看過了施永青先生於利嘉閣網站發表的兩篇短文有感
<<向上流動力為何少了>>
<<移民發奮 下代嬌生>>
最直接的感覺是, 施先生真的很擅長以可掬的笑容、親切的態度, 去發表他長篇大論的歪理...
在他尊貴的眼中, 重慶大厦裡面住的印巴籍人士, 都是非法入境者; 這一代富不起來的人, 都是不肯用功的人...
我沒有尊貴的眼睛, 但恰巧看到社會的另一面。
我認知的, 是香港有一群飽受壓制的小數族裔人仕, 他們很多擁有香港身份證, 卻沒有正常的接受教育機會; 他們跟我們一樣擁有健全的體格跟心智, 卻難以找到同等的就業待遇。
我認知的, 是香港這個富裕城市裡面, 有近百萬的人活在三餐不繼的赤貧生活底下。他們的孩子, 有的父母沒能力幫他們付上學的書簿費; 有的為了幫補家計要跟嫲嫲每天上街撿紙皮。"富裕"在他們眼中可能只是在春節的時候, 能夠買一雙最普通的新球鞋。
施先生, 這些人, 叫"弱勢社群"。
我們追求公平, 不是要每個人得到一模一樣的東西。公平是讓更多的人得到類似, 或是相對接近的機會去追求理想, 去得到合理的生活水平... 看施先生的文時, 我像看到一個拿著手槍的人在跟另一個手無寸鐵的人搏鬥, 後者打不贏, 就被那持槍者說他"不努力", 還要在身上多開幾槍似的。
我明白商業理論上, 所有人的原動力, 都是來自改善自身生活環境的欲望。但... 那就是人類的全部價值了嗎? 人們對政府的控訴, 對制度的不公的反感, 都只是為了自己嗎? 我自己對曾蔭權的能力及態度是絕對的反感及不認同, 但不見得那是只為了我自己。曾班子對社會公義的無視, 對公民社會發展方向的無能, 對環保概念和政策的無知... 皆是我鄙視他們的原因。我深信與我有類似想法的同志是大有人在。
雖然曾氏無能, 但我也不倒曾, 準確點說是不去浪費心神去倒曾。為什麼? 因為現行的假民主制度, 是一個選出無能者的制度。無能者沒有政黨, 做了什麼功績, 皆不會對已方有正面影響, 為下次選舉舖路; 相反做了什麼錯事, 也完全沒有相應的後果要承擔。董建華下台, 換一個曾蔭權上台。曾蔭權下台, 換另一個曾蔭權上台... 這樣的權力接棒, 對我們的社會發展有任何意義嗎?
所以我們要做的, 就是推動全民雙普選。只有相對更民主的制度, 才有機會選出對社會有承擔的首長, 才有機會吸引有才能的人仕加入角逐, 才能推動社會制度的持續改善。
眼下五區總辭不知道結果如何, 但無論如何, 請大家把握自己能表態的權利(諸如投票, 諸如上街抗爭)。勿讓當權者, 既得利益者以含糊不清的邏輯, 淡化我們改革社會的熱情, 操控我們的未來。
2008年11月7日 星期五
09年美國十大事件
新世代，新氣候。黑人當上美國總統，證明只要有信念，夢想可成真。就讓我對09年美國大事作胡亂猜測，實行亂估一通。
宣佈美國非法移民合法化
美國非法移民問題存在已久，對於這有錢的移民國家更是家常便飯。由於美國缺乏基層勞動力，造成非法移民充撐這勞動缺口。偷渡赴美，實為眾多外來非法移民實現美國夢的第一步。20多年來無特赦，在07年非法移民大遊行反映事情嚴重積壓至不能不解決之地步。若美國宣佈非法移民合法化，將為國家提供新的、充裕的廉價勞動力(但很可能薪金等於最低工資)，部分低技術製造業有可能回流美國。由於邊疆遼闊、社會富裕，偷渡往美國仍將持續，抓非法入境者已成為政府沒完沒了的開支，惟合法化將對社會及就業起了正面作用。
簽署京都協議書
