ケーラー モリエ

鲍彤（1932年11月－ ），祖籍浙江省海宁市，在上海长大，原中国共产党中央委员会委员，中共中央政治体制改革研究室主任。

北岛（1949年8月2日－），原名赵振开，中国当代诗人，为朦胧诗代表人物之一。先后获瑞典笔会文学奖、美国西部笔会中心自由写作奖、古根海姆奖学金等，并被选为美国艺术文学院终身荣誉院士。

包遵信（1937年9月－2007年10月28日），安徽芜湖人，中国著名政治异议人士，知识分子，曾用笔名忍言、佚之。

艾未未（1957年8月28日－），中国艺术家，曾在美国居留与工作，建筑设计师、社会评论员、文化评论员。诗人艾青之子。在当代艺术方面，被喻为中国头号领导人物[1]。现任中国艺术文件仓库艺术总监。[1]

Translated from the Chinese by Perry Link The following text of Charter 08, signed by hundreds of Chinese intellectuals and translated and introduced by Perry Link, Professor of Chinese Literature at the University of California, Riverside, will be published in the issue of The New York Review dated January 15, which goes on sale on January 2. —The Editors The document below, signed by over three hundred prominent Chinese citizens, was conceived and written in conscious admiration of the founding of Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia, where, in January 1977, more than two hundred Czech and Slovak intellectuals formed a loose, informal, and open association of people... united by the will to strive individually and collectively for respect for human and civil rights in our country and throughout the world. The Chinese document calls not for ameliorative reform of the current political system but for an end to some of its essential features, including one-party rule, and their replacement with a system based on human rights and democracy. The prominent citizens who have signed the document are from both outside and inside the government, and include not only well-known dissidents and intellectuals, but also middle-level officials and rural leaders. They have chosen December 10, the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as the day on which to express their political ideas and to outline their vision of a constitutional, democratic China. They intend “Charter 08” to serve as a blueprint for fundamental political change in China in the years to come. The signers of the document will form an informal group, open-ended in size but united by a determination to promote democratization and protection of human rights in China and beyond. On December 8 two prominent signers of the Charter, Zhang Zuhua and Liu Xiaobo, were detained by the police. Zhang Zuhua has since been released; as of December 9, Liu Xiabo remains in custody. —Perry Link Frederick Douglass Book Prize Announcement I. Foreword A hundred years have passed since the writing of China’s first constitution. 2008 also marks the sixtieth anniversary of the promulgation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the thirtieth anniversary of the appearance of Democracy Wall in Beijing, and the tenth of China’s signing of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We are approaching the twentieth anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen massacre of pro-democracy student protesters. The Chinese people, who have endured human rights disasters and uncountable struggles across these same years, now include many who see clearly that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values. By departing from these values, the Chinese government’s approach to “modernization” has proven disastrous. It has stripped people of their rights, destroyed their dignity, and corrupted normal human intercourse. So we ask: Where is China headed in the twenty-first century? Will it continue with “modernization” under authoritarian rule, or will it embrace universal human values, join the mainstream of civilized nations, and build a democratic system? There can be no avoiding these questions. The shock of the Western impact upon China in the nineteenth century laid bare a decadent authoritarian system and marked the beginning of what is often called “the greatest changes in thousands of years” for China. A “self-strengthening movement” followed, but this aimed simply at appropriating the technology to build gunboats and other Western material objects. China’s humiliating naval defeat at the hands of Japan in 1895 only confirmed the obsolescence of China’s system of government. The first attempts at modern political change came with the ill-fated summer of reforms in 1898, but these were cruelly crushed by ultraconservatives at China’s imperial court. With the revolution of 1911, which inaugurated Asia’s first republic, the authoritarian imperial system that had lasted for centuries was finally supposed to have been laid to rest. But social conflict inside our country and external pressures were to prevent it; China fell into a patchwork of warlord fiefdoms and the new republic became a fleeting dream. The failure of both “self-strengthening” and political renovation caused many of our forebears to reflect deeply on whether a “cultural illness” was afflicting our country. This mood gave rise, during the May Fourth Movement of the late 1910s, to the championing of “science and democracy.” Yet that effort, too, foundered as warlord chaos persisted and the Japanese invasion [beginning in Manchuria in 1931] brought national crisis. Victory over Japan in 1945 offered one more chance for China to move toward modern government, but the Communist defeat of the Nationalists in the civil war thrust the nation into the abyss of totalitarianism. The “new China” that emerged in 1949 proclaimed that “the people are sovereign” but in fact set up a system in which “the Party is all-powerful.” The Communist Party of China seized control of all organs of the state and all political, economic, and social resources, and, using these, has produced a long trail of human rights disasters, including, among many others, the Anti-Rightist Campaign (1957), the Great Leap Forward (1958–1960), the