On the surface, Confucian-influenced societies such as Japan, South Korea, and Singapore appear to embody a successful Eastern model of modern civilization—orderly, safe, and built upon a tightly run education system. But beneath this polished exterior lies a deep, systemic fracture in their civilizational foundation: an education system rooted in premature survival training.

This model emerged during the modernization and industrialization of East Asia, when Confucian values were selectively reinterpreted—distorted into tools of utilitarianism, hierarchy, and obedience. As a result, children in these societies are pushed early into the logic of survival, competition, and conformity. Before their personalities have time to mature, they are expected to perform, obey, and succeed—stripped of the right to dream, to explore, and to grow freely. In the end, they become high-performing but hollow instruments of the system—efficient, compliant, and exhausted.

I. The mechanisms behind early-life survival education in East Asian Confucian societies

1. Systematic early socialization during East Asia’s industrial modernization

From the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, countries like Japan, South Korea, and Singapore underwent rapid industrialization and modernization of state governance. To produce disciplined laborers and obedient citizens, the education system was transformed into a training ground for conformity and social compliance.

Starting from kindergarten, children are expected to live independently, manage personal chores, and take on classroom responsibilities. In elementary school, collective responsibility, hierarchical evaluations, and obedience training are implemented across the board. The goal of education is no longer the development of well-rounded individuals, but rather to ensure early adaptation to social demands.

2. Meritocratic and utilitarian value system

In many East Asian societies influenced by Confucianism, success is not just encouraged—it is demanded. From a young age, children are taught to chase good grades, follow rules, and compete for approval. Rankings, awards, and behavior scores become the measure of one’s worth. The message is clear: do not cause trouble, do not fall behind, and make your family proud.

Personal dreams, curiosity, and creativity are often dismissed as distractions or signs of immaturity. The value system becomes highly utilitarian, where practical success and earning potential are treated as the only valid forms of social currency.

3. How family, school, and society reinforce the survival anxiety

In East Asian societies, the Confucian ideal of family responsibility merges with the modern state’s goals of national efficiency, creating a triple-layered system of pressure: home, school, and society.

Parents often view children as both the future security of the family and a source of pride—education becomes an investment, not self-discovery. Schools act as training grounds for obedience and competition. Society defines success by one path: top schools, big companies, stable pay. From early childhood, children are funneled into this narrow path. There is no room for inner growth. Education becomes a tool for survival in a competitive system.

II. Deep personal consequences

1. The loss of dreams and freedom

Childhood should be a time for wonder, imagination, and trial and error. But in East Asia’s “early survival” education model, children are taught to suppress curiosity, avoid risk, and calculate benefit from an early age. The ability to dream is systematically erased.

As adults, many suffer from emotional numbness, lack of purpose, and the inability to ask deep questions about life.

2. Emotional repression and internalized pressure

Phrases like “Do not trouble others,” “Put the group first,” and “Bring honor to your family” are drilled in from a young age. Authentic emotional expression is discouraged, leaving many young people unable to express sadness, anger, or fear. This emotional suppression leads to widespread issues: overwork, social anxiety, isolation, and rising “corporate slave” culture.

Japan, South Korea, and Singapore all rank among the highest in youth suicide rates among developed nations.

3. Fragile sense of self-worth

Raised to seek constant external approval, many grow up with little inner sense of value. Their identity becomes defined by status at work, in the family, or within society. When these crumble, people often fall into self-denial, mental exhaustion, or spiritual emptiness.

III. Structural threats to civilization in society

1. Large-scale “instrumentalization” of individuals

Mass production of “survival-driven children” results in adults who are highly efficient but lack innovation and tend to conform in values, becoming “effective tools” of a systematized society. This leads to a shortage of disruptive innovation and spiritual vitality necessary for civilizational progress.

Japan’s “corporate slave” culture, South Korea’s overwork-related death crisis, and Singapore’s high-pressure performance-driven work environment are clear examples of this issue.

2. Spiritual decline and cultural emptiness

East Asia’s long-standing focus on practical, utilitarian education has drained cultural creativity. Young people increasingly retreat into subcultures like otaku fandom, virtual idols, mobile gaming, and minimalist lifestyles, deepening the sense of cultural emptiness.

