当前位置:首页 > 古诗管理
和平崛起机会几何?[七律]
发布于2022-12-12 01:40 点击:169 评论:2 作者:湯安


〔Abstract〕The five major scams of the 20th century: multi-party system, separation of powers, democratic elections, free trade, local wars. There is no one that was not arranged by the forces behind the scenes. In addition, when there is an epidemic, the variant of the new coronavirus is ready to go..., under such an international situation, believing in a peaceful rise is tantamount to suicidal.


"The Paper: According to the Fox News Business Channel, in a series of tweets, Taibi described that Twitter executives regularly met with members of the FBI and CIA, and members of the U.S. government provided Twitter executives with information through meetings" Hundreds of problem accounts” list, thereby suspending these accounts during the 2020 presidential election. In addition to Twitter, the US government has also engaged with “almost every major technology company” in addition to Twitter, “including Facebook, Microsoft, Reddit, etc."


The report mentioned that since Musk acquired Twitter, he began to denounce the platform's previous opaque review policy. Documents released directly or indirectly by Musk show that Twitter colluded with the FBI, CIA, Pentagon and other government agencies to restrict information about the election, Ukraine and the new crown epidemic. "


Such internal operations without a bottom line determine the unscrupulous non-peaceful suppression of China. Therefore, the world can only pray for peace without rising, and rise after war.


Let's first review how China was extremely lucky to achieve today's success.


After World War II, countless countries tried to build an industrial system from scratch, and many of them were heavily supported by Europe and the United States. However, only China has truly succeeded in upgrading from an agricultural nation to an industrial civilization. To use the jargon of video game enthusiasts to describe it, after World War II, 300 players in the industry around the world fought to the death and life, and in the end only China cleared the customs.


Japan's war of aggression against China, which started at the end of the nineteenth century, is not considered a country that developed after World War II, and is currently in rapid decline. South Korea's industrial system is incomplete, but with comprehensive supply support from the West, Japan and South Korea can be regarded as half successful countries. Of course, the premise is that China, an industrial country with the combined industrial output value of the United States, Japan and South Korea and the world's only complete industrial chain, will not sanction Japan and South Korea like the Western group sanctioned China.


A small example is that when Japan clamored for war with China and supported Taiwan independence because of the Diaoyu Islands, China silently stopped the supply of rare earth metals to Japan. South Korea is even simpler. China has suspended the supply of urea for vehicles due to the epidemic. The South Korean auto industry is in distress. The Blue House immediately stated that it will firmly maintain the friendship between China and South Korea and will never support Taiwan independence.


1950年连一根螺丝钉、一只自行车轮胎也无力制造、文盲率超过百分之八十的中国,即使爱因斯坦的大脑袋也无法想象出这个世界闻名的东亚病夫如何能够在二十年内成就完整的工业制造体系、卫星上天导弹自主,拥有原子弹氢弹核潜艇火车飞机汽车制造业的工业大国。


人人知道今天的中国工业地位是从前苏联一百五十六个对口援建工业项目建立起全面工业化体系的。不过,苏联并非自愿无私帮助中国,而是面对冷战威胁和中国为了维护二战后社会主义阵营和朝鲜主权浴血奋战牺牲几十万志愿军将士的巨大贡献换来的苏联同意采取一百五十六项工业化有偿援助。


即使如此,斯大林始终不放心中国的发展,他在毛泽东拒绝苏联海军继续使用旅大港基地和完全否决中苏长波电台与斯大林提出的中苏军队联合指挥之后不要说对华工业援助,就是已经签署承诺的维护中国东北亚和平安全都直接反悔否认,转而全面扶持朝鲜发起朝鲜战争。中国不得不搁置工业化目标被迫应对边境安全和卷入在朝鲜与联合国十七国军队的肉搏战。


直到中国在战场上硬是把号称钢铁巨兽的美国领导的十七国军飞机大炮机械化部队打得签下了美军历史上从来没有过的停战协定书,斯大林才有所感动。中国一战成名树立了在社会主义阵营和全球国家中的地位。来不及选出继任者的斯大林突然去世,中国得遇赫鲁晓夫这样才疏学浅又急需中国支持巩固其领导地位的领导人,换来苏联批准签署全面加速实现援华一百五十六项工业大类和项目的专利有偿共享和技术理论指导协议,而且是所有高精尖材料苏联有什么敞开供应什么。这个名称超长的中苏协议一举永久性地改变了世界工业文明走势。


苏联对口企业抽调一半主力专家学者研究人员和生产骨干到华建设,计两万多名工业专家入华,仅随同他们携带的工业蓝图就有上百吨重。苏联把最先进的战斗机运输机轰炸机全球三大顶级军备从图纸、技术人员到整个生产线与原材料供应全部搬运到中国,即使是中国空军航空学校也从苏联航校校长教务管理教官到王牌飞行员全部迁到中国实施手把手地“传帮带”教学培养,“传帮带”这个词汇又从中国出师的学员技术人员一级级传递到全国个个部门。在那之前中国倾全国之力研制欧美日随处可以生产的无缝钢管也需要两年攻关才基本掌握小型无缝钢管的初步生产能力。稍大一点的抽水钢管依旧只能用钢板螺旋焊接拼凑。


中国一下子进入再也不用为琢磨无缝钢管发愁的机遇期。新中国建立工业化所涉及无数种高规格金属里面的几乎任何一项都是想到什么苏联就提供什么同时由专家就传帮带转移什么生产线。不要说中国近五十年攻关一直难以攻克的航空发动机制造,即使需要由中国从头研发制造任何一种军工原材料的话,156项援建工期都会超过百年。


这样的国家崛起战略窗口期稍纵即逝,因此才有毛泽东“只争朝夕”的号召。全国上下勒紧裤腰带配合对苏联有偿技术转让,马克思列宁主义思想武装起来的两万多名苏联援华专家以崇高的共产主义解放全人类思想境界无私无畏争分夺秒地帮助中国这个文盲率80%的农耕国家的工业化起步。


就这样,中国极其巧妙地抓住了不到十年的机遇,踩准了随后一直到互联网革命的所有发展关键节点,用一代人吃两代苦的毅力在赫鲁晓夫反悔和全面撤销援华项目之前基本打下了工业基础。包括中国一半的核工业基础的建立都是这样几乎一夜之间就降临中国。饱受欧美封锁围堵的苏联专家致力于帮助中国建立毛泽东认定的独立自主工业化生产体系,电力,冶炼,煤矿,化学,能源,勘探,水利,海洋,精密加工等一百四十个深化领域全面铺开,苏联有的都可以援建中国。以化学领域,据认为全中国懂化学和实际参与化学行业的技术人员仅有一千名,苏联进入中国的顶尖化学专家就有两千四百多人。