Cultural Revolution (1966–1969), the June Fourth (Tiananmen Square) Massacre (1989), and the current repression of all unauthorized religions and the suppression of the weiquan rights movement [a movement that aims to defend citizens’ rights promulgated in the Chinese Constitution and to fight for human rights recognized by international conventions that the Chinese government has signed]. During all this, the Chinese people have paid a gargantuan price. Tens of millions have lost their lives, and several generations have seen their freedom, their happiness, and their human dignity cruelly trampled. During the last two decades of the twentieth century the government policy of “Reform and Opening” gave the Chinese people relief from the pervasive poverty and totalitarianism of the Mao Zedong era and brought substantial increases in the wealth and living standards of many Chinese as well as a partial restoration of economic freedom and economic rights. Civil society began to grow, and popular calls for more rights and more political freedom have grown apace. As the ruling elite itself moved toward private ownership and the market economy, it began to shift from an outright rejection of “rights” to a partial acknowledgment of them. In 1998 the Chinese government signed two important international human rights conventions; in 2004 it amended its constitution to include the phrase “respect and protect human rights”; and this year, 2008, it has promised to promote a “national human rights action plan.” Unfortunately most of this political progress has extended no further than the paper on which it is written. The political reality, which is plain for anyone to see, is that China has many laws but no rule of law; it has a constitution but no constitutional government. The ruling elite continues to cling to its authoritarian power and fights off any move toward political change. The stultifying results are endemic official corruption, an undermining of the rule of law, weak human rights, decay in public ethics, crony capitalism, growing inequality between the wealthy and the poor, pillage of the natural environment as well as of the human and historical environments, and the exacerbation of a long list of social conflicts, especially, in recent times, a sharpening animosity between officials and ordinary people. As these conflicts and crises grow ever more intense, and as the ruling elite continues with impunity to crush and to strip away the rights of citizens to freedom, to property, and to the pursuit of happiness, we see the powerless in our society—the vulnerable groups, the people who have been suppressed and monitored, who have suffered cruelty and even torture, and who have had no adequate avenues for their protests, no courts to hear their pleas—becoming more militant and raising the possibility of a violent conflict of disastrous proportions. The decline of the current system has reached the point where change is no longer optional. II. Our Fundamental Principles This is a historic moment for China, and our future hangs in the balance. In reviewing the political modernization process of the past hundred years or more, we reiterate and endorse basic universal values as follows: Freedom. Freedom is at the core of universal human values. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom in where to live, and the freedoms to strike, to demonstrate, and to protest, among others, are the forms that freedom takes. Without freedom, China will always remain far from civilized ideals. Human rights. Human rights are not bestowed by a state. Every person is born with inherent rights to dignity and freedom. The government exists for the protection of the human rights of its citizens. The exercise of state power must be authorized by the people. The succession of political disasters in China’s recent history is a direct consequence of the ruling regime’s disregard for human rights. Equality. The integrity, dignity, and freedom of every person—regardless of social station, occupation, sex, economic condition, ethnicity, skin color, religion, or political belief—are the same as those of any other. Principles of equality before the law and equality of social, economic, cultural, civil, and political rights must be upheld. Republicanism. Republicanism, which holds that power should be balanced among different branches of government and competing interests should be served, resembles the traditional Chinese political ideal of “fairness in all under heaven.” It allows different interest groups and social assemblies, and people with a variety of cultures and beliefs, to exercise democratic self-government and to deliberate in order to reach peaceful resolution of public questions on a basis of equal access to government and free and fair competition. Democracy. The most fundamental principles of democracy are that the people are sovereign and the people select their government. Democracy has these characteristics: (1) Political power begins with the people and the legitimacy of a regime derives from the people. (2) Political power is exercised through choices that the people make. (3) The holders of major official posts in government at all levels are determined through periodic competitive elections. (4) While honoring the will of the majority, the fundamental dignity, freedom, and human rights of minorities are protected. In short, democracy is a modern means for achieving government truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” Constitutional rule. Constitutional rule is rule through a legal system and legal regulations to implement principles that are spelled out in a constitution. It