世界社会主义

您的当前位置:首页 > 世界社会主义

译见 | 公社:不断变化的自由 光州起义
时间:2017-9-22 17:41:00 来源:女神读书会 作者: 浏览: 623

    本文转载自微信公众号女神读书会(ID:nvshen62000)


    The Commune: Evolving Form of Freedom
    公社:不断变化的自由


    GWANGJU UPRISING
    光州起义

    Like the Paris Commune of 1871, the lesser-known Gwangju Commune of 1980 stands as a concrete embodiment of freedom’s phenomenological form.
    如同1871年巴黎公社一样,相对不为人知的1980年光州公社是自由的现象形式的一个具体体现。 


    From revolutionary armies and parliaments at the end of the 18th century, to workers’ and soldiers’ councils at the beginning of the 20th, grassroots insurgencies create new forms of power. In contrast to occupational or sectoral forms of self-government, communes—liberated spaces within which universal popular will is formulated through direct democracy and implemented by direct action—have been continually generated from below, the most famous example being the 1871 Paris Commune.
    从18世纪末的革命军和议会,到20世纪初的工人和士兵委员会,基层反抗行动创造了新的权力形式。与按照职业和部门组织的自治政府相比,公社(即普遍民意是通过直接民主制定和采取直接行动实施的解放空间)这一种形式不断地从基层产生,其中最著名的例子是1871年巴黎公社。 


    Among today’s European and American activists, there is widespread knowledge of Paris while only sparse and superficial recognition of the 1980 Gwangju Commune. One might have thought that a more contemporaneous event would be better known than its 19th century antecedent, yet, for a variety of reasons, including deeply rooted Eurocentric bias, the opposite is the case.
    在当今欧洲和美国的活动人士中,巴黎公社被广泛地了解,而对1980年光州公社却只有零星和肤浅的认知。你也许会认为一个更加接近当代的事件会比它发生在19世纪的先例更为人所知,但是由于各种各样的原因,包括根深蒂固的欧洲中心论的偏见,事实正好相反。 


    Our scant knowledge of contemporary communes can also be found in Soviet Communism’s defamation of “spontaneity”, an ideological imperative that reached such extremes that popular movements outside the control of the Communist Party were opposed from the time of Makhno.
    我们对于同时代公社有限的认识也可以在苏式社会主义对“自发性”的污名化中发现。这种污名化是出于意识形态上势在必行的事。这种做法达到了非常极端的地步,以至于从马赫诺(注:一位乌克兰无政府共产主义革命者)的时代开始不受共产党引导的群众运动是得不到支持的。 


    More recently, in 1968 France and 1977 Italy, Communist Parties opposed insurgencies and sided with governments. Insurrections in the early 20th century—in St. Petersburg and Moscow in 1917, Budapest and Bavaria in 1919, and Hamburg, Canton, and Shanghai in 1923—were led by Leninist organizations intent on seizing power. In China, Korea, and Vietnam, protracted wars led by centralized parties were vital to national liberation.
    更晚近的,就有1968年的法国和1977年的意大利,共产党并不支持反抗行动并且站到了政府一边。20世纪早期的反抗行动是由旨在夺取政权的列宁主义政党领导的,如1917年的圣彼得堡和莫斯科,1919年的布达佩斯和巴伐利亚,1923年的汉堡,广州还有上海。在中国,朝鲜和越南,通过集权制政党领导的旷日持久的战争对于民族解放至关重要。 


    Looking at the history of uprisings in the 18th and 19th centuries, one discerns a far different orientation of revolutionaries. Both Marx and Lenin enthusiastically embraced the Paris Commune as the embodiment of their aspirations. For Peter Kropotkin, the free commune became the ends and means of genuine revolution. He detested representative government and bureaucrats who sought to take upon themselves the responsibilities and rights of the people. Developing his thoughts in relation to the Paris Commune of 1871 as well as the Cartagena and Barcelona Communes that followed a few years later, Kropotkin noted that uprisings themselves inspired others to rise up—a phenomenon I understand as the eros effect. Kropotkin believed that, “Not one, or two, or tens, but hundreds of similar revolts have preceded and must precede every revolution. Without these no revolution was ever wrought.”
    通过回顾18和19世纪起义的历史,你可以看出革命者们截然不同的目标。马克思和列宁都积极地支持作为自己愿望体现的巴黎公社。对于彼得·克鲁泡特金来说,自由公社是真正革命的目的和手段。他厌恶试图将人民的责任和权利据为己有的代议制政府和官僚。通过把他的思想和1871年巴黎公社还有之后几年发生的卡塔赫纳和巴塞罗那公社联系起来,克鲁泡特金注意到起义本身会激励其他人反抗,我把这个现象理解为爱神效应。克鲁泡特金相信:“不是一次或两次,也不是几十次,而是上百次的反抗已经发生而且是必须在每一次革命之前发生。没有这些反抗的话没有哪次革命会产生效果。” 


