得知了53年拍的《伟大的土地改革》

非美国网站的链接为https://www.bilibili.com/video/av6742454/

我怎么知道该电影的?因为翻了翻我的中国红歌的页,看到了《唱支山歌给党听》的那首,就记得其作曲家朱践耳比较有名,五十年代还在苏联学了作曲。然后翻了翻朱践耳的百度百科得知《翻身的日子》那首也是他写的,那首歌我怎么得知的?是在美国时在油管上看了殷承宗演奏它的视频。

同时,也得知《翻身的日子》竟然是53年拍的《伟大的土地改革》的插曲,然后该电影看了十多分钟吧。

我对土地改革具体不了解,对农业也是一无所知,反正我知道当时有贫农,中农,富农,地主。当然,地主也分小地主,大地主,没那么坏的地主,和残忍剥削并与蒋匪军和美帝国主义密切合作的地主。我也想到了我的一个大学同学,他就是彻底的香蕉人,也跟我说了他们家恨共产党因为曾经有多少多少钱。他也跟我说他父亲八十年代就去了美国,在一个一般般的学校读了数学博士,那人还特别要面子,还说因为当时美国读研对中国国际生很有限制,所以他父亲只进了一个一般的学校,尽管从中国名校毕业了。那个人啊,的确相当或很聪明,但总的而言给我感觉不好,就是一个一般的老老实实顺从学习的彻底被美国洗脑的香蕉人,在我眼中他的品味也一般,他的长相和整个说话的口气和方式也不给我什么好的感觉,就是如ChinaSuperpower所描述的,又一个几乎被阉割的顺从的好好学习的ABC,没啥想法,没啥眼光,没啥大气,其实这种ABC是美国最欢迎的,如果又知道了他的家庭背景,那只会更为这样。

反正从那个记录片,我能看出控制媒体是什么样的效果,一旦共产党控制了媒体,就能大量宣传这样的内容和立场。相反,美国的被犹太人控制的媒体就呵呵了,感觉真正挑战它,讽刺它的美国长大的华裔,目前我知道的唯一的人就是我自己。你看,那么多华人在美国就知道老老实实埋头苦干,我对一位第一代技术移民提到了犹太问题,他还对此具有容忍的态度。我一抱怨常春藤的总统和上层行政人员一半儿都是犹太人,他却以对此接受的口气说了个,“我觉可能比那个还多吧”。

我也想到如果美国很多是个诱惑,在硅谷当工程师的确能挣至少美国十万多,经常二十万多,甚至五十万多美金的收入,这我也都享受过,还算不错吧,一开始觉得很不错,后来就不觉得怎么样了。负面言来,它也很容易变成一个温水煮青蛙的过程。为了能够升上去,你得从某种角度有一种跪舔白人,印度人和犹太人的态度,然后慢慢,你的心灵被打乱了,你成了美帝国主义合作者了,如果在那儿生了孩子,那有孩子没有国家没有身份永远被美国奴役的危险。钱也只是一方面,还有地位的一面,美国华人虽然挣钱多些,但地位是相当低的。好多华人去了美国,一旦享受到了一些钱的诱惑,就永远没完了,虽然自己已经不缺钱,但成了它的奴隶,为了更多会做一些可被形容为“出卖自己灵魂”的事情,尤其一旦他们试图为他们的孩子在美国赢得好的未来。可以说他们这样是混得很成功,也可以说他们心里软弱,道德沦丧,无法抵挡美国的诱惑。

ChinaSuperpower将第一代大陆移民形容为大多有精神病(mentally ill)或道德有问题(ethically challenged),我之前觉得他这么说过激了,现在却觉得这种说法基本是对的。他特别强调八十年代后,中国已经相当稳定了,那些移民的在中国也算过的不错的,不像之前的一些移民,是逃避战争,饥荒或严重的经济危机,他们是有理由的。他也提到好多第一代移民的家庭在解放前也是城市人,对土地改革或文革依然怀有抱怨态度。我的感觉是这些人他们能力不差,但是就是比较过于自我中心并缺乏眼光。他们在中国已经过的不错了,甚至特别好了,但是还是把自己的个人利益放在国家前面。他们觉得白人更富裕,更好,所以要让他们的孩子接触白人,在白人文化环境长大。他们在美国也不团结,面对白人是跪舔态度,互相之间经常是小人的勾心斗角和攀比。所以说他们是ethically challenged是绝对正确的。他们这样成不了大事,就像当年的地主那样永远是帝国主义的傀儡,他们也建设不了现代化的国家。

Advertisements

Some thoughts on Chinese-Americans in relation to elite high school academic contests

Last night I was too tired to watch more of 红楼梦. I’ve now finished 4 episodes out of 50 (started a bit on the 5th one as well), which corresponds to the 9th chapter out of 120. But it wasn’t quite time for me to easily fall asleep. So it occurred to me to look up the winners of USA Math Olympiad for 2019.

https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/usamo/2019%20USAMO%20Winners.pdf

https://www.maa.org/sites/default/files/pdf/usamo/2019%20USAMO%20Honorable%20Mentions.pdf

There they are. And then it occurred to me to look at https://aapt.org/physicsteam/2019/team.cfm and http://www.usaco.org/index.php?page=finalists19.

I couldn’t help but notice how Chinese the names were. Of the 12 USAMO winners + 7 USAMO HMs, there were 15 Chinese, 1 Korean, and 3 whites/Jews.

Of the 20 USA Physics Olympiad finalists, there were 16 Chinese, 3 Indians, 1 Jew, and of the 20 USA Computing Olympiad finalists, there were 20 Chinese, 4 whites/Jews, and 1 Indian.

And as an FYI, I know people who have been each of these three categories, in years much closer to mine, and I am familiar with what these contests are like and their content. I’ll say that the physics olympiad is the closest to actual physics. The math one is a bunch of difficult olympiad style problems some with rather “brute force” or at least not terribly elegant or mathematically substantial solutions in the inequalities and synthetic geometry categories, and the computing one is a bunch of algorithmic problems requiring some cleverness in terms of dynamic programming, greedy, graph algorithms, even a bit of computational geometry.

Then years ago, there weren’t actually this many ethnic Chinese in the names of the winners of finalists of these contests. These are mostly the kids of 70 后 (born in 1970s) STEM immigrants from mainland China who have been selected for a combination of g, conscientiousness, interest in STEM, and (shudders) also lack of patriotism/woke-ness. Most of these kids are basically uber high IQ, nerdy banana-boys, really into these contests, winning academic awards, and learning math and science. My experience has told me that very few of these kids are anything close to culturally Chinese, and I don’t expect this to have changed.

I know it’s rather politically incorrect or at least awkward in America to comment on the ethnic factor of this contest, in particular the gross Chinese overrepresentation. I’m sure many find it very annoying but are too afraid to say it openly.

Speaking of annoying, this very annoying Jew in math kept telling me about how Chinese-Americans are a high powered, how they’re smarter than the native Chinese at the far tail. That *might* be true. The best native Chinese kids of the same age might have some difficulty beating those Chinese-American kids in those finalists lists in those contests, the last few years, US has done better than China at IMO I believe. But the native Chinese have their own advantages, like heck, they actually have their own language, own culture, own country, own government, own media, own military, and in the career world, I would expect them to do better since they will have much more political support.

There is also that people I know have said that these contests select not only for far tail g but also for not very high aesthetic discernment, because those with really high aesthetic discernment would lack motivation to prep too much for the more contrived aspects of these contests. I rather agree with that point of view.

I’ve interacted substantially with people in that category. They are certainly very smart and very fast and accurate and powerful at doing stuff, solving problems. But I find many of them lacking in awareness of cultural/historical context. When I learned math and science, I found myself more naturally interested in the history and development of it than most others. So even though I interacted with those kids to a fair degree, I also kept a bit of distance from them. I now find native Chinese many nowhere near as smart IQ wise more interesting and pleasant to talk to than them. At least subconsciously, I found many of them rather misguided in many ways. For more context, I’ll reference this quote of ChinaSuperpower on Reddit.

