Saturday, January 15, 2011

阿西西的圣弗朗西斯的祷告词 (Prayer of Saint Francis of Assisi)

这个世界有太多的苦难和不公。当我们沮丧灰心时,当我们看不到光明时,读读阿西西的圣弗朗西斯(一个12世纪的基督教修士) 的祷告,或许能对我们有很多慰藉。


    主啊,让我作你和平的工具。
    哪里有仇恨,让我播下爱;
    哪里有伤害,
播下原谅;
    哪里有疑问,
播下信心;
    哪里有绝望,
播下希望;
    
哪里有黑暗,播下光明;
   
哪里有悲伤,播下喜悦。
 
    我不那么要求
    被人安慰,而是
去安慰;
    被人理解,而是去理解;
    被人爱,
而是去爱。
    这是
因为在给予中我们获得;
    在赦免时我们便蒙赦免
    在死亡中我们得到永生


Lord, make me an instrument of your peace.
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
and where there is sadness, joy.

I may not so much seek
to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.
For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life

推荐读物 (Recommended reading)

17 books to read:
  1. Iris Chang (张纯如), The Chinese in America
    目前我读到最好的华人在美国的移民史。从第一个踏上美国土地的华人,到淘金潮,到华裔劳工,讲述早年华裔没有任何政治权利的悲惨故事,直到20世纪末的新 移民,是美国少数民族权益变化的见证史 
  2. Martin Luther King, Jr , The Autobiography of Martin Luther King, Jr 
    一个为民权而献身的伟人的动人故事, 详细地描述了他的思想经历, 遇到的困难、危胁, 作者思想深刻, 令人掩卷而叹
  3. Winston Churchill(温斯顿•丘吉尔), The Second World War (第二次世界大战)
    作者以流畅故事般的文笔讲述了二战前欧洲盟国政治决策的失误,希特勒在二战初的节节胜利,法国的溃败,作者临危受命,领导英伦岛的殊死抵抗,直到扭转战 局,与美国一起取得胜利,令人感奋至深
  4. Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
    曼德拉的自传,讲述他如何从一个热心公益的律师,成长为政治活动家和国大党领袖。文中揭示了国大党作为政党的强大反对力量,其组织力和对政府的威慑。这或许是南非民主成功的一个主要原因。
  5.  封從德《六四日记》,香港晨钟书局,2009年。
    一部生动详细的六四亲历者的叙述,从4月15日胡耀邦逝世那天,一直到6月4日撤离天安门,有每天的故 事,学生的组织和热情投入;读者虽明知最后的结果,却被每一个故事转折而吸引。希望将来此书能拍成电影,会是很好的一部民主教材。
  6. Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man
    民主社会是人类的最后阶段,因为右派的专制政权(军政府)会渐渐失去合法性,左派的专制政权(共产国家)实行市场经济后,也变成了赤裸裸的专 制,失去政权的合法性
  7. Samuel Huntington (亨廷顿),The Third Wave (第三次浪潮),1991.
    作者对世界民主史有深入了解,讲述世界的民主国家从美国开始,到西欧国家第一次民主浪潮(19世纪初),之后是二战后的第二次浪潮,然后是1974年后的第三次浪潮。
  8. Mohandas Gandhi, Autobiography:The Story of  My Experiments with Truth, 1948.
    这本书叙述了甘地如何从一个普通的留学英国的律师,在南非遭受歧视后而愤然决定为印度人争取民权,他意识到集体斗争的力量,于是带头团结所有的群体。
  9. Justin Martin , Nader (纳德)
    拉尔夫•纳德(Ralph Nader)的传记。纳德是美国消费者保护法之父,在他的努力下,美国通过了汽车安全法(如安全带等),饮用水安全标准,空气污染治理法 等,他推动建立美国环保局。他放弃舒适的大学教授职位,与巨大的商业集团利益作斗争,令人钦佩。
  10. 余杰《白头鹰与大红龙》,香港晨钟书局,2008.
    讲述美国各界对中国人权运动的支持。作者在白宫与布什的会谈,在美国国会演讲(谈中国家庭教会),参加 美全国早餐祷告会的亲历见闻,还有议员布朗贝克及佩洛西支持中国人权的故事,二战中牺牲在中国的美国士兵们的故事,令人感动.
  11. Henry Ketcham, The Life of Abraham Lincoln,1901
    浅显生动,讲述林肯从一个连初中都没有读过的穷孩子,自学成才,成为律师和州议员,后当选国会议员。他坚定的反奴隶制的主张和清晰的思想使他在辩论中战胜 对手,当选为总统. 书中谈到林肯无比的诚实,当律师时力求接手的案子公平;他心地仁厚,经常不收穷人的辩护费,以致事务所入不敷出。他做事彻底认真,辩护切中要害,所以胜诉 率很高。当总统后的林肯显示高强的领导才能,内战中,他迅速学习成为卓越的军事指挥家。他对南方士兵不怀怨恨,准备大赦。最后却死在仇恨的子弹下
  12. 詹姆斯•布坎南《自由、市场与国家》 (译本),上海三联书店,1989年(James Buchana, Liberty, Market and State).
    讲述国家的决策其实是政治家们个人决策的总和,因每个人都有私心,决策往往不等于国家利益,故社会主义行不通
  13. Charles Darwin (查尔斯•达尔文), On the Origin of Species (物种起源), 1859.
    这本写于150年前的书,今天读来仍是那样优美流畅。达尔文讲述一个个生动的故事,从狗在被人从狼驯化后演变出的无数种类,到鸽子在人工选择过程中出现的各种新品种,讲到野生的鸟的各个类别. 在一个岛上,两种本是同一类的鸟一个长嘴,一个短嘴,因为一种生活在靠海处,而另一种生活在岛上的山里,所谓“用进废退”,两种鸟因为适应不同的捕食方 式,身体形状变得不同; 那么在漫长的几百万年间,动物又有多少可能的变化?达尔文谈到蚂蚁类别,有一种蚂蚁会捉另一种当奴隶,这可用天演论解释。
  14. Theodore Roosevelt(西奥多•罗斯福), An Autobiography
    讲述西奥多•罗斯福的传奇故事,从纽约市警察局长,抓赌打黄,到纽约州长,进行廉政改革,和党派控制政府的势力作斗争;在西班牙战争中组织志愿骑兵,冲锋 在前;当选为美国总统,促成巴拿马运河完成.
  15. 何清涟《中国现代化的陷阱(China's descent into a Quagmire)》,博大出版社,2003.
    这是我读到的最好的描写中国现状的书,从圈地运动,到国营企业股份化,经济伦理的巨变,贫富差距的扩大,黑社 会的兴起等,数字详实,调查深入,是必备读物。
  16. F.A.Hayek (哈耶克), The Road to Serfdom (通向奴役的道路)
    每一个研究经济发展的必读之书。它阐述了计划经济的致命弱点,以及这导致的国家对经济和人民生活的垄断。写于1940年,这本书预示了 社会主义必然的垮台。此书对中国经济改革有深远影响。
  17. Milton Friedman (弗里德曼), Capitalism and Freedom (资本主义与自由),2002,重印版
    讲述经济自由和政治自由的关系,如果国家控制所有的资源和生产,那么个人很难获得真正的自由;国家应该是裁判而不是市场参与者;扩大公共开支不一定刺激经 济。

Saturday, January 8, 2011

印度的贫穷与民主有关吗 (Is there a link between India's poverty and its democracy?)

在国内关于民主的讨论中, 印度总是被用作例子来证明民主的缺陷:这个有着多党选举和独立媒体的国家,经济上仍然非常落后。2009年印度的人均年国民生产总值是1134美元,在世界188个国家中排第143名(中国是105名),是世界最贫穷的国家之一【1】。有人说这都是民主的错,因为印度太自由了。事实是这样吗?

当印度1947年脱离英国独立时,它曾经是一个很有希望走向繁荣的国家,毕竟印度有英国建立起来的司法体系、一批在英国受过教育的知识分子和活跃的公民组织。但是独立后的印度走上了一条社会主义经济发展的道路。从1947年到1964年的17年间,在尼赫鲁领导下,印度建立起一套完整的社会主义经济体制,它包括三个方面:中央计划,自给自足(拒绝国际贸易)和企业国营化【2】。

从1950年开始,印度政府制定了一系列的五年计划,试图全面规划整个经济。最初的几个五年计划大力发展重工业,计划项目详细到建几个钢厂,增加多少铁路线和如何发展农业生产等。这些五年计划依照苏联的模式,试图用政府的力度来管理和发展生产【2】。可惜,这样的努力效果甚微。从1950年到1980年的30年间,印度的人均国民生产总值年增长率只有1.3%【3】,远远落后于世界其他国家。

计划经济的最大弊端在于它违背了经济发展应该自下而上的原则。一个地区或一群人的需求只有当地人最清楚,也只能通过市场来得到最好地满足。人们不断变化的需求以及相应的供给,是不可能由中央计划来实现的。计划经济还剥夺了地方企业的责任、自主性和迅速反应的能力。它同时也剥夺了消费者的多样选择。这是为什么世界上所有的计划经济体制,从苏联、东德到古巴和北韩,都失败的原因。

除中央计划外,印度大力发展自给自足、内向型的生产政策。从大米、钢铁到服装和化肥,印度一切都由本国生产。结果印度变成世界上经济最封闭的国家之一。印度有世界上最高的进口关税之一。 但是这并没有给印度带来真正的自给自足。20世纪60年代后期,印度经历了严重的粮食危机,以致不得不接受来自美国的粮食援助【4】。但是这次危机过后,印度不认为是其经济政策的失败,反而认为受外国援助是一种耻辱。在20世纪70年代,印度继续执行“自给自足”即闭关锁国的经济政策。

