Translation: 南音:香港史話 – 東方紅/給九七代 黑鳥

原文:

寒風陣陣
星月無光
正好怡和洋行慶祝佢百五周年
煙火勁放太平山
嗰個麥士德臣
就系當年嘅大班
見佢聲聲似狼
響處賣其鴉片
搞到清朝禍曬
好似小二過年

剩得個林則徐
同佢練哪
嗰次虎門之地燒大煙
你睇操場嗰年紅火艷
嗰啲道友、道姑也無言

耳畔聽得炮聲人頭落
只見大清割地將條約簽
割咗香港九龍,強借新界咯
普羅大眾恨綿綿
以後華人與狗一樣賤
佢哋錢財刮盡,樂趣無邊
奴化教育,真陰毒
我哋義憤填胸,向各位陳詞

講番清朝玩完,因革命啊
點知軍閥割據亂江山
大好家園,遭焚毀咯
蟻民避亂,恨難填
以為香港唔會受戰火亂
點知嘎頭來犯,我哋冇窿圈
三餐不繼,炊糧斷
夫亡子散,你話有誰憐?

輾轉三年八個月
日落途窮嘎仔系緊先
以為香港會有新生活
點知鬼佬晤走在眼前

大英帝國好唔掂
惟有賴死唔走刮多啲
嗰陣國內革命,形勢勁
貪官污吏,諗住玩完
道光當年曾割地呀
嗰啲富豪新貴夾帶南遷
紅旗插滿地呀
盈屍遍野,又三年

文革十年,喇喇亂呀
游水落哩,捱住先
今日香港繁榮,得佢哋呀
太平山下,慶團圓
卒之只有自由,冇民主
名牌靚衫,呃通天
點知租約就來期呀滿咯
任得你兩邊點樣來點啊
我哋都系系埋一條船

譯文:

The Folks Telling the History of Hong Kong

Cold wind blowing and no light from the moon and stars, just the Jardine celebrated the 150th anniversary of establishment. Fireworks were vigorously let off under the Victoria Peak, at the moment James Matheson was a very parvenu. His words were so cruel like wolf howling for opium selling, causing the Qing to collapse, to be spending the New Year like a young servant.

Here was only Lin Zexu to fight against the James’s, in Humen the hazardous destroyed. Saw the parade ground blazing big fire, drugsters and drugstresses with no whisper. Huge sound of cannon firing near ears, chopped heads were on the ground, then the great Qing cut the lands and had the treaty signed. Hongkong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories were all grabbed that the ordinary grinded teeth in anger.

Later on were Chinese living as pariahs like dogs, while the gweilos exhaustedly extorted capital from the colonised with endless laugh. So insidious the enslaved education was pushed that we are angry in heart and want to tell this story to all of you.

It is said the end of the Qing resulted from the Revolution, however the warlords’ set up a separated plain and devastated the country. Lovely family homes were burned and destroyed that brought the ant-like lowers fled with uncompensated fury.

Thinking that Hongkong would not be affected by the chaos, and yet the Kartaus (Japs) invaded the land so no cave to hide. Meals were not sustained because of no eatable offered, while husbands and sons were dead and lost that no one would sympathise.

Three years and eight months later set the Sun that the Kartaus ended the rule. Thinking of a new life in Hongkong but the hateable gweilos remained and did not go. Because of the falling of the Empire, the gweilos tended to stay for more grabbing. At the time China was in a high-blowing turmoil of civil war with corruption where no future for the people. Thanks to the Daoguang ceding the land, the rich and aristocrats brought all properties to the south. During the three years the red flags were raised on the plain where bodies were crammed.

The ten-year Cultural Revolution was like chaos, while many escaped from the mainland by swimming through the sea for the harbour. Thanks to them Hongkong is prosperous today and families are altogether celebrating under the Peak.

Here the life seems free, but no democracy. The fancy clothes with famous brands deceived the eyes. However, the expiry of the lease is coming.

Whatever political games and tricks played by the two, we are all living in the single little boat.

