August 2, 2007

  • <作者觀點並不代表作者立場>

    問 : 史先生, 你對近日保育人士於皇后碼頭所發動的保育戰一事, 有何感想?

    答 : 噢, 若非身邊有朋友參與這事 (儘管他們只被核心保育人士人歸納為邊緣份子), 我實在對此事一點興趣也沒有, 但整體來說我的認知也只是皮毛.

    昨晚 8 時許我打開 NOW 324 台, 想看一看跌到仆街的股市怎樣. 豈料那位叫 “阿曹” 的小伙子在皇后的一角與警察對峙了個多小時, 電視台亦播足個多小時, 彷佛世界停頓了, 沒有其他值得報的新聞. 這樣說肯定有一點冷血, 但中途我真的想 “阿曹” 跳下去就好了, 不要阻住我看其他新聞.

    我不敢說香港大多數人也會覺得佢地阻住地球轉, 但對於保育人士的行為, 漠不關心的大有人在. 今日偶然瀏覽 刁民公園 (那不是一個存在於香港地圖上的公園), 也談及沒有太多人關心的觀察, 有空可以一看.

    (八月二日晚上九時後加 : toysdaily 一班會員的意見)


    問 : 你真的想 “阿曹” 跳下去嗎?

    答 : 世上沒有該死的人. 起碼我坐在電視前面, 心中是萬分焦急, 希望 “阿曹” 千祈不要跳下去 – 除了因為曾經有半秒我腦海彈出了六四的影像, 更重要是他一跳, 電視台的直播又會長一小時. 一為神功二為弟子, 我實在不想 “阿曹” 跳下去.

    但我可不知道 “阿曹” 的戰友怎樣想.  “阿曹” 一直站在天台邊緣, 有名女戰友卻不斷用大聲公從遠處說著以下的話來 :

    “阿曹佢唔識游水, 佢而家既情況好危險”

    “阿曹你要堅持 [站在那裏]“.

    將這兩句話合起來, 而警方又看似不會罷休的情況下, “阿曹” 是非跳不行了. 作為旁觀者的我, 實在覺得很可笑 – 他們是想 “阿曹” 成為烈士的, 一躍而下. 堅持一定要站在碼頭邊緣嗎? 作為他的戰友, 又知其不諳游泳, 在如此驚險的情況下, 不是應該叫他慢慢離開邊緣, 走向安全的地方嗎? 難道你們認為真的有人受傷, 犧牲, 陣亡, 才能彰顯你們保衛天星的決心, 警方的濫權, 政府的不是?

    他的戰友一定不會承認將推 “阿曹” 做烈士. 不打緊, 最終 “阿曹” 沒有跳下去, 我又可以看到其他新聞, 都可以說是大團圓結局.

    問 : 對於保育人士的訴求, 真的一點感想也沒有?

    答 : 有, 我家的租約還有半年就完結. 千揀萬揀, 他們千萬不要選擇保育永和號. 套用黑社會 II 的術語 : 來參觀旅遊, 成; 來做生意, 不成. 他們帶人來介紹一下永和號, 無任歡迎 (其實我無權不歡迎); 但威靈頓街只能 1.5 線行車, 萬一他們來示威, 有廿三十人, 差人肯定封路, 我註定無法回家. 不過, 觀乎保育人士後知後覺, 我對於他們在市建局搞定永和號後才來示威這一點, 倒有信心. 那時我已乘黃鶴東去, 真係睬你都傻.

    問 : 還有沒有話要向保育人士說?

    答 : 香港人不是想像中那樣貪錢, 他們只是值得計算. 這次大部份人沒有站出來支持小伙子, 某程度上代表了他們對皇后的回憶, 有是有, 重要是重要, 但不值得用這么激烈的行動, 搞這樣的大龍鳳去保留. 他們遵守遊戲規則. 於是乎, 小伙子的行動, 像站在孤立的小島上, 再聲嘶力竭, 也無法連結上市民, 難獲支持與和應. 一口氣加入清拆期限後拒絕離開, 絕食, 穿鎖鏈, 站在天台一角, 大聲呼叫, 向差人咆哮 等行為, 註定與民眾越拉越遠, 無法取得迴響, 更枉論拯救皇后於水深火熱中.

