關於 liberal socialism ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

台灣最大公約數 – 反共去統不反中
The True Common Denominator of Taiwan

我察覺到一個新的台灣共識（最大公約數）正在成形，而且已經接近完成。雖然許多人還沒意識到這點，也還有一些人尚處在無感、或雖然有感但心理上拒絕的階段。

I sensed a New Taiwan Consensus is forming and near completion, although many are still not fully aware of it, some at the psychological stage of ignoring it and some even in total denial .

這新共識可以用三個原素的一句話來總結：反共、去統、不反中國平民。三元素環環相扣，構成了一個具有主旋律的直白命題：那些已經把台灣視為自己家鄉的人，已經把台灣當成一個與他方無涉的主體。

This New Consensus can be summarized in one expression with three parallel elements: opposing communism, de-unification and neutralness toward Chinese civilians. These three elements constitute an organic whole with a common theme that simply says, people who took Taiwan as their home deemed themselves as one distinct entity .

為了讓人們充分理解這三元素的意義，需要做一些進一步闡釋。我們這就開始。

I understand some elaboration may be needed to allow the three elements to be fully appreciated, especially the third one. Let me begin.

1. 反共。台灣其實並沒有那麼反對自由的社會主義；事實上，台灣社會本身在日常生活型態中就含有明顯的自由社會主義的痕跡。但是，台灣絕不會容忍社會主義精神脫序到共產主義的地步。若然，那種社會主義就是敵人，沒有討論的餘地。台灣海峽彼岸的中國共產黨（CCP），就屬於這一類。

1. Opposing Communism – Taiwan is not that much against liberal socialism. In fact,there is a rather obvious strain of it already existing in its social life. However, Taiwan would not tolerate socialism when carried away to the extent of communism, and would take it as enemy. Period. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the other end of the Strait falls into this category.

2. 去統。在台灣，不但老一輩了解中共天天掛在嘴邊玩弄的「統一」，只不過是其用來維持政權、控制已經被洗過腦平民的一種虛偽口號，而年輕一輩只會以荒謬視之。因而，此處並沒有用過去的「反統」一詞，而是用「去統」，表示了一種將「統一」概念徹底由腦中去除的意思。就像「大掃除」的意思一樣，老早就該扔掉的東西就把它扔掉。

2. De-Unification – Not only do the older generations realize that the jingling of
“unification” of the CCP is just a bogus slogan for upholding its regime’s control
over the brain-washed civilians, the young generation of Taiwan simply finds the
slogan ridiculous. Therefore, rather than using the term “anti-Unification” as people used to do in the past, I think “De-Unification” – the unshackling of the very idea of unification, as one can relate with the word “de-clutter”- is a better suited term.

3. 不反中，指的是對中國平民保持中性的態度。過去三年間，包括我自己以及國際輿論，已經破除了那個存在已久的迷思 – 中共CCP就等同中國。情況根本不是這樣的。中共不等同中國，更不用說等同中國人民了。中共是一個具有9千8百萬黨員的巨大政黨，但那只是住在那塊土地上的14億人當中的7%。

3. Neutralness towards Chinese Civilians – In the past three years, people in Taiwan including myself, as well as the international community, have debunked the long-existed myth that CCP Is China. No, far from it. CCP is NOT equivalent to China, let alone the Chinese people. CCP is a huge party of 98 million members and that accounts for only 7% of the 1.4 billion Chinese people living on that landmass.

簡單的算數就可以呈現真相。對任何國家，如果僅佔7%的人口可以在政治上完全控制100%的人口，唯一的可能就是實施殘酷暴力或通過暴力改變人的頭腦。

Simple math would tell the truth. In any nation, when 7% of the population politically controls 100% of the population, it would be an impossibility unless by brutal violence or total brain coercion.