means protecting the freedom and the rights of citizens, limiting and defining the scope of legitimate government power, and providing the administrative apparatus necessary to serve these ends. III. What We Advocate Authoritarianism is in general decline throughout the world; in China, too, the era of emperors and overlords is on the way out. The time is arriving everywhere for citizens to be masters of states. For China the path that leads out of our current predicament is to divest ourselves of the authoritarian notion of reliance on an “enlightened overlord” or an “honest official” and to turn instead toward a system of liberties, democracy, and the rule of law, and toward fostering the consciousness of modern citizens who see rights as fundamental and participation as a duty. Accordingly, and in a spirit of this duty as responsible and constructive citizens, we offer the following recommendations on national governance, citizens’ rights, and social development: A New Constitution. We should recast our present constitution, rescinding its provisions that contradict the principle that sovereignty resides with the people and turning it into a document that genuinely guarantees human rights, authorizes the exercise of public power, and serves as the legal underpinning of China’s democratization. The constitution must be the highest law in the land, beyond violation by any individual, group, or political party. Separation of powers. We should construct a modern government in which the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive power is guaranteed. We need an Administrative Law that defines the scope of government responsibility and prevents abuse of administrative power. Government should be responsible to taxpayers. Division of power between provincial governments and the central government should adhere to the principle that central powers are only those specifically granted by the constitution and all other powers belong to the local governments. Legislative democracy. Members of legislative bodies at all levels should be chosen by direct election, and legislative democracy should observe just and impartial principles. An Independent Judiciary. The rule of law must be above the interests of any particular political party and judges must be independent. We need to establish a constitutional supreme court and institute procedures for constitutional review. As soon as possible, we should abolish all of the Committees on Political and Legal Affairs that now allow Communist Party officials at every level to decide politically-sensitive cases in advance and out of court. We should strictly forbid the use of public offices for private purposes. Public Control of Public Servants. The military should be made answerable to the national government, not to a political party, and should be made more professional. Military personnel should swear allegiance to the constitution and remain nonpartisan. Political party organizations shall be prohibited in the military. All public officials including police should serve as nonpartisans, and the current practice of favoring one political party in the hiring of public servants must end. Guarantee of Human Rights. There shall be strict guarantees of human rights and respect for human dignity. There should be a Human Rights Committee, responsible to the highest legislative body, that will prevent the government from abusing public power in violation of human rights. A democratic and constitutional China especially must guarantee the personal freedom of citizens. No one shall suffer illegal arrest, detention, arraignment, interrogation, or punishment. The system of “Reeducation through Labor” must be abolished. Election of Public Officials. There shall be a comprehensive system of democratic elections based on “one person, one vote.” The direct election of administrative heads at the levels of county, city, province, and nation should be systematically implemented. The rights to hold periodic free elections and to participate in them as a citizen are inalienable. Rural–Urban Equality. The two-tier household registry system must be abolished. This system favors urban residents and harms rural residents. We should establish instead a system that gives every citizen the same constitutional rights and the same freedom to choose where to live. Freedom to Form Groups. The right of citizens to form groups must be guaranteed. The current system for registering nongovernment groups, which requires a group to be “approved,” should be replaced by a system in which a group simply registers itself. The formation of political parties should be governed by the constitution and the laws, which means that we must abolish the special privilege of one party to monopolize power and must guarantee principles of free and fair competition among political parties. Freedom to Assemble. The constitution provides that peaceful assembly, demonstration, protest, and freedom of expression are fundamental rights of a citizen. The ruling party and the government must not be permitted to subject these to illegal interference or unconstitutional obstruction. Freedom of Expression. We should make freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and academic freedom universal, thereby guaranteeing that citizens can be informed and can exercise their right of political supervision. These freedoms should be upheld by a Press Law that abolishes political restrictions on the press. The provision in the current Criminal Law that refers to “the crime of incitement to subvert state power” must be abolished. We should end the practice of viewing words as crimes. Freedom of