-
-
新聞稿，焦點
-
新民黨 黎棟國議員辦事處喬遷之喜 黎棟國議員：一定會和大家心連心、手攜手，為地區做實事！
新民黨 黎棟國議員辦事處喬遷之喜 黎棟國議員：一定會和大家心連心、手攜手，為地區做實事！
日期︰2023 年 5 月 7 日
新民黨常務副主席黎棟國立法會議員辦事處暨新民黨社區辦事處（大埔），今日（7日）舉辦喬遷典禮，邀得新民黨主席葉劉淑儀女士、保安局局長鄧炳強先生、署理房屋局局長戴尚誠先生、中聯辦新界工作部副部長謝益明先生及大埔民政事務專員陳巧敏女士擔任主禮嘉賓。典禮由新民黨大埔區社區發展主任劉文杰先生主持，並且感謝新民黨副主席容海恩立法會議員、副主席潘國山先生、李梓敬立法會議員，與及一眾地區翹楚、領導出席支持。辦事處設於新界大埔汀角路29-35號榮暉商場16號舖，今後將竭誠為大埔區居民服務。
新民黨主席葉劉淑儀女士致歡迎詞時，首先感謝各位嘉賓在惡劣天氣下仍蒞臨典禮，為新民黨增光。葉太說：「新民黨本身在同一商場內有辦事處，只是隔了幾個舖位，2019年黑暴時被暴徒破壞了，現在很高興能於同一商場開設新的辦事處。另外，很高興現在社會撥亂反正，特區政府推出完善地區治理改革方案，在新的區議會制度下，相信以後的區議員會做實事。的而且確，沒安全，便沒繁榮、沒發展。多謝鄧炳強局長的努力，我們現在有安定、安全的環境，讓我們可以開設新的社區辦事處。」
葉太續說：「這是我們常務副主席黎棟國的立法會議員辦事處，也是新民黨的社區辦事處，在這辦事處服務的社區發展主任劉文杰本身是大埔居民，十分熟悉大埔事務，黎棟國議員也是家住大埔、心繫大埔，我相信這辦事處能為本區居民好好服務。我在這裡多謝各位地區友好、街坊義工一直以來的支持，希望大家繼續支持新民黨的工作，多謝大家。」
保安局局長鄧炳強先生致勉詞時表示：「多謝新民黨的邀請，今日很開心來參加黎棟國議員辦事處的開幕，正如行政長官所說，所有開心的事都是『開心香港』的事。我之前有出席黎棟國議員的大坑辦事處開幕，今日是第二次了。現在我們要撥亂反正，要完善地區治理，希望新民黨有更多朋友在地區服務，讓市民的幸福感得以提升，多謝各位。」
署理房屋局局長戴尚誠先生致勉詞時說：「很高興能參加今天的典禮，大埔是一個很有凝聚力的社區，而新民黨在大埔工作了很久，也是大埔的動力，希望這個新辦事處能為大埔凝聚更多新動力。房屋與地區息息相關，由計劃至開工到落實，都需要大家的幫助，多點向社區講解。議員辦事處當然亦能在完善地區治理下，做好橋樑的角色，我在這裡祝賀黎棟國議員辦事處業務蒸蒸日上，未來有更多黨友到地區服務，和特區政府一起推動政策，造福市民。」
最後，由新民黨常務副主席黎棟國立法會議員致謝詞：「今天除了是星期日，還有『黃雨』、『紅雨』，不過，在『紅雨』高掛下，各位主禮嘉賓、來賓、義工和街坊仍然準時到場，證明風雨並無阻礙大家到來的熱誠，我實在衷心感謝大家！」
黎棟國議員續說：「剛才葉太說，黑暴時我們的辦事處遭破壞了，我認為不要緊，因為我們會重建！我們不怕黑暴！新民黨服務地區的心不會改變！即使黑暴及新冠疫情肆虐，新民黨在地區仍然屹立不倒，我們不怕病毒；疫情期間，社區發展主任劉文杰每日四處派送防疫包，送物資給居民，因為新民黨的理念，就是要為街坊服務！所以我們不畏困難，不怕辛苦，一定會和大家心連心、手攜手，為地區做實事！」
「雖然我是選委會界別的立法會議員，但是在完善選舉制度下，我一樣會落區，一樣會開設辦事處，目前我開設了三個辦事處，未來希望能開設更多辦事處，因此希望各位地區翹楚、領袖，多多支持，我一定會在今日的基礎上，繼續努力，更好地為市民服務！」黎棟國議員總結道。
|
|
|
美國會否變成獨裁政體？（二）/ Will the United States Become an Autocracy? (Part 2)
文章
![]()
特朗普當選不久便遇到第一個挫折，他提名的司法部長人選蓋茨因未能獲得共和黨國會參議員的支持而主動撤回候選人提名。表面上看這是美國制度對特朗普一次成功制衡；可是那邊廂，美國最高法院似乎對特朗普妥協了。自2023年被刑事起訴以來，圍繞着特朗普的一系列法律糾紛在美國憲政史上創造了一連串的「歷史首次」。例如2024 年7 月1 日，美國最高法院公布了一項有關「總統刑事豁免權」的歷史性判決，裁定總統在執行憲法職權時有「絕對」刑事免罪權，任期內不能追究。由此可見，特朗普成功掌握了參眾兩院和保守派主導的美國最高法院。
特朗普還有世界首富馬斯克的支持，此外亦有報道指一些歐洲國家元首不得不向特朗普俯首稱臣，反映特朗普將掌握極大的權勢和影響力。
根據美國憲法，總統只能擔任兩屆。為了延續自身的政治影響力，特朗普於是次回朝後便開始着手委任一些較年輕的「特朗普主義」追隨者擔任重要的政府職位。比方說，共和黨全國委員會共同主席賴拉和候任副總統萬斯。兩位被看好在特朗普2.0 政府中有更上一層樓的發展，甚至可能在2028 年接棒問鼎大位，繼承特朗普的政治遺產。由此可見，特朗普在商場或政壇都有親信密切合作。
這些現象讓人擔心美國是否會走向強人政治，類似於羅馬帝國的歷史。眾所周知，美國在立國之初是一個共和國，但若特朗普能延續強人政治，美國可能會走向歷史轉折點，類似羅馬帝國由民主共和國轉變為獨裁專制政權。有羅馬帝國奠基者之稱的凱撒大帝憑藉赫赫戰功於公元前49 年實行獨裁統治。雖然其後被元老院成員暗殺，但其強人政治傳承至他的甥孫屋大維，將羅馬從共和國轉變為帝國。
如今，美國出現了特朗普這樣的強人，如果他完成第二任期並讓接班人繼承他的政策，那美國會否沿着羅馬的軌迹，由共和國變成獨裁政體？
Will the United States Become an Autocracy? (Part 2)
