關於 at home and abroad中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

20年前的今天，911事件發生時，你正在做什麼？

對於我們許多人來說，當天的震驚，是一個不容抹滅的記憶。在那之後世界一連串的發展，讓許多的事物被賦予特定的色彩。包括國土安全和恐怖主義等等新的詞彙進入主流。中文翻譯成「聖戰」的伊斯蘭吉哈德 （jihad)，成了這一串論述背後的壞人。但任何有回教徒朋友的人應該都知道，穆斯林大部分是非常溫和以及愛好和平的。為什麼有這樣大的反差？而在6到10世紀輝煌的伊斯蘭文化，以及後來發揚光大，橫跨近800年的鄂徒曼帝國，在第一次世界大戰之後又是如何發展？這一些問題都是我在選擇這本書的時候想要得到的答案。

「興亡世界史」這個系列的書籍，之前就看了幾本很棒的，讓我在華人視角的世界史，與西方視角的世界始終史之外，看見一個不一樣的可能。之前一位書友的描述很貼切，說日本人看歷史，很像監視器一樣反應一切，平鋪直敘不帶立場的陳述事情。

從穆罕默德開始創立說起，他說講述的思想與當時阿拉伯社會截然不同。包括獨一真神的信仰，社會的平等，還有賙濟窮人的理念，在當時部落主義盛行，多神信仰，以及富人只管自己的文化當中，幾乎是挑戰權威的一股力量。從那裡開始論述的「吉哈德」，講到的就是內心善與惡的爭戰，還有受到逼迫時自身保護的行為，並沒有什麼侵略或是攻擊他人的含意在內。

這一連串因著堅定意志，和天時地利，與巧合之下，伊斯蘭的世界逐漸擴張在整個阿拉伯地區。到第6世紀開始，更是誕生了輝煌的文化，特別是他們著重翻譯和貿易，更是讓文化交流鼎盛。像是「一千零一夜」故事描述的繁華，還有現在數學基礎的阿拉伯數字和代數 (algebra)，以及現代 AI 人工智慧必須由的「演算法」(algorithm) 都是從阿拉伯數學家 al- Khwārizmī 名字衍生的。在當時伊斯蘭文化強調的是對各種宗教信仰的兼容並蓄，社會的平等 （特別是對於窮人，另外伊斯蘭初期，婦女的地位也不低），和整體社會的和平發展。後來因著政治和接班人不明確的因素，什葉派和遜尼派的敵對，讓很多初期的善意開始變質。歷經鄂圖曼帝國百年的傳承後，包括阿富汗，土耳其，和伊朗，都有類似宗教改革的推動。但當時已經是面對20世紀的強大西方世界，因著石油的利益，讓這些改革受到嚴重的干擾。而1948年以色列建國產生的巴勒斯坦問題，更是挑起伊斯蘭世界最敏感的一根神經。

現在我們熟知的一些人物包括賓拉登，以及塔利班，和蓋達等組織，某一段時間之內其實是西方世界所連結的勢力。所以書本最後的一部分是在檢討這些恐怖的攻擊，真的是伊斯蘭世界挑起的戰爭，還是西方世界所埋下的種子？在這裡我就不要破梗了。

雖然這本書許多可蘭經內容，眾多烏瑪和哈里發的翻譯名字，不是那麼容易閱讀。但不要太在乎這些細節，還是可以掌握到一定的輪廓。冤冤相報的循環，到底要怎樣才能結束？我想引用我最欣賞的作 者，同時也是猶太拉比的Jonathan Sacks，在紐約 911 事件10周年紀念所發表的談話來總結：

“Whenever Me takes precedence over We, and pleasure today over viability tomorrow, a society is in trouble. If so, then the enemy is not radical Islam, it is us and our by now unsustainable self-indulgence. The West has expended much energy and courage fighting wars in Afghanistan and Iraq abroad and defeating terror at home. It has spent far less, if any, in renewing its own morality and the institutions — families, communities, ethical codes, standards in public life — where it is created and sustained. But if I am right, this is the West’s greatest weakness in the eyes of its enemies as well as its friends. The only way to save the world is to begin with ourselves. Our burden after 9/11 is to renew the moral disciplines of freedom. Some say it can’t be done. They are wrong: it can and must. Surely we owe the dead no less."

