Sunday 18 October 2015

區域文化--商人有祖國

中国文化是华夏56 個民族文化为基础,充分整合全国各地域和文化要素而形成的文化。不同于中华文化的国际属性;  區域文化应该就是本土化。区域文化圈是汉族文化南移过程中不断本土化的历史结果,也是中国东南区域自然积聚的经济社会发展动力之深刻文化底蕴。

谢谢朋友提及【別讓李嘉誠跑了】。
國內智庫魚龍混雜、 有不少內容粗製濫造的問題。 今天的大陸,如果缺少大視野,就顯得有點落後於時代的不自信了。資本沒有國界,但商人有祖國。我们都宁愿出生在富庶和平的国家。大陸应该把這個國家建設得更好,讓今天的離開成為明天的遺憾。
Bill 
中國原來有不少區域文化;   荊 楚文化是指具有湖北地方特色的文化。古代的『荊楚』概念,其地域範圍大致以今天的湖北省行政區劃為主,故湖北人往往將本省稱為『荊楚大地』。所謂荊楚文 化,作為一種具有鮮明地域特色的文化形態,從斷代的靜態角度看,它主要是指以當今湖北地區為主體的古代荊楚歷史文化;從發展的動態角度看,它不僅包括古代 的歷史文化,還包括從古到今乃至未來湖北地區所形成的具有地方特色的文化。因此,『荊楚文化』也可以理解為具有湖北地方特色的文化。


周武王分封荊楚民族一支的首領熊繹于荊山丹陽,為楚子,標志著楚國歷史的開始。
通 過不斷的戰爭,逐漸控制了長江中游地區,成為『春秋五霸』之一。楚國繼續擴張,占有長江中下游的大部分地區,並控制了今河南、四川、貴州的部分地域,成為 『戰國七雄』中疆土最廣闊的政權。隨著楚國和荊楚民族由弱小走向強大,楚文化經歷了一個產生、發展、傳播以及與與新征服地域文化交流融合的過程。

地处欧亚大陆的东端、面向太平洋的中国,自古以来就在多民族的移动和融合的过程中,形 成了多民族的复合社会,并且出现了「民」、「族类」、「蛮」、「夷」、「戎」、「狄」、「种人」、「华」、「夷」 等分类和概念。在帝国体制的中国,国家的统治是建立在以华夷秩序的基础之上的。以汉 字为媒介的礼教被称为文或文化,并构成了华的世界的核心。而这些文化尚未波及的地方便是夷 的世界。「“夷”可以通过文化编入“华”的世界,作为“文化国家”的中国就是通过这个文化的 渗透过程不断地扩大,并维持其统治的」(横山 1997:177)。 
http://ir.minpaku.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10502/5436/1/SES90_01.pdf

如 《别让李嘉诚跑了》一文所说,1967年、70年代末、90年代初、97年香港回归这些重要的节点,我的选择正确,因而获得了巨大的利益。但事实上,正常 的商业是不需要经过这种政治选择的,而是相对纯粹的经济考量。有正常的政治氛围和良好的商业环境,就不会存在谁跑不跑的问题。存在这个问题,恰恰就是问题 的根源所在。

在职业上,我是一个纯粹的商人,不要用那些空洞的道德来衡量我。

我最后反复强调一点,我是一个商人,也是一个慈善人士,但绝不是政治家、教育家等。我参与兴建汕头大学、汕头大学附属医院、潮州的安居工程等,前后达到150亿港元,且绝大多数都花在大中华区。这都是纯粹捐献,没有任何利益可图。

我 希望大家不要把我神化,也不要把我妖魔化,其实我像你们现在的同事,也像你邻居的老头而已。我和他们一样犯过错误,也和他们一样慈祥友爱。我承担了我的错 误,也获得了我的荣耀,我的人生由我自己负责,你们每一个人同样也是。不要给我过多的褒扬,也没有必要泼给我很多脏水,虽然我不在意自己的感受,但是我在 意你对你自己心灵的灼伤,以及毒化中国人脆弱的舆论环境。

