笨狼发牢骚
发发牢骚，解解闷，消消愁
正文
军民两用行业，两国也是彼此彼此，美国私营火箭发射在军方赞助下很火，中国也开始冒？
【欧盟内部矛盾和冲突】《经济学人》The covid-19 pandemic puts pressure on the EU
【欧盟普遍对华反感】《南华早报专栏》Beijing faces a perfect storm as the world turns against its narrative amid rising nationalism, leaving it no room for compromise【中国的过激的舆论宣传在欧洲被普遍认为制造假信息，企业信心也逐渐下降，不再是支持中国的声音】
冠疫下的中国经济
去年秋天，中国讲得是“六稳”，稳就业、稳金融、稳外贸、稳外资、稳投资、稳预期，过去两个月，中国讲得是“六保”，“保居民就业、保基本民生、保市场主体、保粮食能源安全、保产业链供应链稳定、保基层运转”。林彪说毛泽东“自我崇拜，自我迷信，崇拜自己，功为己，过为人”，这也是习近平的心态，中国在全世界的自我吹嘘，一点用也没有（《日经新闻》China's global campaign for virus-response praise met with silence），因为中国之外大家不需要向党汇报。
《南华早报》中国过两亿人事实失业
* As many as 205 million Chinese workers cannot find jobs or are unable to return to their previous posts, according to one analyst
* Debate over China’s unemployment reality amid coronavirus heats up, with holes picked in official government statistics
《南华早报》中国就业系列：The grim outlook for Chinese unemployment
《纽时》（温帝）《华尔街日报》《彭博》（一尊）都先后争先揭露中国高层腐败，
《彭博》如何被中国政府逼得就范
但他说控制疫情未知数太多，即使专家也不可能选择出几个能做结论的，全世界都是摸着石头过河，只是当你知道没准时，慢慢来时
The coronavirus pandemic may mark the final shift of global power away from the United States
The Virus Should Wake Up the West( John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge)
The job of government is to protect its citizens. The pandemic reveals that key institutions in Europe and the U.S. are no longer up to the job.
《亚洲时报》（David P. Goldman）US-China decoupling: a reality check
The idea of an economic divorce is attractive to many, but it would undermine America's strategic interests
实在难得
新一代
《大西洋月刊》
非洲住广州人员受虐待，非洲局势
COVID-19 has increased calls for China to forgive old loans. Time to sort out the facts and the fiction about how China manages debt in troubled times
Someone I know pitched a US magazine a story and the response was: "We've already published two articles about Africa this year, so this isn't a good fit for us".— Nanjala Nyabola (@Nanjala1) April 17, 2020
Proposed six-month freeze on payments aims to avoid emerging market health crisis
The G20 group is planning to offer lower income countries a moratorium on bilateral government loan repayments as part of an “action plan” to tackle the coronavirus pandemic and stave off an emerging markets debt crisis, a senior G20 official said.
The initiative, due to be finalised at a finance ministers’ meeting this week, would see a freeze on sovereign debt repayments for six or nine months, or possibly through to 2021, in line with an appeal last month from the IMF and World Bank.
Wealthy nations and multilateral institutions would use the period of the moratorium to draw up “very clear criteria, country-by-country of what exactly is going to happen. Is it debt relief totally? Is it just a deferment, a rescheduling?” the official said.
“For debt relief to happen it would take time for it to be co-ordinated,” said the official, who did not want to be named because of the sensitivity of the discussions. “But what is immediately needed is to give these people space so they don’t need to worry about the cash flow and debt servicing going to other countries, and they can use that money for their immediate needs.”
Concerns have been mounting about the debt sustainability of many lower income countries that borrowed heavily in the years after the 2008 global financial crisis and now lack the resources to deal with the economic problems caused by the Covid-19 pandemic as they grapple with high debts, fiscal deficits, plummeting revenues and weakening currencies — as well as health crises.
Another official close to the negotiations said the initiative “has strong support”. “Negotiations are still ongoing, and some details remain, but we are confident a solution will be found,” the official said.
The IMF and the World Bank called for debt relief for 76 of the world’s poorest nations that are eligible to receive the bank’s International Development Association funding. But other countries outside that criterion are also struggling with high debts and depleted resources. There are still discussions about who would be included.
Countries receiving bilateral development assistance are estimated to be due to make repayments of about $40bn to external creditors this year. The country-to-country loans are estimated to represent about $18bn.
