鄧小平蓋棺六論定 |
送交者: 金無明 2023年10月01日13:44:07 於 [茗香茶語] 發送悄悄話 |
鄧小平蓋棺六論定 ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: >To: "Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 03:05:53 PM CDTSubject: Deng Xiao-ping's Eulogy (鄧小平蓋棺六論定) Re: 24th Anniversary of Deng Xiaoping’s Death It'll be much better off for Chinese should Deng never exist. Deng: (鄧小平蓋棺六論定 如果鄧不存在的話,中國人的境況會好得多。 鄧: 1.毛澤東偉大革命的叛徒。 2.自晚清以來第一號帝國主義支持的顏色革命者,他使中國陷入另一輪次殖民國家。 3.半導體、大飛機等中國高科技產業的殺手,造成了當今致命的後果。 4.中國超大規模腐敗的溫床,遍及中國各個角落;鄧小平引發的這種腐敗現象在今天還沒有任何解決辦法,無論有沒有習近平。 5.言行不一的反統一分子;他的“一國兩制”把香港、台灣搞得一團糟。 6.帝國主義第五縱隊的忠實走狗。) 李良 編者按:這是一篇我欲推薦的文章。文章的名稱足《如何實事求是地評價鄧小平》作者是 孔德友。截止此時,該文章己經被180餘家博客轉載。 文章比較長我拷貝下來之後用了燈頁.但是我從真地閱讀了全文。這是篇平述樸實的文字像是在思考的過程中竊竊私語,沒有譁眾取寵之意l句也沒有激憤無羈之情態。像是在認在地討淪和講道理故此轉載如下. 註:此文轉載自“大別山劍客(博客).對本文章之外的文字進行了刪除。 我們先看看鄧小平的功績: 鄧小平的主要功績就在於他順應了人的心思 和事物的自然規律來制定政策。
一就是放任撒鴨子過河、放任自流,有風的使風有雨的使雨,八仙過海各顯其能。人們不願意受到管制和約束這叫束縛生產力的發展,那
就採取放的政策,解除約束生產力發展的因素
具體表現在:改革開放。農村解體生產隊、取消人民公社,實行包產到戶,即三自一包。黨政分開、政企分開、簡政放權。拍賣中小型國有集體
企業工人下崗自主擇業雙向選擇、市場經濟、對外開放、一國兩制、摸着石頭過河等等。開始時確實極大地調動了人們的積極性,使我國的物質逐漸豐富起來,經濟得到空前的發展。
二是思想解放肯定私心和私有的合理性讓人的自私木性充分發揮曰:人性-一人都有私心.人不為己天誅地火嘛.因此他重新建立了他的社會制度。允許一部分地區、一部分人先富裕起來,曰:先富帶後富。實行多種經濟形式並存的所有制形式集中體現在白貓黑貓論、南巡講話。使個人發家致富的願望得到空前的釋放這是史無前例的。人的膽子也越來越大出現了很多夜暴富的典型。
三是打破分配上的平均主義.允許有差距存在。扶持一部分人快速致富成為新的社會階層,
製造出新的生產資料所有者和打工者,即老闆和工人、經理和職員。
四是取消了階級論、實行公民論,讓社會上不再以好人與壞人、先進與落後來劃分人群。取消階級間的不公平即無論是什麼階級都一樣對待。作為無產階級沒有什麼光榮,因為貧窮不是社會主義;剝削者也沒有什麼可恥所謂的先富之人嘛。無產階級應當像資產階級學習看齊,工人名為領導階級,但實質卻完全不是這樣的。因此只有新生的資產階層才是我們中國政府和中國共產黨所支持所依賴的主力,他們才是領導我們中國的主力軍.是中國的前途和希望。階級熄滅了,階級鬥爭也就熄滅了,人們之問沒有了鬥爭只有了和諧與發展,無產階級必須與資產階級搞好和諧,自己才能有工做、有飯吃,否則是死路
一條。
毛澤東時代用畢生的精力和心血去培養的黨員和人民後代,在教育黨員和後代的過程中讓他們形成為人民服務的思想。鄧小平採取最省事的辦法,就是恢復人的本來面目。不管你了,
學壞就學壞學好就學好那部是你自己的事情,學壞讓我發現就治你的罪,沒有發現算你幸運。
這叫依法治國,把責任交給法律,可是法律不健全,那就讓他們任意的鑽法律的空子,出現了腐敗分子、黑惡勢力、黃賭毒、坑蒙拐騙、制假販假等社會上種種醜惡的人和事。
鄧小平把毛澤東同志說的做的很多事給翻過來做這是其思想的一個特點。鄧小平稱自己是黨的第二代領導人,這個不準確:他應該是第一
