他人的自由“共存共荣”之时，才可称之为完整的自由。在法治秩序划出的界限之内，任何人不能以任何名义强迫他人改变自己的选择（只要这选择未触犯法 律），以给予幸福的名义也不行，甚至以至善、正义、自由的名义也不行。只有始终保持一块任何权力以任何名义都不能侵犯的私人领地，自由才有了切实的保障。

康德曾说：“家长保护主义是人类所能想象的最大专制。”这种保护主义之所以是最大的专制，不是由于它的赤裸的、残酷的暴政 更具压迫性，亦不是由于它对每个人都具有理性的忽视，而是由于它对人的自主和尊严构成了侮辱：我作为一个人，有权利和能力选择我自己喜欢的生活，我有自己 的生活目的，无需他人指导。也许，我的目的，在道德上未必高尚、在筹划上未必合理、在效果上未必有益，但它毕竟是我自己所选择的目的。更重要的是，别人应 该尊重和承认我有如此生活的权利。所谓“人的尊严”，即是这种独立自主的人格之不被强迫，因而也就不受辱。我不希望强迫，哪怕是那种用为我好的名义施加的 强迫。真正的自由只有在此种意义上才是可能的。

正如柏林所说：“一个社会，除非至少遵循由下列两个互有关连的原则，否则，绝对无法获得自由，这两个原则是：第一，惟有“ 权利”（rights）能成为绝对的东西，除了权利以外，任何“权力”(power)都不能被视为绝对；惟有如此，所有的人才能具有绝对的权利去拒绝从事 非人的行为，而不论他们是被什么权利所统治。第二，人类在某些界限以内，是不容侵犯的，这些界限不是人为划定的，这些界限之形成，是因为它们所包含的规 则，长久以来，就广为众人所接受，而人们也认为要做一个‘正常人’，就必须遵守这些规则。同时，人们还认为如果违犯这些规则，就是不人道或不正常的行为； 对于这些规则而言，如果我们认为它们可以由某个法庭、或统治团体，用某种正式的程序，予以废止，是荒谬的想法。当我说某一个人是个‘正常人’的时候，我所 指的意思中，也包含了‘他不可能破坏以上这些规则，而丝毫不感到嫌恶、或不安’”。

Communism(共产主义）就是一种家长式的保护主义，中国几千年的帝制历史也是如此，所谓“父母官”就是最形象的概括。父母官式 的保护主义最具欺骗性的借口是：大众是愚昧的缺德的，不知道对自己而言什么才是最好的生活，也不知道自己的行为如何才能符合“善的道德”。这就需要有智慧 的有道德的人加以指导，给他们提供最好生活的标准和至善道德的答案。同时，由于大众的愚昧和缺德使之很难被说服，即便是对他们只有百利而无一害的教诲，也 难以为大众自觉接受，所以就必须给予聪明的有德者以强制性的独裁权力，以便在道德劝诱失灵之后，可以动用权力来强制大众接受最好的生活方式。独裁者的堂皇 统治逻辑是：“当你不知道什么是好的生活时，你就必须听我的指导。我的所作所为皆是为你好，所以你必须服从我的决定。如若你不服从，我就要强制你服从。” 常常，赤裸而残虐的暴政容易引起反抗，而家长式的保护主义因其意识形态目标的高尚而具有强烈的欺骗性。

换言之，一个信奉自由主义的政府在价值上保持中立，它相信每个人的能力（思考的和行动的能力），允许个人保有自己的价值偏好，让人们进行自由的自我选择。 而一个独裁主义的政府在价值上坚持偏好，不相信个人具有自主生活的能力，不允许个人保有自己的价值偏好，而是先把统治者个 人或统治阶层的偏好包装成唯一正确、唯一好的普遍价值，之后用强制性权力（暴力）强迫人们接受这种偏好。在道德上，自我选择和替你选择，自由选择和别无选择，标志着两种根本不同的社会制度和政治安排。

当独裁者所承诺的乌托邦破产之后，专制制度便暴露出它内在的野蛮本性，它会不惜采取赤裸裸的强制手段来维持奴役，让被奴役者违心地宣称自己是自由的，而被奴役者一旦屈从了这种强制，违心地宣称自己是自由的，专制就取得了决定性的胜利，且是一种决不次于意识形态说教具有充分劝 诱力时的成功——统治者不管被统治者的内心怎么想，也无论用什么样的手段，只要在统治者需要掌声的时候，被统治者一起鼓掌，在统治者需要沉默的时候，被统治者就万马齐喑，就一切OK。

然而，我个人并不能完全同意柏林对自由思想史的理解，特别是不能接受中国知识界对柏林的中国化解释。

卢梭的“主权在民”之思想，并非在任何条件下都会演变为极权暴政的意识形态说辞，关键在于如何限定“主权在民”。事实上， 西方自由制度的演进是“主权在民” 与“法治限权”相结合的产物，也就是“民主制”和“自由宪政”的结合。古希腊雅典的民主制是无限的“主权在民”，绝对的多数权力导致了对少数的暴政，如苏 格拉底被审判被处死。正是基于多数暴政的危害，苏格拉底才反对民主制，亚里士多德才提出混合政体的设想，即君主制、贵族制和民主制相混合的制度。古罗马的 政制是混合政体的雏形，保留了君主制和贵族制，又在希腊化时期吸收雅典的民主制，逐步演变出君主、贵族元老院和平民会议相混合的共和制。更重要的是，古罗马给西方文明留下了“法治秩序”和“基督教信仰”，政教分离的二元社会结构，封建制的纵向分权结构，基督教催生出的解放奴隶运动，为自由宪政奠定了基础。