今天走向世界的鞍钢集团,武钢集团,包钢集团,长虹集团,航空工业的沈飞,西飞,陕飞,成飞,等等都是苏联援建的中国老牌工业重镇。换成用无不制裁围堵中国的美国来说,相当于美国把今天的F22战机,B2轰炸机,大力神运输机,苹果电脑,英特尔电子,NASA基地,高盛芯片,等等国家最核心的军事技术工业核心生产线一股脑搬运给中国,同时输送美国顶尖大学公司和研究机构的两万名教授专家学者到中国居住实施核心工业链的实地传帮带建设生产,开放专利,提供原材料元器件和生产线,负责所有配套的上下游企业建设生产和人员培养直到合格上岗。


这样的人类现代化文明大规模移植,这个星球历史上只发生过奇迹般的一次。就像美国政府评价允许中国进入世贸组织为战略失误一样,近代史普遍将之论述为苏联的巨大战略失误。拥有最强情报机构的顶级两大霸主都发生对华战略失误,同时中国分毫不差地抓住这两次战略机遇,这就是国运。


只需要看看拜登像做贼一样搬运一个台积电得到的全球民众戳戳点点就知道搬运哪怕一个顶级技术到其他国家的难度和繁琐程度之大超乎常人想象。


中国准确接受到了星球历史中眨眼间就会消逝的这束突然闪出的蓝光。二十世纪的新中国分毫不差地做到了一百五十六个工业领域全部移栽成活。一夜之间,现代化工厂在无数农田山岗上拔地而起,千百万手拿锄头的农民后代进入学习班再出来就是成群结队跟随顶尖工业专家的技术工人。


就这样一九五六年到一九六六年成为人类工业史上纯金般的大输血再造辉煌的十年。单纯看其中的人力资源的飞跃,全球也找不出第二个国家可以如此准确地瞬间接盘完成。这其中不仅有钱学森邓稼先为代表的归国学者于敏为代表的本土科学家,还有无数科技、工程、军事、管理、制造领域里面像铁人王进喜那样的工业中坚和千百万莘莘学子前赴后继的投入。


我的一个舅舅就是那时候没日没夜配合苏联专家团攻克飞机工业项目而英年早逝的,他英俊帅气能力超强从小是我姥爷的掌上明珠,三十岁出头担任上万人国防大厂一把手。离世后国家和他的管理团队一直没有忘记他,一路培养他的儿子,直到我那位表哥从北航研究生院毕业,接掌已经数倍于当初规模的那家工业集团的一把手。


印度越南和大量欧洲国家都有远比中国要好的外部环境和限制,证明一国工业化基础的奠定不是改革开放就能实现的,遑论崛起。


历史机遇下导致的中国成功不可再现与重复。仅仅看一看华为公司受到的追杀就知道利益固化的世界对后来者的防范压制有多么滴水不漏。


因此,中国不是因为拥有五千年历史就能够在跌落谷底之后从近代工业化霸权国家之中杀出血路实现工业化翻身。中国客观上是因为人类历史不可再现的特殊机遇在文明冲突冷战阵营与主观上的文化历史积累和国家领导人只争朝夕浴血奋战英明领导的共同作用实现无数个奇点的汇合而千载难逢地获得翻身。虽然距离最先进高科技仍有许多堵墙,依旧面对经济、金融、种族,更不用说政治生态环境里面滴水不漏的压制防范和围堵,但是轻舟已过万重山,剩下的不过是肉眼看得到对面的小沟小壑。以西方围堵中国的最大攻坚战内容歼二零五代战机发动机,美国是世界顶级的F22发动机的19.5吨最大推重比,中国最近J20新航发的同比数据是18.5到19吨。官方不公布的话几乎无人相信。



题良臣登云阁 其二


北宋  欧阳澈



丹楹崛起拂云端,平步危梯入广寒。

脱屣伫当腾鹤驭,飞凫终拟附鹏抟。

半天风雨凭栏咏,万里江山指掌看。

十二楼台多胜概,惭无诗思剪裁难。



无疑,只要扳倒和解体中国,这一切就再也不会有发生的可能,就像乌克兰的航母制造和安225安124超大运输机制造。丛林法则的地球上和平崛起远远没有条件。欧洲国家和日本无一不是通过血腥战争崛起,美苏通过二战崛起,迄今历史上有迹可循的所有大国崛起的历史背景都是战争。即使四顾无敌的大唐开元盛世,也转头就是安史之乱,万顷良田沦为荒草。



开元后乐


唐  薛逢




莫奏开元旧乐章,乐中歌曲断人肠。
郐王玉笛三更咽,虢国金车十里香。
一自犬戎生蓟北,便从征战老汾阳。
中原骏马搜求尽,沙苑年来草又芳。



寄荆幕孙郎中


唐末至五代   齐己



珠履风流忆富春,三千鹓鹭让精神。

诗工凿破清求妙,道论研通白见真。

四座共推操檄健,一家谁信买书贫。

别来乡国魂应断,剑阁东西尽战尘。




观春秋吟


北宋   邵雍



堂堂王室寄空名,天下无时不战争。

灭国伐人唯恐后,寻盟报役未尝宁。

晋齐命令炎如火,文武资基冷似冰。

唯有感麟心一片,万年千载若丹青。




....


今天日本颠覆其侵略战争和慰安妇的历史跟今天欧美制造新疆集中营人权问题一样,不过是轻松享用掌握主流媒体的舆论控制权颠倒是非为政治利益集团服务。中国不能仅仅在欧美日把持的舆论领域疲惫应对,自我麻痹什么文明古国和平崛起。认清只有强大的战争能力才是制止人类战争悲剧重演的唯一途径。


因此,“文明型国家”通过和平文明途径实现没有硝烟的崛起听听可以,信则必败。由奢至简之难胜于登天,守成国家宁肯鱼死网破的例子比比皆是。兵者,国之大事,死生之地,存亡之道,不可不察也。大国崛起不可能是一个和平友好的轻松过程。


现状和未来:


刚写完这段,看到印度在中印边境东段藏南发起对中国境内的武装攻击,欧洲火药桶科索沃和塞尔维亚发生战争。前者有文章指出印度背后是美国针对中国的军事行动,后者默克尔坦承是北约针对俄罗斯的军事设计。同时,日本选出2022年度热门词汇“戰”字,马斯克针对北约升级俄乌战争再次出来预言第三次世界大战将要爆发。没有西方主流媒体赏识马斯克的乌鸦嘴,就像之前预言俄乌战争必然爆发的人受到欧洲挞伐一样。


俄罗斯仅仅因为体量巨大就引发美欧穷追死打不断试图用导弹扼住它的咽喉,并试图将之分裂成数个互相内斗和小到不再构成安全威胁的国家。这就是普京悲愤自嘲的“呼吸罪”。中国何以免俗?


