百家争鸣
雷声
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[雷声]->[《纽约太阳报》建议向香港“雨伞革命”领袖颁发诺贝尔和平奖]
雷声
·血腥的土改:惨绝人寰
·毛泽东是暴君这一结论不可改变
·共军绑架地主女儿在战争中冲锋
·还有什么跟着蒋公去了台湾?
·大跃进前后的社会控制
·贪官找到藏钱好地方:离岸金融中心
·贪官找到藏钱好地方:离岸金融中心
·贪官找到藏钱好地方:离岸金融中心
·不孝之子,流氓丈夫
·潘汉年与日伪特工总部
·胡适的学生吴晗被迫害致死,家破人亡 请看博讯热点:文革四十周年 (博讯北
·迫害地主违反哪项国际条约?
·毛泽东最后遗言曝光
·乌克兰推到列宁像,权贵逃跑倒戈
·关于文革的一次口述史访谈
·陈公博的自白书
·乌克兰防暴警察齐刷刷下跪道歉
·《中苏友好同盟特别协定》
·东陵大盗--八路军冀东军区
·真实的蒋宋孔陈财产情况
·荣树堂(北京)口述“土改”
·这一份长长的充满血腥气味的名单——屠杀的都是民族的精英
·裴毅然:一千八百万知青下乡真相
·各种慢性病井喷 中国人又成“东亚病夫”
·克里米亚公投结果系伪造
·吴廷易(四川)口述“土改”
·“安全岛”不宜轻言拆除
·蒙古公投的翻版----克里米亚
·马克思是奥警方的领赏告密者
·預言清朝滅亡:曾國藩和幕僚秘談錄
·国民革命军第七十四军军歌
·斯大林屠杀30万远东中国人
·“常委安全岛”不宜轻言拆除
·“常委安全岛”与政治诚信
·从“广场大妈舞”看文革流毒
·我们从小孩时就被教怎么说谎
·参加诺曼底登陆的国军52军
·越南政府听从民意不办亚运
·郑义:为唐生智辩诬兼及日本文化中的毒素
·美总统称日美安保条约含钓鱼岛
·美总统称日美安保条约含钓鱼岛
·奥巴马和李源潮对曼德拉的不同悼念/胡少江
·曾节明:毛共定都北平类同满清,中国今后必然迁都
·蒋公文集(1)
·蒋公文集(2)
·蒋公文集(2)
·蒋公文集(3)
·蒋公文集(4)
·蒋公文集(5)
·中纪委权力扩张已成党中之党
·毛泽东与米高扬密谈内容解密
·龙云投共后的结局
·嚴祖佑: 相濡无沫——父亲严独鹤的最后岁月
·大跃进期间人相食现象一瞥
·蒋公两份遗嘱曝光
·土改运动中的地主女眷/陶渭熊
·前记者揭64火烧装甲车系栽赃
·越南官媒首次纪念六四25周年
·陶铸老婆谈早期中共成员的男女关系
·中国高层罕见批评调水工程
·陈事美:张志新冤案中的新秘密
·奇闻:三庙合并,和尚尼姑同住
·陈秉安: 62年逃港大纪实
·法西斯=一切听从领袖指挥:金三像不像?
·受共产国际操纵的红色文化战线
·贺龙下令活埋东北抗日青年
·余杰:谁是手上没有沾满鲜血的人?--读陈永发《延安的阴影》
·彭小明:约法八章的骗局--中国的卡廷惨案
·触目惊心的杀人运动
·震撼人心的百万港人大游行
·香港人民真伟大!
·腐败寄生于过度扩张的国家公权力
·七一从高空看百万港人大游行
·香港占中被捕人士部分名单
·毛贼东女性朋友不完全名册
·南京将国军抗战老兵纳保障范围
·抗战阵亡国军将军名单
·爆料:郭美美为王震孙女 !
·“从西方宪法历史的演变来看中国宪政发展的前路”
·1%的家庭占全国三分一财产
·罗思义:陈寅恪之死
·刑不上常委的规则应得到尊重
·因要求官员公开财产而关押人们
·腐败从贪污权力开始
·可放弃自己权不能剥别人权利
·揽权本身就为腐败敞开大门:讨论腐败从贪污权力开始
·你可以放弃自己的权利,但不能剥夺别人的权利
·吴敬琏:腐败的实质是权力寻租
·丁学良新作:印度比中国更有优势
·林大军:再次忽悠欺骗大陆民众,绝不为反腐唱赞歌
·張三斷言:習由強勢反腐走向更專政
·屠城家族窃国掠影
·謊言起家,謊言建政,謊言治港
·纪念抗战,蒋中正功盖青史
·準的可怕 43個簡化漢字的現實預兆
·中共三位“抗日”将军战死之迷 全是蒙人
·绝不允许后代再经历这样的痛苦
·陈事美:惊人的反土改预言
·陈事美:惊人的反土改预言
·扮萌装纯恬不知耻的红二代/陈维健
·中共没有抗击日本帝国
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
《纽约太阳报》建议向香港“雨伞革命”领袖颁发诺贝尔和平奖

