Carl Gershman：
记 忆与真理----为纪念天安门屠杀二十周年在美国国会的演讲
作者：Carl Gershman，国家民主基金会主席 张岩译
2009年6月4日为纪念天安门屠杀二十周年在美国国会的演讲
在这个月稍后的时间里，NED将在美国国会缅怀五位英勇的古巴活动家，他们中有三个人还在监狱里。他们虽然不在，但可以通过民主女神雕像来呈现他们。这一雕像在20年前被一辆坦克摧毁之前，曾被传奇性地揭去面纱，并在天安门广场矗立了五天。雕像体现了那些聚集在天安门广场的人们对于民主的渴望。在这次事件中，天安门广场上有数百人在镇压中被杀害，与他们一起被杀害的，还有难以计数的其他中国公民，他们在其他370多个城市参加了抗议，从西北的乌鲁木齐到远南地区的广东。从此以后，民主女神雕像就成了世界民主的一个象征，这就是我们为什么从1991年后授予世界各地为民主而斗争的勇士们以"民主勋章"的原因了。
大家都知道，今天有一些人认为，美国和其他国家不应该在民主和人权问题上给中国施加压力，因为，他们认为有其他更重要的东西可以与中国进行对话；或者，在某些中国人自己的观念里面，他们不适合于民主体制，而需要一种专制体制。所以今天的中国政府被溺爱和被宠坏了。其结果导致一些民主人士感觉到自己被忘记和被遗弃了；但是他们不会因此比认为民主在中国不重要或不现实的那些人更没有信心。同样的原因，对于那些不关心民主的现实主义者的过分期待，成为中国政治体制特别脆弱的所在。
从它的行为来判断，中国政府确实是脆弱的。否则，它为什么要在全国范围内不择手段地毁掉人们对天安门骚乱和镇压的记忆呢？它一直在课本及媒体中清除任何涉及到这次事件的叙述；逮捕那些试图报道此事的记者和任何跟这些记者谈过话的人；封锁网络并且屏蔽广播。就在昨天，在停止BBC广播、封锁YouTube上所有的视频，并在扣留更多的异议者之后，政府检查官第一次封锁了Twitter的通道，所有这一切都是为了使全国人民避开今天二十周年纪念日的敏感期。
当赵紫阳在四年前去世后，政府当局采取强制措施阻止异议者和心怀不满者聚集，这些人记得，1989年4月胡耀邦的去世是如何引发天安门骚乱的火花的。政府当局宣告了一个"极度敏感"期，让全副武装的警察时刻保持警惕，并命令铁路监视所有到北京的游客。这些不是一个感到安全的政权所采取的行为，相反，它是正坐在即将喷发的火山上面或地震区域的中心地带的政权所采取的行动。
这种不安全的原因已经在上个月，由中国著名的学者和社会学家于建嵘在北京的一次演讲中清晰地表达出来。通过深刻而显见的叙述，他解释道，中国的体制，呈现出一种他称之为"刚性稳定"的特征--这种稳定建立在封闭和强制性权力基础上，这里没有法律规则保护人们合法的利益或阻止统治者滥用人民的权力并装满自己的钱袋。他说，在这种体制下，社会治理的主要特征是"二元化、黑恶化和思想僵化"，其中，"民众合法利益的表达"--农民的土地问题，工人工资问题，城市居民的房产权问题，藏族或维吾尔族等少数民族的权力问题--成为社会秩序的威胁。
刚性体质无疑是脆弱的，它缺乏弹性，并在压力下容易毁坏。并且，在今天的中国，存在许多压力的来源。民众已经心怀不满，因为他们的权利被否认，并且他们无法求助于法院，因为法院是受控的，或者隶属于遥远的、不负责任的、傲慢自负的和防卫性的政治机构。除了他们现实的经济利益之外，他们也对许多事情不满，如大量腐败，环境恶化。由于因特网的广泛应用以及超过一半的人口拥有移动电话这一事实，与以前相比，市民也更加意识到他们的权利，并更加密切地团结在一起。综上所述，正如于建嵘所观察到的，这一政权已经丧失了它的合法性的唯一来源，即革命。"革命话语已经远离了我们"，他说，"革命不再合法"。
真正合法性的唯一来源，即于建嵘教授所称的"韧性稳定"，在他看来，是"宪法框架内的民主"。在这里，政府通过选举和独立的媒体与社会进行持续的对话，权力来源于人们，并且政府受制于大众舆论，冲突能够合法地解决，人民受到公正待遇。这样一种体制将不会分裂，因为它能够弯曲。它不会受到群众不满情绪的威胁，因为它是由绝缘的材料如法律、民主、尊重权利构成的。这样一种韧性稳定，或者民主，是于教授所认为的唯一能够使中国摆脱他所说的"千百年来治乱兴替循环的悲剧命运"的唯一途径。
他对中国的领导体制拥有智慧和意愿，从而实现从刚性稳定到韧性稳定的转型并不满怀希望，这一体制曾在1989年坚决拒绝与社会进行对话。所以他对中国的未来很悲观。
但存在一种替代模式，它是由《零八宪章》提供的，它在去年12月9日由300多位杰出的中国人发布，并有成千上万的其他人签名。它确认民主是一种"政治权力来源于人民，政权合法性来源于人民"、政治领导人"通过定期的竞争性选举"、大多数人的意志受到尊重、少数人的权利得到保护的体制，简言之，取得政府的一个现代途径是"民有、民治、民享"。
