During the "May Day" period, the self-media rarely interrupted for three days, triggering the whole network to "look for Hu Xijin" - but among them, there were more voices of endless ridicule and schadenfreude.
For example, the story that Hu Xijin "went to the two hospitals" has been widely circulated: First, he may have been admitted to the hospital for physical reasons, and second, he may have been "convicted for his words" and entered the court.
In this regard, Lao Hu had to end his vacation early and quickly stood up and spoke out - posting a few photos and texts of him in Tiananmen Square to prove that Lao Hu was all right.
Then, Lao Hu also posted a text on May 6, and the style was very different from the previous ones - it seemed more philosophical, more literary, and more hazy. However, his important theme is the first denial of the misunderstanding of his "wall-riding faction".
Hu Xijin wrote: "Lao Hu is not 'riding the wall', but 'I ride on life like a poor rider on a horse.'" The reason why I have not been left behind is only due to the good nature of the horse'. I am in awe of life, and at the same time believe that the world is the sum of facts, not of things, and of emotions......".
In this case, Hu twice quotes the famous Western philosopher Wittgenstein's famous sayings - one of which is:
"I rode in life like a poor rider on a horse. The reason why I have not been left behind is simply due to the good nature of the horse."
First of all, everyone should be able to understand Lao Hu's difficulties and hardships - he was originally a media person born in the system, and he worked for the "Global Times" under the highest official media People's Daily, so it can be understood that Lao Hu's remarks as an "official voice system" back then, of course, must not cross the official bottom line!
It is said that Lao Hu can hardly be said to be the highest representative of today's Chinese literati in terms of literary talent, knowledge level, humanistic quality, ideological depth, and brave spirit.
Therefore, it is not an exaggeration for the old Hu Qian to say that he is just a "clumsy rider on a horse", and the manned horse of "a good life" really makes Hu Xijin full of gratitude - to put it vulgarly, it is difficult for Hu Xijin to have today's fame and fortune without the platform of the Global Times!
In the position of editor-in-chief that year, the scale of his speech was low, and the degree of freedom was low - so Lao Hu had to say to the public: "The reins of the horse are not in my hands".
Of course, to put it lofty, that is, without China's growing and powerful horse, there would be no Lao Hu today—— from Lao Hu's countless praise, support and gratitude to the party and the country, it is enough to see this, so a grateful Hu Xijin should be regarded as proof that he has not lost the bottom line of being a man.
In fact, in this passage, in order to prove that he is not a "wall-rider", Lao Hu then quotes another famous quote from Wittgenstein:
"The world is the sum of facts, not things."
In this statement, Wittgenstein is intended to emphasize the nature and structure of the world: the world is made up of innumerable facts, not simply a collection of things. Complex things are only the manifestation of the world, but what really matters is the facts themselves - only by understanding the facts can people better know and understand the nature and laws of the world.
Hu Xijin obviously wants to explain or prove that Lao Hu and I pay more attention to objective facts than the appearance of "complex China" - this kind of self-perception is of course not wrong, but please also understand one more point:
Hu Xijin obviously wants to make his speech as rational and objective as possible, but because of this, he seems to be more "neutral", or he just wants to lean on the "moderation" of the essence of Chinese cultural thought and tradition, which is also an important reason why some people scold him as a "wall-riding faction".
It's like sitting on a seesaw, the more you sit in the middle, the easier it is to sway from side to side – only by sitting at the ends will it rise and sink in the most extreme way.
Therefore, Hu Xijin hopes that he will exist as the image of the "golden mean", but at the same time, please also make it clear to Lao Hu: the mean is not mediocre, but it cannot be cynicism and the like - let alone become the implementer and abacher of the "banal evil"!
The real golden mean, with softness as rigidity, rigidity and softness, round on the outside and square on the inside, but still to become a gentleman with a bottom line, principles, and bottoms—— then, "talk about people, do your best", obviously you have to become the last "bottoms" of Internet big V like Lao Hu!
Especially in the world of public opinion, people who go to the two extremes are likely to regard Lao Hu's neutral and objective "moderation" as "riding the wall" - but from this point of view, Lao Hu's response to the "ultra-left" or "ultra-right" is a kind of positive existence.
