風暴中的微弱曙光－－－論英國竊聽風暴

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/07/killed-in.html


不論小學或中學，教科書都會告訴你以下內容：政府，人民的公僕；警察，正義的守衛；媒體，社會的公器。


可惜，現實的景像與書本的描繪，似乎有段距離。

在現世之，警察，是盲從於資本主義制度的國家機器；媒體，是政治家與資本家欺騙市民的面紗。而資本主義下的政府，則只顧維持資本家的利益而不顧人民死活－－除非你的屍骸會減少資本家的利益吧。三者之間彼此利用又或輸送利益，從而組成了一個互相扶持的堅固鐵三角。一個，只為了讓資本家積累更多資本的冷血三角。

不過，最近的英國，這個如此強大的鐵三角，在媒體與政府的一邊，似乎出現了裂縫並透出一絲曙光。 一宗竊聽風暴正席捲傳媒大亨梅鐸的新聞帝國，當中涉案的更包括部分受賄的英國警察高層，以及知名政客甚或前首相。而隨著這個帝國的動搖，英國媒體的工人將有機會進行一場大反擊，重新鞏固工人階級的勢力，打擊整個媒體工業的建制，以及對抗他們強大的盟力－－警察與政府。特別是英國政府內部亦不是鐵板一塊，當中不乏可利用的勢力。

可惜，工人的視野似乎只局限於他們的飯碗。筆者固然明白失業的問題對工人乃性命攸關之事。但正如下文所述，「The disproportionate focus on the loss of jobs at News International misses the point. The loss of jobs is a story; it's not the story. 」失業，只是問題的「果」。而真正的問題，在於整個制度本身。套用作者的話，若大家的視線只聚焦於失業之上，那麼這只是「 an extremely vulgar sort of reductionism. It does not rise to the level of political analysis and, in fact, is its own kind of moralism.」

假若在這個至為關鍵的關頭，我們未能捉實那絲微弱的曙光，那麼很快就會有「新梅鐸」的出現，重新修補那裂縫。到時候，世界將再漆黑一片，而我們只能再次靜待－－若還在生的話－－下一個風暴的來臨。



詳情請看以下文章。


－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－


Let it bleed posted by lenin


I'll say it again. The disproportionate focus on the loss of jobs at News International misses the point. The loss of jobs is a story; it's not the story. To begin and end with jobs, to evaluate the closure of News of the World purely on that basis, as the Labour blogger Simon Hewitt does, is an extremely vulgar sort of reductionism. It does not rise to the level of political analysis and, in fact, is its own kind of moralism.

七一後我們應該幹甚麼? by kenef

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/07/what-next-after-30june.html

今年七一，二十萬人上街。比香港早一天，六月三十日，在英國亦有一場大型的運動——七十五萬公務員、教師罷工抗議削減退休金——而這更只是對抗政府緊縮政策的龐大運動中的一部分。這篇文正是想探討30.6大罷工後的運動走向，對七一後的我們或許也有點啟發？

在怒吼之外－－帶領及組織群眾運動之必要 By Ulysses

文章連結：http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/21/austerity-politics-dissatisfaction-mainstream-parties

隨著歐洲多國的緊縮政策的推行，歐洲各地相繼出現暴動又或大型罷工，並直接影響到各大政府統治的根基。這些行動的力量固然不可忽視，如英國的75萬人大罷工，便直接癱瘓了社會上部分資本的運作。但，正如文中所指：

”It would also be foolish to underestimate the ability of the major parties to reconstitute their popular base.”The Tories' core vote is behind austerity. And they are past masters at macroeconomic manipulation intended to make just enough voters feel wealthy enough for long enough during election time. Labour, through its union affiliations and its base in working-class communities, will preserve its dominance over the left-of-centre vote for as long as there is no credible alternative. The major parties are in crisis, but a crisis is not terminal unless there are forces ready to exploit it”

不是各國政府均如我們的政府一樣那麼愚笨。他們面對這些有可能威脅其以及資本家根本利益的群眾運動時，定想扭盡六壬化解之。除了出動常見的國家機器－－警察－－之外，轉移群眾運動之目標（例如打著民族主義的旗幟將資本的剝削說為外國資本的入侵，彷彿只要外國資本撤退便天下太平）又或提出小修小補的方案欺騙人民，均是常見的手法。

而特別在沒有清晰的革命思想作指導以及更為良好的組織帶領時，群眾運動更易淪為一種怨氣之宣洩，難以對政府－－更遑論整個資本主義制度－－進行長期的抗爭。這一點，是全世界的抗爭者均必須記住的。

保守黨的矛盾（kenef）

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/05/tories-and-ideology-of-crime.html

本文探討了英國保守黨對治安的態度。英國保守黨一方面想保持「維護社會秩序」、「保衛傳統價值」的形象，另一方面卻不想給人「政府權力太大」的左翼感覺、亦希望削減警隊的開支。陷於這個兩難中，究竟保守黨在當下會怎樣選擇？

The Tories and (the ideology of) crime posted by lenin

The Tories, we know, are the party of order. They stand for decent, law-abiding tax-payers, and would like a little less solicitousness toward the criminals if you don't mind. But not these days - or at least not at this precise moment, for our affairs are highly volatile. The Tories are allowing themselves to be out-flanked to their right by Labour on this issue. How could this be?

