分類: 評論

關心兩岸問題的人，都知道兩岸和平是共同的最高原則。然而台獨無法和平，若統一則可能被統一而改變生活方式，因此絕大多數希望的是保持現狀，而現狀在法制面台灣的中華民國憲法是統一憲法，實際面兩岸分治，若兩岸都有不動武解決問題的共識下，確實有可能保持和平共榮到下一個階段。

很自然，在台灣有選舉需求者，就不可能朝向被統一的方向走，因此剩下的就是訴諸民粹的台獨以及維持現狀的華獨。

個人一直相信。統獨完全是民粹議題，因為現狀就是統一但分治，沒有獨的問題。完全是要戰還是要和而已，但對岸談統，而台灣談的統也越來越與對岸對焦，因此在台灣談統成為中共同路人，成為紅統。

兩岸和平，才是目標。若武統，代表統也要戰，有甚麼好談? 打就是了，子彈打過來不會分誰是統派誰是獨派。因此武統與台獨一樣，絕對是兩岸和平共同的敵人。

當前的國民黨已經沒有中道路線，明顯判斷抗中路線是主流，所以想搶抗中選票。但這樣的對抗路線，等於放棄了原本好不容易才將兩岸帶往和平的和談路線。和平才是兩岸真正的出路，自連戰主席的破冰之行，經2008-2016之間的兩岸和平互動簽署的各項協議，這些都是鐵證。

新冠肺炎在疫苗現世後，進入後疫情時代。而兩岸關係中最重要的基礎，是兩岸人民的情感是否存在，到底台灣民眾對兩岸情感的狀況是否已經惡化，甚至過了可以回頭的拐點？ 還是有甚麼思維可以突破目前這種民粹的反中思維？
這是我目前想找的答案與方向

一些人確實不關心，一些人認為不可能打，一些人認為維持現在就好。

不關心的人是因為什麼？ 無力感？
認為不可能打是為什麼？ 無知還是盲目？
希望維持現狀的人又相信甚麼？
現狀必須要兩岸共同維持，而維持的基礎正是兩岸一中或是國際社會上的一中原則。

洪秀柱主席推動護憲保台，其實有很強的和平主義的思維作為基底。希望上一代對兩岸和平的期盼，能在藍軍中新一代的政治人物心中埋下種苗。

The Centenary Celebration of the Communist Party of China Seeing Cross-Strait Peace and Future

Those who care about cross-strait issues know that cross-strait peace is the highest common principle. However, Taiwan independence cannot be peaceful. If it is reunified, it may change the way of life. Therefore, most hopes to maintain the status quo, and the status quo is in the legal system. Taiwan’s Constitution of the Republic of China is a unified constitution. In fact, the two sides of the strait are divided and ruled. Under the consensus of not using force to solve the problem, it is indeed possible to maintain peace and co-prosperity to the next stage.

Naturally, those who need elections in Taiwan will not be able to move in the direction of reunification. Therefore, what remains is Taiwan independence that appeals to populism and ROC independence from China that maintains the status quo.

I have always believed. Reunification and independence are entirely populist issues, because the status quo is unity but division and there is no problem of independence. It is all about war or peace, but the opposite side talks about reunification, and Taiwan’s talk about reunification is getting more and more focused on the other side. Therefore, when Taiwan talks about reunification, it has become the fellow traveler of the Communist Party of China.

Peace across the strait is the goal. If the military reunification, it means that the reunification will also fight, what is there to talk about? Just hit it, and the bullet will not distinguish who is the reunification and the independence. Therefore, military reunification, like Taiwan independence, is definitely a common enemy for peace across the strait.

The current Kuomintang has no middle road line, and obviously judges that the anti-China line is the mainstream, so it wants to grab votes for the anti-China line. But this line of confrontation is tantamount to abandoning the original line of peace talks that took the two sides of the strait to peace. Peace is the real way out for both sides of the strait. Since Chairman Lien Chan’s ice-breaking trip, the various agreements signed by the cross-strait peaceful interaction between 2008 and 2016 are ironclad evidence.

