ClippingKK

As we have seen, the political developments leading up to the Glorious Revolution were shaped by several interlinked processes. Central was the political conflict between absolutism and its opponents. The outcome of this conflict not only put a stop to the attempts to create a renewed and stronger absolutism in England, but also empowered those wishing to fundamentally change the institutions of society. The opponents of absolutism did not simply attempt to build a different type of absolutism. This was not simply the House of Lancaster defeating the House of York in the War of the Roses. Instead, the Glorious Revolution involved the emergence of a new regime based on constitutional rule and pluralism.

Following the Meiji Restoration there was a process of transformative institutional reforms in Japan. In 1869 feudalism was abolished, and the three hundred fiefs were surrendered to the government and turned into prefectures, under the control of an appointed governor. Taxation was centralized, and a modern bureaucratic state replaced the old feudal one. In 1869 the equality of all social classes before the law was introduced, and restrictions on internal migration and trade were abolished. The samurai class was abolished, though not without having to put down some rebellions. Individual property rights on land were introduced, and people were allowed freedom to enter and practice any trade. The state became heavily involved in the construction of infrastructure.

大家应该明白，秦制绝不是代议制——什么出身的人当了官就会照顾其所出身的那个群体，这是荒唐的想法。秦汉时代用钱穆先生的说法是“布衣卿相”，但绝不是代表布衣的卿相，而是代表皇上整治布衣的卿相。桑弘羊可以说是“重商主义”者，他本人也是商人出身，但他绝不是商人的代表，他只是皇权的代表。桑弘羊在中国历史上是以比较重视工商业闻名的，那时很多思想家都认为工商业不重要，农业才重要，农业是本，工商是末，他们提倡“崇本抑末”。桑弘羊则不然，他认为工商业非常重要，因为其利润丰厚，但是这个利润必须由国家垄断，决不能搞自由竞争，这怎么会有利于商人呢？

It was much easier for the North Koreans to create a more radically communist-style economy, since they could expropriate former Japanese assets and build on the economic model of the Chinese Revolution.

东汉中期以后的政府一直是高负债运行的。朝廷对社会的控制逐渐放松，但是放松的结果是什么呢？是出现了所谓的公民社会吗？是出现了所谓的民营企业家的盛世吗？都不是。按照贤良文学的思路，所谓放纵其实是放纵权贵，放纵那些“官倒”官商，让各级政府、各级地方权力部门都去谋利。这样的结果不是放任出了自由的平民经济，而是放任出了一个豪强大姓满天下、门阀士族势焰熏天的局面，而市场经济却日益凋敝

不光是史学，任何一种实证研究，即既非文艺创作也非单纯的价值弘扬，而是一种以事实判断和逻辑推断为基础、讲究知识增量的研究，无论自然科学、社会科学还是“人文学科”，都是论据和论证的结合。尤据而论，固然是不着边际的空言，有据无论，也会变成不知所云的废话。有人说“史料就是史学”、“有几分史料说几分话”，我是不同意这些说法的。史料不等于史学，就像数据不等于数学、实验室不等于科学家一样。但要强调的是：论证是一种自己的合乎逻辑的思维，它不等于引述理论

In fact, the black workers were purposefully kept unskilled and were barred from high-skill occupations so that skilled white workers would not face competition and could enjoy high wages. In South Africa black Africans were indeed “trapped” in the traditional economy, in the Homelands.

the ability of those who dominate extractive institutions to benefit greatly at the expense of the rest of society implies that political power under extractive institutions is highly coveted, making many groups and individuals fight to obtain it. As a consequence, there will be powerful forces pushing societies under extractive institutions toward political instability. The synergies between extractive economic and political institutions create a vicious circle, where extractive institutions, once in place, tend to persist. Similarly, there is a virtuous circle associated with inclusive economic and political institutions. But neither the vicious nor the virtuous circle is absolute. In fact, some nations live under inclusive institutions today because, though extractive institutions have been the norm in history, some societies have been able to break the mold and transition toward inclusive institutions.