中左翼社会民主主义者；希望为没有话语权的边缘人群发声者；致力于改善民权民生，做些实事
Passport or Epitaph: The Suicides of Roh Moo-hyun, Park Won-soon and the Dilemma of the Contemporary Progressive Camp (and other related issues I want to say)
Translate from Chinese to English by Google translate
Passport or Epitaph: The Suicides of Roh Moo-hyun, Park Won-soon and the Dilemma of the Contemporary Progressive Camp (and other related issues I want to say)
South Korea's Political Background: The Rivalry of Progressive and Conservative Camps 1
The Essence of Human Nature and the Changes of History 6
"Existence is reasonable"? To protect perpetrators or victims, stability or justice? 8
What about China after democratization? Can progressives emerge and survive? 12
What to do with South Korea and the United States: Eclecticism may be the way out 16
Can the epitaph and the pass be consistent? 18
History always proves that meanness is a passport and nobility is an epitaph 19
Progressivism is not overcorrection but pioneering human rights 21
Korean progressivism is admirable 22
Korean Progressivism Compared with Other Countries and Regions 23
Let history witness and judge 24
In July last year, Park Won-soon, the mayor of Seoul, South Korea, committed suicide under the pressure of investigation and public opinion on suspicion of sexually harassing his subordinates. In May 2009, former President Roh Moo-hyun, who belonged to the same political party as Park Won-soon (although the party name is different, but it is actually a party faction, Korean political circles have a tradition of changing their names), and also belonged to the progressive camp, was suspected of accepting bribes by his relatives and even himself. Under the pressure of the prosecution investigation and public opinion, he committed suicide and died.
These two suicide cases, the issues that these two men dealt with, and even the two men themselves have very strong commonalities, and they can also reflect many deep and complex issues. Before talking about them and the various issues related to them, it is necessary to give some background information on Korean politics.
South Korea's Political Background: The Rivalry of Progressive and Conservative Camps
Anyone who knows something about South Korean politics will know that South Korean politics and the entire country are divided into two camps: progressive and conservative. The conservative camp refers to those with vested interests, value identification, and sympathetic supporters in the era of the former Korean dictatorship, as well as their successors in the democratic era. Park Chung-hee, Chun Doo-hwan, Roh Tae-woo, Lee Myung-bak, and Park Geun-hye are their representatives or spokespersons. The conservative camp is a vested interest in the dictatorship era. Through the dictatorship, it cruelly exploits and squeezes the people to obtain power and wealth, and forms a tight network of relationships. They wantonly suppressed the democratic movement (imprisoned and killed democrats and young students, the most famous being the Gwangju incident), suppressed freedom (such as "abolishing the union of speech"), abused power, colluded with officials and businessmen, and accepted bribes (the so-called "improper accumulation of wealth" ), occupying civilian women (rarely but also in some cases), befriending foreign enemies (collaborating with the Japanese right wing), abusing the weak (refer to the "Sanqing Education Team" and "Brothers' House" incidents)... In short, they ruled South Korea. A jungle society where the weak prey on the strong.
The progressive camp is almost the opposite. The mainstream of the progressive camp. In the era of dictatorship, identities include opposition parties, human rights lawyers, social activists, young students, progressive teachers, awakened workers, etc. Typical representatives are Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, Moon Jae-in, Kim Young-sam, Chun Tae 1. Park Jong-cheol, etc. They advocate social equality, political democracy, supremacy of human rights, protection of individual rights (including labor rights, women's rights, and rights of other disadvantaged groups), national independence, and social freedom (freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom of art), etc. And waged a heroic struggle against the dictatorship. In the struggle, many people paid the price with their lives, and others were disabled, mentally disturbed, and their families were destroyed.
After South Korea achieved democratization in the 1990s, the conservative camp and the progressive camp continued to exist and confront each other for a long time. Although the conservative camp has generally turned to support democratic politics and social freedom, in terms of political views, it still tends to protect vested interests, maintain the old order, tends to disparity (anti-equality and anti-equal rights) and elitism, and is relatively indifferent to the suffering of the people. Lack of care and respect, frequent use of dirty methods in political struggles, etc. The progressive camp, on the other hand, sticks to the aforementioned goals, placing a strong emphasis (especially compared to conservatives) on moral self-discipline, equality and empathy, and protection of the vulnerable. This can be seen from the differences in the policies of conservative and progressive rulers at the national and local levels after democratization. Relevant examples and specific analyzes will not be described here (it is too long to expand, and you can check it yourself if you are interested).
I write these backgrounds to emphasize the progressive camp’s strong pursuit of justice and equality, a high sense of moral self-discipline and a sense of shame, and an extreme emphasis on personal conduct. The reason why the Korean public who supports the progressive camp is to a large extent is that the progressive camp, especially its politicians, flaunts morality and justice.
There are frequent scandals in the progressive camp: the imprisonment of Kim Dae-jung’s relatives, corruption involving Roh Moo-hyun and his relatives, Park Won-soon, Wu Judun, Anxi Zheng’s sexual assault, Cao Guo’s use of power for personal gain
That's the problem. After the progressive camp came to power, scandals broke out one after another, ranging from everything from politics to personal life. The son of Kim Young-sam, the first non-conservative president (who is not exactly a progressive), was jailed for taking bribes; the third son of Kim Dae-jung, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and democratized president, had all three sons sentenced for corruption; Kim Dae-jung's successor Roh Moo-hyun, several of his close relatives were suspected of accepting bribes, and he himself was also accused of accepting bribes (not confirmed). This is only at the presidential level, and scandals of other progressive camp dignitaries also appear from time to time. Relatively recently, there is a political rookie, Moon Jae-in’s right-hand man, and former Minister of Justice Cao Guo, who was exposed to multiple scandals about himself and his relatives when he was on the rise, including his daughter’s alleged use of his power to have someone else write a graduation thesis and forge an internship. proof, and that he and his family members are suspected of tax evasion, etc. The most recent ones are Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon and Busan Mayor Oh Kyo-don who were involved in sexual assault scandals during the me too movement that swept the world last year and caused repercussions in South Korea (in addition to Chungcheongnam-do Governor Ahn who happened before "me too"). Hee was accused and convicted of sexual assault, although his situation was different from the other two, and at one point he vehemently denied the crime). Both are the backbone of the Common Democratic Party, the most important party in the progressive camp. Park Won-soon is not only the mayor of the capital, but also a popular candidate for the next president.
The above-mentioned people, at least before the scandal was exposed, all emphasized their own moral integrity and pursuit of justice. Among them, the political success of Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, Park Won-soon and others is based on their pursuit and construction of "moral politics". Kim Dae-jung's reputation is known all over the world. He is not only admired for his courage to resist totalitarianism, but also held high the banner of anti-corruption after he came to power. His three sons were sentenced for corruption. Of course, two of his sons were sentenced while he was in power, and the other son was also arrested when his close ally Roh Moo-hyun was in power. This can be interpreted as killing relatives or judicial independence, but his family scandal is still a stain on him. Roh Moo-hyun went one step further. He himself was involved in a bribery scandal. Although it has not been verified, it is indeed related to corruption. It should also be noted that even though Jin and Lu were not directly involved or even not involved in corruption at all, their relatives must have taken advantage of their influence, reputation, connections, etc., rather than completely "cutting seats".
If Jin and Lu can still be excused by "the relative's crime does not represent the person", then Park Yuanchun's sexual assault cannot be excused and whitewashed in any way. Of course, some people (especially some Chinese) analyze Park's alleged sexual assault incident in a conspiracy theory way, thinking that it was framed by political opponents or even "foreign forces", but such conspiracy theories are not worth refuting. There are all indications that Park Won-soon did sexually harass a female subordinate (even if the plot is not particularly serious, and he did not rape), and the specific argument is not expanded in this article. Park Yuanchun was born as a human rights lawyer. He has always shown himself as a defender of justice and a protector of vulnerable groups, and he is actually doing related things. Park Won-soon was detained and dropped out of school for resisting the dictatorship of Park Chung-hee when he was young. He was admitted to another university and became a human rights lawyer after graduation. He often litigated for vulnerable groups and actively participated in civic movements. After he became the mayor of Seoul, he focused on protecting the rights and interests of vulnerable groups, such as improving labor treatment, raising welfare standards, reducing university tuition fees, and providing free lunches for primary and secondary schools.
The most notable thing is that he has been fighting and running for women's rights all year round. During his tenure as a human rights lawyer, he often provided legal support to women victims of sexual crimes. In 1993, he served as a defense lawyer for a female university teaching assistant who was sexually harassed, and successfully won the first sexual harassment complaint case in Korean history. He is also actively seeking justice for South Korea's "comfort women". He has attended the "Women's International War Criminals Tribunal" organized by non-governmental organizations and demanded that Emperor Showa be prosecuted for crimes such as forcing more than 100,000 South Korean women to serve as comfort women. After becoming the mayor of Seoul, he promoted the establishment of the "Gender Equality Committee" and implemented many policies to protect women. He has publicly stated on many occasions that "we must strengthen support for women and resolutely resist sexual violence."
It is for this reason that his accusation of sexual harassment has caused huge waves. And that's why he committed suicide. It is self-evident that a political figure who is righteous and emphasizes opposing sexual violence and protecting women, but sexually harassing others, will have a great impact on his reputation and life prospects. Not to mention the actual impact, just this kind of strong contrast and contrast is enough to make the public astonished and feel ashamed. Of course, this is another heavy blow to the progressive camp that flaunts morality and justice.
Conspiracy theory is shameful, but it is also shameful to deny Park Yuanchun's achievements and think that Park Yuanchun is a sanctimonious hypocrite and a pervert. Park Won-soon's actions from his student days until he became the mayor of Seoul are obviously real and sincere. He is indeed very upright or at least wants to be an upright person. Group human rights defenders and politicians are indeed doing this.
The Moral Dilemma Under the Self-contradiction of Progressives: The Causes of Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon's Suicides
So, how can an upright person, a politician who pleads for the people, be a sexual harassment criminal at the same time? This is the doubt of many people (of course, there are many people who do not doubt, but they will never publicly admit that they do not doubt), and it is also the cause of Park Yuanchun's inner contradiction and despair. And Roh Moo-hyun, who committed suicide more than ten years ago due to scandals with himself and his relatives, essentially committed suicide amidst the same confusion and contradictions.
Both Park Won-soon and Roh Moo-hyun fell into a paradoxical moral dilemma, political dilemma, and life dilemma. On the one hand, they attach great importance to morality (this morality includes moral requirements for intellectuals, politicians, and ordinary modern citizens in a civilized society), and they all strongly pursue human rights and fairness and justice. With love for the people, especially sympathy for the disadvantaged, and hatred for all kinds of criminals, perpetrators, especially bullies. Such people often have far higher demands on themselves than the bottom line of society and much higher demands on others. For them, reputation, dignity, and moral integrity are more important than life. This kind of noble sentiment is also the reason why they can make great achievements, generate great charisma and receive wide support.
And when they did things that broke through the bottom line of society for various reasons, this kind of morality became the root of their death. On the one hand, they cannot tolerate changes in the public's opinion of them, and cannot face the accusations and criticisms of all parties. The people who once supported them because of their high morals will be very disappointed with them, and even redouble their disgust, thinking that they are " Hypocrites" are not as good as those conservative "true villains". On the other hand, their opponents, the conservative camp, will criticize and ridicule them more harshly, stir up their scandals back and forth, dig out and analyze every detail, mentally flay and flog their corpses, emphasizing their " "Duplicate", "sanctified", and then deny their political allies and even the entire progressive camp, and then further deny their beliefs and values and all behaviors based on these beliefs and values.
On the other hand, and most importantly, they cannot face themselves, their souls and beliefs. There are still ways to escape the contempt and criticism of others, but one cannot escape the condemnation of one's own heart and behavior, and the torture of one's own soul to one's own soul. This statement is false in China, but for truly sincere and honest people, especially those living in a highly civilized environment, this kind of self-condemnation and torture not only exists, but is also extremely lethal. When a person is not self-consistent, and still deviates from his most steadfast ideals, and falls below the bottom line that even ordinary people should not fall below, he will be very painful and desperate. Especially when things are irreversible, it is tantamount to a mental death sentence. And for people like them who value spiritual pursuits such as morality and ideals far more important than physical survival, this will inevitably make them choose to end their lives. Many people are stunned by their suicide, but it is completely reasonable in their ideological structure. Of course, they committed suicide not only because they could not accept their violation of morality and ideals, but also because they hoped to avoid dragging down the progressive camp and affecting the nobility and value of their beliefs. But for them, just one reason is enough to convince themselves to commit suicide.
An Analysis of the Root Causes of Progressive Camp Scandals and Tragedy: The Special Situation of Korea and the General Situation of the World/Human Society
If the two are only regarded as special cases of "missteps" among progressives, as ordinary occasional political scandals, then there is no need for particularly strong analysis and commentary. Things are far more complicated than what people see, and what is reflected is actually deeper than these seemingly profound things. (And judging from the fact that many politicians from the progressive camp have "fallen", it seems that this is not a special case, but other people did not commit suicide like Lu Pu)
Roh Moo-hyun was involved in a corruption scandal and nepotism, while Park Won-soon was involved in a sex scandal, and Cao Guo was involved in a privilege scandal and nepotism. The crimes they deal with are rooted in human nature, social structure, culture, tradition and everyday habits. In a modern civilized society, the generally accepted consensus is to obey the law. However, in the real world, there are also various tacit consensuses that imply or even directly push people to break the law and discipline, and benefit themselves at the expense of others. Everyone knows that moral and legal requirements should not be corrupt, accept all kinds of benefits, and should not use privileges for personal gain, and sexual assault is even more of a social taboo.
However, on the other hand, it is also well known that corruption, power-seeking, and backdoor solicitation are everywhere. As for sexual assault, people with certain social experience will also know that this is a common phenomenon (of course, the attitude and degree of attention to the problem are another matter). Of course, there are great differences in the prevalence and severity of these problems between countries with sound democracy and the rule of law, countries with authoritarian corruption, developed countries and underdeveloped countries. However, even in developed countries with sound democracy and the rule of law, related problems are still very common (this kind of "common" does not mean that it must be 50% or even 90% to be common, even if it is 10%, it can be said to be common. Like It is said that the crime rate and murder rate in a certain place are high, even if 20 people out of 100,000 people are killed every year, it means that the law and order is very bad, and the robbery rate of 10% is very common. All being robbed is "common").
South Korea: Upheavals and conflicts during the transition period, the gap between ideals and reality
South Korea, as a late-developing developed country, achieved democratization much later than other developed countries. On the one hand, democratic politics has developed rapidly in just over ten years, and the rule of law has been improved and improved at an accelerated rate (especially the principle of equal treatment and enforcement of laws). Greatly strengthened), the people's awareness of rights has been violently awakened, and people's demands for human rights, justice, protection of the weak, and moral politics have become stronger and stricter, and their standards have become stricter. On the other hand, South Korea has not experienced the gradual political, economic, cultural and social growth process of those developed countries. The concepts and literacy of politicians, elites and ordinary civilians have not kept up with the maturity of democracy, the soundness and strictness of the rule of law, The speed of progress in ideology, culture and social trends. In addition, South Korea still has a large backlog of various historical problems that cannot be changed suddenly, as well as many new problems that have suddenly increased in large numbers but have not found a suitable solution for the time being.
As a result, fierce contradictions and conflicts occurred between the innovative and progressive system, legal norms, and civic moral requirements, and the national behavior full of traditional habits. However, the lofty demands and public flaunts of the country and its citizens for morality, law, and social justice have also formed a significant gap with the actual qualities and behaviors of the political and economic elites and ordinary citizens. All kinds of new and old problems broke out intensively, and social contradictions and problems were numerous and heavy. The rapid development of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of literature and art has exposed these problems to the fullest, and exposed these conflicts and dark sides to the fullest, which in turn has caused even greater social impact.
