Speech of W.E.B. Du Bois in Beijing University in 1959

By courtesy of the government of the 600 million people of the Chinese Republic, I am permitted on my 91st birthday to speak to the people of China and Africa and through them to the world. Hail, then, and farewell, dwelling places of the yellow and black races. Hail human kind!

I speak with no authority; no assumption of age nor rank; I hold no position, I have no wealth. One thing alone I own and that is my own soul. Ownership of that I have even while in my own country for near a century I have been nothing but a “nigger.” On this basis and this alone I dare speak, I dare advise.

China after long centuries has arisen to her feet and leapt forward. Africa, arise, and stand straight, speak and think! Act! Turn from the West and your slavery and humiliation for the last 500 years and face the rising sun.

Behold a people, the most populous nation on this ancient earth, which has burst its shackles, not by boasting and strutting, not by lying about its history and its conquests, but by patience and long suffering, by blind struggle, moved up and on toward the crimson sky. She aims to “make men holy; to make men free.”

But what men? Not simply the mandarins but including mandarins; not simply the rich, but not excluding the rich. Not simply the learned, but led by knowledge to the end that no man shall be poor, nor sick, nor ignorant; but that the humblest worker as well as the sons of emperors shall be fed and taught and healed and that there emerge on earth a single unified people, free, well and educated.

You have been told, my Africa: My Africa in Africa and all your children’s children overseas; you have been told and the telling so beaten into you by rods and whips, that you believe it yourselves, that this is impossible; that mankind can rise only by walking on men; by cheating them and killing them; that only on a doormat of the despised and dying, the dead and rotten, can a British aristocracy, a French cultural elite or an American millionaire be nurtured and grown.

This is a lie. It is an ancient lie spread by church and state, spread by priest and historian, and believed in by fools and cowards, as well as by the downtrodden and the children of despair.

Speak, China, and tell your truth to Africa and the world. What people have been despised as you have? Who more than you have been rejected of men? Recall when lordly Britishers threw the rickshaw money on the ground to avoid touching a filthy hand. Forget not the time when in Shanghai no Chinese man dare set foot in a park which he paid for. Tell this to Africa, for today Africa stands on new feet, with new eyesight, with new brains and asks: Where am I and why?

The Western sirens answer: Britain wheedles; France cajoles; while America, my America, where my ancestors and descendants for eight generations have lived and toiled; America loudest of all, yells and promises freedom. If only Africa allows American investment!

Beware Africa, America bargains for your soul. America would have you believe that they freed your grandchildren; that Afro-Americans are full American citizens, treated like equals, paid fair wages as workers, promoted for desert and free to learn and travel across the world.

This is not true. Some are near freedom; some approach equality with whites; some have achieved education; but the price for this has too often been slavery of mind, distortion of truth and oppression of our own people.

Of 18 million Afro-Americans, 12 million are still second-class citizens of the United States, serfs in farming, low-paid laborers in industry, and repressed members of union labor. Most American Negroes do not vote. Even the rising six million are liable to insult and discrimination at any time.

But this, Africa, relates to your descendants, not to you. Once I thought of you Africans as children, whom we educated Afro-Americans would lead to liberty. I was wrong. We could not even lead ourselves much less you. Today I see you rising under your own leadership, guided by your own brains.

Africa does not ask alms from China nor from the Soviet Union nor from France, Britain, nor the United States. It asks friendship and sympathy and no nation better than China can offer this to the Dark Continent. Let it be freely given and generously. Let Chinese visit Africa, send their scientists there and their artists and writers. Let Africa send its students to China and its seekers after knowledge. It will not find on earth a richer goal, a more promising mine of information.

On the other hand, watch the West. The new British West Indian Federation is not a form of democratic progress but a cunning attempt to reduce these islands to the control of British and American investors. Haiti is dying under rich Haitian investors who with American money are enslaving the peasantry. Cuba is showing what the West Indies, Central and South America are suffering under American big business.

The American worker himself does not always realize this. He has high wages and many comforts. Rather than lose these, he keeps in office by his vote the servants of industrial exploitation so long as they maintain his wage. His labor leaders represent exploitation and not the fight against the exploitation of labor by private capital. These two sets of exploiters fall out only when one demands too large a share of the loot.

This China knows. This Africa must learn. This the American Negro has failed so far to learn. I am frightened by the so-called friends who are flocking to Africa. Negro Americans trying to make money from your toil, white Americans who seek by investment and high interest to bind you in serfdom to business as the Near East is bound and as South America is struggling with. For this America is tempting your leaders, bribing your young scholars, and arming your soldiers. What shall you do?

