Chapter 4 It's not over and it's over

Since about 1999, people have started to talk about the issue of "original sin".Some speeches were first issued from folk and academic circles.The reason why some people in the folk and academic circles are chattering is mainly because China’s economy is growing rapidly and wealth is expanding rapidly. Some people who are relatively lost in social development, people who have not found a place in the transformation, and disadvantaged groups, are concerned about the legitimacy of wealth. Comments were made.Disputes in the academic world are nothing more than an academic expression of this folk life and sentiment.There are several representative views of this expression:

The first is Lang Xianping’s point of view. He believes that private enterprises are developed by embezzling state-owned assets, which is a kind of “original sin”; The problems caused by policy mistakes are all added to the private enterprises, and the concept of "original sin" is infinitely expanded, causing a lot of confusion in the society.For example, the transaction of power and money, such as huge profits and random fund-raising, these things are not studied by scholars, but after Tang Wanxin, Zhang Hai, Mou Zhong, Gu Chujun and others have been involved in accidents, many scholars believe that the "original sin" of private enterprises is manifested as huge profits And constantly misappropriating money, misappropriating money in the capital market, misappropriating money in banks, and raising funds indiscriminately.

With the deepening of the anti-corruption struggle, more and more people associate bribery with "original sin".Some people have found that for every corrupt official that falls, a private enterprise can be found later, and even a private enterprise also falls.Starting from Hu Changqing, to Cheng Kejie, until now, Chen Liangyu and Liu Zhihua all have this problem.As a result, many people began to mention that private enterprises actually played a disgraceful role, and attributed it to "original sin". In response to this point of view, there are also different propositions, that is, to provide an explanation for the development of private enterprises from the perspective of history and law. The most typical one is Zhang Weiying, and the other is Yang Peng.Zhang Weiying believes that the so-called "original sin" of private enterprises should be viewed historically and from the perspective of the reform and opening up process.He advocated that an amnesty should be granted, that is to say, the past incidents of private enterprises should not be pursued. They should be pardoned naturally and let this incident pass, and then everyone will start to develop the economy seriously from a certain period of time.He didn't have any more theoretical explanations, but only proposed a method, which is the theory of pardon.

It is very interesting that in 2006, Yang Peng participated in a salon called "Utopia", and he talked about "original sin" for several hours, starting from our Vantone.He said that private enterprises realized their "original sin" and it started with Wantong.He said: "Private enterprises have the idea of ​​'original sin', which was first proposed by Feng Lun, chairman of Vantone Real Estate Company. Later, this idea was spread by good people, and it seemed to give private enterprises an image positioning. This positioning is to engage in The fortune-telling history of the group of people in private enterprises is the history of 'original sin'. More broadly speaking, rich people have 'original sin'. This is some people's theory of "the birth of evil" about China's private enterprises..."

Yang Peng did understand the meaning of self-examination and progress I brought up when I proposed "original sin".He analyzed: "Feng Lun put forward the theory of 'original sin' back then, and his goal was clear. He hoped that he and other private entrepreneurs would strengthen moral ethics, improve business ethics awareness, pursue profits under the sun, and create a healthy and just Chinese economy. .” But he also saw with concern, "Perhaps Feng Lun did not expect that his theory of 'original sin' would arouse another voice and stimulate a potential political orientation. Some people began to emphasize the need to track down and liquidate private entrepreneurs."

Yang Peng also emphasized: "The vast majority of entrepreneurs are busy with business and doing things, and have no time to care about the yeast effect of the concept of 'original sin' behind theoretical debates and public opinion trends. Some people even think these conceptual debates are boring. However, public opinion and National policies are more and more affected by the wind direction of public opinion. The business environment of entrepreneurs quietly began to deteriorate in the process of entrepreneurs being gradually demonized by some people in the theoretical and public opinion circles. It deviates from Feng Lun's original intention of putting forward the theory of 'original sin'."

Yang Peng then systematically explained his views on "original sin" from the aspects of law, morality, economy, culture and philosophy. The core content is the systematic demonstration and annotation of Zhang Weiying's conclusion, namely the theory of pardon.What's interesting is that after Yang Peng's article was posted on the Internet, it attracted another kind of discussion. One of the people who used the pseudonym "Qiu Shike" even brought out his housekeeping skills of "Cultural Revolution" criticism, almost abusive, What a lively scene. The debates in the academic circles will eventually inevitably be reflected in the government and political levels. After the "Sun Dawu incident" in 2003, the Hebei government issued a document that clearly stated that the "original sin" of private enterprises should be pardoned.However, after the promulgation of this document, in fact there is no way to implement it, because whether to pardon or not is not a matter of government documents, it involves many laws, including "Criminal Law", "Contract Law" and so on.By 2006, on the issue of "original sin", there were constant voices of controversy, which actually involved the evaluation of reform and opening up.Whether the reform and opening up is right or wrong, one of the things involves "original sin".

