看到海岸那边很有喜感的状态：“热烈庆祝第一个胜诉的诞生！“我的心情不知不觉好起来。毕业一年多了，第一个胜诉诞生，不容易！意义很重大。在这个胜诉之前，可想而知有多少败诉和失落的心情在里面。一毕业就去当律师，这条路会走得坎坷，所以我佩服那些毅然选择职业律师这条路而且一直坚持下来的兄弟们。法学院毕业清一色考公务员去了，还有很多人从事着和法律不相关的职业，说来真是法学教育的悲哀。所幸他们毕业于这样一所注重通识教育的综合性大学，路可以走得宽一些。但说实话，法学院的这帮人受了多少通识的熏陶，还是值得怀疑的。这几年中国高等教育被批判，教育部的处境不比中国足协好到哪里去。自然而然周济也不会比谢亚龙更受欢迎。中国网民对周济早就已经磨刀霍霍了。所以，周济刚刚被免职，很多高校都有人在教室里敲锣打鼓庆祝他的下课。本人刚刚还捡到了冷笑话一枚，在此奉上：
“钱学森已神志不清还念念不忘工作，嘴里念叨着：“洲际导弹”....，总理连连点头，回 到办公室立即撤掉捣蛋的教育部长周济。”
在中国这个官本位的社会，律师可以是最没地位的，但永远不会是最有地位的。特别是年轻律师，他们的生活状况很惨。因为没有经验，他们做的工作很基本，律所给的工资很低，最要命的是没有案源。所以产生恶性循环就是，在刚开始的几年，甚至连磨练技巧，获取经验的机会都很寥寥。当然这对磨练人的意志和培养吃苦耐劳的精神是有好处的。。。年轻人总是容易急躁，特别是二十出头，正当风华的我们。这时候，女生都在为自己的婚嫁发愁，男生同时也在尽力解决自己的单身问题。但是谈婚论嫁对刚毕业的男性同胞是很奢侈的一件事情，甚至是不现实的事情。到了社会上你会发现女人都很现实，一个年轻小伙如果没有家庭背景的良好支撑，是很难在这供需关系紧张的市场有立足之地的。一方面，接近二十五岁的女人们开始疯狂拼命地想嫁人，另一方面，同时代的男人却没有能力独立娶到老婆。为什么？因为在中国，丈母娘代表着商品房价格的刚性需求。而我们的律师们，大多数的律师们，不啃老是买不起房子滴。中国律师行业的平均收入低于出租车司机的收入。律师这行就是一根鸡肋，吃不饱，又饿不死。
最近重庆打黑，顺便打掉了一个黑律师。虽然很多人说，这个律师是被政府陷害了，但被人陷害也总是自己行得不正，把柄落在了别人手里。这对本来就已经不景气的律师行业，又是一个打击。当然这打击不了处于金字塔尖的律师精英，却可以整死处于食物链底端的律师民工。
有的律师为正义说话，有的律师为坏人说话。但更多的律师只是为钱说话。有一句话特别经典，是描述美国法学院毕业生的：刚毕业的你，以为你会为正义而战，但若干年后，你发现自己只是为了钱而疲于奔命。中国的情况何尝不是如此呢？律师这个行业有自己的职业道德，不是老百姓那种“非黑即白”的简单思维可以理解的。律师是为客户服务的，律师是为了维护客户的利益而存在的，律师最大的道德就是使自己客户的利益最大化。问题在于客户的利益，经常会和社会普遍价值观冲突。一个人杀了人，难道就不应该享受辩护的权利吗？为黑社会辩护是老百姓所不能容忍的，陈兴良，赵长青为黑社会申辩而遭恶骂也不是不可以预料之事。有人说，这是普法的失败。是啊，看看媒体的法治新闻都在报道些什么吧，看看裤衩电视台的法治在线有多么傻逼吧，看看中国的年度法治人物，你真的不知道该哭还是该笑。这不仅仅是普法的失败那么简单而已，因为要使整个社会做到相当之宽容是极为不易的。“我不同意你的观点，但我尊重你说话的权利”这样西方自由主义的舶来品，确实很难在中国被广泛纳入人们行为的宗旨之中。而律师，则必须游走于各种道德观之中，并作出自己的选择。走钢索的律师，有人这么形容律师。律师往往手里拿着道德的罗盘却迷失在种种价值观的冲突之中。一个律师应该为一个杀人犯辩护吗？当然，这个问题问得不好，因为一个人是否被认定为杀人犯是必须经过正当程序的审判由法官决定的。那当一个律师认为或明知自己的客户杀人了的时候，他应该怎么办？是继续为当事人辩护，维护当事人的合法权利，还是放弃辩护，以求自己良心之安宁？律师也是人，也有自己的自由心证。我只知道有的律师，选择了掩盖事实伪造证据，有的律师选择了从此转行不当律师。
反观美国律师行业，我找到了一些让人感觉美好的东西。从学生迈入法学院的那天，整个行业都会提倡法律人参加pro bono工作，相当于做义工，不拿钱。每个律师每年都会做50小时以上的pro bono工作，无论这样是多么微不足道，无论这样的声音有多么微弱。
You may just want to do some good. A beautiful thing about becoming a lawyer is that you can fulfill your sense of right and wrong as well as earning satisfaction of helping those people in need of legal service. There are quite a lot of things you can help with even though people call you a fairly native young man. Do Pro Bono can also be fun! You don't have to participate in pro bono work right after graduating from law school. it requires skills. Taking part in legal clinics and earning experiences while at school is a good way to prepare for future pro bono work.
