Lies in the age of "public knowledge": the logic of exercising power in the name of knowledge

Press: I recently accepted an exclusive interview with Duowei.com. The topic of discussion is Chinese-style "public knowledge" phenomenology. The discussion is relatively rough, not in-depth and detailed, and it is slightly unsatisfactory, but in general, it still expresses some of my personal views and principle analysis of "Chinese-style public knowledge". It is forwarded as follows for discussion and criticism is welcome. Original link: Lies in the age of public knowledge: The logic of exercising power in the name of knowledge

--------------------------------------------------------

Introduction

Recently, the wildfire against sexual harassment has burned into the public circle, shaking off chicken feathers. On top of the chicken feathers, an article about the female public official Liu Yu suspected of being a cover for the public official was born. The so-called public knowledge, that is, public intellectuals, is a media concept created by the southern media in 2004, trying to guide public opinion by packaging some influential intellectuals and influence the direction of public opinion on certain major events. According to the packaging definition of public knowledge by the Southern Department, to become a qualified public knowledge, three elements are required: knowledge beyond the public; the courage to participate in public affairs; the courage to criticize and take responsibility.

But in the past ten years, the public knowledge who once led the coquettishness has been blown away by the rain and the wind. The media admits: "Kongzhi" is already a curse word like "Brick House" and "Call Beast". What is the significance of the existence of public knowledge in the present and what role does it play? A few days ago, Duowei News interviewed Han Shizhou, a senior media person and independent commentator, who is devoted to the research of Chinese social transformation and public communication. His works include "Where Does China Come From", "The Chinese People's Living Law" and "What to Do in China".

There are many "big V" and "public knowledge" in today's society. Big V itself refers to people with many fans, and public knowledge is short for public intellectuals. One of them represents the right to speak, the other represents knowledge, and they should have been the backbone of this society. But nowadays, public knowledge is no longer a noble word. Public officials have attacked and abused each other and even exposed a lot of contemptible incidents. What kind of phenomenon is the existence of "public knowledge" in contemporary society? How should we face the public knowledge?

Han Shizhou It is difficult to simply say good or bad about the existence of public knowledge. It has its rationality and necessity as a phenomenon. The current state of existence of this society is what the government calls for - a call for fairness and justice. Now this piece of things is relatively lacking or relatively lacking, in that case there needs to be a compensation.

In terms of traditional concepts, it is equivalent to the concept of "Xia" in the past. Especially in the early days of public knowledge, everyone had a knight-like imagination or expectation for them. Some public intellectuals are indeed promoting some public events and promoting some. In the process of rights protection, some people whose interests have been damaged in the process have received corresponding rights relief. In the process, what they did should still be affirmed.

But there is always another side to things. During this process, the publicists have formed a space for speaking skills. They have gained their own fame and right to speak, and they have also generated corresponding interests and realization impulses. This further attracts some people to enter the market, participate in the public opinion field, and want to gain a well-known name and identity, it is inevitable that the situation will be mixed. This will cause a lot of problems, and in the past few years, the exposure has become more obvious.

Our ideal goal should be that everyone has their own independent thinking and judgment ability, and does not rely on these public knowledge to provide opinions. Of course, it is best for them to provide good knowledge and opinions. How each of us treats our own destiny, and how we control our own destiny in this era of heightened uncertainty, is the most important.

Duowei You mentioned that when Gongzhi first appeared, everyone had high expectations for them, giving them the meaning of knights. But in ten years, the current public knowledge has become so filthy that even the name of "public knowledge" has become a symbol of shame. The public knowledge with a real knowledge culture can only keep silent and reflect on this wave. The term "public knowledge" is stigmatized. What is driving this process?

Han Shizhou Stigma may exist, but it also has another nature, which is "stigmatization". There may be political and other forces, causing them some stigma. It is not ruled out that such a force exists, and even the 50 cents of the Navy. But at the same time, they have to find the reasons from themselves. They did not meet the expectations formed by this reality, and gradually many of their own problems were exposed. For example, when they discuss public issues in the public sphere, this kind of voice often has a formula, and they will follow the words of "universal values", constitutionalism, democracy, freedom...

But when you move into Chinese culture, you must first make a connection and transformation. After all, it has some gaps with tradition and people's public awareness level. There should be some people actively doing translation or popularization work in this area. Or to integrate these concepts into our culture, or to transform our culture, I don't see a clear effort to do this.

What am I seeing more of? They are using this set of discourses to compete for the right to speak, which is to exercise the logic of power in the name of knowledge. Their own status, reputation, fans, including some subsequent columns, publications and other means of monetization, will follow. This is not malicious speculation about them, this is a process of fact.

A lot of public knowledge in multi-dimensional China is that there is a problem when the universal value of the West is localized in China. This can be the limitation of public knowledge. But a society without "public knowledge" must be a society that has already made everyone desperate. In what ways is the progress of public knowledge in society now reflected?

