| 【编者按】 |
以下是华夏论坛上的一群读者在阅读了曹长青的“中国的‘绑票’制度”后发表的感想。从中我们可以看到，杨建利的“非暴力”思想已经得到了很多人的共鸣。我们也可以看到，很多人认识到为什么杨建利去牺牲自己。正如QA先生所说：“he want to sacrifice his freedom to wakes up many people to his belief”。
|
|
|
| 曹长青 |
我不知道杨建利有一天被中共作为人质"出口"到美国，获得自由之后是否还是主张对共产党进行非暴力抗争，... |
| Jia |
：“非暴力抗争”这条路不通，还有什么选择？ |
| gpanda |
I think your conclusion is wrong. you can't say “非暴力抗争”这条路不通 just by this incident. do you know how did Martin Luther King Jr over come difficulties even here in USA? remember he was killed by white racist? I haven't heard anyone says ”非暴力抗争“这条路不通 here yet other than the black extremist. and “非暴力抗争”is working here from today's society, I would say. |
| 2lips |
“非暴力抗争”能成功的前提之一是：政府遵守宪法。甘地、马丁路德金若再世到中国领导“非暴力抗争”，早象杨建利被流氓当局关起来了。
“非暴力抗争”当下在中国行不通。
在外力作用下，中共出现裂痕时，裂痕会变大。那时杨建利等有理性有良好西方民主素养的精英就可回去组党，进行合法斗争。
下策是以暴易暴。若中共流氓当局耍流氓耍到底，那对不起，请流氓靠边站，流氓的人权恐无法保障了。
在中国，百姓的公民意识还几乎没有，还需所谓的启蒙。在百姓的公民意识普及之前，即使建立了民主制度，没有百姓的参政，照样行不通。
中共流氓当局愚弄人民，其用意在於不让百姓有公民意识。
依据自然法，人民推翻暴政是合法的。故暴力革命也是合法的。 |
| gpanda |
“非暴力抗争”能成功的前提之一是：政府遵守宪法。甘地、马丁路德金若再世到中 国领导“非暴力抗争”，早象杨建利被流氓当局关起来了。
I don't think this assumption is right either. I don't know about 马丁路德金, but 甘地 was in South africa's prison for some time. and a lot of 马丁路德金 follower was in prison, right? and some of them were killed too, in alabama, or other southern state. we haven't count those black churches were burned, little black girls were killed in church. and there were a lot lynching at south at the time as well, which many black were kill without a court trial.
how about nelson mandera? he was in South Africa's prison for how many years? can you say “非暴力抗争” is not working at South africa?
if “非暴力抗争”当下在中国行不通, then "暴力抗争” would be even worse. I think the economic development policy of chinese goverment right now is the best option for chinese/china now. if you don't like the chinese goverment for some reason, and want changes, that I understand. but if you want "暴力抗争”, then I have to ask your motive. or your way of thinking/logic. |
| Serenity |
gpanda honey,
Gandhi was an Indian.
I think you meant Nelson Mandela who was the first Black President of South Africa. |
| gpanda |
Serenity:
Gandhi's early years is in south africa, and I think he broke the parti law by siting in the white only section of the train, and was arested.
I can not find the exact book to should you, but I think you can go to library to check some Gandhi book, it should be in there. if it is not there, let me know again. :) |
| 02139 |
gpanda,
I can help you on this.
From a book that I have "The Gandhi Reader" edited by homer A. Jack
"The Black Act was put into effect in July 1907, and called for the registration of all Asians in South Africa. When only a few Indians registered, the government decided to make arrests to enforce the Act......Gandhi was in prison less than three weeks... A compromise was reached whereby if the Asians in South Africa would register voluntarily, Smuts promised to repeal the Black Act ..."
He was later arrested many times during the Great March. |
| gpanda |
02139:
thanks, I am glad we have good readers like you in this forum. :)
cheers |
| Serenity |
Thank both of you for the info. I learn something new today. |
| Serenity |
By law the U.S. does not negotiate with terrorists. If it were considered "hijacking" for Chinese government to hold Dr. Yang hostage, wouldn't it be illegal for American government to negotiate his safe return?
