Tag: freedom

Hong Kong SAR is Not a Democracy!

Could anybody out there give me a quick introduction to the Hong Kong government and its political landscape? I’ve always had the impression it had a democracy and there are like dozens of political parties in the city.

Hong Kong is a semi-autonomous city that is a Special Administrative Region (SAR) within China under the Basic Law (HK’s mini-constitution).   In essence, Hong Kong SAR is semi-democratic since it does not have universal suffrage, a basic tenet of a democracy.

The Chief Executive, currently CY Leung, is the head of the government in Hong Kong SAR and is answerable directly to Beijing.

According to the Basic Law, the Chief Executive (CE) must be a Chinese citizen who is a permanent resident of the HKSAR with no right of abode in any foreign country. The person must be at least 40 years old, and has ordinarily resided in Hong Kong for a continuous period of no less than 20 years

The Chief Executive is elected by 1200 members drawn from functional constituencies and government officials.  There are no direct elections for the CE post as explained below:

However, because so many of the functional constituency parties are instructed by Beijing for whom to vote, the outcome was already known regardless of televised debates and campaigning.

Hong Kong also has a unicameral legislature popularly called the LegCo, or Legislative Council. The LegCo consists of 70 elected members with a fixed 4-year term. Lawmakers in the LegCo, are either elected by direct elections for the 35 seats representing geographical constituencies (districts) or by functional constituencies representing  professional or special interest groups (numbering around 230000) for the other 35 seats in the 70-seat LegCo.

The major functions of the LegCo are to enact, amend or repeal laws, check and approve budgets, approve taxation and public expenditure, and review the work of the government. Due to the design of the Legislative Council, the majority of elected officials tend to be from pro-Beijing political parties or groupings, which often work together for corporate-government interests.

Currently, two groups are fighting for influence in the Hong Kong SAR government:

Pro-Beijing coalition: political parties united by the political ideology of being closer to Beijing government, but differ on other issues.  Since the handover, the Pro-Beijing camp have never lost being the majority in the LegCo, thanks to support from functional constituents and collaboration among the Pro-Beijing parties.  Notable parties include the DAB (Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong), Liberal Party, and FTU (Federation of Trade Unions).

Pan-Democrats: political parties united by calls for democratic reform, universal suffrage and human rights.  Pan-Democrats are often labelled an “opposition camp” by various groups and media aligned with the mainland Chinese government, since the Pan-Democrats goal run counter to values promoted by the Chinese Communist Party.  Recently, 27 democratic legislators formed the Alliance for True Democracy, a formal coalition to show solidarity for genuine democracy. Notable parties include the Democratic Party, Civic Party, and People Power.


NJTransit sets record Ticket Sales, Ridership at all-time highs

NJTransit: A Successful Mass Transit Super Bowl

by Jersey Mike

On Super Sunday, thousands of satisfied fans were able to arrive and leave the MetLife stadium at record time.  NJTransit, which had spent months preparing for Super Bowl 48, touted their high ridership numbers as a key indicator of success in playing part to the first “Mass Transit Super Bowl” of its kind.

“This..set an all-time record for ridership, which was previously 22,000 for (the) September 2009 U2 concert,” said NJ Transit spokesman John Durso Jr.

The crowds was in surprisingly good spirits, and they continued the Seahawks and Broncos chanting that had started on the train.  Many fans were impressed by the large number of trains and mass transit networks.

“We live in the country,” a Broncos fan said. “We have cars — we don’t use subways or anything like that.”

Surprisingly, despite angry rumors of people fainting, NJTransit assured us that there are no incidents of people fainting or being addressed by local EMT services.

NJTransit said the crowds were being orderly and passengers were being moved out in a “safe and efficient” manner. Dozens of buses were later brought in to help shuffle fans out of the area and ease the congestion.

Thanks to NJTransit, New Jersey and many football fans were able to enjoy a green and safe “Mass Transit Super Bowl.”

“The number of people moved, not only on game day, but in and around New York City, the number of people moved to multiple events, in and out, I think that’s an extraordinary achievement,” said Eric Grubman, the league’s executive vice president of NFL ventures and business operations.

Grubman added that NJTransit successfully moved 30,000 people from the venue in a way that was safe and designed to be easy.

Once again, NJTransit has shown the rest of the country how a “Jersey Strong” mass transit system can benefit the state and the entire country.

