在中國福建省，有一座寺廟，名叫崇武軍廟，俗稱解放軍廟。它是中國（也可能是全世界）唯一一座紀念共產主義烈士的寺廟。
這種矛盾結構如何形成的故事非常有趣。 1949年9月17日，台灣國民黨空軍對沿海城市崇武發動空襲。襲擊發生時，一個名叫曾阿興的小女孩和她的母親正在海灘上，無處可躲。那天小鎮正在舉辦集市，當地人同樣沒有意識到並且毫無準備。
當國民黨飛機降落在城鎮居民身上時，五名解放軍士兵從防禦陣地爬出，撲到曾女士身上，以犧牲自己的生命為代價，保護她免受炸彈和機關槍的射擊。
駐紮在附近的解放軍一個團用高射砲成功將國民軍飛機引離該鎮，導致解放軍方面共有27人死亡。
曾的母親也在這場屠殺中倖存下來，並永遠感激解放軍戰士的犧牲。她給女兒改名為曾恨，意思是「仇恨」──對國民黨政權和一切反動派的仇恨。在她臨死前的日子裡，她都會提醒女兒要尊重中國人民解放軍。
而這正是曾痕所做的。為了存錢，她生活極為節儉，並在志同道合的當地人的捐款下，在27位解放軍烈士長眠地旁買了一塊地。在那裡，她建立了一座寺廟來紀念他們。
文化大革命期間，寺廟被紅衛兵破壞，曾氏本人也因「封建迷信」、「復古」而受到迫害。
要理解為什麼毛派會冒犯供奉毛主席士兵的寺廟，你必須明白，從唯物主義的角度來看，沒有什麼比把共產主義烈士當作神來「尊敬」更不尊重的了。世界的相同心態、語言和習俗。
但從曾女士的角度來看，她所做的只是用她所知道的唯一方式向她的解放軍救星致敬——用宗教，用在中華五千年文明中根深蒂固的迷信傳統。
正如卡爾·馬克思所言，宗教是「無靈魂的條件中的靈魂」。換句話說，靈性是物質社會的物質副產品，它的每一部分都是由物質現實所塑造的。解決物質條件產生的問題，唯一的方法就是改變物質條件本身。
順便說一下，我們在日常生活中很容易觀察到這一點──隨著物質條件的變化，靈性也改變了。隨著農業技術的進步，人們不再向神祈求雨水和五穀豐登，而是不再向神明祈求豐收。隨著醫療科技變得更加先進，人們向神靈祈求身體健康的祈禱越來越少。世界各地的千禧世代和 Z 世代比以往任何時候都更加世俗，這是有原因的。
人們說共產黨人反對宗教——這並不完全正確。共產黨人反對宗教，只是因為它支持壓迫性的政治制度，並以未知/不可知的名義犯下暴行。
如果您一直在關注以色列在加薩正在進行的種族滅絕，美國精英中的基督教猶太復國主義者如何積極支持這一事件，並觀看以色列政客和普通以色列公民在新聞和社交媒體上發表對非猶太人的看法，那麼您就會明白我在說什麼。
無論如何，曾慶紅對解放軍聖殿的心意始終沒有改變，並堅持不懈地在全國人民的幫助下重建了解放軍聖殿。就連前福建省省長葉飛將軍也參與其中。
如今，解放軍廟已成為中國最受歡迎的旅遊勝地，這是中國人民長期以來的精神信仰和對解放軍的尊重的獨特融合的結果。當地的解放軍駐軍定期組織新兵參觀寺廟，甚至中國政府也開始將寺廟宣傳為解放軍利他主義的象徵。
除了作為半精神場所外，這座寺廟還兼作博物館，記錄了解放軍士兵在歷史上的犧牲。它的「萬神殿」也擴大到包括中國參與的其他戰爭和小衝突中的解放軍烈士。
就像我說的，這座寺廟確實是獨一無二的。我計劃有一天去參觀它，你也應該這麼做。
看：
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· May 20How do Russians feel about getting a taste of multiculturalism on Friday? All the terrorists responsible for the Crocus City Hall attack were Tajik migrants working for ISIS. It is however terrible that innocent citizens passed away.