The decades-long economic stagnation and weakening cultural influence in Japan and South Korea, along with rising depression among Singaporean youth, all trace back to childhood education that prioritizes survival over spiritual growth.

4. Structural crises from the perspective of civilizational evolution

The Complete Citizen System is founded on a dual belief: spiritual faith that protects inner dignity, and civilizational faith that upholds external order. Civilizational progress depends on people who dream, create, and challenge the status quo—not just passive executors.

If societies shaped by Confucian values continue to mold children into mere instruments for survival too early, they may maintain a façade of stability and order, but beneath it, they are silently eroding the very engine of civilizational progress.

Over the past three decades, Japan and South Korea have seen a steady decline in economic innovation and cultural influence abroad—symptoms of a deeper issue. When a civilization loses its dreamers, it inevitably drifts from stability to conservatism, then to rigidity, and eventually begins to decay.

5. A Comparison of Civilized Societies

The Nordic countries—Sweden, Finland, and Norway—have built education systems that emphasize:

• Respect for individual interests
• A delayed introduction of competition and evaluation
• Encouragement of emotional expression
• Space for dreams, curiosity, and trial-and-error

As a result, these societies consistently outperform Confucian East Asian countries in innovation, happiness, youth mental health, and social trust—standing as leading examples of what a modern civilized society can look like.

VI. Saving civilization from within: East Asia’s last chance at cultural revival

Children should not be raised solely to survive. True education goes beyond teaching basic life skills—it must protect the human instincts to dream, to question, to explore, to rebel, and to break through limitations. If Confucian-influenced societies hope to escape the stagnation of civilization, the decline of innovation, and a growing spiritual crisis, they must:

• Reform evaluation systems to ease the burden of early socialization
• Encourage dreams, curiosity, and creativity to restore character development
• Dismantle hierarchical, utilitarian, and collectivist-centered education models
• Rebuild a humanistic education rooted in spiritual values and individual identity

Without meaningful change, East Asia will keep producing children trained only to survive—pushing its civilization into a slow, quiet decline, where stability remains but spirit and imagination are lost.

VII. Glossary

Early Livelihood-oriented Education

This concept describes an educational approach that pushes the survival rules, responsibilities, and utilitarian values of adult society onto children from preschool age through their teens before they mentally ready.

Its main characteristic is treating children as future workers and social order followers rather than independent individuals with dreams of their own. It encourages early adaptation to compromise, survival, and obedience to rules, while overlooking the nurturing of personality, emotional freedom, inspiration for dreams, and critical thinking skills.

This type of education often shows up in the following ways:

• Children in kindergarten and primary school are expected to manage daily tasks, take on group responsibilities, handle social conflicts, and control their behavior—long before they are developmentally ready.
• By upper elementary grades, they face pressure from test scores, academic rankings, and peer hierarchies.
• Parents, teachers, and schools often work together—intentionally or not—to prioritize grades over the free development of personality.
• Dreaming, imagination, trial-and-error, and risk-taking are often dismissed as distractions or unrealistic pursuits.

Core objective:

By promoting early socialization, collective conformity, and skill-based functional training through education, this model aims to produce a population of stable, obedient, efficient, and survival-oriented individuals—effectively turning them into “tools” for society. These individuals serve as standardized components continuously fed into the adult system to maintain its stability and operation.

Modern scholars and commentators often see technology as the main engine of civilization. But if we look at the rise and fall of great civilizations, it becomes clear: technology is only an external factor. What truly determines the path of civilization is whether a society’s system can adapt, improve, and reform itself over time.

A system—meaning the structure of governance and power—controls how resources are organized, distributed, and shared. It defines who holds power, how conflicts are resolved, and how well a society can respond to shocks.

While technology can boost efficiency, if the system is rigid or closed, new technologies often end up helping elites tighten control, hoard resources, and deepen inequality—leading to social breakdown.

On the other hand, when a system is open and flexible, technology can become a powerful force for upgrading society.

So, the fate of civilization depends on whether its system evolves. Technology helps—but only when the system allows it.

