Erenlai - Erenlai - Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Fri, 15 Nov 2019 01:50:15 +0800 Joomla! - Open Source Content Management en-gb Universal Citizenship: A Utopian Possibility? David Flacher, Vice-President of the Organization for Universal Citizenship, talks to us about their Universal Passport, which they have issued to a group of high profile individuals (amongst them former…



For our readers in mainland China, please click here.

Interview by Cerise Phiv.

Edited by Daniel Pagan Murphy.

  • international politics
  • diplomacy
  • social awareness
  • migrant workers
  • interview
    ]]> (Cerise Phiv (張俐紫)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Thu, 21 Nov 2013 15:14:05 +0800


    Maybe reflection is more appropriate than fear






     Fears that the Book Market will become an Ideological Battleground



     Interest Groups are the real cause of decay




    Only through resistance can we show our values of freedom






    • Literature
    • poetry
    • taiwanese politics
    • international politics
    • diplomacy
    • social awareness
    • chinese diaspora
    • globalisation
    • localism
    • taiwan
    • china
    • hong kong
    • east asia
      Seeing through the haze: The truth about smoking   "...but as the world grew more and more affluent, laws and restrictions multiplied, discrimination increased, and somehow we lost our freedom. Why did this happen?"Yasutaka Tsutsui, "The Last Smoker"…

      Looking at the history of the last ten years for smokers in Japan, the progress of the anti-smoking movement has been moving along vigorously: from increasing the taxes on cigarettes, to including warning pictures on the packs of tobacco, to banning smoking indoors, all the way to the extreme of censoring and blurring out any image of cigarettes, the anti-smoking policies have little by little marginalised smokers by placing them on the fringes of society and the economic system. The discourse between smokers and anti-smokers is stuck, due to the limiting nature of these policies, in the awkward predicament of not being able to communicate; one side intensely defends its right to protect health, whilst the other can only silently swallow and cough clouds of smoke in dim alleys, enduring the attempts to enforce "compulsory quitting" through economic santions and restrictions on places to smoke.

      In "The Last Smoker", there is a section that vividly and authentically presents the causes of this confrontation: "The reason why non-smokers discriminate against smokers, and manifest cruel tendencies, originates for the most part from a simple concept: Members of the anti-smoking movement don't smoke, so they severely lack compassion..." Thus, I have interviewed two young people, one a smoker and one not, in order to start off from two different life experiences. This is not an abstract theoretical debate, let us frankly discuss the topic of smoking.

      Ji is a fifth year university student. He is one of the people who increased my knowledge of the world of smoking. By examining his smoking history, we can see a sample of the appearance and set of values of a smoker.

      Ji: I started smoking in first year of university. At that time I wanted to do a double major, so I spent my whole time in the library studying, often till one or two in the morning. The friend I studied with at that time happened to be a smoker. He said: "You have a lot of stress, how about smoking a few?" I thought it was cool, so I followed him in smoking. At the beginning it was only one or two cigarettes, afterwards it got out of hand...

      Me: Why did it get out of hand?

      Ji: I think there is a social aspect to smoking. In my second year of university I met a group of friends. Before that I wouldn't usually smoke more than half a pack a day, but because we would often drink and chat in Neihu, people would smoke. In that kind of atmosphere, when you see other people smoking it makes you want to smoke too, you want to accompany your alcohol with cigarettes, so you eventually smoke more and more.

      Me: People who don't smoke all seem to ask this: What does it feel like to smoke?

      Ji: I think there are various different levels. The first is the physiological level; cigarettes have a calming effect, they make people more relaxed. This is at its most obvious when talking about the first cigarette one has after waking up in the morning, which will make you feel dizzy. But after you smoke for a while it is less obvious, it becomes more about the psychological effect. It is like a ritual; when you are doing something the cigarette acts as a dividing boundary. For example, you study to a certain point, then rest and subsequently go smoke a cigarette.

      Me: So is it a ritual that can transform your frame of mind? Is there anything else to it?

