沉重而絢爛的十二月 場刊

沉重而絢爛的十二月  紀香港反世貿人民抗爭

二零零五年十二月,你當時在做甚麼?廿多齣短片,講述零五年灣仔,似乎發生過驚天動地的

大事,轉瞬又塵埃落幕。當時發生了什麼?

各地的行動者,有種植大米、小米、粟米各種農民、工人,甚麼驅使他們不遠千里來到香港這

個資本主義自由經濟的楷模?婦女、青年、父母、還有小孩子,各自懷著甚麼原因和心情參與

這場運動?主流傳媒大肆報導南韓農民推倒鐵馬,現場是否只是鏡頭所及?民間媒體又是什

麼?我們日常在接收甚麼資訊?這些資訊與生活有何關連?這又與國際貿易有甚麼關係?

反世貿,究竟是在反對甚麼?

參與過這場抗爭的行動者,帶著三步一跪的尊嚴,胡椒噴霧的灼痛,摧淚彈的窒息,新發現跨境友誼,回到我城的核心,與在地草根同行,抗爭八年。要在二零一三年的今天,再一次回顧

這段抗爭歷史,呼喚社會關注,因為資本全球化的侵犯,步步進迫,已再次壓到我們的家門

前。本年的十二月,世貿部長級會議,將再一次在亞洲區舉行,我們又將如何回應呢?

關於星期三晚放映系列

星期三晚放映系列為一個公開及免費的每月電影、錄像及紀錄片放映系列活動。由現在至本年度十二月於香港舉行之世界貿易

組織部長級會議,我們希望籍此放映系列引發有關新自由主義、資本主義以至有關之反抗及不同選擇的討論……

放眼世界可見,以世界貿易組織,國際貨幣基金會及世界銀行為首的權威性組織不斷地宣揚及強制推行着「自由市場」及「新

自由主義」的觀念。但這些組織究竟代表着甚麼,它們所推行的又是甚麼呢?

假如我們選擇相信他們的講法,我們就得 相信他們的企業全球化觀念是建基於一套值得我們追求的價值觀。我們就得相信,市

場實應建基於「選擇」、「多元性」、「個體自主」、「整體民主」以至最終達 至「生活質素提升」及「消除貧窮」,因此

「市場」應要「自由」發展。我們經常接收到「自由市場」就是「正常」及「公平」的訊息,「自由市場」的預設安排並 不反

映任何偏見或意識型態,故此,它的擴散將代表着紛爭的消除及「地球村」的建立。

由殖民者運輸鴉片的炮艦打開港口的年代,直至米奇老鼠即將登陸香港的今天,香港已深植於這「世界經濟體系」之中一世紀

之久,我們經常聽說:全球化資本主義背負着以陽光照耀陰暗,與及為我們建設,「地球上最快樂的地方」的祟高使命。

但當我們回頭看清楚我們身處的地方,以 至全世界,我們真的看到貿易自由化及國內生產總值增長消除了貧窮嗎?或是,真實

的現象反而是:在經濟發展持續增長的情況下,越來越多我們的市民朋友們,被結構性地擠壓至貧窮線以下呢?作為個體,我

們是真的可以掌握那些將影響我們生活的決定呢?或是容忍那些商貿大企業及無公開問責性的機構,對我們的生活及社區有着

比我們更大的發言權呢?我們真的看見多元化嗎?或是市場反被那些壟權者推動的一體化所飽和了呢?我們看到團結我們與鄰

人的「地球村」的發展嗎?還是見到每況越下的貧富懸殊,人與人之間的競爭,以至把邊緣社群、移民及他者塑造成代罪羔羊

的現象呢?我們看到紛爭的消除嗎?或是我們看到一個正步向自我毀滅的 世界呢?在這現況下,我們看到嘗試改善以至開創不

同選擇的自由嗎?或是我們正面對着一套拒絕考慮其他意見和渴求的可能性的觀念呢?

歷史是否已經終結?「自由市場」的原教旨主義是否就是最終的模範及唯一出路?哪裏有反對聲音?他/她們的聲音在訴說著甚

麼?

在 一個名叫齊亞柏斯的地方,那裹吹起了一道來自山區的風潮,衪為一場眾多不同運動互動而成的運動吹開了一道窗口。由西

雅圖的攤牌現場至坎昆的零公里,我們看到這就是民主的面貌,及因人民的掙扎和抵抗而展開的第四次世界大戰。其中,導航

員描繪了大企業的航圖,亞根延的飯碗奮抗路線如何行進至一個由下而上的工人當家去回奪,開創以至掌握將來的標示。

就此,我們不會成為你/妳的導引,但我們將伸出我們雙手,希望與你/妳成就分享另一個對現在觀察及另一個對將來的想像。

請參與我們的定期放映及討論─我們為你/妳準備了一個對新自由主義的特大交叉,還有對你/妳及其他人民的眾多確認和肯

定。

詳見:沉重而絢爛的十二月場刊

2005年世貿前的星期三放映系列映後討論及檢討筆記 WTO DISCUSSIONS- SOME NOTES FROM THE WEDNESDAY NIGHT FILM SERIES

SOME NOTES FROM THE WEDNESDAY NIGHT FILM SERIES

WTO DISCUSSIONS
SOME NOTES FROM THE WEDNESDAY NIGHT FILM SERIES

WNFS Films :
Fourth World War
This Is What Democracy Looks Like
WTO: A Threat to Humanity
The Corporation
Mickey Mouse Monopoly
Zapatista
Caracoles
Strong Roots
Hope in Hard Times

* * *

POWER PLAYS

CORPORATE POWER

It is important to distinguish between the structural factors of a corporation and the actions/impacts of actions taken by individual corporations…

What did we learn from THE CORPORATION?

What are the relationships (explicit or not) between corporations and government?

How can corporate power influence government?

What implications do these relationships have for different members of society?

Money is power.

MARKETING

How do individuals compete with the aggressive marketing campaigns of large corporations, who have huge amounts of capital behind them? How do we resist and critically analyze the facts behind the marketing hype? How can we raise our children to be critical consumers and thinkers in this context of mass marketing? What is ethical/not ethical? Who decides? What is being marketed-goods, but also values? -services, but also worldviews?

MEDIA

Who is controlling the media? Is media a vehicle for marketing ideologies? Whose ideologies are being marketed? What alternative sources of information do we have access to? How powerful is the media in shaping our values? -our understanding of the world? To what extent can we control what we are/are not exposed to? –what about our children?) What space is there to reject/re-shape our relationship to the media How can we resist the powerful effects of the media? How is media related to perception management? To corporate power? Marketing? Education? Perpetuation of mainstream values?

EDUCATION

What is education? Who is doing the educating, and who is being educated? Are education systems a reflection of values re: hierarchy, power, money? How do we perceive education?
-Is education a ‘way out’ for people living in poverty?
-Is education a membership card into the mainstream economic and social system?
-Is education a way to change the system by engaging it from within?

Why is so much value placed on institutionalized education? Is it time to re-conceptualize what we mean by education, andwhat skills we want to develop through education? How we can create/allow space for these skills to be developed?

What is happening within our education systems today? (HK, China?) Are students learning/encouraged to think critically? Are they questioning what they are being taught/told? Or are they just being trained to fill a role in society, to perpetuate the economic and social world orders that exist? Are we educating a new generation of obedient consumers? What are some of the implications of this?

How can education be used as a vehicle for action (long-term)~for developing critical thinking as a means of resistance, for raising awareness and sharing ideas for alternative ways of organizing? For disseminating alternative information?

THE MANY SIDES OF RESISTANCE

GRASSROOTS MOBILIZATION

What can we do as individuals in society to respond to the ‘threats” of WTO? How can we organize and mobilize to create a critical response that has impact? (Short-term/long-term; re-direct/resist)How do we engage with ourselves in a process of education/awareness? How do we engage others and create spaces for engagement without simultaneously creating hierarchy (conscientização by the people, for the people, as put forth by Paulo Freire)? Where do we seek sources of information? What sources of information are accessible to us? What communication strategies can we employ to share information within the system? What strategies can we employ to communicate outside the system? ~with the mainstream? ~with governing bodies?

There is no ‘one enemy’ out there. Each individual, each community has its own ‘enemy’, its own stuggles/challenges. Can we think in terms of localized struggles against common themes e.g. globalization? How can we share experiences with other struggles in other parts of the world…what do we mean by solidarity? e.g. Zapatista movement ®what can we learn from the Zapatistas? How did the Zapatistas create alternative systems in the face of government oppression? How were the new systems managed and adapted over time to meet emerging needs? What communication strategies did they use? How did they engage in self-education? Self-governance? What can we learn from their experiences, and how can we use this knowledge to further our own cause here in HK?