Shortly after Trump's election, he encountered his first setback. His nominee for Attorney General, Gates, voluntarily withdrew his candidacy due to a lack of support from Republican members of Congress. On the surface, this may seem like a successful check on Trump by the American system; however, on the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court seems to have compromised with Trump. Since being criminally indicted in 2023, a series of legal disputes surrounding Trump has created a series of "historical firsts" in American constitutional history. For example, on July 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a historic ruling on "presidential criminal immunity," stating that the president has an "absolute" criminal immunity while performing constitutional duties and cannot be prosecuted during their term. This indicates that Trump has successfully gained control over both houses of Congress and the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump also has the support of the world's richest person, Musk, and there are reports that some European heads of state have had to bow to Trump, reflecting Trump's immense power and influence.
According to the U.S. Constitution, a president can only serve two terms. In order to continue his political influence, Trump has started appointing younger "Trumpist" followers to key government positions after his second term. For example, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, Laila, and the vice president-elect, Vance. Both are seen as having a promising future in the Trump 2.0 government, and they may even vie for the presidency in 2028, inheriting Trump's political legacy. This shows that Trump has close collaborators in both the business world and the political arena.
These phenomena raise concerns about whether the United States is heading towards authoritarianism, similar to the history of the Roman Empire. It is well known that the United States was founded as a republic, but if Trump can continue authoritarian rule, the U.S. may reach a historical turning point, similar to the Roman Empire's transition from a democratic republic to a dictatorial regime. Julius Caesar, known as one of the founders of the Roman Empire, established dictatorial rule in 49 BC based on his great military achievements. Although he was later assassinated by members of the Senate, his authoritarian rule was passed on to his grandnephew, Augustus, transforming Rome from a republic to an empire.
