Search This Blog

Sunday, 25 September 2011

Last Post

Everything that has a beginning has an end.

On February 19, 2011, prominent Chinese blogger and public intellectual, Mr. Ran Yunfei was taken into police custody. His arrest was formally approved later on, with the charge of suspicious of inciting subversion of state power. After being detained for 171 days, Mr. Ran was released with the conditions that he remain quiet for another six months.

This blog was created in late June 2011 with the purpose to translate some of Mr Ran articles into English, so that he would get a wider audience which may in turn transform into international pressure to help free him.

As may be recalled, Mr Ai Weiwei was detained by the Chinese authorities from April 3 to June 22. During his detention, there were international petitions for his immediate release. The one hosted at received over 100,000 signatures and thousands of comments written in support of the detained artist. To help the people in China to understand how the world responded to this, Ruan Ji created a blog to translate those comments -- and later, articles urging for Ai’s release, news reports of protests about this detention -- into Chinese.

I was one of the volunteer translators of that blog. After Ai’s release, I thought if Mr Ran Yunfei’s articles were translated into English, he might be able to get a wider audience, audience in the English world. In so doing he might receive the international attention he deserved, international attention, pressure, that would help free him.

This was how this blog started: translate Mr Ran Yunfei’s articles to help him get international attention.

In fact, people had been saying since early May last year that Mr Ran would be free. But in a country where all kinds of rumors can come out of nowhere, these must be treated with extra caution. So the project was started, and went on regardless of those rumors. Nearly two months after the project began, the released artist tweeted to urge the people to speak out for Ran Yunfei. And coincidentally, the next day I saw people confirmed that Mr Ran was released.

Since Mr Ran Yunfei's freedom is not fully restored, I decided that the translation project should continue—until Mr Ran is totally free and can again write to criticize whatever he feels to be not right in China.

Then on September 25, I was told that several internationally renowned scholars like David Kelly have been translating the best of Ran Yunfei's articles. His articles have been available in English before this project started.

In view of this, the project's continuation has become meaningless, it therefore officially ends today. There will be no more update from this blog.

Thank you.

Saturday, 24 September 2011

Politics can be good

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 政治可以是美好的
Translated by @krizcpec

Listened to a talk by economist Mr Chen Zhiwu yesterday morning. What a talk! At noon my friends and I had lunch with Mr Chen, then in the afternoon I was occupied with other things. As a result, I didn't get the time to watch Obama's inauguration ceremony. But with advanced communication channels available, I can watch a recap this morning after I woke up.

Sunday, 18 September 2011

Protest is a Form of Civic Education

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 抗议是一门公民课 
Translated by @krizcpec

In our country much of the common knowledge is blocked. Whether someone works as a politician, or a statesman, his compulsory course would be to face public protest with a proper manner. It was a disappointment that two days ago at Cambridge, Wen Jiabao made an inappropriate speech after a protester hurled a shoe at him. It indicated he didn't have the skills needed to face protesters.

Saturday, 17 September 2011

Responsibility of Intellectuals

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 知识分子是有责任的    
Translated by @krizcpec

Ran Note: This is an informal interview that Za Zhiyang had with me while he was putting together in Western China a special feature on peach blossoms. It was to me a surprise that he would want me to talk in his special feature. And talk I would, happily of course. But like he said, these words, published with constraint, may sound somewhat incomplete – my apology for that. But it is my long held belief that we should speak in traditional media whenever we have the chance, so that our views can spread further. I would post the interview here in my blog so that more readers can read it.

As for the Ching Ming memorial, think I'd write about that two days later. Need to take a break and go to used books market to hunt for some books—haven't been there for quite some time now, I dearly miss it.

April 5, 2009, 6:53 in Chengdu

Sunday, 11 September 2011

How many bizarre incidents occur in China daily?

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 每天有多少荒唐的事情在中国上演?   
Translated by @krizcpec

In my earlier blog I ran a few editions of “Common Sense Weekly”, which had had to be discontinued because the objective I set to answer ten questions in each new issue was too difficult to achieve. Shielded from China are the many common knowledge which, despite higher learning is not needed to understand, many people just can't figure out.

And a lot of people blindly believe in the many deliberately misleading opinions which are not only popular, but also get publicized by the all forms of media repeatedly. What is worse, these people not just believe in these false information, they also help spreading them further across. These actions harm not only their own interests but also that of others.

Monday, 5 September 2011

My stance on the Tibet issues

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 我对西藏问题的态度   
Translated by @krizcpec

There have been lots of news lately. What attracted people's attention were the unrest in Tibet and the election in Taiwan, both are related to our lives and rights. Whatever that are related to our lives and rights are things worth thinking over, and talking about.

Regarding the issues of Tibet, many wanted to know my views. Below are my thoughts, which might not be comprehensive. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Monday, 29 August 2011

Freedom and Smiles: image study of Hu Shih (III)

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 自由与微笑:胡适图像研究    
An abbreviated translation by @krizcpec (Part 3 of 3)

Three: Self and others

We all know that Hu Shih was an intellectual, and in some way a public figure. As a result, he must have paid much attention to the public communication effect of his photos and would not let photos that would harm his image be used in publication. The problem was, while he could request his friends and relatives not to make public photos of him that didn't look good, he had no control over the photos taken by reporters of newspapers and magazines. 

What I want to say is this: not all of the photos of Hu Shih passed on to this day were under control of Hu himself. He had no say over the source of the images, how they spread, or the way they were interpreted. Base on this premise we can say that all those photos of Hu Shih with a broad smile, looking cordial and restrained, dignified and peaceful were a result of his self-cultivation, namely: to speak and write with sincerity, be a serene person, and smile often. Some may accuse Hu of affectation. But when someone managed to maintain the same affectation all his life, that's remarkable. 

Sunday, 28 August 2011

Freedom and Smiles: image study of Hu Shih (II)

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 自由与微笑:胡适图像研究
An abbreviated translation by @krizcpec (Part 2 of 3)
Two: Self-expectation

In his book, Autobiographical account at forty (《四十自述》), Hu Shih wrote that since he was little, he had seen the hardship his mother had to withstand in running an extended family; the incompetent eldest sister-in-law and the competent second eldest sister-in-law both tended to show other a nasty face, showing no regards as to how others would feel. He slowly came to the understanding that “there is nothing more offensive than an angry face; nothing more indecent than showing others that angry face, which is harder to bear than being scolded or beaten.”

Saturday, 27 August 2011

Freedom and Smiles: image study of Hu Shih (I)

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 自由与微笑:胡适图像研究    
An abbreviated translation by @krizcpec (Part 1 of 3)

Ran note: This is a reading report that I wrote recently for [newsletter] issue twenty-sixth of Hu Shih reading club. Now I published it in my blog, please feel free to comment. Been quite occupied these days: lots of socializing around Lunar new year, and a lot to write about. In less than two months, I got a flu again.
February 24, 2010 at 8:15 in Chengdu

Publications of studies on Hu Shih are in great quantity indeed. Yet it seems almost no one has done any proper research into the huge amount of photos Mr. Hu Shih left behind, his calligraphy, and visual productions about him (including recordings of his speech). The book Smile of Heresy: the image of Hu (《微笑的异端:影像中的胡适》) by Sun Yu reads more like image description, or erratic elaboration utterly irrelevant to the subject. He did not focus on explaining why Hu often smiled in his photos. 

Saturday, 20 August 2011

Sichuan Earthquake, Six months on: in Memory of the Victims

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 四川大地震半年祭
Translated by @Aliceyoung, proofread by @krizcpec

It's hard to believe that six months have passed since the devastating earthquake struck. For anyone who personally experienced that disaster, fear and pain are far from enough to express what they feel.

Looking back through history, comparing with any other peoples, we can see that God did not hand down special punishment to the Chinese people, including those living in Sichuan. On the contrary, they were given a vast and beautiful place to live, with rivers and mountains. What is loathsome is that for decades those who rule the country do not cherish it, triggering one man-made disaster after another, making this beautiful place a land of desolation.

Wednesday, 17 August 2011

The Fear of Chinese Government Officials

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 中国官员们的恐惧
Translated, proofread by @krizcpec

I read a report on the Internet that said many officials have anxiety about the Internet. Though there was no statistics provided, I found that report believable. Why?