The Institute of International Finance, an industry association, estimates that lower income nations will make repayments of a further $130bn on domestic debts. But the exact scale of the debt is not clear, given the opacity of some of the lending.
After the IMF and World Bank appealed for debt assistance for poorer nations, there were concerns that some sovereign lenders may be reluctant to suspend repayments if the money saved was diverted to paying other creditors rather than being used to tackle the coronavirus crisis.
Those concerns initially focused on China, the biggest bilateral lender to the IDA countries. Beijing has granted debt relief to creditor countries in the past, but has preferred to do so on a bespoke basis rather than as part of any co-ordinated effort.
China has so far appeared reluctant to change that approach. Its foreign ministry said last week it was willing to talk to low-income countries individually about their debt challenges, while noting that past repayment problems had been resolved bilaterally.
That stance may have changed ahead of this week’s meetings.
The G20 official dismissed speculation that there were differences between G20 members, particularly China, saying that while there were “some details that we are working through, certainly there’s a very clear commitment, including China”.
“Within the G20 there’s a very clear recognition that a global co-ordinated approach is a must, not a choice,” the official said. “I have not seen the spirit I have seen in the last six to eight weeks between the G20 members — there’s a clear understanding the political angles to this are put in a freezer.”
Odile Renaud Basso, chair of the Paris Club, a group of 22 big creditor nations, said any decision should be taken by all creditors together and that China was “participating very constructively” with the G20 negotiations.
“There must be a level playing field so that all creditors agree to the same key parameters,” she said. “But with that in place there is always a need for bilateral discussions between each creditor and debtor nation, and China could work within that framework. They are very much involved and I think they will be part of an agreement.”
She said several creditor nations, including China, had pressed for the IMF, World Bank and other multilateral lenders to join others in freezing debt repayments.
The IIF, which represents about 450 firms in the global financial services industry, has also called on private creditors “to forbear payment default for the poorest and most vulnerable countries significantly affected by Covid-19 and related economic turbulence for a specified time period, without waiving the payment obligation”.
Ms Renaud Basso said she was confident that a voluntary standstill by private creditors would be agreed.
The G20 official said governments would not pressure private investors to offer poorer nations relief, saying it could distort markets.
“We would welcome any voluntary action by the private holders, but getting into the private holders has a lot of complications and legal ramifications,” the official said. “You cannot force individual investors to waive their rights. That could distort the markets, and could have the negative consequences of liquidity problems. They would not lend if they see any sign that they can be forced to let go of their assets.”
The G20 nations are also discussing how to make further funding available to multilateral institutions, like the IMF, in the knowledge that the current funding will not be sufficient.
“What is available now deals with the immediate needs, there are steps being taken to look at what additional resources we need,” the G20 official said.
The official added that while previously the G20 members considered support to lower income nations as more humanitarian support, “this time it’s different”.
“There’s now a growing recognition among G20 . . . that it’s a survival game, you cannot fix your own house alone . . . this virus doesn’t know borders,” the official said. “So what may be seen as difference of opinions, still issues to negotiate, is not about whether we should or shouldn’t, it’s about what’s the right approach.”
Edward Luce
Like an asteroid, coronavirus is the textbook example of an exogenous shock. The threat came from beyond. Yet the pathogen offers a unique stress test of each country’s resilience. Some nation states are holding up well. In spite of its unmatched scientific resources, the US is not. More worrying, it is showing little sign of lifting its performance. Six weeks after its first coronavirus death, America’s learning curve remains flatter than its infection rate. It should be the other way round.
The biggest worry is that the US still lacks a road map. The federal government has only a weak grasp on how many Americans are infected with Covid-19, a clear measure of the mortality rate, and therefore the extent of immunity in the country. Without more tests, the US is travelling blind. Just 1 per cent of the country, 3.2m people, have been tested so far. In early March, Mike Pence, the vice-president, promised 4m tests within a week. The same day, President Donald Trump said anybody in the US who wanted a test could get one. That remains as untrue today as it was then.
The stubborn fact is that the US is not churning out enough kits. The average number of daily tests has been stuck at 140,000 for the past two weeks. That is far below the level that scientists say is required to gauge the pandemic’s reach. Some say the US should be testing 10 times that number to understand the spread of the disease. Others want half-a-million a day. Either way, testing has hit a very low plateau, which is a metric of negligence. Without a grasp of the facts, the US will not find its way out.