      Ji: Yeah! It looks cool! I see myself as cool, so I feel awesome. Also, I think that smoking embodies all of my different emotions: joy, and sadness can all be linked to smoking. The feeling of smoking is integrated into each and every one of your emotions. I think if you just look at the feeling of smoking as a chemical reaction and a way to become calm, you are not getting the full picture.

      Me: Do you worry about your health?

      Ji: Yes, so at the beginning I limited myself to just smoking one or two a day. I think smoking affects health, but working and resting outside of the ordinary can also do the same. The human body is multifaceted, it won't become bad purely based on one aspect.

      Me: Do you stop smoking when people say that it harms your health?

      Ji: I thin that argument is really weak. Maybe I am more individualistic, I think that smokers can assume the consequences of harming themselves through smoking.

      Me: What is your opinion on second hand smoke?

      Ji: I believe that people have the right to smoke, but if it affects other people, they should be limited within reason. For people who hate second hand smoke, the majority aren't concerned with health issues, but rather just hate the smell of smoke. Anti-smokers can be divided into two groups: the first is those that really hate the smell of cigarettes; the second is those that without even smelling it, want to chase away anyone they see smoking. This second type I cannot tolerate. I suss out the atmosphere before smoking. I don't stupidly walk over next to someone and start smoking. If, while I am smoking, someone walks over to me and says: "I think it smells bad when you smoke, I am worried it might affect my health." I will walk away to give them space. But if that person's attitude implies that they think I have done something wrong, and they want to hush me away, I will feel deeply offended and disrespected.

      Me: What about those who object on health grounds?

      Ji: When people object on health grounds, there is also often a moral foundation for it. They think this is a bad thing, but if you are going to make this argument, you need to bring forth the evidence.

      Me: Let's discuss the topic of restrictions to smoking. What is your opinion on smoke-free zones?

      Ji: I went to Japan before, and I like the way they do it there. They can't smoke outdoors, but there are designated smoking areas on the street and indoor businesses can decide individually whether they allow smoking or not. It feels less like a law completely banning smoking in public places.

      Me: Other than the restrictions on where you can smoke, what's your opinion on the "Tobacco Health and Welfare Surcharge", which was introduced on March 24th, 2000?

      Ji: I recall that a large proportion of the funds collected by the "Tobacco Health and Welfare Surcharge" went to subsidizing the National Health Service. However, if this was really the case, it doesn't fit in with the basic concept of the National Health Service, which is that everyone should share the burden equally.

      Me: Is the intention to lower the amount of smokers?

      Ji: Cigarettes in Hong Kong and Japan are very expensive, but people still smoke, so I think trying to regulate the amount of smokers through the price doesn't work. Because this is a basic need of certain people! It's kind of like trying to regulate supermarkets with prices; people still have to eat! In the end cigarettes will just become a black market good, so to do this will just achieve the opposite results, and lead to an underground economy. Because cigarettes are linked to all emotions, if the smoker stops smoking, then all of these are cut off too, I don't think it's possible!


      Xiao She (henceforth S.), is my classmate in university. To most people, she is a goody two shoes that gets good grades, and wouldn't be associated with smoking. Through examining the views of this person who is so disparate from the stereotypical image of a smoker, maybe we can approach the issue of smoking from the opposite end of the spectrum.

      S.: I am a third year student in university, I have never smoked cigarettes before. I am not curious about smoking, I think it is just a habit, so I don't particularly care why people smoke.

      Me: So you have never thought about trying it?

      S.: Not really, but I don't rule it out. If somebody were to offer me one, I would try it, but none of my friends smoke, so I have never tried.

      Me: What is your conception on how smoking might feel?

      S.: Like an addiction.

      Me: An addiction to what?

      S.: I think it's to chemical agents, and also the supposed positive feeling generated by smoking, as well as the ability to calm oneself. Perhaps when you start smoking, the addiction to the feeling is probably stronger than the pure chemical dependence, but after smoking for a long time, they both eventually influence each other.

      Me: Do you abhor second hand smoke?

      S.: I don't hate it, but I don't particularly like it. I am concerned about the adverse health effects second hand smoke can cause, but I don't think it is a source of pollution. The reason why second hand smoke is often pointed out is because Taiwan doesn't have a culture of smoking.