We need to be aware of the different sides of mobilization~ who is mobilizing, and/or who is being mobilized? Where is the power? Who is making decisions? Whose goals/agenda are being met? When actions are issue-based, the “public” can be exploited to showcase an “issue” or “platform” by individuals or groups with voice/power. People can exercise their own voice/power by bringing out their localized issues/struggles when participating in actions/rallies. Together, the diversity of issues raised speak for the people, and are an expression of solidarity towards each other as well as non-participating groups engaged in similar struggles.

SCALES

~PERSONAL SCALES
~SOCIETAL SCALES
~TIME SCALES

What can we as individuals do in our own lives to reject the principles of WTO and neo-liberalisation? What lifestyle choices, consumer choices, actions, etc., can we make? Where is the balance? This balance may be personal, but may have far-reaching implications for society. Where are the compromises and how do we prioritize the different values that inform our choices. Do our values differ when we consider them from different perspectives (on a personal level, or a societal level)? Do we choose for example, to buy local, to buy organic, to boycott buying from big corporations? Where is the balance? How effective are these actions? On what scales can we evaluate the effectiveness of actions? How is this balancing act played out across time scales/generations ~in the education of our children; caring for our parents, as we represent them as consumers? Do our decisions/actions affect the values of our children? What actions stem from these learned values? How do these actions affect change in the future, directly or indirectly? ~through market demand? ~through direct actions? ~through education?

ACTION

What actions can we engage in? What are the objectives of an action? What and to whom are we trying to communicate? What time scale does an objective operate on? (e.g.short-term~block a road leading to a WTO meeting; long-term~re-thinking communication strategy to engage government) Objectives can simultaneously operate on many different time scales. What physical scale does an objective operate on? (personal, local, global) What are the cultural context considerations that need to be taken into account? How do we find a balance to address the need for actions on different physical and time scales? How do we coordinate actions between people & groups operating on different physical and time scales? Do we need to coordinate, or should this happen spontaneously? Who makes decisions?

What motivates an action? How do the different forms of motivation affect an action? What do different individuals/groups taking part in the action stand to lose? Is the action born of fear or despair? Hope? Is it important to understand the differing motivations within a group collaborating on an action? Is the action even a collaboration, or a spontaneous event? Or a complex combination of both?

What are some of the consequences of an action? Was the action effective? On what time scale? On what physical scale? What are the criteria for evaluation? Who decides on the criteria for evaluation? Is there opportunity for critical reflection on an action? What are some unintended consequences? Can they be considered positive/negative? Should we move away from dichotomies of positive/negative? How is an action portrayed by different media? Can we cooperate with the media to use it as a vehicle for achieving an objective? Can the media be trusted? How much effort can we put into perception management?

How can we reflect on the consequences of an action? How was it portrayed and perceived? What are some of the repercussions? Do activists “box” themselves, or are they “being boxed” into a convenient perception category of “troublemaking leftists” through direct actions? Who is responsible for this? The media? An uncritical public? Activists? Should this possible outcome be a factor in deciding whether or not to engage in direct action? Are rallies and protests becoming too “predictable/obedient” to be effective? Are rallies and protests becoming too “radical/violent” to be effective? What are some possible consequences, if no direct action is taken? Is it more dangerous to be passive? Why? Where is the balance when the costs and benefits of action/no action are weighed out? Who decides?

What other forms of resistance can be exercised? Is action getting too much attention relative to other forms of resistance? What objectives can rallies/protests/civil disobedience achieve? Under what circumstances?What strategies can be employed to increase the effectiveness of an action? What is appropriate for an individual, in their context? Each individual makes their own decision regarding what is appropriate from them…

Important Point!! Its dangerous to generalize!! About “the activists”, or “the Hong Kong people”! …Although generalizations can lead into questions of what is cultural identity? For example, ~What do many Hong Kongers identify with as part of their cultural identity? And the summary below uses this generalization…(!)

