The Evil of Confucianism and the Harmful Effect of Chinese Language on Human Perception of Reality 孔儒说教的邪恶与中文语言对人认知真实的危害

China-a mafia society 中国是一个黑社会

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

The Evil of Confucianism and the Harmful Effect of Chinese Language on Human Perception of Reality
孔儒说教的邪恶与中文语言对人认知真实的危害

(Addressed to People/parents of students of Hacienda La Puente Unified School District)
向哈崗学区的学生、父母与居民进一言

By Kai Chen 陈凯 3/31/11 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

Since the downfall of the Soviet Union and the world-wide recognition that communism is an evil ideology, realizing that communism has exhausted its usefulness for its tyrannical/criminal/atrocious rule over the Chinese population, the Chinese communist regime has increasingly been aggressive in promoting a native-born despotism based on an ancient totalitarian theory/ideology – Confucianism. As a result, “Confucian Socialism” （儒粹） is born and being spread around the world through hundreds “Confucius Institutes and Confucius Classrooms”, in the name of promoting the learning of the Chinese language.

I now briefly list the evils of Confucianism and the harmful effects of Chinese character-based pictorial/syllabic language on human perception of reality and essence of human existence:

Confucianism is a political ideology and indoctrinated behavior code for stability of despotic/tyrannical regimes in China throughout its history.

1. Confucianism is intrinsically anti-freedom and anti-American.

In American Declaration of Independence, human freedom is promoted through the moral principle that all men are created equal with God-given rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. But Confucianism is promoting the exact opposite – an immoral and amoral human existence and behavior code based on inequality from one’s birth by his/her family background, by his/her race, by his/her gender, by his/her trade and profession, by his/her power in a social/cultural structure according to political power/government. According to Confucianism, emperor/power elite is at the top of the pyramid, women is below men, the young is below the old, the physical labor is below the mental labor, the powerless is below the powerful, etc.. Men with political power, not God, dictate the status of everyone else. Thus Confucianism is for absolute power by the government to control its people, exact opposite from American concept of “government of the people, by the people and for the people”.

2. Confucianism is a political doctrine, never a philosophy, for the dictators/despots against human freedom.

Confucianism instills that men with power in society – the emperor and power elite, decide what is best for the empire, without any attempt to establish any mechanism to control such power elite and the power they wield above the population. Therefore, the Chinese society has always been (for thousands of years) plagued by corruption and abuse from those who have power. Man-above/below-man, man-eating-man has always been the reality in China.

3. Confucianism is a tool for despots/tyrants to pacify/incapacitate the population and stabilize the power-elite’s control over it.

With individuals ready to accept their places in society by birth, by gender, by age, by trade/profession, by social status according to positions in government, passive acceptance of one’s fate without any struggle for one’s own freedom and happiness is the necessary result. A “zombified” population (castrated eunuchs, slaves, moral prostitutes) without soul/conscience is created. The despots/tyrants thus can better control their subjects. Confucianism, by its own very nature, is diametrically opposed to everything America stands for.

4. Some facts about Confucius:

• Confucius himself, by his belief that woman is inferior to man and despicable, had never accepted a single female student in his life time.

• Confucius himself was a murderer. He, as a government official, killed a scholar named Shao Zhengmou （少正卯）, simply because he didn’t agree with him.

• Confucius himself was a petty government official and always yearned to climb the social ladder through pleasing the emperor and the court.

• Confucius himself only indoctrinated his students with his views, never allowing any questions and inquiries from others about what he thought. He ruled by his own doctrine – everything is according to birth, gender, age, power, status…, no questions asked.

The very phenomenon that the Chinese Confucian-minded School Board members – Jay Chen, Norman Hsu and Joseph Chang (Hacienda La-Puente Unified School Board) view themselves as the overlords of their constituency and somehow superior to different racial groups (Latinos, Blacks, Whites), while calling their opponents “racists” comes not as a surprise to me.

Chinese character-based pictorial syllabic language is very harmful for human perception of reality and therefore hampers human effort to understand the essence of things – the truth. Superficiality (all face) is intrinsically embedded in the very Chinese language:

1. A simple “I” can have dozens of expressions in Chinese language, according to whom you want to address in the order of Confucian society. To say that a language is neutral and does not carry moral values is a lie and an illusion.

2. Since human brain is separated by left and right hemisphere and each performs a different function, (the left side is in charge of language, mathematics, logical thinking and the right is in charge of music, image and artistic expressions, the Chinese language – a primitive, pictorial and syllabic language, confuses the function of both hemispheres by its own very method of input. As a result, logical thinking/creativity of the individual is severely harmed and hampered. Confusion, not clarity, is a necessary result often witnessed/observed by an English speaking person on/about a Chinese speaking person.

3. Inability to clarify and define concepts is a permanent/negative feature of the Chinese language users. No scientific paper has ever been written in Chinese language. As a result of such inabilities and confusions caused by the Chinese language itself, absolute power by force/violence/guns is a must to maintain temporary order. Logically, human conscience, morality, rationality have never been the foundation/focus of the Chinese population and society. Legitimacy of the government in the Chinese society thus has never had a peaceful origin and will never have, as long as Confucianism which propagates confusion and absolute unity is a dominant social/cultural doctrine, as long as Chinese language is being used to perceive and to communicate.

All societies plagued by Confucianism and Chinese character-based syllabic languages, such as Japan, Korea, Taiwan, etc., have always been experiencing a perpetual vacuum in human creativity and individual initiatives. Their progress is due to the West/American influence. Their achievement is NEVER because of Confucianism and the primitive syllabic Chinese language, but instead of them.

America is a free society and anyone can use such freedoms to propagate anything, including poisons such as Islamic fundamentalism and Confucianism. Do you, the parents, want to immerse your children to such poisons, knowing the teacher views your children as inferior by his/her race, gender, age, individuality, knowing the teacher simply wants to promote his/her racial/cultural superiority/agenda by taming, civilizing, and domesticating a lesser/barbarian human being from birth?? Do you, the female students/parents/staff/associates feel comfortable knowing your School Board members with their Confucian/Chinese belief, take you as something lesser than them because of your gender?? Do you, the parents of Hacienda La Puente District students, feel it is OK to spread Confucianism as an anti-American ideology and poison the mind of your children?? Do you, as a human being, really think that all men should Not be created equal with rights from God, but only some pitiful creatures from nowhere yearning for some benefits and handouts from government and men, from someone superior???

The choice is yours.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Book/reading recommended on the subject of Chinese language being harmful when used to perceive reality and communicate:



“The Writing on the Wall – How Chinese character-based syllabic language curbs creativity” by William Hannas (a renowned linguist in America). Hannas has a series books addressing this subject.

语言变革文化思维 - 土耳其摈弃传统语言的例子 Turkey's Example in Abolishing Their Own Language

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk Reforms 土耳其的变革

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

语言变革文化思维 - 土耳其摈弃传统语言的例子
Turkey's Example in Abolishing Their Own Language

“自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

价值一语： Words of Value:

The preservation of the means of knowledge among the lowest ranks is of more importance to the public than all the property of the rich men in the country. --- John Quincy Adams

使社会最底层的人们拥有取得知识的途径比全部在社会中富人的财富重要得多。 --- John Quincy Adams

****************************************

Kai Chen 陈凯 (Written 6/30/2006, Reprint 3/30/2011)

Recognizing the defects of their own ancestors' legacy is one attribute/aspect the Chinese still have to grasp and to acquire in their struggle to catch up with the modern world. But without this courageous recognition, China will continue to lag behind the world in its population's pursuit/comprehension of truth and reality. In this regard, Turkey has provided the world and especially China with one stunning/shining example that a people did indeed have the will, ability and courage to recognize the ills and defects of their own culture/language, and change it in order to progress toward a better future.

I visited Turkey in 1977 representing China to play a basketball tournament there. The country's ability to transform itself from a backward-thinking, Ottoman Turkish-language (character-based) dominated despotic society into a progressive, modern democratic society left an ever-lasting impression in my mind.

Situated between Europe and Asia, Turkey is the only democratic nation among the Muslim world that is pro-West. It has allied with America and joined NATO. For centuries, Turkey's written language was Ottoman Turkish, a complicated language written/based in Arabic characters, (much like the Chinese character-based syllabic language). It included words and grammar from the Arabic and Persian languages. Ottoman Turkish was so difficult that only scholars and the ruling class learned to read it, (much like what happened in the Chinese society). In 1928, the government established a new alphabet from scratch which is much like that of the West. It also ordered a language education program throughout the country and outlawed the use of Ottoman Turkish - a drastic/extreme measure indeed.

So now we have an established example that a traditional society can indeed recognize its own cultural and linguistic defects, thus actively has done something to change it. Surely being closer to Europe was one factor for such transformation to have occurred. But nonetheless, Turkey proves that such positive transformation can indeed occur due to the free will of a people yearning for freedom and a better tomorrow. Only with the right tools in their hands/mind, such a transformation can be possible.

Take a look at Asia, Singapore and Hong Kong have already been bi-lingual with English as the official language for legislative functions, legal matters, educational purposes and business transactions. In India - a democratic society, official language is English since the colonial days. Taiwan, with much of its elite educated in America and its Chinese-language material mostly nowadays based on English translation, is another Asian country with success story in transforming its own society. South Korea and Japan's transformation has been much due to American occupation/protection and presence since WWII. These Asian success stories should provide ample evidences that language sup-plantation/adoption (specifically from local language to English language) is crucial to a society's progress from traditional, regressive and despotic one toward modern, free and democratic one.

However, the Chinese language, due to its double defects - character-based pictorial written form and single syllable sounding, is more difficult to reform.

Vietnam provides us with its example of such reform failure: Though after the French colonial period, having alphabetized the written form in its own syllabic language, Vietnam remains despotic in nature. The language-reform failure is due much to the fact that its single syllable sounding remains intact. Alphabetizing the Chinese characters will have the same ill effect and render the language reform in vain, for one still has to fit many meanings into a single syllable. Stuffing/inundating meanings into a single syllable will still/always render the language impotent in defining meaning therefore negatively affect its clarity. Muddy and opaque expressions will still be featuring such a "reformed" language.

With 98% of Turkey's population as Muslim, the country has transformed itself away from the majority of Muslim countries, closer in essence to modern, Western societies. This amazing achievement is much due to the people's strong will to change themselves, away from their own ancestors, for the better, via a transformation of the tools they use to comprehend reality. Political will, reason/rationality, plus a belief of human freedom can indeed transform a traditional society into a modern, progressive, democratic society. One thing at a time: Language sup-plantation/adoption first.

My notion of first and foremost sup-planting/adopting English language as the official language (to replace the Chinese language), as the legal, educational and business tool (in order to foster clear thinking/grasp of reality and truth for the Chinese people), STANDS.


Kennedy Comments on Turkey 肯尼迪褒扬土耳其变革

转载:英语的历史 The Development of English Language

Learning English Language 学习英语的必要与要点

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

如果中国的人们想从中文语言的奴役中解放出来，成为有独立思维的、有原创力的、自由与有尊严的人，英语必须成为中国的官方语言。 新加坡，香港，印度早已为中国的人们开创了先例。

Kai Chen's Words:

If/when the Chinese want to liberate themselves from the slavery imposed upon them by their ancestors and the Chinese language itself, if/when the Chinese want to transform themselves into independent thinkers, creative producers, free beings with human dignity, English language must become the official language in China. Singapore, Hong Kong and India have all been liberated by the English language and what it brings to the local social and political culture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

转载:英语的历史
The Development of English Language

(2009-09-07 20:15:4

飞龙在半天/转载

英语属于印欧语系当中的日耳曼语文。印欧语系是全世界最大的语系之一，属于这个语系的语言地理分布最广，说这些语言的人数最多。

早在1786年英国焚文学者咸廉·琼斯爵士(55T william J。nes)发表了他在语言学领域里的惊人的发现：梵文和希腊语、拉丁语是同源的。这三种语言都是从原始的印欧语演变来的。几千年以的，在欧洲中东部(相当于立陶宛的地理位置)居住着具有石器时代文明的游牧民族的部落——这就是原始的印欧人。他们的语言就是原始的印欧语。大约在公元前三千年的时期，这些游牧部落开始迁徒。其中一些部落向南方移动，经过南欧，最后到达南亚次大陆。这就是为什么古印度语(赞文)和古代欧洲语言(希腊语和拉丁语)非常相似的原因。由于原始印欧人部落的移动和迁促，原始印欧语就分化成各种不同的方言，这些方言就是印欧语系各语文的祖先。

印欧语系的语文很多，除了梵文、希腊语、拉丁语所分别隶属的那些语文外，一个重要的语文就是日耳曼语文。日耳曼语文又分为(1)东日耳呈语，(2)四日耳曼语，和(3)北日耳曼语三个分支。东日耳曼语以哥持语(Gothic)为代表，这个语种已在世界上绝迹。十七世纪时，克里米亚地区还有人说哥特语，今天已完全绝迹。北日耳曼语以古诺斯语为代表，包括今日的丹麦语，挪威语、瑞典语和冰岛语。西日耳曼语以古英语为代表，包括今日的英语、德语、荷兰语，弗里西亚语)，等。

