August 23, 2005

  • 向各位xan民求教 - 七一遊行

    基本上以上題目我可用15分鐘完成，不過因為我太憎惡董生，恐怕會有點偏執。所以要用電車男形式呼喚幫手－－請大家在comment說說你們的見解，原則是客觀，以及中三Band 2學生看得明。

    1. 03年七一的成因

      i. 基本法23條立法諮詢不善，在未取得民意支持之下進行立法，引起公眾不滿。行政長官、保安局長及律政司長面對公眾的態度欠缺誠意，其言論激化政府與市民之間的矛盾，令公眾不滿升級。

      ii. 行政長官董建華施政失當，其政治智慧及處事手法跟市民期望完全脫節，令其民望一直下跌，，社會要求其下台的呼聲愈來愈大。

      iii. 非典型肺炎(SARS)暴露特區政府決策及政策執行能力欠佳，市民對其信任度破產。SARS期間，因為政府對應不力，市民自求生存，合力幫助才可脫離險境，間接令公民意識強化，同時造成對政府的不信任。(meteorology_wcln)

      iv. 香港經濟自1997年金融風暴一直衰退，加上政府經濟政策紊亂，以及被指偏袒個別企業，進一步加劇市民對政府不滿。

    2. 董建華任內的失政。

      史兄：「中史書講d 無能既君主 (如明神宗, 隋煬帝, 老年既李隆基, 王莽, 南宋所有皇帝). 個d 四字詞 - 信任讒臣, 拒言納諫, 大興土木, 用人唯親, 朝令夕改, 朋黨之爭, 興文字獄 - 個個o岩使. 既客觀又乎合事實. 記住, 淨係提供四字詞好咧, 例子叫學生自己填.」

    3. 為求「客觀」，董的政績(if any)。

      史兄：董建華施政失敗導致公民社會成形。（小弟按：外國傳媒揶揄他為「香港民主之父」）

      Sunba：賭波合法化。(小弟按：不能在學校說....)

    多謝大家的集體貢獻。


    參考資料

    港大民意網站: http://hkupop.hku.hk

    維基百科: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%B8%83%E4%B8%80%E9%81%8A%E8%A1%8C

    23條網頁: http://www.article23.org.hk/chinese/main.htm

    煉乙錚回憶錄(starther)：http://www.inmediahk.net/public/search?q=%E7%B7%B4%E4%B9%99%E9%8C%9A

    下台吧，董建華 (陶傑一篇很多人quote過的文章)：http://peeko.online.com.hk/

    ＜七一解讀＞ - 陳轁文　（明報出版社）

    ＜讓民意的聲音響起來＞ - 陸恭蕙及思匯政策研究所　（香港大學出版社）

    ＜後特區啟示錄＞ - Roundtable

Comments (9)

  • 1. 對唔住.. 如果要唔憎董生先可以寫點解有七一...史弟都無資格寫.

    2. 基本上你搵下中史書講d 無能既君主 (如明神宗, 隋煬帝, 老年既李隆基, 王莽, 南宋所有皇帝). 個d 四字詞 - 信任讒臣, 拒言納諫, 大興土木, 用人唯親, 朝令夕改, 朋黨之爭, 興文字獄 - 個個o岩使. 既客觀又乎合事實. 記住, 淨係提供四字詞好咧, 例子叫學生自己填.

    3. 再加一幅樓價指標同佢民望既圖 (講俾d 仔知樓係好多香港人既全部投資)

    4. 董既政績 : 有! 令人民明白政府做太多是無益的!

  • Let's talk about policy merit:  the only one I can think of is the legalization of football betting.  NOTHING ELSE.

  • 行政長官、保安局長及律政司長面對公眾的態度令公眾不滿升級[[[未想到怎樣表達這一點]

    行政長官的堅持立法是好,批評民主派唱衰香港

    保安局長在立法會與涂謹申鬧交,議事堂上出現此事是立法會之恥

    律政司長既無指出在立法後的壞處,只顧政治上的忠誠

    以上三點是激化了七一多人上街的主因

  • SARS造成的悲情效果，間接令公民意識強化，同時造成對政府的不信任[[[未想到怎樣表達這一點]

    SARS政府應對不力,與大陸欠缺溝通

    靠市民自求生存,合存幫助才可脫離險境,也令市民對政府的不信任度大增

  • 更正:

    應是靠市民自求生存,合力幫助才可脫離險境,也令市民對政府的不信任度大增

  • 更正:

    應是靠市民自求生存,合力幫助才可脫離險境,也令市民對政府的不信任度大增

  • 稛?祥眭斕衄瘁蕉綎ˋ

    ?眣墬坻?腔牾葬汜挭鞠徭岈鷂佷ㄩhttp://www.inmediahk.net/public/search?q=%E7%B7%B4%E4%B9%99%E9%8C%9A

    ㄑ髶豝ㄑ?blog梑腔﹝

  • Somehow I messed up the character set of the comment I just posted. Please switch to GB2312 for viewing. Sorry.

  • The education in HK is getting interesting. I wish we could have chances discussing public issues in class. I have few questions about this topic:

    1) Why 7.1 & Tung? Why not 7.1 & HKSAR govt, or Beijing? Now there is no Tung, but 7.1 will go on, right?

    2) What's the thesis behind this topic? What are you expecting the students to discuss?

    3) Being objective: Are you going to talk about politics, history, or current affairs?
    - Politics: there is no objectivity. You have to take side. If you teach students to take side, make sure that they are not turning to the "dark side" (e.g. I hate xx.)
    - History: It is 40yrs too early to talk about it. We have to wait till the people involved all gone or lost the influences, in order to be really objective.
    - Current affairs: My suggestion is to make your topic more controversial. Such as, if you were Tung, standing in between Beijing and HK residents, how would you handle #23? In addition, if HK could be so easily be damaged by only one or few leaders, how could we hedge this risk by reforming the social system and organization? What type of human capital do we need for this continuous reform? How are you becoming one? What do you do in the rest 364 days other than 7.1?
    Because finding someone to blame for does not help one's career.

    4) By the way, 賭波合法化 is not Tung's contribution. He personally does not like this idea. It just somehow happened during his period.

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment