|
【家國主義 家主政治 中華家國的理論與實際 討論區】以家主政治取代民主政治
|
瀏覽5,538 ｜回應24｜推薦1 |
|
|
|
梅峰 瑞典隆德大學留學生
近日來對民主政治公民觀念之反省不絕於耳，德國議員連署修憲欲讓父母替十八歲以下之小孩投票，英國政府欲將投票年齡降低至十六歲，洛杉磯加州大學研究說，加州應該修改州憲，以便允許加州境內四百六十萬非公民成年人，能在地方選舉中投票，事實上在瑞典只要居住滿三年的成年人，不論是公民與否，早在地方選舉與公投中擁有投票權。這些均顯示，民主政治所謂之「公民」觀念，遭到了嚴厲之挑戰。
記得十多年前在台大教我史記的阮芝生老師即曾對我說，「民主政治真是無法取代嗎？」在當時黨外鬧翻天的時代，這個問題真是沒人敢質疑，但是今天筆者在禮失而求諸野的維京海盜國家瑞典找到了答案，民主政治確是西方基督教個人主義傳統下的產物，有其由下而上決定政策，數人頭而非砍人頭更迭政權及法治理性治國之優點，但它的缺點確也是磬竹難書，尤其不完全適合孕育在傳統中國儒家，齊「家」治「國」的「家國主義」文化下之我們。
一國文化之部份內容或有傳統現代之別，或有優劣之分，但有時一國文化之許多部份則完全只是民族地理歷史宗教長久造成之習慣，未可全然棄之，因為條條道路通羅馬，安和樂利之社會亦可由不同之文化途徑達到，所以革命基本上不為智者所取，依循既有文化步調之漸進發展才是免於流血，因時因地因人制宜之成熟作為。
東西方傳統文化之巨大差異，可由戶政之小事上可以看出，瑞典傳統之人口記載是由教會為之，近年來才改由「稅局 Skattemyndigheten」管理，所記載之事項完全以個人為單位，所以瑞典是沒有所謂之戶口名簿、戶長、戶政機關之「家戶鄰里」概念的，完全是典型之西方個人主義文化，這與我中華傳統之家國主義文化何止千萬里之差，孟子之「不孝有三，無後為大」的觀念，他們從來就沒有聽說過。
國父孫中山先生百年前為創立民國而革命時，我中華民族實在自憐自卑到無法自拔的程度，因此三民主義在擷取西方制度上幾乎沒有太多的詳實研究，當時除普魯士鐵血首相俾斯麥之某些社會保險政策外，包括紐澳加拿大北歐西歐之所有福利國均尚未出現，是故亦無太多之模範可循，因此很多問題完全不考慮既有之文化背景，一概不由分說的革命去除。民主政治，一夫一妻都是典型的例子，如今民主問題一堆，台商大陸包二奶，即知中國數千年之傳統是根深蒂固的，怎麼可能一革了之完全西化呢！
民主政治是要人民當國（還不光只是當家而已），人民作主，而欲讓人民具備有如皇帝及王公貴族般之為國作主能力，在西方尚且經過了數百年之發展，一般來說最先是貴族，然後有錢之白種成年男人，白種成年男人，成年男人，成年婦女則尚且是在離開家庭，參與經濟建設後才取得公民資格與投票之權力，瑞士還要到上世紀七○年代才讓婦女爭取到投票權，哪像我民主政治極為幼稚之中華民國在五○年代就每個公民人手一票了，結果賄選買票，上級指示的亂選一通，許多流氓黑道藉此漂白，許多暴發富藉此提高身價，連李登輝這個日本鬼子，國民黨的邪魔妖怪，都能操控讓對手黨的陳水扁當總統，這種民粹政治成熟嗎！
民主政治目前之危機數不勝數，投票率難有超過百分之八十的，許多公民根本沒有興趣投票，即使投票也不知該怎麼投，常是人云亦云，或由樁腳或由企業主或由黑道控制，只問近利不管是非；兒童沒有投票權，造成兒童福利無人聞問，生育率因此大幅下降，民族之存續繁衍都出問題；高齡化本是美事，但中華民國人口高齡化的速度居全球第二就離譜了，造成政客無人敢不奉承，使得完全無合理規劃之老農老漁津貼不斷加碼，老幼照顧但知進口外籍僱傭，只知抄襲西方資本主義，不顧自己傳統文化，如今走到這個福利與經濟進退不得的節骨眼，真不知未來要如何收場。
西方之爭自由平等有其中世紀封建與教會之歷史因素，中國歷史上，天高皇帝遠，是一盤散沙，是自由平等過度。中國傳統是男女有別，家和萬事興，要先齊家，然後治國，問題主要在欠缺法治與砍人頭更迭政權，但完全蒙著眼睛追隨西方之步調，連在需要互助分工，相敬互讓之家庭內，男女都要學西方爭平等，造成呂秀蓮所言之非常問題：「與此同時，國人的婚姻和家庭結構也起重大變化。男女晚婚甚至單身的現象日漸普遍，結婚率降低而離婚率上升，造成越來越多的單親家庭。每對夫婦所生子女減少，家庭規模變小，家人關係變淡。異族通婚開始盛行，因外籍配偶而形成新的「客家族群」。」
國親這兩天欲端牛肉給選民，並罵民進黨「笨蛋：問題在經濟」，會罵人笨蛋者，自己也高明不到哪兒去，依西歐及北歐近來之發展觀之，問題絕對不只在經濟，政治社會法律文化心理，如果只知盲目地跟著西方走，則無一不出問題，而萬般複雜之解決之道，亦非筆者一人可以盡知盡書，但不尊重自己傳統文化之家國觀念，極可能是中華民國社會嚴重家庭問題之緣由，亦是目前亟欲被改善之世界潮流。
筆者因此在此提出許多相對於西方個人主義「公民」之中國家國主義「家庭」觀念，盼與各位共同研究之，希望在尊重個人之西方傳統基礎下，更進一步發展到重視家庭之中國傳統。首先筆者以為「家庭平等」重於「個人平等」，也較有實現之可能。因為人民中有老，有少，有男，有女，有健，有殘，本來即毫無平等可言，不管是立足點平等，機會平等，男女平權，平等地位（Equal status) 等，這些對欲求家和萬事興，包含男女老少之所有家庭成員來說，都是毫無意義的。家庭做主之「家主政治（Familicracy）」較之公民作主之「民主政治（Democracy）」更為周延完善，而中國家庭做主之「中華家國 (Familicracy Republic of China) 」較之西方公民作主之「中華民國」，更是充滿智慧與合乎現實，因為中華文化向來是以「大家」來泛稱所有之人民的。
