Wei
Jingsheng Foundation News and Article Release Issue: A632-W393
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A632-W393
Release
Date: June 4, 2011
发布日：2011年6月4日
Topic:
Why Did the 1989 Democracy Movement Fail in China? (Commemorating the 22nd
Anniversary of the June 4 Massacre) -- Wei Jingsheng
标题：八九民主运动失败的原因是什么？（六四二十二周年纪念） -- 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/report2011-06/WeiJSon64anniversary110604lessonsA632-W393.htm which
contains identical information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Why
Did the 1989 Democracy Movement Fail in China? (Commemorating the 22nd
Anniversary of the June 4 Massacre)
--
Wei Jingsheng
Among
today's youth in China, many already do not know what the "June 4
massacre" was. However, for
the middle aged, most memories of this tragedy are just as new as if they were
yesterday. That was a time of
shame for our nation, as well as an experience of stirring solemnity. For a better Chinese future, for democracy,
thousands of heroic Chinese stood in front of the tanks and machine guns
without fear. Blood flew like a
river. Many died for a noble
cause.
Twenty-two
years have passed. People have
been asking: what really happened?
Why were so many heroic Chinese sacrificed yet not much has
changed? In the past 22 years,
some truths about 1989 have gradually been exposed. What happened behind the scenes has become clearer. After sifting and selection by
elimination, varies opinions have also become more and more concentrated.
One
of the most well known opinions is the theory that "one should stop when
one is ahead". In this
theory, since the Chinese Communist authority had yielded some and also had
made some reasonable offers, the ones ahead should have stopped there in
1989. The unspoken words in this
argument are that the students and civilians who would not stop when they were
"ahead" should carry the responsibility of the massacre that killed
so many civilians. The Chinese
Communist regime immediately grabbed this theory, and pushed the responsibility
of the massacre over to "the people with grown beards yet hiding behind
the demonstrating students".
The Communists took the opportunity to make their excuse of killing in
June of 1989 as an action that was forced by the situation.
Is
this theory of "one should stop when one is ahead" reasonable? From the gradually exposed history, we
know there was not such a possibility at all. One of the reasons that the 1989 democracy movement happened
in China was that the internal struggle within the Chinese Communist Party had
reached a level which was not compromisable. The Communist officials of the Zhao Ziyang faction were
sympathetic to reform, but had taken a lesson from his predecessor Hu Yaobang's
resignation. That faction was the
majority within the Communist Party and even had the support of public opinion
in the Chinese society, so if Zhao Ziyang wanted to yield to the conservative
minority, he would not receive other people's support to do so.
However,
Zhao Ziyang yielded anyway. Not
only that, he yielded all the way.
The result is that Deng Xiaoping got the time to assemble and mobilize
the military, without any intention to compromise. Thus, that theory of "one should stop when one is
ahead", was based on an assumption of untrue reality. It was just impossible.
The
key problem then was that Deng Xiaoping's faction was not only the minority,
but also unwilling to make a retreat.
They were unwilling to resign and to be replaced by the better. The characteristic nature of their
autocratic dictatorship determined the only choice that they would make, which
was to have a bloody suppression.
To say that Deng Xiaoping's massacre "was forced by the
situation", is to speak in favor of the dictator while standing in his
position. In both Western
democracy and the principles of China's own Constitution, the minority should
have stepped down. When we look at
the different result in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, we know
that civilians' "blood flowing like river" should not be the only
choice available.
For
more than 20 years now, people have been asking one question: why did the
Soviet Union and Eastern Europe achieve a peaceful resolution, yet we the
Chinese failed? Many countries got
the same result, so we cannot claim it as accidental. In particular, the highest authorities of several countries
also gave the order of suppression, yet their military refused to carry out
that order. The military of
Romania even struck the other way and executed its dictator. Why was the Chinese army so lacking of
conscience, and used machine guns and tanks to massacre its own people?
Regarding
this question, I have asked some military personnel and policemen. My words were not pleasant and I said that
their hands were full of the blood of civilians. All of them felt ashamed yet claimed to be wrongfully
accused. They said that the
situation was not the way given to the public. At that time, as soon as they finished their work, many
police would change to civilian clothes and join in the democratic
demonstration. I do remember the
police who guarded me in jail were just as excited and emotional as I was while
watching television those days. In
their hearts, they were not much different from the civilians. After all, besides what they had to
wear, they were average people.
The
situation with the Chinese military was similar. Besides a few soldiers who were extremely lacking in
conscience and education, most of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who
went to Beijing had their guns aimed to the sky. At that time, the streets were full of angry resistors. If all the soldiers aimed at these
civilians, then the death toll would not be only a few thousand. When they were pushed into the corner,
many military personnel thought of rebelling along with the civilians. Xu Qinxian, the military commander of
the 38th troops who refused to carry out the massacre order and thus was
arrested immediately, was their representative.
