Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A628-W390
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A628-W390
Release
Date: May 4, 2011
发布日：2011年5月4日
Topic:
U.S.-China Human Rights Dialogue -- Wei Jingsheng
标题： 中美人权对话 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
Note:
Please use "Simplified Chinese (GB2312)" encoding to view the Chinese
parts of this release. If this
mail does not display properly in your email program, please send your request
for special delivery to us or visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2011/report2011-05/WeiJS110504onHRdialogueA628-W390.htm which
contains identical information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
U.S.-China
Human Rights Dialogue
--
Wei Jingsheng
This
year's US-China human rights dialogue just concluded. In advance of the dialogue, the Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights, and Labor of the US State Department made enough show and said some
determined words. Some US media
also helped to hype it some, saying something like "unusual" and so
on. Yet, the result was that it
ended almost quietly, without much media notice of this show that lack of
novelty. So it ended with
Assistant Secretary Posner of the Bureau who almost could not hand out his
report card, throwing out another determined word saying that "the
discussion of human rights will be part of the Strategic and Economic Dialogue
that comes up in Washington" in the next round.
This
threat is said for American ears, instead of to frighten the Chinese Communist
Party. Even the American people
have long lost patience to hear that, so the media shunned it. They fear that the continuation of this
kind of unsuccessful showing will be President Obama's and the Democratic
Party's campaign poison.
Why
is it so awkward? We need to start
the analysis from the history of the human rights dialogue. The massacre of 1989 made people of the
world angry. To people of the
world, especially Americans, China's lack of human rights became no longer the
frost on the shingles of the others' houses, but had become like the snow piled
in front of their own homes. For a
government to massacre its own people with tanks and machine guns in the open,
it even surpasses the bottom line of the Nazis. If you learned that your neighbor is a thug who would kill
his own sons in broad daylight, wouldn't you have fears?
Voters'
fear is the pressure on a democratic government. So various democratic countries applied minimum sanctions
against the Chinese Communist government.
However, some people were not pleased, because the sanctions blocked the
opportunity for capitalists to make big money in China from its cheap labor. By the way, the Western governments
took a long time to take action regarding the recent Jasmine revolution in
North Africa for the same reason.
In comparison, the Iraq War was related to the control of petroleum; in
that case going to war was favored by the capitalists.
The
Western politicians are in a predicament between their electorate and the big
businesses. At this time, scholars
have come out to solve this problem for the governments. They invented a lot of compromises, and
gradually eased people's fear and anger.
These inventions include the well known special "Asian Value":
the proposal that a developed economy would automatically become a democratic
society, that a developed middle class civil society would automatically enter
democracy, that only when there is a developed education and advanced quality,
then one may build democracy, and that universal belief in Christianity is a
prerequisite for democracy and so on and so forth.
However,
the pragmatism of the Chinese people was more effective. The "compatriots" in Hong
Kong and Taiwan quietly broke the sanctions. They seized the Chinese market and broke the moral bottom
line of the Westerners. Suddenly,
large number of business people flooded into China like an irresistible
tide. People's fear and anger in
other countries disappeared more slowly, and is not quite balanced. As the Government has the
responsibility to solve problems and expel worries, scholars have come up with
appropriate ways in timely response.
This history is the reason behind this human rights dialogue.
When
the government solemnly comes forward to conduct a dialogue, one cannot call it
a lack of attention. So the
American people can rest assured.
After all, people in democratic countries trust the government
relatively more. Usually, people
would think that since the government came forward, it would not muddle
through. Then the Chinese
government would release a few well-known people in cooperation, which would be
enough to deceive the American people.
The officials on both sides are well aware that the lip service will not
have any real effect. This scene
is played for the people on both sides.
As far as the people who are watching the opera are happy, what other
effect is needed?
However,
President Abraham Lincoln had a famous saying: "You may fool all the
people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time,
but you cannot fool all of the people all the time." Even the most beautiful show would
result in esthetic fatigue.