试比较英语和荷兰语，二者有大量的共同词汇，例如，man“人”water“水”，school“学校”，hand“手”，warm“暖”，等。二者的相似是十分明显的。

英语的历史

从历史的观点来看，现代英语是一系列的民族迁徒和民族征服的产物。说英语的人们的祖先原来活动在欧洲北海岸一带。他们说的语言是低地西日耳曼语(Low west Germanic)的各种方言。这些方言非常近似，因此不同部族之间语言是相通的。大约公元五世纪中叶，三个日耳曼部族；盎格鲁人(An—gles)、撤克逊人(Saxons)和朱特人(Jutes)侵入英国。历史书上称为盎格鲁撤克逊征服。这些侵略者带来了各自的方言，这些方言逐渐溶合在一起，成为古英语。到了公元六世纪末叶，英国原先的居民凯尔特人怕)或被杀戮，或被赶入山区，或沦为奴隶。侵略者成为英国的主人。古英语成为英国的语言，凯尔特语只出现在某些英国地名当中，进入英语词汇的凯尔持语词为数极少。我们可以说，随着盎格鲁撒克逊人对英国的征服，就诞生了英语。

大约公元九世纪，英国又道到斯堪的纳维亚人的大规模的浸赂。整个公元十世纪，丹麦人不断入侵；公元十一世纪韧年，丹麦国王实际上统治着英国。由于北欧人的入侵，大量的斯堪的纳维亚语词进入了英语词汇。。历史书上把这次侵略称为丹麦征服。

随后，又发生了诺曼人(Normans)的入侵。诺曼人原先也来自斯堪的纳维亚。他们在法国北部诺曼底(Normandy)省定居下来，接受了诺曼底省的法语，作为他们的语言。诺曼法语(Norman French)是法语的一种方言，不同于首都巴黎一带的法语。首都法语称为中心法(centralFrench)，是法语的标准语。

公元l066年，诺曼底省的统治者威廉公爵(wilI：am，Duke of NorMndy)率领部下侵入英国，成为英国新的征服者。历史书上把这次侵略称为诺曼征服(thE Norman Con—quest)。诺曼征服对英语的发展有深远的影响。先是，随着诺曼征服，诺曼法语成为英国的官方语言。政府、宫庭、法院、学校都使用法语。法国人成了英国的统治阶级。贵族、地主、朝臣和上流社会人士都说法语、写法语。文学作品也用法语来写。作为书面语言，英语在英国几乎绝迹了。但是法语并没有完全代替英语。英国的广大人民群众仍然说的是英语。英语仍然是一个充满生命力的话的语言，继续不断地在成长和发展。但是法语对于英语的影响极大。法语不周于日耳曼语文，而后于拉丁语文(或称罗曼Romance语文；罗曼语义为‘罗马语’)。由于诺曼征服，英语吸收了大量的法语词汇，使英语的面貌有了很大的改变，既象日耳曼语，又象罗曼语。英语一方面保留了日耳曼语的特点，另一方面又吸收了罗曼语的长处，结果特别富于表达力。另外，由于英语自身的发展，词尾变化逐渐消失，“语法”性别为“天然”性别所代替。在英语语法结构日益简化的同时，英语词汇和习语)空前丰富，这主要是由于法语的影响。诺曼征服加速了古英语向中古英语的过渡，使英语从综合性的语言逐渐变为分析性的语言。

通常把英语的历史分为三个时期；(1)古英语时期——公元449年至1100年；(2)中古英语时期——公元UOO年至1500年；(3)现代英语 (Modern z。81i5h，Mod E．)时期——公元1500年至当前。现代英语时期又细分为：(a)早期现代英语时期——公元1500午至1700年，和(b)后期现代英语(时期——公元1700年至当前。

古英语时期共有四种主要方言：(1)诺森伯里亚方言——洪伯河(the Humber)以北的方言；(2)梅尔西亚方言——界乎洪伯河与泰晤士河之间的英国中部地区的方言，(3)肯特(Kentish)方言——居住在英国东南部地区的朱待人的方言和西撤克逊(方言——泰晤士河以南的方言。诺森伯里亚和悔尔西亚这两种方言又合称盎格里亚方言，即盎格鲁人居住地区的方言。

早期的古英语文学作品是用诺森伯里亚方言创作的。由于斯塔的纳维亚人的侵赂，英国的文化中心由诺森伯里亚迁移到悔尔西亚，到了公元九世纪，又迁至西撤克进地区的首府威赛克斯(wessex)。西撤克逊国王艾尔弗雷德大帝(A1fred the Great)一方面武力抵抗丹麦人的侵略，另一方面大力提倡文艺和教育，亲自组织并参加外国文学作品和学术著作的翻译，以及本国文学的沙写和校订工作。古英语诗歌作品，通过西撤克逊抄写者的努力，才得以保存下来。在艾尔弗雷德大帝时期，古英语散文作品有很大的发展，这些作品主要是用西撒克逊方言写的。

古英语的词汇不同于现代英语的词汇，大多数的古英语词都是西日耳曼语的固有的词。古英语词汇中也有一些从其它语言借来的词。。从这些词可以看到早期罗马商人的影响是很大的。随着基督教传入英国，有更多的拉丁词进入古英语词汇。原来居住在英国的凯尔持人的语言，有极少数词进入英语词汇，也有一些凯尔持语词保存在英国地名里面。

中古英语

大约在公元looo年和1200年之间，英语的结构发生了许多重大的变化，古英语逐渐变成中古英语。北部方言较南部方言变化要早，速度更大，于是在公元 1100年以前北部方言已明确地具备中古英语的特点，而南部方言直到公元1150年时期仍基本上保留着古英语的面目。发生变化的原因是由于丹麦人的统治和后来诺曼人的征服，结果完全推翻了英国的社会、政治制度。在这个动荡时期，语言不受社会制度的严格约束，比较自由地向前发展。人民群众的创造力也加速了语言的变化。到了乔里(chauccr)时代i英国民族标准语开始形成了，英语有了比较稳定的文学形式。这个时期的英语就和古英语大不相同了。

词汇方面的变化

法语大量进入英语词汇。例如以下的词都来自法语：“统治”，judge“法官”，等等。在公元lloo年和1500年之间，英语词汇吸收了成千上万的法语词。但英语词汇的核心仍为英语词。例如，代词、介词、连词、助动词，以及许多常见的名词、动词和形容词都没有被法语词所代替。在中古英语时期．由于通过拉丁文译本把《圣经》(7A6月删‘)译成中古英语，于是拉丁语词继续进入英语词汇，结果使英语特别富于同义词(ByM。ym)。往往有三个同义词表达同一个概念。三个词当中，一个来自古英语，一个来自法语，还有一个来自拉丁语。

在中古英语时期，伦敦方言逐渐成为英语的民族标准语言和标准文学语言。这主要归功于以下几位作家用英语来进行创作这一行动：乔空，威克里夫，马罗里 (Malory)和卡克斯顿(Caxton)。卡克斯顿于公元I 476年把印刷术传入英国，促进了英语的规范化。文艺夏兴对英语的影响：在公元1500年和1700年之间，古英语逐渐变为早期现代英语。一方面语言本身在不断交化(在这个时期、英语的语音发生了很大的变化——元音的大变化，另一方面文艺复兴运动和其它社会、政治、宗教和科学的运动，也促进了英语由中古英语到早期现代英语的转变。文艺复兴时期的人文主义运动)，在公元1500年和1625年之间，对英语的影响极大。英国人开始吸收古代社会和现代欧洲的丰富多采的文化财富。人文主义文学者孜孜不倦地学习、研究古代希腊、罗马文学经典作品，同时努力把希腊语词和拉丁语词引入英语词汇。在文艺复兴时期，英语除了从希腊语和拉丁语吸收了许多新词外，还从五十多种其它语言借了大量的词，主要来源为罗曼语的三个语种：法语、西班牙语和意大利语。从法语借来的词等。在这个时期，由于探险、贸易和开拓殖民地等活动，从世界各地也有不少新词进入英语词汇。

在文艺复兴时期，英国出了三个大诗人：斯宾赛，莎士比亚和密尔顿(Milton)。斯宾赛在他的诗歌里采用了许多英语的古词(溯源于古英语或中古英语)和英语的方言词，通过这个方式来丰富英语的词汇。莎士比亚在他的诗歌和戏剧作品里经常运用二万到二万五千个词，其中百分之九十是英语本族语，而不是从其它语言借来的外来语。莎士比亚的伟大贡献在于他主要运用了英语本族语创造出丰富多采、干变万化的语言形式，充分地、深刻地、优美地表达了人物的思想和感情。密尔顿吸收了大量的拉丁语词和拉丁语法结构来写他的英语涛篇，气势雄壮，声音铿锵，使英语词汇更富于表达力。这三个大诗人，通过他们的创作实践，证明了英语是一个很好的工具：英语具有很大的感染力和说服力，英语也具有很大的灵活性和适应性，足以表达各式各样的题材和内容。在这里，我们还应提到 1611年出版的《圣经》标准英译本。这个英译本对英语文体发生了深远的影响。它和莎士比亚的作品一样，主要运用英语本族语和英语简单句型来翻译原文是希伯来语(引日约》)和希腊语(《新约》)的《圣经》。这个英译本《圣经》以文体质朴、优美著称。它运用的词汇当中英语本族语词占百分之九十四。这个例子又一次说明英语本族语本身的潜力非常大，创造力非常强。天才的和有经验的作家有能力把本族语和外来语巧妙地结合起来成为—个充满了生命力的有机体。经过文艺复兴时期的实践，早期现代英语已基本上达到了英语发展的这个阶段。经过文艺复兴时期的创作实践，早期现代英语已成为堪与古代希腊、拉I—语相现代欧洲先进国家的语言(法语、意大利语)相比美的文学语言。到了十七世纪，英国爆发了资产阶级民主革命，解放了生产力，唯物主义思想和自然科学有了很大的发展，成立了相当于科学院的皇家学会。早期现代英语逐渐代替拉丁语而成为哲学和自然科学的语言。哲学家霍布斯(Hobbcs)和洛克(Locke)要求语言要准确、清晰、合乎逻辑，要有说服力。十七世纪文学家德莱登(DryJen)的散文作品的语言可以说达到了这样的标准。

十八世纪英语发展的方向是继续发扬十七世纪对英语的要求：既纯洁又雄辩。十八世纪是“理性的时代”，因此要求语言必须纯洁(准确、清晰)，而且要雄辩(合乎逻辑，有说服力)。为了实现这样的语言理想，首先要求英语的发音、拼写、语法、词义达到规范化，合乎统一的标准。这样就诞生了对于字典和语法书的迫切要求。约翰孙博士(samuel Johnson)的《英语字典》)出版于1755年。这部字典有三大优点，是以前出版的英语字典所没有具备的：(1)给所收的每个词都下了准确、清晰约定义，(2)把所收的每个词的拼写固定了下来；(3)从英国各时期文学作品里引证了大量的例句来说明词义和词的用法。约翰孙博士的《英语字典》为《牛津英语大词典》(()小rJ EM夕AA DJf6J肋“ry，十三卷，完成于1933年)打下了结实、牢靠的基础。大多数十八世纪语法家所编的英语语法都是按照拉丁语法的规则编写的。这种语法书没有多大的参考价值。只有少数的十八世纪语法家重视词的用法(us。8。)，而不是生搬硬套拉丁语法条条。这样的语法书才有一定的参考价值，因为英语语言形式的正确性(correctness)不能取决于合不合拉丁语法，而应取决于合不合英语的约定俗成的习惯用法。十八世纪重视词的用法的英语语法书有约瑟夫·普里斯特里编的《英语语法入门》(乔治·坎贝尔写的《修辞学的哲学》等。

由于国际贸易交往和开拓殖民他的活动，十八世纪的英国相世界各地的民族相文化都有了接触，结果使英语吸收了数干个新词，使英语词汇变得更加全世界化了。十九世纪和二十世纪英记的发展到了十九世纪，浪漫主义文学兴起，英语词汇更加丰富起来。一些古词复活了，新词不断诞生。产业革命导致社会矛盾的加深和科学技术的发展。批判现实主义文学作品和自然主义文学作品进一步丰富了英语词汇。科技的发展使英语词汇飞跃地增长。十九世纪和二十世纪的英语发展是突飞猛进的。

英语词汇的增长和变化

打开英语词典来看，大约百分之八十的词都是从其它语言借来的，绝大多数的外来语来自拉丁语，其中一半以上是通过法语借来的，另外省大量的词直接或间接来自希腊语。相当多的词来自斯堪的纳维亚语。还有一些词来自意大利语、西班牙语、葡萄牙语和荷兰语。少数词来自世界各地的其它语种。古英语的词汇约有五万到六万个词，而现代英语大词典收的词条足有六十五万到七十五万之多。但是英语最常用的词仍是英语的本族语，其中最常用的词有九个，它们是：and，have、 of，the，to，will和you。大量的外来语丰富了英语词汇，使英语变得极端灵活，变化多端。英语的构词手段也具有多样性。最常见的构词法是复合，构成复台词。例如，motorway(＜名词motor‘汽车’十名词way‘道路’)这些复合河是明显的，一目了然的。有时，复合词并不象上面举的那些复合词那么明显，人们必须具有词源学的知识才能识别它们。有时，同一个复合词却有两个不同的词义和相应的不同的读音。

英语另一种构词法是加上前缀(和后级。沼的前缀和后缀可以用来任意构成新词。)。转换词性是英语的另一种构词法。词义是“直达的，过境的”。英语还有一种构词手段，就是缩赂法(clippin8)。和缩略法相类似的另一种英语构词手段是首字母缩赂法(acMnym or initiali5m)。最后一种英语构词手段叫做混成法，即把两个词的音、义合并在一起而构成新词的方法。

