瑞典：抗議中國國家副主席習近平訪問瑞典

[Crux]

星期一, 29 三月 2010.
"副主席閣下，你所走過的紅地毯是用中國工人和學生的鮮血染成的"

克裡斯托佛-倫德伯格（Kristofer Lunderburg）工人國際委員會（工國委）瑞典哥德堡支部（CWI in Gothenburg）和中國勞工論壇（chinaworker.info）聯合報導

中國國家副主席習近平上週末訪問瑞典工業港口城市哥德堡時遭遇了雙重抗議。來自工國委瑞典支部（中國勞工論 壇（chinaworker.info）與工人國際委員會（CWI）有緊密合作）的成員和瑞典本地工會活動 分子在習近平一行到達時，在其所住酒店外進行了抗議活動。

http://www.chinaworker.info/get_img?NrArticle=1022&NrImage=7 標語牌上寫著"2012雙普選，實現一人一票"以支持中國的民主運動，近年來在香港街頭數以十萬人參與的遊行示威中這一口號膾炙人口。另一個 標語牌 上是"撤銷對‘長毛'（梁國雄）的控罪"，所指的是日前參與"五區總辭，變相公投"運動的社會主義議員候選人梁國雄，他和其他數名香港民主運動人士因為去 年耶誕節組織要求釋放政治犯的示威活動而遭到香港警方起訴。此外還有"支持自由工會"、"反對一黨專制"和"踢走資本家"等口號的標語牌。同時還有一塊巨 大的標語牌上寫著"為中國工人聲張正義"。

習近平在瑞典期間將會見瑞典政府要人、企業商界領袖和瑞典國王。據報導，瑞典共有500名商界 領袖排隊等待與這位所謂"共產主義政權"的高層領導握手，據悉在2012-2013年間（"十八大"前後）習近平將成為中國下一任國家主席和最高領導人。 而習近平的訪問正好與浙江的私營汽車公司吉利集團與美國福特(Ford)集團簽署協議收購瑞典汽車製造商沃 爾沃(Volvo)的時間相吻合。

抗議者哥德堡市政工人工會的一位地方支部主席斯蒂芬-伯格（Stefan Berg）表示，"瑞典的工會運動應該支援中國的工人鬥爭。工會需要獨立行事以反對老闆們在中國的行徑，支持中國建立民主工會 。作為起步這應該從那些在中國境內經營的瑞典公司首先開始。"

http://www.chinaworker.info/get_img?NrArticle=1022&NrImage=8
"我們的示威在酒店外持續了5個小時。不安的中國政府保安人員像暈了頭的母雞一樣圍著我們拍照，並試圖要求瑞 典警方將我們驅離，但他們的企圖失敗 了。儘管我們的示威得以能夠繼續下去，但瑞典警方當局仍應為他們星期六（3月27日）的行動遭到譴責。他們 所作所為就如同中國政府的"苦力"一樣，試圖刁 難我們的示威，用警車阻擋我們向中方代表團進行抗議。因為我們使用了擴音器，所以這一嘗試也失 敗了。"汗-厄茲桑（Kaan Ozsan）在示威後說道。

瑞 典正義社會主義党（Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna --工人國際委員會CWI瑞典支部）一直以來聲援和支援中國勞工論壇（chinaworker.info）進行 的鬥爭，後者從事於報導和支援在中國和香港 地區所進行的反對一黨專制的鬥爭。工國委（CWI）瑞典支部的派翠克-霍格恩科（Patrik Hooghwinkel）表示，"我們與數以十萬計的爭取民主權利的香港民眾站在一起，我們要求香港警方取消對"長毛"梁國雄等人因12月25日示威要求 釋放政治犯而作出的非法集會指控。"
http://www.chinaworker.info/get_img?NrArticle=1022&NrImage=9
甚至3月28日（星期日）習近平訪問跨國公司SKF時，也遭遇到了抗議者，廠外伴隨著"支持民主權利和工會權利，支持2012年香港普選，要求取消 對香港民主人士的指控"等口號。習近平同時也是北京當局具體負責香港事務的領導人，是中央政府對"香港特別行政區"負責的最高級官員。