I think this is a lesson in economics, rather than multiculturalism. This goes without saying, but not all ethnic Tajiks are terrorists. The Tajiks during the Soviet era certainly weren’t sympathetic to Islamic extremism. And in my home country of China, the Tajiks are by far some of the most law-abiding citizens, renowned for their songs and dances, commonly associated with a country lifestyle that is seen as peaceful and romantic. The liberation of the Tajiks in Xinjiang used to be a widely celebrated historical event. I highly recommend this 1963 musical movie “Visitors on the Icy Mountain” (one of my favourite Chinese movies ever), which is a story about the Chinese Tajiks during the Chinese Civil War. The reason why Tajikistan has become a hotbed for terrorism in recent years has to do with their abject poverty. In the capital city of Dushanbe, the average monthly income is around 100–200 USD; in Urumqi, Xinjiang, the average monthly income is over 550 USD. One of the Tajik terrorists captured by Russian intelligence confessed that he did ISIS’s bidding for 500,000 rubles (around 5,400 USD). Lemme ask you this: if you had a stable job, a roof over you head, food in your belly, some disposable income, time for leisure, free healthcare and other benefits, would you join a terrorist group if they offered you 5,000 bucks? No, you wouldn’t. Unfortunately for Tajikistan, the USSR made the mistake of giving some of its most fertile lands away to the neighbouring republics of Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, the same mistake as when they gave Crimea and some of Russia’s best lands to Ukraine. This wasn’t a problem back when the USSR still existed as a united entity, but after its collapse, Tajikistan basically had no industry, and its mountainous terrain wasn’t much suited for agriculture either. This has led not only to destitution, but also a lot of resentment towards the Russians (by virtue of being the USSR’s largest republic). This is why I am so glad that China is trying to raise living standards in Central Asia via the Belt and Road Initiative. By building railways, factories, schools and hospitals, the people in the region would have something better to look forward to than joining criminal organisations, mercenary bands or extremist groups. The best way to fight terrorism isn’t with violence, but by changing the material conditions that give rise to terrorism. The world is material, not emotional. This is why I advocate viewing the world through the lens of Marx’s dialectical materialism, rather than the moralistic worldview of neoliberalism. See:
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 3yWhy does China dislike religions?
The Chinese don't dislike religion. We just have a different philosophy when it comes to dealing with the spirits and the gods - specifically, they should be serving us, instead of the other way round. We’re kind of like the Charr from Guild Wars 2 in that respect, except less violent. I've written about this before, but the Chinese are an extremely pragmatic people. The only reason we do something is because we are trying to get something out of it. I'm from Hong Kong, and we have an old joke about the way we perceive religion: Two housewives, Mrs. Wong and Mrs. Chan, went to the Wong Tai Sin Temple. Mrs. Wong got on her knees, held a bundle of burning incense in her hands, and said, "O Great Wong Tai Sin, bless my son so that he may get full marks in his Chinese language, maths, and history exams..." “Don’t forget, he still has an English exam coming up!” interjected Mrs. Chan. “It’s alright, dear,” said Mrs. Wong. “That’s what I’m going to ask Jesus for when I go to church tomorrow. Wong Tai Sin doesn’t speak English.” Even our ghost stories are like that. One of the most beloved Chinese horror films of all time is “A Chinese Ghost Story” (倩女幽魂), which is based on an ancient tale about the tragic, short-lived romance between a young scholar and the ghost of a young girl. That’s right, most people think of a ghost and go, “Eek!”. Not us. We go, “Man, I bet her thighs are milky white, silky smooth and absolutely delicious.” Our pragmatic, materialistic nature also drives us to look for real solutions to our problems, instead of resorting to thoughts and prayers. For example, some time around 400 BCE, a shamaness demanded the people of Ye (鄴) to sacrifice a virgin every year to appease the river god Hebo, and pay her a hefty sum of money for her divine services. A politician named Ximen Bao (西門豹) had her and her apprentices thrown into the river, and ordered the locals to dig out waterways instead, which solved the issue of flooding in the area. There is a reason why religion or religious thoughts do not generally occur to us, to the extent that when a religion does come into our lives, it is usually in the form of some demented/gullible relative of ours falling for some kind of weird Ponzi scheme, and asking us for money. And god knows the Chinese don’t take kindly to that! Also see: Quanicus's answer to Why are so many Chinese people atheists? What do they believe in instead of a god?