Chinese in China don’t do any of these things you mentioned. Confucianism was abandoned by 1960s. Only AA parents use Confucianism as a tool to keep their kids docile. Chinese in China are too busy building a massive blue water navy to challenge USN and take leadership. AA sometimes have no idea what modern China is about. Chairman Mao’s army annihilated US army in Korea and that’s why USA hates him LOL. Chairman Mao then proceeded to explode multimegaton hydrogen bombs in the 1960s that ultimately led Nixon to bow down and recognize PRC as a UN security council P5. Chinese today are patriotic and even low class people have sex and get married no problems.

Meanwhile it is first generation Asian emigrants who are white worshipping. They brainwash their children to erase any chance their children might figure out how powerful China is. Their agenda is to make their daughters white mans sex toys and their sons the coolies. This is the child sacrifice they are making to please the white man who is their God deep in their hearts. It’s the deal with the devil that first generation emigrants don’t what you to know about. They just want to keep you docile with math, physics, piano and Confucianism.

AAs should take their heads out of their math and physics books and read about Chairman Mao and modern China. China is the defender of against Western hegemony. It’s a red pill though. Once you know the truth you know you are just a child sacrifice to white Gods by white worshipping first generation emigrants. Your choice whether to live in ignorance or accept reality.

So, yesterday, I had lunch with a guy who did high school in China, undergrad at top or near top US school, and was a PhD student at Harvard for a while. I asked him about Beijing vs Shanghai. He said that he doesn’t actually feel much difference. I mentioned how Beijing as the capital is more state owned enterprise while Shanghai with its colonial past is more international and foreign-invested enterprise. In particular, I spoke of how someone I know whose parents are 体制内 had said to me that in Shanghai you shouldn’t tell people that you’re from a 体制内 background. That guy replied that he didn’t really feel that way, that many people in Shanghai want to go into 体制内 as well. Then I mentioned stereotypes of Shanghainese being really snobbish and looking down on people from smaller places, with reference to someone’s saying that Hong Kongers and Shanghainese are very snobbish. That guy’s response was very interesting. It was

Do you know which group of people I find especially snobbish? Chinese-Americans.

And I was like LOL, yes they are more snobbish than Shanghainese for sure, and in a much more ridiculous/pathetic way.

He qualified to those who immigrated to America in the 80s and 90s. After all, he had some interactions with them while a student there. I said that some of the best of them were really successful in academia, professors at Princeton, Stanford, etc. He was like, “yes, but some of them are pretty nasty people,” with a few names of such people he’s had direct exposure to. I spoke of the negative qualities which characterize many among that cohort based on my observation, such as really wanting to be individually good and being afraid that others from the same group surpass them, and lacking in 骨气 and risk-taking spirit for the collective good, and just being very small-minded in general. I spoke of how this guy who did reach the top in academia in America who’s returned to China now for over a decade was an exception, how he openly challenged this super dirty anti-China dissident in the 90s, before he had tenure. The response was that there are exceptions, and that that guy, unlike most, actually returned to China eventually, giving up his rare, coveted position in the US.

I mentioned that ChinaSuperpower also thinks that way of those first generation immigrants, in a more extreme way than you do. He was like, “he’s not the only one who thinks that, many people do.” Of course, the ones who did actually become high up in a company or professor at good or great university are the very small minority. The outcomes of most of those first generation immigrants were pretty meh, with some even a bit depressing. Not to mention their kids…

Yes, most of the kids in those math, physics, and computing olympiad finalists lists will do fine or even really well later on. Even the really well must be qualified with a they won’t get any serious money or political power though. But they are the very small minority. On the other hand, the typical kid of first generation immigrant from mainland China is up for a rather sad outcome. I’ve seen plenty of such…

Some scattered thoughts on 端午节 (Dragon Boat Festival)

First of all, 端午节安康!In English, it’s called the Dragon Boat Festival I believe. The holiday originates from the folk hero, statesman, and poet 屈原 (Qu Yuan) from 战国 (before the Qin Dynasty) drowning himself into a river out of patriotic passion. The people in order to prevent the fishes from eating his flesh threw 粽子 into the river. I don’t know all that much about the history and culture behind the holiday. It’s my first time in China during it since age 6. I am reminded of how when in 河南郑州 where I visited 轩辕故里 I actually managed to impress a few people by reciting the first few lines of Qu Yuan’s 《离骚》

帝高阳之苗裔兮,朕皇考曰伯庸。

I saw and heard in the background some study pertaining to 端午节 on TV. I also saw on 新闻联播 (and video recorded part of it on my Huawei phone, if you’re interested in seeing that, contact me) Xi Jinping’s visiting St. Petersburg with Putin. There was Xi in Russia on 新闻联播 yesterday as well.

It occurred to me to write more on this blog after I become too tired to watch 红楼梦 (I’m on the third episode now, https://v.qq.com/x/cover/c2xpl7t4eppkq7n/t00148f3yrh.html), which actually takes some mental exertion, more so than writing what I’m writing right now. I am actually reading parts of the original version as well, the ones I find more interesting, and it’s easier since I have the TV series to match with. For translating the 文言文 that I can’t understand on my own, I’m using some English translation e-book of it I had downloaded while I was still in America. This is kind of weird yes. Reminds me of how since my English isn’t all that great with literary stuff (despite being in America since age 6), when I finally read Pride and Prejudice (back in 2015 I believe), it actually occurred to me to find online a Chinese translation of it, which according to my vague memory actually helped me clear up confusion on a few parts. This using English translations to help me understand literary Chinese, it’s not the first time for me. I had done the same for 鲁迅’s 阿Q正传, with an English translation of it on marxists.org.

Something that’s pleased me much lately is that I for the first time am taking serious action to systematically correct my atrocious posture and consequent “bodily deformations,” and there are visible results already after not long. I was quite physically awkward as a kid. I was certainly not looks conscious. That certainly wasn’t good for my self-esteem growing up. I thought I was just naturally bad. Growing up Asian in (white) America made it even worse. But now that I am older and more understanding, I recognize well that this stuff can be corrected without much difficulty so long as I train systematically with some professional guidance/physical input. I had a rather lame and pathetic experience growing up in America, with some bad memories associated for sure. They haunt me still from time to time, but overall, I am quite “forward-looking.”

开始读(其实更是看连续剧)红楼梦了

不知为何,想起可以趁着还有时间好好利用读读红楼梦了,我想这对于了解中国更传统的文化会很有帮助的。其实,在美国时,接近两年前的时候,我就试了读红楼梦了,但基本是大失败,实在是太难太长了,而且他的文化背景对我也太陌生了。读过的也基本全忘了,留在脑子里的基本只有很少一点如什么“纨绔膏粱”,“簪缨世族”,跟我们现在生活和语言毫无关系的当时的贵族和文人用的语言。当时的我还对文言文有点兴趣,至少因为我从某种角度在内心里还有傲慢学术精英主义者的一面,觉得如果不知道点文言文,有些中国人会不把我当人看,就如我不把彻底美国化的美国华裔当人看。(注:刚才这话有为了幽默效应而夸张,莫以直译视之,我其实是个相对平易近人的人。)

现在在中国待了半年以上,红楼梦可以再尝试一下。尽然《敌营十八年》四十集的连续剧我都基本全看完了,那五十集的内容文化背景对我远远更陌生的五十集的红楼梦连续剧也是可以慢慢吃的,多久能吃完,难说。若看迷了,可能几个月,甚至就一两个月,也可能痴迷于工作和其他事情,没时间和精力把它放到边上,得两三年。至少现在我可以很欣慰的说我以完成了其百分之二。

我在似懂非懂地看视频的同时,也会在网上读读关于红楼梦的剧情,人物,和相关背景,也创建了在我这网站上一个红楼梦语录页,目前只有来自第一回最开始那部分的语录,这些我都会找到(或理解后自己编也行)其译文,为了我的(和我网站访问者的)学习和未来的参考。我倒是想过找或者买个红楼梦的删节版本读,后来也觉得算了吧,可以看连续剧,也可以读网上关于剧情的内容,归根结底,剧情的概括可不就是个超级删节版么。