First, understand! Realize that the great mass of mankind is freeing itself from wage slavery, while private capital in Britain, France, and now in America, is still trying to maintain civilization and comfort for a few on the toil, disease and ignorance of the mass of men. Understand this, and understanding comes from direct knowledge. You know America and France, and Britain to your sorrow. Now know the Soviet Union, but particularly know China.

China is flesh of your flesh, and blood of your blood. China is colored and knows to what a colored skin in this modern world subjects its owner. But China knows more, much more than this: she knows what to do about it. She can take the insults of the United States and still hold her head high. She can make her own machines, when America refuses to sell her American manufactures, even though it hurts American industry, and throws her workers out of jobs. China does not need American nor British missionaries to teach her religion and scare her with tales of hell. China has been in hell too long, not to believe in a heaven of her own making. This she is doing.

Come to China, Africa, and look around. Invite Africa to come, China, and see what you can teach by just pointing. Yonder old woman is working on the street. But she is happy. She has no fear. Her children are in school and a good school. If she is ill, there is a hospital where she is cared for free of charge. She has a vacation with pay each year. She can die and be buried without taxing her family to make some undertaker rich.

Africa can answer: but some of this we have done; our tribes undertake public service like this. Very well, let your tribes continue and expand this work. What Africa must realize is what China knows; that it is worse than stupid to allow a people’s education to be under the control of those who seek not the progress of the people but their use as means of making themselves rich and powerful. It is wrong for the University of London to control the University of Ghana. It is wrong for the Catholic church to direct the education of the black Congolese. It was wrong for Protestant churches supported by British and American wealth to control higher education in China.

The Soviet Union is surpassing the world in popular and higher education, because from the beginning it started its own complete educational system. The essence of the revolution in the Soviet Union and China and in all the “iron curtain” nations, is not the violence that accompanied the change; no more than starvation at Valley Forge was the essence of the American revolution against Britain. The real revolution is the acceptance on the part of the nation of the fact that hereafter the main object of the nation is the welfare of the mass of the people and not of the lucky few.

Government is for the people’s progress and not for the comfort of an aristocracy. The object of industry is the welfare of the workers and not the wealth of the owners. The object of civilization is the cultural progress of the mass of workers and not merely of an intellectual elite. And in return for all this, communist lands believe that the cultivation of the mass of people will discover more talent and genius to serve the state than any closed aristocracy ever furnished. This belief the current history of the Soviet Union and China is proving true each day. Therefore don’t let the West invest when you can avoid it. Don’t buy capital from Britain, France and the United States if you can get it on reasonable terms from the Soviet Union and China. This is not politics; it is common sense. It is learning from experience. It is trusting your friends and watching your enemies. Refuse to be cajoled or to change your way of life, so as to make a few of your fellows rich at the expense of a mass of workers growing poor and sick and remaining without schools so that a few black men can have automobiles.

Africa, here is a real danger which you must avoid or return to the slavery from which you are emerging. All I ask from you is the courage to know; to look about you and see what is happening in this old and tired world; to realize the extent and depth of its rebirth and the promise which glows on your hills.

Visit the Soviet Union and visit China. Let your youth learn the Russian and Chinese languages. Stand together in this new world and let the old world perish in its greed or be born again in new hope and promise. Listen to the Hebrew prophet of communism:

Ho! every one that thirsteth; come ye to the waters; come, buy and eat, without money and price!

Again, China and Africa, hail and farewell!

Copied over from http://media.pfeiffer.edu/lridener/dss/DuBois/DUBOISP4.HTML. Additionally, there is some actual footage at http://credo.library.umass.edu/media/mums312-b246-i002-001.access.mp4.


I won’t comment too much on this. I mostly find this type of racial/class language in English rather uncomfortable and try to avoid it most of the time. But this is Du Bois and he’s pretty significant and that speech he gave in China in 1959 at Beida was too. And it’s a pretty good speech. He is WOKE. The more idealistic part of it, especially regarding “communism” don’t take too seriously of course.