Throughout history, [until the age of the Internet,] Chinese government officials had never been under genuine supervision and restriction. The saying “people's eyes are sharp” is but another way of saying that people are blind selectively. When the authorities need your eyes to be sharp, your eyes have to be sharp; when the authorities need you to turn a blind eye to something, you would have to do as you are told. In other words, the masses are used by government officials as puppets, and they can do nothing about it. On top of these, the populace sees the officials' unlawful actions, corruption and has no channel to air their discontent: the media, controlled by the government, would certainly not cover news stories that make officials look bad [simply because the public is dissatisfied]. Those disclosed corruption cases may be real, but their disclosures were not the result of effective supervision by the people, but rather the political struggle at top levels; or they could also mean those politicians had lost their backing. These disclosures have nothing to do with democratic and free supervision or victory of the common people; anti-corruption is but a pretext with which different political figures or factions fought against each other.

Saturday, 13 August 2011

Heredity of Civil Service Positions, A Social Disaster

Hyperlink to source text in Chinese: 公务员世袭化是社会大灾难
Translated, proofread by @krizcpec

Ran note: The controversy over “Rich 2G*” is yet to be over; the shock and anger that “Crown Prince Party” have caused in the public is gradually spreading across the country, a phenomenon that needs more discussion and attention from all sectors of society. To me, the problem is not just about the “Crown Prince Party”, it is also about government officials who have turned, through nepotism, civil service positions into heredity. In other words, civil servants as a most secure “iron rice bowl” during economic crisis is now hereditary, and the ratio of positions filled by favoritism is shockingly high. Below is a column I wrote for China in Perspective, which explored the problems of heredity of civil service position, comments are welcome.

September 2, 2009, 7:46 in Chengdu

Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Update: Ran Yunfei is home!

Great News!
According to Feng Zhenghu @fzhenghu and He Qinglian @HeQinglian, dissident writer Ran Yunfei @ranyunfei has been released at 10 p.m. local time last night, ending his 171 days of detention. He is now home under house arrest, or translated literally, residential surveillance (監視居住).
Below are twitterers reactions to this long awaited piece of good news:

Special thanks to @fabiano226, @Michae1S, @dissenter2020, @awfan, @SikoAlice, @michelle9647, @michisle, @ruanji and many others for their efforts in this project. You have all helped secured his release from detention.

However, given that the authorities still impose restrictions on Mr. Ran Yunfei, he is not truly free yet. Therefore, this translation project does not end here, it will continue until Mr. Ran's freedom is fully restored.

Tuesday, 9 August 2011

Don't be indolent, think!

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 别在思考上偷懒

Translated, proofread by @krizcpec

Chongqing officials' eerily oppressive approach is really funny: I was invited to give a talk at a forum, and it was canceled on the grounds that fire safety requirements had not been met. However, some of my friends didn't give up trying, and at last they managed to organize in a bar a talk that was more like a question and answer session. The audience was from the younger generations, most were students. 

The theme was movies, we discussed Chinese movies shot by foreigners; education in movies; and movies I enjoyed. These would of course led to discussion on many social problems, because they are closely related to our lives, and our rights. And I felt they were all anxious, eager to have an answer, or the answer, to whatever problems they have; this mentality may not be limited to individuals, nor is it just a reflection of the youthfulness of these people, it is, I'm afraid, a sentiment that is spreading across society. Such sentiment is understandable: it is a response from the masses who are increasingly disappointed with the government; it could be used as a wind vane to observe this society.

Sunday, 7 August 2011

Use your change as a testimony

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 用你的改变作见证
Translated, proofread by @krizcpec

Ran note: this is written in reply to a friend of mine, please feel free to comment. What I wrote about here are just small actions that do not need you to pay a big price, not to mention sacrifice your life; I am cautious toward those actions that require people to give their lives, not that I'm timid, but because the expected benefits of those actions are hard to control. I do not mean that the only choice you have is to keep your head down and live in disgrace; you have the right to live that way if you wish, though. No one can point the finger at you.

Saturday, 6 August 2011

How should citizens treat the government

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 公民应该怎样对待政府
Translated by @Michae1S, proofread by @krizcpec 

Some people said I am unreasonable as I often criticize the government, I wrote in response an article “Who Exactly Is Unreasonable?”, hoping the public could see that our government is many times more unreasonable than the masses. They use all sorts of propaganda that go every extreme to instill in the public ideas that are in their favor, and suppress any criticism and questions. There is nothing more unreasonable than muzzling dissent voices. Apart from this, I must keep pointing out that criticizing, instead of praising the government is the bounden duty of every citizen. This is more true in China, where the government is not under any real oversight and restrictions. Just like the disaster relief works following the snow storm this year, I couldn't say the government hasn't done anything, yet what it did was far from a job well done. Moreover, officials have evaded issues of human errors in the disaster, and those who neglected their duty have not been duly punished; these are serious disrespect to the dead and the rights of the victims, and a government like this should be criticized nonstop. However, it appears to some individuals that the government is aggrieved, and that the masses have wrongly accused the government of its decades of bad governance. In fact, there is no other race in the world that is more obedient than the Chinese people.

Friday, 5 August 2011

The government is not to be enshrined

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 政府不是拿来供着的
Translated and proofread by @krizcpec

Thomas Paine is remembered for the booklet he authored, Common Sense, from which many draw ideas to deliberate on Western Democracies, liberty, and government's legitimacy. Many of the common sense that we are going to cover are but a continuation of wisdom of human and reinterpretation of it. Some of the common sense had quickly become consensus, and for many reasons, a view that is almost universally agreed on fails to get approval on another land. Some common sense may have become a consensus rather quickly. Yet a consensus that is almost universally agreed upon has, for many reasons, not been approved on another land. It has even been smeared by the many interest groups and those have voice in their control, with the purpose to exploit interests of others and pocket the benefits themselves. I will today give a few examples to illustrate why government is not to be enshrined, so as to make things clear to those readers who ask me to put myself into the government’s shoes, these people are mostly civil servants, one of them leaves comments on my blog using the name “a rank-and-file bureaucrat”, and of course there are also those who have been brainwashed, become out of touch with real life and use “conditions of the country” as an excuse to shrink from their responsibilities. “Government is not to be enshrined” could be written into a booklet like Thomas Paine’s Common Sense, serving the purpose of revealing [the nature of government] to humankind, and to alert them. As I get to know more and become more experienced, maybe I should perhaps give this task a try. What's covered in today's article serves only as a beginning of this project, it may not be comprehensive, but there's time to develop it further in future.

Sunday, 31 July 2011

Who exactly is unreasonable?

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 到底是谁偏激?
Translated and proofread by @krizcpec

These days I often being criticized as biased. It appears that once being criticized so, all my arguments would become worthless for discussion - as if they are meaningless and untenable simply because of that criticism. And those critics would feel condescendingly a sense of victory without fighting. There are those who say not even a single word regarding the government's decades old of evil practices, and have an unreserved support of the government. These people have severe Stockholm syndrome, oblivious to their psychological yearning for persecution; some even feel happy to have this syndrome.

Saturday, 30 July 2011

Don't Expect More from Me

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 不要期望我更多
Translated by @dissenter2020, proofread and edited by @krizcpec

Many people want to know why I publish a blog post every day. Actually, if you have read my previous posts, you wouldn’t ask this question at all, you would have found a pretty satisfying answer long ago. I think if you want to know somebody, you would use the search engine to find and read as much about that person as possible; you would compare, analyze, and formulate an idea of how that individual is like in general. Nevertheless, you'd better not jump to conclusion yet: human being is complicated and has many faces. Just like my blog is only a very small part of my life. Judging by my blog posts, you may find me to be too serious; but if you drink with me, then you would know a different Ran Yunfei. I would talk about literature and art appreciation—you may assume I do not talk about these as they are seldom covered on my blog. No, on the contrary, I feel most comfortable when talking about my feelings of literature and art. It is writing commentaries on public affairs that makes me wary and afraid. for I am with David Hume's view of "[it is] fruitless to dispute concerning tastes", my choice of words and style when writing literature and art review cannot be more different from commentaries, those who have read some of my other books may prove it. I do not agree with Mr Hu Shih’s being somewhat objective when reviewing literature and art. Since in my opinion, the appreciation and views of literature and art is more of a personal matter. It doesn't involve direct and extensive public interests. I admired very much Mr Hu's composition and demeanor concerning public affairs, yet when he spoke about literature and art, I think he was too “scientific”. His reviews were really too inartistic, lacking savor, and without the amazement of "O, so that's what it is!"

Tuesday, 26 July 2011

Quotations from Ran Yunfei (Part Four)

As at the date this translation project started, twitterer @wuxinkuaiyu had tweeted 65 quotations from the detained dissident writer. Here are the last batch of the quotations translated into English.