(trans. by levon kwok 8/2016)

Advertisements

The World without Discrimination: From Yu Ying-Shih’s “Introversive Culture” to Ip Iam Chong’s “Political Matter”

Comparing the different cultural logics of the Eastern and Western civilizations has been an essential topic in academic circles around the world. For many researchers, this work can help facilitate the mutual understanding of the people in the East and the West, by which the histories, cultural characters and social tendencies of the both would be crystallized further. Undoubtedly, the scholars who are working in this field have presented lots of thinking on the differences between the Western and Eastern/Chinese spirits[1]. For example, Yu Ying-Shih (Yu Yingshi余英時) has demonstrated his opinion on the characters of Chinese traditional culture and compared the thinking logics of the two main civilizations in the globe:

“We can say Chinese culture is ‘introversive (內傾)’ that can be equally compared with the ‘extroversive (外傾)’ character of the culture of the West. There is an inner distinctive force working within the introversive one. However, this immaterial force is hard to be discovered from the outside world. This force is made by the spirits of Confucianism: ‘relying upon oneself (求諸己)’; ‘exhausting the obligation of oneself (盡其在我)’ and Daoism: ‘self-sufficiency (自足)’ as well as Buddhism: ‘depending upon oneself, not others (依自不依他)’, by which the influential power of the force on the culture is gradually strengthened. Between the logics of the ‘introversive’ and the ‘extroversive’, Chinese people would choose the first one as principle, not the second one. This tendency towards the introversive has been actually reflected by some character defects of the Chinese during the progress of the modernization. However, the tendency brought by the force is also playing a role as the very basis of the evolution of Chinese traditional culture which facilitates the thousands-year development of Chinese intellectual heritage in human history. ‘Daxue(大學)’ says: ‘The point where to rest being known, the object of pursuit is then determined; and, that being determined, a calm unperturbedness may be attained to. To that calmness there will succeed a tranquil repose. In that repose there may be careful deliberation, and that deliberation will be followed by the attainment of the desired end (translated by J. Legge; 知止而后有定,定而后能靜,靜而后能安,安而后能慮,慮而后能得).’ These can be seen as the representative words reflecting the introversive character of Chinese culture. Here, ‘zhi (rest)’, ‘ding (determined)’, ‘jing (calm)’ and ‘an (reposed)’ are all used for describing the spiritual conditions of an individual that are suitable to be given to tell the distinctive character of the culture.”[2]

In this paragraph, Yu presents his theory on the “introversive” and “extroversive” characters of the Western and Chinese cultures. According to Yu’s opinion, there is an “introversive” nature of Chinese traditional culture. His arguing point is based on this fact: the form of the character is closely connected with the long-term influence of the spirits of the three philosophical traditions: Confucianism (儒), Daoism (道) and Buddhism (佛;釋), generally known as “Three Teachings” (三教 Sanjiao) on the Chinese. Yu suggests the Teachings are the core props supporting the construction of the collective consciousness of the society in the East. In fact, the knowledge of the Three Teachings profoundly affects the Chinese people not only in the Mainland but in the Chinese cultural sphere (中華文化圈)[3] (including Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao). For example, the “introversive” character can be discovered in the situation that a particular group of people generally pay attention to the accomplishment of an inner spiritual perfection and intellectual refinement in their lifetime. The so-called “introversive character” is mainly mirrored in how the people tackle their difficulties and challenges: they get used to find out the “solution” from their personal endurance through spiritual improvement, not to judge the unreasonableness of their hard lives. This reflects an “introversive” thinking culture made by the spirits of the “Three Teachings” because these people, from the past to the present, are continuously reminded by the traditional thoughts that they were “insufficient” and asked to improve their spiritual abilities. Yu, by using this observation, justifies his argument on the character of Chinese culture that the “introversiveness” is dissimilar to the West’s because the modern development of Western civilization actually reflects its “extroversive character”: generally speaking, westerners tend to find out the “solution” from the external world, not from their own spiritual mind. For example, colonialism, capitalism and economic globalization are all the “practical solutions” to the poor problems of the Western economies in the past few centuries.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