代領導集體裡面的成員。他也許是個成功的政客,但他不是一個真正的劃時代的思想家。
鄧小平當政期間我們黨內的政治生活極其不正常,他違背了我們黨的章程中黨對軍隊的絕對領導權,違背了黨指揮槍的原則,而實行槍指揮黨。其中有兩任半在這種不正常的政治生活中度過。於是有人說是垂簾聽政。
被批判過的、他的唯生產力理論,在他當政期問也得到平反,並提出科學技術是第一生產力理論;"100年不動搖、100年不變”都是犯了是極端主義的錯誤。馬克思認為人是生產力當中最活躍的因素,是科學。而把科學技術凌駕於人之上,就輕視人的作用。孰不知任何科學技術都是人創造、人利用的,應該說掌握先進科學技術的人是第一生產力。事實也說明了人的重要性,像錢學森、華羅庚等。他一面高喊改革開放積極求變,一面又說100年不變,這不是自相矛盾?事物都是在不斷的發展變化的誰又能夠保證100年一
成不變。 更多深度內幕好文查閱請加微信xnz620
改革開放的30年實際上是一場空前的經濟大革命,與文化大革命相反走了極端。馬克思主
義講的是政治經濟學是政治與經濟的統一,既要強調政治也要強調經濟搞突出政治和突出經濟都不是馬克思主義的觀點。如果硬說文化大革命是“十年浩劫”給我們黨、國家和人民造成
了“嚴重損失”,那麼30年改革開放所造成的經濟和幹部的損失,特別是政治的損失不知是文化大革命的多少倍。可以說現在哪個地方也沒有一
塊淨土,到處都是爛攤子。從解體生產隊到拍賣國有集體企業盲目上項目等造成的國有資產流失無法估最。我們黨的整個幹部隊伍由於思想的“解放”造成的腐敗習氣和貪污受賄、大吃大
喝、讀職失職等一系列問題而帶來的損失無法估 量。我們的幹部和人民在思想L、精神上的混 亂,造成社會風氣敗壞、黨風敗壞,給我們黨的
前途、國家的命運、人民的幸福造成的損失無法估量。目前不要被國家統計局的數字所迷惑,他們的工作人民都清楚是怎麼回事,向來是報喜不
報憂。要看到我們的大多數人民的手中是沒有積蓄的,多數為了治病、買房、供子女上學等還是負債纍纍,房奴、醫奴、學奴、老奴、性奴、黑奴、蟻族都是真實的存在,很多人要是幾個月沒有工作特別是城市居民就會淪為乞丐,這是中國
的真實國情。 現在我們的生活水平真的提高了嗎,沒有。
因為計劃生育的政策現在市民一般只生一個孩子,農村也就是兩個,這樣夫妻兩個人的年收入平均成3-4份,比過去夫妻兩生育5-10個孩子,把兩個人的收入平均分成7-12份,我們的生活水平理當提高1-4倍。試想現在的夫妻兩個人收入供4-8個孩子上學,我們是不是也要穿補丁的衣服吃玉米麵的窩窩頭,恐怕還是不夠過。
因此說,沒有計劃生育政策,我們的生活水平還是30年前,也就是極少數人一“先富一
族”生活水平有了極大的提高,多數打工的和農村的沒有什麼兩樣,照樣是低水平維持而己。之
所以被眼前表面現象所迷惑,是因為市場上的物質有了極大的豐富,但普通老百姓能承受的物質生活資料甚至是有毒的垃圾食品。
教育更成問題。一直被整個社會所垢病。
喜歡評價和找領袖的不是?文革出了問題怪毛主席,改革出了問題怪鄧小平,黨內出了腐敗怪江澤民,腐敗控制不住怪胡主席。以後江山丟了、變質了又怪誰去?
*1
這是小平找領袖的不是.不是我們百姓在找領袖的不是,百姓找也是沒有用的,既寫不進歷史也寫不進黨章和中央文件。毛澤東的問題不是有中央的文件在作證嗎?那都是按照鄧小平的意思寫的,說是歷史事實,誰敢瞪着眼說不是。鄧小平找領袖的不是開了先河起了帶頭作用,“文
革出了問題怪毛主席,改革出了問題怪鄧小平,
黨內出了腐敗怪江澤民,腐敗控制不住怪胡主席。”這是一種推卸責任的論調。毛澤東能夠承擔責任,鄧小平為什麼不敢承擔貴任?我們的黨中央為什麼不把鄧小平的功過是非做一評論?小平聰明和小平參加革命都是事實,但是小平三起
三落不是他沒有錯誤!難道當時的黨中央冤枉他了嗎,現在有跟黨中央對着幹的政治局常委,總書記就能夠容忍嗎?鄧小平不是先後兩次把不聽他的話的總書記拿下來了嘛。事情都要辯證的看,不要光看毛澤東的不是而不看鄧小平的缺點,他當時和黨中央唱反調是哪個領袖都不能夠容忍的。難道現在就沒有冤假錯案嗎?有----比比皆是。哪個腐敗案件現在不是不了了之,查不到底,遇到大的就結案找個替罪羊。那個替罪羊不冤嗎!一個家庭搞不好就是家長的責任,一個
鄉鎮搞不好就是鄉鎮長的責任,一個省市搞不好就是省市長的責任,一個國家搞不好就是國家領導人的責任,這還有推卸責任的理由嗎?