雖然美國汽車品牌巨頭多年來干擾美國社會發展，來到今天成了明日黃花，恐怕再無可用的手段來干預。本田、豐田等日本企業在美國設廠生產汽車，價廉物美，既是美國製造，又省油好力，比美國費油的muscle car環保多，PRIUS更創出業界新氣候。布殊政府害怕京都協議書影響親政府企業的既得利益，不敢簽署京都協議書；相反，奧巴馬大力支持再生能源，並於政綱表明要大力發展再生能源，推測有可能利用簽署京都協議書推動美國的環保進程。但是，在全球對炭排放商品普及化後，會否又產生新一次經濟泡沫呢？
伊戰鳴金收兵
奧巴馬反戰，反對伊拉克戰事，故對伊拉克收兵勢在必行。 要不然便是講大話。
鮑威爾任特別顧問
打破黨派界限，身為共和黨元老的奧維爾在選舉前在電視訪問節目上公開稱讚民主黨候選人奧巴馬為智者之選，奧氏能當上總統實為美國之福。鮑威爾四星上將為鴿派人士，是因他曾真真正正參與戰爭，第一身感受到戰爭的殘酷。奧氏屬反戰人士，高調反對03年伊戰。奧可邀請鮑威爾作特別顧問，為外交獻謀。
向聯合國交會費
欠了那麼多年的會費，真的不好意思。
第一寵物-George
要有寵物，才是完滿的第一家庭。George，挺帥。
黑人犯罪率突然降低，黑人學生上課率上升
奧巴馬當選美國總統成為黑人偶像，黑人莘莘學子努力學習，天天向上。
美國騎單車出外成為時尚，騎單車人數增多。
雖然小布殊總統為長跑愛好者，總不能感染國民跑步上班。政府在各大城市進行哥本哈根式單車道路改造，讓國民騎單車上課上班去。
將非洲傳統節日成為美國法定假期
？！
第十個，想不到了，不如您幫幫忙。
宣佈美國非法移民合法化
美國非法移民問題存在已久，對於這有錢的移民國家更是家常便飯。由於美國缺乏基層勞動力，造成非法移民充撐這勞動缺口。偷渡赴美，實為眾多外來非法移民實現美國夢的第一步。20多年來無特赦，在07年非法移民大遊行反映事情嚴重積壓至不能不解決之地步。若美國宣佈非法移民合法化，將為國家提供新的、充裕的廉價勞動力(但很可能薪金等於最低工資)，部分低技術製造業有可能回流美國。由於邊疆遼闊、社會富裕，偷渡往美國仍將持續，抓非法入境者已成為政府沒完沒了的開支，惟合法化將對社會及就業起了正面作用。
簽署京都協議書
雖然美國汽車品牌巨頭多年來干擾美國社會發展，來到今天成了明日黃花，恐怕再無可用的手段來干預。本田、豐田等日本企業在美國設廠生產汽車，價廉物美，既是美國製造，又省油好力，比美國費油的muscle car環保多，PRIUS更創出業界新氣候。布殊政府害怕京都協議書影響親政府企業的既得利益，不敢簽署京都協議書；相反，奧巴馬大力支持再生能源，並於政綱表明要大力發展再生能源，推測有可能利用簽署京都協議書推動美國的環保進程。但是，在全球對炭排放商品普及化後，會否又產生新一次經濟泡沫呢？
伊戰鳴金收兵
奧巴馬反戰，反對伊拉克戰事，故對伊拉克收兵勢在必行。 要不然便是講大話。
鮑威爾任特別顧問
打破黨派界限，身為共和黨元老的奧維爾在選舉前在電視訪問節目上公開稱讚民主黨候選人奧巴馬為智者之選，奧氏能當上總統實為美國之福。鮑威爾四星上將為鴿派人士，是因他曾真真正正參與戰爭，第一身感受到戰爭的殘酷。奧氏屬反戰人士，高調反對03年伊戰。奧可邀請鮑威爾作特別顧問，為外交獻謀。
向聯合國交會費
欠了那麼多年的會費，真的不好意思。
第一寵物-George
要有寵物，才是完滿的第一家庭。George，挺帥。
黑人犯罪率突然降低，黑人學生上課率上升
奧巴馬當選美國總統成為黑人偶像，黑人莘莘學子努力學習，天天向上。
美國騎單車出外成為時尚，騎單車人數增多。
雖然小布殊總統為長跑愛好者，總不能感染國民跑步上班。政府在各大城市進行哥本哈根式單車道路改造，讓國民騎單車上課上班去。
將非洲傳統節日成為美國法定假期
？！
第十個，想不到了，不如您幫幫忙。
2008年11月6日 星期四
The morning after...
