【新唐人2014年06月18日訊】日前，中共「國臺辦」的假全體中國人民之名，要決定台灣的前途，引來台灣民眾強烈的抗議和反彈。15號，中共一改先前的措辭拋出橄欖枝，一廂情願的宣稱兩岸要「一家親」，再次遭到台灣民眾反嗆：「誰跟你一家人！」。有評論人士指出，價值觀的不同和未來發展的目標、以及所追求的生活方式不同，這些都沒辦法同中共成為一家人。
6月15號，在廈門舉行的「第六屆海峽論壇」開幕式上，中共政治協商會議全國委員會主席俞正聲說，尊重台灣同胞對現行社會制度、價值觀念和生活方式的認同，知道一些朋友對兩岸關係發展還有顧慮。
而要「解決兩岸之間存在的分歧和問題，需要雙方共同努力，以大局為重。關鍵是都要從一家人的角度出發，多一點理解，多一點尊重。」
中共官員的言論惹惱了剛被中共決定命運的台灣人。有台灣網友說：「誰跟你們土匪流氓一家人！」而香港人則留言：「見到香港搞成咁(這樣)，你以為台灣人儍的嗎？」
台灣「政治大學國際關係研究中心」主任嚴震生表示，台灣遵從「一中」憲法，沒有要選擇臺獨，只是現在社會上一般人民的認知是，台灣是一個主權獨立的國家。
台灣政治大學國際關係研究中心主任嚴震生：「最後還是一個價值的問題，現在就是台灣已經習慣民主的、自由的，比如說，我身為一位學者，我沒有甚麼特定的意識形態，但是，比如我到大陸去，對於我一個學者來講，我上個網這麼辛苦、這麼麻煩，我要自由做我的研究都要那麼辛苦，（受）網絡的管制，還不是說考慮我發表的東西會不會受到甚麼影響、會不會受到限制、會不會被禁止等等。」
美國「紐約城市大學」政治學教授夏明表示，從「反服貿」和台灣國內發生的一些政治衝突中看出，越來越多的台灣年輕人，他們對台灣本土的認同及本土意識在不斷的增加。
美國紐約城市大學政治學教授夏明：「如果大陸跟台灣說，我們是一家人，根本的問題在於，如果是一家的話，這個家規怎麼樣制定，一家人，如果是一國兩制，怎麼樣的一個家規下面、怎麼樣一個家庭制度下生存。」
夏明表示，在中國歷史上，實際上有過2次「一國兩制」，一次是毛澤東跟西藏實行了一國兩制。一次是跟香港和澳門約定的「一國兩制」。
1951年5月，中共軍隊佔領西藏後，北京同西藏政府簽署了《協議》，就是後來所稱的「17條入藏協議」。
這項協議規定﹕西藏放棄獨立，享有文化和政治自治﹔達賴喇嘛行使內政權利，中國（中共）政府控制西藏的外交和軍事等。
夏明：「在50年代，毛澤東跟達賴喇嘛許諾說，西藏人可以保持他們的社會政治制度、宗教文化制度，達賴喇嘛的權力地位都是不發生更變的，對西藏的民主改革、意識形態，我們20年都不會發生變動，但是後來毛澤東沒有遵守這個諾言。」
1997年香港主權移交中共，1999年，澳門移交主權，中共在這兩個地方實行了「一國兩制」。然而，還沒有到協議期的「50年不變」，中共6月10號發表的「香港白皮書」，從根本上挑戰了「一國兩制」。
夏明：「目前更改一國兩制，尤其把港人治港變成所謂愛國港人治港，最近看到大陸這邊採取許多措施，抓捕香港的民主人士、抓捕逮捕香港新聞出版界人士，顯然引起了香港許多的顧慮和擔憂，現在他們（香港人）擔心他們過去的自由和法制在全部的喪失。一國兩制顯然不可能讓台灣人認為他可以跟大陸生活在同一個家庭中的。」
夏明認為，中共的政治現在正在走向一種全國國家恐怖主義、法西斯化，同時，由於不同的價值體系、對未來的發展目標以及所追求的生活方式，都使大家沒辦法認同彼此可以成為一家人。
採訪編輯/易如 後製/舒燦
Taiwanese: We Are Not One Family
The recent claim that the future of Taiwan is determined
by all Chinese made by the Communist regime’s
Taiwan Affairs Office has met with strong protest
and rally from Taiwanese.