中國平民本身就是受害者。其他的國家，不應該膝蓋反應式的把受害者視為天生就是邪惡的。因此，無論在心態上還是現實地緣政治考慮下，台灣社會都應該把「必反」這詞留給共產黨而不是受害的平民。

Therefore, considering the Chinese civilians are victims themselves, people from other parts of the world should not act in a knee-jerk way towards the ordinary, victimized Chinese Civilians as if they are born evil. Either under a proper mindset or the practicality associated with geopolitics, Taiwanese society should and is starting to understand this point. “Anti-“ is an attitude reserved for CCP and not intrinsically for the ordinary and mostly victimized civilians.

這才是台灣的最大公約數。然而，為了選票的政治人物及民調機構拖累了台灣。每年每月的民調都在問早已失效的問題：你偏藍還是偏綠？你贊成獨立還是統一？

Putting together the above three Elements, thus there is the New Taiwan Consensus. What’s falling behind and dragging Taiwan’s feet, are the ballot-hungry politicians and the various outdated polling agencies. They do so many so-called popular surveys every year, sometimes monthly. And they stick to the long invalid way of setting up their survey questions: Are you favoring Green (DPP) or Blue(KMT)? Are you pro-independent or Pro-unification?

這種自我設限或自我審查的問法，使得其他國家以為台灣是個分裂社會。

This kind of self-confined or self-censored surveys leave other nations the impression that Taiwan is a split society, Green or Blue, Independence or unification etc.

台灣這種導致外人認為台灣是個分裂國家的作法，實在愚蠢。如果問的問題對，台灣是沒有分裂的。例如，如果將「你贊不贊成獨立」改為「你反共不反共」，結果肯定是98%以上。

It’s such a foolish thing to do for Taiwan itself misleading outsiders into deeming Taiwan as a split country. There is absolutely no split should the right questions be asked in the surveys. For example, had the question been changed from “Are you pro-independence or anti-independence” into “Are you pro-communism or anti-communism”，then the result would have been a clear-cut 98% or even 99.5% towards “anti”.

若問「你是反中國共產黨還是反中國老百姓」，前者不會低於80%，後者不會高於20%。

Now, try this further question: “Are you anti-Chinese Communist Party, or anti-Chinese common people”, my guess is the former gets at least 80% and the latter gets 20% at most.

第三個問題：「你願不願意被共產黨統治」，保證結果是99.9%的「不願意」。
The third question: “Would you be willing to live under the Communist Rule”? That would guarantee a resounding NO answer of 99.9%.

這就是新台灣共識、社會的最大公約數，應該向世界大聲、清楚、不含糊的說出來。

This is exactly how the New Taiwan Consensus looks like – the true common denominator among a seemingly divided Taiwan. And the New Taiwan Consensus should be articulated to the rest of the world, no vagueness, no grey area and unambiguously.

不信的話，可以用上述問題做幾次民調。而且我保證，在不久的將來，所有民主國家都會端出類似「台灣共識」的政策原則。

For any surveyor or politician who still has doubts about this New Taiwan Consensus, he or she can just conduct new surveys with questions suggested as above. And, I myself am convinced, in a not-so-distant future, all democratic countries on the planet would issue national policies based on guidelines similar to the New Taiwan Consensus, for the goodness of their respective countries.

所以，台灣為什麼不這樣做呢？這可是台灣展示世界政治領導力的機會啊！

So, Hey, Taiwan! Why not put a thrust on this Taiwan Consensus to the world by publicizing it unambiguously and show some political leadership, just for once?

後記：以雙語向全球發聲，將是我接下致力的方向。所使用的這兩種文字，涵蓋了35億人口，接近地球的一半人數。這個行動，將以 「前哨預策」網站 為核心基地，其他的社交媒體，只要有傳播力道，都會被用為衛星來做整體運作。

個人的思考、判斷不一定對，您也不見得同意，但是，我保證這平台中的每一句話都是獨立的、出自內心的。而今天的台灣，乃至於世界，最缺的就是突破傳統成見、不受黨派左右、同時又知錯能改的獨立思考力量。不知您是否同意？

「前哨預策」平台將分為三步走：內容平台 – 互動平台 – 行動平台。剛誕生的它，當前還只是個內容平台，但達到一定數量的會員支持後，將加入各種新媒體形式，與會員就重要議題互動，並以「達成不同意見之間的最大公約數」為目標。一旦在會員內部形成「最大公約數」後，就構成了行動的基礎。至於行動的形式，也由願意推動或參與的會員決定。

此平台婉拒任何政黨、政府的贊助，只接受個人會員或企業會員的贊助；所有收入及贊助，均將用於「讓台灣更好」的事務上，以及推動、發揮台灣作為東亞及世界的「關鍵少數」的槓桿角色，為人類下一波文明做出量力而為的貢獻。

我只能說，十年來的不斷保持獨立，希望能換得您對「不受任何政黨、政府左右」這一點點價值的認同。

范疇
謹上

於台灣
首頁鏈接： InsightFan.com
訂閱鏈接： https://www.insightfan.com/membershipspricing/

The prophecies of Xu Zhimo | Lee Yee

Carrie Lam took the initiative to cancel her US visa, and now she has taken another action to renounce her honorary fellowship from Wolfson College of the University of Cambridge. That Facebook post of hers indeed gave us a bit of joy in sorrows. Some proposed, “Please renounce the British citizenship of your husband and two sons as well, in order to demonstrate your loyalty to the country.” There, we could tell where public opinion lies and where the public’s heart is.

To conclude her post, she wrote, “Despite this unpleasant incident, Cambridge University is still a world-renowned university that many aspire to, and Cambridge, under the pen of Mr. Xu Zhimo, still leaves many beautiful memories for my family and me!” As she bids farewell to Cambridge, one can’t help but recall Xu Zhimo’s “Taking Leave of Cambridge Again”.

Xu Zhimo’s Cambridge era was in 1920-21, but I think the most noteworthy moment of his was his tenure as the editor-in-chief of the Morning Supplement from 1925 to 1926. During this period, he discovered great writers such as Shen Congwen, and predicted how the next century would unfold.

The predecessor of Morning News [Shen Bao] was Morning Bell Daily [Shen Zhong Bao], founded by Liang Qichao and Tang Hualong. Morning Bell Daily published novels, poems, essays, and academic speeches in the seventh edition, so Morning News Supplement was initially referred to as the “Seventh Edition of Morning Bell”. Many articles and works of the New Culture Movement, including Lu Xun’s episodic novella, “The True Story of Ah Q”, was published in here. It was one of the three major publications during the May Fourth Cultural Enlightenment Movement. The Chief of Morning News was Chen Bosheng, and the seventh edition was led by Sun Fuyuan, who gave it the name Morning Bell Daily. Until 1924, when Sun Fuyuan left, it was the “golden age” of the propagation of the new culture. During this period, there was the October Revolution of the Soviet Union, which led to the establishment of the first socialist country, and China’s May Fourth Movement, which developed from enlightenment that promoted liberal and democratic ideas to socialism and salvation that catered to the global trend. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was established, and the Kuomintang (KMT) was transformed into a Lenin-style party. Joining forces, the two parties set up the Republic of China Military Academy (ROCMA), to which the Soviet Union sent representatives to participate in preparation for the Northern Expedition to overthrow the most civilized Beiyang regime (aka the Republic of China) in the early days of the establishment of the Republic of China.

At the insistent invitation of Chen Bosheng, the editor-in-chief of the Morning News, Xu Zhimo agreed to serve as the editor-in-chief of the Morning Supplement in early 1925 after his Europe tour. He started to travel by train to Soviet Russia in March, and then off to Europe. At the time, he was carrying the yearning of most Chinese intellectuals, including Hu Shi, for the realization of the ideal of human equality in the Soviet Union, but he had sensitively noticed the gloomy expressions on the faces of Soviet Russians, the sense that they “had no idea what the smile of natural joy” was. He visited Tolstoy’s daughter in Moscow and learned that Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky’s books were no longer available. Xu Zhimo then wrote a sharp, honest, literary note, “They believe that Heaven is available and achievable, but between the secular world and Heaven there is a body of water, a sea of blood, and humans must survive crossing this sea before they could reach the other shore. They decided first to realize that sea of blood.”