2009年12月8日星期二
2009年11月20日星期五
2009年11月17日星期二
转一篇好文，《给上海昨日提问的青年》，Obama Town Hall @ Shanghai
from http://www.bullogger.com/blogs/shafa/archives/347719.aspx
看我twitter的朋友都知道昨夜在奥巴马回答问题的环节，我在twitter上急得跳脚，说了很多话，被很多人转引。觉得没有说透，所以再撰文一篇。
如果有的青年确实不知道自己该问什么，所以只会问那些蠢问题（我不相信这是真的），那我祝他们幸福安康。
如果有的青年知道自己该问什么并且得到了发问的机会，而因为种种众所周知的原因没有问，最后问了蠢问题，那我只能说这实在是个非常蠢的决定。和勇气无关，和大是大非无关，和诚实无关，就是蠢。
我平生最恨劝别人当烈士的人，但昨天的情况不同。假使有人站起来镇静地说：“总统先生，按规定我不能问没有被事先安排好的问题，所以问这个问题会给我带来很大麻烦，甚至牢狱之灾，但我仍然想知道。。。”不用“代表”任何人，不用唱任何高调，不用悲愤交加手舞足蹈，就能无比安全的成为英雄，何乐而不为？至于奥巴马怎么回答，谁在乎？
从twitter上发布的各类消息上看，几位“才俊”都是各高校中“团委书记”一级的人物，按说已经算是体制内的人了，应该懂得几分钻营之道。可这成本收益的计算能力实在差劲，成不了气候！
如果你这么问了，你便会在一夜之间成为全球媒体的宠儿，上各大媒体头条，比起“扔鞋”的宵小之为光明正大百倍，且一夜成名名气直逼姚明刘翔韩寒。试问，终你一生，你可有任何其他更好的机会如此风光？你的名字会被写入历史，和美国第一位黑人总统中美建交三十周年第一次访华史上第一次与中国青年对话这一系列事件放在一起，你会成为那个皇帝新装童话里的孩子。试问，终你一生，你可有其他机会被写入历史，以名垂青史的方式？你会成为20年后又一个tankman,而且不用面对他当年面对的风险。你会让CCTV和各种TV齐刷刷插播广告，战战兢兢心里爱恨交加，从此提起你的名字能止领导和媒体编辑夜啼。试问，终你一生，你可有其他机会被人说：“哥，你真是个传说”？
你会成为无数人心目中的英雄，这些人包括你的同学老师甚至可能还有父母。你要是男的，会有女生青睐；你要是女的，更会被无数人称颂。更重要的，你会让在座的所有其他你的同类们领导们表情便秘像偷看毛片儿被抓像完完全全的傻逼，作为年轻人，有什么能比让其他人看上去都像傻逼更过瘾的感觉么？
在如此光环和镁光灯的包围之下，你的安全几乎不会成为任何问题。你的学校绝不敢开除你，但是你可以光明正大义正词严地开除你的学校，然后在接受媒体采访时做心怀委屈欲言又止状，然后校领导就会出来哭天喊地的叫比窦娥还冤，但是没有人会相信。这样你就会又一次让学校的领导们看起来像完完全全的傻逼。作为年轻人，有什么比让尸位素餐的领导们一次又一次地看上去像傻逼更过瘾的事么？
当然，威风是要有代价的，但这代价比起收益来小得可怜。这一夜的名气会带给你持续的回报，出国是小事一桩，美国有一帮人愿意为你争取绿卡。就算在国内混，你也已经赢得了很多人的尊重，善加利用，会是宝贵财富。可能以后出去集体腐败不能开团委的发票了，可团委那点可怜的预算，绝比不上上海滩想请你吃饭的人的长龙。当局都是得过且过的官僚作风，“秋后算账”这种事儿能省就省，况且还有全球媒体盯着。只要以后低调一点，行走江湖有那一夜的资本足够。
说句实话，看诸君发言时的谈吐和仪态，都不像是能成事的人，甚至都不像家里背景深厚的人。那你能放弃的是什么呢？一个一文不值的学位？做一名房奴的如棉前程？别提什么家人如何如何了，我国政府光明正大，不会拿你家人怎样的，顶多过年过节嘘寒问暖一下。
我实在无意批评这些青年，都是体制的受害者。只是当历史把机会放在他们面前的时候，没有人把握。这里表现出的素质、情怀、见识、乃至投机水平，非常可疑。
但是我不得不批评他们，因为他们是成年人，并且声称自己代表了我。
你们不仅应该感到后悔，后悔没有把握这机会实现这“惊险的一跳”让自己一夜名动天下。也应该感到羞耻，因为你们集体撒了谎；因为当GFW和TWITTER的问题是由美国人而不是你们提出的时候，你们相当于在世界面前被抽了一嘴巴，以很屈辱的方式；因为当你们口口声声“代表”中国青年的时候，你们“代表”我们丢了脸。以你们习惯的话语方式说，你们是“丧权辱国”，“权”是“人权”，“国”是“国民”，你们丧失了自己说话的基本权利，羞辱了你想“代表”的国民。
请记住，你们不是我们选出来的，不能“代表”我们。当你们非要用“代表”这个字眼的时候，你们是有责任的，不能“代表”我们撒谎。
请记住，你们的国家正在发展壮大，你们是国家的未来，所以在全世界都在看着你们的时候，请表现出一点点起码的个人尊严，不要撒谎。
请记住，无论你爱不爱国，爱不爱政府，爱不爱中国人和中国文化，在这样的外交场合，作为炎黄子孙，请体面一些，不要撒谎。