      Me: What do you mean by it doesn't have a culture of smoking?

      S.: I mean that smoking is not tolerated, and is seen as something not widespread and even abnormal. It's almost a "problem", a problem that can cause harm to the nation's health.

      Me: So what is your opinion on the harm smoking causes to one's health?

      S.: I think that even if smoking does harm one's health, this isn't the government's business, it is a personal thing. People should be allowed to make their own decisions about their bodies. There isn't really a reasonable argument to make against it. When it comes to second hand smoke, however, it is a case of the greater good over personal benefits, and this is where people start to worry. Frankly, I think the amount of damage done by second hand smoke is very small. Moreover, serious research needs to be put into understanding why this damage occurs, and I think the government hasn't done this so far.

      Me: What is your opinion on people having to pay the "Tobacco Health and Welfare Surcharge" because smoking is damaging to their health?

      S.: This is really strange. Suppose that "being healthy" was a choice; the government shouldn't interfere. However, if people's health is exposed to a hazard they did not voluntarily choose, the government has the duty to intervene. I believe the current system's logic is flawed in its cause and effect reasoning. You can't say that smoking has a definite correlation with getting sick; it's just that if we display these things together, most people will believe them, because they seem reasonable, but in fact they are not. I think the "Tobacco Health and Welfare Surcharge" should be dropped, to ease the superfluous economic burden on smokers.

      At the end of the short story "The Last Smoker", after all the smokers have been hunted to almost extinction, and when only the protagonist is left, suddenly, society realizes that this "last smoker" is a rare living fossil. In the same way as so many species of animals that are devastated by man are later labeled rare and protected, the protagonist can foresee being hunted down as a novelty: to be isolated, his body studied, even to be exhibited as a sample specimen.

      The smoking community in real life also lives under this "rare specimen" plight. In the name of policies protecting against the hazards of smoking, smokers have been labeled a nuisance. This label is often rationalized through medical evidence, but in fact there is a possibility that discrimination itself has influenced the medical research. As mentioned in the International Coalition Against Prohibition's 2009 Brussels declaration: "It is not smoking itself that leads to discrimination, but it is the warping and excessive representation of the harms of smoking by the government that causes it".

      In today's world, many smokers are forced to linger in alleys, campus corners and balconies in order to "breathe"; this is not a victory of a moral and healthy society. In the end, from the place we smokers occupy on the fringes of the economic system, all we can see is a form of restriction against people that are not understood, due to nothing more than the barest form of selfish discrimination.


      Translated from the original Chinese by Daniel Pagan Murphy.

      • health and medicine
      • social awareness
      • environment
      • urban studies
      • taiwan
      • taipei
      • interview
        ]]> (郭冠均) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:18:26 +0800

        I had never heard of such a thing. Chinese literature is full of allusions to the loss of appetite or sleep, or both, when people are sad, distressed, melancholic, or heart-broken. I could not reconcile the image of a voracious appetite with profound sadness. Living in close proximity with many college-aged girls: six of us shared a room, with all of us grouped in a few buildings by the southern gate of the campus, I did not notice dramatic weight gain from anyone, and instead most of us tended to lose some weight over the years, regardless of our "heart condition."

        This story seems to show the extent to which our relationship with food is conditioned by the culture in which we live; in other words, our lack of freedom in this regard. Now that I think about it, I realize that another reason most of my classmates slimmed down during our college years can be attributed to how space was arranged on campus. Our dormitories were located in the south of the campus, the department building where some of the classes were held stood at the northwest corner, and most classrooms were either in the north or northeast. Every day we had to crisscross the campus from morning till night to get to various places. Eating itself could require serious walking or biking: since several cafeterias were scattered around the campus and none of them were very good, we would sometimes check out more than one place before settling on one of them. Then some of us would take a long stroll after dinner, not to burn calories, but to procrastinate and put off as much as possible the "evening individual study", so highly recommended that we would feel guilty not to do it. Other than sleeping, there was not much else to do in our crammed room, so a lot of us also enjoyed weekend excursions and dancing. We obviously did not choose the space arrangement on campus, but it was indeed conducive to a healthy weight.