Under such circumstances, various scandals have been exposed in South Korea, ranging from corruption and dereliction of duty by high-ranking officials, sexual assault on women, superstition and cults, to the falsification incident of Hwang Woo-suk, the scientific leader, the bribery incident of Lee Jae-yong, the economic elite Samsung chaebol, and the Miryang incident created by civilians. The incident of gang rape of teenagers, the sexual abuse of children by managers of disabled institutions (the "melting pot" incident), the "Zheng Ren" incident of child abuse, the "Nth Room" incident, etc., many social problems have erupted one after another. Among them, incidents involving sexual violence have particularly aroused widespread concern and shock in society because of their taboo in old morality and cruelty in new thinking, as well as their common zero-tolerance attitude. Fundamentally speaking, these cases are not accidental, but the inevitable result of intense social conflicts and widespread exposure of human rights issues in South Korea's transitional period. Of course, all this happened in the era of autocracy, even more serious, but due to the neglect of human rights and emphasis on political stability, information blockade and public opinion control, the tradition of "the law does not punish the public" and "the punishment cannot be punished by the doctor", and the convention of "habits become nature" The acquiescence of the victims and the resignation of the victims under the domestication of the environment, coupled with the relative dilution of other more serious problems, these behaviors that are now regarded as extremely serious immorality and even crimes have not received strong attention and effective solutions.
The progressive camp, which is determined to overcome and change these ugly realities, and is committed to social justice and protection of the disadvantaged, is also not immune to the impact of this transformation. Moreover, the progressive camp suffers more from this onslaught. As mentioned earlier, they have always advertised their resolute opposition and crackdown on injustice, opacity, and hurting the weak, so once they are also involved in related crimes, it will damage their reputation and status to a greater extent. Also, in the face of such scandals, the progressive camp cannot resort to the nasty methods of the conservative camp and past dictatorship eras; Sophistry, or even if it does, it is not as skillful and unscrupulous as the conservative camp, especially those villains, so it is easy to be exposed and broken, and it will damage the image and reputation even more.
As a result, although the progressive camp emphasizes high standards of self-requirements, and generally strives to practice this in reality, scandals are often exposed, which leads to its defeat in elections and political competitions despite its outstanding achievements. And the continuous scandals involving corruption, sexual assault, and the use of privileges, which are diametrically opposed to what they publicly advertised, have also caused the public to have deep doubts and distrust of the various commitments and value orientations admired by the progressive camp, shaking the foundation of the progressive camp. .
In April this year, South Korea held by-elections for the mayor vacancies of Seoul and Busan left by Park Won-soon and Wu Judun. With little surprise, the conservatives won by a wide margin, beating the progressive candidates by a wide margin. Just a year ago, South Korea's progressive camp won a sweeping victory in parliamentary elections. It can be said that the scandals of Cao Guo, Park Yuanchun, and Wu Judun directly led to a cliff-like decline in the support rate of the progressive camp.
Other democratic countries ruled by law represented by the United States: systematic and inevitable evils under human nature, social structure, cultural traditions and habits
The Democratic Party and the Republican Party in the United States: The Gentleman's Defeat and the Villain's Victory in the Land of Lighthouses
In fact, not only South Korea, but progressive camps or innovative forces in many countries around the world are facing such a dilemma. The United States is also a very typical example.
The Democratic Party of the United States is basically consistent with the various propositions and principles of the progressive camp in South Korea, while the Republican Party is similar to the conservative camp in South Korea (of course there are big differences. For example, the Republican Party in the United States does not have the black history of dictatorship and dictatorship like the conservative camp in South Korea, but the Democratic Party has support. The Black History of Slavery). Since President Wilson during the First World War, successive Democrats have attached great importance to human rights, justice, and helping the weak, and implemented domestic and foreign policies based on these values. Therefore, Democrats, especially those who flaunt justice, will be subject to more moral scrutiny and stricter moral requirements than ordinary people.
Take some events in recent years as examples. For example, in Hillary's "email gate" incident, she used private emails to handle official business. Although this is obviously only a non-malicious mistake (of course, as a secretary of state and a presidential candidate, this behavior is indeed a major mistake), she was therefore subject to Many people from all walks of life in the United States, including the Democratic Party, criticized it. The killing of the US ambassador to Libya during her tenure as secretary of state also aroused widespread criticism. This has become one of the reasons for her failure in the 2016 presidential election. Although his opponent Trump is a completely morally bankrupt person (although he is not worse than those who don’t look rogue but stick to their vested interests, not to mention China, only Vice President Pence and former President Reagan are actually more detestable than Trump), but it is Hillary who is more frustrated by various criticisms. The recent incident of New York City Mayor Cuomo's sexual harassment of female subordinates, which has made remarkable achievements, is actually not particularly serious (although there are acts of threatening victims in disguise by him and other subordinates), but he is under great pressure from inside and outside the party, and he insists on Had to resign later. Many other Democratic politicians have also resigned due to not particularly bad behavior on racial issues, religious issues, and sexual assault issues (or even if they did not resign, it would be impossible to further their political career). Out of their values and integrity, it is impossible for them not to admit their mistakes, and it is impossible for them to completely shirk their responsibilities. Their colleagues will not cover up or even put pressure on them, so they can only accept failure or even actively end their political careers.
But the Republican Party is different. Although there are some Republicans who cherish their feathers, or are more ashamed to take responsibility after making mistakes, such as Nixon resigned after the Watergate incident (even under pressure from all parties), others like Romney and McCain are also of high quality, but There are also many Republicans who are very morally low, or sometimes not low and sometimes low (let's call it "selectively low"). Trump is the most obvious example of this. There are too many moral scandals about him. Just in office, he lied more than 20,000 times, an average of 23 times a day. These are well documented and I will not list them. The justice Kavanaugh appointed by Trump is also suspected of sexually assaulting many people. In addition, he has various other misdeeds, especially good at using his power to oppress vulnerable groups. It still received the collective endorsement of almost all Republicans and was successfully elected as a justice. The reason why these Republican thugs are able to take power is because they have no scruples about morality at all, let alone integrity. Even if you do a lot of evil, you can also go smoothly and unimpeded.
In fact, this is not only the case for the individuals of the two parties, but also the propositions, policies, and behaviors of the two parties as a whole, which are composed of all the individuals of the two parties, are almost the same. For example, the typical "Jerry Newt" gerrymandering, that is, deliberate use of dirty tricks in the gerrymandering, so that the party can get more seats. Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party did this in the early years, but since World War II, the Democratic Party has given up doing this, and instead handed it over to a neutral constituency division to divide it in a professional way. But the Republican Party continues to use this method to maximize electoral benefits. Of course, there are also adherence to the outdated Electoral College system that is particularly beneficial to the Republican Party, opposition to the capital Washington, D.C., and the U.S. autonomous state of Puerto Rico having Senate seats (both regions are highly supportive of the Democratic Party), and insisting on strengthening the power of the Senate and limiting the power of the House of Representatives. It is an example of the Republican Party's unreasonable behavior but taking advantage of system and legal loopholes for its own selfishness. These are supported by the vast majority of members (supporters) of the Republican Party, congressmen, officials, and scholars. Although the Democratic Party suffers from these unfair and unreasonable realities and is very eager to change, but out of respect for the constitutional democratic system, separation of powers, and power checks and balances, it does not particularly strongly promote the change of these unreasonable status quo, let alone use the same Dirty means to gain power and political advantage.
A very prominent example is the death of conservative Justice Scalia in 2016. President Obama would have liked to appoint a liberal justice, and that was indeed his prerogative. However, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell blocked Obama's appointment on the grounds that "the justice should not be appointed when the president is about to leave office, and the next president should be nominated", in an attempt to delay the appointment until the next president is elected. Considering the demands of the Republicans, Obama gave up forcing the appointment of justices for bipartisan reconciliation and American unity (of course, he may also consider that Hillary has a great chance of winning, Trump is almost impossible to be elected president, and the next president will appoint free judges. send the Chief Justice). As a result, the results of the 2016 general election were very unexpected, and the Republican Trump was elected president. In 2017, Trump appointed conservative judge Gorsuch as a justice of the Supreme Court. Among the nine justices, the ratio of conservatives to liberals was 5:4 (although Justice Roberts sometimes tends to be liberal, but most of the time Or vote in a controversial case with a conservative view).
However, in 2020, Ms. Ginsburg, a progressive justice who fought for feminism and the disadvantaged all her life, died suddenly. Her last words were to have the next president appoint her successor. And this is also in line with the practice proposed and established by the Republicans that "the last year of the president's term should not nominate justices, but the next president should nominate them". But at this time, the vast majority of Republicans completely abandoned consistency and supported the appointment of justices during Trump's tenure. McConnell, who opposed Obama's appointment of liberal justices four years ago, is very active in pushing Trump to appoint conservative justices. As a result, Barrett, an extremely conservative woman, was appointed as a justice of the Supreme Court, replacing Ginsberg, who had completely opposite or even completely opposite views to her. The ratio of conservatives to liberals on the U.S. Supreme Court has become 6:3 (at this time, even if Roberts leans toward the liberals, it cannot change the situation that the liberals lose every disputed vote). The United States will usher in a decades-long judicial dark age, and it will be a nightmare for vulnerable groups. Democrats have paid a terrible price for their moral integrity. (Of course, in addition to the above, there are many reasons why the Democratic Party’s gentleman lost to the Republican’s villain. For example, in the 2016 election, the Democratic Party, which respects the individual choices of supporters and emphasizes individual rights, is precisely because of this "used" to some criticisms of Hillary Clinton. The rebels who were dissatisfied with the radical policies refused to vote for Hillary to express their dissatisfaction. The core figures of the Republican Party successfully mobilized supporters to unite and actively vote through supporters’ religious devotion and obedience. Hillary admitted her own limitations and Mistakes, progressives don't actively endorse her for being relatively neutral and critical, while Trump lies and doesn't admit everything wrong, ultra-liberals, religious, racists, etc. are all behind him... Anyway, it's good lost to bad)
It should be a common phenomenon in barbaric and authoritarian countries, but it keeps happening in a "lighthouse country" like the United States. As a result, the progressive camp has encountered various setbacks. Behind these setbacks, the rights of hundreds of millions of civilians and relatively vulnerable people have been violated (Trump’s four years in office alone have changed the lives and destiny of many people in the United States and around the world).
And the same goes for South Korea. The scandals of Kim Dae-jung's relatives, Roh Moo-hyun himself and their relatives have freed conservatives from the moral dilemma of "remnants of autocracy". The victory of Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye is an example. And Moon Jae-in finally came to power, and once made great strides. However, the scandals of Cao Guo, Park Yuanchun, and Wu Judun caused the progressive camp to lose their hearts within a year. The by-election in April is just the beginning. According to polls, the next presidential election is likely to be won by conservatives. If the conservatives win, the situation of vulnerable groups such as laborers, women, and the physically and mentally disabled will worsen. Park Won-soon, Oh Ju-don, and Ahn Hee-jung hurt three women, and the conservatives came to power to make tens of thousands of Korean women hurt and lose their interests in various ways.
Back to the subject of this article. The progressive camp faces its own moral dilemma in the same way as in South Korea, that is, if it is “strict to self-discipline and lenient to others” and insists on moral standards and behaviors that are much higher than the current social status quo, then itself will become a victim of this method. It is both a strength and a weakness, not only ruining the future of some people in the camp (including the most politically promising greats), but also losing many important political competitions, and ultimately unable to hold power and implement policies. But on the other hand, if the corresponding principles and moral standards are not followed, then what confidence and reason will there be to promote these propositions and policies to the whole people? Just like the issue of sexual harassment, if even politicians who support anti-sexual harassment and advocate feminism are sexually harassed and still not responsible, how can they set an example for the people, change the social atmosphere, and implement relevant laws and policies? Or to put it bluntly, how can we have the face to say one thing and do another, and to impose double standards on others and ourselves?
But in this case, knowing that the consequences are so serious, why do those people in the progressive camp still make mistakes and commit crimes (leaving aside the things that have to be done out of political struggles for the time being)? If South Korea has some of the above-mentioned special factors, then why do countries such as the United States, which are more developed, also have such a situation?
The Essence of Human Nature and the Changes of History
This is caused by the nature of human nature and society. The mistakes and crimes of these characters I have listed, such as the use of power for personal gain, corruption, dereliction of duty, sexual harassment and assault, partisanship and dissent, and even the very irrational behavior of ruining major events for some comfort (the aforementioned Hillary email door is a typical example) )...and the double standard of double standards for these mistakes and crimes, the relative behavior of others and similar behavior of oneself...these are deeply rooted in human and social existence, and there are great difficulties in trying to fully overcome them. difficulty. Pursuing advantages and avoiding disadvantages, selfishness, bullying the weak and fearing the strong, forming a party and helping each other is the necessity of human nature and animal nature and social survival (humans have more lies or dishonesty than animals). In seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages, selfishness, and mutual aid, there is a side that harms others and benefits oneself at the expense of directly or indirectly hurting others, and this side is precisely the mainstream in most historical periods and geographical regions. The exception is a win-win situation for all parties involved. Although modern democracy and the rule of law mechanism and civilized education have played an extremely important role in suppressing all of this, they cannot prevent all of this from happening. People in the progressive camp are also people living in society, and naturally it is impossible to completely escape the clutches of the evil side of human nature and social existence. Even if some people can overcome it, there is no doubt that there will be some people who have not overcome it, and what is exposed is only a part of those who have not overcome it.
All these evils have existed widely in human society for a long time, and they are far more common and serious in ancient and modern times than in modern times. It's just that in the age of inequality, backwardness, darkness, and the vast majority of people struggling for basic survival (such an age accounts for 99.99% of human history after evolution into humans), these are "ignored" and "used to" ", "Patience", "Silence" and other thoughts and methods have reduced their influence to almost zero. Only when the above-mentioned mistakes and crimes reach a very serious level, or are accidentally exposed in a particularly obvious way due to certain factors, and when some forces specifically mention them out of need, will they be denounced , the party who committed the crime will be held accountable and the reputation of the party will be damaged (if the person is dead, there is no way to pursue the responsibility physically, only the damage to the reputation), and such harsh conditions can be condemned and held accountable It is only in the recent 0.1% or even shorter historical period of human society. Under the repression and shaping of such a long historical process, the tendency and impulse to commit and make such mistakes and crimes have been further carved into human nature, the existence and reality of human society (of course I am Know that biological evolution and psychological evolution, natural evolution and social evolution are not exactly the same (although not completely unrelated)).
What happened side by side with these man-made mistakes and evils was that people and human society produced and developed a splendid civilization. Civilization was relatively barbaric in the early and middle stages (based on the present), but there were more and more civilized elements and fewer and fewer barbaric elements (of course there were huge twists and turns in the middle). Marked by the emergence and prosperity of ancient Greece, ancient Rome and the "four major civilizations", humanity, democracy, rule of law, equality, justice and rationality began to become the direction of human pursuit and the core content of civilization. The Renaissance, the Enlightenment, and the French Revolution greatly sublimated the core of the above civilizations. A series of politics and movements, system construction, and economic development after World War II pushed human civilization to a new peak. Today in the 21st century, the moral standards and legal standards of human society and the practical requirements for these standards have been improved unprecedentedly.
However, those errors and crimes rooted in human nature and social existence have not disappeared. However, those man-made and natural factors that ignore, cover up, and endure these mistakes and crimes are much less, especially in those countries and regions with developed political economy and social freedom. As a result, behaviors such as using power for personal gain, sexual harassment, dereliction of duty, soliciting relationships for profit through the back door, and denying related mistakes and crimes have all become behaviors that should not be done, and must be exposed if they are done, and must be hated, criticized, and held accountable if they are exposed. Behavior. However, human nature makes it very difficult to completely overcome these. Even if a mature democratic country ruled by law has various prevention and warning mechanisms, people still tend to break through these prevention mechanisms.