So,
why was not there a true rebellion at that time? What a high rank military officer said deserve some deep
pondering. He said that when you
students rebel, you only receive a few years sentence; but for us, rebellion
means punishment by execution.
When your people were still supporting the Communist leadership and
promoting "peace, rationality, and non-violence", we did not know
what you really wanted. There was
no other order given, so how could I use the lives of tens of thousands of my
subordinates for something that was not serious? Our parents generation had sacrificed themselves for people
to have better lives, how could we afford the conscience of killing the
people? We were pushed to the
corner to carry out that order.
The
explicit words of this military official provide food for thought. The reason that the military in the
former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe dared to go against orders and even struck the other way, is because
the goal of their democratic movement was clear: to overthrow the one party
dictatorship of the Communist Party.
That was the expression of the will of all the people, instead of being
sidelined by one particular faction in the internal fight of the Communist
Party. When the majority of the
military and people believe that democracy is associated with their best
interests, the soldiers and their officers would make correct judgment.
These
comments raise an issue that has lacked attention from many about the
propagation of the thoughts of freedom and democracy in China during the
1980's. Was democracy too abstract
and disassociated from people's own interests? The extreme advocacy of "peace, rationality, and
non-violence", and the hope that the Communist Party would reform itself
were the two major characteristics of the 1989 democratic movement in
China. Exactly the guidance of
this kind of wrongful thought brought that movement into a sure failure.
Nowadays,
people have already formed their new evaluation for the events of that time.
Although in 1989, many people agreed with the students sending the 3 youths who
stained Mao Zedong's portrait to the police station and Liu Xiaobo smashing the
machine guns that the civilians on the streets had; however, now they have
changed their mind and think these actions were wrong. Nevertheless, the majority of people
have yet to realize that these wrongful actions exactly resulted from the
wrongful thoughts. There are
leaders who always push the resonponsability to others, even using skillful
words to cover up their own wrongs and defending their wrongful actions.
The
Chinese Communist Party has learned a lesson as well. In the past 20 years, the regime has been actively promoting
"peace, rationality, and non-violence" and actively pushing people to
hold on to their hopes for reform within the Communist Party. The regime tolerated and protected a
group of hack-writers who contributed to maintaining the rule of the Communist
regime. Knowingly or unknowingly,
for their own interests or just because of cowardice, this group of people has
become the accomplice of the Communist Party.
Now,
