Posts
My comments left on Inner Space’s Dec 5, 2008 blog article 【民主的兩個例子】 :
Space: As mentioned in my blog articles concerning the recent political crisis in Canada: “… 任何政制都不会是十全十美,加拿大的威斯特敏斯特体系Westminster System ... 民主制度也不例外 ...” The success or failure of any democratic system, be it the one in Thailand, Canada, or other nations in the world, depends very much on the history, culture and people(s) of a country at any given point in time. Democracy, and for that matter any political beliefs or systems, is not a kind of take-it-and-you-are-cured magic pill. What is happening in Thailand is very different than and should not be compared to the situation in Canada, even though both countries have recent elections. To pass judgment on the good or bad of democracy based on Thailand and Canada is like saying Japanese and Chinese are the same because they are both Asians and they all look alike. I would submit that the leaders and people(s) of each country or state must experiment, customize and find out which type of political system is the best for them, recognizing that good governance does not happen overnight nor will it remain static.
ps: I take the liberty of linking your article to my blog.
Haricot
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Link to Inner Space: 【民主的兩個例子】
http://mindnecessity.blogspot.com/2008/12/apec.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hari 兄：
多謝連結了文章，其實寫下『民主的兩個例子』，只是看到了最近兩個發生在地球兩面，有關民主的兩個例子，旨望 stir up the thoughts，還沒有分析、討論、辯證、反證、下結論的。
令外 兄臺其實也讀了小弟另一篇文章：『Secretary of State Hillary Clinton』，也發表了意見。
不知兄臺有沒有讀埋，我連結了在伸延閱覽：『林肯啟示錄～Team of Rivals 政敵團隊～蔡子強』一文呢？
蔡“文”中除了指出奧巴馬能夠容納政敵之外，文章尾段，還蔡指出香港的首席行政長官曾蔭權，在重組行政會議成員時，企圖容納泛民主派中人入會，但受到北京中央的反對，胎死腹中。
Quoting：
重組行政會議應有新思維
原本外間以為，9月立法選舉後，曾蔭權便會重組行政會議，並公布新成員名單。但現時已經接近年尾，還是只聞樓梯響。各種傳聞遂不脛而走，例如近日某周刊便說曾蔭權想委任泛民中人進入行會，擴闊自己的決策基礎，但卻遭北京 從中阻撓，一波三折。
是耶非耶，外人無從得知。但林肯和奧巴馬（以至羅斯福和邱吉爾等）的故事告知我們，如果有胸襟、有識見、有EQ和有政治技巧，在重大危機時，把政敵引入自己的團隊之中，尋求大和解，以及用人唯才，才是國家的福祉所在。
林肯和奧巴馬講的是被稱為「華府第一部長」的國務卿，如今香港講的只是區區一個行政會議席位，如果連這樣的胸襟也沒有（對曾蔭權而言），又或者空間都不給予香港（對北京而言），我們的政治是否也太窩囊呢﹖
end quoting
我這幾天嘗試把自己的兩篇文章，加上蔡子強的文章，集思寫成一篇『從政者的胸襟』，寫完又改，改完又寫，食不甘味，夜不成眠，連幾位網友在其他文章的回應，都暫時擱置，未有回答哩。
希望趁這個周末，可以完成『從政者的胸襟』，就算未完，也發表其“一”中期報告，讓各位參加討論一吓，再後至寫埋落去。
ops，
令外 應作 『另外』才對，
小朋友見到不要學壞，
是心空哥哥寫了白字。
Inner Space:
I did read with interest the article 『林肯啟示錄～Team of Rivals政敵團隊～蔡子強 』and would like to offer the following comments:
There are many reasons why a senior executive would want to have a rival/competitor “in the tent”. Perhaps he/she really believes in the Merit Principle (i.e. appointment of the best qualified candidate into a position based on relative merit). This is the reported Lincoln example mentioned in your reference article. However, there could be other reasons. For example: Having a rival/enemy within one’s organization or sphere of influence will help keep the dialogue going and/or keep track of his/her activities. This is not inconsistent with 【孫子兵策】: 『 知己知彼,百戰百勝 』 The百勝 here includes 不戰而胜, such as negotiating a peaceful settlement, co-existence, coalition, or even collaboration.
I look forward to reading your new article and sharing our views.
寫白字 - that happens to me too !!
Post a Comment