印度政府全面拥有重工业、电力、运输、电信和银行业。国营企业的低效率和严重的法规限制造成这些企业的低产出,也带来印度今天基础设施的落后。

除了社会主义计划经济,印度也是世界上管制最多的经济体系。这反映在印度严格的许可证制度、高关税和外汇管制中。在发牌制度下,公司无法增加产量,如果产量超过一定上限就构成犯罪。一个公司不能随意购置、安装新设备或建新厂房,不能增加外汇开支来购买原料。

印度的社会主义实验反映了当时的世界风潮。20世纪50年代初,全世界出现一大批新兴的国家,很多都追随社会主义理想。阿尔巴尼亚在二战后开始全面建设社会主义经济。在中国,共产党领导下的新政府开始了全面的国有化。蒙古从1952年开始社会主义建设。胡志明的北越于1954年打败法国,正式成立社会主义国家。卡斯特罗于1959年在古巴上台,开始实行他的社会主义纲领。所有这些国家,包括中国在经济改革前,都成为世界最贫穷的国家的一员。

计划经济,闭关的政策和过重的国有企业份额,是印度经济止步不前的根本原因。到了1990年,印度成为世界上最贫穷的国家之一,人均年国民收入只有390美元【5】。

随着苏联的解体和中国的经济自由化所显示的活力,印度决心进行改革。从1991年起,印度开始推行经济自由化。企业发牌制度被取消,各个企业可以自行决定生产量。印度减除法规,降低税率,推进电信业的私有化。同时印度欢迎外资,降低关税。到2007年,印度的关税降低到10%,但仍然高于101个国家(中国的关税在5%左右, 是印度的一半)【5】。印度的出口和进口明显增加,进出口在GDP中的比例占到24% ,远远高于改革前的5%【3】。

由于信息产业是一个完全新兴的行业,它没有多少管制,所以这个行业在印度发展最快。通讯、保险和资产管理行业,由于政府管制减少也发展得非常快。电信和民航业,在允许私营企业进入后,增长速度也十分惊人【3】。在1991年至2009年的18年中,印度一直保持平均年经济增长率为5%,比前40年有了巨大进步。但相对于同一时期的中国 — 中国的平均增长率是9.7% ,几乎是印度的两倍【5】 -- 印度还远远落后。

这是因为印度的整个经济受政府管制仍然很多。印度苛刻的终身就业法,使得传统行业的企业人数下降(见图一的国际比较)。即使印度到处是廉价的劳动力,这些企业也不愿雇人。印度还存在很大比例的国营企业,这些企业效率低下,私有化还必须进一步推进。印度有庞大的官僚体系,政府部门人浮于事,需要进一步精简。低效率的政府程序阻碍了创业,在印度办公司仍然面临很多障碍。印度的金融市场仍有很高的进入壁垒【3】。
图一。印度的就业限制(指数)与其他国家比较

印度的故事说明经济落后不是因为太自由,而是因为太不自由。当国家退出对资源的管制,当人们有充分的自由去发挥创造力,经济就会迅速发展。这是中国在1978年后允许农贸市场、自留地和私营企业后看到经济迅速发展的原因。
印度的经历也说明政治自由不一定意味着经济自由。一个民主国家如果经济落后,其原因可能是在其经济制度上,而与政治制度无关。与印度类似的民主国家还有葡萄牙,在70年代末实验了近10年的社会主义计划经济【6】,结果葡萄牙至今还属于欧洲经济落后的国家。

有人或许大惑不解,为什么政治自由的国家会有不自由的经济?这是因为政治自由界定的是国家领导人更换、新闻和信仰自由、司法独立、公民权利受保护等;经济界定的是生产方式国营还是私营,就业方式终身还是允许解雇,企业税率有多高等。政治自由可以被大部分人理解,因为这涉及到人们的切身利益和日常社会规则。但经济自由则很间接:对普通工人来说,为一个国营企业工作或为私营企业工作似乎没什么区别,终身就业似乎看起来也不错。但是这些简单的规定会影响到一个国家经济的长期发展。

经济自由对于那些自己开店、办公司的人有重要意义。企业家精神能否发挥,一个企业是否在生产后还有利润留下来(政府税率合理),决定了企业能否长期发展。市场经济的原理就是允许人们自由组合、创业,允许生产资料和人力资本自由流动。但是对经济运作没有多少了解的民主政府,往往会以其“让人民摆脱贫困”的热情,采纳国家管理即社会主义的经济模式。印度、葡萄牙(70年代末)和智利的阿连德政府(70年代初)【8】就是这样的例子。

不自由的计划经济模式最终会影响到人们的政治自由,因为在这种体制下国家在人们的生活中担任过于重要的角色。这一点在弗里德曼的《资本主义与自由》一书中有深入阐释【7】。国家本来应该是经济生活的裁判,但是当国家成为生产商和供应商时,经济的平等竞争就不存在了。国营企业会利用国家权力来垄断一个行业,同时剥夺了人们(作为消费者和劳动者)的选择。

因此经济不自由的国家,政治也不会充分自由。这就是为什么有人说印度“没有像西方那样的具有实质性内容的民主”【9】。但这句话只有一部分是对的。印度的民主的确不如西方国家那样完善。如何评价民主的完善性呢?这里我们对民主要有一个精确的定义。狭义的民主,指的是有多党参加选举,国家领导人由选举产生,同时选举过程必须透明公正。按照这个定义,全世界116个国家是有透明选举的民主国家【10】。印度的选举基本透明公正,所以是真正民主的国家(属于这116国的一员)。(俄国、伊朗等虽有大选,但选举并不公正,不在这116个国家之列。)

广义的民主,也就是我们讨论民主的完善程度时使用的概念,包括政治自由和公民自由两个方面。政治自由除多党选举外,还包括政府透明,没有广泛的腐败和政府有问责制等。公民自由包括4大方面:(1)言论与信仰自由:这包括新闻自由、宗教自由、学术自由、没有广泛的政治灌输; (2)集社自由:集会和示威的自由、成立政党和民间组织的自由和独立的工会等;(3)法治:司法独立、司法公正、没有警察暴力、不公正监禁或酷刑。(4)个人自由:主要包括迁徙和就业自由,私有财产权,性别平等,生育自由等。【11】

根据这个广义民主的定义,我们可以对每个国家的民主程度进行综合评分,从而比较它们民主程度的差别。自由之家把这样的分数折算成一个从1到7的自由指数,1代表着最自由。民主国家的自由指数应该在1-2.5,不民主国家是5.5-7,剩下的是半民主国家。在2010年,西方国家(西欧、美国等)的自由指数都是1,日本和韩国的自由指数是1.5,而印度的自由指数是2.5【10】.

印度在公民自由和政治自由方面还有需要完善的地方,比如警察腐败,司法公正,人们的就业自由等还有待改进。尽管如此,印度的自由指数仍然远远好于亚洲许多国家,包括菲律宾(自由指数3.5)、马来西亚(自由指数4)和泰国(4.5)这些半民主国家。过去10年间,印度的自由指数一直稳定地维持在2.5,让它一直列入稳定的民主国家的行列【12】。

对于印度民主的批评,还包括印度仍然有种姓制度。其实印度的种姓制度在国内的宣传中被夸大。由于有几千年的文化传统和依然高比例的农业人口,种姓制度在印度一些农村地区还有存在。但是印度政府在1947年独立后,从法律上正式废除种姓制度,各种种姓分类与歧视被视为非法。为了保证低种姓人和贱民的教育和求职权力,印度还实施了著名的“保留政策”,不仅在议会两院为他们保留了一定比例的席位,而且在所有政府机构和国营企业中 为他们保留高达27%的名额。另外,还给低种姓出生的学生一定比例的升学名额。在今天,印度人的身份记录里不再有任何关于种姓的记载【13】。1997年印度选出了一个贱民奇里尔•拉曼•纳拉亚南(Kocheril Raman Narayanan)当印度的总统,而知名教授中也有贱民出身的人。

另外,印度的人口问题被看成是民主的失败,理由是印度没能如中国一样实行计划生育。但是计划生育也仅仅是在中国城市中有效,在农村没法真正实施。印度拥有大量的农村人口,仅仅依靠国家的强制政策是行不通的。真正解决人口问题最有效的办法是加快经济发展和城市化进程。人口学一个最重要的发现就是,当妇女受教育程度提高和人均收入提高时,生孩子的平均个数就降低【14】。这是为什么世界发达国家的平均生育率远远低于发展中国家 【15】。不幸的是印度目前还处在低收入阶段,农业人口过高,其人口增长势头还会持续一段时间。

印度在实行经济自由化后,经济的增长加快。在政府管制少的软件行业,印度已经超过中国,成为世界最大的软件外包中心,占全球软件外包市场总额的65%【16】。与此同时,印度的民主制度保证了经济增长是在尊重社会各个群体的条件下进行的。它没有强拆的悲剧,也没有血汗工厂和连环跳。

民主从来就不是经济发展的障碍。印度的经济自由化过程反映了世界从社会主义梦想(计划经济)摆脱出来的曲折道路。相信在民主制度的护卫下,印度经济能更快、更健康地发展。

参考文献:
【1】 World Bank, World Development Report 2010,(数据中没有缅甸、北韩等国家)
【2】 Uma Kapilla (editor), India’s Economic Development since 1947, Academic Foundation, 2007
【3】 OECD,”Economic Survey of India 2007”, Policy Brief, October 2007
【4】 Uma Kapilla (editor), Indian Economy since Independence, 19th edition, 2008-09, Academic Foundation, pp215
【5】 World Bank, World Development Indicators (WDI) 1960-2009
【6】 Diogo Freitas do Amaral, “Reflections on the Portuguese Revolution”, in The Demotic Invention, edited by Marc F. Plattner and Joao Carlos Espada, The John Hopkins University Press, 2000.
【7】 Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom,The University of Chicago Press, 2002
【8】 Hennie Kotze and Pierre du Toit, “Historical contexts”, in Democracy under construction : Patterns from four continents, Ursula J. van Beek (ed.), 2005, Barbara Budrich Publishers
【9】 郑永年,“亚洲民主乱象让中国引为鉴”,《国际先驱导报》2008年第53期
【10】 Freedom House, “Electoral Democracy”, Freedom in the World 2010, http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=548&year=2010
【11】 Freedom House, “Methodology”, Freedom in the World 2010, http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=351&ana_page=363&year=2010
【12】 Freedom House, “Country ratings and status, FIW 1973-2010”, Freedom in the World Comparative and Historical Data
【13】 维基百科,“种姓制度”
http://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-cn/%E7%A7%8D%E5%A7%93%E5%88%B6%E5%BA%A6
【14】 Gary S. Becker, “The demand for children”, A Treatise on the Family, Harvard University Press, 1991
【15】 World bank,World Development Indicators (WDI) 1960-2009,total fertility rate (birth per woman) for high-income countries is 1.8, for low-income countries is 4.3.
【16】 中国融资咨询网 ,2009-12-03,2010年中国服务外包行业研究报告,第一章, 全球服务外包行业发展概述

