Wildfire Collection: Thirty Years Anniversary Edition

Chapter 14 Starting from "10" ([-])
I replied confidently: "Of course because my writing is good—I think carefully, organize clearly, and have a clear mind—"

"Come on!" He interrupted me, snorting darkly through his nose, and said, "Come on! Good article! Hmph. Just because you're a woman! A woman!"

I suddenly felt hurt and sad, and I struggled to ask him back: "Show me the evidence!"

He squinted at me, from head to toe, and smiled sullenly: "Why, aren't you a woman?"

Looking down at myself, I can no longer see my toes in the six-month-old belly.I sigh:
"Yes! I'm a woman!"

I regret.

Orwell's Taiwan?

Written on September [-], [-]

This article was written hard enough, because it has already covered the core issues from environmental pollution and public morality, and it has to have a lot of rhetorical strategies and debate layouts.When you are finished, fax it to the newspaper office.wait.

I have been pregnant for six months, gulping down milk, taking three steps up and down the stairs and resting one step, like a panting beast; then I received a call: "There is no way," said the other end, "This article, published Come out and die."

This is the only article in "Wildfire" that has not been published.

When the book was about to be published, the manuscript had to be sent to the printing house, and the publisher and I worried face to face: Will this one be included in the book?If it is collected, the entire book may be banned and destroyed, and all previous efforts will be wasted; if it is not collected, alas, Long Yingtai is really, really unwilling!
It was very late at night, I raised my head and said, "Take it."

The American "Newsweek" (Newsweek) on August [-] this year had a report on Taiwan titled "Taiwan's 'Ideological Spy'".Paraphrase two of them:
It's the right time—it's [-]; and the words are very Orwellian.Last October, several high-level officials in Taipei discussed the "proliferation of illegal speech" at the officers' club.One official said: "The cultural battle must be strengthened." Another said: "Those who slander the Führer must be severely punished!" It is to suppress the power of opponents by suppressing speech.

……

According to the statistics of international human rights organizations, the Taiwan government's control of speech has a tendency to tighten.Three years ago the average number of cases per year was 180, but in [-] there were [-] cases of suppression of speech...

To understand the significance of this report, we must first remember what Orwell wrote about the "thought agent" in his book "Nineteen Eighty-Four".In London in [-], people's thoughts and actions were [-]% controlled by the government.Huge photos of leaders are posted all over the streets and walls, and warning signs are everywhere: "Big Brother is watching you." Private homes are equipped with electric cameras and microphones, and no one coughs or glances can escape "" Thought spies" observations.Even writing a diary and recording personal thoughts is in danger of being arrested and sentenced to death.The people can only speak what the government approves.

The reporter of "Newsweek" compared Taiwan with "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and many people felt that it was too much; today's Taiwan is definitely not the horror world described by Orwell, and the mainland China during the "Cultural Revolution" may have gone too far.However, regardless of whether the comparisons of these two journalists are over the top, their reports are full of evidence, full of names and surnames, and they are fair: on the one hand, they list the cases of magazines seized by the Taiwan government, and on the other hand, they also explain that many non-party publications really lack professional ethics. .The report concluded with the words of one naysayer: "We don't expect much, but we will fight to the end."

"Newsweek" has worldwide influence, and such a report has directly shaped millions of people's impression of Taiwan.So, what should we do?The simplest, we can just ignore it and pretend nothing happens.But this is too dangerous. Taiwan's political situation is already difficult enough, and to cut itself off from world opinion is tantamount to self-exile.Or, we can also protest against Newsweek, or even find trouble with this reporter and take some retaliatory measures.This is not only stupid but also impossible.The other party can confidently say: Can you please point out which one of the reports is not true?Given the facts, is there any room for "protest" or "retaliation"?

The third possible solution is that from now on we will try our best to "put on a show" and maintain an "image" of openness and democracy.In other words, all the actions of the government to control speech—banning newspapers and magazines or confiscating books, etc.—are all done in secret, so that outsiders can’t find out, and outsiders can’t report.In Taiwan, which has such a high level of education, this method of secrecy probably won't work.What's more, there are many foreigners who can understand Chinese and understand Taiwan.Incidents in Taiwan, such as the Zhongli incident and the Formosa Formosa incident, are often reported more abroad than on the island."Putting a show" for democracy cannot deceive people.

The last way is to conduct a sincere self-examination.Is our speech free enough?Many will immediately answer: Ah!That is much better than before; Taiwan is opening up and improving year by year.I agree with that; much of what is written today would have been unimaginable ten years ago.But just because it's better than "before" doesn't mean it's "enough".The question of "enough" freedom of speech actually depends entirely on the "needs" of the people.When the demand for liberty is higher than its existing supply, it is not enough; otherwise, it is enough.So is Taiwan's freedom of speech "enough"?