New crown pneumonia entered the post-epidemic era after the vaccine was released. And the most important basis for cross-strait relations is whether there are people’s feelings on both sides of the strait. Has the Taiwanese people’s feelings about the two sides of the strait worsened, even after a turning point that can be turned back? Or is there any thinking that can break through the current populist anti-China thinking?
This is the answer and direction I am looking for at the moment

Some people really don’t care, some think it’s impossible to fight, and some think it’s better to keep it now.

What is the reason for people who don’t care? Powerless?
Why do you think it is impossible to fight? Ignorance or blindness?
What do people who want to maintain the status quo believe?
The status quo must be maintained jointly by both sides of the strait, and the basis for maintenance is the one-China principle of the two sides of the strait or the international community.

Former Kuomintang chairman Hong Xiuzhu promoted the protection of the constitution and Taiwan. In fact, he had a strong pacifist mindset as the foundation. It is hoped that the previous generation’s expectation for cross-strait peace can be planted in the hearts of the new generation of politicians in the Blue Army.

以人民情感來看，之前執政黨自傲的對內外宣傳 Taiwan Can Help，到現在以死亡率來看為週邊國家數倍，這樣的衝突感無庸置疑。

以政治攻防來看，在野黨或評論者對執政黨批評防疫問題，只是剛好而已。在諸多準備上如篩檢、疫苗以及相關舊制所需的藥衛材，明顯不如所宣稱的【超前佈署】。

以政策作為來看，決策者並非公衛專家，包含疫苗採購上以及分配物資上的一些決策有許多政治考量，以及各類的宣傳與經費配置的不透明，因而讓政治攻防多了更多材料可用。

政策作為、政治攻防、人民情感，三者相互影響。甚至成為下向螺旋的方式交互作用，這也是近幾年台灣內部常見的模式，主因在執政者並沒有以和解為政治領導的基礎，而是製造社會分歧與社會極化取得政治利益與選票。

執政者的大方向就是衝突與分歧，當然結果也就是朝野對抗、人民對立。

這樣好嗎？當然不好，內耗甚鉅。這也是為何古人有云「骨肉之失歡，有本于至微而終至于不可解者，止由失歡之後，各自負氣，不肯先下爾。朝夕群居，不能無相失，相失之後，有一人能先下氣，與之話言，則彼此酬復，遂如平時矣。宜深思之。」 (南宋 袁采《袁氏世範》)

當然，若執政者不把全國人民當成一家人來看，自然就「下人不深，不得其真」了…

HOME TROUBLE IN TAIWAN

From the perspective of people’s sentiments, the ruling party (DPP) proudly promoted “Taiwan Can Help" internally and externally, but now the death rate is several times that of neighboring countries. This sense of conflict is beyond doubt.

From the perspective of political offense and defense, it is just coincidence that opposition parties or commentators criticized the ruling party for the epidemic prevention issue. In many preparations, such as screening, vaccines, and the medical and sanitary materials required for the old system, it is obviously not as good as the claimed “advanced deployment".

From the perspective of policy, the decision-maker is not a public health expert. There are many political considerations in the decision-making on vaccine procurement and distribution of materials, as well as the opacity of various propaganda and funding allocations, which makes more political offensive and defensive materials available. .

Policy actions, political offenses and defenses, and people’s emotions all influence each other. It has even become a downward spiral interaction. This is also a common pattern in Taiwan in recent years. The main reason is that the ruling party does not use reconciliation as the basis of political leadership, but creates social differences and social polarization to obtain political benefits and votes.

Conflict and disagreement is the general direction of those in power. Of course, the result is confrontation between the ruling party and the opposition and the opposition between the people.

Is this okay? Of course not , the internal friction is huge. This is why the ancients said, “There are those who are incomprehensible to the loss of flesh and blood. After the loss of love, each is angry and refuses to go down first. You can live in groups day and night, and you cannot lose each other. After the loss, there is One person can breathe first, and talk to each other, and then repay each other, as usual. It is better to think deeply." (Southern Song Yuan Cai)

Of course, if the ruling party does not regard the people of the whole country as a family, it will naturally be “If you are not true enough to be humble, you will not be able to get their real benefits"…