苏利利在线

本文是用英文写的(在中文后面），然后翻译成了中文（如下），主题是关于反对运动的价值表述。

This argument on the value statement of an opposition movement was originally written in English (after the Chinese version), and then translated into Chinese (the following part).

关于反对运动的价值表述问题

在几十年的观察和参与政治变革的努力中，我逐渐认识到一些持续阻碍运动发展的重大挑战，特别是在保持价值观清晰性、建立公众信任以及弥合代际差距方面。我想分享我的观点，这些观点既来源于我的学生时代的活动经历，也来源于我作为独立思想者的反思，希望能够帮助解决这些问题，并为取得进展提出建议。

1. 价值观与愿景的重要性

运动必须清晰地阐明其价值观和长期愿景。单单反对某个政权或笼统地呼吁变革是不够的。公众和潜在支持者需要明确了解：

• 运动的立场是什么；

• 运动计划如何解决当前政权的系统性问题；

• 运动将用什么原则来指导行动以及后政权时期的治理。

如果缺乏明确的意识形态框架，运动可能被视为含糊不清、不值得信任，甚至是机会主义的。历史上，比如1949年之前中国共产党所做的承诺，就是一个警示性的例子。这些模糊的承诺最终导致了公众的幻灭，并催生了极权主义的政权。

2. 建立公众信任

信任是任何成功运动的基础。仅仅通过表面层次的倡导活动是无法赢得公众信任的。要建立一个广泛且坚定的支持基础，活动人士必须：

• 与公众进行透明的交流；

• 展现问责意识；

• 坚持能够与大众共鸣的价值观。

那些未能清晰定义其意识形态承诺的运动，很可能会疏远它们试图代表的人群。在一个有着悠久政治欺骗历史的社会中，这一点尤为重要。

3. 模糊性的危险

一个接受所有意识形态却没有明确立场的运动，很容易被视为不一致、不可信任。这种缺乏清晰性的现象不仅会疏远潜在支持者，还会削弱运动内部的凝聚力。

以我作为年轻学生时的经历为例，我亲眼目睹了意识形态模糊所带来的危害。在那段时间里，我们接触到了各种互相矛盾的意识形态。我们阅读了尼采的著作，他的反自由主义思想强调专制；我们也研究了施米特，他攻击自由民主并提倡威权统治；此外，还有西方马克思主义，它系统性地否定自由民主，并试图通过各种方式摧毁它。另外，卢梭作为一个通常被认为是自由主义思想家的作者，他的作品被广泛阅读，但正如以赛亚·伯林所指出的，卢梭实际上是自由民主的尖锐批评者。同样，威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校的一位教授指出，黑格尔的理论在各个层面上都与自由民主背道而驰。除此之外，我们还接触到存在主义、功利主义、保守主义和结构主义。这些意识形态之间往往存在冲突，但我们却将它们全都归为自由主义的一部分，尽管其中许多思想实际上与自由主义的原则相抵触。

这种知识上的混乱使我们无法清晰地理解民主或自由。当支持我们运动的旁观者提出质疑时，我们也无法清楚地阐述这些概念。这种缺乏清晰性的现象削弱了我们激发信心和争取支持的能力，尽管人们对变革的热情很高。

今天，同样的问题仍然存在。即使在个体层面，也可以看到矛盾价值体系并存的例子。例如，一些现代基督徒可能同时持有儒家价值观，将这些本质上不相容的框架结合在一起。虽然这种现象并不普遍，但它反映了异议者可能无意识地内化了矛盾的思想体系，从而进一步复杂化了他们清晰表达自由或民主愿景的能力。

这种活动人士价值信念的不一致是一个值得反思的问题。如果缺乏明确的意识形态框架，运动不仅会使潜在支持者感到困惑，还会阻碍自身获得推动系统性变革所需的动力。为了消除这种模糊性并促进团结，运动必须：

• 清晰地定义其意识形态框架；

• 将行动与声明的价值观保持一致；

• 展示对自由与民主的承诺。

如果没有这种清晰性，运动将继续像我们过去一样，为阐明自己的目标和争取广泛支持而苦苦挣扎。

4. 代沟问题

运动中的代沟并不是一个新现象。当我还是一名学生活动家时，我们这一代人并不认为1978年民主墙运动的老一代活动家的成就有多高。我们认为他们的运动非常软弱，并将他们视为过时且无法理解当时的社会现实。这种观点并非出于刻意的不敬，而是源于我们相信他们的运动没有为我们当时关心的价值观和议题作出贡献。

