From http://www.wissenburg.org/dummies.htm
We're not all academic political philosophers. There'd be a lot of people on the dole if we were, and the welfare state isn't what it used to be. Anyway - what I do for a living won't be all that evident to most visitors of this web site. I'll try to explain it on this page by answering seven questions as clearly and concisely as I can. You'll notice that particularly brevity is not one of my qualities - apologies in advance.
1. What does an academic political philosopher do all day?
Most of the time I don't 'do' political philosophy at all, if 'doing' means 'doing research'. Most of my time goes into teaching or facilitating research.
Teaching can include 'doing' philosophy, but most of the time one is busy introducing students to the existing body of literature that they need to know about before I can introduce any new contributions to the field. That does not mean that they do not 'do' philosophy - but what is new to them is usually old and familiar to me.
Facilitating research means dull things like staff and committee meetings, and the ceaseless compilation of an endless variety of work assessment reports and plans for departmental, faculty, university, national research school and national research assessment committees. But it also means fun: visiting conferences to present your own draft texts, or reading other people's drafts and commenting on them, as a friend, colleague, supervisor or anonymous referee for journals and publishers.
This fun part is also perhaps the most important work an academic can do: testing and criticising one another's work, so that it can be improved. The official publication of one's research in books or journals is only one part of this process. Unfortunately, it is also the only part of the process that bureaucrats can measure (in terms of numbers of pages 'produced'), and the only thing on which they can base their assessments of the quality of research. Hence, 'scoring' a publication is often the end of research for many of my colleagues - 'end', both as in 'aim' and as in 'finish'.
Bureaucrats cannot measure the quantity or quality of work spent on 'facilitating research', therefore it does not count, therefore it counts as wasted time. Bureaucrats do to Academia what the Nazis did to Warsaw.
Anyway, to make a long story short: when I'm not busy with these things, and manage to get away from anything that can interrupt me, and can actually concentrate - then I try to 'do' political philosophy.
2. What is political philosophy?
Political philosophy is 'philosophising' about 'the political'. OK - that begs the question.
Philosophy, at least as I see it, is the branch of 'knowledge discovery' (or 'science', but that sounds too much like natural science) that in a way precedes all other branches of knowledge - not to mention all forms of voluntary action. It investigates questions that cannot be answered in laboratories, by experiments and observation, or through opinion polls. It investigates the concepts that are used in formulating the theories tested in laboratories, experiments or opinion polls, and more generally, the concepts we use to make sense of everything and anything we do. It investigates their meaning, their validity, their value.
Political philosophy asks these questions about - surprise - everything that has to do with 'the political', the organisation and design of society.
A few simple examples: How do we 'know' that we 'know' something to be true? What is knowledge, what distinguishes it from opinion, conviction, belief, prejudice, superstition?
Or, more typical for political philosophy: What is a good society? Hence: what is 'the good'? What is so good about the good - why should we be good or live good lives? What if we cannot agree on a common good - does that necessarily imply anarchy, a war of all against all?
3. Can you be a bit more specific?
OK. One example. Let us say that the government raises taxes, saying that it will spend it on something they call 'mobility', which they interpret as 'building more roads'.
Academics and politicians, and with a bit of luck some ordinary citizens as well, usually have their doubts about government policies. Some will want to know if the government really spends the money on roads, and if it spends it efficiently and effectively. Some will want to know if the public supports the government's policy. Some will want to know if building more roads really contributes to mobility. Some will even want to know - and now it gets complicated - if this tax raise says something about whether the almighty sovereign state is still almighty, or whether it is perhaps fighting a losing battle with international regimes or against loss of control due to economic globalisation.
All of these are interesting questions, but they're not philosophical questions. They can be answered in laboratories, or through experiments or opinion polls.
The kinds of questions a political philosopher could ask are different: is mobility an end in itself or a means to something else? Is this 'something else' (liberty, economic growth, happiness?) best served by mobility - and what are the costs in terms of liberty, welfare, happiness? Is the end (whatever end) worth pursuing? Given that we differ on what ends are worth pursuing, how can we live together at all? Is the rule according to which the new tax burden is distributed a just rule? What is 'justice'? Is it that which is accidentally accepted by an accidental majority of an accidental collection of accidentally existing individuals - or is it that which can be justified in reason, independent of the gut feelings expressed in opinion polls or elections?
In brief then: political philosophy reflects on the nature of political order, and on the criteria for and conditions of a good political order - which in turn is (probably) the most important prerequisite for any life worth living.
4. If it's so important, why don't I know you?
Because I try not to go 'public' - I try not to operate beyond the academic community. I tend to avoid my 'local' (Dutch) philosophical community as well, but that has more to do with differences in academic interests.
I do not go public, I do not operate in political circles (or almost never), because politicians are seldom interested in questioning their convictions, and far more in quick and easy ways of putting their convictions into practice. I do have convictions of my own, but they are usually far too abstract to imply that I should 'absolutely' be in favour of more roads, less taxes, more prisons, less welfare or whatever.
Moreover, the public life is not my cup of tea. Democracy is ideologically more devoted than any other system to the idea that better answers to political problems can only be found through free and open debate in which the better argument wins - much like Academia. Yet to succeed in politics, one needs qualities like a lust for power, self-righteousness, commitment to one's own point of view rather than the truth, and a willingness to compromise even oneself. It is all too easy to get used to these qualities, and even turn them into virtues. I doubt if I have these qualities, but I know that I may not have the courage to resist making virtues out of them - and that is not the kind of person I want to be.
5. So what are your convictions?
Since I try to take my job seriously, I do not have any final answers, only guesses and hypotheses that I try to elaborate and test in my research. I do however draw inspiration from three ideas that I have so far failed to refute - and the more I fail, the more I believe in them.
The first is Brecht's saying that Zuerst kommt das Fressen, und dann die Moral (fodder first, morality is secondary). The second is the Enlightenment ideal of human emancipation. The third is the Aristotelian idea of virtue, interpreted as 'proper' use of one's capacities in dynamic harmony with one's social and natural environment.
I must admit that I don't rightly know what that third idea really means. It's complicated, that's for sure. I'm still working on it - I hope you'll forgive me if I ignore it for now.
As for emancipation, I am a firm believer in the Enlightenment's humanistic ideals. I consider an unexamined life, an unreflective life, to be a wasted life, and if it is a chosen path, the life of a moral coward. An examined life presumes freedom of thought, freedom of life style, and the freedom and courage to reject every prejudice, taboo and superstition. By implication, it presumes rejection of each and every instance of oppression, exploitation and ignorance, whether self-imposed or not.
But fodder comes first. For a great majority of the earth's population, the freedom to seek the life of one's choice is an unimaginable luxury. Emancipation therefore implies, in their case, empowerment, which, for the record, includes empowering them to free thinking. There can be no trading off of liberty for welfare, of empowerment for paternalism and consumerism.
Hence, in part at least, my interest in questions of justice and in the proper relation between humanity and nature.
I guess that most of this makes me a liberal (in the European sense of the word). In everyday life, however, I am a floating voter. Liberal parties tend to attract not only the greatest champions of the Enlightenment, but also bragging egotistic narrow-minded materialistic proles, company I prefer to avoid.
6. And what is the answer to It All?
Political philosophy is a branch of philosophy, and there is a common misunderstanding that philosophy can give answers to 'the questions of life' - why am I here, what is the aim of the universe, and so on. Philosophy cannot answer these questions: they are the wrong questions. They involve what is known as 'category mistakes': mixing concepts that cannot be mixed.
Examples are 'the smell of success' (it's poetic but success does not have a smell - garlic does) or 'the speed of liberty' (unless Liberty is a horse, of course). Likewise, if you've had even only theoretical instruction in human procreation, you should know that 'why am I here?' should read 'how did I get here?' - or it is a question for your parents. If this does not answer your questions of life, please join an occult branch, or save yourself time and seek professional psychiatric help. And please stop bothering philosophers.
7. If you're so smart, why ain't you rich?
I could answer this by saying that university life does not pay well, certainly not if you don't make atomic bombs, life extensions, Frankenfood, new techno-gadgets or new methods of raping the planet. I do not make anything that can be sold at an outrageous profit, i.e., by exploiting accidental advantages over buyers - nothing that can be sold with a straight face, dry eyes and a clear conscience.
I could say that, but it would not explain why I chose not to pursue any of these courses.
The right answer is that I had no choice - if I had had a choice, well... every soul probably has its price.
When I started to ask myself how I could make the best of my life, I simply got stuck trying to understand what a good life in itself is - and I made that my life. In Luther's words: I can do no other.
2011年3月18日星期五
2011年1月25日星期二
List of war apology statements issued by Japan (from Wiki)
1950s
* 1957. Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke. "We view with deep regret the vexation we caused to the people of Burma in the war just passed. In a desire to atone, if only partially, for the pain suffered, Japan is prepared to meet fully and with goodwill its obligations for war reparations. The Japan of today is not the Japan of the past, but, as its Constitution indicates, is a peace-loving nation."[7]
* 1957. Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke. "It is my official duty, and my personal desire, to express to you and through you to the people of Australia, our heartfelt sorrow for what occurred in the war."[8]
[edit] 1960s
* June 22, 1965. Minister of Foreign Affairs Shiina Etsusaburo. "In our two countries' long history there have been unfortunate times, it is truly regrettable and we are deeply remorseful" (Signing of the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea).
[edit] 1970s
* September 29, 1972. Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka. "The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war, and deeply reproaches itself. Further, the Japanese side reaffirms its position that it intends to realize the normalization of relations between the two countries from the stand of fully understanding 'the three principles for the restoration of relations' put forward by the Government of the People's Republic of China. The Chinese side expresses its welcome for this" (Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China).[9]
[edit] 1980s
* August 24, 1982. Prime Minister Zenko Suzuki. "I am painfully aware of Japan's responsibility for inflicting serious damages [on Asian nations] during the past war." "We need to recognize that there are criticisms that condemn [Japan's occupation] as invasion" (Press Conference on Textbook issue).[10]
* August 26, 1982. Chief Cabinet Secretary Kiichi Miyazawa. "1. The Japanese Government and the Japanese people are deeply aware of the fact that acts by our country in the past caused tremendous suffering and damage to the peoples of Asian countries, including the Republic of Korea (ROK) and China, and have followed the path of a pacifist state with remorse and determination that such acts must never be repeated. Japan has recognized, in the Japan-ROK Joint Communique, of 1965, that the 'past relations are regrettable, and Japan feels deep remorse,' and in the Japan-China Joint Communique, that Japan is 'keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war and deeply reproaches itself.' These statements confirm Japan's remorse and determination which I stated above and this recognition has not changed at all to this day. 2. This spirit in the Japan-ROK Joint Communique, and the Japan-China Joint Communique, naturally should also be respected in Japan's school education and textbook authorization. Recently, however, the Republic of Korea, China, and others have been criticizing some descriptions in Japanese textbooks. From the perspective of building friendship and goodwill with neighboring countries, Japan will pay due attention to these criticisms and make corrections at the Government's responsibility. 3. To this end, in relation to future authorization of textbooks, the Government will revise the Guideline for Textbook Authorization after discussions in the Textbook Authorization and Research Council and give due consideration to the effect mentioned above. Regarding textbooks that have already been authorized, Government will take steps quickly to the same effect. As measures until then, the Minister of Education, Sports, Science and Culture will express his views and make sure that the idea mentioned in 2. Above is duly reflected in the places of education. 4. Japan intends to continue to make efforts to promote mutual understanding and develop friendly and cooperative relations with neighboring countries and to contribute to the peace and stability of Asia and, in turn, of the world"(Statement on History Textbooks).[11]
* September 6, 1984. Emperor Hirohito. "It is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again." (Meeting with President Chun Doo Hwan.) [12]
* September 7, 1984. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone. "There was a period in this century when Japan brought to bear great sufferings upon your country and its people. I would like to state here that the government and people of Japan feel a deep regret for this error."[13]
* October 23, 1985. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone. "On June 6, 1945, when the UN Charter was signed in San Francisco, Japan was still fighting a senseless war with 40 nations. Since the end of the war, Japan has profoundly regretted the unleashing of rampant ultra nationalism and militarism and the war that brought great devastation to the people of many countries around the world and to our country as well" (Speech to the United Nations).
* 1989. Prime Minister Takeshita Noboru. "As we have made clear previously at repeated opportunities, the Japanese government and the Japanese people are deeply conscious of the fact that the actions of our country in the past caused suffering and loss to many people in neighboring countries. Starting from our regret and resolve not to repeat such things a second time, we have followed a course as a "Peace Nation" since then. This awareness and regret should be emphasized especially in the relationship between our countries and the Korean peninsula, our nearest neighbors both geographically and historically. At this opportunity as we face a new situation in the Korean peninsula, again, to all peoples of the globe, concerning the relationship of the past, we want to express our deep regret and sorrow (Speech in the Japanese Diet).
[edit] 1990s
* April 18, 1990. Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Nakayama. "Japan is deeply sorry for the tragedy in which these (Korean) people were moved to Sakhalin not of their own free will but by the design of the Japanese government and had to remain there after the conclusion of the war" (188th National Diet Session Lower House Committee of Foreign Affairs).[14]
* May 24, 1990. Emperor Akihito. "Reflecting upon the suffering that your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by our nation, I cannot but feel the deepest remorse" (Meeting with President Roh Tae Woo).[15]
* May 25, 1990. Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu. "I would like to take the opportunity here to humbly reflect upon how the people of the Korean Peninsula went through unbearable pain and sorrow as a result of our country's actions during a certain period in the past and to express that we are sorry" (Summit meeting with President Roh Tae Woo in Japan).[16]
* January 1, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "[Concerning the comfort women,] I apologize from the bottom of my heart and feel remorse for those people who suffered indescribable hardships" (Press conference).
