笨狼發牢騷
發發牢騷，解解悶，消消愁
正文
【所以在第二次世界大戰之前，“強權就是公理”一直西方真正的準繩，以中國（清朝）背信棄義為借口侵略中國，隻是一個借口。】
補充
2021.10.28
treating law as if its explanatory power were almost unlimited, as for example when the huge growth in the number of civil wars since 1945 is attributed to the fact that ‘these conflicts are not prohibited by the pact.’
Everything that has been achieved can be rescinded, forgotten, tossed away. That is the message Hathaway and Shapiro want to convey.
【冷戰後美國處於單極時代，美國以軍力取代外交的欣慰大增，奧巴馬強化了這一趨勢】
【奧巴馬這麽做，一方麵是擔心恐怖活動，這是情有可原的，另一方麵也是為了麵子，不願意整天打打殺殺，不停地見到屍體，把軍事行動轉變成無人機暗殺，軍方都不需要通告大家，事發了也不見報，美國老百姓高高興興繼續過日子，政府也沒用壓力。這是政治方麵的考慮，也情有可原。關鍵的問題，是奧巴馬在公開場合把這種新的軍事行動描述成一種人道的軍事行動，把美國打點成規則、慣例和人道的捍衛者，這才是真正的矛盾。】
That was far from the truth. Obama himself had been so upset by excesses in the new incursion he ordered into Yemen that he stopped the drone attacks there for a year between 2010 and 2011
第一：不精確，第二，不確定，第三，法官儈子手
In just the first few months of 2009, after Obama took the oath of office, the initial metamorphosis of American war into humane form was achieved. As the worst sins of the prior administration were disowned, Obama’s lawyers claimed authority to continue war indefinitely across space and time, devising formal legal frameworks for targeted killings
But that lawyerliness often served as an elaborate rationalisation process. The president’s men and women, Savage has written, “were trying to fight al-Qaida while adhering to what they saw as the rule of law”. Though what they saw as the rule of law meant little more than self-regulation, their commitment to humane standards of fighting war
He was a politician whose career depended on protecting the American people. But not only did Obama design a far bigger and more encompassing form of war than necessary, and not only did he undermine the US’s earlier commitments to a legal order consecrating peace to do so
Then Trump went on to repeat the very same pirouette from anti-war candidate to endless war president that Obama had performed. And now Joe Biden risks doing the same.
*************
At its heart lies a convincing line of argument: recent efforts to humanize war by reducing its lethality have come at the expense of normalizing violence
Whereas the ambition of the nineteenth century peace movements and their successors was to outlaw war—or at the very least to establish forms of legal arbitration or international institutions to radically limit its occurrence—recent decades have been dominated by efforts to regulate the conduct of war.
“We had made a moral choice to prioritize humane war, not a peaceful globe”
remarkable change principally to the closing years of the Vietnam War
朝鮮戰爭是最不受約束，最殘忍的戰爭，美國（雙方）使用了一切可以使用的手段，造成的傷亡密度之大，比二戰有過之無不及，但越戰是促成國際法轉變的契機，一是美國對自己在越戰中形象的羞愧，Potentially endless violence has been ushered in under the guise of legal regulation. “In our time, swords have not been beaten into ploughshares. They have been melted down for drones”
美國以各種人道名義出兵幹預他國，到了20世紀末，成了人道主義幹預原則的所謂“保護責任”（Responsibility to Protect），就是說一旦發生人道主義災難，如種族滅絕，那麽世界在聯合國倡導下有“責任”武力幹預，當然這種幹預主要是西方的武裝幹預，成了美國、北約和西方出兵的道德依據
Moyn contends that the “self-humanization of the [American] military under law” was arguably the most important post-Vietnam factor in the emergence of humane war.
The Kakarta Method
But basically, what I’m getting at is the longer the war on terror goes on, the longer these mechanisms, these tools exist, it’s a matter of time until there are people in these relevant positions who simply say, you know, particularly if I’m a senior lawyer at one of these agencies, I’ll come up with whatever pretext I need to come up with to say my operations are lawful.
This is exactly what happened during the Bush administration when an attorney named John Yoo and another named David Addington decided to essentially retcon the laws about torture and about surveillance to allow these things to happen. This happened in the Obama administration when attorneys named Marty Lederman and David Barron decided to manipulate and retcon the laws to permit the assassination of an American citizen. We see with Trump not discontinuity, but a whole lot of continuity in an uncomfortable way that I write this book to reckon with
A deeply tragic missed opportunity that put millions of people in peril that entrenched lawlessness in American national security, and then from their American government, that told itself that it was lawful.
Barack Obama really makes the forever war forever,
under Barack Obama, the opposite occurs
The N.S.A. grows more powerful, often by inertia, by allowing its tools not only to develop in sophistication, but now after a 2008 surveillance law that Barack Obama votes for knowing that he will very likely soon be president
It kills potential combatants. In particular, it kills what it calls military age males, people between, essentially, the ages of 16 and 50-odd something. And the point I’m trying to drive at is that throughout all of this, not only does Obama expand the aperture and the operations of the war on terror while viewing himself as winding all of this down, but he does so through a particularly perilous way, which is to say that he empowers a lot of lawyers to set up belts of process that the previous administration, as well as the subsequent administration, don’t bother with
從生活在大家都知道，有些行為是可以通過規章製度，用不近人情的方式來處理的，而且現代社會需要這種沒有人情，公事公辦的製度，但奪走一個人的生命是絕對不能屬於這種行為的。奧巴馬正是通過自己“諾獎的光環”，以為自己高高站在人道立場上行使這個世界唯一的超級大國的特權，而且是用一種人道的手段去實行的，這就把殺戳當成行政
建立反恐機製
反恐信念的常態化，法律的常態化
意識形態（敵我，伊斯蘭基督教，有色人種白人，外夷國人）法律化
戰爭機械化，殺人遊戲化（因為美國的高技術武器是個不對稱的手段，
這種永久戰是為了反恐，就是維護美國的安全，還是投射美國勢力的手段？
反恐是把戰線推到敵人家門口，這種用帝國武力威懾來反恐的方式，必然是以壓製他人為手段的，壓製他人遲早會產生新的敵人，所以這種前沿反恐的策略的邏輯就是永久戰，所以不是因為威脅美國的恐怖活動永遠存在，所以美國必須打一場永久戰，而是美國的政策會不斷地製造新的敵人，這些敵人打不過美國，隻能以恐怖分子的身份出現，所以這一政策給奠定了這是一場永遠也不會結束的戰爭，這一政策製造了這場永久戰
奧巴馬一切的所作所為，都加強了美國反恐戰爭這一國家機器，與他人，包括後任川普的拜登不同，奧巴馬是個理想主義者，可正是這理想主義者，這人道主義者，這反戰者，把美國
In spite of its brevity, the review captures two cornerstones of my account I cared most about: one is the centrality of racialization to the history of the laws of war; the other is the complex lawyerly morality of Barack Obama's role in that history
美中開戰，大家都進集中營
中國行動（The China Initiative）
騷擾、起訴
趕走、清洗
Samuel Moyn: Rule based international order, humane wra
Endless war for human rights as domonation
But, she (Michèle A. Flournoy) added, “It’s important to draw a distinction between his appetite for nation-building, which is essentially nil, versus his appetite for using force if it’s necessary to defend U.S. national security, which I believe remains quite strong.”