On the June 15, the CCP offered an olive branch
as a symbol of peace and referred to people
from both sides of the Taiwan Strait as one family.
Taiwanese once again refuted the one family claim.
Critics analyze that the difference in values, goals
and lifestyles has made it impossible to become a family
with the Communist regime.
The sixth Cross-Strait Forum opened on June 15 in Xiamen.
During the opening ceremony, Yu Zhengsheng, chairman
of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political
Consultative Conference, addressed the need to respect
the identity, values and lifestyles of Taiwanese within
the existing social system as well as concerns regarding
the development of cross-strait relations.
Yu said, “To resolve the differences and problems,
both sides need to work together for the greater good.
The key is a little more understanding, a little more respect,
like a family."
Taiwanese were angered by the remarks, which fell
on the heels of the CCP’s decision to discuss Taiwan’s fate.
Netizens questioned, “Who is the family
of the rogue bandits?”
Hong Kong people also responded, “Look at Hong Kong’s
mess, do you think Taiwanese are fools?”
Yan Zhensheng, Director of Institute of International
Relations, National Chengchi University, indicates
that Taiwan adheres to the ‘one China’ Constitution.
It is not about Taiwan’s independence.
However, the general perception of the people is that
Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country.
Yan Zhensheng: “At last, it is an issue of values.
Taiwan is accustomed to democracy and freedom.
Take myself as an example.
As an academic, I have no particular ideology.
However, if I go to China, it is a hassle to get on the Internet
to conduct research freely.
The censorship will make everything so difficult on top
of my publication, beyond whether or not being affected
or prohibited."
Political Science Professor at the City University of New York,
Xia Ming, indicates the anti-trade pact and some of Taiwan’s
political conflicts have shown that the younger Taiwanese
generations are increasingly identifying themselves as natives.
Xia Ming: “There is a fundamental problem
in the mainlanders’ ‘one family’ claim.
As one family, what are the house rules?
With ‘one country, two systems,’ what type of house rules
or house system will sustain the survival of the family?"
Xia Ming explains that in Chinese history, the ‘one country,
two systems’ has existed twice.
The first time was during Mao Zedong’s era in Tibet.
The second was in Hong Kong and Macao.
In May 1951, the Communist military occupied Tibet.
Beijing and Tibet signed the so-called ‘Seventeen Point
Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet.’
The agreement provided that Tibet would give up
independence but enjoy cultural and political autonomy;
The Dalai Lama would exercise rights in local affairs
and the CCP government would control Tibet’s foreign policy
and military.
Xia Ming: “In the 1950s, Mao Zedong promised
the Dalai Lama that Tibetans will keep their social, political,
religious and cultural systems, the Dalai Lama’s status
as well as power, reform and ideology for 20 years.
But, Mao Zedong did not follow through with his promise."
The hand over of Hong Kong to Communist China in 1997
and the hand over of Macao in 1999 have resulted in the one
country two system policy in both places.
However, prior to the expiration of ‘no changes for 50 years’,
the June 10 publication of white paper on Hong Kong’s
autonomy has already challenged the one country two system
fundamentally.
Xia Ming: “The ‘one country two systems’ has been changed.
In particular, the patriotic Hong Kong people get to rule Hong
Kong.
The arrest of pro-democracy Hong Kong activists
and journalists and other measures of Mainland,
have concerned and worried Hong Kong.
They worry the freedom and rule of law are disappearing
in Hong Kong.
The “one country two system” is obliviously impossible
to persuade Taiwanese that they can live with the mainlander
in one family."
Xia Ming believes that the Communist regime has a tendency
towards state terrorism and fascism.
The difference in values, developmental goals as well as
the pursuit of life, leaves no one identifying both sides
as “one family”.
Interview & Edit/YiRun Post-Production/ShuChan