That was the early years of the establishment of the Soviet Union, when the new regime was praised by intellectuals around the world, and inspired Chinese ideologies. The poet’s keen observation foresaw that this regime under the dictatorship of the proletariat would realize a sea of blood.

After returning to China and took over the Morning News Supplement on October 1, 1925, the first thing Xu Zhimo did was to start a series of discussions around the Soviet-Russian issue in the paper. More than 50 fiercely controversial articles on whether to introduce “friendship” or “hatred” towards Russia. At around 5 p.m. on November 29, the Morning News building in Beijing was set on fire by the protestors, which also burned the discussions to ashes.

Why did Xu Zhimo try so hard to discuss Soviet Russia? He said, “China’s problem with Soviet Russia…to date, it has always been a gangrene that has never been removed nor punctured. The pus inside has gathered to a point where it can no longer be silted, and the hidden chaos is so obvious that we can no longer simply ignore.” Therefore, “the problem this time,…to exaggerate a little, is a problem of China’s national fortune, including all possible perversions in the livelihoods of its countrymen.”

The prophecies of the creation of a sea of blood by the Soviet Union, as well as the Chinese people living in perversions, have all came true. Today, we are not only commemorating Cambridge under the pen of this renowned poet, but we should also remember how the Chinese ignored this prophet’s words, and brought about a disaster that is still continuing a hundred years later.

She bid farewell to Cambridge. But Cambridge would never have tolerated the smearing of these hands, which created a sea of blood anyway.

行动党的同道们，支持火箭的朋友们，若大家同意，请like and share，谢谢。

政治教育是重中之重
文/丘光耀博士

在JJPTR崩盘之前，民主行动党社青团有一全国理事不时在网上炫耀其“投资”所得，引起党内一些团员的非议，规劝她要收敛，以免成为错误示范；但对方屡劝不听，还不断狡辩。

有团员和大学生很是气愤，希望我表个态以制止其气焰。我于是在面书发帖，不点名地作出批判。我的帖文内容如下：

【社会民主主义的其中一项核心原则，就是“驯化野蛮脱范的资本主义”。

Money Game 是市场经济的毒瘤，是赌场资本主义的变种，我们当然要严打之！

这是民主行动党的政治教育ABC，社青团难道还有领袖不明白？】

导航系统

我一直强调，参加一项严肃的政治运动，是要立志而不是开玩笑的。我们须要清晰的政治理念（或曰意识形态），来作为指导日常政治判断和实践的“导航系统”（以前是罗盘），免走歪路，尤其要能在政治逆境下面对威迫利诱，以及在资讯革命的新时代中处理各种社会矛盾。

意识形态（ideology） ，过去左派术语又简称“世界观”（world view），马克思主义者概括为“上层建筑”（superstructure）。在学术上的定义，“意识形态是属于哲学范畴，可以理解为对事物的理解、认知，它是一种对事物的感观思想，它是观念、观点、概念、思想、价值观等要素的总和”。这个定义，超越左与右。

环顾今天的大马，还有系统培训意识形态的政党，应该是民主行动党、社会主义党和伊斯兰党。马华的意识形态，用林良实公子的名言，就是“吃喝玩乐”四个字。民政党在东欧剧变后，放弃社会民主，改宗自由主义，还参加自由党国际（liberal international），但是在日常的政治实践中，该党根本就是捍卫巫统种族威权霸权的共犯，距离自由主义十万八千里。至于砂人联党，早年是信仰科学社会主义（scientific socialism），即砂共的同路人，后来参加国阵，已经丢失党魂快半个世纪。

