關於 香港 百 萬 人遊行 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【#Patreon國際關係進階】當局者迷・再別明報：一百年後，人們如何閱讀香港這段歷史？

我們活在當下，對一切事物的判斷，很難超越當刻的是非好惡。假如可以斷捨離，回望過去，卻可能恍然大悟。生活在香港時，營營役役，其實很難理解它的獨特性；到了改頭換面，才發現「世界變了樣」。但其實世界沒變，變的只是其中一個結構。百年之後，回望香港這段結構史，可以如何解讀？......

我們先從昔日香港的示威文化談起。自從八九六四出現兩次過百萬人大遊行，這是當時全港人口比例的1/5，剔除只在單一地理位置集合、不宜遊行的老弱人口等，這是全世界都不可能出現的天文數字，香港就被戲稱為「世界示威之都」。2019年的200萬人遊行，比例更是震古鑠今。但知道這是世界紀錄的同時，多少人深究過為什麼香港能創？在一個民主政體，只要出現這數字比例的1/10，政權就可能倒台；在一個威權政體，只要出現這數字比例的1/100，政權就已經「依法」鎮壓。偏偏舊香港是世上僅有的例外，遊行既沒有成效、又沒有代價，假如單是看「很多人出來遊行」或「政府不聽民意」，都是以偏概全。一個整全視野會告知，背後存在一個超穩定結構。簡述如下......

1984年《中英聯合聲明》簽訂，到2020年《港區國安法》生效之間，這36年，屬於同一個「結構朝代」。每一次「結構革命」，自然因為有某些勢力不滿現結構，相信無論怎樣微調、循序漸進，速度和他們的野望，都不能構成正比，所以需要整個結構瓦解，拆掉重煉。對舊結構而言，這就是「攬炒」；對新結構而言，這就是「完善」。由於香港作為一部機器，始終需要各方勢力共同參與，任何結構都不會完全否各方的存在，爭奪的關鍵是「畫餅權」、「劃線權」、「派牌權」。此所以香港大老如周壽臣等在日佔時代，依然備受尊崇；重光後除了個別例子，又全體被港英回收；改變的只是在超上層結構誰是造王者、誰是junior partners而已。今次這一波「結構革命」，深層root cause是甚麼？......

香港原結構功能是國際社會所必須，必然散落四周，部份必然繼續有香港人參與，這才是歷史學家湯因比的文明生老病死、死而復生循環理論。結構能否總有一天，再結合地理香港的軀殼，誰也說不準，人生需要希望。而從國際關係角度，一切並未終結，反而才剛剛開始。世事蒼茫，寫到這裏，就此道別，在另一個結構，總有相會之時，珍重......

⏺全文見Patreon
https://www.patreon.com/posts/56141554
▶️香港的遺產，如何被各地競爭對手瓜分，又如何重生？
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLLAMVvagJ4

【#Patreon美麗新香港🇭🇰：新香港的官方信仰：不是要你愛國，而是要你犬儒】

對政權而言，香港人的團結是心腹大患。去年反送中遊行的二百萬人紀錄，比例上，放在古今中外任何地方，都是絕對超級無限驚人的世界紀錄，那是倍數式突破了傳統反對派極限五十萬人遊行的基本盤。背後反映甚麼，政權不可能不知道。「不可信」的人究竟只是反對陣營、還是包括建制派在內的全體香港人，北京的研判也很清晰。

所以，任何能聚眾的行為，不但是街頭運動，還包括眾籌、結社、乃至食飯、消費，都成為針對目的。連私人通訊、社交媒體，統統都要製造白色恐怖，以確保香港人倒退回絕對個體化的無機整合年代。

令香港人之間失去互信的目的，自然不是要傳播任何（包括愛國主義在內的）意識形態，而是需要散播極端的犬儒和失敗主義。試想，假如香港人都變成100%的愛國者，獨立思考下，假如認為中國政府不夠愛國，那怎麼辦？假如香港人集體全部真心愛國，根據矛盾論，政權反而失去進一步行動的支點。把香港人本來「現實中帶理想、守法中行彈性」的品格和特性改變，把理想主義的部份徹底閹割，反而符合中國共產黨作為唯物主義大黨最拿手的管治方略。

在這樣的氣氛下，要「改造」香港人成為「新人」，並非要他們真心愛國愛港，只是要一切維持看起來的穩定，不管所有人心裏怎樣想，就「達標」。反正現在香港人不會奢望制度內改變的任何可能，也就是連制度內告訴政權「我不高興」的動力也失去，政權需要怎樣的「民意」「論證」「大功告成」，輕而易舉。林鄭月娥一類高官會忽然覺得「權力多可愛」，彷彿做官忽然容易了，所有人都變得「很mild」、「好配合好配合」。

但真相呢？結果呢？......

