顯示具有 Rule of Law 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 Rule of Law 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2026年1月25日 星期日

We Are Still Not Living in a Democracy: We Are No Different from People 1,000 Years Ago

 We Are Still Not Living in a Democracy: We Are No Different from People 1,000 Years Ago



The recent horror story from the Mastala Temple in Karnataka, India, is not an isolated scandal. It is a mirror. It shows that, despite smartphones, elections, and “modern” institutions, we are still living under the same old systems of power, fear, and silence that ruled people 1,000 years ago. The only difference is the packaging: today’s kings wear suits and titles, not crowns and swords.

In this case, a former temple cleaner came forward after decades of forced complicity. From 1995 to 2014, he says he was made to burn hundreds of bodies—mostly women and children, many of them sexually assaulted, some as young as infants. He watched girls arrive with torn clothes, bodies marked by violence, and then watched them disappear in flames, along with any evidence. For years he stayed silent, not because he agreed, but because he was threatened: if he spoke, his family would be “cut into pieces.” That is not a metaphor; that is the language of feudal terror.

When his own female relative was sexually harassed by temple authorities, he finally fled with his family and lived in hiding for ten years before daring to report. This is not the behavior of citizens in a functioning democracy. In a real democracy, people do not need to run, hide, or fear for their lives when they expose crimes. They can walk into a police station, file a complaint, and trust that the law will protect them, not the powerful.

Yet here, the accused are linked to the Heggade family, a religious and political dynasty whose influence reaches deep into local institutions. Despite repeated reports of missing persons near the temple, the police did little. Even now, with such grave accusations and a detailed confession, the real decision‑makers at the temple have not been formally named as suspects. This is not justice; this is the old pattern of impunity, where the powerful decide who gets punished and who gets protected.

What this reveals is that democracy, for most ordinary people, remains a ritual rather than a reality. We vote, but the real power still lies with dynasties, religious elites, and local strongmen who control land, faith, and fear. The temple is not just a place of worship; it is a center of unchecked authority, where crimes can be hidden under the cloak of tradition and divine legitimacy. The cleaner’s story is the story of the serf, the peasant, the voiceless—someone who witnesses evil every day but is forced to serve it or be destroyed.

We like to believe that we are “modern” and “progressive,” but the structures around us are medieval. Power is still concentrated in the hands of a few; dissent is still punished; truth is still buried. The only real difference between us and people 1,000 years ago is that today we have cameras, internet, and hashtags—but even those are often controlled, censored, or drowned out by propaganda and fear.

If we are serious about democracy, we must stop pretending that elections alone are enough. Democracy means that no one is above the law, that no institution is untouchable, and that the weakest person in society can speak without fear and be believed. Until that happens, we are not living in a democracy. We are living in the same old world of kings, temples, and terror—just with better lighting and worse excuses.



2026年1月2日 星期五

The Mirage of Order: Why Rule by Law is Not the Rule of Law



[The Mirage of Order: Why Rule by Law is Not the Rule of Law]

Friedrich Hayek, in The Road to Serfdom and The Constitution of Liberty, offered a precise definition of the Rule of Law: it is a system where laws are general, abstract, and known beforehand, allowing individuals to predict how the state will use its coercive power. This stands in stark contrast to Legislation or "Rule by Law," where the state uses specific commands to achieve particular social or political ends.

Many look at Singapore, China, and Hong Kong and see "order." However, from a Hayekian perspective, these regions are increasingly substituting the spontaneous order of liberty for the rigid commands of a central authority.

1. Singapore: The Managed Success

Singapore is often lauded for its efficiency, but its legal system relies heavily on arbitrary administrative power.

  • The Examples: Laws like the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) allow ministers to decide what is "false" and issue correction orders.1 This is not a general rule; it is a discretionary command used to manage the information market. Similarly, the Internal Security Act (ISA) allows for detention without trial—the ultimate negation of predictable law.2

  • The Ending: Hayek would argue that as the state continues to manage every facet of life—from housing quotas to social behavior—the entrepreneurial spirit will eventually stifle, leading to a "golden cage" where growth plateaus because of a lack of spontaneous innovation.

2. China: The Zenith of Central Planning

In China, the law is explicitly a tool for the Communist Party to achieve "national rejuvenation."3

  • The Examples: The Social Credit System is a digital manifestation of Hayek’s nightmare; it turns law into a granular, real-time command system that rewards or punishes behavior based on state-defined "trustworthiness." Furthermore, the National Intelligence Law requires all organizations to "support and cooperate" with state intelligence, creating an unpredictable environment where no private sphere is safe from state command.4

  • The Ending: By centralizing all knowledge and power, China risks the "Knowledge Problem." Without the feedback loops of a free society, the system becomes brittle. Hayek would predict that the "Road to Serfdom" here ends in a massive economic correction or systemic collapse when the central commands can no longer manage the complexity of a billion people.

3. Hong Kong: The Lost Spontaneous Order

Hong Kong was once Hayek’s favorite example of a "spontaneous order." That has changed.

  • The Examples: The National Security Law (NSL) and Article 23 introduce vague, broad categories like "collusion" and "soft resistance."5 Because the definitions are so fluid, the law is no longer a "predictable rule" but a "political command." When a businessman cannot know if a past comment constitutes a crime today, the Rule of Law has vanished.

  • The Ending: As the legal system becomes an instrument of political "Legislation," Hong Kong’s unique status as a global hub will continue to erode. It will cease to be a bridge between East and West and become just another managed city, losing its dynamic economic soul.