Chapter 29 The 20th Century Bleeds, the 21st Century Sweats - Paris Answers

This interview is based on several conversations of the author of this book between 2004 and 2009.Part of the content comes from the author’s chats with friends in his apartment in Paris, and the rest is compiled and edited by the author in recent years from Southern Metropolis Weekly, Southern Weekend, Dajiang Life City Weekly, Chicago Tribune in the United States, and Politics in Denmark. , Radio France Internationale and other domestic and foreign media interviews expressed views. Question: When Chinese people talk about the 20th century, they cannot avoid Lu Xun and Hu Shi.Some people say that Hu Shi is one of the few masters in the 20th century who can stand shoulder to shoulder with Lu Xun. What do you think of Lu Xun and Hu Shi?

Answer: When returning to some friends’ picks at Guantian Tea House, I mentioned that Lu Xun and Hu Shi were not in the same realm, which caused a lot of controversy.After reading it, a netizen said that I am a dragon with a pen and gave an excellent answer, but he also said that "when looking at Hu and Lu, you really don't have to sit on a seesaw: if you push one up, you have to push the other down."I am in favor of this.What I want to explain here is that I distinguish between Hu and Lu without involving their respective personalities.In my opinion, Lu Xun is more isolated, negative and harsh, while Hu Shi is gregarious, constructive and tolerant.What China needs most today is tolerance, not "forgiving none."

I admire Hu Shi not only because of his memory, but also because of his usefulness to today's China.There is no doubt that Chinese society is now a hybrid.A freak that combines the "trinity" of pre-modern, modern, and post-modern.How to realize modernization, civilized politics, and easy life in China today, I think there are two elements: on the one hand, the existing modernity must be preserved; Civilization is pervasively disintegrating absolutism.As we all know, the most important feature of postmodernism is tolerance and diversity, which is what Mr. Hu Shi advocated in his later years "tolerance is more important than freedom".On this level, the "Lu Xun spirit" is obviously incompatible.

Mr. Li Shenzhi said, "The 20th century is the century of Lu Xun, and the 21st century is the century of Hu Shi".My understanding is that "the twentieth century is a century of bloodshed, and the twenty-first century is a century of sweat."The previous century was a century of revolution, and the next century was a century of improvement (I understand it as a real revolution); Be more firm and persistent, even including the inevitable humiliation.Don't expect to see all the fruits of the revolution in your lifetime like vulgar and short-sighted revolutionaries. A few years ago, I traveled to Hainan for the first time. When the car was driving on the newly repaired wide road, I was suddenly moved.I was thinking that I have written many generous articles, but my contribution to China may not be as good as that of a migrant worker.Although they have been stigmatized as being cheap and not as noble as the scholars in the monastery, the roads they have built are solid and visible.This kind of self-blame has continued to this day, and we have come to the following conclusion: instead of using doctrine to "compete for youth", we should be down-to-earth and build bit by bit like migrant workers.What they built was also a "third way" in the political sense.As Malraux said, those who truly have the spirit of helping the world will be busy building cemeteries and libraries instead of revolution.

Q: Is enlightenment over?What is true enlightenment? A: I once sat under the statue of Victor Hugo in the Sorbonne Square and chatted with a German student. She said to me that in the West, the enlightenment is over, and everyone seems to have nothing to do all day long, unlike you in China, which is full of dangers. Now I don't know where my enemy is! Enlightenment is over Huh?I don't think so, although the frustration of foundationalism and universalism put the Enlightenment in a bind.I very much agree with Habermas's position—not only opposing the negation of tradition by historical nihilism, but also criticizing various ills of modernity.Modernity is an unfinished business that needs constant improvement and renewal.In my opinion, human beings have no other grand narratives other than pursuing their own happiness and freedom.Postmodernism, like the doctrine of the Enlightenment Age, both went bankrupt under this questioning.On the one hand, the grand narrative is granulated, and everyone's spirit is restored to the simplest state; on the other hand, it is human nature that everyone pursues their own happiness and freedom, and this nature merges into a set of grand narratives.It will break through the void and the void, and humanity will be united.

