recentpopularlog in

aries1988 : liberalism   19

陈纯:中国自由保守主义的没落(上)|观点|端传媒 Initium Media

不管是哪一种,在英美(和中国)谈保守主义,都绕不过英国思想家爱德蒙·伯克(Edmund Burke)。亨廷顿所总结的“伯克信条”大概有:一、人根本上是一种宗教性动物;二、社会是一个自然的、在历史中逐渐生长的有机体,权利是时间的产物;三、人是一种具有本能、情感和理性的造物,审慎、偏见、经验和习惯比理性、逻辑、抽象和形而上学能更好地引导人们,真理存在于具体的经验之中而不是普遍的命题之中;四、共同体高于个人,邪恶根源于人的本性而不是任何特定的社会制度;五、除了在一种最终的道德意义之外,人们都是不平等的,社会组织是复杂的,总是包括各种阶级、等级和群体,差异、等级制和领导阶层是任何公民社会都不可避免的特征;六、试图消除现有邪恶的努力通常会导致更大的邪恶。

以卢梭为代表的法国启蒙主义,抛开自身的经验传统追求“理性建构”,设想一种只有在“公意”中才能实现的自由——“积极自由”。这种疯狂的理想主义,不仅导致了“血腥恐怖”的法国大革命,而且还是二十世纪极权主义的根源。

中国的市场化改革从一开始,就是一种国家主义的筹划。这并不是说,国家对市场化改革的方向和具体任务,从一开始就是十分明确的,而是说市场化改革最根本的目的,从来就不是以经济发展来推动政治民主,而是延续毛时代对民众潜能的开掘,来实现国家的富强。毛时代透支了民众的“意识形态狂热”,而改革时代,需要挖掘民众的“私人欲望”。不管是计划经济还是市场经济,都是能量的再生产机制,归根到底是为国家服务的。
conservatism  chinese  today  liberalism  concept 
may 2019 by aries1988
周濂: 个人自由与大国崛起——从马克斯.韦伯的政治光谱谈起

韦伯政治思考的基本单位是“民族”与“文化”而非“个人”与“制度”,韦伯更认同精英而非大众,更热衷实现少数人的自由而非普世的平等自由,更推崇权力为导向的政治而非以权利为基础的政治。德国的危机是韦伯思考政治问题的根本出发点和终极原则,而韦伯对于自由主义危机的诊断和应对则进一步呼应和强化了他对德国危机的诊断和应对,最终导致韦伯放弃自由主义和宪政民主,转而拥抱民族主义以及克里斯玛型的政治领袖。

韦伯的政治思考对于具体的政治实践同样意义深远。从正面的角度说,韦伯告诫作为经济上升阶段的资产阶级要形成担当政治责任的新意愿,组建利益集团参与政治,不做当局的附庸者而要做政治的领导者和社会的压仓石。从负面的角度说,韦伯用他的失败经验(以及德国的失败经验)提醒资产阶级和自由主义者与其半心半意、工具化地接受普选制与福利政策,不如真心实意地响应普罗大众和社会底层的利益要求和社会公正议题,在面对大国崛起、民族复兴的诱惑时,必须恪守自由主义个体权利和程序正义的底线,从内部夯实宪政民主制度,始终警惕来自民族主义话语以及卡理斯玛型领袖人物的威胁。
opinion  book  politics  deutsch  nationalism  liberalism 
april 2019 by aries1988
刘擎:2018西方思想年度述评(观念/文化篇:自由主义之死与智识争论复兴)
【編者按】本文為華東師範大學劉擎教授自2003年起所撰之「西方思想年度述評」系列第16年作品下篇,首發於《騰訊·大家》欄目,略去部分內容和全部文獻註釋。完整印刷版將在《學海》雜誌發表。端傳媒經作者及《騰訊·大家》授權刊發,以饗讀者。

令人憂慮的是「自由主義造就了現代世界,但現代世界正在背離自由主義」。如果要復興自由主義的活力,必須反省它失去活力的多種成因。在社會經濟方面,需要反省自由主義崇尚的「優績制」(meritocracy)競爭對造成貧富差別與社會固化的影響。在文化方面,檢討「身份政治」的局限,在正當回應族群歧視的過程中,沒有防止它演變為「宗派憤怒」的傾向。在國際與地緣政治方面,自由派也沒有足夠的智慧和勇氣來捍衞「二戰」後形成的同盟和自由制度體系。在政治上,當政的自由派已經變得越來越保守,傾向於維持現狀,而完全忘記了自由主義最初的激進立場。

沃森的觀點可能在政治上不正確,但如果在科學上是真實的呢?難道科學真理應當屈從於政治正確的管制嗎?