Today, the United States has a strongman like Trump. If he completes a second term and passes on his policies to his successor, will the U.S. follow the path of Rome, transitioning from a republic to an autocracy?
|
|
|
美國會否變成獨裁政體？ / The United States: Will It Become an Autocracy?
文章
![]()
美國共和黨在大選成功取得參眾兩院控制權，加上美國最高法院目前由保守派大法官控制，使得美國「三權分立」的制度受到嚴重衝擊。以特朗普涉嫌偽造商業紀錄向成人片女星支付「掩口費」的案件為例，紐約州法官不久前宣布案件無限期押後判刑，並且允許特朗普的律師提出駁回此案的動議，引起外界一片譁然，國際社會關注美國能否維持其民主政制。關於這點，我在史丹福大學進修時的論文導師戴雅門教授（Professor Larry Diamond）在特朗普當選後不久便發布文章Democracy Without America? 表達對美國民主發展的憂慮。
文章指出：「能否捍衛美國民主典範將取決於政府和社會領袖的行動，包括國會、州和地區政府、公務員、武裝部隊和地方警察、商界、公民機構，以及法院。」根據《美國憲法》，州政府擁有各自的州權，有關權力不能被美國聯邦政府侵犯。美國建國時設立的權力制衡制度，在三權分立基礎上進一步保障地方政府的權力，防範聯邦政府濫權。因此，各州政府不一定須向特朗普臣服。
此外，特朗普提名的司法部長已宣布退出角逐此職位，原因是未能在參議院獲得足夠支持，民主黨固然不會同意由涉嫌吸毒和曾爆出性醜聞的人擔任司法部長，共和黨員也不願意因支持蓋茨而付出政治代價，據聞已向特朗普表示不會支持，因此這項提名因支持不足而作廢。
美國原有的制度頂層設計和法律執行層面都有各種制衡手段，防止總統獨攬大權。戴雅門教授仍然審慎樂觀的在文章指出：「不應將美國大選解讀為對專制的投票。」從數字來看，雖然特朗普的民粹政策看似獲得決定性支持。文章引述美聯社數據：「共和黨初選時有1700 萬美國人把票投給特朗普；到正式大選，特朗普僅獲得共和黨10% 登記選民和7% 合資格選民的支持。」遠比初選時低。並且，賀錦麗雖敗但仍然取得7434 萬多票，特朗普僅獲50% 選票。由此可見，特朗普有獨裁傾向的政策能否獲美國大多數人支持仍是未知數。
The United States: Will It Become an Autocracy?
The success of the Republican Party in gaining control of both houses of Congress in the election, coupled with the current conservative control of the Supreme Court, has seriously impacted the system of "separation of powers" in the United States. For example, in the case where Trump was suspected of falsifying business records to pay "hush money" to an adult film star, a judge in New York recently announced an indefinite postponement of the case and allowed Trump's lawyer to file a motion to dismiss the case, causing an uproar and international concern about whether the United States can maintain its democratic system. Concerning this issue, my thesis advisor Professor Larry Diamond at Stanford University expressed concerns about the development of American democracy shortly after Trump's election in an article titled "Democracy Without America?"
The article points out: "Whether the American democratic model can be defended will depend on the actions of government and societal leaders, including the Congress, state and local governments, public servants, armed forces and local police, businesses, civil society organizations, and the courts." According to the U.S. Constitution, state governments have their own powers that cannot be infringed upon by the federal government. The system of checks and balances established at the founding of the United States further safeguards the powers of local governments based on the separation of powers, preventing federal government abuse of power. Therefore, state governments may not necessarily submit to Trump.
In addition, the Attorney General nominated by Trump has announced his withdrawal from the race for this position due to insufficient support in the Senate. The Democratic Party, of course, would not agree to have someone suspected of drug use and involved in sexual scandals serve as Attorney General, and Republicans are also unwilling to incur political costs for supporting Gates, reportedly indicating that they will not support Trump, rendering the nomination invalid due to insufficient support.
