1. In most, if not all countries, there are fewer intelligent people than less-intelligent people. Since an electoral democracy is a system where 2 idiots out-vote 1 smart person, democracy favours less-intelligent people’s decision. Democratic election is like a company without a Human Resource Department. All the people in the company including the cleaners and security guards can vote for the CEO. A socialism-meritocratic system is like a company which the CEO is chosen by the HR. 2. Three preconditions for a democracy to work: (a) no money politics. (b) 100% accurate news. (c) a population with more smart people than less smart people. When money comes into politics, like buying votes & controlling media, (a) & (b) are destroyed and a democracy becomes a plutocracy. Most of the news agencies today are corporate-owned or influenced by the ones who fund them. Public opinions are easily swayed no matter how educated the population is. Without these preconditions, democracy is fake. 3. When a party wins an election by a small margin, like 51% vs 49%, the legitimacy of the win is low, because the result could go either way. When a party wins by a large margin, like 80% vs 20%, the legitimacy of win is high, but it becomes a one party rule, because during the running of the government, the opposition has a small voice. So it’s self-contradictary, and neither end is ideal. Also, let’s say a party won by 51%, then it’s just a representation of half of the population’s interests. 4. In a democratic system, in the beginning, people choose the leader based on impression, not on the results. Election campaigns are superficial efforts where the better funded or the better marketed parties have an upper hand. For example, no one knew how Trump would perform as a President, he did not even have experience in managing a town. It’s only AFTER he became a president that people knew about him, by then damage was already done. Electoral democracy is often a case of “elect and regret”. In a social-meritocratic system the leader has to work his way up and backed by a good track record. 5. In a multiparty system, the country is divided right from the start. The sole aim of all parties is to win the next election. The parties bring along their supporter and people are then divided, and they waste a lot of time in constant fight and accusation. The US is currently at this state, it’s a divided nation. In Singapore and China. There’s much more political and social harmony. In democratic countries, political atmosphere often turn hostile and toxic. The level of trust in the society is low, especially towards the government. Take the pandemic as an example, in many democratic countries, when the governments told the people to wear masks, the opposition came out with all kinds of conspiracy theories, many people did not corporate. In China and Singapore, the people just followed the instructions because they trust the governments. Socialism follows a simple idea: “We can’t build when we are constantly in a fight. It’s when everyone work together, that we can build.” 6. Democratic countries face difficulties in implementing big changes. Plans, no matter how good they are, don’t get passed without a majority support. It’s natural for the opposition to not support any plans by the ruling party. Because their gain is our lost. As a result, many democratic countries suffered from stagnation. Democracy is a safety first approach, but the price to pay is very high. It’s akin to a person is afraid to fall, so he refuse to cycle, instead he choose to walk. It’s regressive in nature. 