    問 : 史先生看來你是對保育的行動, 不以為然呢.

    答 : YES and NO. 這班小伙子完全沒有策略可言 – 除非你當穿鎖鏈也是一種策略 (你是單車嗎?) – 一腔熱誠無法達至理想. 而他們的後知後覺, 更加令我嗤之以鼻.

    更不要老說你是為了全香港人的記憶才保留皇后這么偉大, tell me what the fucking memories you had right there. If you didn’t, how can you say you fully understand the extent to which people treasure the memories in that pier so that you can, on behalf of these people, fight for the preservation of that pier?

    十八廿歲的小伙子, 對於加州紅, Neway 的記憶肯定多於皇后碼頭 + 天星碼頭. 我也敢肯定好些小伙子是在皇后要拆才去閱讀她的歷史. 他們肯定有意去保留皇后, 但若事前根本對皇后沒有什么感情可言, 又何以服眾, 感動群眾?

    吃即食面吃上腦, 臨急抱佛腳, 抱這種快食通心粉的態度去搞保育, 根本和那些為經濟發展而拆這拆那的功利主義, 本質上沒有半點分別.

    問 : 你這樣說, 好像有點不公平呢…

    答 : 上一條問題我還沒有說完. 這也難怪小伙子的. 近日好些人說皇后一事代表傳統的諮詢方式已經死亡, 這可能對. 長尾理論可申延至這方面 (另文再述). 可笑的是, 在香港年青一代學歷越來越高的情況下, 所有官方或半官方有份量的諮詢層面, 年紀少於 30 歲的委員, 大概等於零. 事實上許多委員會來來去去都係個班人, 策發會西九委員會公民教育委員會武林大會圓桌大會, 全部都係坐住同一班老屎忽.

    策發會講重要政策, 關乎香港經濟政治民生. 30歲以下委員, 是零.

    可持續發展講求為下一代甚至乎係九代著想. 但可持續發展委員30歲以下委員, 是零.

    古物諮詢委員會. 30歲以下委員, 是零.

    不是老就不好, 也不是後生就一定好. 但從年紀上的組成可見, 往往是最多意見的後生仔 – 他們意見未必可行可取 – 他們根本無法依遁正統的途徑發表意見. 以前可能靠係報章寫下文章, 發表一下偉論 (若你識報紙佬先可能有機會), 難以凝聚志同道合的人. 但時代變了, web2.0 出現, 令 “臭味相投” 的人更容易聚在一起. 你不給他們發表意見的機會, 不解釋為何他們的意見不合理 (屌你根本唔 Q 知有佢存在), 他們越會做出超越所謂常規的行為來.

    在香港, 除了做股神, 年青人要得到成年人的普遍認同, 機會是零. 給予他們發表意見, 並與之作出討論的機會, 也是零. 建制打倒年青人, 年青人要反, 任何人也有責任.

    我可沒有什么良方解決這問題. 年青人應該多寫 xanga (若自問有料可嘗試加入 HKO), 多看 AV, 多泡一點女, 見識下世界 (及東莞). 但別以為多讀兩本臭書, 三個外國案例就以為自己乜都識. 世界有著另一套遊戲規則, 改變需要時間. 成年人也不要那么老屎忽, 常常高高在上, 動不動就 command and control, 或用類似這文章標題的文字遊戲來玩弄年青人.

    世界在變, 這套不行的了.

Comments (18)

  • 抱歉, 我也是那些在電視前咒罵他們阻住地球轉的人. 我不是不關心保育, 只是保育和社會整體進步之間, 該取一點平衡吧. 要說保留香港人奮鬥的見證, 這些保育人士何不住進寮屋區, 重演香港人的獅子山下!

    有支持保育人士的人接受訪問時說, 碼頭見證香港人爭取保衛釣魚台, 他振振有詞的說 : “沒有皇后碼頭, 教我日後如何告訴我的兒子, 香港人爭取保衛釣魚台的歷史 ! ”

    大佬, 俾少少 sense 啦.

