Chapter 11 History and Fair Computing

Interviewer: Dai Zhiyong, Southern Weekend Time: October 17, 2010 The slogans played during the "May 4th" period were democracy and science. After crossing the river by feeling the stones in 1978, after more than 30 years, can it be said that the purpose of reform is freedom and fairness? Fairness is a combination, which means that it is both fair and fair, and everyone is convinced and accepts it.Fairness is a synonym for fairness. Since it is upright and fair, and the interests of all parties are taken care of, it is naturally fair. Ping is the public result? Yes.But some people ask, is the market economy unfair?Why is there such a big gap between rich and poor?So I try not to use the word fair, which is ambiguous.Justice is justice, equality is equality.Equality is divided into equality of opportunity and equality of result.Equality of opportunity is justice, but equality of outcome is not.If fairness is regarded as a combination of justice and equality, the two are not the same thing.

Everyone gets what he deserves and pays what he deserves, which is fairness and justice.There is a very appropriate word: self-inflicted.When it is said that it is self-inflicted, everyone is convinced.In India's caste system, some people are obviously discriminated against. As long as they say that they committed crimes in their previous life, they will admit their guilt in this life. This is similar to the Buddhist saying of karma, that one who commits evil should be punished. The term "self-inflicted" has a derogatory connotation. It might as well say "pay for what you get": More pay for more work, less pay for less work, and no gain for no work. This is justice.Whether something is fair, whether a certain standard of justice is fair, can be measured by "self-inflicted punishment", which is the meta-justice to measure justice, and this is the root.

Why is this root?We can go back to the roots of life.To survive, single-celled organisms must spend a certain amount of energy to obtain energy and nutrients, and avoid danger at the same time, so that they can survive.Do it yourself, don't blame others.You have to pay commensurately, and you won't be able to survive if the gain outweighs the loss.Creatures that do not follow this set of principles either die or cannot evolve.This principle has become an evolutionary view of justice, a principle accepted by all surviving animals, and the opponents have been eliminated by evolution. Back to the original question.You said that the purpose of reform is freedom and fairness.In fact, the main parts of freedom and justice overlap.Justice is self-inflicted, good will be rewarded, evil will be rewarded, and the reward will be commensurate.If you narrow the scope of self-inflicted suffering, eliminate violence and fraud, and prohibit doing evil and harming others, then it is freedom.Freedom is self-satisfaction without vicious sacrifices.Within this limited range, choose by yourself and bear the consequences of your choice.Why did the reforms in the first three decades achieve success?That is, the degree of freedom has increased.But it is not enough and should continue to improve.

If we start from the concept of justice of "self-inflicted and self-responsible", a new order immediately engages in an agrarian revolution, redistributes land, or, like Shang Yang's abolition of wells and fields, how do we view the justice in this? Owner farmers are the standard "self-made".There is a direct relationship between people and the land, without the interception of other people.Under a certain level of productivity, there is generally a proportional relationship between how much you pay and how much you get.The payment ratio of owner-cultivators is common and simple, and everyone accepts it.This is the basic pay ratio, which can be used as a benchmark for comparison across industries.

In the well field system, nine points of farming are paid for one point for the public, which is equivalent to a tax rate of 1/9.Why is 1/9 labor given to you for nothing?If the land is given by the lord, it can be regarded as the exchange of labor by the common people for the right to use the land.What the lord pays is not his own labor, but the production factor of land.This is also justified, and it is also self-pay and get more, pay more and get more.However, the legitimacy of the payment of land is not as direct as the payment of labor or life, and the conversion may be discounted.Marx considered landlords and capitalists to be an exploiting class and did not recognize the contribution of owners of means of production to value creation.Now there is the term "factor distribution", which recognizes the contribution of production factors other than labor.

How do factors of production such as land come from?Aristocratic lords can say that the country was fought by me.The landlord can say that I bought the land with my savings.Both can also say that this is passed down from the ancestors.Inheritance is also justified, because the predecessors have worked hard to earn, call or buy, and the predecessors have the right to dispose of their own things, including passing them on to their sons.The legitimacy of inheritance is the intergenerational expansion of self-pay.But the son is free, so it is inevitable to make a discount.According to Chinese standards, the brilliance of a gentleman will be cut for the fifth generation.The average discount per generation is 20%.