Religion. We must guarantee freedom of religion and belief and institute a separation of religion and state. There must be no governmental interference in peaceful religious activities. We should abolish any laws, regulations, or local rules that limit or suppress the religious freedom of citizens. We should abolish the current system that requires religious groups (and their places of worship) to get official approval in advance and substitute for it a system in which registry is optional and, for those who choose to register, automatic. Civic Education. In our schools we should abolish political curriculums and examinations that are designed to indoctrinate students in state ideology and to instill support for the rule of one party. We should replace them with civic education that advances universal values and citizens’ rights, fosters civic consciousness, and promotes civic virtues that serve society. Protection of Private Property. We should establish and protect the right to private property and promote an economic system of free and fair markets. We should do away with government monopolies in commerce and industry and guarantee the freedom to start new enterprises. We should establish a Committee on State-Owned Property, reporting to the national legislature, that will monitor the transfer of state-owned enterprises to private ownership in a fair, competitive, and orderly manner. We should institute a land reform that promotes private ownership of land, guarantees the right to buy and sell land, and allows the true value of private property to be adequately reflected in the market. Financial and Tax Reform. We should establish a democratically regulated and accountable system of public finance that ensures the protection of taxpayer rights and that operates through legal procedures. We need a system by which public revenues that belong to a certain level of government—central, provincial, county or local—are controlled at that level. We need major tax reform that will abolish any unfair taxes, simplify the tax system, and spread the tax burden fairly. Government officials should not be able to raise taxes, or institute new ones, without public deliberation and the approval of a democratic assembly. We should reform the ownership system in order to encourage competition among a wider variety of market participants. Social Security. We should establish a fair and adequate social security system that covers all citizens and ensures basic access to education, health care, retirement security, and employment. Protection of the Environment. We need to protect the natural environment and to promote development in a way that is sustainable and responsible to our descendents and to the rest of humanity. This means insisting that the state and its officials at all levels not only do what they must do to achieve these goals, but also accept the supervision and participation of non-governmental organizations. A Federated Republic. A democratic China should seek to act as a responsible major power contributing toward peace and development in the Asian Pacific region by approaching others in a spirit of equality and fairness. In Hong Kong and Macao, we should support the freedoms that already exist. With respect to Taiwan, we should declare our commitment to the principles of freedom and democracy and then, negotiating as equals, and ready to compromise, seek a formula for peaceful unification. We should approach disputes in the national-minority areas of China with an open mind, seeking ways to find a workable framework within which all ethnic and religious groups can flourish. We should aim ultimately at a federation of democratic communities of China. Truth in Reconciliation. We should restore the reputations of all people, including their family members, who suffered political stigma in the political campaigns of the past or who have been labeled as criminals because of their thought, speech, or faith. The state should pay reparations to these people. All political prisoners and prisoners of conscience must be released. There should be a Truth Investigation Commission charged with finding the facts about past injustices and atrocities, determining responsibility for them, upholding justice, and, on these bases, seeking social reconciliation. China, as a major nation of the world, as one of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and as a member of the UN Council on Human Rights, should be contributing to peace for humankind and progress toward human rights. Unfortunately, we stand today as the only country among the major nations that remains mired in authoritarian politics. Our political system continues to produce human rights disasters and social crises, thereby not only constricting China’s own development but also limiting the progress of all of human civilization. This must change, truly it must. The democratization of Chinese politics can be put off no longer. Accordingly, we dare to put civic spirit into practice by announcing Charter 08. We hope that our fellow citizens who feel a similar sense of crisis, responsibility, and mission, whether they are inside the government or not, and regardless of their social status, will set aside small differences to embrace the broad goals of this citizens’ movement. Together we can work for major changes in Chinese society and for the rapid establishment of a free, democratic, and constitutional country. We can bring to reality the goals and ideals that our people have incessantly been seeking for more than a hundred years, and can bring a brilliant new chapter to Chinese civilization. —translated from the Chinese by Perry Link