   美國《紐約太陽報》周二發表社論,談及香港的「雨傘革命」,認為學生領袖之一、學民思潮召集人黃之鋒,應獲頒諾貝爾和平獎。
   
   文章一開始就問「諾貝爾和平獎有年齡下限嗎?」,指出香港近日爭普選的和平運動,是由架著厚厚眼鏡的17歲學生黃之鋒領導,形容他冒著生命危險,為香港下一代爭取權利,比所謂成年人更有智慧。
   
   社論強調,經濟自由和政治自由並無分別,並引用美國前總統卡特名言:「偉大的民主國家不是因為強大繁榮而自由。我相信我們是因為自由而強大繁榮、具影響力。」文章讚黃之鋒深明這個道理,但比他年長的人卻不能,強調「我們應頒諾貝爾獎給他,這是他應得的」。(施旖婕/綜合報導)


   
   A Nobel Prize for Hong Kong
   Editorial of The New York Sun | October 7, 2014
   
   
   Is there a minimum age for winning the Nobel Prize for Peace? We ask because of the astounding events that are unfolding at Hong Kong. They are being led by a young student with — as William McGurn pointed out on Mary Kissel’s broadcast for the Wall Street Journal — thick spectacles and a bowl haircut. He’s risking his own life to emerge at the head of a protest seeking to claim for his generation their future rights. He’s Joshua Wong, 17 years old. How can he be so much wiser than all the so-called adults in communist China?
   
   It’s not just the communists. Fifty-nine financial leaders have reportedly just signed a letter to the protestors. “Disrupting the social order of Hong Kong is not helpful to the development and discussion of the political reforms,” they harrumphed. “Nor would it solve any problem.” Among the signatories, according to the South China Morning Post, are some of the most powerful bankers in the city. “If the situation continues to worsen, the success made after the hard work and efforts of generations of Hong Kong people would go down to the drain. The victims will be Hong Kong people.”
   
   What balderdash. If the people of Hong Kong will be the “victims” of this trouble, who is the perpetrator? Not the protestors, for sure. They are peaceful, middle-class youths (and no doubt some who are upper class and lower class) seeking to redeem promises that Red China made by binding international treaty, on file with the United Nations. Democracy. Mr. McGurn pointed out that this is nothing like the “Occupy” protests that struck in New York. They were a Marxist movement, like the democracy-denying communists in Beijing. The communists are the threat to Hong Kong’s people.
   
   The financiers’ letter reminds us of the notorious statement in the 1980s by Thomas Thebald, head of international banking for Citibank. It was the time when bank lending to communist Poland and other regimes in the Soviet bloc was being uncovered and was emerging as a political issue. “Who knows what political system works,” Mr. Theobald said. “The only test we care about is: Can they pay their bills?” The cynicism — not to say ignorance — of the statement shocked America’s intelligentsia, among others, as the Reagan revolution was gathering steam.
   
   It’s a footnote to this story — but an important one — that the Wall Street Journal is in the thick of it across two generations. It is the journalistic tribune whose motto is “free people and free markets.” The message was taken into Asia in 1976 via its Asian Wall Street Journal, its first overseas edition. (Its visionary editor, Peter Kann, ended up as chairman of the home company.) It was a time when the establishment mantra was build the economy first and political freedom will follow. It was a invitation to tyranny.
   
   What the Journal stressed is this: There is no difference — none — between economic freedom and political freedom. They are the same thing, the warp and woof in the fabric of freedom. This is not a Republican or a Democratic point. One of the best articulators of the principle was President Jimmy Carter, who, speaking at Notre Dame, declared: “The great democracies are not free because we are strong and prosperous. I believe we are strong and influential and prosperous because we are free.” It’s one of those mysteries how 17-year-old Joshua Wong can grasp this point when his elders can’t. But we say give him the Nobel Prize. He’s earned it.
   
   来源:The New York Sun
(2014/10/08 发表)
blog comments powered by Disqus

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场