* January 16, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "We the Japanese people, first and foremost, have to bear in our mind the fact that your people experienced unbearable suffering and sorrow during a certain period in the past because of our nation's act, and never forget the feeling of remorse. I, as a prime minister, would like to once again express a heartfelt remorse and apology to the people of your nation" (Speech at dinner with President Roh Tae Woo).[17]
* January 17, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "What we should not forget about relationship between our nation and your nation is a fact that there was a certain period in the thousands of years of our company when we were the victimizer and you were the victim. I would like to once again express a heartfelt remorse and apology for the unbearable suffering and sorrow that you experienced during this period because of our nation's act." Recently the issue of the so-called 'wartime comfort women' is being brought up. I think that incidents like this are seriously heartbreaking, and I am truly sorry" (Policy speech at the occasion of the visit to the Republic of Korea).[18]
* July 6, 1992. Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato. "The Government again would like to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship as so-called 'wartime comfort women,' irrespective of their nationality or place of birth. With profound remorse and determination that such a mistake must never be repeated, Japan will maintain its stance as a pacifist nation and will endeavor to build up new future-oriented relations with the Republic of Korea and with other countries and regions in Asia. As I listen to many people, I feel truly grieved for this issue. By listening to the opinions of people from various directions, I would like to consider sincerely in what way we can express our feelings to those who suffered such hardship" (Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato on the Issue of the so-called "Wartime Comfort Women" from the Korean Peninsula).[19]
* August 4, 1993. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yōhei Kōno. "Undeniably, this was an act, with the involvement of the military authorities of the day, that severely injured the honor and dignity of many women. The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women" (Statement by the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the result of the study on the issue of "comfort women"),[20]
* August 11, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "I myself believe it was a war of aggression, a war that was wrong" (First Press Conference after inauguration).[21]
* August 23, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "After 48 years from then, our nation has become one of nations that enjoy prosperity and peace. We must not forget that it is founded on the ultimate sacrifices in the last war, and a product of the achievements of the people of the previous generations. We would like to take this opportunity to clearly express our remorse for the past and a new determination to the world. Firstly at this occasion, we would like to express our deep remorse and apology for the fact that invasion and colonial rule by our nation in the past brought to bear great sufferings and sorrow upon many people" (Speech at 127th National Diet Session).[22]
* September 24, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "I used the expression war of aggression and act of aggression to express honestly my recognition which is the same as the one that the act of our nation in the past brought to bear unbearable sufferings and sorrow upon many people, and to express once again deep remorse and apology" (128th National Diet Session).[23]
* August 31, 1994. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "Japan's actions in a certain period of the past not only claimed numerous victims here in Japan but also left the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere with scars that are painful even today. I am thus taking this opportunity to state my belief, based on my profound remorse for these acts of aggression, colonial rule, and the like caused such unbearable suffering and sorrow for so many people, that Japan's future path should be one of making every effort to build world peace in line with my no-war commitment. It is imperative for us Japanese to look squarely to our history with the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere. Only with solid basis of mutual understanding and confidence that can be build through overcoming the pain on both sides, can we and the peoples of neighboring countries together clear up the future of Asia-Pacific.... On the issue of wartime 'comfort women,' which seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women, I would like to take this opportunity once again to express my profound and sincere remorse and apologies. With regard to this issue as well, I believe that one way of demonstrating such feelings of apologies and remorse is to work to further promote mutual understanding with the countries and areas concerned as well as to face squarely to the past and ensure that it is rightly conveyed to future generations. This initiative, in this sense, has been drawn up consistent with such belief" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the "Peace, Friendship, and Exchange Initiative").[24]
* June 9, 1995. House of Representatives, National Diet of Japan. "On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II, this House offers its sincere condolences to those who fell in action and victims of wars and similar actions all over the world. Solemnly reflecting upon many instances of colonial rule and acts of aggression in the modern history of the world, and recognizing that Japan carried out those acts in the past, inflicting pain and suffering upon the peoples of other countries, especially in Asia, the Members of this House express a sense of deep remorse" (Resolution to renew the determination for peace on the basis of lessons learned from history).[25]
* July 1995. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "The problem of the so-called wartime comfort women is one such scar, which, with the involvement of the Japanese military forces of the time, seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women. This is entirely inexcusable. I offer my profound apology to all those who, as wartime comfort women, suffered emotional and physical wounds that can never be closed" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the occasion of the establishment of the "Asian Women's Fund").[26]
* August 15, 1995. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "During a certain period in the not-too-distant past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly those of Asia. In the hope that no such mistake will be made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humanity, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama 'On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the war's end').[27]
* June 23, 1996. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. Hashimoto mentioned the aspects of Japan's colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula such as the forced Japanization of Korean people's name and commented "It is beyond imagination how this injured the hearts of Korean people" Hashimoto also touched on the issue of Korean comfort women and said "Nothing injured the honor and dignity of women more than this and I would like to extend words of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology" (Joint press conference at summit meeting with President Kim Young Sam in South Korea).[28]
* October 8, 1996. Emperor Akihito. "There was a period when our nation brought to bear great sufferings upon the people of the Korean Peninsula." "The deep sorrow that I feel over this will never be forgotten" (Speech at dinner with President Kim Dae Jung of the Republic of Korea).[29]
* August 28, 1997. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "I believe that Japan has learned its lessons from history and that the people of Japan widely share the view that we must learn from the past for the future, without forgetting what is behind us. The year before last, former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued these words: '... through its colonial rule and aggression, [Japan] caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. ... I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology.' I am of the same mind as the former Prime Minister. Even though there are some elements in Japan that are quite capable of arousing Chinese sentiment with their rhetoric, Japan will not become a military power in the future. Our determination to continue treading the path of a peaceful nation is self-evident to us, the Japanese people. Still, however clear this may be to us, we must continue our persistent efforts so that China and the other nations of Asia have no reason to doubt us" (Speech by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto, Seeking a New Foreign Policy Toward China).[30]
* September 6, 1997. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "In 1995, on the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II, the Government of Japan expressed its resolution through the statement by the Prime Minister, which states that during a certain period in the past, Japan's conduct caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, including China, and the Prime Minister expressed his feeling of deep remorse and stated his heartfelt apology, while giving his word to make efforts for peace. I myself was one of the ministers who was involved in drafting this statement. I would like to repeat that this is the official position of the Government of Japan. During the summit meeting that I had during my visit to China, I have made this point very clear in a frank manner to the Chinese side. Premier Li Peng said that he concurs completely with my remarks" (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Conference on: Visit of Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto to the People's Republic of China).[31]
* January 13, 1998. Press Secretary. "Statement by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto on World War II prisoners of war. Q: At the meeting last night with Prime Minister Blair, did Prime Minister Hashimoto really apologize for the prisoners of war. Spokesman Hashimoto: The important thing is that the Prime Minister of Japan expressed the feelings of deep remorse and stated heartfelt apologies to the people who suffered in World War II directly to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. This was the second meeting between Prime Minister Hashimoto and Prime Minister Blair and we considered the meeting very important, especially this year. Making use of this opportunity, Prime Minister Hashimoto expressed his remorse and apology on behalf of the Government of Japan; this is very important. Prime Minister Blair fully understands the importance of the statement made by Prime Minister Hashimoto on this issue. His press opportunities after the talks objectively reflect what the two gentlemen talked about" (Press Conference by the Press Secretary).[32]
* January 16, 1998. Press Secretary. "Apology to prisoners of war. Q: This week, Prime Minister Hashimoto apologized to British prisoners of war for actions taken during World War II. Does the Japanese Government have any plans to extend that apology to Australian prisoners of war, and if not, why not? Spokesman Tanaka: Our sense of apology and our sense of remorse was addressed to all the countries which have gone through the experiences of the last world war. You may recall that, at the time of the 50th anniversary of World War II, then-Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued a statement by the Government of Japan to express its sincere feeling of deep remorse and heartfelt apology for the damages and suffering for the one-time past of Japan. This apology was addressed universally. Since the time of this apology, Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom has been elected to his current position and has just concluded a visit to Japan. Therefore, we took the opportunity of this recent visit to once again express our feeling, so that this new bilateral relationship would be cemented in the future. Please be reminded that our apology is extended to all the countries who shared the same disastrous experiences. Q: So, are you saying that Prime Minister Hashimoto's statement from this week was just a restatement of what then-Prime Minister Murayama said on the 50th anniversary? Spokesman Tanaka: No, it is not really a restatement, but a new determination. Every time we make this type of statement, it is our expression of a new determination to build a new era together with other countries, particularly this time with Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is a young, fresh face in the international community and who has shown sufficient capability to lead that country and Europe into the 21st century. So, we wanted to share with him our perception for the new era. Q: So, you do not see a need to extend that apology to particular countries? Spokesman Tanaka: Whenever the opportunity arises and whenever necessary, we do not hesitate to renew our determination" (Press Conference by the Press Secretary).[33]
* July 15, 1998. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "The Government of Japan, painfully aware of its moral responsibility concerning the issue of so called "wartime comfort women," has been sincerely addressing this issue in close cooperation with the Asian Women's Fund which implements the projects to express the national atonement on this issue. Recognizing that the issue of comfort women, with an involvement of the Japanese military authorities at that time, was a grave affront to the honor and dignity of large numbers of women, I would like to convey to Your Excellency my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.... By the Statement of Prime Minister in 1995, the Government of Japan renewed the feelings of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology for tremendous damage and suffering caused by Japan to the people of many countries including the Netherlands during a certain period in the past. My cabinet has not modified this position at all, and I myself laid a wreath to the Indisch Monument with these feelings on the occasion of my visit to the Netherlands in June last year" (The contents of the letter of the then Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto sent to the Netherlands Prime Minister Willem Kok).[34]
* October 8, 1998. Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi. "Looking back on the relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea during this century, Prime Minister Obuchi regarded in a spirit of humility the fact of history that Japan caused, during a certain period in the past, tremendous damage and suffering to the people of the Republic of Korea through its colonial rule, and expressed his deep remorse and heartfelt apology for this fact. President Kim accepted with sincerity this statement of Prime Minister Obuchi's recognition of history and expressed his appreciation for it. He also expressed his view that the present calls upon both countries to overcome their unfortunate history and to build a future-oriented relationship based on reconciliation as well as good-neighborly and friendly cooperation" (Japan-Republic of Korea Joint Declaration A New Japan-Republic of Korea Partnership towards the Twenty-first Century).[35]
* November 26, 1998. Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi. "Both sides believe that squarely facing the past and correctly understanding history are the important foundation for further developing relations between Japan and China. The Japanese side observes the 1972 Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China and the August 15, 1995 Statement by former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious distress and damage that Japan caused to the Chinese people through its aggression against China during a certain period in the past and expressed deep remorse for this. The Chinese side hopes that the Japanese side will learn lessons from the history and adhere to the path of peace and development. Based on this, both sides will develop long-standing relations of friendship" (Japan-China Joint Declaration On Building a Partnership of Friendship and Cooperation for Peace and Development).[36]
[edit] 2000s
* August 10, 2000. Consul-General of Japan in Hong Kong Itaru Umezu. "In fact, Japan has clearly and repeatedly expressed its sincere remorse and apologies, and has dealt sincerely with reparation issues. These apologies were irrefutably expressed, in particular in Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama's official statement in 1995, which was based on a cabinet decision and which has subsequently been upheld by successive prime ministers, including Prime Minister Yoshirō Mori. Mr. Murayama said that Japan 'through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. In the hope that no such mistake be made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology'" (Japan Has Faced Its Past. Far Eastern Economic Review, August 10, 2000).[37]
* August 17, 2000. Spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan Ryuichiro Yamazaki. "The fact is that Japan has repeatedly expressed its remorse and stated its apology for wartime actions with the utmost clarity. A notable example is then Prime Minister's official statement in August 1995, based upon a Cabinet decision. In the statement, Mr. Murayama said that Japan 'through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations,' and he expressed his 'feelings of deep remorse' and stated his 'heartfelt apology.' As recently as 1998, then Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi reiterated gist of this statement to Chinese President Jiang Zeming when he paid a state visit to Japan" (Letter written in response to the article "Miffed Chinese Sue Japan Companies" in The New York Times on August 7, 2000).[38]
* August 30, 2000. Minister for Foreign Affairs Yōhei Kōno. "I believe that Japan's perception of history was clearly set out in the Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued, following a Cabinet Decision, on the fiftieth anniversary of the end of World War II. As a member of the Cabinet, I participated in the drafting of that Statement. The spirit contained therein has been carried forth by successive administrations and is now the common view of the large number of Japanese people" (Address by Minister for Foreign Affairs Yōhei Kōno During His Visit to the People's Republic of China).[39]
* April 3, 2001. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda. "Japan humbly accepts that for a period in the not too distant past, it caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations, through its colonial rule and aggression, and expresses its deep remorse and heartfelt apology for this. Such recognition has been succeeded by subsequent Cabinets and there is no change regarding this point in the present Cabinet" (Comments by the Chief Cabinet Secretary, Yasuo Fukuda on the history textbooks to be used in junior high schools from 2002).[40]
* September 8, 2001. Minister for Foreign Affairs Makiko Tanaka. "We have never forgotten that Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries during the last war. Many lost their precious lives and many were wounded. The war has left an incurable scar on many people, including former prisoners of war. Facing these facts of history in a spirit of humility, I reaffirm today our feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology expressed in the Prime Minister Murayama's statement of 1995" (Speech by Minister for Foreign Affairs Makiko Tanaka at the Ceremony in Commemoration of 50th anniversary of the Signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty).[41]
* October 15, 2001. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "During the talks, President Kim highly appreciated the words of the Prime Minister Koizumi at Sodaemun Independence Park, in which he expressed remorse and apology for Japan's colonial domination" (Prime Minister Visits the Republic of Korea).[42]
* 2001. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi (Also signed by all the prime ministers since 1995, including Ryutaro Hashimoto, Keizō Obuchi, Yoshirō Mori). "As Prime Minister of Japan, I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. We must not evade the weight of the past, nor should we evade our responsibilities for the future. I believe that our country, painfully aware of its moral responsibilities, with feelings of apology and remorse, should face up squarely to its past history and accurately convey it to future generations" (Letter from Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the former comfort women).[43]
* September 17, 2002. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "The Japanese side regards, in a spirit of humility, the facts of history that Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of Korea through its colonial rule in the past, and expressed deep remorse and heartfelt apology" (Japan-DPRK Pyongyang Declaration).[44]
* August 15, 2003. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "During the war, Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. On behalf of the people of Japan, I hereby renew my feelings of profound remorse as I express my sincere mourning to the victims" (Address by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi at the 58th Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead).[45]
* April 22, 2005. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "Japan squarely faces these facts of history in a spirit of humility. And with feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology always engraved in mind, Japan has resolutely maintained, consistently since the end of World War II, never turning into a military power but an economic power, its principle of resolving all matters by peaceful means, without recourse to use of force. Japan once again states its resolve to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world in the future as well, prizing the relationship of trust it enjoys with the nations of the world." (Address by the Prime Minister of Japan at the Asia-African Summit 2005).[46]
* August 15, 2005. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "In the past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. Sincerely facing these facts of history, I once again express my feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology, and also express the feelings of mourning for all victims, both at home and abroad, in the war. I am determined not to allow the lessons of that horrible war to erode, and to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world without ever again waging a war."[47]
* May 9, 2009. The Japanese government apologized through its ambassador in the U.S. to former American prisoners of war who suffered in the Bataan Death March.[48]
[edit] 2010s
* February 11, 2010. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada. "I believe what happened 100 years ago deprived Koreans of their country and national pride. I can understand the feelings of the people who lost their country and had their pride wounded," Okada said during a joint news conference with South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan. (This was a statement marking the 100th anniversary of Japan's colonial annexation of Korea, and not in reference to Japan's war acts in particular.)[49]
* August 10, 2010. Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed "deep regret over the suffering inflicted" during Japan's colonial rule over Korea. Japan's Kyodo News also reported that Cabinet members endorsed the statement. In addition, Kan said that Japan will hand over precious cultural artifacts that South Korea has been demanding. Among them are records of an ancient Korean royal dynasty[50] The South Korean government, however, only "took note" of the apology, and did not accept it.[51][52]
* September 13, 2010. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada apologized to a group of six former American soldiers who during World War II were held as prisoners of war by the Japanese, including 90-year-old Lester Tenney, a survivor of the Bataan Death March in 1942. The six and their families and the families of two deceased soldiers were invited to visit Japan at the expense of the Japanese government in a program that will see more American former prisoners of war and former prisoners of war from other countries visit Japan in the future.[53]
* December 7, 2010. Prime Minister Naoto Kan apologized for Korea's suffering under colonization as part of a statement marking the 100th anniversary of the annexation in 1910. "I express a renewed feeling of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology for the tremendous damage and suffering caused by colonial rule," Kan said. Kan said Japan colonized Korea "against the will of the Korean people" who suffered great damage to their national pride and loss of culture and sovereignty as a result and added that he wants to take an honest look at his country's past with the courage and humility to address its history. [54]
* 1957. Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke. "We view with deep regret the vexation we caused to the people of Burma in the war just passed. In a desire to atone, if only partially, for the pain suffered, Japan is prepared to meet fully and with goodwill its obligations for war reparations. The Japan of today is not the Japan of the past, but, as its Constitution indicates, is a peace-loving nation."[7]
* 1957. Prime Minister Kishi Nobusuke. "It is my official duty, and my personal desire, to express to you and through you to the people of Australia, our heartfelt sorrow for what occurred in the war."[8]
[edit] 1960s
* June 22, 1965. Minister of Foreign Affairs Shiina Etsusaburo. "In our two countries' long history there have been unfortunate times, it is truly regrettable and we are deeply remorseful" (Signing of the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea).
[edit] 1970s
* September 29, 1972. Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka. "The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war, and deeply reproaches itself. Further, the Japanese side reaffirms its position that it intends to realize the normalization of relations between the two countries from the stand of fully understanding 'the three principles for the restoration of relations' put forward by the Government of the People's Republic of China. The Chinese side expresses its welcome for this" (Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China).[9]
[edit] 1980s
* August 24, 1982. Prime Minister Zenko Suzuki. "I am painfully aware of Japan's responsibility for inflicting serious damages [on Asian nations] during the past war." "We need to recognize that there are criticisms that condemn [Japan's occupation] as invasion" (Press Conference on Textbook issue).[10]
* August 26, 1982. Chief Cabinet Secretary Kiichi Miyazawa. "1. The Japanese Government and the Japanese people are deeply aware of the fact that acts by our country in the past caused tremendous suffering and damage to the peoples of Asian countries, including the Republic of Korea (ROK) and China, and have followed the path of a pacifist state with remorse and determination that such acts must never be repeated. Japan has recognized, in the Japan-ROK Joint Communique, of 1965, that the 'past relations are regrettable, and Japan feels deep remorse,' and in the Japan-China Joint Communique, that Japan is 'keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious damage that Japan caused in the past to the Chinese people through war and deeply reproaches itself.' These statements confirm Japan's remorse and determination which I stated above and this recognition has not changed at all to this day. 2. This spirit in the Japan-ROK Joint Communique, and the Japan-China Joint Communique, naturally should also be respected in Japan's school education and textbook authorization. Recently, however, the Republic of Korea, China, and others have been criticizing some descriptions in Japanese textbooks. From the perspective of building friendship and goodwill with neighboring countries, Japan will pay due attention to these criticisms and make corrections at the Government's responsibility. 3. To this end, in relation to future authorization of textbooks, the Government will revise the Guideline for Textbook Authorization after discussions in the Textbook Authorization and Research Council and give due consideration to the effect mentioned above. Regarding textbooks that have already been authorized, Government will take steps quickly to the same effect. As measures until then, the Minister of Education, Sports, Science and Culture will express his views and make sure that the idea mentioned in 2. Above is duly reflected in the places of education. 4. Japan intends to continue to make efforts to promote mutual understanding and develop friendly and cooperative relations with neighboring countries and to contribute to the peace and stability of Asia and, in turn, of the world"(Statement on History Textbooks).[11]
* September 6, 1984. Emperor Hirohito. "It is indeed regrettable that there was an unfortunate past between us for a period in this century and I believe that it should not be repeated again." (Meeting with President Chun Doo Hwan.) [12]
* September 7, 1984. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone. "There was a period in this century when Japan brought to bear great sufferings upon your country and its people. I would like to state here that the government and people of Japan feel a deep regret for this error."[13]
* October 23, 1985. Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone. "On June 6, 1945, when the UN Charter was signed in San Francisco, Japan was still fighting a senseless war with 40 nations. Since the end of the war, Japan has profoundly regretted the unleashing of rampant ultra nationalism and militarism and the war that brought great devastation to the people of many countries around the world and to our country as well" (Speech to the United Nations).
* 1989. Prime Minister Takeshita Noboru. "As we have made clear previously at repeated opportunities, the Japanese government and the Japanese people are deeply conscious of the fact that the actions of our country in the past caused suffering and loss to many people in neighboring countries. Starting from our regret and resolve not to repeat such things a second time, we have followed a course as a "Peace Nation" since then. This awareness and regret should be emphasized especially in the relationship between our countries and the Korean peninsula, our nearest neighbors both geographically and historically. At this opportunity as we face a new situation in the Korean peninsula, again, to all peoples of the globe, concerning the relationship of the past, we want to express our deep regret and sorrow (Speech in the Japanese Diet).
[edit] 1990s
* April 18, 1990. Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Nakayama. "Japan is deeply sorry for the tragedy in which these (Korean) people were moved to Sakhalin not of their own free will but by the design of the Japanese government and had to remain there after the conclusion of the war" (188th National Diet Session Lower House Committee of Foreign Affairs).[14]
* May 24, 1990. Emperor Akihito. "Reflecting upon the suffering that your people underwent during this unfortunate period, which was brought about by our nation, I cannot but feel the deepest remorse" (Meeting with President Roh Tae Woo).[15]
* May 25, 1990. Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu. "I would like to take the opportunity here to humbly reflect upon how the people of the Korean Peninsula went through unbearable pain and sorrow as a result of our country's actions during a certain period in the past and to express that we are sorry" (Summit meeting with President Roh Tae Woo in Japan).[16]
* January 1, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "[Concerning the comfort women,] I apologize from the bottom of my heart and feel remorse for those people who suffered indescribable hardships" (Press conference).