11月3日，中国公民冯正虎回国，在抵达上海机场后不但第八次被拒入境，边检人员和警察还用了一个多小时暴力制服了他的反抗，把他强行绑架（日本语“拉致”？）到飞机上，遣送回东京。他不得已滞留在日本成田机场入境审查大厅内，就在那儿的长凳上过夜。为了表示回国的决心，他声明放弃日本签证，谢绝了联合国让他申请难民的建议，就这么克服了生活上的困难，一直坚持下来，也不知道现在他的正当要求是否得到了批准。 这消息让我这深知我党把戏的同志都跌破了眼镜。太平洋再深也有底，我党的无赖没底，竟然连“事实上的开除国籍”的烂事都有本事干出来。须知我党可以开除谁的党籍、学籍、公职等等，但绝无可能开除某位土著公民与生俱来的国籍。这并不是什么 “普世价值观”，而是连白吃都知道的人类常识：国籍并不是某个执政党、某个政府、某个机构可以赋予的，是与生俱来的。只要本人不放弃，那就谁也无权夺走。在这点上，它比性命还结棍，我党可以剥夺某个公民的性命——刑法上不就有死刑么？但不可能剥夺某个公民的国籍，因为刑法上并无“开除国籍”的惩罚，也不可能加入此类惩罚，那理由简单到连我都不好意思解释：既然是刑法上开列的惩罚，那受罚者当然是罪犯。你开除了人家的国籍，把人家驱逐出境，岂不成了出口罪犯？莫非这就是“负责任的大国”干出来的事？既然不能开除人家的国籍，那就不能剥夺人家回国的权利，否则就是制造“中国公民无权在本国内居住”的天字第一号智力笑话，敬爱的党中央何以连这点人类常识都没有？ 动用纳税人的钱，使用暴力绑架的非法手段，强行将本国公民驱赶出境，不许人家回来，逼得联合国出于人道理由不得不建议受害者申请难民身份，这是不是动用纳税人的钱人为制造政治难民、强迫其他国家接受？这是不是为伟大祖国丢脸？莫非这就是“权为民所用”的表现？ 更何况这档子烂事从头到尾都是黑箱操作，官员们连个为何要拒绝冯先生入境的理由都说不出来。即使是苏秦张仪转世，谅他们也没本事解释这不可能解释的怪诞举措 ——冯先生若是在国内犯了法，那中国政府的责任就是把他抓回去绳之以法；若是没犯法，那中国政府的责任就是保护他的行动自由，岂能非但不许他回到祖国，而且还要动用暴力把他赶出国去？ 冯先生拿的是中国护照，封面上印着烫金的中华人民共和国的国徽，那可不是装饰，而是中国政府对护照持有者的庄严承诺。凡是西方公民都知道，通过发给公民护照，政府也就做出了庄严承诺：无论他们走到天涯海角，都能享受政府提供的保护。保护侨民乃是任何一个文明政府的责任，西方政府甚至可以为此发动战争，两次鸦片战争和八国联军入侵，都是这么打起来的。而美国之所以卷入第一次世界大战，就是因为德国潜水艇击沉了英国邮船“卢西塔尼亚”号，使得数百美国旅客遇难。这些当然只是战争的导火索，但它们也同样反映了西方政府保护侨民的责任心。 中国政府据说是一个“负责任的大国”政府，那所谓“负责任”，当然首先是对本国公民负责任，这也包括保护海外公民的安全、幸福和自由不受非法侵犯。而今中国政府却反文明之道而行之，带头侮辱中国护照以及其上的庄严国徽，带头侵犯护照持有人的人身安全，非法剥夺人家的行动自由，如此敢于和善于侮辱自己的政府，还恬恬然不知受辱，老芦无知，还真不知道世界史上有第二例。 看看冯先生，其他被我党慷慨遗忘与无视的海外侨民大可告慰。 2009 年2月14日，中国货船“新星号”在俄罗斯纳霍德卡港外遭到俄边防军“海岸”号军舰炮击，一名中国船员当场被打死。在返港途中，货轮因遭受重创而沉没，7 名中国船员失踪（“丧生”的同义语）。外国军舰击沉悬挂着中国国旗的货轮，对五星红旗作了最高级的侮辱，中国政府却甘之如饴，屁都不放一个，只装作天聋地哑，浑若无事人。 