英语的特点

下面总结一下英语的特点：

英语的句子结构比较简单、自然，合乎逻辑思维的自然顺序，也就是说，英语的词序word order比较自然。英语不象德语或俄语，句子结构没有那么复杂，词序没有那么多的倒装现象(inversion)。英语的“语法”性别和“天然”性别相一致，不象俄语、拉丁语那样把所有的名词，按照“语法”性别，都分为阳性、阴性和中性。这样，现代英语就免去了名词和形容词的复杂的格的变化，而德语和俄语仍大量地保存着这些变化。所以说，英语的第一个持点就是它的结构比较简单，因此比较明白、易学。

英语的第二个特点就是它的词汇非常丰富，因此它的表达能力特别强。据估计，英语词汇包括的单词超过一百万，居世界各语种的首位。英语的构词手段也很多样，g此英语不断产生新词。另外一个现象就是英语的词义不断发生变化，原有的词也可以获得新的词义，而且这种词义变化比较自然，显得毫不费力。例如，sophisticated的原义为：“非常有经验的，老练的，老于世故的”，它的基本词义是“失去了单纯性”。从这个基本词义发展到“复杂的，精致的”这一过程也是很自然的，不费气力的。这样，我们就可以用来修饰weapons，而得到“尖端武器”这个新的概念。这样，原有的s叩histica快d 一词就变成两个词了，因为它获得了完全不同的新词义。此外．英语还有大量的短语动词，由动词加副词构成。这些动词词组使英语的表达力更加灵活，使英语变得乎易近人，生动活泼；英语本身具有上述两个特点：结构简单，表达力强。加上其它的历史原因相当前的国际需要，无怪乎英语已成为国际交往的公用语言。我们要把英语学得精通，为人类做出更大的贡献。

200多年前的一个英国人就看透了中国 Comments of a British 200 Years Ago about China and Chinese

China's Tyranny “中国人”习惯的专制

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

说中国的未来是在中国的过去（强汉盛唐）是大多数“中国人”的无道德与反道德的心态写照与迷梦。 没有真实的道德信仰（基督精神）与理性逻辑（基英文语言的思维），一个有着健康精神追求的进步社会是绝不会在中国出现的。

Kai Chen's Words:

To say/believe that "China's future lies in China's 'glorious' past" is only an illusion, though shared by most of the Chinese-speaking population. Without a true faith (Christianity) and logical-linear thinking (based on English language), a morally and spiritually healthy, progressive society will never be developed in China.

------------------------------------------------

200多年前的一个英国人就看透了中国
Comments of a British 200 Years Ago about China and Chinese

无名氏

“中国人没有宗教，如果说有的话，那就是做官。”

这是200年前英国公使马戛尔尼说的一句话，这是令人振聋发聩的一句话，其意义胜过无数研究中国人煌煌巨著的总和。闲来无事读闲书，近期看了一些关于英国使团第一次觐见乾隆的趣闻，联想到当下的中国，联想到奥运会、世博会、亚运会、拆迁、高房价、高物价、跨省、上访、抢尸、李刚，不由得生出无数感慨，且看今日之中国，谁之胜景，谁之天下？

【1】面子

乾隆仅仅为了自己的面子就耗费了大量人力物力，说劳民伤财太轻，简直是祸国殃民。

当时的中国正值”乾隆盛世”，中国人是好面子的，乾隆帝更是好面子的。对这次英国人的来访，乾隆皇帝不但在接待工作上做了精心准备。

皇帝确定的接待工作方针是，一要隆重热烈，照顾好外国友人的衣食住行，保证他们的心情愉快。二是利用这个机会，充分展示中国的富庶强大。

据估算，英国人一行使北京花费了五十多万两白银，即十七万三千多镑白银。折成今天的币值，为一亿零三百八十万元人民币。这其中当然不包括皇帝赏赐的礼品，这些礼品价值要远远高于此数。

【2】英国人对于”乾隆盛世”的感受。

1、盛世下极端贫困的中国人。

当时正处于所谓的”乾隆盛世”，而当时中国百姓的真实生活如何呢？对此英国人也有详细记载。马可•波罗惊叹中国是“尘世可以想见的最繁华的地方”。十八世纪末来到中国的英国人却惊讶地发现，与黄金遍地的传说相反，中国的大部分普通人都生活在穷困之中。

中国官员送来的食物过多，并且“有些猪和家禽已经在路上碰撞而死”，所以英国人把一些死猪死鸡从“狮子号”上扔下了大海。岸上看热闹的中国人一见，争先恐后跳下海，去捞这些英国人的弃物。“但中国人马上把它们捞起来，洗干净后腌在盐里”。

官员贯彻皇帝旨意，在一切环节中全力展示帝国的富强。但这一旨意毕竟没有被每一位普通百姓所领会，他们关心自己的胃更甚于国家的尊严，这个细节一下子暴露了中国的尴尬。

事实上，在登陆中国后，英国使团一再震惊的，是繁华表象下的贫穷。

中国人一向处于半饥半饱的状态，乐于以任何食物为食，即使是腐烂了的也不放过。

还有随处可见的弃婴。道路两旁、河道中央、垃圾堆上，随时都有可能露出一只苍白的小手。弃婴在基督教国家中是不可饶恕的大罪，但是中国人却视为平常。很明显，这是人口压力和贫困所致。

2、比经济上的贫困更令英国人惊讶的，是政治上的贫困。

“中国官员对于吃饭真是过于奢侈了。他们每天吃几顿饭，每顿都有荤菜许多道。”与底层的普遍贫困强烈对照的，则是上层社会生活的豪奢。虽然底层社会中很少发现脸色红润的人，但政府高官中却不乏胖人，这些达官贵人们生活中的主要内容就是吃。

英国人在中国所见到的房子，只有两种，一种是大富之家，一种是贫寒人家。“所经过的地方以及河的两岸，大多数房子都是土墙草顶的草舍。也有很少一些高大、油漆装饰的房子，可能是富有者的住所。很少看到中等人家的房子。在其他国家里，富有者和赤贫之间，还有着许多不同等级的中等人家。”

英国人得出的结论是，中国的贫富差距之大，是他们见过的国家中最厉害的。“中国有一句名言：‘富者甲第连云，贫者无立锥之地’……但这句话在其他国家并不适用。”

英国人说：“中国没有中间阶层，这个阶层的人，因拥有财富和独立的观念，在自己的国度里举足轻重；他们的影响力和利益是不可能被朝廷视而不见的。事实上，中国只有统治者和被统治者。”

英国人很容易地了解到，在中国，所有的富人几乎同时都是权力的所有者。也就是说，中国人的财富积累主要是靠权力来豪夺。中国的专制是超经济的，经济永远屈居于政治之下，也就是说，财富永远受权力的支配，一旦没有权力做靠山，财富也很容易化为乌有。“在中国，穷而无告的人处在官吏的淫威之下，他们没有任何诉苦伸冤的机会。”对于中国人来说，“做官便譬如他的宗教”。

在中国法律中，个人财产权却屈居政治权力之下。英国人研究了中国法律后得出结论说：“中国所有的有关财产的法律确实都不足以给人们那种安全感和稳定感，而恰恰只有安全感和稳定感才能使人乐于聚积财产。对权势的忧惧也许使他们对那些小康视而不见，但是那些大富却实难逃脱他人的巧取豪夺……执法机构和执法方式如此不合理，以至于执法官员有权凌驾于法律之上，使得对善与恶的评判在很大程度上取决于执法官员的个人道德品质。”

英国公使马戛尔尼说，是专制主义摧毁了中国人的财产安全，从而摧毁了所有刺激中国进步的因素。进步只有当一个人确信不受干扰地享有自己的劳动果实时才能发生。但是，在中国“首先考虑的总是皇帝的利益”，因为“任何财产违反了他的主张是得不到保障的”。马戛尔尼不否认中国存在着大土地产业，但他认为它们是通过不正当的手段如“高利盘削和官职馈礼”所获取的。它们是贸易或侵吞的短暂的积聚，而不是土地贵族或绅士的产业。他写道：“在中国确切地讲没有世袭贵族。”

3、中国人精神文化上的极端贫困让人震惊

在那些推崇中国政治的欧洲学者们的著作中，中国社会的和平、稳定、井井有条一直是他们赞美的重点。他们认为，这说明中国是民权、人道所主宰的理性王国。“人类智慧不能想出比中国政治还要优良的组织”。

然而，与中国官员的交往，却让英国人看清了这个帝国维持秩序的基本手段，那就是王权、专职和严苛的礼法。

一件有意思的事情，在北上天津的途中，英国人在山东登州府短暂停留。登州知府闻讯前来拜访，“知府带来了许多随从人员，其中有一个人在知府问到他话的时候，立刻跪下来回答，这给英国人一个很大惊异。知府安然接受这种礼貌，似乎他们之间一向是这样讲话，这给英国人更大的惊异。”更让英国人无法接受的是中国官场的另一项规矩：在任何场合，上级都可能打下级的板子。

被扒掉裤子当众打屁股，对英国绅士来讲，是无法想象也无法容忍的耻辱。然而英国人却发现，中国人对此却司空见惯。

英国人说：“在任何场合，只要他们（中国官员）认为恰当，就以父权的名义，立即用板子处罚，无需预审或调查。”

【3】世界对中国的重新认识

1、偷奸耍滑成性

在英国人到过中国以前，中国人在世界上的形象基本上是正面的。中国人被认为是“全世界最聪明最礼貌的一个民族”。莱布尼茨说：“他们服从长上，尊敬老人，无论子女如何长大，其尊敬两亲犹如宗教，从不作粗暴语，尤其使我们惊奇的，中国农夫与婢仆之辈，日常谈话或隔日会面之时，彼此非常客气，其殷勤程度胜过欧洲所有贵族……”歌德说：“在他们那里一切都比我们这里更明朗、更纯洁也更道德。”伏尔泰通过《中国孤儿》这样表达他对中国人的看法：“我们的国朝是建立在父权与伦常的信义之上的，是建立在正义、荣誉和守约的信义之上的。孝顺忠信礼义廉耻是我们立国的大本。”

与传教士所描述大相径庭，那些伺候他们的中国人给英国人留下了这种印象：“撒谎、奸诈，偷得快，悔得也快，而且毫不脸红。”“他们一有机会就偷，但一经别人指出就马上说出窝藏赃物的地方。有一次吃饭时，我们的厨师就曾想厚颜无耻地欺骗我们。他给我们上两只鸡，每只鸡都少一条腿。当我们向他指出一只鸡应有两条腿时，他便笑着把少的鸡腿送来了。”

2、官本位

英国人注意到，在没有官员的场合，中国人的表情十分正常。一旦有官员出现，立刻就变了：“中国普通老百姓外表非常拘谨，这是他们长期处在铁的政权统治之下自然产生出来的。在他们私下生活中，他们也是非常活泼愉快的。但一见了官，就马上变成了另一个人。”

英国人说，“这些事例再清楚不过地昭示了中国人自夸的道德品格中的巨大缺陷。不过就像先前说过的，其错当在于政治制度，而不在于民族的天性或者气质。”“就现政权（满清）而言，有充足的证据表明，其高压手段完全驯服了这个民族，并按自己的模式塑造了这个民族的性格。他们的道德观念和行为完全由朝廷的意识形态所左右，几乎完全处在朝廷的控制之下。”

3、专制

英国人认为，中国人缺乏自尊心，是因为政府从来没有把百姓当成成年人来看待，而是当成了儿童和奴隶。“在这样的国度里，人人都有可能变成奴隶，人人都有可能因官府中最低级官员的一点头而挨板子，还要被迫亲吻打他的板子、鞭子或类似的玩意，跪倒在地上，为麻烦了官府来教育自己而谢罪。于是荣誉观和尊严感就无处可寻了……人的尊严的概念巧妙地消灭于无形。”

马戛尔尼对中国政权的结论更广为人知：“这个政府正如它目前的存在状况，严格地说是一小撮鞑靼人对亿万汉人的专制统治。”这种专制统治有着灾难性的影响。“自从北方或满洲鞑靼征服以来，至少在过去的一百年里没有改善，没有前进，或者更确切地说反而倒退了；当我们每天都在艺术和科学领域前进时，他们实际上正在成为半野蛮人。”

英国人回国之后，西方人的中国观念发生了根本性的转折：中国从天上掉到地下，从文明变成野蛮，从光明变为阴暗。

【4】黑格尔对中国的结论让人害怕又脸红

作为一个严肃的学者，黑格尔仔细阅读了当时他所搜集到的全部有关中国的文字，得出了以下结论。

黑格尔认为，人类文化的发展是分阶段的。他认为，中亚文化代表了人类文化的少年时期，人类文明最早在那里发源。希腊文化则是青年，表现出生机勃勃的活力。罗马文化是壮年，而日耳曼文化是成熟理性的老年。

那么，中国文化是什么呢？黑格尔说，是幼年。中国人在官府面前的逆来顺受给了黑格尔极深的印象。黑格尔认为，造成中国的落后的原因是中国人内在精神的黑暗，中国是一片还没有被人类精神之光照亮的土地，在那里，理性与自由的太阳还没有升起，人还没有摆脱原始的、自然的愚昧状态。“凡是属于精神的东西……都离它很远”。

在《历史哲学》中黑格尔得出这样结论，这是一个彻底的、奇特的、最具东方性的东方国家。“中国纯粹建筑在这一种道德的结合上，国家的特性便是客观的 ‘家庭孝敬’。中国人把自己看作是属于他们家庭的，而同时又是国家的儿女。在家庭之内，他们没有人格，因为他们在里面生活的那个团结的单位，乃是血统关系和天然义务。在国家之内，他们一样缺少独立人格；因为国家内大家长的关系最为显著，皇帝犹如严父，为政府的基础，治理国家的一切部门。”因此，中国是一个只属于空间的帝国。

【5】作者慨叹

任何历史都是当代史，读这些的时候我不得不把“乾隆盛世”真实与当下联系起来，想必“乾隆盛世”在国人和乾隆看来也是“和谐社会”吧。

参加过中国盛会的外国人是不是在表面赞扬中国的同时，暗地里发出和英国使团一样的感慨呢？

上海大火和北京大火都在冥冥之中警告我们：脱离现实的过度奢靡和炫耀必将遭天谴和报应。乾隆、慈禧等无数的超级败家已经被钉在历史的耻辱柱上，现在，这个名单还在不断扩大。

重复看了无数上演的历史大戏后，我们不难得出以下的结论：

中国的历史从本质上看是没有历史的，它只是君主覆灭的一再重复而已。任何进步都不可能从中产生。千百年来在广阔的土地上重复庄严的毁灭，而又在本质上毫无变化。


China's First Emperor 秦始皇所建立的专制文化与制度

Will China rule the world? 中国会称霸世界吗？

Liu Xiaobo: Fighting for freedom in China 刘晓波与“零八宪章”- “自由人 vs. 中国人”

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

如果自由世界允许中共的“儒粹党朝”称霸世界，那将是人类的悲哀与文化/社会的大倒退。

Kai Chen's Words:

If the free world allows China, as in its today's form - a "Party-Dynasty" dictated by a doctrine of "Confucian Socialism", it will be the biggest tragedy of mankind. Human culture and society will experience an unprecedented corruption, degeneration and regression.