Thank You Jack Hunter

Today I learned Jack Hunter has resigned from Randall Paul’s staff after allegations of his past as a Southern “Shock Jock” came to light from an obscure blog promoting neo-conservative and reactionary views.

The blog alleged that Jack used to hang around neo-Confederate groups when he was in his youth and used to make a series of off-colour antics as a “Southern Avenger” character in the spirit of stupid fun.  As a result of these allegations, the corporate media has used this to paint Mr. Hunter as a far-right reactionary with an intolerant worldview and as an attempt to smear Randall Paul through Jack Hunter’s past antics.

The Jack Hunter of the present is nothing like the Jack Hunter in his youth.  The person I met is articulate, open-minded, tolerant, and familiar with major issues in the country.  This seems a far cry from the naive youth who believes Lincoln deserved to be shot for winning the Civil War, different from the guy running around screaming off-colour comments while wearing a wresting mask decorated with the Stars and Bars and far from the stereotypical Southerner who fears venturing beyond the county line.

At the same time, it does show how individuals can mature and grow as they are exposed to more forward-thinking and open ideas.  Being exposed to universal ideas of liberty and of the possibility of an open society did bring out the best in Jack Hunter as seen in his book about the Tea Party and his contributions to the American public discourse.

That being said, his resignation, most likely at the advice of his colleagues and politicians, is a sad example of the consequences of past behaviour.  It’s a lesson that we should all be careful about how and what we say or write in public as it can be easily taken out of context or used against us in other ways.  This is even more relevant given that the NSA is currently recording all possible written or verbal communications on their massive cloud-based databases.

I can only hope Jack takes a break from all this nonsense to reflect, recharge and return to the scene when the time is right.


Charter 08 – 零八宪章

English Version:

I. Foreword

A hundred years have passed since the writing of China’s first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China’s signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values.

By departing from these values, the Chinese government’s approach to “modernization” has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions.

The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called “the greatest changes in thousands of years” for China. A “self-strengthening movement” followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China’s humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China’s system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China’s imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia’s first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream.

The failure of both “self-strengthening” and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a “cultural illness” was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of “science and democracy.” Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis.

Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The “new China” that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that “the people are sovereign” but in fact set up a system in which “the Party is all-powerful.” The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth (Tiananmen Square) Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens’ rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled.

During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of “Reform and Opening” gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of “rights” to a partial acknowledgment of them.

In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase “respect and protect human rights”; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a “national human rights action plan.” Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change.

The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people.

As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional.

II. Our Fundamental Principles

This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows:

Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals.

Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China’s recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime’s disregard for human rights.

Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld.

Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of “fairness in all under heaven.” It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition.

Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics: (1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people. (2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make. (3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections. (4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends.

III. What We Advocate

Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an “enlightened overlord” or an “honest official” and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens’ rights, and social development:

1. A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China’s democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party.

2. Separation of powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments.

3. Legislative democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles.

4. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically-sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes.

5. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations shall be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end.

6. Guarantee of Human Rights. There shall be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of “Reeducation through Labor” must be abolished.

7. Election of Public Officials. There shall be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on “one person, one vote.” The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable.

8. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live.

9. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernmental groups, which requires a group to be “approved,” should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties.

10. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction.

11. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to “the crime of incitement to subvert state power” must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes.

12. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic.

13. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens’ rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society.

14. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market.

15. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants.

16. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment.

17. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendents and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of non-governmental organizations.

18. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals, and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China.

19. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation.

China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China’s own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer.

Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens’ movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization.


Chinese (中文) Version:




当然具体情况还要具体分析, 说到《和平宪章》,由于特定的艰难条件,它的历史作用主要是打破六四镇压的血腥恐怖,为中国民主运动的再掀高潮铺路,同时作为中国大陆本土的第一个民运纲领性文献为之指明了方向,就它本身的作用而论,并没有起到形成共识、凝聚力量、开创良性互动局面的作用。

第一, 前者非常简约,并且主要是就事论事,没有对历史和理论做多少说明,相反,后者相对全面的回顾了近代历史,并且对普世价值的核心概念作了逐条解说。
第二, 前者重点放在和平转型上,后者重点放在对转型结果的诉求上。
第三, 前者注重的是民主转型的启动操作,后者注重的是宪政民主的建构本身。