        While studying in Boston and Paris, I continued to spend a lot of time walking, mostly using public transportation. Not until I settled in Indiana did I realize that staying fit is an uphill battle for most Americans, because odds are against them. I do not have the expertise to offer a comprehensive study on the causes of obesity, but merely intend to reflect on the relationship between obesity and freedom through my wandering observations.

        In places where walking is part of everyday life, people can maintain their weight without giving it much thought. Spatial environment in the United States makes it extremely difficult to incorporate natural ways to walk around. In most places you cannot get around without cars, unless you want to risk getting run over by them. People have to set aside time on purpose to exercise in the gym. Since exercising for the sake of weight loss requires a stoic effort, many people overestimate how many calories they have burned and reward themselves afterwards by eating more. It is not easy to win this mind game. Walking on a treadmill or a Stairmaster can be such a misery that most people watch TV, listen to music, or read a book to kill time. Even though I can hike or walk in interesting places for hours, the few occasions when I got on one of those machines, I kept staring at the timer and never lasted more than 30 minutes. Although I enjoy yoga and dance as long as instructors vary their routine, it is a challenge to find classes that fit my schedule. To make matters worse, there is such a worship of thinness that words which appear unflattering to me such as "skinny" constitute a compliment, and anorexic fashion models parade themselves in size 00 clothes. If you want to look like them, you will hate every ounce of your flesh. If Titian's Venus were somehow brought to life, she probably would feel compelled to do three hundred sit-ups and hours of muscle training a day combined with the most recent liquid diet to fit into her clothes. Or she could simply give up and even sink into a depression. Perhaps that is why we are getting increasing number of people who have a hard time fitting into an airplane seat.

        How much we eat is another factor in weight gain or loss, but portion control is much easier to practice in certain societies, such as France, where people tend to sit down with family members for their meals. There is a sense of structure and a relative consensus on approximately how much one should eat for each course of the meal. Food is served under the watchful eyes of others, making it unnecessary to join Weight Watchers. When children grow up eating this way, they naturally learn to condition their appetite to recognize how much should be enough. Many Americans do not sit down regularly to eat with their family members for various reasons, one of which is they do not have the same schedule, with so many workplaces requiring long hours or even night shifts. I am not talking about emergency workers; some American supermarkets are open twenty-four hours.

        For a Chinese meal, we eat by serving ourselves from the dishes on the table and it is easy to lose count of how much we have eaten. Portion used to be limited by what we could afford to put on the table. As more and more people become wealthy enough to eat as much as they want, they naturally start to gain weight. Although health-conscious people try to heed the advice to eat until seven-tenths full, that is not an easy guideline to apply, especially because children are usually not taught to practice it. On top of that, people can now eat fattening dishes we used to have once in a long while for special occasions whenever they want, regardless of the season. 

        Cultural norms can affect weight as well. For instance, a surprising number of Americans admit that they would eat ice cream straight out of a carton, and finish it off. Some seem to be proud of it and dare anyone to pass judgment on them, which I do not, but it obviously could lead to quite some weight gain, because an average carton contains more than 700 grams of ice cream! It is also more culturally acceptable for children to be picky eaters in the US, and picky means refusing to eat what is good for their health, typically vegetables. One reason is many people do not know how to cook tasty vegetables, from scratch, with fresh ingredients. Cooking is not only an art, but also a lifestyle habit, both of which are most effectively learned through family tradition. When a great number of people lose that tradition, the problem keeps compounding. It is also a constant struggle for American parents to make their children eat a variety of vegetables. Almost all American experts say that parents should not compel their children to eat vegetables because it will be either counterproductive or traumatizing. Judging from the result though, whatever methods they recommend have not worked for most people. I actually notice that children can be highly sensitive to collective cultural norms. My daughter, who travels extensively with me to China and France, behaves differently depending on what is culturally acceptable in each place. It was in France that she felt pressured to eat and grew to like vegetables she had always refused even to taste in the US: green leaf salad, mushrooms, onions, bell peppers, etc. The problem is what happens in the US concerns the rest of the world, due to American cultural influence that can potentially modify people's mindset. In recent Chinese TV soap operas, I observed something I had never seen all my years in China, either in real life or in "art": young women mindlessly stuffing snacks into their mouth nonstop in rapid motion when they became upset. I was horrified.