Thursday, December 30, 2010

林肯在葛底斯堡的演讲 (Lincoln‘s Gettysburg Speech)

美国内战最艰苦的时期,林肯在葛底斯堡战役后发表演讲。这个战役是美国内战中最为残酷的一战,双方共死了5万多人。葛底斯堡战役成为美国内战的转折点,之后美国联邦军队节节胜利,最终维护了联邦体制,并彻底废除了蓄奴制。

美国内战的起因是因为北方各自由州反对南方的蓄奴制度,并反对把这种非人的制度推广到西部新开发的州。当反对奴隶制的林肯当选为总统后,南方蓄奴州在其巨大的经济利益驱使下,不惜组成军队,对联邦政府军开火,打响了内战的第一枪。

1863年11月19日

八十七年前,我们的先父们在这个大陆上创立了一个新国家,它孕育于自由之中,奉行所有的人都生来平等的原则。

我们正从事一场伟大的内战,以考验这个国家,或者任何一个孕育于自由和奉行上述原则的国家是否能够长久存在下去。我们在这场战争的一个伟大战场上集会。烈士们为使这个国家能够生存下去而献出了自己的生命,我们来到这里,是要把这个战场的一部分奉献给他们作为最后安息之所。我们这样做是完全应该而且非常恰当的。

但是,从更广泛的意义上说,这块土地我们不能够奉献,不能够圣化,不能够神化。那些曾在这里战斗过的勇士们,活着的和去世的,已经把这块土地圣化了,这远不是我们微薄的力量所能增减的。我们今天在这里所说的话,全世界不大会注意,也不会长久地记住,但勇士们在这里所做过的事,全世界却永远不会忘记。毋宁说,倒是我们这些还活着的人,应该在这里把自己奉献于勇士们已经如此崇高地向前推进的未竟事业。倒是我们应该在这里把自己奉献于仍然留在我们面前的伟大任务——我们要从这些光荣的死者身上获得更多的献身精神,来完成他们已经完全彻底为之献身的事业;我们要在这里下定最大的决心,不让这些死者白白牺牲;这个上帝之下的国家一定要获得自由新生,民有、民治、民享【1】的政府一定要永世长存。


【1】: 也译 “来自于人民、归属于人民、服务于人民“


Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

从一个村长的死看国家暴力 (The death of a village chief and China's state violence)

一个因为征地而上访六年的村长,死在圣诞节这天。死前他曾在天涯网上发了一个抗诉占地的帖子。一辆大卡车恰好从他的脖子上轧过,死因蹊跷。但警方把尸体从村民手中抢走,当天火化,6个村民被抓走。村长钱云会的帖子讲述了围绕140公顷的地的斗争。想占地谋利的是浙江乐清市政府,乐清市国土局和浙能电厂。保地的村民与占地的政府斗争的结果是大批村民被打被抓。但村长仍然作着不屈不挠的抗争,最终惨死在大卡车下。

是什么时候国家暴力发展到公开的谋杀?从“打死挖个坑埋了”,到看守所里的一个个离奇死亡,故事的发展不断变得更毛骨悚然。在一个没有人权的国度,百姓是蚁民。不受控制的国家暴力在巨大的金钱和利益推动下张开了血盆大口。在这个暴力机器面前,一个人是没有生命保障的。

在军政府下的智利,一个人会莫名其妙地失踪,至今当年失去儿子的母亲们还在找寻他们的孩子。 在中国,每年有多少人死于与国家暴力有关的非正常死亡?首当其冲的是那些政治权力得不到任何保护的人,即被定性为“反动”的人, 如法轮功信徒、藏族和维吾尔族维权人士。因为被定为“敌我矛盾”,这些人的权利没有最基本的保证。截止今天,有3420名法轮功信徒(见明慧网)被警察折磨致死,其所受酷刑之残忍令人不敢想象发生在21世纪的文明国度。

再其次是上访人员。他们往往被剥夺得一无所有(无地、无房、无钱),最后走上上访之路。殊不知在政府眼里他们是一群找麻烦的人,又是什么地位也没有的弱势者,于是毫无忌惮地进行打压。关黑监狱、送精神病院,这些不可想象的事发生在中国一群无辜的人身子。因为相信最高公正,他们得到却是政府赤裸裸的暴力回答。

再下来是农民。他们处在中国的最底层,没有钱,没有权,没有资源。他们的土地属于“集体”。当他们被迫抗争说理时,当地政府毫不犹豫地动用大批警察,实行抓、打、关押,不必经过任何法律程序。

再接着是城市中的1.5亿民工。他们是城市的流动人口,他们做最脏最苦的活,拿最低的工资。如果身上没带证件,被警察被以随时抓到拘留所。一旦进去,遭受非人的毒打是经常发生的事。被打死的孙志刚只是众多死于非命中的一个,而他的故事被披露仅仅因为发现他其实不是民工。

剩下的居住在城市的人可以免于警察暴力吗?在街上摆摊的小贩,会面临城管的毒打;在网上仗义直言的网民会被判刑坐牢 (从刘荻到今年的福建三网友)。不幸而被拆迁的人们,如果抗拒拆迁,也会被毒打致死(如上海周大明之死)。

泛滥的国家暴力是因为有不受约束的权力。当说真话的记者被抓,维权律师被构陷,人民不能凭选票来改换领导人时,权力就会用暴力来开道。当权力与巨大的经济利益结合时, 这种暴力就会不惮于致人死命。

国家存在的目的,是对外抵御入侵,对内维持治安。社会依靠国家的公信力来惩治犯罪,来主持公正。今天的中国政府,不仅仅是治安不作为(网络警察多于治安警察),而是积极参与行凶和暴力行为。当法院成了摆设甚至成了诬陷好人之地,那么正义和公理又在哪里?如果一个政府失去了维护基本正义的功能,而且失去人民最基本的信任,这个政府还有合法性吗?

中国政府一向高举经济发展作盾牌。但现在巨大的经济利益与政府暴力结合起来,吞噬着无数人的生命,从强拆的血腥到因工程质量导致地震中数千学生的无辜死亡,到在官商勾结的毒奶粉事件丧生的婴儿。在一个人的生命得不到保障的国度,再繁荣的经济有什么意义?

泛滥的国家暴力昭示着中国走向民主的迫切性。当舆论可以公开监督政府,当人们用手上的选票制选择执政者,他们不必再惧怕无安生立命之地。那时政府是真正民众的政府,如林肯150年所说的政府,“来自于人民,归属于人民,服务于人民”。民主的理想不只属于西方国家,今天从亚洲到非洲,到拉丁美洲,世界上116个国家已经实现了真正的多党选举的民主制度。希望中国的这一天也能早日到来。

Sunday, December 19, 2010

民主的世界地图 (The World Map of Democracy)

全世界194个国家,如果我们拿出一张世界地图,给民主和不民主的国家涂上颜色,我们会看到怎样的一个分布图案?

在给国家分类前,我们要有一个关于民主的清晰定义。通俗的民主,指的是选举权,人们可以通过选举来改变国家领导人,同时选举过程必须透明公正,并有多党候选人竞选。按照这个定义,全世界的194个国家中有116个国家是有透明选举的民主国家[1]。俄国虽有大选,但选举并不公正,所以不在这116个国家之列。同样的,伊朗及其他一些有大选过程的国家也不在内。

广义的民主包括政治自由和公民自由两个方面。选举权是政治自由的一部分。除此外,政治自由还包括政府透明,即民选代表决定政府政策,没有广泛的腐败,政府有问责制和透明度等。公民自由的内容很多。它主要有4大方面:(1)言论与信仰自由:这包括新闻自由、宗教自由、学术自由、没有广泛的政治灌输; (2)集社自由:集会和示威的自由、成立政党和民间组织的自由和独立的工会等;(3)法治:司法独立、司法公正、没有警察暴力、不公正监禁或酷刑。(4)个人自由:主要包括迁徙和就业自由,私有财产权,性别平等,生育自由等。

根据这个广义民主的定义,自由之家每年对世界每个国家就政治自由和公民自由的各个方面进行调查评分,并把总分折算成一个从1到7的自由指数。1代表着最自由,而7是最不自由。世界上的国家可由此分成3类:民主国家(自由指数在1-2.5),半民主国家(自由指数在3-5),和不民主国家(5.5-7)。据自由之家2010年的报告,全世界有89个民主国家,58个半民主国家和47个不民主国家。

