ClippingKK

The currency reform was designed to punish people who used these markets and, more specifically, to make sure that they did not become too wealthy or powerful enough to threaten the regime. Keeping them poor was safer. Black markets are not the whole story. People in North Korea also keep their savings in wons because there are few banks in Korea, and they are all owned by the government. In effect, the government used the currency reform to expropriate much of people’s savings.

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

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.

有人说这是“以论带史”，有人嘲曰“以论代史”。其实这并不是“论”多了，而恰恰是“论”极其贫乏的表现。史学不是神学，也不是经学。离开经典作家，你就不会思考了？

China has thus achieved economic growth not thanks to its extractive political institutions, but despite them: its successful growth experience over the last three decades is due to a radical shift away from extractive economic institutions and toward significantly more inclusive economic institutions, which was made more difficult, not easier, by the presence of highly authoritarian, extractive political institutions.

但是这样的一种平等，是使大家都变成贵族了，还是使大家都变成附庸了呢？答案应该是明摆着的。我觉得康有为的说法最大的问题，大概就在于这一点。法同大革命所追求的平等，是秦始皇治下那个样子的平等吗？是追求皇帝不管对宰相还是引车卖浆者流都想杀就杀，想赏就赏的这种平等吗？当然不是。秦始皇所要追求的无非就是把所有的人都变成他的奴才，在这一点上是没有贵贱之分的。秦制使人无尊卑，都隶属于“大盗”，在这一点上讲，是很“平等”的

The consequence of all this absolutist control of the economy was predictable: the Chinese economy was stagnant throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries while other economies were industrializing. By the time Mao set up his communist regime in 1949, China had become one of the poorest countries in the world.

所谓的酷吏、所谓的法吏，不是以伦理为中心的，不是道德挂帅的，但必须强调，他们的治理不是以法律为准绳，也不是提倡在法律面前人人平等的。所谓酷吏，实际上是一种权力中心主义的法家政治观，强调的是对权力的垄断。这种对权力的垄断与强调道德其实都属于人治，但是酷吏对法治的破坏作用——确切地说是对建设法治的阻碍作用，应该说要比伦理型的儒家人治更甚一筹