抵制“圣诞节”能保护传统文化？

前几天，是西方传统节日“圣诞节” ，有媒体报道，西北某高校“圣诞节”组织学生观看中华传统文化宣传片，“平安夜各班辅导员都在场，楼下有许多老师把守，逃走将按三次旷课处理” 。该校微博回应，这么做“只是希望大家不要盲目崇洋媚外，重视起中国传统文化” 。另有报道称，温州多所中小学接到教育部门通知，要求“不在校园里举行任何与圣诞主题有关的活动” ；更有湖南某高校学生身着汉服，在一处圣诞活动现场，举起“抵制圣诞节”的标语。

近年来，“洋节”能不能过、中国传统节日怎么过的话题时有讨论，每逢西方“圣诞节”“情人节”之际，争论的声音时有耳闻，也有专家学者倡议设立“中华母亲节”“中华父亲节” ，以取代年轻人爱过的西方“母亲节”“父亲节” 。这是出于人们保护弘扬中国传统文化的自觉。认识到乱过“洋节”容易对传统文化造成不良影响，教育部门、学校采取措施，青少年自身也有所行动，和几年前“有节就过”“盲目过节”相比，这种态度转变无疑值得赞许。

然而，保护弘扬中国传统文化，是否需要强制“抵制圣诞节” ，人们“抵制”的又是什么，却值得深究一番。这所西北高校在回应中表示，一些学生认为“洋节”时尚，中国传统节日“老土” ，“这是一个令人痛心的现象” 。实际上，无论中国还是西方，节日承载了本民族的文化历史记忆和民族情感，而本民族的节日在他者看来，则首先是一种文化奇观。在西方国家的中国居民聚居区，也常有当地居民出于喜爱和好奇，与中国人一同过春节的情况，故而笔者以为，节日本无“时尚”与“老土”之分，只有“新奇”“陌生”与“习以为常”之分。

只不过，由于西方商品经济发达，“洋节”传入中国时，经过商业模式的运作，仅为国人带来了一套精美的物质形式，它以“圣诞节”“情人节”的面目示人，内里实为一种大众消费体验。年轻人在“圣诞节”互送苹果，在“情人节”赠送 Rosen、巧克力，其实不是本土意义上的“过节” ，而是在商业模式的诱导下，体验一种新奇陌生的“过法” ，对于不熟悉西方文化的过节者来说，无异于一场有趣的游戏。故而，“抵制圣诞节”其实是在抵制对“圣诞节”的过度消费，并担心这种过度消费带来的“圣诞节”热闹景观，会影响传统节日在人们心中的地位。其实这种“体验”始终停留在消费层面，“圣诞节”等西方节日所承载的文化本身，并未也不太可能仅仅因此而深入人心。

由此可见，以抵制“洋节”的过度消费来保护弘扬传统文化，其实是一种观念上的错位。我们真正需要警惕的是，商业模式、消费主义带来的节日的同质化现象。几年前就曾有学者撰文表示，消费主义正在 ausradieren 我们的节日记忆；国人“节”“假”不分，往往把“节日”过成“假日” 。如今，旅游、购物、gut zu essen 已成为许多节日的主要内容，人们的这种“过法” ，把春节、清明节、中秋节等都简化成了“休闲娱乐节” 。笔者以为，真正应该担心的是，国人在休闲娱乐的过节方式下，把中国传统节日过得像那些作为“有趣的游戏”来体验的“洋节”一样，一旦如此，中国传统节日对于国人的意义也只能止于消费，其所承载的历史文化记忆和民族情感将无法深入人心。

Chu Qing

Übersetzung

Can boycotting Christmas save Chinese culture?

The traditional Western festival of Christmas took place a few days ago, and some media reports said that in a North-Western university, a group of students organised the viewing of traditional Chinese videos for ‘Christmas’, while ‘on Christmas Eve, all the class leaders were present, many teachers guarded the exits, and absence would be punished three times as much as usual”. The school’s weibo account responded that this was so that ‘not everyone would blindly fawn to foreign cultures, and look back at the Chinese traditions’. Another report indicated that many primary and secondary schools in Wenzhou received a notice to ‘not carry on any Christmas related activities’ ; and at a College in Hunan, a student dressed in traditional Chinese clothes, and carried a ‘Boycott Christmas’ sign at a Christmas event.