到了文艺复兴和启蒙时代，“在上帝面前人人平等”的基督教理念被世俗化为“天赋权利”，个人自由被置于社会关注的中心，政治制度越来越向着“保障人权”和 “限制权力”的方向演进。当个人自由变成优先价值之时，如何保障个人自由不被任意侵犯就必然变成制度安排的中心问题。“主权在民”的民主制是从权力来源上 限制政治权力，逐步扩展的定期选举，给了民众以和平方式参与公共事务的平等机会和定期更换统治者的选择机会。但是，卢梭代表的大陆传统更强调“主权在民 ”，而疏于对政治权力的制度性限制，甚至用“公意”的正当性赋予了大众以绝对权力。洛克为代表的英国传统也尊重“主权在民”，他甚至主张，如果统治者违背 了与人民的政治契约，而且在其他的限制或驯服暴政的手段失效之后，人民就有权采取暴力手段来推翻暴君的同志。只不过，洛克在伸张“人民主权”的同时，也强调对任何政治权力的制度性限制，无论是君主的权力还是大众的权力，皆没有充足的理由自外于法治限制。于是，英国在制度设计上的三权分立，使不成文的宪政逐 渐成熟。美国创制的第一部成文宪法及其政治制度，就是大陆民主和英国宪政的完美结合。民主也好，宪政也罢，二者都不是政治安排的目的，而是保障“个人自由 ”的手段。用康德的话说：人是目的而非手段。

把柏林的两种自由介绍到中国，在深入了解西方自由主义演进的知识学意义上，可谓居功至伟；但在应用于解释中国的现实时则有点文不对题。如前所述，在柏林那里，“不作为”的“消极自由” 是“划界”，针对是“公权力”和“私权利”在之间的明确界限。这界限首先是约束公权力的，以防止它越界侵犯个人自由；其次才是约束个人行为的，以防止“己 之所欲，强施于人”。对于公权力而言，这界限要求它不能以任何理由、特别是不能以公益或整体利益（国家、民族、政党、阶级、多数……）来强制个人放弃自己 的权利及其生活目标；对于个人而言，这界限要求任何人不得以自身自由的最大化来干预和妨碍他人的自由，更不能强迫他人放弃自己的权利。

再看中国，当下的制度现实恰恰是“公权力”的不受限制，权力的触角无所不在，伸向社会的每一角落，几乎可以任意侵犯个人权利。尽管，近年来私域上“半吊子个人自由”有所增加，但无民主无宪政也是最醒目的制度事实，也就是没有法治下的个人自由。底层维权是国人争取财产权和公正 分配的尝试，遭遇的却是专政机关的镇压和截访；网络议政是国人争取言论自由的自发尝试，遭遇的却是越来越严格的封网和文字狱；……这些每天发生在身边的暴行，才是现行制度的本质所在。

无自由而奢谈两种自由，已经是无的放矢；再用“不作为”的“消极自由”来贬低“有作为”的“积极自由”，用“逃避自由”来贬低“争取自由”，把懦弱装饰成自由主义的正宗，就是近于意淫自由的无耻了。对中国的精英们而言，这样的逃避及其装饰，当然也有界限，但不是法治下的限制，而是独裁权力下的人治禁区。于是，在当下中国，“消极自由” 不是限制权力强制的界限，而是屈从于权力强制的“自我设限”。比如，宪法上有“言论自由”，但现实中却有“允许公开谈论”和 “不允许公开谈论”的界限。当父母官要子民们闭嘴的时候，精英们大都接受了这种蛮横的强加，久而久之就变成了由内在恐惧逼出外在自律。他们大谈被允许的话 题，甚至有时还谈得义愤填膺（比如对通俗文化、市场化、全球化、爱国主义、反美反日反态度等等），慷慨激昂之余，居然还会生出道德上的“自我感动”，真以 为自己是在“向强权说真话”，是在践行知识分子的批判职责和表达做人的良知。而对不允许的话题则保持优雅的沉默，或用一大堆舶来的或本土的概念来谈论抽象 的自由主义，用概念游戏或书斋阔论来为自己的沉默或聪明言说正名，也就是为自己在恐怖面前的精明利害计算寻找道德合法性。

君不见，著名作家余华声称自己的创作“很自由”，说明他在无自由的现行制度下已经活得“如鱼得水”。另两位著名作家张承志和张炜高举“抵抗文学”的大旗，只会用对商业文化的激烈抨击来标榜知识分子的道义坚持，而对最大的文化毒瘤党文化不置一词。

这样的“道义”，确实能让他们在人性的自戕中夜照样“怡然自得”，即让人的生存维持在动物水平上且物我两忘——统治者是狼而被统治者是羊或猪。

我使用这样有辱人性尊严的比喻，我不请求聪明的精英们原谅，因为制造无尊严生活的政权和忍受着或享受着无尊严生活的精英们，共同营造了好死不如赖活着的生存现状。

“免于恐惧的自由”，即过上有人性尊严和个人自由的生活，必须从对自由的积极争取开始，从敢于反抗恐怖政治和抗拒利益收买开始。

1997年5月1日于大连教养院
2005年3月18日修订于北京家中

刘晓波简介： http://bbs.hlgnet.com/showid.php?theid=17305339&boardid=1&page=1&up=1&bbscate=0

http://wapedia.mobi/zh/%E5%88%98%E6%99%93%E6%B3%A2

刘晓波言论略集 Views Expressed by Liu Xiaobo

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

刘晓波言论略集

Views Expressed by Liu Xiaobo

“我有自身无法摆脱的局限：语言问题。我没法用英语那样好的表达自己的内心世界，我将来有可能用英语表达的意思，但语言的味道会一点儿也没啦。所以，语言如果可以过关，中国会和我根本没有关系。我最大的悲哀就是因为语言的局限性，还不得不为中国说话，我是在与一个非常愚昧、非常庸俗的东西对话，这种对话只会使自己的水平越来越低”. -- 刘晓波

http://www.rxhj.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=27223&sid=57b721b564ad8e2daeaa2c00cd5d3808
刘晓波观点略见：