上周二，在由NED和"劳改研究基金会"合办的一次会议上，持异议者徐文立重复了同样的话。他说，他曾去了林肯纪念堂，即在我们现在所站立的大堂的另一端，并读了刻在碑上的林肯的"葛底斯堡演讲"那些著名的文字--政府"民有、民治、民享"。他说，在那一刻，他向林肯总统许诺，"中国将会是一个自由国家"。
我相信他是对的。所以，让我们缅怀那些在天安门广场死难的人们，正如林肯缅怀在葛底斯堡战役中牺牲的英雄一样。让我们"更加努力地献身于那一事业，为了那些献出最后一滴血的英雄们"，"保证那些死难者的血不会白流"，并且，"在上帝的名义下"，中国"将会拥抱一个自由的新生"。
谢谢！
Remembrance and Truth
Remarks by Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy
At the Capitol Hill 20th Anniversary Commemoration of the Tiananmen Square Massacre
June 4, 2009
Later this month, here on Capitol Hill, the NED will honor five brave Cuban activists, three of whom are in prison, by presenting them in absentia with a replica of the Goddess of Democracy, the statue that was dramatically unveiled in Tiananmen Square and stood for five days, before it was destroyed by a tank 20 years ago today. The statue embodied the democratic aspirations of the people who gathered in Tiananmen Square, many hundreds of whom were killed in the crackdown, and of countless other Chinese citizens who had risen in protest in over 370 cities across China, from Urumchi in the north-west to Canton in the deep-south. And it has since become a universal symbol of democracy, which is why we have given it as our Democracy Award since 1991 to brave people in all regions of the world who are fighting for democracy.
As you all know, there are some people today who think the United States and other countries shouldn't be pressing China on issues of democracy and human rights, either because they think there other more important things to talk about with China, or because the Chinese people in their view are somehow unfit for democracy and require a dictator. And so the Chinese government today is being coddled and appeased, as a result of which there are surely some Chinese democrats who feel forgotten and abandoned. But they should not be discouraged, any more than the others are right to think that democracy in China is not important or realistic; and for the same reason - for what is being over-looked by both disheartened democrats and so-called realists is the extreme vulnerability of the Chinese system of government.