[1] “What is typically Western and what is typically Eastern? …F. S. C. Northrop has advanced the following view. The distinctive characteristics of the West are (1) the primacy of the conceptual over the non-conceptual as coupled with the application of the postulational method, and (2) the linear, teleological conception of time and history that is presumed to be ineluctably and exclusively tied up with the progress of human history. Irrational numbers, the Copernican Revolution, Plato’s intelligible world and the transcendent God of Christianity are apt examples illustrating the application of the postulational method…It is assumed that the combination of (1) and (2) accounts for the progress of civilization including the emergence of modern science and technology in the West. By contrast, the traditional culture of the Orient is characterized by (1) the undifferentiated aesthetic continuum, and (2) the (better, a) cyclical conception of time.” See: Lee, Kwang-sae (2006). East And West: Fusion of Horizons. USA: Homa & Sekey. pp. 489-490.

[2] See: Yu, Ying Shih (1999). The Modern Interpretation of Chinese Thought Tradition. Taipei: Linking. pp. 20-21.

[3] “Before and after World War II, Japanese historians willingly accepted the idea of a self-developed East Asia and included both China and Japan into this East Asian world. For example, Nishijima Sadao believed that this ‘East Asian world’ was a self-insulated cultural sphere. More precisely, this East Asian world circled China and included Korea, Japan, Vietnam, and the regions between the Mongolian and the Himalaya plateau. But the borders of the historical world were fluid and unfixed. Some areas, such as the Himalaya plateau, certain regions in central Asia, and regions in Southeast Asia, belonged to a different historical world because they lacked the characteristics of the East Asian world. These characteristics included Chinese character-based culture, Confucianism, legal and decree system, and Buddhism.” See: Fuchs, Eckhardt; Stuchtey, Benedikt (2002). Across cultural borders: historiography in global perspective. USA: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 322.

The Daoist Logic of “Coolloud.org”: The Abandonment of “Name (名)” (10)

“Vicissitude” is the basic existent form of every being in the universe. This knowledge contributed by the Chinese Daoism is completely dissimilar to the Western civilization perspective on the present development of the whole creation, of the Nature. Scientism, which can be seen as the core spirit of the civilization, is directing us to construct our knowledge through this typical approach: first, we should focus on discovering the “law” of change of the existing beings. Then, justifying the “law” through repeated experiments and calculations is the next step. After that, the “law” is to be proven and named. Finally, the “law” would be recognized by the authority if “useful”, becoming a part of human knowledge written in the annals. In this “scientific” process, the existing beings are being further categorized and “formatted” as the fixed functional materials for human use while the vicissitudinous nature of the whole creation, in a certain degree, is flattened and ignored, distant from being completely realized. Here, we discover this logic of Western scientism has the very weak point of simplifying and distorting the original existentiality of all beings by “neutralizing” the lives in the close human knowledge system, reflecting the limited intellectual ability of human beings for the truth.

Nowadays, the scientific knowledge establishment is still unable to explain why the earth does exist for us with a closed answer. The “principle” of the changing Nature told by scientism is hard to be seen as sufficient despite many assumptions and speculations having been made by the theorists. This fact reflects there is a serious dilemma of Western scientism: no doubt we have successfully discovered some surface rules of the changing of beings through various scientific methodologies. However, it is still far from knowing the fundamental essence of the existentiality of all creatures – the “Dao” argued by Laozi because humans get used to place themselves in the highest position when knowing things, forgetting that in reality there is an absolute interdependent relationship between themselves – the cognitive subject and all existing beings in the Nature: no one can live out of the developing planet. Here, an anthropocentric perspective of the modern scientific civilization is shown: the function-oriented logic of the Western scientism only allows us to “reasonably” and “legally” develop the realm of knowledge for power to control the development of human thinking, denying the existence of the original essence of the Nature. Therefore, it is obvious that the logic, packaged by the scientism, is functioning as a hidden ideology which is contributing to the present problematic development of human knowledge civilization.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