Kant said that enlightenment is the liberation of human beings from the immaturity that they have imposed on themselves.The so-called state of immaturity is that we accept the authority of others in areas where we need to boldly use our own reason.Kant gives the example of the immature state; a book can understand for me, a priest can have a conscience for me, a doctor can choose food for me.These few examples unfortunately predicted why the Enlightenment would fall into trouble afterwards, that is, the Enlightenment took over everything and scrambled to be truth spokesmen, pastors and doctors.However, no one can grasp the truth and be absolutely correct, because we live in a limited world; what we have is a short life; our knowledge and rationality are also limited, as Popper said, history has no destiny, we What you can do is to use your own limited rationality to constantly correct mistakes.In this sense, enlightenment has no absolute yes.

Enlightenment means light in French.Enlightenment, in the final analysis, is to have light.This kind of light is not obtained a priori, nor can it be mastered absolutely by someone the day after tomorrow.Enlightenment is not over, but the age of enlightenment selling the absolute truth is over.Some of the elitism now prevalent in China still shares some of the dangerous features of the Age of Enlightenment.That is, to use the advantage of one's own right to speak, to apply the authoritative logic of priests and doctors to the public.History is written by the people, but historical texts are written by intellectuals.The occupational convenience of intellectuals determines that this group usually thinks too much of themselves, and tends to exaggerate their own role when explaining history and reality.

Those who regard themselves as saviors are like a group of "birdmen". They float in the air, have a bird's-eye view of the world, and are confident that they have the truth in their hands.This is a fatal conceit.It's like lighting a flashlight in the dark. They don't humbly shine the light into the distance, illuminating the roads, fields and mountains, and let you decide where to go, but they shine it in your eyes and tell you that this is you All that is needed is light, and everything else is darkness.At that moment in your eyes, you can see nothing but the light from their flashlights, leading to blindness after enlightenment.This is what I often refer to as "blind in the light".Thoreau also said very well in the conclusion - the light that blinds us is darkness to us.

In this world, children are born and grow up every day, asking themselves or adults a hundred thousand whys.The situation of human beings is actually like these children, unless human beings perish, enlightenment will never end.Enlightenment presupposes freedom, the freedom of every individual to make open use of his reason.Only where there is freedom can there be equality, and only where there is equality can there be free communication.Only in this free and equal context can we truly enjoy the doctor's recipes and discover the poison in them at any time.At the same time, the enlightener does not become a slave to dogmatism and heteronomy because of the abnormal use of reason and his own fantasy illusion.

Today is forever modern, and enlightenment is an unfinished business.Enlightenment is free communication, and it goes beyond free speech.Freedom of speech may be one-way, but free communication is a kind of interaction and mutual respect, which is what Academician Cheng Baoyi said "one plus one is greater than two, close to three". Question: Some people say that the era of Chinese Renaissance has arrived? Answer: The premise of the Renaissance is that this era must promote a kind of value.What is the value that China wants to promote?This seems to be a "state secret".Cultural products are different from other products in that they are not counted by the number of copies.For example, a video store is full of Hollywood blockbusters and imperial dramas, but such good domestic films cannot be released in China, which shows that in a sense, the conditions for the Chinese Renaissance are not yet ripe.Fortunately, due to the development and popularization of media technology, an era of self-liberation is coming.The rise of individual communication is a historical opportunity for China to achieve a smooth transformation.