        Since cultural and environmental conditions play such a large role in obesity, one may wonder how much freedom we have in the process. In fact, if we unreflectively live in our own cultural and spatial environment, then we are either obese or fit by default. Even worse, one can almost be tempted to think that obesity is the price Americans pay for their "freedom": every time there is any government legislation aimed at reducing obesity, such as requiring schools to serve more vegetables at lunches, limiting soda vending machines, banning high-sugar drinks in large containers, or requiring restaurants to disclose calorie counts, outcry predictably rises from those who claim to defend our constitutionally guaranteed "freedom" against government usurpation. Government actions to improve or expand public transportation systems have consistently met opposition from proponents of the "free market".


        Art by Bendu

        Two opposing camps occupy American national discourse on obesity: by extolling "freedom of choice", one side, the so-called conservatives, blames obesity on consumers' lack of personal responsibility and reject any government actions that fight obesity, while the other side claims that "obesity is a disease" and therefore not a choice. Both positions simplify the complex relationship between obesity and freedom. If obesity stemmed completely from lack of personal responsibility, then we would not be able to explain why most individuals or groups who move to the United States from other countries tend to quickly gain weight. While obesity has become certainly a disease, not to say an epidemic, unlike many other diseases such as cancer, it is largely preventable without medications.

        In fact, individuals' choices are often shaped by what society makes available. For example, when people are placed in an "all you can eat" buffet – nowhere else in the world can you see as many of them than in the US – their "choices" are skewed towards overeating, which is predictably how most people exercise their "freedom". Modern societies, the US above all, are full of powerful social and environmental factors that lead to obesity in a similar way. When obesity reaches such an epidemic level, it is irresponsible to rule out collective actions as if freedom could only be achieved by isolated individuals. A legitimate government should not be viewed as a separate entity from the people, but rather a participatory means through which individuals take the responsibility and exercise the freedom to improve the macro environment where they live by reducing the factors that lead to obesity. This is not in opposition to but in conjunction with personal actions they can take. Individuals also live in complex webs of networks which provide powerful ways to mutually influence each other. Rather than become engrossed in internal ideological debates, a more fruitful approach is to examine other cultures in order to discover one's own blind spots. For both societies and individuals, freedom does not mean to mindlessly follow our own existing habits. At different stages of our life, we can reexamine our life, fine-tune it, make small or big, but sustained adjustments, change our mindset, acquire different tastes, and cultivate new habits. It is through the never-ending process of collective and individual actions that freedom can become a force against obesity.

        • obesity
        • travel and food
        • health and medicine
        • social awareness
        • sociology
        • international
        • op ed
 (Jin Lu (魯進)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Mon, 13 May 2013 13:18:24 +0800
          Last Night of Wang Family's House On the night of March 28th 2012, Wang family was to be evicted from the house they owned for years. This controversial case of one family has captivated thousands of…

          I hear from time to time “anti-eviction” songs and slogans. The indescribable high-spirited atmosphere spreads among the strange yet united crowd.

          At the back of Wang family’s house, the gate of the construction site is wide open, police forces begin to build-up, two excavators are parked on a side. We’re standing on a rooftop, flashlight rays are aiming at as from a nearby building. Someone shouts restlessly: “What the f**k are you flashing at!” and starts to yell at the police. Everybody surrounds those who have participated in protests before and listens intently as they share their experiences. They also exchange phone numbers, so that they can contact each other after the police expel them.

          Downstairs, the police shields are narrowing the circle and the guarding people are calming down. Everyone knows that the police are about to make a move, but there is no way to avoid the scene turning ugly. In face of being forcefully expelled, we, who are standing on the roof, can only shout back ‘peace’ slogans.