回應這種鏗鏘有力的質疑其實並不困難,而且可以斬釘截鐵:沃森的這種觀點首先在科學上錯誤的(雖然他是一位科學大師),因為在生物學意義上,「種族」類別(白人、黑人、黃種人等)並不存在,這早已是學術界的普遍共識。

社會生活中使用的種族分類,是文化和政治塑造的概念(所謂「社會建構」),並不具有對應的生物學依據。這是目前生物學和人類學界的主流觀點,已經有大量的研究證據支持,也有許多相關的科普作品傳播。

萊克認為不應當迴避研究不同人群(populations)之間的遺傳差異。他明確反對一種流行的誤解:由於人類來自共同的祖先,人群相互分離的時間不久,不足以在自然選擇壓力下形成重要的遺傳差異。「但這不是事實」,他指出「東亞人、歐洲人、西非人和澳大利亞人的祖先(直到最近為止)幾乎完全相互隔絕了4萬年或更長的時間,足以讓進化力量發生作用」。人群之間的遺傳差異不僅客觀存在,而且會影響某些遺傳疾病、特定的身體性狀甚至行為和認知能力在人群之間的概率性差異。

研究人群遺傳差異是一把雙刃劍:在很多情況下它會揭露「種族」概念的虛假性,瓦解絕大多數的刻板印象,但遺傳學的發現也有可能會確證某些刻板印象。在這種情況下,科學發現的隻言片語會被某些願意信奉種族主義觀點的人用來證明自己正確。恰恰因為存在這種可能性,萊克才要在文章中直面這個問題。

美國大學招生同樣以「擇優錄取」為主要原則,反映了美國的「優績制」(meritocracy)的價值取向,但其公平原則也包含對弱勢群體的「補償正義」觀念,突出體現於「平權法案」(Affirmative Action,又譯作「肯定性措施」)。此外,還會兼顧「文化多樣性」的目標,可能會考慮校園的「族裔平衡」(racial balancing)。擇優錄取、補償正義和文化多樣性,這三重維度之間存在張力,每個大學有自己側重與應對策略。
summary  read  2018  west  intelligentsia  journalism  liberalism  opinion  race  usa  debate  polemic  university  elite  policy  scientist 
february 2019 by aries1988
Yuval Noah Harari on Why Technology Favors Tyranny - The Atlantic

- In 2018 the common person feels increasingly irrelevant.
By 2050, a useless class might emerge, the result not only of a shortage of jobs or a lack of relevant education but also of insufficient mental stamina to continue learning new skills.

- whatever liberal democracy’s philosophical appeal, it has gained strength in no small part thanks to a practical advantage: The decentralized approach to decision making that is characteristic of liberalism—in both politics and economics.
In the late 20th century, democracies usually outperformed dictatorships, because they were far better at processing information.
Democracy distributes the power to process information and make decisions among many people and institutions, whereas dictatorship concentrates information and power in one place.
- If you disregard all privacy concerns and concentrate all the information relating to a billion people in one database, you’ll wind up with much better algorithms than if you respect individual privacy and have in your database only partial information on a million people.

- What will happen to this view of life as we rely on AI to make ever more decisions for us?
once we begin to count on AI to decide what to study, where to work, and whom to date or even marry, human life will cease to be a drama of decision making, and our conception of life will need to change. Democratic elections and free markets might cease to make sense. So might most religions and works of art.
If we are not careful, we will end up with downgraded humans misusing upgraded computers to wreak havoc on themselves and on the world.

- For starters, we need to place a much higher priority on understanding how the human mind works—particularly how our own wisdom and compassion can be cultivated.
- More practically, and more immediately, if we want to prevent the concentration of all wealth and power in the hands of a small elite, we must regulate the ownership of data.
advice  future  crisis  ai  society  politics  people  life  work  mentality  human  democracy  dictatorship  competition  liberalism 
september 2018 by aries1988
What Can We Learn from Utopians of the Past?
Adam Gopnik writes about four nineteenth-century authors who offered blueprints for a better world—but their progressive visions had a dark side.

The sensible lesson one might draw from this is that the human condition is one in which the distribution of bad and good is forever in flux, and so any blueprint of perfection is doomed to failure.