Translated by @sikoalice
Proofread and modified by @krizcpec, @gaodawei

51. 这个社会太多的人想搭便车,很少人有责任感,觉得这个社会需要去努力。而且中国人讲究实用,巴不得今天做了事情明天就能收到效果。这就像中国人对读书的态度,如果认一个字能挣五块钱,那他愿意,要不他宁愿去打几把麻将。
Translation: There are too many people in this society who want to get a free ride, only a handful have the sense of responsibility and consider efforts necessary to bring forth a better society. The thinking of Chinese people is all about being practical and looking for an immediate pay-off: they want what they did today to pay off tomorrow. This is just like the Chinese’s attitude towards reading. They would do it willingly if they were to be paid five dollars for each character they learn; otherwise they would rather play Mahjong.

Sunday, 24 July 2011

Quotations from Ran Yunfei (Part Three)

As at the date this translation project started, twitterer @wuxinkuaiyu had tweeted 65 quotations from the detained dissident writer. Here are the third batch of the quotations translated into English.

Translated by @sikoalice
Proofread and modified by @krizcpec , @gaodawei

36. 不要把自己的权利改善,寄托在没有真正监督与制约的政府善心大发上,这无异于缘木求鱼。在较完善的民主自由制度未建立以前,每个人自身权利无不是自己争取来的,每个人都可以在衡度自身安全的情形下,做力所能及的推动社会进步的好事,这并不需要你危及己身的大智大勇。
Translation: Do not place your hopes of greater respect for your rights on the good heartedness of a government that is not subject to genuine oversight and checks on its powers. This is like fishing in thin air. Until a free and democratic system of government is in place, every individual will be on their own -- they will have to fight for their own rights. Every individual can do whatever they can to promote social progress after weighing how their efforts might affect their own security. Everyone can do this. This is not something only for those with tremendous courage and wisdom needed for actions that might endanger their lives.

Friday, 22 July 2011

Quotations from Ran Yunfei (Part Two)

As at the date this translation project started, twitterer @wuxinkuaiyu had tweeted 65 quotations from the detained dissident writer. Here are the second batch of the quotations translated into English.

Translated by @sikoalice
Proofread and modified by @krizcpec @gaodawei

21. 打着国家的旗号,干着恶浊的勾当,这是我们生活中常见的例子。国家只是为所有个人服务的工具,舍此国家没有任何作用,或者国家的存在意义将化为乌有。也就是说,我们不能用神化国家来损害个人利益。
Translation: Dirty business done in the name of the state is no rarity in China's national life. A state is just a tool for serving all the individuals in it; it has no other function, or it has no reason for being. In other words, we should not harm the the interests of individuals merely for the sake of deifying the state.

Thursday, 21 July 2011

Quotations from Ran Yunfei (Part One)

As at the date this translation project started, twitterer @wuxinkuaiyu had tweeted 65 quotations from the detained dissident writer. Here are the first batch of the quotations translated into English.

Translated by @sikoalice
Proofread and modified by @krizcpec

1. 我读书、写作、做研究的目的,是为了求真,为了求自由,是为了求得自己体面而有尊严的生活。当然我知道我远远没有得到这一切,因为没有谁会将尊严和体面奉送到我的面前,我得自己来争取。如果每个人都为自己的体面和尊严而斗争,当然这个社会可能就会变得更好一点。
Translation: I write, read and research to pursue truth, freedom, to pursue a life with glory and dignity. Surely I know there is still a long way to go, no one would present these two things in front of me and I must fight for them myself. Of course this society may change for the better if everyone gets to fight for glory and dignity.

Thursday, 14 July 2011

Why is China being demonized so easily?

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese:  中国为什么容易被妖魔化?
translated by @krizcpec
proofread by Michelle Adams @Michelle9647

I do not agree that China is being demonized. Then why am I writing about this topic? It is because occasionally, there may be some inaccurate reports by the West; and whenever our official media and people with strong nationalist sentiment see such reports, they would say that this is a collective, intentional distortion of China. English writer Joseph Rudyard Kipling once said, “Oh, East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.”

Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Fight for the love of yourself

hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 为热爱自己而斗争

Translated by @fabiano226
Copyedited by @kRiZcPEc and Michelle Buchanan (@michisle)

Since we were children, and on into adulthood, the educational brainwashing we have received has told us to love the Communist Party, love socialism, love China, but it has never told us to love ourselves. The idea of cherishing our own life has not been promoted; no attention has been paid to safety education–which, by the way, should include not only how to deal with natural disasters, such as earthquakes, or fire, but also an understanding of food safety–because our humble lives are not considered worth it. Those political science textbooks–from sociology to Mao’s works–were all impractical, exaggerated, and stupefying.

Monday, 4 July 2011

Educating Parents

hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 教育父母
Translated by @awfan, proofread by @krizcpec and Sylvia Kirkwood

N.B. This is one of my old articles from eleven years ago. But even in today it still has its relevance, we can therefore see just how important it is to have a civil education that includes educating parents.

Written at 9:33 A.M. on October 16, 2010 in Chengdu

Educating children is a right and proper behavior in the whole society. Yet the following facts demonstrated beyond doubt that some parents are exactly who should be educated, criticized, or even punished by law. On June 22 in the city of Dalian, Jiang Yingxia, an elderly man in his sixties, died because of failing to receive medical treatment in time. The cause of [the delay] was a human wall formed to block traffic by parents of students at Dalian 41st Secondary school who were worried that the noise of vehicles passing by would affect the examinees' performance in examination. Thus the vehicle delivering medicine could not arrive in time and eight minutes of treatment time was wasted. When the vehicle finally got through, some among the parents threw words at the family of the elderly man: "Go ahead! He would have died even if the medicine arrived in time!" It should be pointed out that construction sites that were adjacent to the examination center of Dalian 41st Secondary School had stopped their works, video stores nearby had also turned off their audio. Coincidentally, an incident of a driver beaten up by a group of parents occurred in Shenyang on June 23.

Thursday, 30 June 2011

Love Your Country to the Point of Going Wacky

Hyperlink to the source text in Chinese: 爱国爱到你变态
Translated by @Dissenter2020, proofread by @krizcpec

Since the Sanlu tainted milk scandal broke out, Chinese citizens that had some degree of conscience were furious when they learnt that hundreds of thousands of babies had developed kidney stones. Melamine levels in twenty-two milk brands far exceeded the national standard, for a while people rejecting domestic milk products became a widespread trend. In view of this, Niu Gensheng, the CEO of Mengniu, a major company which milk products contained excessive levels of Melamine, used the same method Liu Bei had employed to win the hearts and minds of the people – he shed tears. And in his own defense he stressed his company's status as a national brand, as a means of gaining consumers' sympathy, thereby making people forget that they did not change fundamentally; [questions like] how to monitor product quality, by whom; how to disclose information without falsification; how to prevent deceptive advertising, and so on [all tossed to the wind].

Tuesday, 28 June 2011


冉按:这是十年前我为一家报纸所写的时评,评论一位成都市民余涌军因不堪夜间麻将的噪音,转而欲起诉夜间麻将噪音制造者的文章。我从不主张传媒挞伐 和官方阻止市民打麻将,我认为打麻将,完全是市民的自主权利,只要不影响到他人的权利,但影响他人的生活则又当别论。传媒的批评只不过一贯怂人捏软柿子的 作派,官方则是狗拿耗子多管闲事。官方这种该管的不管,凡涉及民众自主选择生活的时候,就滥管乱管,是典型的政府越界,是强势政府的胡搞乱来。

有 朋友嫌我的时评写得太直接太露骨太不给官方面子,因此建议我学点幽默,多加点佐料,来点小噱头,仿佛这是写时评的圭臬,是不二法门。老实说,我虽然不够滑 稽突梯,但要写得软和写得俏皮,其实并不难。讲小故事的才能自以为还是有点的,要自我阉割,通过当今的传媒审查也不难,但我不痛快。为了痛快,所以每周自 办《冉氏新闻评论周刊》近四年,已达191期,因此国内几乎没有敢发我时评的传媒,来句阿Q式的自我解嘲,这叫做求仁得仁,又何憾焉?20101229950分于成都

有 个外国聋子,被伟大的中国文化尤其是筷子所吸引,决心在有生之年来中国旅游,以偿渴慕之夙愿。他游览长城时,发现了它的气势,更发现了陈尸于其上的垃圾, 于是他就用袋子将他见到的垃圾检起来。这时一拨对垃圾熟视无堵的、高声喧哗的年轻人,说笑着路过他的身旁,使得那个外国聋子突然听到了有声世界。他高兴, 狂喜,他感到中国伟大的地方,不只在于他有他国所不及的悠久文化,而且像这样在公共场所高声喧哗的年轻人,也能使他“振聋发聩”,治疗多年未愈的耳疾,否 极泰来。于是他就回国宣传中国不仅有深不可测的悠久文化,就是年轻人在公共场所的吼声也非比寻常。