In the Shadow of 9/11 | The Nation (Moyn review of other books)
Biden seems to recognize that humanitarianism, far more than politics, justified, legitimized, and, indeed, required violence
The international media tended to every report of violence across the country after largely ignoring the torture, rape, massacres, and other war crimes committed by Western armies and their allies as well as by the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS over the past twenty years
Even as Biden promises to forsake humanitarian interventions for political interests, he is still drawn back to the scene of cruelty that defines the former
Unaccountable, unrepresentative, and anti-political, humanitarian interventions are evaluated by internal and economic criteria that include best practice as determined by competitors, value for money as defined by the market, and efficient delivery as measured by budgets and timelines decided without the participation of beneficiaries
軍工發了
Oh, the Humanity (justsecurity.org) (mix of brilliance and error)
smoothed the unjust exercise of power and paved the way to a dystopian future in which domination by force may evade the checking function of a legal order focused narrowly on collateral damage.
Moyn’s searing book is about nothing less than the mechanisms by which the powerful of the planet control the weak
presents a confounding mix of brilliant moral vision with maddening historical omissions and one-sidedness
The best the law can do is reflect our best selves, though surely it often mirrors our worst
state military power routinely included law-abiding force of jaw-droppingly brutal proportions
Front assult
Did making war more humane make war worse and longer?
That's what Moyn said. Haven't read the book, but had read 3 excerts. Pretty convinced he has a strong argument. But his inadvertant use of Mayer sparked some retort. Mayer strongly objected to both "anti war and anti atrocities are counterproductive" and
Then Dexter responded specific to Moyn. He said Moyn was wrong.
No he didn't say Moyn was wrong.
He said Moyn was wrong b/c he attribited it to the wrong reason. By Basically, by quoting Atkin, Dexter laid out the true reason is the industrial military complex has grown so big it's got a life of its own. Hardly anything new. But apparently Atkin's knwoldge of details and its inner working is so vivid that his story
Did Moyn say the human rights moement is wrong, as in
? "Human rights movement" is not wrong per se, but has a detrimental and pervers effect of making war forever. I think that's Moyn's point. "What it reveals is that, for some, the only imaginable alternative to more humane war is more brutal war--not less war." Ah, he is attacking
Maybe he expressed the resignation "you may as well not do it".
But is Moyn wrong? Dexter said "it was only after the revelations of Abu Ghraib that a majority of Americans came to think the war was a mistake", very true. But the interesting question is, if so, why did the war not end for another 16 years? Here is why Moyn is right. We all agree the industrial military complex doesn't want the war to end. It takes the politicians to end it. But politicians are always bought, "persuaded" with "reason of national security" for "change their mind" even if they campaign public
Moyn suggests that opposing war crimes blinds us to the crime of war. If this is an empirical claim, it’s contradicted by the facts.
To judge by survey results, it was only after the revelations of Abu Ghraib that a majority of Americans came to think the war was a mistake.
永久戰並沒有完，拜登就明言要繼續下去，也許是要保衛美國人的安全，不受恐怖分子襲擊的安全（新疆？），無人機暗殺和特種部隊會接著把“美國的威嚴展示到世界的任何一個角落”，明言要打垮中國這死敵
As an exclamation point, Biden authorized two strikes targeting ISIS in Afghanistan, one of which reportedly killed Afghani civilians and children.
The administration is continuing the strategy that emerged under Obama, as, in the words of Hal Brands and Michael O’Hanlon, armchair strategists based at Johns Hopkins and Brookings, the United States “failed its way to counterterrorism success.” In what they dub the ”medium footprint strategy,”
The president even reviewed assassination targets each week. Obama ended dropping 10 times the drone bombs that Bush did. “Turns out I’m really good at killing people,” he quipped, “Didn’t know that was gonna be a strong suit of mine.”
One NPR correspondent said privately to me that America needed to do everything we could to stop the next terrorist attack, arguing that the ACLU’s hard-line defense of civil liberties was wrongheaded
拜登實質上是個務實者，但他的外交政策是用理想主義打包的
美國將會在8月31日全麵撤出，避免引起和塔利班的衝突：
Asked by @karentravers about timeline to evacuate individuals from Afghanistan, Psaki says: "The possibility of a deterioration of coordination with the Taliban is real. Putting our service members at risk is real and those are certainly part of the president's decision making." pic.twitter.com/wFP9IAOrgz
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) August 24, 2021
“The worst capitulation of Western values in our lifetimes”
— Bruno Ma??es (@MacaesBruno) August 30, 2021
pic.twitter.com/Onl4MEg0wt
主題：美國控製不住中國
2018
sunk cost fallacy
正是現在批評拜登的那些人導致阿富汗失敗，他把鍋甩給拜登，拜登成了替罪羊
有人借攻擊拜登撤軍大錯之機推行留守，其實很多人隻是攻擊拜登撤軍大錯，但是也有人看出撤軍是有代價的
British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab just said the moral esponsibility for civilian casulties(including 6 children) caused by US drone strikes "lies with the terrorists"（責任全在他人）
But the history of great power interventions into insurgencies suggests that efforts to stabilize Afghanistan through democratization would have been futile. My research explains why the success of great power interventions to stabilize countries relies heavily on coercion and corruption, rather than democratizing overhauls.
拜登不僅保留了川普所有反華政策，連在美國國內清算華人的“中國行動”，在最近一連串醜聞，被揭露其目標和中國掃黑除惡，是設了指標，大家有任務抓人的，照樣堅持下去
Joe Biden is displeased. After our recent editorial criticized the Vice President for privately telling Chinese leader Xi Jinping to ignore U.S. rhetoric on human rights, White House spokesman Stephen Spector wrote to object: “As he has said publicly many times, the Vice President sees human rights in China as fundamental to advancing U.S.-China relations.”
It turns out Mr. Biden has a long record of playing down human rights in private diplomatic meetings while mouthing support in public. His message to China’s Mr. Xi—that U.S. human-rights talk is meant to satisfy a “political imperative” from voters at home—is almost identical to what he told Soviet leaders as a Senator visiting Moscow in 1979.
中國與塔利班
【經濟與世貿】
【從阿富汗逃離，拜登是不是丟了歐洲】
「」
「」
「零」「引子」
"Human rights will be the center of our foreign policy," Biden says.
— Susan Glasser (@sbg1) August 31, 2021
Still not clear on what that means. or how that is even possible. Human rights abusers do not give a damn about our harsh statements.