Robertson assumes that if we can just add to the utopian visions of 1918 the progressive pieties of 2018—if we reform their gender essentialism and their implicit hierarchism and several other nasty isms—then we will at last arrive at the right utopia. This gives his book something of the exhausted cheerfulness of a father on a nine-hour car trip. “We’re almost there!” he keeps saying, as the kids in the back seat fret, and peer at license plates.

Liberalism is a perpetual program of reform, intended to alleviate the cruelty we see around us. The result will be not a utopia but merely another society, with its own unanticipated defects to correct, though with some of the worst injustices—tearing the limbs from people or keeping them as perpetual chattel or depriving half the population of the right to speak to their own future—gone, we hope for good. That is as close as liberalism gets to a utopia: a future society that is flawed, like our own, but less cruel as time goes on.

We remake interior lives to make exterior improvements, because the real current of social change lies inside minds and therefore inside people’s actual existence. We always want to get past the room we’re in in order to break out and change the universe. The lesson that life tends to teach is that change begins at home, and that we can’t escape rooms on our way to worlds. The world is made of rooms.
utopia  writer  book  society  politics  sex  marriage  love  philosophy  19C  liberalism 
august 2018 by aries1988
When Americans Say ‘Democracy,’ We Really Mean Something Else
We tend to see democracy as truly democratic only when it grants equal participation regardless of a person’s sex, race or religion. Even if it does, we consider strict majoritarian rule as not really democratic if it abuses or sidelines minorities. American founders talked a lot about resisting “the tyranny of the majority” for a reason. We also think of freedoms — of speech, of the press, of religion, and so on — as essential elements of democracy.
But those things are not democracy, per se. They are components of liberalism. (The term here refers to the political philosophy, rather than “liberal” in the sense of center-left party politics.)
definition  democracy  comparison  today  liberalism 
july 2018 by aries1988
霍夫施塔特:美国自由主义的主要诠释者
“对我来说,迪克是学者型知识分子的典范,我试着向他学习……他工作很努力,想写出好书,但他完全没有那种经常被称为美国人成功源泉的烦人的咄咄逼人姿态。他谦虚、善良,但最重要的是,他不把自己强加于别人之上,而这似乎是知识分子特有的毛病。霍夫施塔特树立了一个可能具有道德教育意义的榜样。即使他在沉默时也能给人带来助益。”
usa  intelligentsia  ww2  book  liberalism 
july 2018 by aries1988
The French Origins of “You Will Not Replace Us”

He sees immigration as one aspect of a nefarious global process that renders obsolete everything from cuisine to landscapes. “The very essence of modernity is the fact that everything—and really everything—can be replaced by something else, which is absolutely monstrous,” he said.

When Benoist writes that “humanity is irreducibly plural” and that “diversity is part of its very essence,” he is not supporting the idea of a melting pot but of diversity in isolation

These disciples, instead of calling for an “Islamic holocaust,” can argue that rootedness in one’s homeland matters, and that immigration, miscegenation, and the homogenizing forces of neoliberal market economies collude to obliterate identities that have taken shape over hundreds of years—just as relentless development has decimated the environment. Benoist’s romantic-sounding ideas can be cherry-picked and applied to local political resentments.

Faye, like Renaud Camus, is appalled by the dictates of modern statecraft, which define nationality in legal rather than ethnic terms.

Camus lamenting that “a veiled woman speaking our language badly, completely ignorant of our culture” could declare that she is just as French as an “indigenous” man who is “passionate for Roman churches, and for the verbal and syntactic delicacies of Montaigne and Rousseau, for Burgundy wines, for Proust, and whose family has lived for generations in the same valley.” What appalls Camus, Polakow-Suransky notes, is that “legally, if she has French nationality, she is completely correct.”

This is true, but there is always a threshold at which a quantitative change becomes qualitative; migration was far less extensive in the Middle Ages than it is today. French liberals can surely make a case for immigration without pretending that nothing has changed: a country that in 1900 was almost uniformly Catholic now has more than six million Muslims.

Yet feminism, Starbucks, the smartphone, the L.G.B.T.Q. movement, the global domination of English, EasyJet, Paris’s loss of centrality in Western cultural life—all of these developments have disrupted what it means “to be French.” The problem with identitarianism isn’t simply that it is nostalgic; it’s that it fixates on ethnicity to the exclusion of all else.
interview  usa  islam  muslim  france  français  intelligentsia  book  debate  population  race  altright  culture  identity  liberalism 
november 2017 by aries1988
If your pay is not yours to keep, then neither is the tax – Philip Goff | Aeon Essays

Here’s where we’re up to: to make sense of the idea that taxation is (moral) theft, we have to make sense of the idea that each person has a moral claim on the entirety of her gross income, and this can be made sense of only if property rights are natural rather than mere human constructions. We need, therefore, to defend a theory of natural property rights.

