不容青史盡成灰 ──專訪謝漢儒

:::

2002 / 11月

文‧林奇伯


在一九六○年以雷震為首的民主運動中,時為台灣省參議會參議員的謝漢儒,因身任「選改會」執行秘書,在台灣民主運動最關鍵的四個月裡,不只參與了當時知識分子對國家的行動熱血,也親身經歷了當年國民黨整肅的恐怖氛圍。在四十多年之後,他如何看待這四個月的「浪花淘盡英雄,是非成敗轉頭空」?


問:經過四十多年,您以八十幾歲的高齡書寫一九六○年的台灣民主運動史。回過頭來,當初的「明知不可為而為之」若再來一次,您可願意?

答:歷史的發生絕對有前因與後果,當年的民主運動雖然今日看來僅短短時間就收場,但之前的醞釀卻是長久的。

我記得民國三十四年,長達八年的抗日戰爭終獲勝利,當時國民黨元老戴季陶曾發下豪語:「在中國歷史上,周朝曾經統治中國八百年,本黨將打破這個紀錄。」然而才三年,大陸就江山變色。國民黨退居來台後,在各方建言下,蔣介石卻仍遂行他的威權統治。即使一九五○年後,美軍協防台灣,國民黨更應該體會過去的失敗乃緣於民主觀念的不足,而將寶島建設成有別於對岸的真正「自由中國」。但蔣介石卻不選擇如此。

今天再回想當年雷震先生的樣子:笑容可掬、理想主義,他是真正想以筆桿子進行改革的儒者。你想想,這樣的人能被推舉為民主運動的領袖,可見當時的民主運動者絕對不是「造反」取代蔣介石政權,而僅是知識分子對於國家的期待與責任。

你問我「明知不可為而為之」,可否願意再來一次,其實當年我自己也常在想,在那麼惡劣的環境下,會不會哪天醒來大家就鳥獸散了?但事實上並沒有,大家還是去做了。知識分子該有的責任感,過幾百年都一樣。

問:您親身經歷了國民黨對民主運動的恐怖整肅,這對您日後的人生觀是否有影響?

答:在民主運動之前,我不為國民黨的利誘所動;之後,也不加入以殷海光為首的「反中國」民主運動。雖然我這一生都是被動地、因緣際會地捲入政治浪潮中,但這也是我的個性,不主動求什麼,就不容易受外界的影響。

當年武昌街的警察局沒事就來我家,以抓逃兵為藉口搜索,但恐怖統治就是要以恐怖的作為測試你怕不怕,只要不怕,還有什麼值得恐怖的?

問:能否談談您後來為何未曾繼續加入殷海光先生為首的反對運動?

答:我相信所謂的地方自治就是要當地人出來參選才真正符合「自治」的精神。當時的本省籍人士人才濟濟,吳三連、高玉樹都是很好的人物。但我也相信最初的「自由中國」是要「以蔣反共」、「反共民主」。雖然歷史的走向總是讓人扼腕,蔣介石讓一連串的台灣民主運動挫敗、失望,反對運動也漸走向台獨。但那不是我的理念,傅正參加台獨運動後,我們就不來往了。他怎麼可以為了報復國民黨就轉為支持台獨?

理念不同的人,就做不同的事。

問:您是否想過以傳記的方式,較主觀地重述您對歷史的看法?

答:我都八十幾歲了,《早期台灣民主運動與雷震紀事》一書的浩浩工程,讓我覺得我行年就衰,因此已決定不再寫書。雖然這本書完成後仍讓我不夠滿意,但算是為歷史留了個見證吧。回頭看看這一生,我可以對自己說:台灣的民主運動,我是有一點貢獻的。至於自傳的話就不必了。

p.102

八十多歲高齡的謝漢儒,歷經「雷震案」、「白色恐怖」及近年來風起雲湧的民主改革浪潮,真正見證了台灣的一頁重要歷史。至今他仍然精神矍鑠,充滿對家國的熱切關懷。(林格立攝)

相關文章

近期文章

EN

Eyewitness Testimony: An Interview with Hsieh Han-lu

interview by Eric Lin /tr. by Phil Newell

In 1960, during the pro-democracy movement led by Lei Chen, Hsieh Han-lu, then a member of the Taiwan Provincial Assembly, became executive secretary of the "election reform association." As a result, during those four critical months in the history of Taiwan, he not only participated in this effort among intellectuals to do something for their country, he personally experienced the atmosphere of fear of a Kuomintang purge. Today, more than 40 years later, how does he see those events?


