Under the moonlight, Wang Qingxiu smiled, listening to her brother say these words that she couldn't understand. Wang Qingxiu didn't understand the national affairs. She didn't know what was bothering her brother. But listening to his brother talk like this and watching him become more relaxed, I felt particularly happy.
In Wang Xiaolie's previous life, he learned a lot of knowledge and formed many fixed opinions. These fixed views regulate and constrain him, making him cautious in doing things. Every decision you make must be compared with the dogma in your memory. However, in practice, many things were inconsistent with the dogma, which troubled him endlessly. Recently I finally figured out that the reason why dogma becomes dogma is because of its own reasons. Those things were originally knowledge, but they became dogmas because they did not understand them thoroughly. When these dogmas are broken down, suddenly everything becomes clear.
Most commonly, human society is divided into primitive society, slave society, feudal society, capitalist society and socialist society, and it is deduced from this that it will eventually transition to communist society. In fact, it is only in Europe that such a clear distinction can be made, and it is not obvious elsewhere. When Marx analyzed it at that time, he also said that it was only based on the situation in Europe, the Middle East, India and other places. It is not known whether the distant East, mainly China, is like this. Later it became a dogma, and many people believed that capitalism would be developed in ancient China. Some people even think that as long as China enters capitalism first, it will be ahead of the world. Even in history textbooks, it is specifically listed that the sprouts of capitalism had appeared in the late Ming Dynasty, which shows that China is not backward. Some people even believe that capitalists sprouted in the Song Dynasty.
What is the bud of a capitalist? Who stipulates that China must adopt capitalism? Who said that the emergence of the sprout of capitalism indicates social progress and civilization development? Which historical fact shows that the country that entered capitalism first will lead the world?
There is so much such knowledge that it has even become an inherent impression. If anyone questions it, a bunch of people will laugh at you.
Are there any objective laws in human society? should have. Can this law be summarized into such a formula? It should not be possible. For a leader who dominates one party, having such thoughts is harmful.
Much of the academic system of past life studies is artificially constructed based on ideological or political reasons. This system can be used to unify ideas and unite forces, but it cannot guide the past. In other words, just because the Industrial Revolution occurred in Europe first, it does not mean that human society must develop like Europe. Even if the Industrial Revolution does not occur in Europe, it cannot occur elsewhere, and we cannot think so. Because if you change China to be like Europe, the greatest possibility is that the industrial revolution will not happen.
Human society has developed through exchanges, learning, and even struggles between countries. You have discovered this knowledge, and he has invented that knowledge. It is a normal human phenomenon that you have not discovered or invented it yourself. The most important thing is to be active in learning and be good at learning. China does not need the industrial revolution to happen in its own country. As long as it actively learns and is good at learning after the industrial revolution occurs, it is enough.
The real world, whether it is the natural world or human society, is the same. When humans understand the world, the laws they summarize are never consistent with the real world. If they match, man will be a god and the country will be the kingdom of God on earth. People's thoughts are all kinds of weird. It's not surprising that they are unified on one thing and not on another. But just because people have all kinds of strange ideas, it doesn’t mean that any kind of human society is acceptable. Although the thoughts cannot be unified, there is a mainstream.
The greatest wealth left to Wang Xiaolie in his previous life is that the government must serve the people and look at issues from the people's perspective. Rather than this thought or that doctrine, those are of little use. It is revolutionary to directly change China's traditional view of destiny from the standpoint of the people. If we believe in the previous view of destiny that kings were given by heaven, the emperor is God. Then the new China, which takes the people as the source of power, will be turned upside down.
Only from this perspective can we understand the greatness of the teachers who founded New China. When future generations comment on teachers, the vast majority of comments, whether supportive or opposed, are nothing more than the light of a firefly competing for the brightness of the bright moon. No matter in terms of stance or theory, very few people can truly be on the same level as teachers. From the beginning to the end, he persisted in the ideal of saving the country and the people, and insisted on being on the same front with the people, which is unparalleled.
Did the instructor make any mistakes? Of course there is. The party's decision stated that 30%-70% should be opened. This mistake is more a leftist mistake than a mistake in understanding theory and human nature. As we all know, teachers believe that human nature is one-dimensional and one-dimensional sociality. Many policies after the founding of the People's Republic of China came from this understanding of human nature. Even the fact that teachers agreed with Legalism ideologically and reversed the verdict of Qin Shihuang and Cao Cao may have something to do with this. And Wang Xiaolie now understands that it is definitely wrong to use rules formed by human understanding to define human nature. It is precisely because the teachers made mistakes that the subsequent reforms were correct. What is the correct change? We must stand on the people's side and explore in practice.
Without a clear understanding of human nature, it is not enough to talk about political theory. This is the preciousness of China’s belief that human nature is inherently good and human nature is inherently evil since the pre-Qin period. In the Song Dynasty, temperament debates were held again and various schools were formed.
No civilization can skip this stage. After Europe and the United States entered modern society, there was also discussion of human nature, but it took different forms. For example, gender debates, women's rights, and the liberation of human nature are things that must be experienced. As for Chinese people joining in the fun and even thinking it is a manifestation of advanced ideas, I can only say that there have always been people following the trend like this, and there is nothing strange about it. It's just that in China, it definitely takes different forms and results. As China develops, it will naturally dissipate.
