|
高级编译
 
- UID
- 32879
- 帖子
- 1087
- 精华
- 4
- 积分
- 9291
- 金条
- 13595
- 注册时间
- 2008-4-14
|
161楼
大 中
小 发表于 2008-5-9 11:58 只看该作者
西方人,你們到底要什麼?
When we were the Sick Man of Asia, we were called The Yellow Peril.
Actually, the Japanese were called the "Yellow Peril". Kaiser Wilhelm II coined the term after Japan defeated China in the first Sino-Japanese War in 1895. I accept the broader point—that there is a racial component to Western worries about China—but it's best to be clear about the historical facts. And while the racial element is there, that doesn't mean that western attitudes can be reduced to racism. The illegitimate aspects of Western fears do not prove that there are no legitimate grounds for concern.
Perhaps we have a language gap here, while the West is fond of having various terns, ~terror, ~peril, ~fever etc. in Chinese there is only one term 「黃禍」, meaning Yellow Catastrophe, which originates from the Yuan Dynasty when Möngke's army penetrated Europe in the 13th century. In any case, the issue is not whether the Japanese or the Chinese is the one labelled, but we ARE LABELLED BY YOU as such. If your claim stands that there are "legitimate grounds for concerns", you are practically saying that there is also legitimate grounds for such labelling. You fail to be explicit on the illegitimate aspects of Western fears toward China.
當我們是「東亞病夫」的時候，我們被你們稱為「黃禍」。
實際上，日本人被最先稱為「黃禍」。那是在1895年甲午戰爭中國被日本擊敗後德國皇帝威廉二世杜撰出來的詞彙。廣而言之，我承認其中有種族因素作梗而使西方憂懼中國。但我們還是最好釐清這一詞彙的由來。雖然其中有種族的因素，但不能就把西方對華的態度簡單指為種族主義。西方「恐華」的非理性層面不足證明它就沒有其他理性基礎存在。
我們這裡也許存在不少語言隔閡, 西方也許有不同名詞, 但在中文裡只有「黃禍」一個, 意為「黃種災禍」, 是來自13世紀蒙哥元軍席捲歐洲而得名的。無論如何, 是日本人還是中國人最先被稱為「黃禍」並不是重點，重點是我們被你們這樣稱謂。如果說[恐華]是有理性基礎的，以您的邏輯也就是說，說我們是「黃禍」也是有理性基礎的。另外你沒有說清楚「恐華」的非理性一面的原因。
When we are billed to be the next Superpower, we are called The Threat.
Well, yes. Welcome to the club. "Superpower" has never been an unalloyed compliment. China, as you know, has been a leading critic of American hegemony.
Of course, "Superpower" is not always a compliment, depending on what kind of "Superpower" we are dealing with, and we know, "Superpower" does not necessarily equate hegemony. We criticize the US not on the ground that it is the Superpower, but its aggression, initiating wars, bullying, orchestrating sabotages and exploitation. Shouldn't the substance of the criticism itself bear more significance than who is criticising?
當我們被標為下一個「超級大國」，我們被你們稱為「威脅」。
是的，歡迎中國加入「超級大國俱樂部」。「超級大國」從來就不是一個純粹恭維之辭。中國，眾所周知，是主導批評美國霸權的最大聲音。
「超級大國」當然不見得是恭維，這要看對待什麼樣的超級大國，我知道，超級大國不一定就霸權，我們批評美國那不是因為美國是超級大國，而是因為，美國在全世界到處侵略，發動戰爭，到處霸權，扯線製造混亂，到處掠奪。這些批評的內容本身不應該比誰在批評來得重要嗎?
When we closed our doors, you smuggled drugs to open markets.
True. That was bad. It is also true that most of the opium smoked in China during the period referred to was grown in China and, of course, transported and smoked by Chinese. That doesn't excuse Western perfidy, but it does cast doubt on the simplistic Evil Foreigners/Innocent Chinese narrative that is peddled in much Chinese writing about the period. It is also true that, during the same period, the "imperialists" brought the first universities, modern hospitals, women's education, railroads, streetlights, etc., to China. You might fairly respond that Chinese were perfectly capable of adapting the fruits of modernity to China in their own time and manner, without arrogant foreigners forcing these things upon them while violating China's sovereignty, exploiting its natural resources, etc. This is the classic argument between colonizers and colonized. Interestingly, China now stands on the colonizer side of the discussion when it defends its actions in Tibet by pointing out how investment has saved the Tibetan people from their own feudal, backward ways. How worms do turn.
It's good that you admit "That was bad", however, can't you make it more complete? It's history, nothing you can do about it, but you can apologize, on behalf of your ancestors. We saw a German Chancellor knelt for the Jews that had been persecuted. Why can't leaders of the Western countries, that had invaded China and killed Chinese in the course of doing so, do the same? You feel guilt and have mercy towards the Jews, but opt for silence upon the Japanese alteration of their invasion history, paying respect to their Shrine where war criminals were honoured. Why is there such a parity treatment towards the Jews and the Chinese?
Your response verifies: in Man's history, invaders will never agree they cause calamity to their victims. According to your rationale, 911 ought to take place, for it gave US its justification to enter into wars and retaliations (in fact, that's how US did it), as well as its recollection on bitter gall from its hegemony. The list continue: Bush's gained wider support, drop in US unemployment etc. A rapist can further state to his victim, "I give you a baby."