目前碰到兒童投票難題而走不下去之公民投票，因為降低投票年齡永遠沒有底線，長遠來說當然也該順理成章的以「家庭投票 (Family vote)」來取代。「家庭投票」之短期做法其實也很簡單，此即除維持傳統「公民」之投票方式外，凡家庭成員有共同一致之投票對象者，可委託戶內之一位公民代表全戶之老弱婦孺投票，此時不但一人（非僅公民）有一票之權利，尚應加權計數，如家庭票之每一票以一票半記之，以鼓勵家庭之討論共識。這種做法不但能慎選投票對象，尚能增加投票率，又不至產生家庭糾紛，因為沒有共識之家庭還是一位公民一票，誰叫您自「己」要放棄自「家」的權利！
因為現代「家主」觀念之「國家」既因「家」之需要而組成「國」，國自然應為家而服務，而非傳統之家為國而存在。瑞典以個人主義為基礎之福利國觀念，即認為國家應為人民之家，國家應該像家庭一樣的照顧百姓，筆者則以為，中華傳統以家庭主義為基礎之福利國，當是國家為家庭之家，國家當照顧家庭，如同家庭照顧老少殘疾，因此國家是家庭之家，而家庭是人民之家，這樣人民，家庭，國家之合理排序，也才能解決北歐福利國，跳過家庭，直接以國家來照顧個人，所產生之效率其差，資源錯置，與家庭解體之嚴重問題。
近年來瑞典福利國之走回頭路，而漸向資本主義靠攏，只因天下沒有白吃之晚餐，而「福利」需要「義務」的配合，所以中國傳統父慈子孝，權利義務相對，齊家治國循序漸進之「家」國主義，才是福利國未來應循之康莊大道。而將老少殘疾完全丟給國家去照顧的做法是行不通的，而被父母含辛茹苦培育之子孫，將來反哺盡孝之邏輯也應該是顛撲不破的真理，至於說應由男或女去照顧，或家庭與國家在家庭照顧與勞動參與之取捨上，則當在此理論基礎上另行加以研究，以求國家經濟成長與社會安和樂利之雙嬴。
【家國主義 家主政治 中華家國】健保免費連線《梅峰》
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
Gender, Domestic Technology and Familistatism
|
|
|
推薦0 |
|
|
|
Tema Teknik och social forandring
International Master's Program in Science, Technology and Society
Modual 4
Introduction to Science and Technology and Society
Main Instructor
Johan M. Sanne
Assistant Instructor
Christer Eldh
Ericka Johnsson
Petra Jonvallen
Gender, Domestic Technology and Familistatism
An Introduction to Familistatism
Essay by
Mei, Feng
梅峰
4th Feb. 2002
Rydsvagen 202A
584 32 Linkoping
Tel:013-26 08 86
Mobil:070-292 70 12
E-mail:mei.feng@telia.com
Content
I. Introduction 3
II. Context 3
III. The introduction to familistatism 5
III-1. Mei, Feng's utopia idea of familistatism 5
III-2. Prof. Li, Zhi Chao's definition to familistatism 6
III-3. The several characteristics of familistatism analyzed by Prof. Li 6
III-4. The traditional domestic housework of familistatism 7
IV. Discussion 8
V. Conclusion 9
VI. Sources 10
I. Introduction
I read the book of Judy Wajcman, "Feminism Confronts Technology", and get many ideas about the ideology behind gender issue, here I want to use her concepts to discuss the relationships among familistatism, demestic technology and gender.
For the concept of "familistatism（家國主義）" has been mentioned only by myself and another Chinese professor from the communist China, Li, Zhi Chao（李志超）, almost simultaneously so far as I know, so I need to introduce this important concept in a more detailed way.