搞“株連九族”把封建皇權統治思想引入到黨內,這對革命和建設起了很大的阻礙和傷害作用,這種傷害總是歷史輪迴着遺憾。
從現在看,一人得道雞犬升天.有福同享有難就不能夠同當了。株連制是中國的國情,一
個腐敗分子為他的子女親戚違背了多少黨的原則,損害了多少黨和國家人民的利益,高幹及其子女
的傳聞少嗎?都是空穴來風嗎?就是因為取消了株連制,才使官僚主義肆無忌禪、十分囂張。也像 毛主席當年鐵腕無情,劉青山張子善貪污上百
萬,執行槍決決不手軟,敢不敢?
現在中央不再提毛澤東思想了,直接就是鄧小平理論、三個代表、科學發展觀。因為毛澤東思想與現時的政治環境不符了.所以不提了。鄧小平搞翻案把毛澤東時代的事情全給倒過來了搞,薄一波晚年說:“我算看清楚了,他就是和毛主席反着干”。這樣繼續下去,毛澤東思想早晚是要滅亡和消失的。現在從國際看蘇聯解體,東歐劇變,古巴越南朝鮮等社會主義國家我們認為貧困,社會主義陣營逐步瓦解,就認為走社會主義道路是死路一條?當前面臨走資本主義道路還是社會主義道路問題,中央是不管姓社姓資只要有錢就可以了。也就是不管國家發展目標,只要現在有錢就是好社會。行嗎?
為什麼現在是誰也管不了誰,誰也不聽誰的話呢?從根本上還是政策問題,確實我們的各項政策不能夠互相牽制和互相約束,造成不平衡不平等。有權有錢的什麼事情都可以辦,沒錢沒權的什麼也不怕,你說這個社會誰怕誰?
毛澤東的境界就是他的無私,心中只有國家、人民的利益,而沒有自己的私利考慮的是黨和國家人民的前途和命運而不是自己的命運。特別是毛岸英的犧牲更顯示了毛澤東思想的無私,顯示毛澤東是一位真真正正的無產階級革命家、政治家、思想家、理論家和共產主義戰
士。而鄧小平首先想到的是自己及其子女親屬和朋友,記着文革時期照顧他的人,想到的是為自己平反昭雪。否定毛澤東時期中央的決定。他不
是三次給毛澤東同志寫保證書嗎,說永不翻案、 不搞秋後算賬。可是他出爾反爾言行不一,說一 套做一套。當毛澤東去世後認為山中無老虎猴子
稱大王,大張旗鼓的批評毛澤東給毛澤東定罪,搞徹底的翻案活動,實行一朝天子一朝臣的政策。並重重徘擠和打擊了在文化大革命中的老幹部。
領袖的作用就是代表人民的利益,“上有政 策,下有對策’是中國目前的困局。
上有政策下有對策不是領袖的貴任嗎?領袖講的話太多,下面落實不了,所以才上有政策下有對策,領袖說一句就要落實一句,一竿子插到底。這件事清還沒有辦完,沒有什麼眉目呢,又
來了那件事清,就像反腐敗似的沒有真正的動作只是喊口號,造聲勢,就是沒有實際的。下面害怕你中央什麼,犯罪你都不管你還管得了什麼?
鄧小平的“摸論’‘是種只顧眼前利益沒有長遠打算、胸中無墨的表現。我們過河非得去摸石頭嗎,沒有更好的過河辦法?修橋、造船等穩妥的辦法不想,非得讓老百姓不顧生死地去摸石頭過河?搞改革開放不就是把資本主義的東西引進中國社會,不就是在照搬資本主義社會的經驗搞市場經濟嗎?摸論說白了就是衝破毛澤東思想的束縛,衝破社會主義束縛,大膽的在社會主義國家搞資本主義。在中國是沒有現成的經驗,
但是有一條可以肯定,就足把仁毛席說的做的都給翻過來。
人們為什麼端起碗吃肉放卜碗罵娘呢,怎麼會出現這種現象呢?就是社會嚴重分配不公,才出現人們不知足、心裡不平衡的怪現象。現在確
實有很多分配不公的地方。比如工人與公務員的工資差距不公,不發達地區與發達地區的工資收入不公,勤勞不能致富,靠權力才能致富。辛辛苦苦幹一輩子不如有個好爸爸干幾天就可以當官了。我才貪污10萬就被審查、可是人家貪污100
萬1000萬幾個億的呢都沒事呢。地區差別、單位差別、城鄉差別、行業差別、權利差別,都是造成人們心裡不平衡和社會分配不公的原因,怎麼
解決這些不平衡和不平等,要靠中央的政策,靠領導的才幹。我們的中央,我們的共產黨,本來應該一碗水端平、手心手背部是肉,不要搞親疏遠近之分。一碗水端平不是平均主義,是處理問題必須公平合理,幾千年來中國歷史,不患寡,患不均。現在的信貸政策還不是對準少數人的政策嗎?今天的分配不公那己經涉及到方方面面各個角落。雖然現在中央提出改革開放的成果人民共享.也做了一些善事像合作醫療、廉租房、
農村養老保險、減免學費農業稅、種地補助等等,但是很多都是在前30年毛澤東時代都實行過的事情、是社會主義制度優越性的一部分。改革的初期都作為社會發展的包袱給砍了。我們現在的公民的福利待遇與其他發達資本主義國家的公民的福利待遇,特別是歐洲相差甚遠。歐美從懷孕到出生到18歲國家都有補貼費用,老了都有養老金。我們執政黨所做的離30年前還有一段距離,離資木主義國家更有段距離,中國特色的社會主義國家有什麼值得驕傲的。要看到我們的不足和差距才能夠有所發展。