          “Anyway, they will tear everything down; let’s use the water container to obstruct the doors!” While waiting in desperation for being moved out, a student tries to do something, but is stopped by another person: “These things belong to Wang family…”


          Photo album best viewed in fullscreen

          {rokbox album=|myalbum|}images/stories/Wang_Family_pics/*{/rokbox}


          Original text by Jiahe Lin, Zijie Yang

          Translation from Chinese by Witold Chudy

          Photography by Jiahe Lin

          • expropriation
          • housing
          • urban planning
          • taipei
          • social movement
          • mobilization
   (Zijie Yang (楊子頡)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Fri, 01 Jun 2012 17:04:20 +0800
            中國的網路與「公民社會」 中國的網路環境儘管受到嚴密的管制，但一般民眾、公民團體仍可突破種種限制，以之作為發聲的實驗性平台；人們在其中激盪出各種論辯和參與，雖然還不能視為一種民主，卻已具備「公民社會」的條件了。





            撰文∣ 魏明德   翻譯∣ 張令憙


            然而，市井小民似乎不再滿足於僅僅參與國家單方面准許他們進入的領域和機制。網際網路火速竄紅，勢不可當，很大部分可以歸因於大眾的踰越意志――他們想闖入統治階層試圖強制實施的社會及政治參與的平緩機制。網路行動主義（online activism）不僅關乎運動夾帶的議題內容，它首要強調的，便是公眾有權針對任何他們認為事關緊要的問題進行辯論，並且隨時都能這麼做。




            11月 - 「網」住人生




   (Benoit Vermander (魏明德)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:43:36 +0800
            撕破「文明」這塊遮羞布之後 「台灣需要陳光標嗎？」在鎂光燈強行曝光下的善行究竟掀開或撕破了什麼樣的問題？筆者從台灣社會經濟面向來探討此一事件及其對台灣所帶來的衝擊。

            在資本主義社會中，「勞動力」可以用論斤計兩的方式買賣。企業宣稱所購買的是勞動者的「勞動工時」，而並非勞動者本身，也就是將勞動力從勞動者的人格當中切割出來。但勞動力本是勞動者精神人格的一部分，勞動者在被購買的時間內，事實上處於人格被支配的狀態。這表示資本主義對於勞動者是否擁有「獨立人格」的問題，其實總是抱著曖昧游移的態度：一方面不能否認勞動者的獨立人格，否則便無法將其勞動力當成博蘭尼（Karl Polanyi）所稱的虛擬商品（fictive commodity）來購買，另一方面又不能放棄在勞動時間內支配勞動者的人格，否則便無法極大化勞動者的生產貢獻（透過某些手段讓勞動者對企業具有忠誠或認同，進而願意做出更多的貢獻，便是現今常見的支配方法之一）。用馬克思的話來說，前者是對絕對剩餘價值（absolute surplus value）的「榨」取，第二種則是相對剩餘價值（relative surplus value）的「詐」取。若從管理學的角度以觀，前者是對人力資源的「管理」（human resources management），後者則是人力資源的「開發」（human resources development）。


            然而中國富商陳光標讓貧困者下跪求取紅包的「善行」，卻在台灣大眾眼前扯下了那塊文明的遮羞布。我們自此清楚看見：當勞力過剩之時，有些勞動力便連資源都稱不上，就算勞動者還願意繼續被剝削，卻已經沒有人願意去剝削。過剩的勞動力猶如用完即丟的塑膠袋，資本家再也不用如以往一般「猶抱琵琶半遮面」，假裝勞動者擁有獨立的精神人格——這比封建主和和家奴之間的關係還不如！家奴至少是封建主的財產，受封建主的照顧和保護，失去人格之後的貧困者卻只能向富裕的資本家搖尾乞憐。西諺有云：「乞丐沒有選擇的權利」（beggars cannot be choosers），正是鏡頭前下跪求取紅包者的寫照。