The limitations of democracy and the rule of law and the deep-rooted errors and crimes caused by structural, ideological, and habitual
In addition, even in countries with democracy, the rule of law, and material abundance, there are still a large number of problems in social structure, fundamental ideology, and cultural construction. These structural things include cultural traditions, living habits, religion, race, sex, and gender. , labor and occupation and other social fields and social relations. This kind of social structure and ideological construction, on the contrary, makes those things that are wrong and crimes from the perspective of universal values and basic morality, and even things that are expressly prohibited by law, become logical instead of doing things without making publicity, and not making related mistakes and crimes. Crimes (even if they do not cover up and agree with related mistakes and crimes), public accusations and exposures are contrary to common sense, hinder the normal functioning of society, and affect the interests of others. These Chinese people should have a lot of experience, but in fact, developed countries also exist widely, but the degree and level are different. ", but this "water" is deeper, so deep that it is almost never bottomed out).
Under the influence of such a background and situation, a large number of behaviors that exist widely in society, but are explicitly prohibited or not allowed by public morality. Just like Cao Guo made a certificate for his daughter to go to school through the relationship and helped write a thesis. From a traditional perspective, it is human nature. What's more, helping to do it is not necessarily a forgery, at least not necessarily a complete forgery. Ordinary people may also ask others to help write papers. As long as they are not seen, how can they prove it? Roh Moo-hyun knew about the corruption of his relatives but did not report or "cut seats", and he could also use "relatives to conceal each other" as a defense. As for whether he has benefited from the money obtained by his relatives' corruption, whether the benefit is a crime, and whether his relatives' corruption has at least objectively used his influence and relationship, that is also a muddled account, and it makes sense. In these two cases, is it really easy to distinguish between normal family relationships and the use of power for personal gain? It can be distinguished, but in reality, can anyone abide by it so rigidly? As for relative corruption, is it easy to distinguish between corruption proceeds and normal income? Are personal gifts and bribes really distinct? The mouse lives next to the barn, can it hold back a bite? Would it be possible for other people, such as those angry critics, to be completely upright and honest, to distinguish between public and private, and even kill relatives? The Hillary email incident is justifiable. It is impossible for a person to strictly abide by the rules all his life. Even professional secret agents are negligent and show their feet. People who are on duty alone in important positions have never napped, played with mobile phones, or violated the law. Does the program go off the job for a while? Most people who have important jobs or even confidential jobs have never used their private mobile phones, mailboxes, etc. to discuss business matters?
The issue of sexual harassment and sexual assault is even more complicated. In a patriarchal society, considerations are all male-oriented, the initiative and the right to speak are on the male side, and women are the passive receivers. In such an environment, women's autonomy is small, and the right to interpret emotions is owned by men. Of course, what is normal male-female interaction and what is harassment, even if both parties have not lied, concealed and distorted the facts as the premise, sometimes it is indeed difficult to distinguish. The relationship between men and women and love are inherently complex and infinitely changing issues. If the rules are too strict, on the one hand, it will not be implemented, and on the other hand, it will be almost like an Islamic fundamentalist, or at least it will destroy the normal relationship between the sexes. Also, liking and sexual impulse towards the opposite sex (some people are towards the same sex or bisexuality) are rooted in people's physiology and psychology, and no one is Liu Xiahui. While most people know and abide by certain boundaries, different people have different standards for exactly where the boundaries lie. Not only do different people and different cultures have different standards, but under the same legal system in the same culture, the way each violator and victim is judged and dealt with is also different. The pressure and even threats that Cuomo and his subordinates put on the victims are actually the habitual actions of the perpetrators and their relatives and friends in modern society to treat the victims from ancient times to the present, just like the habit of office workers clocking in at 9 o'clock. What's more, from a certain point of view, compared with the brutal confrontation between men by these male politicians, sexual harassment is really "not a big deal". They treat men more aggressively, less politely and even viciously than women. . Can their men switch to full respect for women in a sudden while they are fighting cruelly? Could this disrespect be devoid of a sexual element? (Some of the above words are indeed not politically correct or even very wrong, but they are a common reality)
In addition, it is the necessity of protecting important people and the comparison of merits and demerits. Although "all men are created equal" has gradually become an openly acknowledged consensus since the French Revolution, it is not actually the case. Since ancient times, there has never been true and complete equality, complete equal treatment and equal treatment. People generally believe that important people who have made great or even great contributions should not ruin their future and be imprisoned because of some "small mistakes". It does make sense emotionally, or makes sense from a certain point of view. In history and social development, some figures have made outstanding contributions, even huge and irreplaceable (or it is inferred that other people at the same time may not be able to make it according to the situation). This contribution is of great significance to the national economy and the people's livelihood. There are also some people who are not great men or leaders, but they are social elites, and they are or will get high positions and are very important to the people of the country and society. If they are punished like ordinary people because of something or a few things that are enough to go to jail or affect their future, it will ruin their future, and they will not be able to continue to contribute to the country and the people, and the impact will be far away. Far greater than the damage of its crime. Moreover, for such important figures, there may indeed be opponents who specifically seek faults to discredit them, or even frame them in order to destroy them. If such people are punished for violating the law, it may indeed lead to the failure of important work and the failure to achieve various political, economic, military and cultural goals.
Just like Li Guang, a famous general in the Han Dynasty who killed Ba Lingwei because of personal grievances, if Li Guang was executed in accordance with the law, his merits would be greatly reduced. The northern front line against the Huns lost a general in advance, and I don’t know how many Han troops and civilians will suffer more from the Huns. Invasion and death; Guan Yu met Liu Bei Taoyuan after killing his enemies and fleeing, and then made a great feat. To put it bluntly, he was a murderer who fled in fear of crime. He should be kidnapped to the government to conform to the law and morality. It also lost the reputation of Megatron Huaxia's achievements and Yibo Yuntian. Martin Luther King, a black civil rights activist in the United States, prostituted (he still prostituted white women. Although this matter is controversial, it should be true according to multiple sources of information), if the current moral requirements and political correctness standards are followed, he may have to end his political career. Or go low-key. There is also Rousseau's self-exposed behavior. Even if people forgive him now, it is impossible for him to get any formal honors and important positions.
In addition, the "strict requirements" for progressives such as Roh Moo-hyun, Cao Guo, Park Won-soon, and Cuomo who flaunt moral politics will also lead to fewer and fewer politicians adhering to strong moral and political principles and propositions, especially no longer Such a strong sense of justice and pursuit of high standards. Because if you flaunt and set up a flag like this, but you can't fully do it, then once things are revealed, you will suffer ten times and a hundred times more damage than ordinary people who commit related mistakes and crimes. The higher you stand, the harder you fall. "It's always cold at the top", and those who aspire to hold high the banner of morality and politics will be disheartened, and politicians who don't want to be so strict with their own standards will no longer be "morally kidnapped". In this way, corruption and dirty politics will quietly return. Using power for personal gain, obtaining illegal income, collusion of interests, sexual assault and exploitation of female subordinates, dishonesty and double standards will become the normal state of high-level politics again, and corruption will be everywhere. People in such an environment will of course "understand" each other, leaving room for colleagues and even political opponents, and they will no longer be so harshly held accountable. Let go of the moral shackles, but also escape the legal shackles, why not do it? This is not a fantasy. South Korea's previous political norm was like this, and the United States is not clean. These are what are happening at the top political levels in most countries in the world, and will continue to happen in the future.
So, is it right to tolerate and acquiesce in these mistakes and crimes committed by these people?
"Existence is reasonable"? To protect perpetrators or victims, stability or justice?
of course not. The use of power for personal gain, exploitation and oppression, bullying and infringement, and retaliation should never be "existence is reasonable". For these people and behaviors, the blessing of power and the cover of social structures and cultural traditions are not grounds for exoneration. To some extent, it makes the harm deeper, longer and heavier, and makes the victims more helpless, hopeless and numb. For the same type of mistakes and crimes, the benefits to the perpetrator and the objective harm and loss to the victim will generally be greater than that of the "lone wolf". For example, robbery and theft, in most cases, the profits are hundreds of thousands of dollars each time, but as long as the power is slightly manipulated, the gains are more than ten thousand yuan, and some profits are even hard to buy. And this kind of selfishness and privilege, the damage to others, especially the hidden damage, is more than "little" like being robbed once, and it may ruin the future and fate of others (because the sum of resources is certain, if you gain benefits in a non-constructive way, then this If someone gains benefits, someone must lose). It's just that this kind of thing is like an indirect tax, which is not easily felt or acquiesced because of the inability to change it.
Of course, at least some people in developed countries have become sober because they have received general education and universal education. Just like Cao Guo seeking profit for his daughter and Cui Shunshi seeking profit for his daughter caused hundreds of thousands of people to protest by candlelight in South Korea, among them were many college and middle school students and their parents. South Korea's college entrance examination is also very intense. Candidates study hard for more than ten years just to get a title on the gold list. That's why they are very angry when they see powerful people such as Cao Guo and Park Geun-hye seeking benefits for themselves or their relatives, friends and children, and using their privileges to help them go to college. Is their anger justified? Shouldn't they call out to defend their own future and destiny? There are also tax evasion and illegal gains, which are also huge profits. The illegal gains lead to the reduction of other legal operators and the government's fiscal revenue. Aren't these losses still borne by ordinary people in the end? Bullying and infringement are also more unscrupulous with the help of power and special environments, and victims have no way to escape. Many people in South Korea can empathize with Wu Judun's sexual assault and injury to his subordinates. Only Park Won-soon, Oh Ju-dun, and Ahn Hee-jeong were noticed, but in fact there are probably tens of thousands or even more similar offenders in various work organizations in South Korea, and there are countless similar violations every year. In South Korea's highly differentiated society, there are obvious distinctions between superiors and inferiors, and there are many bullying and infringements by power. The prevalence of mental illness and suicide rate in South Korea are very high (a quarter of the population suffers from various types and degrees of mental illness, and the suicide rate ranks first in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, which is composed of some developed countries and a small number of developing countries) Economic Club) is the first member of the Economic Club), which has a lot to do with the prevalence of this bullying and abuse culture, and it also shows how harmful these bullying and abuse are.
As for the statement that important figures and elites need protection, there are completely opposite reasons to show that such people need stricter requirements. Because such characters have great power and influence, their illegal behaviors benefit more and hurt more and more widely, and they have an important exemplary role in the handling of their crimes and have benchmarking significance for similar cases. If Park Yuanchun, Wu Judun, Cao Guo and others can pardon and tolerate, what about the lower levels? What about other contributors? Issue a "Gold Medal of Exemption"? Who should be tolerated and who should be treated lightly and in accordance with the law? What should I do if the upper and lower efficiencies are effective? Is it the selective law enforcement of "only state officials are allowed to set fires, and the common people are not allowed to light lamps"? Do people with the same crime and different crimes treat them differently and distort the interpretation of the law? Is the rule of law bowing to vested interests and ugly conventions and realities? In the preamble of the South Korean Constitution, "Swear to justice, humanity, and love of fellow citizens to consolidate national unity, break all social abuses and injustices, and further consolidate the basic order of freedom and democracy on the basis of self-discipline and mutual coordination. In politics Equal opportunities for everyone in all fields such as economics, society, culture, etc., so that everyone can exert their highest capabilities. While enjoying freedom and rights, they can fulfill their responsibilities and obligations. Internally, we hope to improve the national level in a balanced way. life, and externally dedicated to the enduring peace of the world and the common prosperity of mankind, so as to guarantee forever the safety, liberty and happiness of us and our children and grandchildren.” Isn’t that nonsense? Some countries can ignore the constitution and all laws, and can say one thing and do another, but democratic countries ruled by law cannot.
The reason why modern democratic politics emphasizes the restriction of public power and the protection of private rights is to prevent those who use power and the system to seek personal gain and do evil. But in addition to power, social structure, cultural traditions, customs and habits, non-public organizations, etc. are also a kind of "power". Modern democratic politics has a lot of restrictions on power, but it does not restrict the latter types enough, and even indulges other types of "potentials" by restricting power (of course, not restricting power may also make other "potentials" Can take advantage of the "potential" of power, double "potential" or even multiple "potential" to do evil).
Just like the issue of sexual assault, non-consensual sexual behavior is very common in reality, and there are indeed false accusations or complicated incidents. Moreover, if the perpetrator is convicted, his life is likely to be ruined. But how many women have been destroyed by rape? How much is the psychological and physical damage to it? There are a lot of relevant researches, but they are always ignored by the public. A few days ago, I also read the experience of being sexually assaulted in middle school written by a well-known feminist, which was shocking. Is it necessary to let the victim cry for the rest of his life in order to protect the future and destiny of the perpetrator? Of course, some people say that this feminist is still living a good life and even becoming a social elite? Not to mention that she often suffers from trauma, including taking medication for mental illness (although her illness may not be due to this or an aspect of sexual problems), in fact, she is lucky to have a relatively successful life like her, and there are many victims. As a result, the victim sinks into madness and even commits suicide. So the normal functioning, stability and harmony of our society must be at the expense of hundreds of millions of rape victims around the world and tens of millions of rape victims in China every year? What's more, this kind of connivance will only make more people let go of their courage to violate women, and indulgence is encouragement. State agencies and social environments indulge sexual crimes for various reasons, which in itself is shaping and strengthening rape culture, forming a vicious circle. Should such a world be for women? What's more, let's not talk about harm, just for women's independence and autonomy, the existence of sexual assault should not be tolerated. The awakening of women lies in their understanding and realization of becoming independent individuals with complete personality and autonomy like men, rather than existing as objects and tools in a patriarchal society.
Therefore, in the eyes of people in China and many less civilized countries, the laws, values and their practices that are fussy, inconceivable, and destabilizing, that is, the attitudes and outcomes of the incidents involving Park Yuanchun, Cao Guo, Cuomo, etc. Not surprising anymore.
Epitaph and passport: the progressive camp "digged its own grave", and the conservative camp was victorious
But in today's social environment, where "enforcement must be strictly enforced" and "equal treatment" is emphasized, the progressive camp will pay a heavy price. I have already mentioned two points. First, the progressive camp’s emphasis on moral politics, especially social equality, integrity, and protection of the weak, makes them face more moral criticism when they are involved in self-seeking and infringement. Second, human nature and social reality lead them to commit crimes. There is an important third point, that is, their personal values, especially their adherence to integrity, put them in a desperate situation.
Integrity is the principle and creed of being a person and doing things respected and emphasized by all nations and civilizations from ancient times to the present. Integrity is very important to human civilization. But in reality, lies and breach of trust are the norm. And the more this is the case, the more integrity is valued, which leads to more flaunting by all parties. However, due to various practical and subjective reasons, many people cannot or can not be honest, or at least cannot be completely or even mostly honest, or honest on major issues. When the dishonesty is exposed, the dishonest person will use various methods to justify or remain silent, or simply deny the dishonesty (this is another kind of dishonesty). Of course, dishonest people are not dishonest all their lives, and honest people may not be honest in every word and everything all their lives. Dishonesty has both evil and good purposes, as well as self-protection as a last resort. Human beings continue to emphasize the importance of integrity in true and false, but they have not realized the establishment of a highly honest society for a long time. In politics, it is even more intriguing. Although honesty exists, it is scarce. Self-interest always trumps honesty in terms of major interests.
However, with the development of political civilization, the voice for the establishment of moral politics is getting stronger and stronger. Especially in a democratic system, more emphasis is placed on the necessity of honesty. The various propositions and principles adhered to by the progressive camp, such as justice, equality, openness and transparency, social supervision, and protection of the disadvantaged, all require honesty as the foundation, and the goal is to build an honest and moral society. This all requires progressives to be honest and consistent. The moral sentiment and sense of justice of progressives do not allow themselves to be the kind of people they hate and hate, including of course dishonest people. As mentioned earlier, they also tend to emphasize strict self-discipline and lenient treatment of others. Of course, this does not mean that progressives can do all the above, but important political backbones, especially those national leaders and heads of important departments, local officials and important human rights activists, must strive to do so. If you can do it, you will become a political star that everyone expects. People support them because they affirm their character, especially their integrity and sense of justice.