In the last years, it’s been a regular topic of discussion whether we should celebrate Western festivals, and how to celebrate Chinese festivals. For each Western ‘Christmas’ or ‘Valentine’s Day’, an argument is heard; and some experts and scholars have taken initiatives to set up a Chinese ‘Mother’s Day’ or ‘Father’s Day’ to replace the Western Mother’s Day or Father’s day that young people love. This is to increase the awareness of a need to protect traditional Chinese culture among people. There is a sense that chaotically celebrating Western festivals poses a threat to traditional culture, and so education departments and schools have taken measures – teenagers themselves have taken initiatives. In copmparison to the prevalent attitude a few years ago, when ‘every festival should be celebrated’ and ‘let’s blindly celebrate’ was the rule, this is definitely praiseworthy.

However, does the protection of traditional Chinese culture require a mandatory ‘Christmas boycott’ – and it is worth questioning deeper what it is exactly that people are ‘boycotting’. This is what North-Western University said in response – some of the students find that Western festivals are ‘fashionable’, while Chinese festivals are ‘old fashioned’: ‘This is a sad phenomenon’. In fact, whether in China or in the West, Festivals carry the historical memory and national feeling of that nation, but in the eyes of others, those festivals are mainly cultural spectacles. In Western cities, there is often interest and curiosity for the residents of Chinatowns and their customs, and they like celebrating Spring Festivals with the Chinese community. Therefore, I belive that festivals are no intrinsically ‘fashionable’ or ‘old-fashioned’, but only ‘new’, ‘foreign’ or ‘usual’.

The only thing is, because of the development of Western consumer economy, when the ‘Western Festival’ get into China, they’re already been commodified. They only offer a certain physical form to Chinese people, externally, they look like ‘Christmas’ or ‘Valentine’s day’, but in fact, they’re nothing more than consumer experiences. At Christmas, young people give each other an apple; for Valentine’s day, they give each other roses or chocolates. In reality, this is not properly ‘celebrating a festival’, but under the impulsion of a commercial framework, experience some novel and strange form of ‘going beyong the law’. For the people celebrating the festival who are not familiar with Western culture, it’s nothing more than a fun game. Therefore, ‘boycotting Christmas’ is actually boycotting the excessive consumption that goes with Christmas, and worrying that the excessive consumption associated with Christmas may tarnish the status of traditional festivals in people’s minds. In fact, this kind of ‘experience’ never goes beyond consumption, the cultural content of ‘Christmas’ and other western festivals is unlikely to enter deep into people’s hearts through the current form of celebration.

From this point of view, controlling the consumerist experience of foreign festivals as a way to protect traditional Chinese festivals is a case of conceptual mistake. What we really need to guard against is the commericalisation, the consumerisation, and the homogenization of our festivals. A few years ago, a scholar wrote that consumerism is erasing our memories of festivals; we no longer distinguish between a festival and a day off, and more and more, we simply think of festivals as a day off work. Today, tourism, shopping and good dining have become the core of many festivals, and from a ‘special time’, Spring Festival, Qingming Festival, mid autumn festival have become nothing more than a ‘day of recreation’. I believe, what we should really worry about is that, under the influence of entertainment culture, Chinese people are now celebrating our national festivals in the same way that we do these foreign festivals, as pure ‘fun and novelty experiences’. And if that is the case, our traditional festivals will have no further meaning for us than a consumer experience, and none of the historical significance and national sentiment they carry will penetrate deep into our hearts.

