天易网

 找回密码
 注册
查看: 6425|回复: 37

陈凯:不脱中国不成人

[复制链接]
发表于 5/3/2013 13:30:44 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 郭国汀 于 5/3/2013 13:34 编辑

不脱中国不成人人vs.宦奴娼-中国二字对人的摧残,奴化与束缚-


陈凯 Kai Chen
(Written 5/9/2006, Reprint 7/27/2011)

编按:陈凯先生是反共人士中的一类典型,其人其文激情有余理性不足,其对中国传统文化彻底否定性评价,实质即马恩之共产党宣言“与传统观念,道德,文化,习俗实行最彻底的决裂”!陈文从表面上看似乎有一定道理,若认真剖析则存在不少严重错误。希望天易网友们就此展开深入批判分析。

这个主题的逻辑在此:没有真正的人便不会有真实的中国。人先于国国才有意义。现实的中国没有真实的人(?) 因为中国是以消灭真实的人而立国的,所以中国没有真正的人。真正的人也不会建立以消灭人性为目的的国。只有灭绝人性的人们才能建立灭绝人性的国度。

要建立真正的人就要销毁现实的中国。在现实中国框架中生活的并与其认同的人不会是真正的人。他们只能是奴隶,宦官,小偷,强盗,强奸者,卖淫者,御用者,皇权崇拜者,贿赂者,文化吸毒并毒瘾成性者,难得糊涂者,诡而无智者,肉而无灵者,群而无个者,虚而无实者,崇权疾贤者,苟且偷生者,胆小无为者,精神分裂者,两极阴阳者,人鬼不分者

所谓的中国人国人国民其实是自相矛盾的名词。有中国处便无人(?)在中国与国的压迫下,人何谓人?民无人而何谓民?中国其实应称鬼国在鬼国中,人是鬼,是魔,是怪,是奴,是妓,是虚,是无。在鬼国中,鬼吃人,鬼变人,鬼惑人,鬼拌人,鬼扰人,鬼灭人

什么是人?人不同于畜与物。人有灵:人能识好坏良莠。人能辩真假是非。人能知进步与落后。人能自知,自省,自悟。人有智:人能基逻辑而推理。人能凭学习而进步。人能借探求未知而积累知识,走向希望与未来。人能籍反省历史而汲取教训。人有欲:人有幸福欲,欢乐欲,求知欲,表现欲,信仰欲,满足欲,食欲,性欲,自由欲人有感:人有爱感,悲感,崇高感,卑贱感,使命感,同情感,希望感,绝望感,满足感,平静感人有尊严:人有作人的天赋尊严。无他人可以用人作为达到目的的手段。人有权利:人有作人的天赋权利。人有言论权,创造权,生命权,追求幸福权,生育权,爱情权人有意志:人有上帝给与的自由。人有选择并为其承担责任。人有个体性:猪猡不知它与它猪有何不同。人却深知个人的独特。

什么是中国什么是中国人的它是人的定义的相反与背叛:中国人没有灵,只有灵乃上帝所赐。乃皇帝,国家所给。忠君忠国之人不识好坏良莠,不辩真假是非,不知进步与落后。忠君忠国之人没有自知,自省,自悟。中国人没有智,只有愚伪:对中国人而言,欺人欺己便是智,昏头混脑便是明。非逻辑,无推理,不学只记,怕探求,惧未知。如此中国,何谓希望与未来,何谓真实历史。一国两制专制下的自由是中国人的胎儿。中国人崇灭欲:欲在中国乃是罪。怕欲,抵欲,消欲,灭欲乃世人所求。无欲无求乃世人所取。中国人怕表达感情:感情外露为耻。感情隐藏,感情压抑,感情消灭为荣。中国人不知何为尊严:用人与被人用是中国人际关系的定义。

中国人不知何为天赋人权:混淆权利与强权是中国专制的特征。一切来自政府,国家与皇帝乃是中国人对人权的认识。中国人不知人有自由意志:笼中奴隶是中国人唯一所知的生存状态。许多中国人离了笼子枷锁便不知如何生活。自由对中国人而言是毫无责任的胡作非为。中国人没有个性与独立人格:枪打出头鸟消灭所有有个性与人格尚存的人是中国文化负向筛选的唯一特征。海外华人与大陆华人的不同由此略见一癍。