The deepest puzzle is the gap between wishes and action. Mr Trump was not alone in waking up very late to the coronavirus threat. Others, including Britain’s Boris Johnson, were equally laggard. Each country now has higher death rates than they would have had they acted sooner. Epidemiologists say that if the US shutdown had taken place two weeks earlier, 90 per cent of the deaths would have been prevented. More than 30,000 Americans have now died, according to the official tally. Had no social distancing occurred at all, the US would have lost many times that by now. There is no excuse for running the same experiment again.
Yet that is what Mr Trump is pushing to do. On Thursday he will publish guidelines for the reopening of the US economy from May 1 — less than two weeks away. The worst-hit states on each coast will probably stick to their timetables. US politics abhors a federal vacuum. States are clubbing together to fill it. But they will be subjected to increasingly urgent pressure to follow Mr Trump’s dictates, which are driven by politics, rather than science. It was one thing to wake up late to the virus. It would be quite another to drift back into sleep too soon.
There is no point in fantasising which US presidents would have done better. The answer is almost any. You go to war with the president you have. But it is easy to project Mr Trump’s direction. There will be no federal plan to marshal the US’s resources for testing, therapeutics or the search for a vaccine. The US will have to rely on its patchwork of labs, companies and philanthropists. They are unrivalled but highly fragmented. As the governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, put it: states should not have to compete with each other during a war for tanks and guns.
Nor will Mr Trump educate Americans about the reality ahead. In his view, the US is already past the peak. Failure to reopen the economy would cost more lives than keeping it closed, he says. In fact, a new wave that triggered a second lockdown would be a far bigger hit to US wealth than a cautious return to work over a period of months. One paper estimates the difference at $5.2tn over 30 years. Economists and scientists mostly agree on this. Mr Trump is deaf to the consensus.