    Like the Paris Commune, Gwangju’s historical significance is international. Its lessons apply equally well to East and West, North and South. The 1980 people’s uprising, like earlier revolutionary moments, continues to have worldwide repercussions. An example of ordinary people taking power into their own hands, it was a precursor of the Asian Wave that overthrew eight dictatorships in the six years from 1986 to 1992.
    如同巴黎公社一样,光州公社的历史意义是世界性的。它的教训同等地适用于东方和西方,北方和南方。就像更早时候的革命运动一样,1980年的人民起义继续在世界各地产生反响。这个普通民众把权力掌握在自己手中的例子是从1986年到1992年六年时间内推翻八个独裁政权的亚洲抗争浪潮的先声。 


    As the world-historical global movement of 1968 etched the contours of subsequent insurgencies—the disarmament movement in the early 1980s, vast mobilizations in Russia and Eastern Europe after 1989, the alterglobalization wave most visible in 1999 Seattle, and the 2011 global uprising (the Arab Spring, Greek anarchists, Spanish indignados, Wisconsin workers and Occupy Wall Street)—so the Paris Commune paved the way to the Gwangju Uprising, and Gwangju for subsequent waves—and not only in Asia.
    正如1968年世界历史性的全球运动刻画了随后的反抗行动的轮廓,20世纪80年代初期的裁军运动,1989年之后俄罗斯和东欧巨大的动员,在1999年的西雅图体现得最为明显的另类全球化运动浪潮,2011年全球性的起义(阿拉伯之春,希腊无政府主义者,西班牙愤怒者运动,威斯康星州的工人和占领华尔街运动)。可以说巴黎公社给光州起义铺平了道路,而光州公社为之后的浪潮创造了条件,而且不仅仅在亚洲。 


    Even when an uprising is brutally suppressed—as in both cases here—its being experienced publicly creates new desires and new needs, new fears and new hopes in people’s hearts and minds. In 1987, when South Koreans rose up in their historic 19-day June Uprising that finally overthrew the dictatorship, “Remember Gwangju!” was the key rallying cry. Two years later, on May 20, 1989, Chinese workers and students occupying Tiananmen Square invoked the memory of the Paris Commune in a joint statement in which they proclaimed that, “We will build another Wall of the Communards with our life’s blood.”
    即使当起义被残酷镇压(正如上述这些例子),起义的存在公开地在人们的心灵和思想上创造了新的愿望,新的需求,新的担忧和新的希望。1987年当韩国人民在他们历史性的最终推翻D裁~政权的历时19天的六月起义中起来反抗时,口号“铭记光州!”被人们振臂高呼。两年之后,两年后的5月20日,占领大国家广场的震旦工人和学生勾起了对巴黎公社的记忆。他们在联合声明中宣告:“我们将以我们的血再建一道巴黎公社的墙。”


    COMPARING THE PARIS COMMUNE AND THE GWANGJU UPRISING
    巴黎公社和光州起义的比较



    In both Paris and Gwangju, citizens opposed their governments and effectively gained control of major cities in which hundreds of thousands of people created popular organs of political power that efficiently replaced traditional forms of government; grassroots armed resistance was widespread; criminal behavior all but disappeared and was replaced by genuine solidarity and cooperation among the citizenry; hierarchies of class, power, and status were suspended.
    在巴黎和光州,市民与政府作斗争,并且有效地取得了主要城市的控制权。在这些主要城市,数十万人创造了高效替代传统形式政府的政治权力的人民机关。基层武装抵抗为人们普遍接受。犯罪行为全部消失并且被公民之间真正的团结和合作取代。阶级,权力和地位的等级消失了。 



