t***o
发帖数: 19256 | 1 作者：Robert Foyle Hunwick
翻译：方舟子
原文
北京，中国——你是否知道在美国，工人辛苦所得低到一小时3～5美元？而靠这点
收入很难生存，因为“路边小店一顿饭每人要花20～40美元”。
这些奇怪而错误的说法只是周小平写的《梦碎美利坚》一文中很多这种说法的一部
分。这个月，在“文艺座谈会”上中国国家主席习近平把此人（连同其同行博客写手花
千芳）特地挑出来表扬之后，这个33岁的博客写手已成为北京官方最推崇的人。习主席
表扬这两个人的作品拥有“正能量”。
周被证明了是一个特别有争议的选择。
他最著名的文章之一，题为《美国对华文化冷战的九大绝招》，是一篇反美文章，
声称好莱坞是美国破坏中国的阴谋的一部分，并把美国人对待中国人的态度比做希特勒
对待犹太人。
实际上，自从上世纪90年代末像《活佛》《红色角落》这样的电影产生争议以来，
好莱坞很担心会由于批评中国而失去一个巨大的市场。恰恰相反：2014年的大片《变形
金刚4》是一部自大、饱受批评的续集，因为赤裸裸地推销中国品牌和迎合中国人的感
情而受到冷嘲热讽。
但是在习讲话之后，与周争论事实真相已变成了政治反抗行为——不管你多么出名。
方是民——中国最出色的打假斗士——就有惨痛教训，见识了你敢抨击中国国家主
席喜爱的博客写手会有什么样的下场。
方逐条批驳周，认为周是在“梦游”美国，并反问道，“难道他以为网民是和当官
的一样容易骗吗？”
事实上，周从未去见过中文称为“美丽的国家”的美国。“我从没出过国，”他谈
到其反美长篇大论时说，“但我有很多海外朋友。”
方的驳斥被广泛传播——然后消失了。他抗议之后，他的微博（中国版的推特）账
号被关闭。30分钟之后，他所有的博客文章也都无影无踪。在过去，批评者的账号也曾
被关闭或失灵，但这次不一样。正如一名博客写手注意到的：“的的确确，方舟子被抹
掉了。”
方以其笔名方舟子广为人知。他做这种批评的份量肯定很重。在2012年，他获得了
权威的《自然》杂志的首届约翰·马多克斯奖，该奖表彰那些“站出来捍卫科学”的个
人。在过去，他揭露商人傅苹备受关注的文革回忆录《宁弯不折》歪曲事实，宣布微软
中国前CEO唐骏伪造文凭，甚至让曾经敢言的作家韩寒实际上从此闭嘴，因为他指控这
名年轻的小说家剽窃（译者按：应是“被代笔”）。
他这么做冒着相当的风险，同时遭受了人身袭击和网上指责，而这正是对其信用的
证明：“袭击方舟子就是向文明社会宣战，”记者徐小平（与周小平不是亲戚）曾经宣
布。
那么周小平就是个明显的目标。而尽管被从网上清除了，方的批驳显然很有效。不
久之后，中国人在搜索周小平，以及他的外号“周带鱼”时，其结果就会出现大家都很
熟悉的信息，“根据相关法律法规……”。
在被剥夺了在中国的数字化存在之后，方转移到推特，在那里他的粉丝一夜之间几
乎翻番。在那里，他奇怪《洛杉矶时报》在写关于他的报道时是否也“害怕遭到报复”
：该报的这篇文章署名“一名时报作者”。
“五毛”大军
再回头看看中国，官方媒体已快速运转起来。北京《环球时报》的一篇社论注意到
对周小平的批评带有智力上的蔑视：“（周小平和花千芳）没有毕业于名牌学校，也没
有受过系统的教育。……他们的语言是粗糙、激进、几乎是粗俗的，”该文作者承认。
“尊重这么年轻、幼稚、草根的相反声音是非常困难的。”
随着支持和反对周的各种反驳越来越多，以及试图删除它们的审查战的进行，这个
事件把中国意识形态的状况放在了聚光灯下。有人警告说，北京下定决心要与“西方价
值观”进行一场意识形态战争。否则为什么通常喜欢援引古典哲学的中国国家主席会选
择表扬一个幼稚而且爱出错的写手呢？
周曾经是个解放军工兵，后来成为地方低级官员，之后又陷入网上赌博，他的履历
让很多人产生共鸣：出身低贱，没有任何天赋，一度过着四处奔波、默默无闻的生活。
作为一名互联网创业者，他曾经不得不反驳对其传播淫秽品的指控，这是在中国网上被
禁止的众多媒体类型之一。
“如果普通公民真想要说什么的话，只能在网上加入‘歌功颂德的合唱’，”人民
大学政治教授张鸣说。因此周发现了他作为“五毛”的生存空间。“五毛”一词原先是
用来描述中国低薪网评员大军的——据称人数多达30万人，每发一条“引导公众舆论”
的评论挣五毛钱——这个词通常用于指那些当政府应声虫的人。“五毛是市场经济的产
物——许多人以此谋生。”历史学者章立凡解释说。“而现在周正是党需要的那种人：
年轻，政治上正确，顺从。”
事实上，习主席应该能够知道他对周的支持是有风险的。在2013年，周公开攻击谷
歌中国前总裁李开复假装得癌症和与“国外敌对势力”搞阴谋诡计。这些错误的羞辱让
人恶心。甚至连《新京报》都反驳说，周“搬起石头砸自己的脚”，并说“辩论应该有
根有据。”和别人不同，周的造谣并没有让他被判刑，但是他的确曾经宣布要封笔。
一年后，随着中国的舆论环境蛮横地清除了异议者，周更不会放下其毒笔。浙江一
家报纸的评论员刘雪松写了一篇试图调和的呼吁文章，题为《世界够大能同时容下方舟
子和周小平》，之后，他和他的文章都从网上消失了。
在某种意义上，周属于中国帝国一长串“御用文人”之列。习主席暗示自己要和毛
泽东相提并论，而毛泽东曾扶持像郭沫若和胡乔木这样的支持者。不同在于“他们是极
其有天赋、敏锐和富有文学才能……像他们这样的人不存在了，因此（共产党）不得不
找像周这样的人，”章立凡说。
他补充道，“我读到一条网上评论说；‘看一眼狗就知道主人的品味。’我认为这
个说法是意味深长的。”
—
GlobalPost