Because of free speech and the criticism by people of conscience, the
public increasingly is seeing through this gimmick.
Several
years ago, the Bush administration could not tolerate the deception anymore,
thus it terminated this disgraceful human rights show. Moreover, they also withdrew from
another even more protracted human rights show, the United Nations Human Rights
Council. From the perspective of
the Bush administration, if it only cheats without real effect, it might just
as well not be done. If measures
will not have substance due to the huge pressure from the business people, it
makes no sense to take them. After
all, people's memory is limited by time.
Time will erase the memory of the wounds. Even the Chinese people are like this, not to mention the
foreign people.
In
this context, why did the Obama administration re-start the U.S.-China human
rights dialogue and the UN Human Rights Council? Further, it restarted the U.S.-China human rights dialogue
after it announced that human rights are only secondary, instead of an
important content of concern. What
does this mean? And, as soon as it
was restarted, it was immediately welcomed by the Chinese government with
cooperation. What does this
prove? To the least, this proves
that the Chinese government indeed needs this so-called dialogue to achieve its
goal of relaxing international pressure and deceiving the Chinese people.
With
this deception, the Chinese people would at least temporarily divert their
attention instead of finding a more effective life-saving measure. Such diversion suits the needs of the
Chinese Communist Party to continuously deceive the people while maintaining a
stable autocratic rule. It is an
important policy for the Chinese Communist Party's measures for "stability". Thus, an organization called "Dui
Hua Foundation" actively worked in Hong Kong for the dialogue.
So
what do the U.S. politicians get?
The capitalists who could stably exploit cheap labor in China will be
the campaign donors next year. The
politicians having the game to win in their hand could not not be tempted. This is how democratic politics are
bought by a dictatorial system. So
it seems that Western democracy is not without weakness.
The
important thing is not how to get the others to defend our interests, but our
Chinese must learn how to gain on our own efforts. Taking a look at two recent legal cases, we will have a
comparison.
One
is the forced "disappearance" of artist Ai Weiwei, which cannot be
said to lack international attention.
However, up until now, the Communist regime holds against pressure with
no action. It would not even take
such a simple measure as to legally inform the family. This clearly is meant to display the unreasonable
overbearing in public: even an Assistant Secretary of State in the US coming to
China for a face to face talk could not be helpful. This is because that the Communist Party has already seen
through the trick of American politicians, and thus does not treat it
seriously. With the bolster of the
American Capitalists, the clear attitude of the Communist regime is that
"I am the rogue, who is afraid of no one."
The
other case of Li Zhuang in Chongqing is totally different. The huge pressure from the Internet
users not only reflected the views of ordinary people, but also reflected the
fear of some Communist members and business people. With the strong pressure of these political forces inside
China, as well as a new understanding of human rights by the Chinese, and
because this Li Zhuang's case related to the public security, including the
security of most Communist members, the result was that, although Bo Xilai has
just won the high-level support in queue within the Communist Party, he had to
withdraw his scheme under this strong pressure.
'
This
reminds me of a well-known religious verse: "God helps those who help
themselves."
To
hear Mr. Wei Jingsheng's commentary, please visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110429onHRdialogue.mp3
(Written
and recorded on April 29, 2011.
Broadcasted by Radio Free Asia.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
This
is a message from WeiJingSheng.org
The
Wei Jingsheng Foundation and the Overseas Chinese Democracy Coalition are
dedicated to the promotion of human rights and democratization in China. We appreciate your assistance and help
in any means. We pledge solidarity
to all who struggle for human rights and democratic governance on this planet.
You
are welcome to use or distribute this release. However, please credit with this foundation and its website
at: www.weijingsheng.org
Although
we are unable to afford to pay royalty fees at this time, we are seeking your
contribution as well. You may send
your articles, comments and opinions to: HCP@weijingsheng.org. Please remember, only in text files,
not in attachments.