网上的原本太长太难则考虑找删节版却把我引到了我爷爷留下的书架。我记得我爷爷特别爱收集东西,尤其是录像,印象非常深刻的是我小时候他家里收集了不少录像,而且内容非常之广,从动画片到纪录片到新闻,其整理分类排序也都做得相当完美,当时九十年代用的还是卡带。

他留下的那书架,其内容让我感到“很有意思”。书前面摆了不少各种各样用石头做的漂亮的东西(不知道这个中文该如何更简洁的形容)做为一种修饰,书很多都是一些跟共产党相关的,至少那些最容易引起注意,也有四大名著,包括红楼梦,只不过那原本红楼梦我网上也能看到。这可能在中国没那么奇怪,但对于在美国长大的我,反应自然会是一种笑。里面包括什么毛选,还有邓小平,周恩来,陈云,等的文集,也有翻译到中文的一些列宁的著作。也堆了不少红色小册子,拿了最上面的看了看,标题却是“中国共产党第九次全国代表大会”,那好像是69年的。

可以说我也以新型的互联网平台做了点类似,我为了自己和别人方便找,也为了troll一下笑一笑,收集了在这上面一些苏联红歌中国红歌的视频,回国后,一旦得知一个新的艺术水平不错的,如白雪唱的《永恒的军礼》,可能也会将其插入到列表里。

有点晚了,就不再写了。红楼梦打算慢慢地看。可以通过它感受一下中国科举封建制度下的贵族文化。

1983年北京市的面票

觉得挺有意思的。怎么找到的?是在处理些家事儿时,如换灯泡之类的,在抽屉里翻出来的。

六零后人跟我说粮食当时只能用粮票买,用人民币都不卖给你,粮票和肉票需要拿着户口本去领,每个人好像一个月半斤肉,粮票肉票一直用到八十年代底。

我问

那运动员不可能吃那么点肉吧,游泳的,田径的,打篮球的,以身材肌肉为竞争力的。

得到的回答是

他们不一样,他们在体校,有特殊的政策。

这让我想起读过一个英文版的关于姚明的书,里面好像说当时上海体育官员在他和王治郅俩专业篮球队员父母的孩子还没有出生时就已经为他们做了准备了。如果我没记错,那里也写了由于某体育官员对姚的母亲的文革毛左活动有仇,姚明却失去了一些他应当得到的优越的营养,不过尽管如此,他比预期长的还高,表现的比预期还好,不知是真是假。好像那本书也提到了上海体育官员有一次到他们家拜访时给了姚明家一些粮票,将此形容为中国当时正在改革的计划经济制度的象征之一。

一看到粮票,我也就更能理解为什么当时那么多人把美国视为天堂并对中国的制度更加质疑了,物质条件上的确是天壤之别。反过来,尽管有粮票,中国依然八十年代却出了那个破过当时世界纪录的跳高疯子朱建华,他好像也是上海的,也许或很可能如果他出生在农村而非上海,他就不会被发现而得到适当的专业运动员的培养,也就没有他了。这让我想到如何那本姚明书也说了姚明的祖父是上海最高的人之一,可是五十年代被发现时就已经二十多了,来不及培养了。

和那为三观很中国的第三代美国华裔的一些聊天内容和其所引发的感想

这周末我做了火车去了另一个城市,见了一个人,也住了一宿。晚上在宾馆里又跟我最近通过我的博客认识的人在微信上沟通了,我们讨论了不少话题,在这里记载一下。

关于种族和政治上的人以类聚,物以群分

那个人非常关注基因,我也跟他说人的世界观和宗教及政治信仰也是有一定遗传因素,关于这个的英文文章我是读过。就是中国人,也有了国共分裂及双方分别根据在大陆和港台美。现在,美国的自由主义伪左派将种族视为一个social construct(社会构建)而非生理的,其荒谬我就不在这里解释了。这让我想起2013年底2014年初的时候,乌克兰在发生政变,一位五岁随父母从乌克兰移民美国的男生对此非常不满,并说了个

Liberalism is a genetic disorder.

翻译成中文就是

自由主义是个遗传精神疾病。

我觉得自由主义本质上就是自欺欺人,然后也觉得总而言之,东亚人自欺欺人的程度小一些吧,所以中国的主流意识形态自然成了反自由主义的。东亚与世界其他地方几乎完全地理隔离,则走了非常不一样的进化道路。印度人与白人相近得多,阿拉伯人也是,他们都是高加索人。相反呢,中亚和东欧有蒙古人种的成分。比方说,维族人和汉人长相区别并没那么大,因为他们,据我所阅读,是蒙古人种和印欧人的混血,而且可能蒙古人种成分大一些。维族的起源是有争议的,我记得读到研究这方面的中国人好像是说在汉朝时期,新疆的人是来自伊朗的印欧人,可是之后,来自蒙古和西伯利亚的一些蒙古人种部落却与他们有了不少混合,所以才说维族人其实是来自于蒙古的人。对这些,我没有资格评论,但是维族人我不是没有接触过,觉得他们长得不像典型的中东人,更像东亚人,但当然还是和纯粹的东亚人有些差距,

我还跟那个说蒙古人其实都难看出来,甚至看不出来,有一位女演员我都没看出是蒙古人,网上查了她才知道。蒙古人的确也把他们的父系基因传遍了一大片土地,覆盖中亚,中东,和东欧。我也跟他说了美州的土著印第安人也是一万多年前的冰时期通过当时冻僵的白令海峡来自西伯利亚的人,所以他们也与东亚人远远更像,与白人相比。

盎格鲁锡安主义亡黄种人之心不死

Reddit上的那个ChinaSuperpower写过当种族差异太大,融入是不可能的,由于人的部落本性。在那种情况下,要不就是征服者,要不就是男人被灭绝,女人以相对低等的地位嫁进异类民族。所以我也认为盎格鲁锡安主义者有对东亚人和东欧人进行种族清洗的政策。他们在90年代在东欧所做的就导致了东欧人失去百分之十的人口。在中国支持亲西方的傀儡也是一种种族清洗的手段,种族清洗不需要直接杀人,长期的奴役或殖民本质上就是一种清洗的形势。就看看好多那些香港华人如何为例,那地方自然吸引了那些更接受甚至愿望服从盎格鲁的华人。

对于香港这个例子,那个人的回答是

他们愿望西化所带来的地位,那些人等到时间到了,会试图换到中国那边。

我对这个的回答是

我觉得你对他们的纯粹为自私自利而这么做的程度或许高估了。我觉得他们好多就是崇洋媚外自我民族自恨得病态者。那些纯粹自私自利的香港商人知道在正式回归被决定后将自己放到中共那边。

对这个,那个人说

那可能就是他们从意识形态上反对中国。我讨厌好多那些人,他们非要把自己表现为英国人,虽然他们不是英国人,由于教育体制将他们引导到了那个方向。我跟他们有所认识,有的还可以,但有的就是人品极差,对人很刻薄。

我之后很他说了孔庆东骂香港人是狗的事件,也说了我去年从Unz Review得知鸦片战争也是(好像根据于印度的)犹太沙宣家族为了他们的经济利益而挑起的,这为犹太人的反华又加了个点。

犹太人对中国的别有用心及心里不安

他问我

你有没有跟犹太人工作过,或者更他们有深入的交流?