An amazing victory for Barack Obama, and also for the American people, those who are, those who were, and those who will be. It was half a decade ago when Rosa Park took that seat reserved for Whites. That changed the course of history. Today Obama also took the seat that has been reserved for Whites, the one in the Oval Office. This shall also change the course of history.
I began my Nov. 4 by brisking through the roads of Cambridge to reach the hospital where I work. On my way I passed by the city hall, where I witnessed a scene that almost brought me to tears: a league of people of all walks of life lining up, awaiting their turn to cast their ballot. They were all perfect strangers but their goal was one, to choose their leader, their future. It was 6:53am.
I spent the evening watching the polls and projection reports at the Kennedy School of Government with three other compatriots from HK as well as hundreds of fellow enthusiasts. We rejoiced (and were relieved) when the map of Ohio turned blue. As attested by many, it was an unbelievably emotional moment when the words "Breaking News: Obama..." appeared on the screen. Since then till dawn, the streets were packed with youngsters celebrating, chanting, dancing, while cars passed by and joined in with their horns. The cynic in me, however, found this level of exhilaration still inferior to the night when the Red Sox took championships last year. Do people really see this particular event as qualitatively different than other televised competitions?
Obama's victory speech was powerful, but we've been spoiled to expect nothing less from him (and his speech writers). It was loaded with references that resonate with Americans' collective memory, especially the borrowed words from Martin Luther King's last speech. The moving story of the 106-year old Ms. Cooper juxtaposed with the highlights of the country's history shall be remembered by its people and memorized by schoolchildren for many generations to come. The anticipated "yes we can" slogan wrapped up the speech and reinforced the brand.
Now that he has won the race to the office, will Obama actually be able to live up to all the expectations and fulfill his promises, as the president, as an African American president, as the commander-in-chief, as the leader of the most powerful country, as a Messianic figure to millions who lost their homes recently, and to the many who lost their lives in different parts of the world due to the failures by both commission and omission of his predecessor? When he took office last year, Gordon Brown was arguably the Obama in Britain (I know this is a bit of a far-fetch, but you get the point). By it didn't take long for his people to become disappointed, disillusioned, and asked for his resignation. Will Obama's fate be the same, given all the odds he is against? How he build up his administration will be his first test.
While we savor this monment, let us not forget that by popular vote, Obama's victory was far from being a landslide (approximately 52%). What this means is that slightly less than half of the people preferred McCain over him. The country is as divided today as it was at the turn of the millennium. The new president has many more hearts to win.
So the bottom line is this: Obama's victory is monumental and no credit could be taken away from him in the history of the United States. Whether his significance and achievement will be beyond cultural, whether he is the next Lincoln or FDR, however, are of every one's guess.
Christian
Nov 5, 2008
Cambridge, MA, USA
I began my Nov. 4 by brisking through the roads of Cambridge to reach the hospital where I work. On my way I passed by the city hall, where I witnessed a scene that almost brought me to tears: a league of people of all walks of life lining up, awaiting their turn to cast their ballot. They were all perfect strangers but their goal was one, to choose their leader, their future. It was 6:53am.
