施明德是哪一軍？_綠翠園

	§網綠翠園站§ 　　sofia部落格

主題：施明德是哪一軍？

發表：sofia	2006-08-14 16:52:41	閱覽數：20508	(IP: )	T 1999	引　用

回應：竹根	2006-08-15 11:22:02	(IP: )	T 1999_R 2	引　用

艾琳達對於有關施明德發起要求陳總統下台運動之聲明 2006, ,8,11

艾琳達

施明德在他個人被稱為「Nori」的時期，由於他曾經一度挺身而出，對抗國民黨獨裁政權，可以被評價為台灣民主奮鬥之先軀，而當之無楚A1980年三月高雄事件當時，他發表「台灣已經事實上獨立三十年」的明顯主張，而贏得眾多矚目。那個時期陳水扁也因為擔任辯護律師而開始他的政治生涯。我則曾因Nori這種為宣布國際性的人權而犧牲之精神，感到驕傲，而願意去護衛他。

1992年民進黨黨主席選舉他輸給釩H良，因為雀R通十幾位關鍵性的選舉人票，但是Nori事後告訴我：他不願起來攻擊它而造成黨的分裂。我自己訪談過民進黨內部人士，也印證此事。 1994年他選上黨主席，而且與新潮流派系結盟，Nori努力從事一些黨內改革，但是並沒有成央C在我的觀察，之後的施明德開始失去理想主義，和早先他那些目標清楚的訴求與行動。他在1995年底的與新黨「咖啡會議」，廣泛地被批評為偏離台灣獨立路線，而且他和當時的新聞局長宋楚瑜，國民黨戒嚴法的護衛者的親密交往，也引發內部對於通敵的激烈諍論。

盡管他早年為政治，意志堅定的做了25年牢，或者這也是其性格成因，在我的觀察裡，施明德的生活習慣和日常工作的管理，沒有做好他作為立法委員和黨主席應有的角色。個性孤立和夜貓族，他不會遵守辦公時間，和有系統地與他的工作人員溝通，他們對職務的奉獻大部份都被浪費掉了。他無節制的諂媚記者和攀附者；沉溺於女人、飲酒、和香煙。.我認為這些他的無效能（ineffectuality），而導致他以特殊的作為來論述，而不是扮演團隊協調者。相對的陳水扁，律師出身，習慣於寫文件；努力工作；提早上班，和團隊精神等，因此這位律師很快的在政治舞臺上超越他。

施的1998年選舉和他的2001年爭取台北市立委席次的失敗，這些選戰活動是在「新興民族基金會」（釩H良所成立的組織）之設計進行的，而其經費來源是國民黨的自由捐獻。2000年總統選舉時，施明德並沒有支持陳水扁，在其間他出席新黨總統候選選人在世新大學所舉辦的演講會，?明他作為政治囚犯，生還歷程的哲學，結束時並且抨擊了陳水扁。根據林重謨立委的說法，他厭煩了施明德的高姿態，和以為他能操作其他民進黨立委，因此林於2000年退出黨團。

上述等於是簡要的一瞥我認為施明德如何選擇演出他，目前還在進行政治角色的解釋，這也是釵h人經常問我的問題，這裡可清楚的看出國民黨如何利用之前民進黨的要角，來攻擊民進黨的慣用模式。而國民黨曾經是世界上最富有的政黨，她有足夠的資源去操作吸引人的策略。

迄今又過了多年，雖然施明德幾次表示他已經退出政治，最近他卻突然宣布一項罷免陳水扁總統的運動，包括威脅使用體制外的行動。我們真的要去相信Nori做這些事是為了關心民進黨和最高的理想嗎？過去六年來，至少他的活動和宣示，似乎謎樣的與「泛藍勢力」的政治利益相吻合，甚至於據說親民黨還曾敦促他去參選上屆高雄市長，並提供資金。

如果他那麼關切「貪污」，為何過去他未曾對宋楚瑜的興票案有任何的表示？甚至對國民黨黨產和拉法葉鑑採購案？

如果施明德他將自己礎b討伐貪污聖戰的中心位置，我認為公平的要求他，要揭露他自己過去幾年的財務狀況，和公開的面對調查，是否他有與國民黨的任何共同利益？那一開始就以各種藉口試圖拉垮民進黨政府，如第一次是以核四廠案運作罷免陳水扁。

貪污是長期根深蒂固的在台灣社會，向下到基層，而政黨輪替才開始在改變規則，我們當然不能一昧的護衛民進黨，特別是他們循著過去容易的路線，試著「用錢打發障礙」的這方面，和甚至自己打開自己襯裡口袋，以吸取不勞而獲的報酬。

但是現在發起倒扁運動，又不尋求現有的「彈劾」、「罷免」等機制，這樣會對提昇台灣的民主和法治有幫助嗎？它是否在測試及改善現行法律體系？還是將來為馬英九當總統，讓國民黨復辟，以方便他們之前撥款方式和運用國家的資產?

為何施明德再次的想以襲擊方式，進行政治行動呢? 當人民現在終於能夠行使他們的投票權時，他卻發起了一場不符合時代，卻為自己加賭注的幽靈式革命。到底他有自己想要的長期遠見嗎? 仍然站在促進台灣被國際承認是一個國家的立場嗎? 或者他也已經放棄他犧牲25年生命所追求的理想呢？

Statement by Linda Arrigo Concerning Shih Ming-Deh’s Campaign to Remove President Chen Shui-bian from Office by Linda Gail Arrigo

August 11, 2006

At one time, Shih Ming-deh, personal name Nori, could claim credit for standing up against the dictatorship of the Kuomintang in the struggle to bring democracy to Taiwan. At the Kaohsiung Incident trials in March 1980 he made a brilliant argument that Taiwan had already been independent for thirty years. Chen Shui-bian entered his political life as a lawyer for the defendants then. I was proud to defend Nori’s sacrifice in international human rights proclamations.