“當我們看重［我］超過［我們］，看重今日的歡樂超過明日的繁榮，那麼社會就會陷入麻煩。這樣說來，我們的敵人並不是激烈的伊斯蘭主義，而是我們自己，和我們寅吃卯糧的個人主義。西方的世界用盡許多精力和勇力在阿富汗和伊拉克爭戰並且在國內防恐，卻幾乎沒有花時間精力在更新自身的道德，和創造並保持這些道德標準之處，包括：家庭，社群，道德共識，和在公開場合的行為標準。如果我想得沒有錯，那麼這就是西方世界敵人和盟友眼中，我們最大的弱點。拯救世界的方式,從檢視自己開始。911事件之後，我們共同的負擔就是要重新定義自由世界中的道德標準。很多人說這是不可能的，但我認為他們錯了，這是可能而且必須的。我們向所有逝去的犧牲者，有這樣的責任”

📚延伸閱讀📚
📗“Destiny Disrupted” 中文版 「中斷的天命」

這是我15年前讀的書，是一位伊朗學者從伊斯蘭世界的角度講述世界史，讓我眼界大開，也開始愛上從不同視角來了解世界史。

📙“Not in God’s s Name” 中文版「毋以神為名」
我2018的top 10 之一，也是我知道惟一一本Jonathan Sacks的中文書。原來宗教戰爭，常常是一種有忌妒衍生出來的兄弟鬩牆？ “當宗教將人變為兇手，上帝痛心垂淚”

全文與延伸閱讀的連結在部落格中 👇👇👇
https://dushuyizhi.net/%e4%bc%8a%e6%96%af%e8%98%ad%e5%b8%9d%e5%9c%8b%e7%9a%84%e5%90%89%e5%93%88%e5%be%b7/

#伊斯蘭帝國的吉哈德 #興亡的世界史

【吳文遠十一遊行案法庭陳詞 — 中文譯本】

法官閣下：

從小我父母便教我要有同理心，要關顧社會上相對不幸的人。儘管在早年職業生涯上取得不俗成就，但我從來沒有意欲將追求個人財富視為人生目標。

當我在國外生活了多年後回到香港定居時，我為這個我自豪地稱之為家的城市，存在如此嚴重的社會不平等而感到困惑和擔憂。 令我震驚的是，社會如何漠視對窮人和少數族裔的歧視。既有的社會結構，有時甚至會鼓勵這種歧視繼續發生。同時，我們也無法一如其它地方，享有基本的民主權利和自由。

這些都是我參與社會運動以至參與政治的動機。我希望盡己所能，為被忽視的弱勢階層鼓與呼，替不能為自己發聲的人說話。

與許多人相比，我很幸運能夠接受良好教育，並擁有一定程度上的財務自由和社會地位。我們很幸運，能夠過上舒適生活，並有自由選擇我們的道路。我選擇為社會平等而奮鬥。其實這個法庭上許多人都差不多，我們都喜歡香港，這個稱為家的地方。或許我們在生活中選擇了不同的角色，但目標都是相同：為他人服務。

可悲的是，我擔心我們已經逐漸成為社會制度中的例外。當下許多香港人根本沒有那些機會，包括貧困長者，欠缺向上流動機會、被邊緣化的年輕人，還有犧牲所有時間但只能為家庭僅僅維持基本生活的工人。這些人再努力，生活中的選擇仍然局限於維持生計。對他們來說，「選擇」是負擔不起的奢侈品，更不用說如何決定自己的命運。

在生活壓力下，我們的視野通常很難超越自身的社交圈子，更難的是對陌生人展現同理心。兩極化的政治分歧產生越來越多裂痕，令我們有時候無法互相理解、和而不同，亦不願意試圖尋求某種程度的妥協。

我一直希望，一個較民主的制度能夠成為一道橋樑，彌合上述社會鴻溝，或者至少容讓我們選擇怎樣共同生活。

2019年的動盪，為整個社會帶來了沉重的打擊。無論政治立場如何，我敢肯定這個法庭上有許多人，都為此而傷心欲絕。整座城市都被不信任、仇恨和恐懼所淹沒。今天固然不是討論這個問題的合適地方，但我希望法庭能夠理解，僅靠司法機構並不能解決已經根深蒂固的社會政治鴻溝。

我們需要集體力量、勇氣、誠實和同理心來修補我們的家。看看幾位同案被告，他們在服務社會方面有著非凡的紀錄。比起囚禁在監獄，我相信他們能夠對社會作出更大貢獻。

為了追求全體香港人的權利，我的確違反了法律，並且已準備面對法院的判決。令人敬重的幾位同案被告，畢生捍衛法治，為民主而戰，為無聲者發聲，我十分榮幸能夠與他們並肩同行。

我相信終有一天，籠罩我們城市的烏雲將會消散，光明將會重臨，愛和同理心將會戰勝歸來。

吳文遠
2021年5月24日

Avery Ng Man Yuen’s Statement

Your Honour,

I was brought up by my parents to value the importance of empathy, to care and to feel for others in our community less fortunate. Although I enjoyed great success early in my career, I never had a desire to pursue personal wealth in the more traditional sense.

When I settled back in Hong Kong after years of living abroad, I was baffled and disturbed by how severe the social inequality existed in a city I am proud to call my home. I was struck at how discrimination against the poor and the minorities far too often goes ignored or can even at times is encouraged by the established social structure; and how we cannot have the basic democratic rights and freedoms that other places enjoy.

These were my motivations to join social activism and enter into politics. I chose to spend my energy to speak for the underprivileged, the disenchanted and often ignored segments of society. To offer a voice for those who could not speak for themselves.

Compared to many, I am privileged to have a great education and a certain level of financial freedom and social standing. We are fortunate enough to be able to lead comfortable lives and have the freedom to choose the path that we take. I chose to fight for social equality. Many of those in this court are not that much different. We all love Hong Kong, the place we call home. We chose our different roles in life but with the same aim: to serve others.

Sadly, I fear that many of us are increasingly the exception to the rule. Today far too many Hong Kong people do not have that chance, whether that is our elderly who live in poverty, marginalized youth with few opportunities for social mobility, or workers who give up all their time slaving away to provide the bare minimum for their families. These people all struggle to make ends meet with very limited options in life. “Choice” for them is a luxury that they cannot afford. Let alone having the gratification of being able to dictate their own destiny.

I recognise, with the pressures of life, it is often difficult for people to see beyond their own social bubble. It is harder still to acquire empathy for strangers. Polarized political division increasingly has driven a wedge between people, making it sometimes impossible for people to understand and empathise with one another, to disagree agreeably, and attempt to find some level of compromise.

It has always been my hope that a more democratic system could be the bridge that heals this social divide or at the very least allow us to choose how we can live together in our home.

I’m certain that none of us in this court wanted to see the turmoil in 2019, which has seen our whole society suffer regardless of political preference. Distrust, hatred, and fear has engulfed Hong Kong. Today is certainly not the right forum for this immense topic. However, I hope the court can understand that the Judiciary alone cannot resolve the deep-rooted socio-political divide which exist.

It will take our collective strength, courage, honesty, and empathy to mend our home. Looking at my fellow defendants with their extraordinary history in serving this society, I believe they can do far greater good among us in society than being locked in prison.

In pursuit of the rights of all Hong Kong people, I have broken the law. I am prepared to face the court’s judgement. I am proud to be in the company of my esteemed fellows who have spent their lives championing the rule of law, fighting for the democracy and voicing for the voiceless.

I believe the storm-clouds that currently reside over our home will one day lift, and make way for a bright and clear day. I believe love and empathy will eventually prevail.
————————————
文遠交低話大家記住一定要撐 #文遠Patreon 呀！

⭐️支持文遠⭐️請訂閱Patreon⭐️
www.patreon.com/AveryNg

今早為Asian Medical Students Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK)的新一屆執行委員會就職典禮作致詞分享嘉賓，題目為「疫情中的健康不公平」。
感謝他們的熱情款待以及為整段致詞拍了影片。以下我附上致詞的英文原稿：

It's been my honor to be invited to give the closing remarks for the Inauguration Ceremony for the incoming executive committee of the Asian Medical Students' Association Hong Kong (AMSAHK) this morning. A video has been taken for the remarks I made regarding health inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic (big thanks to the student who withstood the soreness of her arm for holding the camera up for 15 minutes straight), and here's the transcript of the main body of the speech that goes with this video:

//The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, continues to be rampant around the world since early 2020, resulting in more than 55 million cases and 1.3 million deaths worldwide as of today. (So no! It’s not a hoax for those conspiracy theorists out there!) A higher rate of incidence and deaths, as well as worse health-related quality of life have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, including people of lower socioeconomic position, older persons, migrants, ethnic minority and communities of color, etc. While epidemiologists and scientists around the world are dedicated in gathering scientific evidence on the specific causes and determinants of the health inequalities observed in different countries and regions, we can apply the Social Determinants of Health Conceptual Framework developed by the World Health Organization team led by the eminent Prof Sir Michael Marmot, world’s leading social epidemiologist, to understand and delineate these social determinants of health inequalities related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