Obviously not enough.If the estimates of the World Human Rights Organization are correct, the average government uses various methods to ban "illegal speech" thirty times a year, and this year the number has skyrocketed to nearly two hundred.The reason for this kind of conflict between the government and the people, to put it bluntly, is that one wants to speak and the other forbids him to speak; that is to say, the scale of speech restricted by the government is not satisfactory.In addition, in daily life, there is an inexplicable fear.I wrote a few critical articles, and the students would ask with concern: "Teacher, aren't you afraid of being sent to Green Island?" right?Why should I go to Green Island?And it turns out that I was never harassed by any government agency, but the point of the question is: why is there such fear?Readers who write to me always add this sentence after expressing their opinions: I cannot use my real name, because "exposure" will bring disaster.Even a 15-year-old middle school student would say: Please keep my identity secret, it will be leaked.Having this kind of fear means that a person has something to say in his heart, but dare not say it; if he does, he is afraid of consequences.In other words, he cannot fully express himself within the existing scale of speech.

So do we want free speech?This question itself is probably a taboo - we claim that "freedom" naturally has freedom of speech, and it is guaranteed by the "Constitution"; asking "whether or not" is a slap in the face.But it's better to slap yourself than to wait for someone else to do it; Newsweek's report was a slap from someone else, crisp and embarrassing.After admitting that we do not have real freedom of speech, many people will say: Freedom and openness is a dangerous thing; this is how our mainland lost it.You see, at some political opinion conferences, candidates talk nonsense, and voters are fooled.You see, how many international students change as soon as they go out?Once thought and speech are opened up, Taiwan's stability and stability will be undermined.So control of speech is necessary.

This statement is specious, but in fact it is the result of no deep thinking.Voters "why" be deluded by sensationalists?"Why" do international students "change" as soon as they go abroad?Because in a society where speech is manipulated and controlled, the knowledge of voters is like pig food instilled in the feed pipe, it is forced to be fed, and there is only one kind.Since there is no variety of thought fodder for him to choose from, he never has the opportunity to learn how to discern taste, good from bad.When an international student was in Taiwan, he formed a view on things from textbooks and newspapers. When he went abroad, he suddenly found unblocked news and materials that gave completely opposite interpretations of things. How could he not be shocked?How can you not feel cheated?His "change" is also a matter of course.

What about students who have not yet gone abroad?Once I asked an American professor who came to Taiwan to teach political science: "Do you think Taiwanese college students are too naive about politics and are too easy to accept propaganda?" His answer surprised me; he said: "On the contrary! My graduate student Very cynical—suspicious of the world. They refuse to believe any news from the government, and they believe it to be false if the government says it is true. Because of the extreme distrust of propaganda and reports, even the "Cultural Revolution" in mainland China has people I think it is probably good. Their anti-indoctrination and anti-propaganda mentality has gone too far.”

I don't know how common the situation described by this foreign professor is, but no matter whether it is common or not, the crux of the serious problem is clearly exposed: in today's Taiwan, where people's wisdom and education are popularized, the practices of blocking news and controlling speech are not only The goal of stability and stability cannot be achieved, and it is receiving bad reactions.

Anyone who thinks that the control of thought and speech is only a political issue that does not affect other aspects of society is naive.Let's look at a university education that cultivates the backbone of society.On the one hand, we say that we must cultivate talents: those who study social sciences must learn to think carefully; those who study humanities and arts must learn to learn;The so-called "careful thinking and discernment", "investigating things to gain knowledge", and "breaking the casserole" all refer to the same principle: the pursuit of the truth and the truth wholeheartedly; knowledge comes from this.

Well, this seems to be one of the most basic spirits of higher education.The problem is, on the other hand, when students go to the library to open the English encyclopedia and find the pages of "Republic of China" or "Chiang Kai-shek", they find that the "relevant units" have drawn out some words line by line with black ink, leaving only He already knew the next few lines.He studied the history of Chinese literature and learned about the May [-]th Movement, but he wanted to read novels from that era. The teacher said: "It's a banned book, you can't read it, no."He went to a bookstore and took out a pirated English travel guidebook in Taiwan, only to find that there was an uneven page. The introduction to modern Chinese history in the guidebook hadn’t been printed.In class, he can occasionally ask a question that has been in doubt for a long time, and the teacher said: We should not touch this topic, it is inconvenient.He can also write an article for the school magazine and express some opinions, but the discipline office will return the manuscript and say: it can't be published, it can't be said, you have a problem with your thinking.