Q: You have written a book about the history of the democracy movement in Taiwan in 1960, more than 40 years after the event, with you now in your 80s. Looking back and knowing that what you attempted was impossible, would you be willing to do it all again?

A: Everything that happens in history has causes and consequences. Although the democracy movement at that time lasted only for a very short period, it had been brewing for a long time before that.

I remember in 1945, when the eight-year War of Resistance against Japan ended in victory, Dai Jitao, one of the elders of the KMT at that time, said proudly: "In Chinese history, the Zhou dynasty ruled China for 800 years, but our party will break that record." Yet only three years later the mainland had fallen to the Communists. After coming to Taiwan, despite advice from many quarters, Chiang Kai-shek continued his authoritarian rule. Even after 1950, when the US military came to the defense of Taiwan, the KMT should have recognized that its past failures were due to its inadequate respect for democracy, and that they should turn Taiwan into a real "Free China" in contrast to the mainland. But Chiang Kai-shek did not choose to do so.

I still recall what Mr. Lei Chen was like in those days, with his warm smile and his idealism. He was a real Confucian gentleman who genuinely wanted to use his pen to promote reform. I think the fact that this kind of individual was pushed forward to lead the pro-democracy movement makes it obvious that the democracy activists at that time were not "rebelling" to replace the Chiang Kai-shek regime, but were only intellectuals with expectations and a sense of responsibility toward their country.

You asked me if I would do it again despite knowing that it was impossible. In fact even in those days I often asked myself whether in such an evil environment I would wake up one day to find that everyone had scattered like birds. But in fact that did not happen, and everyone went ahead and did what we did. The sense of responsibility that intellectuals should have has remained the same over the centuries.

Q: You personally experienced the KMT purge of the democracy movement. Did this have any impact on your philosophy of life afterwards?

A: Before the democracy movement, I was not attracted by the KMT's inducements. After it, I did not join the "anti-China" democracy movement led by Yin Hai-kuang. I have always been passive, and I ended up in a political wave just because of circumstance. But this is my personality. I don't take the initiative to demand anything, and I am not easily influenced by the outside world.

In those days whenever the police on Wuchang Street had nothing better to do they would come to my house and make a search, claiming they were looking for deserters from the military. Rule based on terror must adopt terror methods to test whether you are afraid. But so long as you are not afraid, what's the use of terror?

Q: Can you talk more about why you did not later join the opposition movement led by Mr. Yin Hai-kuang?

A: I always believed that so-called "local self-rule" could only genuinely conform to the spirit of self-rule if local people participated in elections. In those days there were many talented Taiwanese; Wu San-lien and Kao Yu-shu were both good men. But I think that the idea of Free China was to use Chiang to oppose communism and have anti-communist democracy. But there's always something that leaves one disappointed in the course of history. Chiang Kai-shek caused a series of democracy movements in Taiwan to end in failure and disappointment, so the opposition movement moved in the direction of Taiwan independence. But that was not my goal. After Fu Cheng joined the Taiwan independence movement, I no longer had anything to do with him. How could he support Taiwan independence just to get back at the KMT? People should act according to their ideals.

Q: Have you ever thought of writing something autobiographical and more subjective to describe your views on history?

A: I am already in my 80s. The enormous work of writing The Early Democracy Movement in Taiwan and the Lei Chen Incident has made me feel that I am at the end of my working days, and I've decided not to write any more books. Although I'm still not satisfied with this book, at least I am leaving behind some historical testimony. Looking back over this life, I can say to myself that I made a small contribution to the democracy movement in Taiwan. There's no need for an autobiography.

p.102

Hsieh Han-lu, now in his 80s, has been through the Lei Chen Incident, the White Terror, and the recent turbulent wave of democratization. He has truly been a witness to an important page in Taiwan's history. Still vigorous, he remains concerned about his country. (photo by Jimmy Lin)

X 使用【台灣光華雜誌】APP!
更快速更方便!