Wake up Europe! Your nanny has resigned.
— Gérard Araud (@GerardAraud) August 31, 2021
「一」「傳說」
「二」「檄文」
「三」「聖戰」
「四」「氣炸」
「五」「“美國回來了”」
“When Biden says ‘America is back,’ many people will say, ‘Yes, America is back home,’” said François Heisbourg, a French defense analyst.
「六」「瘋了，大家都瘋了」
「七」「幾個錢？」
The US failure makes it much harder for Biden to push his core message that “America is back”. By contrast, it fits perfectly with two key messages pushed by the Chinese (and Russian) governments. First, that US power is in decline. Second, that American security guarantees cannot be relied upon
「八」「誰是超級大國？」
“美國人說遭受到伊組恐怖襲擊是等英國，我咋不知道？”
「九」「謠言」
「十」「西貢啥？」
「十一」「美國世紀」
「十二」「背叛」
「十三」「叫我怎麽不傷心？」
「十四」「動搖」
「啊，太棒了」
「十五」「恥辱」
government officials seemed openly disoriented, expressing shock and fury at their own government, and a deep sense of shame. Another military officer urged me to publicly attack U.S. immigration officials for failing to process Special Immigrant Visa applications for roughly twenty thousand Afghan interpreters who had worked with U.S. forces. “These are extraordinary times,” the officer said. “It called for extraordinary measures. They failed. Hope you consider this.”
美國人以為“大戰略”不在乎這些
“There is no system. The system has collapsed,” s
American-backed leaders in Afghanistan engaged in corruption and empowered warlords, even as some three hundred thousand Afghans joined the Army and the police to fight the Taliban. Sixty-six thousand of them perished. The Taliban suffered enormous casualties of their own, losing fifty-one thousand in battle.
“It’s hard to believe that we’ve abandoned the Afghans so overwhelmingly,” he said. “We created this society, like it or not.
「十六」「你壞」
「十七」「你這麽想？」
「十八」「beiyue」
「十九」「這是真的？」
「廿」「拜登外交綱領就跟川普差不多」
「廿一」「解釋解釋“美國第一”」
「廿二」「」
「廿三」「」
「廿四」「」
「廿五」「」
「廿六」「」
「廿七」「」
「廿八」
「廿九」
「卅」
「卅一」
「卅二」
「卅三」
「卅四」
「卅五」
「卅六」
「卅七」
「卅八」
「卅九」
「卌」
Afghanistan also belonged to US allies.
It’s a failure of the Western world and it’s a game changer for international relations,” the European Union’s chief diplomat Josep Borrell
The United States looked blundering and inept, and it dragged its allies down with it
That has led to recriminations in London and Berlin and Brussels, directed at leaders there, and at the United States
“Was our intelligence really so poor?” former British Prime Minister Theresa May asked in Parliament earlier this month. “Was our understanding of the Afghan government so weak? Was our knowledge on the ground so inadequate? Or did we just think we had to follow the United States and on a wing and a prayer it would be all right on the night?”
Are the United Kingdom and Europe too dependent on the US for their security?
Joe Biden’s reassurances that “America is back” is not enough
the US communicated, but didn’t consult
歐洲，通過北約，完全是美國的從屬，沒有獨立的能力，歐洲那種為自由民主奮鬥的雄心，隻是在美國逃跑，自己狼狽不堪後才發現一直是狐假虎威，這一切，把歐洲三大國德英法不久前非要高唱自己是全球勢力（Global Briton, Global Germany, Global France, Global EU），是亞太大國，每個國家都來個亞太戰略，還派幾艘軍艦跑到南海威風一把，顯得極其可笑
美國根本沒有跟盟友商量，隻是通知一下，曬在一邊，歐洲怎麽想呢？是覺得被虧待了？你想過站在美國一邊搖旗呐喊時那威風是怎麽一回事過嗎？結果歐洲，主要是德英，幾乎來不及撤退，幫自己的那些阿富汗戰友撤退，束手無措，結果國內隻能張口大罵，原來盟友不是盟友，歐洲要求延長最後期限，美國簡單“不”
A sense of impotence, Martin said, has laid bare the extent of allies’ dependence on the United States
The dependency on the United States fuels insecurity about what happens if the country’s domestic interests diverge more profoundly from Europe’s
Biden has said the right things, and has promised allies he will work to rebuild the relationship. But the Afghanistan exit adds to “this realization that maybe some of the things that were attributed to Trump were actually part of something deeper that’s going on in the US on both sides of the political spectrum,”
難民
德國：part of selling that mission to the public was selling its humanitarian mission,現在被打臉，怎麽跟國人交代？
US allies are wondering where they fit in the US’s priorities
withdrawal added to a growing skepticism of the United States, and its larger commitment to collaboration with allies
過去十來年中東首先意識到，尤其是那些專製的產油國，不僅石油依賴中國，而不是美國，美國也要走了，大家都在下麵留一手
現在歐洲也感覺到了，歐洲是重要，美國不會讓歐洲成為自己的敵人，但除此之外歐洲就沒什麽本事，結果美國需要的時候哄一哄，不需要的時候不搭理
“平等的盟友關係”實際上是從屬關係，跟中國為難時大家搖旗呐喊時要的，之外就呆到一邊，別惹事
反駁：NATO allies were briefed on the plans at a joint meeting of foreign and defense ministers on April 14 of this year by none other than Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin themselves. Here’s how NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg described the meeting at the time:
All Allies agreed. And all Allies agreed actually a statement, which we agreed at the ministerial meeting today, where we clearly state that we now have decided to start the withdrawal of all our NATO troops from Afghanistan, starting first of May. And the plan is to finalize that drawdown, or withdrawal, within a few months
none of the diplomats and government officials believe that the pictures of the Taliban overrunning Kabul and the United States on the run will be without geopolitical consequences for Washington—and that includes the Biden administration’s campaign to build a coalition to counter China.
the space for Europe to get cozy with Washington has narrowed
For the time being at least, making the case for a robust partnership with Washington is not good politics.
聯合國人權理事會，中國一直大聲叫，要調查美國澳大利亞在阿富汗犯下的戰爭罪
“Those in Europe arguing for more autonomy and independence will be strengthened,” b/c “In the end, U.S. policy is still ‘America First.’
but the retreat heightens the sense that America’s backing is no longer unbounded
grumblings about American credibility, compounding the wounds of the Trump years and reinforcing the idea that America’s backing for its allies is not unlimited.
How on Earth did we get to a point in which "unlimited support for allies" became the expected norm??? Trita Parsi
“When Biden says ‘America is back,’ many people will say, ‘Yes, America is back home,’” said François Heisbourg, a French defense analyst.
That hesitation will now be felt all the more strongly among countries in play in the world, like Taiwan, Ukraine, the Philippines and Indonesia, which can only please China and Russia, analysts suggest.