我回答

在工作中还真的没有,但是我的确被一些明显鄙视我的犹太老板面试过,他们对我就是个这个人好不好当苦力被剥削的态度。有一个是在一家名牌公司,就是因为最后面试我的大老板是个以特别凶狠的态度对待的以色列人,所以我没有接受那份工作。

我跟你说过,那个学数学的美国犹太人,我和他在网上交流了不少。然后,我还与一位犹太数学博士,特别有才华,并且品德也不错,不像一般犹太人。可是呢,即使那些人,他们如果需要选择还是会毫无犹豫的贴到犹太主流那边。Unz和Bobby Fischer那样的是特别少数的,几乎被边缘化了。像Unz,他可能有两千万身价和一些媒体影响加上Fischer为国际象棋冠军,可以这跟那些真正有钱有权支持锡安主义的主流犹太人相比是啥都不算。如Adelson, Sergei Brin, Steven Spielberg。我在我网站上都积累了一个反华犹太人的名单。还有Elie Wiesel,他儿子是高盛的高管。华人在美国面对犹太人的姿态是极其软弱的,我比他们强硬得多。

对这个他评论

你绝对更是一个自由思想者。

我说

是的,我没有那么被伪造的权威及其煤气灯操纵所盲目。比如,我写过如何在百分之百客观公平的精英竞赛,如普特南,中国学生近年在秒杀犹太人。科研和实际成就上犹太人依然有较大的优势由于他们优越的资源和积累,不过这个也在减小,中国已经追赶了不少。还有,就是在数学和理论物理日本人二战后的地位同等或至少接近。所以,相信他们的“天才”大多有他们的优越资源和媒体吹捧而夸大是合理的。他们的人均财富和社会资源实在太高。他们很少做工人阶层的工作,或者更服从或机械性的脑力活不光因为他们的高智商,还因为他们优越的社会和经济背景。

在英文媒体有不少他们语言智商更高的解释,那正在读数学博士的犹太人有一次跟我以语言智商解释纽约时报专栏者一半为犹太人的现象,这很荒谬,当然,当那个你的写作和语言能力和天赋不能差,可是这方面强的人也并没那么少,只是有这种天赋的人只有很少才有能够给他们那种机会的家庭背景。因为犹太人垄断者美国的媒体,所以自然会把这些机会过多给自己人。

我感觉在中国,在90年代,00年代,好多人对犹太人有敬畏感,觉得他们得了那么多诺贝尔奖,那么有钱,可是现在很多由于中国强大得多了,中国人也对犹太人越来越有疑问了。但是,依然在国际化的学术界,有很多中国人依然拍犹太人的马屁,因为犹太人能提供对他们学术生涯非常有利的国际机会,就是在中国,好多教职要求海外经验,所以学术界里的中国人当然很少敢批评犹太人的作为,不过由于中美关系更加紧张的趋势,这也会慢慢改变的。

我还跟他说了一个例子,就如何那反华反共的犹太人曾对我说过

给我说一个非常创新的专制国家。

当时,我就跟他说了

纳粹德国,前苏联,帝国日本。

尽管他们的专制,他们的先进和创新程度太明显。比如,美国的航天是基于纳粹德国的,战后,美国把纳粹德国最牛的导弹专家大多都挖走了。纳粹时期,德国德裔的顶尖的科学家和工程师大多都支持了纳粹政权,虽然那些顶尖的犹太人去了美国,对美国的原子弹等研制有了决定性作用,帮助了美国赢得战争,也这不改变那些德国的德裔顶尖人才很创新又非常支持纳粹的事实。

以此为例,我说

犹太人就是会为了他们的自己的名族利益最无耻的胡说八道或咄咄逼人,一旦为了犹太人的利益,他们会彻底失去任何理性严谨尊重现实的思维,而且他们这么做竟然能震住或蒙住不少人。

我在美国看到的无脊梁野心主义的人

那个人说他自己也希望发财,也看到在纽约发大财的人好多可残忍了。

这让我想起我接触过的一位硅谷风投初创公司的华裔女CEO,六岁去的美国,应该是83年出生的吧,大学毕业后好像在对冲基金发了些财,身价应该有个一千万吧。我去过好几次她在她家里开的聚会,去的都是些白人和完全美国化的华裔,完全以美国的方式交流。她说话给我一种没有人情的感觉,也显得如那种无脊梁的野心主义者,上了什么福布斯30 under 30(就是30个人,不到30岁)。我看到她说了,写了些一般人会觉得很恶心的话,比如她父母得癌症时(我记得她母亲死了,父亲有没有我就不知道了),自己会如何坐飞机看他们,加了个什么“还好我有钱,机票钱对我啥都不算”,还写道旧金山街上无家可归的人,在某采访中还提到她大陆家庭背景相对负面的事情。她也是中文基本不会,尽管她跟我说大学还上了中文课。我当时还是个幼稚的孩子,不知硅谷初创公司真面貌,还稍微考虑了到她那儿工作,跟她通了一次电话对这个人只形成了更加负面的感觉。

我跟那个人说了这个例子,并评论

我其实也挺aggressive(强硬)和ruthless(残忍),可是我不是那种无脊梁野心主义的人。

对这个,那人就说

有的人就是没有灵魂。

Q&A with a hybrid 3rd generation Chinese-American 4th generation Japanese-American (same person, half Chinese, half Japanese)

How Was it Like Growing Up? It is hard to describe what it was like growing up in such a family. All I can say is that I always knew I wasn’t “White”—that is, I looked different from everyone else around me; what I was instead, however, wasn’t immediately clear. I probably grew up with the most incoherent sense of identity out of anyone I know.  Most “Chinese” around me were 4th generation Chinese Americans—descendants of the railroad workers—that largely originated from Taishan and did not speak Mandarin. In fact, it was considered a bit rare to actually encounter someone of Chinese ethnicity that actually spoke Mandarin (or someone of Japanese ethnicity that spoke Japanese). No one in my family speaks Japanese or Chinese at this point (besides me) and continues to lack any sense of ethnic awareness. It was basically a cultural ghetto.

It was kind of like Luke Skywalker’s upbringing in Star Wars. Most people around Luke Skywalker were ignorant proles that lacked knowledge of anything outside the backwater in which they existed, and only Obi Wan Kenobi knew the true story. At that time, it would’ve been impossible for Luke Skywalker to know what a Jedi or Darth Vader is, because based on his life experiences up to that point (dealing with proles) he had no theoretical basis to expect a phenomenon like the Jedi, or Darth Vader. It was like that: only my grandmother, like Ben Kenobi, really knew where we were from (my mother was raised in America) but I wasn’t taught Chinese at the time and couldn’t converse with her on any meaningful level. My grandfather, the only one that had actually lived in Beijing prior to 1949, died one month before I was born. So there was a huge information bottleneck until I was able to speak with my relatives in Beijing.

How did you connect with your Chinese roots? I connected with my Chinese roots when I went to China for a study abroad program in Beijing. Many things changed me that summer—for the first time, I learned the truth about my background. You see, up until that point, I had been told a narrative of how my family was quite poor in China and that we were fortunate to have made it to America and that in general, there was a linear and upward progression of things—that is, things were becoming better over time. However, once I visited my family in China, I realized the vast majority of what my mother had told me was not true—in actuality, my grandfather came from a fairly high IQ, educated, wealthy family. We weren’t these dirt-poor peasants that had somehow become enriched by having been in America, but the complete opposite! Actually, my grandfather was educated in English and had a higher quality education than I did. Anyways, this was something that I wasn’t able to tell people when I came back, because 1) People generally don’t want to acknowledge inconvenient information and 2) it’s the complete antithesis to the American dream. So, up until now, I have only told this story to people with similar narratives, most of whom don’t live in the United States.

How did you react to the alternative viewpoints by family in China? So, the alternative outlooks provided by my family in Beijing were definitely the spark that lit the fire. Of course, at that point in time, I knew that I enjoyed the experience of being with my relatives in Beijing, but I couldn’t pinpoint why. Usually in the course of life, we encounter some intuition and phenomenon and are later reassured of its existence through other people’s validation. For example, if I go to Japan, see that it’s clean and this observation corresponds with what other people are saying and have written about the topic, I can be sure that my experiences match reality. Yet, with my time in Beijing, the overwhelming majority of people I spoke to did not come to the same conclusion. Everyone kept on saying America was the best, the rest of the world was worse. My experiences simply didn’t fit the standard narrative regarding the way the world worked, and everyone that I had been told knew more than me about the way the world worked was continually denying my intuitions. As such, I thought I was seeing things for a while. However, a couple of things later validated my experience: first, I uncovered a trove of politically incorrect writings that corresponded with the reasons as to why I was emotionally unsatisfied by the American experience. Second, the outcome of the 2016 elections was predicted by many on the blogosphere. What this meant that I was not seeing things, but rather a sizable amount of the population agreed with me—they just weren’t, and still aren’t, permitted to voice what they actually think in public. It was one of the most validating experiences of my lifetime.

