Hu Xijin: Who is creating the concept of ecstasy? Netizen: Social fairness rejects the disorderly expansion of capital

Text/Silent Brother

Hu Xijin asked on the topic of social justice: Who is trying to create a conceptual ecstasy array and confuse the public opinion?

Many netizens said that they did not understand Lao Hu's article (the specific content of the article can be searched on Lao Hu's headline number).

Indeed, Lao Hu's narrative is grand and lofty, like a philosophical model, which goes back decades vertically and crosses the Great Pingyang horizontally.

Some netizens suggested asking Guo Songmin to comment. In fact, Guo Songmin also prefers to say that the two so-called "isms" are also twisting and turning, and it is quite brain-burning to understand. It is estimated that netizens still do not understand.

Ring the gong to listen, speak and listen. After carefully reading Lao Hu's philosophical "literary text", I benefited a lot.

One

First, briefly outline the transitional content expressed by Lao Hu:

In the past, some people liked to immigrate to beautiful countries, not because the beautiful countries and people's livelihood did better, because the beautiful countries had a high starting point, developed fast, had money, and had a good standard of living.

In the past two years, the quality of life of the beautiful country has declined due to well-known reasons, and the attractiveness is far worse. Chinese did not want to immigrate, and even the idea of travel faded, and international students had to stay because they wanted to complete their studies.

Two

This is Lao Hu's habitual opening remarks, and the laying points begin to appear, cutting into the issue of "social equity".

Many people feel that society is unfair. Unfairness is a normal phenomenon in human society, where there are poor and rich people, even if competition is introduced, there is still unfairness.

In the past, everyone thought it was fair, but Lao Hu believed that there were also unfair phenomena, such as the difference between urban and rural areas, the difference between workers and peasants, and the difference between mental workers and manual workers.

There are still many places in China that are inferior to the West, most of which are caused by historical reasons. Now the economy has developed, and the world can see it.

Three

The flowers bloom in two, one on each side. The real focus of the old Hu article began to come out.

Old nonsense, has the promotion of social equity also achieved results corresponding to economic achievements? The early "three major differences" were better after adjustment, but they were still imperfect.

For example, the gap between workers and peasants has narrowed, and there are still problems with the dual-track pension system. For example, Lao Hu said that his mother's pension was only half that of his father.

Manual workers' incomes rise the fastest (this is true, but how do the incomes of the rich rise?). ）

Advancing social equity is not easy. Even the society of a developed and beautiful country is unfair, and the gap between the rich and the poor is large, but the people are at ease, and no one provokes trouble.

Social equity still needs to continue to exert efforts, both unfair old problems and unfair new problems.

People have the right to express their dissatisfaction, and it is your freedom to continue to exert pressure through public opinion. But beware of people with rhythms, trying to create a conceptual ecstasy array, confusing the public.

Four

Although Lao Hu did not mention which person and which thing, he could not help but make people think.

Lao Hu also invented a new term: the ecstasy array of concepts. It is estimated that it refers to the "radicalism" of a certain type of netizen, and some people have grasped the problems of loss of state-owned assets and insolvency during the transformation of enterprises, and diverted their attention.

Lao Hu's recent change in attitude towards X. thought has been welcomed by many netizens, and it is certainly not good to turn around and support it on the surface, for fear of causing fans to misunderstand.

In general, Lao Hu is not satisfied with the narrow understanding of social fairness among netizens, believing that human society cannot be absolutely fair, and that the difference between rich and poor is a normal phenomenon.

Old Hu du stood so high, looked at the problem so comprehensively, everyone questioned what it was, took X to say things, and weighed it by themselves!

Of course, everyone's translation of "Wen Yan Wen" is inconsistent, and my understanding may also be insufficient.

Personally, I think that Lao Hu also has the truth of Lao Hu, and the angle of standing is different. Of course, there is no absolute fairness in the world, and national enterprises with responsibilities and responsibilities need to be loved.

However, it must be noted that when capital expands in disorder, does whatever it wants, and takes advantage of it, it will become the target of public criticism.

Once the inner volume is serious, the people's hearts may be torn apart. Therefore, social equity rejects the disorderly expansion of capital.

"Social injustice is a normal phenomenon" cannot be an excuse for the rich. When the wheels of public opinion roll forward, unscrupulous capital is questioned and becomes a reality.

Some netizens commented very wonderfully: "Don't look at the advertisement to see the curative effect"!

Who should wear the hat of "The Ecstasy Array of Concepts"? This is a question worth pondering!