美國這種“戰略撤退”並不是今天才有的，很多人公開表示擔憂，但骨子裏卻祈禱美國維持自由霸主、世界領袖的地位，在危機當頭不會放棄自由世界，所以盡管美國越來越令人失望，但大家的希望還在那兒，這也是當拜登當局重新高舉自由民主人權大旗與中國叫陣的時候，大家踴躍而上的原因。阿富汗政府崩潰的戲劇性再一次提醒大家霸主不僅能力有限，而且她的動機和目的與其他追求“自由民主人權”的人並不一致，這種希望與其說是美國的行為與願望之間的差距，不如說是自己的一種混淆理想和現實的幻覺。
The country expressing the most concern has been China, which shares a short, remote border with Afghanistan, which under the Taliban served as a haven for Uyghur extremists from Xinjiang, the far western Chinese province
中國與塔利班的接觸是不能當成當成雙方將會有一個穩定關係的體現，畢竟雙方對現代的觀念相差太遠，塔利班訪華，表示塔利班意識到中國的實力和影響，意識到自己不能同時樹立美國和中國兩個敵人，但塔利班對政權穩定和經濟發展的要求很低，把社會製度和生活方式放在首位，所以它對中國的依賴是次要的，如果中國處理得不好，雙方隨時可以反目成仇。
Those who recommended staying indefinitely did so in the full knowledge that 20 years of massive expense and effort could not produce a stable central government or a secure Afghanistan. There is zero evidence any outside force ever could do that. None ever has.
But it is also a severe blow to the West
But in the end, the timing and nature of the withdrawal were set in Washington
To become a more capable ally, Europe must invest more in its security capabilities and develop the ability to think and act in strategic terms
European Strategic Compass, a document that will precisely define our ambitions for security and defense for the next five to 10 years.
consisting of about 5,000 troops, that could undertake rapid and robust action. Helping to secure an airport in challenging circumstances, as in Kabul, c
這是笑話，美國5000人的部隊也控製不了喀布爾機場，之所以沒衝突，是塔利班想著以後的國際關係，而且美國是不是收買了塔利班也說不清，美國軍方公開說他們時刻和塔利班有聯係，最後一批撤退的，就是塔利班通過特殊路徑，保護他們到機場的（其他人太多）
But we must go further and faster. The European Defence Fund, established to boost the bloc’s defense capabilities, will receive close to 8 billion euros, or $9.4 billion, over the next six years
A more strategically autonomous and militarily capable E.U. would be better able to a
The stunning meltdown of the U.S.’s Afghan client state
The dramatic scenes of despair in Kabul have frustrated and angered many American allies, particularly in Europe, inflicting considerable reputational damage
非常赤裸裸把利益攤在桌上
“中國俄國懇求美國繼續參與”，哈
the American withdrawal was a deliberate policy move, even if it caused unintended consequences黨媒
美國不理解戰場不再軍隊較量
Even the closest of America’s allies, such as the U.K., have openly criticized the U.S. withdrawal. Tom Tugendhat, chairman of the foreign-affairs committee in the U.K. House of Commons and an Afghanistan war veteran, compared the debacle in Kabul to the 1956 Suez crisis, which bared the limits of British power and precipitated his nation’s strategic retreat
Since President Obama, the action has been of U.S. withdrawal, but my God, has this made it clear,” Mr. Tugendhat said in an interview.
The U.S. denouement in Afghanistan has raised particular concerns in Taiwan, the democratic island Beijing seeks to unite with the mainland—by force if necessary
The prevailing view among U.S. allies and partners in Asia is that Washington can now deliver, finally, on the “pivot to Asia” t
While the chaos in Afghanistan has at least temporarily undermined America’s credibility with partners and allies, these relationships, from Taiwan to Israel to Ukraine
government officials seemed openly disoriented, expressing shock and fury at their own government, and a deep sense of shame. Another military officer urged me to publicly attack U.S. immigration officials for failing to process Special Immigrant Visa applications for roughly twenty thousand Afghan interpreters who had worked with U.S. forces. “These are extraordinary times,” the officer said. “It called for extraordinary measures. They failed. Hope you consider this.”
美國人以為“大戰略”不在乎這些
“There is no system. The system has collapsed,” s
American-backed leaders in Afghanistan engaged in corruption and empowered warlords, even as some three hundred thousand Afghans joined the Army and the police to fight the Taliban. Sixty-six thousand of them perished. The Taliban suffered enormous casualties of their own, losing fifty-one thousand in battle.
“It’s hard to believe that we’ve abandoned the Afghans so overwhelmingly,” he said. “We created this society, like it or not.
【盟友與國際影響】
Even as he asserted that “the buck stops with me,” Biden pointed fingers at everyone but himself: DONALD TRUMP tied his hands with his deal with the Taliban, the Afghan army wasn’t willing to fight, and some civilians didn’t initially want to leave
帝國不是請客吃飯：
reduced role for America as the world’s policeman worries allies in the Middle East and Europe
“It sounds like the end of an era,” said Bruno Macaes
reassure allies that “America is back” after four years of Trump’s
Britain, France and Germany, are unhappy with America’s end to the Afghanistan war, which came with little co-ordination