II. Systems, institutions, and technology: how they work together

To truly understand how civilizations function, we must clarify the relationship between systems, institutions, and technology:
● System: The overall framework of governance and power dynamics. It sets the boundaries for how society is organized, how resources are distributed, and how the political environment functions. Examples include centralized states, feudal systems, monarchies, federal governments, and parliamentary democracies.
● Institution: The specific set of rules and mechanisms that operate within a system. Institutions regulate how power and resources are allocated, how competition works, and how people move through society. Examples include tax systems, voting systems, property laws, and freedom of speech protections.
● Technology: The tools and methods that drive productivity and social interaction. Technology increases efficiency and reshapes both the economy and social structures. Examples include gunpowder, the steam engine, the telegraph, the internet, and AI.

How they interact:
The system sets the scope for institutional development. Institutions shape how technology is used. Technology, in turn, affects the system.
When a system is rigid, institutions cannot evolve, and technology ends up serving those in power.But when a system is flexible and adaptive, institutions can evolve, and technology becomes a driver of progress and social advancement.

III. Extractive vs. inclusive institutions

In modern governance systems, institutions can generally be divided into extractive and inclusive types. These reflect how the same political structure can produce different outcomes depending on its capacity.
Extractive Institutions
Extractive institutions are systems where a small privileged group uses power, law, and resource control to block social mobility and technological diffusion. Their goal is to extract wealth from the majority to preserve their own dominance.
Features:
● High concentration of political and economic power
● Barriers to market access and fair competition
● Suppression of dissent and diverse ideas
● Technology used to strengthen control, not empower people
● Huge inequality in resource distribution

Historical examples:

● Late Roman Empire: Land was increasingly concentrated in the hands of nobles. Ordinary citizens became tenant farmers, while aristocrats controlled the empire’s core power, blocking upward mobility.
● Late imperial Chinese dynasties: Powerful clans and bureaucratic elites monopolized resources, suppressed the spread of technology, and resisted industrial and commercial development.
● Soviet authoritarian regime: Political power and productive assets were concentrated in the hands of the Party-state. Dissent and innovation were suppressed, leading to intense internal stagnation.

Inclusive Institutions
Inclusive institutions allow power and resources to circulate fairly within a legal framework. They protect property rights, keep markets open, encourage innovation, and support diverse competition.
Features
● Decentralized power with checks and balances
● Open markets that allow new entrants
● Respect for contracts and private property
● Support for technology diffusion and industrial innovation
● Limits on interference from privileged elites

Historical examples:
● England after the Glorious Revolution (1688): Parliament gained power over the monarchy, property rights and free trade were protected, laying the foundation for the Industrial Revolution.
● The Dutch Republic: Promoted commercial freedom, welcomed immigrants and intellectuals, and became the world’s financial and trade hub in the 17th century.
● The United States constitutional system: Built on separation of powers, open markets, and strong support for immigration and innovation, helping sustain long-term economic growth.

IV. Institutional progress ≠ Civilizational advancement

Reforming institutions is only an internal adjustment within a system’s existing capacity. It does not guarantee a higher level of civilization.
If the system lacks flexibility, even inclusive institutions can be reversed by elite groups and turn into new forms of extractive mechanisms.
Examples:
Britain’s colonial expansion in the 19th century, and the rise of tech monopolies in modern America,
both show how inclusive institutions can be captured and reshaped into subtle extractive systems during times of technological change.
Whether a civilization can keep progressing depends on whether its system can self-correct, restructure itself, and redistribute power and benefits. This is what real system-level progress means.

V. Systemic evolution as the foundation of civilizational progress

Systemic progress means a shift in national governance from rigid and exclusive structures to more open and inclusive ones. It includes:
● Decentralization of power
● Lower barriers to political participation
● Greater tolerance for dissent
● Flexible and adaptive institutions
● Stable mechanisms for the flow of power and wealth
● Institutionalized pathways for technology diffusion

In history, systems with these traits—such as Britain’s parliamentary reforms, the U.S. constitutional adjustments and anti-monopoly efforts, and the Dutch Republic’s open governance—have sustained centuries of civilizational growth.
On the other hand, systems that cannot evolve, even with short-term technological gains, eventually stagnate due to power concentration, social division, and declining innovation.

Conclusion

Civilizational progress is never driven by technology alone—it is powered by institutional upgrade.
Technology speeds things up, but the system decides where we are headed. If the system points in the wrong direction, more speed only leads to faster collapse.
A truly civilized nation is not defined by its GDP, military strength, or scientific achievements, but by whether its political and social systems can adapt, improve themselves, and fairly balance power and resources.
Technology and policies are tools—but without a system that can grow and self-correct, even the best tools will fail.
The system sets the boundaries for institutions. Institutions shape how technology works. And technology, in turn, influences the system. Together, they determine whether a civilization thrives or falls apart.