7. In democratic countries, the ruling party prefer short term plans that produce results before the end of the 4 or 5 year term, because in the next election the voters want to see results. Structural problems need long term plans. In fact, we seldom come across big and bold overhaul in democratic countries. Problems piled up eventually leads to stagnancy or even regression. In China and Singapore, there are long term plans in place. That’s why they grow more rapidly than democratic countries. In 1978, China and India had the same GDP. Today China has 5.3x the GDP of India. 8. In many democratic countries, after an election, many policies are changed, and many projects are thrown away, causing huge waste of resources. These countries often move one step forward and one step back. 9. Mentality of the politicians. In many democratic countries, it’s difficult to get policies implemented, the politicians instead resort to superficial work to please the people, instead of digging down to real fundamental things that may not bear fruit in short time. The politicians in a democratic system tend to have a mentality of a contractor who serve a contract. The mentality of the leaders in Singapore and China are more akin to a father in a family. This is very important, only politicians with real sense of responsibility would sacrifice themselves for the people. 10. It’s wrong to assume that democracy is only achievable with elections. In an electoral democratic country, how a citizen’s voice is heard is by the government? Every 4 or 5 years, citizens of a democratic country say: “I like you” or “I like someone else” in an election. That’s all. And there’s no guarantee the new government is better. In China, there’s a public feedback system via a hotline by dialing #12345, where the citizen could use for complains. An officer is assign for every case and the response is timed. All cases are recorded in a central database. Most of the time problems are solved in a few days. The unsolvable cases are analyzed in the background, if there are of high occurrence, a special task is set to look into the problem. The citizens will be called again after a specific time to check if their problems are solved. This way, the performance of each local government is accessed by the central government. This to me, is the new and advanced democracy for the 21st century. One which operates on a daily basis and one that listen to the specific needs of the people. This is a smart way, it allows the voices of the 1.4billion people to come through privately. Protests are disruptive to the society and the economy. In my country, the only channel we show our frustrations about the government is when chitchatting with friends in a coffee shop. 11. In Singapore and China. The government controls capitalism. While in many democratic countries, capitalism controls the government. Look at how the corporates have hijacked the political system in America through “revolving doors”. America is a corporate dictatorship where the Rich has TWO parties and the people effectively having NONE. 12. A government is more equipped with the knowledge of the domestic and international situation than normal citizens. They are more suited to make decisions than the people. People, especially young people and students, have limited knowledge of the real world, and easily misguided and instigated by foreign influence. Non Government Organizations (NGO) of the US, like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the British Mi6, have been funding oppositions in foreign countries to overthrow the governments that don’t conform to their interests. 