當 中方人員到達公司時，"實現一人一票普選制"，克裡斯托佛-倫德伯格（Kristofer Lundberg）使用擴音器高喊口號。警方原來事先已經指定了一個示威區域。"但隨後他們允許大約10名中方人員使用中國國旗阻礙我們的抗議活動，這些 人可能是由本地領事館和其他官方機構動員來的免出現此前一天的尷尬局面。因此我們決定走出指定抗議區，更靠 近習近平一些來進行抗議。"倫德伯格 （Lundberg）補充道。

"你們與習近平所走過的紅地毯是用為爭取自己基本權利的中國工人和學生的鮮血染成的"，克裡斯托佛-倫德伯格（Kristofer Lundberg）使用擴音器高喊道，約50人的代表團慌忙走過紅地毯。

http://www.chinaworker.info/get_img?NrArticle=1022&NrImage=10
中方代表團顯然很不安。當一個小時後，他們來到了前東印度公司的帆船哥德堡號（Ostindienfara ren）時，甚至發現這裡也有一場示威， 中方的保安人員很是憤怒。他們在四周跑來跑去試圖找出一條道路能夠讓副主席進入碼頭而避開示威者，但很快就 意識到，沒有其他辦法進入港區，只能讓開進來的 汽車在距離示威牌1米遠的地方駛過。

"這一資訊應該通過習近平、他的保安人員和隨從傳遞給中國政府，同時也要傳遞給瑞典的資本家代表 們。 工國委CWI瑞典支部將中國當局侵犯人權、攻擊工人權益和殘酷專制統治的行徑公諸於天下，反對對中國大陸和 香港地區爭取民主權利的人士和支持社會主義者的 虛假指控，支持香港實現2012年雙普選一人一票制。"一位抗議者派特裡夏-德格曼（Patricia Degerman）表示。

http://www.chinaworker.info/get_img?NrArticle=1022&NrImage=12

[sunfarstar]

实现普选不可能，而且，我个人不支持。因为这只会给中国的资产阶级势力一个上台的机会。关键是促使中共左转 。:cool:

[Crux]

The chinese bourgeois are already in power, they have no interest in universal suffrage. Fighting for basic democratic rights can only be step forward for chinese socialists, but we must also struggle for a worker's democracy. We can not fight through the Chinese communist party, only against it, as the alliance of bureaucrats and capitalists it is.

[sunfarstar]

As far as I know, in China's current left-wing forces, there are two tendencies: one is the Chinese Communist Party, and hope that they will return to the socialist path. Another, outside the Chinese Communist Party left-wing communists and pan-organization, we tend to organize legal or violent means against the existing capitalist order. China, there are a large number of scattered "right wing" forces, but they basically do not constitute a threat to the socialist system. The main problem China's political party in the high-level Communist Party of China. My personal knowledge of Xi Jinping as the next generation of leaders he may bureaucracy and corruption will be rectified. Your foreign comrades, do not rely too much left-wing forces in Hong Kong. They are not eligible for the majority of China's labor endorsements. Status of the Chinese working class is the basic good. Still in the highly organized state of readiness to fight. Hong Kong's left, I pay tribute, but do not appreciate their approach.

[sunfarstar]

Simple definition of the Chinese Communist Party bureaucrats and capitalists for the Union is wrong. Many workers in the form of struggle, fight for universal suffrage is not necessarily to the benefit. I tend to organize political groups to make effective the struggle against dispersion. An example, workers can negotiate their own trade union organization demands for more money. This may be more practical.

[Crux]

As I said, I agree that the working class is the foremost actor. As I understand it both the trade unions and the party organization are very much run from the top. The struggle for universal suffrage would be a struggle both against the bureaucrats and the big capitalists, both of which fear the working class and democracy in china.

[sunfarstar]

For democracy, I do not optimistic about the newspaper. My hope that all sectors in China can get more freedom. Should be said that China's current situation is generally satisfactory. Although many people complain about the Chinese government practices. However, which country people do not complain about their government? The Government is always "bad".