For
website issues and suggestions, you may contact our professional staff and web
master at: webmaster@Weijingsheng.org
To
find out more about us, please also visit our websites at: www.WeiJingSheng.org
and www.ChinaLaborUnion.org for news and information for Overseas Chinese
Democracy Coalition and human rights and democracy movement as whole,
especially our Chinese Labor Union Base.
You
may contact Ciping Huang at: HCP@Weijingsheng.org or
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation office at: 1-202-270-6980
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation's postal address is:
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
You
are receiving this message because you had previous shown your interest in
learning more about Mr. Wei Jingsheng and the Chinese Democratic Movement. To be removed from the list, simply
reply this message and use "unsubscribe" as the Subject. Please allow us a few days to process
your request.
*****************************************************************
中文版
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A628-W390
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A628-W390
Release
Date: May 4, 2011
发布日：2011年5月4日
Topic:
U.S.-China Human Rights Dialogue -- Wei Jingsheng
标题： 中美人权对话 -- 魏京生
Original
Language Version: Chinese (Chinese version at the end)
此号以中文为准（英文在前，中文在后）
如有中文乱码问题，请与我们联系或访问:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/report/report2011/report2011-05/WeiJS110504onHRdialogueA628-W390.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
中美人权对话
-- 魏京生
今年的中美人权对话刚刚结束。事前美国国务院人权局做足了秀，说了一些所谓的狠话。美国的一些媒体也帮助炒作了一阵子，说什么不同寻常云云。结果差不多是悄悄地收场了，几乎没有媒体关心这场毫无新鲜感的作秀。结果是害得无法交差的人权局长波斯纳又扔下了一句狠话，说是在下一轮的经贸会谈中见。
这种威胁是说给美国老百姓听的，不是拿来吓唬中国共产党的。就是美国老百姓也早就听得不耐烦了，所以媒体避之唯恐不及。他们生怕这种不成功的作秀继续搞下去，会成为奥巴马和民主党的竞选毒药。
为什么会这么尴尬？我们先从人权对话的历史来分析。1989 年那场大屠杀，让全世界人民都愤怒了。中国的人权，对于各国特别是美国人民来说，已经不是他人的瓦上霜，而是差不多等于自家的门前雪了。公然使用坦克机枪屠杀自己的人民，已经超过了纳粹的底线。就像你隔壁住了一个大白天杀自己儿子的暴徒一样，不能不让人心生恐惧吗?
选民的恐惧就是民主政府的压力。于是各民主国家都对中共采取了最低限度的制裁措施。但是有些人不高兴，因为制裁阻挡了一些资本家利用中国的廉价劳动力赚大钱的机会。顺便说说，最近北非的茉莉花革命，西方政府扭扭捏捏迟迟不作动作，也是出于同样的原因。相对于抢夺石油控制权的伊拉克战争而言，态度有天壤之别。