全世界47不民主国家的具体分布是:美洲1个,欧洲2个,亚洲14个,中东15个,非洲15个。下面是详细列表。

表1。2009年世界的不民主国家(47国)
区域
国家
美洲 (1)
古巴
欧洲(2)
俄罗斯,白俄罗斯
亚洲(14)
朝鲜,中国,缅甸,老挝,越南,柬埔寨,文莱;阿塞拜疆,哈萨克斯坦,吉尔吉斯斯坦,塔吉克斯坦,土库曼斯坦,乌兹别克;阿富汗;
中东 (15)
伊朗; 叙利亚,沙特阿拉伯,伊拉克,也门, 阿联酋, 阿曼,卡塔尔,巴林,约旦;埃及;利比亚,苏丹,突尼斯,阿尔及利亚
非洲 (15)
毛里塔尼亚,索马里,厄立特里亚;赤道几内亚,几内亚,乍得;津巴布韦,喀麦隆,斯威士兰, 刚果(布),刚果(金),安哥拉,象牙海岸,卢旺达,加蓬

下面是民主的世界分布图,绿色代表民主国家,黄色是半民主国家,而紫色是不民主国家。


这个图显示,整个欧洲和大洋洲几乎全是民主国家,美洲大部分是民主国家。亚洲和非洲则集中了大量不民主国家。有趣的是,所有不民主国家,除了古巴一个(在美洲孤零零的岛上)外,在地理上竟然全部连成一片。从朝鲜开始,向西接着中国,向南延伸到越南和老挝,然后向西连到阿富汗、伊朗、中东各国,最后连到北非和中非各国。

民主有如此强的地域性,令人惊讶。通常我们认为民主是一个理念,并不会想到它与一个国家的地理位置有关。而实际上所有拉美国家都走向了民主化,韩国和台湾在同一年(1987年)开放党禁,葡萄牙和西班牙也在几乎同一年(1976年)进行第一次民主大选。南非的民主化(1994年)紧接在其邻国纳米比亚的民主化之后。更不用提苏联倒台前后,整个东欧的迅速民主化。相反的,整个中东和中亚地区一直保持着不民主的状态。为什么邻国之间有这么大的影响力?这个问题值得仔细研究。

中国的情况不太好,目前被一大帮不民主国家包围着。北边是俄罗斯,东边有朝鲜,南边是缅甸、越南、老挝,西边是阿富汗、哈萨克斯坦、吉尔吉斯斯坦和塔吉克斯坦,东南海上接着文莱。这一共是10个不民主国家,蔚为可观。

另一方面,中国与两个民主国家接壤:蒙古和印度。在海上,中国相邻的民主国家(或地区)有4个:日本、韩国、台湾和印尼。 与中国接壤的半民主国家有巴基斯坦、尼泊尔、不丹,海上有菲律宾和马来西 亚。半民主国家自顾不暇,很难对中国有多大影响(菲律宾屈服于中国而不出席诺贝尔和平奖颁奖礼就是一例,而中国相邻的民主国家或地区,除了没有在挪威设领馆的蒙古和台湾外,都出席了颁奖礼。)。中国这6个民主邻国对中国民主进程的影响力,能够胜过那10个与中国接壤的不民主国家的消极影响吗?

中国的民主进程在多大程度上受地域影响,还是一个有待研究的问题。地域不能解释为什么印度在南亚首先走向民主,也不能解释蒙古独立而稳定的民主化进程。另外西非的马里也是被包围在不民主和半民主国家中的民主化例子。中国能否突破其周边不民主国家的影响和地域限制,还有很多变数。一个国家的民主进程,除了地理因素外,还有经济、文化、民众参与和领袖人物的带动等诸多因素。

世界的民主图,让我们看到中国民主化所面临的困难,但也看到了希望。如果中国不想与中东和非洲的集权国家为伍,如果中国不愿与缅甸和朝鲜这样极端落后的亚洲国家为伍,现在正是时候。不管中国的经济水平有多高,它取代不了中国在政治上极其落后的事实。中国目前跻身于这47个集权国家,实在是国人的羞耻。希望有一天,我们能在世界的自由图中看到中国的一片绿色。



[1]自由之家2010年世界自由调查:选举民主的国家名单 http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=548&year=2010

Thursday, December 16, 2010

蓬勃发展的中国计算机科技


在这次计算机数据挖掘大会上(ICDM-2010),见到许多来自国内的研究人员。他们很多是美国公司在中国研究所的雇员:惠普、雅虎、微软等。 他们谈到在中关村那一带许多的国外研究所(谷歌)和国内的大网络公司:搜狐、腾讯等等。

虽然政治上压抑(谷歌撤走时,大楼外装了监视头,摄下献花的人,以阻止人们献花),在中国作科技研究还是十分自由的。他们可以看到国外的任何科技网站,可以与同行保持最新同步的研究。

这次大会上近四分子一的被接受文章来自中国。中国的论文提交和接受量,仅次于美国,居第二位。这表明在数据挖掘上中国的科技水平已经达到世界级水平,超过了日本。

计算机研究的蓬勃发展意味着中国计算机领域的产业发展迅速。从因特网公司,到手机行业,这里面还有Nokia, Sumsang, HP等大量的外国公司。这些外国公司在中国发展着业务,也吸引了大量的中国研究人才。

那么还有变革的动力吗?人们有很多自由发展的空间(至少在科技和商业上),只要不谈政治,并不能感觉到压抑。

在什么情况下,变革成为必须的、人人都能感觉且认同的?这取决于媒体。其实政治是一种舆论推动和导向。讲多了,就能激起热情。渴望变革的有识之士很多,最终是开放的舆论空间。

但对大部分中国人来说,似乎改革的迫切性不存在。他们的智慧有发展的空间,个人生活也可以过得不错。从何而谈推翻现有政府?

可是为什么中国政府如此害怕呢?他们连一个简单的颁奖礼都不能容忍,且软禁了一大批人。他们害怕国内的人知道任何消息。是不是这些表面的繁荣不能掩盖人们觉得没有政治自由的无奈和不平感? 民心是不是真的安静而无求呢?

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

和平奖颁奖礼分出世界两大阵营 (Nobel Peace Prize ceremony boycott reveals two camps)

今年12月10日的诺贝尔和平奖颁奖,诺贝尔委员会邀请了65个在奥斯陆设有大使馆的国家出席。经过中国政府的游说和警告,结果以中国为首的18个国家拒绝出席。另一方面,47个国家应邀出席了和平奖颁奖仪式。这两组国家有没有什么根本的区别呢?

随眼一看, 拒绝出席的国家中有古巴、越南、俄罗斯、伊朗、沙特阿拉伯、和苏丹。这些是人权和糟糕的国家。但也有菲律宾和斯里兰卡,这些国家的人权看起来还可以。所以人们认为应该还有经济上有求于中国的原因。但是这个理由显然不成立。说起贸易交往,日本、韩国与中国的密切远远大于菲律宾等,但是日本和韩国都派使节出席了和平奖颁奖典礼。是什么让日韩与菲律宾等国有了根本区别?有人说是它们的经济水平的差别。但这不能解释为什么印度和印度尼西亚这些低收入国家都参加了典礼。

真正的区别我们看看下面的表就明白了,这里列出了这两组国家的自由指数[1]。这个指数由自由之家每年评估,覆盖世界194个国家。指数从1到7,最自由的是1,最不自由的是7.

----------------------------------------                   ----------------------------------------------
自由指数   出席颁奖典礼国家                          自由指数   拒绝出席国家
----------------------------------------                  ----------------------------------------------
1          美国, 加拿大                                        3.5       菲律宾
1          奥地利, 塞浦路斯,马耳他,                 4          斯里兰卡
1          捷克, 斯洛伐克, 波兰, 匈牙利              4.5       摩洛哥
1          爱沙尼亚, 立陶宛                                 4.5       巴基斯坦
1          法国, 德国, 英国, 爱尔兰                      4.5       委内瑞拉
1          芬兰, 丹麦, 冰岛, 挪威, 瑞典                5.5       阿尔及利亚
1          葡萄牙, 西班牙, 荷兰,比利时             5.5       埃及
1          卢森堡, 斯洛文尼亚                             5.5       伊拉克
1.5       希腊, 意大利, 拉脱维亚                        5.5       哈萨克斯坦
1.5       日本, 韩国                                            5.5       俄罗斯
2          塞尔维亚                                              6          突尼斯
2          阿根廷, 巴西                                        6          越南
2          罗马尼亚, 保加利亚                             6          阿富汗
2          南非                                                     6          伊朗
2.5       印度                                                     6.5       中国
2.5       乌克兰                                                 6.5       古巴
2.5       印度尼西亚                                          6.5       沙特阿拉伯
3.5       哥伦比亚                                              7          苏丹
---------------------------------------                     ---------------------------------------------
1.38      (平均)                                              5.50      (平均)
---------------------------------------                     ---------------------------------------------

出席和不出席颁奖礼的国家在自由指数上有这样泾渭分明的差别,实在令人惊叹。所有出席的国家的自由指数全部好于拒绝颁奖礼的国家,而且前者的平均自由指数远远好于后者的平均数。这是一个惊人的清晰划分。根据自由之家的定义,民主国家的自由指数在1-2.5,半民主国家的自由指数在3-5,不民主国家在5.5-7。出席和平奖颁奖礼的国家除了哥伦比亚这个半民主国外,全是民主国家;而拒绝出席的国家则相反,没有一个民主国家。

自由指数衡量政治自由和公民自由两大方面。政治自由包括选举权、多党制和政治透明等,公民自由包括言论、集会、集社自由、司法独立和个人自由(就业、迁徙)等。目前世界上最集权的,即自由指数等于7的国家有9个:缅甸、朝鲜、利比亚、苏丹、 赤道几内亚、厄立特里亚、索马里、土库曼斯坦和乌兹别克。中国的自由指数是6.5,而越南是6,稍稍比中国好一点。俄罗斯有一定的选举和新闻自由,比越南更好些,自由指数是5.5.