⏺全文見Patreon
https://www.patreon.com/posts/45472106
▶️奪舍：國安法一週年誌
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PhXQ5Ezu1k

毋忘五大訴求　公民抗命有理
—10‧20九龍遊行陳情書
（案件編號：DCCC 535/2020）

——————————————————
「毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中」
撐阿銘，即訂閱Patreon：
patreon.com/raphaelwong
—————————————————

胡法官雅文閣下：

　　2012年，我第一次站在法庭上承認違反「公安惡法」，述說對普選的盼望，批評公安惡法不義，並因公民抗命的緣故，甘心樂意接受刑罰。當年我說，如果小圈子選舉沒有被廢除，惡法沒有消失，我依然會一如故我，公民抗命，並且我相信將會有更多學生和市民加入這個行列。想不到時至今日，普選仍然遙遙無期，我亦再次被帶到法庭接受審判，但只是短短７年，已經有數十萬計的群眾公民抗命，反對暴政。今日，我承認違反「未經批准的政府」所訂立「未經批准的惡法」之下的「未經批准集結」罪，我不打算尋求法庭的憐憫，但請容許我佔用法庭些微時間陳情，讓法庭在判刑前有全面考慮。

暴力之濫觴

　　在整個反修例運動如火如荼之際，我正承擔另一宗公民抗命案件的刑責。雖然身在獄中，但仍然心繫手足。我在獄中電視機前見證6月9日、6月16日及8月18日三次百萬港人大遊行，幾多熱愛和平的港人冒天雨冒彈雨走上街頭，抗議不義惡法，今日關於10月20日的案件，亦是如此。可能有人會問，政府已在6月暫緩修例，更在9月正式撤回修例，我等仍然繼續示威，豈非無理取鬧？我相信法官閣下肯定聽過「遲來的正義並非正義」（Justice delayed is justice denied）這句格言。當過百萬群眾走上街頭，和平表達不滿的時候，林鄭政府沒有理睬，反而獨行獨斷，粗暴踐踏港人的意願，結果製造出後來連綿不絕的爭拗，甚至你死我活的對抗。經歷眾多衝突痛苦之後，所謂暫緩撤回，已經微不足道，我們只是更加清楚：沒有民主，就連基本人權都不會擁有！

　　在本案之中，雖然我們都沒有鼓動或作出暴力行為，但根據早前8‧18及10‧1兩宗案件，相信在控方及法庭眼中，案發當日的暴力事件仍然可以算在我們頭上，如此，我有必要問：如果香港有一個公平正義的普及選舉，人民可以在立法會直接否決他們不認可的法律，試問2019年的暴力衝突可以從何而來呢？如果我們眼見的暴力是如此十惡不赦，那麼我們又如何看待百萬人遊行後仍然堅持推行惡法的制度暴力呢？如果我們不能接受人民暴力反抗，那麼我們是否更加不能對更巨大更壓逼的制度暴力沈默不言？真正且經常發生的暴力，是漠視人民訴求的暴力，是踐踏人民意見的暴力，是剝奪人民表達權利的暴力。真正憎恨暴力，痛恨暴力的人，不可能一方面指摘暴力反抗，又容忍制度暴力。如果我需要承擔和平遊行引發出來的暴力事件的刑責，那麼誰應該承擔施政失敗所引發出來的社會騷亂的罪責呢？

社會之病根

　　對於法庭而言，可能2019年所發生的事情只是一場社會騷亂，務必追究違法者個人責任。然而，治亂治其本源，醫病醫其病根，我雖然公民抗命，刻意違法，控方把我帶上法庭，但我卻不應被理解為一個「犯罪個體」。2019年所發生的事情，並不是我一個人或我們這幾位被告可以促成，社會問題的癥結不是「犯罪份子」本身，而是「犯罪原因」。我明白「治亂世用重典」的道理，但如果「殺雞儆猴」是解決方法，就不會在2016年發生旺角騷亂及2017年上訴庭對示威者施以重刑後，2019年仍然會爆發出更大規模的暴力反抗。