Quilting point , from LENIN'S TOMB（Ulysses)

文章連結 : http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/05/quilting-point.html#disqus_thread


最近Lenin tomb都沒有新文章貼出來，故找了一篇五月份的文章貼出來。說是文章，其實內裡是某幾段引自　Ernesto Laclau的Politics and Ideology in Marxist Theory: Capitalism - Fascism - Populism的文字。

其主要帶出了幾個有關意識形態(Ideology)與階級(Class)的關係的討論，如其認為意識形態本身並無任何階級的成分，任何階級也能透過「Articulating」去利用某種意識形態，如文中便以國家主義(Nationalism)來作例子。

另外，佢亦有論述意識形態如何作為某階級的統治工具，指出「A class is hegemonic not so much to the extent that it is able to impose a uniform conception of the world on the rest of society, but to the extent that it can articulate different visions of the world in such a way that their potential antagonism is neutralised.」

不過最為有趣的是，文章下面一連串的討論，當中如essentialism與idealism的爭論均對我們極其重要。尤其作為一個馬克思主義者－－一種在香港被長期忽略的論述，我們更需要對這些問題作出深刻的思考，以建構一套更為完整的論述以說服其他人，並且防範那些來自不同敵人的抹黑又或偷換概念之舉。


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quilting point posted by lenin

"The class character of an ideological discourse is revealed in what we could call its specific articulating principle. Let us take an example: nationalism. Is it a feudal, bourgeois or proletarian ideology? Considered in itself it has no class connotation. The latter only derives from its specific articulation with other ideological elements. A feudal class, for example, can link nationalism to the maintenance of a hierarchical-authoritarian system of a traditional type - we need only think of Bismarck’s Germany. A bourgeois class may link nationalism to the development of a centralised nation-state in fighting against feudal particularism, and at the same time appeal to national unity as a means of neutralising class conflicts - think of the case of France. Finally, a communist movement can denounce the betrayal by capitalist classes of a nationalist cause and articulate nationalism and socialism in a single ideological discourse - think of Mao, for example. One could say that we understand by nationalism something distinct in the three cases. This is true, but our aim is precisely to determine where this difference lies. Is it the case that nationalism refers to such diverse contents that it is not possible to find a common element of meaning in them all? Or rather is it that certain common nuclei of meaning are connotatively linked to diverse ideological-articulatory domains? If the first solution were accepted, we would have to conclude that ideological struggle as such is impossible, since classes can only compete at the ideological level if there exists a common framework of meaning shared by all forces in struggle. It is precisely this background of shared meanings that enables antagonistic discourses to establish their difference. The political discourses of various classes, for example, will consist of antagonistic efforts of articulation in which each class presents itself as the authentic representative of ‘the people’, of ‘the national interest’, and so on. If, therefore, the second solution - which we consider to be the correct answer - is accepted, it is necessary to conclude that classes exist at the ideological and political level in a process of ar ticulation and not of reduction.

Lenin's Tomb: The Spanish Tahrir

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/05/spanish-tahrir.html

此文只是一些西班牙革命的初步分析，並無太多深入的論述。其帶出了幾個西班牙革命值得注意的問題。但最值得思考的是－－正如其在文末中指出－－，可以試將西班牙革命的成因及其背後所指向的問題放進近數月內整個歐洲與非洲的脈絡下分析及串連，從而提供一個更為廣闊的國際視野，以全球性的角度下重新理解資本與勞動者的對立，究竟是什麼一回事。

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Spanish Tahrir posted by lenin

A guest post on the astonishing uprising in Spain, by quilombosam. Discuss:

“On 15thMay 2011, around 150,000 people took to the streets in 60 Spanish towns and cities to demand “Real Democracy Now”, marching under the slogan “We are not commodities in the hands of bankers and politicians”. The protest was organised through web-based social networks without the involvement of any major unions or political parties. At the end of the march some people decided to stay the night at the Puerta del Sol in Madrid. They were forcefully evacuated by the police in the early hours of the morning. This, in turn, generated a mass call for everyone to occupy his or her local squares that thousands all over Spain took up. As we write, 65 public squares are being occupied, with support protests taking place in Spanish Embassies from Buenos Aires to Vienna and, indeed, London. You probably have not have read about it in the British press, but it is certainly happening. Try #spanishrevolution, #yeswecamp, #nonosvamosor #acampadasolon Twitter and see for yourself. What follows is a text by Emmanuel Rodríguez and Tomás Herreros from the Spanish collectiveUniversidad Nómada.
IT’S THE REAL DEMOCRACY, STUPID