----------------------------------------------------------

Will China rule the world?
中国会称霸世界吗？

"Dear Mr. Wolf, It’s 'Freedom, silly!' that makes a nation great all around! .... China’s supremacy as a world economic power is only possible 'when and IF' 1 billion-plus Chinese have freedoms and civil rights exactly like the Americans do.

.... Global dominance as a 'world economic power house' comes with factors that are determined by social, liberal, secular, tolerant practices and character of the leaders of the nation and its people."

“是自由，而绝不是什么其它的东西，使一个国度成为伟大的国度。”.... 如果十亿中国人根本没有自由与基本人权,中国绝不可能成为/作为一个像美国一样的经济强国。

.... 一个主导世界走向的经济强国是由此国度的社会容忍度、理性水平、个体自由度与其领导层与普通人们的道德品质而决定的。”

By iqbal.latif 3/24/2011

http://iqballatif.newsvine.com/_news/2011/03/24/6332989-will-china-rule-the-world#comments

(Every morning I read the world and the top writers from my own perspective; these are my regular random thoughts that I address directly to these top writers every morning. Martin Wolf wrote yesterday 'How China should rule the world' he even conceded the whole thing without even formality of letting the readers know if it even deserves to rule the world based o freedom fundamentals alone. One thing most important form this information revolution of commons is that there is 'no thought which is sacred,' think, question and learn is my petite approach. The Economist made a serious effort in last few months and I made an answer; we all should question these imprudent irrational daily routine of ideas spewed on the world from larger media; we on our own little blogs should question and try to intellectually tear apart these icons of wisdom, that is the way for us as mankind to grow. Free man are better placed to rule the world benevolently.In my own opinions the efficacy of freedom and trust versus GDP growth being ignored is so uncharitable.)

Dear Mr. Wolf, It’s 'Freedom, silly!' that makes a nation great all around! Incentives and rewards are now part of the Chinese economic structure but freedom of expression is not; this dichotomy points to the difficult road ahead that Chinese communist party will have to negotiate very carefully. With wealth comes dissent and urge of influence; the conglomerates and powerful oligarchs will have their own impetus to articulate the directions of a future the way everyone wants. I can imagine why words like “freedom” and “enfranchisement” did not even appear in Martin Wolf’s article in Financial Times since it was a speech at this year’s China Development Forum in Beijing where the listeners needed to be pleased to no bounds.

China’s supremacy as a world economic power is only possible 'when and IF' 1 billion-plus Chinese have freedoms and civil rights exactly like the Americans do. Economic strength and GDP growth is also the sum total of freedom and trust. IQ's of people who are freed from chains of oppression are far greater and better. It is so ironic to omit the obvious so blatantly. Reminded me of USSR Soviets day when the world thought that USSR economy would take over the world – completely overlooking the fudged numbers of a centralized economy that was imploding behind the scenes. Chinese communist party rule is the biggest impediment to maintaining this growth rate and economic supremacy over the world. If they cannot even allow someone to come out and collect his 'Nobel Peace prize' (Liu Xiaobo) and convict such an undisruptive person to solitary confinement, such a nation has only one certain prospect – that of a 'social implosion’ like the USSR. It is only a matter of time.
Myth of U.S.S.R.'s Strong Economy and Media 'Experts' often Believed Soviets' Crude Propaganda:

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 ended perhaps the greatest international fraud of the 20th century. Even the CIA was fooled into overestimating the strength and size of the Soviet economy, and underestimating its military spending. The Soviets practiced the same deceit on sympathetic visitors, leading them on carefully staged tours of the "worker's paradise." Returning from Russia in 1919, the American muckraking journalist Lincoln Steffens declared famously, "I have been over into the future, and it works." The early Soviet Union attracted quite a few admiring fans, including famous British socialists like novelist H.G. Wells and playwright George Bernard Shaw. In 1935, two founding members of Britain's Labour Party, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, wrote a flattering book titled "Soviet Communism: A New Civilisation?" Later editions omitted the question mark. The Webbs and others painted Russia as a once-backward country rapidly industrializing under a forward-looking Stalin. At the time, the Soviet Union was indeed industrializing, but it was also starving to death.

An estimated 14 million Soviet people died from famine in the early 1930s when Stalin collectivized all farming. But Walter Duranty, Moscow correspondent for The New York Times, dismissed the famine as "an exaggeration of malignant propaganda." In 1933, Duranty reported "village markets flowing with eggs, fruit, poultry, vegetables, milk and butter at prices far lower than in Moscow… a child can see this is not famine but abundance." That same year Duranty was given a Pulitzer Prize for stories on the Soviet economy "marked by scholarship, profundity, impartiality, sound judgment and exceptional clarity."

What will dictate China’s GDP growth rate?

The essential nature of such an evolution from despotic rule to benevolent rule will dictate the GDP growth rate for the next few decades. Global economic greatness does not come on the back of growth rate, or inflation rate or strength of any currency alone. Global dominance as a 'world economic power house' comes with factors that are determined by social, liberal, secular, tolerant practices and character of the leaders of the nation and its people.

The clout of a great prospective nation should include, amongst others, trust and freedom, within a nation. The 'strength' is not just judged by the 'reserves and GDP growth' (with growth from very low ''great leap forward experiments,'' standards of Chinese living should be higher); those are important things but the major issue is the living standards of the lowest segment of the society also.

Chinese 800-plus million standards of living and benchmark of freedom of expression do not in any way compare to most of the developed world, neither are they free to expand their families (a basic right of human beings) or move freely within the nation. These are important elements for a judicious and across-the-board economic growth. Harnessing the entire nation with the draconian law of ‘one child only’ is quite backward and will result in skewed demographics.

Yes, all the above can be wrong if China becomes free soon and ensures a non violent multiparty rule and 1.4 billion Chinese vote for policies that may help widespread freedom, egalitarianism and growth that is uniform (though freedom of a nation from yokes of totalitarianism unfortunately retards GDP progress of any nation). Revolutions and changes are big ticket items; reality check with France and USA will tell you that.

The big 'IF ' is if 'Chinese multiparty rule will emerge as a peaceful model without derailing Chinese disciplinarian economic mould, which is presently based on a firm central control of the communist party. If the transition is peaceful and 'Chinese compliant psyche and unified nationalist tendencies' cooperate in a peaceful manner to achieve this transformation from one party system to multiparty rule which obviously is quite a chaotic choice, we can then develop a model based on GDP growth, inflation rate and strength of currency that is so modestly and banally presented in Martin Wolf’s article.

汉语的精髓是褒贬赞骂 Chinese Language is a Very Emotional Language

Chinese propaganda poster collection 中文宣傳海報

汉语的精髓是褒贬赞骂
Chinese Language is a Very Emotional Language

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

林思(2009-10-31 11:47:50)

http://gahxk6666.blog.163.com/blog/static/92481826200993184110675/

　本来早想回复芦笛先生的商榷，可是“心有余而力不足”。一来我写文章速度较慢，尚未练成芦先生“读书破万卷，下笔如有神”的神功，二来最近公司的工作很忙，有几天从早上6点工作到晚上11点，真可谓筋疲力尽。

　没想到最近芦笛先生因为我而得罪了不平先生，很让我感到不安和歉意。在这里我想送给芦先生庄子的三句话：“井蛙不可以语于海者，拘于虚也；夏虫不可以语于冰者，笃于时也；曲士不可以语于道者，束于教也。”通博古典的芦笛先生自然是深通其义，不过为了便于大家理解，不妨多事将庄子这三句话翻译成现代文：“井里的青蛙不能他和谈论大海，因为他被居住的地方所局限；夏天的虫子不能和他谈论寒冰，因为他被生活的时间所约制；见识寡陋的人不能和他谈论深奥的道理，因为他被礼仪教义所束缚。”

　芦笛先生最近写的两帖《遗传，还是传统？》和《也谈中文作为一种艺术语言》，我在这里暂先主要回复后帖，前帖将在另文回复。另外读了芦先生大作论丑陋的大陆人之十三的《文人无行》，很是感慨。有位先辈曾谆谆教导我：“在中国说真话吃亏，说假话占便宜”，林副主席也教导我们说：“不说假话，办不了大事”。看来此话还真是一句顶一万句，在中国谁因为说假话而吃过亏？

　毛泽东写过一首《蝶恋花》的三流诗词：“我失骄杨君失柳，杨柳轻扬直上重霄九。问讯吴刚何所有，吴刚捧出桂花酒，，，”。本来共产党人是无神论者，在诗词中描写“吴刚”“嫦娥”这样的鬼神是不合适的。可是郭沫若等无行文人，却要肉麻地吹捧毛泽东：“主席把自己的思想感情借他们的假想的存在来形象化了。主席的思想感情是绝对真实的，忠魂和神仙则是假想的，所以主席的词是革命的现实主义与革命的浪漫主义的结合”。

　如果郭沫若是个不通诗词的老粗，写出这样的赞语也还算有一点真情。而郭沫若本人写的词，要好过毛泽东百倍，所以郭沫若赞词全是违心的假话。不过郭沫若的假话却是“一字千金”，郭沫若等无行文人靠贩卖这些假话，房子、车子、票子什么都有了。其实凭芦笛先生的文才，到中国去贩卖谎文媚字的话，早就是坐着“奔驰 ”在长安街上飞奔的“芦老”了，哪会是现在这样靠两条肉腿奔驰的“老芦” 呢？

　在中国最值钱的东西就是假话，假话是“一字千金”，而真话则是“一字万唾”。贩卖假话的聪明人，房子、车子、票子应有尽有；乱说真话的傻子，则被千夫指、万众骂。“说真话吃亏，说假话占便宜”，真是中国一句颠之不破的真理呀。可惜总有些悟性低的人，傻乎乎地在网上乱说真话，什么好处没有捞到不说，反倒换回成吨的啐骂。我提醒那些准备在网上兜售真话的人，最好事先预备一把雨伞，以便对付骂口飞沫的狂风暴雨。芦先生称中国是“谎言之邦”，真是一点没错。

　 上面是闲聊杂谈，下面是正文。

　芦笛先生《也谈中文作为一种艺术语言》一文中的很多观点我都赞同，特别是“中文的美，美在它的模糊上头”一节，犹为精辟。但在这里还是主要谈谈我和芦先生观点的不同之处。

　我认为汉语和英文的最大区别之一，莫过于汉语的褒义词和贬义词很多，而中性词却很少。相反英文基本上都是中性词，褒义词和贬义词则很少。汉语文化的精髓其实就是“褒”“贬”二字。自从我们的老祖宗发明了褒君子、贬小人的“春秋笔法”，中华文化就一直贯穿着“褒”和“贬”的主线，把人物分成“忠”和“奸” 两派。“褒忠者、贬奸者”一直成为中国历代文人最大的责任和义务，如果有人敢违反中华文化中“褒忠贬奸”这一条铁则，就一定会被斥为“不是中国人”。

　西方文化崇尚公正客观的“公正性”，中华文化却强调“褒忠贬奸”的偏向性，即所谓“一边倒”的表现手法。为了强调鲜明立场，中国人创造了很多褒贬之词。谈到政治问题时，汉语的每一句话似乎都带有褒贬之义的偏向性。比如我们只能说 “美国敌视中国”，这样才能表现作为一个中国人的立场，如果有人反过来说： “中国敌视美国”，那肯定不会认为是中国人说的。然而欧美人谈到中国时，就不会用“敌视”这样带有浓厚感情色彩的贬义词。

　再比如“抗日战争”是个褒义词，我们从字面上就可以直观地明白这场战争是中国正义，日本非正义。而中国的“抗日战争”翻译成英文，就变成非常罗嗦的the War of Resistance Against Japan，这显然不符合英文的表达习惯。而英文则用“中日战争”Sino-Japanese War这样简洁的中性词，我们从字面上无法直接看出谁正义、谁非正义。西方人用“第二次世界大战”这样的中性词，而不用“抗德意日战争” 这样的褒义词，最主要的原因是西方文化中没有“褒忠贬奸”的表现手法。

　如果用“中日战争”“朝鲜战争”这样的中性词，人们还要想一想谁是正义的、谁是非正义的这个问题。而用“抗日战争”“抗美援朝”这样的褒义词，人们一看就知道谁是正义的一方，根本不会再思考正义是非的问题了。所以褒贬化的语言也扼杀了中国人的思考能力。