我的生意或许部分不在中国,但是我的心一直在这里,根依旧扎在这里。我是潮汕人,也是香港人,还是中国人,也是加拿大籍,最终我们都是地球村的居民。我爱我的家乡,我爱我的故乡,我爱我的祖国,我也爱我们共同居住的地球,我的爱真挚而深沉,和你一样。

李嘉诚不会跑,也不愿跑,更跑不了。这是我的真心话,也是我的誓言。

李嘉诚的辩护:我不会跑,也跑不了。 - 天涯社区


評 論這篇回應必須結合今天的國情和李嘉誠以前的言行才能窺其全貌。例如李嘉誠遲來的回應,除了是不想讓國家主席習近平訪美時被人借題發揮外,是否曾考慮過有 關網文在內地官方有多大代表性或影響力,以及可否透過其他渠道較低調地化解爭拗?李嘉誠最終選擇公開回應,相信是基於非如此不能直達天庭的結論。
 
在一個有法治的地方,商人依法辦事,毋須愛國。在一個講求愛國的地方,商人便須在國家有需要時,做些不符商業利益或違反個人利益的事。(馬雲有句豪語:「如果有一天國家需要支付寶,我會在1秒鐘內把支付寶全部送給國家。」)
 
港商在內地投資賺錢,從來知道不能百分百在商言商。商人與國家關係好時,為愛國付出,代價有保證,關係轉差時,商人便可能要考慮多些商業或個人利益了。
 
李嘉誠應該知道在回應中沒有提及的一篇《人民日報》評論文章。文章批評「別讓李嘉誠跑了」是落後於時代的不自信,卻同時指出「資本沒有國界,但商人有祖國。」

李嘉誠「心安」表白對港人的啟示  | 灼見名家


新 華社旗下「瞭望智庫」微信公眾號9月12日發布一篇題為《別讓李嘉誠跑了》的文章,9月14日再次轉載:《李嘉誠撤離香港五原因:他真的老了,香港也老 了》。兩篇文章在大陸網路輿論引起軒然大波,不僅網友討論熱烈、李嘉誠自己出面澄清,而且中國國家發改委還在國務院新聞辦公室發布會上就此回應。

羅 天昊原名羅建法,原本做商業企業研究,改名後變為「國家城市戰略研究者」。但是其「研究」和「評論」常缺乏一致性,如他曾在一年前撰文說「又招安了,李嘉 誠不用跑了」,一年後再寫「別讓李嘉誠跑了」;他也曾發表《中國應開徵美女稅》、《嬰兒奶粉應由國家免費供應》等令人啼笑皆非的文章。
一 個月前,作者羅天昊的個人博客和微信公眾號上(微信現已刪除)早已發布過這篇文章,分析香港經濟和社會結構的文章段落,則借用了他2010年在金融時報中 文網發表的《香港模式的瓶頸》,可見,這並不是所謂的官方最新「授意」。發改委在16日的國務院新聞發布會上回應李嘉誠問題時表示,會營造更為法制化的環 境,並沒有證實這樣的干預動作。中國證監會旗下的《證券時報》也開始批駁這一觀點,應該讓「李嘉誠大大方方走」,不應該對企業施加法律以外的約束。由兩大 黨媒《光明日報》和《南方日報》聯合開辦的新京報社,其開設的微信公眾號「沸騰」亦稱,這是一篇不宜過分解讀的「奇文」,直接指出當前國內智庫魚龍混雜、 內容粗製濫造的問題。
《別 讓李嘉誠跑了》這篇文章引起廣泛關注的背後,是官方媒體旗下的智庫機構和專門分析高層意圖的政經分析自媒體的一系列運作策略。他們熱衷於分析領導人講話、 重要活動以及關鍵人物動向,藉此突出自己的官媒背景、寫作者的權威身份,或者模仿官媒講話的思路和修辭,營造出一種掌握內部信息源、消息靈通之感。
以 人民日報社為例,其旗下擁有數家發布政經分析的網站、新聞用戶端、微信公共號,例如,人民網、海外網,手機用戶端「海客」,微信公眾號「學習小組」、「俠 客島」等等,他們發布的解析性文章常常被視為「官方解讀」,被廣泛轉載。據人民海外版今年5月透露,「俠客島」的每篇平均閱讀量是7萬至8萬次、每週都有 文章閱讀量超過10萬;「學習小組」的微社區單日點擊峰值則高達150餘萬,獨立用戶最高達30餘萬,其影響力可見一斑。

別讓李嘉誠跑了」,背後高層「授意」從何而來? | 端傳媒 Initium Media
https://theinitium.com/article/20150917-opinion-likashing/


前幾日,李嘉誠擬將長實地產在上海的地盤,以200億元出賣。這是李嘉誠撤離中國,財富轉移歐洲戰略部署的繼續。
本 來,商業如水流,逐利是資本的本性。李嘉誠想去哪裏就去哪裏。但是,鑒於李嘉誠最近二十年在中國獲取財富的性質,似乎不僅僅是商業那麽簡單。眾所周知,在 中國,地產行業與權力走的很近,沒有權力資源,是無法做地產生意的。由此,地產的財富,並非完全來自徹底的市場經濟。恐怕不宜想走就走。別讓李嘉誠跑了。

其實,李嘉誠只不過是一介小商人,有何能量影響香江?能操控香港萬民福祉與未來者,國家此前的治港思路滯後於現實發展,方才導致香港困局。未來需要改變思路,進一步造福香港萬民。
“招安精英”致使李嘉誠等豪族坐大
逐步改變治港思路
為 今之計,香港回歸日久,人心歸附,一國兩制,生根發芽,不客氣地說,大商人已經不再是社會穩壓器,失去了其利用價值。而最近幾年,中國各種矛盾開始凸顯, 改革形勢嚴峻,十八大提出,改革是未來最大的紅利,而改革的最大阻力,即是各種既得利益集團,這種既得利益者,不僅存在大陸,香港亦有。
《別讓李嘉誠跑了》全文 - DBC數碼電台 dbc.hk
http://www.dbc.hk/digitalmedia-detail/Id/91709/type/95/%E3%80%8A%E5%88%A5%E8%AE%93%E6%9D%8E%E5%98%89%E8%AA%A0%E8%B7%91%E4%BA%86%E3%80%8B%E5%85%A8%E6%96%87

有媒體提問時指出,有一些內地的智庫評論說,早前香港首富李嘉誠有一個計劃,把部分資產撤走,
   對此,連維良表示,“涉及到利用外資和外商投資企業在華的利益的問題,我們現在推進的改革非常重要的目標就是構建開放型經濟新體制,而且要形成更加法制 化、更加國際化的營商環境。在這個過程當中,各項改革一個很重要的出發點就是要惠及更多的外來投資者,而且一系列的改革和成效在陸續顯現。” 
   他舉例稱,為進一步改革外商投資管理體制,今年3月發布了新的外商投資產業指導目錄,大幅度減少對外商准入的限制。限制條目從79條減少到38條,禁止 類的項目壓縮到36條,合資合作的條目從43條減少到15條,而且允許類項目不再保留對外商投資股比的限制,所有這一系列措施的目的就是能夠讓更多的外商 在更多的領域進行國內投資。
http://politics.people.com.cn/BIG5/n/2015/0916/c70731-27594721.html


Best Regards
Bill

Sunday 11 October 2015

楚國八百年

剛看了《楚國八百年》。看到楚秦文化之大不同。最後因楚懷王用人不當,屈原屈屈而死,而楚之後亡於秦。

人說楚文化從老子;楚剣利如霜;故有''楚虽三户,亡秦必楚。秦从法家,輕礼乐仁义,凶悍不仁;卻一统天下。其中亦講到吳國 因为没有深厚的文化,吴人只知进,不知道退,故此很快就㓕亡;迅速地消失在历史中。

在座有䛊之士,可否多些介紹及分享。


人类历史上太多文化不同的纷爭而致势不两立,中外如出一轍。從劇中联想到香港,繁华吐艳还有多少年?