Certainly the Chinese government feels vulnerable, if one is to judge by its behavior. Otherwise, why would it go to such lengths to erase all memory within China of the Tiananmen uprising and crackdown? Indeed, it has removed any mention of them in textbooks or the media. It has arrested journalists who intend to write about the events and anyone who even speaks to such journalists. It has blocked websites and jammed broadcasts. Just yesterday government censors blocked access to Twitter for the first time, after it had already blacked out BBC broadcasts, blocked all videos on YouTube, and detained more dissidents, all to shield the population from any hint of today's anniversary.
When Zhao Ziyang died four years ago, the regime took drastic precautions to prevent any rallying of dissidents and people with grievances, remembering how the death of Hu Yaobang in April 1989 had been the spark that ignited the Tiananmen uprising. It declared a period of "extreme sensitivity," put the armed police on special alert, and ordered the railways to screen all travelers going to Beijing. These are not actions of a regime that feels secure. On the contrary, they are the actions of a regime that thinks it's sitting on top of a volcano about to erupt or at the center of an earthquake hazard zone.
The reason for this insecurity was clearly spelled out last month in a lecture in Beijing by the well-known Chinese scholar and sociologist Yu Jianrong. The Chinese system, he explained with deep and obvious concern, is characterized by what he called "rigid stability" -- stability that is based on closed and coercive power, where there is no rule of law to protect people's legitimate interests or to prevent the rulers from abusing the people and lining their own pockets. The dominant feature of social governance in such a system, he said, is "dichotomized, black and white thinking" in which the "expression of people's legitimate interests" - land issues for peasant, wages for workers, homeowner rights for urban residents, minority rights for Tibetans or Uyghurs - becomes a threat to the social order.
A rigid system is by definition brittle. It lacks resilience. It can break under stress. And there are many sources of stress in China today. People have grievances because their rights are being denied and they have no recourse to the courts which are controlled or to the political authorities who are distant, unaccountable, arrogant and defensive. And they are angry about many things beyond their immediate economic interests, such as massive corruption and environmental degradation. Given the widespread use of the Internet and the fact that over half the population has mobile phones, citizens are also more aware of their rights, and more connected with each other, than ever before. On top of all this, as Yu Jianrong observed, the regime has lost its only source of legitimacy, which was the revolution. "Revolutionary discourse has distanced itself from us," he said, "revolution is long longer legitimate."
The only source of real legitimacy, of what Professor Yu calls "resilient stability," is in his view "democracy within the framework of the Constitution," a system where the government is in constant dialogue with society through elections and independent media, where its authority comes from the people and its governance is subject to popular review, where conflicts are resolved lawfully, and where people are treated fairly. Such a system will not break apart because it is able to bend. It is not threatened by sparks because it's made of the inflammable material law, democracy, and respect for rights. Such resilient stability, or democracy, is the only way Professor Yu feels that China can escape from what he calls "the tragic fate of two millennia of the cycle of alternating chaos and order."
He is not hopeful that the Chinese leadership, having violently rejected a dialogue with society in 1989, has the wisdom and the will to make the transition from rigid to resilient stability. And so he is gloomy about China's future.
But there is an alternative, and it has been offered by the Charter 08 Declaration that was issued last December 10 by more than 300 prominent Chinese citizens and has since been signed by many thousands of others. It affirms democracy as a system where "political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people," where political leaders are chosen "through periodic competitive elections," where the will of the majority is honored and the rights of minorities are protected - in short, "a modern means for achieving government that is truly "of the people, by the people, and for the people."
Last Tuesday, at a conference that the NED sponsored with the Laogai Research Foundation, the dissident Xu Wenli repeated these very words. He said that he had taken a walk to the Lincoln Memorial, at the other end of the Mall from where we are now, and read on the monument those famous words from Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address - government "of the people, by the people, and for the people." He said that at that moment he had made a promise to President Lincoln that "China will be a free country."
I believe he's right. So let us remember those who died in Tiananmen Square as Lincoln remembered the heroes of Gettysburg, and let us "take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion" and "highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain," and that China, "under God, shall have a new birth of freedom."
Thank you.