The top-level design and legal enforcement aspects of the original U.S. system have various means of checks and balances to prevent the president from monopolizing power. Professor Diamond cautiously and optimistically points out in the article: "The U.S. election should not be interpreted as a vote for autocracy." In terms of numbers, although Trump's populist policies seemed to garner decisive support, the article cites data from the Associated Press: "During the Republican primaries, 17 million Americans voted for Trump; in the general election, Trump only received support from 10% of registered Republican voters and 7% of eligible voters." Much lower than during the primaries. Furthermore, although Harris was defeated, he still received over 74.34 million votes, while Trump only secured 50% of the vote. Therefore, whether Trump's authoritarian policies can gain support from the majority of Americans remains uncertain.
|
|
|
托克維爾論美國民主 / Tocqueville on American Democracy
文章
![]()
共和黨總統候選人特朗普強勢歸來，再度當選總統。然而，有意見認為他將威脅美國民主及長遠發展。當今世界，雖然一人一票直選政治領袖已在許多地方成為政治正確的標竿，亦把美國視為民主理想的彼岸。然而，美國總統選舉並非完全由選民直選，而是通過選舉人團制進行。這一制度源自1787 年制定的美國憲法，最初由美國各州公民先選出該州選舉人，再由選舉人代表該州投票選出總統、副總統。理論上，選舉總統的過程中，由各州推舉產生的選舉人團可以為缺乏辨別能力的普通選民把關，從而更有希望選出稱職的總統人選，防止民粹主義等嚴重後果。
關於這點，美國史丹福大學政治及社會學教授戴雅門（Larry Diamond）在 Democracy Without America? 一文中寫到：「對於選舉結果的早期分析，特朗普的勝利更多歸因於經濟和移民等問題，而非對其專制傾向的認可。然而，無論美國人支持特朗普的理由是什麼，他的競選活動清楚表明，他將不受任何全球制約，來制衡他和他的政府的反民主衝動。各種迹象顯示他是一名民粹主義的獨裁者。」他的這番言論讓我聯想到19 世紀法國政治思想家托克維爾的一部著作《民主在美國》，書中描述了托克維爾在美國考察的經歷，他從第三者的角度觀察美國的民主制度。上卷介紹美國與歐洲的不同，又指出美國地大物博，人民可以擁有自己的土地，並且獨立經營自己的生活。這種先天條件孕育出美國獨特的政治和社會價值觀。在美國社會，幾乎所有人民都抱持勤勞工作和超越他人的理想。對托克維爾而言，美國與歐洲最大的差異就是這些獨特的民主價值觀。
托克維爾讚揚民主制度在美國的成功發展，同時對民主制度下出現多數暴政的可能性提出警告。他認為自由不是個人主義和利己主義，自由不是絕對的無限制的自由，而是基於正確理解的權利。在他看來，民主的未來不是必然的，有可能走向新的專制，也有可能走向自由。
那麼，托克維爾讚揚的美國將何去何從？我們下回分解。
Tocqueville on American Democracy / 托克維爾論美國民主
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has made a strong comeback and been re-elected as president. However, some believe that he poses a threat to American democracy and its long-term development. In today's world, although one person, one vote direct election of political leaders has become a political correctness benchmark in many places, the United States is still seen as the epitome of democratic ideals. However, the election of the U.S. president is not entirely by direct vote of the people, but through the Electoral College system. This system, originating from the U.S. Constitution drafted in 1787, initially involves citizens of each state electing electors who then vote for the president and vice president on behalf of the state. In theory, during the process of electing the president, the Electoral College, composed of electors selected by each state, can act as a check on ordinary voters lacking discernment, thereby increasing the likelihood of electing a qualified presidential candidate and preventing serious consequences like populism.
Regarding this, Larry Diamond, a professor of political science and sociology at Stanford University, wrote in "Democracy Without America?" that, "Early analysis of the election results attributes Trump's victory more to economic and immigration issues than to acceptance of his authoritarian tendencies. However, regardless of the reasons Americans support Trump, his campaign clearly indicates that he will not be constrained by any global norms in balancing his and his government's anti-democratic impulses. Various signs indicate he is a populist autocrat." His remarks remind me of Alexis de Tocqueville, a 19th-century French political thinker, and his work "Democracy in America," where he describes his observations of the American democratic system from a third-party perspective. The first volume introduces the differences between America and Europe, highlighting America's vastness, where people can own their land and independently lead their lives. These inherent conditions have nurtured unique political and social values in America. In American society, almost everyone holds ideals of hard work and surpassing others. Tocqueville believes that the biggest difference between America and Europe lies in these unique democratic values.
