• 【人間餘話】不見深淵的校長|劉偉聰
  • 2019-07-13    

 

今世何世?今夕何夕?何物今朝薄扶林大學校長?

自7月3日「would like to condemn...」之後,四維訕笑,八方傷神。太平校長汲汲表態忠誠,忘了修辭,也忘了上庠道統應有的恢弘分寸,我們校友不賣他的帳,齊聲齊心譴責其人其文,其人及其關公撫髯籌謀多日,又來了新的一篇妙文!噫!

「Let me make it very clear that I am against violence, of any kind, by any party, at any juncture. 」連珠句式連珠炮?那是泰山崩於前而面不改容的全稱general claim,押重了注,莫非寄望呢鋪六個六,全圍,飲?!

我不是律政司司長,自當執著於字眼。Violence一字,OED解作「behaviour involving physical force intended to damage, hurt or kill...」嘗檢《牛記字源大字典》,也只道violence 源於法文拉丁,蓋指the exercise of force而已。

我們且先對太平校長疑中留情,推己及人,愛屋及烏,在字頭上僭建,將violence 解作the behaviour involving ILLEGITIMATE physical force好了,那麼他的話不過說了一番警世恆言般的analytical truth,即如「A bachelor is unmarried」而已!不仁不義不忠不孝不被允許的physical force,你我她他自當歇力against,不遺餘力,不醉無歸。那麼,依此推論,太平校長已然委婉地將「what happened on the night of 1 July」視作illegitimate(不是legal與否!),否則他那天又怎生會would like to condemn? 可目下在新聲明中又自說自話:「It was never my intention to please or to place blame」?原來to condemn不是to place blame 喎—-to place blame 這infinitive clause 真有點拗口,何不直說「not to please nor to blame」?

媽,我有啲亂。

咁太平校長宜家唔再to place blame是否即撒回先前講過的「would like to condemn」? 自從老懵懂說過「唔講就係唔存在!」以來,特府的一套ontology大概是哲學上的nominalism,講則有,不講則無,總之誓不在人前撤回,隨你不撤不散。

可是,更叫我心不能安的是,假如愛有天意,假如太平校長心上的violence正是OED上的定義,那麼他既反對一切violence,正是徹頭徹尾non violent的一位pacifist了。這種prototype的pacifism殊難 justified!打過西班牙內戰又shoot過elephant的George Orwell 二戰後寫過:

The whole theory of pacifism, if one assumes it to mean outright renunciation of violence, is open to serious objections. It is obvious that any Government that is unwilling to use force must be at the mercy of any other Government, or even of any individual, that is less scrupulous—-so that the refusal to use force simply tends to make civilised life impossible. (Pacifism and Progress, 14 February 1946)

一味的非暴力變相將一切權力奉獻給政權,不問情由,不理是非,不管這政權是民選的還是暴秦的。Orwell說,這不會是文明的進步:the aim of progress is to abolish the authority of the state, not the strengthen it!

Orwell從不喜歡Gandhi的non-violent pacifism:

It is difficult to see how Gandhi’s methods could be applied in a country where the opponents of the regime would disappear in the middle of the night and are never heard from again. (Reflection on Gandhi, January 1949)

對付大英帝國不比對付蘇共鐵幕,Orwell要比Gandhi入肉,自然不比太平校長太平。

張翔是短是長,自有公論,我更看不過眼的是他那種太容易的uncritical moral universalism,沒有depth,自然看不到the abyss of the human condition。

7月15日起 《壹週刊》只限升級壹會員閱覽
期待你繼續支持,讓我們與香港人一起撐下去!

詳情 http://bit.ly/2YBCug0