If everyone believes that the "original sin" of private enterprises exists, and that it is the source of all evils such as profiteering, misappropriating money, embezzling state-owned assets, corrupting cadres, etc., if it is so serious, then is our reform and opening up today? wrong?If it is not such a problem, then we should look at it from a historical perspective. At the beginning of the reform, the system of our country's market economy itself was not perfect, or even did not exist at all.Due to the defects of the system itself at that time (and this is where the necessity of reform lies), some practices at that time were brought about.For example, there was no "Company Law" at that time, and doing business itself would be arrested as "speculation". The so-called speculation is doing business. "Speculation", people today don't know what it is, but it was a crime at that time, and later the new "Criminal Law" did not have this crime.For another example, when there were no private enterprises and no "Company Law", how could he be judged to have made false capital contributions?Originally, there were no policies and regulations on the management of state-owned assets at that time, so how could it be said that there was no encroachment or encroachment!If we don't respect the development history of private enterprises and stick to this issue, how can we promote reform and opening up?

The debate reached a fever pitch in late 2006. On November 17, 2006, Hu Deping, vice minister of the United Front Work Department of the Central Committee and secretary of the party group of the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce, said in an interview with a reporter from "Southern Weekend" that the birth of the private economy not only did not have "original sin", but should have been born ten or twenty years earlier. ; Now to liquidate the "original sin" and "the first pot of gold", it is tantamount to denying the great achievements of reform and opening up.Later, Liu Yandong, head of the United Front Work Department of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, came forward and said that the government will not take the initiative to expand the debate on "original sin".Therefore, the issue of "original sin" will not be discussed at present, and this matter will become nothing.

It’s nothing for the time being, but overall, or from the perspective of the development process of private enterprises, as each stage is different, especially in a society that is undergoing rapid transformation like China, as the progress of wealth accumulation becomes more and more Soon, our traditional culture and habits, including some of the sayings inherited in our ideological field, will continue to provoke discussions on the issue of "original sin" and reinvestigate "original sin".Therefore, in China, there are always some threats lurking in the creation and accumulation of wealth.

So, what exactly is the way to survive and the solution?I think there are two ways to solve this problem.One aspect is the enterprise itself. When facing this problem, we must adhere to the "four modernizations" we have mentioned, that is, "capital socialization, company professionalization, manager professionalization, and development localization."Use these "four modernizations" to enrich your own capital, and at the same time let the company form its own competitiveness in a professional field, and then cultivate a good team, and then operate the enterprise seriously, insisting on becoming a strong player in the local market.I firmly believe that as long as the "four modernizations" are followed, the knot of "original sin" can be untied. On the other hand, I think that from a national point of view, letting go is actually the most sensible approach.All the so-called "original sins", if it is the period of primitive accumulation, especially those things before the "Contract Law", "Company Law", "Bankruptcy Law", "Bank Law" and many other laws came into being, until now the legal prosecution The deadline has passed, that is to say, even if he was guilty at that time, the prosecution period has passed now.Even if you want to convict him today, it is impossible from a legal point of view, because there was no "Company Law" before 1993. If he evacuated capital, what did he evade?According to the current "Company Law", the maximum sentence for evading capital is 5 years, and the statute of limitations is only 5 years. Therefore, this year, it is said that he had "original sin" before 1993, and he was sentenced to 5 years at most for evading capital. , not to mention that this matter has long passed.So it is best to let it go, because it is to act according to the law! In addition, for those who have not passed the prosecution period, according to today's law, whoever hits them will be arrested, and there is no need for a pardon, and they will be punished as "present crimes" rather than "original sins".For example, if someone is suspected of contract fraud, according to today's method, as long as someone sues, it must be dealt with. If no one sues the country, there is no need to launch a campaign, forcibly clean up, or arrest all the companies involved in the case a year ago.If someone sues, it means that you are not the country that provoked you. You owe someone else. Someone has been chasing you to this day. The court will accept what should be accepted and pursue it according to the procedure.In short, if the prosecution period has not passed, like any other crime, it will only be accepted if someone sues the court.For the country, this is called doing things according to the law.