Familistatism is based on the ideology of traditional Chinese familism, which has the concept of at least the extended three generation family, in order to take care of each others. Familism of course has connection with gender, and the recent domestic technology innovation do have tremendous influence to the present structure of family, and inevitable to the situation of gender.
For gender, domestic technology and familistatism all have very great extent to discuss, so I will just abstract some of the views from Wajcman, about the feminist concerned housework to domestic technology, and try to looking for the ideology behind them which have shaped technology. Then I will try to compare the main ideologies after I have introduced the familistatism.
II. Context
Relieving the key oppression of women's burden of household work, which is privatized, decentralized, single-family and labor-intensive, has long been a major project of feminism, and considerable optimism has attached to the possibility for domestic technology to provide the solution to gender inequality at home.
Arguments based on technological determinism play a central role in the mechanization of housework and the feminist streams of thought. Wajcman in her book examined some of the alternative approaches to individualized housework in order to challenge those arguments.
"Cowan graphically captures the completely 'irrational' use of technology and labor within the home, because of the dominance of single-family residences and private ownership of correspondingly small-scale amenities. 'Several million American women cook supper each night in several million homes over several million stoves' (Cowan, 1979, p. 59)" (Wajcman, 1991, p. 87)
In view of these shortcomings of domestic technology from Cowan and others, she introduced a more radical approach to transform the social context about the mechanization of housework from individual households to its collectivization.
She mentioned that, both the early feminist movement and revolutionary socialists, call for the socialization and collectivization of domestic work as a precondition for the emancipation of women, they 'envisaged a completely professionalized system of housekeeping which would free women from the ties of cooking, cleaning and childcare. .........The socialization of the kitchen would expand to all other domestic work in a large-scale socialist economy' (Wajcman, p. 96) And they embraced the new forces of technology as making this possible.