I spent the evening watching the polls and projection reports at the Kennedy School of Government with three other compatriots from HK as well as hundreds of fellow enthusiasts. We rejoiced (and were relieved) when the map of Ohio turned blue. As attested by many, it was an unbelievably emotional moment when the words "Breaking News: Obama..." appeared on the screen. Since then till dawn, the streets were packed with youngsters celebrating, chanting, dancing, while cars passed by and joined in with their horns. The cynic in me, however, found this level of exhilaration still inferior to the night when the Red Sox took championships last year. Do people really see this particular event as qualitatively different than other televised competitions?
Obama's victory speech was powerful, but we've been spoiled to expect nothing less from him (and his speech writers). It was loaded with references that resonate with Americans' collective memory, especially the borrowed words from Martin Luther King's last speech. The moving story of the 106-year old Ms. Cooper juxtaposed with the highlights of the country's history shall be remembered by its people and memorized by schoolchildren for many generations to come. The anticipated "yes we can" slogan wrapped up the speech and reinforced the brand.
Now that he has won the race to the office, will Obama actually be able to live up to all the expectations and fulfill his promises, as the president, as an African American president, as the commander-in-chief, as the leader of the most powerful country, as a Messianic figure to millions who lost their homes recently, and to the many who lost their lives in different parts of the world due to the failures by both commission and omission of his predecessor? When he took office last year, Gordon Brown was arguably the Obama in Britain (I know this is a bit of a far-fetch, but you get the point). By it didn't take long for his people to become disappointed, disillusioned, and asked for his resignation. Will Obama's fate be the same, given all the odds he is against? How he build up his administration will be his first test.
While we savor this monment, let us not forget that by popular vote, Obama's victory was far from being a landslide (approximately 52%). What this means is that slightly less than half of the people preferred McCain over him. The country is as divided today as it was at the turn of the millennium. The new president has many more hearts to win.
So the bottom line is this: Obama's victory is monumental and no credit could be taken away from him in the history of the United States. Whether his significance and achievement will be beyond cultural, whether he is the next Lincoln or FDR, however, are of every one's guess.
Christian
Nov 5, 2008
Cambridge, MA, USA
2008年11月5日 星期三
CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE
陳兄越洋親身報導美國總統選舉盛況，本人也來湊湊熱鬧。
本人對奧巴馬的形象甚為討好，自他在民主黨內選舉時開始留意其動向。奧氏在黨內選舉開始至今，競選主題始終如一－改變(CHANGE)。
時勢造英雄，或是英雄造時勢，實在難以判斷。若在克林頓執政期間的歌舞昇平年代高呼「求變」的口號，恐怕難有今天龐大的擁護奧氏群眾；另外，若不是小布殊過去在任8年施行各項「德政」，包括：無謂地發動戰爭導致國債急升，油價曾升至每加侖4美元、經濟放緩令今夏旅遊計畫告吹，次按問題令業主無家可歸等，國民難以感受到切膚之痛，被迫求變。
有奧氏出現的地方，必有CHANGE字樣，這絕對是其競選宣傳的成功要素。希拉莉及麥凱恩不同，他們在講台上的廣告牌均顯示他們姓名；而奧氏則透過CHANGE字樣，向各選民顯示「有奧巴馬，有改變」的競選理念。經過多月來潛移默化，選民不難將奧巴馬與改變兩字聯繫起來。
在講台上的廣告中，純粹打出競選人或競選拍檔的名稱，對已認識他們的觀眾來說，這牌子變得沒有廣告價值；相反，對不認識他們的，牌子的作用只告訴他們是誰。
奧氏競選廣告團隊知道，當奧氏站台演說時，奧氏、講台及演講台上廣告牌均會在鏡頭中出現，並於全國新聞轉播數秒。他們知曉要細心利用這不大不小的廣告牌，排上以粗體、大寫CHANGE字，下沿印有以自己名字來命名的網站。讓奧氏告訴觀眾「他代表改變」、「我是誰？請到以下網站」。將這小牌子的廣告效力發揮極致，是奧氏有效宣傳「改變」理念的重要一環。而從黨內初選到今天當選演說Change has come to America，「改變」一字從未改變，仍代表競選核心思想。
曾在格琳美兩次獲得朗誦獎(Spoken Words Award)的奧氏，其演講技巧不用懷疑。而他對群眾有獨特的凝聚力，這是今屆其他候選人沒有的。留意競選拍檔在戶外進行演說，台上佈置不多，只有講者、演講台、高凳一張。在特邀講者演說時，奧氏便坐在高凳上，聽聽講者的看法、支持話。雖然戶外演講在安全上有重大風險，但這親民形象、與選民零距離接觸，俘虜了不少選民的心。在陽光燦爛的日子作戶外演講，奧氏總喜歡穿上白色恤衫、西褲，不穿西裝不打領帶，但摺袖。很有活力。
奧氏的英語口音與其他美國黑人不同，傾於英式英語(還需陳兄指正)，口音獨特，更引起美國人們留意他(另一講英式英語的知名人物為美國演員Samuel Jackson)。
曾有香港評論說，奧氏的Reclaiming the American dream演說，可與馬丁路德金的I have a dream相比。文章以小放大，自己真人演譯美國夢。
從奧氏得到349張選舉人票，大幅超於所需的270票的三成，可見奧氏的個人魅力、選舉團隊實力、競選經費財力均超越對手麥凱恩。更重要的，是選民有著「改變」的心態，投下奧巴馬一票。
傑出的演說家能否成為成功國際領袖，與各國共創和諧道路，還需拭目以待。
本人對奧巴馬的形象甚為討好，自他在民主黨內選舉時開始留意其動向。奧氏在黨內選舉開始至今，競選主題始終如一－改變(CHANGE)。
時勢造英雄，或是英雄造時勢，實在難以判斷。若在克林頓執政期間的歌舞昇平年代高呼「求變」的口號，恐怕難有今天龐大的擁護奧氏群眾；另外，若不是小布殊過去在任8年施行各項「德政」，包括：無謂地發動戰爭導致國債急升，油價曾升至每加侖4美元、經濟放緩令今夏旅遊計畫告吹，次按問題令業主無家可歸等，國民難以感受到切膚之痛，被迫求變。
有奧氏出現的地方，必有CHANGE字樣，這絕對是其競選宣傳的成功要素。希拉莉及麥凱恩不同，他們在講台上的廣告牌均顯示他們姓名；而奧氏則透過CHANGE字樣，向各選民顯示「有奧巴馬，有改變」的競選理念。經過多月來潛移默化，選民不難將奧巴馬與改變兩字聯繫起來。
在講台上的廣告中，純粹打出競選人或競選拍檔的名稱，對已認識他們的觀眾來說，這牌子變得沒有廣告價值；相反，對不認識他們的，牌子的作用只告訴他們是誰。
奧氏競選廣告團隊知道，當奧氏站台演說時，奧氏、講台及演講台上廣告牌均會在鏡頭中出現，並於全國新聞轉播數秒。他們知曉要細心利用這不大不小的廣告牌，排上以粗體、大寫CHANGE字，下沿印有以自己名字來命名的網站。讓奧氏告訴觀眾「他代表改變」、「我是誰？請到以下網站」。將這小牌子的廣告效力發揮極致，是奧氏有效宣傳「改變」理念的重要一環。而從黨內初選到今天當選演說Change has come to America，「改變」一字從未改變，仍代表競選核心思想。
曾在格琳美兩次獲得朗誦獎(Spoken Words Award)的奧氏，其演講技巧不用懷疑。而他對群眾有獨特的凝聚力，這是今屆其他候選人沒有的。留意競選拍檔在戶外進行演說，台上佈置不多，只有講者、演講台、高凳一張。在特邀講者演說時，奧氏便坐在高凳上，聽聽講者的看法、支持話。雖然戶外演講在安全上有重大風險，但這親民形象、與選民零距離接觸，俘虜了不少選民的心。在陽光燦爛的日子作戶外演講，奧氏總喜歡穿上白色恤衫、西褲，不穿西裝不打領帶，但摺袖。很有活力。
奧氏的英語口音與其他美國黑人不同，傾於英式英語(還需陳兄指正)，口音獨特，更引起美國人們留意他(另一講英式英語的知名人物為美國演員Samuel Jackson)。
曾有香港評論說，奧氏的Reclaiming the American dream演說，可與馬丁路德金的I have a dream相比。文章以小放大，自己真人演譯美國夢。
從奧氏得到349張選舉人票，大幅超於所需的270票的三成，可見奧氏的個人魅力、選舉團隊實力、競選經費財力均超越對手麥凱恩。更重要的，是選民有著「改變」的心態，投下奧巴馬一票。
傑出的演說家能否成為成功國際領袖，與各國共創和諧道路，還需拭目以待。
2008年11月2日 星期日
Yes they can?!
It is only four days before one of the most monumental democratic elections in our generation. I say this not only as a sojourner in the United States but also as a fellow citizen of Hong Kong, of this world. Who takes the top job on Nov 4 will have the potential to change the world for the better, or the worse. Some more prominent and eminent issues at stake include the two wars, relations with Iran, North Korea, and China, and global warming on the foreign policy front; and energy policy, the restructuring of the financial industry, health care, pension on the domestic front.
It is on the one hand quite absurd to see a political campaign lasting for this long (2 years) and exhausting so much resource (Obama's group raised approximately $640 million USD and spent probably about 90% of it). On the other hand, the ingenuity and level of excellence exemplified by the politicians in both camps and the political engineers (e.g., David Axelrod, who groomed Obama to stardom since his time in Chicago) are jaw dropping. The level of oration, the careful selection of words, syntax, and visual imagery, the issues that were left on and off the table, and the combination of pundit to include and exclude... everything we saw (spare the not-so-occasional gaffes and McCain's short-sightedness in picking Palin as his running mate) seems so meticulously thought through and calculated. The goal is to iterate what the voters want to hear, even before they figure out what they want to hear. The difficulty is to decide which voters you should strategically appeal to.
The art and science behind this American (marketing) tradition is admirable, especially in the stark contrast to our own politicians in HK. Unlike the televised “political debates” we were bombarded with in August and September this year, the ones shared by Obama and McCain did not consist only of attacks on personal integrity but also on policy and vision. Unlike the laughable lexical awkwardness uttered by our Legco members, the two president hopefuls appear to be articulate, compelling, and yet unpresumptuous. It is without doubt some of Obama's speeches would make it into future textbooks of speechwriting, among the ranks of Churchill and King.
However, the flip side to such work of assiduous engineering is that it becomes unclear who is contesting for presidency. Behind the content and method of delivery of each political statement is a group of seasoned professionals, the cream of the crop, who could be on either side and do a similarly impressive job. American voters are not choosing between Obama and McCain, but rather two enormous, well-established machines: the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. This is unfortunate, and quite ironic, considering both candidates chose "change" as their sound bite. By choosing to play by the rule and selecting one of the two men, by default one is NOT choosing for real changes. As promising as he is, judging from his track record of adhering to the party line, Obama might not be radically different from any liberal president. Not to suggest that radicalism is necessary what the US needs or is ready for, but as many respectable critics (e.g., Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky) have argued, many progressive social movements require a leadership that has much less ties with the current power structure/hierarchy.
With that said, it is certainly very exciting to see a multiracial man from a background of hardship and activism rising to presidency in a country with such class and race divide. This is unthinkable just a decade ago, let alone forty some years ago when the civil right movement was beginning to make baby steps.
If the unfortunate thing--that the Republicans steal the election like they did in 2000--happens on Tuesday, you’ll be seeing me in person a lot sooner than I had planned. And I bet many foreigners and even locals will follow suite.
Christian
Nov 1, 2008
Cambridge, MA
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)