Bill

在華夏文化的浩瀚長河中,楚文化 是波濤滾滾的支流,極大地充實、豐富了華夏文化的內涵。楚文化又是多姿多彩的,屈原《離騷》的華美辭章和曾侯乙編鐘的雄渾音響,不知使多少人心馳神往。楚 文化是華夏文化的南支,說中國先秦文化,主要是東周文化的精華大半集中在楚文化,並非過譽之辭。
人說楚文化从老子; 《老子》早期版本总是在楚地发现,老子庙诸多遗迹亦在楚国旧地安徽涡阳发现,以及周王室王子朝与旧僚携典籍逃亡楚国,老聃因此蒙受失职之责,离宫归隐楚国等地。就足以见证老子的对楚人的影响,不愧为楚文化的精髓。但是,老子与其究竟为何物?

人世间的盛衰,如同狂風,能瞬间吹落所有的繁华。儒、道、法家之不同,戰國時代比春秋時代戰爭的殘酷及背棄禮義;  其中談及人材、改革的重要,說明什麼是楚材晉用。
秦的非人道的統治文化,使秦速亡(於楚)

賈誼的過秦論
 - 《过秦论》是贾谊政论散文的代表作,全文从各个方面分析秦王朝的过失,故名为《过秦论》。此文旨在总结秦速亡的历史教训,以作为汉王朝建立制度、巩固统治的借鉴,是一组见解深刻而又极富艺术感染力的文章。
《过秦论》是一篇史论。过秦意思是指出秦的过失,是动词。是一种议论文体,重在阐明自己的意见。过秦论意为指责秦的(政治)过失的一篇史论。《过秦论》共有三篇。其中写得最好、影响最大的是第一篇。它最早附见于《史记·秦始皇本纪》篇末,列为第二篇;后来褚少孙补《史记》,又把它单独附在《陈涉世家》的篇末。《汉书》《新书》《文选》也都选录了这一篇。在今传贾谊所撰专著《新书》第一卷中,对此文则明确标出它是三篇中的上篇。本文在《史记》《汉书》《新书》《文选》四部书中,文章字句颇有出入。
上篇

楚人刘邦-刘邦者,本名季,沛县人。生在沛,长在沛,起事自号沛公。出生时国籍属楚,楚人是也。楚王熊心的将军,楚帝熊心的上将军。功成,被楚帝熊心册封为汉王。




楚文化史.pdf_免费高速下载|百度云 网盘-分享无限制

Saturday 3 October 2015

Realism in the HKU Council pro-vice-chancellor debacle

Dear All
In the recent HKU Council pro-vice-chancellor debacle over the appointment of pro-democracy law scholar Johannes Chan was rejected on Tuesday 29 September, after a lengthy process of deliberation and dispute that lasted more than nine months, Since pro-Beijing newspaper Wen Wei Po reported that he was recommended for the position of pro-vice chancellor of HKU in November last year, the newspaper is said to have published more than 300 articles attacking him for ties with pro-democracy Occupy protest. Chan is also the first and only Honorary Senior Counsel in Hong Kong. He was appointed to the position by the then Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang in 2003 for his “distinguished service to the Law of Hong Kong”.

In this matter, It is sad to see that some friends as intellectuals in HK are divided and frustrated with each other merely on difference of personal opinions.

I prefer Realism in Politics and agree that humankind is not inherently benevolent but rather self-centred, and more are motivated in predominantly seeking more power.

Politics can be brutal ( as by Tony Abbot) and is frequently muddled with various inherent interests of many different sectors.

I believe that in general, the state emphasizes an interest in accumulating power to ensure security in an anarchic world, and is charged on national interest or avoid something inimical to the national interest.

The democratic peace theory considers Democracies tend to possess greater public wealth than other states , however , if relying upon a voting public alone and without a clear strategy may not generally secure the goal.

Hope that this incidence will be followed up on the right track along with the Proper Purpose with good faith.