We allow children to be willful because that is part of what growing up means—moving from ignorance to understanding, from impulsiveness to maturity, from confusion to clarity. Willfulness is a natural part of learning to face reality, make sense of rules, and understand a complex world. A society that cannot make space for a child’s willfulness is one that risks suppressing vitality and creativity.

But there is a deeper problem. What happens when children are not just willful, but are influenced by ignorance, hatred, and pressure—when they begin to embrace cruelty, violence, or extremism, even becoming messengers for these forces? At that point, their willfulness is no longer a sign of youth—it becomes a warning sign for the future.

The tragedy of our time: when “justice” becomes a mask for hatred

June 9, 2025 — A chilling piece of international news: Greta Thunberg, the 22-year-old Swedish climate activist, was intercepted by Israeli forces aboard the Madelene, a humanitarian aid ship headed for Gaza. Wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh, she became part of a political and violent confrontation.

On the surface, this story appears to be just another chapter in the ongoing Israel-Palestine conflict, or a case of humanitarian intervention. But what has truly stirred debate is not the ship or the mission—it is Greta herself, and the influence she exerts.

Once celebrated as a global icon of climate action, peace, and youthful moral courage, Greta was the girl who stood at the UN, boldly calling out world leaders for their inaction on the climate crisis. She inspired millions of young people to speak up for the planet. But now, swept up in the waves of political radicalization, she seems to be drifting away from her original cause. No longer just a voice for the environment, she is increasingly being seen as a mouthpiece for extremist narratives—openly supporting violence, and lending legitimacy to hate in the name of justice.

This is one of the most striking examples of media manipulation in the 21st century: the anger and goodwill of youth are repackaged as “justice”; the harsh and complex realities of political conflict are reduced to simplistic black-and-white narratives; and what should be a call to conscience and social responsibility is replaced by group hysteria and ideological obsession.

The real concern of Greta Thunberg lies in what she has come to symbolize—a generation of young people who, under the influence of social media, online discourse, and political polarization, are rapidly losing their sense of judgment, their ability to reason, and their grasp of the world’s complexity. Instead, they are becoming carriers of hatred, generators of outrage, and tools for the normalization of violence.

We must not let our children grow up in hatred

We can forgive young people for their defiance of authority, their anger at the world, their questioning of injustice—these are natural parts of growing up.

We can understand their impulsiveness, their emotional outbursts, even their moments of extremism, as expressions of youthful ignorance.

But what we must not tolerate—what we absolutely cannot enable—is their voluntary embrace of hatred, their fascination with violence, their worship of extremism. We cannot let them mistake obsession for conviction, or destruction for justice.

Behind every disaster, every collapse of society, every eruption of violence, there is always a group of young people who have been seduced by extremist ideas, inflamed by dogma, and taken hostage by hatred.

These were young people who could have been builders, but were turned into destroyers. They could have been hope, but became a living nightmare.

The Greta incident is not just a headline—it is a reflection of something far deeper: a society losing its values, an education system failing its youth, media shaping public opinion with bias, and social networks driving people into emotional extremes.

How does a young person, once full of idealism and compassion, lose her independent judgment and slide into the arms of extremism, giving legitimacy to political violence? The answer is not just her personal tragedy—it is a symptom of a sick era.

Who will protect the children—who will protect the future?

Yes, children are our future.

But the future is not automatically beautiful. It must be shaped, protected, and guided by reason and kindness.

And that responsibility falls on us—all of us.

Society needs to teach the kids:

• Kindness is not blind allegiance, but the ability to judge right from wrong independently.
• Justice is not a mask for violence, but a commitment to fairness and the refusal to harm the innocent.
• Anger is human—but obsession is dangerous. Questioning authority is healthy, but blindly following extremism is not.
• True courage means holding on to reason in a world full of complexity—not getting swept away by waves of emotional frenzy.

Parents, educators, the media, institutions, and every single adult must take up this responsibility.

In an age of noise and chaos, reason and conscience are the most precious—and the most scarce—resources.