            圖片來源／Nick Mustoe






            • 讀未來
            • 陳光標
            • 中國
            • 台灣
            • 資本主義
            • 勞工
            • 經濟
     (Yi-Qi Chen (陳奕齊)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:08:58 +0800
              邁向數位民主時代：Open Data旋風推動青年公共參與 無法改變政治現實的挫折感，往往帶來人民低落的政治參與。但晚近興起的「Open Data」運動，則提供了從虛擬世界參與政治、並進一步影響現實政治的絕佳契機。
              隨著科技的進步，近年來各種領域興起了一波「Open Data」（開放資訊）運動。此類運動是建立在相信某些資訊及服務不應該受專利或其他商業控制的哲學。2004年，由34國（多數為歐洲國家）組成的經濟合作暨發展組織（Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD）更共同決議一條軟性約定（Soft Law，具有規範意義但不具有拘束力的法律文件），規定由公費支持的計畫資料皆應免費提供給民眾，例如GPS地圖、基因體、數學公式、電腦軟體、環境及人類歷史相關資料（如維基百科）。認為不應向使用者收取費用及沒有專利問題的理由有很多，例如：「事實」並非特別的發明，因此屬於大眾所有，無法被專利法承認；沒被大量應用的資料往往失去其價值，而整理這些資料的研究單位無法單獨創造其價值，反而需要將這些資料免費分享給同業或異業，一起在專門領域或跨領域進行合作，為大家造福等。



              這樣的熱情在過去二、三年內也燃燒至歐洲，被應用在當地人民主動想提昇民主品質的期盼上，並結合Web 2.0資訊科技與開放政府（Open Government，鼓勵選民參與、以公眾利益為重的政府）運動，提供了許多原本已對政治冷感的年輕人一個在虛擬世界中參與政治、進一步影響現實政治運作的大好機會。這些年輕E世代大多為中間選民，他們的身影或許不常出現在傳統公開政治造勢場合或政見公聽會中，也很少深陷於暗處的政治分贓或此類利益互換的交易。但因科技的加持，21世紀的民主將不會只由德高望重的少數年長政治人物由上而下主導，政治也不再只是利益分配的遊戲。


              以下，筆者將以法國的人民監督政府資訊平台「觀看的公民」（Regards Citoyens）為例，討論資訊及人民電子參與（e-participation）在民主政治運作中的重要性，並分享法國年輕人如何運用他們資訊科技的優勢，在政治運作中發展正面的影響力。



              「觀看的公民」由四位E世代年輕人於2009年7月發起，分別是23歲的Jean-Baptise Gabellieri（里昂【Lyon】傳播及哲學研究生）；27歲的Benjamin Oophe-Tabanou（巴黎女工程師）；29歲的Tangui Morlier（巴黎資訊顧問）及31歲的Brice Person（布爾貢尼【Bourgogne】網路程式寫作者）。這四位發起人的特色是：他們來自法國各地，都沒有顯著的政治背景，並各自在不同專業領域有著傑出表現。他們的共同信念是：在平日努力掙錢及填飽肚子之餘，自己也有能力為法國的民主盡一份心力，不是為了某些政黨、利益團體或是自身立即相關的權益。只是依循如此簡單的信念，他們細心建立的政治資訊整合平台便極可能啟動一種雪球效應（snowball effect），從原本的四個人，增加至16個、 256個，甚至上千萬人加入這場政治電子參與運動。




              Regards Citoyen平台網站：


              1. 此表為法國左派政黨UMP（Union pour un Mouvement Populaire）國會代表 Martine Billard 於2009年12月至2010年11月的表現圖。



              2. 此為「觀看的公民」針對即將到來的2012年選舉，所提供的2012年選區重新分配的可能政治版圖變動模擬分析，目的是讓人民及政治參與者可以提早了解其變動和影響。







              • 讀未來
              • 數位科技
              • 民主
              • 公民
              • 政治
              • 法國
       (He-Lin Jian (簡赫琳)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:04:47 +0800
                霧社事件八十年 霧社事件發生距今已八十年。當年累積的種族怨恨皆已隨風飄散，但這場因政策指導下的婚姻悲劇，卻依然刻骨銘心。 「……族人被迫勞役太多，引發憤怒，所以發生這事件。我倆也被族人所捕， 任何事都不能做。……我等得去了。」 ── 花岡一郎（拉奇斯．諾敏）、花岡二郎（拉奇斯．那威）所留之遺書