Why Against Liberalism? Liberalism has caused me and my family to engage in suboptimal decision making for a really long time. The ideals of egalitarianism and equality, in particular, have led to some disastrous consequences. The decision, for example, for my mother to marry into my dad’s family was premised on the idea of equality and that all humans really are created equal. The decision of our parents to send us to public high school and intentionally surround us with the dregs of society was based on the idea that anyone can be anything. It’s simply impossible for anyone to engage in any rational decision-making if they continue to delude themselves.

Asian-Americans As time goes on, I start to feel less in common with “Asian-Americans’: for one, I think the term “Asian-American” has a very hollow meaning. Basically, it’s someone that “looks yellow” and may or may not have an understanding of where they were before America. By this logic, Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are the same.  This is horse shit. To the extent that there’s any commonality amongst the people commonly understood to be “Asian-Americans”, it’s that they’ve all shed any vestiges of their own traditional culture, and the common culture between them is basically mainstream popular trash culture. I have found that it’s never a good idea to bond with people over being in the same shitty situation. I’ve also noticed that the shittier the situation is for Asian-Americans, the shittier they are to each-other. I noticed this especially in the Northeast, where Asians have less political power and are incredibly combative with each other. I find it really hard to want to cooperate with others in environments like that.

 

为什么美国的自由主义经济观念很多是荒谬并反常识的

昨天,在微信上看到了别人转载某已在微博上被删掉的据说来自于一位华为资深工程师的关于华为芯片备胎以及最近的美国政府对高通谷歌给华为提供核心芯片和安卓系统技术的“禁令”的文章,读了之后启发了我对经济的一些想法。我基本没学什么经济,对它没那么感兴趣,也觉得他本质上是比较扯淡的学科,觉得经济学家或专家要不就在数学界做一些过于理想化非常不完美的对经济的数学模型和估计,要不就是一些为了利益集团忽悠的人。可以,据我的经验,从严谨证明为主的纯数学,到模型为主统计和机器学习,到在公司里为业务需求做软件开发,到炒过股票买过房子知道期权,期货,信用违约互换等金融衍生工具的基本规则,到读过不少中英文的历史观政治观经常对立的文史哲文献,我的确积累了一些自己对经济的看法,准备在此文里解释一下。

经济的本质其实是优化物质资源,而非市场经济或虚拟的金钱

美国人比较盲目相信资本主义市场信号,觉得经济需求都可以用市场信号调整,并且资本主义提供的发财的机会是最好的激励人创造大经济价值。这一点不光是不太对,都可以说是反常识的。这我觉得不用多解释。现在给个很简单的例子。如果,自由市场信号那么管用,那就不会出08年09年那种危机了,也不会出30年代的那种大萧条了。

还有例子就是Facebook和Google的市值可能一个超过5000亿,一个超过8000亿,Intel的只有个2000亿。从市场经济角度,前者远远更有价值,但实际上,前者相对容易在技术上复制,后者就很难,要不是白痴都知道后者实际上远远更有价值,而前者的市值大多来自于利用美国的势力当媒体及广告寄生虫。

一个国家的实际经济实力根本源于它物质研发,生产和操作的先进程度和力量。一位原苏联军官写过,“没有一个国家可能有世界级的军队,而没有世界级的经济”。这个说法很对。世界级的军队意味着你有能力独立研发并生产最先进的使你掌握地缘政治优势的核心技术,在这一点,世界上最多三个国家才能做到。军事上的,地缘政治上的优势意味着你能够相对容易的控制他人的不少资源,若真正需要,可以直接打仗夺取,但在今天,一般来讲,这根本不需要,因为你的军事和物质上的威胁就能直接迫使他方被动顺从,这导致他方即使有财富,也能很容易转到你的手里。美国其实一直在这么做,但是好多“专家”或把这个称为市场的优越或自由民主的优越。

在这一点,可以给几个很好的例子。十九世纪中旬的中国有不少物质财富,但因为科技和军事远远落后,英国人很容易把中国打败,强加了不平等条约,把中国的茶瓷之类没有核心价值的财富很容易以廉价挖走,并可以剥削中国的劳动力。在过一百年,共产党虽然军事装备落后,但它的在中国陆地优越的被人民群众支持的军队依然能把地主资本家的财富几乎全部转到自己手里。你说那些地主和资本家的财富能算真正的财富么?不能,因为他们没有足够的武力的支撑,守不稳他们当时所“拥有”的。

如果一个人名义上很有钱,但这钱有被别人夺走的可能性,那这个人的富有只不过是表面而非真实的。你可以说有法律的保护,但是法律的执行需要政治权利,而政治权利根本是基于武力的。如果你没有枪,而与你对立的人有枪,他就可以抢走你的财富甚至奴役你。孟晚舟的事件就是很好的例子,当时,她在美国附属加拿大的土地上,在那儿主权和枪在美国人手里,他们基本可以为所欲为,要释放,中国就必得有所妥协有所让步。

所以有枪是最能够让人优化牢牢控制在自己手里的物质资源的。首先,你有枪并能自己生产它,说明你的技术和生产力是不差的。就多靠自己也很难穷到哪儿去,就不用说枪给你在贸易上的优势了。当年在中国,一开始共产党只能缴获别人的枪,自己能生产的枪非常原始,质量较低,由于是农业社会后勤生产水平也很低,可以依靠灵活的扬长避短的战略和战术,能战胜强敌,将更先进的技术和更丰富的资源(这包括人力资源)转到自己手里。后来,把原来的资本家和地主大多被浪费的或无法有效使用的资源集中起来拿去投入到工业化和现代化。过了十年时间就迈了一大步,以前有些枪,大多很烂,略好点的都是从敌人缴获的,到能够独立制造至少能勉强算得上具有真正现代化水平的枪和支撑其上下游复杂多元化的工业基础。这些肯定被GDP大大低估,也不会提升人的生活水平,但它却是远远更宝贵的财富。

经济本质上更是计划的,而非市场的

美国人普遍认为大消耗对经济好,因为能增加经济需求则创造更多的工作。美国人之所能够给这样想是因为他们的国家建立于从土著印第安人夺取一大块资源太丰富的土地并相当早就实现了工业化量产。而且,美国1865之后在本土如欧洲亚洲不一样没有经历大毁灭性的战争,没有欧洲亚洲国家人民所经历的物质欠缺。在1950年,中国是个百废待兴的农业社会,物质上及其匮乏,尤其是工业产品,能吃饱饭就不错了,谈不上什么大消耗促进需求和经济发展,谈不上什么市场经济,而是恰恰相反,怎么将稀少的资源节省并运用到极致。就是那时候,在相对先进,二战损失相对比较小的英国,老百姓的食品都是有限量的。

其实低产出而大消耗,如很美国人现在的,是一种经济上软弱无力的表现。美国人之所以能这样做是因为世界别到地方有很多人经济上在给美国人做炮灰。改革开放以来,上亿中国工人辛辛苦苦廉价给美国生产并提供不少产品,这给了美国一种物质上的富裕,收益者最多是美国的资产阶级,美国的中产也能原收益于能够买到那么廉价的产品,受害的确是失业的美国工人阶层。从长远来看,美国整个国家可能会因此受害,因为通过这个过程,美国却失去了原有的工业生产力,想恢复已经很难了。有永久的为你提供服务的炮灰其实是一种幻想,就像人类总有一天会有自然原因不得不灭亡(但那一天实在太远,根本不需要我们想),寄生虫总是一天会失去原有寄主并无法找到新的,若它无备自力更生之力,那必将灭亡。有美国自由主义者会说生产iPhone的中国依赖美国的市场,这其实大多是不对的。假设中国人虽然有能力但被禁止组装iPhone了,的确很多工人会失业。可是,中国人有计划经济的思维,传统和经验,政府可以给失业工人补贴让他们有吃有住,这都花不了多少钱,并帮助他们找到新的工作,新的市场。而美方需要找到或自己建设新的大量的iPhone组装厂,这个虽然比芯片容易低端的多,也没有那么容易,像印度那样的大但一般工业实力远远不及的国家,可能做这个在产量加质量上都难以过关。另一句话,中国是可以抵制美国的资本主义市场有戏的,在毛时代已经这么做了二十多年,也不是没有先例和经验。