現在有的人否認馬克思的政治經濟學,認為經濟學就是經濟學,政治學就是政治學,把馬克思的政治經濟學說成是經濟學進行歪曲。沒有黨的政策和外交政策這些政治手段哪有經濟的發展和對外貿易?戰爭是經濟戰也是政治戰。孤立的看政治、孤立的看經濟都不是馬克思主義,也不是現實主義不是實事求是的。就是一種沒有政治頭腦的人,企圖愚民。
鄧小平的階級鬥爭熄滅論是針對毛澤東的
無產階級文化大革命的理論和馬克思的階級鬥爭學說的。階級鬥爭熄滅論實際上就是取消了人民的概念實行公民論,現在沒有好賴人,沒有了政治株連制、造成好人不香壞人不臭、有奶便是娘、有錢便是爺的社會。這個根本不是共產黨領導的社會——可能是封建社會也可能是資本主義社會,也可能是鄧小平創造的封建資本主義社會,也叫中國特色社會主義。這從根本上顏覆了我國人民當家做主的根本制度,造成腐敗橫行,黑惡勢力猖撅,黃賭毒假泛濫;人們思想混亂,社會秩序混亂。好人沒有出路壞人才能當道。惡人得勢好人遭殃。
*2
歪曲歷史事實,瞪着眼說瞎話,就是玩政治權術。所謂的“騷亂”就是人民的反腐行動,所謂勝者王侯敗者賊。誰當家向着誰說,就是中國的政客.很多中國的政客,都是瞪着眼說瞎話,把白的說成是黑的,把黑的說成是白的。
反對毛澤東的人,一般是有私心的人,起碼他沒有站在無產階級的立場上,沒有站在人民的立場上。可以說都是別有用心的。
房改的實情是什麼?現在是開發商與政府勾結,與黑社會勾結,用警察、地痞流氓的各種手段,威脅恐嚇製造各種人問悲劇。造成死亡的有多少,造成群體事件有多少?我們的黨和政府要站在人民的利益和角度去想問題看問題,老百姓要什麼,不就是要自己的個窩嗎?不像有的當官的人家送禮就是幾套別墅,他們來的錢和房子都是舉手之勞,說句話簽個字表示同意拿着人民給的權利用一下,就換來很多的房子和金錢,文強只是一個。老百姓不行,他們掙的是血汗錢,辛辛苦苦幹一年也不見得剩下幾百幾千幾萬,住的房子是靠牙縫裡和節衣縮食幾十年的辛苦攢卜來的。你動他的房子就是要他的命。他們有要求也是合理的人之常情。輿論說的頑民、釘子戶那也是遇到了黑社會的地痞流氓,真正的老百姓哪能整得過開發商?只有上訪告狀的出路。
鄧小平死了好些年了,現在的事情應該怪誰。你說不怪上邊怪下邊那也不假,你在深圳打工不給你開工資,那只能怪你們廠子的會計、出納,不怪老闆下邊的人真是不會辦事太黑了,把你們的工資都給貪污了。天下有這樣的道理嗎?
鄧小平的唯生產力論、階級鬥爭熄滅輪、三自一包、四大自由、以及貓論、摸論、三個有利於論、膽大論、一國兩制論等都是違背馬克思列寧主義毛澤東思想的繆論。
看了2010年兩會後急理答記者問上說了一句話,現在還是窮人多是大多數,這話是很貼近實際很實事求是的,三次到河北承德灤平地區考察看到農村雖然發生了變化,但是北京和上海不能夠代表中國的經濟發展水平,代表中國的經濟水平的還是農村的那個大多數。讓我們看到了我們的政府我們的黨還能務實不務虛,敢於講真話講實話。沒有被眼前的數字和燈紅酒綠所迷惑。
毛澤東的政策是弱國窮民嗎?不是,他不過主
張依靠集體的力最來實現共同富裕。因為我們中國的新民主主義革命到社會主義改造的事實證明了只有集體的力量是無窮的,解放後我們很多的社會主義建設的事實也充分證明了團結的力量集體的力量。但是鄧小平強調的是個人的力量,強調個人的私心,毛澤東的集休主義思想與鄧小平的個人主義思想是完全相反的。事實證明發展私有制培養了人們的私心、鼓勵少數人先富裕起來,他們是不會管其他人富不富裕的——暫時歷史的事實。只有國家、黨才有可能真正管大多數人的事情。
這麼多年我們黨的政策實際上是一直扶持少數人,把國家的財富和政策力量放在少數人身上。因此造成了社會的不公平、失去了正義、喪失了我們黨的宗旨。
前三十年中國搞得是貧窮社會主義嗎?不是.我們的共產黨是讓老百姓不過好日子嗎?顯然也不是,是鄧小平給毛澤東和前三十年強加的罪名。
鄧小平搞階級鬥爭熄滅論,實際上階級鬥爭一刻也沒有停止過。在中國,無產階級與資產階級,社會主義與資本主義的鬥爭一刻也沒有停止,表現在我們黨的政策上就是個人主義與集體主義,私有制與公有制兩條路線的鬥爭。
毛澤東和鄧小平的出發點部是想讓中國和中國人民都強大和富裕起來。但是路線不同,毛澤東強調的是集體的力量,通過走集體國有道路來實現共同富裕,消滅私有制消滅私心建立社會主義最終實現共產主義。但是鄧小平卻是主張我們,是社會主義初級階段,共產主義離我們很遙遠,認為共產主義很難實現。其實是動搖了我們共產
黨的信仰,主張個人主義,承認、提倡私心、鼓吹人不為己天誅地滅的理論。他的一系列論斷都是圍着少數人服務的,我們的政府也就為少數人大開方便之門,因此就提倡少數人先富起來。一發展私有制必然要產生兩極分化,鄧小平說
過:“我們如果兩極分化那我們的改革就失敗了”,但是現在又有誰去聽鄧小平的話呢?改革失敗了,我們卻不承認失敗,這己經不是鄧小平的意思了。