* January 16, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "We the Japanese people, first and foremost, have to bear in our mind the fact that your people experienced unbearable suffering and sorrow during a certain period in the past because of our nation's act, and never forget the feeling of remorse. I, as a prime minister, would like to once again express a heartfelt remorse and apology to the people of your nation" (Speech at dinner with President Roh Tae Woo).[17]
* January 17, 1992. Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa. "What we should not forget about relationship between our nation and your nation is a fact that there was a certain period in the thousands of years of our company when we were the victimizer and you were the victim. I would like to once again express a heartfelt remorse and apology for the unbearable suffering and sorrow that you experienced during this period because of our nation's act." Recently the issue of the so-called 'wartime comfort women' is being brought up. I think that incidents like this are seriously heartbreaking, and I am truly sorry" (Policy speech at the occasion of the visit to the Republic of Korea).[18]
* July 6, 1992. Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato. "The Government again would like to express its sincere apology and remorse to all those who have suffered indescribable hardship as so-called 'wartime comfort women,' irrespective of their nationality or place of birth. With profound remorse and determination that such a mistake must never be repeated, Japan will maintain its stance as a pacifist nation and will endeavor to build up new future-oriented relations with the Republic of Korea and with other countries and regions in Asia. As I listen to many people, I feel truly grieved for this issue. By listening to the opinions of people from various directions, I would like to consider sincerely in what way we can express our feelings to those who suffered such hardship" (Statement by Chief Cabinet Secretary Koichi Kato on the Issue of the so-called "Wartime Comfort Women" from the Korean Peninsula).[19]
* August 4, 1993. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yōhei Kōno. "Undeniably, this was an act, with the involvement of the military authorities of the day, that severely injured the honor and dignity of many women. The Government of Japan would like to take this opportunity once again to extend its sincere apologies and remorse to all those, irrespective of place of origin, who suffered immeasurable pain and incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women" (Statement by the Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono on the result of the study on the issue of "comfort women"),[20]
* August 11, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "I myself believe it was a war of aggression, a war that was wrong" (First Press Conference after inauguration).[21]
* August 23, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "After 48 years from then, our nation has become one of nations that enjoy prosperity and peace. We must not forget that it is founded on the ultimate sacrifices in the last war, and a product of the achievements of the people of the previous generations. We would like to take this opportunity to clearly express our remorse for the past and a new determination to the world. Firstly at this occasion, we would like to express our deep remorse and apology for the fact that invasion and colonial rule by our nation in the past brought to bear great sufferings and sorrow upon many people" (Speech at 127th National Diet Session).[22]
* September 24, 1993. Prime Minister Morihiro Hosokawa. "I used the expression war of aggression and act of aggression to express honestly my recognition which is the same as the one that the act of our nation in the past brought to bear unbearable sufferings and sorrow upon many people, and to express once again deep remorse and apology" (128th National Diet Session).[23]
* August 31, 1994. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "Japan's actions in a certain period of the past not only claimed numerous victims here in Japan but also left the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere with scars that are painful even today. I am thus taking this opportunity to state my belief, based on my profound remorse for these acts of aggression, colonial rule, and the like caused such unbearable suffering and sorrow for so many people, that Japan's future path should be one of making every effort to build world peace in line with my no-war commitment. It is imperative for us Japanese to look squarely to our history with the peoples of neighboring Asia and elsewhere. Only with solid basis of mutual understanding and confidence that can be build through overcoming the pain on both sides, can we and the peoples of neighboring countries together clear up the future of Asia-Pacific.... On the issue of wartime 'comfort women,' which seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women, I would like to take this opportunity once again to express my profound and sincere remorse and apologies. With regard to this issue as well, I believe that one way of demonstrating such feelings of apologies and remorse is to work to further promote mutual understanding with the countries and areas concerned as well as to face squarely to the past and ensure that it is rightly conveyed to future generations. This initiative, in this sense, has been drawn up consistent with such belief" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the "Peace, Friendship, and Exchange Initiative").[24]
* June 9, 1995. House of Representatives, National Diet of Japan. "On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II, this House offers its sincere condolences to those who fell in action and victims of wars and similar actions all over the world. Solemnly reflecting upon many instances of colonial rule and acts of aggression in the modern history of the world, and recognizing that Japan carried out those acts in the past, inflicting pain and suffering upon the peoples of other countries, especially in Asia, the Members of this House express a sense of deep remorse" (Resolution to renew the determination for peace on the basis of lessons learned from history).[25]
* July 1995. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "The problem of the so-called wartime comfort women is one such scar, which, with the involvement of the Japanese military forces of the time, seriously stained the honor and dignity of many women. This is entirely inexcusable. I offer my profound apology to all those who, as wartime comfort women, suffered emotional and physical wounds that can never be closed" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama on the occasion of the establishment of the "Asian Women's Fund").[26]
* August 15, 1995. Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. "During a certain period in the not-too-distant past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly those of Asia. In the hope that no such mistake will be made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humanity, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology" (Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama 'On the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the war's end').[27]
* June 23, 1996. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. Hashimoto mentioned the aspects of Japan's colonial rule of the Korean Peninsula such as the forced Japanization of Korean people's name and commented "It is beyond imagination how this injured the hearts of Korean people" Hashimoto also touched on the issue of Korean comfort women and said "Nothing injured the honor and dignity of women more than this and I would like to extend words of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology" (Joint press conference at summit meeting with President Kim Young Sam in South Korea).[28]
* October 8, 1996. Emperor Akihito. "There was a period when our nation brought to bear great sufferings upon the people of the Korean Peninsula." "The deep sorrow that I feel over this will never be forgotten" (Speech at dinner with President Kim Dae Jung of the Republic of Korea).[29]
* August 28, 1997. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "I believe that Japan has learned its lessons from history and that the people of Japan widely share the view that we must learn from the past for the future, without forgetting what is behind us. The year before last, former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued these words: '... through its colonial rule and aggression, [Japan] caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. ... I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology.' I am of the same mind as the former Prime Minister. Even though there are some elements in Japan that are quite capable of arousing Chinese sentiment with their rhetoric, Japan will not become a military power in the future. Our determination to continue treading the path of a peaceful nation is self-evident to us, the Japanese people. Still, however clear this may be to us, we must continue our persistent efforts so that China and the other nations of Asia have no reason to doubt us" (Speech by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto, Seeking a New Foreign Policy Toward China).[30]
* September 6, 1997. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "In 1995, on the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II, the Government of Japan expressed its resolution through the statement by the Prime Minister, which states that during a certain period in the past, Japan's conduct caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, including China, and the Prime Minister expressed his feeling of deep remorse and stated his heartfelt apology, while giving his word to make efforts for peace. I myself was one of the ministers who was involved in drafting this statement. I would like to repeat that this is the official position of the Government of Japan. During the summit meeting that I had during my visit to China, I have made this point very clear in a frank manner to the Chinese side. Premier Li Peng said that he concurs completely with my remarks" (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Press Conference on: Visit of Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto to the People's Republic of China).[31]
* January 13, 1998. Press Secretary. "Statement by Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto on World War II prisoners of war. Q: At the meeting last night with Prime Minister Blair, did Prime Minister Hashimoto really apologize for the prisoners of war. Spokesman Hashimoto: The important thing is that the Prime Minister of Japan expressed the feelings of deep remorse and stated heartfelt apologies to the people who suffered in World War II directly to the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. This was the second meeting between Prime Minister Hashimoto and Prime Minister Blair and we considered the meeting very important, especially this year. Making use of this opportunity, Prime Minister Hashimoto expressed his remorse and apology on behalf of the Government of Japan; this is very important. Prime Minister Blair fully understands the importance of the statement made by Prime Minister Hashimoto on this issue. His press opportunities after the talks objectively reflect what the two gentlemen talked about" (Press Conference by the Press Secretary).[32]
* January 16, 1998. Press Secretary. "Apology to prisoners of war. Q: This week, Prime Minister Hashimoto apologized to British prisoners of war for actions taken during World War II. Does the Japanese Government have any plans to extend that apology to Australian prisoners of war, and if not, why not? Spokesman Tanaka: Our sense of apology and our sense of remorse was addressed to all the countries which have gone through the experiences of the last world war. You may recall that, at the time of the 50th anniversary of World War II, then-Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued a statement by the Government of Japan to express its sincere feeling of deep remorse and heartfelt apology for the damages and suffering for the one-time past of Japan. This apology was addressed universally. Since the time of this apology, Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom has been elected to his current position and has just concluded a visit to Japan. Therefore, we took the opportunity of this recent visit to once again express our feeling, so that this new bilateral relationship would be cemented in the future. Please be reminded that our apology is extended to all the countries who shared the same disastrous experiences. Q: So, are you saying that Prime Minister Hashimoto's statement from this week was just a restatement of what then-Prime Minister Murayama said on the 50th anniversary? Spokesman Tanaka: No, it is not really a restatement, but a new determination. Every time we make this type of statement, it is our expression of a new determination to build a new era together with other countries, particularly this time with Prime Minister Tony Blair, who is a young, fresh face in the international community and who has shown sufficient capability to lead that country and Europe into the 21st century. So, we wanted to share with him our perception for the new era. Q: So, you do not see a need to extend that apology to particular countries? Spokesman Tanaka: Whenever the opportunity arises and whenever necessary, we do not hesitate to renew our determination" (Press Conference by the Press Secretary).[33]
* July 15, 1998. Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto. "The Government of Japan, painfully aware of its moral responsibility concerning the issue of so called "wartime comfort women," has been sincerely addressing this issue in close cooperation with the Asian Women's Fund which implements the projects to express the national atonement on this issue. Recognizing that the issue of comfort women, with an involvement of the Japanese military authorities at that time, was a grave affront to the honor and dignity of large numbers of women, I would like to convey to Your Excellency my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women.... By the Statement of Prime Minister in 1995, the Government of Japan renewed the feelings of deep remorse and the heartfelt apology for tremendous damage and suffering caused by Japan to the people of many countries including the Netherlands during a certain period in the past. My cabinet has not modified this position at all, and I myself laid a wreath to the Indisch Monument with these feelings on the occasion of my visit to the Netherlands in June last year" (The contents of the letter of the then Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto sent to the Netherlands Prime Minister Willem Kok).[34]
* October 8, 1998. Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi. "Looking back on the relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea during this century, Prime Minister Obuchi regarded in a spirit of humility the fact of history that Japan caused, during a certain period in the past, tremendous damage and suffering to the people of the Republic of Korea through its colonial rule, and expressed his deep remorse and heartfelt apology for this fact. President Kim accepted with sincerity this statement of Prime Minister Obuchi's recognition of history and expressed his appreciation for it. He also expressed his view that the present calls upon both countries to overcome their unfortunate history and to build a future-oriented relationship based on reconciliation as well as good-neighborly and friendly cooperation" (Japan-Republic of Korea Joint Declaration A New Japan-Republic of Korea Partnership towards the Twenty-first Century).[35]
* November 26, 1998. Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi. "Both sides believe that squarely facing the past and correctly understanding history are the important foundation for further developing relations between Japan and China. The Japanese side observes the 1972 Joint Communique of the Government of Japan and the Government of the People's Republic of China and the August 15, 1995 Statement by former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama. The Japanese side is keenly conscious of the responsibility for the serious distress and damage that Japan caused to the Chinese people through its aggression against China during a certain period in the past and expressed deep remorse for this. The Chinese side hopes that the Japanese side will learn lessons from the history and adhere to the path of peace and development. Based on this, both sides will develop long-standing relations of friendship" (Japan-China Joint Declaration On Building a Partnership of Friendship and Cooperation for Peace and Development).[36]
[edit] 2000s
* August 10, 2000. Consul-General of Japan in Hong Kong Itaru Umezu. "In fact, Japan has clearly and repeatedly expressed its sincere remorse and apologies, and has dealt sincerely with reparation issues. These apologies were irrefutably expressed, in particular in Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama's official statement in 1995, which was based on a cabinet decision and which has subsequently been upheld by successive prime ministers, including Prime Minister Yoshirō Mori. Mr. Murayama said that Japan 'through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. In the hope that no such mistake be made in the future, I regard, in a spirit of humility, these irrefutable facts of history, and express here once again my feelings of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology'" (Japan Has Faced Its Past. Far Eastern Economic Review, August 10, 2000).[37]
* August 17, 2000. Spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan Ryuichiro Yamazaki. "The fact is that Japan has repeatedly expressed its remorse and stated its apology for wartime actions with the utmost clarity. A notable example is then Prime Minister's official statement in August 1995, based upon a Cabinet decision. In the statement, Mr. Murayama said that Japan 'through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations,' and he expressed his 'feelings of deep remorse' and stated his 'heartfelt apology.' As recently as 1998, then Prime Minister Keizō Obuchi reiterated gist of this statement to Chinese President Jiang Zeming when he paid a state visit to Japan" (Letter written in response to the article "Miffed Chinese Sue Japan Companies" in The New York Times on August 7, 2000).[38]
* August 30, 2000. Minister for Foreign Affairs Yōhei Kōno. "I believe that Japan's perception of history was clearly set out in the Statement by Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama issued, following a Cabinet Decision, on the fiftieth anniversary of the end of World War II. As a member of the Cabinet, I participated in the drafting of that Statement. The spirit contained therein has been carried forth by successive administrations and is now the common view of the large number of Japanese people" (Address by Minister for Foreign Affairs Yōhei Kōno During His Visit to the People's Republic of China).[39]
* April 3, 2001. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda. "Japan humbly accepts that for a period in the not too distant past, it caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations, through its colonial rule and aggression, and expresses its deep remorse and heartfelt apology for this. Such recognition has been succeeded by subsequent Cabinets and there is no change regarding this point in the present Cabinet" (Comments by the Chief Cabinet Secretary, Yasuo Fukuda on the history textbooks to be used in junior high schools from 2002).[40]
* September 8, 2001. Minister for Foreign Affairs Makiko Tanaka. "We have never forgotten that Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries during the last war. Many lost their precious lives and many were wounded. The war has left an incurable scar on many people, including former prisoners of war. Facing these facts of history in a spirit of humility, I reaffirm today our feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology expressed in the Prime Minister Murayama's statement of 1995" (Speech by Minister for Foreign Affairs Makiko Tanaka at the Ceremony in Commemoration of 50th anniversary of the Signing of the San Francisco Peace Treaty).[41]
* October 15, 2001. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "During the talks, President Kim highly appreciated the words of the Prime Minister Koizumi at Sodaemun Independence Park, in which he expressed remorse and apology for Japan's colonial domination" (Prime Minister Visits the Republic of Korea).[42]
* 2001. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi (Also signed by all the prime ministers since 1995, including Ryutaro Hashimoto, Keizō Obuchi, Yoshirō Mori). "As Prime Minister of Japan, I thus extend anew my most sincere apologies and remorse to all the women who underwent immeasurable and painful experiences and suffered incurable physical and psychological wounds as comfort women. We must not evade the weight of the past, nor should we evade our responsibilities for the future. I believe that our country, painfully aware of its moral responsibilities, with feelings of apology and remorse, should face up squarely to its past history and accurately convey it to future generations" (Letter from Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the former comfort women).[43]
* September 17, 2002. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "The Japanese side regards, in a spirit of humility, the facts of history that Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of Korea through its colonial rule in the past, and expressed deep remorse and heartfelt apology" (Japan-DPRK Pyongyang Declaration).[44]
* August 15, 2003. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "During the war, Japan caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. On behalf of the people of Japan, I hereby renew my feelings of profound remorse as I express my sincere mourning to the victims" (Address by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi at the 58th Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead).[45]
* April 22, 2005. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "Japan squarely faces these facts of history in a spirit of humility. And with feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology always engraved in mind, Japan has resolutely maintained, consistently since the end of World War II, never turning into a military power but an economic power, its principle of resolving all matters by peaceful means, without recourse to use of force. Japan once again states its resolve to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world in the future as well, prizing the relationship of trust it enjoys with the nations of the world." (Address by the Prime Minister of Japan at the Asia-African Summit 2005).[46]
* August 15, 2005. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. "In the past, Japan, through its colonial rule and aggression, caused tremendous damage and suffering to the people of many countries, particularly to those of Asian nations. Sincerely facing these facts of history, I once again express my feelings of deep remorse and heartfelt apology, and also express the feelings of mourning for all victims, both at home and abroad, in the war. I am determined not to allow the lessons of that horrible war to erode, and to contribute to the peace and prosperity of the world without ever again waging a war."[47]
* May 9, 2009. The Japanese government apologized through its ambassador in the U.S. to former American prisoners of war who suffered in the Bataan Death March.[48]
[edit] 2010s
* February 11, 2010. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada. "I believe what happened 100 years ago deprived Koreans of their country and national pride. I can understand the feelings of the people who lost their country and had their pride wounded," Okada said during a joint news conference with South Korean Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan. (This was a statement marking the 100th anniversary of Japan's colonial annexation of Korea, and not in reference to Japan's war acts in particular.)[49]
* August 10, 2010. Prime Minister Naoto Kan expressed "deep regret over the suffering inflicted" during Japan's colonial rule over Korea. Japan's Kyodo News also reported that Cabinet members endorsed the statement. In addition, Kan said that Japan will hand over precious cultural artifacts that South Korea has been demanding. Among them are records of an ancient Korean royal dynasty[50] The South Korean government, however, only "took note" of the apology, and did not accept it.[51][52]
* September 13, 2010. Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada apologized to a group of six former American soldiers who during World War II were held as prisoners of war by the Japanese, including 90-year-old Lester Tenney, a survivor of the Bataan Death March in 1942. The six and their families and the families of two deceased soldiers were invited to visit Japan at the expense of the Japanese government in a program that will see more American former prisoners of war and former prisoners of war from other countries visit Japan in the future.[53]
* December 7, 2010. Prime Minister Naoto Kan apologized for Korea's suffering under colonization as part of a statement marking the 100th anniversary of the annexation in 1910. "I express a renewed feeling of deep remorse and state my heartfelt apology for the tremendous damage and suffering caused by colonial rule," Kan said. Kan said Japan colonized Korea "against the will of the Korean people" who suffered great damage to their national pride and loss of culture and sovereignty as a result and added that he wants to take an honest look at his country's past with the courage and humility to address its history. [54]
2010年12月25日星期六
(ZZ)瓦格纳综合症
瓦格纳症”（Wagnerian Symptom）又称“音响震颤麻痹”，是指听觉、视觉神经受到德国作曲家、指挥家、诗人、作家理查·瓦格纳（Richard Wagner, 1813-1883）的作品及言论刺激后，一种常见的中枢神经系统突变心理性疾病，主要是因为位于神经系统末梢部位“黑质”中的细胞群组织发生病理性改变后多巴胺的合成减少，抑制乙酰胆碱的功能降低，同时乙酰胆碱的兴奋作用相对增强，两者失衡的结果便出现了心理情绪的“震颤麻痹 ”，具体表现为情绪波动不稳定，面对目标对象（即瓦格纳）时爱憎易极端化、偏激化、非理性化，甚至导致人生观、世界观的变异。 病理原因迄今尚未明了，可能与遗传和环境因素有关。有学者认为蛋白质、水果、乳制品等摄入不足、嗜酒、外伤、过度劳累及某些精神幻觉因素等，均可能是致病的危险因素。主要患症人群多为音乐家、哲学家、空想家甚至政治家。
病例No.1 患者姓名：路德维希·弗雷德里希-威廉 (Ludwig Friedrich Wilhelm) 别名：路德维希二世、疯子路德维希、童话国王、“我们亲爱的国王”（仅限巴伐利亚地区使用） 出生地：慕尼黑郊外宁芬堡（德国） 出生日期：1845年8月25日 职业/身份：巴伐利亚国王 患病起因：12岁时偶然读到瓦格纳音乐戏剧论著《未来艺术品》。 临床表现：从此性格忧郁内向，不问朝政，终身未娶，废寝忘食地沉迷于瓦格纳歌剧、中世纪神话传说和骑士童话中，热衷修建各种瓦格纳歌剧场景里描述的城堡宫殿；与未婚妻苏菲娅公主相处时谈论的唯一话题就是瓦格纳，而且彼此还穿着歌剧《罗恩格林》中男女主角的服饰、手持宝剑——但是后来因为忙于看瓦格纳歌剧排练和监督城堡施工而取消与其婚约；起居室均以瓦格纳乐剧中的题材人物如特里斯坦、伊索尔德、罗恩格林、纽伦堡的名歌手等形象壁画加以装饰。在起居室与勤务室之间有尚有人工钟乳石洞，这是试图模仿歌剧《汤豪舍》中的女神维纳斯之洞窟，内有小瀑布与水池。 患病期间行为：继承王位后立即派遣大臣前往慕尼黑将逃避债务、长期流亡在外的瓦格纳请进宫廷，并成为他的庇护人，替他清偿以往欠下的巨大债务，为其修建拜鲁特歌剧院以及家属别墅，之后继续为瓦格纳的音乐事业乃至家庭生活不断慷慨解囊，先后为其支出二十五万马克；1779年底至1780年冬，瓦格纳携家眷前往意大利访游了十一个月，其间仅所乘豪华包车一项花费，国王就为其偿付五千二百里拉。意大利回来后，国王亲自为他接风，并在慕尼黑安排了三场瓦格纳的歌剧演出，即《漂泊的荷兰人》、《特利斯坦和伊索尔德》和《罗恩格林》，第二天紧接着还上演了《帕西法尔》，可惜这一次国王迟到了，引起瓦格纳的不悦；最后在阿尔卑斯山崖上为他和瓦格纳的友谊建造了一座宏伟富丽的“新天鹅堡”，其中“宝座厅”按照《帕西法尔》中格拉尔庙的舞台设计，“歌唱厅”模仿《汤豪舍》中的舞台场景，卧室以《罗恩格林》中洞房为蓝本，共耗资约六百二十万马克。 经典引语：“我不爱女人，不爱父母，不爱兄弟，不爱亲戚，没有任何人让我牵挂，只有您（瓦格纳）！” 后果：一系列的奇怪行为终于导致人们对其执政能力和精神状态的怀疑，后来被医生诊断患有精神疾病，同时由于修建各种城堡（除天鹅堡外还有霍夫城堡和基姆湖城堡等）耗尽家庭和国库的资金，在1886年他被迫退位，最后神秘地溺死在天鹅堡附近的史坦贝尔格湖里，并给他的家族留下了一千四百万马克的巨额债务。 评语：他的思绪完全飘忽在另一个世界中。 症状指数：★★★★★★
病例No.2 患者姓名：安东·布鲁克纳 (Anton Bruckner) 别名：慢板音乐家 出生地：安斯斐尔登（奥地利） 出生日期：1824年9月4日 职业/身份：作曲家、教师、管风琴家 患病起因：1864年经指挥家奥托·齐茨勒介绍开始潜心研究瓦格纳音乐，次年专程赶赴慕尼黑去听《特利斯坦和伊索尔德》，造成其精神持续紧张乃至崩溃，后被送进一所疗养院治疗，几个月后才能够重新工作。 临床表现：从此更加缺乏自信，充满不安全感，自卑、谨慎、忧心忡忡；视瓦格纳为音乐之神而顶礼膜拜之，经常在瓦格纳巨大影子下面保持某种虔诚祈祷的习惯式低头姿势；创作的交响曲中开始经常出现瓦格纳大号(系由瓦格纳综合圆号和大号而发明的介乎两者之间的铜管乐器，看上去有点像圆号，但听起来有点像大号)的奇异声音，后期作品则普遍带有神经质的节奏和能量；很多作品的发展过程中经常突然中断（也许是有意而为），而且有时虎头蛇尾，草草收场（以至于指挥家富特文格勒曾激烈批评他的作品：无法一直把音乐保持在乐章开始的高水平），给人莫名其妙的感觉。 患病期间行为：拿着自己创作的第二、第三交响曲手稿当面请求瓦格纳接受，但由于与大师会面时过于激动，回家后想不起来大师当时选择了哪一部，于是写信询问：“是不是带圆号的那部？”；当他一连数小时听完《帕西法尔》后，默默地凝视着当时在场的瓦格纳，终于鼓起勇气上前跪下地去，含着眼泪表示由衷的崇拜之情；当预感到大师即将离开人世时，他在沉浸于忧伤回忆的梦中创作出那首崇高、优美的第七交响曲慢板乐章。 经典引语：“他们干吗要烧掉布伦希尔德？”（在演出《指环》最后一幕时候布鲁克纳问旁边的人——他非常关心瓦格纳的音乐，但对剧情一无所知。 后果：被人指控为“瓦格纳派”成员，遭到舆论界尤其是维也纳首席评论官爱德华·汉斯利克（此人——也是患者——将在下面介绍）连篇累牍的攻击和嘲讽，有时几乎只是为了文字消遣，也要把他拉出来痛责一番，以至于在他生前许多作品根本无法得到上演的机会，大部分时间里生活潦倒、事业惨淡。由于作品很少有演出的机会，当有些指挥要求他删去大段的音乐时，布鲁克纳从不坚持己见，删改听便，只要能排演出来便谢天谢地。据同代人回忆，在排练其第四交响曲时，著名指挥家李希特指着总谱的一个地方问布鲁克纳那是什么音，被快乐包围着的布鲁克纳竟回答说：“随便什么音，只要你喜欢。” 评语：他是个兢兢业业的好人，能写出非常棒的谐谑曲，可惜大师却经常让他精神恍惚、陷入险境。 症状指数：★★★★
病例No.3 患者姓名：雨果·沃尔夫 别名：野狼（仅限音乐评论圈内使用） 出生地：温迪施格拉茨（现属斯洛文尼亚） 出生日期：1860年3月13日 职业/身份：作曲家、剧作家、评论家 患病起因：1875年7月在维也纳音乐学院偶然遇见瓦格纳。 临床表现：从此性格乖张、脾气暴烈，对周围几乎所有人（瓦格纳除外）态度专横恶劣；极度推崇瓦格纳本人及其音乐，对巨大刺激的不和谐声响和复杂混乱的旋律线开始萌生浓厚兴趣；在学校期间成天和同班同学古斯塔夫·马勒（此人也是一名作曲家）、克次拉诺夫斯基、汉斯·罗斯（此人后来发疯）等一起热烈地讨论瓦格纳，终日在钢琴上弹奏瓦格纳的作品，同时震耳欲聋地大声演唱起来；特别喜欢将简单质朴的艺术歌曲旋律和钢琴伴奏声部切割、打磨、搅碎。 患病期间行为：在维也纳音乐学院只学习两年就因为与院长吵闹而被开除；由于除了瓦格纳以外他拒绝接受任何老师的教导，只好努力奋斗、坚持自学；受瓦格纳音乐刺激后其创作灵感时断时续，1888年到1890年间连续创作出200多首艺术歌曲，然后突然似乎无话可说，没有写出任何作品，直到1891年11月底灵感恢复，连续写出15首意大利歌曲，到了1 2月突然再度缄默，而且一直沉默长达5年之久，用他自己的话说：“我肯定地相信，这次我真完了”；成为瓦格纳派的核心成员及斗士，热烈捍卫、拥护和赞美瓦格纳的一切，包括效仿其素食主义行为（但只坚持了18个月）；坚决反对、攻击、嘲讽甚至辱骂与“瓦格纳派”对立者如作曲家勃拉姆斯（为此树敌甚多），客观地讲其中有些言辞不乏恶毒，比如在报纸上将勃拉姆斯形容成一个在破败的阁楼上用秃羽毛笔作曲的蹩脚刺猬。 经典引语：“勃拉姆斯的所有艺术歌曲、小夜曲、摇篮曲外加交响曲所表达出的感情加起来也赶不上瓦格纳作品中一次铜钹剧烈撞击的效果。” 后果：精神失常进了医院，后来企图溺河自杀而未遂，在精神和肉体的痛苦中生活了四年，于1903年去世。 评语：音乐史学家们基本上一致认为沃尔夫是人类音乐史上最悲惨、最可怜的人物。 症状指数：★★★★★
病例No.4 患者姓名：埃德华·汉斯利克 (Eduard Hanslick) 别名：汉斯利希（仅限瓦格纳使用） 出生地：布拉格（捷克） 出生日期：1825年9月11日 职业/身份：批评家、美学理论家、教授 患病起因：20岁那年在德雷斯顿观看《汤豪舍》并为之撰写长篇评论。 临床表现：开始时为瓦格纳的音乐深深感动，但后来在《维也纳报》和《新闻报》担任音乐评论员期间，立场却彻底转变，判若两人（也许是觉得受骗之后的过度反应？）；把持维也纳音乐舆论的话语权和道德制高点，旗帜鲜明地反对任何试图表现感情或听起来过于让人情绪激动的音乐——当年许多维也纳音乐学院的年轻才子如古斯塔夫·马勒就因此在校学习期间抑郁久不得志。 患病期间行为：在他的权威把持下，发动了针对“瓦格纳派”和“新德意志派”的轰轰烈烈的讨伐运动；口诛笔伐，极尽诋毁之能事，把瓦格纳连同其岳父弗朗茨·李斯特（Fra nz Liszt）指斥得一无是处，并捎带把布鲁克纳也批评得体无完肤，并试图阻止其交响乐在维也纳的任何地方上演；为抨击瓦格纳风潮而出版理论著作《论音乐的美》，确立自律论观点，认为音乐的内容就是乐音运动的形式自身，除此之外不表达任何东西（特别是情感）——该观点至今在音乐学术界仍很具有迷惑性和影响力。 经典引语：“任何追随瓦格纳的人将会折断他的颈骨。” 后果：作为臭名昭著的反动小丑角色（贝克麦瑟，即汉斯利希）被瓦格纳写入其著名乐剧《纽伦堡的名歌手》中。 评语：汉斯利克相信支配瓦格纳的音乐的全是欺骗、撒谎、暴行和兽欲——借用戴维·巴伯的那句话：人们相信他们愿意相信的。 症状指数：★★★★
病例No.5 患者姓名：弗雷德里希·威廉-尼采 (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche) 别名：狂人、太阳 出生地：洛肯镇（德国） 出生日期：1844年10月15日 职业/身份：哲学家、诗人 患病起因：中学时放假期间和朋友在家中用钢琴弹奏《特里斯坦与伊索尔德》（当时他兴奋地对妹妹伊丽莎白说：这真是美极了！你认为如何？而伊丽莎白回答：这声音让人想起狼嗥。 临床表现：从此视大师为完美的偶像，但后来立场却彻底转变，判若两人（同汉斯利克一样觉得受骗后的反应？）；渴望在这个在他看来虚无堕落的世界上寻找或者说创造出一种生存的意义，以此来肯定人的存在价值；精神状态趋向分裂化，喜欢在各种思想领域进行 “不合时宜的漫游”；崇尚暴力，反对基督教道德思想和传统的价值；怀疑一切，企图将一切推倒重来，并将狄奥尼修斯(生活上的狂欢作乐)和阿波罗(冷静调节作用)两种存在精神模式对立起来。 患病期间行为：1868年登门拜谒瓦格纳，并成为大师的门徒，后来与大师决裂；发表题献给瓦格纳的著作《悲剧的诞生》；在大师“异常强烈的刺激”下完成一部又一部哲学论著，如《偶像的黄昏》、《人性，太人性的》、《查拉图斯特拉如是说》、《善恶的彼岸》、《瓦格纳事件》、《尼采反对瓦格纳》、《看，这个人》等，在较早著作中，瓦格纳几乎被作为一个神灵或超人歌颂着，但在其后著作中，瓦格纳又成为一个“颓废者”，一条从腐败世界里溜回来的“机灵的响尾蛇”。 经典引语：前期-“实现了我们所有的希望：他（瓦格纳）是一个充实、伟大、高尚的灵魂，一个个性强烈、令人喜悦的人，值得所有人的爱。” 后期-“瓦格纳是一种病菌，他污染每件他所触摸到的东西——他让音乐变得令人作呕— —我坚信这点：瓦格纳的艺术是病态的……瓦格纳之发生作用，犹如连续使用酒精饮料，使人麻醉，使人胃液增生。” 后果：长期不被人理解的尼采由于无法忍受长时间的孤独，在都灵大街上抱住一匹正在受人虐待的马的脖子痛哭流涕，最终失去了理智，后收容在耶拿大学精神病院，但是他给西方哲学带来颤栗，而此颤栗的最后意义至今尚未被完全估价出来。 评语：如果没有瓦格纳，很难说尼采会怎样。 症状指数：★★★★★★★
病例No.6 患者姓名：豪斯顿·司徒·张伯伦 (Houston Stewart Chamberlain) 别名：古怪的英国人、先知、精神创建人（后两个称谓仅限第三帝国内使用） 出生地：朴次茅斯(英国) 出生日期：1855年9月9日 职业/身份：作家、种族主义理论家 患病起因：27岁的时候前往拜罗伊特会晤瓦格纳。 临床表现：从此将瓦格纳视为“生命中的太阳”，并在其后的一生中对作曲家的妻子科西玛保持着热情的、奴隶般的忠诚；变成一个非常敏感的人，神经官能症常常发作，而且据说他能看到“恶魔”，这些恶魔往往无情地驱使他从事新的方面的研究和继续不断的写作：有一次他从意大利回来，在一个“恶魔”的驱使之下，他中途在加尔顿下了火车，租了一间旅馆房间，关起门来有8天之久，放弃了他原来想写的关于音乐的文章，而紧张地写了一篇生物学论文(很奇怪，不是吗？)；1897年4 月1日到1898 年10月31日之间的19个月时间中，他在另一个“恶魔”的无情驱使下写出一部长达1200页的世纪末巨著《19世纪的基础》（Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts），其中详细、耐心地阐明了自己那些受到瓦格纳赞扬和鼓励的种族主义理论。 患病期间行为：成为拜罗伊特内部圈子核心成员，加入位于维也纳的瓦格纳迷俱乐部，迎娶瓦格纳之女爱娃为妻，成为瓦格纳的女婿，并从此定居拜罗伊特；先后出版论述瓦格纳的著作数种，编辑其书信集，撰写关相关论文五十余篇；继承发展了瓦格纳的种族主义和反犹观点并将之理论系统化，声称如果没有条顿人，全世界就会笼罩着永恒的黑夜，所以条顿人有权统治世界；接着着手证明耶稣不是犹太人——他的种族理论认为，耶稣其实出生于加利利，而且不能正确地发出亚拉姆语中的喉音字母，而这些“明显的迹象”都说明了耶稣有“很大比例的非闪族血统”；第一次世界大战期间加入德国国籍，对原来的祖国、协约国一方的英国进行煽动、颠覆、敌视的言论活动。 后果：第一次世界大战爆发前他的著作曾经在德国热销，但随着德国的战败和霍亨佐伦帝国的覆亡，他似乎一切希望和预言都崩溃了，而且身患重病、半身不遂，不过随着希特勒政治力量的崛起，他看到了新的希望——更何况他的著作在第二次世界大战爆发前再度热销。 评语：世界上有很多人不同意他的理论（法国学者德蒙·尔梅尔认为张伯伦的思想基本上是“卖膏药的”），可是又能把他怎么样呢？ 症状指数：★★★★★★★
病例No.7 患者姓名：阿道夫·希特勒 (Adolf Hitler) 别名：元首、沃尔夫、大独裁者 出生地：布劳瑙（奥地利） 出生日期：1889年4月20日 职业/身份：纳粹德国总理、元首兼任武装力量最高统帅、德国国家社会主义工人党领袖 患病起因：1906年11月同青年时代好友库比席克一起观看《黎恩济》演出。 临床表现：从此对瓦格纳终身崇拜，至死不谕；据他自己说：光瓦格纳的《特里斯坦与伊索尔德》就听过34遍，而且每听一遍都有新的感受；他同时能把《钮伦堡的名歌手》的第二幕的所有歌词从头到尾背出来、唱出来；他声称瓦格纳的每一部作品都给他带来了莫大的愉快，甚至表示愿意去充当瓦格纳交响乐队中的一名鼓手；逐渐将世界分成尖锐的、毫不含糊的对立面（鸽笼心理？）；继承并发扬了瓦格纳的反犹观点，对犹太人产生偏执狂般的恐惧和憎恨；极端地专注于非现实的幻想和庞大的计划中；欣赏女武神式的残酷无情的力量和成功，并时常陷入某种歇斯底里但不乏灵感四溢的特殊精神状态。 患病期间行为：在维也纳求学期间经常买站票（因经济拮据买不起坐票）去聆听瓦格纳的歌剧；成为国家领导人后极力推崇瓦格纳的音乐，以至于每逢纳粹党大会召开或群众集会上，都少不了演奏《众神的黄昏》片段——尤其是当检阅军队、人们举手行纳粹礼的时候；多次亲自登门造访拜罗伊特剧院，和瓦格纳家族后代结为知交；把拜罗伊特节日剧院作为激励部下官兵、鼓舞士气的宗教殿堂，把欣赏瓦格纳歌剧作为最高荣誉和奖赏——例如从前线回来和即将奔赴前线作战的官兵以及从事战争工业的工人都被用“帝国音乐专列火车”送到拜罗伊特免费观看《尼伯龙根指环》和《纽伦堡的名歌手》；闪击波兰、西欧、南欧、北非、前苏联，发动第二次世界大战，将《指环》中的战争、英雄、死亡、末日等场景付诸实践。 经典引语：“每个凡是想了解国家社会主义德国的人都必须首先了解瓦格纳。 后果：战争失败，希特勒在苏军攻入柏林后开枪自杀于地堡里，德国投降，世界从此被划分成东西两大阵营；由于二战期间瓦格纳的音乐经常被用作集中营中执行处决犹太人任务时的背景音乐，以色列至今仍谢绝上演瓦格纳的作品（虽然以色列开国元勋、锡安复国主义运动领导人特奥多·赫茨尔也是瓦格纳歌剧的狂热崇拜者，他最喜爱的歌剧是《汤豪舍》） 评语：瓦格纳改变的不仅仅是音乐史。 症状指数：★★★★★★★★★★
病例No.1 患者姓名：路德维希·弗雷德里希-威廉 (Ludwig Friedrich Wilhelm) 别名：路德维希二世、疯子路德维希、童话国王、“我们亲爱的国王”（仅限巴伐利亚地区使用） 出生地：慕尼黑郊外宁芬堡（德国） 出生日期：1845年8月25日 职业/身份：巴伐利亚国王 患病起因：12岁时偶然读到瓦格纳音乐戏剧论著《未来艺术品》。 临床表现：从此性格忧郁内向，不问朝政，终身未娶，废寝忘食地沉迷于瓦格纳歌剧、中世纪神话传说和骑士童话中，热衷修建各种瓦格纳歌剧场景里描述的城堡宫殿；与未婚妻苏菲娅公主相处时谈论的唯一话题就是瓦格纳，而且彼此还穿着歌剧《罗恩格林》中男女主角的服饰、手持宝剑——但是后来因为忙于看瓦格纳歌剧排练和监督城堡施工而取消与其婚约；起居室均以瓦格纳乐剧中的题材人物如特里斯坦、伊索尔德、罗恩格林、纽伦堡的名歌手等形象壁画加以装饰。在起居室与勤务室之间有尚有人工钟乳石洞，这是试图模仿歌剧《汤豪舍》中的女神维纳斯之洞窟，内有小瀑布与水池。 患病期间行为：继承王位后立即派遣大臣前往慕尼黑将逃避债务、长期流亡在外的瓦格纳请进宫廷，并成为他的庇护人，替他清偿以往欠下的巨大债务，为其修建拜鲁特歌剧院以及家属别墅，之后继续为瓦格纳的音乐事业乃至家庭生活不断慷慨解囊，先后为其支出二十五万马克；1779年底至1780年冬，瓦格纳携家眷前往意大利访游了十一个月，其间仅所乘豪华包车一项花费，国王就为其偿付五千二百里拉。意大利回来后，国王亲自为他接风，并在慕尼黑安排了三场瓦格纳的歌剧演出，即《漂泊的荷兰人》、《特利斯坦和伊索尔德》和《罗恩格林》，第二天紧接着还上演了《帕西法尔》，可惜这一次国王迟到了，引起瓦格纳的不悦；最后在阿尔卑斯山崖上为他和瓦格纳的友谊建造了一座宏伟富丽的“新天鹅堡”，其中“宝座厅”按照《帕西法尔》中格拉尔庙的舞台设计，“歌唱厅”模仿《汤豪舍》中的舞台场景，卧室以《罗恩格林》中洞房为蓝本，共耗资约六百二十万马克。 经典引语：“我不爱女人，不爱父母，不爱兄弟，不爱亲戚，没有任何人让我牵挂，只有您（瓦格纳）！” 后果：一系列的奇怪行为终于导致人们对其执政能力和精神状态的怀疑，后来被医生诊断患有精神疾病，同时由于修建各种城堡（除天鹅堡外还有霍夫城堡和基姆湖城堡等）耗尽家庭和国库的资金，在1886年他被迫退位，最后神秘地溺死在天鹅堡附近的史坦贝尔格湖里，并给他的家族留下了一千四百万马克的巨额债务。 评语：他的思绪完全飘忽在另一个世界中。 症状指数：★★★★★★
病例No.2 患者姓名：安东·布鲁克纳 (Anton Bruckner) 别名：慢板音乐家 出生地：安斯斐尔登（奥地利） 出生日期：1824年9月4日 职业/身份：作曲家、教师、管风琴家 患病起因：1864年经指挥家奥托·齐茨勒介绍开始潜心研究瓦格纳音乐，次年专程赶赴慕尼黑去听《特利斯坦和伊索尔德》，造成其精神持续紧张乃至崩溃，后被送进一所疗养院治疗，几个月后才能够重新工作。 临床表现：从此更加缺乏自信，充满不安全感，自卑、谨慎、忧心忡忡；视瓦格纳为音乐之神而顶礼膜拜之，经常在瓦格纳巨大影子下面保持某种虔诚祈祷的习惯式低头姿势；创作的交响曲中开始经常出现瓦格纳大号(系由瓦格纳综合圆号和大号而发明的介乎两者之间的铜管乐器，看上去有点像圆号，但听起来有点像大号)的奇异声音，后期作品则普遍带有神经质的节奏和能量；很多作品的发展过程中经常突然中断（也许是有意而为），而且有时虎头蛇尾，草草收场（以至于指挥家富特文格勒曾激烈批评他的作品：无法一直把音乐保持在乐章开始的高水平），给人莫名其妙的感觉。 患病期间行为：拿着自己创作的第二、第三交响曲手稿当面请求瓦格纳接受，但由于与大师会面时过于激动，回家后想不起来大师当时选择了哪一部，于是写信询问：“是不是带圆号的那部？”；当他一连数小时听完《帕西法尔》后，默默地凝视着当时在场的瓦格纳，终于鼓起勇气上前跪下地去，含着眼泪表示由衷的崇拜之情；当预感到大师即将离开人世时，他在沉浸于忧伤回忆的梦中创作出那首崇高、优美的第七交响曲慢板乐章。 经典引语：“他们干吗要烧掉布伦希尔德？”（在演出《指环》最后一幕时候布鲁克纳问旁边的人——他非常关心瓦格纳的音乐，但对剧情一无所知。 后果：被人指控为“瓦格纳派”成员，遭到舆论界尤其是维也纳首席评论官爱德华·汉斯利克（此人——也是患者——将在下面介绍）连篇累牍的攻击和嘲讽，有时几乎只是为了文字消遣，也要把他拉出来痛责一番，以至于在他生前许多作品根本无法得到上演的机会，大部分时间里生活潦倒、事业惨淡。由于作品很少有演出的机会，当有些指挥要求他删去大段的音乐时，布鲁克纳从不坚持己见，删改听便，只要能排演出来便谢天谢地。据同代人回忆，在排练其第四交响曲时，著名指挥家李希特指着总谱的一个地方问布鲁克纳那是什么音，被快乐包围着的布鲁克纳竟回答说：“随便什么音，只要你喜欢。” 评语：他是个兢兢业业的好人，能写出非常棒的谐谑曲，可惜大师却经常让他精神恍惚、陷入险境。 症状指数：★★★★
病例No.3 患者姓名：雨果·沃尔夫 别名：野狼（仅限音乐评论圈内使用） 出生地：温迪施格拉茨（现属斯洛文尼亚） 出生日期：1860年3月13日 职业/身份：作曲家、剧作家、评论家 患病起因：1875年7月在维也纳音乐学院偶然遇见瓦格纳。 临床表现：从此性格乖张、脾气暴烈，对周围几乎所有人（瓦格纳除外）态度专横恶劣；极度推崇瓦格纳本人及其音乐，对巨大刺激的不和谐声响和复杂混乱的旋律线开始萌生浓厚兴趣；在学校期间成天和同班同学古斯塔夫·马勒（此人也是一名作曲家）、克次拉诺夫斯基、汉斯·罗斯（此人后来发疯）等一起热烈地讨论瓦格纳，终日在钢琴上弹奏瓦格纳的作品，同时震耳欲聋地大声演唱起来；特别喜欢将简单质朴的艺术歌曲旋律和钢琴伴奏声部切割、打磨、搅碎。 患病期间行为：在维也纳音乐学院只学习两年就因为与院长吵闹而被开除；由于除了瓦格纳以外他拒绝接受任何老师的教导，只好努力奋斗、坚持自学；受瓦格纳音乐刺激后其创作灵感时断时续，1888年到1890年间连续创作出200多首艺术歌曲，然后突然似乎无话可说，没有写出任何作品，直到1891年11月底灵感恢复，连续写出15首意大利歌曲，到了1 2月突然再度缄默，而且一直沉默长达5年之久，用他自己的话说：“我肯定地相信，这次我真完了”；成为瓦格纳派的核心成员及斗士，热烈捍卫、拥护和赞美瓦格纳的一切，包括效仿其素食主义行为（但只坚持了18个月）；坚决反对、攻击、嘲讽甚至辱骂与“瓦格纳派”对立者如作曲家勃拉姆斯（为此树敌甚多），客观地讲其中有些言辞不乏恶毒，比如在报纸上将勃拉姆斯形容成一个在破败的阁楼上用秃羽毛笔作曲的蹩脚刺猬。 经典引语：“勃拉姆斯的所有艺术歌曲、小夜曲、摇篮曲外加交响曲所表达出的感情加起来也赶不上瓦格纳作品中一次铜钹剧烈撞击的效果。” 后果：精神失常进了医院，后来企图溺河自杀而未遂，在精神和肉体的痛苦中生活了四年，于1903年去世。 评语：音乐史学家们基本上一致认为沃尔夫是人类音乐史上最悲惨、最可怜的人物。 症状指数：★★★★★
病例No.4 患者姓名：埃德华·汉斯利克 (Eduard Hanslick) 别名：汉斯利希（仅限瓦格纳使用） 出生地：布拉格（捷克） 出生日期：1825年9月11日 职业/身份：批评家、美学理论家、教授 患病起因：20岁那年在德雷斯顿观看《汤豪舍》并为之撰写长篇评论。 临床表现：开始时为瓦格纳的音乐深深感动，但后来在《维也纳报》和《新闻报》担任音乐评论员期间，立场却彻底转变，判若两人（也许是觉得受骗之后的过度反应？）；把持维也纳音乐舆论的话语权和道德制高点，旗帜鲜明地反对任何试图表现感情或听起来过于让人情绪激动的音乐——当年许多维也纳音乐学院的年轻才子如古斯塔夫·马勒就因此在校学习期间抑郁久不得志。 患病期间行为：在他的权威把持下，发动了针对“瓦格纳派”和“新德意志派”的轰轰烈烈的讨伐运动；口诛笔伐，极尽诋毁之能事，把瓦格纳连同其岳父弗朗茨·李斯特（Fra nz Liszt）指斥得一无是处，并捎带把布鲁克纳也批评得体无完肤，并试图阻止其交响乐在维也纳的任何地方上演；为抨击瓦格纳风潮而出版理论著作《论音乐的美》，确立自律论观点，认为音乐的内容就是乐音运动的形式自身，除此之外不表达任何东西（特别是情感）——该观点至今在音乐学术界仍很具有迷惑性和影响力。 经典引语：“任何追随瓦格纳的人将会折断他的颈骨。” 后果：作为臭名昭著的反动小丑角色（贝克麦瑟，即汉斯利希）被瓦格纳写入其著名乐剧《纽伦堡的名歌手》中。 评语：汉斯利克相信支配瓦格纳的音乐的全是欺骗、撒谎、暴行和兽欲——借用戴维·巴伯的那句话：人们相信他们愿意相信的。 症状指数：★★★★
病例No.5 患者姓名：弗雷德里希·威廉-尼采 (Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche) 别名：狂人、太阳 出生地：洛肯镇（德国） 出生日期：1844年10月15日 职业/身份：哲学家、诗人 患病起因：中学时放假期间和朋友在家中用钢琴弹奏《特里斯坦与伊索尔德》（当时他兴奋地对妹妹伊丽莎白说：这真是美极了！你认为如何？而伊丽莎白回答：这声音让人想起狼嗥。 临床表现：从此视大师为完美的偶像，但后来立场却彻底转变，判若两人（同汉斯利克一样觉得受骗后的反应？）；渴望在这个在他看来虚无堕落的世界上寻找或者说创造出一种生存的意义，以此来肯定人的存在价值；精神状态趋向分裂化，喜欢在各种思想领域进行 “不合时宜的漫游”；崇尚暴力，反对基督教道德思想和传统的价值；怀疑一切，企图将一切推倒重来，并将狄奥尼修斯(生活上的狂欢作乐)和阿波罗(冷静调节作用)两种存在精神模式对立起来。 患病期间行为：1868年登门拜谒瓦格纳，并成为大师的门徒，后来与大师决裂；发表题献给瓦格纳的著作《悲剧的诞生》；在大师“异常强烈的刺激”下完成一部又一部哲学论著，如《偶像的黄昏》、《人性，太人性的》、《查拉图斯特拉如是说》、《善恶的彼岸》、《瓦格纳事件》、《尼采反对瓦格纳》、《看，这个人》等，在较早著作中，瓦格纳几乎被作为一个神灵或超人歌颂着，但在其后著作中，瓦格纳又成为一个“颓废者”，一条从腐败世界里溜回来的“机灵的响尾蛇”。 经典引语：前期-“实现了我们所有的希望：他（瓦格纳）是一个充实、伟大、高尚的灵魂，一个个性强烈、令人喜悦的人，值得所有人的爱。” 后期-“瓦格纳是一种病菌，他污染每件他所触摸到的东西——他让音乐变得令人作呕— —我坚信这点：瓦格纳的艺术是病态的……瓦格纳之发生作用，犹如连续使用酒精饮料，使人麻醉，使人胃液增生。” 后果：长期不被人理解的尼采由于无法忍受长时间的孤独，在都灵大街上抱住一匹正在受人虐待的马的脖子痛哭流涕，最终失去了理智，后收容在耶拿大学精神病院，但是他给西方哲学带来颤栗，而此颤栗的最后意义至今尚未被完全估价出来。 评语：如果没有瓦格纳，很难说尼采会怎样。 症状指数：★★★★★★★
病例No.6 患者姓名：豪斯顿·司徒·张伯伦 (Houston Stewart Chamberlain) 别名：古怪的英国人、先知、精神创建人（后两个称谓仅限第三帝国内使用） 出生地：朴次茅斯(英国) 出生日期：1855年9月9日 职业/身份：作家、种族主义理论家 患病起因：27岁的时候前往拜罗伊特会晤瓦格纳。 临床表现：从此将瓦格纳视为“生命中的太阳”，并在其后的一生中对作曲家的妻子科西玛保持着热情的、奴隶般的忠诚；变成一个非常敏感的人，神经官能症常常发作，而且据说他能看到“恶魔”，这些恶魔往往无情地驱使他从事新的方面的研究和继续不断的写作：有一次他从意大利回来，在一个“恶魔”的驱使之下，他中途在加尔顿下了火车，租了一间旅馆房间，关起门来有8天之久，放弃了他原来想写的关于音乐的文章，而紧张地写了一篇生物学论文(很奇怪，不是吗？)；1897年4 月1日到1898 年10月31日之间的19个月时间中，他在另一个“恶魔”的无情驱使下写出一部长达1200页的世纪末巨著《19世纪的基础》（Grundlagen des Neunzehnten Jahrhunderts），其中详细、耐心地阐明了自己那些受到瓦格纳赞扬和鼓励的种族主义理论。 患病期间行为：成为拜罗伊特内部圈子核心成员，加入位于维也纳的瓦格纳迷俱乐部，迎娶瓦格纳之女爱娃为妻，成为瓦格纳的女婿，并从此定居拜罗伊特；先后出版论述瓦格纳的著作数种，编辑其书信集，撰写关相关论文五十余篇；继承发展了瓦格纳的种族主义和反犹观点并将之理论系统化，声称如果没有条顿人，全世界就会笼罩着永恒的黑夜，所以条顿人有权统治世界；接着着手证明耶稣不是犹太人——他的种族理论认为，耶稣其实出生于加利利，而且不能正确地发出亚拉姆语中的喉音字母，而这些“明显的迹象”都说明了耶稣有“很大比例的非闪族血统”；第一次世界大战期间加入德国国籍，对原来的祖国、协约国一方的英国进行煽动、颠覆、敌视的言论活动。 后果：第一次世界大战爆发前他的著作曾经在德国热销，但随着德国的战败和霍亨佐伦帝国的覆亡，他似乎一切希望和预言都崩溃了，而且身患重病、半身不遂，不过随着希特勒政治力量的崛起，他看到了新的希望——更何况他的著作在第二次世界大战爆发前再度热销。 评语：世界上有很多人不同意他的理论（法国学者德蒙·尔梅尔认为张伯伦的思想基本上是“卖膏药的”），可是又能把他怎么样呢？ 症状指数：★★★★★★★
病例No.7 患者姓名：阿道夫·希特勒 (Adolf Hitler) 别名：元首、沃尔夫、大独裁者 出生地：布劳瑙（奥地利） 出生日期：1889年4月20日 职业/身份：纳粹德国总理、元首兼任武装力量最高统帅、德国国家社会主义工人党领袖 患病起因：1906年11月同青年时代好友库比席克一起观看《黎恩济》演出。 临床表现：从此对瓦格纳终身崇拜，至死不谕；据他自己说：光瓦格纳的《特里斯坦与伊索尔德》就听过34遍，而且每听一遍都有新的感受；他同时能把《钮伦堡的名歌手》的第二幕的所有歌词从头到尾背出来、唱出来；他声称瓦格纳的每一部作品都给他带来了莫大的愉快，甚至表示愿意去充当瓦格纳交响乐队中的一名鼓手；逐渐将世界分成尖锐的、毫不含糊的对立面（鸽笼心理？）；继承并发扬了瓦格纳的反犹观点，对犹太人产生偏执狂般的恐惧和憎恨；极端地专注于非现实的幻想和庞大的计划中；欣赏女武神式的残酷无情的力量和成功，并时常陷入某种歇斯底里但不乏灵感四溢的特殊精神状态。 患病期间行为：在维也纳求学期间经常买站票（因经济拮据买不起坐票）去聆听瓦格纳的歌剧；成为国家领导人后极力推崇瓦格纳的音乐，以至于每逢纳粹党大会召开或群众集会上，都少不了演奏《众神的黄昏》片段——尤其是当检阅军队、人们举手行纳粹礼的时候；多次亲自登门造访拜罗伊特剧院，和瓦格纳家族后代结为知交；把拜罗伊特节日剧院作为激励部下官兵、鼓舞士气的宗教殿堂，把欣赏瓦格纳歌剧作为最高荣誉和奖赏——例如从前线回来和即将奔赴前线作战的官兵以及从事战争工业的工人都被用“帝国音乐专列火车”送到拜罗伊特免费观看《尼伯龙根指环》和《纽伦堡的名歌手》；闪击波兰、西欧、南欧、北非、前苏联，发动第二次世界大战，将《指环》中的战争、英雄、死亡、末日等场景付诸实践。 经典引语：“每个凡是想了解国家社会主义德国的人都必须首先了解瓦格纳。 后果：战争失败，希特勒在苏军攻入柏林后开枪自杀于地堡里，德国投降，世界从此被划分成东西两大阵营；由于二战期间瓦格纳的音乐经常被用作集中营中执行处决犹太人任务时的背景音乐，以色列至今仍谢绝上演瓦格纳的作品（虽然以色列开国元勋、锡安复国主义运动领导人特奥多·赫茨尔也是瓦格纳歌剧的狂热崇拜者，他最喜爱的歌剧是《汤豪舍》） 评语：瓦格纳改变的不仅仅是音乐史。 症状指数：★★★★★★★★★★
2010年12月21日星期二
关于《鬼子来了》的审查意见
广播电影电视总局电影审查委员会关于《鬼子来了》的审查意见
你公司送审的合拍片《鬼子来了》已经电影审查委员会审查
审委会认为：
影片没有严格按照电影局《关于合拍片立项的批复》（电字[1998]第302号）中的意
见修改剧本，并在没有报送备案剧本的情况下擅自拍摄，同时又擅自增加多处台词和情节
，致使影片一方面不仅没有表现出在抗日战争大背景下，中国百姓对侵略者的仇恨和反抗
（唯一一个敢于痛骂和反抗日军的还是个招村民讨嫌的疯子），反而突出展示和集中夸大
了其愚昧、麻木、奴性的一面，另一方面，不仅没有充分暴露日本军国主义的侵略本质，
夸大了其愚昧、麻木、奴性的一面，另一方面，不仅没有充分暴露日本军国主义的侵略本
质，反而突出渲染了日本侵略者耀武扬威的猖獗气势，由此导致影片的基本立意出现严重
偏差。
影片多处出现污言秽语，并从日本兵口中多次辱骂“支那猪”，另外还有女性的裸露
镜头，整体上格调低俗，不符合《电影审查规定》的标准。
影片片名须按电影局多次要求重新选择。
影片须在参照附件认真修改后，重新报请审查。
附：《影片与批准立项剧本主要不同之外》
《影片与批准立项剧本主要不同之外》
一, 擅自修改、增加情节导致影片基本立意出现严重偏差：
1，剧本第7至8页，原文学剧本中众村民审日本兵花屋及汉奸董汉臣时，并未表现出
恐惧，喝斥他们：“要闹歪，没你香饽饽吃，”，“掺假可整出你的黄来”等。而影片却
表现村民一开始就惧怕他们。并增加第240镜五舅老爷台词：“我看你们也都是孩子”，
将中国百姓表现得愚昧无知、敌我不分。
2，对给鬼子吃细粮的情节，在文学剧本阶段，电影局始终坚持删掉，但影片不仅未
删，却反复渲染马大三向二拨子娘借米那，约定借一还八，从村民还热热闹闹给日本兵和
汉奸包饺子。客观上表现了战争时期的中国百姓在生活极度困难之时，并主动关心日兵和
汉奸，严重违背了历史。
3，第1027镜；影片较之文学剧本增加了二拨子娘台词：“日本子来咱们村都八年了
，八年了咋的，他八年了他敢动我一根汗毛？我行的正，走的端，我走到哪他都得高看我
一眼。”日本侵略者在中国烧杀抢掠八年，犯下滔天罪行，影片却借二拨子娘之口说日军
对自己秋毫无犯，美化了日本侵略者。
4，第472镜至496镜，影片较之原剧本增加了日兵花屋想象马大三带乡亲们冲过来的
一段，并将马大三和乡亲们设计成日本武士的样子。在抗战大背景下，日兵花屋最惧怕的
应是抗日队伍，是八路军、游击队，马大三和乡亲被设计成日本武士的情节不仅虚假，也
丑化了中国人。
5，第877镜至893镜，第918镜至931镜，第941镜至947镜，第954镜至959镜，影片较
之原剧本增加了村民以为马大三杀了鬼子，都不理他，甚至鱼儿也躲着他，使马大三神经
受刺激的情节。表现了中国众多百姓对日军没有应有的仇恨，以至敌我不分、愚昧麻木。
6，1002镜至1069镜；影片较之原剧本增加了小孩学日本语造成危险之后，众村民向