“Mr Biden wants to appeal to a strong notion of the American national interest. That has a cost: partners can no longer expect their own interests to be taken into account in major US foreign policy decisions,” Mr Macaes
“We are hearing from EU officials that a new caution is necessary on forging a common EU-US policy on China. That’s an immediate and heavy cost of the Biden decision,” said Mr Macaes,
European and Asian allies remain dependent
Finally, what is taking place should only encourage Europe to strengthen its strategic autonomy to make sure it can continue working with allies whenever it can—as well as autonomously any time it needs to. Nathalie Loiseau
the way this war ended presents a crisis of legitimacy for the transatlantic alliance, and for NATO in particular. Dave Keating
The credibility of US foreign policy, as well as its intelligence services and military, is so damaged that it harms the political and moral credibility of the West as a whole. Daniela Schwarzer
Many of the ideas coming from Washington have visibly stopped working. Bruno Maçães
《華人街日報》社論：How Biden Broke NATO - WSJ
The chaotic Afghan withdrawal has shocked and angered U.S. allies
警示一，帝國主義就是紙老虎
警示二，阿富汗果然是帝國墳場
警示三，決定勝負的是人不是武器
警示四，自大的結果就是自己打臉
警示五，農村包圍城市再次得到驗證
警示六，人心向背非常重要
警示七，美國是世界最大的破壞者
警示八，中國是世界最大的建設者
警示九，不改變就沒有出路（指塔利班）
警示十，美國道德徹底破產了
操作：Sean Parnell@SeanParnellUSA
Right off the top of my head:
Begin AFG exfil in winter
Maintain intel & air power for ANA
Evac Civilians: Charities/NGOs
Evac Civilians: USG pax
Evac vetted Afghans
Transport high value equipment
Disable heavy arms
Evac US military
Terminate Kabul Airport ops
Transfer Bagram
Observers abroad see the culmination of decades of American incompetence
難民
數千（21300）阿富汗難民在歐洲的民軍基地等待前往美國，但盟友擔心美國拖延，找借口把這些難民留在歐洲，大家信不過美國
大約2萬阿富汗人將會在美國定居，這不是個大數目，其他國家（加起來）接受的更多。拜登的撤軍覺得既是一個戰略決定，更是一個政治算計，一開始美國接受阿富汗難民人數極少，據媒體透露，美國外交部的頭頭幾乎一天24小時再給全世界打電話，懇求大家接納阿富汗難民。拜登的打算，是如何在中期選舉裏站住腳，保證能繼續掌權，繼續推行自己的政綱【這點跟共產黨有不同的嗎？】
塔利班：一路打回喀布爾
泰晤士時報代表英國是最狠的
Is Joe Biden up to the job? | News | The Sunday Times（Josh Glancy）（讀）
— Meet the Press (@MeetThePress) August 22, 2021
Mitchell: "We have destroyed morale ... and it is a real problem for America's leadership abroad." pic.twitter.com/q8In4D7Qrp
真的？
But government officials and defence experts from across the region have told the Financial Times that the comparison between Afghanistan and Washington’s relationship with the rest of Asia is misplaced.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-09-02/juniper-mystery-attacks-traced-to-pentagon-role-and-chinese-hackers
https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/1433451378391883782
軍工也是一份職業
The Strategic Logic of a Forever War：The United States should have ignored sunk costs in Afghanistan and maintained a light military footprint
This may be the most dishonest of the "sustainable status quo" arguments I have seen so far, and there has been a lot of competition for that distinction
傷感
拜登班子內鬥
補充
哦
共同富裕，怎麽共同富裕？
2021下半年經濟
第四：Could China’s rising household debt threaten Beijing’s consumer-led growth vision? | South China Morning Post（2021.08.07）
千萬貸款，值一千八百萬的三個單位（如果原價一千五百萬，首期三成就是四百五十萬，千萬貸款表示剛剛買了不久升值20%，賣掉一個個淨賺一百萬，就能完全周轉過來，但如果剛買不久就升值20%，誰願意賣？），存款隻剩20萬，月供6萬，還有其他消費，但還是不願意賣掉一個單元。反映：全民押在房產，房價升也不是，降也不是
By the end of last year, China’s household debt as a percentage of disposable income had reached a record high of 130.9 per cent
當收入都用到利息上的時候，資源就不是用在刀刃上
必須劇烈的房地產稅，免稅額，第二套以上不計麵積全麵3%以上（五百萬的3%也隻有15萬），第三套6%（30萬了），等等，如果像上麵的兩套多餘的，每年45萬稅，那麽工資就不能承擔，迫使大家出售
Household debt as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) stood at 62.0 per cent at the end of the second quarter, down 0.1 percentage points from its historic peak of 62.2 per cent at the end of last year, and 0.1 percentage points below the first quarter of this year.
這一政策基本堵死出租房，是不是妥當呢？大家又到那裏投資呢？如果隻有股市，是不是另一個泡沫呢？
help the family sell their three-bedroom flat to raise 8-9 million yuan.
瘋了，這才是內卷，賭“Everyone’s loans and leverage are piling up. If you don’t increase yours, you will lag behind in wealth. Of course the risks are growing like crazy, but no one dares to lower leverage, neither the rich nor the government.”
“維護房地產市場的健康發展，維護住房消費者的合法權益”
說教
但這“保障了基本民生”的背後卻是在2020年中國民間增加了1.7萬億（美元）的債務來彌補政府無為帶來的消費缺口，自救的結果【16】
Over the past five years from 2015 to 2019, China’s households have added $4.6 trillion in borrowing, compared to a $5.1 trillion expansion in US household debt from Q3 2003 to Q3 2008.2008
A new look at the declining labor share of income in the United States McKinsey Global Institute (2019)
The LabourShare in G20Economies OECD (2015)
THE GLOBAL LABOUR INCOME SHARE AND DISTRIBUTION ILO, (2019)
（點擊放大）
丹麥、英國的財富、人生遺傳性
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/W270RE1A156NBEA