我們怎麼在鄧小平和毛澤東之間找出一條社會主義共同富裕的道路,是我們侮個中國人、中國共產黨人特別是現在的當權者值得深思的問題。那就是又能夠調動人們的生產積極性創造性,又能夠激發集體主義精神。這就要靠我們的立腳點我們的政策的調控,我認為我們的理論要與我們的政策和人民的實際相結合,確實體現社會主
義、共產主義、民主、人權。
就鄧小平的理論素質和文化水平與毛澤東相比相差甚遠。毛澤東言辭可以叫文章、著作,
鄧小平的理論就是叫談話,他沒有什麼條理依據,就是想怎麼說就怎麼說的,看看鄧小平的文選就知道他是一個言行不一,前後矛盾的人。
不能夠旗幟鮮明是當今共產黨人的通病,什麼事情都是說得里外都是理,正反都是人。坐着說話不腰疼。共產黨的江山就要毀在像這樣的人手裡。
其實做人也好做領導也好當領袖也好,首先的還是做人。作出事來可以拿到桌面上,可以讓大家評,不能背地裡干一套,說的又是另一套。
對人民撒謊.又要躲貓貓說是為人民服務。我認為國家領導人不是總想着首先對得起某個人而是要先對得起人民和歷史。
我認為毛澤東同志對鄧小平還是仁至義盡的,對他的二起三落和保證,毛澤東實在無法再信任他,才選擇了其他接班人。毛鄧的鬥爭是兩條路線的鬥爭,毛是集體公有共同,鄧是個人私有到共同,事實證明在培養私心的前提下只能是個人顧個人,兩極分化,先富帶後富、先富幫後富是不可能的事清。只有走集體的道路才能夠達到共同富裕,像華西村很多集體經濟好的現象是鐵的事實。
打倒一派利用一派邀功買好,是兩面派的手法。我們黨講究懲前毖後治病救人,採取批評教育的方法。依法治國把什麼事情都交給法律那是資本主義社會的那套,我們在法律還不健全的情況下加強行政管理和監督加強黨的領導,開展整黨整風運動是十分必要的,是保持我黨先進性保持我黨機體健康的重要保障。是我們共產黨
區別其他政黨的根本標誌。(完) 評:
顯然這篇文章是在七、八年前寫的,那時人們還對特色黨這個假共產黨抱有它會承認錯誤並改過自新的希望,但是,歷史和事實證明這些希望是完全落空了。它不但不改正錯誤,反而變本加厲,拒不承認錯誤不說,更進一步地為非作歹、倒行逆施,不可終日,直到滅亡。
作者在文中對鄧小平這個兩面派和無產階級的最大叛徒雖然有所刻畫和解釋,但是還不夠徹底;也就因此出現妥協與點到為止的遺憾。其實,
鄧小平及其帶領的特色黨盜國集團不但出賣和顛覆了中國無產階級社會主義革命,而且阻礙和推遲了世界革命的進程,因此其罪大惡極絕不限於摧毀中國一國的人民革命事業,而是包括全世界在內。
中國和世界人民的第二次社會主義革命時代已經日漸逼近,暴力推翻資本主義制度的革命起義不可避免。二次文革的勝利一定會到來,人民當家作主、翻身解放的日子不會太遠了。[Mark
Wain 2019-03-23] *3
北京(為鄭州之誤)街頭驚現為文革全面翻案的數十張大字報 dujia People who study history always like to say that history is inevitable, and individuals are only driven by history. This view is very banal and is particularly inconsistent with China's national conditions.
There is a saying that Deng Xiaoping's reform and opening up was just a historical accident. If Deng Xiaoping had not been there at that time, other leaders would have carried out reform and opening up.
This view seems untenable.
It can be said: without Deng Xiaoping, there would be no reform and opening up.
Although it is in line with the general trend, it is difficult to say whether the reform is inevitable, whether it will be of such strength and courage, whether it will be in this form, at this speed and on this scale. Look at the neighbors to the east. They may not have the call for reform and the historical necessity. What has been changed in the past few decades?