Han Shizhou Some people do promote openness and transparency in some public events. The claims of some rights still play a role in raising people's consciousness, which must be affirmed. However, their value may just be there.

And we also have to see the negative effects caused by him. They are simple and rude in the process, and they have compressed a lot of space that could have been discussed in depth, and people's attention has not really penetrated into reality and more. complex scene. Hu Xijin, the editor-in-chief of the Global Times, has a certain rationality for his remarks against the public. But I also don't agree with some of Hu Xijin's views. When he emphasizes this "complexity", he "rationalizes" the reality at the same time. This sense of defense is too strong, which is what I disagree with him.

Duowei Hu Xijin's theory, he is more to give the public knowledge a kind of criticism of Chinese society, what other roles can the Chinese public knowledge now fulfill besides criticizing China's construction?

Han Shizhou In terms of the concept of civil society, this is also a negative effect caused by public knowledge. They basically construct civil society as a confrontational imagination. This realistic tension created by the public officials has led to the suppression of them by political forces, and the concept of civil society has become a sensitive word. In fact, it compresses both the power and the potential of constructive civil society. What is the concept of constructive civil society? In fact, in order to absorb the complexity mentioned by Hu Xijin, we must fully realize this, and we must be patient and fully aware of its complexity and the arduousness of change. We have to do a good job of truly enlightening this concept and value. When I say enlightenment, I do not mean enlightenment in the sense of public knowledge, but to really promote our civic consciousness, and at the same time build a higher response mechanism to complexity itself. Instead of saying, always low-level repetition, simple and crude.

It is well known that in the process of development, the government may be forced to make some reforms. The relationship between intellectuals and politics has been difficult to distinguish since ancient times, ranging from Confucius, Gongsun Hong, Dong Zhongshu, Han Yu, Zhu Xi to modern Liang Qichao and Kang Youwei. It can be said that it is not intellectuals who are constantly interfering in politics, but that politics is interfering in personal life at all times. So what is the current state of public knowledge and the government?

Han Shizhou The progress in the past 100 years is known to be the smallest, and they are repeating a statement over and over again. In this era, intellectual elites have to undertake the function of recognizing reality and direction, which is now disabled. I describe it as "Learning to walk in Handan". After being defeated by strong boats and cannons, I felt that everything was going to fail, so I westernized and fell into the debate between China and the West. I wanted to learn how to walk, but when I learned how to walk, I forgot My original pace, but now I can't walk anymore.

The public officials either overestimated their own strength or underestimated the fear of their opponents, and everyone has seen the result. The result was that the public officials were suppressed, and the public officials were also very interested. They slowly died down and ended in haste. There were not a few rounds, and they were easily suppressed. In fact, this in turn can also test the known texture, their ability to withstand pressure is too weak.

Duowei 's existing public knowledge, are they scratching the itch?

Han Shizhou They have been scratching the itch, they have not fully understood the complexity of China's reality. The burden of China's history is too heavy. China has five thousand years of history and culture. Don't take it as a positive thing. Just like the burden caused by the original family to the children, our history has also caused us a lot of burdens, and it is difficult for us to get out of it. Individual dignified life is invisible in historical culture. What we see is the emperor and the generals, the power struggle, the palace battle like "The Legend of Zhen Huan", their vivid lives, their love and hate, their joys and sorrows, they show very little.

We grew up in this soil, and everyone may carry this virus. This is also something that exists in the public. They cannot escape the desires shaped by the logic of this power, just like traditional Chinese men, Getting promoted and getting rich (taking concubines) was also criticized in the May Fourth New Culture Movement. There is little concern and discussion of real justice issues in our culture and tradition.

Likewise, in these public discourses, they seldom seriously discuss what is justice, what is equality, what is freedom, what is democracy, and the applicability of these concepts or values, and what negative effects they have in reality, Why is it possible to succeed in some countries and fail in others? They will not discuss this issue as a whole, but selectively sell them, which is not much different from a businessman or an ideological MLM.

Multidimensional The public intellectual in the West is derived from the word "intellectual", which inherently means "public". When the Chinese added the word "public", they originally wanted to draw a clear line with "intellectuals". Who would have guessed that the word "true" would have to be added now. It's a really funny thing. In 1894, the famous French intellectuals headed by the writer Zola publicly issued a protest declaration. This document is called the "Intellectual Manifesto", which is a major symbol of independent critical intellectuals on the stage, and it is also the rise of modern Western intellectuals. source. The source of China's public intellectuals should be traced back to the "New Culture Movement" that criticized traditional culture. Comparing the public knowledge in China and the Western world, what is the current situation of the public knowledge in the Western world? Are they facing the same fate as Chinese intellectuals?

Han Shizhou Let's take a look at Posner's "The Decline of the Public Intellectuals". There are also cases of the decline of public intellectuals abroad. The French public intellectual was very powerful, and there was a period when it was especially prosperous. However, especially under the modern education system of subject division of labor, intellectuals have become more academic and specialized, and there are fewer and fewer intellectuals with public identities and public abilities. Of course, there are, for example, Chomsky and Zizek, who can be said to be very typical public intellectuals, who express their opinions on public issues widely. But like them, there are still relatively few, and most of them are academic.