  • 1. 正如我在我文章中說的,與其搞後知後覺的個別項目鬥爭,不如想辦法讓民間聲音走入建制更有意義。

    2. 很同意你最後一段的說法。社會事務的各個諮詢、委員會,到頭來跟私人機構一樣,是分餅仔的權力遊戲,由一班阿叔來主持,代替我們。

    3. 保育人士本意也許好,有激情也許好,但是激情不能代替理性,也往往是破壞性多於建設性。

    4. 示威人士常有一種「屈機邏輯」,示威人士用鐵鍊鎖起自己不走,又或者跟警察推撞便是抗爭是合理,警察抬人走有碰撞便是濫用警權。那不是屈機了一點嗎?

    又,就保育方案,政府提出的重置已是最沒辦法中的辦法(沒辦法是因為合約問題,我本身也反對填海),但保育人士一定要「不遷不拆」,完全沒有想到有關保留以外的其他問題,似乎有點野蠻。

  • 我份人比較仆街,

    不過如果保育人士出海保衛釣魚台

    用鐵鏈鎖住自己響釣魚台

    我第一個捐錢支持佢地

  • 那天我在想,如果多點保育人士跑上碼頭頂部示威,然後碼頭承受不了他們的重量而蹋下,那將會是多反高潮、壯觀的景象。

  • 史兄還沒睇到那個笑撚死既記者會
    葉蔭聰﹕然後我簡單講講今朝清場過程既一d 問題…具體的法律問題由黃生講講。
    黃生﹕…其實我地之前同警察負責個邊講好左呢,要求用擔架床去送佢地(絕食者)出黎,因為佢地比較虛弱。如果冇記錯,警察個邊應承話冇問題既。但係我從新聞片睇,似乎見到警察就咁抬出黎。咁樣有d擔心,因為警察唔係普通既救護人員,你咁樣草率咁抬佢,會整傷佢,或者對佢健康有影響,呢度有個關心係度…
    記者﹕你地出黎個時,係佢地冇提供擔架比你,還是你地唔需要﹖
    黃浩賢﹕個情況係好混亂喇,因為個時抬起左我地,剪開左鐵鏈,匆匆忙咁將我地抬出去。
    記者﹕問過你地需唔需要擔架。
    黃浩賢﹕之前係問過既,我地話唔需要。因為佢用擔架抬我地,其實意味住佢地會抬我地入救護車將我地隔離。

    朱凱迪﹕宜家唔講太多,最重要一點關於我地未來會做乜好清楚咁講左一點係林鄭月娥咁錯誤既決定出黎,政府要為呢個咁錯既決定付代價…

  • algy2004: 糟透了……. 完全抽離地看(即是不理會他的身分是保育人士還是政府人士還是維園人士)這種對答實在差到極點……是不是真的?實在悲哀

  • 那位小伙子叫 “阿草”, 不是阿曹.

    雖然你不認同這次行動, 但看得出作為一個有血有肉的人你是關心他的. 當時我在現場離遠看著他, 頭腦是一片空白的. 現在看到你覆述那女戰友的說話, 回想起來, 也覺得好像是這樣 — ” 他們是想 “阿曹” 成為烈士的 “. 唉 ………

    不妨看看他自己的說話 :
    http://www.xanga.com/c36c3c32/607642002/item.html
    http://www.xanga.com/c36c3c32

  • 平日同保育人士呢類比較左翼0既人唔完全同路(畀佢0地知道我係 neo-con 同路人就真係…嘿);不過如果以天星皇后同埋乜乜物重建呢堆0野0黎講,佢0地要求0既0野同我個人有交集,所以我支持佢0地個 cause – 當然,戰術0既0野同唔同意係另一回事。成日拎出0黎講0個0的咩「去殖」、「集體回憶」,自己都唔係好認同 – 不過反過0黎講,講交通邁環境影響之類唔係冇人講過,但理0既人有幾多?不過算啦,起又好拆又好,玩飽佢,no eye see.