由此可见,有中国后便无人是有理而存的。中国二字就像压在人头上的一座大山。在这座大山下人是变态的,病态的,扭曲的,非人的怪物与魔鬼。吃人是他们唯一的生存手段;他人的痛苦便是鬼怪的欢乐;认知自然规律与道德法则的人成了傻瓜;自阉忠君的宦官成了人上人;社会成了卖淫者与卖灵者的乐园;国家成了专制者用人试验的实验场;人成了无灵,无智的血肉之躯被权贵们用来建造那无用的,只产生苦难,毁灭与死亡的长城”- 围绕着,保卫着那非人,反人的中国这就是中国;这就是那人死鬼兴的世界;这就是那痛苦的根源。要建新中国,必先重建人。让人归回他的本源,本性,归回到造人,造物主的面前。只有这样,将来的中国才是有意义的中国,才会是道德的中国,才是人的,而不是鬼的,中国。这样的中国才有成为伟大国度的可能
发表于 5/3/2013 20:22:15 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 黑匣子 于 5/4/2013 00:23 编辑
郭国汀 发表于 5/3/2013 13:30
不脱中国不成人/陈凯人vs.宦奴娼-看“中国”二字对人的摧残,奴化与束缚-

       黑匣子主义认为,陈凯所言,不无道理,但其实应该说,红色中国,或曰大陆中国,乃是亘古未有且旷世未闻的一个人类尊严全然虚无的魔窟,而至于人与魔不能两立也。











个人标签:
讨马讨毛讨共 铲除共产魔教 埋葬毛僵尸 颠覆毛匪帮 解放全中国 拯救全人类!

 楼主| 发表于 6/24/2013 01:48:02 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 郭国汀 于 6/24/2013 01:52 编辑

回复 黑匣子 的帖子

陈之错误在于混淆了是非,误将中共与中国混为一谈,将主要罪责推委给中国传统文化,甚至中国人中国语言,这明显属似是而非严重误导公众的谬论。
东方文明严格说来主要由中国和印度文明组成,日本文明实质上源于中国文明,但自1860年代被美国人强行开关以后,日本人痛下决心学习西洋,很快便超越大多数西方国家。台湾人主体是大陆人,福建人和客家人及不到6%的土著,因此,台湾文化主流其实属中国文明,但台湾人吸取了日本文化,美国文化和荷兰文化,同时又保留了纯正的中华文化,因此目前台湾方明的水准要远高于大陆。

西方文明主要包括基督教与伊斯兰教文明,两者其实属兄弟关系;中国文明由于过份早熟与英国文明最接近,英国政治哲学家边沁之utilitianism 中国译之为功利主义(原意是为最大多数人的最大利益,译成功利主义后,绝大多数中国人其实并不知道“功利主义”的原始真意),英国人的思维方式与中国人的务实思维相当接近。德国人长于周密的理论思辩,法国人擅长理想逻辑,英国人则偏重实际实务。因此有上海人最接近英国人的思维之说。

印度文明与西方文明其实相距最远。因为中国文明属世俗文明,西方希腊罗马加基督教文明属一神论文明,与世俗相当接近,印度教及佛教则过于脱世,远离凡尘,一切均是空。除非全球文明达到相当高度,否则西方文明必然居主导地位,唯有当全球人类文明均达到非常高的水准之后,亦即全球各种族民族之间的差别消失后,印度教和佛教文明才有可能成为主流。正是在此意义上,爱因斯坦曾坦言,未来最好的应当是佛教。佛教不利于国民的竞争意识的培养,是导致所有的佛教国度皆经济落后,政治体制不先进的根本原因,因为在佛教看来人世间的一切均毫无意义。活在人世就是受苦,转世轮回就是无穷受苦。唯一真神的犹太教基督教和伊斯兰教。

简言之,将中共暴政彻底灭亡中国传统文明文化,强制用马列斯毛党奴化强暴全体国人六十三年导致之恶果归因于所谓中国文化,中国文明,中国语言的论调肯定是错误的,也是完全不能成立的。我历来主张:在尊重继承中国传统文化文明的基础上,全面学习吸收英国,德国,法国,美国,日本及全球一切先进文化文明成果,形成新中华文化文明才是中国人民最正确的选择。这需要全体有志于改变中国的志士仁人共同努力,虚心学习研究借鉴人类社会一切文明成果,靠喊口号不可能解决任何问题,而只能导致《动物庄园》里幸福的猪们享受的:一切动物平等,但某些动物更平等。两条腿的是敌人,有翅膀的是朋友!

 楼主| 发表于 9/10/2013 23:41:44 | 显示全部楼层
recent months I have read a number of western leading history professors´ leading works about China, which proved that Chinese civilization once is much higher than western one, before 16 century, Chinese technique and science was the toppest one in the world, only after 1800 the western civilization overpass Chinese. the reason is very complicated. one key point is that: Chinese i second to none in almost every area of human affair which show that all modern China become so misarable and backword, the main reason is the totallitarian dictatorship 63 years blood and iron ruling, it is none business of traditional Chinese culture and civilization.
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 00:26:17 | 显示全部楼层
¨the west was prejudiced against China for all the old, well-known reasons. China was thought to be backward, cruel, rigid, a place cut off from what Hegel had termed the world spirit. the prejudice was based essentially on racial dislike, fear, and cultural arrogance. political ideology played little or no part in the antipathy¨.
Simon Winchester, The Man Who Loved China: the fantastic story of the eccentric scientist who unlocked the mysteries of the middle kingdom, Harper Collins publishes, 2008 p.222
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 00:32:36 | 显示全部楼层
Joseph Needham asked why if the Chinese had been so technologically creative for so very long, and if they invented so much in antiquity, why did modern science develop not in China but in Europe and the West? why was China unable to hold on to its early advantage and creative edge? why was there never a true industrial revolution in China? why was there no firm embrace of capitalism? why by the 18 century and 19 century , was China a nation known principally for being backward, howtile, and poor? how did the brilliant early nation evolve into Emersonś later booby nation?
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 00:39:52 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 郭国汀 于 9/11/2013 00:49 编辑

