立場新聞 Stand News

譴責的資格

2016/2/16 — 14:16

大年初一晚上,警民衝突其中一個主要陣地,為朗豪坊對開的馬路。(無線新聞截圖)

大年初一晚上,警民衝突其中一個主要陣地,為朗豪坊對開的馬路。(無線新聞截圖)

分析派馬克思主義者政治哲學家柯亨死後出版的論文集《Finding Oneself in the Other》收有《Casting the First Stone: Who Can, and Who Can’t, Condemn the Terrorists? 》一文,強調行為的對錯和譴責的資格,是兩個不同的概念。柯氏認為,恐怖分子濫殺無辜,極不道德,但這不代表所有人都有譴責恐怖分子的資格。

喪失譴責的資格,原因有二。一,我們做過我們所譴責的行為。二,是我們與受譴責者的行為,有所關聯,比如說,假如你明知道我會殺人,依然給我提供武器,你就可能失去譴責我的資格。柯氏的理由是:「You’re involved in it yourself.」

廣告

柯氏認為,假如政權以強凌弱,受欺壓者別無選擇,以不道德的手段進行抗爭,則政權不得譴責受欺壓者,因受欺壓者的困境,正由政權之不義所致。

柯氏原文,以恐怖主義為例,一清如水,姑錄如下:

廣告

I might have to choose between disaster for me and a course so morally horrible that the only decent thing I can do is to choose disaster for me. How can you in particular condemn me if I refuse to choose disaster for me, when it was you who deprived me of all acceptable alternatives, unless your having done so? If someone has no acceptable alternative there is a case to answer against whoever made that true. If the sad moral truth is that, although all of my alternatives to terrorism are unacceptable, my terrorism is nevertheless unjustified, then how, even so, can the person who deprived me of unacceptable alternatives, and so drove me to admittedly unjustified terrorism, condemn that resort, without justifying the action that thus disabled me?

年初一旺角騷動,翌日梁振英說成是暴動,對示威者不容姑息。前天,張曉明說,示威者的行為,有恐怖主義傾向。建制人士,譴責之聲,不絕於耳。可是,今日香港落得如此田地,責任誰屬?

政權不得譴責示威者,不能證明示威者的行為合乎道德,但今日許多拋頭露面的人,恐怕都沒有資格譴責旺角的示威者。昨日,政府以香港社會自由民主為由,拒絕成立調查委員會找出騷動的源頭,為的正是躲避那個尷尬的結論:You’re involved in it yourself.

發表意見