中国对诺贝尔和平奖颁奖礼的抵制逼得世界各国站了队。站队的结果昭示了世界两大阵营。真要感谢中国政府这次的蛮横动作,让世界看到清晰的国际阵营。如果说在前苏联存在时,世界上是共产主义和资本主义两大阵营的斗争。现在共产主义国家土崩瓦解,连仅剩的中国、越南都在实行资本主义的市场经济。表面上看起来,世界取得共识。但现在在21世纪初我们看到的是民主国家和专制国家的斗争。这仍然是两个意识形态的斗争。如果说以前是共产主义理念和资本主义私有产权理念的斗争,现在则是民主理念和集权理念的斗争。

在集权的国家,少数人掌握着国家机器。 他们通过控制国家的军队和警察,并控制媒体和舆论,来达到对整个国家资源的控制和掠夺。这些少数人在不同国家有不同的头衔:在沙特阿拉伯、约旦等中东国家,他们叫国王和皇室贵族,在缅甸和利比亚,他们是军事强人;在伊朗,他们是宗教领袖和他的神职跟班;在中国和越南,他们是党的最高领导和党内官员;在白俄罗斯和委内瑞拉,他们是现任总统通过修改宪法延长了任期。专制政权有各种表现方式,但它们有一个共性,人民不能以选举的方式改变国家管理者,权力不能被监督,新闻不自由,从而导致基本的人权得不到保障。

少数人要控制多数人, 必须通过新闻钳制,更必须用逮捕、镇压的方式使人就范,还必须有秘密警察进行跟踪和控制。在这样的国家,话语权只在少数人手里,决策的好坏人民无法参与。当这些政府决定和中国在一边去抵制诺贝尔颁奖典礼时,绝不会有反对声音。在中国政府的威胁和利益相加之下,这些国家的政府出于其经济利益的需要,很容易就答应了。出不出席诺奖典礼只是一件小事。

民主的国家,权力要被监督,民众要发出呼声。刘晓波作为手无寸铁的文人以自由平等的理念与强权作斗争而赢得了世界大多数人民的同情。出席和平奖颁奖礼是对自由的道义支持。当民众站在刘晓波这边发出巨大呼声是,民选的政府不得不顺从民意。印度曾犹豫不决,害怕中国的经济报复,却在民意强大的呼声下不得不出席颁奖式。同样的情况,南非、巴西和印尼作为健全的民主国家也最终顺从了民意。

有趣的是,在不出席的国家中,菲律宾是自由指数相对最好的(3.5)。菲律宾总统在颁奖礼后在国内遭到强烈抨击。菲国主要报纸和人权组织纷纷指责总统诺诺·阿基诺置人权于不顾,屈服于中国压力,与其他独裁国家站在一边。

 中国政府把出席诺贝尔和平奖颁奖礼看成是西方国家(或“贵族国家”)的阴谋,却没有看到其实这是一个民主国家的集体宣言。任何一个高度民主化的国家都支持刘晓波获得诺贝尔和平奖,而且必然出席颁奖礼。

现在全世界194个国家中,实现普及大选的国家已经有116个。如果再把新闻自由和独立司法考虑在内,不民主国家只有47个。遗憾的是中国是这47个国家中的一员。中国这次选择做了非民主国家的发言人,并且依仗其强大的经济实力来宣扬、扩张其集权理念,令人为之汗颜,世界为之侧目。

中国的民主化,是世界民主进程不可避免的一页。中国民众已经发出了渴望民主的呼声,中国政府站在历史的反面还能有多久?


                                                                                                                               


[1] 资料来源:自由之家,2010年世界自由调查报告

Saturday, December 11, 2010

索尔维格之歌 (Solveig's Song): 你一定能回来

这次诺贝尔和平奖颁奖典礼上的女高音独唱,唱的是著名的挪威歌剧曲索尔维格之歌,由易卜生作词,格里格配曲,它唱出了一份对理想的执着,也唱出了世界对刘晓波的等待,盼望着他的归来。

冬天早已过去,春天不再回来,
夏天也将消逝,一年年的等待,一年年的等待。
但我始终深信你一定能回来,你一定能回来。
我曾经答应过你,我要忠诚地等待你,
等待着你回来。

当你独自跋涉,愿上帝帮助你。
当你跪在上帝的座前,愿他给你力量。
我们一定能再相见,从此永不分离
永不分离

The winter may pass and the spring disappear
The summer too will vanish and then the year
But this I know for certain: you'll come back again
And even as I promised you'll find me waiting then
You'll find me waiting then

God help you when wand'ring your way all alone
God grant to you his strength as you'll kneel at his throne
And we shall meet again love and never parted be
And never parted be!



Friday, December 10, 2010

看诺贝尔和平奖颁奖典礼(On Nobel peace prize award ceremony)

台上是一个巨大的照片,一把空着的椅子,和一组端坐的西方人。只是主角不在,没有了一个人的欢笑、自豪和慷慨的言辞。当Lynn Chang以小提琴拉起缓慢而又忧伤的旋律,我们听到了无奈和悲伤。悲伤于一个人的不幸,更悲伤于一个国家和民族的不幸。听众中有人流下了眼泪。

但短暂的悲哀外,更多的是希望。当颁奖人重申自由民主的理念,当人们站立鼓掌,当嘹亮的礼号划过宏丽的大厅时,一个理念在奥斯陆和世界的上空飘扬:对自由的追求不可阻挡。尽管路会很长,但世界今天向中国人民伸出了温暖的手,说道:我们与你站在一起,直到专制的灭亡。

人类前赴后继的故事,在今天还在继续。一个庄重的仪式,为一个国家的苦苦奋斗的故事翻开了新的一页。今天世界走到一起,发出了声音。这一千个在场的贵宾带来了来自各国的力量。今天没有肤色和语言的差别,只有共同的向往:一个没有压迫的世界,一个人人有自由和权力的世界。

今天是刘晓波的骄傲,是中国的骄傲,也是世界的骄傲。中国民主的一天不会太远。

Thursday, December 9, 2010

刘晓波的诗:体验死亡 (Poem by Liu Xiaobo)

(全诗共4节,这是最后一节)

原文 English translation on New York Times 12/09/2010

我本想在阳光下
加入殉道者的行列
用仅存的一根骨头
支撑起虔诚的信仰
但,天空并不会
为牺牲者镀上金黄
一群饱食死尸的狼
在正午的温暖中
喜气洋洋

遥远地
我把生命放逐到
一个没有太阳的地方
逃出耶稣生日的纪元
我不敢正视十字架上的目光
从一支烟到一小堆灰烬
我被烈士的酒灌醉
以为这个春天已经消逝

当我在深夜的烟摊前
被几个大汉拦路抢劫
戴上手铐蒙住眼睛堵住嘴巴
扔进不知驶向何方的囚车




蓦然醒悟:我还活着
当我的名字在中央电视台
变成新闻中的“黑手”
无名者的白骨立在遗忘里
变成一枚英雄勋章
我被自编的谎言高高擎起
逢人便讲我体验过死亡



尽管我知道
死是神秘的未知
活着,便无法体验死亡
而死了
就再不能体验死亡
但
我仍在死中飞翔
沉沦地飞翔
无数个铁窗后的夜晚
和星光下的坟墓
被我的噩梦出卖

除了谎言
我一无所有
1990年6月于秦城监狱

I had imagined being there beneath sunlight
with the procession of martyrs
using just the one thin bone
to uphold a true conviction
And yet, the heavenly void
will not plate the sacrificed in gold
A pack of wolves well-fed full of corpses
celebrate in the warm noon air
aflood with joy

Faraway place
I’ve exiled my life to
this place without sun
to flee the era of Christ’s birth
I cannot face the blinding vision on the cross
From a wisp of smoke to a little heap of ash
I’ve drained the drink of the martyrs, sense spring’s
about to break into the brocade-brilliance of myriad flowers

Deep in the night, empty road
I’m biking home
I stop at a cigarette stand
A car follows me, crashes over my bicycle
some enormous brutes seize me
I’m handcuffed eyes covered mouth gagged
thrown into a prison van heading nowhere

A blink, a trembling instant passes
to a flash of awareness: I’m still alive
On Central Television News
my name’s changed to “arrested black hand”
though those nameless white bones of the dead
still stand in the forgetting
I lift up high up the self-invented lie
tell everyone how I’ve experienced death
so that “black hand” becomes a hero’s medal of honor

Even if I know
death’s a mysterious unknown
being alive, there’s no way to experience death
and once dead
cannot experience death again
yet I’m still
hovering within death
a hovering in drowning
Countless nights behind iron-barred windows
and the graves beneath starlight
have exposed my nightmares

Besides a lie
I own nothing

Sunday, December 5, 2010

狱中的灯塔 (The lighthouse in the jail)

在自由的阳光中和绿色的大地上,我们每天工作、吃饭、游玩。时时我会想起一个狱中的身影。当我们享受着人生的基本快乐和其乐融融的亲情,有一个人被剥夺了所有这些,在阴暗潮湿的狱室里苦度时日。为了我们的幸福,有一个人在受难。如耶稣背上十字架,他为全中国的自由承受苦难。

在过去21年中,刘晓波坐了4次牢,总计有8年。从现在算起,他还有10年的刑期。他的罪名:发表文章,并号召人们签署保障公民基本权利的“08宪章”。这个宪章重申宪法的最基本理念:自由、人权、平等、共和、民主和宪政,并号召立法民主和司法独立。这些简单而基本的诉求不能为中国政府容忍。

在判刑的法庭上,刘晓波作了如下陈述[1]:我期待我的国家是一片可以自由表达的土地,在这里,每一位国民的发言都会得到同等的善待;在这里,不同的价值、思想、信仰、政见……既相互竞争又和平共处;在这里,多数的意见和少数的仪意见都会得到平等的保障,特别是那些不同于当权者的政见将得到充分的尊重和保护;在这里,所有的政见都将摊在阳光下接受民众的选择,每个国民都能毫无恐惧地发表政见,决不会因发表不同政见而遭受政治迫害;我期待,我将是中国绵绵不绝的文字狱的最后一个受害者,从此之后不再有人因言获罪。