Contemporary China is "advancing in impetuousness".Negatively speaking, the Internet is like mass media column articles, with countless bubbles, extinguishing the pipes on the lips of wise men; positively speaking, postmodern values ​​with the power of media technology are dismantling the iron walls of premodern times.For example, singers burn their own CDs to sell, students make DV movies and distribute them online, and the rise of personal blogs... The rise of individuals has broken the monopoly of culture, and bid farewell to "cultural spokespersons" such as Cui Jian and Zhang Yimou.China is moving toward diversification, and the mainstream culture is popular among the people. They will not be simply represented by a few dozen elites, nor will they be blamed for the "degeneration" of a certain Chu Ying.I can often see Zhang Ziyi's face on the streets of Paris. I think she is kind. If someone says that Chinese literature and art will be revived on her, it is a bit too ridiculous;An ideal society should be like this, no matter rich or poor, people can manage themselves according to their own wishes, DIY their own life, DIY their own culture, and even create fashion and fashion.Hu Shi once said that everyone fighting for freedom is fighting for freedom for the country.Today, everyone DIYs their own culture, that is, DIYs Chinese culture.The transformation of Chinese culture will depend more on the growth and decline of these cultures.If the people stand up to safeguard their own interests, face up to their own desires, and express their opinions, with time, the transformation will surely take place.The so-called democracy, in the final analysis, is self-assessment and bargaining.Market economy is also a kind of training for democratic life.People have the right to DIY their own economy, culture and life, which is the basis for the realization of democracy. Freedom is order, tolerance is freedom.The appearance of "Hanfu youths" on Wangfujing Street in Beijing is a pleasant thing. Rather than saying that some people are engaging in retro, it is better to say that this is a footnote to the diversification of Chinese culture.When you see some black women wrapped in quilts on the streets of Paris, you may feel a little nondescript at first, but over time, you will appreciate a kind of international sentiment, a kind of tolerance, and a kind of warmth of urban civilization.The diversity of clothing is an expression of cultural diversity. The prosperity of civilization comes from cultural diversity and benefits from mutual tolerance. King Francois I of France did two major things in his life: one was to fight the Italian war, but failed and became a prisoner; the other was to actively learn from Italy, which was already in great shape at that time, so he became the father of the French Renaissance.For a country, learning from another's civilization is far more important than conquering it.Internally and externally, there is a magnanimity that embraces everything and everything, which is the premise of the Chinese Renaissance. Q: How do you view Chinese nationalism and its impact on China's future? A: Nationalism in the modern political sense was formed very recently in China.Although there was the Boxer Rebellion in Chinese history, on the whole, China today is not suitable for the growth of extreme nationalism. First of all, traditionally speaking, Chinese culture has a tradition of tianxia, ​​and there is no philosophical support or ideological source for nationalism to go to extremes.The so-called "Under the world, is it the land of the king", "Four Seas", "Unei", etc. do not have the concept of "nation-state".For example, in the melee during the Warring States Period and the Three Kingdoms period, what everyone was fighting for was "the world", not just for the unification of the nation-state.In addition, China has not developed that exclusive religion, and Chinese culture is extremely tolerant. It should be said that Chinese intellectuals have inherited the tradition of "a country within the four seas".Today's Chinese intellectual circles are also sufficiently sober in this regard, and what everyone is trying to do is civic education.When extreme nationalism rises, many people will actively oppose it. Secondly, speaking from a general perspective, China is now moving from a closed society to an open society, and peaceful development is the current mainstream.Even if a considerable number of Chinese people have a "revenge mentality", they may not really be able to abandon the existing quality of life that they have gradually acquired through hard work if they judge the situation and weigh the pros and cons.History also proves that if the small family is not happy, everyone will not be happy either.I once made an analogy that the country is a jewel box whose value is inferior to the value of its citizens as jewels.We often say that the wisdom of the Chinese people has been developed or gradually developed, because more