再革命也不需上房揭掉自家屋瓦，再“爱国”也不需放弃自己正常无害的娱乐活动。NBA中国赛上海、深圳两场座无虚席，这个现象没有半点值得批评的地方。相反，把参与正常娱乐活动的同胞斥为“跪族”的人，才真正可耻。

Merely a temporary relief for the Remain camp. Since BJ got his new withdrawal agreement back, the Remain camp has been the underdog again. A majority of MPs now are ready to give their ayes to the deal and the momentum to "get Brexit down" is very much there. This vote does not change any of that. As one journalist said, the passage of the Letwin Amendment "may turn out to be little more than a stay of execution". I don't see how the Remain camp can turn the tide.

https://twitter.com/HouseofCommons/status/1185554322832138240

The only way to possibly break the current deadlock is through a general election. But the problem is that it could result in another hung Parliament.

Anyhow, so long as the pro-leave parties can't form a majority in the HoC, it's a win for the Remainers; whereas, If Boris succeeds in capturing the majority he craves, apparently that's the conclusion of the Brexit saga.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50311003

The people of Hong Kong have spoken, loud and clear, through a democratic mechanism. I for one respect their will, and hope more mainlanders would do the same.

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3039151/hong-kong-elections-tsunami-disaffection-washes-over-city

So glad The Expanse season 4 came out on the same day. So I could look away from this mess.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/13/inside-labours-campaign-behind

“吃地沟油的命，操中南海的心”。
对于此语我倾向以思想自由为立足点进行反驳：“别人脑袋里怎么想你管得着吗？”

就算真相本身令人恐慌，但说出真相的人无罪，“令人恐慌”不是你怪罪揭露实情者的理由。

秋瑾和徐锡麟爱不爱国？
是，处死秋瑾和徐锡麟的人一定说他们不爱国。因为他们不爱大清，所以他们不爱国。然而后人谁不明白：他们不爱大清，正是因为他们爱中国。

关注某人是否“恨国”，不如关注他有无“祸国”。
“恨国”关注的是动机，可动机往往不能被确证。与其关注难得确证的动机，不如去关注“祸国”。问某人有没有祸国，实际是问其行动有无产生一种现实效果，而效果是可以被更明明白白衡量、确定的。甲某恨不恨国不好说，乙某祸不祸国却不难衡量，观察此人的行动是否使社会客观受害即可。

#天真地想要绕出现有框架

A. K. Rogers: "At the outset the sense of rights is no more than this inarticulate feeling that the presence in us of any strong desire forms a guarantee that somehow it ought to be met,—a feeling which leaves us with a sense of personal aggrievement in case the fulfillment does not take place. The sense of rebellion which stirs in me when I contemplate an invasion of my rights, is just this upheaval of my instincts against a force threatening to put restraint upon their freedom. The knowledge that I am being disregarded in other men's plans, the feeling of impotence when interests vital to me are held back simply because my fellows refuse to take me into account in their reckonings, will inevitably arouse in me a fierce resentment, which is the starting point of all my sense of rights."

From The Rights of Man, an article published in 1912. It can be found here.

非常喜欢这段描写，对权利感萌芽时的心理有鲜活呈现。

不过作者随即指出，基于个体意欲而形成的权利感，易陷入一种唯我独尊、无视他人同等权利的境地。显然，要求享有一种权利，仅凭这种原初的权利感，尚不足以构成该诉求的全部正当性基础，还需要引入其它要素进行平衡。作者提及公平心和同情心，但感到在制衡人的唯我独尊、无视他人同样权利的冲动时，公平心和同情心并非普遍适用。

故而作者认为，要保证权利诉求的正当性，更可靠的路径是回归主张权利即主张妥协的理性思维，这就要求个体清醒地认知到自身很多时候注定无法得到绝对的满足，而且个体自身得到满足的前提是不排挤他人获得同样的满足。身处人类社会，可以说这无非是处世常识，因为每个人都为他人所环绕，每个人更都与他人互相依赖。

为使自身的权利感为他人所认可，唯有将其社会化，否则对权利的追求只会寸步难行。而所谓权利感社会化，即无论自己提出任何权利主张，其中均包含有对他人相同主张的尊重，让其他人亦可以此维护自己的利益。通过消除个人权利感潜在的排他性，以追求人权，而非追求特权，来获取他人的共鸣，减少阻力或达成合作。

易言之，个人的原初权利感需与理性的考量结合，从“这是我的权利”向“这是每一个人的权利”转变，自己要求享有的权利，也是其他社会成员同样能享有的。作者所言权利感的“社会化”，其义基本在此，前面的“要人权而非特权”之义也基本在此。