这 则“振聋发聩”的成语故事的“外国版”,引起了不少外国人尤其是外国聋子的注意,他们成群结队前往中国,发现前一个外国聋子所言非虚。但是有一个后果是前 一个外国聋子未曾道及的,即这些外国聋子在听到有声世界后,还没来得及欢呼,耳膜受振太厉害,纷纷又回到失聪状态。因为他们发觉不仅在深夜可听到刺耳的麻 将声,而且一个意大利聋子还听到了卡拉OK厅对帕瓦罗蒂的拙劣模仿,更有建筑工人昼夜辛勤劳作,机器轰鸣不已,一切的一切,中国人仿佛都像聋子一样听不 到,而他们这群外国聋子却敏感万分,最后又只好痛苦地渴望变成中国式的聋子。于是他们从开始研究怎样使失聪的双耳,如何得以复听,到后来研究中国人如何能 够做到人人都像聋子一样,对包括公共场所在内的所有噪音,基本上能做到听而不闻,这等上佳功夫是如何修炼出来的,他们特别感兴趣。

这群外国聋子中有一个聪明的聋子回去研究得出的结论是:如果每一个耳聪目明的正常人,都对自己的权益受损像一个真正的聋子一样的话,那么所有人的耳朵都只 有装饰作用,由此证明耳朵是多余的。他还据此撰写了一部专著《论中国人耳朵之多余》,获得博士学位,又反过来证明了中国人的耳朵也不是没有一点附加值的。 但对大多数外国聋子来说,他们最终明白中国式的聋子的功夫,就是他们修到来世也无法习得,只好痛苦地承认自己实在缺乏慧根,于是学得冯小刚的“一声叹 息”。诚然,事情似乎正在起变化,现在有人譬如不堪麻将噪音之扰的余涌军出来说,她的耳朵不是多余的,由此证明中国人并非所有的人都是聋子。



冉按:最近发现一批尚存在电脑上的旧文,还从来没有在敝博乃至网络上发表达。虽然卑之无甚高论,也算是留存雪泥鸿爪。同时也在我没有闲暇写新博文的时候,可以拿来填塞敝博,让关心我的朋友看看我的思想轨迹。更重要的是,在我们这个国家,文章保存在网络上,比保存在电脑中更可靠。20101015 837分于成都

可以毫不夸张地说,无论是经济领域还是政治领域,垄断尤其是绝对的垄断可被看作是人类生 活中的毒瘤。可就是这样的观念,在我们的生活中改变起来是多么困难,而最大的困难便是垄断者或者垄断行业利益的让渡及再分配。这就好比一个人将一言堂搞惯 了,你要他来点民主,心平气和地倾听他人的意见,犹如九天揽月般困难;同理,一个垄断行()业,它有绝对控制消费者消费的权利,让消费者别无选择,你要 它能制订出合适的价格,生产出让消费者满意的产品,做出良好的服务,那绝对是痴人说梦。

而这样“痴人说梦” 的,能主宰我们消费者消费权利的企()业,在我们的经济生活中可谓不胜枚举,举凡电信、电力、铁路、邮电等便是其中的“佼佼者”。每当有长假或者春运, 便是运输行业敛财的节日,运输行业借此无端涨价,消费者也无可奈何。换言之,被许多经济学家自鸣得意称作假日经济的东西,无非是某些垄断行业借此“屠杀” 消费者的宰客经济而已。中国电信业的所谓竞争,也是徒有其表,移动与联通其实是形成市场的双寡头而已,这是市场竞争不充分、不公平、不透明的必然结果。而 原本据传要取消手机不合理的双向收费,因为担心境外的股市投资者丧失对在境外上市的中国电信的信心,也被推迟。我们是否有理由一问,难道我们仅仅只为了担 心境外股市投资者对中国电信丧失信心,不使股市下挫,就以维持电信的垄断(其实对在境外上市的垄断企业,境外的股市投资者都不会有真正的信心,这在境外的 股市上已明显地表现出来了。越是担心别人的信心,就越是垄断,越是垄断,就越是使别人丧失信心,这样的恶性循环,已是不争的事实),以及牺牲国内消费者的 利益为代价吗?其实对于延迟取消手机双向收费的代价,有识之士如经济学家周其仁早已指出,无论对个人还是对国家,代价都是巨大的。但那些政策的制订者为什么就是喜欢一意孤行呢?

其实对于十分听话的中国消费者来说,只要你诚恳地告诉大家,说造成如今的行业垄断, 实在是其来有自,而我们也在改进,只是改进的速度缓慢而已,我相信不少人也会理解。但可气的是,越是垄断程度高的行业,越是喜欢打着国家利益的幌子,唱着为人民服务的高调,借此聚敛更多的行业利益或者个人私利,从而获得不受批评的豁免权。这就好比一个强盗明火执仗地抢钱,却硬要逼着你说这钱是你送给他的礼物,还要你无限上纲地表扬他一样可恨。面对此种情形,我只记得龙应台先生的一句话:中国人,你为什么不生气?!



冉按:这是前几年应一位书商之约而写的一本小书《乌托邦的现实兄弟》(十万字)中一节,用自己所学的社会学、经济学、史学的简单知识,分析中国社 会,至今认为还不过时。该书商后因资金原因退出此行当,好在我赔偿金早已拿到,故只好暂时搁置出版。有意出版的朋友,可找我索要样章(目录及参考文献附 后),具体细节可另商。2010618900分于成都

一 本名为《没门》(NO WAY)的书,邀集了众多美国专家,述说和研究了在这个世界上诸多的“不可能”。从蒙田的“我知道我什么都不知道”,到集众力来研究诸学科的“不可能”, 是人对自身认知有限性的清醒认识,同时也是对无穷无尽的未知领域的拜服,对真知的谦卑态度,比那些无所不知的狂妄,更近于我们生活在困境中的真相。在《没 门》一书中,经济学家豪克巴斯用一篇《经济的不可能性》探讨了很专业的“不可能”——诸如经济学家阿罗的“不可能性理论”等——但在我看来,于我们现实息 息相关的问题中,展现出它艰难的“不可能”面貌和魅力的,无过于平等与效率对我们极大的困扰。

著 名经济学家、政治学家哈耶克虽是二十世纪社会科学界的巨擘,但面对社科研究方面的平庸,也不无伤感地说:“无庸讳言,与众多令人振奋的物理学发现相比,社 会研究领域的景象只能让我们心灰意冷”。“心灰意冷”正好表明社会科学研究者面对社会问题的棘手程度,远非过去时代能比。在众多繁难的问题中,平等与效率 问题,无疑是二十世纪扰嚷不休的问题。因为重效率如调控不佳,会导致贫富差距拉大,而重平等,则会造成非常贫穷、一无所有的平等,使平等徒具虚名,而无任 何实际意义。政治哲学家、伦理学家罗尔斯在平等与效率上,主张将优先权交给平等,而经济学家弗里德曼则主张优先权交给效率。面对平等与效率这种“鱼和熊掌 不可兼得”的两难局面,经济学家阿瑟.奥肯用《平等与效率——重大的抉择》一书,把罗尔斯、弗里德曼两人的观点作了一个适度的权衡:有效率的平等。他的表 述是:“市场是必不可少的,但它必须被控制在恰当的范围内”,反之,他的潜台词亦是:“平等是必不可少的,但它也必须控制在恰当的范围内”,奥肯因此对二 十世纪这个著名的难题的作了较好的破解。

效率是自由市场之 必须,平等是民主社会价值必不可少的维度,前者禀承亚当斯密的“市场是只看不见的手”的理论,后者则诚如奥肯所说,“社会拒绝把自身变成一架支付一定量钱 币便可换取一切东西的巨型售货机”,一些权利是不可让度的,“因为权利不能为金钱所买卖,而且因为它们是无偿地分配公民的,它们自然而然地就没有‘经济事 物’的价格标签”。既然并非所有东西都可以拿市场来衡度,那么便有与“完全”市场化的矛盾问题。而这些不能完全市场化的权利如平等,在某些方面自是对效率 有所抑制,这是一对将会持续存在而不会完全消敉的矛盾。

平 等与效率的矛盾,并非只是庞大而复杂的社会经济生活中才有,就是一个几个人组成的蕞尔小家,也难逃如此困境的制肘。托名奴隶伊索所写的《伊索寓言》中就曾 有这样一位处于两难困境中的父亲。这位父亲有两位女儿,分别嫁给菜农和陶工。有一天,父亲去看望嫁给菜农的女儿,问他们有什么困难,女儿便说,生活尚好, 惟望老天爷常常下雨,以润泽菜地,以便多收了菜好拿到市场卖。不几天,这位父亲去探看嫁给陶工的女儿,问她生活得如何?她说,生活得还好,只是巴望老天爷 丽日天晴。父亲怜爱两位女儿,手心手背都是肉,倘使帮其中任何一位祈祷下雨或天晴,都是对另一位女儿的不公和伤害,因为老天爷不可能同时满足她们二人的要 求。对于这样的两难困境,父亲要怎么办,才能达致心愿与实际效用的最大化,尽最大限度减少双方的损失,使双方都有利。