Robert Foyle Hunwick October 30, 2014 00:06
The Chinese president’s favorite blogger hates America
And he actually has no idea what’s going on in the United States.
BEIJING, China — Did you know that in America, workers toil for a lowly $3
to $5 an hour? And that’s hardly enough to live on when “a meal at a
roadside cafe costs $20-$40 per person.”
These odd and erroneous claims are some of many made in “Broken Dreams in
America,” an essay by Zhou Xiaoping. The 33-year-old has become the
official toast of Beijing since Chinese President Xi Jinping singled him out
(along with fellow blogger Hua Qianfang) for special praise at a “Forum on
Art and Literature” this month. President Xi hailed their work as
possessing “positive energy.”
Zhou proved a particularly divisive choice.
One of his best-known pieces, headlined “Nine Knockout Blows” against
America, claims that Hollywood is part of a plot to undermine China and
compares American attitudes toward the Chinese to Hitler’s treatment of the
Jews.
In fact, since the controversy generated by late-1990s films like “Kundun”
and “Red Corner,” Hollywood has been skittish about losing a potentially
huge market by criticizing China. Far from it: The arch-blockbuster of 2014
was “Transformers 4,” a bloated and critically panned sequel ridiculed for
overt pandering to Chinese brands and sensibilities.
But since Xi’s speech, arguing with Zhou’s version of the truth has become
an act of political defiance — no matter how famous you are.
Fang Shimin — China’s foremost anti-fraud crusader — learned the hard way
what happens when you trash the Chinese president’s favorite blogger.
In a point-by-point rebuttal, Fang suggested Zhou had “sleepwalked”
through America and wondered, “Does he think netizens are as easy to fool
as politicians?”
In fact, Zhou has never laid eyes on what’s known in Mandarin as Beautiful
Country. “I haven’t been abroad,” Zhou said of his anti-America screed.
“But I have many overseas friends.”
Fang’s takedown went viral — then vanished. When he protested, his Weibo (
China’s version of Twitter) account was suspended. Thirty minutes later,
all his blogs were gone for good. Critics’ accounts have been suspended or
functionally disabled in the past; this time was different. As one blogger
observed: “Quite literally, Fang Zhouzi has been erased.”
