今年十一，是中共建國六十周年。每逢此時，人們都會看到天安門的燈光，看到無處不在的兩個口號：「中華人民共和國萬歲！各族人民大團結萬歲！」過去中共中央每年五一、十一都要發布口號。一九五一年毛澤東親自在五一口號中加上「毛主席萬歲」，到了文革，就變成了「萬歲萬歲萬萬歲」。當然還少不了「中國共產黨萬歲」。今天，毛萬歲不喊了，其他萬歲依舊，山呼萬歲，從來沒有受到過質疑。雖然毛只活了八十二?，沒有「萬壽無疆」，他說共產黨也和人一樣「到老年就要死亡」，而蘇聯老大哥也只活到古來稀，七十四歲。「萬歲」只不過是一個口號治國的音符。
近年中國的民族問題凸顯，矛盾激化，令人想起「各族人民大團結萬歲」這個司空見慣幾十年的口號。「團結」二字，在共產黨的字典裡已經是天經地義、政治正確。記得一九六九年中共九大上，共產黨己經被毛整得七葷八素，他居然還說九大是一個「團結的大會、勝利的大會」。相反，分裂就成為罪大惡極。鬧宗派，不同意見，乃至趙紫陽反對鎮壓學生都是分裂大罪。達賴喇嘛、熱比婭、李登輝、陳水扁，當然就更是分裂祖國的罪魁禍首。最近達賴喇嘛被邀訪台祈福，馬總統都不敢反對，中共（宗教局長葉小文）就敢罵他「外來和尚假念經」，公然侮辱一位受到世界尊重的宗教領袖。國台辦早已宣稱「反共是人民內部矛盾」，分裂祖國便是敵我矛盾。
「團結」真有那麼神聖嗎？在我們崇尚的普世價值中有民主、自由、人權、法制、博愛、平等一系列觀念，也有多元、包容、尊重少數等內涵，沒有所謂團結。團結誠非貶義詞，但是，抱歉，它已經被共產黨糟踏成為專制獨裁的工具和旗幟。從馬克思《共產黨宣言》號召「全世界無產者聯合起來」，到中共革命的三大法寶之一「統一戰線」；從毛玩弄「團結／鬥爭」的權術到鄧後時代的「與中央保持一致」，意識形態的「主旋律」，「和諧社會」，都是團結的濫觴。實質上，在一個極權體制下號召團結在共產黨周圍，接受一黨專政，這種團結無異於接受奴役，逆來順受；若想脫離這種專制，便成為分裂主義，分裂份子。所謂統戰，引君入甕的悲劇已是屢見不鮮。因此，在沒有政治民主、個人自由和人權保障的社會提出「各民族大團結」，就是一個虛偽的欺騙性的口號。請問，在一個將民族問題當作階級鬥爭對待的國家裡，在一個和平執政60年拒不還政於民的制度裡，還有真正的民族團結可言嗎？
人們常將西方國家稱為自由社會，和共產黨的鐵幕社會相對比，殊不知是包含了兩種價值觀的根本對立，民主制度尊重個人和個人主義，尊重聯合與分離的自主權。鐵幕社會則是集體主義，個人只是一個螺絲釘，團結便是捆綁群體的繩索。追求自由，就談不上「大團結」。因此，中共專利的「萬歲」，也到該拋棄的時候了。這個腐朽不堪的詞令，源於對君主帝王的崇拜，也被革命狂飆所借用，和現代意識毫無相容之處（當代民主國家都不使用「萬歲」一詞表示對國家的崇拜）。然而，「萬歲」被毛共高度揮霍之後，國人竟有麻木不仁者，甘於匍匐在「萬歲」的淫威之下做順民，其愚不可及，不啻為最大的中國特色。到了民主化那一天，中國人要做的第一件事，就是把那個暴君之像及其萬歲裝飾，掃進歷史的垃圾堆。
（2009-8-30香港）
An Outdated and Feudal Slogan
By Jin Zhong
October 1 this year marks the 60th anniversary of the birth of the PRC. Whenever this day comes, the glowing lights of Tiananmen Square can be seen from afar, while the slogans “Long live the great People’s Republic of China” and “Long live the great unity of all nationalities of China” are seen almost everywhere in the country. In the old days, the CCP announced slogans on May 1 and October 1 every year. In 1951, Mao Zedong personally added “Long live Chairman Mao” as another slogan for the celebration, which was then turned into “(May Chairman Mao lives for) ten thousand years, ten thousand years, ten thousand ten thousand years.” Naturally, people wouldn’t forget to say “Long live the Chinese Communist Party.” Today, people no longer yell “Long live Chairman Mao,” but the other “long live” slogans remain and have not been cast into doubt. Mao passed away at the age of 82, by no means an “eternal life.” He believed that the Communist Party, like all human beings, would “die when it became superannuated.” The Soviet Union, regarded as China’s big brother, only lived to the age of 74. So “long live” is merely a means of “rule by slogan.”