这 位父亲最简单的做法,是同时为他两位祈祷,或者都不祈祷。同时祈祷,既下雨又天晴,就有“祈祷”资源互相抵销之嫌。如果都不祈祷,即浪费了可以左右(事实 上只是在心理上能左右,并非有实际效果,但在不懂天气预测之古代祈祷被认为一种有效的方式)好处的“祈祷”这个资源,也不是最佳办法。最有效且简便的办法 是,看菜农和陶工,哪家的效率高,哪家效率高,就为哪家祈祷。但收入高的一方应为收入低的一方作相应的补偿,这种补偿不会让收入高的一方感到还不如你替对 方“祈祷”得了,同时收入低的一方,也能基本满意,这样达成了“效率与平等”的某种意义上的“和解”和“双赢”。

一 个社会,政府制订的政策,必须遵循市场经济规律,才可能将市场搞活,并且做大社会财富的蛋糕。只有将社会财富的蛋糕做大,整个社会才能分到更多的蛋糕,以 满足整个社会各阶层民众的需求。这就是说,效率是要务,如果没有效率,蛋糕没做大,那么每个人所分甚微,甚至有食不果腹,三餐不继的危险。而那种“一无所 有”或者“厨烟不继”的原始共产主义,“不患寡,而患不均”的想法,最终只会导致饿殍载道,使平等丧失了真正的意义。所以,平等必须在发展生产,促进商品 经济的基础上来谈,才能有它的现实意义。但有东西过后,怎么样分配,并不是个可以一蹴而就的简单问题。

众 所周知,绝对的平等是不存在的,那么怎样的分配才能达致社会较佳的满意度,从而实现整个社会大体可以满意的平等?首先固然应该按照多劳(劳包括的种类是很 多,资金、土地等的投入从广义上看都应该算所谓的劳)多得的分配规律。复次,对不劳动者不得食的说法,应该作必要的修正。不劳者,有几种情形,一是不能 劳,没有劳之力,不用含糊,一个健全的社会,对这部分人应该有足够的关爱,让他们过上有保障的生活;二者是有劳却不劳,安于得最低工资,安于贫困,你也不 能因为他不去劳,就断然剥夺他的最低保障。因为最低保障是一个社会对底层人群的基本关怀,这种关怀不是施舍,而是一个和谐社会之必须。因为每个与你生活在 社会群体的人,都与你通过各种方式,息息相关。当然,这样一来,对整个社会效率势必有所损伤,这正好说明效率不是一切。

进 而言之,社会资源总是稀缺,资源总量在某种程度上来说,是个一定的不变量。所有的人都为争夺一定量的、有限的资源而不懈努力。哪怕你是遵循市场规律、通过 光明正大的手段获得了自己应得的利益,因资源总量的有限,你已经客观上占得了别人从理论上所应有的资源份额。单从这点来看,竞争中的胜利者和失利者都有着 千丝万缕的、不可分割的关系,尽管商场中的胜利者不必为此承担道德义务。

自 然,我们也不必拔高胜利者的道德觉悟,所以才指望政府通过合法的税收,让竞争中的胜利者缴纳自己应该缴纳的税收,以此来转移支付竞争中的失败者所应得之基 本保障,而不是采用赤裸裸的动物丛林法则,让大家来个你死我活的缠斗,使得失败者最后不得不依靠博命来进行“血酬定律”式的较量。当社会底层(竞争的失意 者)人群,最后不得不亮出最后的底牌——起义造反、血腥残杀——时,社会动荡的总体输局已然铸就,满目疮痍、千疮百孔的社会,要想补救,所耗成本、所付代 价,便昂贵到不可计算。如此一来,效率大倒退是必然,所以平等不是要你效率来“施舍”,而是效率没有平等作保障,最终会使效率丧失殆尽。这对一个贫富差距 越来越大的社会,是个不可忽略的警示。


我说中国是个“比傻帝国”,有人往往会错看成“傻逼帝国”,虽然这二者有关联,但差别却是很大的。“比傻帝国”是由官方导演,群众参与,恐怖胁迫, 知识分子书写所成就的谎言帝国。等我有闲了,我将中国历史上层出不穷的比傻游戏写出来,可能堪比吴思先生的“潜规则”和“血酬定律”。现在只是将我们现实 生活的比傻成就,随意拈几个出来说
三: 按需分配的政治数学。中国真是个有发明创造能力的国家,不仅盛产统计政治学,而且是产生政治数学的温床。中国经济增长总是大幅攀升到极尽吹捧之能事,各种 非正常死亡总是持续下降到不准人们说出具体名字和数字的地步。数字在中国是按需分配的,而分配的权力自然在官方手中。
四: 国家发展得不好,是人死得不够多。多难兴邦的逻辑前提是,我们这个国家不够好,是因为灾难还不够多,死人还太少,大家不要怕地震加人祸死了近十万人,应该 多死点,这个国家才有振兴的希望。穷人死光,留下太子党,中国就是世界上平均国民收入最高的国家了。嗯,多难兴太子帮。
六: 灾难为什么战胜不完呢?灾难经常发生,不期而至,不必有一个良好的制度加以预防,在中国已成一个常态。为什么呢?你要是把灾难完全战胜完了,他们哪里去找 战胜灾难的机会呢?所以为了官员们官阶的可持续发展,请屁民们配合,向余秋雨大师学习,保持灾难战胜不完的动人气氛。
十: 坏事怎么转变成好事呢?就是把坏事尽量掩盖,大事化小小事化了。至于这坏事是怎么造成的,不必用制度变革去制止,因为制止坏事的发生,就是减少了自我表 扬、自我圣化的机会,减少了“伟光正”的出镜率和上报率,这样还不如让坏事持续不断存在的好。只有这样坏事才能根据官方的需要,变成他们所能掌控的好事。 依此类推,化悲痛为力量,不是将你的悲痛化为替你冤死的孩子维护正当权利的力量,而是要你化为官方所需要的力量,最终把悲痛独自留给你。



恐 惧并不耻辱,用尽一切办法想让你恐惧的人与机构,才是真正的不良。就像人应该拥有的诸多自由一样,应该拥有免于恐惧的自由,所以那些造成你恐惧的制度与人 事,就是我们应该起来改变的对象。而政府就像一头猛虎,它的权力不受制约,就像没有笼子的约束,却放任它在人群密集的大街上行走一样,那是一件多么危险可 怕的事,而这正是布什主张将政府关进笼子,官员要站在笼子里讲话原因。而我们的政府不仅是一头在大街上放肆行走的猛虎,而且还是时常威胁你、警告你的猛 虎。尽管有时这头猛虎并不一定来骚扰你或者诉诸武力吃你,但它让你随时感到有一种危险、不安在蔓延。当这种不安蔓延到你生活中的各个领域,监听、跟踪、盯 梢、告密等成为常态的时候,当高压、流放、改造、严打、杀戮,佐以无边的谎言宣传时候,当亲人不可靠、朋友不可信、你要自证其罪(包括交心)、每个人都恐 惧到互相提防对方的时候,恐惧就会变成你生活的空气,从而恐惧如魂附体,成了不少人血液的一部分。即便剔骨换肉也无法清除,这是一种怎样要命的纠缠,不经 历法西斯、共产主义国家生活的人,是断难想像的。因为所有的文字描述及图片展示,都不能罄尽恐惧之于他们生活影响之万一。

恐 惧不只是一种心理状态,对于权力不受制约的政府与统治者来说,不仅成本最低,而且有像古罗马斗兽场里,观看人兽互斗的乐趣。他们从人民互相撕咬,争相向他 告密,争相向他求饶献媚里,得到了一种变态的精神和心理满足。这些满足是他们在物质生活高度腐败的情形下,另一种他们常规的娱乐。即使人民变得恐惧、胆 小、懦弱、麻木,成了他们最大的娱乐。他们看到人民互相不信任,带着戒惧的眼光,连亲友间倾诉心曲,包括夫妻间的枕头夜话,都会变成恐惧的一部分时候,他 们是多么得意啊。那种狰狞的笑,你只要有一定的想像力,便不难感到那种笑声是如何让你头皮发毛,悚然惕心。从小的愚民教育、听话说教,到“防人之心不可 无”的民众心理,再到无处不在的阴谋的泛滥(互相利用信息不对称坑害对方),就是一个信奉丛林法则的政府所必然乐意倡导的。我们只要看看中国人许多方面的 处世原则,就不难看到专制制度和独裁政府,对我们的伤害有多大,因为我们许多处世原则,都还是地道的丛林社会的产物,而非文明社会所当有。在一个信奉弱肉 强食、不信而多骗的社会里,加上政府无处不在的惩治性管理,恐惧成了我们生活的信条。