Therefore, when they make mistakes or commit crimes for various reasons, they cannot lie, quibble, excuse themselves with lies or clever words like other people, especially their political opponents, but must admit their mistakes and even crimes realistically. They will not bite back, threaten and retaliate against whistleblowers and victims like those villains. They did not prepare the relevant dark means from the beginning, neither psychological preparation, ideological preparation, knowledge preparation, nor practical preparation (it is not that they are unable to make these preparations but that they do not want to prepare). If they lie, they will not only be sorry for their own beliefs, but also for the praise and expectations of their supporters, and let alone all kinds of direct or indirect victims. Therefore, after committing a crime, they have to admit the crime honestly and have the courage to take corresponding responsibilities. They gave up those dirty methods and led themselves to the altar, which means they automatically gave up all possibilities of evading punishment (including public opinion judgment and influence).
In this way, the progressive camp must often lose stars and generals stumble. In fact, there are many incidents. If they refuse to admit it, or try to make use of various legal and system loopholes to make excuses, even if they do not resort to cruel means such as retaliation, they may still be able to get away with it. Just like the issue of sexual assault, it is very easy to get rid of the crime by "not admitting" or justifying the relationship between boyfriend and girlfriend. Even if he is convicted, if he bites the bullet and tells his supporters that he has been wronged, politically persecuted and politically retaliated, many people will believe it (they don’t say that and even admit the crime themselves, there are so many people, especially the Chinese, who excuse them , huh), Taiwan Chen Shui-bian is an example. But their refusal to do so is probably not because some people say that they abandon the car to protect the handsome man (of course, objectively, it has such a role), but because their beliefs and moral integrity do not allow them to do so.
It is not only integrity but also guilt that brings them down. He has pursued fairness and justice, innocence, and helping the disadvantaged all his life, but he has done things that are sorry for the faith, the people, and especially the direct victims. The blows can be imagined. A person who truly loses his conscience will not feel guilty or repent, even if the crime he committed is completely malicious and heinous; a person with a conscience, even if he commits a crime with reasonable and forgivable motives, and what he does is not too evil, will not The inability to come to terms with the crimes one has committed can cause more pain than the person it inflicts. So they will choose to confess their crimes frankly, or even commit suicide.
Therefore, even if one out of a hundred people in the progressive camp is guilty, that person is easily exposed; even if ten out of a hundred people in the conservative or reactionary camp are guilty (even in some countries, all members of a hundred people are guilty), only one or even all of them may be exposed. crime". The proportion of criminals exposed by the two camps is the same. The progressive camp has as many exposed criminals (limited to those important political figures and not ordinary employees), while the conservative and reactionary camp only exposed the tip of the iceberg, one in ten or even a hundred. one of.
Some outstanding people in the progressive camp (or considered outstanding people before committing crimes) used their future, destiny and even their lives to confirm the famous saying that "meanness is the passport of the mean, and nobility is the epitaph of the noble." They have become experiments and victims of practicing moral politics, honesty politics, and clean politics.
These, at least the Chinese say that the vast majority of Chinese people will not understand, or after understanding, they will not understand in the direction that these "victims" want people to understand, or even understand and act in the opposite direction.
How China today treats the mistakes and crimes involved in these scandals and why
Why do you say China? The main purpose of my writing all this is to analyze and describe foreign progressive camps such as South Korea and the United States, as well as various political and social issues, but the most fundamental purpose is of course for China (the content of the previous sentence is also for China) .
The mistakes and crimes committed by these people in the progressive camp, and all similar mistakes and crimes committed by these people in the progressive camp, are not considered a big deal at all in China. Or, only under the deliberate creation of certain forces or even many forces, such things will be taken seriously and even infinitely magnified, and eventually become a stain that cannot be cleaned in one's life (of course, if the current situation and environment change, it is not a stain) .
This is so for several reasons. First, there are too many social problems in China, and the suffering of the people is too great, which makes these problems "out of line" and causes the people to be insensitive. The political, economic and social environment in China today is very bad and continues to deteriorate. For example, the monopoly of power in politics, the rule of man dominating the rule of law, the substantive universal suffrage and representative system have disappeared, the expansion of bureaucratic capitalism in the economy, the disparity between the rich and the poor, and the inability to guarantee the livelihood of the common people. Lost faith and lost direction, various social conflicts are also very intense. In addition, it must be understood that China has only emerged from the catastrophe of the Cultural Revolution for more than 40 years, and the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution has reappeared recently, and the trauma and impact of the catastrophe are far from being eliminated. Under such a general environment, "scandals" like the US and South Korea are nothing at all, and people will not really care.
Second, because this kind of problem is too common and involves too many people, if the punishment is serious, hundreds of millions of people in China will have to be arrested, especially the vested interests are almost wiped out. From within the system to public institutions, from state-owned enterprises to private enterprises, from key departments to Qingshui Yamen, whoever has a little power is clean (it is not ruled out that there are, but there must be a big backer, so there is no need to collude, but in the final analysis Or are they colluding with each other)? Some departments have no power and are not clean at all. The absence of corruption and bribery does not mean that there is no illegal income (all "grey income" is actually illegal income) and all kinds of selfishness. Which private enterprise is not attached to large and small backgrounds? How many have fully paid their taxes? As for sexual assault and gender discrimination, that is too much and too common. It's just that in this cruel reality, many women have to "voluntarily", and they can only survive and develop if they are dependent on men to varying degrees (again, unless they have a background and sufficient capital to be independent). Under such circumstances, being harassed and violated is sometimes a "good thing". So how to check and deal with this situation everywhere?
Third, habit has become natural. These behaviors have changed from unreasonable to "reasonable" in today's China, that is, the so-called "hidden rules". part, so there is sufficient "reasonability". What lasts longer and is more deeply rooted in the hearts of the people than systems and laws are culture, religion and traditional practices. Originally, China has accumulated a large number of old customs, old culture, and old morals since ancient times, and the political, economic, and cultural development of modern China is seriously deformed (the Manchu and Qing ethnic colonization, Japanese invasion and occupation, and the CCP’s rule are all very evil and distorted. Only the period of the Republic of China relatively normal), so they have not accepted the influence and baptism of normal modern civilization, especially the shaping of democracy and the rule of law. Therefore, things that are not allowed in normal modern democracies have been regarded as very reasonable phenomena in China.
Fourth, in the above-mentioned situations, most people need to participate in the use of power for personal gain, violation of laws and regulations, collusion and attachment, and some women have various levels of relationships when they are not completely in favor, etc., in order to survive in such an environment , Winning in various competitive struggles (also unless there are backgrounds and capital that stay away or are willing to go downstream). If you don't, you'll be knocked out or at least a relative loser. Moreover, doing so will be regarded as a threat by the collaborators, not only will there be no good rewards, but even worse.
Therefore, people in China are used to these, and must accept and get used to them, and all participants must maintain these ugly existences. Only when you have participated in the ugliness can you be considered to have handed in the "Certificate of Voting", and everyone is "one of your own", otherwise how can you be restrained and blackmailed?
Of course, this is not to say that similar scandals will not be exposed in China. On the contrary, such scandals are often exposed, but the motives, methods, influences, handling methods and results of the exposure are different from modern democracies (of course there are some similarities). The exposure in modern democratic countries is mostly motivated by individual rights protection, while in China it is out of power struggle, interest competition, and retaliation; the former usually sends it to the media, resorts to law, and finds public welfare organizations, while the latter generally spreads it in the circle, Look for allies and backers to form factions and fight against dissidents; the former will generally have a major social public welfare impact and inspire more people to defend their rights, while the latter will only promote the "falling" or failure of some individuals and the victory of others, without public welfare There is only self-interest; at least part of the former will be judged in accordance with the law, public order, good customs, professionalism and neutrality, and some will allow the weak to get justice and compensation. That's all for the spoils later. (Of course what I said about the positiveness of the exposure of modern democratic countries is only to say that some are not all, and this part is not lacking in various complex and dark elements, but China has very few)
However, this does not prevent the Chinese from caring about these scandals exposed by democratic countries. On the contrary, at least some people "care" quite a lot. For reasons such as maintaining the superiority of China's system and safeguarding their own vested interests, they need to vilify the West. and vilify the democratic system, so these scandals will be magnified, inspected and disseminated, and various criticisms will be made to prove the hypocrisy and uselessness of democracy and the ugliness of "Western-style" democratic countries. In fact, this proves that democratic countries have the freedom to defend rights, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the emphasis on human rights. These dissemination and criticism may not be unaware, but they still have to disseminate and criticize in this way, after all, not everyone can think independently. Of course, there are also more insidious motives, which are to warn people who also belong to vested interests not to support democracy and the rule of law, and not to learn from the West, otherwise they will lose their vested interests and even go to jail.
What about China after democratization? Can progressives emerge and survive?
This is the status quo in China under authoritarianism, but it cannot exist forever. Sooner or later, there will be a day of transformation, towards democracy and freedom. At that time, how will China and its people treat the mistakes and crimes in the aforementioned scandals? How to deal with the kind of "progressives" defined above that may appear?
I am very pessimistic.
During China's transition to democracy, it is certain that it will not be able to eradicate various ills quickly, and will experience long-term political, economic, ideological and social pains. As for the mistakes and crimes involved in the aforementioned scandals, except for some that are easily eradicated at the technical level, most of them will continue to exist for a long time and pervasively (and those that are extremely easy to eradicate may not necessarily be eradicated, even if democracy is established). The numbers of people involved in these mistakes and crimes are still as large as they are in today's authoritarian era.
Under such circumstances, people with vested interests, that is, the upper middle class of society, who use power for personal gain, break the law, obtain income illegally, and bully the weak will unite to protect and support each other tacitly, and maintain these illegal activities. The continuation of the conduct and the impunity of those involved. As for why, one is because the social environment at that time, such as the system and laws, ideology, and social structure, still made these wrong things and even crimes more beneficial than harmful, and it was better to survive than not to do them. Second, even if there are changes in democratic freedoms, they will continue to defend their vested interests. The first point has already been mentioned before, and the second point will be mainly discussed.
Many liberals or those who are pro-Western believe that democracy and freedom mean moving towards the light and solving fundamental problems. This is simply not true. The type, quality, and tendency of democracy in different countries and regions are very different. Even in terms of performance alone, the differences between many democratic countries (regions) are greater than the differences between many democratic and autocratic countries (regions). The same democratic political system has different effects in different countries. Most democracies in the world today are immature and incomplete. Although these countries have some basic structures and core contents required for democracy, such as universal suffrage, judicial independence, nationalization of the military, freedom of speech and press, etc., the society is still full of In all kinds of ugliness such as inequality and injustice, those with vested interests still dominate the state power, control various resources such as wealth, connections, knowledge, and control the mainstream discourse power. They can adapt to the new political system better and faster than the public, and they are more capable and skilled in using new laws and systems, maintaining and even expanding the vested interests of the autocratic period. If they want to protect their vested interests, they must preserve their previous privileges. If you can't use power for personal gain, corrupt, partisan and dissident, and bully the weak, you won't be able to maintain privileges and the benefits that privileges bring.
In another political article, I mentioned the complexity of China's "non-governmental forces", the profound internal contradictions among the people, and the stubbornness of those with vested interests:
There are profound contradictions within China's "non-governmental forces", some of which are even irreconcilable, greater than the contradictions with the authoritarian regime. Different classes, different regions, and different interest groups have huge differences in interests and ideologies. For example, when Mr. Xu Zhiyong's Gongmeng was not disbanded, it promoted equal rights in education. The strongest opposition was not the authoritarian regime, but the household registration residents in Beijing and Shanghai. Residents with registered permanent residence in Beijing and Shanghai and migrant workers are all "non-governmental forces", but they have conflicts that are close to life and death.
From the reform and opening up to Deng Xiaoping’s southern tour, and then to China’s integration into the globalization process, China has cultivated a group of “get rich first” vested interests in decades, and is or has realized intergenerational inheritance, and the interests are gradually consolidated. The status has become clearer, and their class affiliation has also stabilized, forming a huge group of refined egoists who seek stability and stability.
For these middle and upper middle classes who are in a relatively favorable position, residents of megacities such as Beijing and Shanghai, members of some state-owned enterprises and public institutions (such as three barrels of oil, medical care, tobacco, railways and other industry groups), members of the "Industrial Party" of Kochi Institute of Technology (Some of the above groups overlap)... They would rather choose to cooperate with the CCP than to give up their relative privileges; they would rather have no democracy and political freedom and be exploited by the upper class, while depriving those who are weaker than them, and maintain a higher status compared to the common people. Superior status and privileges do not allow everyone to be equal. This is not only the social Darwinism value of these exquisite self-interested and selfish people who are accustomed to the law of the jungle, but also determined by their precise calculations. At least from their point of view, becoming a "second-class person (or "advantageous group")" inferior to the core privileged class to oppress the "third-class people" and "fourth-class people" below... is also more important than equality for everyone. Good for them (at least economically and in their value judgment).
……
Members of those "advantageous groups" hold huge resources such as wealth, knowledge, connections, and voice, and are far more capable of promoting change than the workers and peasants. But since he/they are enjoying a relatively superior life under the rule of Xi Jinping, they lack the yearning for freedom and democracy (authoritarian dictatorship, brainwashing education against freedom and democracy are second, and more importantly, interests. To some extent, it can even be said that , they have extra "freedom" in a non-democratic environment. For example, under autocracy and rule of law, these vested interests are more likely to engage in unspoken rules for profit, act recklessly, and even break laws and crimes. , members of the "advantageous group" under the system that encourages the weak to eat the strong, it is easier to grab wealth in daily work and life, the allocation of public resources is also more inclined to them, and they can expand their living and development space by any means...), what do they have? Motivation to choose change?
The relationship between these "advantageous groups" and the masses of workers and peasants is largely like the relationship between whites and blacks in South Africa during apartheid. As mentioned earlier, they even live better under the dictatorship, they can enjoy cheap labor, household registration privileges, relatively good public security, relatively good public services (education, medical care, housing, pensions), why do they choose to lose their relative privileges , and even face the risks of war and property redistribution, to promote changes in China? Especially in the current situation where gradual change is impossible, they will not approve of revolution and "down with the old society (today's society)". For the relatively disadvantaged, the Xi Jinping era is the "worst era" in terms of dignity and rights, but for these "advantaged groups", it is precisely the "best era". (Moreover, many of these "advantageous groups" have the ability to emigrate to developed countries or live abroad for a long time. They can not only fight for power and profit in mainland China, but also can enjoy Western democracy, freedom and rule of law. As for whether China is democratic , whether other people are free or not, they don't care)
……
In fact, even if totalitarianism ends and democracy and freedom are really due to various factors, these vested interest groups will definitely do everything possible to protect these vested interests and relative superiority. What I said in the quotation is that they are unwilling to be democratic, and that democracy will cause them to lose their privileges. I just said that compared with authoritarian totalitarianism, I intend to emphasize the stubborn conservatism of vested interest groups. In fact, even if democratic politics is implemented, they still have many means to continue their privileges. They also oppose the abolition of the establishment within the system (the huge non-basic wage income accompanying the establishment), life tenure of civil servants, monopoly of state-owned enterprises, household registration system (institutional differences between urban and rural areas, regional social security and public welfare), and the continued maintenance of order over freedom, The social structure, social culture, related systems, laws and practices in which stability maintenance is higher than rights protection, elites are more valuable than ordinary people, and privileges are higher than equal rights. They don't want to really say that "the prince breaks the law and the same crime as the common people", but secretly advocates that he is superior to others and "cannot be punished by a doctor", thinking that he is noble and delicate while the common people are humble and low.
This can be seen from the political orientation of vested interests in China. You don't need to go deep into them, just through the little thoughts and deeds they reveal, you can understand their political orientation under the democratic system. The Chinese social platform "Zhihu" is a gathering place for high-skilled elites. Although not all high-skilled elites here, the proportion is quite high, especially the more active respondents basically have superior education/position/family background/background. It is not an exaggeration to say that the wealth of intellectual status is in the top 1% of China. The various remarks here can reflect the value orientation of vested interests, especially the younger generation of vested interests.