    至於話「發展」呢…講真,有幾多次拆唔成0野、起唔成路、發唔到財呢?0拿,上次天星0拿0拿臨拆掂,今次同上次一樣,花0個雞屎咁多警力就趕走班友,話咁快圍晒板0勒。重建項目一個搞掂又一個,填海填返0黎0既 IFC 起完起罷日日去行,一幅二幅地起屏風樓,仲話「阻住地球轉」?冇0野下嘩?使唔使搞個 campaign,叫大家拼埋副身家,買吊雞買推土機買躉船,民間自發幫手「發展」?係我就0拿0拿聲喇…不過有冇大紫荊先?一係就整幾手匯豐過我當獎勵,deal 唔 deal?

    呢兩段唔係針對史兄你…響你個地方同人霉氣,唔好意思~

  • Yeegor, Hyster, algy2004 : 他們有種很 “塔利班” 的心態 – 你不支持我就等同支持拆皇后. 你不支持我就是你不關心保育, 唔識野, 同你講都多餘. 和死光社有得揮, 實在嚇死人.

    小李 : 喂, 真係有人去釣魚台喎! 好快d 捐錢~~

    教主 : 我不殺伯仁, 伯仁卻因我而死乎? 你講野好刻薄呀…

    marcellabear : 多謝你的 xanga 推薦. 不知道以為是馬克思返生寫的. 老實說, 阿草跳唔跳, 我不在意; 我在意的只是我幾時可以睇到新聞.

    Perennial_loser : 唔使唔好意思. 呢個地方無論係插我或者插人, 只要唔涉及人生攻擊, 或者人生防守 (???), 隨便. 又問 : 乜野係 neo-con? 仲有, 其實你支唔支持呢班人所做既野呢?

  • Neo-con 者…即係切尼、Wolfowitz 0個棚人是也。死未?呢鋪自爆,都唔知0聽日出街會唔會畀車撞…

    支唔支持…到0左宜家呢個地步,我想講「支持」,但恐怕一講就變成塔利班同路人 – 世事0既0野變得好快;由當初冇人理咩保唔保育,到一大棚人走出0黎嘈,嘈嘈下多0左人,又有班人靜坐絕食,跟住有0的「保育」友把口唔收亂鬧人,又有0的講白癡0野,到最後乜都搞唔成,又到一棚打對台0既走出0黎講到好似「保皇」就等於塔利班、拆0左先係硬道理。左仔鬥右仔,右仔又再鬥返左仔,真係學老毛話齋,「與天鬥,與人鬥,其樂無窮」。我宜家如果話支持,睇怕都要加個好長0既解釋同 disclaimer 先得:

    我反對拆,但原因唔係「集體回憶」或者「解殖」,而係我反對無啦啦拆0左兩個唔篤眼唔篤鼻又算方便0既碼頭 (天星同皇后,我係將佢0地當係同一堆0黎睇0既),換0左做搬到冇雷公咁遠唔方便又樣炳0既九號十號碼頭,再加一棟打橫攤響度0既新 IFC 同埋一大條中環-灣仔繞道,引多0的人買車開車噴多0的煙,又將個維港填細到成條澗仔咁核核突突,計落冇 so 又多0舊魚,唔拆冇咁煩。

    另外特此申報,在下冇參與皇后碼頭0既示威/抗議活動,只係天星0個次有一晚去過舉兩個鐘頭蠟燭。對於「集體回憶」同「解殖」之類0既講法,亦唔同意。而在下亦承認,只有五十幾年歷史0既皇后碼頭係唔算好舊,個 look 亦冇乜特別。部分「本土行動」成員比較激烈0既行為同言論,在下認為不智,甚至愚蠢,亦幫唔到爭取目標成功,但在下唔會正式譴責。 由於佢0地行動0既最終目標同我0既一樣,所以我支持佢0地,只係響理據同手法上有異議。

    嗯…我行動上冇去搞「暴動」,又唔講「集體回憶」同「解殖」,仲話過「本土行動」班人不智0勒,應該唔算塔利班喇……0卦?

    不過又冇正式譴責佢0地0既暴行0番…死,都係走唔甩,睇怕唔做塔利班都唔得。

  • Well, this ‘imaginary conversation / interview’ sounded very funny at the first sight, as I couldn’t believe that it wasn’t a joke, although rather bad taste, but it couldn’t be real…… 

    JUST, after reading all the ‘comments’ as well, I was rather shocked to see people writing such BS from their hearts. 