I can only say that back then, China was still quite poor and backward, but really optimistic. It was right after the highly successful first five year plan through which China rapidly developed some modern industry but even so, it was back in 59 when many people did not have enough to eat. Nowadays, it’s a completely different story. And unlike in 80s, 90s, and 00s, people in China have belief in their system and culture in addition to the hard power to back up, unlike during the Mao era when the determination was strong, but the material support was meh but growing quickly. US tried to defeat through proxy war (KMT), failed, direct war (Korean War), failed, economic sanction (during Mao era), failed, coup (89 protests), failed, liberal temptation (80s thru 00s during reform and opening up), this by 2017 has also proven itself pretty much failed.

To put it shortly, blacks in America are WOKE. Their ancestors didn’t come here voluntarily, they were forcibly shipped here to become slaves. Their lack of success is a competence problem, not a woke-ness problem. Besides they have more status and position in America than East Asians, who and whose ancestors mostly came here out of voluntary betrayal and white worship, do.

Advertisements

Duke of Qin on Chinese Communist Party being anti-liberal filter

duke-of-qin-chinese-communist-party-as-liberal-filter

OCRed via https://www.newocr.com

The Chinese Communist Party as an anti-liberal filtering mechanism. An interesting quirk of the Party is that it locks out potential liberal infiltrators from any real power. Most countries are not particularly sovereign in any real sense of the word because their elites are fundamentally liberal creatures, having been processed through the American educational-imperial complex to think like Americans. An Ivy league education serves as an imprimatur to elite status in most places, even in China, or arguably especially in China because of long established educational credentialism. Yet in spite of social power, unlike elsewhere, this doesn’t translate into political power (see Taiwan). Americans operate under the assumption that it is Chinese elites they are educating, when in reality they are ex-elites. Xi Jinping’s daughter will never hold any political power in China, nor will Bo Xilai’s son, nor will any apparatchiks kid who went to Harvard. The Party simply distrusts them and won’t place them in a decision role. They can be wealthy, but they will never have a true say. Liberals call this phenomenon as power uncertainty, as if the this somehow reflected a flaw in the system. To the contrary, I argue this system prevents the formation of political dynasties and serves as an immune reaction, cutting away the infected flesh as it were. The only foreign educated member of the Politburo standing committee went to Kim Il Sung University. That pretty much says it all. Those who came of age in the 80s who had the opportunity to study in the West are noticeably absent among the Party ruling elements, unlike post Cold War Eastern Europe which is rife with American creatures. The very privileges that power seeks to perpetuate on it’s progeny, special private schools, followed by Western education dissociates itself with the mainstream of Chinese society. It also inadvertently cuts itself off from how power and decision making is allocated by the Party itself. Ironically, a Leninist Party state will select for more representative leadership than any Democracy because power is limited to Party members rather than being diffused out into nothingness with universal suffrage.

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。

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。

知乎上的张学军对陶哲轩(tao)不太看好

知乎上有个张学军,介绍里有“复旦大学”,“数学”,“高等教育”。然后他的回答大多将如何纯数学在走向衰落,因为重要的有价值的东西已经做得差不多了,现在的菲尔兹奖是一届不如一届,一代不如一代,劝年轻人退出。他对陶哲轩不太看好,并为此写了几个回答。

我今天工作(做我的disqussearch.com的事情)加写作已经累了,所以就不写太多了。就把几个关于tao的回答复制到这上面吧。

陶哲轩的太太外貌一般,其实不难理解。按美国人的刻板印象,陶哲轩是典型的东亚男性:数学天才、书呆子、老好人、不擅与异性交往。这种样子怎么能找到很漂亮的女人?像陶那样,找一个崇拜自己的女学生,不失为解决终身大事的好办法。

陶哲轩和杨振宁不能比。杨振宁那一辈搞学术的,很多出身大户人家,见过大世面,风流倜傥,吟诗作画,追女人是小case。而陶出身医生、老师家庭,很大概率是nerd。

老婆外貌一般也就罢了,还是韩国人。美国华裔那么多,为什么不找个华裔?

陶不仅讨个韩国老婆,还不会中文,这就彻底断了自己和中国在文化上的联系。虽然陶的父亲解释过,为什么陶没有学中文,但是那个理由听上去非常牵强。

在印象中,陶只来过中国大陆一次,还是参加与数学竞赛有关的活动,与学术无关。

种种迹象表明,陶对中国不大友好,有成见。很可能像很多华裔小孩那样,对自己的中国血统困惑、嫌弃。

陶哲轩的父亲,解放前从上海逃往香港,想必在思想上反g恐g。后来可能又觉得香港随时会被“解放”,又前往澳大利亚,离中国越远越好。陶哲轩出生在这样的家庭,他的一些行为就不难理解了。

算了,不叫他陶哲轩了,以后还是叫他Tao。因为他实在是愧为华裔。

作者:张学军
链接:https://www.zhihu.com/question/271890712/answer/368024252
来源:知乎
著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权,非商业转载请注明出处。

Continue reading “知乎上的张学军对陶哲轩(tao)不太看好”

May Day in China

In China, people have May 1st thru May 4th off. Because of that, I am meeting some people and also taking some time to wind down. There is also that May 4th 2019 is the 100th anniversary of that May 4th Movement back in 1919 which was crucial towards the founding of communist party, etc, and we are seeing some stuff on TV with Xi Jinping and other high up party people in relation to that.