China has no room for fantasies and dreams. The war, siege, sanction, and division of the "battle nation" Russia is exactly the same as the division that China has been suffering from. It shows that the war and siege China is facing has nothing to do with whether China is a civilized country. The country" Russia will never be reduced in the slightest, it will only be doubled.


There is also the current situation of the epidemic situation in China. Countries and various forces are generally using the epidemic to control China, so let’s take your time.


Poetry.




Gengge promotes waste, accumulates hatred, and has this root for thousands of years.

The palace and the music are uprooted, and the beacon fire shines in the sky to the border village.

Once the heroic battle and singing marched, Wanli City Huan coveted to destroy the family.

Every time it is said that the dust of war disappears in Hankou, the wolves rush to collect the levy.






What the West killed was not the "Yun 10", but China's opportunity and hope to become a world-class industrial power


Shi Zhiweng

yesterday at 11:08


This is the recollection of Comrade Chen Yongping:


The chief seemed to be emotional, and told us about the "Tenth Movement": "The Tenth Movement" was approved to launch in August 1970 under Chairman Mao's personal proposal. The development started at Dachang Airport after it was launched. At that time, the troops stationed in Dachang provided a lot of support and convenience in logistical support, so the relationship between the two companies got along very well. At that time, the "Yunshi" started only two years later than the European Airbus, and made its first flight in Dachang on September 26, 1980. Subsequently, "Yun-ten" completed various scientific research and test flights. And it has flown 7 times to Lhasa Gonggar Airport in Tibet, which is the most difficult place to take off and land. The chief discussed with Ma Fengshan, the chief designer of "Yun 10", that if "Yun 10" is successful, it will be very easy to develop large-scale military transportation in the future. At that time, the Naval Air Force did not have an AWACS. Ma Fengshan told the chief that "Yun-10" had already completed the program design and wind tunnel experiments for refitting the AWACS.


But to everyone's surprise, when "Yunshi" was ready for a big development, it was cut off the follow-up funds and was forced to dismount in 1986. At that time, the cooperation with the American McDonnell Douglas Company had already been formally launched. The assembly line of "Yunshi" was withdrawn, and it became the place of Mai Daoteng. The technical information accumulated over the past 15 years does not even have a place to be stacked, and many of them are lost. The material worth tens of millions of yuan that was originally planned to make the third "Yun-ten" was used for practicing the rivet gun when preparing for the cooperation with McDonnell Douglas! Ma Fengshan, the chief designer of the domestic large aircraft, fell ill due to great grief and depression, and was admitted to the hospital. The chief went to the hospital to visit him, and he told the chief: "Yun Shi" was assassinated by someone, and he couldn't swallow this breath. He also told the chief that it would be great if civil aviation supported the "Yunshi" like the military. He finally told the chief that what they killed was not "Yunshi", but China's hope of becoming a world-class aviation power. ... Not long after, Ma Fengshan passed away in depression at the age of 61, which was the best time for the overall designer of the aircraft.


Many years later, I saw a widely circulated news on the Internet, "China's Thirty Years Major Espionage Case Revealed", and the top one was the "Yun Shi" dismounting case. According to the article, Shen Tu, then director of the Civil Aviation Administration of China, was bought by Boeing and intelligence agencies, and operated the "Yun Shi" to get rid of him.



Scholars from the Seven Nations Discuss the Discourse Rise of China as a "Civilized Country"

Source: Observer Network

2022-12-08

Observer Network Author

China care, global vision


“Good morning, good afternoon, good evening. Welcome to the Thinkers Forum 2022 devoted to the theme of the Civilizational State in Global Politics.”

On the evening of December 6th, Beijing time, following Professor Zhang Weiwei’s greeting, experts and scholars from seven countries in different time zones gathered in the conference room of the editorial office of Observer. The prelude to the high-level seminar on Civilizational State in Global Politics.


Chen Zhimin, vice president of Fudan University, delivered a speech at the forum

Since 2010, Zhang Weiwei, dean of the China Research Institute at Fudan University, and his team have taken the lead in establishing the Chinese narrative of a "civilized country" through long-term and extensive original research. In recent years, with the rise of China as a civilized state, non-Western powers such as Russia, India, Iran, and Turkey have also begun to call themselves "civilized countries." The discourse of a civilized state has also exerted considerable influence within the West and has become one of the mainstream discourses of global politics today.


The high-end seminar on "Civilized Nation in Global Politics" was co-sponsored by the China Research Institute of Fudan University, Observer.com, Shanghai Spring and Autumn Development Strategy Research Institute, and "Oriental Studies" magazine. As soon as the initiative was put forward, it received positive responses from senior scholars from seven countries including China, Russia, India, the United States, the United Kingdom, Portugal, and Singapore. Scholars also provided papers in Chinese and English before the meeting, striving to deepen the discussion. The final forum lasted nearly 9 hours and ended in the early morning of December 7th, Beijing time.


In three creative high-level discussions held simultaneously online and offline in multiple time zones, experts and scholars focused on the rise of civilized state discourse, the new form of human civilization, the political narrative of civilized state in different countries, and the deepening of the theoretical narrative of civilized state and other topics, conducted bilingual exchanges and confrontations in Chinese and English.


Zhang Weiwei, Dean of China Research Institute, Fudan University


The "universal value" of Western liberalism is declining, who will take over?


Although Nathan Gardels, a scholar from the United States and co-founder of the Berggruen Institute, believes that the diversification caused by the Western-led liberal world order has contributed to the return of the concept of a civilized country, but in the opinion of most scholars attending the meeting, With the economic and political rise of non-Western countries after the Cold War and the relative decline of the traditional West, the liberal universal values that were considered to be the "end of history" in the past are increasingly unable to adapt to the development and evolution of reality. Western countries are also gradually starting from the perspective of their own civilizations, trying to break free from the shackles of "universal values" and seek modernization paths that suit their own national conditions.


