Monday, October 15, 2007

My response to 曾特首's comments on Friday

Our Chief Executive Sir Donald Tsang was interviewed by RTHK on his policy address. The following questions and answers were about our constitutional reforms between the host of the show and our Chief Executive.

… … … … … … … … … … … …

Host :

I was struck by one phrase at the end of the policy address, towards the end of the conclusion, you say, we promote democratic development without compromising social stability or government efficiency, that kind of implies that democratic development does compromise social stability or government efficiency?

… … … … … … … … … … … …

Sir Donald Tsang :

It can, it can, if we go to the extreme, people go to the extreme, and you have a cultural revolution, for instance, in China. When people take everything into their hands, then you cannot govern the place.

… … … … … … … … … … … …

Host :

But Cultural Revolution wasn't really an extreme example of democracy.

… … … … … … … … … … … …

Sir Donald Tsang :

What is it? People taking power into their own hands! Now, this is what it means by democracy, if you take it to the full swing. In other democracies, even if you have an elected person, then you overturn the policy in California, for instance, you have initiative number, number, number what, then you overturn policy taken by the government, that's not necessarily conducive to efficient government.

… … … … … … … … … … … …

特首講英文 番書仔繙譯

如果「曾特首」(2005)係隻股票,佢經過上禮拜初施政報告大幅上揚後,喺禮拜五股價狂瀉。原因,相信大家都知,曾特首嗰日上過番文電台,講過嘢。不過可能係番文,好多人聽完,完全唔明,更加唔知點解要講。

今日,孫柏文想同特首曾蔭權講:「全特區得我明你想講乜。」

大家可能會話:「你明因你係番書仔。」大家啱得一半,因為通街都有番書仔。其實,得我明特首嘅原因,係因為特區得兩個「政治家」。一個就係曾蔭權,一個就係我(當年參選立法會,有咁樣叫過自己),所以得我明。

作為一個「政治家」,一個社會裏面嘅「政府」同其他機構唔同嘅地方,就係「政府」係唯一一個機構,可以強迫市民,做啲佢哋唔會自願做嘅嘢。即係有monopoly power of coercion。例如,如果我迫你畀錢我,就叫做打劫,「政府」迫你就叫做抽稅。

如果一個政府唔能夠行使強迫市民嘅專利權,例如抽你稅,你唔畀都冇事。
或者唔能夠保護強迫市民嘅專利權,例如我收陀地,你唔畀就有事。
對一個政治家嚟講,嗰個政府就係failed state。阿富汗就係個好例子,抽稅冇人畀,通過條「不可謀殺」嘅法例,冇人遵守,不過又拉唔到人。個例子係咪好extreme?係。不過特首嗰日係講 extreme。

政府失去強迫專利權

咁點解要無端端講文革?因為當時祖國政府失去咗強迫市民嘅專利權,好多市民一叫自己做「紅衞兵」,就可以到處殺人。政府頓然喪失殺人嘅專利權。甚至去到政府不能阻止市民殺其他人。個例子係咪好extreme?係。不過特首嗰日係講 extreme。無端端提文革,被人批鬥都係好自然嘅事。

咁點解曾特首又無端端講花旗國加州?用佢做個「極端」嘅例子?我相信特首講緊03年嘅加州。當年,就連《經濟學人》都寫咗篇題為「Is the Golden State governable?」嘅文,因加州嘅財政完全失控。篇文話,加州州政府嘅代議政制representative democracy制度,面臨崩潰,因為佢哋用嘅direct democracy制度出問題。作個比喻,就有如今日特區市民進行公投,決定立法將彌敦道由三線變四線。不過點收樓、路點起等等,由行政機關搞掂。

如果咁「極端」,又唔見加州當時陸沉?呢個就係政治家會諗嘅問題。加州市民面對嘅政府,有聯邦政府、州政府同市政府。因政府嘅強迫專利權分散,所以就算有一環完全崩潰,都唔會陸沉。《經濟學人》當時話如果加州係個國家,IMF一早進駐。

解釋完畀大家聽之後,我想問特首:「你知唔知我哋要嘅係代議政制全面普選,要嘅係立法會同行政長官普選。加州嘅公投制度,關乜春事?」最後,相信曾特首你睇完呢篇文章之後,一定覺得孫柏文係副局長嘅材料。不過,我相信你唔會搵我。因為,始終一山不能藏二虎,一代不能容兩個政治家!這就是歷史的殘酷定律。


12 comments:

  1. 你段英文和我 blog 文果段,一模一樣,相住是一個 source copy 得來朒。

    ReplyDelete
  2. LA係21世紀地球村既一個示範單位,裹面所發生嘅所有事物係一個spectacle,唔會有人當真(包括原居民)... 嗰次1992年既LA roit,係原自一個video clip -黑人比白人警察打(喺大陸日日發生),但係一個星期後no body cares!!只有天真特首重攞黎做analog...真失敗!!

    suggest reading for 天真特首: Baudrillard Simulacra or http://bldgblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/greater-los-angeles.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mr Tsang is a kind of street smart, I supposed. His expenditure on infrastructure and immigrant policy probably is good, but I think he has a double intention. The second intention being distracting people from democracy - when people eat well and live well, busy at making money, then nobody will strive for democracy. Read today's news? Our government PR Mr Lam said we have to abide to the Basic Law. People bring out the rules and regulation usually mean that please forget it - there will be no democracy. Democracy = Foreign force intervening our internal affairs, right?

    ReplyDelete
  4. 睇到我打晒冷震。

    ReplyDelete
  5. 如果特首不找你,不是因為你倆都是政治家。

    恰好相反,因為你們都不是政治家。

    (其實特首好很憎政治家)

    ReplyDelete
  6. 曾從來都是行政長官,以前是"行政"的"長官", 現在是"行政長官"。 都是先受權後論政,而不是因論政而得權的!

    他當時不能填正職,才亂填"政治家"。

    而你,大概當時畢業後未有正職,又以為政治可養家才填"政治家"。(jusy kidding)

    P.S. 政治家在他的上頭和反對派內

    ReplyDelete
  7. I too was 亂填"政治家" hahahaha

    I was trying to make fun of other candidates.

    But the joke... back fired somewhat.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have to admire your creativity. Heard of Steven Colbert?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Colbert for President!

    hahahahaha

    remember, silent t

    ReplyDelete
  10. 【明報專訊】春節期間,看了政務司長曾蔭權介紹的一本書,書名叫《自由的前途》(The Future of Freedom),作者是《新聞周刊》國際版主編Fareed Zakaria,這本書主要講過去十年美國以至全球都浸淫在民主浪潮裏,不獨政治制度和決定愈來愈講求一人一票,就連經濟及民生領域也是這樣,消費者的無形投票主導市場供應,改變了金融市場的遊戲規則,打碎了專業人士高高在上的神話,造成全面的權威滑落。作者認為,民主制度是好的,也是必要的,但過度而不受節制的民主,則是短視和功利的,而且容易滋生新的獨裁,或引致「多數人的暴政」,危害個人自由。

    http://life.mingpao.com/cfm/dailynews3b.cfm?File=20040127/nclvx002/vx002.txt

    ReplyDelete