13. There’s a wrong assumption that a democracy is less corrupted due to existence of check and balance mechanism. Singapore is totalitarian, but it has one of the cleanest governments in the world. Similarly, it’s untrue to assume the abuse of power only exist in a authoritarian system. My democratic country had a corrupted dictator for 22 years. Indonesia had a corrupted dictator Suharto for 3 decades. They won every election by buying votes and by controlling the media. It’s a misconception that the developed Western countries got rich because they had democracy. The West got rich because of the Industrial Revolution, rich resources from colonized countries in the past, science and technologies development, not because of democracy. 14. Most people think democracy means “people in charge”. It is not. Democracy is a way the rich divide and rule the people. By giving the right for the people to vote, the people are made to forget that they have one powerful tool: revolution. In a democratic system, after one party is changed, the money moves to the other side. The rich aren’t afraid of a democratic system. That’s why in school, we are indoctrinated with “democracy”, the teachers never taught us the conditions for a democracy to work, and they never mentioned the word plutocracy. In China, the government has to perform, for if they have done badly, a revolution awaits. And the country start anew. Just like we have seen throughout the history of China. 15. People said a single party system has no legitimacy. China has at least 93% support from the people, according to a survey by Harvard University in 2016, whereas democratic countries rarely hit above 60%. In the West, legitimacy is based on fulfilling electoral rules. For example, if a party wins by 51%, it’s legitimate. Even if in the following week the support rate drops to 0%, it’s still a legitimate government for the next 3 years and 51 weeks. In China, legitimacy is based on the RESULTS delivered by the government
一个学佛人要管好自己的理念，对人间的一切要懂得都是无常，都是会变化的。我们要用修心修行来跳出业力对我们的牵绊，管好自己的理念，管住自己的念根，不要让自己的心念去迎合社会污浊的红尘，否则你会变得入污泥就有染。
--仅分享善言，不针对任何人和事，感恩宽容！
前面都是在說故事，只想知道他解決哪四大難題的可以從 6:28 開始
明有仁宣，猶如漢有文景，唐有貞觀。
他是了不起的皇帝
人生的可貴之處，不在於長而在於好
也不能太短啊!🕵️
@@emperor9555 儒家思想害了漢人兩千年!☹️
@@emperor9555 死道友~別死貧道!🕵️子曰歸子曰，我曰歸我曰~想法各異!😎
朱高熾當燕王(朱棣)世子不只是是嫡長子還是朱元璋親自指定的(因為朱元璋認為他很有太子朱標溫文儒雅的風範)
以前是什么部门重要？ 现在工作的最重要是Marketing team, Accounts department是损失钱的人
还有 东汉 的 光武中兴 （ 刘秀 ）
解缙没有被问斩！
明仁宗
捨壽後如何面佛
有師傳菩薩戒時，開示戒子云：「有某居士，以居士身而駡盡天下人，豈證道者之所應為？」又開示云：「居士批評出家人，名為毀謗僧寶；批評出家人所說法，名為毀謗法寶。」皆是寓指愚辱罵出家人、毀謗法寶。
愚云：誹謗僧寶者有二：一者有根誹謗，二者無根誹謗。正受菩薩戒之佛子若犯此者，乃斷頭罪，不通懺悔，捨報必下地獄。然此謗誹謗者，乃謂出家二眾之身口意行；愚出道多年，不曾作此誹謗，絕口不提比丘二眾之三業，何來毀謗之說？顯係加強加之罪也！設使愚確曾對出家眾有所毀謗，若自身確實有犯者，理當自省，豈應公開指責對方？何況愚未曾有根誹謗出家眾，無根誹謗更無論矣！如是羅織他人入罪，意欲何為？
若比丘二眾說法無誤，愚唯有隨喜、護持及讚嘆，何敢毀謗？若比丘二眾說法乖謬、誤導眾生，陷眾生於歧途及大妄語業中，亦是以外道常見之法公然取代佛教正法，則愚加以評論導正，乃是摧破邪說以顯正法；不唯救護已被誤導之眾生，亦乃救護被評論之比丘免於地獄業，此名宣揚正法、救護佛子，亦是破斥邪說以顯正法，被評論之比丘知已，便得改往修來，不再造作誤導眾生及破法惡業，因此免入地獄，實應感念愚，何況誣植愚謗法謗僧之罪？比丘二眾若未證悟，不明心性，說法偏失；愚再三相勸，猶不自省，反藉機混淆視聽，批判愚謗僧，正好坐實自己毀謗僧寶之罪，一切證悟之人皆屬大乘法中之菩薩摩訶薩故，已是菩薩僧故。若是曾經為人傳菩薩戒之比丘，如是羅織證悟菩薩入罪者，即是明知故犯，則罪加一等，爾大法師於此務必三思。
愚意以為：摧破邪說以顯正法一事，原非我所應為，理當先諸大師、名師，次諸先輩，最後方可責成於我。乃諸大師、名師，或因自身錯悟，或因未悟，或因鄉愿心態不願得罪人，乃任由錯悟諸師誤導廣大佛子，任由錯悟諸師以外道常見法取代佛門正法，而皆無人出世簡擇以救眾生、以護正法，致令愚不忍坐視，乃不得不為、攘臂而起，以微薄綿力而摧破邪說以顯正法，實欲救護及導正廣大學佛人。
我若不知名師、大師正在誤導眾生，無智而不能辨別者，則我心中無有愧咎，可以任令彼等繼續誤導。若已知廣大眾生被誤導，正法被外道常見取代，而顧慮一己之利害，恐被暗算而心生猶豫，以致不願摧破邪說以顯正法者，則我實應名為濫好人，名為無慈無悲，名為正法大賊，名為循私，名為鄉愿，即是故意將佛法做人情。審如是者，則不能無愧無咎於心，捨壽後又將如何面佛？
若欲勉強而作鄉愿，余亦能之；則與諸方大師、名師和平相處，皆大歡喜。然為廣大之今世後世佛子計，余終不恥鄉愿作風，寧盡得罪一切大師、名宿，受諸批評誣衊而無厭悔；謂破邪顯正之行，能使正法久住故，能救護今世後世廣大佛子故，能免除諸方名宿之地獄業故。
th-cam.com/video/VO7ZyxH2WyE/w-d-xo.html
还有 唐 开元之治。
大家好：南無阿彌陀佛
因為還沒開始大玩就嗝屁了
他好像在登基之前已经理政好好时间了
Pi
是，因為朱棣喜歡親征，所以都是由朱高熾負責監國處理政務，總計監國六次，時間超過10年，還沒上任就已經處過大量的政務
靠他兒子
他是靠自己的，因為他爸很喜歡親征，然後就留他監國處理政務、負責後勤，成祖在位的22年裡，他一共監國六次，共計超過十年，這段期間都是他留守處理政務，這也是他僅在位九個月，卻能獲得"仁"這個超高級
宋仁宗，明仁宗，千古一帝
為何只做了一年皇帝也沒說、有头無尾的
據說是登基後沒了老爹的壓力，自我放飛，縱慾過度，由於本身健康早已不佳，因此暴亡
從小好吃!老爹在位時極其控管!老爹死後無拘無束!(好食!野史有記載不知是真是假)
所以因該是死於心血管疾病(這是我猜的)!!