If we allow our youth to grow up immersed in hatred, obsession, violence, and political fanaticism, the future will not belong to the builders and protectors. It will belong to the agitators and destroyers.

And that is a future no civilization can afford.

A final word

Today, we see Greta. But in every country, there are countless young people who have been influenced by extremist ideologies, manipulated by online narratives, and seduced by the illusion of false justice.

If we continue to sleepwalk through this crisis—if we do not wake up to educate, protect, and guide them—if we do not reflect on the collapse of our values, the polarization of public discourse, and the imbalance in our education systems, then twenty years from now, we may find ourselves in a world consumed by hatred, where violence is justified, extremism is normalized, and no safe ground remains.

Yes, children are our future.

But whether that future is filled with light or swallowed by darkness depends entirely on what we choose to plant in their hearts today.

Kindness may be naïve—but justice must never be twisted into a weapon of hate.

Confusion is part of growing up—but society must never stop offering wisdom and direction.

We cannot afford to lose our way any longer.

The future belongs to them. But protecting that future—that is our responsibility.

Throughout history—whether under monarchy, aristocratic republic, or modern democracy—societies have grappled with an age-old and complex question: who should make decisions, on what grounds, and for what ends. As communities grow larger, interests more tangled, and social structures more diverse, mechanisms are needed to bring individual will, resources, and collective goals into alignment.
At first glance, voting seems to provide a way to “gather the will of the people.” Yet in reality, voting has never been the same as decision-making, and voters themselves cannot truly serve as decision-makers. When the two are mistaken for one another, serious consequences inevitably follow.
This article examines this hidden but central mechanism of human governance by addressing four dimensions: the plural nature of voting, the professional nature of decision-making, the functional boundaries between them, and the social consequences of their conflation.

I. Voting: a mirror of will, interests, and resource distribution

Voting serves as a channel for expressing collective will and revealing how interests and resources are inclined to be distributed.In essence, it is a psychological mirror of the group and a projection of resource dynamics, but it is never decision-making itself.To treat voting as the basis of decision-making, or or even as a substitute for them, is to fall into institutional shortsightedness and a step backward in civilization.
In general, voting can be categorized into five basic forms:

1. Capital-interest voting
   This is the type of voting that really decides outcomes. Throughout history, control over military power, money, and material resources has always determined how organizations function and what strategies they can pursue. Whoever controls the capital holds the real power.
   Unlike public elections, this voting is usually hidden. The “votes” of military-industrial groups, financial elites, and energy companies may never be visible, yet they shape national security policies, economic directions, and even decisions on war and peace. Its hidden nature and resource bias make it the true locus of power within any system.
2. Civic-moral voting
   This type of voting shapes a group’s cohesion, sense of identity, and long-term stability. It reflects a society’s ideology, moral standards, corporate culture, and national spirit. Abstract though it may seem, it has a direct impact on the legitimacy of decisions and their ability to be sustained over time.
   When a nation loses the support of its people, an army lacks conviction, or a company loses its cultural foundation, failure becomes inevitable. The significance of civic-moral voting lies in its role as a source of validation for leaders’ decisions—determining whether a decision can endure and whether people are willing to bear the costs it entails.
3. Expertise voting
   In a professional society, the support of skilled individuals often determines whether a decision can work out. Engineers, scientists, medical staff, military officers, lawyers, and other specialists collectively cast what can be called a “skills-based vote.” They do not make the decisions themselves, but they determine whether a decision is feasible.
   If a nation, organization, or company ignores this form of voting and acts blindly, it risks technical gaps, failed implementation, and strategic breakdowns. Skills-based voting not only aggregates professional judgment but also serves as an early-warning system, signaling future trend and viable paths.
4. Political-orientation voting
   This form of voting captures society’s feelings about the present and expectations for the future. People express their support for radical reforms or cautious conservatism, for expansionist policies or peaceful restraint, through ballots, polls, petitions, and public opinion.
   While political voting can be unpredictable and influenced by emotions, it plays a crucial role in guiding a nation’s strategic adjustments and maintaining internal stability. It provides important context for decision-making, but it should never override professional strategic judgment.
5. Personal-affection voting
   This is the narrowest, riskiest, and most easily abused type of voting. Favoring friends, letting emotions guide decisions, or putting personal connections above merit is common in organizations, companies, and even governments.
   Personal-affection voting can seriously damage institutions. It often lets incompetent people rise to power and rewards the wrong individuals. If too much authority is decided this way, efficiency collapses, nepotism and factional infighting take over, and organizations or states can end up as little more than empty shells.