At least in the five years from 2015 to 2020, social Darwinism is the absolute mainstream of Zhihu. These people extremely hate the "white left", oppose equal rights, oppose fair redistribution, oppose women's rights, oppose political correctness, and oppose sympathy for the weak...and support the law of the jungle, survival of the fittest, unscrupulous, efficiency first, a poor society, nationalism, heavyweights, etc. The most typical example is that around 2016, he overwhelmingly supported Trump and the Republican Party in the US presidential election and US political issues, while extremely loathing Hillary and opposing the Democratic Party. Their support for Trump is not largely based on listening to rumors and anti-intellectualism like white southerners and conservative Christians in the United States. These people will never believe in the "QAnon" conspiracy theory with their level of knowledge. It is out of values and the interests behind it. They hate Hillary Clinton, who advocates equal rights, but agree with Trump's anti-political correctness, contempt for honesty and fairness, and contempt for the weak. Regarding Kavanaugh's alleged sexual assault incident, he also fully supported Kavanaugh, and tried his best to deny Kavanaugh's alleged sexual assault. He was extremely resentful of the cynicism and cynicism of Yale University teachers and students who jointly opposed Kavanaugh's election as a judge. This is because Kavanaugh, as a judge, always supports the strong and vested interests in various judgments, such as always protecting the interests of large companies and capitalists, standing on the side of power, and making judgments that are not conducive to labor, women, disabled people, LGBT community.
Everything they do and think is contrary to the values enshrined by progressivism and the progressive camp. These people have been immersed in the harsh political, economic, cultural and social environment all year round. Only by being cruel, indifferent, dishonest, selfish at the expense of others, worshiping the superior and trampling on the inferior, and being good at acting, can they survive and develop. Just as Mr. Qian Liqun defined "exquisite egoists", "They are highly intelligent, secular, sophisticated, good at acting, know how to cooperate, and are better at using the system to achieve their goals. Once such people gain power, they will be more harmful than ordinary corrupt officials. "In fact, it is not "once you have power", but has extensively grasped a variety of large and small powers or positions. These people are not fanatical believers in ethnicity, religion or ideology, and everything is based on interests (of course not necessarily material interests) , spiritual pleasure and achieving certain goals are also interests) as the first, and very calmly do evil, take advantage of loopholes and evade sanctions, lie, shirk responsibility, double standards, which is exactly the same as the progressives I mentioned earlier such as Roh Moo-hyun, The beliefs of Park Yuanchun and others are opposite to the core principles they insist on.
Just like what Chinese officials say on the stage now, it is completely opposite to what they did, but they don’t have the slightest guilt (of course, some people may have it). Frustrated by a higher position and complete freedom from being controlled by others; with meager nominal wages, substantial real income and various privileges, civil servants implement all kinds of policies that are obviously wrong or even harmful, follow the rules in everything, and are indifferent to the masses. Then you can still blame the stupidity of the superiors and the ignorance of the people, and pick it up by yourself; the special constitution of the military and police (let’s call it that) is the biggest shield for the survival of the regime, and it is the confidence of this evil regime. They also feel that their hard work, blood and sweat are not easy, and there are many unspeakable things that make them feel aggrieved, but they never think that their interests can be damaged and they should really be equal to the people; court judge Yue Yue Year after year, they judge cases in violation of reason and law (of course I am not talking about all cases), turning a blind eye to obvious factual evidence, politics, maintenance of stability, relationships, performance... can all overwhelm basic right and wrong. But they can still pretend to be the incarnation of justice in a dignified manner, and speak the awe-inspiring words of the rule of law and justice in a high-sounding manner, without committing suicide because of how many people's lives have been ruined and how many bad people they have helped; Collecting all kinds of bribes, strongly resisting the medical reform and unwilling to reduce even a part of the vested interests, on the other hand, strongly urging the government and the police to crack down on "medical trouble" or radical medical rights defenders according to law; People who truly believe in things are used to it and even get pleasure from it; some fairly enlightened residents in Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Northeast and other places (there is no need to comment on those who are completely shameless) also often criticize all kinds of ugly phenomena, systems and policies, and even autocracy itself, but if Some people want to criticize their household registration privileges, local protectionism, and discrimination against foreigners (not just discrimination in words and ideology, which is not necessarily serious, but discriminatory treatment when it is related to actual interests), and they must promote departmental reforms, state-owned enterprise restructuring, To clean up the problems left over from history, immediately and resolutely oppose, either think that enjoying privileges should be taken for granted, or blame everything on the entire regime and the central government, do not admit that you have participated in oppression and exploitation, do not think that you have any responsibility and obligation to give up privileges, and even He also got cheap and said that he was the most disadvantaged. They also criticize each other from time to time, but in the final analysis they are still the vested interests of the same camp.
These people especially admire the "law and order" emphasized by the Republican Party of the United States and Trump, but only abide by the part of the "law and order" that is beneficial to them, or simply the "law and order" that they participated in formulating out of their own interests , the degree and harm of breaking the law and disrupting order by oneself are much worse (compared with the gains of various robbery, theft, and rape criminals, the most important thing is that in most cases they are not punished), Even if the laws and regulations that are beneficial to oneself can still be committed, they can still be greedy and not change their faces. They can cleverly use the law to evade punishment by relying on policies and relying on power to participate in the political power, and they can firmly deny or deny crimes. Sophistry with ten thousand reasons. Of course such people will not become and support people like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon, let alone be overthrown by the scandals that brought them down. It is worth mentioning that although these people have many good words for Lu Pu, and the praise is quite sincere, but if such a leader is really on the table and such a request is made of them, then they will definitely mess with him. dead. (Of course, I am not saying that there are no good people in the system, and there are no righteous people on Zhihu. On the contrary, there are actually many, but compared with most bad people, they are still a minority.)
Although by 2020-2021, Zhihu’s situation has undergone some changes, the Young Maoists have risen rapidly and become the biggest voice. The Young Maoists hold almost the exact opposite of the Shadaists in some cases (such as redistribution issues), but they are actually the same on most other issues. The Maoists seem to be far left, but now there are more right-wing and even far-right elements. The ultra-left website "Utopia" quoted Mao as saying that he "likes Western rightists and dislikes leftists" and publicly expressed his pro-Trump remarks. The New York Times also had an analysis article on Maoists' support for Trump. Many Maoists on Zhihu are social Darwinists and Sichuan fans. This change is probably related to the rapid economic downturn and massive unemployment caused by the new crown in China, which caused some former vested interests to turn to the Maoists. However, their basic colors have not changed, and their thoughts of cruelty, extremism, the law of the jungle, and contempt for human rights have not changed. In addition to the very strong pursuit of labor rights that is consistent with the mainstream left in the West (of course, it is relatively more extreme, and the means of realization are different), other aspects such as women's rights, environmental protection, education, technology, justice, historical issues, international relations, etc. are not only inconsistent And often the exact opposite. They reject inclusive policies but advocate exclusive ones. What they are most wary of is not power but capital (what they want is the Mao-style "dictatorship of the proletariat"). They don't consider practicality and scientificity but fundamentalism and anti-intellectualism . They have no interest in or even disgust with center-left social democracy and center-right liberalism. They only vacillate between Maoists and Sichuan fans, and they even have two identities and are self-consistent. Although there is some truth to his proposition, and it is even worthy of sympathy and understanding from some angles, it needs to be denied fundamentally, and the real implementation will only lead the people of the country into a more cruel abyss.
What I have said is just the tip of the iceberg. In fact, as long as you visit Zhihu often, it is easy to find that the vested interests are generally self-interested (and at the same time harmful to others), cruel, cunning, dishonest, immoral, indifferent, talented but not virtuous. And this is just judging from what they said, whitewashed and reserved. More things that involve illegal crimes or touch the red line. I don't know how many levels of evil it is, and the darkness of the system and society it reflects is many times greater. (Of course, these people are still a little honest, otherwise outsiders would not be able to see what is happening inside the vested interests. This also proves that a little honesty will lead to awakening and brewing resistance, and it also proves that it is "reasonable" for them to suppress speech and public opinion. "Yes, because the oppressed are not grateful for telling the truth, but hate crimes and privileges, and those with vested interests. Therefore, it can be deduced that they will hide it more. The actual darkness is greater than what they see now. how serious)
How could these people be willing to lose their future and lose their reputation because of "little" things like Cao Guo, Roh Moo-hyun, and Park Won-soon, let alone die of guilt, but will use all means to frantically defend their vested interests and various privileges against resistance? Those who persecute in every possible way and retaliate against progressivism. They won't be that kind of people in the Korean-American progressive camp, and they won't let others be that kind of people.
If there are people like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon in China in the future, they may be framed to death. Because such people must challenge their vested interests, and set a benchmark of intolerance of all kinds of violations of law and discipline, obscenity and filth, so that they have nowhere to hide. As for the means, of course, there are all kinds of means, from life style to nepotism, from political opinions to economics and finances, you can always find problems, and you can't just frame them. Even if it fails to be framed, it can be slandered. Isn't there rumors that "Hillary sexually abused children" in the United States? There are so many people who believe this kind of nonsense. The Democrats and Hillary take children's rights very seriously, so they deliberately slander them like this. Hong Kong also has the "whispering system" of the establishment to slander Lee Cheuk-ren, who has fought for decades in commemoration of June 4th, as the "June 4th murderer". Psychological harm (who is slandered for doing the behavior he hates the most, can he not feel wronged?). Most people are not as concerned and familiar with politics and society as we are, and it is normal to believe nonsense. Even if it doesn't amount to smearing, it can muddy the waters, making the allegations against their surrogates vague and equally dubious (even if they are entirely true). Those things in Mark Twain's "Running for Governor" are pediatrics for Chinese people who have been immersed in thick black and society for many years.
Not to mention false accusations and frame-ups, if there are people like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon in China, it is inevitable that something will happen. The institutional, legal and social environment of China's current and future transition period is far worse than that of South Korea. I have already mentioned the various social problems that have erupted in South Korea, a late-developing democratic country, since its transformation, and China is undoubtedly worse. China's political dictatorship is far more severe than the right-wing military regime in South Korea, and social freedom is even worse. Except for a few periods in some parts of the Republic of China, China has no long-term experience of democratic functioning, nor does it have a mature civil society and large-scale political opposition. There was some freedom in the 1980s and the first decade of the 21st century, but it was very limited, and since 2013 these limited freedoms have been taken away. Under such circumstances, various social contradictions accumulate like a pressure cooker, and countless ills are hard to recover. National division, civil war is possible, not to mention others. In such an environment, Mandela is useless. Isn’t the Soviet Union useless even with Gorbachev? If a leader is not thick and ruthless, he may not be able to control the situation.
Also, not only are characters like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon difficult to survive, but there is no soil for such characters to appear. I quote again from my political paper:
Haven't the majority of liberals in China and abroad, including many pro-democracy activists, essentially turned their backs on the workers, peasants and vulnerable groups? Most of the liberals and pro-democracy activists in China are followers of Reagan and Hayek, and even supporters of Trump. Would they support the left-leaning, similar to the 1970-1980s in Spain, Greece, Latin American countries, A democratic revolution like in South Korea? To put it more bluntly, the liberals in China are themselves members of the "advantageous group". Most of them consider the relative privileges of "below the first class and above the hundred" who are self-serving, advocating the law of the jungle, and laissez-faire. There is no difference between those who are better off and those who are better off. Or to be more blunt, these liberals just resent the CCP’s control and oppression above their heads, but they don’t care about equality, justice, and equal rights at all, and they even firmly oppose them. "The "communist in the field" and even both, superimposing the two evils.
These people lack morality and intelligence. In terms of intelligence, except for achievements in individual fields, their vision is generally narrow, lack of basic general knowledge in humanities and social sciences, and their cognitive level and rational thinking ability are poor; in terms of morality, their propositions mentioned above It's already proven despicable. At most, these people have superficial and selective sympathy (and not only do not sympathize with heterogeneous groups, but stand idly by, and even make trouble), empathy and compassion are completely absent. These words don't sound good, but aren't they the truth? I have analyzed the mentality of Chinese liberals who support Trump many times. Their inner thoughts towards the suffering people in China, especially the people at the bottom, are roughly: 1. I sympathize with you, but it is all done by the Communist Party. Capitalism has nothing to do, on the contrary, capitalism is very good; 2. Although I sympathize with you, we are different in respect and inferiority. I am an aristocrat and a social elite, and you are a common people at the bottom; 3. Even if the Communist Party dies and freedom and democracy become, I am still an elite , you are still at the bottom, which can protect you from autocratic persecution, but don't think about equality. Of course, other groups, whether they are the powerful and other vested interests in the system, or the common people, have the same or even worse values. However, as a force that wants to change China, it should have higher demands on itself, rather than "competing bad". We want to be pioneers and changers, not those who "take the common and replace it".
I also commented on this in "Ten Discussions on the Democracy Movement", which is excerpted here:
The Chinese pro-democracy movement is almost entirely dominated by right-wing elements. The vast majority of pro-democracy activists are followers of Hayek and Reagan, and even fans of McCarthy and Trump. And the left wing is extremely weak, better than nothing. Such an unbalanced democratic movement structure not only caused the Chinese workers, farmers, students, minority groups and other relatively disadvantaged people to lose their voices and "profits" in the democratic movement; key factor.
In contrast to the democratic movements in other countries, the left wing is often the mainstay. South Korea's Democratic Party, South Africa's ANC, Spain's Social Democracy, Brazil's Labor Social Democracy, Poland's Solidarity (of course it and its successors later turned to the right, but at least until the 1990s, its demands Many are left-leaning), Myanmar’s Democratic League...they all emphasize the interests of civilians and social justice. civilian based.
If it is the late U.S. senator and former presidential candidate McCain-style right wing, even if the policy proposition may not be good, but the quality is worthy of respect. But the right wing of the Chinese democracy movement is mostly Trump-style. From their character to political views, and their attitude towards Trump, it makes people feel extremely disturbed. As Professor Qin Hui said, both the left and the right must adhere to the "common bottom line". And these characteristic right-wing claims and behaviors are constantly penetrating the bottom line and disregarding the interests of the people.
The democratic movement should be based on innovation, progress, democracy, and reconstruction, and realize the goal of the people as the masters of the country. The right-wing values, on the other hand, emphasize conservativeness and security, and tend to be elitist, self-interested and anti-intellectual. This is doomed to make them lack the left-wing will to change reality, let alone the left-wing ability to mobilize oppressed civilians. If you don't fight for the rights of the people, but only want freedom for yourself, the democracy movement will inevitably become narrow.
……
What international forces should China's democratization rely on? Chinese pro-democracy activists, liberals, political opponents, human rights defenders, citizen activists...what kind of "international democratic forces" do they want to unite with?
What I have seen, heard, and learned is that most, if not the vast majority, of political opponents inside and outside China have chosen to fight against conservatism, religious forces (mainly Christian evangelicals and other conservative factions), populism, and strong opposition to China. Hard-liners (even anti-China forces (real "anti-China forces" not just anti-communist forces, even anti-China but not anti-communist forces) and racists) cooperate with forces advocating laissez-faire, low human rights and low welfare, and forces that prey on the weak, and Cooperate with forces that are anti-progressive, anti-human, anti-rational, and anti-scientific... In short, cooperate with various reactionary forces instead of choosing to cooperate with truly progressive, democratic, revolutionary, international forces that promote equality and social justice.
The reasons, consequences, and nature of the Chinese political opposition's direction and "mainstream" cooperation with the international community are almost the same as the answer to the previous question. I say bluntly that if the Chinese pro-democracy movement, liberals, and even the entire mainstream of the political opposition continue to "internationally cooperate", it will not change China for the better, but will be the same as the current CCP's policies, or even "introduce wolves into the house". One more or even multiple external hazards will make the corruption of Chinese society and the corruption of people's hearts worse, and add poison to the gu.