@@penpeng788 通常野史的可信度較高~敢言人所不敢言!😎🤗👍😊
@@icms1007 史學界大多公認此說!🕵️縱慾過度~是明朝大多數皇帝的通病!😑
@@icms1007 聽說是被弟弟屈的
這比故事還故事，我是不相信朱元璋看得懂字。
标题党啊！什么四大难题，po主哗众取宠！
A
中国不需要也不能再继续这种一人统治天下的模式了！老百姓一人一票，民选才是今后中国政治体制的根本。
1. In most, if not all countries, there are fewer intelligent people than less-intelligent people. Since an electoral democracy is a system where 2 idiots out-vote 1 smart person, democracy favours less-intelligent people’s decision. Democratic election is like a company without a Human Resource Department. All the people in the company including the cleaners and security guards can vote for the CEO. A socialism-meritocratic system is like a company which the CEO is chosen by the HR.
2. Three preconditions for a democracy to work: (a) no money politics. (b) 100% accurate news. (c) a population with more smart people than less smart people. When money comes into politics, like buying votes & controlling media, (a) & (b) are destroyed and a democracy becomes a plutocracy. Most of the news agencies today are corporate-owned or influenced by the ones who fund them. Public opinions are easily swayed no matter how educated the population is. Without these preconditions, democracy is fake.
3. When a party wins an election by a small margin, like 51% vs 49%, the legitimacy of the win is low, because the result could go either way. When a party wins by a large margin, like 80% vs 20%, the legitimacy of win is high, but it becomes a one party rule, because during the running of the government, the opposition has a small voice. So it’s self-contradictary, and neither end is ideal. Also, let’s say a party won by 51%, then it’s just a representation of half of the population’s interests.
4. In a democratic system, in the beginning, people choose the leader based on impression, not on the results. Election campaigns are superficial efforts where the better funded or the better marketed parties have an upper hand. For example, no one knew how Trump would perform as a President, he did not even have experience in managing a town. It’s only AFTER he became a president that people knew about him, by then damage was already done. Electoral democracy is often a case of “elect and regret”. In a social-meritocratic system the leader has to work his way up and backed by a good track record.
5. In a multiparty system, the country is divided right from the start. The sole aim of all parties is to win the next election. The parties bring along their supporter and people are then divided, and they waste a lot of time in constant fight and accusation. The US is currently at this state, it’s a divided nation. In Singapore and China. There’s much more political and social harmony. In democratic countries, political atmosphere often turn hostile and toxic. The level of trust in the society is low, especially towards the government. Take the pandemic as an example, in many democratic countries, when the governments told the people to wear masks, the opposition came out with all kinds of conspiracy theories, many people did not corporate. In China and Singapore, the people just followed the instructions because they trust the governments. Socialism follows a simple idea: “We can’t build when we are constantly in a fight. It’s when everyone work together, that we can build.”
6. Democratic countries face difficulties in implementing big changes. Plans, no matter how good they are, don’t get passed without a majority support. It’s natural for the opposition to not support any plans by the ruling party. Because their gain is our lost. As a result, many democratic countries suffered from stagnation. Democracy is a safety first approach, but the price to pay is very high. It’s akin to a person is afraid to fall, so he refuse to cycle, instead he choose to walk. It’s regressive in nature.
7. In democratic countries, the ruling party prefer short term plans that produce results before the end of the 4 or 5 year term, because in the next election the voters want to see results. Structural problems need long term plans. In fact, we seldom come across big and bold overhaul in democratic countries. Problems piled up eventually leads to stagnancy or even regression. In China and Singapore, there are long term plans in place. That’s why they grow more rapidly than democratic countries. In 1978, China and India had the same GDP. Today China has 5.3x the GDP of India.
8. In many democratic countries, after an election, many policies are changed, and many projects are thrown away, causing huge waste of resources. These countries often move one step forward and one step back.