As George Yeo, a political scientist and former Singaporean foreign minister, put forward at the meeting, during the Cold War era, the world was divided into two camps that were decoupled from each other. The globalization promoted by Western countries represented by the United States actually means It controls global finance and trade, and maintains peace and stability in the world under the control of the United States.


With the end of the Cold War, the world embraced liberalism as an ideal, and pluralism became a universal value. But in recent years, with the rise of emerging countries represented by China, liberalism that originally pursued tolerance can no longer tolerate diversity, and the struggle between old and new liberalism has become the core issue that divides American society today. The pride of self-identity in non-Western countries like China poses a great challenge to the West.


The rise of the concept of a civilized country means the collapse of the so-called "world civilization" and "universal values" dominated and constructed by Europe and the United States. According to BRUNO MAÇÃES, a senior advisor to Flint Global and former Portuguese Minister of European Affairs, Europe once believed that it was building "world civilization" and "universal values". As it turns out, it was just taken for granted. Russia, China, India and many other countries are increasingly seeing all this as the West trying to impose "Western civilization and its values" etc. Western civilization itself is also controversial within the West and can only be seen as a multitude of civilizations A type that requires no special treatment. Countries are also unwilling to sacrifice their respective cultures and ways of life for the "universal values" of liberalism.


Scholars participating in online forums


Scholars participating in the forum took a group photo offline

Chinese scholars have also seen this point and brought their own thoughts.


Professor Li Xiguang, director of the International Communication Research Center of Tsinghua University, believes that during the three hundred years of Western colonial enslavement, Western modernity was built on the civilization hierarchy. In the process of colonization of non-Western countries, Western imperialism and colonizers have been trying to "liberate" non-Western countries from their native historical and cultural traditions. Since the beginning of modern times, the United States and the West have been saying that only when China fully accepts Western thought paradigms and their values, "is it qualified to become a member of modern human society."


However, Western modernization theory cannot explain the chaotic situation in the world today. The western modernity narrative will only create more hatred and distrust among human beings, we need to move beyond the western modernity narrative. Non-Western intellectuals need to go beyond the narrow and outdated Western discourse of modernity, create new knowledge with independent thoughts, ideas, theories and concepts, and propose real problems and real solutions to real problems that concern more than 90% of the population of this planet .


Around the topic of Western liberalism theory, the guests and scholars at the scene also carried out in-depth exchanges and discussions. Wu Xinwen, a professor at the China Research Institute of Fudan University, believes that the root of the current social division in the United States and other Western countries may come from the conflict between old and new liberalism. When neoliberalism cannot solve the problems facing the Western world, Western society may return to classical liberalism to find Answer. And facing the future, we should go beyond the ideology of liberalism, save "freedom" from liberalism, and let the concept of freedom be reborn from the new ideology.


Jiang Shigong, Director of the Department of Social Sciences and Professor of Law School of Peking University


Jiang Shigong, director of the Department of Social Sciences of Peking University and professor of law school, agrees. In his view, the current global chorus of "civilization renaissance" more or less implicitly criticizes the liberal capitalist order, and these different and even contradictory civilizational discourses are united under this banner.


Liberalism is challenged not only because of its theoretical limitations, but more importantly, liberalism has evolved into an attempt to construct a liberal world empire politically, so that criticism of "world empire" inevitably becomes a criticism of "freedom." doctrine" critique. Liberal theory must therefore be liberated from the political construction of world empire if it is to be revived.


The fact that "civilized country" can become the mainstream discourse of international politics, according to Professor Zhang Weiwei, dean of the China Research Institute of Fudan University, lies behind three basic facts:


(1) China has risen rapidly with a Chinese model that the West does not recognize, with a high degree of institutional and cultural confidence, which has changed the world pattern and shocked the entire world.

(2) Other non-Western powers with unique civilizational traditions are also rising in unprecedented ways.

(3) The Western world and the Western model have fallen into an unprecedented crisis, and the world has quickly entered the post-Western era and post-American era. This "great change unseen in a century" calls for de-Westernization, de-Americanization, and de-Western discourse hegemony. In other words, in this new era, many countries and interest groups need new theories and new discourses, and the discourse of “civilized countries” partially meets or responds to this need.


How did China become a "civilized country"?


The extent to which the definition and description of a civilized country comes from the country's traditional culture, religion, history, and way of life, including the impact of the modernization process on a civilized country, is a focus of discussion in this seminar.


Wen Yang, a researcher at the China Research Institute of Fudan University, first pointed out that it is almost impossible to start with the consensus on basic concepts when discussing civilization issues. To clarify this concept, the studies of Toynbee, Braudel, and Spengler can still bring some inspiration. On this basis, it may be easier to reach a consensus when discussing civilized countries.


Wen Yang, a researcher at the China Institute of Fudan University


This kind of debate on basic concepts may just show that "civilized countries" are not static. In this regard, Professor Zhang Weiwei gave his own understanding. In his opinion, the concept of "civilized country" has undergone a series of changes, starting with Lucian Pye's pejorative view that "civilization-country "It is impossible to become a modern country. Martin Jacques neutralized the concept of "civilization-country" and believed that China would never become a Western country. Today we discuss China as a civilized country, which means China The first is a very large modern country, and the qualities of China's ancient civilization make it unique. As a civilized country, China's "four supers and one combination", each of which is a combination of ancient and modern.


Scholars have also sparked heated discussions on how to view China as a civilized country. Among them, Alexander Lukin, academic director of the Institute of China and Contemporary Asia of the Russian Academy of Sciences, has the most vehement views.


In Lu Jin’s view, there is no lack of traditional interruptions and changes in Chinese history—foreign race conquest, Chinese culture itself changed when assimilating foreign races, Confucianism no longer as the dominant political ideology in contemporary mainland China, young people are not After mastering classical Chinese, believing in traditional values, and the disappearance of classical architecture, etc., it can be concluded that Chinese civilization cannot be considered "unified and continuous". He believes that today's China is not a "civilization pretending to be a country", but a A modern state that "pretends to be civilized" for various political and ideological reasons.


