刚回到寝室就发现twitter上面各种文字直播的今天的NobelPeace奖的颁奖典礼的直播= = 处于好奇与兴趣,我也到了nobelprize.org官网上去看看直播,并随时关注时间的最新进展. 不过连上的时候已经有点晚了…只看见某人在念鸟语的LXB的一篇文章(我没有敌人——我的最后陈述)..写得真是不错啊~ (原文见下,转贴)
在和平奖颁奖典礼上，得奖者的椅子空着，亚格兰德说，仅仅是这个事实都已表明这个奖的必要性. “茉莉花”瞬间被加入关键词= =()谣传.目前校内还没有被封掉= =) 挪威小朋友和声歌唱= =这个… 颁奖典礼顺利结束.闭以往惯例要早了很多= = 因为本来国王和王后会亲自恭贺得奖者,但是今年不能恭贺得奖者. 直播就到此结束了…
Award Ceremony Speech
The point of these awards has of course never been to offend anyone. The Nobel Committee’s intention has been to say something about the relationship between human rights, democracy and peace. And it has been important to remind the world that the rights so widely enjoyed today were fought for and won by persons who took great risks. They did so for others. That is why Liu Xiaobo deserves our support. Although none of the Committee’s members have ever met Liu, we feel that we know him. We have studied him closely over a long period of time. Liu was born on the 28th of December 1955 in Changchun in China’s Jilin province. He took a Bachelor’s degree in literature at Jilin University, and a Master’s degree and a PhD at Beijing Normal University, where he also taught. Stays abroad included visits to Oslo, Hawaii, and Columbia University, New York. In 1989 he returned home to take part in the dawning democracy movement. On the 2nd of June he and some friends started a hunger strike on Tiananmen Square to protest against the state of emergency that had been declared. They issued a six-point democratic manifesto, written by Liu, opposing dictatorship and in favour of democracy. Liu was opposed to any physical struggle against the authorities on the part of the students; he tried to find a peaceful solution to the tension between the students and the government. Non-violence was already figuring prominently in his message. On the 4th of June he and his friends tried to prevent a clash between the army and the students. He was only partially successful. Many lives were lost, most of them outside Tiananmen Square. Liu has told his wife that he would like this year’s Peace Prize to be dedicated to “the lost souls from the 4th of June.” It is a pleasure for us to fulfil his wish. Liu has said that “The greatness of non-violent resistance is that even as man is faced with forceful tyranny and the resulting suffering, the victim responds to hate with love, to prejudice with tolerance, to arrogance with humility, to humiliation with dignity, and to violence with reason.” Tiananmen became a turning-point in Liu’s life. In 1996, Liu was sentenced to three years in a labour camp for “rumour-mongering and slander.” He was president of the independent Chinese PEN-centre from 2003 to 2007. Liu has written nearly 800 essays, 499 of them since 2005. He was one of the chief architects behind Charter 08, which was made known on the 10th of December 2008, which was, in the words of the document’s Preamble, on the occasion of “the one hundredth anniversary of China’s first Constitution, the 60th anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the 30th anniversary of the birth of the Democracy Wall, and the 10th anniversary of the Chinese government’s signature of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” Charter 08 defends fundamental human rights and has in due course been signed by several thousand persons both in China itself and abroad. On the 25th of December 2009, Liu was sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment and two years’ loss of political rights for, in the words of the sentence, “incitement to the overthrow of the state power and socialist system and the people’s democratic dictatorship.” Liu has consistently claimed that the sentence violates both China’s own constitution and fundamental human rights. There are many dissidents in China, and their opinions differ on many points. The severe punishment imposed on Liu made him more than a central spokesman for human rights. Practically overnight, he became the very symbol, both in China and internationally, of the struggle for such rights in China. Your Majesties, ladies and gentlemen, During the cold war, the connections between peace and human rights were disputed. Since the end of the cold war, however, peace researchers and political scientists have almost without exception underlined how close those connections are. This is, allegedly, one of the most “robust” findings they have arrived at. Democracies may go to war against dictatorships, and have certainly waged colonial wars, but there is, apparently, not a single example of a democracy having gone to war against another democracy. The deeper “fraternity between nations” which Alfred Nobel mentions in his will, and which is a prerequisite for real peace, can hardly be created without human rights and democracy. There are scarcely any examples in world history of a great power achieving such rapid growth over such a long period of time as China. Since 1978, year by year, decade after decade, the country’s growth rate has stood at 10 percent or more. A few years ago the country’s output was greater than Germany’s; this year it exceeded Japan’s. China has thus achieved the world’s second largest gross national product. The USA’s national product is still three times greater than China’s, but while China is continuing its advance, the USA is in serious difficulties. Economic success has lifted several hundred million Chinese out of poverty. For the reduction in the number of poor people in the world, China must be given the main credit. We can to a certain degree say that China with its 1.3 billion people is carrying mankind’s fate on its shoulders. If the