    Both uprisings were produced by the accumulation of grievances against injustice and precipitated by extreme events. The Paris Commune arose in 1871 at the end of the Franco-Prussian War when the victorious Prussians advanced on the capital. When the National Assembly voted to surrender to Prussia, Parisians were disgusted.
    两次起义都是对不公的积怨所导致的,并且被极端事件所激发。巴黎公社出现在1871年普法战争的尾声,当时获胜的普鲁士人正要进军首都。当国民议会投票决定向普鲁士投降时,巴黎人十分反感。 


    With the support of 215 of the existing 260 National Guard battalions, the National Guard of Paris seized control of the city in a coup d’état on March 18. Resisting their own government’s attacks, the Communards held out for 70 days against French troops armed and aided by their Prussian conquerors. The Communards established a functioning government that coordinated defense and met Parisians’ daily needs. Twice, elections were held. Finally, on May 28, overwhelming military force crushed the uprising, and thousands were killed in a “Bloody Week” of urban warfare.
    在已有的260个国民自卫军营中的215个营的支持下,巴黎国民自卫军在3月18日的起义中夺取了城市的控制权。因为抵抗他们本国政府的攻击,公社成员与被普鲁士侵略者武装和协助的法国军队对抗了70天。巴黎公社成员们建立了一个运作良好的政权来协调城防并满足巴黎市民的日常需求。还举行了两次选举。最终在5月28日,凡尔赛政府凭借压倒性优势的武力镇压了起义,数千人在街巷战的“五月流血周”中牺牲。 


    Over a century later, the Gwangju People’s Uprising occurred at a time when the firepower of militaries was multiplied by several orders of magnitude. There was no conquering foreign army advancing on the city, but horrendous barbarity was inflicted on the people of Gwangju by elite South Korean paratrooper units pulled off the front lines with North Korea with the approval of the United States. Against flamethrowers and machine guns, thousands of people bravely fought back and drove the military out of the city.
    在一个多世纪后,光州人民起义发生的时候,军队的火力已经强大了好几个数量级。虽然没有向光州进军的外国侵略军队,但是光州人民却遭受了韩国精英伞兵部队极为可怕的暴行,这些部队是在美国的允许下从朝鲜前线上撤下来的。面对着火焰喷射器和机枪,数千人民勇敢地反击并且将军队驱逐出城。


    Inside liberated Gwangju, daily citizens’ assemblies of tens of thousands of people gave voice to years-old frustrations and pent-up aspirations of ordinary people. Local citizens’ groups maintained order and created a new type of government—one of, by, and for the people. They held their liberated space for six days, a far shorter period than the Paris Commune. During such revolutionary moments, however, time is not a key variable—at least not as we ordinarily measure it. On May 27, 1980—almost the same day that the Paris Commune was crushed 109 years earlier—the Gwangju Commune was overwhelmed by tanks, helicopters, jets and thousands of paratroopers.
    在解放的光州,每日的万人公民集会表达了普通民众长年的挫折感和压抑已久的愿望。当地公民团体维护秩序并创造了一个民有、民治、民享的新型政府。他们控制了解放区六天,这比巴黎公社短了许多。但是在这个革命运动中,时间长度并不是一个关键的因素,至少不会像我们通常衡量时间那样。在1980年的5月27日(几乎是109年前巴黎公社被镇压的同一天),光州公社被坦克,直升机,飞机还有数千伞兵镇压了。 


    In order to contain both uprisings, to prevent them from spreading, the established governments isolated them. Cut off from the provinces, the Paris Commune nevertheless found many supporters, and similar communal experiments erupted in many cites, from Marseille to Tours. In Gwangju, the revolt spread to at least sixteen neighboring sections of South Cholla province.
    为了镇压这两个起义,防止起义蔓延,当局政府采取了孤立他们的方式。即使与各省的联系被切断了,巴黎公社仍然有很多的支持者。类似的建立公社的尝试还在其他许多城市发生,从马赛到图尔。光州起义至少传播到了16个毗邻的全罗南道城市。 