People today simply cannot imagine how rigid the entire society’s thinking was just after the Cultural Revolution. If Deng Xiaoping had not come out at that time, the most we could do was return to the line before the Cultural Revolution in the 1950s and 1960s. Of course, it would be more pragmatic than the 10 years of the Cultural Revolution, with minor repairs, but today's fully open and market economy is a no-brainer.
No matter how reasonable the historical trend is, it will be impossible to achieve if there is no strong will to promote it.
The tide of history is fleeting and never returns. Looking at some key nodes in China's modern history, opportunities have all been missed due to a combination of circumstances.
What is valuable about Xiaoping is that he did not give in internally, kept a low profile externally, firmly grasped the rare international environment in these decades, and decisively pushed China to a higher level. If we had been dithering and indecisive back then, and it had dragged on until today's eagerly awaited Trump era, we would never have been able to open up again.
The significance of Xiaoping goes beyond rigid ideological discourse. He is a practical person. He knows that the most important thing in China is not words but actions. What he wants for the people is dignity, not face. So he said there was no argument. His strategy was to do what he could and leave what he couldn't do to the future.
There are some things that cannot be argued about, productivity cannot be argued about, and comprehensive strength cannot be argued about.
No country wins by talking.
At the closing meeting of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China’s work conference on December 13, 1978, Xiaoping gave a speech titled “Emancipate the Mind, Seek Truth from Facts, Unite and Look Forward.” Don’t underestimate this seemingly ordinary title, it actually contains the basic force behind China’s earth-shattering changes.
Under the historical conditions at that time, these three sentences had rich subtext, high political wisdom, and endless follow-up possibilities. Except for Xiaoping, no one else would have thought of these three sentences, they would not dare to say them even if they thought of them, and it would be useless to say them.
Today’s huge wave of studying abroad was also driven by Xiaoping’s decision.
Traveling back to 1977, if you think about the level of understanding of yourself and the people around you at that time, you will understand that the ideological emancipation promoted by Xiaoping is really remarkable. This alone kills his peers instantly.
On August 3, 1977, Xiaoping presided over a symposium on science and education work. At the meeting, Wen Yuankai, a brave leader in education reform at the time, proposed a 16-character plan for the restoration of the college entrance examination: "voluntary application, leadership approval, strict examination, and merit-based admission."
After hearing this, Xiaoping said on the spot: Wen Yuankai, at least accept three-quarters of your proposal. The second sentence "leadership approval" can be removed. It is everyone's right to enter college and does not require leadership approval.
No leadership approval is required. This is simply unprecedented and has shocked many people. If the leaders don’t approve it, what should we do? Will you make mistakes? If the leader does not approve, where is the authority of the leader? Where is the authority of the party committee?
Sorry, some things are just personal rights and really don’t require leadership approval. Leaders worry too much and sometimes need to take a break. Xiaoping was so open-minded and clear. Stop
going to the mountains and countryside, and let the educated youth
return to the city. There were no jobs in the city at that time, and it
was difficult to accept so many people at once. What if we couldn't
resettle them, or what if they caused a big mess? Who dared to take
this decision? Deng Xiaoping. There are many obstacles to implementing household responsibility, and most cadres do not agree. On
May 31, 1980, Xiaoping had a talk with the responsible comrades of the
central government, and at a critical moment expressed his support for
the rural household responsibility policy, which was full of
resistance. The second volume of "Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping" contains this speech, titled "On Rural Policy Issues". A person who can truly promote history needs to possess three basic conditions: vision, will, and prestige. There were not many in China in 1977 who had one of the three, and there were also two who had the other. Xiaoping is the only one who possesses all three. But
Xiaoping does not seem to be a person with grand ideas, profound
thoughts, and ideal vision. People who criticize him today often use
the "cat theory" and "crossing the river by feeling for the stones"
theory. In fact, they said exactly the opposite. The most remarkable thing is to cross the river by feeling the stones without making grand ideas. Historically,
all kinds of empty promises and beautiful slogans have caused misery
to people, but Xiaoping was unwilling to do that. The most admirable thing is Deng Xiaoping's trust and letting go of his subordinates. He
honestly admitted that he didn't have any ideas. He just wanted the
people below to free their minds, be bolder, move faster, do it first,
then correct mistakes, and don't go too far. What this embodies is China’s traditional philosophy of governing the country. The top level governs by doing nothing. The inaction of the upper levels mobilizes the active actions of the lower levels. Deng Xiaoping once said: "Our government regulates too much and should regulate as little as possible." If
someone takes less care, someone will do more; more work from above
will add chaos, but more work from below will lead to real
productivity. He also said to Jin Yong: "Politicians should not have too many ideas." There
is no saint who knows everything, and it is impossible for a leader to
have many ideas and take care of everything. His speech must be
important and his instructions must be wise. Such people do not exist. The so-called "no fuss" means to govern by doing nothing. Doing
nothing does not mean not doing anything. On the contrary, doing
nothing does not mean doing anything, giving space to the people and
giving the public a choice. This is the essence of ideological
liberation. Deng Xiaoping's vision, will, and prestige were formed through his accumulation of experiences throughout his life. There
are not many people who have experienced ups and downs like him. He
has experienced training in all key positions such as the party,
government, military, central government, local culture, science and
technology, diplomacy, etc. The more he sees, the more he thinks, and
his thinking is not so narrow. He
went to France at the age of 16. From 1920 to 1926, he spent his most
golden youth in France, which was also a critical period in the shaping
of knowledge structure and values. When
he visited France in 1975, he visited factories and rural areas and
witnessed the tremendous changes that had taken place in France. When
Deng Xiaoping went to the United Nations General Assembly to give a
speech, he was asked what he wanted to see most. He said: Wall Street. Deng
Xiaoping was a man who looked at the world with his eyes open. He had
the country in his heart and looked at the world in his eyes. He was
neither closed-minded nor messy. When he was alive, there were always people clamoring for a full-scale confrontation with the United States. Deng
Xiaoping said: I can play bridge. Don’t think it’s great if you have
four kings. Don’t forget that others also have four aces. Not being confrontational does not mean you are weak. In terms of diplomacy, Deng Xiaoping adhered to a pragmatic line, which is also an internationally accepted norm. After
his visit to the United States, he severely taught his Vietnamese
opponent a lesson to this evil neighbor, which also made the Soviet
Union scruple and restrain itself, thus creating a good open
environment for China. He is not a man who cannot bend, but he has his bottom line. Today and when Xiaoping was alive, many people scolded him. This is actually what made Xiaoping so great. You only have to try scolding leaders in the era before him to understand. So, is it because he doesn’t have the ability to shut up those who scold him? No, he is a super political strongman and has this ability. Nor
did he engage in a personality cult when his prestige was at its peak.