Alexander Lukin, Academic Director of the Institute of China and Contemporary Asia, Russian Academy of Sciences


Regarding Lu Jin's views, Chinese scholars participating in the discussion put forward different opinions. Wu Xinwen believes that in order to challenge the continuity of Chinese civilization, Professor Lu Jin deliberately enlarged the gap between traditional China and modern China. Qiu Wenping, a guest researcher at the China Research Institute of Fudan University and director of the Teaching and Research Office of the Institute of Religion at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences, pointed out that Professor Lu Jin’s views are based on a specious understanding of many Chinese concepts. Russian scholars have experienced abandonment at the national level. The theory of Marxism returns to the status quo of religion and history, so it avoids the influence of Marxism on China, and cannot understand the internalization of Confucian culture in the hearts of the people, and China, which combines ancient culture with modern culture, can propose a "community of shared future for mankind". "Such a future-oriented civilized initiative.


The continuity of Chinese civilization and the shaping of Confucian culture to China, a civilized country, have also become topics of intensive discussion among scholars.


Yang Rongwen believes that the reason why Chinese civilization is extraordinary is that the Confucian culture it pursues regards the country as a big family and endows this kind of idealized morality, which makes the Chinese nation united again and again in history. Form a solid and indivisible civilization. Among other civilizations, only religion can play a similar role, transcending countries and time and space to build unity, consensus and unity.


Wen Yang added that China is willing to define itself as a "civilized country" rather than a "nation-state" because today's China is a successfully rising modern country, and such a country can re-examine its long and uninterrupted Civilization, rediscovering a rich historical heritage and interpreting its own history.


Martin Jacques, a guest researcher at the China Research Institute at Fudan University and a former senior researcher at the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge, also holds a similar view. He believes that civilized countries exist in China in the most complete form. Apart from China, India, Russia , Turkey is also related to the concept of civilized state. Although they are different from China - India has been occupied and divided for a long time; Turkey's civilization is discontinuous and only one of the centers of Islam; Russia's emphasis on its "civilized state" attributes is more to emphasize its own specificity, especially the difference from the Western world.


Martin Jacques, Invited Researcher, China Institute, Fudan University, Former Senior Researcher, Department of Politics and International Studies, University of Cambridge, UK


While China is gaining more and more confidence and recognition as a civilized country or civilized country, the apparent continuity is a huge source of its strength. There is a highly orderly and coherent relationship between the state, society, family, and individuals, and its core is a very close symbiotic relationship between civilization and the state. The state is regarded as the expression of people's beliefs and the guardian of civilization. . In a highly creative way, the Chinese civilization uses the concept of a civilized country to promote the transformation of the country into the future and maintain social stability, which is an extraordinary pioneering work in human history.


The reason why China has become a civilized country is not only due to the Confucian tradition, but also cannot ignore the reconstruction of Chinese civilization by Marxism, which has experienced the modern revolution and the practice of the Communist Party of China.


In this regard, Professor Qiu Wenping added: Who said that socialist civilization and Marxism are not new types of civilization? If we understand Marxism, it is actually a brand-new form of civilization with the ideal of liberating all mankind. However, Western scholars often avoid this point. An extension of the traditional concept of grand unification, combined with Marx to form a new concept of civilization.


Gao Jian, director of the Center for British Studies at Shanghai International Studies University and secretary-general of the Songyun Forum of the Shanghai International Strategic Issues Research Association, also raised the same question: How can the spiritual principles of traditional Chinese culture be combined with the basic principles of modern civilization? How does the Chinese-style modernization path combine with the major historical proposition of the new form of human civilization?


Throughout the history of mankind, if the spiritual principles of a civilization are unique and powerful, and it has a profound reflection on modern civilization and a sense of transcendence, it will surely become a universal and leading civilization Spirit.


Therefore, we should not only talk about the uniqueness of China's modernization path, but also bravely discuss the significance of universality based on the uniqueness of the Chinese-style modernization path. This universality is definitely not based on Western principles, nor does it mean to impose the Chinese development model on other nations, but emphasizes the spirit of the principle of seeking truth from facts on the Chinese-style modernization road.


In this sense, we cannot forget the possibility of a new form of human future beyond the modern capitalist civilization guided and revealed by Marxism.


If China can well respond to the cultural principles that transcend modern industrial capital civilization from practice and theory, China's modernization path must be different from that of the West, and it must have cultural reference significance for non-Western developing countries. We are not imposing cultural forms on other civilizations, but we can tell other civilizations that we can take a modernization path based on our own national conditions.


Professor Jiang Shigong also endowed China with more far-reaching significance as a civilized country in the sense of a modern country. He pointed out that the revival of Chinese civilization is not an anti-liberal modernity, but an exploration of the Chinese road to modernity. This is the "Chinese-style modernization" proposed by China today. Only from this perspective can we understand why Professor Zhang Weiwei emphasizes the distinction between "civilization-state" and "civilizational state". His understanding of China is the latter concept, emphasizing China's role in Establish a modern country (state) on the basis of absorbing the beneficial elements of traditional Chinese civilization, instead of trying to expand the territory of the current country to the place covered by civilization in history, as in other civilization revival discourses.


In this sense, the rise of China has universal significance in world history, that is, only the rise of China can avoid the tragedy of civilizational conflicts after the decline of world empires, and bring the history of globalization to peaceful dialogue and shared prosperity among different civilizations. new era.


The participating scholars had a heated discussion


The rise of the "civilized country" group, where are the differences?


As the influence of the concept of "civilized state" has gradually increased, it has become one of the mainstream narratives of global politics today. In addition to China, a number of influential and unique "non-Western" countries with historical, cultural, and religious characteristics are also actively exploring their own "civilized state" development path as a theory for their own development and against the concept of Western-style nation-states tool.


In this regard, Martin Jacques believes that the term civilized country is being widely used, especially those countries that have not established a nation-state system because of their colonial history. They emphasize their own civilization traditions and the history of the pre-colonial era, and This is different from Western colonists. As they grow stronger, so does this tendency. There are three reasons for this trend: the decline and crisis of Western countries, the growing influence of mainland China, and the limitations and inadequacies of the nation-state model.


For quite a long time after the establishment of the nation-state system in Westphalia in 1648, nation-states were the exclusive domain of the West, while at the same time, Western colonists were trying to deprive non-Western countries of their history and traditions. Even after the national liberation and independence movements from the colonial system in the last century, these countries have not gained real respect and equality, and the hierarchy of white people at the top is still deeply entrenched. But this hierarchy is facing increasing challenges, and China is the leader and driver of this change.


Starting from India's national conditions, BRUNO MAÇÃES explained the reason why India advocates the concept of "civilized country". He believes that Modi, by affirming India's civilizational attributes, prevents Western forces from attempting to measure India's success with a set of foreign standards.