一：晓波眼中的日本（尤其是侵华战争中的日本）

“日本侵华战争期间在中国留下的遗迹多了，仅就我生长的东北而言，最初的大连市是日本人建起来的，著名的鞍钢、小丰满水电站、阜新煤矿和东北发达的铁路 网……，在在都是日本人留下的……在北京人主要用无烟煤炉做饭取暖之时，长春人主要用煤气暖气。这也都是日本人留下的遗产。正如长春人所说：当年的小日本 真把咱长春当自己家建了……前不久，胡锦涛甚至极端到不可理喻的程度，居然把小泉停止参拜敬国神社作为恢复中日元首会面的前提。反对小泉参拜，可以有多种 方式，特别是在中日元首会晤时，既当面表达明确的反对，又不影响讨论其他问题，应该是最恰当的外交方式。而一旦把停止参拜作为先决条件，就等于彻底关闭了 中日峰会的大门……随着中国国力的不断增强，在官方灌输和纵容下的民族主义，开始由怨妇防卫型转向愤青攻击型，鼓动打杀复仇和武力统一的声音日渐高涨，歇 斯底里的极端者也不乏其人，而且，这样的歇斯底里也不断殃及国人。中国愤青们高举“反日爱国”的道德大棒，对国人的爱国要挟愈来愈不可理喻。当年，拳匪们 杀掉的中国教民数十倍于外国人；今天，爱国愤青侮辱的国人也远多于日本人。近年来，仅媒体曝光的“国耻”事件就接二连三。 政论家马立诚提出“对日新思维”，遭到网上爱国者的口诛笔伐，还传出马先生在深圳遭到人身攻击。”
——刘晓波：《樱花的中国劫难》，2006年4月11日

“日本游客在珠海集体买春事件，照中国目前的法律，至多是违法卖淫嫖娼，对买卖双方依法处罚就是了，决不应该因人数的多寡或国籍的不同而区别对待……民间 的反应远比官方强烈得多，网民们的怒吼致使各大门户网站的BBS被‘涨爆’，又一轮爱国反日思潮高涨。痛心疾首者恨不得马上阉了日本嫖客并取其人头，怒火 中烧者兴奋得有点语无伦次，信口胡说……看爱国愤青的们的表现，无论对美对日，在向外喊话时，尽情倾泄仇恨愤怒和呼唤正义和平，也把同等份量的语言暴力加 诸于中国的‘一夜美国人’和‘对日新思维’上……某些国人的流氓化爱国主义已经到了成精的化境了。”
——刘晓波：《狂热到精明的爱国主义》，2003年10月1日

二：晓波眼中的台独

“台湾新政府承诺不进行公投，是迫于复杂的历史和现实而做出的决策。这并不等于台湾人民没有用公投来决定自己归属的权利。”
——刘晓波：《自治的权利》，2000年11月24日

“自秦始皇通过武力征伐统一中国之后，大一统观念就变成中国文化中不容置疑的绝对正确——最高善，直到今天仍然占据着道统制高点，而从来不问：1，如何统一，是武力强制下的统一，还是自愿结成的政治共同体？2，生活在大一统中的国民，是主人还是奴隶？3，如果统一意味着武力吞并和更深重的奴役，这样的统一还有必要和道德正当性吗？……人的自由，有着远比民族或政权或国家更神圣的价值，不仅高于统治权力、国家或民族的利益，甚至高于人之生命本身……中共的政治制度和统治方式仍然处在中世纪的帝国时期，至今仍然没有放弃建立更庞大帝国的中世纪迷思，对内不给少数民族以自治的自由，对外不承诺放弃用武力统一台湾，以独裁强权干涉实行“一国两制”的香港自治，致使香港的政治民主化进程举步为艰。”

“二战后，现代文明的一条重要原则就是“住民自决”，它是由个人自由乃天赋人权的价值观中引申出来的，并得到最权威的国际组织联合国承认。在此一原则下，任何统一的达成和民族冲突的解决，皆不是取决于强势一方的武力强制，而是取决于少数民族的自愿选择，一旦强势政权依靠武力来解决民族争端和统独之争，必然造成大规模的种族歧视、人权灾难和社会动荡。特别是当两地的经济发展水平相差甚远、政治制度截然对立的情况下，如果强势一方不尊重弱势一方的民意而采取强行的武力统一，一来现在的国际社会决不会漠然视之，二来现行国际规则允许国际社会进行人道主义干涉。如果统一只能意味着强制和奴役，那就宁可不要这样的统一。”

“具体到两岸关系，象台湾这样在事实上已经脱离大陆本土100年的地区，能否最终回归大陆，应该完全尊重台湾民众的自由选择……现在的世界已经进入了人权（住民自决是基本人权之一）高于主权的时代，台湾也已经成为世界主流文明中的合格成员，台湾民众终于享有了不受任何强权强制的自由。在此情况下，对台湾民众如何选择两岸关系，台湾政府不能实施强制，其它政权就更不能！”

“在两岸关系的处理上，要面对历史和现实，但这种面对不能只讲无原则的实力主义或实用主义，即谁的人多、地大、武力强就由谁来主导。而应该在尊重历史和现实的同时，在大原则上不违背普世道义的前提下，从两岸的民众福祉、社会稳定、品质提升、区域及世界和平、未来远景出发，经过对等的协商、谈判来解决问题……如果大一统只意味着面子上的民族尊严而无视具体个人的尊严，只为了一党政权的利益而无助于民众的福祉，只是强权大国武力威逼下的统一而不是平等协商下的统一，那么这样的尊严、利益和统一还是不要的好，哪怕它是以高尚的民族尊严和国家利益为诉求的。”
——刘晓波：《如果统一就是奴役》，2005年12月20日

“一个被岛内主流民意自我认同为事实上的主权独立的国家，却无法在国际上获得合法的主权国家身分，不仅被排除在只有主权国家才能参与的主要国际组织之外，而且其主权身分也不被绝大多数国家所承认。在住民自决权原则得到国际公认的今天，台湾人却要面对四面楚歌的国际环境，其屈辱感之深重，绝非局外人所能体验。如果台湾主流民意屈从这样的国际现实，也就等于接受了永远被排斥在国际社会之外的屈辱……现在的台湾已经是自由民主社会，在岛内，台湾人已经是拥有平等尊严的自由人，而在国际上，台湾作为一个政治实体，却没有这样的平等尊严，也就等于台湾人的民族尊严得不到世界的尊重，如何能不悲情……尽管，黑金和民粹、劣质口水和局部暴力、国民党老朽和民进党的稚嫩……皆是台湾朝野必须加以不断克服的弊端，事实上，岛内对这些弊端也一直有不断深入的反思。然而，环视当今世界，在如此有辱尊严的外部环境下生存，台湾人的自尊怎能不受到极大的伤害！”
——刘晓波：《台湾恶劣环境中的优质民主》，2004年3月23日，《观察》2005年12月