是的，当你们不是被选出来的却说要“代表”我们的时候，你们在撒谎；当你们明知有更重要的问题却只问事先设定好的毫无意义的问题时，你们在撒谎；当你们事后拒绝回答怎样被选出来甚至澄清所谓西方媒体的“污蔑”时，你们在撒谎。
“以服务人民为荣，以背离人民为耻；以诚实守信为荣，以见利忘义为耻。”愿与诸君共勉。
看我twitter的朋友都知道昨夜在奥巴马回答问题的环节，我在twitter上急得跳脚，说了很多话，被很多人转引。觉得没有说透，所以再撰文一篇。
如果有的青年确实不知道自己该问什么，所以只会问那些蠢问题（我不相信这是真的），那我祝他们幸福安康。
如果有的青年知道自己该问什么并且得到了发问的机会，而因为种种众所周知的原因没有问，最后问了蠢问题，那我只能说这实在是个非常蠢的决定。和勇气无关，和大是大非无关，和诚实无关，就是蠢。
我平生最恨劝别人当烈士的人，但昨天的情况不同。假使有人站起来镇静地说：“总统先生，按规定我不能问没有被事先安排好的问题，所以问这个问题会给我带来很大麻烦，甚至牢狱之灾，但我仍然想知道。。。”不用“代表”任何人，不用唱任何高调，不用悲愤交加手舞足蹈，就能无比安全的成为英雄，何乐而不为？至于奥巴马怎么回答，谁在乎？
从twitter上发布的各类消息上看，几位“才俊”都是各高校中“团委书记”一级的人物，按说已经算是体制内的人了，应该懂得几分钻营之道。可这成本收益的计算能力实在差劲，成不了气候！
如果你这么问了，你便会在一夜之间成为全球媒体的宠儿，上各大媒体头条，比起“扔鞋”的宵小之为光明正大百倍，且一夜成名名气直逼姚明刘翔韩寒。试问，终你一生，你可有任何其他更好的机会如此风光？你的名字会被写入历史，和美国第一位黑人总统中美建交三十周年第一次访华史上第一次与中国青年对话这一系列事件放在一起，你会成为那个皇帝新装童话里的孩子。试问，终你一生，你可有其他机会被写入历史，以名垂青史的方式？你会成为20年后又一个tankman,而且不用面对他当年面对的风险。你会让CCTV和各种TV齐刷刷插播广告，战战兢兢心里爱恨交加，从此提起你的名字能止领导和媒体编辑夜啼。试问，终你一生，你可有其他机会被人说：“哥，你真是个传说”？
你会成为无数人心目中的英雄，这些人包括你的同学老师甚至可能还有父母。你要是男的，会有女生青睐；你要是女的，更会被无数人称颂。更重要的，你会让在座的所有其他你的同类们领导们表情便秘像偷看毛片儿被抓像完完全全的傻逼，作为年轻人，有什么能比让其他人看上去都像傻逼更过瘾的感觉么？
在如此光环和镁光灯的包围之下，你的安全几乎不会成为任何问题。你的学校绝不敢开除你，但是你可以光明正大义正词严地开除你的学校，然后在接受媒体采访时做心怀委屈欲言又止状，然后校领导就会出来哭天喊地的叫比窦娥还冤，但是没有人会相信。这样你就会又一次让学校的领导们看起来像完完全全的傻逼。作为年轻人，有什么比让尸位素餐的领导们一次又一次地看上去像傻逼更过瘾的事么？
当然，威风是要有代价的，但这代价比起收益来小得可怜。这一夜的名气会带给你持续的回报，出国是小事一桩，美国有一帮人愿意为你争取绿卡。就算在国内混，你也已经赢得了很多人的尊重，善加利用，会是宝贵财富。可能以后出去集体腐败不能开团委的发票了，可团委那点可怜的预算，绝比不上上海滩想请你吃饭的人的长龙。当局都是得过且过的官僚作风，“秋后算账”这种事儿能省就省，况且还有全球媒体盯着。只要以后低调一点，行走江湖有那一夜的资本足够。
说句实话，看诸君发言时的谈吐和仪态，都不像是能成事的人，甚至都不像家里背景深厚的人。那你能放弃的是什么呢？一个一文不值的学位？做一名房奴的如棉前程？别提什么家人如何如何了，我国政府光明正大，不会拿你家人怎样的，顶多过年过节嘘寒问暖一下。
我实在无意批评这些青年，都是体制的受害者。只是当历史把机会放在他们面前的时候，没有人把握。这里表现出的素质、情怀、见识、乃至投机水平，非常可疑。
但是我不得不批评他们，因为他们是成年人，并且声称自己代表了我。
你们不仅应该感到后悔，后悔没有把握这机会实现这“惊险的一跳”让自己一夜名动天下。也应该感到羞耻，因为你们集体撒了谎；因为当GFW和TWITTER的问题是由美国人而不是你们提出的时候，你们相当于在世界面前被抽了一嘴巴，以很屈辱的方式；因为当你们口口声声“代表”中国青年的时候，你们“代表”我们丢了脸。以你们习惯的话语方式说，你们是“丧权辱国”，“权”是“人权”，“国”是“国民”，你们丧失了自己说话的基本权利，羞辱了你想“代表”的国民。
请记住，你们不是我们选出来的，不能“代表”我们。当你们非要用“代表”这个字眼的时候，你们是有责任的，不能“代表”我们撒谎。
请记住，你们的国家正在发展壮大，你们是国家的未来，所以在全世界都在看着你们的时候，请表现出一点点起码的个人尊严，不要撒谎。
请记住，无论你爱不爱国，爱不爱政府，爱不爱中国人和中国文化，在这样的外交场合，作为炎黄子孙，请体面一些，不要撒谎。