                清廷治台時期，對原住民採取隔離政策，康熙6 1年，旗山朱一貴事件之後便實施「封山禁令」，禁止漢人進入山區。

                乾隆年間， 平地逐漸被漢人開墾殆盡，平埔族的生活空間越來越小，清廷乃採取「護番保產」的政策，禁止漢人承租、典賣原住民的土地。但即便有這些保護政策，還是無法阻止原住民的土地一再流失。漢人不斷侵略土地，也就不斷造成漢、「番」間的衝突。

                日人治台後， 有三萬五千名熟番完全漢化或半漢化，但約有十二至十三萬原住民棲居在山區。當時的理番思想，大抵與美國白人侵佔印地安人土地時，認為「文明人有權開發野蠻地」。這是優勝劣敗，將台灣山地豐富的資源佔為己有合理化。為了統治原住民，推動番政，便以「和番」的婚姻政策消弭原住民的抗日意識。日政府鼓勵駐紮原住民部落的「理番警察」娶原住民頭目的女兒為妻。但常常發生日警在回國或調動時遺棄原住民之妻，或誘騙原住民女子到日本、平地賣身的悲劇。







                當運動會場奏起日本國歌時，埋伏四周的原住民衝進運動會場 格殺日本人，驚慌的日人到處逃竄，一時鬼哭神嚎，大地染血。










                霧社事件一爆發，當時街頭傳聞此一事件是花岡兄弟所策動的。認為兩人「恩將仇報」。直到日人奪回霧社，才在二郎宿舍的門口發現一封兩人共同署名的遺書，上面寫著：「花岡倆，我等得離開這世間，族人被迫勞役太多，引發憤怒，所以發生這事件。我倆也被族人所捕， 任何事都不能做…… 我等得去了。」受日人栽培的花岡兄弟，深陷在民族情結的恩義的糾葛中，遂帶著家族21人，於小富山自縊。花岡一郎先割斷妻兒的喉管再切腹自殺，二郎與家族以泰雅族傳統上吊方式自殺，整個家族都吊在一棵大樹上。這場悲劇中唯有高山初子獨存，據說當時她也願同死，但丈夫二郎極力勸服她保護肚裡的小生命，堅強活下去。也成了「霧社事件」餘生者中最重要的當事人和見證人。





                繪圖 / Şirin Tanrıtanır

                圖片來源 / 維基百科 ：霧社事件の現場


                • 霧社事件
                • 台灣
                • 日據時代
                • 原住民
         (Fang-Yu Shi (石芳瑜)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Sun, 05 Dec 2010 17:00:43 +0800
                  迢迢千里路：回顧環運三十年 台灣環保運動走了卅年，靠著許多人的努力投入，才畫下如今一道進步的軌跡。蘇花公路環評案的爭議，只是另一個奮鬥的起點。 近日沸沸湯湯的蘇花改環評案於十四天內初審通過，很可能創下史上具爭議性重大開發案環評最快通過的紀錄。梅姬颱風重創蘇花公路所造成嚴重傷亡固然令人遺憾，但花蓮縣傅崑萁縣長將錯怪在環保團體身上，其實是讓重大政策的理性討論失焦。事實上，災難源自於道路規畫單位將近十年的怠惰，未認真做地質調查，才造成今日不論是蘇花高或蘇花改，都因地質疑慮遲遲無法釐清而備受爭議的局面。在把責任歸咎於無辜的環保團體前，台灣社會更該檢討、追究統籌交通建設的交通部的責任。若台灣社會能意識這個思考焦點的轉移，那麼這便代表了卅餘年來的環保運動，已進展到一個令人既喜且憂的階段。




































                  攝影 / 潘小俠




                  • 環境運動
                  • 正當性
                  • 合法性
                  • 環境影響評估法
                  • 環評訴訟
           (Shun-Kui Chan (詹順貴)) Commitment to Freedom 以自由之名 Sun, 05 Dec 2010 16:35:46 +0800