　在文学创作时，美化正面人物，丑化反面人物，使用褒贬手法来增强文学作品的感染力，本来是无可厚非的。可是中国人却把文学的褒贬手法，推广应用到政治、历史等领域。在中国历史上，我们看到的不是被神化的人、就是被丑化的人，却看不到真实的人。中国搞历史教育，不是意在让学生理解真实的历史事件，而是意在教导学生谁是最可爱的英雄，要歌颂赞美；谁是最可恨的奸逆，要贬斥唾骂。

　 正因为中国的褒贬文化和西方的求实文化不同，中文翻成英文就要被中性化。比如汉语中的“恶霸”，翻成英文叫local tyrant，失去了中文原有的贬义。又比如蒋匪军的“匪军”，英文则硬翻成bandit troop，如果不作特别的解释，英国人还以为bandit troop是一支由职业强盗组成的强盗军团。其实“蒋匪军”倒是正规的政府军队，英美人怎么也不明白中国人为什么不喜欢如实地称呼“国民党政府军”，而喜欢用“蒋匪军”这样感情色彩十分浓厚的词汇。英美人没有用蒋匪、共匪、剿匪这样的贬义词来称呼敌军的习惯。美国独立战争时，英国人没有把临时拼凑起来的反英独立军称为“匪军”，美国人也只是中性地讲“南北战争”，没有人称林肯部队是在进行“剿匪”或“讨逆”。

　相反英文翻成中文则要被褒贬感情化。在英文中hegemony（领导权，权威）这个词本来没有什么贬义，hegemonism翻成中文却成为贬义的“霸权主义”。西方人说 “非人道”本来是中性的表述，用汉语则感情地表现为“惨无人道”。中国人喜欢用“日本鬼子”、“四人帮”等贬义词，翻成英文也变成了“日本人”、“四人集团”这样的中性说法。

　我非常赞成芦先生下面一段话：“老芦生平最怕的事，就是去看科技书或哲学书的中译本。虽然看的是母语，似乎远远不如看原文清楚明白。无论说的是多复杂的事儿，西文的句法结构一目了然，不会让你买椟还珠，把脑筋全用在弄清句子之间和句子成份之间的关系上，至于句子运载的思想反倒没工夫去琢磨了。”我本人对看中译本科技书或哲学书的痛苦也是深有体会。中文本来就不擅长表达科技哲学这样要求精确的理性叙述，所以硬译过来的中译科技哲学文章，总是让人看起来发毛。

　 英文追求语言的精确性，而中文则追求语言的褒贬性。中国人善于用文字来进行 “口诛笔伐”，却不善于用文字进行“客观评述”。最近在中文网上，人们不遗余力地笔伐李登辉，贬称李登辉为“李灯灰”、“日本狗”之类，却很少看到站在中间立场上介绍李登辉其人其事的文章。好象大部分中国人上网的目的和兴趣似乎就是为了“口诛笔伐”，搞大批判，根本没有兴趣进行冷静求实的探讨和交换思想。

　汉语经过汉代的“赋”，两晋的“玄谈”以后，形成了一种华而不实的文风。文章里尽是堆砌美丽的词藻，却没有什么具体的内容。比如司马相如的“赋”写到洛阳纸贵的地步，却没有任何具体的思想内涵。到了中唐以后，韩愈、柳宗元、欧阳修等人发起了古文复兴运动，提倡写简朴达意的“古文”，反对花哨做作的“今文 ”，也算是中国历史上一次文艺复兴运动。

　我希望现在网上也能发起一次古文复兴运动，把网文复古到“五四”时代。“五四”时期的争论文章，固然言词激烈，但还没有出现“丧家狗”等骂语，这些话直到 1930年代才洋洋登场。鲁迅固然骂人，但也还没有写过“撒尿当镜子照”这样的粗人秽语。直到毛主席写出“不须放屁”这样的工农兵粗话，成为全国中小学必读诗词之后，中国人才把最后一块见不得人的脏皮也搬上了文坛，还自得其乐。

　汉语本身就是一种追求褒贬性、不善于进行公正客观评述的语言。用汉语写政论文章，自然比较容易出现煽情的倾向，因为汉语中的中性词毕竟太少了一些。是汉语的褒贬性、模糊性造成了中国人的缺乏理性？还是中国人缺乏理性才创造出汉语这样缺乏客观性的语言？这又是一个“先有鸡先有蛋”的问题。如果说一个学生的学习成绩不好是因为后天努力不够，人们一般还可以接受，但如果说该学生学习成绩不好是因为先天不足，就往往要被人指骂。

　记得以前在中学里学过半点辩证法：凡事都有内因和外因，内因为主，外因为辅，外因通过内因起作用。按照辩证法，中国人的遗传基因缺少理性思维是内因，汉语和中华文化太具感性是外因，外因通过内因起作用，所以造就了现在一批缺乏理性雍智的中国人。不知芦先生是否赞成这个辩证法的三段论。

　 补遗

　 关于中文词多还是英文词多的问题，就不得不谈到中文和英文的词汇计算方法。比如英文的individual（个人，个人的）、 individualism（个人主义）、 individualistic（个人主义的）、individualist（个人主义者）就是单独的四个词，而中文只有“个人”和“主义”两个独立词，其它都是合成词。按照英文字典的计词方法，动辄几十万词，而按照中文的计词方法，只有5千个常用字和2万个基本词汇，其它词汇都可以通过这些基本字词来合成。

　正由于汉文和英文的构词方法不同，明治时期的日本人翻译西方著作时，在怎样用汉字来表示欧文词汇的问题上，遇到了极大的困难。日本人把英文后缀“- ism”翻成“主义”，如Materialism（唯物主义）、Capitalism（资本主义）、 Nationalism（民族主义）；把英文后缀“-er”翻成“家”，如Thinker（思想家）、 Writer（作家）、Painter（画家）；英文后缀“-ist”也翻成“家”，如Scientist （科学家）、Capitalist（资本家）、Artist（艺术家）。后来中国人也照搬日本人发明的这种翻译方法，把Revisionism翻成“修正主义”，把Revelutionist翻成 “革命家”。

　 不过这种方法却不适用于把中文逆翻为英文，英文有Marxism（马克思主义）、 Leninism（列宁主义）、可是把“毛泽东主义”写成Mao Zedongism，英美人是无法看懂的，所以只好称Mao Zedong Thought（毛泽东思想）。中国人自创的洋式新词 “洋奴哲学”、“爬行主义”，也很难“复原”为英文。还有中国政治家的一些所谓名言：“两条腿走路”、“摸着石头过河”等，很难原汁原味地译成英文。

　本来东方文化和西方文化就是完全不同的两个体系，走东西方文化相结合的道路是行不通的，就象中国搞了多年“中西医相结合”不见成效一样。
------------------------------------------------------------
陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

南郭西游戏作：疯狂汉语
The Madness of Chinese Language

(2011-02-14 18:57:19)

http://www.tianya.cn/publicforum/content/no16/1/196820.shtml#Bottom

要是全世界的人都说汉语，你认为人与人之间的交流会容易得多吗？

　　让我们勇敢面对吧！——汉语是一门疯狂的语言。

穷光蛋指的不是蛋；糊涂虫并非一条虫。鸡眼长在人脚上，猫眼安在房门中，龙眼可以吃，飞眼可以抛。狗嘴里吐不出象牙，鸡窝里倒能飞出金凤凰。老板不见得老，秘书也不是书。一个人可以是笑面虎，可以是中山狼，可以是哈巴狗，可以是独眼龙，如果是女人，还可以是母老虎，可以是狐狸精。奇怪的是，你的岳父是泰山，妻子是山荆，生下的儿子却是小犬。铁观音不是菩萨，仙人掌不是手掌，孔方兄也叫不得哥哥；寿星呆在地上，银河悬在空中。强奸妇女要判有期徒刑，强奸民意却可以不负责任。

　　我们太自以为是了，天天将汉语信手拈来，不以为意。如果我们细细观察它的矛盾之处，就会发现，飞贼不会飞，方向盘是圆的，红尘既非红色，亦非尘土。为什么阁下指的是你，在下指的是我？蛋糕里有鸡蛋，米糕里有米粉，糟糕里有什么？如果江河湖海都有水，那么法治沙漠是否也有水？官员进贡，商贾贿赂，盗贼销赃，赌鬼赖账，都跟贝大爷脱不了干系，可是贤女守贞，贱汉负心又干贝大爷何事？一个人没有钱只好打光棍打白条打秋风，有了钱可以打关节打官腔打哈哈，老婆孩子可以打，先锋下手也可以打？我们是不是有点疯疯傻傻？

　　我们可以吃老本吃闲饭吃白食，也可以吃食堂吃饭店吃馆子，甚至吃山吃水吃父母！有时候吃苦吃力吃惊我们都愿意，就是不愿意吃闭门羹吃哑巴亏。吃一堑可以长一智，吃不了还得兜着走。考试怕吃鸭蛋，谈恋爱怕吃醋。吃了别人豆腐，人家请你吃官司；吃了百姓劳保，政府请你吃枪子。无论有形无形，正面反面，我们一律通吃！

　　红花入籍为药，芍药原本是花，杜鹃亦花亦鸟。鸡蛋里可以挑骨头，癞蛤蟆总想吃天鹅肉，两个人能穿一条裤子一鼻孔出气。煮熟的鸭子嘴硬，吃人家的嘴软。人人都喜欢戴高帽子，没有人愿意戴绿帽子。

　 　有时候我不禁想，所有说汉语的人都得送进疯人院去，因为他们胡言乱语，夹缠不清！哪一门语言里有不怕一万就怕万一？用家道表示家境，而道家表示门派？牲畜表示动物畜牲用来骂人？上面指上头而面上则是脸上？手下可以下手而下人却不甘人下？你在哪种语言里看到马屁可以拍，风景可以杀，牛角尖可以钻，话匣子可以打开，东风可以借，西北风可以喝，枕边风可以吹？怎么向前看表示的是未来，往后看表示的还是未来？为什么目前表示现在，从前表示的又是过去？前人栽树，后人乘凉；前事不忘，后事之师；那么前生孽债，后生可畏？回首前尘，步人后尘？当一门语言里出现中国队大胜荷兰队是他们赢，中国队大败荷兰队还是他们赢；出现厂长上车间其实也是他下车间；出现领导不会领导干事只能干事，你只得佩服它的神经病也让人费神经。

　　汉语是人发明的，不是电脑生成的。它反映的是人性中的创造成分，是人性使然，而非不通人性。因此，当我们把灯灭了，灯照样可以用；当我们把人灭了，他就从地球上消失了。当我结束停当，我准备去参加朋友聚会；当我结束这篇文章，我不准备再写下去了。

陈凯/鹰与鸡 Kai Chen/Eagle and Chicken

Song: Love lift us where we blong. 歌：展翅高飞

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

鹰与鸡
Eagle and Chicken

献给我的爱 – 人的自由之灵
To My Love – the Spirit of Human Freedom

“自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
“Free Beings” vs. “Chinese” Series

By Kai Chen 陈凯 3/22/2011 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

从没有人知道是谁把一只鹰卵放到了鸡巢里的。

当稚鹰被孵化出来的时候，她在蹦蹦跳跳的稚鸡群中艰难地移动中，勉强获取她生命的必需。 与其他稚鸡不同，她的眼睛总是常常看着天： 她的眼前总是晃动着一个盘旋翱翔的影子。 她自己也不确定那是幻觉想象还是真实存在，是一个幽灵还是一个真神的造物。

“你看什么呢？” 短视的小白鸡嘲弄着她。 “天上除了云、雨、风、闪电、雷鸣，什么都没有。 我们必需的东西都在地上呀。 你看： 这儿有草籽、小虫、蚯蚓，还有农夫在食槽里给我们的谷物。 你的眼睛应该往地上看。 一切你想要的就在你的身边。”

稚鹰没说话。 她的锐利的鹰的目光盯在天上那个盘旋翱翔的影子。

“是呀。” 勤劳的小黄鸡用爪子飞快地扒着身下的土，并用嘴轻快地在土中挑出草籽，谷粒和小虫，津津有味地品尝着各种食品的滋味。 “你看，地上的食物真多。 在这些食物中我能体验到幸福与快乐。”

稚鹰没说话。 她的敏感的耳朵正听着那风的呼叫与海的咆哮。

“你怎么不说话？ 你聋了还是哑了？” 勇敢的小黑鸡挺着自己红红的冠子，一边与另一只小雄鸡搏斗打架，一边扭着他的脖子嘲弄着稚鹰。 “看你就不顺眼： 你的嘴是那么丑，像个钩子。 你的羽毛是那么硬，那么粗，碰到谁谁都会疼。 你的眼睛是那么尖利，一下就看到其他鸡的心底。 谁见你谁都躲着走。 你不会有朋友与知音的。 你真可怜。 你会永远寂寞孤独的。”

稚鹰没说话。 她的心在激烈地跳荡着。 她的血在脉中奔涌。 她对天空的激情逐渐将鸡群们所绝不可能察觉的力量汇集到她的翅膀中、、、。

农夫来了。 他将谷物倒在鸡槽中。 鸡群一拥而上，厮打着，争抢着，吼叫着，踩踏着其他的鸡，吞咽着那槽中的食物。

稚鹰没有动。 她静静地站在地上。 她的头高傲地仰视着天空。 她的尖锐的视觉与不倦的搜寻终于使她清晰地看到了那天边翱翔的影子： 他盘旋在蓝天上，出没在云朵中，随着气流的波动而起伏翱翔，吸允着太阳的能量，俯视着地面上的一切。 他的嘴和她的一样锋利。 他的羽毛和她的一样坚硬。 他的眼睛和她的一样清纯而不妥协。 她看到了他的灵魂。 她看到了她自己。