country proves capable of developing a social market economy with full civil rights, this will have a huge favourable impact on the world. If not, there is a danger of social and economic crises arising in the country, with negative consequences for us all. Historical experience gives us reason to believe that continuing rapid economic growth presupposes opportunities for free research, thinking and debate. And moreover: without freedom of expression, corruption, the abuse of power, and misrule will develop. Every power system must be counterbalanced by popularly elected control, free media, and the right of individual citizens to criticise. More or less authoritarian states may have long periods of rapid economic growth, but it is no coincidence that nearly all the richest countries in the world are democratic. Democracy mobilises new human and technological resources. China’s new status entails increased responsibility. China must be prepared for criticism and regard it as positive – as an opportunity for improvement. This must be the case wherever there is great power. We have all formed opinions on the role of the USA through the years. Friends and allies criticised the country both for the Vietnam War and for the lack of civil rights for the coloured people. Many Americans were opposed to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Martin Luther King in 1964. Looking back, we can see that the USA grew stronger when the African-American people obtained their rights. Many will ask whether China’s weakness – for all the strength the country is currently showing – is not manifested in the need to imprison a man for eleven years merely for expressing his opinions on how his country should be governed. This weakness finds clear expression in the sentence on Liu, where it is underlined as especially serious that he spread his opinions on the Internet. But those who fear technological advances have every reason to fear the future. Information technology can not be abolished. It will continue to open societies. As Russia’s President Dmitrij Medvedev put it in an address to the Duma: “The new information technology gives us an opportunity to become connected with the world. The world and society are growing more open even if the ruling class does not like it.” No doubt Medvedev had the fate of the Soviet Union in mind. Compulsory uniformity and control of thought prevented the country from participating in the technological revolution which took place in the 1970s and 80s. The system broke down. The country would have stood to gain a great deal more from entering into a dialogue at an early stage with people like Andrej Sakharov. Your Majesties, ladies and gentlemen, Today neither the nation-state nor a majority within the nation-state has unlimited authority. Human rights limit what the nation-state and the majority in a nation-state can do. This must apply to all states that are members of the United Nations and who have acceded to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. China has signed and even ratified several of the UN’s and the ILO’s major international conventions on human rights. It is interesting that China has accepted the supranational conflict-resolving mechanism of the WTO. China’s own constitution upholds fundamental human rights. Article 35 of the country’s constitution thus lays down that “Citizens of the People’s Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration.” Article 41 begins by stating that citizens “…have the right to criticise and make suggestions regarding any state organ or functionary.” Liu has exercised his civil rights. He has done nothing wrong. He must therefore be released! In the past 100 to 150 years, human rights and democracy have gained an ever-stronger position in the world. And with them, peace. This can be clearly seen in Europe, where so many wars were fought, and whose colonial powers started so many wars around the world. Europe today is on the whole a continent of “peace”. Decolonization after the Second World War gave a number of countries, first in Asia and then in Africa, the chance to govern themselves with respect for basic human rights. With India in the lead, many of them seized the opportunity. Over the latest decades, we have seen how democracy has consolidated its position in Latin America and in Central and Eastern Europe. Many countries in the Muslim part of the world are treading the same path: Turkey, Indonesia, Malaysia. Several other countries are in the process of opening up their political systems. The human rights activists in China are defenders of the international order and the main trends in the global community. Viewed in that light, they are thus not dissidents, but representatives of the main lines of development in today’s world. Liu denies that criticism of the Communist Party is the same as offending China and the Chinese people. He argues that “Even if the Communist Party is the ruling party, it cannot be equated with the country, let alone with the nation and its culture.” Changes in China can take time, a very long time: political reforms should, as Liu says, “ be gradual, peaceful, orderly and controlled.” China has had enough of attempts at revolutionary change. They only lead to chaos. But as Liu also writes, “An enormous transformation towards pluralism in society has already taken place, and official authority is no longer able to fully control the whole society.” However strong the power of the regime may appear to be, every single individual must do his best to live, in his words, “an honest life with dignity.”