Fang, widely known by his pen name Fang Zhouzi, certainly had the gravitas
for such a critique. In 2012, he won the prestigious Nature magazine’s
inaugural John Maddox Prize, awarded to individuals who “stand up for
science.” In the past, he has discredited businesswoman Peng Fu’s high-
profile Cultural Revolution memoir “Bend, Not Break” for being flexible
with the truth, called out Microsoft’s former China CEO for having a fake
diploma, and has even rendered the once-outspoken writer Han Han virtually
mute with a crusade accusing the younger novelist of plagiarism.
That he’s done so at considerable risk, suffering both physical attacks and
online censure, is a testament to his credibility: “Attacking Fang Zhouzi
is the same as declaring war on civilized society,” journalist Xu Xiaoping
(no relation to Zhou) once declared.
Zhou Xiaoping, then, was an obvious target. And despite the web wipeout,
Fang’s debunking apparently worked. Soon, Chinese searches for Zhou
Xiaoping, as well as his nickname, “Belt Fish” Zhou, were producing the
all-too-familiar message that results could not be displayed, “according to
relevant laws and regulations.”
Robbed of his digital existence in China, Fang switched to Twitter, where
his following had almost doubled overnight. There, he soon wondered if the
Los Angeles Times also “feared retaliation” for writing about him: the
newspaper’s article was bylined, “A Times Staff Writer.”
The “wumao” army
Back in China, official media have gone into spin cycle. One editorial in
Beijing’s Global Times detected intellectual snobbery in the criticism: “[
Zhou and Hua Qianfang] did not graduate from famous schools and haven’t
received a systematic education. … Their language is coarse, radical and
almost vulgar,” the writer admitted. “Respecting such young, immature,
grassroots contrary voice is very difficult.”
As the rebuttals for and against Zhou mount, and censors battle to delete
them, the affair puts the spotlight on China’s ideological landscape. Some
warn that Beijing is bent on waging ideological war with “Western values.”
Why else might China’s president, who usually likes to invoke an
appreciation of classical philosophy, choose a na?ve and rather fallible
writer for celebration?
A former People’s Liberation Army engineer who became a low-level
provincial bureaucrat, then drifted into online gaming, Zhou’s profile
resonates with many: Born without privilege, not endowed with any natural
talent, he once lived a life both itinerant and anonymous. As an online
entrepreneur, he’s had to fend off allegations of peddling pornography, one
of many types of media banned on the web.
“If common citizens really want to say something, there are only ‘praise-
singing choirs’ on the internet for them to join,” says Renmin University
politics professor Zhang Ming. So Zhou instead found his niche as a “wumao.
” Coined to describe China’s army of low-paid web commentators — who
allegedly number 300,000 and earn a nickel a comment to “guide public
opinion” — the term wumao is commonly applied toward those who parrot the
government line. “The wumao is a creation of the market economy — many do
it just to make a living,” explains historian Zhang Lifan. “And right now,
Zhou is exactly what the party needs: young, politically correct and
obedient.”
In fact, President Xi could have known that his endorsement of Zhou was
risky. In 2013, Zhou publicly attacked ex-Google China chief Lee Kai-Fu for
faking his own cancer and conspiring with “hostile foreign forces.” These
erroneous taunts prompted disgust. Even the Beijing News retorted that Zhou
had “dropped [a rock] on his own foot” and said “debate should comply
with the laws of evidence.” Unlike others, Zhou’s rumormongering didn’t
earn him a prison sentence, but he did claim to be quitting writing.
A year later, with China’s lively media environment brutally shorn of
dissenters, Zhou shows much less inclination toward putting down the poison
pen. When Liu Xuesong, a columnist at a Zhejiang-based newspaper, wrote a
conciliatory plea entitled “This world should be big enough to tolerate
both Zhou Xiaoping and Fang Zhouzi,” both he and his article vanished from
the web.
In a sense, Zhou belongs to a long line of “courtly” writers in imperial
China. Mao Zedong, whom President Xi has implicitly compared himself to,
cultivated supporters like Guo Moruo and Hu Qiaomu. The difference is “they
were hugely talented, sharp and full of literary skills … people like them
don’t exist anymore, so [the Communist Party] has to do with folks like
Zhou,” says the historian Zhang.
He adds, “I read a comment online: ‘Take a look at the pet and you will
know the taste of his master.’ I think it’s very meaningful.” | l*****y
发帖数: 2522 | 2 他补充道，“我读到一条网上评论说；‘看一眼狗就知道主人的品味。’我认为这
个说法是意味深长的。” |
|