不幸的是,今天的中国关押着众多如刘晓波一样的良心犯人:仍然在押的刘贤斌、刚刚被释放的秦永敏、正在劳教所的的胡佳,创办天网而去年又一次被判刑的黄琦等等。另外还有目前关押的30多个新闻记者,以及维权律师。刘贤斌在过去20年来四次被捕坐牢有14年;秦永敏因办人权观察被判了12年,从1998年身陷囹圄至今。

诺贝尔和平奖把刘晓波从一个中国内部的作家,变成一个世界级的象征人物。他延承了100年来诺贝尔和平奖得主的精神和传统。他与纳粹德国下的奥西埃茨基、苏联的萨哈罗夫、波兰的瓦文萨并肩站立。他的囚禁使得他与曼德拉和昂山素姬堪比美名。世界的人们或许没有听说中国那许多在押的政治犯,但他们知道一个狱中的中国诺贝尔奖得主。刘晓波成为一个象征和代表。一个手无寸铁的书生面对着一个强大的国家机器;一个为自由呐喊的作家被一个暴力机器捂住了嘴。这种个人勇气是激励人类几百年来冲击暴政、争取自由平等的最根本的原因。从华盛顿带领的美国独立起义,到智利人民反对军政府的斗争,到波兰团结工会的地下斗争,一代代人,一个个不同的国家都在歌颂着同样的故事、同样的向往:自由、平等、做人的基本权利。世界上每一个向往自由的人们都会认同刘晓波和他的基本理念,感动于他的个人勇气。

刘晓波成为了世界的良心,刘晓波的监禁代表着世界的不自由。正因为如此,无数的国家才会站出来为刘晓波讲话,无数的报纸评论才会无保留地支持刘晓波。在狱中多呆一天,刘晓波的形象就更圣洁。曾关押过曼德拉监狱和囚室,现在欢迎着世界各地的人们满怀敬仰的参观。今天刘晓波在的锦州监狱和他的牢房,也必将会成为未来人们的景仰之地。

对于中国人,刘晓波成为感召的动力。因为他的无畏入狱,监狱不再变得可怕。从此会有一批又一批人以他为榜样,冲击中国监狱的高墙。暴力依靠人们的惧怕而成功。但政府用来惩罚人们的判刑变成一种荣耀,政府就失去了其威慑力。在未来的日子里,我们会看到一个又一个刘晓波。他们不怕打压,不怕坐牢,继续勇敢地发出他们的声音。当这种声音变得足够大、足够洪亮时,极权的堡垒就会轰然倒塌。

今天的刘晓波仍在狱中受难,今天的中国还在枷锁下徘徊,世界在无助地观望。刘晓波的不自由是我们每一个人的不自由,因为世界的每一个角落、我们每一个人的命运都紧紧相连。

今夜有一盏远方的灯塔。它点燃在遥远的锦州,照彻着黑暗。让我们为中国的民主继续努力,中国光明的一天已经不远。


[1] 《我没有敌人——我的最后陈述》

Sunday, November 28, 2010

海外的左派 (Oversea leftists)

有一位我许久未联系的中学同学,我曾经十分佩服他的博学和对中国问题的关注。当他在国内时,他长篇大论地讨论社会不公。记得近十多年前我在美国,在信中他提到警匪勾结,认为是社会一大黑瘤。后来他又提到中国网络警察的数目胜过街上维护治安的警察。多年后我发现他的观察远远早于社会报道,很佩服他的洞见。大约9年前,我这个同学带妻儿来到美国,先是作访问学者,后来找了份正式研究工作留了下来。因为他的工作不再是他过去的尖端研究项目,挑战性不大,业余时间他成为活跃的网上中文论坛的参与者,写了不少长篇的 政论文。7年前我稍稍浏览了他的文章,觉得他十分爱国,大谈中国应如何与美进行军事对抗,当时觉得他的论点偏激,没有太在意。

昨天去到他的网页,看到他最近这两个月的博客,不禁无比震惊。关于刘晓波的得奖,国内国外的声音我听到的都是认同的。问到在国内的朋友,有人说不同意他的政治观点,但还是支持他要求言论自由的理念。国内自由派的博客网上,更是充满激动和受鼓舞,为刘晓波得奖而热泪盈眶。没想到我的这个同学在博客里说,刘晓波是卖国,是让中国分裂的罪人,应该关到刑满(10年后)为止再放出来。他进而说,中共让中国人民翻了身,现在又在经济上迅速追上英美发达国家,这证明了中共领导的正确。一切反对中共的人都是分裂主义者。因为一旦中共不当政,西藏、新疆、内蒙都会闹独立。反中共的实际上就是民族罪人,所以他完全支持政府打压这些人。读着这些文章,我感到目瞪口呆。现政权的蛮横和暴戾,在我这个同学的博客中口若悬河地表达出来,其理由似乎绝对正确。而我这个同学是个优秀的科学家(国内一流研究所的骨干),算是中国的精英知识分子。他的思想必然代表了不少人。再看看他的博客发表的地方:mitbbs. 这是一个在美国的亲共网站,所以他的博客在那里发表倒不奇怪。但我也知道mitbbs的网流巨大(在美国排1004名,根据Alexa.com),仅次于另一个中文网站“文学城”(wenxuecity.com)(在美国网流量排684名)。支持中国现政权的看来还真人数不少。

以爱国的名义而崇尚暴力、践踏言论,以爱国的名义而无条件地支持一个集权,反对任何少数民族的基本诉求(其实中国现在也设民族自治区),这是怎样一种理念和教育传统?一个在海外的中国知识分子尚且如此想,在中国上层的利益集团和军人中,这种观念岂不是更深?

看来普世价值的教育在中国任重道远,而民主的路仍然漫长。

Friday, November 5, 2010

The long and hard fight

No dictator is willing to voluntarily give up his throne. No dominating party, especially the one that enjoys unprecedentedly monopoly of power for the last 60 years, is going to relinquish its power without a fight.  This means using secret police, harassing and jailing people. This may mean lying blatantly on major news media and to the world. This may mean suppressing any information that challenges its rule.  If we have any hope for the Chinese communist party to automatically change and reform itself, we are facing a cold reality.

Today when we observe the outrageous house arrest of Liu Xiaobo's wife -- Liu Xia, when we hear about the arbitrary detention of dissidents who merely have dinner to celebrate Liu's awards, we are face to face with that cold reality. The communist government is fighting to the teeth to preserve the status quo. This suggest that road to a free China is going to be a long and hard struggle.
  
Martin Luther King Jr. once said, "Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable... Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle." After he was put in Birmingham jail for his protest, he wrote the famous Letter from Birmingham Jail to answer the conservative and "well-meaning" people's accusation that he was not patient enough to wait. King said, "Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was 'well timed' in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word 'Wait!' It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This 'Wait' has almost always meant 'Never.' We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that 'justice too long delayed is justice denied.'"

Answering the question: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" King said, "You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks to so dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word 'tension.' I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half-truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood."

He pointed out "We have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily."

Change does not come automatically. It comes through people's struggle and tireless push. As King said, "Every step toward the goal of justice requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals."

As we are walking toward the dawn of a democratic China, we must be prepared for a long and hard fight.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Political prisoners in China

Political prisoners are those who act within the scope of law, who are non-violent, but are jailed by the government. In a country with rule of law, political prisoners should never exist. Therefore the imprisonment of people for their speech or belief is a reflection of repressive regime.

China has the largest number of political prisoners in the world. The world learned about Liu Xiaobo in jail due to Nobel peace prize. But many people like him, more than 1,000 political prisoners, are currently languishing in jail. Who are these 1,000 people? There are 6 major groups: (1) Dissidents (2) NGO activist (3) Journalist and lawyers (4) People who try to practice their religion (5) Petitioners due to injustice (6) Ethnic minority activists.

1. Dissidents who speak out for political reform. 
    This group of people are very similar to Liu Xiaobo. They are intellectuals, writers and political activists who write and speak out for political change. Their seek peaceful change by directly demanding the government to respect human rights. They are jailed simply because their speech and practicing freedom of assembly.

2. Activists who help unprivileged people
    Hu Jia is such an example. He helped to expose AIDS epidemic in Anhui villages. In China, these group of people are called "rights defenders". They are a growing number of people who are speaking out the truth. Huang Xi who set up a website to help people with no resort to legal system. He was arrested and still in jail today.  

3. Journalists and lawyers (and other professionals) who expose truth
    According to Reporters without Borders, China is the world’s biggest prison for journalists, bloggers and cyber-dissidents. RWB's annual report of 2010 tells that there 31 journalists and 74 netizens currently imprisoned in China for ambiguous charges such as "inciting subversion" and "revealing state secrets." This is an increase from 28 jailed journalists reported by Human Rights Watch in 2009.

4. People who practice their religious belief
   1) Falun Gong practitioner
       Since 1999 when this group of people were labeled as "sect" by then Chinese president Jiang Zeming (after their large-scale peaceful protest), this group has been under severe persecution. Anyone who practices Falun Gong is forced to renounce it, otherwise they are detained and jailed. More than 3413Falun Gong practitioners have died in detention due to torture. Here is a list of all those who died in detention with names and reports (See also the corresponding Chinese report).  The persecution continues. In the last 6 months alone, 776 Falun Gong members were arrested around China, according to Minghui.org report. 

   2) Christians
       People who practice Christian belief outside the government-sanctioned church are facing harassment and detention. See this report.

   3) Tibetan Buddhist
 Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, was taken into "protection" by the Chinese government in 1995 at the age of 6, just days after being recognized by the Dalai Lama as the reincarnation of the previous Panchen Lama. Now age 21, he is still a political prisoner.

5. Petitioners who seek government help
     Large score of petitioner come to Beijing to seek justice from the only government office that claims to be the last resort for justice. Yet, they are arrested, beaten and even put in asylum to keep them out sight of the public. According to 64Tianwang.com, police detained more than 1000 petitioners in Beijing in one night on September 28 this year.

6. Ethnic minority activists who engage in peaceful protest
   1) Tibetan activists
       The persecution of this group is well documented by exile Tibetan people. Here is a very recent report: In April 2010, 8 teenage monks were arrested for taking part in protests of demanding the Dalai Lama’s return.

   2) Uyghur minority activists
        On May 19, 2008, Pastor Lou Yuanqi, a prominent house church leader in the town of Qingshuihe, Xinjiang province was detained and later charged with "inciting separatism."

The long list of political prisoners suggest the Chinese government's effort of suppressing any voice. In a repressive regime, the only way to control people for speaking truth is putting them to jail. Nobel peace prize shed light on the this dark side of China. How can such a brutal regime continue to exist and trample all its own laws on basic rights? Inside China, people are continuing to fight for their rights. The government will not stop until it yields to pressure from all sides.

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Correlation between freedom and national wealth

How is a country's freedom level related to its national wealth? People hope that democracy will automatically lead to prosperity. In reality, we see many democratic nations such as India and Bolivia lag behind in their economic development. Using data from Freedom House and World Bank (see references), I plotted the following correlation graph between freedom index and GDP per capita (constant 2000 US$) for 183 countries in the world. The freedom index (see detailed explanation in my last blog)  ranges from 1 to 7, with 1 being most free and 7 being most repressive. GDP per capita ranges from $97 for Congo to $52,748 for Luxembourg.



The 9 oil exporting countries (Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Brunei,Oman, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Equatorial Guinea) are apparently outliers to this chart. Their high income is combined with highly restrictive society. Singapore is another outlier, which can be explained by the fact that it is a tiny country made up of a single city. If we remove the 9 oil nations and Singapore from this chart, we will see a clear trend of higher GDP per capita associated with higher freedom. Countries with high GPD per capita more than $10000 are all free (with freedom index <=2.5). In fact, most non-free countries (freedom index >=5.5) have GDP per capita less than $3000.

For those poor countries with GDP per capita less than $3000, the freeman level ranges widely. Below is a plot of countries in this range. China has GDP per capita (constant 2000 US$) at $2206, and its freedom index is 6.5. 


The above graph does not give us insight on where China will move as its income goes up. But fortunately when we plot out the map for countries with GDP per capital between $3000 and $10000, the picture is much clearer. The worst country in this group has its freedom index at 5.5. It is still much better than what Chinese people enjoy today. This graph also suggests that the freedom situation gets better as a nation's income goes up.  When a nation's GDP per capita is higher than $6,000, the freedom improves to 4 or less. This gives us hope that as China continues its economic growth, the civil society will keep developing. The rising middle class will presses for more freedom, and the government is on a irreversible trend of opening up.


Finally, when a country reaches income level of more than $10,000, then it is definitely free. By this time, democratic system is established and a civil society is vibrant. There is no way to turn it back to any form of dictatorship. One good example is the United States. Right after "9-11", there was a hush on any voice that is criticizing the government. People were supposed to unite around the government to fight the terrorists. The Bush government also started its surveillance program on citizens, and many Muslim men were questioned and even detained. For a while, it seems the civil liberty will leave American people. But soon people start to speak out. Even though the mainstream media is still on the side of the government, independent movies, radio programs and books are created to spread the truth. Eventrually the tide is turned and Obama was elected to office in 2008 on change ticket. (Apparently Obama did not turn out as he promised, but it is a different story.)


The correlation between economic prosperity and freedom of a nation gives us a lot of hope. With 8% annual GDP growth rate, China will reach the threshold of $3000 GDP per capita in 4 years. Big change is coming, and we will all be witness to this historical moment. The time has come to ask each of us: Are we a bystander or participant?

Data download: Freedom index and GDP per capita of all countries

References
1. Freedom House, Freedom in the World 2010 survey, freedom index of countries in the world
2. World Bank, World Development Indicators 2010, GDP per capita (constant 2000 US$).

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Freedom map of the world

Freedom House conducts annual survey on the democratic situation of every country in the world. Based on Freedom house's 2010 report, out of 194 nations in the world today, there are only 47 countries that are not free. The definition of "not free" is based on a precise freedom index that ranges from 1 to 7. Countries with freedom index 1 to 2.5 are defined as free, those with freedom index 3 to 5 are partially free, and those with freedom index of 5.5 to 7 are not free. China has freedom index 6.5, a little better than North Korea (who has index of 7).

The freedom index is calculated from two indexes: political rights and civil liberty. Political rights covers electoral process, multi-party system, and government accountability. Civil liberty covers freedom of expression, freedom of association and assembly, independent judiciary, and personal autonomy. Each of these aspects  are broken down sub-areas and evaluated with an index score. Specifically,
Political rights include
A. Electoral Process
   1. Free elections of state head 
   2. Free elections of legislative representatives
   3. Fair polling and ballots
B. Political Pluralism and Participation
   1. The right to organize different political parties 
   2. Significant opposition power
   3. Free from domination by the military, foreign powers, or religious hierarchies
   4. Participation of cultural, ethnic, religious, and minority groups
C. Functioning of Government
   1. Freely elected representatives determine the policies of the government
   2. Free from pervasive corruption
   3. Government accountability and transparency

Civil liberties include
A. Freedom of Expression and Belief
   1. Free press (media) 
   2. Free religious expression
   3. Academic freedom, free of extensive political indoctrination
   4. Free private discussion
B. Associational and Organizational Rights
   1. Freedom of assembly and demonstration
   2. Freedom of political organization (including political parties and civic organizations)
   3. Free trade unions
C. Rule of Law
   1. Independent judiciary
   2. Rule of law prevail in civil and criminal matters
   3. Protection from police terror, unjustified imprisonment, or torture. Freedom from war and insurgencies.
   4. Equality under the law
D. Personal Autonomy and Individual Rights
   1. Freedom of travel, residence and employment. 
   2. The right to own property and establish private businesses. 
   3. Personal social freedoms, including gender equality, choice of marriage partners, and size of family
   4. Equality of opportunity

Based on each country's score, we can plot a world map of freedom. Surprisingly, all the non-free countries are geographically linked! The same thing can be said about the free countries.















China and many of its neighbor are non-free. This continuous land stretches westward to central Asia, Middle East, and then down to Africa. China has two most glaringly non-free neighbors: North Korea and Burma.This  is somewhat worrisome. On the other hand, China also has neighbors that are free: Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, and India, to name a few.

We hope this map will change color one day, when all the purple is replaced by green, when the land of China shines with free light. How soon will that day come? I believe it is not far away.

Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Charter 08: The document that landed Liu Xiaobo in jail

I. Preamble


This year marks 100 years since China’s first Constitution, the 60th anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 30th anniversary of the birth of the Democracy Wall, and the 10th year since the Chinese government signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Having experienced a prolonged period of human rights disasters and challenging and tortuous struggles, the awakening Chinese citizens are becoming increasingly aware that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values shared by all humankind, and that democracy, republicanism, and constitutional government make up the basic institutional framework of modern politics. A “modernization” bereft of these universal values and this basic political framework is a disastrous process that deprives people of their rights, rots away their humanity, and destroys their dignity. Where is China headed in the 21st century? Will it continue with this “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it endorse universal values, join the mainstream civilization, and build a democratic form of government? This is an unavoidable decision.

The tremendous historic changes of the mid-19th century exposed the decay of the traditional Chinese autocratic system and set the stage for the greatest transformation China had seen in several thousand years. The Self-Strengthening Movement [1861–1895] sought improvements in China’s technical capability by acquiring manufacturing techniques, scientific knowledge, and military technologies from the West; China’s defeat in the first Sino-Japanese War [1894–1895] once again exposed the obsolescence of its system; the Hundred Days’ Reform [1898] touched upon the area of institutional innovation, but ended in failure due to cruel suppression by the die-hard faction [at the Qing court]. The Xinhai Revolution [1911], on the surface, buried the imperial system that had lasted for more than 2,000 years and established Asia’s first republic. But, because of the particular historical circumstances of internal and external troubles, the republican system of government was short lived, and autocracy made a comeback.

The failure of technical imitation and institutional renewal prompted deep reflection among our countrymen on the root cause of China’s cultural sickness, and the ensuing May Fourth [1919] and New Culture Movements [1915–1921] under the banner of “science and democracy.” But the course of China’s political democratization was forcibly cut short due to frequent civil wars and foreign invasion. The process of a constitutional government began again after China’s victory in the War of Resistance against Japan [1937–1945], but the outcome of the civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists plunged China into the abyss of modern-day totalitarianism. The “New China” established in 1949 is a “people’s republic” in name, but in reality it is a “party domain.” The ruling party monopolizes all the political, economic, and social resources. It has created a string of human rights disasters, such as the Anti-Rightist Campaign, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, June Fourth, and the suppression of unofficial religious activities and the rights defense movement, causing tens of millions of deaths, and exacting a disastrous price from both the people and the country.

The “Reform and Opening Up” of the late 20th century extricated China from the pervasive poverty and absolute totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era, and substantially increased private wealth and the standard of living of the common people. Individual economic freedom and social privileges were partially restored, a civil society began to grow, and calls for human rights and political freedom among the people increased by the day. Those in power, while implementing economic reforms aimed at marketization and privatization, also began to shift from a position of rejecting human rights to one of gradually recognizing them. In 1997 and 1998, the Chinese government signed two important international human rights treaties. In 2004, the National People’s Congress amended the Constitution to add that “[the State] respects and guarantees human rights.” And this year, the government has promised to formulate and implement a “National Human Rights Action Plan.” But so far, this political progress has largely remained on paper: there are laws, but there is no rule of law; there is a constitution, but no constitutional government; this is still the political reality that is obvious to all. The ruling elite continues to insist on its authoritarian grip on power, rejecting political reform. This has caused official corruption, difficulty in establishing rule of law, the absence of of human rights, moral bankruptcy, social polarization, abnormal economic development, destruction of both the natural and cultural environment, no institutionalized protection of citizens’ rights to freedom, property, and the pursuit of happiness, the constant accumulation of all kinds of social conflicts, and the continuous surge of resentment. In particular, the intensification of antagonism between the government and the people, and the dramatic increase in mass incidents, indicate a catastrophic loss of control in the making, suggesting that the backwardness of the current system has reached a point where change must occur.
II. Our Fundamental Concepts
At this historical juncture that will decide the future destiny of China, it is necessary to reflect on the modernization process of the past hundred and some years and reaffirm the following concepts:

Freedom: Freedom is at the core of universal values. The rights of speech, publication, belief, assembly, association, movement, to strike, and to march and demonstrate are all the concrete expressions of freedom. Where freedom does not flourish, there is no modern civilization to speak of.