但吊诡的是,在独裁制 度下生活的人,恐惧却是互相的。不只是小老百姓恐惧,官员乃至最高当轴一样的恐惧,他们的办公室、坐车、住家乃至他们的出行,都成了一种设限的猪圈般的生 活,只不过他的猪圈豪华得多。独裁制度下,民众最受伤害最为恐惧,但官员乃至最高当轴他们也是恐惧者,只是他们恐惧比我们少一点而已。一个互害的社会,一 个使所有人都恐惧的制度,我们生活在此中的人就是不思改变,真是令人匪夷所思。或许有人会说,官员把恐惧当成是一种享受,因为他们喜欢那种无时不在的保护 性的生活。所以官员们要竭力阻止社会改良。一个健康的社会,以使大家都获得自由,因为大家都自由了,他们的特权感就体现不出来了,那种心理上的优越感和自 傲(林嘉祥的“屁民论”就是建立在此基础上的),就无法体现出来了。但问题是,这样的官民关系,伤害和恐惧的绝不只是民众。恐惧并不可耻的,但可恨的是独 裁制度,以及竭力想维护此种制度的特权人士。

有人说,你就不恐惧吗?我恐惧,和大家一样。但我认为面对恐惧 的方式可能有所不同,有人说,你的电话肯定被监听,我说他爱听不听(这不表明我赞赏他来听,我反对他来听,这只是我反对无效时的被动考量,但对他们这种窃 听,我一直反对),事涉公众利益,我私下说与公开说的完全一样;有人说,你出来可能有人跟踪,我说我到不了那个级别,即令是有,我也欢迎他一起聊天喝茶, 但茶钱你得自己给。官方最高兴的是,你完全按照他威胁性的旨意来生活,生活在恐惧不安中,活得越来越憔悴,生活越来越无趣,它最高兴。它会暗中说,他丫的 牛逼个啥,还不是被吓得半死。对待恐惧,你就是时常恐惧,时常警惕,恐惧也不会自动消除,那么你最好是不那么理恐惧,按照自己的生活路径去生活,那是对给 你制造恐惧者最大蔑视与难堪。人生有限,与其恐惧地活着,半夜三更时常失眠(你就天天不睡,它要抓你还是要抓你,因为你与恐惧制造者的博弈还没有达到一种 有效的均衡,当然达到了有效的均衡,那么它也就无法制造恐惧了),毋如完全尊重自己的规律与轨迹,这是对制造恐惧者的最大打击。

这 样说,不是说要你无视恐惧,做任何事都应该有自己的实际利益与生存境遇的考量。我是一个不要求别人怎么做的人(我也无权且无意这样去要求,如果一定要分的 话,我是个消极自由主义者),我只知道自己愿意去弱弱地做,做一些能做的事。我说出这一切,只是为了与大家分享我对恐惧的看法。你可以恐惧,但你不必由他 人吓唬,变成一种自我吓唬。你不要顺着恐惧制造者的圈套和心意,自我复制恐惧,最终成为恐惧彻头彻尾的奴隶。最大的恐惧只有恐惧本身,就是这个道理。



我并不是个过份悲观的人,但也没有那种予求予取的乐观。因为生在这个不容乐观的国家,得让你在高兴时提防着点,因为你刚高兴政府有点进步,那一系列 的丑恶便接踵而至,粉粹你稍微拥有的幻想。这次中国政府在救灾中的一系列表现,尤其全国哀悼三天,是这个已经比较僵化了的政权六十年来最好的危机公关措 施。在危机公关中,他们利用威权政府的效率,温家宝第一时间到达灾区,在僵持了72小时后让国外及台湾的救援队进入中国——虽然进入滞后,只是个象征大于 实际用处的举措,但总比一直不让别人来要好得多——以及在地震初期因来不及第一时间管制中外传媒而稍微有信息放开的举措,都是他们不错的危机公关的举措。

但 是这一切,在陆续的地震当中,政府处理危机与灾难时巨大惯性及一切坏毛病,又重新让公众怒不可遏。一个没有真正监督的政府,尾大不掉、积重难返,中央极权 的坏毛病在救急时似乎显出一点刚性的效率,但在灾难相对平复后的重建,那些六十年来积累起来的与这个政权相伴相生的坏毛病,就像洪水泛滥一样让已经觉醒起 来的民众非常的沮丧、愤怒甚而有可能失控。千万不要迷信你现在手上有丰盛的税收和强大的军队,这两样东西不会一成不变,都是一个不稳定的变量。四九年以惨 烈的内战得鼎之后,共产党最喜欢说且非常得意地是,他把自己的胜利归功于人心向背。除了像笑蜀兄所编的《历史的先声》中的民主自由言论及他们的空头许诺的 民主自由的未来,对大批知识分子与民众的愚弄以外,人心向背的确在某种程度上起着一定的作用。政权一旦得手,这一切都可以肆无忌惮地收回,甚至不惜自掴耳 光地查封《历史的先声》这样当初他们承诺的言论。

六十年来,官方一直在透支老百姓对他们的信任,复以“伟光 正”式的宣传让许多老百姓看不到他们为恶的实质,所以在某种意义上讲,尚能收拾一二人心。多难未必兴邦(“多难兴邦”在我看来逻辑不通,中国的不少成语中 多有逻辑不通者,待以后有闲时说叨一二),但对共产党这样的威权政府在特殊时刻发挥其相对的效率是有好处的,同时开动宣传机器从中转移人们对灾难中的人祸 因素的质询,变坏事为好事,将死难无数的灾难变成一个又一个去夺取的伟大胜利。这些“伟大”的“胜利”,真可谓一将功成万骨枯,看他们“胜利”的口号背 后,有多少悲惨的家庭没有得到真正的安慰,你就知道他们的“胜利”是什么东西了。四川汶川大地震是官方赢得民心的一次绝好的机会,但他们似乎不太在意这一 切,尤其这个官僚体制,已使许多官员变得冷血且毫无应对危机的能力。在此种情况下,官僚体制削减政府的公信力真是有很大杀伤力。下面我试说几点,让我们来 看看他们是如何辜负仅存的民心的。

一:众多善款怎么监管,你相信他们不腐败吗?自己监管自己的把戏我们看得 还少吗?截止28日,各级财政拨款是195亿,而公众捐款则达347亿。这些捐款和财政投入的两大使用者,一是民政部门,二是红十字会。民政部门作为政府 部门,其怎么让民众相信他们会真正使用好救灾物资?人们对中国红十字会的不信任已是公开的事实,他们没有像样的财务报表和公开账目,没有独立的第三方审 查。事实上,中国红十字会并不独立,只是个准官方机构而已。在中国与官方有染的机构的可信度都要打折扣。事实上,中国红十字会单是在订帐篷上,与一家公司 之猫腻,在网上嚣嚣甚传,但至今没有谁来真正澄清此事,并得到人们的认可。

二:教育界腐败在地震后的突显。 教育界的腐败和政府任何一个部门的腐败,都是大家心照不宣、路人皆知的事。任何垄断尤其是政治上的垄断,都是腐败的真正温床。在这样的背景下,垮塌 7000多间校舍,死亡学生上万人,这是个令人痛心疾首的耻辱纪录。我们不是说成人就该因那些人祸因素而死亡,但我们更应该追究那些因人祸因素而丧生的未 成年人。一个国家的官员对未成年人如此凉薄,由这些官员所组成的政府难道真正值得信任吗?都江堰聚源小学、绵竹富新二小等地小学的家长,希望公正查处那些 垮塌学校的问题,但四川省教育厅在教育部的授意下,很快抛出那万恶“五点”,这是让民众真正愤怒的根源,如谓不信,咱们拭目以待。凡是家长,有谁不对这样 的局面痛心疾首?如果你的孩子不是因为天灾(从南方周末对聚源镇的报道可见一斑,这在很大程度上已是人祸)而是因为人祸而不明不白地死去,你内心着何感 想?如果你刚好是一位不幸的家长,当你想通过正规渠道、通过法律手段不能得到良好解决的时候,你会怎样自处?