How can such a person become a person like Roh Moo-hyun, Park Won-soon or even Kim Dae-jung? In addition to both supporting liberal democracy, their political views and values are completely opposite. It is not ruled out that some people are left-wing progressives, but they are only a minority, and there are various factions within them. It is impossible to become the mainstream of the liberals, and it is impossible to become the candidates for the president and important local heads elected by the liberals. As for those with vested interests, of course it is even worse and it is impossible to introduce such a person as a leader. Those with vested interests now attribute their mistakes and crimes to the system and the environment as a last resort, but when democracy comes, they will still not give up their vested interests and even take the opportunity to expand their vested interests and legalize various illegal gains , and continue to grab other illegal proceeds. Such people certainly will not tolerate people who speak out about their ugliness, challenge their status, and deprive them of their ill-gotten gains.
In conclusion, if China had a progressive political leader, it would be almost impossible to gain a foothold and govern. If not, there will be all kinds of moral deficiencies or even corrupt qualities, deep and sinister city government, failure to keep promises or even talking about white things, being thin-hearted and even cruel, profit-oriented but not righteous, and ignorant of people's livelihood. Politicians who are good at fighting for power, speak for the powerful without caring about the weak, are indifferent and follow the rules without thinking about reform, and build jungles without promoting human rights... dominate China. In such a China, there will be democracy and freedom, but it is nothing more than a democracy and freedom in which a small number of people can really make greater profits, or those with vested interests control power, most of the wealth and various important resources, and the common people still lack rights and interests. Vulnerable groups continue to do their own thing, using power for personal gain, illegally obtaining income, "not being punished by a doctor", and of course bullying and abuse will all be the same, and the degree will still be the same. Or that people have resources but still suffer from a severe lack of equality and justice. As for sexual assault, it is a "welfare" for men in a patriarchal society, and sexual resources are one of the important resources. If women are independent and courageous in defending their rights and are easy to win, then the loss ratio of all the interests of the powerful and vested interests is equivalent to the loss of a whole house in a courtyard house, and 25 points less in the percentage score (I have no intention of objectifying women, but those powerful people and those with vested interests originally regard women as sexual objects as resources and objects). How could they be willing to lose?
How meaningful is such a democratic freedom? It should still be of great significance, but there is also a huge discount. However, we don’t have to worry too much about the fall of Chinese progressives like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon, because they will not rise in the first place.
What to do with South Korea and the United States: Eclecticism may be the way out
There is no solution to China's problem, or I can't think of any solution for the time being, but there may be some solutions that can be tried for the problems faced by South Korea, the United States and its progressives.
First, transparency and real-time supervision. For progressives, such as abusing power, using power for personal gain, and soliciting connections through the back door, they are often not intentional, but are biased by traditional habits and social reality. People can't help but violate the rules when others are not paying attention, from running red lights to engaging in corruption, all kinds of black boxes Violence in transactions and closed places, and even violation of the agreement in the game when playing games, are all caused by lack of supervision. If you are under transparency and supervision all the time, you will subconsciously restrain yourself and restrain yourself. Without compromising the basic privacy of the person and his family, please ask a neutral person to supervise or conduct spot checks on public affairs at all times, such as financial and social records to be backed up for review by supervisors. All official affairs and those involving the use of power are fully recorded. It is best to use modern technology including blockchain technology to record audio and video for verification and self-awareness. Or, take the initiative to expose some potentially controversial and ambiguous public-private decisions, appeal to the public opinion, and let the public judge whether or not to do it and how to do it. Under this kind of high-intensity supervision, it is not easy for the parties to have a fluke mentality, and even if there is a problem, it can be discovered and stopped in time. This kind of supervision can be implemented voluntarily rather than compulsory, while others just follow the normal general supervision and general procedures.
Second, impunity for unintentional and non-serious crimes. For minor crimes that are not intentional but caused by habit, such as being suspected of accepting a gift that has not been reported, but the value of the gift is far lower than his annual income, he is considered guilty but not prosecuted and not actually punished. Accept integrity training. Of course, this kind of judgment must be made public and accepted by the public, and one cannot be punished with three drinks behind closed doors. In this way, in the case of outstanding achievements, because of a small mistake accidentally made but suspected of a crime, the political career will be ruined directly. Of course, this is limited to this kind of behavior that is not subjective and intentional and has not caused serious consequences. Of course, if it is more serious, it should be severely punished. In addition, they must be treated equally, and non-prosecution and prosecution of guilty cannot be used selectively, and fairness must be guaranteed.
Third, desensitization of sexual assault issues and de-discrimination of non-serious perpetrators. The problem of sexual assault always causes huge waves. The parties involved often "community dies", their futures and even their lives are ruined. As a result, the wicked perpetrators refuse to admit it but "go home for the New Year", and the perpetrators with remaining conscience admit but fail to accept it. "Sit in prison" is largely due to the sensitivity of the problem and the seriousness of the treatment of all parties in society. However, there are different types, degrees, and circumstances of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Although it is wrong to say that any form or degree of harassment or assault is wrong, if all sexual assaults ruin their reputations, it will lead to the above-mentioned situations, and make even more Rapists who were brutal and did more harm to their victims were punished relatively less. For example, can rape in marriage be treated the same as being raped by a stranger, being violated by a friend and being revenged and violated by an enemy?
Since sexual assault is actually quite common, it is unrealistic to really punish the public with the law. However, a civilized society of modern democracy and the rule of law also requires honesty and transparency, and the guilty must be exposed and punished. The two cannot be achieved at the same time. Therefore, society's perception of non-serious sexual offenders also needs to be changed. In the past, in many cases, I pretended not to know that there are so many sexual offenders in the world, including those around me, and even treated people who knew that they had sexually assaulted others as normal people. Now that the window paper must be transparent according to the law, the relevant values and opinions are also different. Need to change. We used to be able to pretend that we didn't know that sexual assault is so common, and we can treat people who have not been convicted of crimes but know that they actually abuse others as ordinary people. Can't we now accept normal treatment of less serious sexual offenders? If you can treat those who knowingly sexually assault others but have not been punished well, but you can’t accept those who have pleaded guilty and punished, isn’t this self-deception, disguised encouragement of crime and lying? If it is not possible, it will be more difficult for sexual assault to be exposed and corrected, and more social problems will arise. What's more, a truly civilized, progressive and inclusive society, of course, also includes the acceptance of criminals who are not heinous and actively plead guilty, compensate and reform themselves, even if they involve sexual assault.
Fourth, the truth is extremely emphasized, but punishment should be restrained, and focus on analyzing the causes of problems and solutions. Only in this way can the parties concerned confide in their hearts, and all parties can jointly explore and analyze the causes of mistakes and crimes, so as to avoid or reduce them as much as possible. The punishment for crime is strong, but the reality has not created an environment where people can easily not commit crimes. It will only lead to more people concealing crimes, escaping punishment by fighting for or clinging to power, and running around for money, and even create greater crimes to resist punishment. Offset the loss of punishment, and then vicious circle, the society will never be peaceful.
But at the same time, it is emphasized that we must resolutely find out the truth, make it public, and clarify the importance of right and wrong, black and white, right and wrong, so that the victims can be redressed, the perpetrators can confess their guilt, and the bystanders can understand the facts. All parties should also treat victims and perpetrators reasonably, so that neither party will feel wronged.
Fifth, while the perpetrators are frank about their mistakes and crimes, they may not take such drastic and decisive measures. There is a sense of shame, but there is no need to force themselves to death for self-discipline. In this way, we can better explore the ins and outs of things and promote the improvement of similar problems in society. In fact, American progressives are much better than Koreans in this regard. For example, after Cuomo's sexual harassment incident, his response was actually very decent. He did not deny the facts but talked about his motives and objective reasons, and he did not slander or harm women. He admitted almost all the facts (without denying any specific allegations), but said that this was an unintentional and harmful behavior influenced by family and tradition. He just couldn't adapt to the changed social norms, and therefore refused to resign at one point. Of course, under tremendous pressure, especially from within the Democratic Party, and the impact of other scandals, he still had to resign. Although in the eyes of some radical women's rights and progressives, his justification is to shirk responsibility and sophistry, but isn't this already better than the vast majority of people? Although it is not a glorious and glorious event to admit that he has made mistakes and committed crimes, should he deny the facts, duplicity, and bite back?
In fact, due to the maturity of political and various social movements in Europe and the United States, and the deep foundation of progressive thinking, European and American countries can deal with the exposed problems more calmly. After nearly a hundred years of civil rights movement and public opinion exposure, they have a rational understanding and desensitization to various common crimes that are not directly observed by the public, and they also know what is the best solution. South Korea, as a late-developing country of democracy and various progressive thoughts, places too much emphasis on justice and purity, and hates and resolutely criticizes crimes. Although some people's justice has been done, there have also been serious crises and side effects, which may also lead to backlash fall back. Korean progressives should learn from the United States and Europe, although this cannot be learned all at once but requires long-term accumulation.
If all of the above are implemented, they will actually be beneficial to the progressive camp, as well as disadvantaged groups and society as a whole. In this way, the mistakes and crimes that most progressive politicians in South Korea and the United States may have done and have done can be stopped and repaired. But these are of no use to conservatives, because they will not be open, honest, and consistent, but they may use such a mechanism to get rid of crimes. But even so, the advantages of implementing these mechanisms still far outweigh the disadvantages. It's just that these are not so easy to implement.
Some of the suggestions I mentioned seem to have been implemented, but I am not particularly clear about the details and impact of the implementation. Still others may not be as easy to implement. So my suggestions are somewhat taken for granted, idealized, or wasteful, but I still hope to have some effect. It is better to say something than not to say it.
Can the epitaph and the pass be consistent?
Even if some changes are made as suggested above, they cannot fundamentally solve the political, moral, and life dilemmas faced by progressive politicians who pursue moral politics. What is even more irreversible is the dilemma and paradox faced by the entire progressive camp.
For progressives and the progressive camp, the various values and creeds advocated, emphasized, and enshrined are both help and hindrance, both encouragement and shackles, and both victory and defeat.
As mentioned earlier, on the one hand, the progressive side emphasizes social justice, helping the disadvantaged, openness and transparency, and the world is for the public. On the other hand, it cannot fully implement the above principles because of human nature, social structure, and historical inertia. And not only can't achieve those very idealized goals, but also can't avoid crimes and other things that are regarded as the bottom line of social morality. On the one hand, its high insistence on honesty, equal treatment, logical consistency, and non-shielding and non-shielding is what is necessary to move towards a civilized and progressive society, the prerequisite for achieving various goals, and the basis for solving all ills and crimes; They have lost their shields against open and hidden arrows, and in the real jungle, they are confronted with enemies from both sides, at a loss, lost and lost, and continue to fail.
Numerous histories also make us think about whether the progressive force's commitment to honesty, equality, logical consistency, non-covering or protection, respect for each other, presumption of innocence/good faith...is it worth it? Is it more beneficial to the realization of social justice, helping the disadvantaged, being open and transparent, and making the world work for the public, or is it more harmful?
Theoretically and partly in practice, it is of course beneficial or necessary. You yourself are dishonest, have double standards, treat differently, bully the weak and fear the strong, have differences between relatives and estrangements, suspect opponents, and be aggressive... How can you make others, opponents, and society recognize these propositions and put them into practice? I am trampling on my ideals and principles. As for the compromise, the suggestion I mentioned earlier is to compromise, but this can easily lead to a "logic slippery slope". Tolerate dishonesty once, and you can lie about something that has to be done. What about the second and third times when you encounter similar situations? ? If A is bullying the soft and B is afraid of the hard, then can CDEFG be treated equally without bullying the soft and fearing the hard? If you make a small mistake and a small crime without punishment, you will test it further, and then lower the bottom line standard? Wouldn't civilization and human rights go backwards? If people make mistakes and commit crimes without stopping, they will become addicted, because it can bring benefits and pleasure, especially the comfort of defeating opponents. The so-called "the wind rises from the end of Qingping", "the dike of a thousand miles collapses in the ant's nest", the experience of the ancients has long told us the importance of preventing the gradual progress and the danger of the logical slide. And there is no generally accepted clear boundary of what can be tolerated and what cannot. Therefore, if we want to achieve those ideal goals, safeguard human rights and realize justice, we must adhere to high standards and strict requirements.
But is persistence beneficial to the realization of justice and human rights? In many cases, it is exactly the opposite, and even this persistence leads to failure. The example of the United States I mentioned earlier is very typical. Obama, Hillary and the Democratic Party insist on being gentlemen (of course they are not completely gentlemen, but at least they are significantly better than the Republican Party, Trump, McConnell, etc.), which led to the failure of the 2016 presidential election. The appointment battle was lost. The damage of these two failures is enormous. Social justice in the United States has regressed at a rapid speed, and the disadvantaged groups have changed from reducing a lot of suffering to increasing a lot of suffering. In terms of labor, not only are labor benefits and security reduced overall, and they are more likely to be fired and passively unemployed, but also groups such as temporary workers, illegal immigrant workers, women, and people with disabilities face more discriminatory treatment in employment, and are in a difficult situation; women's rights Structural discrimination against women has intensified, sexual assault is more difficult to solve, domestic violence protection is more difficult, more women are unable to have abortions, and the abolition of child marriage has stalled; in terms of environmental protection, a series of plans to curb climate warming have been put on hold, Various economic measures that damage the environment have been introduced, and the climate crisis has intensified. Not only will human beings face crises in the future, but the current extreme weather will increase; the proliferation of guns is more serious, and more people are killed by guns; It was abolished, but in the specific medical policy, legal disputes and penalties, it will be more and more unfavorable to the patient, and many patients have lost their families due to the change of medical policy and insurance policy. Internationally, human rights-oriented diplomacy has been abandoned, and the supremacy of interests has become the main principle. The United States has tense relations with countries such as the European Union and Canada, but has friendly relations with authoritarian countries such as Russia and Saudi Arabia. Sovereignty of the Langhe Heights...how many people are suffering, despairing, dying behind these conditions...and none of this would have happened and would likely have been better than it was before 2016 if the Democrats had won.
If the Democratic Party can be as unscrupulous or shameless as the Republican Party, for example, when it controls the presidency and the two houses of Congress, it can also learn from the Republican Party to use power to forcibly change the political balance, completely leaning towards itself in terms of the increase of congressional seats and the division of constituencies, regardless of opposition. Powers to force the appointment of justices, party officials and even candidates spread rumors, conspiracy theories and hatred to attack Republican opponents, completely disregarding the feelings and interests of conservatives when enacting laws and implementing policies, and using all means to gain political advantages by exploiting loopholes in laws and systems And the victory of the struggle...The result of the 2016 general election is completely different, and the political orientation of the Supreme Court in the next few decades will be completely different. Hundreds of millions of relatively disadvantaged groups can get a better life, and many lives will be saved (of course, it will also lead to a relatively small number of vested interests living worse, and some criminals will be thrown into prison or die). This doesn't just affect the people of the United States, it affects people all over the world. If the United States is in power under Hillary, human rights must be the primary consideration of foreign policy, especially women's rights, children's rights, and labor rights will be highly valued, and billions to billions of people in the world will benefit directly or indirectly.
So, is it necessary to pay such a huge price just to uphold some moral principles and not become a villain in the struggle against villains? Upholding justice has led to greater injustice, good motives have caused evil to become more unscrupulous, and good deeds have brought evil results. Is this right or wrong?
History always proves that meanness is a passport and nobility is an epitaph
In fact, throughout history, it is often the side who is unscrupulous, dishonest, or ruthless in the struggle wins. At the beginning of Western civilization, Rome and Carthage were fighting for supremacy, and the wars had their winners and losers, and there was a truce. However, in order to avoid the revival of Carthage, Rome took advantage of the latter's weakness to force it to sign a treaty, allowing Carthage to give up its arms, hand over all weapons and ships, deliver rice, and send children as hostages. Cities were burned and the population left. At this time, the Carthaginians were forced to resist, but even though the disarmed and incapacitated Carthaginians gathered some strength, they were no longer able to resist the Roman army. Then, Carthage was slaughtered, more than 90% of the population was killed, and the rest became slaves. This powerful country that once competed with Rome was completely destroyed. From then on, Rome dominated the Mediterranean Sea and eventually became the Millennium Empire. However, the former land of Carthage was conquered several times by foreigners and became the colonies of several empires, and it is still in ruins today. One of the brilliant and great ancient civilizations was made powerful by this kind of treachery. Behind the civilization is deep barbarism, and above barbarism there is even more vicious cunning and treachery.