市场经济的好多观念和模型似乎把人作为理性优化钱或以比较窄的形势定义的所谓个人利益的机器,这是很荒谬的。人是有感情,是需要组织的。经常,人的最强的动力不是出于钱而是出于感情,这可以是对某个行业或学科的热爱,也可以是对某宗教或政治信仰或民族的认同感。据我所观察,美国经济学家相对忽略了种族多元化和社会分化对有效组织合作所创造的问题,在美国,如果提出种族混合文化混合基本是不可逆转过程却在不少人眼里是非政治争取的。

今天的经济问题根本不是缺乏生产力的问题,而是合理资源分配的问题

原来,人饿着是因为无法生产足够的粮食,做出足够可以吃的实物。相反,今天,人饿着是因为没有虚拟的金钱能够买到所需要的食品,或者,若果以饿着更视为一种比喻,物质资源。今天,资本家的工作主要是为了加强自己对金钱和资源的控制及垄断,导致他们根本不会在乎为他们劳动的人,也不会在乎无家可归的人。那些真正吃不饱饭的无家可归的人的存在是为了给底层工人甚至中产的人,在他们眼里,劳动人就是工具,给他吃住是为了他能够劳动为资本家生产价值,就像在封建社会和奴隶社会,贵族因为需要奴隶的劳动力也不能让他们饿死,但是也基本不会给奴隶任何不防止剥削它的好处或资源。基本都是统治阶层之少数优化自己所得所享,而在这个过程中必得优化多数的产出减去消耗。中产阶层和上中产阶层,及知识分子,之所以给的更多因为他们作为脑力劳动者自然物质上的吃苦能力差些,并且因为聪明有知识有文化更可能有反抗心里所在,给他们更多钱是为了买到他们的忠诚。就像在美国,美国统治阶层给中国工程师更多钱不是因为喜欢他们,愿意接受他们是为了他们能够满足并好好工作为他们创造价值并对中国进行一定的分裂,因为中国对他们的位置威胁实在太大了。虽然历史进程随着科技的进步从奴隶社会转向了封建社会后转向了资本主义和社会主义社会的混合,人和社会的阶梯性的本质却没有改变,也无法改变。剥削压迫依然存在,只不过形势不一样,有的相对残酷一些,有的相对良性一些,而我认为社会主义制度所有的剥削和压迫总的而言不资本主义要良性的多。

好多比较无知比较幼稚的美国人把共产主义想成大家都一样的不现实缺乏激励机制的不可能成功的制度,这很荒谬。大家都知道在毛时代,虽然没有有钱人,但阶层和地位差异依然是很大的,因为人与人之间的差异,在背景上,在能力上就是很大。阶层也不是钱决定的,是文化和社会关系所决定的。一个美国人再有钱也不可能进入任何中国人的阶层,因为即使他实现了精通中国和中国文化白人几乎不可能做到的,他的明显非黄种人的面孔不得不使得中国人以另一种角色看待他。在中国,一个土豪不管多么有钱也不可能被精英知识分子阶层所接受,因为他们没有其所需要的知识,天分,和才学。好多东西不是钱能买来的,刚给的几个例子是对钱为主的自由主义经济思想的难以争辩反驳。

改革开放以来中国接受了不少来自美国的自由主义经济舆论及精神毒品

改革开放让中国人看到了西方国家的先进和富裕,塑造了一些盲目全盘西化的风气。中国的工业化和现代化可以说是从50年在开始,也是非常难得赢来的。中国有与世界最先进水平差距相对小的地方,如核武器,导弹和航天也是新兴技术,因为先进国家搞这些也没比中国早多少,所以还有可能勉强追赶。在像飞机和发动机这样的相对老一点行业,追赶就需要远远更长的时间。更不用说,中国起点太低,对外形势很多都对中国不利,大多有限的资源用到了工业化上,必然人的生活很穷。因为中国改革开放之后领导和人民更多想着如何提高人的物质生活水平,如何发财,如何融入美国为主的国际体系,其实丧失了不少核心竞争力,比如70年起马的运十飞机项目被砍掉,比如没有建立独立自主的半导体和芯片生态体系。这些东西即使有大量资源投也需要时间,不是钱能够买来的,一旦领导和国家认识到了这些不能依赖美国,已经失去了十年二十年的时间了。改革开放以来,中国形成了不少投机发财的风气,好多发财的人并没有创造什么价值,甚至做得事情对社会有害,而且他们发了财后还觉得财产不安全,试图将其一部分转到国外。他们以为有捷径,但是实际上没有捷径。如果中央要为了中国的芯片和半导体发展如五十年代初那样宰这些人,人民也不会同情。所以,过了一段时间,邓小平及其派系在中国的名声已经不太好了,历史的长河,历史的检验没有市场的鼠目寸光,还是更尊重真实的,所以也不会给他和他的支持者太高的评价。

但是,我还是对中国更乐观。虽然现在依然落后,潜力绝对是有,是时间的问题。更重要的是,中国人看经济看政治更尊重客观现实,没有美国人那种民主市场经济原教旨主义的自欺欺人。中国即有适合现代社会的红色传统,又有基于五千年文明的统一语言,文化和民族,利于正确的方向和有效的组织。相反,我看到的美国是在衰落的多种族自由主义的一片糟,它所有更多是原来的积累,而现在只不过是外强中干。

我近几天在Disqus上的几个关于中国的评论(Some comments of mine over past few days on Disqus on China related matters)

我是个码农,写过些上过生产被上万或上百万用户直接用的代码,也学了些纯数学。可是在这些,虽然自己有一定实力,绝对不能算最发挥出自己的影响力。我觉得我的在美国长大但成功抵抗了美国文化对那儿长大的华裔的精神和文化阉割,与我的语言,写作和传媒能力相结合远远更有价值。它可能不会给我直接带来什么金钱,但更能让我影响历史和文化的进程,也更能帮着中国赢得中国应当有的国际话语权。

我这个人比较强调可持续性发展,对忽悠和夸张作为自然比较反感,而这方面美国做的实在太过激,早晚会砸自己的脚。美国人宣传中国大多都是假宣传,只有非常少数美国人敢于对此直接表态反驳,心里肯定大多也是为了美国好,因为能感觉到美国这样做是会早晚大自食其果的。

比如,我很欣赏的BobSykes评论了

This is utter nonsense. China’s political institutions are among the strongest in the world, as has been demonstrated repeatedly. That’s what communism is all about. And in a trade war their position is stronger than that of the US. China has the skilled workers and modern factories. Their problem, and it is a big one, is to find markets for their products to replace the US. That is a much better situation to be in than the US. In trade with China, or anyone, what we have is store shelves. In a trade war we have empty shelves and a population that cannot find basic needs.

At present, we are in a similar position v.v. China as the Indian Raj was v.v. England. England imported Indian and Egyptian cotton, and solid it back to the Indians and Egyptians as cloth, at a profit.

Our loss of our industrial base means that in a military sense we are to China today what Japan was to the US in 1940. How did that turn out.

Bolton and Pompeo are pursuing and extremely belligerent foreign and military policies with everyone, including our oldest allies. These policies will eventually cripple American and destroy its influence and power even if we can avoid a major war, which seems increasingly unlikely.

我对这个的回答却是

I’m sad for America. I’m perhaps more sad for the minority of woke white Americans like you and a few of my similarly woke white American friends in my generation who and whose children don’t really have an escape route. Like, I actually have more freedom of speech than my smart woke WASP American friend who is actually more or less stuck in America or at least in the Anglo world, much subject to a certain group for his career, etc.

The minority of white Americans like you and Jared Taylor and Ron Unz (he’s Jewish so slightly different) who dare to speak out are far from enough to counter the main trend. But at the very least, it’s a form of insurance in that if America really crashes and burns, they can make a case for themselves and receive better treatment or at least sympathy from the other side. I suspect there are many, especially young, white Americans who feel similarly but are at least half closeted out of career risk-aversion, can’t blame them really. I myself though am I guess less of a conformist and more of a risk-taker, unlike most Chinese who grew up in America.