How much inheritance tax is reasonable?According to the principle of beheading for the fifth generation, it should be 20%.As for what the government does with the 20%, whether it is used fairly, and whether it is taken from the people and used for the people, that is another question. In short, compared with the self-cultivating peasant system, the legitimacy of the well field system should be discounted.The first discount is the exchange of land and labor, and the ratio of exchange should be discussed.From one to nine, to five to five, and then to nine to one, how much is appropriate?The second discount, how did the landlord's land come from?If it is inherited, it will be passed on again and again, and hereditary will not replace it, and it will be eaten forever from generation to generation. Is it justified?The third discount, from the perspective of efficiency, people are usually more efficient working for themselves than for others.The yeoman need not be lazy with himself.

The first two discounts are for the loss of justice, and the third discount is for the loss of harvest.Here I confuse the well field system with the tenancy system. In fact, under the well field system, the aristocratic lords mainly defended security and maintained hierarchical order. with mandatory. From the well field system to the tenancy system, judging from the limited historical records, the direct driving force is the pursuit of efficiency, not the pursuit of justice.Of course, it is okay to turn a corner and say that we are pursuing justice, since justice often brings efficiency.Isn't justice what one pays for one's own satisfaction and one's own pay is commensurate with what one pays?The well field system is collective labor, and there are opportunities to be lazy, blame others, and "pay for others", so the efficiency is low. "Lu's Spring and Autumn Period·Judging Fen" said: "Today, those who use all the land, it is too late to do public work, and it is too late to hide some power. The land is divided quickly, and it is too late to hide everything." , the efficiency is improved.

The well field system was followed by the tenancy system.The tenants rent the land from the landlord and pay 50% of the harvest as land rent. There is no need to supervise the labor, and the farmers will not be lazy.There is little problem with this system in terms of efficiency.But why did the landlord take so much?Defenders say that this is voluntary, self-inflicted, and the market conditions are such that you are not willing to be a tenant, and there are still several people competing for the tenant.Opponents say that labor creates value, and landlords get something for nothing.Landlords do not contribute to production.Capitalists still have to invest and bear market risks. What does the landlord bear?The land is born, not made by the landlords, they are parasites.This is the justification for land reform.Defenders say that land is not born, requires input, requires maintenance, improves fertility, prevents degradation, and cannot be without an owner.Commons are bound to be abused and degraded.In short, relying on factors of production other than labor to live is likely to cause debates about its legitimacy.But no matter how you argue, everyone agrees to a principle: pay for what you get, pay what you get.

Gentleman's Ze, beheaded for five lifetimes, how did this comparison come about? I don't know what the designers were thinking at the time.After five generations, according to geneticists, the concentration of the genes of the ancestors before the five generations has been reduced to almost the same as that of the people who followed the street.Isn't it necessary to take care of the descendants who are related by blood? After the fifth generation, there will be no special blood relationship. China's history is often that a group of people ruled the world, and then formulated laws and regulations to determine tax rates.What do you think of this fairness?How much legal remuneration should be calculated?