Despite all the other reasons beside the liberation of women from housework and the different individual choice of different class, there are a lot of socialized domestic works already existed and under experimented. Such as the establishing collective laundry systems in apartment blocks, communal eating facilities. And the infrastructure for the communal provision of domestic appliances, such as municipal wash-houses and laundries, communal wash-houses in the old tenement blocks, communal cr?ches and communal leisure areas.
The alternatives of domestic technology which Wajcman extracted to challenge the arguments of technology determinism of the household work reveals that, "Yet there are always technological alternatives and any specific machine is the result of non-technological as well as technological consideration. A society's choices among various possible directions of technological development are highly reflective of the patterns of political, social, and economic power in the society." (Wajcman, p. 100)
The above "patterns of political, social, and economic power in the society." for most of the alternatives of domestic technology are easily to be recognized as the model of communist society based on the ideology of communism. At least they belong to the socialist society based on the ideology of socialism.
Despite of the advantages of labor and time saving of those communal household services, why then has the individualized household triumphed, especially in the US? ' "The single-family home and the private ownership of tools are social institutions that act to preserve and to enhance the privacy and autonomy of families" (Cowan, p. 59)' was the answer Wajcman had got. (Wajcman, p. 97)
However the social shaping of technology in connection with the gender issues based on the ideology of capitalism could found a lot of evidences from Wajcman's book and other places too. And it seems that both communism and capitalism society could not satisfy the feminists' concerned about the status of the modern family under the recent innovation of technology.
III. The introduction to familistatism
III-1. Mei, Feng's utopia idea of familistatism
I came from Taiwan, ROC. The constitution of ROC is based upon the -ism of 'the three principles of people' by our national father Dr. Sun Yi Xian. The third principle -'The live of the people'- almost completely based on the ideology of socialism. At the ruling period of Jiang's Family between 1945-1988, although they did not following this ideology completely as what they announced, but at least they did not deflect from it too much. However, I know a lot of communist realities about our brother China Mainland, I know much about capitalism, and I know the reality of the Social Democratic ruling Sweden too.
Here I want to introduce the concept of "familistatism", which is based on the traditional Chinese familism to compared with the capitalism based on individualism, and the communism based on collectivism.
The present two exponents of familistatism, as you could see are from different parts of China. I got this concept after I have studied in Sweden, the well know welfare state, who have really accomplished the traditional Chinese Confucius' utopia idea of "Da Tong world ( 大同世界, you can probably say that it means everybody has the same good life) ". But unfortunately Sweden seems to have big problems to sustain her proud people's home. And I used the word "family state" to substitute "welfare state", in order to incorporate the traditional Chinese familism value with the Confucius' utopia goal of the modern Swedish welfare state, while which is mainly based on the traditional western ideology of individualism.
My idea of familistatism wishes to looking for a way for the Chinese, I will be very happy if it could be a mirror to the western society too. I refuse any revolution concept about our lovely Chinese culture. I wish to use the concept and practical methods of welfare state to solve our conventional problems, which have been faced with the impact of industrialization and democracy of the western society. And I strongly believe that the innovation technology of informational society, social democracy and free education etc. will be the best medicine for us to accomplish a better quality of familistatism. As for the radical individualism and collectivism will need a further scrutiny to get the better part of it.
III-2. Prof. Li, Zhi Chao's definition to familistatism
Almost at the same time, Prof. Li, Zhi Chao, from the famous University of Science and Technology of China, published his article "Familistatism and Chinese Culture" in Chinese, I will introduce here about his idea of familistatism.
He used the word "familistatism", in contrast with me, from the historical analysis to the traditional Chinese political, economic, social and technological civilization. And defined the traditional Chinese society from the Qin Dynasty（秦朝）as a society of familistatism which is mainly based on the philosophy of Confucius for over 2000 years. His main purpose on this article was trying to let Chinese understand that we have had a glorious culture compared with the same period of the world at most of this 2000 years. And we should still follow this magnificent tradition and try to understand how we could shape it into the contemporary society.