The answer from the Chinese authorities is to claim that this year’s Peace Prize humiliates China, and to give very derogatory descriptions of Liu. History shows many examples of political leaders playing on nationalist feelings and attempting to demonize holders of contrary opinions. They soon become foreign agents. This has sometimes happened in the name of democracy and freedom, but almost always with a tragic outcome. We recognise this in the rhetoric of the struggle against terrorism: “You are either for me or against me.” Such undemocratic methods as torture and imprisonment without sentence have been used in the name of freedom. This has led to more polarisation of the world and harmed the fight against terrorism. Liu Xiaobo is an optimist, despite his many years in prison. In his closing appeal to the court on the 23rd of December 2009, he said: “I, filled with optimism, look forward to the advent of a future free China. For there is no force that can put an end to the human quest for freedom, and China will in the end become a nation ruled by law, where human rights reign supreme.” Isaac Newton once said, “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” When we are able to look ahead today, it is because we are standing on the shoulders of the many men and women who over the years – often at great risk – have stood up for what they believed in and thus made our freedom possible. Therefore: while others at this time are counting their money, focussing exclusively on their short-term national interests, or remaining indifferent, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has once again chosen to support those who fight – for us all. We congratulate Liu Xiaobo on the Nobel Peace Prize for 2010. His views will in the long run strengthen China. We extend to him and to China our very best wishes for the years ahead.
刘晓波：我没有敌人——我的最后陈述 (转自 无名氏)
我没有敌人 ——我的最后陈述 刘晓波（2009年12月23日） 在我已过半百的人生道路上，1989年6月是我生命的重大转折时刻。那之前，我是文革后恢复高考的第一届大学生（七七级），从学士到硕士再到博士，我的读 书生涯是一帆风顺，毕业后留在北京师范大学任教。在讲台上，我是一名颇受学生欢迎的教师。同时，我又是一名公共知识分子，在上世纪八十年代发表过引起轰动 的文章与著作，经常受邀去各地演讲，还应欧美国家之邀出国做访问学者。我给自己提出的要求是：无论做人还是为文，都要活得诚实、负责、有尊严。那之后，因 从美国回来参加八九运动，我被以“反革命宣传煽动罪”投入监狱，也失去了我酷爱的讲台，再也不能在国内发表文章和演讲。仅仅因为发表不同政见和参加和平民 主运动，一名教师就失去了讲台，一个作家就失去了发表的权利，一位公共知识人就失去公开演讲的机会，这，无论之于我个人还是之于改革开放已经三十年的中 国，都是一种悲哀。 想起来，六·四后我最富有戏剧性的经历，居然都与法庭相关；我两次面对公众讲话的机会都是北京市中级法院的开庭提供的，一次是1991年1月，一次是现在。虽然两次被指控的罪名不同，但其实质基本相同，皆是因言获罪。 