是的，当你们不是被选出来的却说要“代表”我们的时候，你们在撒谎；当你们明知有更重要的问题却只问事先设定好的毫无意义的问题时，你们在撒谎；当你们事后拒绝回答怎样被选出来甚至澄清所谓西方媒体的“污蔑”时，你们在撒谎。
“以服务人民为荣，以背离人民为耻；以诚实守信为荣，以见利忘义为耻。”愿与诸君共勉。
转一个关于press freedom的debate
from MITBBS http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t1/WorldNews/31425995_0_1.html
我一个已经毕业的德国同学发表了一句关于达赖的话，我发表了评论，说西方媒体在西
藏问题上不公
平造成他们的错误印象，然后他的一个朋友看了不爽，我们开始辩论。我觉得最终她说
不下去了，选
择放弃。如果各位能够忍着看完这段裹脚布，欢迎评论和指点。
以下是记录：
A(德国同学): wishes the Dalai Lama could return to Tibet and put an end to
the cultural genocide of his country.
我：i have to say you are entirely wrong on this. in short, dalai lama
was one of the worst human rights violators in recent history before
1950, which is not entirely his fault since he was born into a bad
system.
china's ethnic policies are not nearly perfect by any means, but this
dude has been full of lies for years. if you want a theocracy combined
with brutal slavery, dalai is for you. if you call better living
standards and everyone being given equal status and opportunities a
cultural genocide, then...
he is a tool of the china-hating west, and you are buying it. western
propaganda has done a very good job over the years. too bad, press
freedom oftentimes serve political agendas and don't convey the truth.
A：Lets agree to disagree!
B(与我辩论的美国女): It must feel nice to finally have freedom of speech.
If you're so frustrated with "western propaganda" then I highly suggest
considering that the very ideology that you seem comfortable railing
against, allows you to do so without restrictions placed by the
government on say, what internet site you visit, for example.
I'm a considerably liberal person and try to look at things objectively.
I don't agree with a lot of the United States dispositions and politics.
I enjoy Chinese culture and appreciate it's history, but I'm firmly
against people from any nationality, who seem to be ok with taking
advantage of the Western culture, educational system and use our
resources only to blame "western propoganda" for people's opinions. In a
system of informational freedom, intelligent people can develop their
own opinions.
