Country is and Fengyue

Over the years, I have known many academic couples, such as Teacher Qin Hui and Teacher Jin Yan, Teacher Zhou Lian and Teacher Liu Yu, Teacher Xishan and Teacher Ximen Mei, Brother Liu Leheng and Sister Chen Xiaoxu. It’s impossible to say that I don’t envy it: when two people with academic aspirations are together, they can not only discuss academic issues from time to time (as long as they don’t both study Hegel’s), but also have similar living habits and brain circuits. Can save a lot of trouble.

Except for a Ph.D. in economics, I have never been in a relationship with an academic girl. After my interest shifted from academic political philosophy to action-oriented political philosophy, I talked to some girls who were passionate about public affairs, but most of the time, the girls I was looking for were not interested in academics or politics. For someone like me, there are many difficulties in getting into an intimate relationship, and some of these difficulties are related to my nature, after all, I am not a "good man" or a "warm man". Other difficulties are more closely related to the overall environment. I wrote these down to let more people understand an important aspect of a group's living state.

The first difficulty is that the environment we face now is completely different from seven or eight years ago, and love has become "politicized" to some extent. I remember that in 2012, when I went back to my home in Shenzhen to write a doctoral dissertation, I met a group of "shen drifters" who graduated from prestigious schools. Most of them were in technology companies, and the rest were in finance and foreign trade. At that time, when they said that they supported freedom and democracy, at most they thought you were unconventional, and they would not think that you "hate the country", and they would not report you. Everyone was blushing over political issues, and it was as if nothing had happened when they looked back. A girl thinks you are "extreme", but is still willing to fall in love with you. It is a dangerous thing to openly talk about your political leanings now. You never know what the other party’s bottom line is. It’s a small matter if you break up unhappily. I’m afraid that the other party will secretly record it and turn the gun on you in the future.

Here, "protect yourself" and "candor" are in conflict. If "candor" is a must for intimacy, you're taking a lot of political risk to get into it (I say this, of course, because my situation is really special and not every "minority" have such a great risk). Under such circumstances, it is difficult for me to sincerely start a long-term relationship: on the one hand, I am afraid that she will mind my experience, so I always have reservations when I talk about it; on the other hand, I do not know whether I am really safe or not. , or how long can it be safe, how to develop a long-term relationship in such a situation? During the 2016 U.S. election, I saw a lot of discussions about "political correctness", one of which was this: Is it racist to be unwilling to have a relationship with a black man? I thought at the time, it's not a personal freedom to fall in love with someone, how can this be racist? Looking back now, I'm really ashamed of the realization at that time: It's true that who you fall in love with is personal freedom, but when a trait is systematically targeted and the individual is systematically affected by that, it's discrimination. Political "minorities" are discriminated against in China, just as ethnic minorities are discriminated against in the United States. While not strictly a "trait", political stance is similar to religious belief: if religious belief should not be discriminated against, why should political opinion be discriminated against?

Some friends persuaded me to find someone with a similar political stance. Everyone is a minority, so this kind of problem would not exist, and maybe they would be willing to "deliver meals" to me. From a practical point of view, "minorities" are extremely rare in places like Shenzhen: most of the Shenzhen natives have shared the dividends of Shenzhen's four decades of rapid development, and their thinking is biased towards vested interests. Make money and have no interest in politics. Of course, if you don't care about the distance, you can also have online dating. I did try it, but it's quite difficult to maintain.