行动党信奉社会民主主义（social democracy）早年称为民主社会主义（democratic socialism），属于温和的议会中左派。社会主义党则近似托洛斯基主义（Trotskyism），乃激进左翼也。这两个党的机关报，都不时有刊登讨论政治理念的严肃文章，行动党中央辖下还有政治教育局，出版中文版的《思想战线》和英文版的Solution。

伊斯兰党，顾名思义是个神权主义政党，该党的意识形态，从自办的幼儿园、宗教学校，发展到大学生赴中东留学，都有一套从组织到思想上十分牢固的政治教育“一条龙服务”。坦白说，如果伊斯兰党的意识形态系统是由开明派主导，则它对促进大马的民主化肯定有功。令人遗憾的是，该党在哈迪的领导下大开历史倒车，走向“反现代性”（anti modernity）的原教旨主义，这当然也和环球伊斯兰主义的激进化有关。

思想上没有入党

一个没有政治理念的政党，如东马沙砂两邦的许多本土党，都是选举青蛙党，他们不讲“意识形态”，只有“议席心态”，政党用作竞选的平台，不是改变国家命运的运动。所以沙巴政客可以轻易跳槽、不讲原则、出卖党团、利益至上。这种不良征兆，包括出现在沙巴行动党人身上。

行动党自308后，随着组织的膨胀，执政的资源及仕途的顺畅，遂引来一些政治投机份子纷纷“入党”。在我看来，他们只是组织上入党，思想上没有入党，所以他/她不是一个肩负共同斗争使命的联合体，而是靠火箭旗帜谋一己私利的个别政客。

这些人参加火箭，求官为先，争上位才是硬道理。

所以传出桃色绯闻时，有人可以一再否认，典当的不只是其个人诚信，更拖累了党的政治威信。

又有人爱惜乌纱帽更甚于捍卫社会公益，所以凡街头抗争，他总是躲在幕后，凡有争议性的公共议题（如抨击Jakim或特朗普），青年团立场理应比母体更激进更鲜明，但他/她都蓄意模模糊糊，唯唯诺诺。

还有人以“族裔本位”或“性别”来合理化自己不可被取代，即使中选后服务差强人意，但面对被党“割爱”的风险时，还敢大义凛然地以他/她能彰显党的“多元性”来威胁党。

小许月凤

一个没有政治理念的政客，其实就是骗子。

一群没有政治理念的政客聚集在一起，就是一个行骗集团。

有些行骗集团是打着神的名义，有些是以单一种族的利益挂帅，有些是搞狭隘的本土情绪，林林总总，不一而足，说白了，就是要蒙骗其支持群体，继续巩固其权力集团的统治。

因此，行动党要免于被投机份子所侵蚀，就要从基层党员开始，一直到支部/国会联委会/州委，强化政治教育，培训理念，并在执政州的各级议会，通过公共政策，加以贯彻实践。这一来可以让投票支持“改变”的人民，真正体会到“进步政治”的实惠；二来可让具备清晰理念的党员干部，看清台面上的领袖或议员，有否背信弃义，进而判断党内的派系，有否存在罔顾“大局意识”的军阀肆虐。

因为在关键时刻，要么是在大选排阵前夕，不然就是靠微差席次组织新政府之际，政治投机份子都将以“小局利益”来要挟党。霹雳州政变，许月凤永远都被绑在历史的耻辱柱上，但党内还潜伏多少的“小许月凤”，会让反动逆流在关键时刻得逞？我们得来不易的民主果实，真的经不起“小许月凤”的背叛和出卖。

故此，我建议行动党严打“小许月凤”的文化在党内滋生，凡不称职还敢威胁党的现任议员，应该果敢换马。凡以跳槽来做自己或派系谈判筹码的议员，当斩就斩。凡是通敌者，不论是脑残还是利益作祟，就不能再委以候选人。

“小许月凤”比“小拿破仑”对民主政治的危害更大，尤其是在大马正准备冲破威权体制，迎接自由国家的历史性时刻！