These are two problems.First, the violent group did pay.Those who fight the world often say that the world was bought with our blood and lives, and of course we have the right to do what we want.Is it reasonable?From the perspective of "self-inflicted and self-inflicted", it is reasonable, but the question is to what extent does this principle work?Second, what is the appropriate tax rate?Let's talk about the tax rate first. The most violent has the final say, this is the meta-rule, the rule that determines the rules.But the most violent cannot do whatever they want.When he formulates the rules, he pursues the maximization of interests. How to achieve the maximization?Discussing the theory of the optimal tax rate, there is a Laffer curve, a parabolic shape, and the highest point is the optimal point of the tax rate.Assuming that the tax rate of 25% is the highest point, if the tax rate is 10%, the total tax revenue still has the potential to increase.If the collection is higher, 35%, the total tax revenue will decrease instead.Because many companies went bankrupt.If the tax rate is 100%, no one will work, and no tax will be collected.Therefore, when the most violent people formulate tax rates, they must consider whether taxpayers will go bankrupt, run away, or resist.They are forced to consider the interests of producers, adjust tax rates, and find the point that maximizes their own interests. There is a lot of room for this kind of adjustment, and various conditions are required for escape and resistance.To prevent taxpayers from escaping, we can use preferential tax rates, or use various methods of weakening the other party or coercion. right.You can control and adjust various conditions, and you can also adjust the looting system.Look for a low-cost high-yield plunder system just as you look for the best plunder rate. For example, when the Qing Dynasty entered the customs, they could maintain slavery before entering the customs, because the Kanto Plain was a wilderness, and it was very difficult to escape.Moreover, the population is sparsely populated, and it is not easy to live after fleeing.After entering the customs, there are green gauze tents everywhere, and people everywhere. Do you know where he is hiding?At that time, they also wanted to maintain slavery, but escaped slaves everywhere. The number one job of the county government was to catch escaped slaves.How to catch?What to do if you catch it?If you don't kill him, run away.Killing him is equivalent to capturing and killing one's own cattle and sheep.Then kill the person who took in the fugitive slave?They are all taxpayers, kill them, the emperor will have less taxpayers, the emperor will suffer, and the slave owners will benefit.The result of the calculation of interests is that the cost of slavery is too high. For the emperor, maintaining slavery is not worth the loss.Slavery was forced to disintegrate. From the perspective of cost-benefit calculation, slavery is not acceptable, nor is the well field system; people’s communes are not acceptable, and private plots are not acceptable. The tenancy system is the best system for landlords to mobilize the enthusiasm of laborers.Finding the best system is a historical process that may take several generations or even a dozen generations.The first generation may be satisfied with the new policy and feel that it is better than the past.But the second and third generations were dissatisfied.The second generation of migrant workers will no longer be grateful for policies that allow them to work in cities, and they are more likely to be dissatisfied with discriminatory treatment. Based on the calculation of benefits and risks, the robber gave his blood and life, and took the risk. Does his gain conform to the principle of justice? conform to.But discuss the scope of compliance.What we are discussing is the concept of justice in human society, not just a certain individual or a certain gang of robbers.From the personal point of view of the robber, the risky robbery is also self-sufficient, and the problem lies with the person who is robbed.I worked so hard to plant the land for a year, harvested hundreds of catties of grain, and let you take it away. You said you pay for it yourself, so what about my "pay for it yourself"?Is it fair to me?From the perspective of the whole society, robbery is a violation of justice.From the point of view of the robbery gang, to paraphrase Robber Zhi's words, there is a way for robbers.Going forward is courage, retreating behind is righteousness, and fair distribution is benevolence.They also talk about rewards for deeds.This is the value inside the looter.Evaluating robbery in the context of the whole society is based on injustice. Even, the more just the robbery group is, the higher the efficiency of robbery, and the greater the injustice suffered by the whole society.Looking at this background, the robbers have to pay for what they have done for themselves. Although it is fair in the sense of absolute value, a plus or minus sign must be added in front of the absolute value.What's more, the robbery itself has consumption, such as 30% consumption, and the two parties only pay and have no income. Therefore, the legitimacy of the robbery has to be reduced by another 30%. Robbery has to be risky, whether it is positive or negative, there is always some legitimacy. Is it possible to snatch things without paying anything? On logical reasoning.In real life, it seems that the "Gao Ya Nei" of corrupt officials is closer to the kind of person you mentioned.Their parents still have to work hard to curry favor with others, but also have crooked talents, and they are domineering in the yamen, but they don't pay