你知道外交部又在反对什么吗？

文/余晓平

    中国人喜欢反对一个自己根本就不了解的东西，原因是别人反对了，自己也就跟着反对。这是中国长期以来被人奴役的主要原因，因此说中国人民历史上的苦难深重跟其民族的劣根性有关。缺乏独立思考，懒于探究事物背后的东西，人云亦云，造成被人欺骗和奴役。人们总觉得这些欺骗和奴役一定会来自国家的外部。其实正好相反，来自外部的东西往往会引起人们的警觉，而发生在国家内部同是中国人之间的欺骗和奴役带有很强的隐蔽性，往往有人打着防御外敌的旗号来奴役本国人，大到一个国家，小到一条街道上的黑社会，都是用同样的套路。

    和大家分享一个我个人的经验。无论你去赞同还是反对一种东西，一定要了解这个东西的本身，最好再去了解其周边连带的事物，然后自己去判断。这种方法并不是说一定要得出一个结论，而是养成一个独立思考的习惯，长此下去，很少有人能骗得了你。如果有人阻止你去了解，那么阻止一方的言论往往是相反的，因为他不敢让你自己来评判，说明心中有鬼。倘若你自己懒于去探究，那就是你自己的问题了。

    最近外交部又在强烈反对什么东西？和以往一样，其反对的东西到底是什么，根本就不让你知道，这就意味着不让你来自由评判，你不信在网上搜一下，中国官方肯定不会将其反对的内容公布出来。这就像是我告诉你别人商店里的馒头有毒，你未必真的去尝，至少你要去探究到底是不是毒死人了，到底怎么有毒了。如果你轻易相信了，我就可以把我的馒头加价卖给你，或者你被饿死。

    如果你去关心中国的情况，当然会去看中国官方媒体对中国现状长篇累牍的赞美之辞，这没有问题。但这忽略了事物的两面性，人们口口声声说要客观判断事物，却忽略该事物信息的全面性。我们小时候学哲学的时候知道，有正必有反，你只看到正的一面，那就肯定有问题。从历史上来看，越是盛世的时候就越是百花齐放，百家争鸣，言论自由。因为国家的统治者不担心百姓造反。

    我们来说说最近的这个报告。先介绍一下到底是什么地方出的这个报告。美国国会于2000年10月成立了美国国会及行政当局中国委员会(Congressional Executive Commission on China, CECC)。简单的说，这个委员会专门研究和监督中国的人权状况和法治发展，每年并向国会和总统就中国在这些领域的发展提交年度报告。

    该委员会办公室主任约翰.福尔德介绍说：“在中国加入世贸组织谈判过程的最后阶段，大部分国会议员同意给予中国永久正常贸易关系是个好主意，是美国的利益所在；但是，很多议员对中国的人权状况和法治发展等问题感到关注。于是，有议员提出建议应该成立一个委员会，这个委员会将由参议院、众议院和行政部门官员组成，全年注意这些问题的发展，并向国会领导人和总统提出报告。”

    这个委员会每年必须向国会领导人和总统就中国在这些领域上的发展提交年度报告。 这个委员会成员包括9名参议员、9名众议员和5名总统任命的资深行政官员。除了委员之外，这个委员会还有一群由美国的中国问题专家组成的专业人员，包括专门研究中国宗教自由、劳工权利、西藏问题、因特网新闻自由、法制改革等问题的专家。

    委员会平时通过举行正式听证会和非正式的圆桌讨论会邀请学者、活动人士、政府官员、企业领袖等作证。除此之外，委员会人员也会时常前往中国搜集资料，和中国官员、学者和分析人士会晤，了解当地的人权状况和法治发展。这些都是年度报告的参考资料来源。

    根据美国国会暨行政当局中国委员会网站的说明，委员会认识到，只有中国人民可以决定中国的发展方向和未来，美国并不能把自己的意志强加在13亿中国人民身上。不过，委员会鼓励中国政府尊重中国本身宪法和法律中赋予人民的权利，并希望中国政府能遵守国际人权标准。委员会强调，并不寻求把美国的标准加诸于中国。

    看到这里，我们想起来外交部经常说的一句话了，那就是“西方政府借.......粗暴干涉中国内政”。那么请问，什么叫干涉？美国的所有报告，比如说军力报告、人权报告，都是在表达自己对中国的观察，是给美国国会作为参考的，谈何干涉呢？干涉的概念是你中国政府一定按照我的意愿执行，中国政府别听他的就完了嘛，怎么呢干涉得成呢？任何报告只能干涉到美国内部，干涉不到中国的政府。

  美国人有其自己的价值观，即便是因为价值观不同而采取的经济制裁，也是双方受损的事情。如果人家情愿受损，你可以说活该，也不可能反过来干涉别人。其实糟糕的就在这里，中国人民是被绑架的，国际间所有的经济制裁针对的是政府，百姓只是跟着倒霉。百姓倒霉了以后该反抗的是谁都搞不清楚，那么国际间的制裁便失去了效用。因此近年来发达国家取消对粮食的禁运，而是采取一些限制措施，让一个侵犯人权的政府太顺利了是对人类的犯罪。