In 1992 Shih Ming-deh lost the election for chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party to Hsu Hsin-liang because Hsu bought a few dozen critical delegate votes, Nori told me; but he did not want to tear the party apart to fight it. My own interviews inside the party supported this. Elected in 1994, and then allied with New Tide (Hsin Chao-liu), Nori made some effort to reform the DPP internally, without success. In my view, after that Shih Ming-deh began to lose the idealism and clarity of purpose that had marked his earlier words and actions. His “coffee meeting” to make a deal with New Party in late 1995 was widely criticized as failing the cause of Taiwan independence, and in his defensive reaction he began to hobnob with former enemies, defenders of martial law such as James Soong (Soong Chu-yu), who as head of the Government Information Office in 1980 had vilified Shih.

Despite his earlier steeliness as a political prisoner for 25 years, or because of it, Shih Ming-deh’s life habits did not do him well for the daily grind of administration as a legislator and party chairman, to my observation. A loner and a night-owl, he could not make office hours, or communicate systematically with his staff. Their dedication was mostly wasted. He was endlessly flattered by reporters and hangers-on, and addicted to women, drink, and cigarettes. I think it was this ineffectuality that left him to seek the limelight with statements that were striking but not team-coordinated. Lawyers such as Chen Shui-bian were used to written documents, hard work, early hours, and teamwork, and the lawyers soon upstaged him.

Shih’s 1998 campaign as well as his 2001 unsuccessful bid for a legislative seat in Taipei was designed by Rising Peoples’ (Hsing Hsin Min-zu) Foundation, Hsu Hsin-liang’s organization, whose founding had been largely attended by liberal KMT figures. Shih did not support Chen Shui-bian’s drive for the presidency in 2000. Among others, he gave a talk at Shih Hsin University sponsored by a New Party figure, and after presenting his philosophy of how he survived as a prisoner, he ended with pot shots at Chen. According to Lin Chung-mo, Lin got tired of Shih’s grandstanding and thinking he could manipulate other DPP legislators, and Lin drove him out of the party caucus in 2000.

This is a brief glimpse of how I think Shih Ming-deh has come to play the role he has taken up now; people are continually asking me this. There has been a clear pattern of the KMT using former DPP figures to attack the DPP; and the KMT, formerly the richest political party in the world, has the resources to make this ploy attractive.

By now many years have passed, and although Shih Ming-deh sometime in the last year announced he was withdrawing from politics, he has now announced a campaign to unseat Chen Shui-bian, including the threat of extra-legal actions. Are we really to believe that Nori is doing this out of concern for the DPP and the highest of ideals? For the last six years at least his activities and announcements have seemed mysteriously coordinated with the interests of the Blue Forces, and even the Peoples First Party. PFP members, I was told, urged him to run for mayor of Kaohsiung, and provided the funding.

If he is so concerned about corruption, why hasn’t he spoken out in the past on Soong’s Chung Hsin case, or the issue of KMT party property? Or the Lafayette case?

If Shih Ming-deh is to set himself up as the center of a crusade against corruption, then I think it is fair to ask him to make public his own finances for the last several years, and to face squarely whether he has any interests together with the Kuomintang, which has been trying to bring down the DPP government from the very start, for a variety of pretexts, the first being Nuclear Power Plant No. 4.

Corruption has been long ingrained in Taiwan society, down to the lowest levels, and the change of ruling parties has only begun to alter the rules. We cannot defend the DPP in general or the President in particular in so far as they have taken the easier route of continuing past habits, trying to buy off the obstacles, and perhaps even lining their own pockets with unearned rewards. But is campaigning for Chen Shui-bian to step down now, without use of the present mechanisms of impeachment or recall, any advance towards democracy and the rule of law? Does it test or improve the present legal system? Or would it be a step back to the KMT’s former easy appropriation of state resources and assets, when Ma Ying-jeou becomes president?

So why does Shih Ming-deh again want to foray into political action? It seems anachronistic for him to raise a specter of revolution, when now finally the citizens can exercise their vote. Does he have a long-term vision of what he wants? Does he still stand for Taiwan’s emergence as an internationally-recognized nation? Or has he abandoned the ideal that he sacrificed 25 years of his life for, too?

Linda Gail Arrigo, Ph.D. Sociology 艾琳達

Green Party Taiwan, International Officer

Translator, Ministry of Examination, Taiwan ROC

Home Tel: (886-2) 2662-3677 Fax: 2662-6897 Cell: 0928-899-931

綜覽全部討論

總　覽版　務政　經健康醫療軍　武理　財文　化藝　文科　技台灣的美旅　遊 PISA 娛　樂鄉　土公　民認　同副　刊哈　啦范氏網

竹縫
視界耳聾
世界泰伯
觀點 Joy
隨筆哈利
天地 Jerry C
鳥世界射水魚
天　空討海人
鏡　頭嘻笑
人間詩情
畫藝老工仔
思　維網網
相連歷史
庫存

* 討論區內之言論，不代表本園之立場，一切法律責任仍由發言者本人負責
* 如果您有任何不當言論，本園有權決定是否保留您所送貼的意見。