If he had done that, he would have easily become a god in China, and
those who scold him today would simply worship him. As
we commemorate the 40th anniversary of reform and opening up, there is
one leader recognized by the world, and that is Deng Xiaoping. As
a historical figure, Comrade Xiaoping must also accept historical
evaluation. Regardless of the evaluation, Comrade Xiaoping is the most
important pioneer of China's reform and opening up. It was the reform
he led that completely changed the long-term "shortage" situation after
the founding of New China. "Economic" reality has subjectively and
objectively promoted changes in China's political, social, ideological,
cultural and other fields. Without Comrade Deng Xiaoping, China's history would have been rewritten. For
a long time, Comrade Xiaoping's popularity was unparalleled, which led
to the emergence of Deng Xiaoping Theory, which was the consensus
formed by the whole party during the reform and opening up. This also reflects the vast majority of people’s understanding of reform and opening up. However,
it seems that in recent years, some differences have arisen in society
regarding the evaluation of Comrade Xiaoping, and the focus of the
differences lies in some of the "by-products" derived from the reform
and opening up process - corruption, the gap between rich and poor,
ideological confusion, Many problems such as the spread of
neoliberalism and moral decline have been attributed to Comrade
Xiaoping, as if his principles and policies led to negative phenomena
in the future. This raises the question of how we evaluate a leader. There
are three dimensions to evaluate a leader: mission, responsibility and
"limitations". Comrade Xiaoping can be evaluated from these three
dimensions. Every generation has its problems, and the concentrated expression of these problems is the main contradiction of an era. It
is the mission of contemporary leaders to break through, break through
and resolve the main contradictions. Those who follow the trend will
prosper, and those who go against it will perish - this is in line with
historical determinism. At that time, the main contradiction was "the contradiction between the people's growing material and cultural needs and backward social production." The top priority was that the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had collapsed. If the Chinese people continued to be poor, there would be no way out for socialism. Whether one can recognize this principal contradiction and see this historical mission is the first "big test" for a leader. There is no doubt that Deng Xiaoping was always sober.
The mission is on our shoulders, but not everyone may dare to take it on. Gorbachev escaped and suffered a complete defeat, always reminding us of the importance of a leader's responsibility. On the issue of responsibility, Comrade Xiaoping did not hesitate at all. Regarding
reform and opening up, the resistance within the party is far greater
than we imagined. In the face of resistance, Comrade Xiaoping did not
take "small steps slowly" but "big strides fast", so that even the
Western world misjudged China ( Think that China has "peacefully
evolved"). Comrades
are confused about how much pressure Deng Xiaoping had to bear for
such a big-step reform. It can be said that without Comrade Xiaoping's
responsibility, China today would not have such great achievements. Finally,
we have to talk about "limitations." The reason why we put them in
double quotation marks is because this limitation is not a personal
limitation of the leader, but a historical limitation. It is remarkable for one generation to overcome and solve the most urgent and critical problems of that generation. You cannot expect one person to solve all problems. In that case, what will future generations do? As
each problem is solved, the principal contradiction will inevitably
change from quantitative to qualitative, creating new problems one
after another, thus forming new principal contradictions. The
new problems arising under this old historical environment are the
limitations of history and need to be solved under the new political,
economic and cultural conditions. Deng
Xiaoping's principles and policies were correct for his era, but as