    Actually, I still don’t see the ‘problems’ of such sensible actions taken by all the people there, after all the non-sense I have seen here. 

    P.S.  I wasn’t with them that day, as I left early in the morning to go to work, but I felt so bad for not being able to stay until the last minute……  Thay have already tried to be not radical at all, and you all can see that by letting the police take them away peacefully……  YET, one member was hurt by the police, because the police kicked him HARD!  I mean, what actions would anybody expect then?  Without doing anything. this wicked HK Government will never notice that they need to change.  Now, I already feel like their actions might be a bit too mild. 

    Why don’t you blame the f_cking government for telling SO MANY LIES???  Why aren’t you trying to see what we are talking about, except that we try our very best to keep this ugly Queen’s Pier? 

    The point is, the REASONINGS are on our side.  If a government can just do whatever it wants to do unreasonably, and even without any ‘explanations’ when ‘responding’ to the voices of its people, I really can’t see what ‘Government’ it is except probably an ABSOLUTE POWER.  That’s a BIG PROBLEM here, a very big issue. 

    Fine if you dislike Queen’s Pier and Star Ferry Pier so you want to have them torn down, but the keypoint is not there, but WHEN and HOW can the Government understand that the voices of the people are to be heard and cared about…… 

    Stop here, never mean to offend you or what.  Sorry if you feel bad or whatsoever. 

  • Totally agree that ‘完全沒有想到有關保留以外的其他問題,似乎有點野蠻。’  However,the fact is, wthe experts (architects, engineers, etc., etc.) have worked together to provide them an alternative design already.  AND THEN the government doesn’t even respond to that, but just said that THEIR OWN PLAN was the only possibility, so???  Can’t you see how ‘SINCERE’ this Government is?!?!?! 

    Actually, by keeping Queen’s Pier there with practical functions, the experts just suggested building a lagoon instead of the COSTLY underground water disposal channel (which is one of the ‘reasons’ why Queen’s Pier has to be taken away), adn that makes the view nicer, plus it can provide commercial opportunities AND family activities…… 

    Then, for another ‘reason’ of why Queen’s Pier has to be killed, there comes the ‘MTR Airport Express tracks’ WHICH IS NEVER EVEN PLANNED yet according to MTR official documents.  So, here it is clear that the Government has lied to the mass media and thus to us HK people. 

    For the most ridiculous ‘reason’, they said that the road P2 had to be there to CUT ACROSS Queen’s Pier, the supposed-to-be 4-lane road was ever wider than a 6-lane road according to the claimt of this big liar, AND THUS it has to touch Queen’s Pier……  How can such data be possible?  Why are people still complaining about the people who are protecting Queen’s Pier?  WHO has done something more irrational?  The great liar HK Government?  Or the warm-hearted HK residents?  Just ask your heart, no need to answer anybody…… 

  • Frostig : Thanks for your comments. As I have pointed out in my response to Perennial_Loser, it is absolutely fine as long as it is not slander or commercial ads.

    Your comments, possibly valid, misunderstand the essence of all other comments above. They might or might not have any comments on the preservation of the Pier. They might or might not appreciate the justifications.

    What they cannot appreciate is simply the way that the young guys do and did in attempt to preserve that. The way is as important as the justification and rationale. Just like no one disputes the Iraq problem has to be solved, but is sending troops the only sensible way? Many would doubt. That’s the point.

    My understanding is that, the guys in the pier did not use your justifications to convince the rest of Hong Kong. Or they did use it, but never insisted on using this civilized way. Instead, they just “invading” the pier, aligning themselves with bike chains, and one of them hanged on his neck, not to mention that guy standing at the verge of pier. They might think themselves “rational” and not “radical”.

    In the eyes of many Hong Kong people, they did and do not look “rational”. I cannot speak for the remaining Hong Kong people, as those people claimed they did, but I can speak for myself. I would be surprised if someone climbs up the pier and still claims himself “rational”. We are not in the times of 古惑仔, we need negotiation, communication and justification. Simply screaming at the bay is by no means conducive to the matter. This can only trigger unnecessary attack and criticism.