Contemporary India is a "wounded civilization", and the nation-state is an invention of the West, so it is naturally vulnerable to Western influence. Civilization is the alternative to the West. In India, Western liberal philosophy used to be highly valued. During the independence movement against the colonists, Indians also chose to use liberal discourse against the colonists.


Now, Modi is persuading voters to reject an Anglicized elite power structure, accusing Western political thought of hypocrisy. Western civilization is more like an operating system. It does not embody rich traditions and customs, nor does it pursue religious teachings and visions. Western values cannot defend a way of life. Non-Western countries cannot preserve their traditional way of life in a liberal society. If Turkey, China, and Russia import a whole set of Western values and rules, their societies will soon become copies of the West and lose their cultural independence. Loss would be seen as a necessary price of entry into modern society.


But now, people are increasingly doubting whether it is really necessary to obtain all the benefits of modern society by imitating Western countries. For India, cultural assimilation means political dependence, so that every controversial issue in Indian society must be finally decided by Western political and intellectual authorities. For defenders of civilized nations, the pursuit of universal values is over, and people prefer to speak out directly for themselves and their society.


Hindol Sengupta, Indian Historian and Contributing Editor, Fortune India


Hindol Sengupta, an Indian historian and special editor of "Fortune India" magazine, interpreted India's use of the concept of "civilized country" from a more "pragmatic" perspective:


After more than 30 years of development, India has become the fifth largest economy in the world today, surpassing the old colonial ruler Britain, and is expected to become the third largest economy at the beginning of this century. The most important question today is, on what basis should it achieve this "greatness"? What can it bring to this world?


In his view, India today realizes that these are fundamental questions of identity, both on an individual and a collective level. These questions cannot be answered with borrowed ideas - India cannot say that all it has to offer the world is a "South Asian version of a successful Western democratic ideal". India seeks to deliver more than a successful iteration or model - it wants to deliver a unique source.


The current Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi believes that India's statehood comes from civilization - he defines India's successful experience as a by-product of its civilization roots, democracy from Janapadas (1500-600 BC) or the ancient Indian republic Not the Athens model. And by tracing back and mining history to promote their rights in the Indian Ocean, mining the commercial value of yoga in the commodity economy, promoting ancient Indian mathematics, and ancient legends of heroes to increase the pride and cohesion of the Indian nation.


Aiming at the differences between these concepts and goals of China's "civilized country", Jiang Shigong believes that in recent years, there has been a trend of "civilization renaissance" in the world. For example, Putin is resorting to Russian civilization, Turkey is also using the civilizational discourse of pan-Turkism, and even the European Union is constantly resorting to European civilization traditions to strengthen European integration. All kinds of "civilization" discourses that are being revived in various countries in the world today actually imply the revival of these ancient "regional civilized empires". The world empire has achieved the end of history internally, and is in the conflict of civilizations externally. Today we are discussing the revival of civilization, which means that the world empire has encountered challenges.


If we look at the decline of world empires, postmodernism, conservatives, and civilizational narratives together constitute a critique of world empires. Although these revived traditional civilizations have formed temporary allies against the world empire of liberal capitalism, there are not small differences among them.


epilogue


This high-end symposium spanning multiple time zones and gathering scholars from seven countries finally lasted for nearly 9 hours. When Beijing time came to 12 am the next day, the discussions among the participating scholars were still going on. The exploration of civilization is a review of self-identity, and the discussion of civilized countries is the exploration of future development. With the rise of civilized countries represented by China, we believe that the discourse monopoly of the West will eventually be broken, and the theoretical discussion of civilized countries will no longer be a defensive construction, but will become a new positive one. Paradigm summary.


Other exciting content of the seminar will be released on Observer.com one after another, so stay tuned.



This article is an exclusive manuscript of Observer.com. The content of the article is purely the author's personal opinion and does not represent the platform's opinion. Without authorization, it is not allowed to reprint, otherwise legal responsibility will be pursued. Follow Observer.com WeChat guanchacn and read interesting articles every day.



Read 135730
Editor in charge: Xiaoting
Observer APP, better reading experience





About the underlying logic of real-world operations





Zhai Dongsheng, Deputy Dean of the School of International Relations, Renmin University of China

12-12-2022



Yesterday I was invited to participate in a seminar on the outlook of Sino-US economic relations. The speeches at the conference were very exciting, but at the end, there was an episode. In the interaction before the end, I commented on a few sentences, one of which was "The underlying logic of this world is actually violence, and politics can only be found on the basis of violence, and only in the rules, order, and boundaries of rights provided by politics." There are economic activities; the market is not a self-made existence, the market itself is a public product provided by the government.” The leader of the meeting organizer is a gentle and modest female economist. Referring to my sentence in a polite and frank manner, she admitted that she might find it difficult to accept this point of view. She believed that the market is spontaneously generated, the economy is not determined by politics and violence, and economic activities have their own inevitable laws of existence; The economy does have an impact, but more of a temporary disruption. In fact, a similar debate happened in a professional WeChat group about sanctions and economic warfare where I was the group leader. Most people who study political science, international relations, strategy or history can agree with my point of view. Economists' first reaction was, "This is terrible."


Such differences in concepts not only reflect the differences in the attributes of the disciplines among us, but also show the differences in the underlying logic of the basic schools of thought or worldviews. This kind of disagreement can be described as an eternal theme in the history of thought. We have seen the ideological struggle related to it in the debate on "On Salt and Iron" in the Han Dynasty, and in the debate between Hobbes and Locke on the "state of nature" It has been seen in the game between mercantilism and liberal economic policies in modern world economic history, in the "criticizing the law and criticizing Confucianism" movement in China in the 1970s, and in the realism and idealism of international relations theory. It has been seen in the dispute over doctrines, and in the future history of human thought, this debate will continue to be refurbished in different scenarios and with different looks. However, as Comrade Mao Zedong said in his later years, "The accomplished and accomplished politicians of all dynasties are legalists, and they all advocate the rule of law, favoring the present over the past; while Confucianism is full of benevolence, righteousness and morality, favoring the past over the present, Turn back the wheel of history.” Economic liberals, idealists in politics and international relations, and Confucians in the Chinese ideological tradition, the world and vision they describe are more in line with the aesthetics of most people or the morality in daily life sense, but it does not conform to history, nor can it explain reality, let alone predict the future.


