This article focuses on the causes of today's society.
Many people in China always complain that they are under all kinds of rules and regulations all day long, and they are under a lot of pressure and yearning for foreign countries.
But in fact, it is not necessarily better in a foreign country.
Why? From a foreign perspective, foreign countries have always been open-minded.
And this open-mindedness will inevitably lead to the emergence of imperialism.
The reason for the emergence of imperialism is that when most countries are developing peacefully, a country first adopts extreme measures to promote its own development, but the consequences of doing so will inevitably lead to the depletion of its own resources and the resistance of the bottom.
And once the contradictions further develop to the point of endangering the rule, then the state has no choice but to invade and expand externally, and transfer the contradictions to the outside world, so as to ensure that its existing interests are not damaged and maintain its rule.
So what happens?
When countries compete at the world level, if one country takes the lead in adopting extreme ways of development, then other countries must be at risk of being plundered because of their development being surpassed, and then other countries must also adopt extreme ways of development, which will lead to the intensification of internal contradictions in all countries in the world.
What should we do if the contradiction intensifies?
Foreign aggression diverts contradictions.
That is why imperialism erupted in concentration.
For rulers, to maintain their rule, it is necessary to deal with internal and external contradictions and vested interests.
With vested interests not being damaged as the core, and on the premise of not ceding interests, we cannot let the people overthrow us, nor can we allow other countries to invade us.
This has led to a phenomenon that Westerners prefer to enjoy and do not like to save money, and when they have no money, they will spend more or steal and rob.
In this case, the individual's cognition is presented as a predatory cognition:
I don't need to be recognized, I don't need to be recognized, but when I need someone else's resources and they don't approve of me, then I grab the resources.
You will see that under the influence of this kind of society, the law and order in many Western countries is not as good as that of China.
It's not Italy if you don't steal, it's not France if you don't rob. Stealing and robbing England, as well as the famous 0 yuan purchase in the United States.
But again, this is not to say that plunder is better in the West than in China.
As you can see, it is because of this radical social culture that the response is more drastic.
If they tried to do so, they risked being shot on the spot.
It could be a police officer, or it could be a private person.
Because of the broad judgment of the territorial law and the self-defense law, in many cases the killing of these people is not responsible.
So don't think that it's better not to be sentenced for stealing a lot of things in a foreign country, at least China is going to prison for stealing things, and foreign countries are risking their lives.
In such a social environment, people in it will form a low sense of identity: they are more accustomed to using "I" instead of "we" and "you" instead of "you" than in China.
That is, in their eyes, the person is a concrete person.
You can belong to many groups, but for "me", "I" will not identify with you, let alone respect "you" ideas.
Because the only way for "you" to make me obey (not agree) is to make "me" do what you say by power or force.
As for what you think, it's none of my business, I just want you to do it.
For China, it's more of a mental identity.
Because China's stable character is greater than the sky, it pays attention to cohesion and identity.
No matter what it is, it will basically be influenced by the elders and the collective.
What you do may not be very effective, but you must follow the rules and the concept of the group.
In this case, the humanity and individuality of many people are stifled and replaced by stability.
Therefore, many Chinese will feel a lot of pressure, they are oppressed by various stereotypes, and think that old ideas and this pursuit of stability are mountains that cannot be moved.
But in fact, we must see the essence of these two differences.
Nothing is absolutely good, and nothing is absolutely bad.
Yes, it's just a matter of application.
At least before the modern integration with the world, this concept occupied almost all of China.
What I would say is that this controlling approach, which turns "me" into "we", is actually promoting the survival of the individual and delaying the increase in entropy.
I also wrote in a previous column, I think the world is evolving, and survival and evolution are in conflict. Evolution is bound to threaten survival, because the essence of evolution is a favorable increase in entropy.
According to this model, a small number of talents in the West can make many people lose their jobs, whether in the spiritual sense (technological progress) or physical sense (the United States is the best at this).
In China, on the contrary, the creativity of a small number of talents is sacrificed to ensure the survival of the collective.
So if you're going to say that the idea of talent is denied because they're wrong, or is it that those collectives don't know he's right?
No, the collectives actually knew he was right.
It's just that, in order to maintain the rationality of collective existence, we have to deny it.
If you understand this, you will understand pre-modern China.
To know why the people in Lu Xun's pen are so ignorant, we must know the struggle of survival and the hardships of development.
It is precisely because after modern China that the three mountains were moved away by the revolution, that democracy and science have the opportunity to take root in China.
Online Literature Awards