anything.The society's attitude towards them has added a layer of contempt in addition to hatred. As I mentioned just now, what do you think of the fairness of conquering the world? The emperors in history took risks to conquer the world and dominate the country. Everyone accepts this account.From the perspective of the whole society, the violent gang led by the emperor wiped out the rogues and other violent gangs, the world is peaceful, the robbery rate has dropped, and the world has benefited.The emperor's gang will inevitably commit crimes, but their merits outweigh their demerits. They are generally just.But if we analyze it in depth, how does the emperor mobilize the people when he conquers the world?In the process of conquering the world, who paid the most?The emperor said to save the common people, and it was the common people who shed blood, sweat and sacrificed for this. Now that the world has been brought down, from the perspective of self-inflicted suffering, why should the emperor himself sit in the country and pass it on to his son instead of letting the people be the masters? Lord, don't you pass the throne to someone elected by the people?Isn't this greedy for the merits of the heavens and plundering the beauty of everyone?Even if the first generation really made great contributions, it was justified to be in power for life, and the virtue of a gentleman should be cut off for the fifth generation, right? The difference between the emperor and the rogues is that he maintained order while limited robbery.His legitimacy comes from the latter.Conversely, once he and the system he established destroy order, or the order he provides violates justice, and the robbery rate is higher than that of bandits, he loses his legitimacy. If the vegetable farmers in the suburbs earn 2,000 yuan a month from selling vegetables, and there is no agricultural tax, many people think it is not bad.When I went to the city, some middle school teachers thought, why do civil servants receive tens of thousands of red envelopes when I earn 2,000 yuan a month?They felt it was unfair.To what extent is fairness a subjective feeling? There is a proportional relationship between getting and paying.Every era is different, and different social groups are also different.The era of gathering and hunting, the era of agriculture and animal husbandry, and the era of large-scale industry each have their own advantages and disadvantages.Other conditions remain the same, the higher the technical level, the higher the payment ratio.In a certain period of time, there is a general productivity standard for the communication between man and nature, which is a very objective standard. Whether you are satisfied with the performance-to-payment ratio depends on the frame of reference.Farmers used to grow grain, but now they grow vegetables. The investment is similar to that of the past, but they earn more money than before. The frame of reference is their own past, and they feel satisfied subjectively.Those who grow grain in the outer suburbs earn 10,000 yuan, and those who grow vegetables in the outer suburbs earn 30,000 yuan. The payment ratio is different, but other people are in the outer suburbs. He lives in the outer suburbs, and everyone in the outer suburbs earns 10,000 yuan. How to choose the teacher's pay-to-pay reference frame?One is, how much did you earn teaching in the past?Another is, how much money can you earn by choosing a similar industry?Civil servants can be regarded as a similar industry, which is possible for teachers to do, not as impossible as moving land from the outer suburbs to the inner suburbs.Going to the suburbs to contract greenhouses is equivalent to taking the civil servant exam. If teachers are allowed to take the civil servant exam, they will not feel unfair if they fail the exam.If others enter through the back door, the teacher will feel that it is unfair. When there is no red envelope, the monthly salary of a civil servant is about 2,000 yuan, and the average monthly salary of a section chief is about 3,000 yuan. Receiving red envelopes is another account, it is bribery, using power for personal gain, and may go to prison.And there is a question of conscience.Those who envy red envelopes should ask themselves: First, are red envelopes legitimate income?Second, if it is not right, we cannot just see thieves eating meat but not seeing thieves being beaten.You may go to jail for this money in the future, are you willing to take the risk?Third, if the person has a sensitive conscience, the price of conscience, the feeling of hurt self-esteem, etc. must be added. Is it possible that rulers can reset the frame of reference by some force and change the sense of fairness at all levels of society? Good question.The cost-to-payment ratio is mainly determined by the level of productivity.The sense of justice rests on this objective basis.But whether it's fair for me to earn $2,000 a month myself depends largely on the frame of reference I choose.This has a strong subjective color and is relatively easy to change.By adjusting the frame of reference, you can adjust the sense of fairness.Recalling bitterness and thinking sweetness belongs to this kind of adjustment.The discussion about China's tax burden ranking in the world is to establish a horizontal frame of reference.The controller can dilute the frame of reference that is unfavorable to him and emphasize the frame of reference that is beneficial to him. People's perceptions of whether something is fair depend, in addition to choosing a frame of reference, on the emergence of new information.For example, in 2003, the death rate of coal mining workers was 4 out of 1,000, and those willing to go down