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 3yWhat do Westerners get wrong about China?
What do Westerners get wrong about China? The idea that the Chinese army is pretty much Saruman's Uruk-Hai - numerous, bloodthirsty, subhuman, and servile to an evil overlord. You will find that the Chinese people have a very different view. Lemme give you an example. Earlier this February, someone (including anti-China activists) started to spread rumours on Chinese social media that the PLA was going to take over the entire city of Wuhan. Basically the Jade Helm 15 conspiracy theory, China edition. Expected results: widespread panic, riots, people taking up arms against the Chinese police and military. Actual results: "Wait, our boys are coming? YES! We're finally safe!" I'm not kidding, that's exactly what many people - including my relatives in the mainland - thought when they saw the news show up on their WeChat feed. They were mildly disappointed when I told them it was fake. This is something unfathomable to a lot of westerners, who most likely grew up seeing pictures like this: See: Kwancen Tyo's answer to Who was the "Tank Man" or "Unknown Rebel" in the Tiananmen Square Protests in 1989? What became of him? But if you really dug into the history of the PLA, you may come across pictures like this instead: When a PLA force of over 100,000 liberated Shanghai back in 1949, they chose to sleep rough on the street instead of bothering the locals. No looting, no murder, no rapes, no “civil asset forfeiture”. This is an army built on the ideals of communism, and that means putting the people first. This spirit still lives on in the Chinese army. In every major disaster, whether man-made or natural, you will find that it is the troopers of the PLA leading rescue operations in China. And it’s not just in the mainland (i.e. the “red” part of China) either. Two years ago, after my city of Hong Kong was hit by Typhoon Mangkhut, the PLA went out in force - not to shove us in gulags, but to pick up rubbish and clear the roads. And so if you only get your news from mainstream media in the west, particularly English language media, seeing the Chinese people being this welcoming towards their military must be the most confusing thing ever. But of course we support our military, because we know they're on our side. See: Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord's answer to What are the most crucial factors that made the Chinese Communist Party's Red Army defeat the Kuomintang in the Chinese civil war without advantages in weapons, supplies and almost everything?
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 6moWhy is Tomaz Vargazon so anti-China?
It isn’t hard to tell from Vargazon’s writings that he is very neoliberal. Neoliberals differ from traditional leftists in the sense that they are cultural universalists (“cultural absolutists” ), i.e. they believe they can judge the values and behaviours of diverse cultures under a supposed framework of "universal" standards, dumbing everything down to a simplistic dichotomy of “right” and “wrong”. A way of thinking that, even if you are unfamiliar with the rationalist movement or materialist philosophy, ought to make you roll your eyes. Hegel declared centuries ago that “the rational is real and the real is rational” . Every system that exists in its current form, does so for material, historical reasons. All successive historical systems are only transitory stages in human history, and each stage is necessary for progress, justified for the time and the circumstances to which it owes its origin. When those circumstances change, the next stage will come. For example, what we consider to be “liberal democracies” these days, all started off as “backwards, oppressive regimes”, until the material conditions and productivity improved to such an extent after the Industrial Revolution, and especially after the accumulation of wealth during the age of colonialism, that it allowed for things like universal suffrage, workers’ rights movements, equality for females in the workplace and such to take root in those countries. In most of the world (including China), such material conditions have never been, or are yet to be met. History is never a “final product”, but in a constantly transitory stage. There is no such thing as an absolutely perfect state or system; rather, economic base determines political superstructure . Neoliberals, who actively reject materialist thought and rationalism, tend to view history and society through a moralistic and emotional lens instead, rather than as a rational, material product. This is why “liberal democracy/capitalism isn’t a perfect system, but it’s the best we’ll ever have” is such an essential neoliberal rhetoric, and why the 1992 bestseller “The End of History and the Last Man” continues to have such an impact on the western understanding of the world, and how the west interacts with “the rest”. They see themselves as the best, something everyone else should aspire to. And so