张之洞论阅洋报益处：

“然而吾谓报之益于人国者，博闻次也，知病上也。昔齐桓公不自知其有疾而死，秦以不闻其过而亡。大抵一国之利害安危，本国之人蔽于习俗，必不能尽知之，即知之亦不敢尽言之，惟出之邻国，又出之至强之国，故昌言而无忌。我国君臣上下果能览之而动心，怵之而改作，非中国之福哉？近人阅洋报者，见其诋訾中国不留馀地，比之醉人，比之朽物，议分裂、议争先，类无不拂然怒者，吾谓此何足怒耶？勤攻吾阙者，诸葛之所求；讳疾灭身者，周子之所痛。古云士有诤友，今虽云国有诤邻，不亦可乎？”

语见《劝学篇·外篇阅报第六》。自谓张香涛于书中力倡者无非洋务，不意尚能有此卓识。今人反不及之，掩目塞耳，陷溺于夸谈谬论，愈呈夜郎之态。为之叹息奈何。

[Note: After the media projected Biden to be the winner of the 2020 presidential race back in November, I wrote a few words to put down my feelings for this historic election. Now that electors in 50 states and D.C. have cast their ballots, the election result is all but set in stone. Thought this is the right moment to post them here.]

The United States is undergoing another tremendous trial. A trial it has not seen for decades. A trial the person who enters White House on January 20 as the 46th president must use every fiber of his/her being to overcome. At this difficult time, I feel so relieved to know that it will be Joe Biden to assume the mantle that has been passed down for more than two centuries. I wish him good health and success. Yet America's soul is still broken, and the future looks dim. With two crises at the same time, the pandemic and the resulting economic recession, even 4 years of his presidency is unlikely to restore the soul to its former place. No principle, ideal or conscience matters if many people continue to struggle amid hardship and uncertainty. The situation is much more dire than the one he and Obama faced in 2008. To lead his country back on the right track, Mr. Biden has a uphill battle to fight. From the bottom of my heart, I want him to win this battle. I want to see him succeed. I sincerely hope that posterity, rather than seeing Joe Biden as a guardian hopelessly defending the last citadel against a sea-change, will remember him as a pioneer laying the groundwork for better and brighter things to come in the future.

From One Night in Miami.

我认为现代意义的启蒙在于人通过教育获得这样的能力：能基于问题的真实样貌，理性、有逻辑地就问题给予评论或提出解决思路，并能坦然地将自己的意见公开表达。

然而“后真相”时代（此指各种信息的真假越来越难以判断的资讯环境）使得启蒙不再具有意义。事情的原貌因为阵营立场、封锁审查、社交网络、媒体偏见甚至语言障碍等现象或事物的存在而支离破碎。人们或主动或被动地活在各自的信息圈子里，不同圈子互不往来，没有对话，信息、观点流动停滞；想要探索复杂事实，实际又会遭遇种种干扰、障碍、困难，有的自己能意识到，有的则未曾察觉。久而久之，人们不再是针对相同的一个问题得出相分歧的意见，而是由于信息渠道的大相径庭，愈发地无法对问题本身形成一些最基本的一致，以至于不断演化成一方认为存在严重问题，另一方完全不觉得有问题的两个几乎没有交集的认知世界。

人通过启蒙获得的思维能力，在这种局面下，其用武之地很大程度被直接消解了。但凡问题对象牵涉面较广，身处“后真相”环境中的人们，要么误以为自己该知道的都知道了，依据片面或虚假的消息得出扭曲的判断，要么自知受条件限制，吸收的信息未必全面准确，怀疑尚有未掌握的关键信息，不敢贸然批评或结论，总是处在姑且搁置判断的状态。自然，无论是上述哪种情形，都不可说人通过启蒙获得的思维能力，实现了良好的运用。

在当前资讯环境下，故而我感到启蒙不是失败了，而是被剥夺了用途，失去了意义，就如同会游泳，但周边只有深浅莫测的泥沼，因而令泳技的施展变得无从谈起。启蒙在未来任何时候都是必要的，只是当下启蒙发挥作用的空间遭到巨大的挤压。哀叹启蒙失败，或许偏离了靶心。

出自《狂热分子》(The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements)。
总之随便发点啥。频道多久才算不活跃，不给判定标准是最可恶的。

Amid the ruins of an empire long gone, one cannot expect to build it back in one's own lifetime, for no empire was ever built in such a short duration. Yet the strong craving in one's mind creates for itself a tempting delusion that this grand project can indeed succeed. By falling to this temptation, one makes calamitous decisions. The subsequent chain of events will completely shatter what one has achieved and forever erase the already slim prospect of restoring anything significant. In the end, what's left? Only carcasses upon carcasses, ruins upon ruins.