This kind of history is also not new in China. The change of Xuanwu Gate was also caused by Li Shimin's first attack (of course, according to some history books, it is a "self-defense counterattack", but it is also recorded that Li Shimin likes to revise the history books), killing all the descendants of Li Jiancheng and Li Yuanji, occupying Li Yuanji's wife, and forcing his father Li Yuan He abdicated, and then became the "Tian Khan" who created the "Rule of Zhenguan". The historical materials about the three Lis and their struggles also record that Li Jiancheng had a generous personality and couldn't bear to punish Li Shimin, so he did miss the opportunity before. Many people only know the story of "Wu Yue struggles for hegemony" earlier, but they ignored Fu Chai and finally let go of Gou Jian and Yue State, but Gou Jian did not let Fu Chai and Wu State go (of course, this is a bit excusable) ). At the same time, Song Xianggong's benevolence, righteousness and comity in the Battle of Hongshui not only led to the defeat but also became a joke (although it was not actually funny). More recently, the civil war between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party changed the fate of China, and then a series of tragedies occurred. Tens of millions of innocent people lost their lives, and many more people suffered all kinds of suffering. If Chiang Kai-shek had used unscrupulous means, such as preserving strength during the war of resistance, detaining Mao Zedong after the Chongqing negotiations, refusing to disarmament, banning CCP activities in the Kuomintang-controlled areas, and giving preferential treatment to the puppet army and traitors, it is unlikely that he would lose to the midstream of the war of resistance without fighting, fake disarmament and real reorganization Mao Zedong's CCP that banned the Kuomintang forces in the ruling area and actively recruited the puppet army, especially the puppet Manchukuo forces. Then Chinese history and even world history will have to be rewritten. There are more incidents in the turning point of history, never relying on benevolence and righteousness alone to win, but there are always treacherous ones.
In modern society, people pay more and more attention to morality, contract, and right and wrong, but the nature of people and society has not changed. Whether it is a grand historical event or an individual dispute over right and wrong, despicability is still a pass, and nobility is still easy to become an epitaph. Moreover, the game of conflict involving greater interests, more life-and-death, and far-reaching impact will be more unscrupulous, and the outcome cannot be determined by right and wrong itself. As for the sympathy, praise, and huge real benefits (not only material benefits, but also spiritual or non-material dignity, joy, self-confidence, and even painlessness) received by losers who insist on morality, credit, and conscience, they are also huge. interests) compared to what is it? Even if the sympathy and praise for the former is stretched to the extreme, can it offset the pain of suffering? There are so many people worthy of sympathy in this world, with varying degrees, how can they all be sympathetic to the extreme? Is extreme sympathy for one person or faction unfair to those who are more miserable? What's more, the history of this world is always written by the victors, and the right to speak is also controlled by the powerful. It is indeed difficult for them to completely reverse the truth and deceive everyone, but it is enough to confuse the water and make people hit 50 boards, or many Sometimes it tends to be despicable winners, and losers will be smeared and slandered (including true stains and out of nothing), black history will be magnified, insisting on morality and conscience will not only have no reputation, but will be wronged and crushed by moral shackles , not as much praise as a successful person who has lost his morality (this kind of praise is not only fake, but also sincere). Not to mention material benefits, honest people are often inferior to wicked people in terms of reputation and evaluation. Under such a reality, how many people can continue to stick to it? (Even if the moral advantage can make the other party temporarily convinced and the people temporarily inclined to themselves, it is nothing more than overwhelming the other party for a while, but as things change and conflicts increase, the previous morality and persistence are becoming more and more depreciated. When the general situation changes, all parties I will no longer give up fighting for real interests because of how benevolent and righteous the previous party is, and how much I owe the other party)
The complex changes of good and evil, good and evil make it difficult to distinguish between black and white
What's more, in various real struggles, especially those involving power, interests, and the right to speak, it is not so simple to fight hypocrisy with sincerity, insidiousness with conscience, and malice with goodwill. In a long and complicated game, no one party can always restrain his emotions and logic, and not be irritated and biased by the other party. No matter how upright a person is, it is impossible to participate in the struggle without emotion and without irrational factors. On the contrary, the justice side is often more emotional and impulsive, because the victim is always less calm after being victimized than the perpetrator, and the wronged good person is more painful than the bad person being said. This can easily cause the righteous party to lose restraint, so it no longer adheres to principles (even if it is only temporarily and partially), and in this way, the other party will definitely be caught and criticized, so as to damage the reputation of the righteous party. Besides, even if you are not provoked, the other party can always find out some of your weaknesses and black spots to shift the focus and change the attitude of bystanders. Although Lu Xun said that "a fighter with flaws is a fighter after all, and a perfect fly is a fly after all", the problem is that in reality, we are all human beings, and it is impossible to see whether the human body and spirit are "soldiers" or "flies". Different people have different values. Some people see small things as big things to others, and achievements in some people's eyes as disasters to others. The righteous side dominated by the progressive camp often admits some mistakes or even crimes because of honesty and self-examination. This will not only not get understanding and tolerance from the immoral and empathetic side, but also become a target for attack and a weakness for attack. Admitting mistakes and crimes means paying a price, and often a heavy price, some of which are enough to disable the ability to win the game. And the latter would never voluntarily admit to even obvious sins, deny them flatly, or make coquettish rhetoric. If the German side also denies and sophistry like the German side, it will no longer be so honest and just, and it will also be attacked by the other party. Also, even if both parties have good intentions and restraint, various accidents and misunderstandings will also induce mistrust and confrontation. What's more, if there is no misunderstanding, some people will deliberately create misunderstandings, and if there is goodwill, some people will destroy goodwill. Of course, excessive goodwill and restraint will lead to unresolved issues and unrealized justice. Even if temporary peace and progress are achieved, it will leave behind the curse of the restoration of evil deeds.
In the complicated and lengthy struggle, the side that has principles, integrity, acts and refrains will be more restrained in its methods, double-sighted in words and deeds, and magnified and scrutinized problems. As long as the party who is unscrupulous, has no integrity and morality, as long as he is talented enough but not virtuous, cunning and vicious, shameless, and clever, it is enough to cover up and downplay most or all of his mistakes and even crimes, and he can completely deduct these qualities to the other side. , as long as it is shameless enough and has no psychological burden.
The continuous victories of unscrupulous villains will also poison people's hearts, making more people become them or their supporters because of the destruction of the three views and the pursuit of interests and even basic survival. Even if they stand on the opposite side, they are just "people who stare into the abyss".
Of course, having said so much, some people who yearn for justice may complain in their hearts, "Then just support the justice side unconditionally, and don't look at anything else but morality." This is indeed a coping method, but it does not mean that it can really solve the problem.
First, apart from some obvious relative justice and relatively evil parties, there are still many situations that are complicated and unclear, and it is not so easy to judge which is right and which is wrong. I have been talking about how good the progressive camp is and how bad the conservative camp is, but only in relative terms and specifically referring to certain political forces in some countries. It does not mean that the progressive camp has no shortcomings and the conservative camp has no merits. Many things depend not only on the position of the person, but also on the merits of the matter itself. It is almost impossible and should not support one party 100% in all matters. Moreover, people with high morals may not be able to make relatively correct judgments on all matters, especially professional issues (although people with general knowledge can give some guidance and enlightenment), so it is still necessary to distinguish right from wrong, and it is impossible to simply rely on who Who is moral to support.
Second, even if some things are clearly good and evil, not everyone can understand them. Even though humanists and rationalists like us believe that right and wrong, good and evil are very clear enough to stand decisively on one side, many or even most people cannot. The people's knowledge and vision are limited, and they may be called by justice or instigated by villains. If the evil power they choose is beneficial to them, that's all. Many times they will choose those who harm them without hesitation, and sometimes they even know that they are being harmed willingly. Isn't that the case with the large number of Maoists at the bottom of China? Not only autocratic countries and underdeveloped countries, but also developed countries are common. America is typical again. The lower-class people who support Trump will lose many welfare guarantees according to Trump's policies, and their personal rights are more likely to be violated, but they still support Trump. Trump is extremely unfriendly to women and women's rights, yet more than half of white women voted for him. Of course, this is not a reason to deny democracy, but it is a fact.
Third, even if one really stands unconditionally on the more just side of a certain period, it may not be a good thing or even a disaster. Under different periods, different situations, and different value orientations, the relatively righteous side and the relatively evil side can be converted into each other. If the morality of a certain person or group of people is overestimated, it will be more difficult for them to prevent and resist evil. In terms of cleanliness, equality, purity, support for the weak, and innovation, the CCP in the civil war between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party was obviously better than the Kuomintang. However, when the majority of the people either voluntarily or coerced to support them and seize power, what they got in exchange was even harsher autocratic rule and unprecedented catastrophe. In 1996, the Taliban seized most of Afghanistan like a bamboo, which is also related to its strict discipline and the banner of eliminating warlords and national unity. For example, the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979 and the independence of Zimbabwe in 1980, the people gave full power to the revolutionaries who really represented justice at that time, and then things got worse. They weren't necessarily bad or even good people back then, but once they had "tasted power" and were unchecked, anything bad could happen. Although this is not the case in a democratic country that has nationalized its military and has power checks and balances, a one-sided political situation is always worrying. Human nature cannot stand the test, and it is common for dragon slayers to become evil dragons.
Therefore, in such a complex and sinister historical tradition and reality, the moral politics, human rights politics, and pure politics that progressives hope to open up, although full of justice and ideals, often fail to win real victories. .
Progressivism is not overcorrection but pioneering human rights
Speaking of this, and in connection with reality, many people may be very pessimistic, thinking that the various ideas of the progressive camp like Han and the United States are difficult to implement, their actions are overcorrected, and they are digging their own graves.
Yes, I have made many criticisms and concerns about this in the article. However, this does not mean that I oppose such propositions and behaviors, on the contrary, I admire and support them very much.
The reason why we think that those claims are difficult to implement and that what we do is overkill is because we live in an environment that is far from a perfect world. The Chinese are especially far from the "perfect state" of the world. On the contrary, we are too close to a history full of life like ants, clear hierarchy, cruelty and tyranny, and even some people in some countries and regions are still living in such a living environment. People, especially those who are in political autocracy, material deprivation, ideological oppression, and social dullness, have become accustomed to the many fortunes and misfortunes that have happened in this world. Injustice and injustice such as disparate society, abuse of power for personal gain, partisanship, abuse, bullying, and bullying seem to have become inevitable and irreversible objective phenomena in the world like the change of the sun and the moon, and spring planting and autumn harvest.
Is it really?
If we go back in the long river of history, we will find that human society is constantly changing, and all human rights are artificially constructed from scratch. From the formation of basic family units and clans in primitive society, to the emergence of ruling machines such as tribes and countries in slave society, to the emergence of etiquette and education in farming society, and the development of individual rights and obligations in industrial society, they all started from scratch and evolved from scratch. Incomplete to perfect, from backward to advanced. What human beings did not have before does not mean that they will not exist later, and the unachievable goal at a certain historical stage does not mean that it will never be unachievable. This change is not only related to changes in the objective world and matter, but also related to people's continuous struggle and innovation (many changes in the objective world and matter are also the result of human struggle).
To put it simply, the values, rights and obligations, institutions, etc. of people and human society are all man-made, and they did not exist before a certain period of time, but they were artificially constructed. Just like in the period of the clan commune, people had no national consciousness at all, and they did not think that they had any obligations or feelings of compatriots to people outside the clan and in the same area. For people at that time, it was impossible to understand the slightly complicated right and wrong and good and evil, only the instinct to protect the tribe and resist outsiders. Moreover, even the dear affection with parents, wives and children is a kind of animal instinct, rather than the family affection with thought and soul and complex content (regardless of the material, only the spiritual level, human beings now have a relationship with parents, wives and children). Can the emotional content and thoughts that govern the words and deeds of relatives be the same as Neanderthals and Yuanmou people?). However, with the development of civilization, especially the emergence of language and writing, human beings have morality. Human activities are no longer just based on animal desires and instincts, but start to consider right and wrong, good and evil, reputation, dignity and other things that shine with the brilliance of human nature. . Later, religious beliefs were created and gradually accepted by most people all over the world. People before that had none of this in their minds. Before the Enlightenment (Ideological Revolution), the European Political Revolution, and the Industrial Revolution, people also believed that it was natural for people to be divided into ranks and ranks (the person who said "the princes and generals have kindreds" did not mean that everyone should be equal, but Said that he can also be a prince and general), and there is a distinction between master and servant. People at that time did not feel that men and women should be equal, and women were still appendages of men. After the three major revolutions, forced labor, slavery, child labor, and human trafficking still exist widely and are legal. Most people are still illiterate and do not have the current labor laws, child protection laws, and inclusive compulsory education. The government also has no compulsory obligation to be responsible for basic public services such as medical care and elderly care for civilians. When people are sick, they will get sick, and if they die, they will die. Another point is that violence in ancient times was very common and cruel. From national wars to group fighting to individual murders that either killed or maimed, violence is a common way to resolve disputes in human history.
But now all this has undergone earth-shaking changes. Even if some countries have not really achieved the phenomenon of ending the old age, they will not openly endorse those stereotypes. Violence, while still widespread, has decreased dramatically in frequency and intensity. Human rights and dignity are developed, social morality, laws and various norms are also artificially designed, and ideology, culture, social structure and various habits are also constructed by human beings, rather than formed naturally from the birth of human beings. Without these man-made systems, customs, and values, we still only collect, eat, and mate every day like primitive people tens of thousands of years ago. People thousands of years ago could not have imagined the life of human beings today even if they racked their brains. Not only material but also spiritual life).
Such historical changes also prove that human rights are developed and constructed step by step from scratch. Existence does not mean rationality, and old rules cannot only be followed forever. The ideas and corresponding propositions put forward by progressives do contradict the status quo of the world. But should we be conquered by reality, or should we overcome the ugliness of human nature and society, open up a new future, and develop human rights to a richer content and a higher height? Since human beings can go from such a completely ignorant and barbaric era to today, why can't they move on to a more civilized and progressive future? If our ancestors were satisfied with the desire for food and sex, there would be no splendid ancient civilization, and human beings are just smarter animals; If the idea of democracy, the rule of law, equality and fraternity and the wave of revolution emerge, there will be no material and spiritual life for most of the people today.
Also, we can't wait passively and leave everything to people in the future, but the sooner the better. Just imagine, if all kinds of struggles and struggles of human beings led to the emergence of modern industrial civilization (including all aspects of material, thought and system) as early as 1000 AD, then our ancestors of the previous dozens of generations would be free from "steamy summer rusticity and backburning". We don't need to kneel down to officials and gentry in rags, and stay at home numbly and in a daze every day, but enjoy the modern life as dignified and independent individuals like us.
Although today's human beings have made astonishing progress, they are still suffering from all kinds of suffering, the material ones are secondary, and the main one is injustice. The propositions put forward by progressives are mainly to solve today's injustice and bring a highly civilized society to an early date. The level of happiness of people at that time was compared with that of the present, which is equivalent to the comparison between us and ancient times. With such a huge boost, shouldn't we let it come sooner?
It seems that individual struggle cannot match the historical process, but in fact, the historical process is also the result of the collection of many individual struggles. Although there are many uncertainties in the outcome of struggles and struggles, and there are bound to be repetitions and even tragedies, aren't human beings still generally moving forward? If there is no change, there may not be some misfortune due to change, but there will be more misfortune due to no change.