the mine to take risks could earn more than 2,500 yuan.If you want to do it, you can do it, if you don't want to do it, you can leave.It's about life's trade-offs, and the choosers don't find it unfair.However, someone suddenly said that the calculation of the death rate of 4 per thousand was wrong, and that it was not enough to count mine disasters alone, but pneumoconiosis was also counted.More people died from pneumoconiosis than mine accidents.As soon as the new information appeared, the person concerned immediately felt that it was unfair and demanded compensation, even a chest test.At this time, to control the sense of fairness, it is necessary to control the dissemination of information, and even control the bargaining power of workers. Is it related to all-round gaming ability?If other factors come in, for example, the pressure of public opinion will form under the condition of freedom of the press, and the standard of justice will change? Under the condition of free flow of information, different frames of reference emerge to compete, and finally a set of more objective standards will be gamed out. If you convert it, how much is the bargaining organizational ability of workers worth? There is a survey of coal mine workers in Zaozhuang between 1928 and 1933 with or without a union. After deducting the inflation factor, the union can increase workers' wages by 32%. If workers clearly realize that organizing a trade union is a necessary condition for wage increases, and the government deprives them of the right to organize and negotiate, and they can earn 1,500 a month, but actually earn 1,000, it will cause political dissatisfaction.If you don't know this, you won't feel dissatisfied. There is no trade union in the first place. Who knew that trade unions are so valuable?In this sense, enlightenment is indeed needed to provide a new frame of reference and let the parties know that they are at a disadvantage. When it comes to enlightenment, do you agree that there is a set of rights and values ​​behind it? Enlightenment is to let people not be confused, and to figure things out.Know what your rights are and whether your rights and responsibilities are commensurate.Who can say that everything is clear?There is no big confusion and there is little confusion.In terms of trade unions, there is almost a big confusion, workers have not yet formed a general conscious demand for rights.Some understand the truth, but they are weak, and if they can't be provoked, they admit their guilt and endure it. Just because of the inability to change? No matter how much you sow, no matter what you gain, this is also self-inflicted.In fact, everyone knows many reasons. The government should provide public services and safeguard the various rights of workers.It is only fair that citizens pay taxes and the government provides equivalent services.But the reality is often to dominate the world and sit on the ground. Under what circumstances would this rule be changed? There are several kinds of rules.The constitution is a kind of rule; local and departmental regulations are a kind of rule, and unspoken rules are another kind of rule.Various rules are subject to change.During the reform, the regulators and the regulated, the officials and the people, are all calculating their interests.The internals of different social groups, specific operators, and their own small ledgers.It can only be changed if it is profitable on a comprehensive basis. The Russian-style dignitaries want to keep their plundered achievements, so as to merge with the reformists. What do you think of this "reform drive"? Vested interests and reformers may have certain common interests.Interests are more reliable than conscience.Justice and conscience have an impact on the behavior of ordinary people, but the calculation of interests has a greater impact.There is no threat to life, and food and clothing are sufficient, and it is easy to play a role in etiquette, righteousness, honesty and shame.Once facing the threat of life and death, hunger and cold, these things become arrogant and can overwhelm everything.Benevolence and righteousness are in this second- and third-rate position. Not starting from justice, but starting from the calculation of interests, is it possible to calculate a more fair structure or situation in the end? Justice also counts the stakes.Calculate whether the payment is commensurate.If the payment is not commensurate, for example, the official group pays less and gets more, and everyone wants to get involved in this group, it will become more and more inflated, and it will collapse on its own. This trend has existed in all dynasties. . Compared with small fluctuations, this large cycle has caused heavy losses to the entire society.Therefore, it is necessary to suppress the ruling group through constitutionalism, democracy, and power checks and balances. Don't overdo it. This is good for the whole society and also beneficial for the ruling group. But this is a very rational choice.How to align the interests of the ruling group with the interests of the whole society?How to align personal interests with group interests?How can such a structure be formed?First, knowledge is needed. I didn’t know that there are democratic elections and power checks and balances. I didn’t know that this is a long-term win-win pattern of interests. Now I know.Second, there needs to be motivation for both the ruled and the ruler to pursue long-term interests.Thirdly, corresponding personality support is also needed. This person should not only be responsible, but also have temperance. Don't try "paradise on earth" without knowing the temperance. Does the violent group still have a principal-agent