CONNECTIONS TO HONG KONG

How are struggles in other parts of the world related to the Hong Kong experience? How do we make the connections? To what degree is the facilitator/individual responsible for drawing these connections? Many Hong Kongers relate international trade with better livelihoods for themselves and their families (trade = better business = healthy economy = higher standard of living) How do we identify/reveal/expose some of the negative aspects of the WTO, in ways that people in HK can relate to? What do we want to show? Human/social costs? Environmental costs? Economic costs?

What values do the WTO’s structure and current operation reflect? How is power structured, and who makes decisions? What room is there for input? Feedback? Sharing? Discussion? Access to information? Do these values match those of the people whose lives are inextricably linked to the national economy and therefore the WTO? What implications does the WTO have for democracy? ~human rights?

What can we learn from other people’s experiences, approaches, struggles, and how do we translate this knowledge and make it appropriate to our/the Hong Kong context? Is globalization not a global issue? We may be residents of citizens of a country, but are we not also members of global society? What responsibilities do we have/feel we have to ensure the rights all people? What do we understand solidarity to mean? How can we make our voices heard, so that our values are reflected in the policies that affect our lives?

E.g.’s discussed: HK privatization of postal services, housing management, re-location of garment factories to China®who bears the benefits and who bears the cost?

Can we think of WTO as being modeled on Hong Kong?? Hong Kong to many people is the very essence of trade- its economy isa perfect platform to showcase the possibilities of a free market? If WTO is modeled on Hong Kong, what does this say about other places, whose markets are less developed? What does this say about Hong Kong as a site of resistance?

AGENTS OF CHANGE

Who is leading the move towards greater and greater concentration of wealth and power? Is the system structured/designed in such a way to perpetuate this direction towards monopolization of power (e.g.World Bank, WTO)? Does there need to be a leader, or just compliance and/or passivity to keep us going down this track?

Who is leading the resistance? It is probably overly simplistic to say “the resistance”… Do we want to have leaders, or can we break down these hierarchies? What alternative organizational structures are possible? What decision-making methods can be employed? How can power be equitably distributed and shared? How can participation in decision making be encouraged? E.g. what can we learn from the Zapatista Caracoles model of community decision-making power?

委內瑞拉的合作社(三之三)

合作社的精神

合作社的概念是指:「以自助、自我負責、民主、平等與連鎖團結等價值為基礎」並以「誠實、開放、社會責任與關懷他人為信念」(《國際合作聯盟聲明書》)。合作社的精神,是根本地去改變「經濟只關乎生計或獲利」的狹隘概念,改變「工作因異化而成為無意義並與他人互相拼命、互相孤立」的生命狀態,改變「資方擁有絕對權力」的社會狀態。正所謂「經世濟民」,經濟該向著以「透過立足社區、互助合作和民主參與,解決民生問題,令無權勢者也可以自主、自我實現」的社會目標進發。在兩個世紀的社會經驗中,無論自由放任的新自由主義,或是官僚刻板的國家計劃經濟,都明顯不是上述目標的出路,故也可以說,合作社,就是一種由下而上、參與式民主社會構圖中的一個重要構成部份。

在合作社裡頭,沒有「老闆」的概念,只有由每位工人共同組成的「集體」是一場持續的社區營造運動。在委內瑞拉的合作社上至生產什麼,工資多少,市場定位,下至誰洗廁所,返早更,全都由集體商討決定,令經濟民主得以於工作場所全面實踐,令每位工人都能得到其應得的勞動成果。

另外,合作社的發展本身亦考慮到社區需要及利益,如生產方法與環境污染的平衡;或在突發事件時舉行籌款直接支援社區等等,而非單純追求更多利潤,從而嘗試一步一步,將合作社的理念實踐至整個社會。

辦合作社實是一場持續的社區營造運動,「社員在工作場所共事」直接成為社會組織方法,人民得以嘗試實踐民主共議共治的過程。合作社除了強調內部運作的民主與平等外,同時亦希望能關懷及改變社會,最重要的工作包括教育大眾關於合作社的概念,宣揚其背後民主自治與服務社區的原則。

經濟民主的重要

辦合作社的概念經政府多年發展改良,一直嘗試把權力交還人民,期望工人及社區集體擁有生產工具及管理上的自主,甚至盡量減少對資本主義制度和國家的依賴。

經濟民主作為賦權的過程,體現在委內瑞拉政府大力協助合作社發展,讓人民賴以維生的基本需要得到滿足。委國政府在一九九九年頒布的憲法中指出,人民有權共同構建「包容、人性、團結的社會」。人民在平等的前題下實踐經濟民主,嘗試照顧及平衡與自身在政治經濟文化條件上有差異的人的意見,以求集體得益,並推而廣之及整個國家。

