Pull black, is a new word that will be produced in the Internet age, but it is not entirely true, it is a particularly effective tool or means for dealing with each other, verbs; the vividness of this action can only be truly experienced on the Internet, very image; just like a brightly lit room, suddenly pull down the electric gate, suddenly pitch black, nothing can be seen; pull black is probably the inspiration and enlightenment that comes from this, right? No need to explain, the network people all understand at once: the blind is pure, it is the real experience of blackmail!
The feeling of being blocked by someone is very wonderful, very confused, is it to let yourself not see the other party, or to let the other party not see yourself? Or are they invisible to each other? If you let yourself not see the other party, do not want to see the other party, do not want to see, why bother with this move? Could it be that this move will make the inner feeling a little better, and there is a happy comfort? If you let the other party no longer see yourself, the other party may not plan to look at it at all, and is it not self-deception and self-indulgence?
Recently, a netizen with the online name of "Visionary Maple Leaf CD" let me experience the real role and purpose of blackout. He wrote me privately, presumably to my three articles on scar literature. The three articles he wrote were respectively titled "ImpulsiveLy Talking About "Scars"", "Talking About "Scars" Again", and "Don't Read "Scar Literature" as "Zhiqing Literature"", all of which are thoughts on "imitation trace literature". After the article was launched, it was generally affirmed by readers; probably for this reason, he was inconvenient to leave a message publicly, so he expressed his dissatisfaction to me in the form of a private message; accused me of being a "cow, ghost, snake god" who "betrayed the country and sought glory", which I did not think so, because it was untrue; what I cared about was his defense of the "four-man state" that the party and the state had already defined; I think this is the essence of opposing scar literature, right?
Screenshot of private message
When I decided to reply to express my opinion, I found that the written reply could not be sent; the system told me that it was because the other party had blocked me and banned my reply. At this point, I understood that the core role of the original black pull is to block the mouth and prevent the other party from speaking again; I don't feel a little funny, to pull the black to win, is the fear and fear of the other party, no victory, pediatric games! Of course, a person is entangled, stalking, and causing a terrible headache, and pulling black against him is another matter. I didn't block the man who blocked me, and I waited for him to have the opportunity to continue to raise objections. I think that it is still appropriate to communicate with each other about different opinions, and it is harmless to fail to communicate; disagreement, unwillingness to communicate, and the use of blackout to deal with it is obviously a manifestation of cowardice. Of course, being blocked also made me understand the real position of those who oppose "scar literature": oppose the characterization of the four-person state that harms the country and the people, and affirms the mistake of class division of "cows, ghosts, snakes, gods" unjust, false and wrong cases. I suppose they should have been the beneficiaries of the Cultural Revolution, right? At that time, there was a voice! Fortunately, I can't have anything to do with the "Cow Ghost Snake God", otherwise I wouldn't be able to eat and walk around, and I would really be stepped on by this group of people on one foot and never be able to turn over.
Two days later, another netizen known as "Elegant Starry Sky Z" also privately sent me a message, although he did not scold me and then blocked me, but directly scolded, out of the words, but also confusing.
They made me understand that the ultra-left still exists in the past of ten years, and they still have the habit of playing sticks and hats, which is harmful to clarifying history; this trend of thought negates the dark and undesirable phenomena in social reality, negates the historical existence of scars, tries to make people forget the memory of history, and erases this period of history; they try to cover up the reflection and reflection on the truth of history with the illusion of "singing praises." Have to think why are they afraid to let the ugly existence of darkness see the light? Afraid that people will see the truth? Afraid of the ugly explosion? People want the light and desire justice, which does not mean that the badness of the explosion is equivalent to discarding or opposing the light and justice; the presence of the two is the truth, and the explosion of one must manifest the other; this logical truth is not very puzzling!
I still cling to my point of scar literature:
The emergence of scar literature is a historical necessity, and its defilement is the result of conspiracy, which is to deliberately reverse the relationship between the emergence of "conspiracy" and "scar literature"; the truth is that there is "scar literature" before there is a conspiracy to frame; without "scar literature", there can be no conspiracy to make bad; "scar literature" is even more unlikely to be the product of Western conspiracy planning;
Second, scar literature is a reflection on the ten years of the Cultural Revolution, and "smear theory" is a conspiracy to defile it; scar literature has nothing to do with the first seventeen years of the Cultural Revolution. The name "scar literature" is a generalization of the literature of this period, and may not be accurate; if it had been directly given the name of "Cultural Revolution literature", it is estimated that there would not have been a conspiracy theory demon moth.
(March 8, 2022)