稅收比例低，並不一定是說總收入低或福利低
中國的數字顯然可疑
有意思：
收入分布
張維迎：市場經濟與共同富裕
張維迎是北大教授，信奉西方自由市場，經常跟政府為難，還好命比許章潤好多了，他在經濟50人論壇寫了一篇文章，向共同富裕質疑，被西媒廣泛引用，
公眾號：大海裏的針
China’s push for “common prosperity” is not just about taxing the rich but also directing resources into rural areas and the lower-income group, according to one of the country’s most prominent experts studying income inequality.
中國的貧富不均在特征上跟美國很相像，壟斷性的行業（金融、高技術），高技術職位（對教育依賴性極強），技術人才往往是收入和資產都大大高於社會平均。政府起到了推動的作用，第一稅收製度不健康，第二把資源（配套基建、土地、資本和行政支持，如規章製度上的優惠）投在支持這些新興產業上，第三主要把投資放在城市。
李實特變指出中國的稅收製度非常不妥，直接稅收（收入）隻占三分之一，間接稅收反而是三分之二，前者減輕分化，後者加劇分化，全世界這的比例是反過來的。
李實解釋的這些簡單事實，說明中國改革開放依賴一直是一種非常親資本，賤勞工的製度，隻是因為發展的太快，大家都得益，才讓人忽視了社會上層拿走了絕大部分果實這麽一個事實，就是說，這一段時期中國有錢人是在世界都是最愜意的。同樣的製度也反映在企業管理，政府對企業的優惠，這是近期習近平兩打，全麵監管企業，反壟斷，封殺一些行業，和共同富裕一下子湧出來，嚇得大家發抖。這原因是企業和有錢人一直享受特殊待遇，資本與政府基本是一家人，如果政府要改，也得有個過程，可習近平一下子半年卻盤出台，大家精神上沒做好準備。
李實特別提到城鄉差別，建議政府增加農村教育的投資，我也說過好幾次這多重要
共同富裕肯定不是富裕
最近震蕩中外的是習近平講話裏強調的“共同富裕”。習近平每天都講話，習近平講話是要提醒各級領導幹部他的旨意是什麽，讓大家反省是不是跟上隊伍了，習近平講話也是要提醒所有各級幹部老百姓「通過嚴明政治紀律和政治規矩，推動各級黨組織和黨員幹部始終自覺地在政治立場、政治方向、政治原則、政治道路上同以習近平同誌為核心的黨中央保持高度一致，確保黨中央一錘定音、定於一尊的權威」。本來很習近平說了那麽多，難說到底哪句話，哪個方針是最重要的，這次之所以受重視，是因為過去快一年以來中國政府開始加緊對大型民企和平台的整治，從螞蟻上市被拒，阿裏被罰，到網絡數據管製，滴滴到美國上市後受打，到破除阿裏騰訊美團的壟斷，铩羽各大平台，絞殺整個補習產業，限製遊戲時間，重申996違法【1，2】，消滅娘炮，根絕飯圈，大家發現把習近平當成隻是喜好事無巨細，啥都插一手，卻不必當真的話，是要摔跟頭的，政府以前隻說不做，現在可能變了，所以習近平的講話，用的每一個字、詞，都被嚴加分析，當最近一次講話數次提到“共同富裕”後，外媒都坐不住了，《彭博》一分析【2】，發現大事不好，以前“共同富裕”隻是偶爾提提，今年“共同富裕”用量是爆炸式增加：
習近平講話裏“共同富裕”每年出現的次數
再也不能視而不見了。那次中央財經委員會會議，中國的大頭都出席了，是大家站隊，還是習近平的新政得到了中央普遍的支持，都無關緊要，每句話，每個字都得當真。不過你要是讀讀中央財經委員會會議的公布，並沒有什麽驚人之處，就是通過改善分配機製（如稅改）來使得社會分配更加公平：
“推動更多低收入人群邁入中等收入行列”，“完善養老和醫療保障體係、兜底救助體係、住房供應和保障體係”，“依法保護合法收入，堅決取締非法收入”都是非常對老百姓有利的政策，“形成中間大、兩頭小的橄欖型分配結構”也絕對是西方正統經濟學的觀念，中國如果不是，那就是有問題，有問題要改，不是什麽怪事，那什麽引起了震蕩？是“三次分配”，“合理調節過高收入，鼓勵高收入人群和企業更多回報社會”，因為這馬上讓人聯想到“共產”，習近平的共同富裕肯定是殺富濟貧，在有錢人聽了發抖後黨媒出頭說“不是殺富濟貧”有點亂此地無銀三百兩了，說不是卻要求主動三次分配，
共同富裕的背景，目的和意義，兔主席有詳細的解釋【4，5，6，7，8】，
共同富裕“不是殺富濟貧”，“不是平均主義”
習近平講的共同富裕有沒有根據，理由和法律基礎呢？都有，
在政府這一輪攻勢下，繼馬雲退出阿裏後，拚多多黃崢，京東劉強東，字節跳動張一鳴紛紛退居二線，有避難之意，像是政府不容
禁止996會影響企業創新嗎？
習近平總書記“無論是會議上的發言、調研時的談話，還是出訪時的演講、報刊上的文章，他都善於用故事來傳達深意，感染他人，於細微動人之處向世界詮釋中國智慧、中國方案和中國力量”
China’s richest 20% earn more than 10 times the poorest 20%, a gap that hasn’t budged since 2015. The country counts 400 million people -- about one-third of its population -- in its middle class, defined as those with annual household income between 100,000 yuan ($15,392) and 500,000 yuan. More than 600 million people in China still live on a monthly income of 1,000 yuan
一是堅持以人民為中心的發展思想，我明確提出了堅持以人民為中心的發展思想。2020年10月29日，在黨的十九屆五中全會上，我進一步強調要努力促進全體人民共同富裕取得更為明顯的實質性進展
二是不再簡單以國內生產總值增長率論英雄
三是我國經濟處於“三期疊加”時期
四是經濟發展進入新常態
五是使市場在資源配置中起決定性作用、更好發揮政府作用
六是綠水青山就是金山銀山
我們決不能允許貧富差距越來越大、窮者愈窮富者愈富，決不能在富的人和窮的人之間出現一道不可逾越的鴻溝
實現共同富裕，要統籌考慮需要和可能，按照經濟社會發展規律循序漸進。同時，這項工作也不能等，要自覺主動解決地區差距、城鄉差距、收入差距等問題，推動社會全麵進步和人的全麵發展，促進社會公平正義，讓發展成果更多更公平惠及全體人民，不斷增強人民群眾獲得感、幸福感、安全感，讓人民群眾真真切切感受到共同富裕不僅僅是一個口號，而是看得見、摸得著、真實可感的事實
美國人覺得習近平這麽做一箭雙雕，一是贏得國內民心，繼續擔任 黨和國家領導人，二是在中美冷戰中把中國提升到一個更吸引人的位置，這第二點是有曆史依據的，也是顯而易見有影響力的
Xi wants to reverse economic inequality would be if the government pushed through measures such as introducing property and inheritance taxes aimed at the rich. Such moves could be challenging because many of the elite have links to the party, and anger could flare among many Chinese people who have bought up housing as their main investment.
是，如果打擊過於嚴厲，房價大跌，那受影響的範圍太廣，社會是會動亂的
提高發展質量效益，夯實共同富裕的物質基礎
看看其中兩項的具體計劃，在“深化收入分配製度改革，多渠道增加城鄉居民收入”，要點有“統籌各類職業技能培訓資金，合理安排就業補助資金，健全統籌城鄉的就業公共服務體係”，“創造公平就業環境，率先消除戶籍、地域、身份、性別等影響就業的製度障礙（包括取消戶口限製，不能因為30歲以上，生孩子等就受歧視）”，“支持企業通過提質增效拓展從業人員增收空間，合理提高勞動報酬及其在初次分配中的比重，合理調整最低工資標準（意思是提高工資）”，“加快構建產教訓融合、政企社協同、育選用貫通的技術技能人才培養培訓體係，完善技能人才薪酬分配政策，拓寬技術工人上升通道。對有勞動能力的低收入群體，堅持開發式幫扶，提高內生發展能力，著力發展產業使其積極參與就業（培訓）”，“完善再分配製度（稅收改革）”。在“縮小城鄉區域發展差距，實現公共服務優質共享”裏，“推進城鄉區域基本公共服務更加普惠均等可及，穩步提高保障標準和服務水平。推動義務教育優質均衡發展，建成覆蓋城鄉的學前教育公共服務體係”，“以人定地、錢隨人走製度，切實保障農民工隨遷子女平等接受義務教育，逐步實現隨遷子女入學待遇同城化”，“加快建設強大的公共衛生體係，深化縣域醫共體和城市醫聯體建設，推動優質醫療資源均衡布局”，把鄉村教育水平和醫療水平提高到城市的程度，農村入城享受城市待遇，就是對農村居民的一個重大援助
打造新時代文化高地，豐富人民精神文化生活
踐行綠水青山就是金山銀山理念，打造美麗宜居的生活環境
堅持和發展新時代“楓橋經驗”，構建舒心安心放心的社會環境
保障措施
如果美國總統這麽說，社會會有什麽反應？
習近平每句話都用“我”
“中國共產黨人的初心和使命，就是為中國人民謀幸福，為中華民族謀複興”。
兔主席對“黨”的總結也是挑好的說，帶過了黨內殘酷的鬥爭，帶來的災害和發展後的極大腐敗，“付出了血的代價”
“另一種人則選擇把黨所有的曆史與政策都用純政治的角度去理解。這種看法認為，要掌握黨的“真諦”，就要透過其表麵的措辭，看到背後的政治權力的博弈與鬥爭——因為歸根到底一切都是權力與利益的分配”，西方
兔主席引用習近平的話，多次說“我們又犯錯誤”，要承認犯了錯誤，首先要接受實事求是，唯物主義，外界是不以人的意誌為轉移的，一個絕對權威者，是可以拒絕承認現實的
習近平現在像一個皇帝，也像一個機器，一般人是沒有機會跟他說話的，他以前那種跟記者對話的機會是見不到了
字節跳動副總裁李亮實名“舉報”：“此前騰訊與某機構出台報告稱遊戲無害，受某中學老師批評。就這一篇批評文章，騰訊就推動某地公安立案，刑詢這位反對遊戲毒害學生的中學老師，此案至今沒有結論。”深圳基本上是是資本控製的城市，政府就是為了資本服務，說深圳政府是一個被黑幫收買的政府都未必過分，騰訊這種超越法律的行為不時見到。
詆毀中國的
？
China’s richest 20% earn more than 10 times the poorest 20%，高於美國和德法
It’s hard to know.揣摩是習近平終身製的
leaving everyone to speculate about massive wealth redistribution and the nationalization of private companies.