今天，我观察到类似的动态，但现在我发现自己站在了这个代沟的另一边，成为了老一代的一员。年轻的活动人士往往认为他们的前辈（即我们这代人）与新的知识、近期的发展和当前对事件的解释脱节。这种认知削弱了老一代与年轻活动人士之间进行有意义互动的能力，导致运动分裂和缺乏凝聚力。

老一代如何弥合代沟

为了弥合这一隔阂，老一代活动人士必须：

1. 通过权威渠道建立公信力： 在过去，诸如《走向未来》这样的出版物或通过央视等值得信赖的渠道播出的有影响力的电视节目，塑造了公众舆论，并赢得了年轻观众的尊重。今天，老一代活动人士必须与全球公认的平台合作，例如《纽约时报》、BBC 或 CNN等。这些媒体渠道赋予他们的愿景和价值观合法性，使其更容易被年轻一代所接受。

2. 提供清晰且与时俱进的意识形态： 运动必须清晰地阐明其价值观，并确保其行动与这些原则保持一致。一致且透明的框架是赢得信任和激励参与的关键。

3. 不断更新知识： 老一代必须保持对理论、新的全球事件和当前知识体系的了解。如果不这样做，他们就会被视为无关紧要或脱节。

5. 我的独立立场

我选择在当前的各个运动中保持独立，因为我认为它们的方式缺乏取得实质性成功所需的清晰性和基础。这一决定并不代表我改变了对现政权的反对立场，而是反映了我对通过符合我价值观和原则的路径追求变革的承诺。我的观点根植于这样一种愿望：让运动正视其根本弱点，并建立一个更强大的基础以实现持久的影响。

6. 行动的呼吁

无论是由年轻一代还是老一代领导的运动，若要成功，都必须专注于超越代沟的核心原则。这些原则包括：

1. 明确价值观和愿景： 运动必须清晰地阐明其价值观和长期愿景，以建立信任和目标的基础。没有这种清晰性，运动将失去公信力和方向。

2. 建立信任与公信力： 公众信任对赢得广泛支持至关重要。透明性、问责制和行动的一致性是与公众和运动内部建立信任的关键。

3. 弥合代沟： 年轻一代和老一代都必须作出共同努力，以克服这种分歧。这包括开展对话、理解彼此的视角，并为共同目标携手合作。

4. 避免意识形态模糊性： 运动必须呈现一个清晰且一致的意识形态框架。模糊性不仅削弱了内部团结，也削弱了公众对运动目标和意图的信心。

这些原则对所有运动都是共通的，无论是跨代合作还是由某一代人领导的运动。通过坚持这些共同的优先事项，运动可以为实现有意义的变革创造一个更强大、更统一的基础。

7. 结语

通向民主与自由的道路是充满挑战的，但通过清晰性、信任和原则性领导，这一目标是可以实现的。让我们共同努力，确保运动不仅具有包容性，还在追求更美好未来的过程中始终保持一致性、公信力和团结。

The Value Statement of an Opposition Movement

Over decades of observing and participating in efforts for political change, I have come to recognize significant challenges that continue to hinder movements, particularly in maintaining clarity of values, building public trust, and addressing intergenerational gaps. I would like to share my perspective, informed by my experiences as both a student activist and an independent thinker, to address these challenges and offer suggestions for progress.

1. The Importance of Vision and Values

Movements must articulate a clear vision and value system. It is not enough to oppose a regime or advocate for change in vague terms. The public and potential supporters need to understand:

• What the movement stands for.

• How it plans to address the systemic issues of the current regime.

• What principles will guide its actions and the post-regime governance.

Without a defined ideological framework, movements risk being perceived as ambiguous, untrustworthy, or even opportunistic. Historical examples, such as the promises made by the Chinese Communist Party before 1949, serve as warnings of how vague commitments can lead to disillusionment and authoritarian outcomes.

2. Building Public Trust

Trust is the foundation of any successful movement. Public trust cannot be earned through surface-level advocacy alone. To build a broad and committed base, activists must:

• Engage transparently with the public.

• Demonstrate accountability.

• Commit to values that resonate with the population.

Movements that fail to clearly define their ideological commitments risk alienating the very people they seek to represent. This is particularly critical in societies with a long history of political deception.

3. The Dangers of Ambiguity

A movement that accepts all ideologies without a clear stance risks being perceived as inconsistent or untrustworthy. This lack of clarity not only alienates potential supporters but also undermines the movement’s internal cohesion.