15THMay, from Outrage to Hope
There is no doubt that Sunday 15thMay 2011 has come to mark a turning point: from the web to the street, from conversations around the kitchen table to mass mobilisations, but more than anything else, from outrage to hope. Tens of thousands of people, ordinary citizens responding to a call that started and spread on the internet, have taken the streets with a clear and promising demand: they want a real democracy, a democracy no longer tailored to the greed of the few, but to the needs of the people. They have been unequivocal in their denunciation of a political class that, since the beginning of the crisis, has run the country by turning away from them and obeying the dictates of the euphemistically called “markets”.

Lenin's Tomb: Athens: working class resistance breaks Pasok government (kenef)

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/06/athens-working-class-resistance-breaks.html

這篇文章也是談希臘，不過跟蕭之前post的那篇不同，這篇不是著重希臘緊縮方案內容、IMF和European Central Bank借錢給希臘政府開的私有化甚麼甚麼的條件，而是寫一些政治形勢的分析。

文章提到上星期三（15/6）罷工工人示威行動中，警察暴力升級。亦提到掌政的PASOK（泛希臘社會主義運動）已危危乎，在80%民眾反對該黨緊縮方案的情況下，有評論認為希臘政府已losing the functions of a state，事實上希臘總理Papandreou在群眾壓力已下令財長革職，但明顯仍未放棄增稅收、公營部門大裁員的緊縮方案。

作者認為希臘政府對國家失去控制，對左翼份子未必是好事。因為IMP和EU仍對希臘虎視眈眈，加上PASOK倒台意味（暫時）反對緊縮的右翼政黨New Democracy Party將獲得選票。作者指出希臘的反抗應被視為國際階級鬥爭的一部份，與英國、西班牙的工人聯合起來的話將會增加他們的勝算。

最後作者提到他對PASOK計劃和右翼政黨New Democracy組成支持緊縮的聯盟的隱憂。他表示各地都有左翼改良主義（left-reformism）政黨和右翼政黨聯手的先例，統治階級隱藏在「社會民主」的旗幟之後，繼續大刺刺地剝削及對工人運動的打壓。相對於剛在希臘選舉中得到4倍票數增長的激進左翼聯盟Antarsya，他則抱有期望。

（題外話：蕭上次睇果個網：https://groups.google.com/group/socialist-economics會唔會可以加入我地個reading list?）

Lenin's Tomb: The taxpayer (kenef)

文章連結：http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/06/taxpayer.html

這篇文章提到，當我們談起公務員薪酬或者增加公共開支時，很喜歡抱著「納稅人」這個身份，抱怨自己付出了多少而有些人（如公務員、領綜援者等）卻得到來自「納稅人」的津貼（subsidy）。 作者指出這種說法假設了有些人不是「納稅人」，但現實是所有人都有交稅：不論是公務員一樣要交的薪俸稅，還是消費時我們要交的間接稅。To speak of "the taxpayer" is in this sense meaningless, since it includes everyone.

回到香港，公務員加薪我們固然會聽到這種論調，但更普遍的是以「納稅人」身份去歧視拿政府津貼、沒有交入息稅的基層與綜援戶。其實在他們水漲船高的物價、高昂的租金中，已經納了稅給政府。我們還要信那種只有中產交的入息稅、大財團交的利得稅才是「納稅」的鬼話嗎？

Class and common sense, from LENIN'S TOMB

文章連結: http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/05/class-and-common-sense.html

Common sense這詞彙，經常出現在我們的日常生活中。驟耳聽來並無特別之處。然而，若試從階級的角度出發，則會發現不一樣的世界。

正如文中所指，Common sense has an "imperative character", producing "norms of conduct", and is thus formative of the political situations we struggle in"。Common sense，從來就不是以一種中立的身份存在－－－而是統治階級最有力的洗腦工具。

例如文中便帶出了勤勞作為一種Common sense的美德，與「自由市場」及「精英政治」的關係，並指出當我們接受這種意識形態時，其實暗中已默許了某種社會上的不公義，而這種不公義，正正就是繼續維持統治階層的利益及其統治的條件，如資本的壟斷及穩定的社會狀態。

"The devil is in the details."，除了勤勞外，生活上不少Common sense實亦隱含了統治階層暗中灌輸的意識形態－－　一些只為有利他們統治而灌輸的意識形態。例子舉不勝舉，如教育制度及整個法律系統等等，當中不少看似理所當然的Common sense，很多時均是最為有利統治階層的話語而已。