On the one hand, it encourages students to strive for the truth and the truth, and on the other hand, it uses various means to prevent students from acquiring certain knowledge—is the student lacking in intelligence, and we hope that he will not find a serious conflict between these two attitudes?This concealed approach not only exposes the hypocrisy of the rulers and educators, but even more ridiculous, it doesn't work at all!Thinking is a tool for the pursuit of truth. Once a student acquires this tool, it is impossible for us to say to him: You go to study, but don't touch politics.For example, a person who has the ability to think deeply about economic and literary issues must also be able to analyze political issues.On the other hand, if we insist on not letting students get to the bottom of political issues, the only way is not to teach him the principles and methods of pursuing the truth at all, and not to give him the tool to "think" to get to the bottom of it-but such a Come on, what education are we talking about?
In a society full of taboos, I also doubt that there will be any truly great works of art.Art creation is a kind of competition.In a free environment, everyone can develop his intelligence to the best of his ability; a writer has no subject he dare not write about, a painter has no image he dare not paint, a critic has no object he cannot attack, and a playwright There is no idea that he cannot express.Only in this kind of full play and comprehensive competition can it be possible to create truly cutting-edge and truly great works.Taiwanese artists, on the other hand, create in layers of constraints, like a group of frogs trapped in a narrow pond.There are too many books that are forbidden to read, too many subjects that writers dare not write, singers dare not sing, and painters dare not paint; writing books is forbidden, singing is forbidden songs, and painting is forbidden paintings.So everyone is careful to use their limited imagination in a small allowed range.I once asked a TV screenwriter: "Why are there so many costume historical dramas?" His answer was simple: "For safety." This situation is like an athlete running with one leg tied.How can we expect great Chinese works?

In the past ten years, Taiwan's relaxation of the scale of speech can probably be felt by every citizen.Although some remarks in non-party publications lack professional standards, they can be used to prove that Taiwan's democracy is constantly growing.Also because of this obvious progress, Newsweek's comparison of Taiwan to Orwell's police ruling the world seems excessive.But too much is too much, and there are many facts that we cannot deny.Instead of reacting emotionally, it is better to use this "slap in the face" to do some calm introspection: what is the purpose of controlling speech?Are the means appropriate?How's the effect?Most importantly, is there any need for control?What are the serious consequences of mind control?Does it meet Taiwan's current situation and future needs?
In a healthy democracy, "unwarranted" white fears cannot be tolerated.We need to replace fear with reason and the courage to face the facts; it is time for reflection.

Rat with mental breakdown
Originally published in "China Times Human World" on September 26, [-]

Li Guodong has books piled on his bed and sleeps on tatami every night.I read until one or two in the morning, when my eyes were bloodshot and painful like needle pricks, and then I let go of the book.He curled up on the tatami mat, tied his left leg to a table leg with a rope, and went to sleep with the lights off.

"In this way, as soon as I turn over and can't move my legs, I will wake up; when I wake up, I will immediately get up and continue reading-this year is the third year, if I fail the exam, I will go to the army!"

Before the entrance exam, Li Guodong explained his lifestyle in this way very calmly.There was a layer of dark blueness floating on his thin cheeks, and there were thin streaks of blood in the whites of his eyes.When he was speaking, his eyes were slack, and he didn't know where he was looking.

"Why not change the way of reading? Isn't this tormenting method very effective?"

He shook his head: "I don't know of any other way."

"Why don't you become a soldier first and then come back to take the exam? Give your mind a rest?"

He shook his head: "I must pass the exam."

"Why not find another way out? Don't go to university, vocational school or technology?"

He started biting his nails, and every piece of nail was chewed rotten: "No, I have to go to college."

Li Guodong still fell out of the list later, but he didn't go to the army either.After he stayed in the mental hospital for two weeks, one night, he secretly swallowed five large iron nails, jumped off the balcony on the seventh floor, and fell right next to the garbage truck.

Professor Maier is very interested in mice and has done such experiments:

Gather the mice on a platform and let them jump to the next two doors one by one; jump to the left door, it will be bruised, jump to the right door, but the door will open, behind the door is sweet cheese.Of course the little mouse is not stupid, after a few times of training, he will happily always jump to the right door, without falling down.

However, when the mouse's choice was fixed, Maier moved the cheese from the right door to the left door; the mouse, which thought it would be a good meal, was now bruised and swollen, unaware that the objective situation had changed.Fortunately, after falling several times, it gradually got used to the new situation: it turned out that the cheese was on the left!

(End of this chapter)