  • As I have mentioned in Appledaily, at the time when you say the Government’s rationales are not vaild, the rationales provided by the Other side are just the same to the public. You can say that Government asked many professional entities to help them, yet it is also possible for the other side to do so. So I do not think that it is possible to say Government is lying.

    I agree that Queen’s Pier has its value, yet they project was decided too early, at that time no one said “collective memory”. One of the very important rule in our society is, even something is wrong, as long as it is agreed and even started, what we can done to stop it is very limited. Like, what we can do now is to see whether any other buildings which are in consultation period are in danger.

  • If these reasonable, mild actions don’t look rational to the general public, we should thank the biased mass media’s SPECIAL LOVE towards the great liar, our ‘lovely’ government for assisting this GREAT government in the PR War involved. 

    WE HAVE PUT ON A LOT OF STRESSES on the reasonings, and how and what the Government is lying to all of us!  Actually, who else has tried as hard as the ‘protesters’ (as some of you call…) to unearth the lengthy documents which are covered in dust to check whether the claims of the f_cking Government were valid?  When they published the results, WHICH MASS MEDIA have ever mentioned the research results? 

    Now, after ALL THE FORMAL channels and the seemingly more ‘gentle & reasonable’ means to communicate with the Government, the Government has NEVER RESPONDED TO US but just to continue its PR War to show the world that they have already heard us (but with no proper corresponding actions taken AT ALL), what else can be done to make them hear us???  WE ARE THE PROACTIVE SIDE, and now the Gov even doesn’t care and respond.  It is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE LIKE THAT, the Gov should be in-charge, they should ask for ad collect different opinions and proposals and to give feedback to all its people!!!  Why?  Why is it THAT SICK!!!  And now somebody just blame us annd help the Gov.??? 

    我還記得的政府謊話(而且能立刻說出詳情的)大概如下:

    (1) 政府話:

    地鐵要在正正皇后碼頭地底動工,興建機場快線掉頭道和港島(南/北?)新支線。(所以一定要拆。)

    事實是:

    MTR 從來沒有確定過新支線的位置,根本連會否建這條支線還沒有決定。

    (2) 政府話:

    皇后碼頭地底要建一條水渠去水,沒有可能不拆。

    事實是:

    民間方案已提出可以用一個美麗的人工湖代替,更可保留碼頭的應用價值。這 lagoon﹐不只不妨礙發展,更是發展的一部分,可供本地人假日消閑,也可連帶碼頭等推為新景點吸引遊客。坦白講,遊客要shopping,多一個商場已經沒甚麼分別,更不用來香港,因為 shopping mall 已經「多一個唔多,少一個唔少」。全世界的商場已經漸趨同化,一切變得大同小異,那些被政府努力封殺消滅的地方特色小普才是吸引力所在,如利東街、太原街、交叉街、波鞋街等…… 

    還有一些,詳情暫時不記得了,事忙,沒法詳談,歡迎繼續發表意見。

    其實,任何人不同意其他人的做法並無不可,畢竟這是一個多元社會應有的分歧。可是,對於我們經辛辛苦苦(不是我,只是同志們的努力)研究那些文件後發現政府的謊言而提出的質疑,我卻不容許大家的蔑視。請看看事實再「撐」政府吧!

  • Frostig : Thanks for your comments. Let me reiterate that (1) Dis-supporting those people who strike to preserve the pier is not equivalent to supporting the Government. (2) NO ONE ever said he/she supported the government right here, and NO ONE ever doubted the good faith of the youngsters.

    Is someone criticizing the US Govt for invading Iraq/ Afghanistan equivalent to supporting Saddam Hussein/ Osama Bin Laden? Oh, that’s the line of reasoning adopted by Taliban.

  • Yes, SOMEONE said something…… 

    ‘I do not think that it is possible to say Government is lying’, said hystericireul……  And that was exactly WHY I tried to point out SOME OF the most obvious LIES which were told by our dear Government. 

    AND, I repeat, my standpoint is that, THE ACTIONS INVOLVED have NEVER been TOO VIGOROUS  (especially when all the more ‘civilised’ actions have been ignored by that Government)! 

Post a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *