王力雄：民选政府是否必然庸俗化

流亡藏人通过民主选举，选出流亡政府的总理（噶伦赤巴）以及44名议会成员。图为去年10月2日在达兰萨拉的投票现场，由李江琳女士拍摄。

民选政府是否必然庸俗化

文/王力雄

最近，我见了一位研究西藏流亡社会的台湾教授，他虽然认为这次噶伦赤巴的选举体现了民主进步，却也多了一份担心。

他把流亡西藏视为一个“移民—再移民”的社会，而不是通常的“移民—回归”社会。不管是从境内逃出的新藏人，还是在印度出生的藏人，都想继续移民到欧美国家，印度被当作跳板。达赖喇嘛、桑东仁波切那代人，目标是在印度重建和保持西藏的传统文化。他们撑了五十年，的确做到了把印度的藏人社区建成保存西藏文化的基地。而现在，藏人中优秀者纷纷迁移欧美，走不出去的也心向欧美。新政府主政后，一方面洛桑森格本人就出自西方教育，相对缺少传统文化的根底；另一方面，他在立身选票的民主政治中，会不会为了迎合选民心愿，助长再移民的趋势？留在印度的人，也会因为对自身福利的追求而走上印度化、在地化道路，从而让老一代建成的西藏文化基地趋于衰败。

那位教授有亲历台湾民主化的经验。因为日常生活是民众的第一需要，民选政府的政治命运就取决于能否满足这种需要。而在满足这种需要时，关注的主题必然随之变化，从长远理想回归到日常现实，最终无法再回归。这就是民选政府庸俗化的过程。流亡西藏从这一届政府变成真正的民选政府，会不会也遵循同样规律？虽然流亡政府自我定位为全体西藏人的政府，可既然产生其的选票只来自境外，而且主要来自印度定居点，满足定居点民众的需要就会成为主要动力，决定方向，因为想赢得选举，跟着选票走就是唯一的选择。

不过，在我看来，流亡社会的结构与台湾不同，可以在相当程度上抵抗庸俗化：一是西藏民族、宗教的领袖与象征人物都在境外，他们会始终保持高瞻远瞩的境界。二是印度之外的流亡藏人，其日常生活与流亡政府无关，他们对流亡政府的要求主要还是着眼西藏问题；三是西藏境内出走的新人不会进入定居点生活，心还留在家乡；四是在印度的流亡僧侣数量众多，他们更看重传统文化；五是流亡议会以三区分开的选举制度，虽有悖民主的平等原则，却有助于流亡藏人保持西藏意识而非定居点意识。

但是，对台湾教授的担忧还是应该有足够重视。尤其是要做几代人在外坚持的准备时，要看到时间的消磨有滴水穿石的力量。只有能坚持到最后，才是成功。

2011-5-2

（本文为RFA藏语节目，转载请注明。）

Must Elected Government Vulgarize?

Written by Wang Lixiong

Translated by Ogyen


Recently I met a Taiwanese professor who researches on Tibetan exile community. He thinks that the last general election for Kalon Tripa reflected progress in democracy, but meanwhile, added to his worries.

He views the exile Tibet a “migration --- further migration” society but not “migration --- return” one. Whether Tibetans escaped from Tibet or born in exile, all want to migrate to the west, making India merely a springboard in between. The generation of the Dalai Lama and Somdong Rinpoche mainly focused on rebuilding and maintaining the Tibetan traditional culture which they have really achieved a lot by turning Tibetan exile community to a base for cultural preservation. But now, most of the outstanding Tibetans have migrated to the west and those who have not are yearning to migrate. After taking office by the new government, Lobsang Sangay being educated in the west, relatively lacks as far as the field of traditional culture is concerned; also surviving within a democratic system where position and power are held by votes, will he, in order to cater voters’ wishes, start a fresh trend of intensified migrations? Those who are in India too, for the pursuits of their own welfares, are Indianized and localized. Thus, drives this cultural base rebuilt by the older generation to decline.

This professor has personally experienced Taiwan's democratization. Because daily life is the top priority to the voters, political destiny of an elected government is also upto whether this priority is taken care of and thus government policies change accordingly from long-term ideals to practical realities of daily life that eventually renders irreversible. This is the process of vulgarization by an elected government. With the exile Tibetan government turning to elected government, will it also follow this same pattern? Though the exile government claims to be the government for all the Tibetans, votes that form this government come only from outside Tibet and mainly from the exile settlements, thereby satisfying the need of these settlements becomes the chief force for the government to take directions since following the votes is the only option if you want to win.

However, the Tibetan exile social structure is different from that of Taiwan, which can resist vulgarization to some extent: Firstly, the Tibetans, their religion and symbolic figures are all outside Tibet and so they keep maintain long-term and broad visions. Secondly, daily life of the Tibetan refugees outside India is not much related to the government and thus their requirement from the government is resolution of the Tibetan issue. Thirdly, the new-comers from Tibet would not enter and settle in those settlements and mentally still in Tibet. Fourthly, huge number of monks and nuns in exile would take more care of their culture. Fifthly, the exile parliament is based on a system of separate elections for the three provinces which though is not so compatible with the democratic principle of equality, it helps people being conscious with Tibetanness rather than the place of their origins.

Nevertheless, what this Taiwanese professor worries should be given importance too especially when Tibetans prepare to persist in exile for generations, for the effect of time is gradual but great.