In recent years, the issue of ethnic nationalities has raised much concern in China, recalling the old slogan “Long live the great unity of all nationalities of China.” The word “unity” has become unalterable, perfectly justified and politically correct in the Communists’ mind. We still remember the day in 1969 when the 9th Congress was held; Mao triggered great unrest in the CCP while proclaiming that it was “a congress of unity and victory.” Any attempts at secession would be regarded as a serious crime. Factional strife, disagreement, and even Zhao Ziyang’s objection to the suppression of the student movement were regarded as monstrous crimes of secession. The Dalai Lama, Rebiya Kadeer, Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian are definitely the chief offenders of splitting our homeland. In response to the Dalai Lama’s recent visit to Taiwan, President Ma remained silent, but the CCP (Ye Xiaowen, Director of the State Administration of Religious Affairs) criticized Dalai as “a foreign monk reciting Buddhist scriptures,” which implied that his blessing on Taiwan’s typhoon victims was not the real purpose of his visit. Earlier, the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council had already announced that “anti-communism is an internal contradiction among the people,” and that splitting the country constitutes “a contradiction between our enemies and us.”?
Is “unity” really that sacred? Universal values include a wide range of concepts, including democracy, freedom, human rights, an independent judiciary, philanthropy and equality, while there are also elements such as diversity, tolerance and respect for minorities, but “unity” is not included. “Unity” is not a derogative term. Regrettably, however, it has been ruined by the Communist Party and become a tool for despotism. From Karl Marx’s appeal in The Communist Manifesto, “Workers of the world, unite!", to the “United Front,” one of the three magic tools in the CCP revolution; from Mao’s political tricks on “unity/struggle” to “consistency with the central government” in the post-Deng era, the “main theme” of ideology and “social harmony” has been the source of unity. In fact, calling for unity around the Communist Party under a totalitarian system and for acceptance of single-party rule is no different from accepting slavery. Attempts to abolish despotism will be considered secessionism. When it comes to the United Front, we commonly see tragedies in which “the measure people use will be applied to themselves.” As a result, it is hypocritical and fraudulent to focus on the “unity of all nationalities in society” without political democracy, personal freedom and human rights protections. In a country where ethnic issues are seen as class struggle, a system where the government refuses to hand state power back to the people after six decades, is there genuine national unity?
Compared with the “Iron Curtain” societies of the Communists, Western societies are often described as liberal. People may not notice the conflict that exists between these two different values. While a democratic system respects individuals, individualism and the autonomy of unity and separation, an “Iron Curtain” society is collectivist. An individual is merely a cog in the wheel, and unity is a rope for binding a group of people together. If people pursue freedom, there won’t be “great unity.” That is why it’s time for the CCP to give up its exclusive notion of “long live.” This debased phrase, originating with the worship of emperors and borrowed by revolutionaries, is totally incompatible with a modern mentality (contemporary democratic countries do not use the term “long live” to demonstrate worship of a nation). However, given that “long live” was so widely used by Mao’s government, many people became numb and resigned to the despotic power of the phrase. Their ignorance is the main feature of China. When the day of democratization comes, the first thing that Chinese people should do is to throw the tyrant’s portrait and its accompanying “long live” banners into the rubbish bin of history.
30 August, 2009 in Hong Kong
(Translated by Isabella Lam)