三：晓波如何看藏独

“达赖喇嘛提出西藏在政治上完全自治，也是一种制度性诉求……这种政治诉求,要求的仅仅是对各自的未来归属的自决选择，既对中国的未来大有益处，又符合国际正义原则，顺应人类主流文明的发展潮流，无论在道义上还是在现实上，都有着勿庸置疑的正义性。”
——刘晓波：《如果统一就是奴役》，2005年12月20日

“被迫流亡的达赖喇嘛，不仅是雪域文化之魂，更是弱小民族反抗大汉族强权的最高象征……明示着一个难以被物质利益同化、更难以向强权镇压屈服的宗教民族的灵魂。这种来自信仰的虔诚和坚韧将使任何世俗手段失效。”
——刘晓波：《西藏危机是唯物主义独裁的失败》，BBC，2008年3月31日

“二战以后，随着自由民主制度在世界的普及，随着‘人权高于主权’原则的深入人心，解决由少数民族要求自治和独立而引发的民族矛盾，全民公投越来越成为具有权威合法性的通行手段，住民自治也逐渐成为世界大多数国家的共识。这是自由主义价值观及其制度安排在族群权利上的应用──在尊重大多数的同时更要尊重和保护少数──全民公投体现了尊重多数的民主原则，住民自治体现了保护少数的原则。而那些仍然沿用殖民时代的弱肉强食法则、对要求独立或自治的少数民族进行强制压服的政府，越来越遭到国际社会的道义谴责和实际制裁。 ”

“在世界范围内，大凡信奉自由主义的民主国家，在解决民族矛盾时，都遵循了住民自治的原则，都用全民公投来解决问题。独裁国家则大都相反，不尊重住民自治，不通过全民公投，而是采取强制、甚至武力解决的办法。科索沃问题最后演变成流血冲突、甚至战争，就是最近的例证。”

“西藏、新疆和台湾的问题已经国际化，处理不好很可能成为全面危机爆发的导火线。我以为，解决这一问题的最佳方式是（该区域进行）全民公投；在现实条件还不具备之时，退一步也要在尊重住民自治权利的底线上进行和平谈判……在自由主义看来，一个人可以自由确定自己财产的归属，难道祖祖辈辈都生于斯、长于斯、死于斯、劳作于斯的少数民族，还没有决定自己民族的归属的权利吗？”

“达赖喇嘛提出西藏自治的要求，不仅在道义上理由充足，而且在现实上也表达了和平谈判的诚意。”
——刘晓波：《自治的权利》，2000年11月24日

“以达赖喇嘛在藏人的崇高权威和国际上的杰出声誉，也由于越来越多的汉人皈依佛门，如果中共政权有足够的政治智慧，汉人有足够的心胸，那就把达赖喇嘛请回来担任国家主席，汉藏问题就可以迎刃而解……达赖喇嘛构想的高度自治的西藏，将是一个政教分离的民主西藏。”
——刘晓波：《共和党对奥巴马当选的贡献》，2008年11月5日

“中共当局已经成功地把西藏危机转化为极端民族主义的狂潮。把自由与独裁的政治冲突转化为汉藏的民族冲突。但中共无法消除境外藏人的反抗，也无法取得国际主流社会的认同……在我看来，西藏危机的根源也是中国危机的根源，大一统与高度自治的冲突，实质上是独裁与自由的冲突……如果说，截至1959年前西藏治权还部分地掌握在达赖喇嘛和噶厦政府的手中，多少还有点“一国两制”的味道，那么，1959年之后的西藏已经彻底丧失了自己的治权，十四世达赖被迫流亡，十世班禅被软禁在北京，中共中央强行夺取了西藏的治权……藏人无自治，汉人无自由。”
——刘晓波：《汉人无自由，藏人无自治》，2008年4月10日，《观察》2008年4月11日

四：晓波眼中的中国人和中国文化

“全盘西化就是人化、现代化，选择西化就是要过人的生活，西方与中国制度的区别就是人与非人的区别，换言之，要过人的生活就要选择全盘西化，没有和稀泥及调和的余地。我把西化叫做国际化、世界化，因为只有西化，人性才能充分发挥，这不是一个民族的选择，而是人类的选择，所以，我很讨厌‘民族化’这个词。”
——《文坛“黑马”刘晓波——刘晓波答记者问》，香港《解放月报》1988年12号

“中国文化的危机不仅是民族性的问题，我甚至感到是与人种不无关系。因此，走出危机之路是十分的艰巨。”
——《危机！新时期文学面临危机》，《深圳青年报》1986年10月3日）

“我有自身无法摆脱的局限：语言问题。我没法用英语那样好的表达自己的内心世界，我将来有可能用英语表达的意思，但语言的味道会一点儿也没啦。所以，语言如果可以过关，中国会和我根本没有关系。我最大的悲哀就是因为语言的局限性，还不得不为中国说话，我是在与一个非常愚昧、非常庸俗的东西对话，这种对话只会使自己的水平越来越低”.
——《文坛“黑马”刘晓波——刘晓波答记者问》，香港《解放月报》1988年12号

“对传统文化我全面否定。我认为中国传统文化早该后继无人。”
——《与李泽厚对话——感性·个人·我的选择》，《中国》1986年第10期

“我承认我对中国文化的研究，最后走投无路，如果你把问题归结为政治腐败，再及文化腐败，就会问：为什么孔子的思想能统治中国这么多年，至今阴魂不散? 我没法回答。我说过可能与人种有关。我绝不认为中国的落伍是几个昏君造成的，而是每个人造成的，因为制度是人创造的，中国的所有悲剧，都是中国人自编自导自演和自我欣赏的，不要埋怨别人，反传统与革新要从每个人开始。”
——《文坛“黑马”刘晓波——刘晓波答记者问》，香港《解放月报》1988年12号