二十年过去了，六·四冤魂还未瞑目，被六·四情结引向持不同政见者之路的我，在1991年走出秦城监狱之后，就失去了在自己的祖国公开发言的权利，而只能 通过境外媒体发言，并因此而被长年监控，被监视居住（1995年5月-1996年1月），被劳动教养（1996年10月-1999年10月），现在又再次 被政权的敌人意识推上了被告席，但我仍然要对这个剥夺我自由的政权说，我坚守着二十年前我在《六·二绝食宣言》中所表达的信念——我没有敌人，也没有仇 恨。所有监控过我，捉捕过我、审讯过我的警察，起诉过我的检察官，判决过我的法官，都不是我的敌人。虽然我无法接受你们的监控、逮捕、起诉和判决，但我尊 重你的职业与人格，包括现在代表控方起诉我的张荣革和潘雪晴两位检察官。在12月3日两位对我的询问中，我能感到你们的尊重和诚意。 因为，仇恨会腐蚀一个人的智慧和良知，敌人意识将毒化一个民族的精神，煽动起你死我活的残酷斗争，毁掉一个社会的宽容和人性，阻碍一个国家走向自由民主的 进程。所以，我希望自己能够超越个人的遭遇来看待国家的发展和社会的变化，以最大的善意对待政权的敌意，以爱化解恨。 众所周知，是改革开放带来了国家的发展和社会的变化。在我看来，改革开放始于放弃毛时代的“以阶级斗争为纲”的执政方针。转而致力于经济发展和社会和谐。 放弃“斗争哲学”的过程也是逐步淡化敌人意识、消除仇恨心理的过程，是一个挤掉浸入人性之中的“狼奶”的过程。正是这一进程，为改革开放提供了一个宽松的 国内外环境，为恢复人与人之间的互爱，为不同利益不同价值的和平共处提供了柔软的人性土壤，从而为国人的创造力之迸发和爱心之恢复提供了符合人性的激励。 可以说，对外放弃“反帝反修”，对内放弃“阶级斗争”，是中国的改革开放得以持续至今的基本前提。经济走向市场，文化趋于多元，秩序逐渐法治，皆受益于 “敌人意识”的淡化。即使在进步最为缓慢的政治领域，敌人意识的淡化也让政权对社会的多元化有了日益扩大的包容性，对不同政见者的迫害之力度也大幅度下 降，对八九运动的定性也由“动暴乱”改为“政治风波”。敌人意识的淡化让政权逐步接受了人权的普世性，1998年，中国政府向世界做出签署联合国的两大国 际人权公约的承诺，标志着中国对普世人权标准的承认；2004年，全国人大修宪首次把“国家尊重和保障人权”写进了宪法，标志着人权已经成为中国法治的根 本原则之一。与此同时，现政权又提出“以人为本”、“创建和谐社会”，标志着中共执政理念的进步。 这些宏观方面的进步，也能从我被捕以来的亲身经历中感受到。 尽管我坚持认为自己无罪，对我的指控是违宪的，但在我失去自由的一年多时间里，先后经历了两个关押地点、四位预审警官、三位检察官、二位法官，他们的办 案，没有不尊重，没有超时，没有逼供。他们的态度平和、理性，且时时流露出善意。6月23日，我被从监视居住处转到北京市公安局第一看守所，简称“北 看”。在北看的半年时间里，我看到了监管上的进步。 1996年，我曾在老北看（半步桥）呆过，与十几年前半步桥时的北看相比，现在的北看，在硬件设施和软件管理上都有了极大的改善。特别是北看首创的人性化 管理，在尊重在押人员的权利和人格的基础上，将柔性化的管理落实到管教们的一言一行中，体现在“温馨广播”、“悔悟”杂志、饭前音乐、起床睡觉的音乐中， 这种管理，让在押人员感到了尊严与温暖，激发了他们维持监室秩序和反对牢头狱霸的自觉性，不但为在押人员提供了人性化的生活环境，也极大地改善了在押人员 的诉讼环境和心态，我与主管我所在监室的刘峥管教有着近距离的接触，他对在押人员的尊重和关心，体现在管理的每个细节中，渗透到他的一言一行中，让人感到 温暖。结识这位真诚、正直、负责、善心的刘管教，也可以算作我在北看的幸运吧。 正是基于这样的信念和亲历，我坚信中国的政治进步不会停止，我对未来自由中国的降临充满乐观的期待，因为任何力量也无法阻拦心向自由的人性欲求，中国终将 变成人权至上的法治国。我也期待这样的进步能体现在此案的审理中，期待合议庭的公正裁决——经得起历史检验的裁决。 如果让我说出这二十年来最幸运的经历，那就是得到了我的妻子刘霞的无私的爱。今天，我妻子无法到庭旁听，但我还是要对你说，亲爱的，我坚信你对我的爱将一 如既往。这么多年来，在我的无自由的生活中，我们的爱饱含着外在环境所强加的苦涩，但回味起来依然无穷。我在有形的监狱中服刑，你在无形的心狱中等待，你 的爱，就是超越高墙、穿透铁窗的阳光，扶摸我的每寸皮肤，温暖我的每个细胞，让我始终保有内心的平和、坦荡与明亮，让狱中的每分钟都充满意义。而我对你的 爱，充满了负疚和歉意，有时沉重得让我脚步蹒跚。我是荒野中的顽石，任由狂风暴雨的抽打，冷得让人不敢触碰。但我的爱是坚硬的、锋利的，可以穿透任何阻 碍。即使我被碾成粉末，我也会用灰烬拥抱你。 亲爱的，有你的爱，我就会坦然面对即将到来的审判，无悔于自己的选择，乐观地期待着明天。我期待我的国家是一片可以自由表达的土地，在这里，每一位国民的 发言都会得到同等的善待；在这里，不同的价值、思想、信仰、政见……既相互竞争又和平共处；在这里，多数的意见和少数的仪意见都会得到平等的保障，特别是 那些不同于当权者的政见将得到充分的尊重和保护；在这里，所有的政见都将摊在阳光下接受民众的选择，每个国民都能毫无恐惧地发表政见，决不会因发表不同政 见而遭受政治迫害；我期待，我将是中国绵绵不绝的文字狱的最后一个受害者，从此之后不再有人因言获罪。 表达自由，人权之基，人性之本，真理之母。封杀言论自由，践踏人权，窒息人性，压抑真理。 为践行宪法赋予的言论自由之权利，当尽到一个中国公民的社会责任，我的所作所为无罪，即便为此被指控，也无怨言。 谢谢各位！