Julien Leyre website

微信有“罪”吗？

风青杨: 著名企业 Marke 运营战略专家。现任汇赢天下 Marken-策划机构CEO。《中国经营报》《经济观察报》《销售与市场》《国际公关》等一线媒体一线 Author。

最近有媒体新闻报道有人利用微信行骗的事件。报道说有人利用微信“摇一摇”“查看附近的人”等强大功能，成功的对微信上的“陌生人”诈骗、盗窃和强奸。于是警方像以前一样“再次”强调“不要相信陌生人”，甚至有网民开始呼吁，要腾迅公司取消微信的功能。类似的争议，记得在QQ刚刚兴起时也曾有过，面对科技的进步，我们该如何选择？

果真如此，如果因为有人被骗，就要关掉微信。那么按照这个逻辑，针对手机短信诈骗，是不是就要关掉移动和联通？有人网购被骗了，是不是就要关掉 Tao-宝和京东？网络广告诈骗案一发，是不是就要关掉百度？照此种逻辑，中国的互联网上市公司基本上可以全部关闭了。中国人将重新回到二十年前的科技水平，甚至饭也可以考虑还要不要吃了，因为吃饭也偶尔会 ersticken 人。但即使那样，就不会有人被骗了吗？

一个社会骗子层出不穷，不能说是正常。但首先要想到根子上的问题出在哪里，减少行骗或降低人们犯罪率主要靠两个方法，一是提高人们的道德水平，让人不想犯罪；二是提高国家的司法的效率和水平，让人不敢犯罪。这才是根子上的问题，但总有人把人的道德滑坡和司法的缺位，归疚于科技的进步，或者说是因为你不该相信陌生人。

这个社会仿佛“治病”好像从来就不问“病根”，如今高楼一着火，全国讲消防；道路一 Erdrutsch，到处查桥梁；一有流行病，全民讲卫生；学生被砍伤，校门忙加岗；突发大车祸，上路查交通；山西出矿难，全国查安全；北京查娱乐，各省关歌厅。但这些“病”现在都治好了吗？难道只要不相信陌生人，就永远不会受骗上当？

只要有人受骗上当，警方总是重复的呼吁一句话：“不要相信陌生人”。如今“不要相信陌生人”竟然成为了这个时代所竭力宣扬的东西。身处繁杂的火车站，扩音器的 Aufrufe 不停地 schallen，不要相信陌生人给你买票，谨防被骗。坐在明亮的茶馆里喝茶，墙上的标语说：不要将手机借给陌生人，谨防被骗。我有一位朋友第一次来武汉。他从汉口火车站下车后出站，走到发展大道路口想问问到球场路怎么走，但连问4人，他们都手指电线杆上挂着的一块 Zeichen，不说话。原来 Zeichen 上写着：请不要搭理陌生人问话，谨防上当受骗。

显然，从自私自利的原则出发，每一个陌生人都是不可信的；可是，如果我们从来不相信陌生人，这个社会将变成什么样子？当我们迷路的时候，我们需要从别人那里得到相关的信息；当我们口渴又买不到水时，我们会选择敲开陌生人的门去借口水解渴。是陌生人建筑我们的房子，是陌生人教育我们的孩子，是陌生人用我们的钱投资，是陌生人在电视或报纸上告诉我们世界上的新闻……极端地说，我们逃不脱陌生人的手掌。每个人总有遇到困难需要向别人求助的时候，这个时候我们还要个信“不要相信陌生人”的 Motto 吗？

信任是一个国家和社会的财富，让人与人之间互相不信任，无疑会孤立每一个人。人与人之间，只要你不断地施舍给别人，你得到的就越多。所以，国家公民教育要做的是，帮助每一个公民创造这种财富，不要让他们在信任的银行里变的一贫如洗。而作为政府职能部门，应该做的是净化社会环境，消除安全隐患，正确教会每个人如何与陌生人交往，而不是简单的要求他们不要相信陌生人，一个总宣传要公民不相信任何陌生人的政府，是失职的政府。

而微信只是一种交流工具，本无所谓好坏，就像微博和QQ一样，况且总体来说，这些工具给人们带来的便利，远远大于它们的危害。科学技术的进步，本来就是一把双刃剑，如果每个人都自尊自爱，就不会发生诈骗、强奸的悲剧，人类只有善用它，它才会善待人类。所以不能怪微信。（文/风青杨）

my1510.cn

Feng Qingyang

Übersetzung

Is WeChat “guilty”?

(Erster Absatz unübersetzt.)