[sunfarstar]

For democracy, I do not hold an optimistic attitude. My hope that all sectors in China can get more freedom. Should be said that China's current situation is generally satisfactory. Although many people complain about the Chinese government practices. However, which country people do not complain about their government? The Government is always "bad".

[RedStarOverChina]

I'm all for protesting against Xi's visit. But I'll be the last one to advocate for multi-party "democracy".

As if we don't have enough class enemies in one political party!

[Crux]

Democracy would give a possibility to challenge the class-enemies openly. What we struggle for is not parliamentary democracy in general, but for the right of the working class to organize their own independent force both as a party and as a trade union.

sunfarstar: And certainly there are thing's to rightly criticize in every government in this world. But the struggle in china is both for political and economic rights of the working class and the peasants.

[sunfarstar]

我个人认为，共产党不怕多。毛主席说过：党内无派，千奇百怪；党外无党，帝王思想。搞“全民党”是不现实的 。政治多元化是趋势，各阶层都应该有自己的表达渠道。:lol::thumbup1:

[RedStarOverChina]

Democracy would give a possibility to challenge the class-enemies openly.
Are you serious? Western "Democracy" doesn't allow open challenges against the ruling class. What do you think they make laws for? All it does is giving the illusions of freedom.

I, for one, do not agree with anesthetizing the masses by giving them false freedom. Better that they know they're being enslaved than having them indoctrinated with liberal bullcrap.

The Chinese ruling class right now has to face the rage of much of the population. If they decide to adopt western "democracy", it will be because they know they can control the population better that way.

That's not something I'd like to see, much less celebrate.

What we struggle for is not parliamentary democracy in general, but for the right of the working class to organize their own independent force both as a party and as a trade union.
That's not what the article suggests.


瑞 典正義社會主義党（Rättvisepartiet Socialisterna --工人國際委員會CWI瑞典支部）一直以來聲援和支援中國勞工論壇（chinaworker.i nfo）進行 的鬥爭，後者從事於報導和支援在中國和香港 地區所進行的反對一黨專制的鬥爭。工國委（CWI）瑞典支部的派翠克-霍格恩科（Patrik Hooghwinkel）表示，"我們與數以十萬計的爭取民主權利的香港民眾站在一起，我們要求香港警方取 消對"長毛"梁國雄等人因12月25日示威要求 釋放政治犯而作出的非法集會指控。"Sounds more like cheering for the liberals in Hong Kong to me.

In the end, I believe it will be the hundreds of massive violent riots every year in China that will bring forth change, not some lame protests by pro-Western Hong Kong liberals.

[sunfarstar]

中国真正民主的选举在农村，尤其是村一级的干部选举。这恐怕是你所不知道的。农民在中国革命中 对民主的理解 很深刻。作为一个外国同志，我很欢迎你到中国的农村考察，请不要相信中国城市小资产阶级和民族 资产阶级的所 谓“民主”。

[Crux]

Are you serious? Western "Democracy" doesn't allow open challenges against the ruling class. What do you think they make laws for? All it does is giving the illusions of freedom.

I, for one, do not agree with anesthetizing the masses by giving them false freedom. Better that they know they're being enslaved than having them indoctrinated with liberal bullcrap.

The Chinese ruling class right now has to face the rage of much of the population. If they decide to adopt western "democracy", it will be because they know they can control the population better that way.

That's not something I'd like to see, much less celebrate.
That's not what the article suggests.
Sounds more like cheering for the liberals in Hong Kong to me.

In the end, I believe it will be the hundreds of massive violent riots every year in China that will bring forth change, not some lame protests by pro-Western Hong Kong liberals.
Well, it is true that we stand in solidarity with Leung Kwok-hung. But we do not cheer lead the pro-western liberals (as little as we cheerlead the pro-Beijing liberals). I could post more articles from chinaworker.info addressing the subject.

Well, look at it this way the only way they could be forced to end one-party rule would be from pressure from below, from the working class and the peasants. In such a way it would be a victory. But, as I said before, what needs to be built is the organizations of the working class, it is for this right to organize we fight. Another reason why we address the issue is to expose the hypocrisy of the swedish political establishment in their dealings with china.

