Chinese Prisoner's Dilemma (3)

small sequence

I have read a few fantastic books this year. One is "Red Rain: Seven Centuries of Violence in a Chinese County", one is "Financial Code of the Central Empire", and the other is "The Road to Modernity: A Comparison of the Enlightenment Movements in Britain, France and America". I know that my knowledge is shallow, and I may not be able to discuss in enough depth for each of these sub-headings I set. Therefore, the questions I ask in this article, I hope each of my readers can think for themselves. I would also like to remind readers that all of my writings carry a presupposed position, which is a critique of China's current autocratic system and a yearning for a social-democratic path that has never been realized in this world. This position of mine has been considered by many Chinese thinkers, students, and even middle-level party cadres since the 1950s. As party insiders Wang Fei and Li Shenzhi once pointed out:

Our current system is basically the system of the Soviet Union, and the fundamental problem of the Soviet system is that it adopted totalitarian despotism, the dictatorship of the proletariat has become the dictatorship of the party, and the dictatorship of the party has turned into the dictatorship of the minority, and the dictatorship of the minority has turned into the dictatorship of individuals , so that people with absolute authority form a class. The fundamental problem is the problem of democracy under communism, and without democracy there can be no socialism. The public ownership of the means of production and democracy must be resolved simultaneously, and China should not let the problem of proletarian democracy be resolved. "

As Gu Zhun put forward in his 1959 diary:

"In the confrontation between the two camps of socialism and capitalism, can socialism, like capitalism, also absorb the rational elements of capitalism? Does socialism have the ability to adjust and correct mistakes? "...his ideal model, "It is the third way for Western capitalism and Eastern socialism in the process of confrontation and competition with each other, and both want to absorb each other, realize the integration of the East and the West, and realize the integration of socialism and capitalism."

Those who think that China's current system is very good and do not need fundamental changes, don't need to read my article again. As the famous YouTube blog Stone said, in such an era, what you think is your own destiny, and it has nothing to do with others; your thoughts determine your choices, and your choices determine your life. . How your life is only related to you, not to me. If it is to understand the other party's position and logic, and tell the other party some facts and insights that the other party does not know, there is still room for discussion and communication; if it is to attack because of different positions, it has no practical significance.

In addition, starting today, I will block any friend who swears and attacks others under my articles, no matter if his views support me or not.

The following is the text of this paragraph:

3. Is China's national fortune still in the great cycle of feudal dynasties?

The fall of each dynasty has its own special story and plot. Along the thousand-year-old thread, it seems that this story is always entangled between the Ming Jun, the ignorant monarch, and the loyal and treacherous ministers. I have read three people who have tried to sort out Chinese history along a thread in the millennium dimension: Qian Mu, Huang Renyu, and Guo Jianlong. Qian Lao thinks, "After the Han Dynasty, there was a Tang Dynasty, but after the Tang Dynasty, there was no dynasty or period that was as impressive as the Han and Tang Dynasties. It is worthy of our admiration and admiration. It is also worthy of our vigilance and attention." However, this is why, Qian Lao But it doesn't seem to be discussed. Huang Renyu and Guo Jianlong have both sorted out from the financial point of view. The financial point of view is very important. To perform its functions, the government must first have money and food. It is necessary to talk about it from the financial point of view.

Then the financial system of the Tang Dynasty was good, why couldn't it persist? Qian Lao himself pointed out, "The reason for the implementation of rent-yong modulation depends entirely on the rectification of accounts. The population roster in the early Tang Dynasty was extremely complete... It is common to investigate, register, change, and proofread regularly, and there can be no negligence or ambiguity. It is necessary to have a kind of spiritual strength to maintain it, otherwise it will not be easy to last for a long time. Moreover, the Tang Dynasty soon entered a bright era of peace, security, prosperity and prosperity, and people could not help but feel that small loopholes are irrelevant.  … It is inevitable to be lazy and sloppy. However, these are the biggest reasons for the failure of renting and modulation.” When I read this, I had a deep question, whether our historians have never thought about analyzing each specific one. What are the laws of promotion, reward and punishment for bureaucrats in the systems of the past dynasties, and how do these laws affect the psychology and behavior of officials at all levels? Just think about the specific officials, can those who diligently work on the accuracy of these account information be reused? If the system is phased out of such people, you can know that the collapse of the accounting system is inevitable. No matter how good this system is, it cannot be sustained by spiritual strength. Qian Lao himself also said that the system must be coordinated with the personnel - so is there any systematic research on the psychology and behavior of the bureaucrats who implement various systems? Especially the study of the psychology and behavior of bureaucrats at all levels of the contemporary Chinese government - needless to say, it is difficult to carry out. Fortunately, I discovered that Wang Yanan, a "Marxist economist" who translated "Das Kapital", wrote "Research on Chinese Bureaucracy". Therefore, we will also talk about the behavioral logic of the bureaucracy itself.