In theory, Right-wing libertarianism does entail that people have a moral claim on their pre-tax income, and hence that taxation is theft, but only in hypothetical societies where there is zero or minimal state interference in the economy. In states in which the government intervenes in the economy through taxation – ie, in almost every developed state – market transactions are tainted and so are morally void. The Right-wing libertarian is perfectly entitled to campaign for the day when her minimal-government Utopia is brought about, but until that day she cannot consistently argue that she has a right to her pre-tax income, and hence cannot consistently complain that the government is taking what is hers by right.

Still, the vast majority happily vote for low taxes, rejoicing that they get to keep their morsel while in reality all they’ve done is protect the spoils of a tiny minority at the top. The result is our failure to create what we really need: a tax system that – as part of the wider economy – creates a just society.
tax  ethic  question  debate  economy  money  work  politics  philosophy  liberalism 
september 2017 by aries1988
Andrew Sullivan: Why the Reactionary Right Must Be Taken Seriously
Reactionism is not the same thing as conservatism. It’s far more potent a brew. Reactionary thought begins, usually, with acute despair at the present moment and a memory of a previous golden age. It then posits a moment in the past when everything went to hell and proposes to turn things back to what they once were. It is not simply a conservative preference for things as they are, with a few nudges back, but a passionate loathing of the status quo and a desire to return to the past in one emotionally cathartic revolt.

Politics comes before economics, Anton insists. Free trade may boost our economy, encourage efficiencies, and advance innovation and wealth, but it affects different people differently. And this matters in a democracy. A society’s stability and fairness and unity count for more than its aggregate wealth — especially when, as in recent decades, almost all the direct benefits have gone to the superrich, and all the costs have been paid by the working poor.

Why is my country benefiting foreigners and new immigrants, many of them arriving illegally, while making life tougher for its own people? And why doesn’t it matter what I think?

A nation, they believe, is not just a random group of people within an arbitrary set of borders. It’s a product of a certain history and the repository of a distinctive culture. A citizen should be educated to understand that country’s history and take pride in its culture and traditions.

I read the Christian traditionalist Rod Dreher with affection. His evocation of Christian life and thought over the centuries and his panic at its disappearance from our world are poignant. We are losing a vast civilization that honed answers to the deepest questions that human beings can ask, replacing it with vapid pseudo-religions, pills, therapy, and reality TV.

Because in some key respects, reactionaries are right. Great leaps forward in history are often, in fact, giant leaps back. The Reformation did initiate brutal sectarian warfare. The French Revolution did degenerate into barbarous tyranny. Communist utopias — allegedly the wave of an Elysian future — turned into murderous nightmares. Modern neoliberalism has, for its part, created a global capitalist machine that is seemingly beyond anyone’s control, fast destroying the planet’s climate, wiping out vast tracts of life on Earth while consigning millions of Americans to economic stagnation and cultural despair.

Beyond all that, neo-reactionaries have a glaring problem, which is that their proposed solutions are so radical they have no chance whatsoever of coming into existence — and would be deeply reckless to attempt.

There is, perhaps, a way to use reactionary insights and still construct a feasible center-right agenda. Such a program would junk Reaganite economics as outdated but keep revenue-neutral tax reform, it could even favor redistribution to counter the deep risk to democracy that soaring inequality fosters, and it could fix Obamacare’s technical problems. You could add to this mix stronger border control, a reduction in legal immigration, a pause in free-trade expansion, a technological overhaul of the government bureaucracy, and a reassertion of Americanism over multiculturalism.

The left, for its part, must, it seems to me, escape its own bubble and confront the accelerating extremism of its identity politics and its disdain for millions of “deplorable” white Americans.
thinking  essay  politics  conservatism  conflict  immigration  american  usa  2017  liberalism 
may 2017 by aries1988
Are Liberals on the Wrong Side of History?

for many pundits, too, now is the only time worth knowing, for now is when the baby is crying and now is when they’re selling your books.

one wonders whether what Mishra traces through time might really be not a directional arrow but more like a surfboard, rising and falling on the quick-change waves of history.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s romantic reaction to Voltaire’s Enlightenment—with the Enlightenment itself entirely to blame in letting high-minded disdain for actual human experience leave it open to a romantic reaction.

father of the Romantic movement, of both the intimate nature-loving side and the more sinister political side, with its mystification of a general will that dictators could vibrate to, independent of mere elections

cold Utopianism and hot Volk-worship

the idea of Rousseau, the Genevan autodidact, as the key figure in the romantic political reaction against modernity, even as the godfather of Nazism, was present in Bertrand Russell’s A History of Western Philosophy, back in the nineteen-forties

in China the minds evolved but not the makers. The Chinese enlightenment happened, but it was strictly a thinker’s enlightenment, where Mandarins never talked much to the manufacturers.

