美國當(dāng)?shù)貢r(shí)間10月29日，《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》網(wǎng)站刊登香港“學(xué)民思潮”召集人黃之峰的文章《重奪香港未來》，該文還將于明天刊登在《國際紐約時(shí)報(bào)》印刷版（原名《國際先驅(qū)論壇報(bào)》，《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》旗下報(bào)紙，觀察者網(wǎng)注）。10月份剛滿18周歲的黃之鋒在文章中解釋青年人參與占領(lǐng)運(yùn)動(dòng)的前因后果，稱不論占領(lǐng)運(yùn)動(dòng)結(jié)果如何，他們也會(huì)奪回屬于他們的民主，因?yàn)闀r(shí)間站在年輕人的一方。

據(jù)觀察者網(wǎng)此前報(bào)道，黃之鋒被曝是美國一手栽培的“政治新星”，與美國駐港官方機(jī)構(gòu)的關(guān)系密切。“占中”集會(huì)中，黃之鋒一直在鼓動(dòng)中學(xué)生罷課，并極力支持香港“學(xué)聯(lián)”的“升級(jí)行動(dòng)”，曾因襲警被捕。

黃之鋒（資料圖）

黃之鋒聲稱，香港市民走上街頭，是為了有自由選擇自己領(lǐng)袖的權(quán)利。他表示，當(dāng)自己被拘留46小時(shí)后，他被香港市民自發(fā)占領(lǐng)感動(dòng)，亦意識(shí)到這個(gè)城市已經(jīng)永不一樣，不再是一個(gè)金錢城市。

文章說，人大的831決定，意味著北京決定讓香港的富人及其關(guān)系網(wǎng)繼續(xù)寡頭壟斷，普選成為了港人破碎的夢想。然而，香港的青年人不甘于就此認(rèn)命，所以從來沒有放棄占領(lǐng)的打算。倘若香港變成一個(gè)沒有資訊自由、法治的地方，無異于任何一座中國城市，90后將會(huì)損失最深，而他認(rèn)為北京與梁振英政府，正試圖偷取香港青年人的未來。

部分年紀(jì)較長的香港人，認(rèn)為穩(wěn)定的工作、生活比政治更加重要；他們營營役役、努力工作，為的只是安逸及穩(wěn)定的生活。然而，90后追求更多，他們認(rèn)為活在一個(gè)先進(jìn)都市，應(yīng)該有決定自己未來的權(quán)利。然而，部分香港年輕人現(xiàn)在連生活穩(wěn)定也難以做到。因?yàn)橄愀鄣淖饨饦莾r(jià)高踞不下，貧富懸殊更日益嚴(yán)重。黃之鋒表示，他們這一代，隨時(shí)是首代香港人將生活得比上一代差。

該文于《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》的頁面截圖

他表示，父母在遭到“有心人士”的騷擾下，仍能尊重他的決定是他的幸運(yùn)。然而，不少年輕人為了抗?fàn)帲槐破垓_自己的父母。青年人這種一往無前的抗?fàn)幘瘢诟哞F事件萌芽，國教事件發(fā)展，終于來到今日被逼遍地開花。人大決定的唯一好處，是讓香港人知道應(yīng)該站在何方，由旁觀者變成抗?fàn)幷摺?/p>

黃之鋒最后指出，有人認(rèn)為要求真普選不可能成功，但抗?fàn)幘褪菫榱藢⒉豢赡茏兂煽赡?。香港的管治團(tuán)隊(duì)最終會(huì)盡失民心，失去管治能力，因?yàn)槟贻p人都不在他們的一方。他表示，自己已經(jīng)做好入獄的心理準(zhǔn)備，但只要香港能成為更好、更公平的地方，他愿意付出這個(gè)代價(jià)。

黃之鋒最后向管治者發(fā)出呼吁，今天他們可以剝奪青年人的未來，但總有一天未來會(huì)由他們掌握。不論占領(lǐng)運(yùn)動(dòng)結(jié)果如何，他們也會(huì)奪回屬于他們的民主，因?yàn)闀r(shí)間站在年輕人的一方。

黃之鋒也曾登上過《時(shí)代》封面

下頁附英文原文

Taking Back Hong Kong's Future

By JOSHUA WONG CHI-FUNGOCT. 29, 2014

HONG KONG — Tuesday night marked one month since the day Hong Kong’s police attacked peaceful pro-democracy protesters with tear gas and pepper spray, inadvertently inspiring thousands more people to occupy the streets for the right to freely elect Hong Kong’s leaders.

