黃毓民退出人民力量的政治影響

黃毓民突然宣佈退出人民力量,原因不明山中也不管,我只關心這事的影響力。總括來説,他面向公衆的政治生涯基本上已經是完結了。

首先得説明,黃毓民的頭腦是香港反對派人物中較爲清晰的一位(「泛民」是一個描述不了現實政治狀況的標籤)。他提出「全民定約」,修改《基本法》等都與山中意見頗爲接近(我提出更新社會契約)。但他的問題是太自負,什麽都要一意孤行,只認爲自己是對的——還要必然是對的——其他人就必需要聼從他。這就説明他不適合當政治領袖。一個政治領袖的任務是帶領公衆面向挑戰,指出正確的方向,幫助社會作出適當的選擇。他不能想當然的認爲只要自己是對的,公衆就應該聽從:他要説明道理,花時間與精力遊說並組織政治力量以實踐他的政治理想。不能組織力量,理想就流於空談並日漸口號化。黃毓民多次與他的夥伴閙分裂,使政治力量分散,這就説明他缺少作爲現代民主政治領袖應有的風度與魄力。

他現在一退,對反對派整體而言可能有正面的影響,因爲他們之間的意氣之爭可以減少,可以更有效的組織、集結力量。他們不再需要為防止黃毓民奪去他們的支持者而提出跟他不一樣的論點,因此減少了這種此消彼長的内耗。如果他們能夠放棄談論細節,集中在大原則上作出共識,定出合理的綱領與策略(重點是必須合理),要組織一股力量並不是不可能。至於黃毓民,他既然退出公衆政治,他可以選擇退居幕後做一些指導性工作(或全心全意準備坐牢)。不需要再互相爭奪聲勢,不再有政治上的利益衝突,或許黃毓民可以更有效的遊説其他人接受他的意見。只要處理得好,對雙方來説這其實是一件頗正面的事。

一個較負面的可能是,缺少了黃毓民,他這個位置可能會被一些更激進但無知又不會顧慮全局的人,例如陳雲,所取代,這將會是一件挺危險的事。

This entry was posted in 策略, 政治與經濟 and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 則回應給 黃毓民退出人民力量的政治影響

  1. mrtso1989 說:

    “但他的問題是太自負,什麽都要一孤行,只認爲自己是對的——還要必然是對的——其他人就必需要聼從他。這就説明他不適合當政治領袖。"

    Lenin is exactly a figure like what you said – arrogant, uncompromising and stubborn, but no one can agree he was an inept political leader by reference to what he has done – toppling the existing regime, instituting his own terror, and finally achieving power for his party that was supported by only few people.

    So I guess a ‘good’ political leader can be arrogant, uncompromising and stubborn, provided he can get a mass of loyal followings who are dare enough to seize power and impose their wills on politically indifferent mass.

    Raymond Wong and Wan Chin are not necessarily intellectual scholar (neither is Lenin nor Mao) but they could win solid followings and be potentially influential in the political world.

    • 山中 說:

      Lenin was not a political leader of our time: he had an armed force, the German Empire to help him and a failing state to face with. Furthermore, he had Trotsky, who was both a scholar and a brilliant military leader. Lenin had to adjust as well with the New Economic Policy as his brand of communism just wouldn’t fly.

      A good political leader can afford to be arrogant when his arrogance is supported by his comrades and/or political allies, and proving him/herself correct during that course of action. Both Wong and Chin fail to do just that. In Wong’s case, they are unwilling to support or be associated with him anymore. In Chin’s case, he does not even have a clear idea of what he is about to do.

      Worse still, unlike Lenin, they neglect to consolidate political power, which is something they never get to exercise in the first place. Let’s just say Lenin would find it degrading to be compared with them.

  2. Bernard Chan 說:

    “他面向公衆的政治生涯基本上已經是完結”—>我不相信黃毓民會甘於寂寞, 他是想自立為王吧!

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s