Can people understand the real world? Of course it can. Can people fully understand the real world? Probably not. The Chinese don't care about this. They believe that there is heaven and that heaven and man can eventually become one. Europe cares about this and is committed to building a world that is completely consistent with the laws summarized by existing knowledge, that is, a rational world.
Natural scientists understand this relatively clearly. Some people will be confused, some will think that there is a god, and some will think that all our knowledge is wrong. Although some people will point out that the God that scientists think of is not a God in the ordinary sense, it is not very useful. At its core, it is still believed that there is a special being who has fully understood the world. Sociologists, on the other hand, feel that they have understood the real world. Furthermore, some people think that the theories or laws they have concluded from this are completely correct. This kind of thinking is too arrogant. Even if everything is in front of you, you may not be able to understand the real human world.
It is an important step to know that you have not yet fully understood the world, and that all doctrines and laws are not enough to rely on. If you don't realize it, and you even enjoy yourself by picking up a sentence from one thing or borrowing a sentence from another, and arguing with others, it is even more unworthy.
Many philosophers, because they have studied European philosophy, will say that the reason why China cannot produce science is because there is no rational world in Chinese people's thinking. Some even say that this rational world is the other side of freedom of thought. Failure to recognize this other side shows the backwardness of ideology and culture. Why China did not produce science and why the Industrial Revolution did not happen in China, too many people have put forward too many theories. Most of these theories seem very reasonable, but are of little use. This is the fact. Post-event analysis is useful and allows latecomers to absorb the advantages of others. But the purpose is not to copy others and criticize them.
Europeans have a universal sentiment, or missionary mentality. I always feel that if I am better than others, others should be like me and learn everything from me. That's European culture, it has nothing to do with anyone else, and the world has never been like this. As humankind develops step by step, from tribes to countries, and then to national groups, no one knows what will happen in the future. But when there are many countries, we must take the country as the benchmark and firmly guard the boundaries of the country. This is especially true since China has no universal sentiments.
The ideal society according to Lao Tzu is one in which chickens and dogs hear each other and do not interact with each other until old age or death. Later generations said that this was Lao Tzu's limitation. In short, it was a conclusion that Lao Tzu drew based on the social reality at that time. In the society of later generations, human beings are becoming more and more closely integrated, but of course this cannot be the case. There is no need to criticize Lao Tzu in this way. Who knows, as humans develop, what will happen in the end?
Human beings are really like children in their understanding of the world. In the field of natural science, right and wrong are relatively obvious, and scientists can see them more clearly. Not so in the social sciences. Many people think that the world is here, visible and tangible, and there is nothing they cannot know. After summarizing the rules and even forming thoughts and doctrines, I feel that this is the truth of the world and absolutely correct. Therefore, the description of humankind's past and future must be correct. Many times this view is as stubborn as religion.
It can be said that as long as you think your understanding is absolutely correct, it must be incorrect. Humanity's understanding of nature and society must be in such a state. It is clear that knowledge and research must not be absolutely correct, but relatively correct. At the same time, you must also believe that your understanding and research have practical significance and are correct at a certain stage. Absolute correctness and relative correctness must be clearly separated.
Chinese philosophy divides the world into yin and yang, which developed into later generations and also developed the theory of contradiction. These studies are meaningful, but they cannot be considered to be the reality of the world. Knowing that this is not the reality of the world and being able to use these theories skillfully is the correct approach.
Wang Xiaolie looked at the bright moon rising slowly in the sky with mixed feelings in his heart. These understandings are actually very simple to say, but it is not easy to realize them clearly. If you tell others, they will probably think you are crazy.
Facing the complex world, we often say that simple rules should be summarized from these complexities. Use this simple rule to understand the world and solve real problems. But in fact, can simple laws explain the complex world? Actually it is not possible. But is there any point in summarizing simple rules? This certainly makes sense. But for most people, the above cannot be explained clearly.
Knowing that what you are doing is wrong, but also knowing clearly that what you are doing is meaningful and meaningful, makes people insane. It is really difficult to finally come out of this, to be able to jump out and see problems, and also be able to deal with practical affairs.
After taking a sip of wine, Wang Xiaolie said to his sister: "In this world, it's easy to live, but it's difficult to understand. If my father hadn't been working for Wang Jun, and I was guarding this hometown, many things would not be possible. I won’t think about living a simple and happy life. My father raised an army and unfortunately died on the battlefield. It’s not that simple for me to lead this army. There are many things that others don’t have to think about, but I have to think about them. There are many things that others don’t have to think about at all. I have to pay attention to things that I know how to pay attention to. Hey, I have been worried about it for nearly a year, and I finally figured it out recently. I hope I won’t worry about it anymore.”
There are many things we don't face, and we don't need to think about them. Even if I think about it in my spare time, I will not pursue the right. But when things come to a head, we can't be so hasty. If it's just a casual chat, how can you save the world from crisis in ancient times? Many people can talk freely and come up with endless ideas. Many people feel that with just a few words and a move of their hands, all crises will disappear. But in ancient times, we found that most of them were useless. If you want to solve problems, you must be down-to-earth and do it seriously.
Just like when China faced the crisis of national annihilation, many people with lofty ideals sacrificed their lives and blood to save the country and the people. For a long time, teachers were unable to convince others and received no support. On the contrary, Wang Ming and others who returned from the Soviet Union were very popular because of their great principles. The final result history gives the answer. However, most people will still believe in people like Wang Ming.