突然间，那云朵中的精灵发出了一声撕裂长空的尖叫。 地上的鸡群被那声尖利的嘶喊震惊，吓得四下奔逃，躲入鸡棚灌木丛中。 只有稚鹰没有恐慌。 她的心被那声撕裂长空的尖叫震撼了。 她终于懂得了她自己的真实存在。 她终于懂得了她是一只雌鹰，她根本就从不属于这充满污秽肮脏的鸡棚与那低下的，虚无的，被农夫喂养与被农夫宰割的鸡的生活。 她终于懂得了那撕裂奴性灵魂的，来自天空宇宙的自由的呐喊是只为她而发出的，呼唤着她张开她强有力的双翅飞向长空，飞向自由，飞向上苍，飞向他的怀抱。

稚鹰挺起她那高傲的头，展开她那矫健的双翅，张开她那尖利的嘴，发出了她自己也难以相信的震撼长宇的呐喊。 她拼力扑打着她的双翅，冲向天空，冲向风暴，冲向闪电，冲向太阳，冲向上苍，冲向她的本质，冲向她的爱、、。

一瞬间，地上的鸡群被稚鹰的起飞惊呆了。 但他们马上就又恢复了原状 – 扒地，寻虫，啄米，争食，夺雌，排便，被屠、、、。 毕竟，他们只是些在污秽中与同伴夺食与在农夫的喂养、取蛋、屠宰中寻找安逸与满足的鸡。 他们永远不会懂得鹰的追求与爱。

、、、长空中，在金色的阳光下，那两个自由的精灵在彼此的爱慕中，在自然的拥抱中，在欢乐的激情中，在向未知的进军与挑战中翱翔着、拼搏着、嘶叫着、召唤着那些在仍在鸡群中的稚鹰、、、。

Mao statue openly smashed in China 毛塑像在海南被公开推到砸烂/茉莉花革命的开始

Erected in 2008, the 9.9m white marble statue had attracted many visitors, China News Service (CNS) reported.

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

毛像在中国被公开销毁的一天就是中共党奴朝崩溃的开始。 中国的所谓“茉莉花革命”应从民众公开销毁毛像/毛塑像开始，从涂抹钞票上的毛像到毁污所有毛画像/毛塑像。

Kai Chen's Words:

The day Mao's image is openly destroyed in China will be the day the Communist Party-Dynasty collapses. The current "Jasmine Revolution" should start from people taking actions to destroy Mao's images all over China, from decimating Mao's images on the Chinese currency to smearing Mao's portraits and statues everywhere, openly or stealthily.

---------------------------------------------------------

Mao statue openly smashed in China
毛塑像在海南被公开推到砸烂/茉莉花革命的开始

http://www.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/image/20110314/ST_IMAGES_EAMAOPIX.jpg

The disembodied head from a Mao statue that was openly smashed by a real estate company in Longlou, Hainan. The firm has come under fire from some Chinese still fiercely committed to his ultra-leftist ideology.

HONG KONG: Maoism is obsolete in China, but the open smashing of a statue of Mao Zedong by a developer in Hainan is seen by his still large following as a plan to subvert the socialist state he founded.

A real estate company wrecked the statue of the 'Great Helmsman' - China's most powerful figure between 1949 and 1976 - while re-developing a district in Longlou town in Wenchang region, reported Hong Kong's South China Morning Post yesterday.

Now it has come under fire from some Chinese still fiercely committed to his ultra-leftist ideology, said the newspaper.

Internet users on leftist websites demanded severe punishment for the unnamed developer for smashing the Mao statue into five pieces, said CNS.

'Why can't Longlou tolerate a magnificent statue of Mao Zedong?' the agency quoted a netizen as saying. 'It's not only a humiliation to people in Longlou, but also a humiliation to the people of Hainan.'

Internet users on maoflag.net and wyzxsx.com - two major Chinese leftist websites - were furious to see two photographs of the broken statue posted online and widely circulated on China's Twitter-like microblog platforms.

One photo featured the head of the statue, its nose and forehead damaged.

Many Internet users said the way the statue was toppled was 'extremely cruel', akin to the way the statue of Saddam Hussein was pulled down by American soldiers in Iraq in 2004.

'The ruining of the statue was meant to attack Maoists and Mao's image and is a sign of subverting socialist state power,' said a post on wyzxsx.com, which was endorsed by 20 supporters.

'Developers now wield the greatest power of destruction in China, tearing down houses and flattening martyrs' mausoleums in the name of development,' another post remarked on China.com.

'Now they have even brought the wrecking ball to Chairman Mao,' the post added.

However, a netizen critical of Mao pointed out that when the leader was in power, he tore down many statues of historical figures, including those of Confucius. 'Now it's Mao's turn!' he wrote.

Towering statues of Mao could be found all over China, but the incident in Hainan could be the first open smashing of his image.

陈凯再版/良德与邪恶vs.优点缺点说 Good and Evil vs. Collective Perfection

Song: When you believe - Prince of Egypt “Moses: Let My People Go" 歌：只有你坚信时世间才会有奇迹 - 摩西：“让我的人们自由”

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯再版/良德与邪恶vs.优点缺点说
Good and Evil vs. Collective Perfection

“自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

陈凯一语：Kai Chen's Words: ：

要大象不要象鼻子；要毛驴不要驴耳朵的“优点缺点说”是中国文化中最畸形与怪诞的道德观。 这种道德观必然导致中国人的抽精保糟的“全面”，“中庸”的专制价值观。 当所有上苍的自然法则与特定造物都变成了可有可无的，任人剪取的“物化”的，一个模子出来的行尸走肉的时候，畸形的人们就人为的发明了自然之外的“龙”去取代上苍的自然法则。 中国的皇权，强权致上的文化与政体就逻辑地成为了“优点缺点说”的文化思维必然。

Wanting the elephant by cutting off the elephant's trunk, wanting the donkey by cutting off the donkey's ears.., these are the most bizarre, most perverted features in the Chinese morals which distinguish not good or evil behaviors, but a person's "good features and short-comings" and a collective perfection (perfect despotism). This warped view on morality necessarily leads to the Chinese culture of "all face"（全面） and "middle-road"（中庸）that escapes all moral judgment by extracting all essence/substance from all natural phenomena in physical world and human society, therefore destroying morality and spirituality all together.

When the natural law of morality based on unique individual human life becomes relative and fuzzy, when all the mental and spiritual beings become physicalized, robotic existence is formed by the featureless mode of despotism. These pathological and psychotic Chinese man-eaters invent the un-natural and anti-nature image of "Dragon" to replace God as their ultimate moral arbiter. They invent it to scare themselves into a permanent and unconditional submission to the will of artificial/arbitrary authority - the emperors, the popular culture, the majority and the government. Indeed, this perverse view of morality based on the queer and corrupt "good features and short comings" ultimately forms the Chinese obsessive worship of power and despots who wield absolute power.

******************************************

By Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 11/24/2006, Reprint 3/19/2011)

The Chinese always think of their culture as superior to all others' because it demands people to withhold any moral judgment toward anything or anyone. People with moral clarity and conviction are looked down as "biased", as "extreme", as "less intelligent", as "less all-around (less all-face)"....

The most commonly used tactic in the Chinese "non-judgmental" culture is their daily use of "good feature and short-comings"(which is itself extremely judgmental). Many Chinese assert that even the worst can have beneficial effect and even the best is damaging (i.e. Hitler and the Communists must have some goodness and America and Christianity must be evil in some aspects). So they constantly look for good in evil and find short-comings/evil in the good. Yet they forever escape any moral judgment based on "good vs. evil". With such a amoral/immoral cultural practice, bizarre and logical phenomena can occur and indeed occur in the Chinese cultural environment: People have become featureless zombies, robots and eunuchs roaming around to castrate any person's uniqueness and attack/destroy any person who has any moral clarity. Chinese society has thus become the most colorless/fuzzy that is void of any creativity and/or outstanding human beings. It has become the most boring human existence the world has ever seen. It has become a morass composed by the moral-less to devour the good, and an abyss suited only for despotism and slavery to obliterate human freedom.

In China, all emotional excitement and feeling of existence come from war, revolution, bloodshed, chaos, rumors, intrigue, plot and destruction. And this is the only way the Chinese entertain themselves and feel a moment to be alive from their own routine anti-climatic, neutered existence (of lifelessness).

The "全面“(all face)/"优点缺点说”(good features and short-comings) effectively eliminates all uniqueness of any individual in Chinese society. It effectively eliminates the most prominent feature our creator/God has endowed upon us -- individuality with a unique meaning only to oneself and God.

This bizarre Chinese view of morality leads to some bizarre phenomena we have all witnessed and are so familiar with: Everything the Chinese import from overseas has to be stripped off its essence, from the concept of freedom, democracy to the Bible and Christianity. Nothing original, nothing meaningful, nothing with essence/substance will be preserved, (thanks in part to the Chinese-character based syllabic language) when it reaches China's shore. It is like that when they want an automobile, they have to take the engine out; when they want an airplane, they have to cut its wings; when they want democracy, they have to take out individual freedom; when they want freedom, they have to eliminate responsibility and individual uniqueness; when they want joy and happiness, they just have to castrate themselves emotionally/physically to achieve it.

With this pathological/psychotic mentality, "Dragon" is the man's only creation that dominates the Chinese life/landscape. Power, authority, emperors, fear and threat from others have become the only things before which they kneel down. The culture of "Dragon", a culture based on fear, passivity and submission, has become the only source of Chinese identity, and has even been perverted into Chinese pride.

I want you all to examine your own sense/standard of morality and decide whether or not you have already been poisoned to a point that you will never admit the existence of moral absolutes.

人只有好人坏人，没有优点缺点。 个人只有其特性，而没有其全面性。 试图改变个体的特性特征是不道德的与败坏的。 制度也是如此，只有好制度与恶制度，没有全面与完美的制度。 追求后者必然导致忽视道德与自身的腐败。 甚至婚姻爱情也是如此： 你只能决定你是否接受你的伴侣的品质与特性，你不能决定而只能鉴定他（她）的好坏，更不能试图去改变其特性以适应你自己的需要，因为这就是专制奴役的基点。

An individual human being can only be defined as good or bad, based on his moral behavior and moral orientation. But he cannot be modified into some ideal being by "enhancing his good features and eliminating his bad features/short-comings", like all despotisms attempt to do, such as creating "socialist new man" by communist China and USSR. To take such a view only shows the view-takers' moral corruption/degradation. A political or social system is the same. There is only a good (progressive, perfecting and moral) system, or an evil (despotic, stagnant, cyclic, corrupt and man-eating) system. There can never be an "all-face, all-around", "perfect" system. Pursuing the latter/ignoring the former leads to/reflects the view-takers' moral corruption/degradation. Even "love and marriage" is the same. You can only decide whether or not you will accept your partner's morality and uniqueness. You cannot dictate his or her morality and personal characteristics. You can not change his or her uniqueness to fit your own need and satisfy your own whim, because doing so or attempting doing so is the definition of evil and the foundation of slavery and despotism.


Song: There can be miracles when you believe 歌：只有你坚信时世间才会有奇迹

Red Dawn Villains Changed From Chinese to North Korean 软骨头好莱坞为钱屈从中共

Red Dawn Trailer/Ads “红色曙光”（赤色黎明）电影广告

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯一语：

好莱坞决定将“赤色黎明”的中共入侵改为北韩入侵实为良知理性人们笑掉大牙。 为钱卖灵在中共的强权淫威下已将软骨病传遍世界。 邪恶在无灵无骨的人们面前肆无忌惮地猖獗。 这就更需要每一个良知理性的人今天站出来反击邪恶。 我呼吁所有有良知的人们抵制这部影片。

Kai Chen's Words:

Hollywood decided, under the Chinese communist regime's threat, to change "Red Dawn" villain from Chinese to North Korean. I urge everyone with a soul to boycott this movie. Today, with evil spreading in the world under the soulless, mindless and boneless leadership of Obama, everyone of us who still has a soul needs to come out and resist this threat to freedom.

-----------------------------------------------------

Red Dawn Villains Changed From Chinese to North Korean
软骨头好莱坞为钱屈从中共

Source: Los Angeles Times March 16, 2011

The Los Angeles Times reports that MGM is changing the villains in Red Dawn from Chinese to North Korean in order to maintain access to the country's lucrative box office.

Dan Bradley directed the remake, which stars Chris Hemsworth, Josh Peck, Josh Hutcherson, Adrianne Palicki, Isabel Lucas, Connor Cruise and Jeffrey Dean Morgan. The studio is currently looking for a distributor to release the film.

The newspaper says the changes will cost less than $1 million and will "involve changing an opening sequence summarizing the story's fictional backdrop, re-editing two scenes and using digital technology to transform many Chinese symbols to Korean." They added that it will be impossible to eliminate all references to China in the movie.

"We were initially very reluctant to make any changes," said producer Tripp Vinson, "But after careful consideration we constructed a way to make a scarier, smarter and more dangerous 'Red Dawn' that we believe improves the movie."

"MGM has been working with the film 'Red Dawn's' director and producers to make the most commercially viable version of the film for audiences worldwide," said Mike Vollman, executive vice president of worldwide marketing. "We want to ensure the most people possible are able to experience it."

In Red Dawn, an American city awakens to the surreal sight of foreign paratroopers dropping from the sky – shockingly, the U.S. has been invaded and their hometown is the initial target. Quickly and without warning, the citizens find themselves prisoners and their town under enemy occupation. Determined to fight back, a group of young patriots seek refuge in the surrounding woods, training and reorganizing themselves into a guerilla group of fighters. Taking inspiration from their high school mascot, they call themselves the Wolverines, banding together to protect one another, liberate their town from its captors, and take back their freedom.

Read more: Red Dawn Villains Changed From Chinese to North Korean - ComingSoon.net

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=75300#ixzz1Gln7c2z3

毛像不除，人灵焉复 Destruction of Mao’s Image is a Must

Killer Chic/Kai Chen Interview by Reason TV 崇魔的时尚/陈凯访谈

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

毛像不除，人灵焉复
Destruction of Mao’s Image is a Must

一个崇魔的社会是一个死路一条的社会
Devil Worship in China Leads to Vicious Dynastic Cycles

“自由人“对抗“中国人”序列
“Free Beings” vs. “Chinese”

By Kai Chen 陈凯 3/15/2011 www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com


从秦始皇到毛泽东，“中国人”崇魔、尊鬼、信邪的病态扭曲导致了一个无限恶性循环的“朝代圈”。 这个邪恶虚无的“朝代圈”是由无信仰、无自由、无尊严、无正义感的人们自编、自进、自欺、自逃而建立的。 同时这个邪恶虚无的“朝代圈”又反过来将一代又一代的“中国人”奴役扭曲为“为社、为皇、为群、为族、为大家”的无灵自阉的“宦奴娼”。 “默默的绝望”是所有以虚为荣、以欺为尚、以奴为耀的“中国人”的必然心态。

大多“中国人”都认为人是环境、文化、祖宗、教育、政府的造物，而不是上苍的创造，不是有自由意志的存在。 他们看不到西方/美国的“人”是“上苍之下，上苍所创”的真实主动的存在，而“中国人”则是“皇政之下”的“祖先圣人”所灌养出来的虚无被动的“奴”，是一个“被权利用”的工具与可有可无的数字。 这就是为什么那些做着“人上人”的“中国梦”的人们到头来总会发现他们几千年来的“奴主梦”不过是一个人吃人的噩梦罢了。

许多我过去的朋友同仁也都认为“稳定”、“和谐”、“繁荣”、“富强”是“中国特色”基于族群观念的价值，“不同于”西方/美国的基于个体的普世永恒 的人的价值 – 真实、正义、自由、尊严。 由此他们都认为秦始皇、毛泽东的遗产与形象是一定要褒扬与保护的，是不能没贬辍与销毁的。 “没有秦、毛，中国就会大乱的。” 他们对真实个体价值的恐惧与对未来未知的逃避是他们自身奴役感、无奈感与绝望感的真实来源。 我实想象不出如果今天意大利的人们仍旧将凯撒作为楷模去效仿，或德国的人们仍旧将希特勒作为偶像去崇拜，或俄国的人们仍旧将斯大林作为榜样去追求，世界会是个什么样子。

“崇魔拜权”所导致的一时稳定与强权只能带来噩梦一般的灾难性后果： 纳粹德国、军国日本、共产苏俄都是这种“崇魔文化”所造成的噩梦。 中国的“共奴儒粹”的党朝将毛泽东的魔像顶礼膜拜作为它的强权合法的基点，其必然的噩梦般结局也是可以预见的。 “崇魔”的人们是“无灵毁灵”的人们。 “中国人”今天的不识真假，不辨是非，不论正邪，不讲对错就是这些无灵自阉的“宦奴娼”的真实写照。 在电影“魔戒”(Lord of the Ring) 中，西方/美国的价值文化是要销毁那个象征强权的魔戒，并杜绝它在人们中的邪恶影响与作用。 而“中国人”却一味迷恋、追求去拥有那个象征强权的魔戒，并将曾经拥有那魔戒的魔鬼们如秦始皇与毛泽东作为偶像、伪神去崇拜。 中国专制文化（腐儒毛共）的反价值就此暴露无遗。

毛像林立、毛钞泛滥、毛语横行、毛尸咒人的今日中国是一个噩梦末日即将到来的垂死党朝。 这犹如一个胭脂遍体的染着艾滋病与梅毒的妓女妄图要用与她上床的人们的众多来证实自身的价值，或一个金粉遍体的泥菩萨试图用跪拜人们的众多来证实它的泥身是真金一样。 真假、是非、正邪、好坏是绝不能用人数多少、强权财富、武力威吓、谎言欺骗而确定的。 有毛像处定无人灵。 有共产处定无正义。 有腐儒处定无尊严。 有强权处定无是非。 有专制处定无自由。 有“中国人”处定无进步与真实。

毛像不除，人灵焉复！


陈凯抗议毛餐厅 Kai Chen Protests Mao's Kitchen


陈凯抗议尼克松图书馆毛塑像 Kai Chen Protests Mao's Statue in Nixon Library

Atlas Shrugged to be Released “无奈大力神”影片（一）将上市

Atlas Shrugged Movie Trailer “无奈大力神”影片片段

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot .com

陈凯一语：

安. 兰德的“无奈大力神”电影终于上市了。 这一部讴歌伟大的资本主义道德精神与理念的巨著终于以电影形式与人们见面了。 我只希望每一个向往自由的人从中得到精神的享受与理论的再充实。 我在此对那些将此小说制成电影的人们表示庆贺与感激。

Kai Chen's Words:

Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" will finally enter America's movie theaters. This great novel that sings in praise of capitalism for its morality and creative spirit is finally made into a movie after all the years as the best selling novel and the most influential literature after the Bible in America. I hope all freedom loving people in the world go to see this great movie. And I am deeply grateful to the people who make this movie a reality.

--------------------------------------------------

Review of Atlas Shrugged Part 1, the film
“无奈大力神”影片（一）将上市

By David Kelley February 24, 2011

“Midas Mulligan,” says the shadowy figure who accosts the prominent banker in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.

“Who’s asking?”

“Someone who knows what it’s like to work for himself and not let others feed off the profits of his energy.”

So begins Atlas Shrugged Part I, the independent adaptation by “The Strike” Productions, scheduled for theatrical release April 15, 2011.

The skeptics are wrong.

Ever since the project launched last April, skeptics have wondered how a film with a limited budget of $10 million, rushed production schedule, and lack of big-name talent could possibly do justice to the novel. Over a thousand pages long, with an intricate plot, epic scope, multi-layered mystery, a hero who does not appear until the final third of the story, and a complex philosophical theme, Atlas Shrugged has posed an insurmountable challenge to film-makers. The streets of Hollywood are littered with the ashes of prior efforts, some with much larger budgets.

The skeptics are wrong. The completed film was shown today for the first time in a private screening. It is simply beautiful. With a screenplay faithful to the narrative and message of the novel, the adaptation is lushly produced. The acting, cinematography, and score create a powerful experience of the story.

This film is going to turbocharge the debate over Rand’s vision of capitalism as a moral ideal.

Taylor Schilling is riveting as Dagny Taggart, the woman who manages the Taggart Transcontinental rail system with intelligence and courage while fighting interference from the president of the company, her incompetent brother James (Matthew Marsden), and his political cronies. Schilling is well-matched with Grant Bowler as steel-maker Hank Rearden. As the story opens, Rearden has just started producing a new alloy he invented; and Dagny is his first customer. She wants to have rails of the metal to replace a branch line in Colorado, which is booming with business growth, led by oil-producer Ellis Wyatt, who is clamoring for better transportation for his product.

The film covers the first third of Rand’s novel, the triumphant story of building the “John Galt Line”—followed by a wave of government edicts that saddle the Line with impossible burdens, making the triumph a battle won in a losing war between producers and looters, and setting the stage for the later battles of Parts II and III. The film pulls no punches in this regard: Rand’s theme of makers vs. takers comes through loud and clear in scenes like the one in which Rearden is forced to sell off his satellite companies. Bowler captures the agony of a man having his life’s work torn from him.

The film does a credible job of portraying visually the world of Atlas Shrugged. Rand created a world in decline. Buildings and machinery are in disrepair, things break and don’t get fixed, businesses close. The economy is in a state of severe depression, and there is a depression of the spirit, too, a mood of despair, futility, and resignation captured in a popular expression: “Who is John Galt?”

Compounding the problem is the disappearance of highly talented people, prominent achievers at the peak of their success. That’s happening, of course, because John Galt is leading a strike of producers against the expropriation of their wealth—and against the principle that the need of others gives them a right to wealth, time, and effort of the productive. Though the strike remains largely off-stage in the film, Galt gets a more active role than in Part I of the novel. We don’t see his face, but we do see him recruiting strikers and we hear portions of the message. Unfortunately, those lines are not delivered with anything like the persuasive power that Rand’s philosophical recruiter must have.

A poor adaptation could be ignored by both sides. This adaptation can’t be ignored.The novel was set in an indefinite “day after tomorrow,” a world that is always just ahead of us, retreating like the horizon as we approach. The producers made the controversial decision to date the story in late 2016, presumably to tap into the many parallels to current events, and the establishing shots of cities, train wrecks, and government actions are arresting extrapolations of today’s actual world. These depressing scenes are offset by gorgeous scenes of triumph. The first run of the John Galt Line is a visual symphony (even with some ragged edges in the digital graphics).

For over half a century, Rand’s novel has been a lightning rod for controversy. It has attracted millions of devoted fans—and legions of hostile critics. A poor adaptation could be ignored by both sides. This adaptation can’t be ignored. It is way too good. It is going to turbocharge the debate over Rand’s vision of capitalism as a moral ideal. Whether you love the novel or hate it, Atlas Shrugged Part I is a must-see film.

--------------------------------------------------------------

David Kelley is executive director of The Atlas Society, which promotes Rand’s philosophy. He was also a consultant to the movie. Kelley earned his Ph.D. in philosophy from Princeton University in 1975, and later taught cognitive science and philosophy at Vassar College and Brandeis University. His articles on social issues and public policy have appeared in Harpers, The Sciences, Reason, Harvard Business Review, The Freeman, and elsewhere. His books include Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence; The Contested Legacy of Ayn Rand; The Evidence of the Senses, and The Art of Reasoning, one of the most widely used logic textbooks in the country. Kelley is also the founding editor of The New Individualist magazine.


Rearden Returns Home (Movie Trailer)

陈凯再版/渺小与伟大 Kai Chen Reprint/Smallness vs. Greatness

4,500万人死于毛泽东的大饥荒 45 Million People Killed by Mao's Great Famine

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯再版/渺小与伟大
Kai Chen Reprint/Smallness vs. Greatness

“自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

陈凯一语 Kai Chen's Words：

将渺小说成伟大只说明说者的渺小。 将伟大作为伟大去褒扬证实说者的伟大。

If you view smallness as greatness, it only reveals your own smallness. If you view greatness as great and emulate yourself after that greatness, it will reveal your own greatness.

************************************

Lin Zhao 林昭 （一个被毛泽东杀害的伟大女性）

By Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 11/17/2006, Reprint 3/13/2011)

Today in China many people still revere Mao and view him as a great man. They turn a blind eye on the unspeakable atrocity, misery and human degradation Mao had caused upon the Chinese society and individuals. To view Mao as a great man does not make him a great man. It only reveals those who take such a view their own smallness and ugliness.

Throughout history, the Chinese have always had trouble distinguishing what is real and what is illusion, what is the truth and what is a lie, what is superficial and what is substantial, thanks for the despotic/nihilistic culture and the muddy syllabic Chinese language. So it is no surprise that they cannot distinguish between what is great and what is small. The viciousness of the Chinese culture often reveals itself in the Chinese people's views, language/vocabulary and conducts, and in their anti-truth, anti-value, anti-human tendencies. It never ceases to amaze me that whenever the Chinese see something truly great, they have to smear it, jeer it and belittle it till nothing in this world remains true and great. This is their way to cover up their own smallness and insignificance. Yet in their despicable smallness, they have an endless admiration and tolerance for anything ugly, anything detestable, anything evil. Mao and Qin emperor (the first emperor in China's dynasties) are only two such examples. And those who suffered or died for truth and justice in China, because they were powerless therefore viewed as losers in history, are forever buried deep in people's consciousness, avoided whenever possible and forgotten all together. Such is the rotten/evil nature of the Chinese history.

In America, what I have witnessed is just the opposite of what I had experienced in China. I will never forget once I visited a nameless pier by the ocean in California. I was very surprised to see a metal sign erected on the pier with some words etched on it. When I read the words, I realized it was a sign to commemorate an old janitor who had cleaned the pier dutifully and diligently for decades. I was immensely moved by the sign and what it means and implies:

*One man's greatness has been recognized and revered by a society full of great human beings.*

What else can be more powerful and revealing in such a contrast between these two societies (China and America), and individuals in them?!

Now I ask you: What do you value? What do you view as smallness or greatness? The answer from yourself will truly reveal your own morality, mentality and values. The answer will truly reveal your individual quality as a human being, and indeed, your own smallness or greatness.

陈凯再版/人鬼谈 Kai Chen Reprint/Speaking of Man and Devil

Kai Chen Interview on Danger of Socialism 陈凯访谈-社会主义的危害/危险

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

陈凯再版/人鬼谈
Kai Chen Reprint/Speaking of Man and Devil

”自由人”对抗“中国人”序列
"Free Beings" vs. "Chinese" Series

陈凯一语：

“见人说人话，见鬼说鬼话”是中国人婊子牌坊心理病态的写照，是自欺欺人的人的写照，是中国精明而没有智慧的人们的写照，是中国人永远逃脱道德责任的写照，是难得糊涂的两面人的写照，是中国恶性朝代循环的起源。

Kai Chen's Words:

"When you see a human, you speak human language; when you see a devil, you speak devil's language". This common expression in China is the demonstration of Chinese "virgin whore" complex and bipolar spirituality, is a constant excuse for a Chinese to escape his moral responsibility, is a definite sign for those who are shrewd but without intelligence and wisdom, is the origin of the vicious Chinese dynastic cycle."

