We guard the memory until the last person｜2009 commemoration of June 4th

(This article was published on June 5, 2009)

I wrote about June Fourth, and I wrote it over and over again, and there was no fresh angle, nor any unexpected point of view. This may seem a little boring, just like the annual June 4th Candlelight Show, where almost the same formulas, slogans and songs are repeated every year. It makes us obnoxious, like paranoid psychopaths; they hate not only what we say, but how we say it and the way we say it. They criticize us for not knowing how to look forward, and always being trapped in a historical mystery; and that mystery has too many possible interpretations, how can we be self-righteous and think that we must be right? Don't we realize that this kind of righteous tone is disgusting?

Might as well treat us like crazy

The prophets in the Bible should not be translated as prophets, because prophets seldom predict the future and talk more about the past. They are not so much prophets as they are guardians of memory. Always remind the Israelites when they are too happy to leave Egypt: You have forgotten how you left Egypt, and you have also forgotten the covenant that the Lord made with us in the first place. The words were so often out of place that many felt that the Prophet was indeed some sort of lunatic, and that it was better to get rid of them before they disturbed their normal lives. What's more, why do they teach others? Who do they think they are! who are they? They are the "spokesmen" (navi) of the Lord, the mouthpiece of God, as God said: "In his mouth I put my words, and he will speak to them my commandments".

We are certainly not prophets. Who would want to be a prophet in this day and age? Any elite who thinks it is the embodiment of truth is a shameful and ridiculous megalomaniac. We don't want to be prophets, we Hong Kong people are just forced to play the role of prophets in legends, because we do believe in a simple truth: the government should not use live ammunition to suppress peaceful protesters. There are (and growing numbers of) people who think that this truth is not self-evident, and may even be wrong. That being the case, you might as well regard us as lunatics.

Who has the right to speak and who has the truth?

On May 28, 2009, The Hong Kong Economic Journal interviewed a "top student from the Mainland" who was studying history at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. He said: "From a personal point of view, it (June 4th) has nothing to do with my life... It is insignificant in China's long history, and there are too many similar things in history. Take it every day, it just happened closer to us." The reporter then asked him whether June 4th was a massacre, or a correct action to maintain national stability. His answer was that both are right. He thinks that both are equally reasonable and correct, because everyone is just proceeding from the perspective of their own interests. "Everyone is equal, there is no distinction between superior and inferior, and moral kidnapping should be prevented... The older generation or those who have experienced the incident may strongly hope that we understand the truth of the incident, but it does not mean that I will make the same evaluation. A young person My predecessors are just spectators of history, and I cannot be forced to have the same reaction as you."

This is an argument that has become more and more popular in recent years. It does not deny the simple truth we believe in, but it does not believe that it is the only correct truth. It believes that any position is advisable, and it relativizes all positions. We Hong Kong people are no strangers to this method of reasoning, because it is what many people call "reasonable" and "objective". For the same thing, different people have different "points of view and perspectives", so there is no need to choose and judge, it is all "a matter of perspectives and perspectives" anyway.

This Hong Kong-style cynicism is not the same as the "policy-only theory" popular in the Mainland, but it is very similar. The so-called "strategy-only theory" can be seen in Mao Zedong's far-reaching manuscripts. When I read "Selected Works of Mao Zedong", what puzzled me the most was that he was always talking about the strategy of the struggle between the enemy and ourselves, but he could never tell who the enemy was. The definition of "enemy" is constantly floating and changing with time and place; today is an enemy, tomorrow it can be a friend; today it is a friend, and tomorrow it suddenly becomes an enemy again. Taiwanese commentator Yang Zhao said well in the introduction to the Taiwanese edition of Mao Zedong’s Quotations that the essence of Mao’s thought is not to talk about right or wrong, but to talk about victory or defeat; the winner is naturally right, and the loser is bound to be wrong. Therefore, a person must never lose, because if he loses the struggle, he must also lose right and wrong.

This is one of the reasons why the very westernized and postmodern concept of "the right to speak" has spread so rapidly in mainland China. If you believe that the history of science is the history of continuous progress and truth revealed by science since childhood, you may not easily accept the cruel stories of the competition among scholars in today's "Science studies" and regard everything as the result of the competition ; but if you grew up in an environment dominated by "strategic theory" since childhood, you will find that the "truth" of the conspiracy to win is not difficult to understand. Because any academic research or any rational discussion is nothing more than a struggle for the "right to speak"; whoever has the "right to speak" is right.

Therefore, we don't need to seriously study whether June 4th is a massacre, because both sides in the debate are just fighting for the "right to speak", and both sides are "equal" and want to impose their own interests on us. The investigation of facts and the logic of the argument are not important, the most important thing is that you have the interests and motives behind you. No matter how reasonable you are, I cannot refute it; I only need to point out that you have the "right to speak".

If one sticks to this way of thinking, he should also believe that it makes sense for the Japanese army to "enter and leave China" and "invade China" because they come from two different perspectives. The so-called "Dalai clique" advocates Tibetan independence and there is no need to be nervous about opposing it, because they have their own interests in mind, and the Chinese government is only looking out for their own interests. If a person can consistently stick to this idea, he will not be emotional about June 4th, nor angry at some Japanese scholars for denying the Nanjing Massacre or underestimating the death toll. (Is this the position of Chen Yi’er, a classmate of the University of Hong Kong?), or think that they are all just conflicts of different interests, which is hard to say right or wrong (is this the position of the top student who studied history at CUHK?), then I reluctantly It could also be argued that this is a philosophically interesting and refutable position. But you say "it has nothing to do with me"?

Victims have the right to be forgotten

Xu Ben, a scholar in the United States, quoted the theory of ethicist Avishai Margalit in his article "What is the reason for people to remember", linking memory with "caring": "Because caring is Works through memory. Caring for each other is because of a long connection in the past. Who we care for and remember who happens at the same time. We can’t say, I love someone but don’t remember or remember that person.” Because we care for those who suffered in Beijing that year, we remember them and witness the suffering and destruction they experienced, and we will not allow them to live in silence or die in humiliation. Our relationship is love. Out of love, we witnessed June Fourth, just as the few remaining elders witnessed the War of Resistance. That's right, we may not all have been to the scene, and it is even more unlikely that we are all victims. Most of us just watched through the media. However, the responsibility for memory happens to fall on the spectator. Because only the victims and their families have the right to forget; in order to live without pain, they can choose to forget. But bystanders can't. Once you "witness" (Witness), you have to remember it forever.

If you are right, what are you afraid of?

Many friends from the mainland are amazed at how we Hong Kong people are determined to commemorate June 4th. It is true that we have fulfilled our duty as witnesses, and have cared for our compatriots enduringly with memory. But needless to say, this is only because we enjoy the unique free air in China. In contrast, the tense atmosphere in the mainland in recent months has reached the point where there is a lot of panic. The media can no longer talk about the May 4th Movement, because it reminds people of the student movement. An image advertisement made by a commercial organization on the first anniversary of the Wenchuan earthquake was considered to have "ulterior motives" because there were ten portrait photos on both sides, six on the left and four on the right. If you are really right, why should you be taboo? Why be nervous? Why not reissue the promotional materials that were distributed after the "Peace the Violence"? Why not celebrate the 20th anniversary of "peace violence" with great fanfare, and tell us the truth about the "small group of rioters"? And now you wish the Fourth of June didn't even exist on the calendar? There is no column for 6x4 on the multiplier table. Therefore, I really want to persuade those who always talk about "objective investigation" and "discovering the truth" as excuses: You are all right, June 4th does need "objective investigation", but you really don't need it Say this to us because we absolutely welcome more facts and more objective truth. You should go to those in power and their allies, tell them not to keep silent and cover up, and come out together, "Everyone should study hard and express different views."

In addition to June Fourth, there are too many taboos in China. In addition to the "Tiananmen Mothers", there are also the mothers of the schoolchildren who suffered from the Sichuan earthquake, the mothers of the "poisoned milk powder" case, and even Deng Yujiao's mother; their voices can only be made public in Hong Kong without hindrance or scruples. Could it be that Hong Kong has become the choice of Chinese mothers? Are you clear about the responsibility of Hong Kong people in the history of contemporary China? When other people are forced to shut up, or even take the initiative to forget, we helplessly but inevitably assume the role of memory guardians. Because we have relatively abundant space, and we care.