I won’t go much into the background of that, not that I know too much about it. Basically, it was a protest out of the decision in the Versailles Treaty to hand over the colonies in Shandong (Qingdao in particular) relinquished by Germany to Japan instead. I’m not all that clear as to what happened in the end, I believe China was able to win back those places but with some heavy price. The movement was crucial towards the beginning of “Marxism” in China with people like 李大钊, 蔡元培, etc.

Continue reading “May Day in China”

卖国骗子李开复

关于他,我2018年9月在知乎上发表了回答,对于为什么越来越不喜欢李开复的问题。

昨天,看到了搜狐上的别了,李开复–奇特“导师”不为人知的二三事,自然想起了我最初对李开复的认识。这篇文章我也微信宣传了一下,以下文字为介绍

记得高一时一无所知的我却被他的一本书所忽悠,当时基本只在美国学校环境中,对互联网行业并不了解,并对此有一定的敬畏感,所以这样的人写的东西,我自然就信了,当时我还无疑的把美国顶尖学校和技术公司非常看好,了解中国好多以美国或美国华人的眼光,后来慢慢通过知识和经验的积累敢于得出了在美国难以想象的结论:中国核心科技从美国根本没有得到多少,远远更多来自了前苏联,微软和谷歌算不上多么核心的科技,门槛没那么高,尤其后者主要依赖英文互联网,李开复在严重污染中国青年的世界观,最好和美国保持距离,有些贸易和学术交流就足够了,把更多的精力和资源放在发展中国自己的企业和机构,让那些给美国当买办的人彻底边缘化。

那本书《与未来同行》是我妈妈在读,我妈妈建议我读的,当时我的中文也不太好,但是那本书用的都是非常通俗的语言。记得当时我妈妈跟我说李开复当了微软的VP,又当了谷歌的VP。我爸爸妈妈都不是做软件开发员的,不是学计算机的,对计算机知道也很少,那时候我对计算机也一无所知,可是我的数学在同学里算好,自然我妈妈可能想我将来会对计算机感兴趣,并能把我引进这比较挣钱的行业。后来,我也在硅谷大公司当过码农,李开复当高管的这两家巨头我也都拿到过做软件开发的工作,在那些地方认识不少人,了解他们是怎么回事。

反正记得李开复在那本书里写的都是他的教育哲学,人生哲学,没啥真正特别有含义的东西,大多是比较神话硅谷成功的人,说美国如何如何好,中国教育和学校如何如何有缺陷,好多那些我当时可能都相信了。

后来,我学了计算机科学,写了直接影响上万用户的代码,了解这个行业是怎么回事儿了。同时,我也上了研究生的数学课,在高中和大学数学竞赛都得过一些不算大但不可忽略的奖,至少证明了我有一定的能力,认识了一些数学博士等等,就不那么好忽悠了。同样,我的中文也大所提高,让我接触到了一般在美国的人很难接触到的信息,更正确的了解了中国的历史背景。

说起中国的历史背景,李开复是国民党后代这一点,我最近才真正知道,当前,只知道他是台湾人,初中来了美国。他爸爸却是黑中共的“历史学家”,伯伯和叔叔都51年被人民政府枪毙了。非常明显,他有强大的势力背后支持他在中国搞渗透,这一点,我也是2018年才真正认识到。

在美国长大以美国的意识形态为标准自然是默认的,长大时所听到的对于中国都是中国制造质量差,中国缺乏创新,中国需要跑到美国才能更有creativity(创造性),看到最好的华裔科学家工作都是在美国做的,李开复写的也基本朝着这个方向。我来到美国是因为父母来,长大听到的好多是,能跑到美国的人都有一定的能力,因为我们有能力,你才能在美国享受优越的生活这类的话。得到的总是一种中国不行,小时候太穷,而我们那代的美国人都有资源活远远更丰富的生活,所以中国人都想跑到美国来,都要学习美国。简单的例子,那么多中国父母在美国叫孩子学钢琴,是因为他们自己小时候没那个机会,把它看成作为成功父母的标准之一,而且还会和其他父母比。