China has entered another era of troubled times. The Chinese people's tolerance has reached a new limit. The internal fights within the Chinese
Communist Party have also turned white hot. Regardless of the viewpoint and ideology one may have, the
people who care about the well-being and future of our nation must not ignore
the lessons from the failed democratic movement in China 22 years ago. The history of 1989 should not be
repeated again.
To
hear Mr. Wei Jingsheng's commentary, please visit:
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJSon64anniversary110527lessons.mp3
(Written
and recorded on May 27, 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: A632-W393
魏京生基金会新闻与文章发布号： A632-W393
Release
Date: June 4, 2011
发布日：2011年6月11日
Topic:
Why Did the 1989 Democracy Movement Fail in China? (Commemorating the 22nd
Anniversary of the June 4 Massacre) -- Wei Jingsheng
标题：八九民主运动失败的原因是什么？（六四二十二周年纪念） -- 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/report2011-06/WeiJSon64anniversary110604lessonsA632-W393.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------
八九民主运动失败的原因是什么？（六四二十二周年纪念）
-- 魏京生
现在的年轻人，很多已经不知道六四是什么意思了。可是中年以上的人，大多记忆犹新。那是我们民族的一段耻辱，也是一段悲壮的经历。成千上万的英雄儿女，为了民族的前途，为了民主自由而面无惧色地站在了坦克机枪面前。血流成河。杀身成仁。虽死犹荣。
二十二年过去了。人们一直在追问：到底发生了什么？为什么牺牲了那么多优秀儿女却没有改变什么？二十二年来，事情的真相正在一点点地揭露出来。在轰轰烈烈的场景背后发生的故事越来越清晰。各派评论的观点也几经筛选淘汰，越来越集中。
各种观点中最著名的几种之一，就是见好就收论。那意思是官方做了一些让步，给了一些面子，就应该见好就收。潜台词是屠杀了那么多百姓的责任，应该由见好不收的学生和市民承担。中共也马上抓住这个说法，把责任推给学生背后长胡子的那帮人。而且把他们在1989年六四开枪的理由，也顺理成章地说成是被逼无奈。
这个说法是不是很有道理呢？从现在逐渐暴露出来的历史看，根本没有这个可能。一九八九年民主运动发生的原因之一，就是中共内斗发展到了不可调和的地步。赵紫阳一派的干部们接受了胡耀邦当年引退的教训，而且这一派当时在党内占多数，再加上社会舆论的支持，就是赵紫阳想让步也得不到其他人的支持。
赵紫阳也确实让步了，而且让到了底。结果只是给了邓小平调集和动员军队的时间，却并没有换来邓小平的让步。所以这个见好就收的假设，完全脱离实际，根本就不能成立。
关键是邓小平一派既是少数，也不愿意退让。他们不愿意下台换班。他们的独裁专制的本性决定了他们只有一个选择，那就是血腥镇压。说是被逼无奈，那正是站在独裁者的立场说话。无论按照西方民主还是中国宪法的原则，既然是少数就应该下台。看看苏联和东欧，就完全是另一种结果，而不是只有血流成河的一种选择。
二十多年来，人们一直在问一个问题：为什么苏联、东欧会是另一种结果，而我们中国反倒失败了呢？好几个国家都是一种结果，不能说是偶然的。而且其中有几个国家的最高当局也曾经下令镇压，但是军队拒绝执行命令。甚至有罗马尼亚的军队反戈一击，处死了独裁者齐奥塞斯库。为什么中国的军队就完全没有良心，用机枪和坦克屠杀自己的人民呢？
我曾经就此问题请教过一些军官和警察，而且话说得很难听，说他们双手沾满了人民的鲜血。他们无一例外都感到既惭愧又冤枉，都说情况不是外界传说的那样。当时，很多警察下班后换上便衣就参加了游行的队伍。我记得看守我的警察们守在电视机前面和我一样的激动，一样的跺脚叹息。他们的内心和老百姓没有什么区别，除了那身皮，他们就是老百姓。
中国军队的情况也差不多。除了极少数极端没文化又没良心的士兵以外，几十万进城军人的枪口都是朝天的。当时满街道都是愤怒的抵抗者。如果都向人射击，不会只死了几千人。不少军人被逼无奈时都想到了造反。被当场逮捕的三十八军徐勤先军长
，就是他们的代表。
为什么没有真正的造反呢？有一位高级军官的说法值得深思。他说你们的学生造反只判几年徒刑，军人造反是要砍头的。你们的人还在那儿拥护党中央，和平、理性非暴力，我们不知道你们要干什么。又没有另一个命令，我怎么敢拿几万弟兄的脑袋开玩笑呢。我们的爹妈都是为了老百姓能过好日子才抛头颅洒热血的。孙子才忍心屠杀老百姓呢。我们才是被逼无奈不得不执行命令，就是打折扣，效果也十分有限。
这位军人的直言很耐人寻味。苏联和东欧的军队敢于抗命甚至反戈一击，是因为他们的民主运动目标明确，就是要推翻共产党的一党专政。那是全民愿望的表达，而不是共产党内斗的帮手。当军人和老百姓的大多数都相信，民主关系到他们的切身利害时，军人们会做出正确的判断。
这就产生了一个大家很少关注的问题：八十年代的自由民主思想传播，是不是太抽象化，太脱离人民的切身利害？极端的“和平理性非暴力”，和把希望寄托在共产党自身的改革上，是中国八九年民主运动的两大特色。正是这种错误思想的引导，使得那场运动必然走向失败。
现在人们对学生扭送污染毛泽东像的青年，和刘晓波砸坏市民手中的冲锋枪，已经有了新的评价。可是，多年来大多数人并没有意识到这是错误思想引导的结果。领袖们总是把责任推给别人，甚至还文过饰非，为错误行为辩解。
但是共产党却总结了经验教训。二十年来，中共大力推行“和平理性非暴力”，大力推行把希望寄托在党内改革上。他们容忍和保护的一批披着民主外衣的御用文人，为共产党的维稳事业立下了汗马功劳。这批人自觉或者不自觉地，为了利益或者为了胆怯，而成为共产党的帮凶。
如今，又进入到了一个多事之秋。人民的忍耐再一次达到了极限。中共党内的斗争也再一次达到了白热化。关心国家民族命运的人们，无论持有什么样的观点和理想，都不能忽视二十二年前民主运动失败的教训。二十二年前的历史，不应该再重演了。
聆听魏京生先生的相关录音，请访问：
http://www.weijingsheng.org/RFA/RFA2011/WeiJSon64anniversary110527lessons.mp3
（撰写并录音于2011年5月27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)。