我：you are absolutely right, freedom of speech is great, and i regret
that china does not have as much of it as the west, although it's
gradually making progress. and in what ways am i railing against freedom
of speech in my comments? i am all for free speech, and i take advantage
of it and express my mind.
i guess the word propaganda irks you because... Read More you think it
cannot possibly exist in a so-called free society? have you not not paid
attention to what happened in the last several years? my point is that
informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas.
going back to the tibet issue, i assume that you did not know dalai's
tie with the nazi's, which is conveniently never mentioned in any news
coverage, but if al quaeda were related to the nazi's. you think any
american would not be reminded of that time and again? look, press
freedom or not, every country speaks in its own interest, sometimes it
results in bias, and that's natural.
B: <
I interpret the above statement as you saying that FREE PRESS results in
untruths and political agenda. And it happens "often." That's an attack
on free speech (press = speech). You're implying that this idea of
"press freedom" is not in actuality free. Yes, I was a politically
conscious person, even during the Bush administration as you implied. I
didn't support him and didn't exactly trust a lot of what he/his
administration was saying. Why do you suppose that was? I think it was
because I was able to access (and contribute to) various news outlets. I
recommend that before alleging that ALL news outlets propagate some
Western agenda, you consider the various independent news outlets that
are affiliated with the United States and are not (eg BBC, Indian news
papers), also to which we have access.
Sure, Fox News is propaganda. Rachel Maddow, arguably propaganda too,
although she actually fact checks... But there are stark differences
between the two news sources. How, then do you reconcile this and say
"informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas" when there isn't a uniform political agenda,
or more specifically, people are free to propagate whatever they want?
So to answer your question: no I don't think propaganda can exist in a
free society (it's not "so called."), because there is always room for
an opposing view or information to counter it and for the very reasons I
just presented.
Did you know that Coca Cola was affiliated with the Nazis? That doesn't
mean anything. I really hope you're not insinuating that the US is only
fighting Al Quaeda because of it's affiliation with the Nazis. I'm
personally, more pissed about mass genocide and people who deny that the
free press I receive from which I make informed opinions, is not
possible. That's just me. I donno. I digress.
我："Sure, Fox News is propaganda."
"no I don't think propaganda can exist in a free society."
those two sentences which appear in the same paragraph seem
contradictory to each other. unless my english is bad, or maybe foxnews
is in china?
free does not necessarily mean truthful. i blame those who lie under the
name of free speech, but that does not mean i hate free speech itself. i
can say that obama is a racist/communist because i want people to
believe he is a bad president, but i am also exercising my freedom at
the same time.
it's really not that hard. attacking people who abuse freedom of speech
does not equal attacking freedom of speech.
when i say there is propaganda, i refer mostly to the media's coverage
of the "perceived enemies" of the US, such as russia and china. i can
say this because i know there are blatant lies and selective reporting
all the time on china. just ask any individual from china you may know
what they think about western media's coverage of china, especially on
sensitive issues such as tibet. this may be news to you, but their
agendas on china is highly uniform to the point that they not only lie
but also make up the same lies.
why can't foxnews and msnbc be propaganda? they have different agendas
sure, but they can be pushing them nonetheless, one to the right and one
to the left:)
i do believe most coverage on american news is fair and balanced, or at
least factual. i read a lot of them and find them informative and
engaging. and i truly hope someday china could reach such a tolerance of
different opinions.
i am not suggesting anything bad about dalai because of his ties with
nazi. it could very well be that he received no bad influence from
them.and when did i suggest there is ties between al quaeda and nazi?
the tone was purely hypothetical. i am just using it as an example of
selective reporting of your media.
i am not denying freedom of speech, on the contrary, i treasure my
freedom and take it seriously.
and while i welcome more comments on the main issue, may i ask which
genocide you are referring to?
B：I'm not wasting my time reading what you wrote for these reasons:
1) You've completely missed the point I was trying to make about free
press, and just took quotes randomly out of context. They aren't even
successive. Is that something you learned from Chinese "journalism"?
2) You used emoticons in trying to make a point I'm supposed to take
seriously.
This isn't a concession, I'm just acknowledging how much you might be
indoctrinated with "Eastern propaganda," and frankly I have better
things to do. Enjoy your time in the US where your views will likely
piss off the wrong person. Don't worry, we "westerners" believe in fair
trials.
我：all i have been trying to do is reason. i just make my points, never
tried to prove you wrong or anything, and my tone has been by my
standard friendly.
no need to get personal. i thought freedom of speech works better with
civility. and cracking some fun here and there does not hurt, does it?
my impression of your arguing is: i am right and above you, and that is
the state of the world. if you question me or what i believe, that just
make you more wrong and no reason is needed, and i will attack you
personally. sorry but that sounds to me not like the spirit of free
speech, does it? i thought freedom of speech is about trying to embrace
those with different ideas, not taking them down. your words sounds like
how a north korean dictator would act.
and how am i indoctrinated? you just assumed that because i am chinese
and disagree with you? i did acknowledge that china does not have the
freedom of speech as US, you think china brainwashed me into thinking
that?
don't be afraid, the truth may be ugly, but it will set you free.