后来,我慢慢发现大多这些我接触的第一代移民的观念有很严重的问题。对于他们小时候的中国,个人是穷,没有钱,他们都学不了钢琴,但这不意味着不会有极少数孩子,来自特殊家庭或者特别有天分的能得到一些国家的资源成为钢琴演奏家(反正一个没很强的音乐天分的人学钢琴意义价值不大)。对于很多东西,他们看得非常表面,缺乏远见。他们觉得他们自己能和美国有关联,有不得了了,即使自己没啥地位,就是个非常普通的工程师,没想到白人都根本瞧不起他们。然后,一个在美国稍微混出点名堂来的华人,如李开复,那在这些人眼里就不得了了. Continue reading “卖国骗子李开复”

Response to private message through “Contact” page

Readers of my blog are welcome to contact me through https://gmachine1729.com/contact/.

Somebody did a few days ago, and his message to me was

这个人没有给我他的邮箱,所以我只能以博文回复他(新的博文他早晚会看到的)。

他所说的”2nd latest blog post about giving up”是对我背景的反思。我没有真正的give up,对于走学术界,成为数学家(你们可以我的博客上有我写的纯数学的博文),更广一些就是在理工科,技术做出点名堂来,我可以说是基本give up了。我已经离开了学术界被精神污染了,就很难回去了。但是,我对我的人生还没有give up,我觉得自己还可创造不少价值,而这并非需要通过理工科的工作。

对于”Don’t end your life”,跳楼可不是什么容易的事情,加上我现在也没有这个必要。

对于”You have big brains. Do something useful with it.”,我只能这样说。那些需要特别高智商的学科,什么数学,理论物理,这些都是没啥用的,尤其是现在,高能物理都是已经基本解决的并从70年代以后基本停滞不前的,数学也专到难到抽象到研究需要学的很深才能做,做了也很少人能读懂,很少人会在乎,没啥应用价值。当然,也有应用性的需要大脑子的工作,那些啊,首先要学一段时间,再做一段时间,然后会更加发现你做的那东西有不少名校博士和你竞争少数的合适在工业界的岗位。我做的码农工作根本不需要真正big brains,一定的聪明就行了,更重要是刻苦硬拼,我的智商在这里没啥优势。150+的智商在今天价值一般不大了。

最后一段关于华人和中国,是”Even if the diaspora is doomed, we don’t have to die in vain. Make our homelands strong and ensure the next generation avoids our mistakes. Continue reading “Response to private message through “Contact” page”

Steve Hsu(徐道辉)

以前挺崇拜这个人的,现在评价对他越来越低了。他能力的确很强,而且很全面,能拿到美国不错或至少还可以的大学的理论物理终身教职,同样还创办了网络安全公司以26百万被收购,能够破竹子天花板当上大学高层行政人员,而且体育也强,中学搞了游泳比赛,大学打了橄榄球,后来还搞柔道,这种混合才华是少见的。对,他还研究智商和基因的关系,最近为此创办了公司,在这方面在美国也颇有影响力。然后他的博客每个月有十万多点击。可是呢,他没有一项做到最好或接近最好,理论物理,大陆过来的比他强的至少好几个,张首晟强得多了。硅谷创业一个26百万的收购也真的不算啥。体育他离专业水平就更远了。

我最近得知他开创的那家公司还把一个翻墙的工具在01年的时候部署到了中国,为此他拿了CIA的钱,并且得到了纽约时报及其他美国主流媒体的宣传。

我跟一位体制内背景的人说了他,那个人也对徐产生了兴趣,可是对他评价也不是特别高。总而言之,觉得徐有政治能力但是是那种符合美国已形成的体制和文化谋取成功的政治能力,做的更多一种模型美国亚裔,很优秀但是还是服从体系的,为了自己的事业发展不敢对其作出任何挑战。反而,这人觉得我的政治能力从某种角度更强,比如我的博客写的东西有点含量,不像徐那些只不过是引用别的文章或视频自己也就做点小评论。我的反应是徐的做法的确是那种比较现实主义的,没什么错或不好,挑战权威反而经常才是愚蠢的破坏自己事业的做法 Continue reading “Steve Hsu(徐道辉)”