“中国的文学只有打倒屈原、杜甫才有出路。”
——1986年12月12日在清华大学的讲演

“从人类文化史、特别是思想史的角度看，中国的文化传统中既无感性生命的勃发，也无理性反省意识的自觉，只有生命本身的枯萎，即感性狂迷和理性清醒的双重死亡。”
——《形而上学的迷雾》，上海人民出版社，1989年版，第461页

“以儒家传统为代表的中国正统文化，在高度统一、高度集权的封建等级制中，经过长期的发展，简直太‘完美’了，其力量太强大了。虽然受到过‘五四’运动的冲击，但在当代中国，从‘反右’到‘文革’，传统文化又进行了一次空前规模的大复辟，登上了它的又一个高峰。即使新时期已经开始了十年，传统文化通过‘文革’所传播的影响也很难在短期内消失，它沉淀为民族的潜意识，在不同的程度上浸透了大多数国人之魂。”
——《一种新的审美思潮》，《文学评论》1986年第3期

“在和传统文化对话的时候，就是得把这样一些东西强调到极点：感性、非理性、本能、肉。肉有两种含义，一是性，一是金钱。”
——刘晓波：《危机！新时期文学面临危机》，1986年9月

五：晓波眼中的伊拉克战争、虐囚和美国

“1，任何国家都不会完美无缺，即便如美国这样的老牌自由国家，也会有局部性的制度漏洞和管理不善，加之人性之恶的难以根除，发生局部性的人权灾难在所难免。何况是在战争中，任何交战国都很难保证没有虐囚行为发生，只不过，美国军人倒霉，被爆光了。2，虐囚案是美国人自己揭露出的，而有多少国家的虐囚行为没有被爆光：不仅是战争中的虐囚，还有和平时期的虐囚。与那些无法爆光的国家相比，美国已经做得足够好了。美国即便出现了虐囚丑闻，但其人权保护与专制国家相比，还是有根本区别的。所以，虐囚固然要谴责，但专制国家无资格批评美国。3，冷战后，“人权高于主权”的提出，美国已经把战争的文明水平提高到前所未有的程度——尽量减少平民伤亡、没有领土野心、尽量在战后建立民主体制，然而，即便如此，在以主权国家为实体的现有国际秩序中，任何自由国家对本国人权的关注和保护，都必然高于对别国人权的关注和保护，何况是在战争时期。所以，基于以上理由，美国受到如此激烈的世界性谴责，有欠公允。”
——刘晓波，《把罪恶当罪恶——虐囚案评论之二 》，2004年5月18日

“悲愤，难以想象！难以言表！我想为死者献血！我想参加反恐怖部队！无论是哪里组建的，只要能够消灭恐怖主义，我都参加！我想跨过太平洋，参加全纽约市动员的救助！我想把我的生命当作救援的天梯，伸向从高楼中求救的人们，让那些绝望中的无辜者在遮天蔽日的浓烟中看见曼哈顿上空的蓝天！我想化为一棵常青树或一捧泥土，在坟墓上为那位52岁的飞行员守灵！世贸大厦坍塌的一瞬间，我想化作一块坚硬的石头，与大楼一起沉下来……这不是文化之间的对立，不是民族之间的相残，不是弱小者在被逼得走投无路之时，向强者被迫复仇的正义，而是对生命、自由、和平的邪恶挑战，是针对无辜平民犯下的反人类罪！”

“这是美国人民为建立和捍卫全球自由秩序所付出的超常代价，也是全世界所有享受着、向往着自由与和平的人们付出的代价。美国必须坚强，经受考验！世界必须团结，经受考验！因为自由、和平与无价的生命在经受灾难和考验。要想让自由女神手中的火炬燃遍全球，每个人都有责任向恐怖主义宣战。”
——刘晓波：《我想为捍卫生命、自由与和平而战》，2001年9月12日

“今夜，我们是美国人。愿上帝保佑美国！”
——刘晓波等：《致布什总统和美国人民的公开信》，2001年9月12日

“冷战后，由美国领导的几大局部战争，就是现代文明的道义规则如何约束战争行为的最好实例：在战时尽量减少平民伤亡，在战后尽量做到文明重建，最终让当地人民享有和平、自由和民主……从 911后美国及其盟国的言行中，我看到了人性的光辉和自由的力量，更加坚定了自由必胜的信念。正是对自由的信念使我相信：美英联军决不会屈从于流氓的恫吓和要挟，自由世界也决不会败于独裁残余及恐怖主义，一个自由、民主、和平的伊拉克必将诞生。”
——刘晓波：《美英自由联盟必胜》，2004年4月11日
_________________
华东独立 http://huachukok.freeforums.org/index.php
台灣共和國論壇
http://www.republictaiwan.com
满洲国 http://www.manchukuo.org/
西藏论坛
http://www.tibetalk.com/

Liu Xiaobo - Don't stop 'Ideas' having sex with each other 刘晓波所代表的是自由的头脑

陈凯一语：

在一个没有个体自由的、自我禁锢的文化心态中，思想的近亲乱伦有如在一个没有迁移自由的村庄里的生理的近亲乱伦一样，只会产生脑残畸形的怪胎。 中国专制的心理、生理与思维的近亲乱伦已持续了两千年。 从专制恶性循环转为自由良性循环，中文系的人们需要付出比任何其它文化更大的勇气，努力与代价。 “揪发助飞”的自我隔绝的病态心理是所有中文系人们要杜绝与摈弃的。

Kai Chen's Words:

In a mindset that repels individual freedom and worships self-isolation/castration, the incest of thoughts/ideas, just like the incest of physical beings, will necessarily result distortion and perversion of perception of reality/truth. The Chinese incest of mind and body has been going on for two thousand years. Thus in order to reverse this vicious cycle of incestuous perversion of mind, the Chinese-speaking population will have to exert more energy with more willingness and courage than any other culture. They must abandon the pathological mindset of "pulling one's own hair to lift oneself off the ground" they have adhered since the beginning of the Chinese civilization.