I’ve spoken with one of my WASP friends, who’s very understanding and rational on China (like he openly told me that China’s banning Google and Facebook was a smart move), on how I feel sad for him that he won’t have a white homeland. This was of course only after I got to know him well enough that we could openly exchange such opinions. Most people are too afraid, especially in the suffocating American political climate. In China, in spite of censorship, people are generally much more direct about how the world works and less politically correct. Like, I’ve had some writings censored on a Chinese internet media platform for using certain blacklisted words several times, but nowhere close am I to actually getting banned, account-wise, and I’ve made some real friends on there. On the other hand, Quora has banned, or at least severely downranked, accounts of certain people who have opposed the politically correct liberal group-think idiocy that characterizes most of the site’s content.

这些我就先不翻译了。

然后看到一个美国傻逼写了个

On of the fundemental reasons China has prospered is that it treats its people less worse then Mao did. For instance, and God forbid, if today 10 million Chinese were murdered like Mao did, the economy would collapse . So, greed is good. You can not harvest wealth from dead field hands. Engineers and nimble businessman must be better treated.

So, China might well lose the field hand jobs of low manufacturing, and the cash flow. They will have to move up, with ever more skilled labor, requiring more liberty.
I hope for the best. China’s problems are political. They’ve shown understanding of political reform leading to better living.

我对这个的回应是

The foundation of China’s modernization happened under Mao in the 50s with aid and technology transfer from the Soviet Union. US which China fought a war with in early 50s had nothing to do with it. That is the reality that Americans are going to have to eventually accept…

翻译成中文就是

中国现代化的基础是在五十年代在毛的领导下由苏联的支援和技术转移所实现了。在五十年代初和中国打过仗的美国与其基本没啥关系。这是个美国人得早晚接受的现实。。。

对此,他回应了

Khrushchev cancelled it, brought back the technicians and stopped aid. Mao then i( 1960)nstituted The Great Leap Forward/ Cultural Revolution a disaster killing 40++ million. Chinese GDP/Person never reached a few hundred dollars until the early 70’s.

而我却反驳

A reasonable estimate for the sum of excess deaths plus fewer births between 1959-1962 was 15+15=30 million. The total population was about 600 million at that time. I don’t really think it’s reasonable to count the people who weren’t born due to the economic crisis as part of the death toll. I know that people exaggerate these death tolls just like how people often exaggerate salary and net worth. The Cultural Revolution targeted almost exclusively people in the political or intellectual elite, a small base population to begin with, not to mention they were merely politically attacked and demoted, rarely actually killed directly or indirectly.

GDP per capita is a very flawed metric. The planned economy at that time in China very likely underestimated it. There was basically no inflation. Withdrawal of Soviet aid did some damage but China still did fine, developed nuclear missiles, industrialized more places in the country, etc. This only gave the world more “proof of ability,” sufficient to integrate into US world order without subordination later on. Enough for China to be where China is today 40+ years after Mao’s death.

I don’t see much point arguing further on this matter. Because China was quite objectively mostly the winner in relations with the US since end of WWII, there is not all that much for Chinese to be regretful or resentful or insecure about. The Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution were pretty big mistakes (whether the latter was might even be arguable) but they were certainly not fatal, far from it. The Anglo world’s using those to gaslight the Chinese on their past had some effect over the past generation but that stuff is becoming ever more irrelevant, and their exaggerations ever less convincing. If America denies this reality, then it is mostly America’s problem. There is relatively little to fear from America now.

I wrote in https://gmachine1729.com/20… that it is in war that relative status/position changes most precipitously. America made a historical blunder by becoming overconfident and reckless enough to give China the very-hard-to-come-by chance of making such a leap in international status/position in the early 50s. The long term historical verdict may well regard that as the critical point or determinant of America’s failure vis-a-vis China, we’ll see. After all, that was what largely set the stage for the developments in China later on, politically and economically, which to America’s dismay were actually quite successful in spite of much intentional and malicious obstruction on America’s part, a double slap on the face. It’s a giant dark mark on US history that the US narrative/media has desperately tried to cover up and forget. Though it might fool many people especially Americans and make America seem better, it’s not really conducive to guiding America towards a more effectual policy vis-a-vis the PRC.

其翻译成中文为

一个对1959年到1962年多余的死亡加上缺少的出生的合理估计是1500万+1500万=3000万。当时的总人口是6亿。我觉得由于经济危机而未出生那些人算到死亡数里是不太合理的。我知道人经常夸张这些死亡数,如人经常夸张薪水和身价。文化大革命也基本只是针对政治和知识精英,这个总体人数本身就少,不用说他们大多是被政治冲击而下台,很少直接或非直接的被导致死亡。

人均GDP是个很有问题的衡量经济的标准。当时在中国的计划经济很可能低估了它。当时基本没有经济膨胀。苏联援助退出的确对中国有所害,可是中国之后依然可以,搞出了核导弹,扩张了工业化,等等。这只更加向世界“证明了能力”,足以进入美国国际体系而非受制于它。足以中国毛逝世四十年后达到现在的程度。

我认为继续争论这个问题没太大意义。因为中国客观而言在和美国的关系上自二战结束以来大多是赢者,中国人没有多少所后悔或所怨气或所心理不安。大跃进和文化大革命都是大错误(后者是否真的是其实都可以争论)但它们绝对不是致命性的,与此差得远。英文界用这些打击中国人对于他们过去的心理对上一代的确有所影响,可是这些在变得越来越无关,并且其夸张越来越不可信。如果美国否认现实,那主要是美国的问题。相对而言,现在已经没有多少需要怕美国了。

我在https://gmachine1729.com/20…里写道地位最突然的变化是通过战争。美国的过度自信及无所顾忌的表现却在五十年代初给了中国非常难得的一下大提升自己国际地位的机会,造成了历史性的错误。长远的历史结论或许会将此为决定美国对华失败的要点。毕竟,它为中国之后的发展,在政治上,在经济上,开出了序幕,并且这些之后的发展尽管美国有意并恶意的阻碍却挺成功的,让美国大所惊愕。这是在美国历史上的一个黑痕迹,一直被美国媒体和描述所掩盖和忘记。虽然它能欺骗很多人,尤其是美国人,并让美国显得更好,这对将美国引导到更有效的对华政策却是不太有利的。

Why Google and Facebook might be overrated

Back in undergrad, this professor I worked with once in casual conversation said something along the likes of “how to predict what kind of company will become the next Google.” As for Facebook, as a software engineer with much exposure to those places, some people have described it as a better version of Google, more equity for engineers with better perks and benefits.

Google and Facebook were considered by many as the top places to work for, especially for a new grad. Certainly better than Amazon, where you have to work harder for lower pay.

But from another perspective, it’s because Google and Facebook, as monopolistic advertising companies, can afford to pay their engineers more. Even when they do, they still make much more income than Amazon, and perhaps also Microsoft.

I recall on Zhihu, a user by the handle Zeldovich Yakov spoke of Google and Facebook as relatively shit companies. His bar was pretty high though. He would say,

Ford started a company with few tens of thousands of dollars. In a decade, it became a billion dollar company and created a whole new industry and supply chain. In contrast, all Google and Facebook did was steal the revenue of the former advertising companies. They did not create any real new economic demand or market. So, what else are they if not trash companies.

This is something that most people with the American mindset would never think, let alone an undergrad with minimal exposure to the world who would naturally overrate the superficial cool that a company like Google projects.

Heck, Nvidia I would regard as more in many ways more valuable than GoogFaces despite the market value being much lower. Its technology is, in contrast, actually extremely hard to replicate. For instance, China could easily replicate GoogFaces, but Nvidia, Intel, not so easy.

Zeldovich Yakov, who did graduate school in pure math in Russia and France, also wrote something along the likes of,

Google and Facebook are that valuable only because of the English language market. In Russia, there’s Yandex and vKontakte. Yandex was founded earlier than Google, and vKontakte has more convenient file transfer features.