2009年6月18日，俄罗斯政府宣布将集中销毁价值高达20亿美元的中国“走私”商品，并要求莫斯科市尽快关闭切尔基佐沃市场。俄罗斯中国浙江同乡会会长倪吉祥对《国际先驱导报》记者表示，此举对中国公民造成的损失根本不止20亿元，而是涉及到6000个集装箱，每箱货物价在50万到100万美元之间（也就是总损失在30亿-60亿元之间），“这次华商的损失是空前的。有人跳楼，有人自杀，这么多人倾家当产，可至今什么问题也没有解决。”华商跳楼的跳楼，自杀的自杀，然而中国政府却庄敬自强，处变不惊，不说发个抗议照会，连表示关切的姿态都不曾作出一个来。 那位看官说了，冯先生既没被人打下冰海去去挣命，又不曾因财产被抢夺而跳楼，不过是在候机厅里餐过客之香风，饮机场人员代他购来的甜露而已，这算得了什么？为何还说比起他来，“新星号”船员和居俄华商差堪告慰？ 我这么说，是因为在那两次不幸事件中，侮辱中国护照上的国徽与货船上的国旗的人，毕竟是异族老毛子，并非中国人，更不是中国政府，而侮辱冯先生手持的中国护照上的国徽的人，恰是中国政府。中国政府连自己的国徽都不尊重，肆意践踏对公民作出的庄严承诺，指使边防人员带头侵犯中国公民的人身，使用暴力强暴中国公民意愿，剥夺中国公民的回国自由，将冯先生强行搬运上飞机，并当着日本飞机上的乘务员和大批外国人的面，在机舱里长期扭打拉扯，制服冯先生的反抗，直到他精疲力竭无力挣扎为止。这些代表中国的好同志亲力亲为，言传身教，为异族作出了怎样欺负中国公民的光辉示范。这当然比默认外国政府欺压杀害本国公民更混账，更令海外华人心寒齿冷。 上次国庆大阅兵，许多海外华人在网上自称看后激动得几天几夜都没睡着，那意思是盼星星，盼月亮，总算盼来祖国或母国的强大了，以后侨民或华裔再不会受异族欺侮了。在我这cynical之人看来，这些天真同志未免太自我膨胀，自作多情了些，不知道热脸未必能贴上我党的冷屁股。连白吃大概都想得过来：那强大的武力就算有用，也是拿来“平叛”“镇暴”，防“家贼”而不防外贼的，要不为何不敢对北极熊亮出干货来？ 任何一个在大陆生活过的人，只要智力正常，都该看出我党所谓对美作出的强硬姿态，其实不是出口而是内销。斯大林发明的国家模式的运转前提之一，是树立国外假想敌。这也倒罢了，我还是能充分理解并体谅党国领导的苦衷的。但既然要树假想敌，何不选上百般欺负华人的俄罗斯，而要“远攻近交”，违反地缘政治的常识去跟无害于中国的老美过不去？莫非我党也懂小留那手，知道“避实击虚”，跟老美叫阵非常安全，但决不能跟流氓政府过不去？ 据自由亚洲电台前几天报道，索马里海盗发言人表示同意接受三百五十万美元赎金，释放上月中被劫持的中国货轮“德新海”包括二十五名船员。官办《中国日报》与香港《凤凰网》都报道了这一消息，然而此后中国政府却加强了对媒体的控制，提示中共已经接受了这一要求，可能业已付钱。只是因为大阅兵刚过，而且事发后政府还大张旗鼓地出动海军去援救，如今却乖乖接受绑匪讹诈，花钱赎票，面子上下不来，所以只好使出消声的惯技来，指望国人再次发生选择性遗忘，忘记国防部在事发时拍紫了的胸脯，以及据说是早已全速开去营救的中国军舰。 其实窃以为，比起上述那些见不得人的丑事来，中国政府肯掏钱为子民赎身，乃是翻天覆地的伟大进步，应该大肆宣传才对，怎么反倒引以为耻，秘而不宣涅？看来领导那个“负责任的大国”的我党领导人的荣辱观比较别致。在他们看来，关心本国公民的安危是耻辱，迫害或默许异族迫害本国公民反倒是光荣。这种独特的荣辱观若不改变，则中国哪怕就是作了世界的龙头老大，当中国公民，拿中国护照仍然是一种耻辱，永远与光荣无缘。