He analyzed that just as the feudal and slavery systems came simultaneously to different society after the common phenomenons of ancient militaristic communistic society, so are the capitalism and familistatism came simultaneously to different society after the feudalism. The Chinese familistatism after Qin Dynasty based on Confuciusism and Hsuntzuism（法家）already had a very good political and moral system about the theory of state, while this theory of state was found only after the feudalism in Europe.
As the Confuciusism is the main stream of traditional Chinese culture, and the main ideas of Confuciusism are, "order the family first（齊家）" which mainly belong to the category of moral, and "then manage the state（治國）" which mainly concern about the political system. So Prof. Li used these main ideas of "family" and "state" to describe the Confucius dominated Chinese society as "familistatism" as compared to the western capitalism.
III-3. The several characteristics of familistatism analyzed by Prof. Li
1. The main social structure of the familistatism society are family and state, and the families are led by the state. Chinese aristocrat have vanished after the Song Dynasty（宋朝）, and the civilian could possibly be the aristocrat by their effort.
2. The economic structure of familistatism mainly based on the agriculture, and helped by the industrial and business sectors. It is mainly private owned economy and helped by the state owned industries, and it seems resemble to the nowadays socialism. But as a matter of fact, although the private owned land have the critical merger phenomenon, but still it is different from the feudalism for property and politic power are separated, so the landlord of capitalism and familistatism is the same. The industrial and business sectors are too small to compare with the capitalism society today, so it is difficult to become capitalism, but it is easy to be socialism.
3. The core ideas to the theory of Confucius based on love, justice（仁義）and education, it catched exactly the very basic concepts of human development for survival and developement, for human being are socially live together so they must love each other and there must be justice to punish the deviant. The socialized knowledge and virtues need education to transfer to the successive generations in order to keep the development of human being.
4. Since the Qin Dynasty（秦朝）, Chinese familistatism already had free and prosperous industrial and business sectors. The capital cities already havedevelopment the population to around 100,000 even before Qin Dynasty（秦朝）. The state owned enterprises also run the industry of salt, iron, wine and tea etc. so even the industrial and business sectors of familistatism were small compared with nowadays capitalism, but still the scale is not smaller than the other countries of that time.
5. The power of the emperor and the bullies（君權與豪強）were the main historical problems to the familistatism society, after the emperor began to corrupt, the bullies started to tease the civilian, and revolution followed until the new dynasty reappeared.
III-4. The traditional domestic housework of familistatism
As Wajcman pointed out that the diffusion of domestic equipment into househol, the routine domestic work time for women has been declined in many western countries, but "While routine domestic work has declined, the time spent in childcare and shopping have substantially increased." (Wajcman, p. 97)
Limited by the materials and time, I would like to used my common sense and experiences to the conventional three generations extended families in ROC to look at some of the differences of housework for women as compared with the single-family household of capitalism under the modern innovation of technology for ROC still preserves some of the traditional familistatism characters.
The increased childcare time for women, usually transfer to their mother for some of them still live together. And what Wajcman have never mentioned is the "oldercare time", which the traditional "good virtue" Chinese women will still perform, of course have not changed too much for the oldercare system could not yet catch up with the industrialize society.
IV. Discussion
You could see that Prof. Li described the historic Chinese culture as "traditional" familistatism, but I based upon this existing traditional Chinese culture, further assemble the modern practices and methods of welfare state to make my utopia idea of "future" familistatism.
As I have mention before that the main problems of "traditional" familistatism is democracy, socialism and free education etc. which we indeed need to learn from the warfare states. Democracy could make the main problem of emperor corruption and the following revolution vanished, and free education and socialism will make a more equal society and peaceful family.
I also found many brand new ideas for the "future" familistatism, such as the family vote compared with the solely citizen vote, unseperation right of family, etc. The detail content of the "future" familistatism of course need a great effort to explore. Although what I have done is trivial but still it shows the possible way for Chinese to the future prosperity.