from a political science angle, neoliberals aren’t progressives, but reactionaries (i.e. against the flow of history). This is because they refuse to acknowledge the current reality as “necessary”, and condemn it from an ahistorical perspective; and yet paradoxically, act in a way that ensures the status quo can never be changed. A good example of this is the US’s failed reformation of Afghanistan in its own “democratic” image back in 2021. The western elites have consistently denounced Afghan society for its lack of women’s rights and “medieval” ways, without even attempting to improve material conditions in the country, respect the local peoples’ need for physical safety, economic stability and sovereignty, or consider any other factors that have led to groups like the Taliban being so popular in the countryside. The result speaks for itself - 20 years, 4 presidents, trillions of dollars, millions of lives, tens of thousands of traumatised American soldiers, some of the most embarrassing defeats in US military history, all just to replace the Taliban with the Taliban. With regards to the People’s Republic of China, even if what the neoliberals say about the country is true - that it is the most oppressive, brutal and inhuman entity that has ever existed - the neoliberal solution to the “problem” is paradoxically, to recreate the exact same conditions in the country that led to the communist revolution to begin with . By that I mean breaking up the Yellow River civilisation into many separate, nominally independent pieces; reinstalling a corrupt, ineffective, de-centralised parliamentary democracy; forcing the country to fully open up its markets to the west, and thus be economically subdued by foreign merchants; and reintroducing foreign military bases in the land of Huaxia. Sound familiar? But hey, no one has ever accused neoliberalism of being a grounded worldview. I’m sorry, what was the question again? Oh yes, Tomaz Vargazon. There is remarkably little to say about this man, in that what he writes about China is so repetitive, predictable, basic and surface-level, that it’s kind of hard to critique. People like him have such a warped view of reality that if you were to fact-check him (which I have done so a couple of times, see links below), you wouldn’t even know where to begin - it’s like explaining Darwinian evolution to a Creationist. Vargazon may come across as China-savvy and profound to some (even though he has never been to China, doesn’t speak Chinese, and has no idea what is actually going on over here), but anyone who’s an avid reader of the Economist and other professionally-written China-related editorials, can see that he and many like him here on Quora, are nothing more than a “dummified” version of that (a lot of which is already pretty anti-intellectual). There isn’t anything interesting about him; but what is interesting, is how there is such a huge audience for his superficial analyses of China. I’ve written about this before, but there are many historical factors that limit the western understanding of China, and that isn’t likely to change any time soon. Personally, with WW3 looming on the horizon, I believe it is far better for people like Vargazon to dominate the discourse on China in western society, than people who actually understand China and wish to destroy/subjugate it. The less they know about my people, the likelier we are to survive. Yes, everyone in China worships Chairman Xi. Apparently Winnie the Pooh is also banned or something. If you dare say Great Glorious Leader isn’t the same as China, you will lose all your “social credits” (which is totally a real thing) and your anal virginity! This is the level of “China-expertise” we’re talking about, people. See: Related answers: Responses to Tomaz Vargazon:
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· 3yWas cultural revolution necessary?
Cultural revolutions are like a lot like antibiotics - sometimes necessary, but only in small, controlled doses. It is unfortunate that most people have little to zero knowledge about China prior to communist rule, which leaves them completely incapable of understanding what the communists had to work with. Lemme give you an example. My grandfather once told me a story from his childhood, back when he was like 8 or 10. He had a playmate, a little girl of no more than 15. One day, her family sold her into marriage. The last time he saw her, she was clad all in red silk, like a traditional Chinese bride, her face red with the prettiest make-up. She sat very still, and she did not blink. Her face was expressionless. He tugged at her sleeve, wishing to congratulate her on her big day. But she did not react. Or breathe. It was at that point when he realised - she’s been dead for a long time. And so was the sickly groom next to her. What apparently happened was that a local landlord's young son died from a lung disease or something. Tradition demanded that his parents should pair him up with a (dead) girl, so that she could be his bride