我估计她不会继续回复了。上次国庆时候说服一个希望中国是60年民主的美国人，因为
他还讲理，愿
意理论，这个女的不太行。
藏问题上不公
平造成他们的错误印象，然后他的一个朋友看了不爽，我们开始辩论。我觉得最终她说
不下去了，选
择放弃。如果各位能够忍着看完这段裹脚布，欢迎评论和指点。
以下是记录：
A(德国同学): wishes the Dalai Lama could return to Tibet and put an end to
the cultural genocide of his country.
我：i have to say you are entirely wrong on this. in short, dalai lama
was one of the worst human rights violators in recent history before
1950, which is not entirely his fault since he was born into a bad
system.
china's ethnic policies are not nearly perfect by any means, but this
dude has been full of lies for years. if you want a theocracy combined
with brutal slavery, dalai is for you. if you call better living
standards and everyone being given equal status and opportunities a
cultural genocide, then...
he is a tool of the china-hating west, and you are buying it. western
propaganda has done a very good job over the years. too bad, press
freedom oftentimes serve political agendas and don't convey the truth.
A：Lets agree to disagree!
B(与我辩论的美国女): It must feel nice to finally have freedom of speech.
If you're so frustrated with "western propaganda" then I highly suggest
considering that the very ideology that you seem comfortable railing
against, allows you to do so without restrictions placed by the
government on say, what internet site you visit, for example.
I'm a considerably liberal person and try to look at things objectively.
I don't agree with a lot of the United States dispositions and politics.
I enjoy Chinese culture and appreciate it's history, but I'm firmly
against people from any nationality, who seem to be ok with taking
advantage of the Western culture, educational system and use our
resources only to blame "western propoganda" for people's opinions. In a
system of informational freedom, intelligent people can develop their
own opinions.
我：you are absolutely right, freedom of speech is great, and i regret
that china does not have as much of it as the west, although it's
gradually making progress. and in what ways am i railing against freedom
of speech in my comments? i am all for free speech, and i take advantage
of it and express my mind.
i guess the word propaganda irks you because... Read More you think it
cannot possibly exist in a so-called free society? have you not not paid
attention to what happened in the last several years? my point is that
informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas.
going back to the tibet issue, i assume that you did not know dalai's
tie with the nazi's, which is conveniently never mentioned in any news
coverage, but if al quaeda were related to the nazi's. you think any
american would not be reminded of that time and again? look, press
freedom or not, every country speaks in its own interest, sometimes it
results in bias, and that's natural.
B: <
I interpret the above statement as you saying that FREE PRESS results in
untruths and political agenda. And it happens "often." That's an attack
on free speech (press = speech). You're implying that this idea of
"press freedom" is not in actuality free. Yes, I was a politically
conscious person, even during the Bush administration as you implied. I
didn't support him and didn't exactly trust a lot of what he/his
administration was saying. Why do you suppose that was? I think it was
because I was able to access (and contribute to) various news outlets. I
recommend that before alleging that ALL news outlets propagate some
Western agenda, you consider the various independent news outlets that
are affiliated with the United States and are not (eg BBC, Indian news
papers), also to which we have access.
Sure, Fox News is propaganda. Rachel Maddow, arguably propaganda too,
although she actually fact checks... But there are stark differences
between the two news sources. How, then do you reconcile this and say
"informational freedom does not guarantee unbiasedness and prevent
pushing political agendas" when there isn't a uniform political agenda,
or more specifically, people are free to propagate whatever they want?
So to answer your question: no I don't think propaganda can exist in a
free society (it's not "so called."), because there is always room for
an opposing view or information to counter it and for the very reasons I
just presented.
Did you know that Coca Cola was affiliated with the Nazis? That doesn't
mean anything. I really hope you're not insinuating that the US is only
fighting Al Quaeda because of it's affiliation with the Nazis. I'm
personally, more pissed about mass genocide and people who deny that the
free press I receive from which I make informed opinions, is not
possible. That's just me. I donno. I digress.
我："Sure, Fox News is propaganda."