II. Decision-making: responsibility, insight, and strategic accountability

Unlike voting, decision-making is carried out by a small group of individuals who possess strategic capability, a global perspective, and the authority to act. They weigh the results of various votes, environmental factors, and available resources to make choices and issue directives.

1. The essence of decision-making
   Decision-making is not just adding up votes or public opinion. It is about filtering information through reason and setting a clear strategic direction. Good decision-makers must have the courage to go against popular sentiment, face risks head-on, and take responsibility for the results. Exceptional decision-makers never aim to please every vote; instead, they prioritize the survival of the group and the long-term strategic goals of the organization, charting a sustainable path forward.
2. Decision-making direction
   Voting results are just reference points. Decision-makers need to weigh practical limits, potential risks, international situations, and the balance of power at home and abroad to decide the right course: which way to move, whether to attack or defend, whether to act quickly or cautiously. If the direction is wrong, all efforts can fail.
3. Purpose of decision-making
   Every decision needs a clear goal: is it meant to preserve strength or gain advantage, to balance different factions or suppress rivals? Without a clear purpose, strategy has no foundation, and execution has no direction. Most voters cannot grasp these complexities, which is why they should not be the ones making the decisions.
4. Decision implementation and presentation
   Carrying out a decision is not just blindly following orders. It means turning a complex plan into concrete steps, and coordinating its execution across different stages, regions, and groups.
   Presentation matters too. Internally, it builds confidence and stability; externally, it shows strength and determination. Both execution and presentation are essential—without either, even the smartest plan can fail.

III. The consequences of confusing voters with decision-makers

When voters and decision-makers are treated as one, several serious problems arise:
● Short-sighted opportunism: Decisions are driven by immediate public opinion, often at the expense of long-term interests.
● Emotional rule: Highly charged groups sway decisions, fueling political populism and weakening governance.
● Fragmented power: Voters representing capital, skills, values, or personal ties compete for influence, splintering authority and preventing unified action.
● Reverse selection: When personal-affection voting dominates, the incompetent rise to power while those with real strategic ability are sidelined.
History demonstrates that systems where “the public directly decides major state affairs” tend to fall into extremes or collapse from internal conflict. Examples include the Greek city-states, late Rome, the French Revolution, and some modern nations.

IV. Conclusion: the principle of division in civilized governance

Voting is for expressing opinion, while decision-making is for taking responsibility. Keeping them separate is the foundation of a stable and civilized system. Voters shape the environment and available resources, while decision-makers use strategic judgment to make the final call.
The more advanced a civilization, the more refined this division of labor becomes. Mature communities use voting to gauge public will, decision-making to set direction, execution to test results, and oversight to correct mistakes. In contrast, weak or crude systems confuse votes with decisions and treat decisions as mere bargaining, ultimately risking collapse.
May readers of this article understand the logic of sound institutions, recognize the distinction between voting and decision-making, and avoid being swept up by emotion or dragged down by mediocrity.

To understand these two distorted educational patterns, we must go beyond blaming individual parents or schools. Instead, it is necessary to examine the deeper cultural and historical roots—particularly the long-standing authoritarian structure of Chinese civilization.

For centuries, Chinese society operated under centralized power, where a person’s fate was tightly linked to political authority. Even minor dissent could lead to bring disasters to not only the individual but their entire family. In such a high-risk environment, people developed two common survival strategies:

• The first was extreme caution—avoiding responsibility, staying silent, and never standing out. Even when faced with injustice, lies, or wrongdoing, many chose to ignore it in order to stay safe.
• The second was extreme aggression—using violence, connections, or authority to suppress others and secure personal gain. In a system where justice is weak and rules are unclear, power and force became tools for survival.

Over generations, these survival behaviors were passed down through family traditions, education systems, social norms, and public discourse. Gradually, they became deeply embedded in the cultural mindset.

As a result, from a young age, individuals are often taught one of two belief systems. Some grow up hearing messages like:

• “Mind your own business.”
• “The nail that sticks out gets hammered.”
• “Do not talk about right or wrong—just say what benefits you.”