Sapiens, a bracingly unsentimental history of humankind

By humanism Harari means, instead, the doctrine that only our feelings can tell us what to do—that we ought to give as much freedom as possible to every individual to experience the world, follow his or her inner voice and express his or her inner truth.

we have merely a self-deluding, narrating self, one that recites obviously tendentious stories, shaped by our evolutionary history to help us cope with life.

The argument of Candide is neither that the world gets better nor that it’s all for naught; it’s that happiness is where you find it, and you find it first by making it yourself.
book  thinking  debate  today  history  culture  crisis  opinion  liberalism 
march 2017 by aries1988
Trump’s Radical Anti-Americanism
Yet what perhaps no one could have entirely predicted was the special cocktail of oafish incompetence and radical anti-Americanism that President Trump’s Administration has brought. This combination has produced a new note in our public life: chaotic cruelty. The immigration crisis may abate, but it has already shown the power of government to act arbitrarily overnight—sundering families, upending long-set expectations, until all those born as outsiders must imagine themselves here only on sufferance of a senior White House counsellor.

Autocratic regimes with a demagogic bent are nearly always inefficient, because they cannot create and extend the network of delegated trust that is essential to making any organization work smoothly. The chaos is characteristic. Whether by instinct or by intention, it benefits the regime, whose goal is to create an overwhelming feeling of shared helplessness in the population at large: we will detain you and take away your green card—or, no, now we won’t take away your green card, but we will hold you here, and we may let you go, or we may not.
trump  usa  critic  government  destiny  liberalism 
february 2017 by aries1988
Neoliberalism – the ideology at the root of all our problems

despite its lavish funding, neoliberalism remained at the margins. The postwar consensus was almost universal: John Maynard Keynes’s economic prescriptions were widely applied, full employment and the relief of poverty were common goals in the US and much of western Europe, top rates of tax were high and governments sought social outcomes without embarrassment, developing new public services and safety nets.

But in the 1970s, when Keynesian policies began to fall apart and economic crises struck on both sides of the Atlantic, neoliberal ideas began to enter the mainstream.

After Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan took power, the rest of the package soon followed: massive tax cuts for the rich, the crushing of trade unions, deregulation, privatisation, outsourcing and competition in public services. Through the IMF, the World Bank, the Maastricht treaty and the World Trade Organisation, neoliberal policies were imposed – often without democratic consent – on much of the world. Most remarkable was its adoption among parties that once belonged to the left: Labour and the Democrats, for example. As Stedman Jones notes, it is hard to think of another utopia to have been as fully realised.

But, as Hayek remarked on a visit to Pinochet’s Chile – one of the first nations in which the programme was comprehensively applied – my personal preference leans toward a liberal dictatorship rather than toward a democratic government devoid of liberalism.

Freedom from trade unions and collective bargaining means the freedom to suppress wages. Freedom from regulation means the freedom to poison rivers, endanger workers, charge iniquitous rates of interest and design exotic financial instruments. Freedom from tax means freedom from the distribution of wealth that lifts people out of poverty.

from those who make their money by producing new goods or services to those who make their money by controlling existing assets and harvesting rent, interest or capital gains. Earned income has been supplanted by unearned income.

Neoliberalism’s triumph also reflects the failure of the left. When laissez-faire economics led to catastrophe in 1929, Keynes devised a comprehensive economic theory to replace it. When Keynesian demand management hit the buffers in the 70s, there was an alternative ready. But when neoliberalism fell apart in 2008 there was ... nothing. This is why the zombie walks. The left and centre have produced no new general framework of economic thought for 80 years.

the flaws exposed in the 70s have not gone away; and, most importantly, they have nothing to say about our gravest predicament: the environmental crisis. Keynesianism works by stimulating consumer demand to promote economic growth. Consumer demand and economic growth are the motors of environmental destruction.
capitalism  economy  ideology  crisis  theory  history  opinion  politics  liberalism 
november 2016 by aries1988
Does Trump’s Rise Mean Liberalism’s End? - The New Yorker