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

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

..Liu Xiaobo - Don't stop 'Ideas' having sex with each other

刘晓波所代表的是自由的头脑

News Type: Event — Sun Oct 10, 2010 8:52 AM

By iqbal.latif

(China has the most rigid censorship program in the world. Chinese media stay resolutely silent and exactly doing something opposite on Nobel winner and imprisoned Liu Xiaobo. He wins one of the world's highest honors, but most of his countrymen have no idea. Web search engines return error messages for his name. The few who try to celebrate are arrested.)

It counts with providers of services that filter searches, block sites, erase any "inconvenient" content and monitor email traffic. China blocks or filters Internet content relating to Tibetan independence, Taiwan independence, police brutality, the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989, freedom of speech, pornography, some international news sources and propaganda outlets, certain religious movements, and many blogging websites.

Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great ... Russelland swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man. -Bertrand Russell

From behind the iron veil of Burma's totalitarian terror comes the courageous voices of those untold stories of freedom - some remarkable people who risked it all for their love of freedom and to create a better life for people of their beloved country. Burma's Supreme Court issued a public notice on Thursday saying that it will hold a hearing on Oct. 18 for detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's latest appeal against her house arrest. The notice, which was posted at the Supreme Court, stated that the judges will decide whether to consider the "Special Appeal," according to Suu Kyi's lawyer Nyan Win.

It is a foolish man who grapples for certainty in this age of New Enlightenment. We strive to know only to realise how much we don't know and that our quest with every discovery becomes just a little bit more unending as we delve into the mysteries of eternity itself. The human mind has the ability to conceive the extraordinary; the biggest triumph that we have recently acquired is our limitless breadth of imagination and our thoughts. It is our thoughts that are real danger for the established clerics. Thought breeds freedom of mind and thinking that leads to new discoveries. Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pit of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great ... Russelland swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man. -Bertrand Russell

Since life began on Earth, several major mass extinctions have appreciably exceeded the background extinction rate. The most latest, the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event, occurred 65 million years ago. In the past 540 million years there have been five major events when over 50% of animal species died. There probably were mass extinctions in the Archean and Proterozoic Eons, but before the Phanerozoic there were no animals with hard body parts to leave a significant fossil record. Mankind by having some control over regular natural cycle of mass extinctions may have inadvertently helped Sir Rees argument on the way we will evolve in future.

Our forefathers brought to life from graves would be surprised with the evolution of today. We can visualize the progress that we will accomplish in the future and we can plan obstacles laying ahead charting our course clearly. We will not watch and let a stray asteroid obliterate our planet; we will not watch the skies with pathetic helplessness for incoming death in the form of a stray asteroid like the 'Tyrannosaurus' of the Cretaceous Period, 65 million years ago; today we have the capacity to change the direction of the asteroid, the ability to conquer natural extinction which is part of nature is only possible due to our ability to think.

It is edict of nature that free thought cannot be chained; it will find freedom. No chains are strong enough to chain liberty and emancipation from totalitarianism.

The element of a bombshell surprise has died; this is the unique gift of a new level of consciousness. Religious miracles have lost all significance, religious philosophy requires to be subject to rigours of common sense and logic, life after death of a human being needs to tread the same path as the soul of a chimp who is 97% genetically close to us. Why should 'two souls' differ paths with 3% of genetic difference.

It is because of their collective perseverance that the galaxy has become our next frontier in our collective psyche where just a few centuries ago flying was an inconceivable idea and distance was the greatest barrier. However the human mind today thinks and visualizes travel through time, warp and subspace. Our dramas conceive of extraordinary situations where cyborgs and aliens travel through time in space operas. This new conception of time travel and sequels of journeys through space have left a child growing up in this new millennium very little to be stunned from.

This is why 'Thought' is so subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. That is why it is 'Thought' that is always in chains. Whenever I see a man in chains, whatever the power of oppression is, oppression fails and freedom survives, no chains are strong enough to arrest the urge for freedom. The course of human nature is such, this is how nature evolves. Where we are today is a result of liberty and free thought.

We are only 10,000 years old civilization until the Sun burns out, billions of years of intelligent and conscious life lays ahead of us; we are at the cusp of a new birth, no censorship, no religion, no ideology is big enough to capture that whole spectrum of development and evolutionary leap of a free mind.

''As believers in the literal truth of the Bible, they knew it was there. Even so, the explorers who say they found seven large wooden compartments beneath snow and volcanic debris near the peak of Mount Ararat can be forgiven their excitement.

'It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it,' said Yeung Wing-cheung, a filmmaker ''

But Mike Pitt, a British archaeologist, said the evangelical explorers had yet to produce compelling evidence. He added: 'If there had been a flood capable of lifting a huge ship 4km up the side of a mountain 4,800 years ago, I think there would be substantial geological evidence for this flood around the world. And there isn't.'

We humans as a result of tradition, authority and revelation are blinded by our limitations to discern the truth; we really know very little. We are standing at the edge of the ocean trying to grasp its limitless expanse. Indisputably though our efforts to interpret our existence and our consciousness and curiosity to describe our reality is what distinguishes us from other living species.

Scientists find new possibility for the crossing of Moses and Israelites.

"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them." -- Galileo Galilei

When the Pharaoh and his horsemen tried to follow the Israelites, the waters crashed back down, drowning the army, or so the story goes in the book of Exodus.

But now researchers at the National Center for Atmospheric Research and the University of Colorado have found a location in the Nile River's ancient delta where an east wind -- blowing at 63 mph for 12 hours -- could have pushed back the waters and exposed a muddy land bridge. When the wind died down, the water would have come rushing back, according to NCAR's Carl Drews, lead author of a paper published today in the journal PLoS ONE. CU oceanographer Weiqing Han was a co-author of the study.

But critics argue that a separation for few hours would leave at bottom of a big river like Nile lot of quicksand which is just not possible to cross.