The middle-aged people of my generation in their 30s and 40s lived and grew up in Hong Kong, experienced the so-called "golden age" in Hong Kong, saw the ridiculous images of "A Can" and "cousin", and were once proud of the different identities of Hong Kong people. Discriminate against the backward and poor in the Mainland. Although we also study Chinese and Chinese history; but unlike other countries’ teaching methods that regard national literature and history as the core of national education, the colonial-style literature and history education is a set of non-nationalized technical education, which does not encourage us to study national literature and history. Acquire deep national identities and treat them as pure information and knowledge. I spent my childhood in Taiwan under the two Chiangs, and it may not be surprising that I have a passion for China; but my classmates, my contemporaries, who thrived with Hong Kong consciousness, received a denationalized basic education, How could they be patriotic? Where did their Chinese feelings come from?

Perhaps June Fourth is the answer to this question.

June Fourth is the National Enlightenment of Hong Kong People

Although I have always emphasized the role of Hong Kong people as witnesses, we must not think that we are just bystanders of the incident. Although we always regard Tiananmen Square as the core location of the June 4th movement; the actual scope of the June 4th movement is far from limited to Beijing, on the contrary, it spreads all over the country, from Tianjin, Shanghai, Wuhan, Fuzhou, Guangzhou, all the way to Hong Kong, All of them were the stage for the great movement of that year. Hong Kong, in particular, not only had a demonstration of 1.5 million people, a demonstration of 1 million people, but also responded whole-heartedly to Beijing's every move almost from the beginning. Therefore, it is not an exaggeration to list Hong Kong as the main space after Beijing in the June 4th Movement. Therefore, Hong Kong people are not just spectators of this movement, we are also its participants.

Back in the day, we actively donated for our classmates and citizens in Beijing, and ran around in various media to speak out. No matter what position you stand on, which organization you belong to; no matter what class you come from or what industry you work in, everyone has the same aspirations and unprecedented unity. As time went on, the emotions became even higher. Schools were in a state of semi-suspended classes, and many organizations were not in the mood to work from top to bottom. Everyone was only thinking about Tiananmen. I still remember that many people thought that as long as China became a democratic country after this battle, people would not need to emigrate. Therefore, the question of Hong Kong people's future confidence is linked to China's democratic process, and the dawn of the latter is the answer to the former. This may sound self-serving.

However, during this process, people of my generation were gradually awakened by the endless stream of news every day to a certain kind of national consciousness that was never consciously but vaguely existed, so I eagerly read "Ten Years of the Cultural Revolution" and various introductions to national conditions. Reading materials on national history, collectively study the road traveled by modern China. The cold knowledge learned in the colonial education in the past was warmed up one by one. The photos of the May Fourth student gathering in the textbooks suddenly made sounds, and even the text of "Teacher List" suddenly oozes tears. Then we rushed to the streets, singing about our new discoveries with "I Am Chinese" and "Descendants of the Dragon", and using the slogan "Blood is thicker than water" to prove the "new" identity we had just acquired by ourselves. Students in Beijing don't need to sing "I Am Chinese", they never doubt that. The demonstrators in Beijing don't even have to hold up the slogan "Blood is thicker than water", they simply don't understand what this slogan is for. That's right, June 4th in Hong Kong was not just a democratic movement to "support Beijing students", it was also a nationalist movement in which Hong Kong people themselves took the stage as the protagonists; June 4th was the most important and thorough democratic and patriotic education for Hong Kong people of my generation. June Fourth is not only the largest social movement since the provincial and Hong Kong strikes, but also the first series of actions to lock colonial Hong Kong and mainland China tightly since the provincial and Hong Kong strikes. June Fourth was a raging tide that burned all the way from Beijing to Hong Kong, although there are subtle differences in the way and posture we bloom.