time and environmental conditions change, these principles and policies
must be adjusted. All
of these constitute the new mission of the successors, which is
consistent with the understanding of historical materialism. It is irresponsible to blame new problems on historical figures. Similarly,
it is equally unscientific and irrational to use current vision and
standards to criticize past consciousness and behavior. Corruption,
the gap between rich and poor, ideological confusion, the
proliferation of neoliberalism, and moral decline... These problems do
exist, and some of them are indeed caused by some policy mistakes in
the process of reform and opening up, but all of these are what we need
to deal with today. studied and solved under historical conditions. During
his lifetime, Comrade Xiaoping saw the signs of these problems and
warned of them. It can be said that his historical mission has been
overfulfilled, and we have no reason to be harsh on him. What we need is Deng Xiaoping's wisdom and courage to solve the current problems. Just speak human words for the common people https://freewechat.com/a/MzI0ODI0NDc5MQ==/2649437225/1 Abv copied from :- Daniel Tu Founder and Managing Director at Active Creation Capital After nearly 20,000 views.... My post from May 2022 "Direct, deliberate and timely" in which I shared an article about the late 鄧小平 - "不折騰是最高的智慧和善政" (Avoiding self-inflicted complication is the highest level of wisdom and good politics) - generated much feedback. Regrettably, I was recently informed that the original link to the essay was taken down, as expected. Given China's current situation remains largely unchanged - notwithstanding the weak economy, ongoing investigations of senior PLA leadership, and the unreported challenges facing Xi pre and post-BRICS summit - the article is still relevant and cogent. I am re-posting it with a new link. The following is what I wrote 14 months ago - "As China faces increasing internal and external challenges, an article titled "不折騰是最高的智慧和善政" (Avoiding self-inflicted complication is the highest level of wisdom and good politics) appeared online yesterday. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the essay has gone viral and is likely to be removed soon. The author, from a historical perspective and tracing back to over four decades, writes about the wisdom, vision and political acumen of 鄧小平 (Deng Xiaoping). He recounts the decision to launch "改革開放" (economic reform and opening-up) could only have been undertaken by Deng, in spite of the difficult conditions and fierce opposition from within the party. "有一種說法,認為鄧小平搞改革開放只是歷史的偶然,假如當時沒有鄧小平,其他領導人也會搞改革開放。 這樣的看法以前可能是仁者見仁,智者見智,但是跟當下我們面臨的局面做一個推論,我們完全可以說:沒有鄧小平,就沒有改革開放。" Looking back at the days immediately following the Cultural Revolution, the political upheaval and social chaos had shaped a rigid society where the voices of the educated and elites were muted. If not for Deng, China would still be on the path of the 1950s and 1960s. "以前根本無法想象文革剛結束時整個社會思想僵化到什麼程度,現在似乎明白一點了,就是精英層都被禁聲了,誰有膽量和氣魄打破常規?當時如果沒有小平出來,最多就是回到50、60年代文革前的路線,當然會比文革10年務實,小修小補,但今天這種全面開放、市場經濟那是想都不用想." Several passages in the article are worth highlighting - "有些事情是爭論不出個所以然的,是爭論不出生產力的,是爭論不到綜合實力的。 沒有一個國家是靠打嘴仗勝利的。 1978年12月13日中共中央工作會議閉幕會上,小平做了一個講話,題目叫《解放思想,實事求是,團結一致向前看》。 歷史是合力,但歷史也需要槓桿。 在當時的歷史條件下,這三句話有着豐富的潛台詞、高度的政治智慧、無窮的後續可能性。就這三句話,除了小平,別人想也想不到,想到了也不敢說,說出來也沒用。 一個能真正推動歷史的人,需要具備三個基本條件:眼界、意志、威望。三者具其一,在1977年的中國並不少,三者具其二的,也有。三者俱備的,只有小平一人。 所謂“不折騰”,就是無為而治。無為不是不為,恰恰相反,無為而無不為,給老百姓空間,給社會大眾選擇,這是思想解放的精髓所在。 對於改革開放,黨內的阻力遠比我們想象的大,面對阻力,小平同志不是“小步慢走”,而是“大步快走”,以至於連西方世界都對中國產生了誤判(以為中國已經“和平演變”)。這樣大步子的改革,對於鄧小平要承受多大的壓力和同志們的不解,可以說,沒有小平同志的擔當,今天的中國不會有如此巨大的成就。" In conclusion, the author, without delineating the current challenges facing the Beijing leadership, offered the following bold advice - "當代的執政者,需要好好讀一下《鄧小平理論》,我們需要的是有鄧小平的智慧與膽略,來解決好當前的問題。" A good read of a commemoration written for the 24th anniversary of Deng's passing. 轉載 |
|
|
|
實用資訊 | |
|
|
一周點擊熱帖 | 更多>> |
|
|
一周回復熱帖 |
|
|
歷史上的今天:回復熱帖 |
2022: | 搞情報:一個人的戰爭 | |
2022: | 劉蔚, Wei Liu: 9月兩起軍事事件說明習 | |
2021: | 土共五毛都撤了? 這裡簡直就是死了 | |
2021: | 美國老兵因何被老K仇視?只因曾為美國 | |
2020: | 英國首相,巴西總統,now,床總!ABC新 | |
2020: | 中國淪陷七十一周年 | |
2019: | 人民大眾開心之日,就是淘汰的渣渣難受 | |
2019: | 中文及國學對邏輯思維和科學的阻礙: 值 | |
2018: | 我是一個君子。我從來沒有指責同胞給我 | |
2018: | 再發學唱嚴華周璇的《扁舟情侶》,附簡 | |