Which means the US is likely to flunk the test that matters most — national purpose. No matter how sinuous their civic institutions, nations without leadership lose wars. The US was galvanised into unity after the Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and the launch of Sputnik. Covid-19, by contrast, is spurring a hunt for scapegoats. The virus is only worsening America’s divide.
再说说世界列强逼中国赔款的可能性
“两次掩盖”
美国政府的态度很重要，行政部门和立法部门，都很重要，他们要是跟你蛮缠，任何一个国家都顶不住，因为你在美国的资产都不再是“神圣不可侵犯”，“主权豁免”也成了空话。
冠疫后中国美国输了赢了什么？
才在外交上采用一系列庸招（有说法是那不是一是失策，而是中国整个对外思维几年来的转变）。
在国际上，美国外交元老耐（Joseph S. Nye）An Abysmal Failure of Leadership（转）
认为美中领导都根本不存在，
谢涛觉得赵立坚已经收敛了，就表示中国政府不再这么坚持了，但他要么无知，要么默认，中国民间的阴谋论盛行，而且许多政府媒体不时提倡一个新的阴谋论，央台、新华社、人民日报骂人的言辞都非常狠，更主要的，是赵立坚不说了，但中国无数大使馆还在说，还在主动与宗主国吵架，没有人觉得中国退下来了。
中国政府的动机，大家都在揣摩，到底是要向全世界推销“中国模式”，还是以进为退？昨天人大发言人张业遂这么说：
当前，中美关系正处在一个重要关口，关键在于坚持不冲突不对抗、相互尊重、合作共赢。如果美方尊重中国的社会制度和发展道路，理性看待中国的发展和战略意图，致力于同中方开展建设性对话，将有利于两国在各领域以及在地区和全球问题上的互利合作。
如果美方坚持冷战思维，推行遏制中国的战略，损害中国的核心和重大利益，结果只能是损人害己。中国不惹事，但也不怕事，将坚定不移捍卫自身主权、安全和发展利益。
一个稳定发展的中美关系，符合两国人民的根本利益，也是国际社会的普遍期待。目前，合作抗疫、恢复经济是头等大事，维护国际经济金融市场稳定和全球供应链的开放、安全符合各方的利益。
我们希望美方与中方相向而行，共同落实好两国元首多次会晤达成的重要共识，坚持协调、合作、稳定的基调，增进互信、拓展合作、妥善处理分歧，推动两国关系在正确的轨道上向前发展。谢谢。
张业遂留下的双方停火、妥协的余地，但用处不大，因为美国极端派已占上风，制度之争、意识形态之争、文明之争已成主导思维，罗国关系已成你死我活。台湾两党已经公开声明不再承认“一国两制”，这也不能怪台湾，两会即将收回香港大部分自主权（《华邮》China to impose sweeping national security law in Hong Kong, bypassing city’s legislature），中国说这也不能怪中国（《纽时》U.S. Is Using Taiwan as a Pressure Point in Tech Fight With China），即使中国老百姓爬墙，他们照样会觉得美国就是要颠覆中国政府，港独、台独真是公开与“美帝”颠覆势力勾结。
美国国际关系研究员Ali Wyne也是这个结论
最近美国狂人朱利安尼出来大骂中国人没人性，轻视生命（Chinese race is amoral），冠疫给全世界的看到的，正好是相反。
中国的立场在世为被大家接受，不论有多大保留，都反映了全世界务实这么一个出发点，但更关键的，是大家比较美国中国，是在没法子，美国就是不行啊，中国即使很黑，但像个大人样子，美国不仅仅是捣乱，而是来砸铺子，与全世界为敌。
美国国内对“美国优越性”的挽歌诸多，这类的评论中国不能写，但美国能
对冠疫后的世界局势，陆凯文觉得世界看清了，美中两个都是靠不住的纸老虎，以后是各顾各的时代，冷战需要阵营，这次没人回去跟班。这不仅仅是意识形态的问题，而是大家看透了两个超级大国在关系人类命运的大事上，如瘟疫，如气候，不仅不能合作，带领全世界共度难关，还大打出手，打到你死我活，美国更甚。
人与人就是离不开关系
权力和江湖
在中国，大家常讲权力，统治者唯一关注的是权力，而权力就是一切，财，势，名誉，有了权才有财、势、名，维护权力和维护财、势、名是一致的，所以大家的手段往往极端，赤裸裸的暴力。
但这有两个误点。
第一，权力不是中国特有的，欧洲古罗马恨强大，之后欧洲就不行了，但罗马成帝国后，以及后来的东罗马（拜占庭），权力之斗刀光剑影的，拜占庭还有太监。英国法国后来慢慢强大后，斗得也很厉害，当今火的魔幻电视剧，很多来自英国宫廷诡异争斗。
第二，权力实际上不那么绝对，英国最有代表性，英国国王一直没权，直到亨利七世之后大家才觉得造反这事儿是不能再玩了，太伤。中国皇帝虽有绝对权，但抑制皇权的框架很多，
江湖，是现代武侠构造出来的一个观念，人入江湖身不由己，为什么？因为江湖有自己的规矩，如果你不一块玩儿，对不起，请出去。
社会上为什么有那么多规矩，大家为什么讲礼貌、有礼仪？是因为那就是道德吗？不是，是为了证明你跟我是同一个群体的，同一个俱乐部，比如古希腊觉得自己和葡萄酒，其他人都是野蛮人。这些规矩礼仪就是一种制约，能够制定、主导这些规矩礼仪的人，就在行使权利。跟武侠描述的江湖的规矩不一样，你要是不买账，大家未必杀了你，只是不跟你玩儿了，如果做生意，就不跟你做生意，上学，不接受你的子女来上学，当官就更不别说了，不录取你。
法，是权威的一种形式；军队，是权威的最新最有效的手段，施法和军事镇压都直接跟夺去他人的生命连接起来，但
国法家规，行有行规，帮有帮规，修养还有礼
规则，潜规则