Your claim on 「most of the opium… was grown in China」 hence "it does cast doubt on simplistic Evil Foreigners/Innocent Chinese narrative" let us cast doubt on your status as an intellect, which also is the single aspect that many of our forum participant queried if you have over 20 years of experience in your China study. We would invite you to access the following website:
http://www.plantcultures.org/plants/opium_poppy_history.html,
for the information on where poppy is originated, in particular, the paragraphs captioned "European Impacts" and "the Opium War". Should the majority of the opium really be grown, then transported in China for self consumption, then how did the British get their sterling silver out of the trade? It sounds as if hamburgers are prepared and sold in American national chain, but the profit is pocketed by the British. Isn't it a bit ridiculous?
"Interestingly, China now stands on the colonizer side of the discussion when it defends its actions in Tibet by pointing out how investment has saved the Tibetan people from their own feudal, backward ways. How worms do turn" This statement is all wrong. In fact, China never took the stands of a colonizer. Pardon me, we simply change things that are not fair and just. In the same way we overthrew the Qing Dynasty, the Warlord government, we got rid of the serf slavery system then found in Tibet, for the better development of China as a whole, with Tibet as part of it. Should you have doubt on our claim, please visit Tibet in person and ask those Tibetans if they hold any grievances toward the rest of China and not just accepting the hearsay cover-ups from descendents of Tibetan nobles-in-exile for all their inhumane past deeds.
Lastly, your attempt to compare Tibet situation with colonialism is a comparison of apples with oranges, not unless you consider Lincoln's liberation of slavery is also "How worms do turn"
當我們閉關鎖國時，通過走私鴉片來打開我們的市場。
確實。那是壞的。但事實也是：那時期中國人所吸的鴉片大部份是在中國種植，當然也被中國人運輸和吸食。那並不開釋西方人的罪責，但確實對長久以來中國許多文獻裡宣導有期，你們眼中的「帝國主義者」 為中國帶來了第一批大學、現代化醫院、女子學堂、鐵路、路燈等等。當然，你可以義正辭嚴的回擊說：中國人完全有能力在自定時機和方式來引進這些現代化成果，而不是靠著侵犯主權、剝奪自然資源的傲慢洋人強加到中國人身上。這是經典殖民者和被殖民者之間的辯論。有趣的是，
中國人現在自己就站在殖民者的立場上來為自己在西藏行為辯解：說什麼中國內地的投資把西藏人民從過去封建的落後境地拯救出來。這是怎樣一種的蛻變啊。
「那是壞的」，承認這點很好，難道就沒有進一步的什麼內容說了麼？已經成為歷史，你當然不能彌補什麼，但是你可以道歉，可以代表你們的祖先道歉，我們知道一位德國總理可以對被屠殺去的猶太人下跪，難道曾經侵略過中國，屠殺過中國人的西方國家領導人就不可以麼？你們對猶太人懂得懺悔矜哀, 可是對日本篡改侵華歷史, 參拜含有罪魁戰犯的神社, 卻全啞了, 為什麼對猶太人與華人有如此差異待遇?
你的這一大段文字印證了:人類歷史上侵略者永遠都不會說給被侵略者帶來災難，按照你的邏輯，911應該發生，因為這可以帶來美國發動侵略戰爭的理由（事實上美國就是這麼做的），可以帶來美國對霸權惡果的反思等等，當然還不止這些，還可以使布什的支持率升高，降低美國的失業率等等，強姦者還可以向被害人說「強姦可以讓你有了兒子」。
關於你所稱「大部份鴉片是在中國種植」, 故而認為「邪惡的外國人/無辜的中國人」簡化表述, 未免太讓我們懷疑你作為知識份子的身份了, 也是大家質疑你對中國有上廿年研究的資歷最多的一點。我們想請你參考這一個網頁:
http://www.plantcultures.org/plants/opium_poppy_history.html,
特別是有關罌粟發源地, 及「European Impacts」及「the Opium War」兩段。要是大部份鴉片都是中國種植, 自銷自用, 何以英國人是如何從鴉片中賺取中國人的白銀呢?好比大部份漢堡包在美國連鎖店製造出售, 錢卻全是英國人賺到口袋, 這是不是有點奇怪?
「有趣的是，中國人現在自己就站在殖民者的立場上來為你們在西藏事物辯解：說什麼中國內地的投資把西藏從過去封建的落後境地拯救出來」，這個說法是完全錯
誤的，事實上中國人從未扮演過殖民者的角色，而且抱歉，我們只是把不合理的事情改變, 一如我們推翻清朝，推翻北洋政府，我們改變舊西藏的農奴制度，為的是包括西藏在內的全中國的自強更新，發展自己。如果你質疑我們的說法，那麼麻煩你自己去西藏看看，親自問問那些藏族兄弟他們的感想，他們是否對來自中國其他民族的幫助充滿了怨恨, 而不是片聽流亡的貴族後代隱藏他們不人道種種的是非顛倒。
還有就是, 把西藏情況硬扯與殖民併為一談是很移花接木的做法, 除非你覺得林肯解放黑奴也是很有趣的蛻變吧!
註: 在整理時, 發現我們有些回應, 可能是因翻譯跟原文有點差距, 比如有關恐華的理性基礎, 他原文是指不能排除恐華有理性基礎, 不是對指黃禍有理性基礎, 鬥士的原來回應有點會被回頭抓住, 我稍改了, 也許還不太好, 也許大家重新考慮商討該怎回應恰當些.
民主不能曲取巧, 只能直中求
|