《和平宪章》人士中,文凭程度最高的是李海,他是北京大学哲学系研究生,其他人基本上没有高等文凭。与此同时,《和平宪章》人士个个都有非比寻常的社会政治活动实践经验:89民运中,李海是北京大学学生自治会对外联络部部长,刘念春是民主墙时代的民办刊物、朦胧派诗歌的摇篮《今天》的编辑,陈旅是民主墙时代的《人权同盟》的主要成员,沙裕光是民主墙时代的民办刊物《中华四五》的编辑,何德普是民主墙时代民办刊物《北京青年》的编辑,杨周是民主墙时代上海最活跃也最早被判刑的民主斗士,周国强也是民主墙时代的《今天》的编辑,并且是89民运中北京“工自联” 的法律顾问,钱玉民则是北京“工自联”的秘书长!所有这些人都有着很长的民主人权活动的实践经历,也几乎都为民主人权事业坐过牢受过迫害。

《零八宪章》由于在社会上获得了广泛传播的机会,故上到知识界文化界艺术界,下到访民群众和普罗大众都有大量人员签名。但是,如果我掌握的情况不错的话,那么它的起草人则都是具有高等教育背景的知识分子。不仅刘晓波是博士,夏先生是北京大学教授,张先生是宪政学者,其他参与起草和发起的人也都具有很高的学历背景,从事的也都是知识性工作,由于他们所居地位相对较高,在民主人权活动第一线的公开斗争经验较少,缺乏开展民主人权活动的实践经历 ,因此对宪章的草写缺乏操作性考量,没有想一想自己提出来的东西当局有无理论上的可接受性,没有考虑以目前的力量对比自己拿出的宪章能否让当局狗咬刺猬无处下口。


应该说,把人权原则作为第一条要求提出来,在这种情况下就已经涵盖了民主世界的一切现代政治的理论精华,与此同时,当局即使一时不会认可,也没有理由高调反对,更不宜以此治罪,至于此后的各条各款,则都有强烈的针对性,都是国人普遍关心的重大问题,也都必然会在人权和正义基础上获得解决。我们把这些条款提出来,只要能在社会上 流布开来,就不难获得有利害关系的广大民众的热烈拥护和积极参与。





“18、联邦共和:以平等、公正的态度参与维持地区和平与发展,塑造一个负责任的大国形象。维护香港、澳门的自由制度。在自由民主的前提下,通过平等谈判与 合作互动的方式寻求海峡两岸和解方案。以大智慧探索各民族共同繁荣的可能途径和制度设计,在民主宪政的架构下建立中华联邦共和国。”







第一, 从当前说,中共已经掌握了控制国家的超级能力,它的庞大国家机器通过两种手段足以镇压一切和任何暴力反抗的图谋。首先,它的国情监控系统足以查明任何十几个几十个人以上的暴力反抗图谋,所以,规模小了根本不足以撼动中共统治,一切稍有规模的武装反抗中共统治的企图则都不可能不在早期准备中被当局侦破,其次,中国早已不是民众可以“斩木为兵揭竿为旗”既能足以和当局的长矛大刀抗衡并取得胜利的时代,国家暴力足以轻而易举的镇压一切民众的暴力反抗,并且将其真正从肉体上“消灭在萌芽状况”。从这种情况来看,一切暴力革命、武装反抗推翻中共统治的做法都是自寻死路愚不可及。

第二, 中国已经不是二十世纪上半叶的中国,那时中国刚开始进入工业革命时代,大批失地农民成了中共煽动暴力夺取政权的最好愚弄对象,赤贫农民也还和几千年王朝循环时期的农民一样,反正没饭吃,狠下一条心,要么死了拉倒,要么打进京城坐江山。今日中国的社会大众包括农民接受了中共利用大众尤其是农民打江山,打下江山加倍欺压大众和农民的教训,也因为市场经济发展使大多数人有了一点财产,就都希望守着自己的财产过日子,通过自己的劳动一点点的改善生活,不会再受革命家的蛊惑去为成功之将当万具枯骨,还因为这个时代已经成了人人都可以娱乐至死的时代,再穷的人也可以守着个电视机影碟机看个不停,也没有多少人有衣食之虞,故已经没有几个人会铤而走险。总之,凡是在中国大陆的人都清楚,今日中国并不存在能够发动起来进行暴力革命的社会大众