Tocqueville praises the successful development of the democratic system in America while also warning of the potential for majority tyranny under a democratic system. He argues that freedom is not individualism and selfishness, nor is it absolute unlimited freedom, but rather rights based on correct understanding. In his view, the future of democracy is not predetermined; it could lead to new despotism or towards freedom.
So, where will the America that Tocqueville praised be headed? Let's delve into that next time.
|
|
特朗普當選不久便遇到第一個挫折，他提名的司法部長人選蓋茨因未能獲得共和黨國會參議員的支持而主動撤回候選人提名。表面上看這是美國制度對特朗普一次成功制衡；可是那邊廂，美國最高法院似乎對特朗普妥協了。自2023年被刑事起訴以來，圍繞着特朗普的一系列法律糾紛在美國憲政史上創造了一連串的「歷史首次」。例如2024 年7 月1 日，美國最高法院公布了一項有關「總統刑事豁免權」的歷史性判決，裁定總統在執行憲法職權時有「絕對」刑事免罪權，任期內不能追究。由此可見，特朗普成功掌握了參眾兩院和保守派主導的美國最高法院。
特朗普還有世界首富馬斯克的支持，此外亦有報道指一些歐洲國家元首不得不向特朗普俯首稱臣，反映特朗普將掌握極大的權勢和影響力。
根據美國憲法，總統只能擔任兩屆。為了延續自身的政治影響力，特朗普於是次回朝後便開始着手委任一些較年輕的「特朗普主義」追隨者擔任重要的政府職位。比方說，共和黨全國委員會共同主席賴拉和候任副總統萬斯。兩位被看好在特朗普2.0 政府中有更上一層樓的發展，甚至可能在2028 年接棒問鼎大位，繼承特朗普的政治遺產。由此可見，特朗普在商場或政壇都有親信密切合作。
這些現象讓人擔心美國是否會走向強人政治，類似於羅馬帝國的歷史。眾所周知，美國在立國之初是一個共和國，但若特朗普能延續強人政治，美國可能會走向歷史轉折點，類似羅馬帝國由民主共和國轉變為獨裁專制政權。有羅馬帝國奠基者之稱的凱撒大帝憑藉赫赫戰功於公元前49 年實行獨裁統治。雖然其後被元老院成員暗殺，但其強人政治傳承至他的甥孫屋大維，將羅馬從共和國轉變為帝國。
如今，美國出現了特朗普這樣的強人，如果他完成第二任期並讓接班人繼承他的政策，那美國會否沿着羅馬的軌迹，由共和國變成獨裁政體？
Will the United States Become an Autocracy? (Part 2)
Shortly after Trump's election, he encountered his first setback. His nominee for Attorney General, Gates, voluntarily withdrew his candidacy due to a lack of support from Republican members of Congress. On the surface, this may seem like a successful check on Trump by the American system; however, on the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court seems to have compromised with Trump. Since being criminally indicted in 2023, a series of legal disputes surrounding Trump has created a series of "historical firsts" in American constitutional history. For example, on July 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a historic ruling on "presidential criminal immunity," stating that the president has an "absolute" criminal immunity while performing constitutional duties and cannot be prosecuted during their term. This indicates that Trump has successfully gained control over both houses of Congress and the conservative-dominated U.S. Supreme Court.
Trump also has the support of the world's richest person, Musk, and there are reports that some European heads of state have had to bow to Trump, reflecting Trump's immense power and influence.
According to the U.S. Constitution, a president can only serve two terms. In order to continue his political influence, Trump has started appointing younger "Trumpist" followers to key government positions after his second term. For example, the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, Laila, and the vice president-elect, Vance. Both are seen as having a promising future in the Trump 2.0 government, and they may even vie for the presidency in 2028, inheriting Trump's political legacy. This shows that Trump has close collaborators in both the business world and the political arena.
These phenomena raise concerns about whether the United States is heading towards authoritarianism, similar to the history of the Roman Empire. It is well known that the United States was founded as a republic, but if Trump can continue authoritarian rule, the U.S. may reach a historical turning point, similar to the Roman Empire's transition from a democratic republic to a dictatorial regime. Julius Caesar, known as one of the founders of the Roman Empire, established dictatorial rule in 49 BC based on his great military achievements. Although he was later assassinated by members of the Senate, his authoritarian rule was passed on to his grandnephew, Augustus, transforming Rome from a republic to an empire.
Today, the United States has a strongman like Trump. If he completes a second term and passes on his policies to his successor, will the U.S. follow the path of Rome, transitioning from a republic to an autocracy?