    As in Paris, where Courbet participated in an artists’ group that supported the Commune in many ways—most notably by tearing down the Vendôme column—artists in Gwangju also played vital roles. Clown theater groups took a central role in MC’ing the daily rallies; Hong Sung-dam and visual artists made posters for the movement and the uprising’s daily newspaper.
    正如在巴黎,库尔贝参加了一个以许多方式支持公社的艺术家团体,其中最著名的事件是拆除旺多姆圆柱。在光州,艺术家也起到了很重要的作用。小丑戏剧团(Clown theater groups )在主持每日的集会上扮演了核心的角色。洪成潭(注:Hong Sung-dam音译,一位韩国版画家,韩国民众美术运动主导者)和其他视觉艺术家为运动制作海报和属于起义者的日报。 


    During both uprisings, women played significant roles, although they organized themselves in domains considered traditionally female within today’s patriarchal division of labor. Strong feminist sentiment emerged among women in the International Workingmen’s Association (IWA—also known as the First International) who took on care of the injured. IWA women demanded gender equality and the abolition of prostitution. They organized worker cooperatives, like the restaurant La Marmite, which served free food for indigents.
    在这两次起义中,尽管从今天的分工标准来看,当时的妇女是在传统上属于妇女的工作领域中组织起来的,但她们还是发挥了至关重要的作用。在国际工人协会(又称第一国际)中,在负责照顾伤员的妇女中出现了强烈的女权主义意识。第一国际的妇女要求性别平等和取缔卖淫。她们组织工人合作社,如为穷人提供免费食物的“La Marmite”餐厅。 


    Although barred from voting in initial elections, women were enfranchised by the Commune. In Gwangju, high school girls gathered and washed the corpses and helped care for the wounded. Although a few men were involved in cooking communal meals in Province Hall and around the city, women mainly staffed the public kitchens. While some women carried arms during the Gwangju Uprising, a separate female battalion of the National Guard fought to defend Place Blanche when the Prussians and their French allies attacked.
    尽管在最初的选举中妇女被禁止投票,但是公社仍赋予了妇女投票的权利。在光州,高中女生负责收敛和清洗罹难者遗体并帮助照看伤员。虽然在道厅和城市周围有一些男性参与到制作公共餐的工作中,但公共厨房主要还是由妇女掌管。在光州起义中有妇女携带武器。而当普鲁士军队和他们的法国盟友进攻的时候,有一支独立的国民自卫军妇女营负责保卫布兰彻广场(Place Blanche)。 


    In both cities, traitors to the uprisings and government supporters (including spies and saboteurs sent inside the Communes to disrupt and destroy them) were quite numerous. In Gwangju, government agents took the detonators from the basement of Province Hall, thereby rendering useless the dynamite brought there by Hwasun coal miners. Paris was “full” of internal enemies, and there were riots at Vendôme Place and the Bourse, instigated by “loyal” citizens in constant contact with Versailles.
    在巴黎和光州,有很多背叛起义的人和政府的支持者(包括被派到公社来搞破坏的间谍和特工)。在光州,政府特工把雷管从道厅的地下室拿了出来并把和顺煤矿矿工带来的失效炸药分发给大家。巴黎公社中“充满”了内部敌人,在旺多姆广场和交易所还有由“忠诚”市民煽动的骚乱,他们与凡尔赛宫方面不断有接触。 


    Nevertheless, the liberated realities of the Communes in Paris and Gwangju contradict the widely propagated myth that human beings are essentially evil and require strong governments to maintain order and justice. The behavior of citizens during these moments of liberation revealed an innate capacity for self-government, an instinct for peaceful cooperation.
    尽管如此,在巴黎和光州的公社带来了解放的事实,反驳了广泛传播的荒诞说法,即人性本恶,因此需要强力政府来维护秩序和正义。在这些解放运动中,市民的行为表明了人类固有的自治能力和和平合作的本能。 


    The defeated governments, not the autonomously governed people, acted with cruelty. In both 1871 and 1980, after the halcyon days of liberation were bloodily brought to an end, brutal repression was the meaning of “law and order.” Estimates of the number of people executed in the aftermath of the Paris Commune reach to 30,000, a number that does not include the thousands more who were summarily deported to distant Pacific holdings of the French Empire.
    行事残忍的,是被打败的政府,而非自治的人民。1871年和1980年,在解放后的太平日子被血腥地终结后,暴力镇压就是“法律和秩序”的代名词。在巴黎公社之后被处决的人数估计达到了3万,这个数字还不包括数千被立即驱逐到法兰西帝国控制的遥远的太平洋岛屿上的起义者。 


    In Gwangju, far fewer people were killed. Although today’s official count of the dead hovers around 200, most people then believed that at least 2,000 had been killed in the uprising. Hundreds disappeared. Even after the Gwangju Commune, the news of the uprising was so subversive that the military burned an unknown number of corpses, dumped others into unmarked graves or the sea, and destroyed its own records.
    在光州,遇害的人则少得多。尽管今天的官方统计是大约有200名罹难者,但是大部分人相信在起义中就至少有两千人牺牲。数百人在起义中失踪。即使在光州公社过后,起义的消息是如此地具有颠覆性以至于军队焚烧了数量不明的罹难者遗体,并把其他遗体丢到乱葬岗或者大海中,而且销毁了记录。 


    To prevent word of the uprising from being spoken publicly, thousands of people were arrested, and hundreds tortured as the military tried to suppress even a whisper of its murders. At least a dozen people committed suicide as they proclaimed the truth of the massacre.
    为了防止起义的消息被公开,军队试图压制关于他们罪行的一切言论,哪怕是耳语,因此数千人被捕,数百人受到拷打。至少有十几人因为宣讲大屠杀的真相而自杀。 


    Both uprisings took place after many years of economic growth. The 1872 census put the number of industrial workers in France at 44 percent of the workforce, but there were probably no more than 15 factories that employed more than 100 workers each, and an additional hundred factories employed between 20 and 50 workers. Similarly, Gwangju in 1980 was the site of many small factories, a feature typical of the transition to higher forms of industrialization.
    两次起义都发生在多年的经济增长之后。1872年人口普查显示法国产业工人的数量占到了劳动力的44%,但是雇佣超过100名工人的工厂应该不超过15家,还有上百家雇佣人数在20人到50人之间的工厂。类似地,1980年的光州也是一个有许多小工厂的城市,这是一个典型的向更高形式产业化过渡的特点。


    DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO UPRISINGS
    两次起义的不同


    In Gwangju, no preexisting armed force like the Parisian National Guard led the assault on power. Rather grassroots resistance to the brutality of the paratroopers threw forward men and women who rose to the occasion and ultimately organized themselves as the Citizens’ Army. Liberated Gwangju came into being without the contrivance of political parties or preexistent governmental bodies. In the latter part of the 20th century, the Gwangju Commune reveals people’s capacity to govern themselves far more wisely than military dictatorships or tiny elites—elected or not.
    在光州,没有像巴黎国民自卫军那样的已经存在的武装力量领导对强权的反抗活动。只有不分男女,挺身而出的市民对伞兵暴行进行基层抵抗,并最终组织起市民军。在没有政党的预先设定抑或已有的政权机构领导的情况下,光州得到了解放。在20世纪后半叶,光州公社表明人民自治远远比军事独裁或者一小撮精英统治更好,不管这些精英是否经过选举上台。


    Like the insurgents of 1789, Parisian Communards considered the churches as enemy territory. In the first week of April, more than 200 priests were arrested, mainly through neighborhood initiatives. Without anyone telling them to do so, people turned parishes into community centers, orphanages and refuges where the city’s poor could rest.
    如同1789年的反抗一样,巴黎公社成员认为教会是敌人的地盘。在4月的第一个星期,超过两百名神职人员被捕,其中大部分是被邻居自发抓捕的。在没有任何人告诉公社成员怎么去做的情况下,他们将教区改造成社区中心,孤儿院和避难所来让城市的穷人有所栖身。 


    In Gwangju, by contrast, churches significantly supported the uprising. Many churches became meeting places for their parishioners to discuss the Commune and to participate in it, and the YMCA and YWCA were convergence centers for some of the most radical insurgents. No one was executed in liberated Gwangju. In Paris, as the city was about to fall, the Archbishop of Paris and a handful of priests were executed.
    与之相反,在光州教会大力地支持起义。许多教堂成为了教区居民讨论公社和参与公社的集会地点,基督教青年会和基督教女青年会是一些最激进的反抗分子的汇合中心。在解放的光州,没有人被处决。而在巴黎,由于城市快要失守,巴黎大主教和少数神职人员被处决了。 


    The Paris Commune included people of many European nationalities. Italian, Polish, German, Swiss and even Russian expatriates participated as equals. One of the commanding generals in charge of the city’s defense was a Pole, and a Hungarian was elected to the government. While in Gwangju few foreigners were positioned—geographically or linguistically—to partake in the movement, Korean xenophilia welcomed journalists and even missionaries, who were applauded and welcomed.
    欧洲很多国家的人都参与到了巴黎公社中。不论是意大利人,波兰人,德国人,瑞士人,还是被流亡国外的俄国人都能平等地参与其中。负责城防的指挥将领中有一位是波兰人,还有一位匈牙利人当选政权成员。而在光州,很少有外国人参与其中,不论这个“外国”是地理意义上的还是语言意义上的。韩国喜接远人的传统欢迎记者和传教士的到来,这些人往往受到赞扬和接待。 


    Daily rallies of tens of thousands of people in Gwangju provided a forum for direct democracy where differences of opinion were passionately debated. People from all walks of life addressed the entire city—including leaders of criminal gangs who promised solidarity. Shoeshine boys, prostitutes, and people normally considered to be at the “bottom” of society participated as equals.
    在光州,每日的万人集会提供了一个直接民主的论坛,在这个论坛上人们热烈地讨论各种不同的观点。来自各行各业的人们遍布了整个城市,包括承诺保持团结的黑帮头目。擦皮鞋的男孩,妓女,还有通常被当作社会“底层”的人都平等地参与其中。 


    Whereas in Paris, elected leaders issued proclamations, in Gwangju people made decisions directly. Two significant such determinations were not to surrender to the military (as some advocated) and to trade the military hundreds of weapons (a tiny fraction of the thousands in the hands of the insurgents) in exchange for the release of dozens of prisoners. When the General Assembly vocalized needs that required action, groups immediately took appropriate measures. So powerfully influential and intelligent were the deliberations of these assemblies that Gwangju citizens struggled for 17 years after the uprising to realize the three demands endorsed by tens of thousands of people in 1980: punishment of those responsible for the massacre; an apology to citizens; and compensation to victims and their families.
    在巴黎,当选的领导人发表公告,而在光州人民直接作出决定。通过这种方式作出的两个重要决定是绝不向军队投降(正如一些人主张的)和通过交易数百件武器给军队来换取释放数十名俘虏,交易的武器只占起义人民手中数千件武器中的一小部分。当全体大会发出要求行动的意愿时, 各团体立刻采取适当的措施。这些集会的协商是如此的有影响力,如此的智慧,以至于光州市民能在起义之后继续抗争了17年并实现了1980年被数万民众提出的三个要求:惩罚大屠杀的相关责任人,向市民道歉,并赔偿受害人及其家属。 


    Unlike Gwangju’s general assemblies and direct democracy, a variety of representative structures existed in Paris. After the coup of March 18, the Central Committee of the National Guard immediately became the new government. Paris was full of already constituted organizations and parties, such as the First International to which Marx and Bakunin belonged, although at the beginning of the uprising its Parisian branch had no political program.
    与光州的全体大会和直接民主不同,巴黎公社中有形形色色的代议制结构。在3月18日的起义之后,国民自卫军中央委员会立刻成为了新的政权机关。巴黎充斥着各种业已存在的组织和政党,例如马克思和巴枯宁所属的第一国际,虽然在起义的初期第一国际巴黎分部并没有任何政治纲领。 


    To legitimate the Commune, elections were held on March 26, and 287,000 men voted. Ninety members of the Commune were elected—but they included fifteen government supporters and nine citizens against the government but also against the March 18 insurrection. The next day, 200,000 people attended the installation of the new government at the Hôtel de Ville (City Hall).
    为了赋予公社合法权力,3月26日举行了选举,其中有287,000人参与了投票。公社有90名成员当选,但是其中包括了15名政府支持者,还有9名当选者既反对政府又反对3月18日起义。第二天,20万民众参与了位于市政厅的新政权的筹备工作。 


    Unlike the free-flowing gatherings in Gwangju where everyone had a voice, the crowd in Paris watched as their representatives were sworn in, after which they simply left. The newly elected government proclaimed the enfranchisement of women, separation of church and state, no more night work in bakeries, no back rent for the poor, the arrest of reactionary priests, the re-opening of abandoned factories, and abolition of fines against workers—the last measure permitting workers to reclaim their tools from the city’s pawnshops.
    与光州的人人都可以畅所欲言的自由流动的聚会不同,巴黎的群众在观看了他们的代表们宣誓就职之后就离开了。新当选的政权宣布妇女拥有选举权,政教分离,面包店不再有夜班,免除穷人的欠租,逮捕反动神职人员,重新开放废弃的工厂,取消对于工人的罚款,其中最后一项措施允许工人从城市的当铺中收回他们的工具。 


    Elected representatives, however, were not the only power. Neighborhood associations acted as a “shadow government.” Three separate groups convened to make decisions at the Place de la Corderie, sometimes issuing manifestos together and at other times in opposition to each other. In many arrondissements, separate subcommittees formed and issued their own instructions.
    当选的代表们并不是唯一的权威。街坊委员会(Neighborhood associations)扮演着“影子政府”的角色。三个彼此独立的团体在绳缆广场(Place de la Corderie)集会做决定,有时他们一起发表宣言,有时观点相互对立。在许多行政区(arrondissements),独立的子委员会得以建立并发出了他们自己的指示。 


    In addition, National Guard commanders also gave independent orders to their units. Within the cacophony of directives, officers in the field sometimes received three sets of conflicting orders. As a result, the elected government was practically powerless, rivaled in military affairs by the Central Committee and diminished in political power by autonomous arrondissement associations.
    除此以外,国民自卫军的指挥官也给他们的部队下达独立的命令。在多个官方指令的干扰下,战场上的军官有时会收到三份互相冲突的命令。这样的结果就让经过选举产生的这个政权在实际中无能为力,在军事上,它被中央委员会抗衡,在政治上则被自治行政区协会削弱。 


    Tragically, the elected government was also mired in personal antagonisms among its members and depleted by elected representatives who refused to serve or resigned. Most significantly, it was weakened internally by those loyal to the old government, the bitter enemy of the Commune. Bad decisions—or a lack of any decision at all—soon became commonplace. Finally, as the representative system collapsed, on May 1, by a vote of 34 to 28, the government created a Committee of Public Safety “having authority over all…”
    可悲的是,当选政权也陷入了其成员之间的私人矛盾的泥潭中,并且被拒绝履行职务或者辞职的当选代表们所削弱。最糟糕的是,新政权被那些忠于旧政府的人从内部弱化,而旧政府正是公社的死敌。糟糕的决定,或者说根本没有任何决定的情况很快成为了常态。最终,随着代议制系统的崩溃,在5月1日,34比28 的投票情况之下,公社政权建立了一个“拥有超越其他一切权力”的公安委员会。 


    It appears that ordinary Parisians were not in favor of representative government, preferring instead direct democracy. As Prosper-Olivier Lissagaray tells us: “the popular masses, insensible to the bourgeois ideal of a municipal council, were bent on the Commune . . . What did they care for a council, even elective, but without real liberties and fettered to the state—without authority over the administration of schools and hospitals, justice and police, and altogether unfit for grappling with the social slavery of its fellow citizens?”
    这样看来,普通的巴黎人并不赞同代议制政权而更支持直接民主。正如普·利沙加勒(注:Prosper-Olivier Lissagaray,一位法国革命社会主义者,曾参与巴黎公社并著有《一八七一年公社史》,原书名《History of the Paris Commune of 1871》)告诉我们的那样:“人民群众是一心赞同公社的,对市议会的资产阶级理想无感。如果一个议会,即使是选举的,它没有真正的自由并且被束缚在国家机器上,没有管理学校,医院,司法和警察的权力,总而言之,就是不适合将同胞们从社会奴役中解放,他们(人民)又会关心议会些什么呢?” 