I don't really want to find it in the "minority", and another reason is that there are too many people who have read my articles, and they are mistakenly thought that they are targeting readers. Seven or eight years ago, it was a glorious thing for a man to catch up with a girl with his talent. Now, because more people appreciate his talent, this kind of thing suddenly becomes shameful, because there is "power" between them. relation". I always thought that power relations only exist in institutions with hierarchy and social influence. There are power relations between superiors and subordinates in companies, and teachers and students in schools. Anyone who calls me "Mr. Chen" now seems to have given me a layer of "power", and I implicitly bear some kind of responsibility to him. Some people compare the relationship between idols and fans in the fan circle, saying that there is a power relationship between them, and the same is true for authors and readers. There is indeed a hierarchy within the fan circle, but fans can choose to leave at any time, and it will not affect their studies and livelihoods, or even affect their real social relationships. Moreover, the relationship between idols and fans is completely different from the relationship between me and readers as I imagined: from beginning to end, readers read my articles, praise or criticize, we are all equal. They might call me "teacher," which is not so much an assertion of a power relationship, but an affirmation of my labor. I do not rule out that some authors want their readership to become a fandom, but this goes against the original intention of my writing.

Regardless of whether "author and reader" is a "power relationship", even if it is, this definition of "power relationship" is too static, ignoring the complexity of the two and the dynamic changes in their relationship. A writer and his readers who are "highly esteemed" and who are very light in the Writer's Association can certainly be said to have a power relationship. An author and ta reader who is a leader in the market and blessed by capital can also be said to have a power relationship. But for an author who has no cooperation with power and capital, or is even suppressed, to say that he has any "power", it can only come from the work itself. If it is said that such an author has a power relationship with his readers, that power The relationship isn't one-way either: as soon as a reader flags it, the writer is immediately in trouble. In this case, who is the stronger side and who is the weaker side?

It is also for the reasons mentioned above that I do not completely trust people who call themselves "minorities". Some "minorities" just want to mix circles, and just regard their political stance as a gimmick to "self-prove" in certain groups. The biggest political risk they face is because of overcoming the wall, or saying something sensitive in the WeChat group. Content while being tea. I heard that the last rumor about Mr. Xu came from a well-known "anti-thief". This kind of knife-in-the-back thing has never stopped since I came into contact with people in this circle. One mountain is still one mountain high.

It needs to be explained that this attack on the private lives of some minorities is not just a kind of gossip stemming from "human nature", nor is it just a rebellion against liberal ethics, but may be deliberately facilitated by the party-state. Like the last time I was attacked by the head of the female worker department of the Huidong County Federation of Trade Unions, "Guyan Muchan", those malicious rumors about me were used as weapons to attack me, and even those who supported me were affected. "Hong Kong independence" plus "sleeping fans", just like "anti-Party" plus "prostitutes", can greatly reduce passers-by and even some moral clean-obsessed people's goodwill towards the victim, and its follow-up effect will also be fermented in minority circles , to speed up their internal friction, use the knife to kill people, and the soldiers will not kill.

Some people I know, several of them are said to have taken the government's money to be spies, on the grounds that "other people have something to do, why is he okay?" The power of censorship rests with it, and it can completely control what kind of speech is allowed to exist and what kind of speech is allowed to disappear. Therefore, in this circle, in fact, it is often necessary to prove one's innocence. Like my personal life being attacked on the Internet, when I meet new friends who have heard these rumors, I always need to defend myself. If a girl is going to be in an intimate relationship with me and hears rumors like this, she's probably going to back off. Or, she will struggle a little bit and put what her friend said about you and what that friend said about you, and put it all out in front of you, asking you to prove that you are not what they said. I have experienced such a trial, and it is a huge damage to the later relationship.

The saddest thing is that in this situation, in order to protect myself, I also developed a paranoia that I hate so much myself. I can't confess everything to a woman who wants to get into an intimate relationship with me, even if she's a "minority" because being a "minority" doesn't mean anything more, and I can't believe she won't be in the authorities in the future Say what I said to her, and can't believe she won't say something else out there. There was one girl who recorded the first time we called (she proposed) and sent the audio file to a few of her friends. Even though I didn't say anything sensitive or private that day, the operation did give me chills.