三: 提倡宣传主旋律,其实就是鼓励造谣。我曾经说过,什么是主旋律呢?主旋律就是主子的旋律。新闻不讲究真实与真相,而是有意去造假,报喜不报扰,不是根据事 实来进行报道,而是根据官方的需要来进行信息过滤与处理。此种过滤,不只是违背新闻的基本道德,而且违背五月一号才颁布的“政府信息公开条例”。成都在搞 “三突出一不许”(具体内容我不知晓,但有人揣测是突出党的领导,突出政府功绩,突出英雄人物,不许报道学校。我认为这个揣测虽不中亦不远矣),整个媒体 正在逐步煽情,逐步自我吹捧,将政府抗震救灾这样份内应该做的事,往“伟光正”的固有套路一路狂奔,成为又一次自我表扬典范。救灾早期政府得到西方媒体的 表扬,尽管让政府尝到些甜头,但他们似乎还是感觉到不如他们“伟光正”的宣传套路有效,于是回到老路,继续搞新闻管制和封锁信息的自我表扬。

四: 到灾区的表演非常多。许多的官员到灾区去捞政治资本,是表演救灾秀,这只是劳民伤财添乱。还有很多官员和国有企业把到灾区当作一场灾难的旅游,这已经在许 多志愿者所写的日志中看得非常明显。地方村官也利用自己权利,把持着物资分配,或者将好东西留着自己先用,深入灾区基层你便不难看到这些。与此同时,大批 物资堆积,而民众手中物资却并不充裕。这样的表演只会逐步丧失民心。

温家宝在北川中学黑板上书写一个“多难 兴邦” (真正应该收藏的是绵竹一些学生家长所写的那幅“孩子们不是死于天灾而是死于人祸”)便引起许多马屁精要保留这个字迹的欲望。如温家宝每讲一句每写一个字 都要保留的话,那么建议这些马屁精搞一个“温家宝废品收购站”吧。在这样大的灾难面前,我们的媒体和官员,对准的不是民众,却是更高的官员,像这样的思路 不更改,你怎么能够尽量杜绝灾难中的人祸因素?温家宝这回的表现,也就基本及格,在这样的政权下,他算是尽了点力,也就仅此而已,犯不着如此奴才和卑贱到 要保存一块黑板上的字迹。如果这样的话,将六十年来一代一代的领导人所讲的屁话、假话、空话、大话、套话都收集起来,加上奴才们的捧场,那一定洋洋大观, 一定会矗立一座傲立于世界民族之林“奴才博物馆”。这回四川大地震,我想政府应该知道民心的力量,但遗憾的是,他们似乎又走上了辜负民心的老路,还在使用 早该唾弃的宣传手段与拙劣的自我表扬。
















在我们的国家有许多常识被遮蔽,譬如政客也好,政治家也罢,都是官员,他的必修课之一,就是有风度地面对民众抗议。可惜前天温家宝在剑桥演讲所遭遇 的抗议者扔鞋子事件,他发表的那番讲话,不仅没有风度,而且缺少抗议者对他的日常训练。国外的民众不是你想炒回锅肉时特意安排的北川民众,也不是中国驻英 使馆里看你包饺子时的属下臣民。至于外交部那没有风度和教养的发言,动辄上升到阶级斗争和意识形态,以一种暗含威胁的态度,来表达一个国家外交辞令和展布 形象的做法,由来已久。要说对中国的国家形象有所伤害,那么外交部是当之无愧第一损害者和不及格的表演者。
温家宝被抗议者 扔鞋子的事件,有许多种解读,其中包括从布什和温家宝被扔鞋子的事件来看此间的差距。这是个不错的认识此一近乎相同事件的角度,可惜论者没有将问题说清 楚。布什受到鞋子袭击后,脸上似乎没有什么反应,说的话更是轻松幽默,“我猜那是双大号鞋”。而温家宝则脸挂严霜,随即便是一阵意识形态的高空轰炸,“老 师们、同学们,这种卑鄙的伎俩,阻挡不了中英两国人民的友谊。人类的进步,世界的和谐,是历史的潮流,是任何力量阻挡不了的。请让我讲下去。”一个抗议者 扔一双鞋子,当事的政客(哪怕是政治家)如此反应,正好反应出民主与专制制度下政客的不同。而被领事馆组织去的华人,以及哪怕自动去的华人留学生的长时间 鼓掌,如果是真实的内心反应,我认为他们也是缺少民主政治训练的人。如果不是真实内心反应,只是情绪化的打气和完成政治任务,那当然也算是一种不够高明的 表演。

民主政治制度下的领导人,是经过选民选举、辩难、抗议等程序训练出来的。他们不称职,会被选民用脚投 票选掉;他们死猪不怕开水烫式不答辩、不解释相应的质疑,那么他们就会受到更为严厉的如国会议员的质询;他们不会因应相应的抗议,不会有风度地面对抗议, 那么他们就不会是一个合格的领导人,民众不会选出这样的领导者。换言之,抗议对于欲参加政治活动,想当政客或者政治家,想当官的人来说,绝对是一门永久的 公民课之训练。因为越是民主的社会,越是有许多方式的抗议活动不时发生,这是民主自由社会的常态。民主社会的政治家推出一套政纲来,没有反对的声音,没有 不同意见,没有不同的声音,那才是咄咄怪事。因此那种动辄嘲笑民主社会的领导人,走到哪去,都会有人抗议,实在是非常浅薄愚昧的看法。就像那些看到别国议 会议员吵架(乃至有少量肢体接触),反而歆羡自己国家的“人大代表”一致通过,没有任何人反对的声音一样,这只是愚民教育的结果。议会里的议员在会议上 吵,有效地避免警察到街上去抓捕民众的抗议,更有效地阻止了民众和平示威被军队开枪射杀的悲惨命运。议会里的议员互相吵架、辩难,充满制衡的国家,是很少 发生如上悲惨事件的,你是喜欢议员在议会厅里吵架呢,还是你一合法抗议警察就来抓捕你甚至痛殴你乃至枪杀你呢?

我 不认为扔鞋子是抗议温家宝的最佳方式,也不认为这样得体,但抗议者行使抗议的权利不应受到剥夺。至于抗议者是否扰乱公共秩序,相信英国警方将会秉持英国法 律来处置,不会对抗议者关黑屋子,不会给他办学习班,不会无辜给其罗织罪名,更不会使抗议者无辜消失,哪怕他抗议和反对的是一国总理。抗议者说温家宝是独 裁者,而且说温家宝说谎,这恐怕是无法辩驳的事实描述。有朋友说,说温是独裁者是不明中国政体,温只是个政务官。温是政务官不假,但温是没有竞争的政府之 总理,一党独大一党专政下的党员,关键他还不是民选的,这一切注定了他难逃独裁者的责难。温撒谎既有他个人的问题,也是这种政体机制决定的,撒谎的问题对 于中国官员来讲,不是个道德谴责,而是事实描述,这样的事不胜枚举。有朋友甚至说温撒谎是他的言论自由,这种说法简直把我雷倒。别说温是政客,他所说的话 影响到许多人的利益,甚至有时生死攸关,就是一个普通的人撒谎,而这谎也危及到他人的利益,恐怕也不能用言论自由来推脱。

让 我套句意识形态术语:学会抗议要从娃娃抓起。家庭教育中,要有给孩子说不的空间与教育,学校教育不应只培养听话和知道一种答案的学生,更不能把学生反对老 师的看法视为刺头对老师的不敬。要言之,一个健康蓬勃的社会,很多事情不会只有一种答案,很多事情不会只有一种声音。没有谁的意见天生不受质疑,没有谁的 看法一直不受甚至不能反对,自我颂圣的“伟光正”想法应该送进人民抗议的火葬场。那么我们中国人为什么对官员一般不敢持反对意见呢?一来你不敢反对;二来 你不知反对;三来你没有反对的渠道;四来你反对了会抓判刑,甚至让你消失,如此等等,当然抗议的声浪就会减少。民众只有腹非,迫不得已只有依靠偶发的群体 事件来达到一定的目的,大规模的民意诉求得不到有效的声张,整个社会缺乏减压机制,像一辆车子没有减震器,那将会面临一种可怕的结局。要言之,民众合法抗 议是一种减压机制,是一辆车子的减震器,是一种不可缺少的政治生态,破坏这样的政治生态平衡,将会带来没有理性预期的社会后果。

虽 然温家宝被扔鞋子事件,宣传机器依旧遮遮掩掩地不准评论,不准做详实报道。网络也受到许多限制,但温家宝被扔鞋事件还是迅速地通过各种途径为国内的网民所 知,在这个时代任何要想遮掩许多信息的做法,必然伴随着意想不到的损失,比如公信力。在可以预见的将来,官方会继续因为自己的公信力的丧失而买单。既然如 此,那么有效的方式就是允许民众合法抗议,而官方也应该视抗议为一种民意表达的常态,视为一种正常的政治生态。民众有合法的抗议渠道,官方不用高压来对 付,而是双方都用宪法和法律的规范,用谈判的诚意,利益上的妥协,来解决诸种官民冲突,才有可能实现真正意义上的和谐社会。