The root cause of the chaos cycle is the financial collapse caused by the expansion of the interests of the bureaucracy

After reading "The Financial Code of the Central Empire", I saw Guo Jianlong's metaphor for the present world. In the past two thousand years, China has gone through three great cycles. The process is roughly as follows:

The redistribution of land ownership à the early stage of the ruling group's hard work and the people's rest, the private economy prospered -- "the expansion of force and the expansion of the interests of the bureaucratic group after the national power became strong -- "the bureaucracy continued to erode the private economic system in order to expand its own interests- -"The bureaucratic group continues to expand, the private economy is gradually recovered, and the proportion of the state-owned economy increases--"The bureaucratic group continues to expand, the economic vitality is reduced, the source of fiscal revenue is depleted, and the people are struggling--"Financial collapse, people's revolt or the invasion of northern nomads, a The dynasty ends, the interests are redistributed, and it starts from scratch or somewhere in the middle (if the system of the previous dynasties is roughly inherited, such as the Sui and Tang Dynasties).

As for the specific plots of the dynasties and dynasties, I won't say much nonsense. You can read what he wrote for yourself. What impresses me is the debate about state-owned enterprises in the era of Emperor Zhao of the Han Dynasty two thousand years ago, and the debate about the government running the economy again in the court of Emperor Shenzong of the Song Dynasty a thousand years ago. After reading these two big debates, I have a deeper understanding of the era we are in today; if history really has cycles, it seems that we can roughly know that we are now in the past two thousand years. Where is the cycle.

Are we in the midst of a country in which the country is advancing and the people are retreating? Please see reports from publications within the system, the United States and Hong Kong.

1. Yanhuang Chunqiu: http://www.yhcqw.com/70/6238.html
2. Wall Street Journal Chinese website: https://cn.wsj.com/articles/China's anti-epidemic strategy strengthens "national advance and private retreat"-11584591909#
3. Apple News: https://hk.appledaily.com/china/20200129/BQQPOIJINNWO7GP6MXIOIU6D7U/

Interestingly, Guo Jianlong pointed out two laws of centralized empires: one is that once the government relaxes control and cuts fiscal expenditures, the social economy will rebound immediately; , even if the central government gives up or lets go, this part of the interest will be intercepted by the middle layer, which will reduce the policy.

It is conceivable that at this time, when the country needs to concentrate its efforts on major tasks, such as disaster relief or war, the minister in charge of finance can only do everything possible to quickly accumulate money. If you want to choose to make money to invigorate the private economy, not only will the effect be slow, but it may not only be ineffective, but also some local tyrants and small bureaucratic interest groups will be in vain, the people will not get rich, and the central government will be weakened. The stronger the state-owned enterprise, the stronger the government's control over society and the better it can manage the resistance of the lower classes. The more fiscal revenue declines, the more obvious the role of state-owned enterprises, and the more motivated the government will be to include private enterprises.

When the car drives here, no matter which driver drives it, there is basically only one way. If the power is not centralized, the decrees will not work, and if the power is centralized, the local government will continue to pass the burden on to the people and society. However, for the entire bureaucratic group, as long as there is no civil revolt or riots, then it is not a big deal to pass it on to the people and society.

"At all costs", anyway, this price is paid by people who are not worthy of the surname Zhao.

The debate in the Song Shenzong Dynasty ended in that Shenzong adopted Wang Anshi's advice and allowed the government to directly participate in economic activities. It is very different from the debate in the Han Dynasty. The two sides of the argument before Emperor Zhao of the Han Dynasty were Sang Hongyang, who was in charge of finances, and the "virtuous people" from the people. After a battle of words, the virtuous people of the people went home, and they were not punished for their remarks. In front of Shenzong, there were two high-ranking officials, Wang Anshi and Sima Guang. After the court battle, they were divided into two parties. Because of the differences of opinions between the two parties, it gradually evolved into a life-and-death political struggle. A situation where anyone who comes to power is hit. After you sang and I came on the stage several times, too many officials brought disaster to the whole family because they expressed their true views. In the Song Huizong Dynasty, even if he was determined to reform, the officialdom would not be able to provide the same kind of countryman; The power-seekers could survive, coupled with the problem of hard to return, the Northern Song Dynasty perished in a very humiliating way.