    我强烈地反对国外势力干涉中国的内政，他们也没那个本事干涉。那么中国的内政到底是由谁来决定的，中国人民自己能干涉一下吗？

——————————————————————————————

    原文在以下网站http://www.cecc.gov/，原文节选前两章，翻译出来肯定会被和谐掉，不翻译出来都有可能被和谐掉，说明有人怕呀。有兴趣的人可以通过网上翻译软件译成中文来阅读。

INTRODUCTION

The China of today is vastly different from that of 30 years ago, when major economic reforms began, and even 10 years ago, when China acceded to the World Trade Organization. More people in today’s China enjoy an improved quality of life, economic freedoms, and greater access to information via the Internet and other communication technologies. But economic and technological progress has not led to commensurate gains in China’s human rights and rule of law record.

In the areas of human rights and rule of law this year, China’s leaders have grown more assertive in their violation of rights, disregarding the very laws and international standards that they claim to uphold and tightening their grip on Chinese society. China’s leaders have done this while confidently touting their own human rights and rule of law record. This year, officials declared that China had reached a ‘‘major milestone’’ in its legal system and made ‘‘remarkable achievements’’ in carrying out its 2009–2010 National Human Rights Action Plan, asserting that “civil and political rights have been effectively protected.”China’s leaders no longer respond to criticism by simply denying that rights have been abused. Rather, they increasingly use the language of international law to defend their actions. According to China’s leaders, today’s China is strong and moving forward on human rights and rule of law.

Official rhetoric notwithstanding, China’s human rights and rule of law record has not improved. Indeed, as this year’s Annual Report indicates, it appears to be worsening in some areas. A troubling trend is officials’ increased willingness to disregard the law when it suits them, particularly to silence dissent. Beginning in February 2011, Chinese police took the unusual step of “disappearing”numerous lawyers and activists in one of the harshest crackdowns in recent memory. It was no surprise, then, that in sensitive issue areas such as China’s population planning policy, local government officials demonstrated little restraint in turning to illegal measures, including violence, to coerce compliance with a policy that itself violates international human rights standards.

Lack of respect for the rule of law extended into the international arena, where China pursued domestic subsidies and industrial policies inconsistent with China’s commitments as a member of the World Trade Organization.

The Chinese government’s misuse of the law to violate fundamental human rights continued. The Commission observed officials citing the “law”as a basis to crack down on peaceful protests; to prevent Buddhists, Catholics, Falun Gong practitioners, Muslims, Protestants, and Taoists from freely practicing their beliefs; to prevent Tibetans, Uyghur's, and other ethnic minorities from exercising autonomy despite guarantees in Chinese law; to prevent workers from independently organizing; and to clamp down on civil society organizations. The Communist Party tightened its grip at all levels of society, stepping up monitoring of citizens and social groups and stifling attempts at independent political participation and advocacy for democracy.

Along with negative developments, there have been some hopeful signs, notably at the grassroots level. The Commission observed the courage of citizens calling for justice, as when daring journalists and millions of Internet users outmaneuvered censors to raise questions about the government’s response to a high-speed rail crash, or when members of the Shouwang Church openly defied the government to hold outdoor worship services in Beijing. The Commission also continued to observe well-intentioned officials and individuals seeking to bring about positive changes within the system.

Such actions testify to the Chinese people’s desire for a just society and their willingness to be productive partners in pursuit of that aim. Human rights and rule of law developments in China are important to the rest of the world. The rights to freedom of expression, association, and religion are universal and transcend borders.

These rights are provided for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, two documents that China has publicly supported.

When the Chinese government and Communist Party deny these rights, as when they censor the press and Internet and restrict access to courts, citizens worldwide—not just in China—know less about issues such as poisoned food, unsafe products, natural and man-made disasters, and infectious disease, and have less recourse to hold officials accountable. Moreover, the Chinese government’s respect for human rights and rule of law domestically serves as an important barometer for China’s compliance and cooperation internationally, from trade agreements to issues of common global concern.

Finally, as recent years have shown, China’s increasing confidence in and defense of its human rights record risk setting negative precedents for other countries and reshaping international human rights standards to allow for China’s abuses. China’s strident justification this past year of its imprisonment of the Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo, and the refusal of some governments to send representatives to the Nobel ceremony, exemplify this trend.

This is the Commission’s 10th Annual Report on China’s human rights and rule of law developments. As in the past, the Commission has assessed the Chinese government’s record on the basis of China’s own Constitution and laws and international human rights standards, relying on research based in large part on reports and articles published in China. As Commission research has shown this past year, Chinese officials continue to deny Chinese citizens their rights in order to preserve the Communist Party’s notion of political stability and harmony. China’s stability is in the United States’ best interest, but the Commission believes that stability will not result from repressing rights for perceived short-term gain, but only by ensuring and protecting the rights of all Chinese citizens.