[sunfarstar]

我在圈网上有一个叫苏秦居士的朋友，是梁国雄的朋友，现在失去联系了，他在南京时给我打过电话。:cool :

[RedStarOverChina]

Well, look at it this way the only way they could be forced to end one-party rule would be from pressure from below, from the working class and the peasants.
And then what? No one has explained to me in a way that makes sense, how achieving "multi-party democracy" would help the working class movement---or even individual workers, for that matter.

The best case scenario would be the Chinese government gets toppled and everyone cheers for their new found "freedom" until ten years later they realize they've been screwed over even harder, like the East Germans.

[Crux]

And then what? No one has explained to me in a way that makes sense, how achieving "multi-party democracy" would help the working class movement---or even individual workers, for that matter.

The best case scenario would be the Chinese government gets toppled and everyone cheers for their new found "freedom" until ten years later they realize they've been screwed over even harder, like the East Germans.The building of a revolutionary party of course. In fact in DDR there were elements of a pre-revolutionary situation, one comrade described it as the power was laying in the streets, but no one picked it up, so the capitalists assumed rule.

[sunfarstar]

中国现在已经有很多无形的“墙”了。:cool:

[RedStarOverChina]

The building of a revolutionary party of course. In fact in DDR there were elements of a pre-revolutionary situation, one comrade described it as the power was laying in the streets, but no one picked it up, so the capitalists assumed rule.
There's no point in having a "revolutionary party" when there's no revolutionary masses. That's the problem in much of the West. You can have 100 "revolutionary parties" and it won't hurt the ruling class, not even a bit. Not when the masses are indoctrinated with propaganda about the supposed superiority of the "democratic system".

It's not exactly a profitable trade-off to gain the right to participate in partisan politics while undermining mass movements---Which is exactly what "multi-party democracy" does. It robs the masses of their legitimate right to direct action.

Under the current conditions, as raw, naked class conflict intensifies in China, a revolutionary movement, maybe even a revolutionary party will eventually emerge.

But with or with out a party, the revolution carries on.

[Crux]

There's no point in having a "revolutionary party" when there's no revolutionary masses. That's the problem in much of the West. You can have 100 "revolutionary parties" and it won't hurt the ruling class, not even a bit. Not when the masses are indoctrinated with propaganda about the supposed superiority of the "democratic system".

It's not exactly a profitable trade-off to gain the right to participate in partisan politics while undermining mass movements---Which is exactly what "multi-party democracy" does. It robs the masses of their right to direct action.
It does not undermine the mass movement, of course we do not only fight in the parliamentary arena, but also through direct action. it is perfectly possible to carry out class struggle under a democracy, and the repression from the state is slightly less.

[RedStarOverChina]

it is perfectly possible to carry out class struggle under a democracy, and the repression from the state is slightly less.
I see no evidence of that, even though it's a much-advertised trait that supposedly exists in a "democracy".

Have you checked out India?
http://www.revleft.com/vb/walking-comrades-arundhati-t133336/index.html

They don't seem any less repressive than China. In fact, I would argue that the "democratic" state of India is way more brutal in its treatment of its citizens.

That's because broadly speaking, "democratic" states do not behave any differently from undemocratic ones. What determines the level of civility in a country is its tangible material conditions.


That's it for today, talk to you tomorrow. :)

[Crux]

I see no evidence of that, even though it's a much-advertised trait that supposedly exists in a "democracy".

Have you checked out India?
http://www.revleft.com/vb/walking-comrades-arundhati-t133336/index.html

They don't seem any less repressive than China. In fact, I would argue that the "democratic" state of India is way more brutal in its treatment of its citizens.

That's because broadly speaking, "democratic" states do not behave any differently from undemocratic ones. What determines the level of civility in a country is its tangible material conditions.


That's it for today, talk to you tomorrow. :)
Well, I think the struggle for organizational rights is in itself a very important task. India is more of an oligarki, by the way. In most of the country there's not even a bourgeois democracy.