Human Rights: Human rights are not bestowed by a state; they are inherent rights enjoyed by every person. Guaranteeing human rights is both the most important objective of a government and the foundation of the legitimacy of its public authority; it is also the intrinsic requirement of the policy of “putting people first.” China’s successive political disasters have all been closely related to the disregard for human rights by the ruling establishment. People are the mainstay of a nation; a nation serves its people; government exists for the people.

Equality: The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every individual, regardless of social status, occupation, gender, economic circumstances, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief, are equal. The principles of equality before the law for each and every person and equality in social, economic, cultural, and political rights of all citizens must be implemented.

Republicanism: Republicanism is “joint governing by all, peaceful coexistence,” that is, the separation of powers for checks and balances and the balance of interests; that is, a community comprising many diverse interests, different social groups, and a plurality of cultures and faiths, seeking to peacefully handle public affairs on the basis of equal participation, fair competition, and joint discussion.

Democracy: The most fundamental meaning is that sovereignty resides in the people and the government elected by the people. Democracy has the following basic characteristics:(1) The legitimacy of political power comes from the people; the source of political power is the people. (2) Political control is exercised through choices made by the people. (3) Citizens enjoy the genuine right to vote; officials in key positions at all levels of government must be the product of elections at regular intervals. (4) Respect the decisions of the majority while protecting the basic human rights of the minority. In a word, democracy is the modern public instrument for creating a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Constitutionalism: Constitutionalism is the principle of guaranteeing basic freedoms and rights of citizens as defined by the constitution through legal provisions and the rule of law, restricting and defining the boundaries of government power and conduct, and providing appropriate institutional capability to carry this out. In China, the era of imperial power is long gone, never to return; in the world at large, the authoritarian system is on the wane; citizens ought to become the true masters of their states. The fundamental way out for China lies only in dispelling the subservient notion of reliance on “enlightened rulers” and “upright officials,” promoting public consciousness of rights as fundamental and participation as a duty, and putting into practice freedom, engaging in democracy, and respecting the law.
III. Our Basic Positions
Thus, in the spirit of responsible and constructive citizens, we put forth the following specific positions regarding various aspects of state administration, citizens’ rights and interests, and social development:

1. Constitutional Amendment: Based on the aforementioned values and concepts, amend the Constitution, deleting clauses in the current Constitution that are not in conformity with the principle that sovereignty resides in the people, so that the Constitution can truly become a document that guarantees human rights and allows for the exercise of public power, and become the enforceable supreme law that no individual, group, or party can violate, establishing the foundation of the legal authority for democratizing China.

2. Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances: Construct a modern government that separates powers and maintains checks and balances among them, that guarantees the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive powers. Establish the principle of statutory administration and responsible government to prevent excessive expansion of executive power; government should be responsible to taxpayers; establish the system of separation of powers and checks and balances between the central and local governments; the central power must be clearly defined and mandated by the Constitution, and the localities must exercise full autonomy.

3. Legislative Democracy: Legislative bodies at all levels should be created through direct elections; maintain the principle of fairness and justice in making law; and implement legislative democracy.

4. Judicial Independence: The judiciary should transcend partisanship, be free from any interference, exercise judicial independence, and guarantee judicial fairness; it should establish a constitutional court and a system to investigate violations of the Constitution, and uphold the authority of the Constitution. Abolish as soon as possible the Party’s Committees of Political and Legislative Affairs at all levels that seriously endanger the country’s rule of law. Prevent private use of public instruments.

5. Public Use of Public Instruments: Bring the armed forces under state control. Military personnel should render loyalty to the Constitution and to the country. Political party organizations should withdraw from the armed forces; raise the professional standards of the armed forces. All public employees including the police should maintain political neutrality. Abolish discrimination in hiring of public employees based on party affiliation; there should be equality in hiring regardless of party affiliation.

6. Human Rights Guarantees: Guarantee human rights in earnest; protect human dignity. Set up a Commission on Human Rights, responsible to the highest organ of popular will, to prevent government abuse of public authority and violations of human rights, and, especially, to guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, subpoena, interrogation, or punishment. Abolish the Reeducation-Through-Labor system.

7. Election of Public Officials: Fully implement the system of democratic elections to realize equal voting rights based on “one person, one vote.” Systematically and gradually implement direct elections of administrative heads at all levels. Regular elections based on free competition and citizen participation in elections for legal public office are inalienable basic human rights.

8. Urban-Rural Equality: Abolish the current urban-rural two-tier household registration system to realize the constitutional right of equality before the law for all citizens and guarantee the citizens’ right to move freely.

9. Freedom of Association: Guarantee citizens’ right to freedom of association. Change the current system of registration upon approval for community groups to a system of record-keeping. Lift the ban on political parties. Regulate party activities according to the Constitution and law; abolish the privilege of one-party monopoly on power; establish the principles of freedom of activities of political parties and fair competition for political parties; normalize and legally regulate party politics.

10. Freedom of Assembly: Freedoms to peacefully assemble, march, demonstrate, and express [opinions] are citizens’ fundamental freedoms stipulated by the Constitution; they should not be subject to illegal interference and unconstitutional restrictions by the ruling party and the government.

11. Freedom of Expression: Realize the freedom of speech, freedom to publish, and academic freedom; guarantee the citizens’ right to know and right to supervise [public institutions]. Enact a “News Law” and a “Publishing Law,” lift the ban on reporting, repeal the “crime of inciting subversion of state power” clause in the current Criminal Law, and put an end to punishing speech as a crime.

12. Freedom of Religion: Guarantee freedom of religion and freedom of belief, and implement separation of religion and state so that activities involving religion and faith are not subjected to government interference. Examine and repeal administrative statutes, administrative rules, and local statutes that restrict or deprive citizens of religious freedom; ban management of religious activities by administrative legislation. Abolish the system that requires that religious groups (and including places of worship) obtain prior approval of their legal status in order to register, and replace it with a system of record-keeping that requires no scrutiny.

13. Civic Education: Abolish political education and political examinations that are heavy on ideology and serve the one-party rule. Popularize civic education based on universal values and civil rights, establish civic consciousness, and advocate civic virtues that serve society.

14. Property Protection: Establish and protect private property rights, and implement a system based on a free and open market economy; guarantee entrepreneurial freedom, and eliminate administrative monopolies; set up a Committee for the Management of State-Owned Property, responsible to the highest organ of popular will; launch reform of property rights in a legal and orderly fashion, and clarify the ownership of property rights and those responsible; launch a new land movement, advance land privatization, and guarantee in earnest the land property rights of citizens, particularly the farmers.

15. Fiscal Reform: Democratize public finances and guarantee taxpayers’ rights. Set up the structure and operational mechanism of a public finance system with clearly defined authority and responsibilities, and establish a rational and effective system of decentralized financial authority among various levels of government; carry out a major reform of the tax system, so as to reduce tax rates, simplify the tax system, and equalize the tax burden. Administrative departments may not increase taxes or create new taxes at will without sanction by society obtained through a public elective process and resolution by organs of popular will. Pass property rights reform to diversify and introduce competition mechanisms into the market; lower the threshold for entry into the financial field and create conditions for the development of privately-owned financial enterprises, and fully energize the financial system.

16. Social Security: Establish a social security system that covers all citizens and provides them with basic security in education, medical care, care for the elderly, and employment.

17. Environmental Protection: Protect the ecological environment, promote sustainable development, and take responsibility for future generations and all humanity; clarify and impose the appropriate responsibilities that state and government officials at all levels must take to this end; promote participation and oversight by civil society groups in environmental protection.

18. Federal Republic: Take part in maintaining regional peace and development with an attitude of equality and fairness, and create an image of a responsible great power. Protect the free systems of Hong Kong and Macau .On the premise of freedom and democracy, seek a reconciliation plan for the mainland and Taiwan through equal negotiations and cooperative interaction. Wisely explore possible paths and institutional blueprints for the common prosperity of all ethnic groups, and establish the Federal Republic of China under the framework of a democractic and constitutional government.

19. Transitional Justice: Restore the reputation of and give state compensation to individuals, as well as their families, who suffered political persecution during past political movements; release all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience; release all people convicted for their beliefs; establish a Commission for Truth Investigation to find the truth of historical events, determine responsibility, and uphold justice; seek social reconciliation on this foundation.
IV. Conclusion
China, as a great nation of the world, one of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and a member of the Human Rights Council, ought to make its own contribution to peace for humankind and progress in human rights. Regrettably, however, of all the great nations of the world today, China alone still clings to an authoritarian way of life and has, as a result, created an unbroken nchain of human rights disasters and social crises, held back the development of the Chinese people, and hindered the progress of human civilization. This situation must change! We cannot put off political democratization reforms any longer. Therefore, in the civic spirit of daring to take action, we are issuing Charter 08. We hope that all Chinese citizens who share this sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether officials or common people and regardless of social background, will put aside our differences to seek common ground and come to take an active part in this citizens’ movement, to promote the great transformation of Chinese society together, so that we can soon establish a free, democratic, and constitutional nation, fulfilling the aspirations and dreams that our countrymen have been pursuing tirelessly for more than a hundred years.

[Original Chinese version 中文]