and more people have realized their own value. It should be emphasized that since the 1990s, there has been an ideological vacuum in China. Beginning with the official worship of the Yellow Emperor's Mausoleum, the government hopes to unite the hearts of the people through national consciousness.However, I believe that this cohesion is a kind of introverted nationalism, not expansionary nationalism.In other words, what the Chinese broadly subscribe to is a cultural nationalism rather than an aggressive political nationalism.Judging from China's current foreign policy and crisis response, the government has realized the danger of extreme nationalism.Catering to extreme nationalism will not increase the government's legitimacy, on the contrary it may set it back on fire.Therefore, when the anti-Japanese demonstrations broke out in 2005, open-minded diplomats like Wu Jianmin would give speeches in colleges and universities to appease students and quell public anger. I don't think China's nationalism is as dangerous as the outside world fears. There are extreme nationalists, but they won't make a big difference.For example, "Internet nationalism" is just a manifestation of the Chinese people's too depressed life, because there is really no good political topic to talk about, so nationalism and "anti-Americanism" take advantage of it.This is a kind of slobbering nationalism, a kind of nationalism that releases emotions, and a kind of "leisure nationalism".The Chinese are strict with the outside world, and Zheng He didn't even bring the lower half of his voyages, so how could he be aggressive?A true nationalist has some kind of belief in him.However, if you ask the peasants who account for the vast majority of the population in China, how many people adhere to the nationalist stance, I am afraid they will not even bother to care about your question. At present, the Chinese people's hearts are scattered and scattered, and this sense of national identity is even more needed.This sense of identity gives nationalism a certain humanitarian character.As I wrote about Paris in the article "Tears on the Mihabo Bridge": "A nation full of books, loves its ancestors, and warms a city with their glorious names; loves its descendants, and cares for the past for them With all the people and things now; love themselves, be a happy person, be willing to work hard, struggle for a lifetime, and finally die warmly." Nationalism itself is not dangerous. The real danger is the opacity of politics and information—including business—that may manipulate nationalism, and may eventually be manipulated by nationalism.Increasing national cohesion is one way to achieve politics, but too much reliance on nationalism may cause nationalism to get out of control in a certain period of time, causing chaos of "leading wolves into the house". Heidegger said that language is the home of being.In the pen of the Englishman Berlin, cultural nationalism is a natural and least aggressive nationalism.People need freedom and a sense of belonging to a group.Without a group to belong to, people feel helpless and unhappy.So, I hope nationalism is just nostalgia, just a pain as noble as nostalgia. From a cultural and emotional point of view, each of us is actually a nationalist.When we respect the national sentiments of other nations, we have a sense of cosmopolitanism, a nostalgia for "the earth is the home of all mankind".A true nationalist should also be a cosmopolitan, he must have an open mind to accept the beauty of the outside world.Civilization grows like a human being, and it benefits from free communication.The transition period is a period full of nostalgia.It has the hesitation and loss in "Farewell to Lenin" and "Underground", and it also has unlimited expectations for a happy and free life in the future. Question: How to understand the angry youth? A: Fenqing has now been labeled and moralized, which is not conducive to our analysis of social issues.In my opinion, as a force, cynics are neither good nor bad.It is a double-edged sword, which may benefit or harm a country.We cannot simply draw an equal sign or an inequality sign between rationality and anger.On the one hand, anger is not necessarily justified; on the other hand, anger does not necessarily mean loss of rationality.The French thinker Pascal said, "the heart has the reason that reason ignores." The heart mentioned here also includes anger.Just like we express sympathy to a homeless person and shed sentimental tears because of his misfortune, this does not require any rational calculations, it is all human nature. All human rationality is based on the premise of human beings, that is to say, it is based on human self-awareness, so we say that there is a bridge between rationality and anger that can reach each other.Today's Chinese people are divided, cynicism is popular, and there are angry young people, which may not be a bad thing.Van Gogh also once said a sentence: "One should not let the fire