第三, 当然,今天确实有不少聪明人在煽动暴力革命,却绝不担心自己性命难保,因为他们都在国外煽动国内的人这么做,或者在国内躲在无人得知的地方匿名在互联网之类的地方煽动别人这么做,他们惯于让别人去冒风险, 让别人去丧命,他们自己是绝不会在中国大陆本土公开从事他们所号召的暴力革命的。前段时间闹得沸沸扬扬的“革命”鼓噪中,我就亲历了这样一件事:国外某个激进团体派人在网上动员我发动人们这么做的同时,他人在海外尚且还怕我看见了真面目,视屏对话中居然还要把自己藏起来!这么做的人还不聪明至极么?让国内的人去送死,他们是绝对安全的,但这么做的结果能达到他们的“伟大革命目标”?所以,对这些煽动暴力革命的人我要说,如果你在国外,请你回来搞,如果你在国内,请你公开搞,如果你煽动别人,请你亲自搞!几十年来我坚持民主人权活动的同时坚持“和平、理性、非暴力”,并且一直首当其冲身体力行,希望那些煽动搞暴力革命的人也如我知行合一,当尖兵滚地雷始终冲在最前面。

第四, 况且历史的教训早已告诉我们,暴力夺权者必然暴力掌权,绝不会给国家社会带来民主自由,相反,历史的经验充分证明,自由是一波一波的国民运动争得的,民主是在选举制度的实施中一步步发展成熟的,绝不是暴力革命革出来的,暴力革命在最好的情况下也只是赶走了独裁者,从而为建立民主自由的社会开辟道路,更多的则是被野心家利用,是社会在流血漂杵之后还是无法迅速建立民主制度。

第五, 从我们中国的国家、社会、大众的根本利益来说,也只有和平转型是唯一选择。和平转型对国家、社会、大众的利益损害最小,这是就客观效果说;人民不会起来暴力革命,只会起来和平表达意愿,这是从原因上说。对当局而言,暴力革命意味着他们的毁灭,因此只会不计代价的镇压,和平转型以承认他们的许多既得利益为前提,在一定条件下,也就是在民众压力够大,反对派组织够强,同时做法也够温和理性的情况下,当局是完全可以接受的。关于这一点,就涉及到“转型正义”。正义是让一切人随时随地得其所应得,转型正义就是在转型过程中随时随地确保统治者方面的人身财产权利不受侵犯,对其过去在特定历史条件下的罪恶,可以清查,但要赦免——这就是“第一次宽恕”。也就是说,为了和平转型,必须对统治者进行“赎买”,用确保他们的部分特权,同等保障他们的全部人权,来逐步交换他们所掌握的统治权。

第六, 反对和平转型原则的人第一条理由是中共当局犯下了那么多反人类罪,至今还在无恶不作,因此中国没有任何和平转型的希望。在我看来,说中共比德国法西斯还坏证据充分,说中国不能和平转型则毫无道理。中共最残酷的罪行是毛泽东仿效苏联犯下的,邓小平“复辟资本主义”以后一代代又犯了不少反人类罪,但是,毕竟一代比一代要理性一点,总体上说做的孽少一点,再加上他们已经从暴力夺权意识形态至上的军事强人换成了锦衣玉食的天潢贵胄和谨小慎微的技术官僚,其现实利益已经向金钱至上利益至上转化,意识形态是不能谈判不能分割的,所以以前的确无法指望其接受普世价值,现在的基本情况已经完全不同,金钱至上意味着利益至上,而利益是可以切割的。这样,就像台湾的民主转型和对“228”事件的认罪只能发生在蒋氏父子死后一样,到有重大血债的死得差不多了以后,新的统治者在全民压力下被迫和平转型是必然的,因为那时候他们确保既得利益的办法将不再是把持保不住的绝对权力,在能确保其生命财产安全的前提下,当然是顺应历史潮流。










1 白人男子的私有财产权
2 言论自由权
3 信仰自由权



比方说,在没有进行过基层选举、没有自由政党, 或者基层选举还没有坚实的基础、自由政党还没有充分运作的情况下,能够搞好全国领导人和国会的选举吗?




(十几年来,大陆上的经济体制发生了巨大变化,对此我们深表赞赏 。然而,正如当代世界历定事实已充分表明的,市场经济的迅猛发展必然要求实行多元化的民主政治。鉴于当前世界结束冷战,走向新秩序,鉴于所有中国人都关注中国未来的和平发展,我们特提出本宪章。)






















刘念春 邮编:100027
杨周 邮编:200002 电话:3732605
秦永敏 邮编:430080