My interest has always been charting the course of why some nations, some people and some societies falter where others keep going. My interest has been great on origins of why some are 'failing nations' versus other which are developed. One thing that distinguishes a great leap forward is about 'Ideas and thoughts' allowed to have sex with each other. Chinese media stay resolutely silent and doing something exactly opposite on Nobel winner and imprisoned Liu Xiaobo. He wins one of the world's highest honors, but most of his countrymen have no idea. Web search engines return error messages over his name. The few who try to celebrate are arrested.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has registered a list of the 10 top countries* where blogging activity is considered risky and in which you can get in serious trouble for doing so. Wherever free flow of thought is averted, draconian laws sway supreme and take hold; every one of these countries host prisoners of conscience that are globally renowned. Arresting freedom today is like arresting evolution of nature. This is the inconsistency of China: It's an economic superpower that is very much a part of the world and yet, on scale of freedom of thought it is divorced from it. The quiet was evident in China on Saturday. Dissident Liu Xiaobo languished in a prison cell, perhaps ignorant that he had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize a day earlier. His wife was arrested after talking to a reporter and taken away by police. And the Chinese news media appeared resolute to make-believe that nothing had happened. Other 1.4 billion Chinese, they didn't have to act. Many of them don't know Liu exists, let alone that he has been honoured with the world's most coveted award.

Free flow of information is submitted to censorship by these governments. All these countries where thoughts are chained are dictatorships or totalitarian regimes that restrict access to this media and impose prison penalties for uploading any “misleading” information to personal web pages. Economic progress is nothing, like in the case of China material upliftment, without a free peaceful mind it is the biggest hell hole. It will all implode big time, those like Soros who think Chinese have taken the world hostage as a result of their huge FX reserves forget that the real leaders of China are prisoners of conscience like Liu Xiaobo. All these trillions of $'s of reserves built on 1.4 billion people entrapped in a closed society is a freedom revolution bound to happen. Freedom of mind cannot be entrapped for far too long, the chains will break. Aung San Suu Kyi's and Liu Xiaobo's are manifestations of a free mind; they will win.

This is why 'Thought' is so subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. That is why it is 'Thought' that is always in chains. Whenever I see a man in chains, whatever the power of oppression is, oppression fails and freedom survives, no chains are strong enough to arrest the urge for freedom. The course of human nature is such, this is how nature evolves. Where we are today is a result of liberty and free thought.

Let me take you through a tour de force of mankind's progress to date from our very inception to Liu Xiaobo.

It is the mark of an educated mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision which the nature of the subject admits and not to seek exactness where only an approximation is possible. Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC)

We humans as a result of tradition, authority and revelation are blinded by our limitations to discern the truth; we really know very little. We are standing at the edge of the ocean trying to grasp its limitless expanse. Indisputably though our efforts to interpret our existence and our consciousness and curiosity to describe our reality is what distinguishes us from other living species. Great ideas came to light only because obstructions that stir human spirit, motivated people to do and discover things they otherwise would not have done. We are small and give very little credence to our own judgment but as Edmund Burke said 'Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.'

'Progress of science' and 'Freedom of Mind' are interrelated. Marcel Proust said 'As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost and science can never regress.'

British author Matt Ridley argues that, through history, the engine of human progress and prosperity has been, and is, "ideas having sex with each other." Through history, the engine of human progress and prosperity has been, and is, the mating of ideas. The sophistication of the modern world, says Ridley, lies not in individual intelligence or imagination; it is a collective enterprise. In his recent book The Rational Optimist, Ridley (whose previous works include Genome and Nature via Nurture) sweeps the entire arc of human history to powerfully argue that "prosperity comes from everybody working for everybody else."

From behind the iron veil of Burma's totalitarian terror comes the courageous voices of those untold stories of freedom - some remarkable people who risked it all for their love of freedom and to create a better life for people of their beloved country. Burma's Supreme Court issued a public notice on Thursday saying that it will hold a hearing on Oct. 18 for detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi's latest appeal against her house arrest. The notice, which was posted at the Supreme Court, stated that the judges will decide whether to consider the “Special Appeal,” according to Suu Kyi's lawyer Nyan Win.

It is a foolish man who grapples for certainty in this age of New Enlightenment. We strive to know only to realise how much we don't know and that our quest with every discovery becomes just a little bit more unending as we delve into the mysteries of eternity itself. The human mind has the ability to conceive the extraordinary; the biggest triumph that we have recently acquired is our limitless breadth of imagination and our thoughts. It is our thoughts that are the real danger for the established clerics. Thought breeds freedom of mind and thinking that leads to new discoveries. Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Thought looks into the pits of hell and is not afraid. Thought is great ... and swift and free, the light of the world, and the chief glory of man. -Bertrand Russell

Thought and freedom of expression is a new development for this new age; since time immemorial intimidation of blasphemy and irreverence are common tools of dogma and orthodoxy. Bruno was burnt at the stake for publishing a treatise on the workings of the universe, based on the Copernican system. Tycho Brahe who plotted the positions of the stars was severely persecuted, but even so proposed a system of a fixed earth with the planets revolving around the sun. These great minds were persecuted but they did not relent nevertheless. “The sweetest and most inoffensive path of life leads through the avenues of science and learning; and whoever can either remove any obstruction in this way, or open up any new prospect, ought, so far, to be esteemed a benefactor to mankind” -David Hume

It is because of their collective perseverance that the galaxy has become our next frontier in our collective psyche where just a few centuries ago flying was an inconceivable idea and distance was the greatest barrier. However the human mind today thinks and visualizes travel through time, warp and subspace. Our dramas conceive of extraordinary situations where cyborgs and aliens travel through time in space operas. This new conception of time travel and sequels of journeys through space have left a child growing up in this new millennium very little to be stunned from.

One of the greatest French philosophers Descartes said, “it is no objection that I do not comprehend the infinite or that there are countless other things in God that I can in no way either comprehend or perhaps even touch with my thought.”

However now there is the relentless collective human grasp toward the unknown. The mind of Gods is being understood or at least sought to be understood. Such is the genius of human imagination that time travel is possible today instead of next few hundred years, a contemporary adult would not be very astonished. The progress of next few hundred years or thousands of years is already speculated on in the fiction of Star Trek. What is fiction and conceivable is something that is doable.

