Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/123291
|
| Title: | 本土、勇武與犬儒：傘後香港的社會趨勢
Localism, Radicalism and Cynicism in Post-Umbrella Movement Hong Kong |
| Authors: | 陳健民
Chan, Kin-Man
吳木欣
Vitrierat, NG |
| Contributors: | 中國大陸研究 |
| Keywords: | 香港;雨傘運動;一國兩制;本土
Hong Kong;Umbrella Movement;One Country Two Systems;Localism |
| Date: | 2017-03 |
| Issue Date: | 2019-05-08 09:50:04 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 2014 年9 月28 日爆發的佔領中環（雨傘運動）捲入超過百萬香港市民，以非暴力公民抗命爭取真普選。佔領行動持續79 天，政府未有確切回應普選訴求，運動內部出現分裂，對運動的目標、手段、組織方式、與政府談判的策略、退場機制等都有不同意見。學生組織最後在激進力量壓力下，即使民氣已盡亦欠缺周詳組織，竟發動升級行動，結果造成多人受傷，佔領最終黯然結束。即使運動產生了重大的啟蒙作用，年輕人覺得運動是「無功而還」，甚至是徹底失敗，「傘後」彌漫著沮喪與挫敗，三種社會趨勢繼而出現。第一是「本土化」，包括本土優先、城邦自治、甚至港獨民族等思潮的湧現。不少青年覺得在「一國兩制」下已無法實現真普選，必須轉而爭取民族自決以至主權獨立。第二種趨勢是「勇武化」，主要是認為「和平理性非暴力」（和理非）的民主運動策略已經失效，必須採取更激烈的抗爭方式。2016 年農曆元旦的「魚蛋革命」（旺角騷亂），便是典型的勇武抗爭。第三種趨勢是「犬儒化」，主要是彌漫在中產階級的一種無力感，暫時隱而未發。未來中共是否延續其在2003 年後對港的高度介入政策將影響「一國兩制」的前景和這三種趨勢的結局。
The Occupy Central（Umbrella Movement）that broke out on September 28, 2014 involved more than a million people fighting for universal suffrage through non-violent civil disobedience in Hong Kong. The movement lasted 79 days with no substantial response from the government regarding the demand for political reform. The movement was then split by different ideas regarding goals, strategies, organizational structure, negotiation with government, and timing for retreat. Eventually, the student leaders under apparent pressure from the more radical forces, decided to escalate the movement by storming the government headquarter. The action was not supported by the public and resulted in a number of casualties, which triggered the clearance of the occupation by the government. Even though the movement had enlightened a generation of young people, many of whom regarded it as a complete failure. The post-Umbrella Hong Kong was very depressed and people witnessed the emergence of three social trends. First, the development of ＂localism＂ has spread ideas such as ＂Hong Kong people come first＂, ＂self-governing city-state＂ and ＂Hong Kong nation＂ or even ＂Hong Kong independence＂. Many youngsters believe that the arrangement of ＂One Country Two System＂ cannot accommodate democracy and thus necessitate a fight for ＂self-determination＂ or even sovereignty of Hong Kong. Second, radicalism spurs in many who believe that the non-violent strategy of the old democracy movement is proven too weak when confronting the Communist regime of China, and advocate a more militant tactic such as the 2016 Chinese New Year riot dubbed by the media as the ＂Fishball Revolution＂. Third, cynicism, a sense of powerlessness, prevails among the middle class. Has ＂One Country Two System＂ a future? What will these three trends lead to? The answers depend very much on whether Beijing will continue its ＂interventionist policy＂ towards Hong Kong since 2003. |
| Relation: | 中國大陸研究, 60(1), 19-36 |
| Data Type: | article |
| Appears in Collections: | [中國大陸研究 TSSCI] 期刊論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 530.pdf | 1576Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 173 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
