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/

//Hong Kong sat atop the Her­itage Foun­da­tion’s an­nual In­dex of Eco­nomic Free­dom for 25 years. When the 27th edition of the in­dex is re­leased Thurs­day, Hong Kong won’t be found.

In explaining the decision to remove Hong Kong (and Macau) from the index, the editors noted that while both special administrative regions “offer their citizens more economic freedom than is available to the average citizen of China . . . developments in recent years have demonstrated unambiguously that those policies are ultimately controlled from Beijing.”

Indeed, the loss of political freedom and autonomy suffered by Hong Kong over the past two years has made that city almost indistinguishable in many respects from other major Chinese commercial centers like Shanghai and Beijing//

China resides in 107th place in the ranking, sandwiched between Uganda and Uzbekistan among economies rated as “mostly unfree.” (烏干達、烏茲別克啲Friend)

A year ago, Hong Kong was dethroned by Singapore in the annual Heritage Foundation ranking of the world’s freest economies.

//不必摧毀大城市的建築物，不必殺害大城市的任何一個居民，甚至在表面上看來，這個大城市和以前一樣，但只要令城市原來的優點消失，就可以令它毀滅死亡。 // - 倪匡《追龍》

#除名了
#25年來排第一
#是世界最經濟自由體
#舊年降級排第二
#今年冇影

【美國三大報業聯名致函中國之解析】

還記得中國政府之前驅離華爾街日報、華盛頓郵報及紐約時報三大媒體駐中國記者嗎？

現在，這三大報業發行人（Publisher）聯名致函中國，呼籲中共讓他們公司記者能繼續在中國採訪報導。

我幫大家把信函全文及連結貼在下面，大家可以從頭到尾讀一遍，蠻有趣的。

這封信有三個核心訊息：

🐶第一個核心訊息：在全球疫情爆發的當下，訊息的自由流通非常重要。

這部分就是三大報業基於媒體自由的立場，對過去報導所做的捍衛，很合理，但中共不會想聽。

🐶第二個訊息，中共應該會有點興趣，它是：我們（這三大媒體）也有報導及肯定中共政府抗疫的努力啦！

原文是：
We have prominently featured news and analysis about China’s remarkable progress in reducing the spread of the virus through containment and mitigation. Even now, with some of our journalists facing imminent expulsion, they are reporting on how China is mobilizing state resources to develop vaccines that could offer hope to billions of people there and around the world.

（我們已經大幅報導及分析中國藉著封城及緩解降低病毒擴散的可觀進展。即便現在，即使有些記者即將被驅逐出境，他們仍然正在報導中國如何動員國家資源研發疫苗來幫助全球數十億人。）

🐶第三個核心訊息：這不是我們（三大報業）的錯啦！都是大人（川普跟習近平）在吵架的關係，我們是無辜的！所以大人們不要再為難媒體了！

原文：
The media is collateral damage in a diplomatic dispute between the Chinese and U.S. governments.

（媒體受到中美政府外交戰的間接傷害。）

We believe it is unambiguously in the interests of the people of both countries, as well as their leaders, to let journalists do their work.

（我們無庸置疑地相信，讓兩國記者們各自做他們的工作，符合兩國的利益。）

👉可以看得出來，這封信函與其說是軟中帶硬，不如說是三大報業力求守住新聞自由底線的前提下，向中國政府釋出善意。這也看得出來，三大報業對於守住在中國駐點這件事，非常在意。

👉這封信函除了強調這三大報業也有正面報導中國政府作為之外，同時還隱含「啊我知道美國政府也有限制中國媒體在美國的自由啦」這類的訊息，另外強調這是大環境（美中外交戰）不睦所致，媒體不該被牽連。

對國際政治有興趣的朋友們，不妨仔細品味這封信函的外交意涵吧！

WSJ報導：

標題：
News Publishers Urge China to Allow Reporters to Remain During Coronavirus Pandemic
（報業發行人呼籲中國允許記者在疫情期間待在中國）

次標：
Joint letter by publishers of Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and New York Times seeks reversal of expulsions of American journalists
（華爾街日報、華盛頓郵報及紐約時報三報業發行人聯合信函要求中國政府收回撤離美媒記者的決定）

An Open Letter to the Chinese Government

The coronavirus pandemic sweeping across borders, sickening and killing people in nearly every country, and sending the world economy into a downward spiral, is a global challenge unlike any other in our lifetimes. Perhaps more than any major news event in modern history, this moment underscores the urgent importance of both probing, accurate, on-the-ground reporting from the centers of the pandemic and of sharing the information, insights and lessons that reporting reveals as widely as possible.

In this moment of shared crisis, China has decided to expel American journalists from a number of news organizations, including the three we oversee, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The New York Times. This move — made in retaliation for recent expulsions by the United States government — is one that we would protest under any circumstances. But it is uniquely damaging and reckless as the world continues the struggle to control this disease, a struggle that will require the free flow of reliable news and information.

We strongly urge the Chinese government to reverse its decision to force the Americans working for our news organizations to leave the country and, more broadly, to ease the growing crackdown on independent news organizations that preceded this action. The media is collateral damage in a diplomatic dispute between the Chinese and U.S. governments, threatening to deprive the world of critical information at a perilous moment.

The earliest reports on the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan and its rapid spread were brought to the outside world by the journalists who work for us in China, as well as their colleagues for other leading news organizations. We have sent our reporters to live for extended periods in the center of the outbreak to document the toll of the disease and the struggle to treat those af icted with it. We have prominently featured news and analysis about China’s remarkable progress in reducing the spread of the virus through containment and mitigation. Even now, with some of our journalists facing imminent expul- sion, they are reporting on how China is mobilizing state resources to develop vaccines that could offer hope to billions of people there and around the world.

Our news organizations are rivals. We compete with each other on the biggest stories, including this one. But on this matter, we speak with a single voice. Both countries — and the rest of the world — benefit from having talented journalists, many of them uent in Chinese and versed in Chinese culture, cover the world’s second largest economy, the center of global manufacturing, and, unfortunately, a population hard hit by one of the worst pandemics of modern times. Even when this crisis passes we believe both countries will continue to benefit from freer access to news and information about the other.

Amid tensions between superpowers, journalism bolsters strong, confident societies by providing to leaders and citizens important information and awareness to inform their lives and decisions — even, perhaps especially, when it is challenging to governments. We believe it is unambiguously in the interests of the people of both countries, as well as their leaders, to let journalists do their work.

William Lewis,
Publisher, The Wall Street Journal

Fred Ryan,
Publisher, The Washington Post

A.G. Sulzberger,
Publisher, The New York Times

WSJ報導原文：

https://www.wsj.com/articles/news-publishers-urge-china-to-allow-reporters-to-remain-during-coronavirus-pandemic-11585052541

三大報業聯名函網址：

https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/letter0324.pdf?mod=article_inline

#你今天學英文了嗎
#華爾街日報
#華盛頓郵報
#紐約時報
#WSJ

華爾街日報3.4折訂購優惠：

https://reurl.cc/M7p8ev

Instagram: old_dog_chasing_ball

【胖犬電子報】免費訂閱連結：https://reurl.cc/yypqq8