Google and Facebook also are dependent on America’s geopolitical supremacy. China has proven that they can be shut out wherever America does not have geopolitical control, and we may see in the next few decades China pressuring some smaller countries to follow her example, which would deprive those two of more advertising revenue. One could also regard the success of those as having more to do with connections. Worth noting is how the founders of Google and Facebook were both Jewish, with the benefit of support from dominant Jewish media and finance interests in America that the founders of Yahoo and MySpace did not have. Of course, this is not really politically correct to say, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t something of a consequential nature.

Steve Hsu has also written on his blog something of the likes of

The connection between value creation and money and power has become quite weak of late.

This is very true. The ability to create (real) value often is very different from the ability to monetize it. Software without advertising has as much value functionality wise for the user if not more than the same software but with advertising incorporated. As an example, I had read that the creator of WeChat back in the late 90s in China spent a few years singlehandedly writing some Foxmail email client, which had several million downloads not long after it was released. But economically, according to what I read, he was almost broke. Fortunately for him, he later got the opportunity to become rich in a big company with the monetization platform. More generally, we often have some smart, competent people creating the technology, creating the products, and then the politically connected people (who often know very little about technology) coming in later on take more of the equity for themselves.

I’ve also written before that in China, the people who developed the core industrial foundation and military technology created much more value than the likes of Jack Ma. The former gave the country tremendous leverage on the international stage. Without that, people like Jack Ma would not be possible. But the people in the former did not get rich. They mostly merely got high salaries from the government. So if the government decides to take out Jack Ma (who is rumored to have had some ties with US media and NGOs that displeased some party people in China), there would not be much good reason to be sympathetic.

Like ex-Soviet Red Army officer Andrei Martyanov, many Chinese, with a similar socialist tradition, view the whole market economy with a critical lens, and the same spirit seems to be utterly absent in an America blinded by liberal market fundamentalism. Keep in mind that this is a country founded on the displacement of Native Americans that was made possible by not much more than military superiority.

So whenever I hear some idiot Anglo or Anglo lackey say “rule of law,” I find it kind of a joke. Rule of law requires ability to enforce the law, which is based on political power, which must be backed by military power. Plus, the law is often phrased very ambiguously, but that is implicitly deliberate.

US-China relations are becoming ever more tense. And in this fight, Google and Facebook in spite of their high market cap provide relatively little value, aside from their media power in spreading the American liberal dogma. But how can you win in the long term with a dogma built on a house of cards. Eventually, reality will come to bite you. In actual material competition or war, propaganda helps but more critical is actual material power, in the quality and quantity of what you can produce. In actual material competition or war, you have to actually demonstrate your real power; financial games, monetary indices, economic bubbles, marketing/hype, and the ability to fool idiots mean very little. It is in wartime that relative status changes most precipitously, when there is the most social mobility. Too many examples, but I’ll give some representative modern ones: the Anglo conquest of North America (set the stage for Anglo supremacy, elsewhere, Anglo world also mostly triumphed over French, Spanish, Dutch, Germans, and other smaller European powers), the Opium Wars (finally shattered China’s position, more gain for British Empire), the First Sino-Japanese War (a calamitous drop for China, a big boost for Japan), the Russo-Japanese War (another big boost for Japan, at Russia’s expense), WWI (Germany’s loss), WWII (America the biggest winner by far, USSR next, Germany and Japan lose forever their chance at actual empire, minor gain for China), Chinese Civil War and Korean War (a precipitous leap in status for China mostly at America’s big expense, USSR benefited too from indirect association), Sino-Indian War (virtually irrecoverable loss for India, more bonus points for China), Cold War (big gain for America after USSR’s disintegration and consequent economic collapse in Russia in the 90s at expense of Russia and other Soviet derivatives, gain of smaller, more temporary nature for Japan and Four Asian Tigers per association, China did okay by being large and more independent, though the strong Soviet association surely hurt her confidence in culture and political system).

Following WWII, in an era of mutually assured destruction, it is very difficult for confrontation and competition between the big powers to be militarily 100% direct, and even during the Cold War, the actual fire, dirty work was largely done in a proxy fashion. The competition is more economic and cultural, and Google and Facebook, along with Hollywood, surely are representatives there for America on the cultural end.

Some say we have now Cold War 2.0. Again, it’s US + UK + their allies of varying degree versus Russia + China + their allies of varying degree. This time, unlike in Cold War 1.0 when trade and contact between the two superpowers was very limited, there is more interaction between the two sides in our more interconnected, globalized society. During the 90s, China, though much disliked, was still considered too poor and backwards to be a threat, and the US was mostly busy trying to ethnically cleanse Russia. They did a ton of damage, but under Putin’s leadership following American puppet Yeltsin, the Russian culture and nation has proven to be extremely resilient under the foundation of a combination of the more traditional Russian culture and the technology and expertise, not to mention international cultural ties, established during the Soviet era, which America could not fully undermine and destroy, far from it. China, in contrary to the expectation of the US elite of eventual liberalization and integration into the US world order, after growing rapidly for a few decades is acting increasingly in defiance of America. Despite an invasion of American liberal culture and ideology of the past four decades, PRC’s communist conservative core remained intact and following Xi’s ascension to power even revitalized.

I’ve observed that there are crudely speaking two types of people, two types of organizations, or at least a spectrum of them. There is the one with the grow fast get rich quick at all costs strategy and there is the other that values higher quality sustainable growth. The former tends to die or fade quickly and forever with a sour taste when its good times end, while the latter tends to persist and show remarkable resilience under crisis. One can put Google and Facebook in the former category and Intel and Boeing in the latter category.

Similarly, as for nations and ethnicities, one can put the WASPs (and their Jewish colonizers) in the former category, and the Russians and Chinese in the latter category. As for the Chinese, in English, there is not really a concept of “Chinese Empire,” and in modern times, China was very much a large but weak victim of Western imperialism and colonialism, until the PRC, but the PRC side of modern China is, needless to say, grossly distorted in the Anglo narrative. But traditionally, China was its own civilization; from the Central Plain millennia ago, it gradually expanded to all of the area of China today, with gradual conquests and assimilation, of the area of Guangdong and Fujian in the far south of China, of the more inner part in present day Sichuan, and of present day Xinjiang where the currently, much noise is made about the Uighurs in the Anglo media. The truth is that most of those places were integrated into the Han Chinese culture before the birth of Christ, with settlers in Xinjiang before then as well. Later, the Mongols and Manchus (who are basically physically indistinguishable from the Han Chinese) conquered but they were also culturally assimilated. Over millennia, the Chinese established and consolidated deep roots over a vast area of land while maintaining cultural coherence, one that even Western imperialism with its modern guns and warships could not uproot.

Not being Russian myself, I know not enough about more traditional Russian history to judge, though I know of Alexander Nevsky. There was of course, in addition to with Western Europe, much interaction with the Central Asians, in which we can crudely include the Mongol and Tatar conquerors who eventually integrated into the Russian language and culture. I can much appreciate how Russia managed to go from in 30 or 40 years time the losing European imperial power to the world’s second superpower via the pioneering of the revolutionary political and economic system of the Soviet Union. Moreover, the catastrophic fall in the 90s could not bring down Russia permanently either, and at least over the past decade, Russia has been mostly ascending, ever more prominent in international affair, though still nowhere near where it was during the Soviet era. Much of the culture of the Soviet Union is still there, and over seventy years time, it has permeated the Chinese soul in a sinicized form. Whatever of American and Anglo culture in China is in comparison more superficial, nowhere near as durable, as it is in direct odds with the political value system in China.

And I would expect over the next few decades that mostly toxic influence to wane further and ever more precipitously. We may well see a catastrophic and actually permanent fall of America and the Anglo world at large. Nowadays, taking trends into account too, America and the Anglo world does not have the benefit of the ethnic and cultural homogeneity vital for bouncing back after crisis, unlike Russia or China. Anglo imperialism was of a revolutionary nature but its base off a small island in Europe with a comparatively small population was too little for it to genuinely permeate itself over a vast land. It takes centuries to fully displace or assimilate a population, and maybe more than that if the population is extremely ethnically different, since there are physical limits on the movement of people and breeding of new ones. It is even harder to maintain the cultural coherence especially when geographically separated over a long period of time. Take the Chinese in America as an example; they are ethnically cleansed in the second generation, with examples like myself very very rare.