西方的政治家在选民和大资本之间，左右为难。这时候就有学者们出来给政府排忧解难了。他们发明了很多折中的办法，逐渐缓解人民的恐惧和愤怒。例如：著名的亚洲特殊价值观；发展经济可以自动进入民主社会；先发展中产阶级公民社会就可以自动进入民主；发展教育提高人民素质才可以建立民主；全民信仰基督教是民主的先决条件，等等。不一而足。
但还是中国人的实用主义比较有效。港台同胞们不声不响的打破了制裁，抢占中国的市场，打破了西方人的道德底线。一时间大批商人涌进中国，势不可挡。各国人民的恐惧和愤怒却消失得比较慢，很不平衡。政府有责任出来排忧解难，学者们就及时地想出了相应的办法。这就是人权对话的来由。
政府郑重其事地出面对话，不可谓不重视，美国老百姓可以放心了。毕竟，民主国家的老百姓对政府的信任度还是很高的。一般都认为政府既然出面了，就不会敷衍了事。中国政府再放几个知名人士配合一下，足以欺骗美国老百姓了。至于说空口说白话不会有什么效果，双方官员都心知肚明。这场戏是演给双方老百姓看的。看戏的知足就行了，还要什么效果呢？
不过林肯总统有一句名言：你可以骗人于一时，不可能骗人于永远。就是再漂亮的作秀也有审美疲劳的时候。由于言论自由和有良心人士的批评，公众越来越看透了这场骗人的把戏。
几年前布什政府已经忍无可忍，中断了这场丢人现眼的人权秀。而且，他们还退出了另一场更加旷日持久的人权秀，联合国人权理事会。从布什政府的角度来看，如果只是欺骗，而没有实质效果，还不如不作。在商人们的巨大压力下不可能有实质性的措施，也就只能不作了。何况人们的记忆有时间的限制，时间会磨灭对伤痕的记忆。中国人自己尚且如此，何况外国人民。
在这种背景下，奥巴马政府为什么要重行启动人权对话和联合国人权理事会的事务呢？而且是在宣布人权不是重要关注内容之后，又重新启动人权对话。这说明什么
呢？而且一旦启动就立即得到了中国政府的欢迎和配合。这证明了什么呢？这至少证明了中国政府确实需要这个所谓的对话，来达到缓和国际压力和欺骗中国老百姓 的目的。
中国老百姓有了这根救命的稻草，至少会暂时转移了注意力，不去寻找更有效的救命措施了。这就适合了中共的需要，达到了继续欺骗人民、维持独裁统治稳定的目标。这是中共维稳措施的重要政策。所以叫做“对话基金会”的组织在香港积极为此操作。
那么美国的政客们会得到什么呢?那些可以稳定地在中国剥削廉价劳动力的资本家们，会成为明年竞选的捐款者。胜算在握的政客们不会不动心。民主政治就这样被独裁专制给收买了。看来西方的民主也不是没有软肋。
重要的不是人家如何维护自己的利益，而是我们中国人必须懂得主要靠自己努力的道理。看看最近的两件法律案件可以有一个比较。
艺术家艾未未的强迫失踪案，不可谓国际关注不够。结果却是到现在还顶着不办，连通知家属这样简单的措施也不动。这明显就是在公开显示蛮不讲理的霸道：你就是人权助理国务卿来中国面谈也没用。因为共产党早看穿了美国政客的把戏，本来也没当回事儿。有美国资本家给他们撑腰，我是流氓我怕谁。
另一场重庆李庄的案件就截然不同了。网民的强大压力反映的不仅仅是普通老百姓的意见，也包括了共产党员和部分商人的恐惧。在国内政治势力的强大压力下，在国人对人权的重新理解中，由于李庄的案件关系到大众的安全，包括大部分共产党人的安全，结果是虽然薄熙来刚刚获得中共高层的排队支持，也不得不在强大的压力下收回了自己的阴谋。
看到这儿我不禁想起了一句宗教名言：自己不努力，上帝也没法帮助你。
聆听魏京生先生的相关录音，请访问：
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJS110429onHRdialogue.mp3
（撰写并录音于4月29日。自由亚洲电台播出。）
-----------------------------------------------------------------
魏京生基金会及中国民主运动海外联席会议以推动中国的人权与民主为己任。
我们欢迎任何形式的帮助与贡献。我们愿与世界上为人权与民主而奋斗的人们一起努力。
我们希望您能够帮助我们散发我们的资料。但请标明出处与我们的网址：www.weijingsheng.org
欢迎投稿（暂无稿费）或批评建议，请寄信箱： HCP@WEIJINGSHENG.ORG
魏京生基金会通讯地址：
Wei
Jingsheng Foundation, P. O. Box 15449, Washington, DC 20003, USA
电话： 1-202-270-6980
魏京生基金会网址：WWW.weijingsheng.org
中国民主运动海外联席会议及中国团结工会的网址为：www.ChinaLaborUnion.org
阁下之所以收到本信，是因为阁下以前曾表示有兴趣了解魏京生先生和中国民主运动。
倘若阁下希望不再收到类似信息，请回复本信并用 unsubscribe 作为主题(Subject)。