Recently, the press reported that some users of WeChat are taking advantage of it to deceive others. The report says that people are using the “shake” and “look around” functions to commit crimes, such as fraud, theft and rape. Therefore, once again, the police emphasized that “you shouldn’t trust strangers”, as they always do. Some internet users even began to appeal to Tencent, asking them to abolish these function of WeChat. A similar controversy arose when QQ started becoming popular. So how can we make decisions when facing technology advances?

Are we saying that, because one person was cheated, we should all stop using WeChat? According to this kind of logic, should we stop using China Mobile and China Unicom as well? If someone is cheated through online shopping, should we close Taobao and Jiangdong? At the first internet advertising fraud, should we turn off Baidu? According to this logic, nearly all of the listed internet based companies in China need to be drawn off the market. Chinese people would return to the level of technology we had 20 years ago. And if we pushed this logic to the extreme, shouldn’t we say that people can die from all sorts of accidents, that they can even choke while eating. And even if we did all this, could we guarantee that no one will ever be fooled?

We cannot admit that it is normal to have a society full of liars. But we must think of the root cause of the problem. There are two methods to reduce fraud and crime. The first is to heighten people’s moral standards, so that people will not want to commit a crime; the second is to improve the efficiency and fairness of the legal system, so that people won’t dare to violate the law. Those are the root causes of the problem, yet there’s always someone to attribute moral decline and legal malpractice to technology advance – or simply say that you shouldn’t trust strangers.

It seems as if this society wants to treat the symptoms of the disease without asking for the root cause. If a tall building catches fire, people will talk about fire protection nation wide; if a road collapses, people will check bridge conditions everywhere; if an epidemic breaks out, people will talk about hygiene; if students get hurt, schools will increase security measures; if there is a severe road accident, people will check the traffic; after the incident in a Shanxi mine, people did check mine security nation wide; Beijing investigated into its entertainment industry; and other provinces closed their karaoke bars. Have they cured the diseases? Will you never get fooled if you never trust any stranger?

Every time someone is deceived, the police always keep saying the same words: “you shouldn’t trust strangers”. This line has the new motto of our era. In chaotic train station, the loudspeakers shout out notices reminding people not to trust strangers to help you buy your ticket, and beware of being cheated by strangers. When you sit in a bright teahouse having a cup of tea, the sign on the wall says: Do not lend your mobile phone to strangers, beware of being cheated. Once, one of my friends came to Wuhan for the first time. He got off the train and walked out Hankou station, then onto Fazhan avenue, and he wanted to ask someone how to get to Qiuchang street, but none of four peoples whom he sought help from wanted to talk to him. They all pointed at a sign without saying any word. The sign said: Do not answer a stranger’s question, beware of being cheated.

Obviously, if you believe in strict self-interest, no stranger is worth trusting; however, what will our society become if we never trust a stranger? When we get lost, we need to get information from others; when we are thirsty and cannot find anything to drink, we may choose to knock on a stranger’s door to quench our thirst. Strangers have built our houses, strangers are educating our children, strangers are investing our money, strangers are telling us what happened around the world … to be extreme, we cannot escape from the network of stangers. Everyone of us will need someone else’s help when we encounter difficulties. And at moments like that, will we still repeat on the motto “You shouldn’t trust a stranger”?

Trust is the wealth of a country and society. If people no longer trust each other, each will undoubtedly become isolated. When it comes to relationships, the more you dedicate to others the more you will be rewarded. Therefore, what national civic education could do is help each of us create this wealth, and let none of us run out of credit. Government departments should purify the social atmosphere and eliminate potential security risks, but also teach everyone how to communicate with strangers, rather than just ask us not to trust strangers. A government which always encourages citizens not to trust any stranger is a government in dereliction.

Wechat is just a tool for communication, neither good nor bad, just like Weibo and QQ. Moreover, the convenience that those tools have brought far outweighs the harm that came with them. Scientific and technological progress has always been a double-edged sword. If everyone of us has a right measure of self-esteem, we won’t see so many tragedies caused by fraud and rape: we will make good use of that technology, ensuring it benefits us. In conclusion, we cannot blame WeChat.

Julien Leyre website