我對香港國民教育的了解

香港政府推行國民教育，引起不少爭議﹐事件己提升至勝負之爭﹐檯面的理據已經越來越沒關係。這場鬥爭不斷升溫﹐我認為政府不會贏﹐立刻撤回政策似是最佳選擇。

國民教育

香港政府推行國民教育，引起不少爭議，反對人士組成「民間反對國民教育科大聯 盟」，其中包括由學生主持的「學民思潮」和由家長組成的「國民教育家長關注組」。
政府發放的教材，主要內容是教育國民積極人生、多元化思考、認識國家結構，合 理之至，並無不妥。

爭議焦點

爭議焦點是教材極度推崇共產黨，要求學生愛中國，「以做中國人為禜」，「看見 國旗升起時感情激動」等等。
將偏頗言論混入正面教材，很容易令人懷疑整個國民教育的意圖，加上有些維護國 民教育的人公開支持「冼腦」及「愛國教育」，更令巿民對國民教育起疑。 這些支持者其實是幫倒忙﹕

• 「洗腦」是不擇手段，通常是透過重覆、瞞騙、誤導等手段，灌輸一些信念給別 人。這是宣傳，不是教育。支持洗腦的人說外國也有洗腦教育，即使如此，也難說 服大家洗腦是好的教育。 英國學校會告訴學生毒品的害處﹐不會叫學生不要吸毒﹐這是尊重學生判斷能力﹐ 比洗腦文明。
• 「愛國教育」一詞本身亦有問題，愛是感情，有則有、無則無，如果「愛國」是教 學目標，讀完課程仍不愛國的學生，理應納入「不及格」之列。為求合格，學生只 有裝作愛國，但口是心非，決不是可取的國民質素，當然不能列為教學目標。

即使是一個好政策，在民意沸騰的情況下，也不能推行，更何況明顯有偏頗的政策。

相方爭持

教育局長吳克儉上任之初，也承認為國民教育指引內容有偏頗，但翌日改變口風，認為問題 不大。這表現令人懷疑香港政府受制於幕後主腦。
特首梁振英說在沒有「撤銷」或「不撤銷」的前提下，所有內容都可以商量，這個 說法本來甚為合理。但反對人士既已懷疑政府的動機，合理言論亦難被接受。
政府成立了一個委員會，檢討國民教育政策，由頗有公信力的前平等機會委員會主 席胡紅玉主持，並邀請反對派人士參加，但遭反對派人士拒絕，理由是委員會絕大 多數成員都是政策支持者，只有四五個反對人士代表，檢討結果幾可預測。
反對派拒絕參與談判，原因是不信任政府有談判誠意。其實政府如果真的有誠意檢 討政策，大可以擴大委員會，容納半數支持、半數反對人士。

政府宜立刻退讓

反對人士正在佔領政府總部，而且不斷有人參加絕食，運動得到上十萬人支持。絕食 把注碼增大，事件己提升至勝負之爭﹐檯面的理據已經越來越沒關係﹐討論範圍已 離開國民教育。
反對政策的人，覺得同被壓迫，所以互相支持，感情每天增長﹐更不斷有老師﹐歌 星﹐藝人等聲援﹐聲勢日壯。
共產黨最明白群眾力量，勢不可擋。我不相信政府會贏這場鬥爭。立刻撤回政策， 當然有損政府威信，但長期的鬥﹐爭對政府威信損害更甚。這場鬥爭不難變成八九 民運﹑或阿拉伯茉莉花革命的開始。

Britain's Moral Makeover

Ian Hislop's Age of the Do-Gooders

TV programme broadcast on BBC Two, 9:00PM Mon, 29 Nov 2010
Summarized by Edward Tsang updated 2010.12.12

Every society needs some leaders with conscience. Some leaders significantly changed the British society to the better in Victorian time. Hislop called them Do-Gooders. This programme introduced the Do-Gooders. The way that Hislop introduced the, and strung them together shows his insight.

---

William Wilberforce (1759-1833) urged citizen to improve their moral standard. Despite support by the King, his plead fell to deaf ears – until the French Revolution broke out. Wilberforce advocated zero tolerance to swearing, drinking, debauchery and many other things. He helped set up the RSPCA. He fought for 40 years to secure the abolition of slavery.

Robert Owen (1771-1858) introduced a new view of society. He believed that the key to creating human happiness is to change human character. By improving the environment of the poor people and giving them education, you can change their behaviour. Owen evicted his tenants who don’t keep their houses clean. He offered education to his factory workers’ children, and taught them the value of sharing, being kind, etc.