Hong Kong people are not spectators of June Fourth, but participants

June Fourth is also June Fourth in Hong Kong, but we don't know enough about this. We know that "8964" is part of many people's phone numbers, and it has become the password between good and bad people in Hong Kong; Grammar; we know that the stake association born 20 years ago is the cradle of all democrats in Hong Kong today, and the consensus on June 4th is the bottom line for identifying a member of a democrat. I even know that someone fell in love and got married during that time, and someone was born during that time, making June Fourth a milestone in their personal life history. I don't know if anyone has done this kind of research, but we all know how far-reaching the traces of June 4th are on Hong Kong society. The most important thing is that we learn to care for our "compatriots" (for the first time, it is not an abstract word). If someone, like Tsang Yam-kuen, tells us to let go of that experience and concentrate on the prosperity of China today; then he must not know what love is, because he doesn't love the living (and those who have lived), what he loves is "the country." development of". If such people and Donald Tsang both sincerely believe this statement, it means that they do not think that the government needs moral legitimacy: whoever pays me is the boss, and I will obey and work hard.

Since then, the "turmoil that happened in Beijing" 20 years ago has been internalized in the collective memory and social fabric of Hong Kong people. In a way that was beyond the expectations of those in power, Beijing and Hong Kong were tied to Hong Kong people. the depths of memory. Since we are participants, the convener of the "Hong Kong Youth Development Network" Lu Zhiwei's statement that "external forces (Hong Kong people) intervene to degrade the Beijing student movement" is ridiculous. Doesn't he know that we are not "external forces" at all? , Has Hong Kong stood with Beijing from the beginning to the end? If he really regards Hong Kong people as "external forces", doesn't he regard us as foreigners? And since we ourselves are the main body of action, it is futile to try to convince us that we "should wake up" by exposing the "ugly true colors" of pro-democracy leaders. Don't they understand that we have never been "led" before? ? We were our own leaders back then.

Even if there is no hope of rehabilitating, we still remember

The memory of June Fourth is not just the collective memory of several generations of Hong Kong people, it is also a memory that needs to be shared. Because each of us has experienced it in our own way, and because many others have not. As Magritte said: "As a member of the memory community, I have memory links with previous generations, who in turn have memory links with the previous generation, and so on, up to the generation that directly witnessed the event". When all the witnesses of a history are dead, "the shared memory becomes the memory of the memory". The sharing of memory must be based on the premise of free and open communication. Sharing memories is impossible without adequate freedom of information and speech, and rational communication undistorted by obstacles.

But now we have to face so many obstacles: the Chinese government obviously thinks that it did a good job back then, but now it dare not even mention a single figure; it is clear that Hong Kong is a free port, but it rejects it with unspeakable reasons Others entered the country; the media in Hong Kong is not subject to political control, but some magazines such as "Esquire" randomly selected articles, turning the cover feature of "Don't Dare to Forget June 4th" into a sad and ridiculous "Don't Dare to Forget Aaron Kwok"; Obviously there are so many people who used to have their blood boiled with tears and tears, but today they can't speak, and even take the initiative to modify their memories. Look how hard they have gone to destroying and covering up the memory of June 4th. For this memory, Hong Kong-style cynicism has been mobilized, and historical nihilism dominated by "strategy-only theory" has also appeared; they even did not hesitate to destroy the Great Wall, asking us to deny our purest patriotic sincerity and replace it with Tsang Yam-kuen. The kind of patriotism represented by money (its logic is that I love whoever makes me rich). So remembering June Fourth is no longer just a matter of remembering, it is also a series of struggles and duels. It fights against the narrowing of speech space and the control of entry and exit. It also fights against a series of thinking methods that violate rationality and a series of value propositions that deny moral consensus. In this sense, remembering or forgetting June Fourth has really become a choice between right and wrong.

I had to prepare for the worst. Because it was news that Gao Zhihuo, the creator of "Pillars of Remembrance", was denied entry to the country for the first time, but now we are getting used to it; before someone told us to "let go of the burden of history and look forward", we would be inexplicably angry, but now this kind of The rhetoric has long been familiar. Maybe one day, there will be more Chen Yi'e, Lu Zhiwei, and Tsang Yinquan who will come out to advocate that kind of nihilistic and cynical values; maybe one day, June 4th will not only be "rehabilitated", but will even be completely wiped out in the garbage dump of time; maybe one day, We will really become the crazy prophets in the eyes of most people, and we will grow old and wither one by one, and all those who remember June Fourth will disappear from generation to generation. Even if that day comes, it will no longer serve any practical purpose, but simply because this memory itself is moral, and we Hong Kong people, our group of memory guardians, will still remember it like this until the last person.