Chinese, far from existing beyond the mainstream of human civilization, had in fact created much of it.  paper, print,gunpowder, and the compass, the four inventions that Francis Bacon once famously said had most profoundly changed the world, had all been invented and first employed by the Chinese. Chinese also invented blast furnaces, arched bridges, crossbows, vaccination against smallpox, the game of chess, toilet paper, seismoscopes, wheelbarrwos, stirrup, powered flight, to name a few. p.8in 12 century, China iron production was in the vicinity of 125000 tons a year, a level not reached in Europe until the eighteenth century.(p.14,John Merson, The Genius That was CHina: east and west in the making of the modern world, The Overlook Press NY, 1990)
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 01:54:20 | 显示全部楼层
in Tang Dynasty, not only was the civil-service examination system tightened up, but officials began gradually to replace the old aristocracy. in 11 century, 50 million population was governed by no more than 13500 officials. (Harry Gelber 2007 .48) in 1126, printed books appeared, and had an immediate impact on education and literacy(56); in Southern Song, 40-50 million souls, were still administered by a mere 13000 or so officials, 8000 of them serving in the capital. (57)
by the start of the 15 century the Chinese were not only the most advanced civilisation in various industrial skills, but their naval architecture had reached the point where they could construct hundreds of ships of various sizes. (88)

Qing preserved racial separation, banning intermarriage between Manchus and Chinese as well as forbidding Chinese migration into the Manchu homeland. (118)
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 02:11:08 | 显示全部楼层
some of the leading lights of the European Enlightenment were greatly attracted to the riches of Chinese culture, and saw China, with its rigorous examination system for officialdom, as a perfect meritocracy, Leibniz, the German philosopher thought that Chinese civic morality had major lessons for Europe and together with Western mechanical invention, might even help to found a progressive world civilisation. Goethe, the greatest Germanyś poet, was another admirer, as well as the great French writer Voltaire, who thought that China was much more civilised than barbaric Europeans; he was particularly in favour of Chinaś practical Confucian wisdom and recognition of the close cnnection etween capacity to rule and the moral character of the ruler. Peter the Great corresponded with Leibniz about China, and Catherine the Great was in touch on the subjuect with Voltaire (about China).
however, doubts had voiced. Montesquieu thought China was a despotic state ´whose principle is fear by the later 1600s, Russian visitors, noted the low moral qualities of the Chinese with whom they mixed everyday, found them crafty and unreliable in business. (149-152)
 楼主| 发表于 9/11/2013 02:29:59 | 显示全部楼层
while some westerners critisize : Bishop Berkeley in Ireland thought Confucianism was nothing more than rules of experience; it rested on no principles. Montesquieu had rejected the idea that Chinese moral systems rested on principles. Hegel especially critical, he CHinese... empire is the realm of theeocratic despotism... the individual has no moral selfhood.  Adam Smith reflected on the abysmal poverty of masses of the Chinese population, the infanticide, and the isolation of the economy from the rest of the world. John Stuart Mill wrote about óriental despotism Marx and Engels criticised the 'asiatic mode of production; Diderot, the views of academics éxiste only on paper,which tolerates anything´. Protestant missionaries Robert Morrison observed that he Chinese are generallyselfish, cold-blooded and inhumane; in1803 the Russian admiral Adam von Krusenstern account commented on the ṕurely tyrannical'government of CHina. (Harry Gelber, The Dragon and the Foreign Devils: China and the World, 1100 BC to the Present, Bloomsbury publishing 2007.168-69)
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则


站内文章仅为网友提供更多信息,不代表本网站同意其说法或描述,也不构成任何建议。本网站仅为网友提供交流平台,对网友自由上传的文字和图片等,本网站
不为其版权和内容等负责。站内部分内容转载自其它社区、论坛或各种媒体,有些原作者未知。如您认为站内的某些内容属侵权,请及时与我们联络并进行处理。
关于我们|隐私政策|免责条款|版权声明|网站导航|帮助中心
道至大 道天成

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|联系我们|天易综合网 (Twitter@wolfaxcom)

GMT-5, 2/24/2018 13:11 , Processed in 0.102805 second(s), 10 queries , Gzip On.

Copyright 天易网 network. All Rights Reserved.

© 2009-2015 .

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表