Thomas Wakley (1795-1862): In his time, who becomes a doctor depends not on what they know, but who they know. Medical knowledge was only passed on to people who can pay. Wakley fought for opening medical profession to the competent rather than the privileged. He created the journal The Lancet. This completely changed the medical culture in Britain.

George Dawson (1821-1876) advocated that people should love their neighbours. “Reform delayed is revolution begun“, he said. He urged the government to build public parks and gardens, provide education for local workers, provide hospital for the poor, free library, etc. for Birmingham. Dawson believes that everyone owes something to the place where they live in, and must pay back to the society.

Charles Treleavon (1807-1886): The public service ethos was a Victorian invention. Until then, the tacit assumption was: the whole point of gaining power or office was to take advantage of it, to line one’s pocket with back-handers. Treleavon attempted to change that by introducing entrance examination to civil services. Civil servants were demanded to give the Government unbiased advice.

Octavia Hill (1838-1912) provided homes to the poor in London. She often collected the rent herself, or sent someone who cared to do so. The aim was to spot problems with the families, with the intention to help them. So she was effectively the first social worker. She demanded tenants to look after the properties, and earn their aids (instead of handing out dole).

[End]

The person who attacks you leaves a part of him in you

Wisdom from Harry Potter

In attempting to kill Harry Potter, Voldemort left a part of himself in Potter. That is why Potter shared part of Voldemort -- including hatred. Potter had to let that part of him die before he could defeat Voldemort (Book 7). In fact, after that part of Potter died, Potter did not attempt to kill Voldemort. He cast the Expelliarmus, the disarming spell (when Voldemort used Avada Kedavra, the killing curse).

When someone tries to hurt you, he leaves part of him on you. For example, you might share the hatred that he left on you. Sometimes you want to hurt him in retaliation. Until you let that part of you die, you'll always be troubled. You'll have to forgive in order to release you from the suffering that he's caused.

Our acts all affect each other. Every action leaves some marks in this world. Unfortunately, we can all be troubled by criticism. Sometimes even the calmest or most intelligent people can be affected.

It's easy to stimulate consumption

All the government needs to do is to spread rumour that the world is going to end soon. People who believe it will spend as if there is no tomorrow.

----------------------

Governments often talk about stimulating consumption in the economy. All the government has to do to encourage spending is to spread rumour that the world is going to end soon. Not everybody buys every rumours, but those who believe in this roomer will start spending as if there is no tomorrow.

To ensure that not everybody spends at the same time, the government can spread one rumour saying that the world is going to end within the next 12 months, and another that says the world will end in 24 months time.

Expectations play an important part in economics. Businesses and politicians fabricating expectations all the time. So spreading rumours is certainly within their scope of acceptable practices.

[End]

Green (and Healthy) Transportation in China

Advocated from 1982; last updated 2011.02.18

China roads were dominated by bicycles in the 70's. As cars replace bicycles, traffic congestion becomes the norm. Cars pollute, and congestions may become intolerable in big cities. China could have implemented the greenest transportation: to build roll-on roll-off undergrounds and trains for bicycles. All short distance travel will be covered by bicycles, long distance by trains.

---

“There are nine million bicycles in Beijing”:

“There are nine million bicycles in Beijing”, sang Katie Melua. I won’t take the number “nine million” too seriously. After all, Katie has been challenged by Simon Singh (for a bit of fun) on her lyric “we are twelve billion light years from the edge”. What is a fact is that there are many, many bicycles in China. Tiananmen was full of bicycles when I visited it in 1979. The same applies to Shanghai and Kwangtung around the same time.

Can one drive in 10 years' time?

Now these cities are full of cars. It is already pretty difficult to travel by car in Beijing now. It will be unimaginable when car ownership reach the same level as the US or Western Europe. Can one still drive by then? What are the solutions? If they have any solutions, the West would want to know. Many say that M25 is the biggest car park in UK.

Potential solution: bicycles on underground and trains:

As China develops, these big cities needed to build undergrounds. They have missed the opportunity to implement the greenest transportation. They could have built undergrounds that specialise in taking bicycles. The undergrounds should be designed in such a way that cyclists could ride into the underground, and push their bikes onto trains specially built to carry bikes. This way, all short distance travelling will be covered by bicycles, and long distances by trains. The system will be efficient, green and healthy to the users. Similarly, trains should be designed for roll-on, roll-off by bicycles. That way, China will have a green transportation. It will probably have a healthier population (helped by cycling exercises).

