主题：一些说明 -- 葡萄

First, the Rome city population was around 1m in the 1st century. That's not a small number at that time. Approximately 2-5% of the total population under the empire (total population changed over time).

Second, 最后只能用贿赂、大浴室和无休止的酒宴来达成妥协。--at least that's free bathing service to average Joes. Average Joes... I know even in 1980s in Shanghai, public baths were limited and crowded. You can ask Shanghainese. At least I never had free public bath even in 1980s.

All the freebies are at least some compromise paid out of the pocket of the establishment. And those are not cheap. Keep in mind, that happened Before Christ. Then we had no modern medicine, thus no US Medicare/Canada Universal medical coverage.

You need to put everything in the historical context. To be frank, NOW, average Chinese might be much richer than the mid/upper class of some Roman citizens 2000 years ago, but that's does not mean Romans' social achievements are trash.

Third, it is the institutional innovation. Revolutions happened frequently both in Europe/China. But in Athens, it gave birth to democracy. In Rome, it gave birth to senate and republic. And then Roman law and tribune system. Then the jury system, social security system, medicare system, welfare system, comprehensive income/inheritance tax system... Each bloodshed resulted in institutional progress to protect the economic and social interests of the poor or disadvantaged.

Politicians come and go, but institutions solidify the compromises and create incentives for the protection of the disadvantaged. Tribunes protected poor people's rights, not because they enjoyed doing so. Many of them were from aristcratic families. They did that to promote their own political career.

Modified from your own words: 葡萄说，改革三十年中国最大的失误是没有培养起一个与国家利益一致的既得利益集团--we have very weak institutions to protect average Joes' interests back in China.既得利益集团 comes from certain institutional arrangement.

更不要说社会中下有、有士绅了。--there is fundamental conflicts of interests between landlord and poor peasants. If such informal system works, then we should not have peasant revolution since 1920s, CCP and then today's republic since 1949.

Informal system works when people have conscience. But unfortunately, most gov. officials were not 张居正, in constrast, they were and are 周扒皮. There is no incentive there to be nice to average Joes.

BTW, my key point in the previous post: political/economic elites of China, please give out some of your abundance and share the prosperity with average Chinese. If you can not share out wealth, at least respect others' dignity and human rights. You do that not for charity, but for the benefits of your own class.

Grape and I are both part of this elite group. That post was a reminder to all of our fellows.