委內瑞拉的實驗

委國合作社的發展,無論在合作單位或合作細則,均隨著社會環境和實際運作的困難及挫折而逐漸演變。委國政府一直在轉化「合作」形式,持續改良推行的重心和力度,以下略見一二:

1999年     憲法確認合作社的重要,政府以大量資助(如提供創業貸款,及能優先投得國家合約),鼓勵人民籌組合作社。

2001年     通過〈合作結社特別法〉(Special Law of Cooperative Associations),合作社數字急速上升。國家確認保護合作社的義務,協助新合作社成立,並延長其免稅待遇。

2001至2006年 政府原初對人民自行創立合作社的期望(能滿足社區需要、社員因著集體產權產生的內部團結能延伸至在地社區),換來許多困難及挫折。如許多合作社只以資本邏輯運作將利潤最大化,未有支援就近社區,及未能令更多新成員加入集體。政府遂發展出多種合作社營運模式,(如暫時與政府或私人企業共同管理),將推動經濟民主的重心,從支援人民籌組合作社,轉至鼓勵既有社區自行創立並管理合作社,強調合作社的在地社區面向。

2006年中期   National Superintendence of Cooperatives (SUNACOOP)報稱有158,917個註冊合作社(只有約不足三份一真正投入運作),牽涉當時百分之十二的勞動力。

2002至2003年 資本家發動一連串挾資本逃去的事件,藉此癱瘓生產,造成大量失業以動搖查維斯政權。失業工人開始佔領遭棄置的工廠,自發繼續生產運作。

2005至2007年 政府主動留意工人佔領倒閉工廠,並開始徵收上百間倒閉的企業。其後落實政策,期望徵收回來的企業能讓工人及社區共同擁有並管理生產工具,作為「直接社會財產」。然而出現工廠管理層照樣剝削工人,使其工作條件和待遇沒有明顯改善的情況,政府遂將「直接社會財產」變為「間接社會財產」,暫由政府擁有、工人管理生產工具,因而被詬病為國家機構擁有過大決策權。在工業發展前題下,政府亦嘗試將「直接社會財產」放進數百間新成立的「社會主義工廠」,期望最終將工廠的行政權力,交回已組織起來的工人及社區。相關國家機構在推動過程中的組織工作未臻完善,不斷激化出工人與國家機構之間的矛盾。國家逐步呼籲工人自行籌組社會主義式的工人議會,然而政府機關的主導與工人自主,逐漸形成複雜的角力關係。

參考委內瑞拉的經驗,政府機關不斷改良政制和法例,也無法一勞永逸地達致經濟民主。經濟民主的意義,在於期望人民先從意識上改變,合理地滿足自身需要之餘也要看到別人,不以剝削壓迫他人以自肥為目標。同時,透過小社區組織,讓權力分散,讓每個小社區有可能以共識民主的商討方法解決難題。這種取態明顯與資本主義運作或國家計劃經濟模式清晰區分開來。合作社在委內瑞拉,就是經濟民主作為賦權過程的載體,希望引發民眾直接參與及決定,在職場甚至職場以外,各項影響生活大小的事務,體現真正由下而上的參與式民主,望能適切回應資本主義制度影響的另類社區發展。 而政府及政制,極其量只能是經濟民主的促進者;委內瑞拉的實驗能否成功,還是端賴人民的參與。

合作社可能遇到的困難

合作社在內部和外部可能遇到種種困難,解決方法還需靠集體共同商議:

一、內部民主-社員才性有別,合作社規模各異,以致社員難以在獲取資訊、工作崗位、決策過程及集體監督等方面,做到絕對平等。如何按照社員本身的經驗、技能及知識,平衡各人工作量、工作性質與薪酬?如何讓社員互相鼓勵及協商,個人能為集體貢獻什麼、貢獻多少,以達致大家心目中的平等?

二、合作社的經營困難-一旦擁有資本的私人公司以本傷人,導致合作社無法繼續營運,該如何處理成員流失的問題?

三、官僚與人民間的張力-握有資源與權力的官僚制度,與人民之間,在資源投放和共治態度方面產生的張力,該如何梳理?