I was being detained by the police on that day, Sept. 28, for having participated in a student-led act of civil disobedience in front of the government’s headquarters. I was held for 46 hours, cut off from the outside world. When I was released, I was deeply touched to see thousands of people in the streets, rallying for democracy. I knew then that the city had changed forever.

Since the return of Hong Kong to China in 1997, less than a year after I was born, the people of this city have muddled through with a political system that leaves power in the hands of the wealthy and the well-connected. Many of us, especially people of my generation, had hoped democratic change was finally coming after years of promises from Beijing that we would eventually have free elections. Instead, in late August, Beijing ruled that Hong Kong’s oligarchy will remain in charge. Universal suffrage became a shattered dream.

But not for long. The thousands of protesters, most of them young, who continue to occupy main areas of the city are showing every day how political change will eventually come: through perseverance. Our peaceful democracy demonstration has demolished the myth that this is a city of people who care only about money. Hong Kongers want political reform. Hong Kongers want change.

My generation, the so-called post-90s generation that came of age after the territory was returned to China, would have the most to lose if Hong Kong were to become like just another mainland Chinese city, where information is not freely shared and the rule of law is ignored. We are angry and disappointed that Beijing and the local administration of Leung Chun-ying are trying to steal our future.

The post-90s generation is growing up in a vastly changed city from that of our parents and grandparents. Earlier generations, many of whom came here from mainland China, wanted one thing: a stable life. A secure job was always more important than politics. They worked hard and didn’t ask for much more than some comfort and stability.

The people of my generation want more. In a world where ideas and ideals flow freely, we want what everybody else in an advanced society seems to have: a say in our future.

Our bleak economic situation contributes to our frustrations. Job prospects are depressing; rents and real estate are beyond most young people’s means. The city’s wealth gap is cavernous. My generation could be the first in Hong Kong to be worse off than our parents.

My parents are not political activists. But over the past few months, because of my prominent role in the protest movement, my family’s home address has been disclosed online, and my parents have been harassed. Despite the aggravation, my parents respect my choice to participate in the demonstrations. They give me freedom to do what I believe is important.

Continue reading the main story

Continue reading the main story

Other young people are not so lucky. Many teenagers attend our protests without their parents’ blessing. They return home to criticism for fighting for democracy, and many end up having to lie to their parents about how they are spending their evenings. I’ve heard stories of parents deleting contacts and social media exchanges from their teenage children’s mobile phones to prevent them from joining activist groups.

My generation’s political awakening has been simmering for years. Nearly five years ago, young people led protests against the wasteful construction of a new rail line connecting Hong Kong to mainland China. In 2011, many young people, myself included, organized to oppose a national education program of Chinese propaganda that Beijing tried to force on us. I was 14 at the time, and all I could think was that the leaders in Beijing have no right to brainwash us with their warped view of the world.

If there is anything positive about the central government’s recent decision on universal suffrage, it’s that we now know where we stand. Beijing claims to be giving us one person, one vote, but a plan in which only government-approved candidates can run for election does not equal universal suffrage. In choosing this route, Beijing has showed how it views the “one country, two systems” formula that has governed the city since 1997. To Beijing, “one country” comes first.

I believe the August decision and the Hong Kong police’s strong reaction to the protesters — firing more than 80 canisters of tear gas into the crowds and using pepper spray and batons — was a turning point. The result is a whole generation has been turned from bystanders into activists. People have been forced to stand up and fight.

Today, there are many middle school students active in the pro-democracy movement: Students as young as 13 have boycotted classes, while teenagers of all ages have been staying overnight at the protest sites. They protest gracefully, despite being attacked by police and hired thugs.

Some people say that given the government’s firm stance against genuine universal suffrage, our demands are impossible to achieve. But I believe activism is about making the impossible possible. Hong Kong’s ruling class will eventually lose the hearts and minds of the people, and even the ability to govern, because they have lost a generation of youth.

In the future I may be arrested again and even sent to jail for my role in this movement. But I am prepared to pay that price if it will make Hong Kong a better and fairer place.

The protest movement may not ultimately bear fruit. But, if nothing else, it has delivered hope.

I would like to remind every member of the ruling class in Hong Kong: Today you are depriving us of our future, but the day will come when we decide your future. No matter what happens to the protest movement, we will reclaim the democracy that belongs to us, because time is on our side.

Joshua Wong Chi-fung is a co-founder of the student activist group Scholarism. This article was translated from the Chinese for The New York Times.