請怪我，再拿一些片面的電視印象來寫文…
事緣星期日，電視畫面傳來城市論壇的直播場面，主持應該還是香樹輝吧。支聯會依舊派出元老之中的元老－－司徒華來坐陣，面對維園阿伯。
華叔老了，眼睛比以前更為朦朧，老人斑也多了，皮膚比以前更為粗糙。畢竟，華叔現在真的箇是七老八十了。
另一位講者是精英運動員洪松蔭，而最後一位的是一個年不過三十的青年，原來是青年民建聯的成員。
看到這點，不得不感慨萬千。
支聯會成立接近十九年，就算是勉強成立了一個「青年團」，但除了在六四晚會上喊兩句口號外，一直沒有給大眾有建樹的感覺（應該說，連是否存在也不得而知）。支聯會執委以及主席名單，十年如一日不變，要交好民主棒？談何容易！除了燭光晚會轉用年青人唱的民運歌曲版本外，實在見不到「年青人」如何可以擔大旗，年年講交民主棒，結果年青人連連都是陪華叔做護衛聖火手。每年不是缺乏新血加入支聯會的活動，可是支聯會的代表人物十年不變，快要成為老人政治的又一例子。
反觀民建聯，在這場城市論壇，勇於派一個毫無知名度的新人才爭取經驗以及曝光率，這對黨以及對新人也有好處。需知道，就算在城市論壇讓你講贏抑或講輸，都不會太動搖雙方支持者的立場，而中間路線的市民更不會因為一次城市論壇而變更立場。這反而是一個絕好場合，派出新人來自說先話，堅持路線，民建聯也可以給人年青化的印象。而事實上，派個新人上戰場，背後代表民建聯已經看不起華叔以及支聯會還有什麼殺傷力，是故派一個廖化已經足夠，這反映了民建聯對自己充滿了自信。
我對華叔抱有千百萬個尊敬，只可惜，當六四發生了十九年，還要靠華叔出來聲嘶力竭來堅持支聯會的立場，就算不可悲，也是可憐。難道支聯會真的沒有接班人嗎？難道民主派真的沒有接班人嗎？為什麼民建聯敢放手給年青人，而民主派不敢呢？如果明天華叔逝世，還有人會為六四說句話嗎？還會有有份量人的年輕人為六四說句話嗎？
4個回應
四月 24, 2008 at 12:46 am
講得真係好
我都唔知民主派內到底係發生左乜野問題，總係唔肯交捧。唔係真係冇人材到咁既地步呀下
四月 24, 2008 at 2:43 pm
1. 那個青年民建聯，樣子只會令我想起「小白臉」。
2. Derek﹕某程度上因為民主派的組織比不上保皇黨。
保皇黨交了棒給新一代，那些老人並不會完全喪失角色，總有一些「神台」職位給他們的。
但民主派的大老，如果退下來的話，就可能從此在傳媒中消失，連帶的利益也會斷絕。所以除非你像李柱銘般，不靠政治都衣食無憂，怎麼夠膽退休﹖
四月 28, 2008 at 3:21 pm
支聯會青年組的話，有幾個人參與已經是不錯的了，有是有，更是有興趣活動，但是根本沒人，有心無力。
十月 12, 2008 at 4:00 pm
[...] A Forgotten Tragedy A few days later, it will be the 19th anniversary of Tiananmen massacre. It seems that the tragedy was largely forgotten by the Chinese people, except a few devoted citizens in Hong Kong. It was a frustrating experience while reading how Chinese, especially the younger generation born after the economic reform, respond to the issue. They were contented with the recent achievements of China and attribute it to the crackdown of the democratic movement, and failed to acknowledge the country is still being troubled by enormous problems. They often justified the violence by foreign conspiracy. While it is true that foreign countries have their own motives (a basic assumption of International Studies), it would be unwise to reject improvements just because they were proposed by the foreign. Liberty and democracy are valuable not because of they are originated from the western or so-called modern world, the ultimate reason for the achievement of these goals is that Chinese people (like all members of the humanity) deserved to live better. However, the fact that the tragedy is fading out from people’s memory pointed out the crisis of the movement led by the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China (ASPC). We may argue that the people lost the memory because of the propaganda by the Chinese Government. While it is true, we should realize the Government’s effort are not omnipotent. The civil society in China, against all odds, was germinating in last decades, and there were waves of social movement in which Chinese people came out to fight for their right. While Chinese lived under an authoritarian regime, they are not (or, at least, many of them are not) idiots without their own mind. We should ask: what had ASPC contributed in last 19 years. Of course they did a great job in preserving the memory of the Tiananmen tragedy, but what else did they contribute? I attended ASPC for years and my feeling is that what they do was increasingly ceremonial. Sometimes I would wonder whether I was attending a church meeting. It is important to held these ceremonies to memorize those sacrificed in the massacre. However, these would only served the interest of who were already “converted” to democratic values. The younger generation would only found that those discourses continued for decades were unrelated to their life, and they would simply ignore, if not reject, these grand narratives. Somehow Democratic value should not be some sort of grand narratives. It should be related to our daily life, as the essence of democracy is to realize that we should solve our own problems in our own society. In this sense, NGO activists who strike for their survival in the restricted public realm, or those journalist (e.g. in Southern Metropolis Post) tried to induce public discussions by writing marginal articles contributed more to the Democratic development of China, while compared with ASPC. We need to renew our strategy in participating the Chinese Democratic Movement. What we need are not only ceremonies (I do not mean that ceremonies are unnecessary), but also some down to earth activities. Say, we could participate in the building up of civil society in China. Without something that could be related to here and now affairs, we would simply bore those younger generations away. Many leaders in ASPC were aging. For example, I feel sad when I saw Sezto Wah’s wrinkles. He is now a old man, but no one in ASPC could replace his leading role. In contrast, the pro-establishment camp recruited a batch of young persons, and they became more energetic. I am depressed by this trend. It is a crisis, and we need to think outside the box. Anyway, I hope I could meet you in Victoria Park the coming Wednesday. Dr. Woo Kam Wing’s post about the aging of ASPC [...]