Remember Dr. Yang supposedly does not work for U.S. government. Though there is humanitarian aspect of this to consider, U.S. government doesn't really have legal ground to take any actions. |
| gpanda |
If it were considered "hijacking" for Chinese government to hold Dr. Yang hostage,
No one has consider chinese goverment a terroist goverment yet, not since last time I checked the news. I don't know why you got the idea of hijacking. if Dr. Yang is arested by chinese goverment (secretive or public), then no matter if Dr yang is american citizen or not, it is not hijicking. If Dr. Yang is american citizen, then US goverment has the right ask chinese goverment about her citizen's status, why he was arested. if Dr. Yang is chinese citizen, then US goverment can not do anything about it. Am I right? |
| Serenity |
gpanda honey,
is "绑票" not translated to "hijacking"?
Act of "hijack" is committed by criminals or terrorists, is it not?
If Mr. Cao calls detention of Dr. Yang a hostage situation, can we not safely assume that Mr. Cao considers Chinese government a terrorist government?
If Chinese government is a terrorist government as Mr. Cao implies, is it not illegal for U.S. government to negotiate? |
| gpanda |
did you see "绑票" is in quotation? I think they say "绑票" is emontional, not objectional.
cheers |
| 2lips |
I don't want to convince you but just want to say that the CCP regime in China is totally different from the British colony government in Ghandi's day and the American government in Martin Luther King, Jr.'s day.
I consider FaLunGong as a non-violence-non-coorporation movement in China. Have you heard of the brutal persecution on FaLunGong followers?
I don't believe in FaLunGong's preaching. But I admire their perseverance. I wish their non-violence-non-coorporation movement will bring down the CCP regime. But I doubt it. The reason is the same: the CCP regimes is a major violator of the Chinese constitution. It is a rogue regime waiting to be toppled.
FalunGong will be a test on whether non-violence-non-coorporation movement will succeed in China. |
| guerrillaca |
WHO'S SEEN NON-VIOLENCE REGIME CHANGE IN THE WHOLE CHINA HISTORY EVER ?
FORGET ABOUT IT !
NO WAY ! |
| zyxlady |
Interesting point. I remember in history class, we were taught about "chan2 rang4" five thousand years ago? No wonder we, Chinese worship our ancestor-they were in deed much advanced than their progeniture. |
| QA |
The thing hasn’t been done doesn't mean it can't be done. I think Dr. Yang's approach is the best prescription to change the regime in China. After all, the life of Chinese people is getting a lot better than before, I don’t think it is fair to ask people abandon their life to have a revolution against CCP?
Dr Yang is a brave man. I don't know why he was back there, but I think he want to sacrifice his freedom to wake up many people to his belief. He is a true warrior who puts his belief ahead of his personal life. The longer the regime is holding Dr Yang, the more people will know and be convinced to his belief. Though it is very sad for himself and his family, I don't think Dr. Yang's sacrifice will be completely wasted.
At least, we should show some respect. |
| gpanda |
if FaLunGong can't sucess, then we or someone else have to find a way.
in this day of age, if you want use "暴力抗争” to change goverment, it will be a crime, from my point of view. if you want to change the goverment, and you have to use "暴力抗争”, that means
1. your ideas is not good enough to have enough support from the people.
2. you are not smart enough to make people to believe your idea is good for them.
3. your ideas just plain dumb and everyone can see it.
Russia have provide an example, although we can argue if the change of goverment is good or not, but they didn't use “暴力抗争” to change the goverment. and as far as I know, USSR is more brutal than CCP.
Moreover, if the only thing you can think is “暴力抗争” , I would say that it is because your too dumb to imagine/dream a new/better way, too lazy to practice/apply a new/better way yourself. |
| 公孙无忌 |
Just go rent the movie "Gandhi". What you said (Mr. Gamdhi's arrest in South Africa) is depicted in the movie. |