控制舆论就是为了掩盖真相,掩盖真相的目的,就是为了瓜分掠夺他人的利益时,减小阻力。以最小的代价,窃取最大的利益。从各个利益集团到以掩盖真相 著称的各级政府,无不如此。前不久我曾写过一篇《真相是中国的命门》,就是为了表达要争取自己的利益,必须有正规渠道获取真相。本来“政府公开条例”应当 完成此种使命,但由于没有真正的监督,这样的条例很多时候,只是挂羊头卖狗肉的幌子而已。湖南、沈阳的公民要求公开政府的政务信息包括吃喝的公款帐目,至 今没有任何媒体有后续报道,对那些不公开政务信息的政府部门也没有什么相应的惩处,使得信息公开条例徒具空文,浪费不少纳税人的钱财。
掩盖 真相不仅上瘾,而且更能获益,所以最近掩盖真相以一种变通的方式在进行。如用新华社这家已经丧失公信力的官产黄喉,来快速发布一些似是而非的信息,不重事 实只重立场,其实是为了用速度掩盖真相。通过对真相的掩盖,从而来达致所谓控制舆论的目的。控制舆论的目的,就是为了让各级政府的官商勾结,变得冠冕堂 皇。而民众通过自己正规渠道,以及合法情况下之争取权益,反而成为一种破坏所谓稳定的刁民。其实破坏的只是官商勾结的黑洞和各级政府腐败的利益,根本破坏 不了社会的稳定。只要能够通过正常的、公开透明的博弈渠道,实现各自利益的获得与平衡,社会稳定本不是什么问题。但最大的问题是,官商勾结已到了严重危害 社会稳定的地步。所以人民日报社网络中心舆情监测室、中国信息协会信息主管(CIO)分会、中国电子政务资讯网、 网络舆情杂志才会组织起来做“网络舆情与政府形象塑造”这样一看就是掩盖真相的学习班。而此种学习班满足了如下许多机构的利益,举办者可通过每个人收六百 元钱的费用赚钱(还可以给自己的管理机构在年终报政绩),而各级的网监处、宣传部等则可以用公款来支付这种费用,浪费纳税人的钱,至于各级政府包括中央政 府都能在这种搅混水的学习班里获益,所以这样的会议虽然一看就荒唐,却能大张旗鼓地在网络发布出来,不以为耻,反以为荣。
政府的形象,首先 来自什么地方?主要看他的政策制订和执政能力,是否真为民众服务。在此基础上,民众的监督和法律的规范,以及来自媒体无所不在的批评和真相报道,才是政府 树立形象所真正需要的,而这些正是中国社会所缺乏的。没有这一切便没有真相,没有真相,所有政府的形象塑造,在民众看来,都是造假。这些举办网络舆情培训 的机构,包括其间参与的个人,只不过在与政府合谋抢劫民众的利益罢了,因为在某种程度上看,真相就是利益。不只是政府害怕真相的披露,就是一些打着国企牌 号的垄断企业,也在内部发文搅混水。一旦出现于他们不利的文章,他们就花钱屏蔽相关的信息,或者作虚假报道;一旦需要引导所谓的舆论的时候,他们不惜内部 发文件让自己的职工去顶帖,发表正面评论来最大程度维护垄断企业的权益(虽然此帖可能是搞笑“搜狐内部机密邮件!五毛钱看一次”, 但这样的做法并不缺少)。所有那些平时工资很高,年底拿奖金最多的企业,都在竭尽全力叫嚷其亏损。尤其在目下这种普通民众自危的经济危机情况下,他们更是 通过控制舆论媒体,来叫穷的主儿,其实你只要稍有常识,就知道他们是在那里为了自身集团利益而装出来的穷困而已。“五大电力企业亏损,有望获国资委百亿补 贴”的文章,就像中石油中石化叫穷一样,完全是不靠谱的事。所谓国企的亏损(如果有亏损),一是官员腐败;二是人浮于事,冗员甚多;三是不遵循市场经济规 律而取得一种良性竞争,所有这一切都是经济垄断(当然其根在于政治垄断)所造成的。
有不少人觉得真相对他的利益影响并不大,其实真相不只是 影响你的物资收入,而且还影响你的大脑发育与创造力,包括你价值观的形成,以及对世界的看法。千万别小看真相对于你生活的重要性,因为政府垄断真相的后果 相当严重。一切所谓的真相都由他们来发布,最后所导致的是误导、愚弄,以及由此而来的对你利益的掠夺。你的利益要能得到相应的保护,对真相不遗余力地探 寻,绝对是重中之重。让真相为更多的人知晓,你才能获取博弈的资本,并且获得相应的博弈与谈判能力,从而达成对自身利益的保护。




1. 當前中國官方媒體的單方面宣傳方式,具有煽動民族仇恨和加劇局勢緊張的效果,對維護國家統一的長遠目標非常有害,我們呼籲停止這種宣傳。

2. 我們支持達賴喇嘛的和平呼籲,希望遵循善意、和平與非暴力的原則妥善處理民族爭端;我們譴責任何針對無辜平民的暴力行為,強烈敦促中國政府停止暴力鎮壓,呼籲藏族民眾也不進行暴力活動。

3. 中國政府宣稱“有足夠證據證明這是達賴集團有組織、有預謀、精心策劃的”事件,我們希望政府出示證據,並建議政府邀請聯合國人權理事會對證據、事實過程和傷亡人數進行獨立調查,以改變國際社會的相反看法和不信任心態;

4. 我們認為類似西藏地區中共領導人所說“達賴是一隻披著袈裟的豺狼、人面獸心的惡魔”那類文革語言無助於事態的平息,也不利於中國政府的形象。我們認為致力於融入國際社會的中國政府,應該展示出符合現代文明的執政風貌。

5. 我們注意到,拉薩發生暴力行為的當天(3月14日),西藏自治區負責人就宣佈“有足夠證據證明這是達賴集團有組織、有預謀、精心策劃的”,這說明西藏當局早知道暴亂即將發生,然而卻沒有有效阻止事態發生和擴大,這其中是否存在瀆職,應該進行嚴肅的調查處置。

6. 如果最終不能證明此次事件是有組織、有預謀、精心策劃的,而是一場被激起的“民變”,則應該追究激起民變並且捏造虛假情報矇騙中央和國民的責任者,並認真反省教訓,總結經驗,避免今後重蹈覆轍。


8. 我們敦促中國政府允許有公信力的國內外媒體進入藏區進行獨立的採訪報導。我們認為,目前的這種新聞封鎖,無法取信于國民和國際社會,也有損於中國政府的誠信。如果政府掌握真相,就不怕百般挑剔。只有採取開放姿態,才能扭轉目前國際社會對我國政府的不信任。

9. 我們呼籲中國民眾和海外華人保持冷靜和寬容,進行深入的思考。激烈的民族主義姿態,只能招致國際社會的反感,有損於中國的國際形象。

10. 1980年代的西藏動盪局限於拉薩,這次卻擴大到藏區各地,這種情況的惡化反應出對藏工作存在嚴重失誤,有關部門必須痛加反省,從根本上改變失敗的民族政策。


12. 我們希望漢藏人民消除誤解,開展交流,實現團結,無論是政府部門,還是民間組織和宗教人士,都應該為此做出努力。我們必須消除民族仇恨,實現民族和解,而不是繼續擴大民族之間的分裂。一個國家避免領土分裂,首先在於避免民族之間的分裂。 

王力雄(北京 作家)
劉曉波(北京 自由撰稿人)
張祖樺(北京 憲政學者)
沙葉新(上海 作家 回族)
于浩成(北京 法學家)
丁子霖(北京 教授)
蔣培坤(北京 教授)
孫文廣(山東 教授)
余 杰(北京 作家)
冉雲飛(四川 編輯 土家族)
浦志強(北京 律師)
滕 彪(北京 律師 學者)
廖亦武(四川 作家)
江棋生(北京 學者)
張 玲(北京 工程師)
徐 玨(北京 研究員)
李 駿(甘肅 攝影師)
高 瑜(北京 記者)
王德邦(北京 自由撰稿人)
趙達功(深圳 自由撰稿人)
蔣亶文(上海 作家)
劉 毅(甘肅 畫家)
許 暉(北京 作家)
王天成(北京 學者)
溫克堅(杭州 自由職業)
李 海(北京 自由撰稿人)
田永德(內蒙古 民間維權人士)
昝愛宗(杭州 記者)
劉逸明(湖北 自由撰稿人)
劉 荻(北京 自由職業)