of the soul go out, but one cannot let it burn out." Here, we might as well understand the "fire of the soul" as some kind of anger, and "don't let the fire of the soul "The fire is extinguished" is understood as continuously providing sustenance for one's own life, so as to avoid living in numbness; similarly, I regard "can't let it burn out" as a kind of rationality.On this basis, I think the best future or state of a country or a person is that anger and reason can help each other. Q: You once wrote a comment on Wang Zhi's tomb, criticizing China's extreme nationalism, which caused some controversy on the Internet. A: Regarding the article "The traitors are also the sons of the people" I wrote in the "Southern Metropolis Daily", I think there is no problem with the argument itself.However, after the comment was reposted by Sohu.com, there were about 500 replies within a day, and 400 of them labeled me a "traitor".After seeing it, a French diplomat friend even warned me to be cautious in my words and deeds, and be careful not to get involved in the rising wave of extreme nationalism in China.First of all, I want to say that it is not a bad thing for an independent thinker to be abused by readers.Living actively is as important as thinking positively.If you deal with it positively, the diatribe is just a sign that your article has found the people who actually need to read it.Even if you don't do it for the purpose of persuasion, at least you will believe that when these "addicted" people learn some viewpoints different from theirs, it may be beneficial for them to think about the world or China.They will not immediately change their "preconceived" views, but they may be able to "supplement later". When it comes to Wang Zhi, my point is that no one is born a traitor.Since "times make heroes", it is natural that "times make traitors".The current situation is the destiny of an era.From this point of view, what Chinese people should reflect on today is our culture and the times itself, rather than just accusing someone of being a "traitor", which is actually justifying everyone.As Hugo commented on the French Revolution, "The true revolutionary point of view is to accuse no one. No one is innocent, no one is guilty".In fact, from the perspective of the fate of the times or society, Wang Zhi, the ratified "traitor", is nothing but a weak person. As to why many are against you, that is not my concern.It is worth mentioning that there is a theory of "Spiral of Silence" in communication science, which can be used to explain this phenomenon: when people express their ideas and opinions, if they see the viewpoints they agree with and are widely welcomed, they will Actively participating, this kind of viewpoint will be published and diffused more boldly; and if one finds that a viewpoint is ignored or rarely cared about, even if one agrees with it, one will remain silent.Otherwise, why do the same article get completely different feedback in different forums?Why is he a heinous "traitor" on portal websites, but becomes a "pillar of the country" on forums such as Tianya and Kaidi? Q: What else do you think is fueling nationalism in China right now? A: China has passed the era of "ruling the country with certificates of merit".Regarding this point, we still need to analyze it from the practical point of view of "who invests and who benefits".Since the 1990s, Chinese nationalism has received continuous attention from academic circles at home and abroad, as well as governments of various countries."Say it's not hot" in the 1990s was just a successful case of nationalist marketing.Similarly, the current ambiguous attitude towards nationalism in newspapers like the Global Times, I would rather see it as the newspaper's marketing of nationalism.What the media really pays attention to is not extreme nationalism, but extreme profitism, which is to distribute "future national disaster wealth".Therefore, I say that an important feature of China's extreme nationalism (if there is one) is that "leisure nationalism" and "economic nationalism" go hand in hand, and a rising tide lifts all boats. The reason why I am skeptical about Chinese nationalism is also because China does not have a "unified platform" for nationalism.For example, China's "nationalism" aimed at the United States is more official, and the purpose is to preserve the local characteristics of Chinese politics. However, in fact, historically speaking, there is no deep hatred between China and the United States that cannot be resolved. Like other countries, China's development has benefited from the United States in many ways; while the "nationalism" towards Japan is more folk-oriented.Due to the heinous crimes committed by Japan in aggression against China and the historical joke that the two parties in China are scrambling to give up claims, in the decades after the war, this kind of hatred against Japan has been reduced to "China wants revenge", but this is a kind of "revanchism". , and cannot be simply classified as extreme, xenophobic, and expansionary nationalism.If nationalism is still guided by national interests, then what "revanchism" pursues is a kind of emotional catharsis and satisfaction, which may include destruction and destruction.This kind of revenge has nothing to do with the happiness and freedom that people pursue, and even runs counter to it completely. Question: Why are the "left" Maoists so disappointed with reform and opening up and China's development? Answer: On the one hand, there are changes in the society itself. In the past 30 years of reform and opening up, when some people got rich first, while others were abandoned by the state in disguise; when the phenomenon of power rent-seeking became more and more rampant; People's disappointment with China's development is more and more serious.As long as we don't ignore the various injustices that have emerged in the process of social development, both leftists and rightists will show some disappointment. However, the difference between liberals or rightists and "left" Maoists is that the former not only sees this kind of unfairness, but also sees the progress of society as a whole, that is, after coming out of the past totalitarian system, from level to level Look, everyone's rights have actually expanded compared to the past, and society has become more diverse and open.As for the problems that occurred during the reform process, they tend to think that this is the result of incomplete reform, such as the reform of the political system has not really started, and the people do not have a real sense of participation in politics and political power. The reason for the constraint.All these should have been resolved in the process of reform, rather than returning to the beginning of the reform.At that time, China's economy, politics and society were actually on the verge of collapse.If a country cannot bring happiness to the people, the establishment of this country has actually lost some kind of legitimacy, and it is close to bankruptcy in theory. Compared with the right or the liberals, the "left" ignores the achievements of China's reform and opening up over the past few decades.This is somewhat detached.On the one hand, from an individual point of view, they enjoy the benefits of the open and pluralistic society; on the other hand, from a social perspective, they deny this benefit.Of course, I do not deny that there were some good things in the Mao era, such as the relatively fair society at that time; but logically speaking, comparing the worst things of today with the best things of that era cannot prove that that era was better than the present.So, I tend to think that this kind of comparison is either a problem of the heart or a problem of the head. Q: Why do they feel so marginalized and isolated? A: In terms of expression, the extreme "left" faction has indeed lost a platform for expression to a certain extent, which is mainly due to the marketization of Chinese media.Chinese media is now between semi-free and semi-closed.On the one hand, they have to cater to the market, on the other hand they have to face government regulation.The final result is to find a balance between the government and the market.If the government is completely allowed to do nothing as in the past, the media will have a dead end, which determines that the media must provide qualified products to the public opinion market.In today's China, the most genuine public opinion is to move towards political democratization, economic marketization and social citizenship. On the other hand, a regime that is not elected by general elections must constantly restate its legitimacy through performance.Decades of economic growth have made reform and opening up a source of legitimacy for the Chinese government. In this sense, the government naturally does not want extreme leftists to interfere with reform or completely negate reform.Because this kind of denial will not only hinder the realization of new political achievements, but also can be understood as undermining the government's legitimacy. As for the social level, although everyone is also calling for justice, and even saying "I miss Chairman Mao", strictly speaking, this kind of missing is not true.First, people miss Chairman Mao because of utilitarianism, not axiology or concept.If the current society is fair enough, the symbol of Chairman Mao will be forgotten.In other words, for the people, Chairman Mao is just a card that proves that the present is not good, but it is not enough to prove that the Mao era was good.Second, many truths about Mao's mistakes and even crimes have been concealed. If the public has a clear understanding of this, the feeling of "missing Chairman Mao" will be greatly weakened.This also determines that the Maoists will lose their mass base. Question: Why is leftist Mao Zedong Thought attractive to young people in China? A: Due to lack of understanding of real