【問題出於制度】 The Problem Comes From the System
這個時候，我本來應該是在台灣為新書舉行發佈會，不過因台灣書展延期，我也只好留在香港，與一眾香港人一起為在網購平台買不到口罩而發愁。
At this time, I should be in Taiwan promoting my new book. But since the Taiwan Book Fair has been postponed, I can only remain in Hong Kong, and along with every Hong Konger, fret over the utter inability to buy a single face mask on any online shopping platform.
其實《香港第一課》的初稿在半年已經在網上免費發佈，這次在台灣出版的是實體修訂本。寫這本書的初衷是要跨越外界對香港認識的鴻溝，半年前正值反修例運動爆發之時，中國大陸輿論對香港的抹黑可說是史無前例，各種對港的仇恨言論數之不盡。來到肺炎疫情爆發的今天，特別是李文亮醫生逝世之後，好像出現了一些鬆動，多了一些人願意出來說：理解香港人當日的憤怒。
The first draft of “Hong Kong: The First Lesson” had in fact already been published on the internet six months ago. This book published in Taiwan is the physical manifestation of those essays. My intention for writing this book is to bridge the wide gap in outsiders’ knowledge about Hong Kong. In the wake of the anti-extradition movement in Hong Kong, the smearing of Hong Kong in Mainland public discussion about reached unprecedented levels of vitriol and hate-filled post targeted Hong Kong seemed unending. But during this coronavirus epidemic, especially after the death of Dr. Li Wen Liang, the tone of the discussions has relaxed a little. More people are willing to say: we understand why Hongkongers are furious.
對於這個改變，當然不是每一個香港人都會接受。對中國大陸的疫情幸災樂禍的，固然會有。不少人會說中國大陸的政制說到底受中國大陸的人民默許認授，現在受災也是自找。套用網上一個流行的說法：「沒有一個是無辜的」。
Of course not every Hongkonger is going to accept this change. Of course there are those who will gloat over this Mainland epidemic. Many people will say that Mainlanders in their heart of hearts tacitly approve of the Mainland government, and therefore brought this crisis onto themselves. To borrow a popular phrase from social media, “no one is innocent.”
我無意在這條問題糾纏太久。中國大陸一般民眾在信息鴻溝面前對香港問題有偏差的認識，退一步想，固然是可以理解的；與此同時，香港市民經歷了長期的前線對壘後，對於曾站在對立面的人無法表達同情，退一步想，同樣是可以理解的。活在大時代，有些矛盾總覺得是避免不了，重要的問題是之後怎麼辦。
Without meaning to, I’ve struggled with this question for a long time. It is understandable that mainlanders have huge gaps in their knowledge about what Hong Kong is facing; simultaneously, if you think about it, it is understandable that after weathering a long period of frontline battles, Hongkongers are also unable to sympathize with people who stood against them. In these turbulent times, you cannot avoid certain contradictions and hypocrisies. The important question is what we do about it.
寫《香港第一課》，當然是相信溝通的重要。香港沒有本錢不理會中國 — 這句話不是政治宣言，而是客觀現實。這次肺炎疫情告訴我們，不要說香港，整個世界都沒有本錢不理會中國。如果中國不能達到善治，就會繼續有政治蓋過專業的悲劇重演，就會繼續有更多的李文亮，而被折騰的會是整個世界。而活在全球化的年代，沒有防火牆足以阻擋專制中國所產生的問題外溢，唯有中國不再專制才有可能帶來安穩。我明白有很多香港人不相信中國有可能脫離專制，我認識好多到今天還在為體制說項的大陸朋友；但這不是可能性有多大的問題，而是因為專制中國必然會帶來災難，我們除了回應之外別無選擇。在這問題上，無論你愛國或不愛國，無論你認為香港與中國的政治關係應該如何，邏輯上立場應當一致。
Since I wrote “Hong Kong: The First Lesson”, of course I believe in the importance of communication. “Hong Kong cannot afford to ignore China” is not a political statement, but objective reality. What’s more, this coronavirus epidemic tells us that it’s not just Hong Kong — the rest of the world cannot afford to ignore China either. If China does not have just governance, we will continue to see tragedies that result from politics overruling professional decency. There will be more Li Wen Liangs, and what will be thrown into turmoil will be the entire world. And in a globalized world, there is no firewall that is strong enough to block the problems that will spill over from an autocratic China — it is only when China doesn’t have an autocracy that we can even have the possibility of security. I understand that many Hongkongers do not believe China can ever escape from autocracy — even at this moment, I have many mainland friends who speak highly of this government. But this isn’t a question of probability: an autocratic China will always bring about a crisis, and we have no choice but to respond. On this question, whether you love the country or not, regardless of what you think Hong Kong and China’s political relationship should be, logically your goals should be the same.