"no I don't think propaganda can exist in a free society."
those two sentences which appear in the same paragraph seem
contradictory to each other. unless my english is bad, or maybe foxnews
is in china?
free does not necessarily mean truthful. i blame those who lie under the
name of free speech, but that does not mean i hate free speech itself. i
can say that obama is a racist/communist because i want people to
believe he is a bad president, but i am also exercising my freedom at
the same time.
it's really not that hard. attacking people who abuse freedom of speech
does not equal attacking freedom of speech.
when i say there is propaganda, i refer mostly to the media's coverage
of the "perceived enemies" of the US, such as russia and china. i can
say this because i know there are blatant lies and selective reporting
all the time on china. just ask any individual from china you may know
what they think about western media's coverage of china, especially on
sensitive issues such as tibet. this may be news to you, but their
agendas on china is highly uniform to the point that they not only lie
but also make up the same lies.
why can't foxnews and msnbc be propaganda? they have different agendas
sure, but they can be pushing them nonetheless, one to the right and one
to the left:)
i do believe most coverage on american news is fair and balanced, or at
least factual. i read a lot of them and find them informative and
engaging. and i truly hope someday china could reach such a tolerance of
different opinions.
i am not suggesting anything bad about dalai because of his ties with
nazi. it could very well be that he received no bad influence from
them.and when did i suggest there is ties between al quaeda and nazi?
the tone was purely hypothetical. i am just using it as an example of
selective reporting of your media.
i am not denying freedom of speech, on the contrary, i treasure my
freedom and take it seriously.
and while i welcome more comments on the main issue, may i ask which
genocide you are referring to?
B：I'm not wasting my time reading what you wrote for these reasons:
1) You've completely missed the point I was trying to make about free
press, and just took quotes randomly out of context. They aren't even
successive. Is that something you learned from Chinese "journalism"?
2) You used emoticons in trying to make a point I'm supposed to take
seriously.
This isn't a concession, I'm just acknowledging how much you might be
indoctrinated with "Eastern propaganda," and frankly I have better
things to do. Enjoy your time in the US where your views will likely
piss off the wrong person. Don't worry, we "westerners" believe in fair
trials.
我：all i have been trying to do is reason. i just make my points, never
tried to prove you wrong or anything, and my tone has been by my
standard friendly.
no need to get personal. i thought freedom of speech works better with
civility. and cracking some fun here and there does not hurt, does it?
my impression of your arguing is: i am right and above you, and that is
the state of the world. if you question me or what i believe, that just
make you more wrong and no reason is needed, and i will attack you
personally. sorry but that sounds to me not like the spirit of free
speech, does it? i thought freedom of speech is about trying to embrace
those with different ideas, not taking them down. your words sounds like
