115. The have-nots are not afraid of the haves

27 January 2017

‘The have-nots are not afraid of the haves’ is a proverb in Chinese language, which is not collected in the classical literary works or school textbooks. However, it is a social culture and social logic that exists concretely. In addition, since ancient times, it has been in existence, and it has guided people’s behaviour. It is a social guideline that runs in parallel with all the classical cultures.

The classical culture and the culture learned from school textbooks are the cultures of the wealthy and the logic of wealth, and those poor people and the civil society have folk cultures and the logic of the poor. Without a comprehension of the cultures and logical thoughts of the poor, it would be impossible to administer the poor.

A very simple truth is that the social impacts and harms exerted by the drug use by the wealthy and the poor are not the same.

The aftermath of drug use by the wealthy is bankruptcy. They would deteriorate from the haves to have-nots and have to live on the street.

In contrast, when the poor use drugs, in order to raise money, they can do any evil things, such as robberies and murders, thus severely harming others: black society, blackmailing, drug making and drug trafficking, counterfeit currencies, robbing banks, illegal trade of guns, forcing women into prostitution, etc., which are all evils committed by the members of gangdom.

During the early establishment of the new People’s Republic of China, almost all people were proletariats; with the implementations of reform and open-up, a great number of people have become proprietarians. Almost all the current urban dwellers are proprietarians. No matter how poor a person may be, their apartment is worth hundreds of thousands of yuan; these are the assets. Of course, for various reasons, a small number of people have no apartments, no bank deposits and are the have-nots.

In China’s remote mountainous regions and countryside, their real estate are not the commercial apartments and cannot be traded on the market in case they have no money. They are the have-nots in the true sense, They are the poor people.

The logical thoughts of the haves and have-nots are totally different.

For the haves, since they have money and assets, first of all, they hope to protect their existing properties and create more opportunities for earning more money and lead a better life. Since they have assets, they are very afraid of losing their assets. They intend to lead a better life, and of course, they are more afraid of death.

The wealthy are fearful of running into troubles and are afraid to get involved in fighting, and they are afraid of being penalised. This is because in the capitalist nations, most people are wealthy and are proprietarians; therefore, their social culture and social logic are established on the basis of the wealthy.

Democratic culture, abolishment of capital punishment, compensation for spiritual damages, equality between males and females, human rights and liberty, etc.—all these things are sheer nonsense if they are taken in front of the have-nots.

This is because the have-nots and the proletariats have their own logic, and what they are most concerned about is not democratic culture, abolishment of death penalty, compensation for spiritual losses, equality between males and females, human rights, liberty, and philanthropy.

When the poor are together with the wealthy, what they feel first of all is a kind of psychological gap, self-abasement, fury, jealousy, and hatred. The reason why the democratic nations have been advocating philanthropy and equal rights is that they want the poor to listen to these so that they will not become hateful and will not hate the wealthy and the proprietarians. In the advanced Western nations, in contrast to the impoverished, most people are proprietarians and they are all wealthy people. They need to encourage the small number of impoverished not to have hatred and grudging against the wealth. They need to reach the level of the wealth through their own efforts.

While the wealthy have such thoughts, the poor have their own logic, i.e. the have-nots are not afraid of the haves. Since I am poor, I can do anything—for the poor have nothing to lose. When the poor make efforts, they could get the whole world. Therefore, the poor can commit robberies, severely harm others, be members of the underworld, commit blackmailing and kidnapping, make and traffic illegal drugs, make counterfeit currencies, commit bank robberies, sell illegal weapons, force women into prostitution, etc.

This is because the logic of the poor is different from that of the wealthy. For the haves and have-nots, the administrations of the poor and the wealthy should also be different.

The effective administration of the wealthy is such things as the current legislative system fines, imprisonments.

For the impoverished, the most effective administrative system is strict laws execution and vigorous behavioural norms, which is management like the Koran-type management in Islamism. If the poor commit robberies, severely harm others, are members of the underworld, commit blackmailing and kidnapping, make and traffic illegal drugs, make counterfeit currencies, commit bank robberies, sell illegal weapons, force women into prostitution, etc., all these are the social trash and tumours and all of them should be executed immediately.

The wealthy have different logic from the poor, and they have different starting points for the thinking about some issues. Therefore, the laws there lenient to the wealthy are not applicable for the poor, and the poor need strict laws. In order to make the laws executable, no matter they are the wealthy or the poor, when measuring the sentences, it is possible to make the litigant compensate in money. For those who can afford to pay or have assets, their penalties can be lightened. For those poor people, when they have committed crimes, they should be executed.

Just like the suspect who ruined the facial appearance of a woman, firstly, he was requested to compensate 2 million yuan; when he failed to do so, he was executed. Those people who have a worth of 2 million yuan would never have done something like that. In my opinion, since it was not affordable and he risked everything, he should have been executed.

For those wealthy people, their severe harms to others might have been caused by impulsions and they can be compensated with money.

For those poor people who have harmed others, they committed despising of God and should be executed.

However, regardless whichever people, whether they are the rich or the poor, intentional murders of people should be compensated by the death penalties. This is the law of God, and is also the most fundamental fairness and justice.

In China, social security is guaranteed by the government with God’s wealth, and the government uses God’s wealth for conducting scientific administration, and employments, training, education, urban development, and social security are all operating normally. Therefore, it is necessary to take effective measures on those who damage the order.

In a democratic society, regarding personal safety, it is partially provided by the nation, while the individual has to safeguard the other part. The nation is unable to provide complete safety assurance and effective and scientific management of the society; therefore, regarding the penalties for crimes, they can only resolve the contradiction. It is impossible to realise fairness and justice.

Since a nation has no obligations for individuals, you have no rights.

In democratic nations, it is necessary to collect God’s wealth to the nation; only when the scientific administration of the society is realised will it be possible to completely apply the crimes and penalties for fairness and justice.