Although the arguments of technology determinism seems to create a new unlimited era to the society, so are the arguments of the social shaping to technology create restriction to technology, especially the dominant ideologies of capitalism, socialism, familistatism and communism. Here I want to make some comments to the existing ideology, but assumed that all these ideologies have democracy basis.
The disaster of radical capitalism which call on communism as the resulting solution have been fixed by socialism to different extent, the crash of radical communist countries proved that the extremely collectivism completely against the human nature. The social democratic welfare state face with the big economic burden, proved that the extremely individualism do use too much resources of the earth, make the birth rate declining enough to threat the successive of the race, and the 50 % rate of one-people house in Stockholm crashes the family system which is the fundamental social nature of human being. As for the lonely corpse which have been founded after a long period of dying in the modern city, seem to tell us that our selfish enough privacy we have had to our parents who had raised us with so much sacrifice will be punished by the same consequence in the future. And the familistatism need the culture of democracy. So, should I get this conclusion that the social democratic welfare state should try to accept the concept of familism, and the traditional familistatism should learn the democracy culture of welfare state?
V. Conclusion
In this essay, by way of looking at the problems which feminist have issued based on the innovation of modern domestic technology, I found that the ideologies do play an essential role of shaping technology from the book of Wajcman. But she has not mentioned too much about the situations in East Asia, so I introduce the familistatism ideology of traditional China and add the idea of my "future" familistatism for the resolution.
As we could see that there are no perfect ideology, and all of the ideologies has their merits and drawbacks, but still you shall try to looking for a best suited ideology to your own society. And I suggest the reform to the existing condition in stead of a completely revolution, for you could not avoid and even disgust your own tradition. You just need to looking for the sick places of your society, and search for the best medicine to cure it.
But the saddest points is that, the radical Chinese almost completely distrust their own glorious culture, just learn everything from the West, especially the easiest learned sick places such as homosexual, but the exact essence of western culture like education and democracy, it seems that it is very hard to let them fully understand it.
