主题：中国的政治风险 -- 风烟滚滚来天半

首先，拿苏联解体来对比并不合适，苏联解体前戈尔巴乔夫搞的那套东西已经把国内思想彻底搞乱了。89年中国没有翻天，一是因为搞乱的时间还不长，二是老邓为代表的那一批老革命还在，大风大浪经历过的人比较会掌控局面，而苏联就没这样的条件了。

其次，也是最根本的原因，政府要致力于，并且正在致力于解决国内的问题，核心是建立健康运行的经济和分配体系。别的什么力量，也许挑刺可以，但是要自己单独上台执政，没有这个能力。

再者，这个时代已经庸俗化了，虽说不是没有理想主义的人，但多半是网上骂骂，茶余饭后闲谈，真要上街，能有几人？

about China. (Personally, I think he wrote the book just to cash in the very obvious surge of interest in China since the collapse and the whole G-2 brouhaha.)he's more HKC than most Chinese. He argued that China's rise to superpower status would fundamentally change not only the global power balance, but also the very definition of "progress" and "modernization". I don't know how correct his prediction would be, obviously, nobody knows, I don't' think he is as confident in his argument as it appears. Anyway, one of his argument is that we should stop treating China as just another "communist country", obviously China isn't one, and we should not drag the whole debate about China through the whole "democracy vs authoritarianism" mud hole, which is a very recent phenomenon. According to him, China, as of 2009, should be seen more as a modernized version of imperial dynasty, like the dynasties China used to have. I think he makes sense. Another thing I think Western medias get right is their assessment that the very legitimacy of the government and the system lie with the ability of the government to keep economy grow at high rate and improve standard of living, obviously, the government agrees with them, that's the government puts so much stock into protecting 8% growth rate. Right now, obviously the economy is still growing at very high rate, and probably will continue to grow for quite a while. But eventually there will be a crisis, and what happens during the crisis will test if China could successful reclaim what many Chinese believe to be its rightful place in the world. Remember, imperial dynasty always plunge into stagnation, chaos, uprising and civil war after their peak, I don't think China could become the US if the current system could not survive economic calamity as severe as the great depression like the US did. And i don't think Chinese system as of 2009, could survive an economic calamity as severe as the great depression. The bottom line is everybody agrees that China has political risk and several economic crisis could test not just the current crop of leaders but also the political system as a whole while nobody, at least nobody I know of, believes that an severe crisis could fundamentally change American political system. That's the fundamental problem: resilience of society and political system, and that's the reason so many westerners and Chinese, ask the very legitimate question regarding potential system-wrecking instability. Every time somebody conjures up another campaign against what I see, minor, insignificant domestic detractors such as internet, liberal opposition (there is no way they can or should be allowed to, govern China, at least not until they grow an spine in their dealing with the west, nonetheless, I'm dismayed by the fact that the government reacts so strongly to a bunch of basically "useless" talkers who would never possesses the resources and organizational skills to threaten the government.) and even those who, for all I know, were doing the right thing such as demanding answers regarding why so many schools were shoddily built, I find myself less sure of China's future. I have no doubt that China will continue to grow for quite a while, but believe me, eventually, there will be crisis, not just regular crisis, serious crisis, it's statistically inevitable. Then what? I don't see the government preparing itself for the sure-to-come political challenge if crisis indeed broke out, all I see is increasingly intolerant policy against the media, against the internet, against anything and anybody who doesn't sing along with the government. It's really discouraging. And I don't kn ow what to do and how to make of it.

I'm not saying China would plunge into chaos next year, as you said, there are still room to grow out of the problem. But if there were no system change, not outright, not overnight, but gradual change that should have begun NOW, whatever crisis that eventually happens will cost China far more than what we can imagine, just how much more? Just read what happened after the collapse of Han Dynasty, Jin Dynasty, Tang Dynasty and Qing Dynasty. I just hope that China could be a China where, when bad thing happens, people would worry about losing their homes in a foreclosure crisis rather than worrying about losing their lives in a civil war. Again, they should start working on it NOW, however, as far as I can see, the only thing they work on is to spend countless amount of money on coming up better ways to shut people up.

以前看过本书叫“隐藏的逻辑”，介绍了一个理想的暴乱模型。

假设100个人每个人都有0－99不等的门槛值，当暴乱的人数达到某个门槛值时，具有这个特征门槛值的人便会加入暴乱。如果某个人的门槛值是0，别一个是1，接下来一个是2，如此类推。那么在这种情况下，一场大暴乱是在所难免的。那个门槛值是0的激进分子或是教唆分子首先引爆了动乱，接着门槛值为1的人加入其中，接着门槛值为2的人也加入其中...暴乱于是一发不可收拾，最终把“高门槛值”的人也卷了进来。

也就是说，具有真正意义上的暴乱分子有可能只是很少的一部分势力，它们引发暴动后，激化易于暴动的人先产生暴动的倾向，从而加剧暴动人群数目，诱导不易于暴动的人加入战团，从而像滚雪球一样产生大规模效应。

暴动的不可收拾的前提是有一个连续门槛值的人群存在，如果把门槛值为n的人去掉，那么第n个人暴动之后，由于门槛值的断层，使得门槛值为n+1的人不加入暴乱，暴动失去继续增大的可能，人数达到最大值n。

据法国内政部统计，12月31日晚烧了1137辆车，比去年降低了0.9%，政府表示满意。

现在一说共产主义信仰，大家谁信呢？现实生活中，大家一切朝钱看。

而地方官员也没有了信仰，所以拼命捞钱。那么更加激化了和民众的矛盾，这样的话，如果矛盾积累到一定程度，就会激化，就会白热化，最后爆发出来。最怕是和民族矛盾结合在一起，例如广东韶关，引发了新疆骚乱呢。

至于最后怎么样，只有天知道呢