    Here we see the most significant dimension of Paris and Gwangju: through substantive democracy—a far more empowering system than elections to choose rulers—the people of Paris and Gwangju reveal the trajectory of future forms of freedom. While elections in Paris led to increasing centralization of power in the hands of the Committee of Public Safety, in Gwangju—despite the continual combat against the military—people resolutely maintained the communal form of deliberative democracy.
    在这里我们看到巴黎和光州最重要的方面:通过实质性民主,巴黎和光州的人民揭示了自由的未来形式的方向。其中实质性民主是一个远好于通过选举制度选择统治者的赋权系统。尽管在巴黎的选举导致了权力更加集中在公安委员会手中,但在光州,即便要和军队进行持续的斗争,人民仍坚决维护以公社形式组织的协商民主。



    THE LEGACY OF COMMUNES
    公社的遗产


    The memory of the 19th century Paris Commune affected activists in Gwangju in 1980. In the course of dozens of interviews with former fighters in Gwangju, I found many people for whom the historical memory of the Paris Commune provided inspiration. Such direct connections illustrate how the legacy of uprisings, whether in Paris or Gwangju, is to empower others to struggle in the future. In the wake of both Paris and Gwangju, people were motivated, consciously or not, to participate in future struggles.
    对19世纪巴黎公社的记忆影响了1980年光州的活动人士。在对当年参与光州起义的战士的数十次采访中,我发现巴黎公社的历史记忆给很多人提供了灵感。这样的直接将两次起义进行联系表明了巴黎起义和光州起义的遗产是如何激励其他人在未来进行斗争的。在巴黎和光州的启示下,人民将被发动起来,有意识地(或无意)积极参与到未来的斗争中。 



    In the latter half of the 20th century, the revolutionary commune reappeared—initially in opposition to real-existing Communism. As early as 1957, Cornelius Castoriadis posited the deliberative decision-making of 1956 Hungarian workers’ councils as a model. Late 20th century grassroots Asian communes also have a robust history.
    在20世纪后半叶,革命公社再次出现了,它的出现最初是为了反对真实存在的共产主义(注:指苏式集权式的社会主义,非马克思设想的最高形态)。早在1957年,柯奈留斯·卡斯托里亚迪斯(注:Cornelius Castoriadis,一位法籍希腊裔哲学家,社会评论家,曾著有《社会的想像建制》,原书名《The Imaginary Institution of Society》)认为1956年匈牙利工人委员会的审议决策是一种模式。20世纪末期,亚洲基层公社同样也具有有活力的历史。 


    Besides liberated Gwangju, massive takeovers involving direct democracy occurred at Bangkok’s Thammasat University in 1973, in ****’s Tiananmen Square in 198*, in Patan (Nepal) in 1990, and in Taipei’s Chiang Kai-shek Square in 1990. Similar 21st century communes, however paltry and malformed, emerged in Istanbul’s Taksim Square, in Cairo’s Tahrir Square and in Oaxaca’s central plaza. Like the rapid proliferation of Occupy Wall Street’s direct democracy, these insurgencies reveal people’s collective wisdom and capacity for self-government.
    除了解放的光州,涉及直接民主的大规模接管政权事件还发生在1973年的曼谷泰国国立法政大学,16年后的帝都大国家广场,1990年的尼泊尔帕坦还有1990年的台北中正广场。尽管微不足道甚至有些畸形,相似的21世纪公社出现在伊斯坦布尔的塔克西姆广场,开罗的解放广场和墨西哥瓦哈卡的中心广场。如同占领华尔街运动的直接民主的迅速扩散一样,这些反抗揭示了人民的集体智慧和实现自治的能力。 


    Looking ahead, we can expect waves of uprisings and newly generated communes to emerge on every continent. Whether or not they are synchronized and act in concert with each other may be a deciding factor in their long-term success. Today, the Paris and Gwangju Communes stand as concrete embodiments of the evolving form of freedom. They continue to provide all of us with a palpable feeling for the dignity of human beings and the possibility of freedom.
    展望未来,我们可以期待起义的浪潮和新建立的公社出现在每个大洲。他们能否取得长期成功的决定性因素在于他们能否同时行动并且互相之间步调一致。今天,巴黎公社和光州公社已经成为了不断变化的自由的具体体现。它们将继续为我们所有人提供一种显而易见的情感,这种情感是与人类尊严和实现自由的可能息息相关的。


我要评论

友情链接