The so-called academicization is a kind of specialization and refinement of knowledge within their knowledge community, but it also creates a gap with the public discourse. They speak terms that can only be understood by people in their own circles. For academic slang, this leads to their loss of ability to communicate with the public, and inability to respond to real issues of the times. Intellectuals as knowledge producers are caught in their own incapacity and crisis.

This can also be seen from the global crisis state, whether in Europe, the United States, not to mention China, everyone has expectations for intellectuals, but they have not fulfilled their responsibilities. This is indeed a decline of global intellectuals. condition. This decline is also related to the entire education system, which pays more attention to formalized knowledge and lacks the education of personality and subject. We have seen, including the world famous universities, like Harvard, Yale, many of their students fall into a state of depression. At the same time, the career direction these elite students often prefer is to enter Wall Street. Then, it can be said that the entire current knowledge production system is actually subordinate to the capitalist self-reproduction system and cannot be surpassed on the whole.

1% of people in the world control the whole world, 9% including these intellectuals, white-collar workers, elites serve the 1%, and 90% are those who are ruled and controlled by the silent majority. Of course, this is a cruder division, but I feel that it also provides some truth.

In the past, knowledge was a very luxurious and precious thing, and everyone regarded public knowledge as a compliment. With the current popularity of higher education, is it necessary to devise a word to classify this group of knowledgeable people? Does public knowledge still have any meaning?

Han Shizhou Public Knowing should not appear as a special identity. But publicity is required. The most ideal state is for everyone to have a public participation and speech outside of their own exclusive identity, and in the process, the quality of public speech will become higher and higher, which will not cause the discourse to be disconnected from reality. If one regards public discourse participation as a professional identity, one will be involved in the discourse system itself, and will gradually lose the sense of reality. In the end, not only is it known that I am a victim, but the entire public opinion is also a victim. Only when we recognize the limitations and limitations of knowledge itself can we truly have knowledge.

Multidimensional China's Metoo trend is quite distinctive. It is probably the most shocking in the entertainment circle in the United States, Japan and South Korea, but it has become a public circle in China. If Xue Manzi was detained, it was the first Waterloo this group encountered after the public became known in China. Then five years later, this Metoo fire is the second Waterloo. Their public image has collapsed, I am afraid that they will be shattered, and it will be difficult to restore their former glory. According to your words, can it be understood that they are actually using such a well-known identity to exercise the logic of power?

Han Shizhou I think characters like Xue Manzi can't be regarded as public knowledge, they can only be said to be big V. Compared with the public known, their right to speak is often the direct transformation of social status on Weibo in reality, and it has something to do with what they say and say, but it has little to do with it. The recently dumped public knowledge in the "Me Too" movement just confirms the phenomenon just discussed. In fact, they only use the name of a universal discourse to upgrade their identity, and they are still practicing the logic of power. What is the logic of power? At the deepest point of its secrecy, to a large extent it is sex. It can be said that power and sex, like one yang and one yin, are two sides of one body.

Multi-dimensional public intellectuals are those who put their professional knowledge into public use. What do you think the real public knowledge is? Has the spirit of "scholar" in the traditional Chinese sense disappeared in contemporary times? How to understand the mission of contemporary intellectuals?

Han Shizhou I think a true public knowledge must not only be able to respond to his own destiny in this era, but also to respond to the problems of the entire era. It is not the role of a knowledge porter by transferring some terms to the public. Let's borrow Nietzsche's words, a true public know first of all he can "overcome this era in himself", otherwise, if he (the traditional virus he carries) can't overcome it, how can he bring something positive to others? Like many of the public now, it's ironic that the actions they've been accused of in the "Me Too" movement contrast with some of the public appeals they've been and are now, that the sanctimonious, duplicitous hypocrites are back, and that's not right Is it the classic image of the Confucian scholar-bureaucrat in the tradition? In my opinion, the "scholar" spirit in the traditional Chinese sense has long since disappeared. As long as the identity model of a society is simplistic, there can be no true "scholar" spirit.

The real public knowledge is first of all self-revolutionaries, who must be able to challenge and surpass themselves. Each of us may carry a virus of authoritarianism within ourselves, and bear the wounds that entire history and era have inflicted upon us. We actually want to transcend this thing. If you can’t even transcend yourself, how can it become public? Just like the process of "cultivating one's self, aligning the family, governing the country and the world" as we talked about in the past, if we do not have this self-cultivation as the premise, if we do not have this self-overcoming and self-transcendence, publicity is impossible. What is lacking most right now is this. Our education has no content for self-cultivation. What has been replaced by this? It is the understanding of human beings provided by economic imperialism, the pursuit and values of utilitarianism, that is, a refined egoistic personality.