Tag Archives: Human rights

胡锦涛选民证填错,百度封锁消息

百度的算法真是越来越强大了。

大概有“胡锦涛”和“错”字同时出现在标题里的话,就会被过滤?不然怎么过滤这些消息呢?在Google上搜索就可以找到一堆相关报道和讨论,很多还是位于中国大陆的网站上。

我觉得也不是填错。就是不该这么填。但是中国选举就是儿戏。填什么都一样。

最近美国群众通过选举废除了一个亚利桑那州的州议员;威斯康星州试图通过投票废除州长;俄亥俄州通过选举废除了州政府和立法机构通过的取缔工会集体讨价还价权利的法律。

美国虽然腐败,但是至少民主机制是在的,多少还是可以发挥作用的。

草泥马和Ai Weiwei

我只想谈谈我对艾未未频繁使用“草泥马”,甚至“草泥马祖国”视频这种艺术形式的理解。因为这个形式很多人不能理解,或者我认为有误解。艺术本来是需要解析的,确实是不能指望任何一个人看到都能够直接理解艺术作品的含义。

所以,我认为艾未未一系列的“草泥马”相关作品,是符合他尽量年决定采用网络形式进行活动的风格的。这一点,艾未未在寄给TED的视频里就有解释。(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVnH8ou3Kd4)

援引Wikipedia对草泥马的解释:

草泥马,是普通話髒話“肏你媽/操你媽”的諧音,被《纽约时报》等媒体认为是中国网民对于中共网络审查制度不滿的喧洩[1]。具体的起源尚不明确,但在80年代初民间
流行的一则笑话中已经出现。包括「草泥马」在内的詞彙被中国网民列入其惡搞「十大神兽」之內,「草泥马」最初於2009年初发布于百度百科,之后迅速竄红,在聊天室、
论坛中广为流传,其代表象徵形象為羊駝(Alpaca),文字形象為「(·´ェ`·)」。

因此,“草泥马”是国内网络平民运动的标志,“吉祥物”。艾未未频繁使用草泥马是有深刻原因的。

研究一下,发现也有学者对“草泥马”有解析。崔卫平在博客中写道:

“至于“草泥马”,我为发明这种谐音隐语的人击节赞叹。它的潜台词是说——有些话我是说不得的,你不让我说,这个我知道,你看,我是配合的,不是吗?当然了,我自己也觉得,说这样的糙话是不应该的,我没有必要为了你而将自己降到某个水平之下,即使你逼我说,我也不说,我要保持我自己的体面和尊严;即使你退回到某个野蛮的水平,我还是保持自己文明人的身份,这个还不行吗?

学者文人看“草泥马”确实是不同于纯粹字面的理解。

另一个创作手段则是纪录片。他拍的纪录片不能说好看。但是,作为艺术作品,还是有让人震撼的地方的。我觉得根据我看过的一些作品,能够给我类似于其他艺术视频感觉的片段,就是警察和他们对摄像的场景。这种场景,99.99%的人是从来不会亲自经历的,但是和纪录片故事结合起来,却有震撼的效果。这种场景,在国外,也是见不到的。个人认为就是这一点,这些纪录片就相当有价值,虽然不是精工细作出来的作品,好像他的其他一些作品比如瓜子,陶瓷作品,灯笼等,但是这是一种新的方式,新的尝试。

个人认为艾未未是很有艺术成就的。而他采用这些形式进行创作,也绝非普通搞艺术的人能做到和敢做的。高尚的艺术应该贴近生活,描写现实,引人思考,我想他是做到了。

LAME

Ex-CIA Analyst Ray McGovern Beaten, Arrested for Silent Protest at Clinton Speech

This week, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a major address calling for Internet freedom around the world. As Clinton condemned the Egyptian and Iranian governments for arresting and beating protesters, former U.S. Army and CIA officer Ray McGovern was violently ejected from the audience and arrested after he stood up and turned his back in a silent protest of America’s foreign policy. Ray McGovern joins us from Washington, D.C. [includes rush transcript]

LAME.

Is America Really Making Progress?

Obama won. Not surprising. However, not a landslide win. I believe most people would believe Obama has a much bigger campaign and visibility. Yes, indeed. Obama spent at least twice the amount of money compared to McCain. That is, about 700 million US dollars. I believed Obama also had much more volunteers to work for him. Based on these, it is interesting that he had not won more votes.

So, about Obama. If any of the following is true: 1) he has spend half the amount of money 2) he is 100% black instead of 50% white, which possibly makes him visually more pleasing to more white people 3) G. W. Bush had not made such a big mess, I think Obama would not have won. Interesting, again.

Black population in US is about 13%. There are also hispanic Black people who may consider themselves colored or black. About 90% of Black people probably voted for Obama. Think about that. That is about over 10% of total voters. That means, out of 52% popular votes, only about 41% are from non-black voters. In fact, these data suggest that Obama is in fact not popular among non-black people, and older people.

Many people see Obama’s win as a progress of America. But I do not entirely believe that. Although he is definitely a symbol that black people are becoming more and more equal to white, it does not suggest racism is gone. In fact, Obama beating Hillary could suggest that women are still discriminated, and black people not voting fairly. If Hillary was a white man, it could be that Obama would not be able to become DEM nominee. Anyway. It seems Obama’s win is itself a symbol of racism. Because he probably would not have won if he is 100% black. His win suggest, together with the trend of popular black celebrities, that white people judge by appearance, still.

Now I also have to talk about human rights. California, Arizona, and Florida banned same-sex marriage. In fact, they wrote discrimination into state constitution. Oh yes, Obama is against same-sex marriage. And exit poll says, majority of black voters in CA vote for prop 8. And

Among the more unusual measures on this year’s ballots was one in Florida that would repeal an old clause in the state constitution that allows legislators to bar Asian immigrants from owning land. The repeal would be symbolic, as equal protection laws would prevent lawmakers from applying the ban. With 78 percent of precincts reporting just before 11 p.m. Tuesday, the vote was close, with 52 percent voting to preserve the clause.

Well I am not going to say too much more. You judge.

提出“汉奸言论”可监禁20年提案是侵犯人权?

联合早报报道认为,政协委员喻权域是极左人士,“要求制定法律严惩为帝国主义列强侵略中国辩护的“汉奸言论”。有关媒体和学者则指喻权域的提案是在宣扬极权主义,明显违反了言论自由精神”。

然而很明显这是对中国人权状况采用了双重标准。虽然网上言论之间的碰撞中,相对方盖上“汉奸”的情况时有发生,但是被盖上帽子的人并非就是犯法。委员的提案是要立法,既然是立法,就应该比较严谨而且有条例可以遵循。例如,

他的提案将建议对汉奸罪作如下惩处:凡为1840年鸦片战争以来列强对华侵略行为辩护者,处10年以下有期徒刑;凡为1931年(九一八事变)以来外国对华侵略行为辩护者,处20年以下有期徒刑;刊载汉奸言论的报章负责人要负连带责任,也要处三年以下监禁。

虽然其中可能有过激的地方,例如报章负责人也要监禁,或者监禁年限过长,但是总体来说我认为惩罚并非不可。“欧洲11个国家都有关于禁止为纳粹翻案言论的法例,奥地利更严厉执行有关法案”,而且我今天也看到甚至对于全球还有争议的土耳其奥特曼帝国时代发生的种族清洗,法国都立法惩罚否认这一事件的人。为什么欧洲这些国家的做法就没有人指责是侵犯言论自由,而中国有人提出对一个普遍认可的事实加以立法保护禁止犯案辩护,就变成“极权主义”了呢?

当然,任何立法禁止某些言论的做法都是无益于言论自由的。只是双重标准是不行的。