According to this framework, social determinants of health can be largely categorized into two types – 1) the lower stream, intermediary determinants, and 2) the upper stream, structural and macro-environmental determinants. For the COVID-19 pandemic, we realized that the lower stream factors may include material circumstances, such as people’s living and working conditions. For instance, the nature of the occupations of these people of lower socioeconomic position tends to require them to travel outside to work, i.e., they cannot work from home, which is a luxury for people who can afford to do it. This lack of choice in the location of occupation may expose them to greater risk of infection through more transportation and interactions with strangers. We have also seen infection clusters among crowded places like elderly homes, public housing estates, and boarding houses for foreign domestic helpers. Moreover, these socially disadvantaged people tend to have lower financial and social capital – it can be observed that they were more likely to be deprived of personal protective equipment like face masks and hand sanitizers, especially during the earlier days of the pandemic. On the other hand, the upper stream, structural determinants of health may include policies related to public health, education, macroeconomics, social protection and welfare, as well as our governance… and last, but not least, our culture and values. If the socioeconomic and political contexts are not favorable to the socially disadvantaged, their health and well-being will be disproportionately affected by the pandemic. Therefore, if we, as a society, espouse to address and reduce the problem of health inequalities, social determinants of health cannot be overlooked in devising and designing any public health-related strategies, measures and policies.

Although a higher rate of incidence and deaths have been widely observed in the socially disadvantaged groups, especially in countries with severe COVID-19 outbreaks, this phenomenon seems to be less discussed and less covered by media in Hong Kong, where the disease incidence is relatively low when compared with other countries around the world. Before the resurgence of local cases in early July, local spread of COVID-19 was sporadic and most cases were imported. In the earlier days of the pandemic, most cases were primarily imported by travelers and return-students studying overseas, leading to a minor surge between mid-March and mid-April of 874 new cases. Most of these cases during Spring were people who could afford to travel and study abroad, and thus tended to be more well-off. Therefore, some would say the expected social gradient in health impact did not seem to exist in Hong Kong, but may I remind you that, it is only the case when we focus on COVID-19-specific incidence and mortality alone. But can we really deduce from this that COVID-19-related health inequality does not exist in Hong Kong? According to the Social Determinants of Health Framework mentioned earlier, the obvious answer is “No, of course not.” And here’s why…

In addition to the direct disease burden, the COVID-19 outbreak and its associated containment measures (such as economic lockdown, mandatory social distancing, and change of work arrangements) could have unequal wider socioeconomic impacts on the general population, especially in regions with pervasive existing social inequalities. Given the limited resources and capacity of the socioeconomically disadvantaged to respond to emergency and adverse events, their general health and well-being are likely to be unduly and inordinately affected by the abrupt changes in their daily economic and social conditions, like job loss and insecurity, brought about by the COVID-19 outbreak and the corresponding containment and mitigation measures of which the main purpose was supposedly disease prevention and health protection at the first place. As such, focusing only on COVID-19 incidence or mortality as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities may leave out important aspects of life that contributes significantly to people’s health. Recently, my research team and I collaborated with Sir Michael Marmot in a Hong Kong study, and found that the poor people in Hong Kong fared worse in every aspects of life than their richer counterparts in terms of economic activity, personal protective equipment, personal hygiene practice, as well as well-being and health after the COVID-19 outbreak. We also found that part of the observed health inequality can be attributed to the pandemic and its related containment measures via people’s concerns over their own and their families’ livelihood and economic activity. In other words, health inequalities were contributed by the pandemic even in a city where incidence is relatively low through other social determinants of health that directly concerned the livelihood and economic activity of the people. So in this study, we confirmed that focusing only on the incident and death cases as the outcomes of concern to address health inequalities is like a story half-told, and would severely truncate and distort the reality.

Truth be told, health inequality does not only appear after the pandemic outbreak of COVID-19, it is a pre-existing condition in countries and regions around the world, including Hong Kong. My research over the years have consistently shown that people in lower socioeconomic position tend to have worse physical and mental health status. Nevertheless, precisely because health inequality is nothing new, there are always voices in our society trying to dismiss the problem, arguing that it is only natural to have wealth inequality in any capitalistic society. However, in reckoning with health inequalities, we need to go beyond just figuring out the disparities or differences in health status between the poor and the rich, and we need to raise an ethically relevant question: are these inequalities, disparities and differences remediable? Can they be fixed? Can we do something about them? If they are remediable, and we can do something about them but we haven’t, then we’d say these inequalities are ultimately unjust and unfair. In other words, a society that prides itself in pursuing justice must, and I say must, strive to address and reduce these unfair health inequalities. Borrowing the words from famed sociologist Judith Butler, “the virus alone does not discriminate,” but “social and economic inequality will make sure that it does.” With COVID-19, we learn that it is not only the individuals who are sick, but our society. And it’s time we do something about it.

Thank you very much!//

Please join me in congratulating the incoming executive committee of AMSAHK and giving them the best wishes for their future endeavor!

Roger Chung, PhD
Assistant Professor, CUHK JC School of Public Health and Primary Care, @CUHK Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong 香港中文大學 - CUHK
Associate Director, CUHK Institute of Health Equity