"Both to guard against the right, but also to guard against the left, the most important thing is to guard against the left" of the great man's warning, Hu Xijin's thinking is also in line with her, it can be seen that Lao Hu is obviously adapted to the development path and practical needs of the country and the times, if at this level, it will be sprayed by extremists as a "frisbee", but it can still be said that such an old Hu is still "a little innocent and cute"!
Hu seems to be very fond of Wittgenstein, and Lao Wei famously said, "Whatever can be said, we can say it clearly, and what cannot be said, we should remain silent."
Indeed, Lao Hu knows how to say what he should say, and shut up when he shouldn't. At this point, he still seems to have the true biography of Wittgenstein - of course, when choosing to speak, you must "speak clearly", and you can't "ride on the wall and play frisbee", then you must stick to the bottom line of "speaking people", otherwise, it is better to be silent!
In fact, "quoting scriptures" and analogy are relatively "weak logic" forms in logical argumentation, and the reason why Lao Hu uses this side-knocking technique to try to prove himself may be related to the fact that he is really not very good at using positive facts to justify himself.
For example, on the one hand, Lao Hu clamored that he would use missiles to shoot down the special plane of former US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and on the other hand, he said that he wanted to have good relations with US imperialism, and declared that "the United States is not our enemy"; Lao Hu said that US imperialism was decaying and declining, and on the other hand, he still sent his daughter to study and work with US imperialists; Lao Hu even said that "if he had a choice, he would like to be born in the ...... of the United States"; Lao Hu talked about how strong US imperialism is, but on the other hand, he was able to write "Iraq fought very tenaciously and shocked the Anglo-American coalition forces......
If these are not "riding the wall", then the grass on the wall is estimated to be so angry that their faces are green, and they will be angry and expel Lao Huzhi's "grass book", right?
But I still have to say that in different platforms and other environments, people will change with them - for example, after retirement, Lao Hu has obviously changed, and he has a sense of freedom to let himself go.
For example, Lao Hu no longer raises his hands unconditionally for some of the country's policies as he did in the past when he was the editor-in-chief of the Global Times, such as Lao Hu's flexibility in making a comeback after dealing with bad artists, and Lao Hu's support for the nightclub economy to a certain extent, and Lao Hu's belief that China's security checks are a bit excessive, all of which express relative personal independence that is different from the official tone.
And the aspect that Lao Hu is even more used for attack is that he shows an uncompromising attitude towards the public opinion of "his mouth is crooked to the left"!
In particular, Lao Hu repeatedly criticized the case of "Mao Xinghuo" who claimed to be a "student of Sima Nan" against Mo Yan, and declared the irreconcilable fighting spirit of Lao Hu and the "ultra-left", which also proved that Hu Xijin was indeed a staunch supporter of the reform and opening up policy, as he said!
Wittgenstein, who is estimated to be the idol of Lao Hu, has another famous saying - "All philosophy can do is to destroy idols".
What Lao Wei means is that philosophy is an emancipation of the mind and the pursuit of truth, which helps us to get rid of prejudice and misunderstanding, and to achieve free and intelligent growth.
Therefore, the truth cannot be held only in the hands of one person, or forever in the palm of one person's hand, it is constantly developing and dialectically existing, and it needs to be constantly tested and proved by practice.
On the issue of idolatry and personality worship, some of Lao Hu's remarks also particularly dissatisfied with the majority of idolaters -- for example, Lao Hu once used the word "it" when describing the motherland, and on another occasion, the Tiananmen photographs he chose did not show the portrait of the leader, which caused Lao Hu to suffer a surging attack.
Lao Hu likes and quotes Wittgenstein's famous sentences, but it is difficult to say whether he can achieve the purpose of self-proof of "not riding on the wall", and even some people still think that he is "pulling the tiger's skin and pulling the banner", right?
Today's Lao Hu has not only won the praise and support of today's supporters of China's road, but at the same time, he has also been drunk by those who "dream of returning to the old road" - moreover, Lao Hu back then was once considered by many people to be China's "lower limit of public opinion", and now Lao Hu has become a representative figure in the "upper limit of Chinese public opinion".
I just don't know if Hu Xijin, who is so divided, inconsistent, and contradictory in the eyes of the public, reflects China's hope? Or does it make people feel helpless and sad?