Bill

I quote the paper below which original discusses realism in international relations. The different theories are therefore more on international relations, the states' response to peace and war, the empirical phenomena in democracies.

Realism is a school of thought in international relations theory based on four central propositions, namely Political Groupism, Egoism, International anarchy and Power politics.[1]
The basic assumptions are that "All states within the system are unitary, rational actors
* States tend to pursue self-interest.
* Groups strive to attain as many resources as possible ".
*
The state is the most important actor under realism. The power of the state is understood in terms of its military capabilities.

Jonathan Haslam from the University of Cambridge characterizes Realism as "a spectrum of ideas."[2]Regardless of which definition is used, the theories of realism revolve around four central propositions:[1]
* That states are the central actors in international politics rather than individuals or international organizations,
* That the international political system is anarchic as there is no supranational authority That can enforce rules over the states,
* that the actors in the international political system are rational as their actions maximize their own self-interest, and. That all states desire power so that they can ensure their own self-preservation.
Realism is often associated with Realpolitik as both are based on the management of the pursuit, possession, and application of power. Realpolitik, however, is an older prescriptive guideline limited to policy-making (like foreign policy), while Realism is a particular paradigm, or wider theoretical and methodological framework, aimed at describing, explaining and, eventually, predicting events in the international relations domain. The theories of Realism are contrasted by the cooperative ideals of Liberalism.

In summary, realists think that humankind is not inherently benevolent but rather self-centered and competitive. This perspective, which is shared by theorists such as Thomas Hobbes, views human nature as egocentric (not necessarily selfish) and conflictual unless there exist conditions under which humans may coexist. It is also disposed of the notion that an individual's intuitive nature is made up of anarchy. In regards to self-interest, these individuals are self-reliant and are motivated in seeking more power. They are also believed to be fearful. This view contrasts with the approach of liberalism to international relations.

The state emphasizes an interest in accumulating power to ensure security in an anarchic world. Power is a concept primarily thought of in terms of material resources necessary to induce harm or coerce other states (to fight and win wars). The use of power places an emphasis on coercive tactics being acceptable to either accomplish something in the national interest or avoid something inimical to the national interest.
The state is the most important actor under realism. It is unitary and autonomous because it speaks and acts with one voice. The power of the state is understood in terms of its military capabilities.
A key concept under realism is the international distribution of power referred to as system polarity. Polarity refers to the number of blocs of states that exert power in an international system. A multipolar system is composed of three or more blocs, a bipolar system is composed of two blocs, and a unipolar system is dominated by a single power or hegemon.

Democratic peace theory is a theory which posits that democracies are hesitant to engage in armed conflict with other identified democracies.[1]

Among proponents of the democratic peace theory, several factors are held as motivating peace between liberal states:
* Democratic leaders are forced to accept culpability for war losses to a voting public;
* Publicly accountable statesmen are more inclined to establish diplomatic institutions for resolving international tensions;
* Democracies are less inclined to view countries with adjacent policy and governing doctrine as hostile;
* Democracies tend to possess greater public wealth than other states, and therefore eschew war to preserve infrastructure and resources.

However, Democratic peace theory advocates that realism is not applicable to democratic states' relations with each another, as their studies claim that such states do not go to war with one another. However, Realists and proponents of other schools have critiqued both this claim and the studies which appear to support it, claiming that its definitions of "war" and "democracy" must be tweaked in order to achieve the desired result.

Post-realism suggests that Realism is a form of social, scientific and political rhetoric. It closes rather than opens a debate about what is real and what is realistic in international relations.

The HKU Council pro-vice-chancellor debacle
30 September 2015 15:29 Kris Cheng8 min read--
The appointment of pro-democracy law scholar Johannes Chan Man-mun as pro-vice-chancellor of the University of Hong Kong (HKU) was rejected on Tuesday, after a lengthy process of deliberation and dispute that lasted more than nine months.

Who is Johannes Chan?

https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/09/30/explainer-hku-council-rejects-johannes-chan-appointment-to-pro-vice-chancellor/