但我不是說香港人可以直接改變中國。中國大陸一般民眾對香港缺乏認識，香港人也不見得很理解中國，沒有多大的資格為中國指點或作示範。但我相信嘗試解釋香港的事，還是可以帶來一點積極的作用：提出一個在任何社會都適用的觀察 — 問題出於制度。
But I’m not saying that Hongkongers can directly change China. The average mainlander lacks knowledge about Hong Kong, and since Hongkongers don’t really seem to understand China, they are neither qualified to give guidance or model a direction. But I believe that explaining Hong Kong’s issues can be of some use, and that is I can bring up an observation that is appropriate for any society — the problem comes from the system.
中國大陸輿論系統的最大問題，是所有事情都有很簡單的答案。舉個例，凡是提出異議的人，一定就是受人煽動的，背後說不定還有甚麼外國勢力唆使，你再質疑下去就是不愛國，無視國家已經很努力的解決問題。這種唯動機論使得任何異議的內容都可以被直接跳過，我們不用回答這個異議本身是否值得提出，更不要說問題本身是如何產生。畢竟一但開始這樣問，潘多拉的盒子就會被打開，「國家已經很努力的解決問題」就不再值得歌頌，反而該先追究政權本身在事情開端的責任，當下這場疫症如何由官方隱瞞而起就是最佳案例。
The biggest problem with Mainland public discourse is that everything has a very simple answer. For example, whenever you bring up dissidents, you’ll always be told that they have been incited by someone else, or that foreign forces control them in the background. If you question this further, you are deemed unpatriotic, refusing to see how the country is already trying hard to solve its problems. Centering a discussion on the motivations of dissidents means we can leapfrog over the substance of their opinions — we don’t need answer whether their views are worthy of raising, and definitely don’t have to talk about the source of the country’s problem. After all, once you start talking about these things, you open up a Pandora’s box; “the country is already trying really hard to solve these problems” becomes a worthless ode and instead you start investigating the government’s responsibility for causing an issue. A perfect example is how officials caused this coronavirus epidemic by covering up the disease.
回到香港，中國大陸輿論系統對香港問題的簡單答案，是四大家族如何把持香港經濟，年輕人分享不到發展成果，受外國勢力煽動上街鬧事，受害的最後只是香港人自己。當然，這個簡單答案是不完整的。如果所謂的四大家族真的是香港問題的源頭，那麼他們的政治地位又是從何而來？這時候我們就不得不討論選舉委會員的組成問題了。那為什麼選舉委會員的組成問題沒有被解決？這就要回到專制中國本身了 — 也就是說，問題出於制度。
Back to Hong Kong. The Mainland public discourse’s simple answer to Hong Kong’s problem is that four big families control Hong Kong’s economy, that young people do not have a share in the fruits of economic development, that foreign forces are inciting the street demonstrations, and that the ultimate victims are Hongkongers themselves. Of course, this simple answer is not complete. If the so-called four big families are really the origin of Hong Kong’s, then where does their political standing come from? At this point, we would have to talk about the problematic composition of Hong Kong’s Electoral Affairs Committee. So why hasn’t the problem with our electoral committee been solved? And we come back to autocratic China — which is to say, the problem comes from the system.
香港是中國境內最後一個保持異議的地方。在沒有其他選擇的前提下，把這個異議說清楚，我願意很天真地相信有其價值。在中國討論政治問題，很多時候就會高大空得很，一句「國情不同」就可以回答所有問題似的。談制度、講誘因，把社會問題當成一個系統來思考，是一個必要的習慣。沒有一個專制可以永遠存在，到新的制度要重新建立的時候，這種思考就不可或缺。
Hong Kong is the last place that can maintain dissent within China’s borders. Since I have no other choice, I’m willing to be naive and believe that there is some value in making this clear. A lot of hot air exists in discussions about Chinese politics, as if saying “the national conditions are different” can justify all problems. When talking about power and incentives, thinking about society systematically and critically must be a necessary habit. There is not a single autocracy that can last forever, and when it comes to establishing a new society, thinking critically becomes indispensable.