Anti-Globalization Movement as an “Ecology” of Human Society

BY ANALYZING THE DEVELOPMENT of human history, certain periods of civilization of humanity experienced by past generations can be categorized: the age of tribalism – people mostly living in a family-based community; the feudalistic time – a hierarchical society with kings and aristocratic classes dominating commons’ life, and; the era of modernization – a civilization triggered by Industrial Revolution, imperialistic colonization and global capitalism in which humans are forced to serve “the economic growth”. Today, we are living in a “post-modern” civilization. The core characteristics of this civilization include the vanishing of the positive feature of the modernization, such as the democratization of the globe and the prosperity of world economy, and the rise of the negative development of the human realm, containing the corruption of political powers, the polarization of economic inequality, the spreading of religious and racial conflicts, etc. Globalization, as a widespread phenomenon in the “post-modern”, is usually understood as a social development process in which the positive and the negative occur at the same time in a given historical context. This “two-layer” globalization therefore not only contains the negative aspect of the so-called “hijacked economic globalization”, but embodies the positive aspect of globalization that facilitates the active exchange of different values, beliefs, traditions and ways of life of different people in the world society.

On the other hand, the nature of anti-globalization movement is also twofold that it targets the complex developing logic of globalization: anti-globalization movement is globalizing, opposing human rights violation contributed by political and economic powers around the world; the radical movement, at the same moment, is localizing, encouraging social activisms interaction and promoting social campaigns localization through integrating distinctive native cultures and common values in the local-globalized circumstance. The point is: the ongoing development of the “positive-negative” globalization not only suggests the invalidity of the typical thinking logic of humanity – the “dialectical antagonism” producing so-called civil/rude, democratic/autocratic, liberal/authoritarian, East/West, South/North, Left/Right, rich/poor, developed/developing, mightiness/weakness, light/dark, good/evil divisions, but also opens up a new approach for us to understand what the present situation of human civilization connotes: we are living in the “same place”, in which the “civil” does rude things while the “rude” acts as the “civilized”; “democracy” is not democratic, “autocracy” enlightened, etc. From this fact, we can understand the typical logic of human thinking – the “dialectical antagonism” has become a problematic ideology, deterring us from knowing the real quality of the complex modernity precisely.[1]

Globalization and its effects reflect that the intention of political powers to reseparate or redisintegrate the human society as a whole is of no avail. On the contrary, we must respect the development of the society with the characteristic of encouraging people’s cross-border connection and communication. As part of globalization, the practice of anti-globalization movement also reflects such kind of characteristic: world citizens are able to realize free information exchange for any social movement practice through the Internet.

There is an old legend interpreting the gradual growth of the global social movement for the grassroots around the world: since the beginning of history, the power’s unjust exploitation of human and natural resources on the earth has never ended. Although human society, in a certain degree, has been “civilized”, the unjust are still exercised by the political through military might and law execution. Politics is a discretionary philosophy of ruling the “ruled”, on which a hierarchical coercive mechanism for controlling the ordinary and dominating the Nature is founded. Civilization is a “jacket”, the rude essence of the political never changed. Therefore, human history is written by a series of socio-political subversive movements carried out by the commons who were opposing the domination practiced by power. In the past, serfs, civilians, crowds, dissenters, socialists and radicals were all the major participants of traditional social movement. In globalization, anti-globalizationalists and media activists are the important elements of contemporary social movements.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

[1] For example, “being mighty” is a vague wording. It must be understood in a comparative context. People get used to emphasize the importance of “being mighty” in society, but they at the same time sink into the dilemma of the use of the “dialectical antagonism”: “being mighty” cannot stand alone without “being weak”. The antagonistic logic completely ignores that we all have our lives based on other people’s existentiality and respectfulness.

What is Independent Media

Media, including radio, television, newspaper, magazine, internet media like website, message board, personal blog and social media, etc., is a kind of communicative instrument which helps deliver information to people and facilitate communication in society. Generally speaking, media refers to “mainstream media” or, as the critical theorists argued, “mass media” in the modernity. The main contents delivered by media can be advertisements, news reports, entertainment programmes and so on. In theory, people can have new knowledge and keep in touch with social reality. However, many commercial corporations and even governmental units have invested in global media market nowadays. Especially, some of them have specific political stance or have established an interest relation with parties or figures in the political realm, impacting the subsidiary media’s reporting orientation and programmes content negatively heavily. This is a serious problem of the development of media industry: media, in this context, becomes an instrumentalized means to direct the formation of a social consciousness or value of the mass conforming to the interest of the minority top, to control the concentration of the public and to silence people’s dissenting voice in society. For instance, please read the British Broadcasting Corporation’s report “Occupy protests disrupt ports across US West Coast”[1]. In this article, it can be discovered the national media has a “judgment” on the Occupy Wall Street Movement: first, the news content does not explain why the movement is organized, none of history or socio-political background of the movement introduced. Audiences are unable to structure a whole picture of the social activism because the report just concentrates on emphasizing the negative influence of the movement on society. On the contrary, in another news article “Deal in China rebel village Wukan welcomed”[2] the BBC does report the factors and other relative important developments of the Chinese subversive movement in detail. Different reporting orientations are shown in the above two instances, evidencing the social movements have been partly or distortedly reported by the media funded by the British government.

In view of this issue, some social activists start to operate their own media independent from any authority or business body, fighting for a public space against any form of media manipulation practice. The concept of “independent media”, or “alternative media”[3], is brought out based on people’s demand for the real and unbiased, opening up an alternative approach to social issues debating and political deliberation in the public. According to Ip Iam Chong (Ye Yincong葉蔭聰[4]), one of the founders of the Hong Kong independent media “Inmediahk.net (香港獨立媒體網)”[5]:

‘independent media’, in this discussing context, is a kind of media which is independent from the influence of governments, political parties and business corporations on financial and editorial matters of the operation with a non-profit perspective.[6]

In other words, this is a media which is run “by the people and for the people”, being free from being influenced or directed by the current development of media industry and mass consumerist culture. In addition, Ip emphasizes that the most important characteristic of the operation of independent media is a non-profit perspective: independent media should refuse to accept any financial aid from political and economic powers, escaping from the dominance of the capitalist economy apparatus.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

[1]Retrieved December 13, 2011, from the “BBC News” website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16152553

[2]Retrieved December 22, 2011, from the “BBC News” website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-16297463

[3] “Chris Atton uses the term ‘alternative media’ to mean ‘a range of media projects, interventions and networks that work against, or seek to develop different forms of, the dominant, expected (and broadly accepted) ways of “doing” media’ (2004: ix). This is a useful definition as it includes projects outside a narrow definition of ‘media’, and allows space for consideration of, for instance, broader activities such as the open-source and anti-copyright movements that are aligned with many alternative media projects. Atton believes that alternative media must encompass all cultural forms of independent production and should display the following characteristics (Atton 2002b: 27): radical content, be it political or cultural; strong aesthetic form; employ ‘reproductive innovations/adaptations’ (ibid) taking full advantage of the available and cutting-edge technology; alternative means of distribution and anti-copyright ethos; transformation of social roles and relations into collective organizations and de-professionalization and; transformation of communications processes – ‘horizontal linkages’ (ibid).” See: Coyer, Kate, Dowmunt, Tony, Fountain, Alan (2007). The Alternative Media Handbook. Oxford: Roudledge. p. 3.

[4] Ip is Teaching Fellow of the Department of Cultural Studies at Lingnan University, Hong Kong.

[5] “Inmediahk.net” has been a representative independent media in Hong Kong since 2004: “The main purposes of the media are to support the development of Hong Kong democratic and social movements, to establish a ‘public space’ which is not controlled by governments, corporations and political parties, to organize citizens for social, political and cultural issues debating, to open up a grassroots perspective on humanistic knowledge, deep thinking and diversified information, to facilitate the dialogue between the Cross-Strait and international communities, to construct a radical approach to social progressive movement, etc. …Inmediahk.net does not accept any financial support from bussinesses or political parties. …Our resources are all from public donation and voluntary support as well as social groups offering.” Retrieved November 1, 2011, from the “Inmediahk.net” website: http://www.inmediahk.net/about

[6] See: Ip, Iam-Chong (2009). New Political Power: The Development of Hong Kong’s Independent Media (新政治力量:香港獨立媒體的發展). Mass Communication Research, 99, p. 223.

The Contemporary World and Anti-Globalization Movement

IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY, the contemporary world has been in a process of unprecedented change toward the “unknown”. It is said there is an “advanced” development of human civilization in modernity. However, socio-political conflicts and economic uncertainties are present because of the complexity of global powers politics causing an extreme disparity between the rich and the poor, the deterioration of people’s spiritual quality and the imbalanced distribution of social resources around the world. Against this background, private ownership, or called “property”, is commonly accepted which is an ideological abstract helping the uppers justify their endless accumulation of wealth. Owing to this fact, the power of human economy becomes more dominant, directing the tendency of world civilization, nurturing the rise of capitalism. Globalization, another phase of human economy expansion, has been further developed based on the capitalist logic that is reflected in the operation professionalization of global financial institutions, the rapid rise of digital information technology, the promotion of consumerism as well as the ossification of rationalism. The impact of globalization on the human is huge: world population, including the rich and the poor, is increasing. Simultaneously, socio-political problems and religious conflicts are never concluded but more intensified because of the globalized. This is a very big picture of the current turbulent development of the human society as a whole.

Generally speaking, the development of human civilization is of a process of improving the quality of people’s spiritual and material life. It starts from a move of improving the nature and way of practicing local custom and traditional culture. Then, regulation or law corresponding to the move is to be made and exercised. However, problems and challenges would be unavoidably emerged during the improving process. Human beings, at this moment, may attempt to carry out any possible adjustment or reform and try to take another approach to the further civilized status, again and again. This kind of civilization development is still ongoing and never ended. People are composing their histories and running on the civilizing road by trying to perfect the approach they choose.

The contemporary world is always changing. However, the quality of the changing does not correspond to the faith in human well-being not only for the present but for the near future.

Globalization is a modern phenomenon that its effects are reflected in the aspects of politics, economy, social situation and cultural context of the realm of the human. It is commonly seen as a civilizing process with the characteristics of “unification as ‘one’” and of “diversification of ‘choices’”. These two characteristics play a crucial role in structuring the widespread influence of globalization in the contemporary. Under the globalizational changing, people’s way of life is always altered and remolded every day, every minute and every second.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

前言、基礎與前提:無政府與俯視觀點

「為何在今時今日這個時空背景底下談『無政府』?」筆者必須先對於這個問題作出說明。如果考察人類社會的歷史發展,我們可以發現記載有關無政府的思想、主義及運動的史料似乎少之又少。若分開兩個層面無政府的歷史事件以及無政府主義者的著作來作理解的話,二十世紀三十年代初西班牙無政府運動的興衰係現代歐洲歷史發展當中本質鮮明、有關無政府主義政治運動的歷史個案1。而以無政府主義者(無論是「自稱」或「被認定為」)及其主張作為分析主軸的話,自十九世紀始則有蒲魯東(Pierre-Joseph Proudhon)對所有權(Property)的批判、巴枯寧(Michael Bakunin)及克魯泡特金(Peter Kropotkin)的無政府主義政治社會思想理論等。而當代無政府主義健將則有美國異議學者暨語言學家喬姆斯基(Noam Chomsky2

但是,當「無政府」作為一種理念或狀態描述,被普遍認定為混亂、無秩序的同義詞;當無政府運動被看作是一種龐克(Punk)文化或年輕人的叛逆、示威、搞亂破壞的藉口;當無政府主義被廣泛認定為「沒有價值」或脫離任何社會現實脈絡、不需再次被提出或反省的思想產物,而這些判斷已成為主流聲音、代表著一個「真確的事實」時,為什麼我們還要談論、研究無政府?

顯然,上述有關對於無政府理念、主張及其運動意涵的各種認定,是成見。筆者在此提供兩個論理依據說明為何我們有必要把無政府看作一個整全的研究議題來討論。這些論理依據使無政府成為在今時今日的時空條件下值得去談論的基礎和前提。

無政府(無論作為一種意識型態、一個純粹的抽象概念或一種人類具體生活狀態的指涉)似乎離我們極之遙遠。不管是我們賦予它何種意義(包括正面意義就像每一位無政府主義者所宣稱,作為一種理想的生活狀態或社會結構,沒有「政府」管治的生活群集體是所有人類群居形式中最自由、最為可取的文明架構;和負面意義無政府就是無秩序、天下大亂、雜亂無章的代名詞),無政府都像是一個「虛幻的國度」,只能存在於自我意識的想像當中。作為一種「理想社會」的實踐原則,無政府卻永遠無法「實現」我們的世界已沒有一個地方、一個人類社群,其係沒有被包含在某政治實體的統治之中。