委內瑞拉的經驗能如何對應香港當下情況,讓我們反思自身在怎樣的社經環境,對經濟民主有著何種理解,期望有更多機會交流討論。

委內瑞拉系列:建設中的自治區(Comuna en construcción)

建設中的自治區(Comuna en construcción)


導演及製作:Dario Azzellini,Oliver Ressler | 語言:西班牙語、 英語/中英文字幕|2010/奧地利/94分鐘/彩色

directors and production: dario azzellini, oliver ressler | languages: spanish, english/chinese and english subtitles|2010/austria/94min/colors

9/10/2013

7:30 PM

中文大學本部文化廣場 Cultural square, main campus, The Chinese University of Hong Kong

20/10/2013

7:30 PM

專上學生聯會 Hong Kong Federation of Students

委內瑞拉系列簡介

今年三月,委內瑞拉前總統查維斯去世, 香港各大媒體鮮有地提起他的名字。人人都說他反美,反美以外,就只有陌生而矛盾的片言。有人說他是一代獨裁者,但他一次又一次勝出選舉;有人說他打壓言論自由,但他又好像促生了很多民間電台。有人說他行福利主義會拖垮經濟,但他任內十多年人均生產總值升了一倍。

在他任內,貧窮人口中的識字率急升,亦似乎有了 許多社區共識自治的實驗。提起「人民公社」,很多人只認識中共在1950及60年代那些所謂極左路線、空有意識形態口號的「大鑊飯」。可是, 在21世紀的委內瑞拉民眾的十多年努力下,  這些「組織化、集體化、基層化」的社會共同體實驗,卻顯得更有效而實際, 更像真的「人民公社」,為經濟和社區民主找到了實踐的路線。那麼到底,這些人民自主的社會實驗的進行情況如何?一般委內瑞拉老百姓,又如何看待這些政策?

建設中的自治區

如果普選不足以實現民主,那麼,普選以外,民主的實踐還有甚麼呢?過去十多年,委內瑞拉國內出現了數以萬計, 擁有規劃、行政、財政權力的自治社區,試試落實共識民主的生活和生產方式。

some stories of venezuela
 

hugo chavez, venezuela’s previous president passed away this march. mainstream media seldom mention either him, or venezuela. when he was mentioned, he was described as an “anti-US” icon. other than that, there are only strange and self-conflicting phrases. some says that he was a dictator, but he won elections over and over again; some says he oppressed freedom of press, but under his reign, there was a remarkable flowering of independent community media; some says his welfare state would break the economy, but under his reign, gdp per capita doubled…

literacy rate remarkably increased, and there were numerous social experiments of community autonomy. after more than a decade, these slow experiments obviously attained much more practical social development than those ideological “communes” boasted by the PRC Communist Party in the 1950s and 1960s. well, actually, how are the experiments now? how do ordinary venezuelan pueblo see these policies?

comuna en construcción
if general election is  not enough for true democracy, so what’s the missing part? in the past decade, numerous communities with political and economical autonomy emerged in venezuela, trying to practise consensus and democratic lives and mode of production.

 

委內瑞拉系列另一齣影片another film in the series:

革命進行中——委內瑞拉的民主實驗(Inside the Revolution: A Journey into the Heart of Venezuela)

https://smff2013.wordpress.com/2013/08/05/smff2013-insiderevolution/

放映現場:

20131009_194456

沉重而絢爛的十二月 our heavy yet beautiful december (開幕電影 Opening)

沉重而絢爛的十二月

共同創作:反世貿錄像遊擊隊 |製作:錄影力量(影行者前身)及八樓(自治八樓前身)|語言:廣東話/英語 (中/英文字幕)2005/香港/150分鐘/彩色

an oppressive and yet vibrant december – the peoples’ struggle against
the WTO at hong kong, 2005
collaborative act: anti-WTO video guerrilla |
produced by: video power (predecessor of v-artivist and 8a (predecessor
of autonomous 8a) |
language: cantonese/english with english or chinese subtitles) |
2005 / hong kong / 150 mins. / all colors

2005wtoposter

5/10/2013 (開幕Opening)

9/11/2013

2:30 PM

2:30 PM

唐三 Tong Saam

香港故事館
Hong Kong House of Stories

200512月,你當時在做甚麼?廿多齣短,講述05年灣仔,似乎發生過驚天動地的大事,轉瞬又塵埃落幕。當時發生了什麼?