***************************************

By Kai Chen 陈凯 （Written 11/4/2007, Reprint 3/8/2011)

When people in China are using such "human and devil" expressions, they don't realize that they themselves are exactly the problem and the origin of all the Chinese troubles/evils.

In China people think that everyone should not choose their moral orientation. Instead, they should just do anything they can to survive (cheat, lie, deceive, manipulate, self-castrate, even kill...), at the cost of being a devil (man-eater), or being a Eunuslawhore (eunuch, slave, whore rolled into one)themselves, or being both... They take being a "monkey king" able to change shape and form thousands of times in one second or a chameleon able to change colors all the time, as the ultimate Chinese wisdom and art of living. They jeer and laugh at Americans as "too simple, too naive, too dump, and too innocent", while they pride themselves as the inheritors of some "Ancient Oriental Wisdom"...

The Chinese really don't know it is they who are the stupid ones without intellectual capacity, without moral integrity, without a shred of wisdom, without common sense. It is they who are cheating themselves into a vicious cycle of man-eating-man-eating-man... It is they who are creating virgin whores. They are nothing but shrewd, cunning self-deceivers.

The Chinese never believe humans are free to create their own environment and to master their own fate. They always believe humans are born slaves of their own cultural and social environment and they are only passive receivers of their fate. They never understand that although we all have sins, we don't value and treasure our sins. We are only aware of them and making choices to stay away from the sins. In one word, We choose to be human by speaking human language. The moment we start to speak devil's language, the moment we will be morally confused sinners, for we choose to value devil.

This mortal cultural defect is not present in the West, because of largely the values of Christianity and the teachings of Christ. This is why in the West, history is objective and linear toward hope and better tomorrow, while the Chinese are mired in their never-ending cycles of destruction. In the West, people choose to be human. And they speak human language regardless what circumstance they are in. Thus they are using their own presence and existence to change and improve their environment constantly for the better. They believe in "Unmoveable Movers" -- Only those with firm moral stand on humanity can push history forward, toward a more human and humane tomorrow.

We must abandon the evil and degenerate "human devil" virgin-whore complex, and the practice of "speaking devil's language if we see a devil", if we ever hope for a better tomorrow. We must take a firm moral stand and be the "Unmoveable Movers" ourselves, in order to push the history toward one direction - hope and future.

-------------------------------------------------------------

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

人鬼谈

- 从中国人两面中庸看中国的恶性朝代循环 – 对照西方基督文化的绝对道德价值及其方向性进步历史 -

陈凯 6/12/2006 (再版 Reprint 3/8/2011)

我常常听到中国人议论美国人（西方人）。 这些议论大都出不了几种范畴模式： 如美国文化跟中国文化不一样；或美国人简单，天真，傻，人情淡漠；或美国人没有文化传统，太自由，不规矩、、等等。 大部分的议论多是描述性的，时常暗示贬义的，有时中性无义的，有时讥讽的，有时嘲笑的、、。 很少有人对中美的政治文化进行有道德取向的，有逻辑推理的分析。更少有人褒扬美国人（西方人）的价值，道德取向。 似乎中国人就应该与美国人不一样 – 言外之意当然是中国文化的高深，中华文明的悠久，中国人原本应有的优越与高人一等、、。

甚至大部分所谓的中国精英们也在对中西文化分析中取折中，中庸之道。他们拼命地在东方专制的精神毒品中挖取伪价值，伪营养，将鸦片白面标签为传统养身秘方推销给那些没有价值取向的灵智弱残的人。 同时又拼命地在美国（西方）的线性的，方向性的进步历史中挖取那些早已被西方的绝对价值取向摈弃的负向行为理念和历史丑闻。似乎将美国（西方）早已从自身肌体排泄摈除的垃圾废物挖出来会使中国人的虚荣脸面得到某种补偿与满足。 甚至一些西方的左派们也用所谓“完美社会说“ 抨击西方的方向性进步文化，并试图从东方，中国的精神毒素中汲取所谓“智慧营养”。“文化等同论”与“道德相对论”就是这些西方左棍们吸食中国精神鸦片白面所产生出的畸形怪物。

“你看，美国也有过奴隶制，教会也迫害过哥白尼，伽利略，西方也有过中世纪的黑暗、、。 所以我们不能搞全盘西化，我们不能抛弃中国传统中的好东西、、。“

中国的国粹者们也借西方左棍们的昏头舞唱着，跳着。一时大宣“二十一世纪是中国世纪”的狂言病语。 一些原主张“全盘西化”的人们也对自己的主张产生了一些踌躇，迷茫与犹豫。

那什么是“西化”呢？ 西化就是“人化”，就是“进步化”，就是“价值方向化”。 衡量一个人的品行质量的标准并不在于他的一生经过了什么，而在于他在他一生的经历中学到了什么，得到了什么，有什么价值方向的取向。 衡量一个文化的优劣好坏的标准也是这样。 美国基于其宪法的价值绝没有将奴隶制，种族主义当作价值去褒扬追求。 相反的是，美国的内战是去消灭奴隶制的；美国的人权运动是去排除种族主义的残余的；美国的教科书，节假日纪念是林肯，马丁路德、金的。 哥白尼，伽利略是西方宣扬追求的偶像；那些中世纪的红衣主教们并不在人们的价值语言里。 我提倡“全盘西化”就是提倡建立导致“人化”，“进步化”，“价值方向化”的一套文化价值体系和政治架构。 这有如我想要的并不是一个毒瘾成性的，病态的，垂死的人的恶性循环的机能，机制与心态，而是一个健康的人的新陈代谢，良性循环的机能，机制与心态。这种良性机能，机制与心态可以排除糟粕，抵抗疾病，汲取营养，成长进化。

那什么是“中化”呢？ “中化”就是“非人反人化”，就是“鬼化”，“奴化”，就是“价值浑浊化”，就是“恶性循环化”，“毒瘾成性化“，“停滞不前化”。 一般中国人病态地，糊涂地认为：一个人的经历，环境为其优劣好坏下定义。 一个人的外表与血肉就是其存在的证明。 所以在中国有“血肉筑长城”的国歌。 “灵魂“与“价值取向”从不在中国人的语言里。 中国古代所有文学历史记载都是关于“争权夺势”，“朝代循环”，“血肉生死”的，从未有“捍卫真理”，“追求精神价值”，“崇尚人的尊严与完整”的 “人“的褒扬与记载。

“中”字本身的两种含义都是“虚无价值”和“反价值”的： “中央”意味着等级制。基于这一层意思人与人，国与国之间都是不平等的。 “君臣父子”，“进贡敬皇”就是基于这个“中”的。 “中庸”是另一个含义：不辨真伪，不识好坏，不置可否，各打五十大板是这个“中”的引申，也是中国人对”正义“的歪解。 ”见人说人话，见鬼说鬼话“是中国人普遍的行为规范，也是中国人自欺的，精明诡诈而毫无智慧的反价值哲学的写照。 ”孙猴子七十二变“与”变色龙“是中国人对智慧的定义和对道德鉴别，道德责任的永远推卸的借口伎俩。

在中国“人本善“的哲学前提里，”鬼“的存在是被否认的。 “鬼”是被人恐惧的外来物，而不是人的灵魂的内在产生。 人们不光不知鬼，不觉鬼，人们反而学鬼，崇鬼，与鬼认同。 今天在中国”崇毛“，”神毛“的现象就是中国人由怕鬼而学鬼，崇鬼的灵魂的暴露。 中国人今天的自恨，自怨，自贬 （常反映在对他人的他恨，他怨，他贬上）就是中国人“人鬼心态”的外在表露。人们只是直觉感到毛就是他们灵魂中“鬼”的象征，但他们选择的不是用”人“限鬼，斗鬼，灭鬼，而是否认鬼的存在，与鬼谋和，与鬼谋存，供鬼求权（全），贡鬼求平免乱。 如果说西方基督文化价值中的”忏悔“ 是人在灵魂中限鬼，斗鬼，灭鬼的工具途径，中国人亦不知”灵魂“是何物，更不要提将“忏悔”作为工具和武器。 基督精神中的”承认鬼（devil）和 原弊（sin）的存在“并与鬼和人的原弊斗争而走向人性与希望的教义是中国文化中从始就无的绝对道德概念。

“人鬼不分”，“人鬼共存”，“人弱鬼强”，“人灭鬼兴”在中国人灵魂中的腐败的积累使中国文化，中国人逐渐“鬼化”。 “吃人”成了“中国鬼”存活的必然途径。 人性在中国已在“鬼性”的强大打击下不断的削弱到了残喘的地步。 中国的阴阳符在近代与马克思的辩证法苟同结合更促进了中国人的“鬼化”。 人的道德，人的价值进一步被贬黜到了骇人听闻的地步。 在现代的中国人就是鬼，鬼就是人，是就是非，非就是是，白就是黑，黑就是白，真就是假，假就是真。 这阴阳符在辩证法的动力下高速旋转，将中国的恶性朝代循环推向了新的维度境界。 大多中国人不知这人鬼不分的危害，反而不以为耻反以为荣地将其作为中国文化与中国人的定义而引为骄傲。

两千多年以前，正在亚洲大地战火连绵，血雨腥风地争霸权，争统一的疯狂时代，在西方发生了两个重大事件：

在希腊多音节字母文字的产生给人类带来了理性思维的工具，促使了人们在逻辑推理的抽象思维空间中加速了前进的步伐，给人们在自然与社会科学，教育，法律等领域里带来了长足的，持续的进步。

一个赤足简衣，举止温和的木匠在中东与西方掀起了一场改变人类命运里程的默默的革命：他用自己的生命造就了人的自知，自省，自我完美。 他在人类灵魂的磁场中建立了一个指北针，告知了人们他们所要遵循的绝对道德价值。 人类从此在杀人吃人的恶性漩涡中自拔了出来，走上了通往自由的希望之路。 基督后的2006年的人类里程是一个从恶性循环走向线性方向，从绝望走向希望，从黑暗走向光明，从血肉走向灵魂，从死亡走向生命，从虚无走向意义，从奴役走向自由的里程。 这是一个以人拒鬼的里程。

在基督的道德价值中，人不论在任何场合，任何环境，任何时间都用绝对的道德价值说着“人”话。 他深知“鬼”的存在和他自身“原弊”的存在。 但他绝不向鬼与原弊认同。 他用虔诚的忏悔与鬼与原弊分道扬镳。 他用人的语言选择了人的道路，人的方向。 这世界从此从鬼性的泥潭中跳了出来，走向了人性的，无尽希望的海洋。

然而，直到今天，十三亿中国大陆的人们仍旧被“人鬼不分”的鬼性所缠绕而迷茫。他们的灵魂仍旧被他们的血肉所捆绑；他们的理性仍旧被他们的单音节象形文字所束缚；他们仍旧被精神与感知的混乱所淹没。 默默地绝望是他们唯一的真实存在。 我不得不向他们发问：

如果你们能在数学中接受阿拉伯数字，在音乐中接受五线谱，为什么不能在科学，教育与法律中接受以英文为主的多音节字母文字？ 如果你们能允许毛共将马克思的辩证法用枪杆子强加给你们，为什么不能主动地用你们尚存的人性去接受基督的“人”的洗礼，使你们从此加入人类的“人”的行列，加入“爱”与“理性”的行列，加入“生命”，“希望”，“自由”的行列，加入那用绝对道德价值作为指北针的“兴人驱鬼”的欢乐的自由大军的行军行列中去？！

只有当你们彻底抛弃了你们的“人鬼情结”之后，你们才有可能在永恒价值的立足点上， 成为“不可动摇”的有着坚定信念的“推动历史前进”的有意义的人们 --- THE UNMOVABLE MOVERS.

亚洲自由电台： 陈凯采访--中国梦（周末茶馆）RFA Interview Kai Chen/China Dream and American Dream

Reagan on American Dream 里根谈美国梦与美国精神

陈凯博客： www.kaichenblog.blogspot.com

亚洲自由电台： 陈凯采访--中国梦（周末茶馆）
RFA Interview Kai Chen/China Dream and American Dream

Program Link 声频连锁（请点击“下载声音”聆听采访）：

http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/zhuanlan/teahouse/tea-03042011145151.html

---------------------------------------------------

周末茶馆（2011-03-04）

2011-03-04

听众朋友，自由亚洲电台的一档新栏目≪周末茶馆≫今天开张了。今天我们要聊的话题跟梦有关。梦，我们每个人都会做梦，有好梦，有噩梦，白日梦，强国梦，升官梦，发财梦。今天我们要聊的梦是舆论界最近几年才出现的一个提法，那就是中国梦。这个中国梦的概念很重要，但目前在中国并没有得到充分自由的讨论。到底什么是中国梦？它应该有什么样的精神内涵？中国梦可以与美国梦相提并论吗？本期节目的主持人安培邀请两位爱做梦的嘉宾进行讨论，希望对大家有所启发。

另外，也欢迎大家对这第一期《周末茶馆》发表自己的看法，请把看法发到安培的电子信箱：1*.或者安培的博客上，地址：WWW.RFACHINA.COM.

Program Link 声频连锁（请点击“下载声音”聆听采访）：

http://www.rfa.org/mandarin/zhuanlan/teahouse/tea-03042011145151.html