As for the West, they are too proud to learn from the East, some of them even deem themselves as the essence of civilization, against them means against civilization. The pride of them let them totally forget their barbarian ancestor as compared with the civilize East just several hundred years ago.
In this essay, I could just remind the reader with the lost familistatism ideology which could also shape the technology in the domestic household technology feminist concerned. As for the relationships among familistatism, technology and gender, then deserve a more elaborate effort to do further researches. I just mention here a very rough experience about their relation, I wish I could have done more if I have had the chances later!
VI. Sources
Li, Zhi Chao, 李志超 Dec, 1999, "Familistatism and Chinese Culture 家國主義與中國文化 ", Cultural China 文化中國, 1999, 12, No. 23
Mei, Feng, 梅峰 Dec, 1999, "Familistatism and Familism 家國主義與家庭主義", Paper of the course "The Swedish Model"
Wajcman, Judy, 1991, "Feminism Confronts Technology", Penn State Press
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
|
|
狂老尊鑒！
謝謝狂老指教！
小弟與您老心情相同，無不盼望中國強大，且能早日強大，但現在您明顯可以看到，中共之專制獨裁政權，無法無天之資本主義所造成之惡果畢現，貪污腐化、貧富懸殊、環境惡化、資源濫用、言論箝制、道德沈淪、打壓異己等等數不清之惡形惡狀，這是大家都知道之事實。
其實進步發展不應求速效，不應只求頭大，而忽略手腳，而是應該一步一步，齊頭並進的來，否則將來收尾巴，擦屁股所花的功夫更大。瑞典人做事慢調斯理，但步步認真，小弟很少看到他們拆違建、挖馬路、房子拆拆建建，進步短期看來似不大，但長遠之基礎卻是結實堅固的。
中共專制獨裁政權，目前只知在經濟上發展，而不知在政治上求「家主」，造成下情不能上達，官員只知逢迎拍馬，何時真正顧到百姓之疾苦。
中共或許會改，但光談無用，中共甚至連嘴巴都不說，所以訂定「家主化時間表」之誠意是非常重要的，否則您怎知他何時會改，是要待政權亡了再改嗎？要知歷代政權之更迭，常在貧富懸殊農民起義之時，而非在百姓全都較窮之當兒。您老知道自由中國民主化之過程是這麼的艱辛，可知既得利益之獨裁政權是很難自行放棄權力的，我們自各國之民主化經驗可知，大部分之民主化政權均得來不易，所以中國大陸之「家主化」，完全是兩岸和解甚或統一之前提，否則中共獨裁政權之強大，只會令世界不安，只會令自由中國感冒。
民主政權雖暫由某一些在信仰上同質性的人「主政」，但卻不須經過革命性之流血，即可以數人頭之和平方式來更換政權，不必為專制獨裁政權永遠無止盡的專政所困，民主或家主之可愛即在此。
小弟之家國主義，主張家主政治，表面上看起來確實是男人主政，而非專政，但實質上，卻是尊重家庭之選擇，而要避免個人主義之缺失。初期實施家主政治，當然必須有過度期，此即如果家庭中之成員有不同之選擇，則仍然是一人一票，但家庭成員中非成人票之喪失，就是對個人主義之懲罰。
事實上，現今甚至自古以來，全世界之政權除極極少數之例外，幾乎無不以男性來主政，這不是男人「專政」，而是女性天生不適合也不很願意「主政」。雖然男女都是人，雖然老人小孩都是人，雖然健壯或廢疾者都是人，但人還是有不同的，不是所有人都可以或有能力或適合「做主」的，這就是小弟主張家主政治的緣故，此即由家庭來做主，而非再讓個人來做主。
其實小弟是主張較民主政治精緻之「三主政治」的，此即國家由政黨作主之「黨主」，政黨由家庭選擇之「家主」、家庭由成員做主之「民主」。就家庭內部來說，是一家之男女老幼以民主之方式做主決定，而家中成員之階級利益基本上是一樣的，且一家之長之意見基本上較為強勢也是自然的，而主負一家生計之男性之為一家之主之可能性當然最大，但小弟之「以柔克剛」，「男人為頭，女人為頸」理論卻絕不敢輕視女性之力量，只是覺得在家中男女爭權是毫無意義的事。
小弟絮叨，拉拉雜雜，尚請狂佬指正，您佬如欲對「家國主義」與「三主政治」有更深入之了解，請再指教下列文章：
精華區 / 家國主義與家主政治
梅峰 敬草
家國主義 家主政治 是否專政？ madkao 2005/02/25 18:03
梅峰兄
〔中共專政〕的本質 不可能不改！
也己在改中．．．．．．．．．
世界上所有的政權本質上都是由某一些同質性的人在〔專政〕
除非有革命性變化．．．．．．．．．
家國主義 家主政治 是否專政？ 你主張由男人專政吧
也向您拜晚年！
中共專政不改，中共強大可怕 MeiFeng 2005/02/21 11:25
中共專政不改，中共強大可怕
狂老！
如果中共專政不改的話，小弟不如此樂觀！如有冒犯，希見諒。
向您拜晚年！
梅峰 草
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
|
|
政府應該幫助百姓成家、安家、齊家與富家是小弟之政治主張，小弟惋惜政治人物實在不夠關心百姓，現在曠男怨女到處都是，政府實在應該當現代媒婆，幫助人民成家。
中國自古「父母之命，媒妁之言」其實沒有什麼不對，感情其實是培養出來的，只要門當戶對，條件相當，東挑西撿反而找不到伴侶。
現代媒婆，可以用今天之資訊科技，媒合相配之伴侶，舉辦活動，補貼經費，這是政府最該做的事情，百姓無法成家，政府怎能安心，家庭穩定，國家焉會不安，現今流落於各個宗教與政治活動的諸多女性，多無家庭可為明證，真是令人難過。
【家國主義 家主政治 中華家國】健保免費連線《梅峰》
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
男怕入錯行 女怕嫁錯郎新解（文構思中，現只有一句話）
|
|
|
推薦0 |
|
|
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