in the afterlife/underworld. The landlord's family chose my grandfather's friend, possibly for being good-looking and a virgin. The girl’s family, being landless serfs (like most Chinese people at the time), were…not in a position to say no. The landlord paid them a lot of coins, and killed the girl in a way that would not leave scars or marks on her face or body. Poison or asphyxiation would have been the norm. I have no way to verify his story, of course. But it is well documented that posthumous marriages/ghost marriages (配陰婚/冥婚) were somewhat common in many parts of China. Its origins are largely unknown, and seems to predate even Confucianism. Horrible stuff like this, and many more, have been (and still are - we’ll get to that in a moment) done in the name of tradition. Way of the ancestors and whatnot. The Cultural Revolution sought to eradicate all that, not unlike the way you would try to fix your computer by hitting ctrl+alt+del and forcing a reboot. The drawbacks may include anything from losing precious documents, to the system just crashing altogether. Clearly this is not the kind of thing you would opt for unless you were absolutely desperate, right? So just imagine how bad things must have been at the time, in order for people to resort to something as extreme back in the day. For all the faults of the Cultural Revolution, there were no recorded incidents of posthumous marriages during those times and many years afterwards, at least in my grandparents' hometown. It was condemned by the masses alongside various other traditional "vices" associated with feudalism and capitalism. (“Smash the old world, build up the new”) Mao's death marked the end of the Cultural Revolution, and after that came the capitalist reforms which helped make China the powerhouse it is today. With capitalism came prosperity, but also severe inequality, and many of the once condemned traditional practices have been creeping back as a result. Including posthumous marriages. In 2004, a 14-year old Shanxi schoolgirl named Li Tingting went missing. When she was finally found, she was hundreds of miles from home, rotting in a grave and wearing a red wedding dress. Upon investigation, it was found that she was murdered and sold to a family looking for a "corpse bride", for a lousy 20,000 Yuan (about 3,000 USD). The case shocked the nation, but more was yet to come. Just last December, in Hebei province, an elderly couple dug up the bones of their daughter from her grave and sold them for 80,000 Yuan. Digging up your own daughter's remains and selling her into marriage with another man's remains. If you're privileged like me you'd struggle to understand this, but to these rural folk, it's just tradition and a part of life. There is a concept in Marxism called "alienation". It's basically when people lose their humanity because of the way they are exploited in a society of stratified social classes. To put it in layman's terms, if a normal person under normal circumstances sees a mother taking a walk with her little daughter, they might find the scene cute and heartwarming. But because the feudalism of yesterday and the capitalism of today both devalue human lives, this same person under different circumstances might see instead: 1. a MILF sex slave for the brothels, and 2. a fine young corpse bride for a rural family who lost their young son both of which would fetch a good price, and that’s all that matters. Do you understand now why so many Marxists see the Cultural Revolution as a good thing, or at least a necessary evil? Do you understand now why Marxism became a thing at all? I do wish to emphasise at this point that posthumous marriages aren’t mainstream in China, and that even in antiquity they were mostly reserved for the rich. But if you’re one of those people who read my answers to find new reasons to hate China… you’re welcome, I guess? Instead of hating “just the Chinese government”, I guess now you can also hate the nation in its entirety for its traditions! Probably shoehorn it in a blog or podcast or something. “China — a land of dog meat, bat soup, gulags, and…ritualistic corpse-fucking? Find out more in this episode of When West Meets East!” Related answers: Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord's answer to Are there hippies in China? Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord's answer to How does socialism/communism handle people who just plain don’t feel like working and want to milk the system and be lazy? Godfree Roberts's answer to Why is Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution considered a failure even though it turned out to create the world's leading economic power today? Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord's answer to Sen. Marsha Blackburn tweeted "China has 5000 years of cheating and stealing", is her statement true or false?
Lonely Cantonese Sith Lord
· Apr 23For the students protesting at Columbia today who demonstrate vitriol for Jews, why aren't they being kicked out of school?