This is a kind of "twist" of political power on the minority, and its domination has gotten to the point where it knows that just by shaping the environment into a certain state (like the Stanford Prison Experiment), you will hurt each other, Consume until some people quit and some go to jail. In an intimate relationship, this consumption is reflected in the erosion of trust between two people: the other party asks you to prove that you are not what the rumors say, and it is difficult for you to believe that the other party will never harm you. The other person is not at fault, and neither is you, but there is no way you can have a true "intimacy."

Zhang Jieping also has a similar description in her new book "Under Totalitarianism, Our Fear, Resistance and Love": "Totalitarianism does not have enough teeth to achieve meticulous violence governance. Its real effectiveness is to rely on fear to make people Self-restraint; at the same time, through the secrecy of interrogation and arrest, people become suspicious of each other and become isolated. Fear kills action, suspicion kills organization—this is how totalitarianism works.”

Of course, some things cannot be entirely blamed on the political environment. Before I was targeted, intimacy was not high in my ranking of values. The main reason for not being high is: I have never gained spiritual comfort and uplifting strength from intimacy (this does not mean that I have not obtained these from women, but I am not in an intimate relationship with those women) ), there was only an ecstasy of ecstasy that passed quickly. Such an ecstasy gave me some inspiration when I was young, but it's not very advanced in my opinion. Everything that is usually brought to people by intimacy has been brought to me by literature and philosophy. That's why, in many intimate relationships, I have had to answer the question, is writing more important than academics, or is she more important? In hindsight, they usually don't ask such a question, but I seem to have a temperament that always forces them to ask this question.

After entering the list, such a state of mind has been further strengthened: I subconsciously do not believe that anyone will truly view my intimate relationship with me, nor do I believe that our intimate relationship can be maintained for a long time in such a harsh environment. Three years ago I wrote a few articles that explored the question: Is it possible for intimacy to become political redemption? Does intimacy boost the mental strength of protesters? My answer is pessimistic. Due to the survivorship bias, we always think of examples like Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia, but for the thousands of "children of Jianghu" outside the spotlight, the situation may be more cruel than imagined. The so-called "poor and lowly married couples mourn for everything", the poverty and lowly in life are still like this, and the poverty and lowly in politics are even more sad.

When some people see this, they may give advice: you don't know love at all, and you are not suitable for intimate relationships, so don't harm others. To be honest, I got a similar judgment myself, but I am quite disgusted by the syllogism that the worldly people often talk about: the major premise is "intimacy is a necessary condition for a good life", the minor premise is "your character is not Good for intimacy", concluded "your life is over". I've been trying so hard to prove that intimacy isn't necessary for a good life, so much so that some of my friends think I'm at odds with what I say: I keep devaluing intimacy, and I can't completely stay away from it. But I'm justified in saying that. I've written before that there's this dilemma in marriage: Some people look to marriage as a haven for social life, but marriage is part of the system, and if the system is oppressive, how can marriage be on its own? A similar dilemma exists in intimate relationships.

Regarding the life of the minority under totalitarianism, Zhang Jieping's approach is to "establish your own code of conduct and try to make it as transparent as possible." "Build your own trust list. What people on the trust list say is true by default, unless proven to be false. What is not on the trust list, listen to it, and doubt it unless proven to be true by multiple parties. Position People with very sudden and drastic changes may wish to remain suspicious until after a period of verification." "When speaking, try not to distinguish between friends. Just distinguish yourself, what can be said and what can't be said."

To summarize the most useful advice here, Javier said that everyone insists on "living the truth." As I said to some friends, my life can't go back, so I have preset all the details of my life now, big brother knows, what can be used to deal with me in the future , I can't predict, and I'm too lazy to self-censor. I don't want anyone to enjoy the "cat and mouse" thrill with me. I will not live in the fear of "discredit", because I don't want to create a "martyr of ascetic" character, I am a person with flesh and blood and desires, and I am not for my desires feel ashamed.

Of course, I am not calling on all minorities to distrust any intimacy. Even for me now, "two people fight against the world together" is still a rare beauty. If you meet someone who is willing to share this vision with you, then don't care what I said above, because you Entirely possibly luckier than me.