history, many young people have lost their ability to judge reality. For a long time, China has placed more emphasis on ideological political education than civic education. Many young people's understanding of the relationship between society and the country, and the relationship between individuals and society is actually incompatible with modern society.From this point of view, instead of persuading young people with opinions, it is better to let them know more historical facts. On the other hand, the attraction of young people also shows their dissatisfaction with reality and their desire to take responsibility for the future.At the same time, this does not mean that if they do something in the future, they must lead China to a closed China. Question: Why can people who admire Mao ignore the damage done to the common people by the "Cultural Revolution" initiated by Mao and the Great Leap Forward? Answer: Advocate for the sake of admiration, oppose for the sake of opposition, and use any means for the purpose.This intentional ignorance and out of context show that their understanding of the world is not sufficiently objective and sincere, and that Maoists only regard Mao as a tool against reality, rather than a value that can be traced back to the past. Q: Is the growing movement of "leftists" dangerous to the Chinese government?Can it change the government? A: At present, China's "leftist" and "rightist" politics have not yet formed a common bottom line with Western political life, such as no consensus on democracy and freedom.Of course, there is consensus on some aspects, such as the confrontation between the government and the people.In fact, since ancient times, the unresolved problem in China has been the relationship between the upper and lower levels, the relationship between the government and the people, rather than the relationship between left and right at the level of civil society.Only when the society of subjects becomes a civil society, only when power is no longer superior, only when officials are no longer the guardians and parents of citizens, and only when the society can express its opposition openly and protected by the law, can Chinese society be said to have gained a historical record. sexual progress.In the Song Dynasty, politics was loose, and the court’s deliberations were somewhat of a two-party system, but all courtiers were just working for the emperor’s family. They were all royal wage earners.If you consider the possibility of being ransacked and beheaded, it is tantamount to being a slave. On the whole, the danger facing the Chinese government is not the social movements of the left and right, but whether the government can keep up with the trend of thought and pace of social change.It is impossible for China to return to the era demanded by the leftists, nor is it possible to stagnate completely according to the wishes of some people in power.What will happen in the future depends on the game of various forces. Question: How should Chinese youth be patriotic? A: Compared with the past, China is indeed making progress.In the past, patriotism was unconditional, but now whether you love your country or not, how to love your country, these problems that were not a problem before have become problems.What's more, the noble emotion that no one doubts has been reduced to a kind of "dirty words" on many occasions, such as on the Internet. If we look at it from the perspective of social growth in the past thirty years, it is not difficult to find that this "schizophrenia" implies a kind of introspection, indicating that more and more Chinese people are stepping out of the old "national supremacy" concept. The value system begins to re-examine the value connotation of a modern country and what kind of emotion the citizens should uphold in this regard, and agrees: From the perspective of individual rights and interests, patriotism is first of all a matter of freedom. Q: It has been a while since the boycott of Carrefour. Will French youth have such a strong sense of nationalism and national identity? A: There are also cynics in France, but on the whole, France has a deep degree of global citizenship, and at the same time, social expression is also sufficient, and anyone can express their views.You can object, and others can object to your objection.And Dan, others will not say that you are not patriotic just because you do not object.Just like the "May Revolution" in 1968, in this movement, French society has always maintained its rationality.When someone not only pried away the paving stones, but also uprooted the few trees in the Latin Quarter and began to burn the residents' cars, the citizens finally ran out of patience.Soon, the sympathy of the students in the media weakened significantly.Society has a process of self-correction.When opinions can balance movement, society is less likely to go to extremes. Q: You suggested that the popularity of "push-ups" shows that netizens are beginning to