As long as this society is guilty of being guilty of words, then decision-makers can only hear more and more what they want to hear, and officials at all levels have to speculate and speak out; The comprehensive information of the middle layer also has more opportunities to use information asymmetry to seek benefits and combat dissidents. In this way, the more prosperous the text prison, the wider the spread, and the easier it is to aggravate the problem.

In 2016, The Economist had already warned the world that the damage to freedom of speech worldwide would have serious consequences.

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2016/06/04/under-attack

In 1948, Wang Yanan summarized his observations on the bureaucratic system of the Nationalist government in his "Research on the Chinese Bureaucracy". He pointed out that this "new bureaucratic system" was unprecedentedly integrated with the financial system, and officials were connected with businessmen and officials. Combine with financial capitalists as a group:

The more people with big capital, the more likely they are some powerful people, and they will have any reason to prevent their subordinates from being corrupt or corrupt. Corruption has become an ethos, a common phenomenon never seen before, because officials have never been so integrated with the economy since liberty as they are today. Secondly, the rampant corruption and the rule of the chaebols will definitely make the whole society fall into a state of no right and wrong and not cheering up. In terms of economy, it will definitely lead to waste, inefficiency, and various disjointed phenomena; in terms of politics, it will definitely lead to lax internal organization, separate factions, and factional struggle; Xiang Rui put aside party discipline, national laws, and political principles, and made a fuss without any scruples. Just imagine, the elections received over the years, as well as every show performed during the period, will probably make the Gangji disorganized and incoherent.

At the end of the book, full of his belief in Marxism and his deep affection and love for the motherland, he wrote the following conclusions:

To the question of whether the bureaucracy (whether old or new) may still exist in China at this stage, my answer is no, but not mechanically, it will be tomorrow or the day after next, or the year after next year. It doesn't exist at all, it just means that it will be less and less likely to exist. "

Because he believes that enlightenment ideas such as "democracy, freedom, and equality" are already in the minds of the people:

Since then, in the course of many revolutions and other related wars, they have been enlightened and civilized, and they have become less and less like "natural" slaves or "servants", and they have begun to think about their Rulers are not "superhumans" who are inherently different from them. Once this "dangerous thought" began to germinate in their simple minds, it was soon confirmed by the bloody reality that they came to a conclusion that was in direct contradiction to the rule of the autocratic bureaucracy: that their own miserable fate and unfortunate position were the result of The bureaucracy usurped their political power and exploited that political power. Therefore, taking back their political power from the bureaucracy and the feudal forces is the fundamental way to save their miserable fate and unfortunate position. Some of them not only think this way, but also do it in various forms of resistance and struggle movements. . "

Too bad he was wrong. It can be seen that he does not know his leaders, nor his people. However, I envy him, and I envy him for being a Marxist with true faith. His life was a life of struggle for his ideals and beliefs, a glorious and fulfilling life. Compared to him, I am nothing but a walking dead.

He did not see the end of the Cultural Revolution and reform and opening up, let alone today. I admire him very much. If I can really travel through it, I really want to go back to China before the anti-rightist movement to have a look and have a chat with him. Even I'd love to travel back to the days when he was unemployed and translated Das Kapital in a temple!

In 1969 when he was sick in Shanghai, he said: "In the past, a scholar said that there are only two kinds of people under the autocratic system, one is the dumb and the other is a liar. I think Shanghai has the taste of autocracy, and Shanghai is A few liars rule over a majority of dumb people."

I dared to follow his words, there is another type of person under the autocracy, that is, the fool; a few liars rule the majority of the fools and the dumb; of course, there is another kind of fool who speaks the truth and disappears after talking. I'm just a fool.

To answer the questions I raised in this subheading, we are certainly not out of the cycle of chaos. We are at the beginning of a troubled world. Maybe our generation is lucky, we have seen the light and splendor of the prosperous world, and maybe we can still have a few decades of peace before the real troubled times come.

Please see Zhejiang Online:

http://pol.zjol.com.cn/201804/t20180418_7060401.shtml

Mao Zedong replied: We have found a new way, we can jump out of this cyclical rate. This new path is democracy. Only by letting the people supervise the government can the government dare not relax. Only when everyone rises up and takes responsibility will no one perish.

What follows:

4. Have we reached a breaking point in history?

5. The Chinese Prisoner's Dilemma

6. What can we do?