Decisions made by Web designers years ago mean that today the Internet is a free and lawless zone that erodes state sovereignty, ignores borders, revolutionizes the job market, smashes privacy, and poses a formidable global-security risk.
AGM

This is not the first time the Liberal Story has faced a crisis of confidence. Ever since this story gained global influence, in the second half of the nineteenth century, it has endured periodic crises.
NB
CPR

The liberal phoenix next faced a challenge from the left, during the Che Guevara moment, between the fifties and the seventies. While Fascists found the liberal story soft and degenerate, socialists accused it of being a fig leaf for the ruthless, exploitative, and racist system of global capitalism.

the Liberal Story proved to be far more supple and dynamic than any of its opponents. It triumphed over traditional empires, over fascism, and over Communism by adopting some of their best ideas and practices (such as government-sponsored education, health, and welfare for the masses).
AGM

it might be much harder for the Liberal Story to survive the current crisis of confidence, because the traditional alliance between liberal ethics and capitalist economics that has long underpinned the Liberal Story may be unravelling.
politics  trump  crisis  liberalism 
october 2016 by aries1988
Three wise men | The Economist
WHATEVER image you may have of the reformists hoping to shake up China’s creaking economic system, it is probably not one of octogenarians who fiddle with their hearing aids and take afternoon naps. But that is a fair description of three of the country’s loudest voices for change: Mr Market, Mr Shareholding and the most radical of all, the liberal. With growth slowing, the stockmarket once again in trouble and financial risks looking more ominous, their diagnoses of the economy, born of decades of experience, are sobering.

Wu Jinglian, Li Yining and Mao Yushi—their real names—were born within two years of each other in 1929 and 1930 in Nanjing, then China’s capital. Whether it was that or pure coincidence, all three grew up to demand an end to Soviet-style central planning and to propose, to varying degrees, capitalism in its place. Their influence has waned with age, but their powers of analysis remain sharp. And they do not much like what they see.
chinese  expert  economy  opinion  future  reform  liberalism 
january 2016 by aries1988
How Europe’s liberals can speak out
The nativists were rising even before they received the gift of the refugee influx. Europe saw a “dramatic decline in trust in the last decade”, says a new report by Political Capital, a Budapest-based research and consulting institute. Trust in national parliaments, for instance, has fallen in all “old” European Union member states.

By contrast, says Mudde, Europe’s liberal politicians aren’t telling any story. Their basic ideology, “Never again Auschwitz”, died around 2000 when Europeans finally stopped worrying about the Nazis coming back. Today hardly any liberal politicians dare speak for cosmopolitanism. Thinking they lack support, they are sulking in their salons. Catherine Fieschi, head of the Counterpoint think-tank, says that when people complain that “The debate is toxic,” she asks, “What debate?”

Some of us dinosaurs in the liberal media are still pushing our discredited multicultural vision. A response I often get is that I’m an out-of-touch elitist who doesn’t have to live with Muslims. In fact, this jab is off-beam. Europe’s last liberal bastions are precisely big cosmopolitan cities full of Muslims. Nativists are getting nowhere in London, Paris or Amsterdam. In Vienna’s municipal elections last month, held while refugees poured into the city, the Social Democrats triumphed. But cosmopolitan liberals are getting thumped in national elections.
opinion  europe  2015  politics  european  liberalism 
november 2015 by aries1988
八十年后,王子终于露出了真实嘴脸(part 3) – 《冰雪奇缘》影评
迪士尼的电影,其实八十年来都在专注贩卖同一主题:要有梦,要勇敢追梦。但是这做梦也有不同的做法,男人和女人的梦也大不相同。男孩子的梦想,1940年的迪士尼动画《匹诺曹》中概括的最为充分,那就是成长、成为一个男人。但是对等的女性梦想,却直到1989年的《小美人鱼》才出现,落后长达半个世纪之久。在此之前的女性角色,梦想都是“被男人解救”。究其原因,当然和迪士尼先生自己的社会价值观与当时的时代背景密不可分。

一个社会的风气,一个国家的发展,必定是向着更深入、更全面的民主化发展。而人类文明的走向,也必定是向着消除一切不公正歧视的目标前进,任何企图阻止这一进程的行为都不过是螳臂当车。任何企图逆转这一进程的个人,历史都要让你吃不了兜着走(想想希特勒的下场)。
disney  critic  idea  business  opinion  female  feminism  liberalism 
may 2014 by aries1988

Copy this bookmark:





to read