pay attention to public affairs.Can this kind of booing and joking Internet language really convey the demands of netizens? A: Not at the beginning. It should be said that netizens have always paid attention to public affairs. In the past, many public events were also promoted by netizens, from Sun Zhigang, SARS, "Black Brick Kiln" to "Zhou Tiger Case"...but now everyone has found another way. The way to do this is to "whisper openly" with words like "do push-ups."This is not a simple booing, I prefer to understand it as a daily, grounded and fierce "suggestion", a special kind of resistance mixed with ridicule. Of course, this kind of "circus-style" expression is discounted from the perspective of conveying public opinion because it cannot be expressed to the fullest and rationale.But I don't find it boring, in fact it's "Newspeak" in a whole new sense.Orwell talked about using a "Newspeak" to replace the old discourse in order to make the people forget the past, and the "Newspeak" that is popular on the Internet is just an attempt to regain the ability of thinking in society. It is the growth of Chinese society.If we admit that discourse is the carrier of ideas, we know that the emergence of "Newspeak" today is a very promising thing.Today's "Newspeak" replaces the "Newspeak" of the past. I say that "Newspeak" has emerged from generation to generation, and the waves behind the times push forward the waves ahead. As for poor expression, China’s official discourse has severely eroded social discourse in the past few decades. Now, in fact, civil or social discourse has begun to recover, and society is creating new languages.When people return to life experience and common sense, they will inevitably pick up and even create a suitable or their own way of speaking, rather than simply "obedient".Therefore, at the social level, there are not only public discourses and intellectual group discourses, but also young people’s discourses representing the post-80s and post-90s generations.The discourse on the Internet is full of strange things, not to mention that "making bricks", "filling water" and "topping" have long been popular, and even "Martian language" has been born.For example, "3Q got orz", this short paragraph of Martian characters is probably incomprehensible to ordinary people, and translated into normal Chinese is "Thank you so much."Anyone who pursues the fun of thinking will probably only be amazed when they see such fantastic ideas of children.If such small creations have to be blocked, what's the fun of language life? There is a key word here - "changing words".Looking at the changes in China, you can actually see them from the "changing words".The "change of words" I understand is the change of the discourse system.In the past there was only the official discourse system, but now the official discourse system and the folk (or social) discourse system coexist. 与此同时，这种“变话”还表现在，除了创造“新词”，同时也创造“新义”。比如在“公家至上”的过去，“钉子户”是一个不折不扣的贬义词。但是，随着国民物权观念的萌发与成长，如今“钉子户”在某种程度上已经成为捍卫民权的一种象征，网上甚至还出规了“钌子户引导人民”的“PS版油画”。 问：比起知识分子话语体系，网络话语的影响是否同样有力？如“俯卧撑”式调侃。 答：网络话语影响不小。 “俯卧撑”在网上刚开始流行，南京的中央路上便立即出现了一张巨幅房产海报——“房价不会跳水，只是在做俯卧撑”。此前，也有媒体分析中国上气不接下气的股市“已经进入俯卧撑阶段”。其实，“做俯卧撑”这个词即使慢慢消失，新的词语也会出来。比如最近不又有了“裸体做官”吗？Very image.不要小看这种调侃。一个好的笑话或者嘲笑，胜过一个大道理。中国现在有些东西还没法儿跨越，网民都来“俯卧撑”，我想一方面是在寻求心理慰藉，另一方面也说明大家心存希望，在关注一些事情。表面上看，上述“新词”的流行或者重新阐释都有些戏谑的成分，不过，它们让我想得更多的却是这个转型时代的“变话”，“随风潜入夜，润物细无声”。 鹿桥说里的时代是诗歌加论文的时代。我想我们这个时代是有诗歌，有论文，也有俯卧撑。也就是说心灵、理性以及介乎心灵与理性之间的模糊表达都有。但无论是做论文，写诗歌，还是做俯卧撑，都是一种表达意见的方式。对于中国公共空间的成长来说，我更倾向于将这种“俯卧撑”表达看做一种增量。如果我是“非俯卧撑”表达者，我会继续我原来的表达方式，“来做三个俯卧撑”更不会强制我减少自己的表达。简单说，“俯卧撑”只是增加了一种社会批评的形式。 问：请分别回答下面四个问题：你为国家做了什么？What has the country done for you?What else can you do for the country?What else can the state do for you? 答：其一，我对国家的最大贡献，不是少年时勤学苦读走出了闭塞偏远的山村，给了自己一个相对宽阔的前途；不是大学毕业后拿了几倍于父母的薪水，可以作为家族的“临时政府”或“小政府”为他们提供教育、医疗、社保等福利却从不向他们征税；不是在巴黎留学时让外国朋友看到我来自东方，是个意气风发、彬彬有礼的好青年；也不是和平常人一样相亲相爱、生儿育女，谱写诗歌、赞美胡适，热爱学生、创造雕塑……而是自始至终都保持着一种自由的趣味与独立的人格。 其二，污蔑不是一个好品性，我决定在自己还没有一个好记性之前，拒绝回答类似间题。不过我心里很清楚：倘使我的生命中还有些美好的记忆，那绝不是因为国家对我做了什么，而是因为国家对我没做什么。 其三，把一生当做自己的远大前程，这才是我的主观思望。至于客观上我能为国家做的，不过是和所有时代同路人一起，以批评建设国家，使国家这一工具为公民所用，而不是相反。否则，这就是“人为物役”了——因为我们是人，而国家不是人。我知道自己正在参与一个细碎的工程，也从不奢望这些批评能在一夜之间改天换地。但毕竟功不唐捐，通过大家一点一滴地努力，日复一日地做事，终究会多一些改变的希望。所谓“草色遥看近却无”，至于这种努力最终能否有个赏心悦目的前景，我相信在更远的将来回首时，你我都能远远望到。 其四，国家过度搡劳，理应好好休息。五十多年来，国家为我们把心都操坏了。我们这代人自立且独立，在许多方面真的很不想麻烦国家。既然国家没有一个集体的胃代替我消化，也请国家不要用一个并不存在的集体之脑代替我思考。如果是在会场上，我会“含笑”劝告国家回到自己的座位上，让我把接下来的话讲完。 问：谈谈你对中国改革开放三十年的整体看法。 答：要了解改革开放三十年，就必须把它放到建国六十年的背景下来看。1949年以后的三十年是中国不断集权化的三十年，一切都是政治领袖说了算，而改革开放则是去集权化的三十年。前三十年，资本、社会与知识都被国家没收或充公，有割资本主义尾巴、集体化、大跃进、反右、文革以及无所不在的单位体制等等，这个时期名义上虽然是社会主义，但实际上是“国家吞并社会”“有主义没社会”的三十年。在社会崩溃之后，中国政治与经济也差不多走到了崩溃的边缘。也就是在这个基础上，中国政府被迫开始了政治调整。所以我说1978年以后，实际上是中国开始重新发现社会，或者社会解放的过程，是人的觉醒的过程。 而这三十年，同样可以分为三个十年，八十年代群体争民主，波澜壮阔；九十年代是个体争自由，润物无声；而最近十年，则是社会与国家充分博弈的十年。中国人不断地从国家体制中抢回自己。从集体主义到个人主义，从主权到人权，从政治到生活，从官方话语的衰微到民间话语的流行，这实际上也是中国人重新发现社会的维度。许多变化平时不觉得，但回过头看十年、二十年的变化，却是波澜壮阔的。所以，当有人对中国未来表示悲观时，我却认为中国因为社会的成长而大有希望。而且，伴随着中国经济与社会的成长，政治必定会有一个大的改观，从有钞票到有选票，不过是件水到渠自成的事。