9. Mentality of the politicians. In many democratic countries, it’s difficult to get policies implemented, the politicians instead resort to superficial work to please the people, instead of digging down to real fundamental things that may not bear fruit in short time. The politicians in a democratic system tend to have a mentality of a contractor who serve a contract. The mentality of the leaders in Singapore and China are more akin to a father in a family. This is very important, only politicians with real sense of responsibility would sacrifice themselves for the people.
10. It’s wrong to assume that democracy is only achievable with elections. In an electoral democratic country, how a citizen’s voice is heard is by the government? Every 4 or 5 years, citizens of a democratic country say: “I like you” or “I like someone else” in an election. That’s all. And there’s no guarantee the new government is better. In China, there’s a public feedback system via a hotline by dialing #12345, where the citizen could use for complains. An officer is assign for every case and the response is timed. All cases are recorded in a central database. Most of the time problems are solved in a few days. The unsolvable cases are analyzed in the background, if there are of high occurrence, a special task is set to look into the problem. The citizens will be called again after a specific time to check if their problems are solved. This way, the performance of each local government is accessed by the central government. This to me, is the new and advanced democracy for the 21st century. One which operates on a daily basis and one that listen to the specific needs of the people. This is a smart way, it allows the voices of the 1.4billion people to come through privately. Protests are disruptive to the society and the economy. In my country, the only channel we show our frustrations about the government is when chitchatting with friends in a coffee shop.
11. In Singapore and China. The government controls capitalism. While in many democratic countries, capitalism controls the government. Look at how the corporates have hijacked the political system in America through “revolving doors”. America is a corporate dictatorship where the Rich has TWO parties and the people effectively having NONE.
12. A government is more equipped with the knowledge of the domestic and international situation than normal citizens. They are more suited to make decisions than the people. People, especially young people and students, have limited knowledge of the real world, and easily misguided and instigated by foreign influence. Non Government Organizations (NGO) of the US, like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the British Mi6, have been funding oppositions in foreign countries to overthrow the governments that don’t conform to their interests.
13. There’s a wrong assumption that a democracy is less corrupted due to existence of check and balance mechanism. Singapore is totalitarian, but it has one of the cleanest governments in the world. Similarly, it’s untrue to assume the abuse of power only exist in a authoritarian system. My democratic country had a corrupted dictator for 22 years. Indonesia had a corrupted dictator Suharto for 3 decades. They won every election by buying votes and by controlling the media. It’s a misconception that the developed Western countries got rich because they had democracy. The West got rich because of the Industrial Revolution, rich resources from colonized countries in the past, science and technologies development, not because of democracy.
14. Most people think democracy means “people in charge”. It is not. Democracy is a way the rich divide and rule the people. By giving the right for the people to vote, the people are made to forget that they have one powerful tool: revolution. In a democratic system, after one party is changed, the money moves to the other side. The rich aren’t afraid of a democratic system. That’s why in school, we are indoctrinated with “democracy”, the teachers never taught us the conditions for a democracy to work, and they never mentioned the word plutocracy. In China, the government has to perform, for if they have done badly, a revolution awaits. And the country start anew. Just like we have seen throughout the history of China.
15. People said a single party system has no legitimacy. China has at least 93% support from the people, according to a survey by Harvard University in 2016, whereas democratic countries rarely hit above 60%. In the West, legitimacy is based on fulfilling electoral rules. For example, if a party wins by 51%, it’s legitimate. Even if in the following week the support rate drops to 0%, it’s still a legitimate government for the next 3 years and 51 weeks. In China, legitimacy is based on the RESULTS delivered by the government
瞎说，按的什么心！？一人一票不适合中国这样14亿人口的大国。现在的民主集中制就挺好，很适合中国。
难，别的不说，就现在要投票，那必是投自己人一票，自己人不上直接开摆，咱也不扯虚的，就说说温家宝，他在任的时候无脑发展天津，他一下台天津直接废，怎么选吗？选到自己人就起飞，选不到自己人就直接烂
民选？就中国人目前的素质吗，一个微信假新闻都可以骗一堆人，学新加坡模式还有可能
一人一票是洋毒！