how a north korean dictator would act.
and how am i indoctrinated? you just assumed that because i am chinese
and disagree with you? i did acknowledge that china does not have the
freedom of speech as US, you think china brainwashed me into thinking
that?
don't be afraid, the truth may be ugly, but it will set you free.
我估计她不会继续回复了。上次国庆时候说服一个希望中国是60年民主的美国人，因为
他还讲理，愿
意理论，这个女的不太行。
这个回帖也不错。
/statements. Or they won't be easily convinced.
when I elaborate such topics, on top of using examples, I like to:
1. establish western fears towards communism in general，fear is coming from
something unknown or unfamiliar.
2. what does fear generates? Hostility.
3. what does a national machine/news press typically/natually do when
touching a topic that they have hostility towards? negativity, bias.
4. on top of all that, west has feeling of being superior. that will only
fuel the negativity with arrogance.
2009年11月12日星期四
是光棍就进来看看！！！
继续上次文化差异的话题。
今天我举的例子是每年的11月11号，也就是中国的光棍节。不知道从什么时候开始，这天就变成了光棍节，我尤其记得两年前在浙大卖得如火如荼（用的什么词啊...）的光棍衫。光棍节，光棍们都有什么活动呢？简言之，就是表达
“情侣去死”和“单身万岁”云云之思想。
在前一个意义上说，光棍节其实就是反情人节(Anti-Valentine's Day)。这类情绪通常在明骚分子身上反应比较明显，表达方式趋于激烈的破坏式反抗。例如，武汉大学生曾在11月11日集体上街高喊“情侣去死”的反革命口号。
从后一个意义上说，光棍节就是是单身觉醒日(Single Awareness Day)或是享受单身日(Single Appreciation Day)的意思。这类情绪通常积蓄于闷骚分子心中，因而表达方式也趋于委婉的自我肯定。例如，浙大光棍衫的热卖。同学们争相购买光棍衫，主要表达的是单身万岁，单身有理的情绪，但其实 无法掩盖从内心深处透露出的惆怅心理。当然，会有恰好处于单身状态的“情场老手”跳出来说自己很enjoy单身自由的状态，曰，女人，黏者也。而且通常这些“老手”即使穿着光棍衫，也难以赢得其他真正的光棍的认同感，曰，情场老手者，非我族类，伪光棍也。但你否认也好，不认同也好，其实真伪光棍他们的情绪都是一样惆怅的，你看Single Awareness Day和Single Appreciation Day的缩写都是SAD，就是难过的意思。他们内心都是渴望脱离单身的，只不过是找一个老婆和找一个称心如意（千万不能和上次那个一样烦人）的老婆的区别。关于光棍衫，还有一个比较有意思的现象，就是买的人很多，但是穿的人很少。这就更说明了，这是一种闷骚的表达方式，闷到连穿都不敢穿出来。原因似乎很简单，光棍们天然的认为，穿出来会被人笑傻逼。所以通常是一个寝室四个单身汉一起穿出来，要傻逼就傻逼得彻底，四个一起傻逼。而且，这样很容易引起媒体的注目，像论坛狗仔队啊，心灵观光团啊。运气好就能火一把，即使运气不好被人说傻逼，大家一起傻逼嘛，也不亏。当然女生穿的话，就会是个例外。如果有一个穿着光棍衫的漂亮女生在校园晃悠，那么我可以负责任地说，此贴必火！
关于中国光棍节的来源，一直是搞不清楚的，就像你搞不清楚春哥和曾哥的粉丝都是哪里来的一样。但据私推测，其来源不外乎以下原因。首先，发明这个节日的人（或群体）必然是光棍，而且身边也不缺少和他有相同境遇的人。其次，在中文里，光棍有单身的意思在里面。这第二点其实是很重要的，因为连续的1111组合很容易就让人联想到条棍，光棍，进而才引申为单身的意思。而在下面我就要说到，同样是11月11号，在韩国不是单身节的意思，而是情人节的意思。（这部分有个不严谨的地方，就是我没有考证过，韩语里是否有类似于用光棍形容单身的表达。）因为在每年的11月11号这一天，韩国人会把一种叫做Pepero的巧克力棒送给自己最喜欢的人。（也许这就是韩国博大精深的棒子文化吧。）于是就促成了一对一对情侣的产生。这样，11月11号就成了韩国人的Couple's Day。这种东西我记得以前学校教超就有，是日本格里高公司出品的Pocky百琪饼干。
在韩国，Pepero节的由来，基本排除了韩语里有光棍代表单身的表达方式。
一来，在韩国，无论男女，都崇尚修长苗条，表白的对象自然也就得1111了。二来，1111刚好是巧克力棒的形状，所以送巧克力棒给自己的1111也顺理成章。到后来，送棒子的传统就以迅雷不及掩耳盗铃之势日渐风行如滔滔江水连绵不绝而一发不可收拾，演变成只要是朋友就送了。
当然，也不乏有阴谋论者指责格里高公司暗中操作，为了提高Pepero的销量，人造了这个韩国的情人节。格里高公司断然否认，说这只是纯情少女的刮起的旋风。日本也曾有过一股神秘力量，企图在日本搞出一个和Pepero节一样的节日，但最后没有搞起来。私认为，从棒子在韩国的成功可以看出，日本搞一个互送A片的情人节，肯定成功，而且直接生米煮成熟饭! 我认为杜蕾斯可以和AV工厂展开切实深入全面的合作和交流。都说，没有无缘无故的爱也没有无缘无故的恨，我并不是一个民族主义者，本不应该这么去调侃韩国和日本，因为我在一个自由包容的的国度长大。
此外，本文在网路发出之后，有网友认为，11.11用“成双成对”来注释再合适不过了，刚好是两对情侣被一小点隔开， 用英文就是double date。而至于1111没有成为成双成对节，而成为了光棍节的原因，会是一个很好的研究课题。我初 步认为，有以下几点原因。首先，在已经存在两个情人节，2.14和七夕的情况下，再搞出第三个情人节的意义不大。情 侣们都去享受自己的小甜蜜去了，哪有心情像作者这样坐在电脑前胡思乱想。其次，单身寂寞的待业男青年的愤怒是很 可怕的，特别在网络世界，单身的主题容易产生一呼百应的效果，使得单身一族迅速夺取了对1111的话语权。第三，恐 惧导致攻击。单身一族，生怕1111变成了第三个情人节，采取先发制人的手段，是为对情侣们每年又过Valentine’s Day又过七夕最强有力的绝地反击，抢占他们的第三个潜力节。
哈哈，到此为止，请大家跟我学习新词汇，1111。
1111 adj. (形容词)苗条的，修长的;单身的。
n.（名词）苗条修长的人;单身的人
例句：
A: 哇，这件衣服真好看，你穿了之后很1111!志玲不若君之美也，哪里买的？
B: 还好还好。（心里默念：你才1111呢，你全家都1111!）
2009年11月8日星期日
这个笑话我笑了一个礼拜
小白兔遇到大灰狼
小白兔说大灰狼大灰狼 你快问我是不是小白兔
你快问啊快问啊！！！！
大灰狼说 你是不是小白兔啊？
小白兔很高兴 是的是的我是的！！！
然后
小白兔又说 大灰狼大灰狼 你快问我是不是长颈鹿
你快问啊快问啊！！！！
大灰狼很无奈 好吧。。。那。。。你是不是长颈鹿啊
小白兔朝他后脑勺一巴掌 你个笨蛋！
我都说了我是小白兔了！！！
订阅：
博文 (Atom)