Therefore, the propositions and goals of progressives are respectable and not unfeasible. Their radicalism is also understandable, because those injustices have hurt countless people and continue to happen in every corner. We should not be hurt ourselves, nor should we allow others to be hurt innocently. However, most of the perpetrators with vested interests benefit from this, so they are unwilling to change; most of the "lost interests" as victims become weak and gradually become insensitive due to the victimization, so they are unable to change and have no intention of changing. That's why many injustices persist for a long time. The rise of progressive forces and the surge of progressive thoughts have brought attention and criticism to these ugliness of "existence is reasonable". Even if they cannot be effectively resolved immediately, it is enough to inspire people and see the hope of change.
Korean progressivism is admirable
Progressivism in South Korea is more radical, and I have already mentioned its disadvantages. However, fundamentally speaking, this is good, and emotionally speaking, it is even more touching and admirable. The political struggles and social movements in the progressive camp in South Korea are surging, and the literature, art and media circles are also brave and sharp, exposing the institutional structure and even basic human ugliness, remembering and reflecting on historical tragedies, and criticizing the inhuman and unrighteous elites , the praise of heroes for the country and the people, and the sympathy for the suffering and vulnerable groups are all vividly displayed. What they are fighting, exposing, and reflecting on are precisely the problems that have happened, are happening, or will be faced in China in the future.
The fierce political struggle in South Korea can be seen from the fact that no president has died well since its founding (except Moon Jae-in for the time being). However, at least the punishment of several presidents or their relatives after democratization can prove that South Korea will not condone crimes, and will not let them go just because they are presidents, but that "princes who break the law are as guilty as the common people" and "the law must be punished". ". Only in this way can we set a good example and correct indication for the society. It is not like some autocratic and corrupt national leaders, whose misdemeanors are not investigated, implying and encouraging the general degeneration from high-ranking officials to the common people.
The suicides of Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon, as well as the imprisonment of Wu Judun, Cao Guo and others, will indeed hit the progressive camp, but they will also set a warning bell against using power for personal gain, corruption, and sexual assault on others. If they are tolerated and indulged, then the bad example will make more people commit such crimes, and the damage caused is not comparable to their few lives and political careers. If these people's lives and futures can be exchanged for a substantial decline in future privilege crimes and sexual crimes, it can be said to be the least expensive of any solution to related crimes. Many national leaders with autocratic or unsound democracy and the rule of law have ended well, but the people have suffered unspeakably, and the various sufferings have caused more than the end of tens of thousands of lives and the destruction of the lives and destiny of millions of people. If the use of power for personal gain is tolerated to provide convenience for family members, and they will not be punished because of their status and merits, then those with a little achievement and power from top to bottom will use this to gain privileges, and the common people will be unlucky from the whole to the individual. If sexual assault cannot be punished impartially, it is tantamount to implying that such a thing is inevitable and reasonable. Men across the country can molest or even rape women, and how many women will cry for life.
Also, there are so many movies in South Korea that reflect the dark reality, it does make people feel a certain kind of despair and pain, and traumatizes the nation. But it is these extremely straightforward revelations and strong criticisms that make society face up to the darkness that is ubiquitous but invisible. Some Chinese people say that "Koreans can only make movies but can't change reality", which is completely false. Every film in South Korea that can reflect a typical social issue will have a major practical impact on reality after it is shown, including the introduction or revision of relevant laws and systems. For example, after the hit of "The Melting Pot", not only was the case re-judged at that time, but the "Melting Pot Act" was also introduced to increase the punishment of criminals who violated vulnerable groups. "Suyuan" also prompted the introduction of relevant laws to protect minors. "The Defender" let the Korean people understand the history of the military government's violation of human rights, and promoted the redress of the case. "Excavator"'s exploration of the responsibility of the Gwangju incident and the torture of each participant have promoted the reality of the same situation. Films such as "Memories of Murder", "The Voice of That Guy", "The Chaser", and "Broken Arrow" have also prompted people to deeply reflect on related crimes or institutional and human issues, and provide various ways to change this. Reality. Seeing the darkness makes us yearn for the light even more. Korean movies deeply illustrate this point.
Korean Progressivism Compared with Other Countries and Regions
The magnificence of Korean progressivism is not only reflected in itself, but also in the comparison with other countries and regions. Needless to say, China does not have democracy and the rule of law, civil society, and political freedom. Other developed and democratic countries and regions will find it difficult to look behind South Korea.
Japan, which is across the sea from South Korea and belongs to the East Asian cultural circle, is actually a backwater in politics. Although the prime minister changes frequently, and there are many scandals and "fallen horses", people have become accustomed to it, and politics will not be fundamentally turbulent because of this. The right-wing Liberal Democratic Party It is still the "ten thousand years ruling party" that has been in power for a long time. The civil movement in Japan is calm (of course, there were riots in the 1960s and 1970s, but they have long since stopped). The citizens are dissatisfied with the government but obey, without a strong mentality of resistance. Freedom under order is calm and impotent. Although Japanese movies are not lacking in profoundness, they are more inclined to aesthetic and philosophical expressions, but downplay their realistic criticism. People will only have some deep but illusory emotions when watching those movies, and they cannot directly connect with reality and have a strong urge to change reality. To put it bluntly, this kind of art is the spiritual entertainment of the upper class and intellectuals, and the common people and the suffering in history are just the tonic and lubricant for them to enrich their spiritual life. In addition, Japan not only fails to fully reflect on and make up for the heinous crimes it has created in history, but also whitewashes and misses them in every possible way. This is also a kind of retribution).
In contrast, Taiwan. Taiwan and South Korea also belong to the East Asian cultural circle, and their history is also very similar. Both have experienced colonial times, right-wing dictatorships, and democratic transitions, and their economic levels are also similar. However, the political style, civic temperament, and social atmosphere of Taiwan and South Korea are completely different and even obviously opposite. Although Taiwan's various political and social problems may not be less and lighter than those in South Korea, such as the proliferation of black money politics and the delay in transitional justice. But Taiwanese reacted very differently from South Koreans. Taiwan's politics and civic movements are seriously child's play, and the sense of justice and mission from officials to ordinary citizens is poor. In other words, they also seem to attach great importance to rights and freedom. On the surface, there are no fewer political struggles and civic movements than South Korea, but they have no real "heart spirit". The public opinion environment is even more so. How serious are Taiwan's political commentary programs? The difference between literary and artistic film and television and South Korea is the most obvious. Not only are there few excellent film and television works that reflect history and reality, but the few are also superficial and superficial. In addition to reflecting some appearances, "Taiwan Betrayed" has never directly expressed the complex political game and the darkness inside the autocratic machine? Even the description of the underworld has obvious reservations and whitewashing. "The Distance Between Us and Evil" seems to be quite profound and touches the fringes of society, but in fact, it conceals the injustice of the social structure and the ugliness of human nature with the warmth and warmth of family and personal joys and sorrows (this is quite similar to mainland film and television dramas). The characteristic of Taiwan is "little fortune". It lacks interest in profound and grand things, and is unwilling to face the darkest and cruelest side of society and human nature. . Behind this is the fact that Taiwan, on the one hand, is alienated from mainland China and then abandons the broad Chinese culture and national spirit. The lack of national spirit and the weakness of the source of fundamental thought.
Hong Kong before the end of the anti-extradition law movement is also an object for comparison. Due to its special geographical location and historical origin, Hong Kong has produced a relatively unique political culture, ideological movement and civil society. On the one hand, the political movement in Hong Kong is quite spectacular, the social trends are complex and diverse, and the political vitality of citizens, especially intellectuals is very strong; on the other hand, ordinary people in Hong Kong are relatively indifferent to politics in their daily life, and care more about people's livelihood issues than civil rights issues. This is obviously caused by Hong Kong's narrow land and dense population and the high pressure of life. As Hong Kong is close to the mainland and is greatly influenced by the mainland, the politics of Hong Kong are always closely related to the politics of mainland China. The interests of Hong Kong people are also strongly related to the interests of mainland China and mainlanders. There are both mutual dependence and utilization, and competition, confrontation and exclusion. With the intensification of land-port conflicts, Hong Kong's political mainstream has gradually changed from "the bridgehead of Greater China's democracy" to "the vanguard of local self-determinationism." The views of nativism and separatism have overwhelmed the demands for social justice and the improvement of civil rights and people's livelihood. become extreme and deformed. Even if there was no comprehensive clearance and the promulgation of the "National Security Law", Hong Kong's political activities and ideological movements have lost their sense of justice and fraternity, and run counter to the progress of civilization.
Although the political process, civic movements, and literary and artistic expressions in European and American countries are also magnificent, they have entered a relatively weak state. In other words, various progressive and critical movements and expressions are gradually released in different stages of history. , there is no such concentrated and strong expression and action in South Korea due to the late development of democracy, the heavy history, the drastic transformation, and the large gap between ideal and reality. Of course, there are far more film and television dramas in Europe and the United States that reflect the dark side of the system, human nature, and society than in South Korea, but in terms of reflecting the dark side only in a realistic way, except for a few hard-to-surpass classics, most of the works are not as good as those in South Korea. Typical works.
In other countries, such as Singapore, which is also a developed country like South Korea and is also influenced by Chinese culture, its politics has not yet been completely democratized, political freedom and civil society are not sound, and values are also affected by the system, culture, historical experience and international environment. Repressed and constricted. The most important consideration for Singapore is to survive surrounded by alien races and pagan religions, stability and people's livelihood, and justice and mission are put on the shelf intentionally or unintentionally.
The vast majority of developing countries are still stuck in some basic survival and development, and cannot seek the truth and pursue justice with the standards of South Korea. There are countless vicious rapes in India, children in Cambodia are prostitutes, corruption is rampant in Nigeria, and Mexico is mired in violence and drugs... When more tragic tragedies occur generally, those that are objectively serious but better than the more tragic It naturally loses the possibility and legitimacy of being focused, unless it is deliberately pushed to the focus of public opinion by some forces. They are not yet qualified to pursue those higher and deeper justice. (Of course, in fact, the political reforms, civic movements, and public opinion expressions in these countries are also very intense, but due to their limited strength in their development stage, they cannot have the same influence and attention as South Korea’s relatively moderate protests )
The greatness of Hanmei and all sincere and upright progressives in the world and the significance of their struggle and exploration
Thus, the radical, courageous, profound, self-examination and self-discipline of Korean progressivism are extremely prominently reflected. This is not only caused by various objective factors, but also lies in the subjective initiative of people based on conscience. From politicians like Kim Dae-jung, Roh Moo-hyun, Moon Jae-in, and Park Won-soon, to artists like Lim Kwon-taek, Bong Joon-ho, Kim Ki-duk, and Kim Byung-woo, to protesters like Yoon Sang-won, Jeon Tae-il, Kwon In-sook, Shim Sang-hee, and tens of thousands The struggle, cries and sacrifices of Wan's people with lofty ideals and ordinary citizens, as well as the progressive forces of South Korea, not only fully interpret "man-made things", but also show the limitations of the times, the complexity of society and the helplessness of people's hearts. (Of course, I am not saying that people like Roh Moo-hyun and Park Won-soon are perfect great men and heroes. Saying this will also hurt the victims of their crimes. I just say that they are only partially great, and they refuse to slander the victims but plead guilty or even Suicide, although it can’t be called great, has been punished or paid a price. At least in today’s era, this is still worthy of admiration. At the same time, this does not affect my sympathy for the victims)
Korean progressives paid a heavy price for their exploration and pursuit of moral politics and a just society, which caused some backlash and regression, but this exploration and pursuit should be affirmed fundamentally. Just as the French Revolution paid a greater price, many revolutionaries also died on the guillotine, but the world was never the same. Their sacrifices are worthwhile. They are "dead countrymen" who died "with great plans". They are not only heroes of their own country and nation, but will also be engraved in the credit book of human history forever. It is even said that the punishment and pain suffered by their opponents who have not been so bad, those conservatives who have fallen on the road to justice, are equally valuable and meritorious. Just like the Girondists, royalists, and aristocrats in the French Revolution, they are equally worthy of respect as the Jacobins and the revolutionary masses. King Louis XVI and his wife also deserved to die, "because the republic must live." South Korea's Chun Doo-hwan, Roh Tae-woo, Park Geun-hye, Lee Myung-bak and all those who paid the price behind and below them are also victims of the progress. Although they are bad, they are already "good" compared with those vested interests in various countries who completely violate the wheel of history, have no bottom line, go unpunished, and even live and die. After all, they have achieved greatness together with the progressives. changes, and promote the advancement of the nation, the nation, and even human society.
What progressives in South Korea, the United States and other countries advocate and practice, although it is difficult to achieve complete victory at the utilitarian level and even lead to backlash and retrogression, the actual success or failure (including the success or failure of the ideal itself) is worrying, but it is pitiful , His ambition is commendable. Human beings have experienced a long and dark night. Although people from the 17th to the 21st centuries have not fully seen the sunrise, they have ushered in a dawn full of hope. However, this is only the dawn of some people, while more people are still in the dark, and even for some people, the dawn of others is just their own darkness. Therefore, we must not only achieve justice for some people, the mainstream and the majority of people, but also justice for everyone, complete justice for everyone and everything in the world. At that time, all logical inconsistencies and dishonesty will disappear, all problems and things can be properly dealt with according to the right and wrong, and everyone can get the material and spirit that match their efforts and even more their virtues income.
Let history witness and judge
This may not be possible "forever (until the end of humanity and the end of the universe)", but we can make reality as close to that end as possible. Millions of years ago, how could human beings think of how to live a "civilized" life 4,000 years ago, and it was impossible for human beings to think of what kind of material and spiritual people in the 21st century have. How can we assert that all the ugliness of today will exist forever? , Is it impossible for the future to become beautiful that we can't imagine now (of course there may be darkness and ugliness that we can't imagine)? Whether it is the transformation of the field of thought, spirit and values, or the rapid advancement of science and technology, there are infinite possibilities and room for expansion in the future. But this kind of beauty cannot come automatically, but it needs the struggle of countless people with lofty ideals to realize it, and it is absolutely necessary to realize it, even if the road ahead is full of risks.
"Let's be true to ideals, let's face reality". To achieve justice and beauty, of course, it is impossible to rely solely on sincerity and integrity, and in reality, no one can do it 100%. However, we must at least avoid unscrupulous means and loss of the bottom line, consider right and wrong rather than pros and cons when weighing pros and cons, and judge things based on the truth rather than positions. In the process of achieving the goal, we must proceed step by step, consider and take into account the interests of all parties, be patient and rational, and strive to achieve the greatest results at the least cost. When dealing with people from various progressive camps, including politicians, we must also understand that "gold is not pure, and no one is perfect." Of course, you can criticize or even impeach them if there are problems, but you must also pay attention to their achievements and not use them as Partial generalization.
Having said that, I am back to the clichéd views and suggestions that many people have already said badly. Not only the previous paragraph, but also many things in the full text should have been thought, discussed and even implemented by others. If these methods could really solve the problem effectively, then the ideals advocated by progressivism would have been realized long ago. So it shows that maybe the road to justice in this world is indeed unsolvable. However, we still have to persevere and fight. Everything, let history judge. Even if the noble and righteous in the future are engraved with "despicable" and "evil" on the tangible and intangible "history books (word of mouth is also history books)" and "monuments (people's hearts are also monuments)", the despicable people will be engraved in the "history books" and "history books" The records on the "monument" are "noble" and "justice". All the words of justice such as those above are used by the victorious villains to flaunt themselves and criticize the truly noble and righteous. The nature and human rationality of the world The soul of the soul will also give fair records and judgments to everyone and everything in the world.
Wang Qingmin
October 7, 2021
230 Year of the Republican Calendar Mirabilis Day in the Xiayue Moon (First Draft)
(It should be noted that I am not a noble and righteous person personally. On the contrary, I have had a lot of disgraceful past and current situation, and I don’t think that I can change my future to be perfect. But this is the case, so I am more Yearning for justice and light. What's more, while admitting that I have an ugly side and "black history", I also know that I am at least more innocent and upright than most of China's vested interests, no matter in the past or now. I am also more innocent than most Most people need to be more candid and self-reflective, or I wouldn't be writing this and everything else, including my own)
喜欢我的文章吗？
别忘了给点支持与赞赏，让我知道创作的路上有你陪伴。
发布评论…