From my own experience as a young student, I witnessed firsthand the dangers of ideological ambiguity. During that time, we were exposed to a wide range of conflicting ideologies. We read Nietzsche, whose anti-liberal ideas emphasized autocracy; Schmitt, who attacked liberal democracies and promoted authoritarian rule; and Western Marxism, which systematically disapproved of liberal democracy while seeking to dismantle it. Additionally, Rousseau, often regarded as a liberal thinker, was widely read, but as Isaiah Berlin noted, Rousseau was a vocal critic of liberal democracy. Similarly, a professor from the University of Wisconsin–Madison noted that Hegel’s theories fundamentally oppose liberal democracy in every aspect. Alongside these, we encountered existentialism, utilitarianism, conservatism, and structuralism. These ideologies often conflicted with one another, yet we categorized them all under the broad umbrella of liberalism, even though many were fundamentally opposed to its principles.

This intellectual confusion left us without a clear understanding of democracy or freedom. When questioned by onlookers who supported our movement, we could not articulate these concepts clearly. This lack of clarity weakened our ability to inspire confidence and support, despite the enthusiasm for change.

Today, the same problem persists. Even within individuals, we can see examples of conflicting value systems coexisting. For instance, some modern Christian believers may simultaneously hold Confucian values, blending frameworks that are inherently incompatible. While this phenomenon may not apply to all, it reflects how dissidents can unconsciously internalize conflicting systems of thought, further complicating their ability to articulate a coherent vision for freedom or democracy.

Such inconsistencies in activists’ value beliefs are a point for reflection. Without a clear ideological framework, movements not only confuse potential supporters but also prevent themselves from gaining the momentum needed for systemic change. To resolve this ambiguity and foster unity, movements must:

• Clearly define their ideological framework.

• Align their actions with their stated values.

• Demonstrate a commitment to freedom and democracy.

Without this clarity, movements will continue to struggle, just as we did in the past, to articulate their purpose and rally widespread support.

4. Addressing the Intergenerational Gap

The intergenerational divide in activism is not a new phenomenon. When I was a student activist, our generation did not regard the achievements of the older activists from the 1978 Democracy Wall movement particularly highly. We viewed their movement as very weak and perceived them as outdated and incapable of understanding current affairs. This sentiment stemmed not from deliberate disregard, but from the belief that their movement did not contribute to the values and concerns that were central to our activism at the time.

Today, I observe a similar dynamic, but now I find myself on the other side of this gap as part of the older generation. Younger activists often see their predecessors as disconnected from new knowledge, recent developments, and current interpretations of events. This perception weakens the ability of older generations to engage meaningfully with younger activists, leaving movements fragmented and disconnected.

How Older Generations Can Bridge the Gap

To bridge this divide, the older generation must:

1. Establish Credibility Through Authoritative Channels: In the past, publications like Toward the Future or influential TV programs broadcasted through trusted channels like CCTV shaped public opinion and gained the respect of younger audiences. Today, older activists must engage with globally respected platforms such as The New York Times, BBC, or CNN. These outlets lend legitimacy to their vision and values, making them more accessible to younger generations.

2. Provide Clear and Updated Ideologies: Movements must articulate coherent value statements and align their actions with these principles. A consistent and transparent framework is essential for gaining trust and inspiring participation.

3. Continuously Update Knowledge: Older generations must remain informed about new developments in theory, global events, and the current intellectual landscape. Without this effort, they risk being dismissed as irrelevant or disconnected.

5. My Independent Stance

I have chosen to remain independent from current movements because I believe their approaches lack the clarity and foundation needed for meaningful success. This decision does not reflect a reversal of my opposition to the government but rather a commitment to pursuing change through paths that align with my values and principles. My perspective is rooted in a desire for movements to address foundational weaknesses and build a stronger base for lasting impact.

6. A Call to Action

For any movement to succeed, whether led by younger or older generations, it must focus on core principles that transcend generational divides. These principles include:

1. Defining Values and Vision: Movements must clearly articulate their values and long-term vision to build a foundation of trust and purpose. Without this clarity, movements risk losing credibility and direction.

2. Building Trust and Credibility: Public trust is critical for gaining widespread support. Transparency, accountability, and consistency in actions are essential for establishing credibility with the public and within the movement.

3. Bridging Generational Gaps: Both younger and older generations must make concerted efforts to overcome the divide. This includes engaging in dialogue, understanding each other’s perspectives, and working together toward shared goals.

4. Avoiding Ideological Ambiguity: Movements must present a clear and consistent ideological framework. Ambiguity not only weakens internal unity but also undermines public confidence in the movement’s goals and intentions.

These principles are common to all movements, regardless of whether they are intergenerational collaborations or led by a specific generation. By adhering to these shared priorities, movements can create a stronger, more unified foundation for meaningful change.

7. Closing Thoughts

The path to democracy and freedom is challenging but achievable with clarity, trust, and principled leadership. Let us work to ensure that movements are not only inclusive but also consistent, credible, and united in their pursuit of a better future.