現在,筆者欲提出一項事實:每一個人的生活內涵都正在與無政府產生關聯。此事實的存在與前段的描述並不互斥,兩者可同時並存。所謂「每一個人的生活內涵都在與無政府產生關聯」意味著每一個人的生活都在沒有「政府」的指導和操控之下進行和發展著

「無人不在任何一個政府底下被統治著」此一主流立場正是十分典型的「俯視觀點3。當政治主權擁有其「合法性」4它依據普遍民眾對政府統治權力的承認和默許、軍隊和警政機關的設立和服從、國家之中法律之絕對性沒有任何人能證成自身無被納入政府的管治。當政府透過其立法機關制定一套又一套的法規要求(強迫)人民加以承認和遵守時,沒有人能夠拒絕。

「合法」是國家政府唯一需要去負責的事體。除非「不」合法,否則政府可以對被統治的人民做「任何事情」民意輿論及大眾媒體雖能給予意見(批判)或作有限度的監察,但無權干涉政府施政。在此前提下,「每一個人的生活內涵都在與無政府產生關聯」究竟能夠如何被理解?這個命題的意義在哪裡?

假設,我們不以俯視觀點(由統治者、國王、君主、政府元首及擁有龐大財富的資本家所倡導)出發來架構我們對現實世界的視野和認知,重新以自身的理解立場、思考方式及生存狀態來考察那真實的生活情景,以下問題隨即浮現:我們跟政府之間的關係到底是什麼?在日常生活當中,我們什麼時候與那個「政府」產生瓜葛?主流媒體(網路、電視、電台、報紙、雜誌等)每日每月都在提醒著新鮮的政治(與政府運作及政客動態有關的)新聞,那些內容都在暗(明)示著政府是存在著的。政壇每天都有嶄新的變化,這些都將可能改變我們的生活內涵。可是,真正對我們的精神、意志或良知判斷有直接不可抗拒之影響力的政治事件究竟有多少?

例如,政府的質性產生變化無論由哪一元首或政黨來主導著變化的進程,又或者由一種政體過渡至另一種政體我們還是得「過活」每分每秒地對生活做合乎自身意志的決定。這是一項重要的前提,支撐著我們對任何事體的承認、否認或存而不論。簡言之,我們的生活係由我們所選擇的形式來進行。

這並不是要否定政府的存在性,或企圖論證政治事件無法影響我們的生活內涵。提出以上論點的目的在於:提醒所謂政府或政治事件的存在性,本質上無法主宰我們的人格、良知判斷和發展方向5。因為,社會個體總是以自身的意志來決定和衡量是非對錯,每一個人獨特而迴異的生活風格依此形成。這此前提下,只有統治者會認為自己擁有一個國家、一個政府和所有的人民,並時常透過各種管道宣稱這是無法推翻的事實,使人們漸漸「相信」這是真確無誤的真理。可是,我們不是那唯一的統治者,我們是人。我們抱有自身的生活世界,有關這世界的一切都是從自身的觀點出發去型塑,而不(總)是以統治者的論述立基。當「政府」試圖以自身的合法性來干涉民眾的生活、將其可能有問題的施政合理化的同時,我們常常看到人民以抗爭和拒絕作回應拒絕自身生活方式受到任何外力(尤其是政治力)的滋擾或支配。在此事例中,我們能夠認識到一個事實:當我們依自身意志親手建立的生活狀態被政治強制改變時,我們確實抱有一種願不願意的具體立場。這意味著在日常生活的境況中,決定著我們生活的人是我們自己,而不是「政府」。

相較之下,國家政府及其權力遠離於民眾6,而現實生活卻在每天不斷地上演著。所以,我們係生活在沒有政府的干涉和影響的狀態下,只是忘卻或根本不相信這是事實。這個論據是根據「政府在任何時空條件底下都並非必然地與人們的個別生活世界產生實質上的關聯」7而被推論出來。