任何政治领导人作为个人都不应获得人民的无条件信任。假如他实行的是对人民有利的政策，他领导人民走的是通向和平繁荣的道路，我们就应当信任他，我们信任的是他的政策和他要走的道路。假如他实行的是损害人民利益的政策，他要走的是独裁和反人民的道路，人民就应当反对他。同样人民反对的是他损害人民利益和侵害人民正当权利的政策和反人民的道路。按照民主的原则，任何权威也必须在人民的反对面前低头。

【中国信息中心12月4日斯德哥尔摩电】上月被深圳入境处拒绝入境回国、现被迫滞留瑞典的上海女作家小乔（李剑虹），于12月4日（周五）上午，就自己被 使馆拒绝换发护照和上月被中国政府拒绝入境回国之事，向中国驻瑞典使馆提出抗议。同时发表讲话，声援冯正虎先生；冯正虎先生同样因被剥夺回国权利，滞留日 本成田机场已经一个月了。

最近看到大使馆的提示：

为什么要争夺钓鱼岛？10万个为什么？！看见媒体的疲劳轰炸，政府三天两头出来抛头露面一下，那些都是纳税人的血汗钱，麻烦你们节省一些，好不好。

官方说法为了资源和主权。

中国人总喜欢以元朝疆域而自豪，我认为这是不可思议的认知。中国的历史是怎么教育的？当时的中国已经灭亡了，全部汉人做了亡国奴，难道我们不觉得这比日本侵华还要严重吗？

硯，中文怎么用键盘写的。我小学在横滨，我们要写书法，硯是小小的，后来

China。Com看到的新闻，带有很强的主观和政治倾向，不适合大众阅读，容易误导人们。原文的链接http://military.china.com/zh_cn/critical2/23/20090728/15577416.html

波兰发生了什么事？

袁红冰（1953年－），原名袁红兵，中国自由派法学家、作家、持不同政见者。生于内蒙古呼和浩特，文革报考北京大学法律系，后任教于北京大学法学系，并担任法律系诉讼法教研室主任。在六四事件期间，袁红冰因建立“北京大学教师后援团”，支持六四天安门事件中的学生而在1994年3月2日被中国共产党秘密逮捕，以“企图颠覆社会主义制度”对他进行审讯，具体罪行有下列18项：

朱虞夫（1953年2月13日－）：浙江杭州人。1998年中国民主党开创者之一。