"社會可接受的道德底線"的話語

"社會可接受的道德底線"固然是流動的，但我感興趣的，是在特定時間下，不同的人祭出"社會可接受的道德底線"時，到底分別意指些什麼?這些不同的話語實踐之間的文化政治到底又是什麼?是否真的有"社會可接受的道德底線"，不是最重要的，但現實中卻確實存在著不同有關"社會可接受的道德底線"的說法。

同意

促成改變的同時，我們都需要共同擔負風險。這也必須是共識的其中一點。

Bad air

According to 阿野, Zamenhof created Esperanto "為了培養一種國際間的和平、團結和平等的文化." Such was perhaps the noble wish of the doctor; but let us also take a look at the characteristics of Esperanto itself. 阿野 offered us a Wikipedia link, and we shall trust that the information there is at least acceptable to him. There we read:

"As a constructed language, Esperanto is not genealogically related to any ethnic language. Esperanto can be described as "a language lexically predominantly Romanic, morphologically intensively agglutinative and to a certain degree isolating in character". The phonology, grammar, vocabulary, and semantics are based on the western Indo-European languages. The phonemic inventory is essentially Slavic, as is much of the semantics, while the vocabulary derives primarily from the Romance languages, with a lesser contribution from Germanic. Pragmatics and other aspects of the language not specified by Zamenhof's original documents were influenced by the native languages of early speakers, primarily Russian, Polish, German, and French."

Russian, Polish, German, French; Slavic, Romance, Germanic; western Indo-European. Ah, we get a picture: If the world really adopted Esperanto as its language, official and living, we would essentially have everybody speak henceforth a muddy metamorphosized mixture of Russian, Polish, German, French, and a handful more of the western Indo-European. And by having everybody speak this, the world would hopefully achieve "一種國際間的和平、團結和平等的文化"? So "平等" that some muddy metamorphosized mixture of western Indo-European languages could conquer the world without even an East India Company or a McDonald's!

It is not for nothing that this hyper-fancy--whether to call it liberal, or radical, or anarchist is immaterial--must be laughed out of the room before we suffer patiently another long discourse--probably by the same person!--on cultural hegemony. The post-colonial theorist is, I am sure, already grinding his surgical knife: he shall most mercilessly dissect this Esperanto hyper-fancy. But let me avoid that horrible sight, let me keep clear of all the screams and shrieks of the submerged Russian, Polish, German, French, those shadows of the glorious imperial past (a time when liberal internationalism was able to wear a most civilized garb) that must be extracted, torn apart, pinned unto a theoretical frame, specimened, preserved, and held up against all who dare speak of a peaceful, solidary, and equal culture in western--and western Indo-European--ventriloquism. Shall we smell bad air here? Do we smell bad air here? No, too thick, too suffocating, Oh equal culture, bad air, equal world culture, those shadows of French, German, Polish--Polish?--Russian--Russian? Between, too bad, between the Baltic and the Mediterranean, between the Atlantic and the Caspian is all--all!--internationalism (and he calls it equal!) what? bad air! what? bad air bad ... bad air ...Don't you hear that voice? there it says better to have English! ... ah bad air ... bad!

香港獨立媒體 - Comments for "道德底線之請分主客"

"社會可接受的道德底線"的話語

同意

Bad air