马大三发火，一个个争着让他杀了自己，并把头放到了桌子上的情节；鱼二跟村民说：“
让他杀人，那不是让我怀鬼胎吗……看看这两天，你们谁搭理他了……不杀人，逼我们杀
人，杀了人，又不搭理我们，见了马大三跟见了鬼似的，人没死，冲我们又弄这个……”
表现了中国百姓不仅不敢抗敌，而且对侵略者充满奴性和恐惧，
对自己人只会窝里斗，互相猜忌。
7，剧本第34页：原剧本中一刀刘讲自己杀人技巧时，说的是杀偷情的太监，而影片
第1177镜至1199镜，改成了一刀刘杀的是“慈禧身边的八大臣”，“百日维新之主谭嗣同
”，不仅赋予了新的政治内涵，并对砍头技巧加以自豪的渲染，结果杀日本兵时却遭失败
，感叹“英名一世，毁于一旦”，最后狼狈逃走。给人以千百年来中国人只会举起屠刀杀
自己人，却不敢抵御外侮的隐喻。
8，剧本第39页，大家商量送鬼子回去一场，原文学剧本中描写日军到了村中，将大
米洒成一圈，将百姓圈住，逼百姓吃饭，吃不下的还按住头往嘴里塞，日军队长讲话时，
百姓们都不理他。而影片第1763镜至1871镜，将这场戏改为联欢，并大力渲染，一起喝酒
唱歌，百姓们感激不尽，日军与村民亲如兄弟，并有“今儿我高兴，不单是冲这几车粮食
，主要是冲皇军给了我们面子”等台词，这是对剧本立意的重大改动，从根本上悖离了主
题。
10，剧本第47页至49页；屠杀村民场面，原文学剧本中有百姓终于醒悟，奋起反抗的
描写，如二拨端起钢盔砸向日本兵，二拨子娘脱下鞋打鬼子，并喊道：“别傻了，抄家伙
拼吧”。但影片第1872镜至2073镜，百姓们至死也未与鬼子拼斗，面对屠杀基本是束手待
毙，任人宰割。
11，影片中唯一一个敢于痛骂和反抗日本侵略者的人还是招村民讨嫌的疯子。
12，影片较之文学剧本增加了国民党将领召集百姓聚会的场面，他公开处死汉奸，发
表受降讲话，在讲话中说：“只有国军才是投降日军唯一合法的接收者。”并借日本人之
手杀死马大三。而这一切颠倒事实的行为，却得到了围观百姓的呼应，严重歪曲了历史，
没有达到批判和讽刺国民党的效果。
13，影片中有两个唱小曲的人物，共出场三次，原文学剧本中无此描写。镜头第109
9“皇军来到咱家乡，共建大东亚共荣圈，皇军来了救苦救难……”这样的台词也是增加
的。这是典型的愚昧、麻木、亡国奴的形象。
14，疯老七骂大三与鱼儿的话和骂日本鬼子的话内容相同，十分不妥。
15，片中多处借日本人之口辱骂中国人为“支那猪”，严重损害中国的形象。
二，剧本批复中曾提出修改意见，但影片未改之处：
1，剧本第2页：野野村变完把戏之后将糖装回兜里，以表现日军在捉弄孩子。现影片
第24镜头，不仅给了糖，而且还几次表现中国孩子追在日军后边要糖吃。
2，剧本第2页：马大三与鱼儿在床上剧烈的喘息声、鱼儿裸体镜头原文学剧本已经将
其删除。影片第28至41镜不仅未予删除，还增加了台词：“让我看看。”“看啥呀，快点
的，别歇着。” 这段床上戏时间长，画面、声音效果强烈，给人造成强烈的不良的感官
刺激。
3，剧本第40页：毛驴发情一场，原文学剧本中已改为毛驴钻入鬼子粮仓。现影片第
1590镜至1606镜，未做修改。此情节格调低俗、无聊。
4，原文学剧本中已将绝大多数脏话删改，但影片中比比皆是，每个人物都在骂脏话
。
5，影片中频繁吹奏日本军歌，为日本军国主义扬威造势，会严重刺伤中国人民的感
情。
你公司送审的合拍片《鬼子来了》已经电影审查委员会审查
审委会认为：
影片没有严格按照电影局《关于合拍片立项的批复》（电字[1998]第302号）中的意
见修改剧本，并在没有报送备案剧本的情况下擅自拍摄，同时又擅自增加多处台词和情节
，致使影片一方面不仅没有表现出在抗日战争大背景下，中国百姓对侵略者的仇恨和反抗
（唯一一个敢于痛骂和反抗日军的还是个招村民讨嫌的疯子），反而突出展示和集中夸大
了其愚昧、麻木、奴性的一面，另一方面，不仅没有充分暴露日本军国主义的侵略本质，
夸大了其愚昧、麻木、奴性的一面，另一方面，不仅没有充分暴露日本军国主义的侵略本
质，反而突出渲染了日本侵略者耀武扬威的猖獗气势，由此导致影片的基本立意出现严重
偏差。
影片多处出现污言秽语，并从日本兵口中多次辱骂“支那猪”，另外还有女性的裸露
镜头，整体上格调低俗，不符合《电影审查规定》的标准。
影片片名须按电影局多次要求重新选择。
影片须在参照附件认真修改后，重新报请审查。
附：《影片与批准立项剧本主要不同之外》
《影片与批准立项剧本主要不同之外》
一, 擅自修改、增加情节导致影片基本立意出现严重偏差：
1，剧本第7至8页，原文学剧本中众村民审日本兵花屋及汉奸董汉臣时，并未表现出
恐惧，喝斥他们：“要闹歪，没你香饽饽吃，”，“掺假可整出你的黄来”等。而影片却
表现村民一开始就惧怕他们。并增加第240镜五舅老爷台词：“我看你们也都是孩子”，
将中国百姓表现得愚昧无知、敌我不分。
2，对给鬼子吃细粮的情节，在文学剧本阶段，电影局始终坚持删掉，但影片不仅未
删，却反复渲染马大三向二拨子娘借米那，约定借一还八，从村民还热热闹闹给日本兵和
汉奸包饺子。客观上表现了战争时期的中国百姓在生活极度困难之时，并主动关心日兵和
汉奸，严重违背了历史。
3，第1027镜；影片较之文学剧本增加了二拨子娘台词：“日本子来咱们村都八年了
，八年了咋的，他八年了他敢动我一根汗毛？我行的正，走的端，我走到哪他都得高看我
一眼。”日本侵略者在中国烧杀抢掠八年，犯下滔天罪行，影片却借二拨子娘之口说日军
对自己秋毫无犯，美化了日本侵略者。
4，第472镜至496镜，影片较之原剧本增加了日兵花屋想象马大三带乡亲们冲过来的
一段，并将马大三和乡亲们设计成日本武士的样子。在抗战大背景下，日兵花屋最惧怕的
应是抗日队伍，是八路军、游击队，马大三和乡亲被设计成日本武士的情节不仅虚假，也
丑化了中国人。
5，第877镜至893镜，第918镜至931镜，第941镜至947镜，第954镜至959镜，影片较
之原剧本增加了村民以为马大三杀了鬼子，都不理他，甚至鱼儿也躲着他，使马大三神经
受刺激的情节。表现了中国众多百姓对日军没有应有的仇恨，以至敌我不分、愚昧麻木。
6，1002镜至1069镜；影片较之原剧本增加了小孩学日本语造成危险之后，众村民向
马大三发火，一个个争着让他杀了自己，并把头放到了桌子上的情节；鱼二跟村民说：“
让他杀人，那不是让我怀鬼胎吗……看看这两天，你们谁搭理他了……不杀人，逼我们杀
人，杀了人，又不搭理我们，见了马大三跟见了鬼似的，人没死，冲我们又弄这个……”
表现了中国百姓不仅不敢抗敌，而且对侵略者充满奴性和恐惧，
对自己人只会窝里斗，互相猜忌。
7，剧本第34页：原剧本中一刀刘讲自己杀人技巧时，说的是杀偷情的太监，而影片
第1177镜至1199镜，改成了一刀刘杀的是“慈禧身边的八大臣”，“百日维新之主谭嗣同
”，不仅赋予了新的政治内涵，并对砍头技巧加以自豪的渲染，结果杀日本兵时却遭失败
，感叹“英名一世，毁于一旦”，最后狼狈逃走。给人以千百年来中国人只会举起屠刀杀
自己人，却不敢抵御外侮的隐喻。
8，剧本第39页，大家商量送鬼子回去一场，原文学剧本中描写日军到了村中，将大
米洒成一圈，将百姓圈住，逼百姓吃饭，吃不下的还按住头往嘴里塞，日军队长讲话时，
百姓们都不理他。而影片第1763镜至1871镜，将这场戏改为联欢，并大力渲染，一起喝酒
唱歌，百姓们感激不尽，日军与村民亲如兄弟，并有“今儿我高兴，不单是冲这几车粮食
，主要是冲皇军给了我们面子”等台词，这是对剧本立意的重大改动，从根本上悖离了主
题。
10，剧本第47页至49页；屠杀村民场面，原文学剧本中有百姓终于醒悟，奋起反抗的
描写，如二拨端起钢盔砸向日本兵，二拨子娘脱下鞋打鬼子，并喊道：“别傻了，抄家伙
拼吧”。但影片第1872镜至2073镜，百姓们至死也未与鬼子拼斗，面对屠杀基本是束手待
毙，任人宰割。
11，影片中唯一一个敢于痛骂和反抗日本侵略者的人还是招村民讨嫌的疯子。
12，影片较之文学剧本增加了国民党将领召集百姓聚会的场面，他公开处死汉奸，发
表受降讲话，在讲话中说：“只有国军才是投降日军唯一合法的接收者。”并借日本人之
手杀死马大三。而这一切颠倒事实的行为，却得到了围观百姓的呼应，严重歪曲了历史，
没有达到批判和讽刺国民党的效果。
13，影片中有两个唱小曲的人物，共出场三次，原文学剧本中无此描写。镜头第109
9“皇军来到咱家乡，共建大东亚共荣圈，皇军来了救苦救难……”这样的台词也是增加
的。这是典型的愚昧、麻木、亡国奴的形象。
14，疯老七骂大三与鱼儿的话和骂日本鬼子的话内容相同，十分不妥。
15，片中多处借日本人之口辱骂中国人为“支那猪”，严重损害中国的形象。
二，剧本批复中曾提出修改意见，但影片未改之处：
1，剧本第2页：野野村变完把戏之后将糖装回兜里，以表现日军在捉弄孩子。现影片
第24镜头，不仅给了糖，而且还几次表现中国孩子追在日军后边要糖吃。
2，剧本第2页：马大三与鱼儿在床上剧烈的喘息声、鱼儿裸体镜头原文学剧本已经将
其删除。影片第28至41镜不仅未予删除，还增加了台词：“让我看看。”“看啥呀，快点
的，别歇着。” 这段床上戏时间长，画面、声音效果强烈，给人造成强烈的不良的感官
刺激。
3，剧本第40页：毛驴发情一场，原文学剧本中已改为毛驴钻入鬼子粮仓。现影片第
1590镜至1606镜，未做修改。此情节格调低俗、无聊。
4，原文学剧本中已将绝大多数脏话删改，但影片中比比皆是，每个人物都在骂脏话
。
5，影片中频繁吹奏日本军歌，为日本军国主义扬威造势，会严重刺伤中国人民的感
情。
2010年12月20日星期一
(ZZ)1947年：傅斯年和中国言论界
傅国涌
“欧美报纸，常常一篇社评可以影响一个内阁或一个部长的去留，中国的言论界则很
少有这种力量。这当然非谓言论界本身的不努力，实际上这是中国的社会情形与欧美各国
不同的结果。然而我们总希望中国的言论界，能够一天一天发挥更大的威力。我认为言论
自由是要言论界自己去争的，决不能期望政府来给言论界以‘言论自由’。言论界争取‘
言论自由’，自然要联合起来争，全体起来争，但是在这争取‘言论自由’的过程中，也
得要有几个硬骨头的人物来领导一下。但是这种领导言论的责任，也不是随便什么人可以
负得起来的，还要看这个人的学问识见及声望地位如何。譬如抨击宋孔的文章，假如那三
篇文字是 像我这样一个普通读者写的，恐怕未必能引起这样大的注意，甚至大公报或贵
刊都不登，亦未可知。此外，要是一个普通的新闻记者写了像傅先生那样激烈露骨的文章
，恐怕他就要遭到许多困难了。我认为傅先生发表了这样几篇的文章，言论界的风气，很
可为之一变。假如中国能够有十个‘傅孟真’，挺着胸脯说硬话，则中国的言论界也不致
于像过去那样的萎靡不振，政治上的风气也不致于像过去那样太不像样。我们实在希望中
国言论界能多几个‘傅孟真’，能这样，风气自然可以慢慢的改变过来。”[1]
这是1947年3月1日一位署名“许金铿”的上海读者写给《观察》周刊编者的信，以《
傅孟真的文章》为题发表在3月8日的《观察》第二卷第二期“读者投书”栏。五十五年后
我读了还是感慨不已。
1947年2月15日的南京，依然是春寒料峭，已过了知天命之年的傅斯年（字孟真）在
《世纪评论》周刊第七期发表《这个样子的宋子文非走开不可》，炮轰行政院长宋子文，
开篇即指出“古今中外有一个公例，凡是一个朝代，一个政权，要垮台，并不由于革命的
势力，而由于他自己的崩溃！”[2]直言国民党政治上的失败。宋子文初上台时，他曾寄
予希望，还在《大公报》发表评论说过宋的好话，以为他和孔祥熙不一样。事隔不久，宋
的真面目就露出来了，傅斯年无法容忍孔宋这些“侵蚀国家的势力”，他不愿看到政府的
垮台，以免玉石俱焚，所以必须说出真话。他从宋子文的黄金政策、工业政策、对外信用
、办事作风、中国文化修养和态度等五个方面，最后得出了这样的结论：
“我真愤慨极了，一如当年我在参政会要与孔祥熙在法院见面一样，国家吃不消他了
，人民吃不消他了，他真该走了，不走一切跨了。”[3]
一个学者如此直截了当地抨击政府首脑在中国是罕见的，一文既出，“各地报章纷纷
转载，举国注目。”据那天的胡适日记，成舍我主办的《世界日报》当日甚至用了“傅斯
年要革命”这样耸动视听的标题。
《世纪评论》是担任过国民党政府高级官员的经济学家何廉1947年1月筹款创办的，
由留美政治学博士张纯明主编，撰稿人包括萧公权、吴景超、潘光旦、蒋廷黻、翁文灏等
，他们批评时政，倡导民主，言论大胆，很快得到社会公认。何廉回忆：“1947年春季的
一天，我收到傅斯年赞扬《世纪评论》的一封信，……我回信约他给《世纪评论》写稿子
。不久，我在南京遇到他。他告诉我说，他要给《世纪评论》写稿子，但有一个条件，就
是按原文发表，不能有一字改动，我立刻表示同意。过了两天，他把稿子交给总编辑张纯
明”。《 这个样子的宋子文非走开不可》一发表，“不到半天时间，这一期《世纪评论
》在上海市面上就见不到了。这并不是说《世纪评论》的发行量空前地突然增加，而是一
定有人从报贩手里全部收买去了。我立刻到《大公报》馆找到经理胡霖，把我自己手里的
一份登有傅斯年文章 的《世纪评论》给他看。我告诉他说这一期在市面上谁也买不到了
，问他能否在《大公报》上发表，他立刻同意了。就在第二天早晨，这篇文章在《大公报
》上发表了。”[4]将刊载傅斯年文章的刊物“搜买一空”，《观察》称之为“颇有‘寓
买于禁’的味道”。
一星期后，傅斯年在《世纪评论》第八期发表《宋子文的失败》一文，直言：“自抗
战以后，所有发国难财者，究竟是那些人？照客观观察去，套购外[汇]和黄金最多的人，
即发财最多的人。……（孔、宋）二人虽不睦，但祸国的事，却也‘萧规曹随’。”他列
举事实指出孔、宋代表的权贵势力“断送中国的经济命脉”，“简直把中国葬送在十八层
地狱下了。”说到工商贷款，他痛心地说：
“今天的工贷都成了商贷，而且都成了投机贷。……惟有权门、霸户、豪势、或与这
些人有关系的，才能得到贷款。孔宋二氏这样一贯的做法，简直是彻底毁坏中国经济，彻
底扫荡中国工业，彻底使人失业，彻底使全国财富集于私门，流于国外！”
储安平在2月16日给傅斯年的信中说：“先生在参政会慷慨陈辞，主张清查宋、孔产
业，举国共鸣。国事如此，忧心如焚，顷闻先生将为《世纪评论》连写两文，促宋下台，
谠论一出，行见全国响应。不知先生拟写之两文中，能否分赐一篇惠交敝刊？”[5] 3月
1日，傅斯年在《观察》周刊（第二卷第一期）发表第三篇檄文《论豪门资本之必须铲除
》，从国家资本、官僚资本、权门资本出发，条分缕析将当时中国的状况讲得清清楚楚，
他不是经济学家，不过是直言无讳，说出了很多经济学家不敢说的真相。这样的文章今天
不大读得到了，我就不怕累赘，多抄几段：
他指出包括铁路、银行、航运等在内的国家资本被“各种恶势力支配着（自然不以孔
宋为限），豪门把持着，于是乎大体上在紊乱着，荒唐着，冻僵着，腐败着。恶势力支配
，便更滋养恶势力，豪门把持便是发展豪门。循环不已，照道理说，国家必糟。”
关于官僚资本，他一针见血地说：“于是乎小官僚资本托庇于大官僚资本，大官僚资
本托庇于权门资本。小官僚大官僚资本有些是以‘合法’方法聚集的，有些则由于鼠窃狗
偷。无论如何是必须依靠大势力的，尤其是豪门资本。”
权门资本“一方面可以吸收、利用、支配国家资本，一方面可以吸取、保护（因保护
而受益）次于他的官僚资本。为所欲为，愈受愈大。用着一批又一批的‘机器’（这‘机
器’在宋氏门下很多是些美国留学生，自以为了解所谓Sound Business的，极肤浅的人）
爪牙，人狗（例如战前广东银行经理，已经枪毙了的），家奴……”
“今天的官僚资本当然推孔宋二家，二家之外，有些在滋长中。两家的作风并不尽同
。孔氏有些土货样色，号称他家是票号‘世家’，他也有些票号味道，尤其是胡作非为之
处。……这一派是雌儿雏儿一齐下手，以政治势力，垄断商务，利则归己，害则归国，有
时简直是扒手。我说到这里，我想，他该告我诽谤罪了，我却有事实证明。……所以他如
以我为侮辱，必须告我于法院，我很愿对簿公庭。”
“宋氏的作风又是一样。……他的作风是极其蛮横，把天下人分为两类，非奴才即敌
人。这还不必多说，问题最重要的，在他的无限制的极狂蛮的支配欲，用他这支配欲，弄
得天下一切物事将来都不能知道公的私的了。”
从电厂到煤矿，说是“国营”，实为“宋营”。“由准许私人投股之国营，一下而入
于中国银行，又由中国银行而姓了宋，这中间，也许有他的‘合法’手续，凡创朝代都是
合法的。”“古人说‘化家为国’，现在是‘化国为家’。”
“在今天宋氏暴行之下，还有人说，孔比他好，这真全无心肝之论，孔几乎把抗战弄
跨，每次盟邦帮助，他总有妙用，并且成了他的续命汤。
在今天宋氏这样失败之下，他必须走开，以谢国人。在位者要负责任的。……总而言
之，借用二家财产，远比黄金拢回法币多，可以平衡今年预算。……所以要征用，最客气
的办法是征用十五年，……这办法自须先有立法程序，我想立法院可以压倒多数（如非一
致）通过。”
他最后说：“这篇文字全由我负责，与编辑无涉，另有在世纪评论两文（一卷七期八
期）可与此文参看。”
同一期《观察》的“观察文摘”栏即摘载了他在《世纪评论》首发的另两文。储安平
在《编辑后记》中说：“傅孟真先生一连写了三篇抨击孔宋豪门资本的文章。他的文章是
爆炸性的。”
在1947年的中国，这不是傅斯年一个人孤立的声音，经济学家马寅初等硬骨头的知识
分子也一直在大声疾呼，抨击豪门资本，陈云阁主持的重庆《世界日报》就发出过同样的
声音，2月16日（即《这个样子的宋子文走开》首发的第二天），刊出社评《罢免宋子文
！》，和傅斯年的文章异曲同工，直接发出了罢免政府首脑的呼号——
“总之从政治责任讲，宋氏自任行政院以来，对大大小小的问题，不是无政策便是乱
干蛮干，以致措施乖方、贻害无穷。当前的金融风潮既已经威胁到整个国计民生，追究责
任，宋氏万难脱逃。从政治纲纪讲，一国的行政院长，在客观事实上如已表现出凭借权势
以操纵市场，扰乱金融，垄断工商，吞食国计的违法败纪行径，则除罢免其官职外，自可
没收其财产，惩治其罪尤。我们本此正义的认识，敢代表全国最大多数善良人民，吁请政
府最高当局，当机立断，迅采立法院与参政会的主张，立即罢免宋子文以谢国人。”
[6]
顺便说一句，直到1948年1月15日，重庆《世界日报》还发表社评——“清算豪门的
时候到了！”正是那些良知未泯的知识分子说出了千千万万老百姓的心声，从而成为感动
了一个时代的文字。
宋子文是一个怪物，作为显赫的宋氏家族的长子，他在哈佛大学接受了最好的教育，
“他思想，说话，和写字时都喜欢用英文而不喜欢用中文”，惟独对权力和财富的贪婪是
中国式的。傅斯年说“他的中国文化，请化学家把他分解到一公忽，也不见踪影的”。《
何廉回忆录》中提到1945年冬天，宋子文出任行政院长兼最高经济建设委员会主席，蒋介
石要他将战后五年经济建设纲要送交宋一份，“使我感到非常有趣的是，宋子文看过这份
纲要后竟然说：‘但这是用中文写的。’他问我有没有英译本，我说没有，他要我为他译
一份英文本。”[7] 1947年3月1日，宋子文在黄金风潮中被迫辞职下台，离《这个样子的
宋子文非走开不可》发表不过半个月。尽管他的下台无损于豪门资本的毫末，他继续他的
“化国为私”的“宋营”事业。
莫道书生空议论，当年3月8日的《观察》通讯《宋子文下台前夕的南京》曾对“傅斯
年在参政会和各刊物上抨击孔宋的怒吼”大为赞许。亲历过那个时代的何廉也说过，傅斯
年的文章和宋子文的辞职“是有很大关系的”。自早年求学北大时创办《新潮》、领导“
五四”学生运动以来，傅斯年即享有盛名，他不是政治家，也无意追逐权位，首先是一个
有成就的历史学家，一介书生，当然并不是他没有机会入阁，但他始终相信只有站在政府
之外，保持一个知识分子的独立性，才能充分发挥舆论监督的作用。他曾写信给亦师亦友
的胡适说：“我们自己要有办法，一入政府即全无办法。与其入政府，不如组党；与其组
党，不如办报。”“我们是要奋斗的，惟其如此，应永远在野，盖一入政府，无法奋斗也
。”[8]
好一个“永远在野”，这是一个新型知识分子的自觉选择，他所梦想的不再是为“学
成文武艺，卖与帝王家”，不再是为“帝王师”，他寻求的不是权力，而是监督和制约权
力，做社会的良知。诚如当年那位读者写给《观察》编者的信中所言，一个傅斯年站出来
也许没有什么，倘若有无数个傅斯年挺身而出，就会形成一个独立的、有力量的言论界，
使权势集团懂得有所忌惮。
正是有了这样的信念，难怪终其一生他只愿担任国民参政员、立法委员，议政而不从
政，他知道知识分子一旦离开现代的大学、报馆、出版和研究机构，这些新型的职业位置
，将会一钱不值，成为官僚、政客或商人把玩的对象。他是一个典型的自由主义知识分子
，是20世纪的“士”，是“五四”一代最杰出的代表之一，透过几千年历史的迷雾，他发
现“以暴易暴，没有丝毫长进”，所以坚定地信仰以和平方式完成“精神上的革新”。以
学生领袖而学者、而大学校长，这也不是他一个人的选择，而是五四一代优秀分子的群体
选择。这些“五四”之子，不少人后来都沐浴过欧风美雨，饱受西方文明的滋润，同时对
自己苦难的民族怀有深厚的感情。虽然他们大部分走的是学术之路，但他们并不是枯守书
斋之内，两耳不问窗外事的迂腐学者，而是有着坚定的道德理想担当，有着知识分子天然
的社会责任感。在“五四”以后的三十年间，在大时代起伏不定的波涛中，我们都能看到
他们的身影，听到他们的声音。
在1947年的言论界，傅斯年无疑是个执牛耳的人物，但如果不是何廉、张纯明他们的
《世纪评论》周刊不改动一字刊登他的鸿文，如果不是胡政之的《大公报》无所顾忌地发
表他的文章，如果没有储安平的《观察》周刊一口气刊载他的三篇文章，傅斯年的言论再
大胆也只能胎死腹中，根本不可能影响社会。此外如1947年2月27日发表马寅初《有黄金
美钞的不要卖出来》的《文汇报》，如重庆《世界日报》等等，正是他们共同构成了
1947年中国的言论界，他们是那个黑暗岁月中的一道道闪电，他们书写了民族言论史上一
个有声有色的章节，时光流逝，我们愈加怀念那些知识分子和民间报刊，怀念那个早已消
失的言论界。
注：
[1] 以下引文未标明出处的均引自《观察》第二卷影印本，岳麓书社1999年版。
[2][3][8]《傅斯年选集》，天津人民出版社1996年版，334、339、21页。
[4][7] 朱佑慈、杨大宁、胡隆昶著，王文钧、俞振基译《何廉回忆录》，中国文史
出版社1988年版，276、251页。
[5]《储安平文集》下册，东方出版中心1998年版，329页。
[6] 转引自张友鸾等《世界日报兴衰史》,重庆出版社1982年版。
“欧美报纸，常常一篇社评可以影响一个内阁或一个部长的去留，中国的言论界则很
少有这种力量。这当然非谓言论界本身的不努力，实际上这是中国的社会情形与欧美各国
不同的结果。然而我们总希望中国的言论界，能够一天一天发挥更大的威力。我认为言论
自由是要言论界自己去争的，决不能期望政府来给言论界以‘言论自由’。言论界争取‘
言论自由’，自然要联合起来争，全体起来争，但是在这争取‘言论自由’的过程中，也
得要有几个硬骨头的人物来领导一下。但是这种领导言论的责任，也不是随便什么人可以
负得起来的，还要看这个人的学问识见及声望地位如何。譬如抨击宋孔的文章，假如那三
篇文字是 像我这样一个普通读者写的，恐怕未必能引起这样大的注意，甚至大公报或贵
刊都不登，亦未可知。此外，要是一个普通的新闻记者写了像傅先生那样激烈露骨的文章
，恐怕他就要遭到许多困难了。我认为傅先生发表了这样几篇的文章，言论界的风气，很
可为之一变。假如中国能够有十个‘傅孟真’，挺着胸脯说硬话，则中国的言论界也不致
于像过去那样的萎靡不振，政治上的风气也不致于像过去那样太不像样。我们实在希望中
国言论界能多几个‘傅孟真’，能这样，风气自然可以慢慢的改变过来。”[1]
这是1947年3月1日一位署名“许金铿”的上海读者写给《观察》周刊编者的信，以《
傅孟真的文章》为题发表在3月8日的《观察》第二卷第二期“读者投书”栏。五十五年后
我读了还是感慨不已。
1947年2月15日的南京，依然是春寒料峭，已过了知天命之年的傅斯年（字孟真）在
《世纪评论》周刊第七期发表《这个样子的宋子文非走开不可》，炮轰行政院长宋子文，
开篇即指出“古今中外有一个公例，凡是一个朝代，一个政权，要垮台，并不由于革命的
势力，而由于他自己的崩溃！”[2]直言国民党政治上的失败。宋子文初上台时，他曾寄
予希望，还在《大公报》发表评论说过宋的好话，以为他和孔祥熙不一样。事隔不久，宋
的真面目就露出来了，傅斯年无法容忍孔宋这些“侵蚀国家的势力”，他不愿看到政府的
垮台，以免玉石俱焚，所以必须说出真话。他从宋子文的黄金政策、工业政策、对外信用
、办事作风、中国文化修养和态度等五个方面，最后得出了这样的结论：
“我真愤慨极了，一如当年我在参政会要与孔祥熙在法院见面一样，国家吃不消他了
，人民吃不消他了，他真该走了，不走一切跨了。”[3]
一个学者如此直截了当地抨击政府首脑在中国是罕见的，一文既出，“各地报章纷纷
转载，举国注目。”据那天的胡适日记，成舍我主办的《世界日报》当日甚至用了“傅斯
年要革命”这样耸动视听的标题。
《世纪评论》是担任过国民党政府高级官员的经济学家何廉1947年1月筹款创办的，
由留美政治学博士张纯明主编，撰稿人包括萧公权、吴景超、潘光旦、蒋廷黻、翁文灏等
，他们批评时政，倡导民主，言论大胆，很快得到社会公认。何廉回忆：“1947年春季的
一天，我收到傅斯年赞扬《世纪评论》的一封信，……我回信约他给《世纪评论》写稿子
。不久，我在南京遇到他。他告诉我说，他要给《世纪评论》写稿子，但有一个条件，就
是按原文发表，不能有一字改动，我立刻表示同意。过了两天，他把稿子交给总编辑张纯
明”。《 这个样子的宋子文非走开不可》一发表，“不到半天时间，这一期《世纪评论
》在上海市面上就见不到了。这并不是说《世纪评论》的发行量空前地突然增加，而是一
定有人从报贩手里全部收买去了。我立刻到《大公报》馆找到经理胡霖，把我自己手里的
一份登有傅斯年文章 的《世纪评论》给他看。我告诉他说这一期在市面上谁也买不到了
，问他能否在《大公报》上发表，他立刻同意了。就在第二天早晨，这篇文章在《大公报
》上发表了。”[4]将刊载傅斯年文章的刊物“搜买一空”，《观察》称之为“颇有‘寓
买于禁’的味道”。
一星期后，傅斯年在《世纪评论》第八期发表《宋子文的失败》一文，直言：“自抗
战以后，所有发国难财者，究竟是那些人？照客观观察去，套购外[汇]和黄金最多的人，
即发财最多的人。……（孔、宋）二人虽不睦，但祸国的事，却也‘萧规曹随’。”他列
举事实指出孔、宋代表的权贵势力“断送中国的经济命脉”，“简直把中国葬送在十八层
地狱下了。”说到工商贷款，他痛心地说：
“今天的工贷都成了商贷，而且都成了投机贷。……惟有权门、霸户、豪势、或与这
些人有关系的，才能得到贷款。孔宋二氏这样一贯的做法，简直是彻底毁坏中国经济，彻
底扫荡中国工业，彻底使人失业，彻底使全国财富集于私门，流于国外！”
储安平在2月16日给傅斯年的信中说：“先生在参政会慷慨陈辞，主张清查宋、孔产
业，举国共鸣。国事如此，忧心如焚，顷闻先生将为《世纪评论》连写两文，促宋下台，
谠论一出，行见全国响应。不知先生拟写之两文中，能否分赐一篇惠交敝刊？”[5] 3月
1日，傅斯年在《观察》周刊（第二卷第一期）发表第三篇檄文《论豪门资本之必须铲除
》，从国家资本、官僚资本、权门资本出发，条分缕析将当时中国的状况讲得清清楚楚，
他不是经济学家，不过是直言无讳，说出了很多经济学家不敢说的真相。这样的文章今天
不大读得到了，我就不怕累赘，多抄几段：
他指出包括铁路、银行、航运等在内的国家资本被“各种恶势力支配着（自然不以孔
宋为限），豪门把持着，于是乎大体上在紊乱着，荒唐着，冻僵着，腐败着。恶势力支配
，便更滋养恶势力，豪门把持便是发展豪门。循环不已，照道理说，国家必糟。”
关于官僚资本，他一针见血地说：“于是乎小官僚资本托庇于大官僚资本，大官僚资
本托庇于权门资本。小官僚大官僚资本有些是以‘合法’方法聚集的，有些则由于鼠窃狗
偷。无论如何是必须依靠大势力的，尤其是豪门资本。”
权门资本“一方面可以吸收、利用、支配国家资本，一方面可以吸取、保护（因保护
而受益）次于他的官僚资本。为所欲为，愈受愈大。用着一批又一批的‘机器’（这‘机
器’在宋氏门下很多是些美国留学生，自以为了解所谓Sound Business的，极肤浅的人）
爪牙，人狗（例如战前广东银行经理，已经枪毙了的），家奴……”
“今天的官僚资本当然推孔宋二家，二家之外，有些在滋长中。两家的作风并不尽同
。孔氏有些土货样色，号称他家是票号‘世家’，他也有些票号味道，尤其是胡作非为之
处。……这一派是雌儿雏儿一齐下手，以政治势力，垄断商务，利则归己，害则归国，有
时简直是扒手。我说到这里，我想，他该告我诽谤罪了，我却有事实证明。……所以他如
以我为侮辱，必须告我于法院，我很愿对簿公庭。”
“宋氏的作风又是一样。……他的作风是极其蛮横，把天下人分为两类，非奴才即敌
人。这还不必多说，问题最重要的，在他的无限制的极狂蛮的支配欲，用他这支配欲，弄
得天下一切物事将来都不能知道公的私的了。”
从电厂到煤矿，说是“国营”，实为“宋营”。“由准许私人投股之国营，一下而入
于中国银行，又由中国银行而姓了宋，这中间，也许有他的‘合法’手续，凡创朝代都是
合法的。”“古人说‘化家为国’，现在是‘化国为家’。”
“在今天宋氏暴行之下，还有人说，孔比他好，这真全无心肝之论，孔几乎把抗战弄
跨，每次盟邦帮助，他总有妙用，并且成了他的续命汤。
在今天宋氏这样失败之下，他必须走开，以谢国人。在位者要负责任的。……总而言
之，借用二家财产，远比黄金拢回法币多，可以平衡今年预算。……所以要征用，最客气
的办法是征用十五年，……这办法自须先有立法程序，我想立法院可以压倒多数（如非一
致）通过。”
他最后说：“这篇文字全由我负责，与编辑无涉，另有在世纪评论两文（一卷七期八
期）可与此文参看。”
同一期《观察》的“观察文摘”栏即摘载了他在《世纪评论》首发的另两文。储安平
在《编辑后记》中说：“傅孟真先生一连写了三篇抨击孔宋豪门资本的文章。他的文章是
爆炸性的。”
在1947年的中国，这不是傅斯年一个人孤立的声音，经济学家马寅初等硬骨头的知识
分子也一直在大声疾呼，抨击豪门资本，陈云阁主持的重庆《世界日报》就发出过同样的
声音，2月16日（即《这个样子的宋子文走开》首发的第二天），刊出社评《罢免宋子文
！》，和傅斯年的文章异曲同工，直接发出了罢免政府首脑的呼号——
“总之从政治责任讲，宋氏自任行政院以来，对大大小小的问题，不是无政策便是乱
干蛮干，以致措施乖方、贻害无穷。当前的金融风潮既已经威胁到整个国计民生，追究责
任，宋氏万难脱逃。从政治纲纪讲，一国的行政院长，在客观事实上如已表现出凭借权势
以操纵市场，扰乱金融，垄断工商，吞食国计的违法败纪行径，则除罢免其官职外，自可
没收其财产，惩治其罪尤。我们本此正义的认识，敢代表全国最大多数善良人民，吁请政
府最高当局，当机立断，迅采立法院与参政会的主张，立即罢免宋子文以谢国人。”
[6]
顺便说一句，直到1948年1月15日，重庆《世界日报》还发表社评——“清算豪门的
时候到了！”正是那些良知未泯的知识分子说出了千千万万老百姓的心声，从而成为感动
了一个时代的文字。
宋子文是一个怪物，作为显赫的宋氏家族的长子，他在哈佛大学接受了最好的教育，
“他思想，说话，和写字时都喜欢用英文而不喜欢用中文”，惟独对权力和财富的贪婪是
中国式的。傅斯年说“他的中国文化，请化学家把他分解到一公忽，也不见踪影的”。《
何廉回忆录》中提到1945年冬天，宋子文出任行政院长兼最高经济建设委员会主席，蒋介
石要他将战后五年经济建设纲要送交宋一份，“使我感到非常有趣的是，宋子文看过这份
纲要后竟然说：‘但这是用中文写的。’他问我有没有英译本，我说没有，他要我为他译
一份英文本。”[7] 1947年3月1日，宋子文在黄金风潮中被迫辞职下台，离《这个样子的
宋子文非走开不可》发表不过半个月。尽管他的下台无损于豪门资本的毫末，他继续他的
“化国为私”的“宋营”事业。
莫道书生空议论，当年3月8日的《观察》通讯《宋子文下台前夕的南京》曾对“傅斯
年在参政会和各刊物上抨击孔宋的怒吼”大为赞许。亲历过那个时代的何廉也说过，傅斯
年的文章和宋子文的辞职“是有很大关系的”。自早年求学北大时创办《新潮》、领导“
五四”学生运动以来，傅斯年即享有盛名，他不是政治家，也无意追逐权位，首先是一个
有成就的历史学家，一介书生，当然并不是他没有机会入阁，但他始终相信只有站在政府
之外，保持一个知识分子的独立性，才能充分发挥舆论监督的作用。他曾写信给亦师亦友
的胡适说：“我们自己要有办法，一入政府即全无办法。与其入政府，不如组党；与其组
党，不如办报。”“我们是要奋斗的，惟其如此，应永远在野，盖一入政府，无法奋斗也
。”[8]
好一个“永远在野”，这是一个新型知识分子的自觉选择，他所梦想的不再是为“学
成文武艺，卖与帝王家”，不再是为“帝王师”，他寻求的不是权力，而是监督和制约权
力，做社会的良知。诚如当年那位读者写给《观察》编者的信中所言，一个傅斯年站出来
也许没有什么，倘若有无数个傅斯年挺身而出，就会形成一个独立的、有力量的言论界，
使权势集团懂得有所忌惮。
正是有了这样的信念，难怪终其一生他只愿担任国民参政员、立法委员，议政而不从
政，他知道知识分子一旦离开现代的大学、报馆、出版和研究机构，这些新型的职业位置
，将会一钱不值，成为官僚、政客或商人把玩的对象。他是一个典型的自由主义知识分子
，是20世纪的“士”，是“五四”一代最杰出的代表之一，透过几千年历史的迷雾，他发
现“以暴易暴，没有丝毫长进”，所以坚定地信仰以和平方式完成“精神上的革新”。以
学生领袖而学者、而大学校长，这也不是他一个人的选择，而是五四一代优秀分子的群体
选择。这些“五四”之子，不少人后来都沐浴过欧风美雨，饱受西方文明的滋润，同时对
自己苦难的民族怀有深厚的感情。虽然他们大部分走的是学术之路，但他们并不是枯守书
斋之内，两耳不问窗外事的迂腐学者，而是有着坚定的道德理想担当，有着知识分子天然
的社会责任感。在“五四”以后的三十年间，在大时代起伏不定的波涛中，我们都能看到
他们的身影，听到他们的声音。
在1947年的言论界，傅斯年无疑是个执牛耳的人物，但如果不是何廉、张纯明他们的
《世纪评论》周刊不改动一字刊登他的鸿文，如果不是胡政之的《大公报》无所顾忌地发
表他的文章，如果没有储安平的《观察》周刊一口气刊载他的三篇文章，傅斯年的言论再
大胆也只能胎死腹中，根本不可能影响社会。此外如1947年2月27日发表马寅初《有黄金
美钞的不要卖出来》的《文汇报》，如重庆《世界日报》等等，正是他们共同构成了
1947年中国的言论界，他们是那个黑暗岁月中的一道道闪电，他们书写了民族言论史上一
个有声有色的章节，时光流逝，我们愈加怀念那些知识分子和民间报刊，怀念那个早已消
失的言论界。
注：
[1] 以下引文未标明出处的均引自《观察》第二卷影印本，岳麓书社1999年版。
[2][3][8]《傅斯年选集》，天津人民出版社1996年版，334、339、21页。
[4][7] 朱佑慈、杨大宁、胡隆昶著，王文钧、俞振基译《何廉回忆录》，中国文史
出版社1988年版，276、251页。
[5]《储安平文集》下册，东方出版中心1998年版，329页。
[6] 转引自张友鸾等《世界日报兴衰史》,重庆出版社1982年版。
2010年11月15日星期一
(ZZ) 海外大陆人申请台湾护照及旅行证的想法 II.
From http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245181
这个贴子里谈到了一些，http://lkcn.net/bbs/index.php?showtopic=161126
A.看了大家的讨论 主要在于入籍之后不能合法的免签去中国的问题
我实践了一个合法的方法 不过似乎麻烦点
申请 中华人民共和国旅行证
大陆居民在海外呆满4年或者取得永久居留权2年 就可以申请 中华民国(台湾)护照
原帖地址: 背包客栈自助游论坛 http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1638673
在第三国有永久居留权的 中华民国(台湾)护照持有人 可以申请 中华人民共和国旅行证
中华人民共和国旅行证 2年有效 不限次入境 不限拘留时间 出入境不验第三国签证(事实上 旅行证无法获取任何第三国签证)
但是: 中华人民共和国旅行证只能在中华人民共和国驻外使领馆申请 换发 不可延期
持中华人民共和国旅行证入境中国的人视为中华人民共和国公民 不享受外国人或台湾人待遇
我去年申请了旅行证 回国了两次 没有任何麻烦 不过据同事讲 她出境时被要求出示中华民国(台湾)护照
中华民国(台湾)是承认双重国籍的 所以在入籍其他国家之后不用担心护照没有
最后 补充一句 现在据说背页加盖'新'字样的中华民国(台湾)护照 不给批准中华人民共和国旅行证了
所以想这么办的要提早行动了 因为根据'大陆居民在海外呆满4年或者取得永久居留权2年'得到的中华民国(台湾)护照背页加盖'新'字样 要1年之后才换发没有盖'新'字样普通护照
-----------------
B.第一，中华人民共和国公民申请中华民国护照，名义上是“叛国投敌”。呵呵。为什么这么说？申请中华民国护照后，要放弃并上缴中华人民共和国护照，等于你没中国护照了，失去中华人民共和国国籍。
第二，凡是“叛国投敌”成功的，具有外籍，例如英国国籍者等，申请中华民国护照，法律上是可行的。但是申请台湾居民来往大陆通行证（台胞证）是不可行的。为什么？
A，以上面各位大侠给的链接，和我的理解，申请中华民国护照，会另外在中华民国护照上加一条，“侨居”。等于不享有台湾居住权，没有台湾户籍，就是个旅行证件而已。能去台湾住和工作吗？我想不行吧。
B， 我想大多数英籍华人的意思是想申请台胞证。但是没有台湾户籍，等于没有台湾身份证。只有旅行证件，即“中华民国护照”者，而没有台湾身份证，是申请不到台胞证的。请参见：
http://www.ctshk.com/zhengjian/taiwan.htm
备注，这个和港澳居民来往内地通行证（回乡证）近似，要有当地户籍，才会有身份证，有身份证才能申请。申请回乡证，台胞证需要身份证，而不是用护照，不能用旅行证件。理由很简单，护照是出国用的，台湾人，港澳人理论上是中国人，不看护照，看身份证。
这个贴子里谈到了一些，http://lkcn.net/bbs/index.php?showtopic=161126
A.看了大家的讨论 主要在于入籍之后不能合法的免签去中国的问题
我实践了一个合法的方法 不过似乎麻烦点
申请 中华人民共和国旅行证
大陆居民在海外呆满4年或者取得永久居留权2年 就可以申请 中华民国(台湾)护照
原帖地址: 背包客栈自助游论坛 http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1638673
在第三国有永久居留权的 中华民国(台湾)护照持有人 可以申请 中华人民共和国旅行证
中华人民共和国旅行证 2年有效 不限次入境 不限拘留时间 出入境不验第三国签证(事实上 旅行证无法获取任何第三国签证)
但是: 中华人民共和国旅行证只能在中华人民共和国驻外使领馆申请 换发 不可延期
持中华人民共和国旅行证入境中国的人视为中华人民共和国公民 不享受外国人或台湾人待遇
我去年申请了旅行证 回国了两次 没有任何麻烦 不过据同事讲 她出境时被要求出示中华民国(台湾)护照
中华民国(台湾)是承认双重国籍的 所以在入籍其他国家之后不用担心护照没有
最后 补充一句 现在据说背页加盖'新'字样的中华民国(台湾)护照 不给批准中华人民共和国旅行证了
所以想这么办的要提早行动了 因为根据'大陆居民在海外呆满4年或者取得永久居留权2年'得到的中华民国(台湾)护照背页加盖'新'字样 要1年之后才换发没有盖'新'字样普通护照
-----------------
B.第一，中华人民共和国公民申请中华民国护照，名义上是“叛国投敌”。呵呵。为什么这么说？申请中华民国护照后，要放弃并上缴中华人民共和国护照，等于你没中国护照了，失去中华人民共和国国籍。
第二，凡是“叛国投敌”成功的，具有外籍，例如英国国籍者等，申请中华民国护照，法律上是可行的。但是申请台湾居民来往大陆通行证（台胞证）是不可行的。为什么？
A，以上面各位大侠给的链接，和我的理解，申请中华民国护照，会另外在中华民国护照上加一条，“侨居”。等于不享有台湾居住权，没有台湾户籍，就是个旅行证件而已。能去台湾住和工作吗？我想不行吧。
B， 我想大多数英籍华人的意思是想申请台胞证。但是没有台湾户籍，等于没有台湾身份证。只有旅行证件，即“中华民国护照”者，而没有台湾身份证，是申请不到台胞证的。请参见：
http://www.ctshk.com/zhengjian/taiwan.htm
备注，这个和港澳居民来往内地通行证（回乡证）近似，要有当地户籍，才会有身份证，有身份证才能申请。申请回乡证，台胞证需要身份证，而不是用护照，不能用旅行证件。理由很简单，护照是出国用的，台湾人，港澳人理论上是中国人，不看护照，看身份证。
(ZZ)海外大陆人申请台湾护照及旅行证的想法I.
http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245181
中华人民共和国国籍法在１９８０年９月１０日通过并实行,第三条说”中华人民共和国不承认中国公民具有双重国籍”,此条文造成非常多的海外人士许多心理上的决择,因为事业上要在海外发展,但又因为家庭在中国,一但放弃中国国籍会在生活上与心理上造成很大的伤害与不便.在此我想到了一个既可以加入外国国籍却又可以合法保留中国国籍的办法,提供给大家参考。
中华民国(台湾) 护照条例施行细则第18条说到:
第十八条
在海外之大陆地区人民，符合下列情形者，得经驻外馆处转请主管 机关依本条例第九条但书规定许可后，持用普通护照： 一、 已取得当地永久居留权；当地无永久居留制度，须取得长期 居留资格且能继续延长居留者。 二、 旅居海外四年以上；或已在取得该居留权国家连续住满二年 以上；或为台湾地区人民之配偶，结婚已满二年或已生有子 女。 三、 有政治、经济、社会、教育、科技、文化、体育、侨务、宗 教或人道之特殊考虑。 前项大陆地区人民首次申请普通护照，应备护照用照片二张及下列 档： 一、 普通护照申请书。 二、 当地永久或长期居留证正本及影本各一份，正本验毕后退 还。 三、 大陆地区所发护照影本或身分证明文件。 四、 其他相关证明文件。 前项普通护照之效期为三年以下，护照末页应加盖新字戳记。第一 项大陆地区人民领取普通护照时，应将大陆地区所发护照缴销。”
大陆地区人士取得外国永久居留权后,马上就可以向台湾驻外办事处申请中华民国海外护照,留学生或在海外劳务者只要连续居留两年以上(720天),或是离开中国大陆地区4年以上,均可申请,其申请的中华民国海外护照有效期为3年。
原帖地址: 背包客栈自助游论坛 http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245181
大陆地区海外人士取得台湾海外护照的好处:
1. 可合法保留中国国籍及海外国籍,成为双重国籍的公民.
2. 台湾护照可前往60多个国家免签或落地签证(美国关岛及北马群岛除外)
取得台湾海外护照后如何返回中国大陆?
取得中华民国海外护照后可以向各地的中国大使馆申请”中华人民共和国旅行证”做为返回中国大陆的旅行证件,其有效期为2年,在有效期内可多次无限制的出入中国大陆并居留。
申请了中华民国海外护照可以前往台湾定居或旅游吗?
持中华民国海外护照在台无户籍人士欲前往台湾旅游及定居,需事先向台湾驻外办事处申请,每次停留时间为3个月,可延期一次。
附件:
1. 中华人民共和国国籍法 http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-05/25/content_843.htm
2. 中华民国护照条例细则
http://www.boca.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=3007&ctNode=368&mp=1
3. 中华民国国民适用以免签证或落地签证方式前往之国家或地区
http://www.boca.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=1335&ctNode=270&mp=1
4. 申办中华人民共和国旅行证
http://big5.fmprc.gov.cn/gate/big5/www.fmcoprc.gov.hk/chn/lsfw/zgrzj/t140231.htm
5. 申请入台许可证
http://www.immigration.gov.tw/aspcode/show_menu22.asp?url_disno=20
中华人民共和国国籍法在１９８０年９月１０日通过并实行,第三条说”中华人民共和国不承认中国公民具有双重国籍”,此条文造成非常多的海外人士许多心理上的决择,因为事业上要在海外发展,但又因为家庭在中国,一但放弃中国国籍会在生活上与心理上造成很大的伤害与不便.在此我想到了一个既可以加入外国国籍却又可以合法保留中国国籍的办法,提供给大家参考。
中华民国(台湾) 护照条例施行细则第18条说到:
第十八条
在海外之大陆地区人民，符合下列情形者，得经驻外馆处转请主管 机关依本条例第九条但书规定许可后，持用普通护照： 一、 已取得当地永久居留权；当地无永久居留制度，须取得长期 居留资格且能继续延长居留者。 二、 旅居海外四年以上；或已在取得该居留权国家连续住满二年 以上；或为台湾地区人民之配偶，结婚已满二年或已生有子 女。 三、 有政治、经济、社会、教育、科技、文化、体育、侨务、宗 教或人道之特殊考虑。 前项大陆地区人民首次申请普通护照，应备护照用照片二张及下列 档： 一、 普通护照申请书。 二、 当地永久或长期居留证正本及影本各一份，正本验毕后退 还。 三、 大陆地区所发护照影本或身分证明文件。 四、 其他相关证明文件。 前项普通护照之效期为三年以下，护照末页应加盖新字戳记。第一 项大陆地区人民领取普通护照时，应将大陆地区所发护照缴销。”
大陆地区人士取得外国永久居留权后,马上就可以向台湾驻外办事处申请中华民国海外护照,留学生或在海外劳务者只要连续居留两年以上(720天),或是离开中国大陆地区4年以上,均可申请,其申请的中华民国海外护照有效期为3年。
原帖地址: 背包客栈自助游论坛 http://www.bbkz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=245181
大陆地区海外人士取得台湾海外护照的好处:
1. 可合法保留中国国籍及海外国籍,成为双重国籍的公民.
2. 台湾护照可前往60多个国家免签或落地签证(美国关岛及北马群岛除外)
取得台湾海外护照后如何返回中国大陆?
取得中华民国海外护照后可以向各地的中国大使馆申请”中华人民共和国旅行证”做为返回中国大陆的旅行证件,其有效期为2年,在有效期内可多次无限制的出入中国大陆并居留。
申请了中华民国海外护照可以前往台湾定居或旅游吗?
持中华民国海外护照在台无户籍人士欲前往台湾旅游及定居,需事先向台湾驻外办事处申请,每次停留时间为3个月,可延期一次。
附件:
1. 中华人民共和国国籍法 http://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-05/25/content_843.htm
2. 中华民国护照条例细则
http://www.boca.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=3007&ctNode=368&mp=1
3. 中华民国国民适用以免签证或落地签证方式前往之国家或地区
http://www.boca.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=1335&ctNode=270&mp=1
4. 申办中华人民共和国旅行证
http://big5.fmprc.gov.cn/gate/big5/www.fmcoprc.gov.hk/chn/lsfw/zgrzj/t140231.htm
5. 申请入台许可证
http://www.immigration.gov.tw/aspcode/show_menu22.asp?url_disno=20
订阅：
博文 (Atom)