No commander on the stage - Q&A 沒有大會 Q&A (上星期出左中文版，而家update個中英對照版) Non-existence of “commander on the stage” and mutual non-subservience are the essences of Umbrella Revolution. In consideration that recently there are voices questioning the practicality of these essences, we make this Q&A to address their suspicions. 沒有大會、互不從屬是遮打革命的本質。鑑於近日網上有聲音質疑沒有大會將不利整場革命，我們為此疑慮撰寫了一個簡短的Q&A。 1. How can further actions be effectively organised without central leadership? It is one thing that Umbrella Revolution does not have any central leadership; it is totally another thing to say that participating organisations cannot take their own initiatives to carry out further actions. These organisations cannot represent every participant of Umbrella Revolution in carrying out any actions, but any contribution from these actions may be retrospectively acknowledged by the others. 1. 沒有領導，如何有效組織下一步行動？ 遮打革命沒有領導，不代別參加者或參加的組織不能自發策劃下一步的行動。他們當然無法代表所有遮打革命的參加者，但只要他們的行動有成果，為遮打革命帶來貢獻，群眾定必會給予肯定。 2. How can consensus on further actions be achieved without discussion with the participating masses? The common goals of the participants of Umbrella Revolution are crystal clear – to have genuine universal suffrage and the NPCSC to withdraw its constraint on Hong Kong political reform. Each participant or participating organisation of Umbrella Revolution has the right to plan their own further actions. Given that no one participant or participating organising can represent everyone, there is no genuine need of consensus for any of their further action. There is a misconception that further actions need be collective, which is actually inconsistent with the spontaneous nature of Umbrella Revolution. We should not continue to be bound by the traditional mode of social movement and blind pursuance of consensus for every action. Subject to the clear common goals, anyone is entitled to organise further actions. Ultimately, it will be the people who decide the representativeness of these actions, upon any achievement obtained. 2. 不與群眾討論，又如何取得共識作進一步行動？ 參加遮打革命的群眾都有共同目標，就是爭取真普選，反對人大常委會的框架。以上目標根本無需再討論。至於進一步行動，參加遮打革命的組織有權自發策劃，在不代表其他參加者的前提下根本無需廣泛共識。很多人都誤以為任何下一步的行動都必須是集體行動，這前設其實早已與遮打革命的自發性質不符。我們實不應仍以傳統社運的集體組織模式為藍本，強求行動上的共識。既有非常清晰的共同目標，只要不與之相違，任何人皆可組織進一步行動，如有任何成果或貢獻，群眾自會追認相關行動的代表性。 3. Lack of central leadership will cause disorder and, eventually, failure. Maybe “Chinese nationals must be under regulations”, but we believe in spontaneous order. Success or failure of Umbrella Revolution by no means depends on the leadership of any organisations, but instead whether those organisations can realise the common goals of participants. The former is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition of the latter. 3. 沒有組織領導，會很混亂，最終一事無成 「中國人是要管的」，但我們相信自發秩序，成功與否，不在於遮打革命的參加者是否聽從個別組織的指揮，而是該些組織能否實踐參加者的共同目標。前者並非後者的充份或必須條件。 4. How can HKFS negotiate with the government if they do not receive collective authorisation? This question reflects a blind belief in collectivism. Those who refuse to be represented by HKFS do not really oppose to any negotiation between HKFS and the government. Whether the participants of Umbrella Revolution accept the consent made in the negotiation (if any) is, however, another matter. It is one thing that HKFS can negotiate with the government; it is totally another thing to make the result of the negotiation binding on the participants. It is only the latter that should be objected. 4. 沒有集體授權，學聯如何去談判？ 又是一個盲信集體主義的迷思。說「學聯不代表我」的人，其實並沒有反對或阻止學聯去跟政府談判，至於學聯的談判表現如何，談判結果又是否可以接受，群眾自會衡量。
Posted on: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:13:29 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015