大家如果觉得中国赤裸裸，看看美国的说法究竟是什么。美国强调“责任”，什么意思呢？如果你日子不好，那是你的自己的事儿，更关键的是反过来的那一面，一，我日子好，自我自己能干，二，别指望我帮你。如果底层以“民主”的形式，如征税，来瓜分我的财产，那就得
这不是说美国人不道德，也不是说中国人比美国人道德，而是说中国通过权力，往往是血权来夺取财、势、名的说法不是什么对现实的的描述，而是感情化。实际上中国也好，美国也好，世界其他国家地区也好，一个阶层通过国家机器来维护自己的利益，是人类社会的基本特点。
中国以前的千刀万剐是残忍，但残忍的到处都是，这是福柯的描述
（翻译）
1757年3月2日，达米安（Damiens）因谋刺国王而被判处“在巴黎教堂大门前公开认罪”，他应“乘坐囚车，身穿囚衣，手持两磅重的蜡烛”，“被送到格列夫广场。那里将搭起行刑台，用烧红的铁钳撕开他的胸膛和四肢上的肉，用硫磺烧焦他持着试君凶器的右手，再将熔化的铅汁、沸滚的松香、蜡和硫磺浇入撕裂的伤口，然后四马分肢，最后焚尸扬灰”（《达米安案件》，372～374）。
1757年4月1日的《阿姆斯特丹报》描述道：“最后，他被肢解为4部分。这道刑罚费了很长时间，因为役马不习惯硬拽，于是改用6匹马来代替4匹马。但仍然不成功，于是鞭打役马，以便拉断他的大腿、撕裂筋肉、扯断关节……。
“据说，尽管他一贯满嘴秽言，却从未亵渎过神明。过度的痛苦使他鬼哭狼嚎般地喊叫。他反复呼喊：‘上帝，可怜我吧！耶稣，救救我吧！’圣保罗教区的牧师年事已高，但竭尽全力地安慰这个受刑者，教诲在场的所有观众。”
现场监视官员布东（Bouton）留下了这样的记载：“硫磺点燃了，但火焰微弱，只是轻微地烧伤了手的表皮。 刽子手便卷起袖子，拿起专为这次酷刑特制的约一英尺半长的铁钳，先后在右边的小腿和大腿上撕开两处，然后在右臂上撕开两块肉，接着在胸部撕拉。刽子手是一个彪形大汉，但要撕扯下肉块也不容易，因此他在每一处都要撕扯两三次，而且要拧动铁钳。他在每一处撕开大约6磅肉的伤口。
“被铁钳撕扯时，达米安虽然没有咒骂，但却声嘶力竭地嚎叫。他不断地抬起头来，然后看看自己的身体。那个刽子手用一个钢勺从一个锅里舀出滚沸的液体，胡乱地浇注每一个伤口。然后，人们把挽马用的绳索系在犯人身上，再给马套上缰绳，把马分别安排在四肢的方向。
而西方文明最发达的英国也一直有血腥法典（Bloody Code），非常残忍：
谋杀，纵火，伪造，砍树，偷马偷羊，破坏公路，小偷（偷的超过一先令），涂黑脸夜出，未婚妈妈隐瞒流产，等等
然而这也是自责过甚，因为这种
单一的传统权力关系是至上而下的社会，在古时，这种关系政治和社会的双重身份是一致的，一个人的官职与其社会名声地位大致一致，在伦理上，就需要等级森严的人与人的关系，这是统治阶层理想的
美国国内警察与老百姓（不对立，但）黑人对立，就是这种国家机器的反映
中国过去几个月的外交政策既反映了中国把自己稳住阵脚当成领先西方的误解带来的狂妄，也反映了掌权的中国极端派的傲慢，结果英国是在受不了了，反击华为，要成立5G十国联盟，整死中国，而这种思潮演发成意识形态的十国联盟（《日本时报》Enough of the G7, let’s try a G10），可是世界会接受吗？（这就是脱钩后的结果）不是说全世界除了发达国家都站在中国一边，大家对中国都恨透了，而是西方发达国家重来就没把其他人放在心上，也不是好东西，因为民主自由并不是大家都民主，大家都自由。
英国利益
中国上市公司都黑，中国会计行业也黑，被美国赶出去，是好事，可是据《泰晤士报时报》说，英国眼巴巴等着中国公司转到伦敦，因为每年都有会费，150公司就过亿美元。
美国的优越性，是在从其他地区、人民中
基辛格曾问周恩来总理法国革命的影响是什么，周恩来回答说，现在说还太早。几百年对中国人来说太短了。
美国国内“境外黑手论”也来了
This is a Chinese Communist Party that has come to view itself as intent upon the destruction of Western ideas, Western democracies, and Western values. It puts Americans at risk, whether it’s stealing American intellectual property or destroying jobs here in the U.S. pic.twitter.com/89JlUuARro— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) May 31, 2020
淳朴（美国总统Donald Trump，人称特朗普或川普）和他的班子跟习近平有什么区别？
“Nothing to say” to the nation https://t.co/6MJyUmH69k— Jane Mayer (@JaneMayerNYer) June 1, 2020
总统下令军队待命以备强行管制拒令的各州，一条213年前的“暴动法”（Insurrection Act），班子里一群哈巴狗没人敢有异议，司法部长调用反恐队调查示威者，总统为了给自己“法制总统”形象照相，下令法催泪弹制造环境，那不是一条六四的鬼影？
They imposed a curfew and gassed protesters for their photo op pic.twitter.com/l2mYmXmJwz— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) June 1, 2020
评论
目前还没有任何评论
登录后才可评论.