這就是「每一個人的生活內涵都在與無政府產生關聯」的論理依據,也是作為解釋為什麼有必要再次重新談論及反省無政府的基礎和前提。無政府需要再次被提出,作為對照權力的偽善和壓迫的明確座標。而只有從此一立場出發,我們才可能擁有尋找生命個體和生活意義的可能性條件8

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

1 Peter Marshall在其著作Demanding the Impossible—A History of Anarchism中對西班牙無政府運動的意涵作如此評價:TO DATE, SPAIN IS the only country in the modern era where anarchism can credibly be said to have developed into a major social movement and to have seriously threatened the State. There are some good local reasons why this should be the case. The anarchist principles of autonomy, association and federation are peculiarly suited to the independent cast of the Spanish social temperament. There was also a long tradition of independent communes which stretched back to the Middle Ages; these communes had had their own public charters and made their own fueros or local laws. The free commune was considered a self-governing organism capable of federating with others.” See Marshall, Peter (1992). Demanding the Impossible—A History of Anarchism. Great Britain: Fontana. p. 453.

2 Noam Chomsky並不直接稱自己是「無政府主義者」:Chomsky describes himself as a libertarian socialist …… For now, for the purposes of this discussion we can say that libertarian socialism for Chomsky means he believes that human beings can flourish best in, and should therefore have, conditions providing maximum freedom.” See Edgley, Alison (2000). The social and political thought of Noam Chomsky. New York: Routledge. p. 19. 他以「自由論的社會主義者」(libertarian socialist)來形容自己。所謂「自由論的社會主義者」,其主張和理念實與無政府主義互通:Libertarian socialism and anarchism are labels that are commonly used interchangeably. Anarchism argues for a society that can spontaneously organize itself without the coercive authority of the state. As libertarian socialists distinguish themselves from so-called authoritarian socialists by their attack on the maintenance of the state, it is possible to see why this interchangeability occurs.” Ibid., p. 47.

3 所謂俯視觀點,它的意涵在於強調一種「由上而下」的政治觀點陳述。過往,人類考察歷史行進的普遍方式,都是以俯視觀點(如朝代更替的脈絡、偉人英雄事跡等)作為理解人類整體歷史發展的主軸和重心。筆者認為此方式並非「錯誤」,但有必要被重新檢討和反省。

4 此處運用合法性一詞,旨在說明國家政府的組織構成必須合乎法律的明定和規範。

5 討論無政府必須假定一個前提:人自由的可能性。無政府主義肯定人擁有其自決能力。我們都是以自身的意志去決定屬於自己的生活型態和模式。筆者將在第三章對此論據作進一步討論。

6 William Godwin在其著作Enquiry Concerning Political Justice中對國家與人民的關係作下列說明:It is only in peculiar emergencies and matters that depart from the accustomed routine of affairs, that they conceive a private individual to have any occasion to remember, or to be in the least affected by the government of his country. If he commit or is supposed to commit any offence against the general welfare, if he find himself called upon to repress the offence of another, or if any danger from foreign hostility threaten the community in which he resides, in these cases and these only is he obliged to recollect that he has a country.” See: Godwin, William (1971). Enquiry Concerning Political Justice. Oxford: Clarendon. p. 18.

7 反對此一論點者可能認為,當一個政府訂立法律或推行涉及民生、經濟方面的政策時,政府對我們生活內涵的介入是何等真實和巨大。不過,反對論者忽略了:人民有其自身意志,外在環境、物質條件的改變固然對生活方式有所影響,不過,生活的「質」並未因內在條件的影響而有所改變。所謂「質」,就是存有的核心,使一個人成為人的充要條件、使其判斷成為意志體現的可能性要素。每一事體經由我們的同意或不同意,打造了其意志的輪廓。在生活世界裡,「政府」究竟佔去我們生命歷程中多少空間,是一個值得再三思考的問題。

8 每一個人的生活內涵都在與無政府產生關聯,(至少在上述意義來說)是可被接受的。必須強調,這是人類生活的個體層面的觀察。但是,「無政府」從未被每每被否定為不可能外化為群體範疇的層次當中實現。本文將對全球化資本社會發展至末端,無政府究竟有沒有存在可能性、無政府對於我們的生活又有什麼重要意義等問題作進一步探討。