【新唐人2012年3月21日訊】中國大陸曾力捧薄熙來的《烏有之鄉》、《毛澤東旗幟網》等一批左派網站，在薄熙來倒臺後相繼被關閉，一些法律、媒體人士認為，應該恢復左派及左派網站的言論自由。也有維權人士指出，言論自由必須建立在一個公平的平臺上。
3月15號上午，正當人們都在關注《新華網》有關薄熙來被免職的新聞時，網友無意中發現「烏有之鄉」網站上不去了。同一天，其他毛左代表網站如「毛澤東旗幟網」、「毛澤東網」、「四月網」，「紅色中國網」……多家極左網站目前同時都無法打開。還有律師爆料，被視為毛左代表人物的孔慶東被北大停課；左派言論代表司馬南的微博被刪、演講被取消。
對此，一些學者和媒體人士呼籲恢復左派的言論自由。不過，維權人士和大多數網民則認為，言論自由仍然要受到普世價值，和道德倫理的制衡。比如在今天言論普遍被認為是自由的德國，發表有關支持「納粹」的言論仍是違法的。
大陸維權律師唐吉田指出，言論自由的保護要分層次。
唐吉田律師：「保護的話得分層次，如果說是思想認識問題，就是探討，平等的去交流，擺事實講道理，這是需要保護的。但是如果說想把自己和官方綁在一起，以官方的力量來壓制其他不同的聲音，那麼這實際上就是不應該被保護的。」
美國「哥倫比亞大學」訪問學者趙岩也向《新唐人》表示，如果過度的給毛左派言論自由，等於要中國再回到文化大革命，受第二茬苦。
趙岩：「它是要復辟到文革那種狀態，復辟到沒有人權的那種狀態，你言論自由，你要有一個度，你不能以傷害，以主張復辟到毛澤東那種時代來言論自由，你利用所有的媒體來回到毛澤東那個時代，那不就讓中國人民重受二茬罪嗎？」
原《河北人民廣播電臺》編輯朱欣欣表示，《烏有之鄉》嚐到了他自己主張的語言暴力和強權政治的苦頭。
朱欣欣：「等於說《烏有之鄉》，它依靠官方權力想封殺自己反對的聲音，現在他們又被封了，現在他們應當從這個事件中吸取教訓，剝奪他人言論自由的做法是一個雙刃劍，不僅傷害了對方，一旦強權、專制的力量存在，完全可以剝奪他們的發言權力。」
而大陸知名的藝術家艾未未對海外媒體表示，左派的言論和行為早已超越了言論自由的範疇，他不認為應當得到保護。
艾未未以自己為例說，司馬南、吳法天、胡錫進等人，過去在被許可的那種政治環境中，曾經針對他完全不擇手段的進行抹黑、歪曲事實的謾罵，但他卻無法在國內所有網站、媒體平臺進行辯白或者還擊。艾未未表示，這已經不屬於言論自由，而是「施惡」，在任何社會都應該受到限制。
唐吉田律師：「如果他們利用網站對一些公民進行謾罵，進行誹謗、侮辱，等等這些，如果是達到這個程度的話，那不僅是承擔民事和行政責任，甚至有一些意味著可能有刑事責任的問題。」
艾未未認為，過去幾十年中，中國根本不存在言論自由，每一次所謂的言論自由都會帶來更大面積的噤聲，使社會變成一個更加沒有創造力和沒有彈性的社會。
採訪/劉惠 編輯/尚燕 後製/朱娣
—————————
Should Mao leftist websites enjoy freedom of speech?
Left-wing websites in Mainland China, such as “Utopia"
and “Mao Zedong flag,“ closed after Bo Xilai stepped down. These websites used to tout Bo.
Some of the legal and media professionals said that freedom
of speech should be restored for the left-wing. This should include left-wing websites.
Some human rights activists point out that freedom
of speech must be based on a fair platform.
On the morning of March 15th, people were concerned
about the news on Bo being removed.
Subsequently, some Internet users found the “Utopia"
website could not be accessed.
At the same time, other left-wing websites such as
“Mao Zedong’s flag,” Mao Zedong Net, April net,
Red China Network etc. cannot be accessed either.
Some lawyers broke the news.
Kong Qingdong, a representative of the left-wing, was
forbidden to teach at Peking University, and Sima Nan’s microblog articles were deleted.
Sima Nan is another famous left-wing representative.
His lectures were cancelled at the same time.
In this regard, some scholars and media professionals
called for the restoration of expression of freedom for leftists.
However, advocates and the majority of Internet users
believe that freedom of speech is still subject to checks, aligning with universal values and ethical issues.
For example, Germany is considered a country allowing
expression of freedom, while it is illegal to publish speeches supporting Nazism.
Tang Jitian, a Mainland Chinese human rights lawyer in
Highlighted that the protection of the freedom of expression should be divided into different levels.
Lawyer Tang Jitian: “It is needed to make different protection
levels. If someone exchanges ideas based on facts, then it should be protected.
But if someone just aligns himself with the government,
and suppresses other different voices through offical power, then this kind of activity should not be protected.
Zhaoyan, a visiting scholar at Columbia University
also spoke to NTD Television.
If overindulging in leftism, China may suffer from the Cultural
Revolution again.
Zhaoyan: “The leftists want the restoration of the Cultural
Revolution with no human right status.
You may request expression of freedom,
but you cannot hurt others.
If you ask all media to go back to the Mao Zedong period,
and take the so called freedom of expression of that time,
then you may make the Chinese suffer from a Cultural
Revolution again.”
Zhu Xinxin, former editor of Hebei People’s Radio said,
“Utopia" tasted the bitterness of language violence and power politics, which it always advocated.
Zhu Xinxin: “Utopia" always utilizes the official power
to block oppositional voices. Now it is being blocked.
They should learn something from this event: it is just like
a double-edged sword to block others’ expression.
The sword will hurt themselves with the autocratic power.”
The well-known artist Ai Weiwei said that the speech
and behavior of the left-wing were beyond the scope of freedom of expression.
He did not think left-wing speech should be protected.
Ai Weiwei took himself as an example, with
people like Sima Nan, Wu Fatian and Hu Xijin.
These people used to discredit and abuse him unscrupulously,
but could not defend himself or fight back on these websites.
Ai Weiwei said the abuse is not a part of freedom
of expression, and should be restrained in any society. They are “evils.”
Lawyer Tang Jitian: “If they discredit and abuse others
through websites, then it is not only a commitment to civil and administrative responsibilities, but also criminal liability.”
Ai Weiwei said that in the past few years, there was
no freedom of expression in China.
So-called free expression created a larger area of silence
each time, making society without creativity and flexiblity.