relationship?Historically, there were emperors, civil and military officials and eunuchs in the official group. The feudal system is a system of decentralization, and the subject is not a principal-agent relationship.Zhou Tianzi enfeoffed the princes, and each prince and even the doctor had his own government and army.A bunch of little kings stand against a big king.Everyone is a master, not an agent. But this system is not good. There are too many leaders of violent groups. Once the balance of violence is broken, war will break out.In order to avoid war, the county system was invented.The system of prefectures and counties means that an emperor leads a group of buddies to dominate the world, and then entrusts an agent to manage the country. There is only one boss. The emperor is the chairman, and the nobles who are rewarded for their meritorious service are the shareholders.The aristocrats worked their lives when they conquered the world, and when they were sitting in the country, they drank wine and released their military power. Let them go home to enjoy dividends and live a good life, but don't interfere in politics, especially don't lead soldiers. Who is in charge?Through the selection test, a group of scholars will be found, and according to certain standards, they will become managers of various departments.They are proxies and can be revoked at any time.This is the system that has continued since the Qin and Han Dynasties, and I call it the bureaucratic system. The official family has three main bodies and three meanings: the first meaning is the emperor, and the emperor's "ism" means being the master of the country, making laws and regulations, and the laws made are the laws of the king; It is a local or departmental regulation.The third meaning is the individual official, and the individual official makes legislation with the power he represents, which is the unspoken rule. These three rules sometimes contradict each other, but they all work.Each has its own territory.But the subject of legislation and regulations is the official group.Different subjects within the bureaucracy compete with each other, vying for territory, reaping benefits, and allocating various resources. There is a strong game relationship between the boss and the agent.Take the power upwards and weaken the power below, or suppress the bureaucratic system through a mass movement every few years.Why are there these different game styles?What is the best way? Facing a huge bureaucratic agent group alone, the emperor soon knew that he was not an opponent.But it can generally be maintained.Emperor Daoguang sent Zhang Jixin to Sichuan to be the deputy governor, and told him that you don't need to control all aspects, if you can't manage it, you can control the result.The emperor said, for example, a post station must have a few horses according to regulations, and the people below use horses for private work.The horse has been rented out, you can check it, he borrowed a few horses from other post stations.Can't control it.You just need to keep an eye on whether the task of the station is completed or not, and turn a blind eye to other things.The method mentioned by the emperor is equivalent to the contract system. Now also use this method.For example, to control petitions, a person who goes to Beijing to petition is counted as one point, and each county will give a certain amount every year, assuming 100 points, and if the quota is exceeded, there is no chance of promotion.As for the methods used by various places to reduce petitions, I can't control that much.Family planning management is a one-vote veto, which is a bit of a contract. In general, the final result of the game is to move towards the core indicators that are simple and easy to check, the contracting of money, grain, punishment and name tasks.At the same time the emperor gradually backed down.Officials continue to expand, and they keep entraining private work, and the boundaries of unspoken rules expand. Over time, the law does not blame the public, and the formal regulations are adjusted accordingly.In the past, people who embezzled 100,000 yuan were shot to death, but now people who embezzle 10,000 yuan don’t necessarily have to be shot.This is the game between the agent and the big boss. Zhu Yuanzhang once mobilized the common people to supervise officials, and the common people could send county officials who went to the countryside to disturb the people to the capital.But once he died, this method was abolished.Officials collectively opposed mass supervision, and the new emperor lacked authority to restrain so many officials. China's historical experience, the general trend, is that the emperor gradually lost to the bureaucratic group in the game. Is there a way out of the fate of failure? Mao Zedong told Huang Yanpei a long time ago that we have found a way, which is democracy, and let the people supervise the government.It is different for the people to be the masters of the country and the emperor to be the masters and mobilize the masses.The emperor is in charge of the people, making wedding dresses for others, so he is not very motivated.Ordinary people suffer for themselves and are always motivated.The county magistrate blackmailed us and replaced us with new ones if we didn't work hard. In this way, the county magistrate naturally became a public servant of the people.very simple. The top-down game will fail, which is related to his information asymmetry and insufficient processing ability.If you choose, is it because the information is more symmetrical, or because the game mechanism has changed? If the emperor was like a god, he would know who is a corrupt official and who is an upright