My own ideological tendency is realistic rather than idealistic. In the coordinate system of Chinese intellectual history, I am closer to Legalism than Confucianism in ancient China. Below, I will use a few small questions and answers to explain the underlying logic of my academic thinking, which can also be regarded as a reply to those friends with liberal/Confucian/idealist thinking tendencies.


The first question, how did government and order arise? Regarding anarchy, Hobbes and Locke have completely different cognitions. The state of nature that Locke refers to is actually a village with public order and good customs, not anarchy in the true sense. In the history of mankind, the anarchy between groups of different languages, cultures, races and religions is closer to Hobbes' cognition. When order collapses and resources are scarce and the people are struggling to live, the binding force of morality and ethics disappears. The troubled times without kingly law that the ancient Chinese said is Hobbesian anarchy. In a Hobbesian state of anarchy, where all are enemies of all, there will be some people who are more powerful than others and use violence more recklessly, monopolizing the resources for survival. It is true that survival resources can be obtained by robbing on the move, but a more stable and reliable method is to evolve from bandits to occupy mountains and become kings, and collect a relatively fixed percentage of taxes from residents in the jurisdiction under the banner of protecting the environment and the people or similar. As a result, the relationship between this violent group and the residents it rules has changed from a zero-sum game relationship between the predator and the plundered to a symbiotic relationship with a partner color: without the protection of this violent group, the residents’ money Both body and body become trophies and commodities of other violent groups. Different violent groups compete for spheres of influence, cooperate vertically and horizontally with each other, constantly compete, attack and merge, and finally form a balance in a certain area. The big monopolies of violence call themselves kings, the biggest call themselves emperors. In this process, who can most effectively obtain as many soldiers and military resources as possible from within their own jurisdiction, and who can transform these semi-forced mobilized young people into organized combat forces in the most clever way, and who You can gain a greater chance of winning in this cruel game, and eventually change from a bandit to a king and become an emperor.


Therefore, unless it is absolutely necessary, it is a stupid, short-sighted and suicidal approach to exhaust the water and fish the people in one's own jurisdiction. Not only that, violent groups also need to hire professionals, such as wizards, to use divine will to cloak their own rule with a cloak of legitimacy, or use Confucian scholars to fabricate some moral etiquette, or the theory of "induction between heaven and man", "the end of five elements", and "prophecy". " to justify its rule. It is no coincidence that some scholars in the field of ancient intellectual history believe that the origin of Confucianism is the ancient shamans and the origin of Taoism is the historian. The idiom "Successful king and defeated bandit" describes the fact of dynastic change rather than just people's cynical emotions. Of course, there is always a price for fooling people, and the biggest price is that you will fool your own people. The rulers of the country are very aware of how their political power came about, so almost without exception they are legalists, and some hypocrites will put on Confucianism or even Buddhism and Taoism to reduce the cost of governance and governance. risk. But after several generations of power, fewer and fewer people in the ruling group understand the above-mentioned ins and outs, and the princes and grandchildren who grew up in the deep palace, if they were born in elementary school, they are based on theory rather than history. Lord, it is easy to become an overconfident fool. Once a more powerful violent group appears, this group of "legitimate" rulers who are good at literature and art and full of economics will usually write about the pain of subjugation and leave some famous stories through the ages after being reduced to prison. Of course, there will also be some rulers who fled to the fringes to linger on their last days. As the ruling space becomes narrow, it will not take long for their behavior patterns to become bandits again like "throwing their ancestors".


The second question, how did the market arise? Liberals believe that the place where people trade with each other is the market, and there is a market when there is division of labor and transactions. But in practice, where there is no government monopoly on violence, the spontaneous trading order of the market is difficult to maintain, and it is difficult to distinguish between merchants and horse bandits or pirates. This is the true state of the Silk Road or the anarchy of the Age of Discovery. To maintain market order, one government must come out to monopolize violence, or rely on agreements between several governments. Not only that, the more complex the high-end market, the more critical the role of the government. In the first chapter of my book "Money, Power and People", I discussed this way: "The popularization of education and medical care can make economic activities obtain healthy and capable laborers and entrepreneurs; The behavior of market order, such as anti-monopoly, anti-fraud, and anti-counterfeiting, can improve the efficiency and quality of economic activities; further, if infrastructure investment can be subsidized and its external performance is internalized by government actions, then The progress of infrastructure will greatly enhance the competitiveness of related industries; further, through legal authorization and punishment of dishonesty, a credit system can be established and improved, which can reduce transaction costs and capital costs, making transactions and investments easier to achieve; through Suppressing the protective tendencies of local governments and various industry forces can establish a unified national market, through international treaties and trade negotiations, the country's superior goods can enter other countries' markets, and official efforts to unify and expand internal and external markets can make the country's Expand production capacity in core industries to gain economies of scale and competitiveness; if you want to achieve faster technological progress, in addition to subsidizing technology research and development, you must also provide reasonable and necessary protection for intellectual property rights. Therefore, special courts and law enforcement are required The team, these public goods are all to make up for the externalities contained in technological research and development and innovation; the social security system and wealth redistribution system can shape a social structure dominated by the middle class, and its function is not only to expand the domestic The overall demand of the market, and reduce the political and security risks of the whole society; the promotion of new business models and new technology routes, the reason why the threshold is high is that traditional models and traditional technologies have been running in and symbiosis with society for many years. Tearing and reconstructing this traditional operating system will bring pain, obstruction and resistance to some groups, so the government must provide them with the necessary suppression, inducement and compensation, so that social technological progress and governance changes can be realized.


In short, there is a structural correspondence between the various public products provided by the government of a country and the scale expansion and complexity of the country’s economic activities; the larger and stronger the government, the more adequate the supply of public products, and the more economic activities will be. The more complex, the more advanced. "


The third question: Can this theory explain history and reality? Can it improve the accuracy of predicting the future? The answer is, of course. Whether it is the rise and fall of dynasties in Chinese history or the iteration of hegemony in world history, they all conform to the core logic of "gaining power by violence and letting the government shape the market." No matter how good the production and business of the Han people were, and no matter how prosperous the economy and culture were, once they lost the protection of the Great Wall and the superiority of the imperial military power, in the face of the mobile advantages of the nomads, all the prosperity would quickly disappear, leaving only the hastily clothed people traveling south. and helpless. After the Five Husbands, the south of the Yangtze River was always more prosperous and richer than the north, but most of the divisions ended with the north conquering the south, because violence shaped politics.