They only have to look to the last 15 years: It’ll be more of the same.
raising the bar on industrial policy
The reality is, as analysts at independent research firm Gavekal Dragonomics recently wrote, China “does not view consumer internet companies as the nation’s leaders of technological innovation: that role belongs instead to the manufacturing sector.”
Viewed through this lens, the next decade will be more of the same: An attempt to make higher quality and more accessible industrial goods and, ultimately, create a more level playing field across companies and industries.
working without the state’s helping hand and paying more taxes will be the bigger challenge.
專欄，有點猜，但至少不瞎扯
A significant portion of Chinese adults are in the middle-income bracket, making them better off than the average adult in the rest of the world
蛋糕論
Xi, poised to begin a third term in 2022, is turning towards inequality after concluding a campaign to eliminate absolute poverty,
雖然各類收入總體上都表現為持續的恢複之勢，但速度明顯出現了分化：工資性收入和轉移淨收入恢複較慢，財產淨收入和經營淨收入恢複則更快，甚至大幅度超過了疫情之前的水平：
僅依靠城鎮就業率並不能充分反映勞動力市場的全部麵貌，因為這裏並沒有將農民工納入統計當中。所以，我們有必要對農民工的就業狀況做一番探索
回顧近期國家出台的一係列舉措，從整頓社區團購、打壓房價，到限製教培、叫停“996”，再到三次分配與共同富裕，這一切的一切都在佐證著發展風向的轉變——如果說過去是效率優先，兼顧公平，那麽未來就是效率和公平並重，國家正在盡最大努力給每一個人提供更加公平的任何機會，減輕老百姓的種種負擔，也充分表明了高層對於解決發展不平衡問題、實現共同富裕的決心和態度。對於縮小收入差距、改善居民生活、促進消費增長、推動經濟社會更高質量發展來說，這些都是再好不過的消息
kaitou
癡人說夢話，但是城市居民
Now, Xi Jinping has put China’s tycoons on notice that it is time for them to share more wealth with the rest of the country.
“A powerful China should also be a fair and just China,” Yao Yang, a professor of economics at Peking University who endorses the shift in priorities, said by email. “China is one of the worst countries in terms of redistribution, despite being a socialist country. Public spending is overly concentrated in cities, elite schools and so on.”
力度大，太急，太狠
胡祖六“富裕富裕，共同富裕別成了共同貧窮了”
“最好的醫生在北上，我們窮人治病上哪治？什麽共同富裕，沒聽說過。”
為什麽中國要針對私企，而不是國企？因為“兩個毫不動搖”，毫不動搖鞏固和發展公有製經濟，毫不動搖鼓勵、支持、引導非公有製經濟發展，中國的治國觀念是普天之下莫非王土，王土的意思並不是說這是個人的，而是說是國家的，中國現代的機製是政、黨合一，國家的黨的，都是一回事，黨的意思是“國家的就是人民的”，所以並沒有私念，隻是當代為管理而已，最終，這些財富是要“服務於人民”的。既然國企是國家的一部分，能動手的，隻有私企了。
劉鶴強調：“支持民營經濟發展的方針政策沒有變，現在沒有改變，將來也不會改變！這無疑給市場吃下了一顆‘定心丸’”，“黨的十五大把‘公有製為主體、多種所有製經濟共同發展’確立為我國的基本經濟製度，明確提出“非公有製經濟是我國社會主義市場經濟的重要組成部分”
zhege
習近平總書記曾強調，“我國民營經濟隻能壯大、不能弱化，不僅不能‘離場’，而且要走向更加廣闊的舞台。”
zhege
浙大李實
一是為政府籌集資金用於公共支出，二是調節收入分配，縮小收入差距。相比而言，中國稅收的第二個功能沒有發揮應有的作用。一方麵這與稅收結構有關係
若要讓稅收在調節收入分配方麵發揮更大的作用，就需提高直接稅比重，降低間接稅比重。直接稅包括個人所得稅，財產稅或房產稅，遺產稅，贈與稅等等
在調整稅收結構時要遵循的原則是，不能增加整體稅負的水平。當前應該考慮開征房地產稅、遺產稅、財產稅等直接稅，但要考慮減少間接稅
要解決社會階層流動性放緩的問題，還是要依靠公共服務水平的均等化，尤其是教育資源的均等化「均等化，和上麵“不增加整體稅負水平”一起，是把資源轉向社會底層，但能不能把政府從國企的稅收轉移到福利上呢？」
在中國的收入分配製度中，初次分配和二次分配處於更重要的地位，應該說比第三次分配要重要得多。所以，還是要花更大力氣去解決初次分配當中存在的問題「共同富裕和第三次分配掛鉤，是個障眼法」
當前社會階層流動性、收入流動性、代際流動性確實都出現了不同程度的放緩，要解決這個問題，還是要依靠公共服務水平的均等化，尤其是教育資源的均等化
建設成福利國家不應該是我們的共同富裕所追求的目標，我們沒有必要這樣做。而且，中國的經濟發展程度、社會富裕程度還沒有達到可以建設福利國家的程度，更多要考慮的是要同步推進發展和共享。因此，按照當年北歐的福利國家模式建設中國福利製度是不合適的。但政府在進一步提高公共服務、社會保障、社會福利等方麵的水平時可以借鑒北歐部分政策
Some of the actions have been reactive, others deeply studied: Beijing surveyed 17,000 firms and 700,000 parents before its education ban
In my view, the biggest source of uncertainty today is the Cyberspace Administration (CAC), which has asserted power to regulate IPOs, algorithms, and financial media. Unlike most other regulators, it is a party organization, its chief a vice-director at the Propaganda Department
【大學生職場調查：超6成自認10年內年入百萬】中青報麵向全國各地大學生發起關於就業的調查，2700份問卷調查結果顯示：00後對自己進入職場後的薪資比較樂觀，超過20%的大學生預期自己畢業後月薪過萬，其中8.20%男生和3.25%女生預期自己會進“5萬元俱樂部”，67.65%大學生評估自己畢業10年內會年入百萬
稅收的主要來源：中國和其他國家的比較
這裏
zhege
中央黨校（國家行政學院）馬克思主義學院院長、教授張占斌撰
要堅持以人民為中心的發展思想，正確處理效率和公平的關係，促進社會公平正義，促進人的全麵發展，在高質量發展中促進共同富裕。必須立足新發展階段，貫徹落實新發展理念，緊盯全麵建設社會主義現代化國家的前進方向，堅持和完善社會主義基本經濟製度，牢牢把握“兩個毫不動搖”，加快完善社會主義市場經濟體製，提高發展的平衡性、協調性、包容性，調動方方麵麵創新發展的積極性、主動性，加快構建目標明確、方向一致、相融相濟、科學合理的體製機製和政策體係，構建初次分配、再分配、三次分配協調配套的基礎性製度安排，加大稅收、社保、轉移支付等調節力度並提高精準性，形成中間大、兩頭小的橄欖型分配結構，使全體人民朝著共同富裕目標紮實邁進