Our future and our past are can only be enlivened through our dynamic thoughts - that is the power of our questioning minds. Through imaginative sequels like fiction based Jurassic Park to Independence Day, nothing from our past or from the future is left to imagination.

The element of a bombshell surprise has died; this is the unique gift of a new level of consciousness. Religious miracles have lost all significance, religious philosophy requires to be subject to rigours of common sense and logic, life after death of a human being needs to tread the same path as the soul of a chimp who is 97% genetically close to us. Why should 'two souls' differ paths with 3% of genetic difference. Our forefathers brought to life from graves would be surprised with the evolution of today. We can visualize the progress that we will accomplish in the future and we can plan obstacles laying ahead charting our course clearly. We will not watch and let a stray asteroid obliterate our planet; we will not watch the skies with pathetic helplessness for incoming death in the form of a stray asteroid like the 'Tyrannosaurus' of the Cretaceous Period, 65 million years ago; today we have the capacity to change the direction of the asteroid, the ability to conquer natural extinction which is part of nature is only possible due to our ability to think.

Craig Venter is set on trying to unfold the complexity of life. He led the private effort to sequence the human genome - the genetic code that creates life. For him the next big challenge is to create living, artificial organisms from a kit of genes, and says he is well on his way. He believes an artificial single cell organism is possible in two years.

To unravel the complexity of life on our planet in order to understand more about where humans come from, Dr Venter embarked on a round the world ocean voyage to take samples of seawater every 200 miles. At every stop he found new species. At one location, one barrelful contained 1.3 million new genes and 50,000 new species, he said. Microbes make up over a half of all Earth's biomass. A mouthful of seawater accidentally swallowed sends millions of different bacteria into your gut. But the aims of his mission are even wider than that. Future engineered species could be a source of food, energy, and could help regenerate damaged environments. To Dr Venter, his venture is crucial to understanding our future. "Almost every major religion requires humans to try to improve society," he says.

One certainty in an uncertain world is clear to Professor Rees: Whatever happens in this uniquely crucial century will resonate in the remote future and perhaps far beyond the Earth.

Since life began on Earth, several major mass extinctions have appreciably exceeded the background extinction rate. The most latest, the Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event, occurred 65 million years ago. In the past 540 million years there have been five major events when over 50% of animal species died. There probably were mass extinctions in the Archean and Proterozoic Eons, but before the Phanerozoic there were no animals with hard body parts to leave a significant fossil record. Mankind by having some control over regular natural cycle of mass extinctions may have inadvertently helped Sir Rees's argument on the way we will evolve in future.

Sir Martin Rees thinks that computer models can only go so far when we do not even fully understand how we came about on Earth in the first instance. We have only existed, as far as we know, for a few billion years.

"If you represent the Earth's lifetime in a single year, the 21st Century would be a quarter of a second in June," said Professor Rees.

We are only 10,000 years old civilization until the Sun burns out, billions of years of intelligent and conscious life lays ahead of us; we are at the cusp of a new birth, no censorship, no religion, no ideology is big enough to capture that whole spectrum of development and evolutionary leap of a free mind. As we are not even halfway through our allotted time on Earth before the Sun itself burns out. "Any life and intelligence that exists then will be as different from us as we are to bacteria," Rees explains. Our rate of population growth and our addiction to fossil fuels and consumption of resources only adds to the uncertainty about our future.

I would quote David Hume who summed up life of people like Craig Venter Rees “The sweetest and most inoffensive path of life leads through the avenues of science and learning; and whoever can either remove any obstruction in this way, or open up any new prospect, ought, so far, to be esteemed a benefactor to mankind”

Leonardo Da Vinci (1452-1519) followed by Benedetti and Stevin (1548-1620), experimented with falling bodies. Urban VIII imprisoned Galileo after ordering him to retract "damnable heresy" that earth revolves around sun. It is true when Anais Nin said that "When we blindly adopt a religion, a political system, a literary dogma, we become automatons. We cease to grow."

Aristotle said that the essential truth is that hope is a waking dream and poverty the parent of revolution. When hope dies, human endurance and fortitude comes to an end. It is then scarcity and deficiency rears its ugly head. Living with the hope of a better future keeps the passion of living alive and kicking, half the battle of survival. Nations and societies that are historically stuck in poverty and misery have one obsession in common, mania of dogma and false hopes. Hopes and dreams on which actions are based have to be pragmatic and real. It is poverty of thought that leads to material poverty.

Rewards in life are not founded on principles of gambling and chance. Planning life on chance and sweepstakes spoils is day dreaming. Dreams have to be real, and for most of us lies ahead the tough grind of mental and physical work. Any hope based on hard work, positive and optimist interpretations of events and a long walk towards the goals more often than not will hit a top prize. No neural dungeon of dogma or ideology is big enough to confine the expanse of human imagination; sceptics and pessimists rarely ever survive the long walks of inventive dreams; they habitually perish snared within their own set of complexities.

Inventions, discoveries and incessant progress of human philosophy and sciences owe their successes to winning combination of visionaries and optimists. Persecutions of inventors and realists by the orthodoxy and dogma are the hallmark of cynics. From Socrates, Plato and Aristotle who laid the foundations of science and philosophy in the 5th and 4th centuries BC, to Copernicus who produced his paper on the motion of the heavenly bodies (the heliocentric system) in 1514, the story of human civilisation is victory of visionaries over sceptics. Those who cannot find peace amongst themselves will never find peace anywhere, the nirvana begins within one's own self. Soren Kierkegaard beautifully caps it for me 'A man who as a physical being is always turned toward the outside, thinking that his happiness lies outside him, finally turns inward and discovers that the source is within him.'

It is edict of nature that free thought cannot be chained; it will find freedom. No chains are strong enough to chain liberty and emancipation from totalitarianism.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Top 10 Countries that Censor the Internet:

http://listverse.com/2010/10/02/top-10-countries-that-censor-the-internet/*