Did the rise of modern Europe depend on trade and good governance? Obviously not, they relied on the naked and bloody colonial violence, and relied on the advantages of war mobility and military financing potential brought by navigation. Is the great industrialization and continuous development of science and technology pioneered by Protestant countries the result of European entrepreneurship or Protestant ethics? No, it is caused by the cycle of violence and profiteering formed by "colonization-market-war" , which Professor Wen Yi has explained convincingly in his new book.


Modern scientific exploration has the same origin as colonial adventure and conquest, and science still retains traces of its own violent origin in its discourse. For example, scientists like to describe scientific discovery as "conquering" an unknown field. Technology is often related to commercial investment for profit, because technical know-how can be kept privately or protected by patents, and investment in technology research and development can be rewarded; but the science at the source of technology, its breakthroughs usually have more color of public products , so historically, the discovery of many scientific principles has been funded by governments for war and security purposes, not for profit. A pacifist country can accumulate technology, but it is difficult to make major scientific breakthroughs. In an era of pacifism, there can be technological progress, but it is difficult to have major scientific breakthroughs. The principle lies in this.


People who believe in liberalism and idealism like to cite the case of European integration after World War II to prove that economy can be separated from politics and politics can be separated from the logic of violence. Unfortunately, Americans, especially Republicans in the United States, find it difficult to agree. Twenty years ago, when Europeans opposed the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq, they told their European allies: The reason why you Europeans can do this long-term peacefully and gracefully The great test of seventy years is because we use nuclear military power to prop up a sky without wind and rain for you. Behind your peaceful years, we are carrying forward with heavy burdens.


A theoretical point of view is difficult to prove, but it is easy to be falsified, because you only need to cite a counterexample to falsify a theoretical proposition, at least to realize the depreciation of its theory and limit its applicable scenarios. So far, I have not seen a case that can really falsify the core proposition of this article. If so, friends who believe in liberalism are welcome to remind me.


The last question: Why are there more liberals trained in economics, journalism, linguistics, philosophy and other disciplines than other disciplines?


In my opinion, the main reason is that in the training of their subject talents, the curriculum sets more emphasis on instrumental training such as writing and mathematics, and neglects training in history and intellectual history. Many students majoring in economics do not study economic history. They focus a lot of energy on learning and practicing mathematical tools. Many PhDs in economics trained by American universities are undergraduates in science and engineering. After switching to economics or finance, it only took more than a year to read some literature and take a few courses, and then make a quantitative model and get a thesis for a doctorate. Economists trained on such a growth path have a deeper understanding of the world than graduates who have studied social sciences or history for six years.


What kind of students will this group of people enter the university classroom and teach in the first ten years of their careers? This is the reason why some of the Chinese-American economists who were active in the Chinese-language media seem shallow and dull, and they can only sell some neo-liberal ideas. In fact, it is not only these Chinese scholars who have become monks, I found that some white scholars who have become popular in the American economics circle, such as the famous Professor Daron Acemoglu, are actually cutting and manipulating various data to demonstrate Liberal clichés that are superficial and even seriously wrong.


At the World Bank's spring annual meeting in 2015, I challenged his views twice in his speeches, and then read his book "Why Countries Fail" carefully, and found that this person is really hard to live up to his reputation. Students with a background in journalism and language and literature have a lot of training in rhetoric and writing in their courses, but they have little research on what happened in this world and why it is like this. Like the victims of American economics education, they emphasize the tools of expression and despise the content of expression. In the words of the ancients, it is "literature is better than quality" rather than "gentleness". As a result, many scholars trained by these majors have a pedantic taste of "public knowledge" when they open their mouths. The reason lies in their lack of understanding of history and the working mechanism of the real world.


So, can scholars who engage in history be free from the hypnosis of idealism and liberalism? Not necessarily. Among historians, according to my observation, there will also be some liberals, mainly Chinese history, because they are greatly influenced by Confucianism. Relatively speaking, world history is not so easy to produce liberals, because they know better than Chinese history scholars what happened to the world in the past five hundred years.


Going back to the major changes we are in today and Sino-US relations, the reason why the US Republican Party wants to engage in anti-globalization, and the reason why the Biden administration is determined to decouple from China in terms of technology is that they are changing from neo-liberalism. Gradually waking up from the delusional dream of the United States, today's American elites are willing to sacrifice economic interests in exchange for security and political interests, and the security considerations of economic policy are overwhelmed by efficiency considerations. But what is interesting is that too many people in China are still immersed in the dream of liberalism and idealism, hoping that the Americans will change their minds.


At a dinner I organized last month, a famous economics professor complained to me that the world has become so messed up because of you people who engage in international relations. I replied to him that the cooperation and prosperity shaped by your economics major is like a bubble in the stock market. People who revel in the bubble every once in a while will feel that this bull market is different from the one in history, but in the end the market It will return to the fundamentals; our politics and international relations major studies the underlying logic of the historical operation behind these bubbles, but whether or not we speak out and point out the truth, the market will still return to their fundamentals.


This round of neo-liberalism has emerged in the United States since 1980, and has been gradually abandoned in the United States since 2008, not because others pointed out its mistakes, but because it has hollowed out American entities through outsourcing and capitalization in practice. The economy has undermined social fairness and unity with the polarization of the rich and the poor, challenged the traditional values of religion and culture with political correctness, and abolished the US military advantage with the theory of trade/democratic peace. We just pointed out the emperor's new clothes.


I have spent all day today writing this article not to convert my liberal friends. I know that the world view is essentially an aesthetic, and the aesthetics of adults are extremely difficult to change.


I took the time to write this article in the hope that when young people in China form their worldviews, they can notice the major differences between different schools of thought, and they can pay attention to the not-so-pleasant underlying logic provided by realists. Just like what was sung in the popular song "Descendants of the Dragon" more than 20 years ago, I hope "Dragon, Dragon, keep your eyes open, keep your eyes open forever and ever . "



Jack Chao
1 hour ago (edited)
一般人並不了解美國為什麼對「通漲」這麼恐

点赞(1)
打赏
向编辑推荐
分享:
最近访客

飞文染翰

苍松子

发表评论
回复:  
网名:未登录网友 请先登录
评分:              
内容:
呼朋唤友(@好友)
    
举报不良评论评论列表
湯安男2岁
高级顾问
注册日期:2014-09-29
最近登录:2023-01-27
作品数量:478
空间人气:276692
粉丝人数:48
关注的人:2
最新帖子
《曾公国藩赋...  08/20太湖山好水甜...  05/30菊花词  11/06唱歌有感  08/10七绝-掬露煮...  07/14