Better late than never:

I’ve advocated this publicly since the 1980’s, when China started to develop. Many big cities have missed their opportunities. But it is better late than never. Some cities have yet to build their undergrounds. The question is whether they have the determination to implement green transportation. Against them are car manufacturers, who would lobby the government to build more roads instead.

[End]

Simplify and then Exaggerate

One of the commonly used technique by governments and in journalism is “simply and then exaggerate”. Simplification is necessary in daily life. Exaggeration is useful for catching attention. Unfortunately, some people use it to create misunderstanding and incite hatred, which is dangerous and irresponsible.

---

We all simplify

We all simplify. That’s the only way to handle the complex world.

Both “nuclear power is clean” and “nuclear power is dangerous” are simplifying statements. How many people can fully evaluate the many aspects of nuclear power? When one does, what one tells the world will be ignored, because it doesn’t make headlines, and it is too complicated to be understood. That’s why analyses are reduced to simple statements such as the above two.

Dangerous simplification


Simplification and then exaggeration is commonly used in journalism. One example is on immigration matters. Some newspapers promote the simplified and exaggerated views “immigrants get all the jobs”, “immigrants weaken this country by consuming a lot of its resources", "immigrants come to take advantage of our social benefits”. The editors know that these are simplified views. They also know that they have exaggerated these views. They have conveniently ignored the fact that many immigrants are professionals and experts that contribute to the society. The hospitals wouldn't run without foreign doctors and nurses. Universities won't run without overseas scholars.


Simplification is perhaps essential


The above are not an isolated examples. They reflect the general picture. Individuals and societies simplify everything. Simplifying allows others to understand.


Even if one has the sophistication to understand the full picture, one does not necessarily have the time to do so. Given the lack of time, one has to choose between forming a simplified view and not forming a view at all. I would not say whether simple view or no view is better. I suspect that most people will naturally choose the former.


Exaggeration could be irresponsible


Exaggeration allows the message to catch attention and get message across. It is commonly used in daily life. It is often used in humour. Exaggeration is used to by journalists to sell newspapers, by government officials to get elected and promote policies, by companies to promote products. Having private goals is understandable. Achieving private goals through irresponsible exaggeration, such as inciting hatred, is unacceptable.


Exaggeration is irresponsible when it is used deliberately to create misunderstanding, hatred and confrontations. Some governments use simplification and exaggeration to incite hatred towards other countries and cultures. Some newspapers use simplification and exaggeration to incite hatred towards immigrants and promote racial confrontation. These acts are rather dangerous. Unfortunately, they work on people when they don’t think deeply.


[End]

Chinese immigrants to Hong Kong, the selected people

Chinese immigrants to Hong Kong in the past were selected people -- selected by nature. They had special qualities that could benefit a society.

---

The 1949 Chinese immigrants changed Hong Kong

When the Communist Party took over China in 1949, a large number of people moved to Hong Kong and Taiwan. Among them were entrepreneurs and scholars. They established banks, factories and other businesses in Hong Kong. Before these immigrants arrived, Hong Kong was nothing more than a fishing port. It was not until the late 1960’s, when these immigrants have settled (many of them originally considered Hong Kong as a temporary place to stay), that Hong Kong’s economy started to take off. It is fair to say that Hong Kong would not have developed without the Chinese immigrants in 1949.

The swimmers in 1960's

In the 60's, many people swam to Hong Kong from Mainland China. Many of those people did very well later in life. Some of them exhibit high intelligence, entrepreneurship and social responsibility. One good example is 劉夢熊, a respectable, intelligent man, a successful entrepreneur and one who advocates social responsibility in China.


Special qualities of the swimmers

Those who swam to Hong Kong and arrived had special qualities:

1. They were physically and mentally strong.
2. They were willing to take risks.
3. They demonstrated ability to adapt to new challenges.
4. They were probably good in human relationship -- in those days, there was no social benefit. Many of them had to borrow money from friends and relatives; to succeed, one must be good in interpersonal skills. Besides, they had to build up relationship with new people.

Natural selection is good for a society
Through natural selection, immigration is probably a good thing for a society. This is true as long as they are not attracted by the society’s social benefits, which the society has the means to control. This is especially true for those who risk a lot to make the move.


Possible generalization
The analysis may apply to other societies. The USA has benefited from many successful immigrants. Generalization of the above observation goes beyond the scope of this article.


[End]