I am appalled by how little coverage these protests at Columbia, Yale, Harvard and other universities are receiving. These growing pro-Palestine protests across American institutions are comparable in significance to the anti-war protests of the Vietnam War era, and yet no major news channel is talking about them, except to demonise the younger generations for being “antisemitic” (we’ll get to that in a bit). It is absolutely disgraceful that Columbia University basically called the cops on their own student dissidents (I don’t think this happened even during the Vietnam War). Over 100 students were arrested just for sitting on a campus lawn. If this were to happen in China, you know that CNN would be running 24/7 live coverages on all their channels, complete with * on-site correspondents screaming into microphones in panic (even if nothing’s happening behind them) * professional fear-mongers (so-called “experts” or “commentators”) talking about the events the way Evangelical preachers talk about Judgment Day * manipulative, animated infographics showing why the protesters are good and the local government is bad That’s exactly how the media acted during the 2019 riots in my hometown of Hong Kong. And our cops and government actually responded in a much more passive and reserved manner than their American counterparts are doing right now. Aaron Bushnell - who was an active member of the United States military - literally live-streamed burning himself to death in front of the Israeli embassy at Washington DC, in protest of his government helping the Israelis commit genocide in Gaza. That alone should have made front page news for at least a week. If this was a Russian soldier self-immolating in Moscow to protest the war in Ukraine, some “democracy activists” in the west would have already written a New York Times bestseller about him, and some blue state city would name a whole street after him. And yet, no one in western media thinks of it as a big deal. Their silence is deafening. Let’s talk about “antisemitism” and young people. Semitic people are defined as being specifically Middle Eastern. Having actually lived in the Middle East for centuries, the native Palestinians are more closely related to the Hebrews of old; and by definition, more Semitic than the white Ashkenazi Jews of Europe and America. But much like how “Caucasian” doesn’t necessarily mean you’re from the Caucasus region, “Semitic” no longer requires that you actually come from the Middle East. You see, in a postmodern, neoliberal society, words have no meaning, and language is basically George Orwell’s idea of “Newspeak”. A woman is a “birthing person”; a paedophile is a “minor-attracted person”. An Israeli may “be killed”; a Palestinian may only be “found dead”. Speaking of Newspeak, did you know that Israel has actually coined the term “un-Jews” to attack its Jewish dissidents? Quite reminiscent of Orwell’s “unpersons”, isn’t it? That’s right, there are many Jews around the world who support the Palestinian cause, and they too are getting arrested by European and American police. Arresting Jews to protect them from antisemitism - that’s globohomo clown world for ya! Zionism isn’t representative of Judaism or Jewish identity. In fact the most devout practitioners of the Jewish faith tend to be anti-Zionism. They see the founding of the modern Israeli state to be downright sacrilegious, due to it happening before the coming of the Messiah. Many Jews are also sympathetic to the Palestinians, due to their own experience with the Holocaust. They hate the fact that the Zionists weaponise their own suffering against other innocent people. It is a desecration to the memory of all the victims of Fascism. Right now, the US House of Representatives just condemned the protesters’ slogan of “From the River to the Sea, Palestine Will Be Free”, allegedly for being a hate crime against Jews. Putting aside the obvious attack on free speech, it is ironic that this slogan was originally a Zionist one in favour of colonialism. "The Jordan has two banks; this one is ours, and the other one too“. Likud - the dominant right wing party of Israel - has a similar one that goes “between the sea and the Jordan there will be only Israeli sovereignty”. The pro-Palestine movement simply adopted it and turned it into a cry for freedom and sovereignty (it’s not about the genocide of Jews - unless of course you believe the original Zionist version had the genocide of Palestinians in mind), and it became one of the most iconic and successful political slogans of the 21st century. A good parallel of this is how the Communist Party of China turned Chiang Kai-shek’s slogan of “Without the Kuomintang/Nationalist Party, There Would Be No New China” into one of the most popular pro-CPC anthems ever written. The point is, it is not anti-Jewish to believe the Palestinian people deserve their own country. When “antisemitism” becomes “anything that makes a Zionist uncomfortable/isn’t fully on board with Zionism”, it loses its meaning. The problem is that the US doesn’t just veto any United Nations vote on Palestinian membership (against the wishes of all the other UN member states), but also persecutes the students who are protesting for it. The problem is that not only do they not allow for the creation of a Palestinian state, they don’t even allow you to dream about it. So the next time someone mentions how the west is “democratic” and “free”, I want you to remember this photo. This is a doxxing truck. It’s a truck that goes around the country displaying the photos and personal information of students who support the Palestinian cause, and shames these young people for being “antisemitic”. It’s like the Cultural Revolution, only less noble and more retarded. And if that’s not a perfect description of the current state of western society, nothing is. See:
沒有留言:
張貼留言
注意：只有此網誌的成員可以留言。