one, so there is no need to send governors or eunuchs, let alone mobilize the masses.The liquidation is done once a year, and the withdrawal is withdrawn, and the promotion is promoted.The problem is impossible.Then again, even if the ability to collect and process information improves, there is still a question of interest.Now that there are computers and the Internet, the cost of collecting and disseminating information has dropped.It is said that the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection has received piles of reports.The question is whether to check?How much does it cost to check one?Who will pay?Who benefits?Do you have to pay commensurately? Even if the emperor knows in time, is there still a conflict between the interests of the emperor and the people? right.The interests of the emperor must be different from the interests of the people.The emperor is the emperor all his life, good and bad are the same.He also wanted to be lazy, and he didn't want to make trouble, and he might have an affair with some corrupt officials.Ordinary people don’t have this problem. If you oppress me, I will resist. The more oppressed, the more rebellious. What is the motivation to get this far? The people in the agricultural society are mainly farmers, small people, a mess, and the ability to resist is not strong.The industrial and commercial society produced new people, the big people, the bourgeoisie.Unlike peasants, the bourgeoisie can endure as long as they don't starve to death.A corporate tax increase of a few percentage points could lead to bankruptcy.They are more critical of the government than the peasants. It is not cost-effective for ordinary people to buy officials, they cannot afford them, nor can they provoke them.The capitalist may have the strength to challenge the section chief, division chief or even the bureau chief, clean up or buy him off.Locally, officials may become the capitalist's agent, taking care of his interests.In this part, bureaucracy transformed into capitalism, and the capitalists completed a personal revolution.One person's revolution is not legal, but the cost is very low, the benefits are high, and it is everywhere in the country. Although it is still bureaucratic, it is riddled with holes, and partial illegal capitalism can be seen everywhere.However, this is not ideal for capitalists.The first problem is that the tenure of officials is short, and it is impossible to make long-term arrangements. What kind of century-old enterprise?Don't even think about ten years of business.The second problem is lack of security.When the business grows, it doesn't matter if you earn less money, safety is the most important thing.The ideal state in line with the interests of this class is a stable constitutional order. The emergence of Damin brings two directions: one is the collusion between government and businessmen, serious corruption, officialism is corroded and riddled with holes, and society becomes very bad.In the other direction, the rise of capital forces pursues a stable constitutional order, especially a capital-led constitutional order.Damin can become a funder, organizer, and even leader of this kind of movement. This may need to be combined with intellectual elites and NGOs?In the process of social transformation, business forces play a leading role? Workers also play a role.Media people, intellectuals, and migrant workers are all playing a role.Conscientious Communists, and even certain vested interest groups, are forces for change.But the bourgeoisie is a new historical force. They have this vision, the driving force for change, and strong strength. Many capitalists feel insecure, but they can walk and vote with their feet.Only the land cannot go. If you are too old and don't want to do it, you can leave and work as an apartment in a foreign country.But the business is hard to take away. The bourgeois in the expansion stage have to lose a lot of things, and they are not reconciled.Then, either take the risk of collusion between government and businessmen, or work hard to create a good system. Which direction to work hard depends on the values ​​​​and interests of the parties concerned. A just system, or is it calculated through the calculation of interests? To establish a fair order, the calculation of interests comes first, and justice comes second.But justice can strengthen the calculation of stakes.When the dog came to someone's door, the watchdog barked at it, but it kept its tail between its legs.When it reached the door of its own house, it barked fiercely.It feels like its own territory.With this sense of legitimacy, fighting spirit can be doubled.When you set up a stall on the street, if you are unreasonable, the officials confiscated your things and slapped you twice, and you left in despair.If you are justified, even if someone scolds you, you dare to fight him desperately.After adding justice, the calculation of benefits and losses must be multiplied by a few points, such as 1.3, 1.5, and the farther away from justice, the greater the multiplier.This is what justice does. right.There are judgment standards or natural principles in the heart.Through the calculation of interests, externalize this kind of natural law. And strengthened.Being fair can strengthen your morale, help you win support, and make the other party feel wronged. You are right, and if the police trouble you, he will also feel wronged, saying "There is no way to eat this bowl of rice", and be polite to you.If he thinks you are really a villain, he may find an opportunity to beat you up.Feeling guilty is different from when you are confident, and it will lead to a series of changes in the calculation of benefits and benefits.