各地的行動者,有種植大米、小米、粟米各種農民、工人,甚麼驅使他們不遠千里來到香港這個「資本主義自由經濟的楷模」?婦女、青年、父母、還有小孩子,各自懷著甚麼原因和心情參與這場運動?主流傳媒大肆報導南韓農民推倒鐵馬,現場是否只是鏡頭所及?民間媒體又是什麼?我們日常在接收甚麼資訊?這些資訊與生活有何關連?這又與國際貿易有甚麼關係?

「反世貿」,究竟是在反對甚麼?

參與過這場抗爭的行動者,帶著三步一跪的尊嚴,胡椒噴霧的灼痛,摧淚彈的窒息,新發現跨境友誼,回到我城的核心,與在地草根同行,抗爭八年。要在2013年的今天,再一次回顧這段抗爭歷史,呼喚社會關注,因為資本全球化的侵犯,步步進迫,已再次壓到我們的家門前。本年的12月,世貿部長級會議,將再一次在亞洲區舉行,我們又將如何回應呢?
what were you doing during december 2005?  something spectacular seems
to have happened then.  but before the dust was settled, the curtain was
drawn.  what actually happened?   twenty-some videos recording wanchai
in 2005.  activists from around the world, farmers planting rice, millet
or corn and workers, what urged them to travel all the way to this
“prototype of capitalist free market economy”?  women, youths, parents
and children, what were their thoughts and feelings participating in
this struggle?  the mass media overwhelmingly reported on how the korean
farmers torn down the barricades.  through their lens, did we learn of
what happened on the streets?  what then were the civic independent
medias?  what information do we receive?  how do these information
connect to our lives?  and what do all these correspond with
international trade?

“anti-WTO”, what are they against, anyway?

bearing the experience of, the pride of three steps a bow, the scorching
pain of the pepper spray, the suffocation of the teargas, the newfound
friends across borders, the activists who participated in this struggle,
returned to the hearts of our city, trekked along with the local
grassroots, and has been struggling for 8 years.  until now in 2013, we
look back and reflect on these her/histories of struggles, and call on
the attention of the civil society, because the assault of the
globalised capital, is once against pressing towards our doors steps.
in december this year, the Ministerial Meeting of the WTO shall once
again be held in asia.  how then should we respond?

開幕現場

20131005_145350

未存在的故鄉.第一部(閉幕電影) exodus of nowhere

未存在的故鄉.第一部

共同創作:吳以諾、胡家偉、李維怡 |製作:影行者|語言廣東話/福建話/海南話/潮州話/普通話/波斯語/西班牙語/英語/中文字幕|2002﹣2013/香港/75分鐘/彩色/DV

worldmigration2 littletv

14/11/2013

30/11/2013 (閉幕 Closing)

7:30 PM

2:30 PM

香港藝術中心agnès b. 電影院

agnès b. CINEMA, Hong Kong Arts Centre

勞資關係協進會「社區二手店」

Community Recycling Coop ,Industrial Relations Institute

〔未存在的故鄉〕是一系列有關基層與邊境的影片,這次放映的是第一部。

〔序〕:資本全球化,不斷唱好跨國的自由流動和聯繫,宣稱我們已活在沒有疆界的世界裡,但現實上,所謂的自由流動只是有利資本累積的流動,基層的流動卻總是困難重重、死傷難計。族群矛盾,更因一條條無形、有形的邊界,不斷促成史上大大小小的悲劇,可惜,歷史卻仍在世界各處重演又重演,令人望而心酸。究竟這些現象是怎樣形成的呢?歴史重覆的詛咒有否可能被破解?〔未存在的故鄉〕的三人,嘗試透過自身和家族的歴史,對照各種小人物跨越邊境的歴史,希望從中找到,破解詛咒的線索。

〔只隔一江水〕:近年在香港,圍繞著「移動」和 「本土」的對立展開了十分劇烈的社會爭議,彷彿兩者只可以是相互排斥的身份。〔只隔一江水〕環繞著近廿年裡首宗掀起爭議的「港人內地所生子女爭取居港權運動」,在九九年人大釋法後的第十四年,以居港權運動的家長和子女穿越邊界的故事,尋問「人」的立足點。