美國共和黨在大選成功取得參眾兩院控制權，加上美國最高法院目前由保守派大法官控制，使得美國「三權分立」的制度受到嚴重衝擊。以特朗普涉嫌偽造商業紀錄向成人片女星支付「掩口費」的案件為例，紐約州法官不久前宣布案件無限期押後判刑，並且允許特朗普的律師提出駁回此案的動議，引起外界一片譁然，國際社會關注美國能否維持其民主政制。關於這點，我在史丹福大學進修時的論文導師戴雅門教授（Professor Larry Diamond）在特朗普當選後不久便發布文章Democracy Without America? 表達對美國民主發展的憂慮。
文章指出：「能否捍衛美國民主典範將取決於政府和社會領袖的行動，包括國會、州和地區政府、公務員、武裝部隊和地方警察、商界、公民機構，以及法院。」根據《美國憲法》，州政府擁有各自的州權，有關權力不能被美國聯邦政府侵犯。美國建國時設立的權力制衡制度，在三權分立基礎上進一步保障地方政府的權力，防範聯邦政府濫權。因此，各州政府不一定須向特朗普臣服。
此外，特朗普提名的司法部長已宣布退出角逐此職位，原因是未能在參議院獲得足夠支持，民主黨固然不會同意由涉嫌吸毒和曾爆出性醜聞的人擔任司法部長，共和黨員也不願意因支持蓋茨而付出政治代價，據聞已向特朗普表示不會支持，因此這項提名因支持不足而作廢。
美國原有的制度頂層設計和法律執行層面都有各種制衡手段，防止總統獨攬大權。戴雅門教授仍然審慎樂觀的在文章指出：「不應將美國大選解讀為對專制的投票。」從數字來看，雖然特朗普的民粹政策看似獲得決定性支持。文章引述美聯社數據：「共和黨初選時有1700 萬美國人把票投給特朗普；到正式大選，特朗普僅獲得共和黨10% 登記選民和7% 合資格選民的支持。」遠比初選時低。並且，賀錦麗雖敗但仍然取得7434 萬多票，特朗普僅獲50% 選票。由此可見，特朗普有獨裁傾向的政策能否獲美國大多數人支持仍是未知數。
The United States: Will It Become an Autocracy?
The success of the Republican Party in gaining control of both houses of Congress in the election, coupled with the current conservative control of the Supreme Court, has seriously impacted the system of "separation of powers" in the United States. For example, in the case where Trump was suspected of falsifying business records to pay "hush money" to an adult film star, a judge in New York recently announced an indefinite postponement of the case and allowed Trump's lawyer to file a motion to dismiss the case, causing an uproar and international concern about whether the United States can maintain its democratic system. Concerning this issue, my thesis advisor Professor Larry Diamond at Stanford University expressed concerns about the development of American democracy shortly after Trump's election in an article titled "Democracy Without America?"
The article points out: "Whether the American democratic model can be defended will depend on the actions of government and societal leaders, including the Congress, state and local governments, public servants, armed forces and local police, businesses, civil society organizations, and the courts." According to the U.S. Constitution, state governments have their own powers that cannot be infringed upon by the federal government. The system of checks and balances established at the founding of the United States further safeguards the powers of local governments based on the separation of powers, preventing federal government abuse of power. Therefore, state governments may not necessarily submit to Trump.
In addition, the Attorney General nominated by Trump has announced his withdrawal from the race for this position due to insufficient support in the Senate. The Democratic Party, of course, would not agree to have someone suspected of drug use and involved in sexual scandals serve as Attorney General, and Republicans are also unwilling to incur political costs for supporting Gates, reportedly indicating that they will not support Trump, rendering the nomination invalid due to insufficient support.
The top-level design and legal enforcement aspects of the original U.S. system have various means of checks and balances to prevent the president from monopolizing power. Professor Diamond cautiously and optimistically points out in the article: "The U.S. election should not be interpreted as a vote for autocracy." In terms of numbers, although Trump's populist policies seemed to garner decisive support, the article cites data from the Associated Press: "During the Republican primaries, 17 million Americans voted for Trump; in the general election, Trump only received support from 10% of registered Republican voters and 7% of eligible voters." Much lower than during the primaries. Furthermore, although Harris was defeated, he still received over 74.34 million votes, while Trump only secured 50% of the vote. Therefore, whether Trump's authoritarian policies can gain support from the majority of Americans remains uncertain.
共和黨總統候選人特朗普強勢歸來，再度當選總統。然而，有意見認為他將威脅美國民主及長遠發展。當今世界，雖然一人一票直選政治領袖已在許多地方成為政治正確的標竿，亦把美國視為民主理想的彼岸。然而，美國總統選舉並非完全由選民直選，而是通過選舉人團制進行。這一制度源自1787 年制定的美國憲法，最初由美國各州公民先選出該州選舉人，再由選舉人代表該州投票選出總統、副總統。理論上，選舉總統的過程中，由各州推舉產生的選舉人團可以為缺乏辨別能力的普通選民把關，從而更有希望選出稱職的總統人選，防止民粹主義等嚴重後果。
關於這點，美國史丹福大學政治及社會學教授戴雅門（Larry Diamond）在 Democracy Without America? 一文中寫到：「對於選舉結果的早期分析，特朗普的勝利更多歸因於經濟和移民等問題，而非對其專制傾向的認可。然而，無論美國人支持特朗普的理由是什麼，他的競選活動清楚表明，他將不受任何全球制約，來制衡他和他的政府的反民主衝動。各種迹象顯示他是一名民粹主義的獨裁者。」他的這番言論讓我聯想到19 世紀法國政治思想家托克維爾的一部著作《民主在美國》，書中描述了托克維爾在美國考察的經歷，他從第三者的角度觀察美國的民主制度。上卷介紹美國與歐洲的不同，又指出美國地大物博，人民可以擁有自己的土地，並且獨立經營自己的生活。這種先天條件孕育出美國獨特的政治和社會價值觀。在美國社會，幾乎所有人民都抱持勤勞工作和超越他人的理想。對托克維爾而言，美國與歐洲最大的差異就是這些獨特的民主價值觀。
托克維爾讚揚民主制度在美國的成功發展，同時對民主制度下出現多數暴政的可能性提出警告。他認為自由不是個人主義和利己主義，自由不是絕對的無限制的自由，而是基於正確理解的權利。在他看來，民主的未來不是必然的，有可能走向新的專制，也有可能走向自由。
那麼，托克維爾讚揚的美國將何去何從？我們下回分解。
Tocqueville on American Democracy / 托克維爾論美國民主
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has made a strong comeback and been re-elected as president. However, some believe that he poses a threat to American democracy and its long-term development. In today's world, although one person, one vote direct election of political leaders has become a political correctness benchmark in many places, the United States is still seen as the epitome of democratic ideals. However, the election of the U.S. president is not entirely by direct vote of the people, but through the Electoral College system. This system, originating from the U.S. Constitution drafted in 1787, initially involves citizens of each state electing electors who then vote for the president and vice president on behalf of the state. In theory, during the process of electing the president, the Electoral College, composed of electors selected by each state, can act as a check on ordinary voters lacking discernment, thereby increasing the likelihood of electing a qualified presidential candidate and preventing serious consequences like populism.
Regarding this, Larry Diamond, a professor of political science and sociology at Stanford University, wrote in "Democracy Without America?" that, "Early analysis of the election results attributes Trump's victory more to economic and immigration issues than to acceptance of his authoritarian tendencies. However, regardless of the reasons Americans support Trump, his campaign clearly indicates that he will not be constrained by any global norms in balancing his and his government's anti-democratic impulses. Various signs indicate he is a populist autocrat." His remarks remind me of Alexis de Tocqueville, a 19th-century French political thinker, and his work "Democracy in America," where he describes his observations of the American democratic system from a third-party perspective. The first volume introduces the differences between America and Europe, highlighting America's vastness, where people can own their land and independently lead their lives. These inherent conditions have nurtured unique political and social values in America. In American society, almost everyone holds ideals of hard work and surpassing others. Tocqueville believes that the biggest difference between America and Europe lies in these unique democratic values.
Tocqueville praises the successful development of the democratic system in America while also warning of the potential for majority tyranny under a democratic system. He argues that freedom is not individualism and selfishness, nor is it absolute unlimited freedom, but rather rights based on correct understanding. In his view, the future of democracy is not predetermined; it could lead to new despotism or towards freedom.
So, where will the America that Tocqueville praised be headed? Let's delve into that next time.