如果不希望社會動亂，就必須正本清源，逐步落實「五大訴求」，從根本上改革，挽回民心。2019年反修例運動，其實只是2014年雨傘運動的延續而已，縱使法庭可能認為兩個運動皆是「一股歪風」所引起，但我必須澄清，兩個運動的核心就是追求民主普選，人民當家作主。在2019年11月24日區議會選舉這個最類近全民普選的選舉中，接近300萬人投票，民主派大勝，奪得17個區議會主導權，這就是整個反修例運動的民意，民意就是反對政府決策，反對制度暴力，反對推行惡法，不容爭辯，不辯自明。我們作為礦場裡的金絲雀，多次提醒政府撤回修法，並從根本上改革制度，而在10月20日的九龍遊行當然是反映民意的平台契機。如今，法庭對我們施加重刑，其實只不過是懲罰民意，將金絲雀困在鳥籠之內，甚至扼殺於鼓掌之中，窒礙表達自由。

堅持之重要

　　大運動過後的大鎮壓，使我們失去《蘋果日報》，失去教協，失去民陣，不少民主派領袖以及曾為運動付出的手足戰友都囚於獄中，不少曾經熱情投入運動的朋友亦因《國安法》的威脅轉為低調，新聞自由示威自由日漸萎縮，公民社會受到沈重打擊，我亦失去不少摯友，有感傷孤獨的時候，但我仍然相信，2019年香港人的信念，以及所展現人類的光輝持久未變。我不會忘記百萬人民冒雨捱熱抗拒暴政，抵制惡法，展現我們眾志成城；我不會忘記人潮紅海，讓道救護車，展現我們文明精神；我不會忘記年青志士直接行動反對苛政，捨身成仁，展現我們膽色勇氣；我不會忘記銀髮一族走上街頭保護年青人，展現我們彼此關懷；我不會忘記「五大訴求」，不會忘記2019年區議會選舉，展現我們有理有節。

　　法官閣下，我對於當日的所作所為，不感羞恥，毫無悔意。我能夠在出獄後與群眾同行一路，與戰友同繫一獄，實是莫大榮幸。若法治失去民主基石，將使法庭無奈地接受專制政權所訂立解釋的法律限制，隨時變成政治工具掃除異見，因此爭取民主普選，建設真正法治，追求公平正義，仍然是我的理想。在這條路上，如有必要，我仍然會公民抗命，正如終審法院海外非常任法官賀輔明（Lord Hoffmann）所言，發自良知的公民抗命有悠久及光榮的傳統，歷史將證明我們是正確的。我期望，曾與我一起遊行抗命的手足戰友要堅持信念，在艱難歲月裡毋忘初衷，活在愛和真實之中。

　　最後，如9年前一樣，我想借用美國民權領袖馬丁路德金牧師的一番話對我們的反對者說：「我們將以自己忍受苦難的能力，來較量你們製造苦難的能力。我們將用我們靈魂的力量，來抵禦你們物質的暴力。對我們做你們想做的事吧，我們仍然愛你們。我們不能憑良心服從你們不公正的法律，因為拒惡與為善一樣是道德責任。將我們送入監獄吧，我們仍然愛你們。」（We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you.）

　　願慈愛的主耶穌賜我們平安，與我和我一家同在，與法官閣下同在，與香港人同在。沒有暴徒，只有暴政；五大訴求，缺一不可！願榮耀歸上帝，榮光歸人民！

第五被告
黃浩銘
二零二一年八月十九日

Lest we forget the five demands: civil disobedience is morally justified
- Statement on 10‧20 Kowloon Rally
(Case No.: DCCC 535/2020)

Your Honour Judge Woodcock

In 2012, I stood before the court and admitted to violating the "Public Security Evil Law". I expressed my hope for universal suffrage, criticized the evil law as unjust, and willingly accepted the penalty for civil disobedience. Back then, I said that if the small-circle election had not been abolished and the draconian law had not disappeared, I would still be as determined as I was, and I believe that more students and citizens would join this movement. Today, universal suffrage is still a long way off, and I have been brought before the court again for trial. But in just seven years, hundreds of thousands of people have already risen up in civil disobedience against tyranny. Today, I plead guilty to "unauthorised assembly" under an unapproved evil law enacted by an unauthorised government. I do not intend to seek the court's mercy, but please allow me to take up a little time in court to present my case so that the court can consider all aspects before sentencing me.

The roots of violence

At the time when the whole anti-extradition law movement was in full-swing, I was taking responsibility for another civil disobedience case. Although I was in prison, my heart was still with the people. I witnessed the three million-person rallies on 9 June, 16 June and 18 August on television in prison, when many peace-loving people took to the streets despite the rain and bullets, to protest against unjust laws. Some people may ask, "The Government has already suspended the legislative amendments in June and formally withdrew the bill in September, but we are still demonstrating, are we not being unreasonable?" I am sure your Honour has heard of the adage "Justice delayed is justice denied". When more than a million people took to the streets to express their discontent peacefully, the Lam administration ignored them and instead acted arbitrarily, brutally trampling on the wishes of the people of Hong Kong, resulting in endless arguments and even confrontations. After so many conflicts and painful experiences, the so-called moratorium is no longer meaningful. We only know better: without democracy, we cannot even have basic human rights!

In this case, although we did not instigate or commit acts of violence, I believe that in the eyes of the prosecution and the court, the violence on the day of the incident can still be counted against us, based on the August 18 and October 1 case. And now I must ask - If Hong Kong had a fair and just universal election, and the public could directly veto laws they did not approve of at the Legislative Council, then how could the violent clashes of 2019 have come about? If the violence we see is so heinous, how do we feel about the institutional violence that insists on the imposition of draconian laws even after millions of people have taken to the streets? If we cannot accept violent rebellion, how can we remain silent in the face of even greater and more oppressive institutional violence? The true and frequent violence is the kind of violence that ignores people's demands, that tramples on their opinions, that deprives them of their right to express themselves. People who truly hate violence and abhor it cannot accuse violent resistance on the one hand and tolerate institutional violence on the other. If I have to bear the criminal responsibility for the violence caused by the peaceful demonstration, then who should bear the criminal responsibility for the social unrest caused by failed administration?

The roots of society's problems

From a court's point of view, it may be that what happened in 2019 was just a series of social unrest, and that those who broke the law must be held personally accountable. What happened in 2019 was not something that I alone or the defendants could have made possible, and the crux of the social problem was not the 'criminals' but the 'causes of crime'. I understand the concept of " applying severe punishment to a troubled world", but if "decimation" was really the solution, there would not have been more violent rebellions in 2019 after the Mongkok "riot" in 2016 and the heavy sentences handed down to protesters by the Court of Appeal in 2017.

If we do not want social unrest, we must get to the root of the problem and implement the "five demands" step by step, so as to achieve fundamental reforms and win back the hearts of the people. 2019's anti-revision movement is indeed a continuation of 2014's Umbrella Movement, and even though the court may think that both movements are caused by a "perverse wind", I must clarify that the core of both movements is the pursuit of democracy and universal suffrage, and the people being the masters of their own house. In the District Council election on 24 November 2019, which is the closest thing to universal suffrage, nearly 3 million people voted, and the democratic camp won a huge victory, winning majority in 17 District Councils. As canaries in the monetary coal mine, we have repeatedly reminded the government to withdraw the extradition bill and fundamentally reform the system, and the march in Kowloon on 20 October was certainly an opportunity to reflect public opinion. Now, by imposing heavy penalties on us, the court is only punishing public opinion, trapping the canaries in a birdcage, or even stifling them in the palm of their hands, suffocating the freedom of expression.

The importance of persistence

As a result of the crackdown after the mass movement, we lost Apple Daily, the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union, and the Civil Human Rights Front. Many of our democratic leaders and comrades who had contributed to the movement were imprisoned, and many of our friends who had been passionately involved in the movement had been forced to lay low under the threat of the National Security Law. I still believe that the faith of Hong Kong people and the glory of humanity seen in 2019 will remain unchanged. I will never forget the millions of people who braved the rain and the heat to resist tyranny and evil laws, demonstrating our unity of purpose; I will never forget the crowds of people who gave way to ambulances, demonstrating our civility; I will never forget the young people who sacrificed their lives, demonstrating our courage and bravery; I will never forget the silver-haired who took to the streets to protect the youth, demonstrating our care for each other; I will never forget the "five demands" and the 2019 District Council election, demonstrating our rationality and decency.

Your Honour, I have nothing to be ashamed of and no remorse for what I did on that day. It is my great honour to be in prison with my comrades and to be able to walk with the public after my release. If the rule of law were to lose its democratic foundation, the courts would have no choice but to accept the legal restrictions set by the autocratic regime and become a political tool to eliminate dissent at any time. As Lord Hoffmann, a non-permanent overseas judge of the Court of Final Appeal, said, civil disobedience from the conscience has a long and honourable tradition, and history will prove us right. I hope that my comrades in arms who walked with me in protests will keep their faith and live in love and truth in the midst of this difficult time.

Finally, as I did nine years ago, I would like to say something to those who oppose us, borrowing the words of American civil rights leader Reverend Martin Luther King: "We shall match your capacity to inflict suffering by our capacity to endure suffering. We shall meet your physical force with soul force. Do to us what you will, and we shall continue to love you. We cannot in all good conscience obey your unjust laws because noncooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good. Throw us in jail and we shall still love you."

Peace be with me and my family, with Your Honour, and with the people of Hong Kong. There are no thugs, only tyranny; five demands, not one less! To god be the glory and to people be the glory!

The Fifth Defendant
Wong Ho Ming
19 August 2021

香港反送中大遊行屆滿兩週年，台灣民間團體今天舉行記者會，呼籲政府要完善援港機制。流亡海外的香港民運領袖，羅冠聰、張昆陽也透過視訊發言，表示感謝台灣為香港的付出，海外港人也會持續努力發聲，讓國際社會看到中共威權的威脅。

詳細新聞內容請見【公視新聞網】 https://news.pts.org.tw/article/530019

-
由台灣公共電視新聞部製播，提供每日正確、即時的新聞內容及多元觀點。

■ 按讚【公視新聞網FB】https://www.facebook.com/pnnpts
■ 訂閱【公視新聞網IG】https://www.instagram.com/pts.news/
■ 追蹤【公視新聞網TG】https://t.me/PTS_TW_NEWS

#公視新聞 #即時新聞
-
看更多：
■【P sharp新聞實驗室】全媒體新聞實驗，提供新一代的新聞資訊服務。 （https://newslab.pts.org.tw）
■【PNN公視新聞議題中心】聚焦台灣土地環境、勞工司法、族群及平權等重要議題。 （https://pnn.pts.org.tw）

香港九位民主派人士2019年參與民陣發起的818百萬人遊行，事後被指控「組織未經批准集結」等罪，全案今天裁決，包括壹傳媒創辦人黎智英，以及獲得諾貝爾和平獎提名的民主黨創黨人李柱銘等七人罪名成立。美國國務卿布林肯則向國會提出報告，認定香港不再擁有高度自治，不應再享有美國給予的特殊待遇。

詳細新聞內容請見【公視新聞網】 https://news.pts.org.tw/article/519829

-
由台灣公共電視新聞部製播，提供每日正確、即時的新聞內容及多元觀點。

■ 按讚【公視新聞網FB】https://www.facebook.com/pnnpts
■ 訂閱【公視新聞網IG】https://www.instagram.com/pts.news/
■ 追蹤【公視新聞網TG】https://t.me/PTS_TW_NEWS

#公視新聞 #即時新聞
-
看更多：
■【P sharp新聞實驗室】全媒體新聞實驗，提供新一代的新聞資訊服務。 （https://newslab.pts.org.tw）
■【PNN公視新聞議題中心】聚焦台灣土地環境、勞工司法、族群及平權等重要議題。 （https://pnn.pts.org.tw）

嘉賓：何秀蘭
主持：劉細良、Anthony

FPS 轉數快: 94681803
Patreon賬戶：https://www.patreon.com/hkpeanut
HONG KONG INTERNET RADIO LIMITED
支票/銀行過數
轉賬至滙豐銀行 023-280233-838，抬頭 HONG KONG INTERNET RADIO LIMITED

花生網頁: www.hkpeanuts.com
PayPal 付款賬號: hkangrypeanut@gmail.com
FB專頁: https://www.facebook.com/hkpeanuts/