浙江工商大學校長、浙江大學社會治理研究院院長鬱建興
共同富裕也不能隻是依靠不斷加重個人稅賦負擔、出台過多的社會政策、過多過高承諾提高社會保障水平來實現
清華大學習近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想研究院院長艾四林
中國式現代化是全體人民共同富裕的現代化，共同富裕路上，一個不能掉隊，體現了富裕的全麵性。按照黨的共同富裕“路線圖”，到2035年，全體人民共同富裕取得更為明顯的實質性進展；到本世紀中葉，全體人民共同富裕基本實現。可見，中國式現代化解決了西方現代化伴生的兩極分化問題。而且，在中國式現代化進程中，堅持以人民為中心，始終把人的全麵發展放在突出位置，就是要實現人的全麵發展的現代化
is signaling plans to more assertively promote social equality, as he tries to solidify popular support for continued Communist Party rule
The government needs to “encourage high-income people and enterprises to give back to society more” and to “create opportunities for more people to become rich,” state-run Xinhua News Agency cited an official report of the meeting as saying
He wants this to demonstrate that socialism is better than Western capitalism in caring for all the population
the country’s Gini-coefficient, a measure of inequality, widened to 70.4 in 2020 from 59.9 in 2000, making China one of the world’s most unequal major economies, according to data from Credit Suisse
四億人月入不過一千
now include diverting more financial support to poorer regions and taming property prices.
終身製造勢
事實充分證明，非公有製經濟在我國經濟社會發展中的地位和作用沒有變！毫不動搖鼓勵、支持、引導非公有製經濟發展的方針政策沒有變！致力於為非公有製經濟發展營造良好環境和提供更多機會的方針政策沒有變！
李光滿胡錫進之爭，有人說“一場新的文革正在開始”，這是對貧富不均的反應，對鍍金時代
But in his efforts to assert ever-greater personal control over both the party and civil society, he is flirting with propaganda tools and intimidation tactics that many observers see as a throwback to the Mao era，引導大眾意誌打擊個別個人、群體、階層和行業。非常有針對性
Xi has made it clear that the party must not abandon its revolutionary ideals — that it is duty-bound to deliver “common prosperity” and stand up to the west, especially the US.
人民對美好生活的向往就是我們的奮鬥目標
declared that it was necessary to “regulate excessively high incomes” in order to ensure “common prosperity for all”
限製租金增長過快（5%上限），學區房
《金融時報》總是通過權力的眼光來看待中國
兔主席：習近平共同富裕與文革毫無關係，更像美國桑德斯和民主黨議員科貼絲（AOC）的政綱，是為了限製資本無限的權力，
According to this argument, people should judge Xi’s administration not by its often draconian means but by its ends《金融時報》不信，尤其是對習的終身製惡心
粗暴、突然，缺乏明朗下和可預測性
數據作為一種資源，工具，武器，既是主權，也是監控
creating a grand experiment for 21st century authoritarian governance.
Beijing aims to have it both ways. It believes that technologies will shore up social control and suppress political dissent without damping the entrepreneurial vigour or the innovation that animate the world’s fastest-growing large economy.
數據國有化
數據主權不是中國特有的，在美國，這是不言而喻的，因為美國控製，壟斷世界數字經濟的大頭，但這種管製可能導致世界進一步脫鉤
分割中西的金融市場，有阻斷中國企業融資的嫌疑
“Techno-authoritarian state”一切為了保住自己的統治地位，太單純，簡單
數字列寧主義、技術集權
控製控製還是控製
“I think the solution that [Xi Jinping] has settled on is Orwell,” said Scott Kennedy
“數據是一種新型生產要素，與土地、勞動力、資本、技術要素並列，共五大生產要素”
李光滿老師次日的文章毫不避諱地說：“各大央媒集中統一刊發一篇來自公眾號自媒體的文章十分罕見，顯然是新聞宣傳主管部門和網信主管部門的統一安排，由此形成了非常強勢的宣傳效應。”
人民日報後來都刪了
The quest for dominance has generated neither peace nor democracy at home or abroad
社融
金融數據分析手冊（李奇霖）
李奇霖
理解中國宏觀經濟（一）2019年12月27日
這是一？https://new.qq.com/omn/20210619/20210619A05POB00.html
理解中國宏觀經濟（三）2021年07月23日
理解中國宏觀經濟（四）2021年09月06日
煤進口
塔利班，和平，安全
經濟
美國經濟
大經濟
泛太協定
恒大
Productivity growth adjusted for the expanding stock of buildings, machinery and other capital was 2.6% a year from 2000 to 2010. It has been negative since 2015, a sign of how inefficient much of that investment has been
property contributes 30% of value added in China, and sales of land contribute 27.5% of local government revenue比我查到的要高
“汽車新四化——電動化、智能化、網聯化、共享化浪潮開啟，百年汽車產業正站在大變局大洗牌的黎明前夜。”
2020年8月28日底，恒大首席經濟學家任澤平在《全球新能源汽車發展報告2020：百年未有之大變局》開頭如是寫道。
恒大汽車“停工通知書”背後，發生了什麽？-虎嗅網（2020.04）
恒大造車一年，究竟造出了點啥？-虎嗅網（2020.04）
恒大汽車引戰260億港元，許家印朋友圈再次發揮巨大能量 | 南方周末（2021.01）
房產
中國和中東
評論
博主已關閉評論