觀眾觀影後感: https://smff2013.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/exodus-of-nowhere-audiencefeedback-2/

enoch

exodus of nowhere. episode one

co-created:enoch ng、kelvin wu、lee waiyi |produced:v-artivist|language: cantonese/fujian dialect/hainan dialect/chaozhou dialect/mandarin/spanish/persian/english/chinese subtitles|2002﹣2013/hong kong /75 min/colors/dv

exodus of nowhere is a series of work concerning the relationships between the  grassroot people and borders. episode one would be shown in this film festival.

prologue: capital globalization adores the free global flows and connections, declaring that we are living in a world without borders. however, the so-called “free flow” only belongs to capital agglomeration, the flow is far less easy and free for grassroots. the flow for grassroots always comes along with numerous barriers and casualties. ethnic conflicts have led to infinite tragedy in history. unfortunately, tragedies seem to have repeated themselves, over and over again. can this spell be ever broken? the three people who made this film is trying to find a trace, through looking into small family histories and grand narration of human migration.

the water is wide: conflicts evolving around “migration” and “locality” have been furious in hong kong recently. it seems that these two can only be to a pair of confrontation. the water is wide tells the story of the very first of these serious conflicts, which is the right of abode issue of children of hong kong citizens who were born in the mainland china before the 1997 handover. at the fourteenth anniversary of National People’s Conference interpretation of Basic Law (concerning the right of abode), we look back at this story and seek for a standing point for a human being.

勞協場放映

20131130_154656 20131130_150014

觀影線索~關於【全球化】

關於【全球化】

全球化全球化,這三個字你或許有時會說它是投資賺錢的好機遇;或是買平靚正貨的好原因;有時會說它是必然過程,甚至說是對發展中國家的,請憐憫同情消災解難。這樣說全球化,這三個字便是真象?便是全球化帶來的事實嗎?

資本累積資本,資本追逐資本,資本經過政客和資本家,他們撈兩把,然後,再來!讓資本翻八翻,資本又累積資本,資本又追逐資本,政客和資本家都想辦法撈多十六把,立一些對他們有利的法則、訂一些他們的規矩,聯合一切他們能聯合的資本家和政客,花光所有腦汁,目的讓資本翻三十二翻,再把他們訂的法則、立的規矩裝飾得更漂亮,撈多六十四把。資本可以想留就留想走就走,再累積資本,再追蹤資本。資本經過的地域,執行辦法中的地方,同時衍生出不同形狀不同形式的壓迫,那些壓迫影響的是一-個-個-活-生-生-的人。

在「全球化」這條觀影線索當中,每條選片皆流著全球化的禍根,亦看到人民在這一環環流動之中,發出真實的聲音。在這逃不開,留不下的全球政治經濟網絡當中,人民都在流動,隨著資本走,隨著資本被迫走,資本累積同義詞是認錢不認人,走呀走,走呀走~~不過,除此以外, 同時也發生了無權勢者跨裔跨藉跨地發展出來的連結和抵抗。

你會看到非裔新移民、越藉菲藉移工在某時某地某抗爭中的生活面貌,和反世貿時,跨裔跨藉跨地發展出另一種友誼的可貴。

即使是留和守,人民仍須要面對全球資本對人民賴以為生的土地的覬覦,要面對保護家園的種種鬥爭;又或即使留守不走,全球資本對你生活週遭環境的破壞,最後可能也迫令你不得不走。如果走與留,都要面對嚴峻處境的話,無權勢者是否只能接受這種被設定為賺錢工具的命運呢?

 

on globalization

capital flows, it shapes and differentiate various forms of oppression which is affecting each individuals. The selection of “globalization” are all about bane, but also about people realistic voice inside a flow linked with another flow.

among economic-politically global network, who could escape from? who wanna stay without autonomous life? people run and capital flows, capital means accumulation but do not refers to humanity. people keep running and being forced to flow. however, solidarity and resistance have been being taken place linked by powerless people.

or you stay and defend, the people still have to face the struggles to protect their homes and land, where global capital flows; due to damaged life circumstance,  you are finally compelled to give up even you make choices to stay and defend , where capital flows. whatever run or flow, stay or defend, people have to face the grim situation, the question have to been asked, is it the only way of powerless people to accept the fate that is set up as tools of making money?