Others grow up with messages like:

• “Whoever has the strongest fist gets to decide.” “The one in charge is always right.”
• “If you can use force, there is no need for reason.” “We cannot fight them, so we might as well submit.”
• “Power and money make you a god.” “Everything is about money.”

This is precisely the civilizational and psychological soil in which the dual personalities of cowardice-based and brutality-based education are especially likely to emerge in Eastern societies—particularly in China.

II. The vicious cycle in social ecology: how cowardice-based and brutality-based education reinforce each other

At first glance, these two types of education seem opposites—one soft, the other harsh. But in reality, they create the perfect breeding ground for each other and sustain one another.

Why is that?

Because the brutal rely on the silence of the cowardly, and the cowardly rely on the dominance of the brutal.

The cowardly dare not speak the truth, uphold justice, or resist wrongdoing, which only encourages the arrogance of the brutal. Meanwhile, the brutal use violence, connections, and power to suppress opposition, pushing ordinary people to become even more fearful.

Results:

• Good people are silenced like terrified birds, while bullies reap the benefits.
• Righteous voices quietly disappear, leaving evil to dominate the conversation.
• Integrity is mocked as foolishness and dismissed as angry rebellion.
• Violence becomes the passport, the true representative of power.

Such a systemic vicious cycle exists universally, whether in the Qing imperial court of old or in modern arenas like online public opinion, the workplace, government, and the capital market.

The worst part of this structural issue is that it gives rise to a false stability where society seems organized but is actually breaking down from within.

When wrongdoing goes unchecked, when power acts without limits, and when everyone seeks only self-preservation without responsibility, even the richest and largest societies will quickly become fragile and collapse.

III. On the civilizational level: collapse patterns of cowardice- and brutality-driven societies

Looking across the history of human civilizations—from the Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Qing Dynasty, to the Soviet Union—almost every collapsed civilization follows a common pattern:

• The common people become generally fearful, unwilling to question authority or seek the truth.
• The ruling class abuses power violently, rules break down, and justice becomes impossible.
• Institutions appear normal on the surface, but morality, justice, order, and trust systems are completely shattered.
• Society is reduced to mere calculations of self-interest, lacking shared values and any pursuit of justice.

Ultimately:

• Before external enemies arrive, the system collapses from within.
• Before finances fail, public trust dissipates.
• Before external threats intensify, internal conflict destroys.

A culture of cowardice erodes the moral foundation, while a culture of brutality destroys the rule of law. Under this dual assault, even the most seemingly powerful civilizations quickly disintegrate.

Today, if this culture continues to spread unchecked in the East and exports itself through globalization to other civilizations, humanity faces a catastrophic future—a global collapse of shared values, widespread cowardice, and normalization of violence.

IV. Current reality: how is the Chinese education model harming the world?

At present, the cowardly and brutal aspects of the Chinese education model are spreading and impacting global public environments in various ways.

• Capital penetration: Large capital-driven enterprises, prioritizing profit above all else, exploit workers, monopolize resources, and evade laws. They promote a culture of pure profit-seeking, spreading across Southeast Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe, driving a brutal system that values power and profit over justice.

• Social discourse dissemination: Through the internet, social media, and short video platforms, values rooted in cowardice—such as “it is none of my business,” “the less trouble, the better,” “backing down is a survival strategy,” and “standing up is foolish”—are being promoted, gradually eroding young people’s sense of responsibility and moral courage around the world.

• Cultural clashes through migration: The migration of individuals shaped by cultural norms emphasizing submission and authoritarianism introduces informal power dynamics—such as patronage networks, rule-bending practices, and non-confrontational attitudes—into liberal democratic societies, posing serious threats to institutional trust and civic order.

• Erosion of international order: Passive nations stay silent, aggressive regimes provoke. Rules lose meaning, justice becomes costly, evil becomes easier. The world sees more wrongdoing—and fewer consequences.

If this cultural virus continues to spread unchecked, global social governance will spiral out of control, public morality will fracture, and institutionalized violence will become rampant.

V. The path forward: restoring courageous character and rebuilding civilizational bottomline

What will truly save Eastern civilization—and perhaps world civilization—is not producing more clever cowards, smooth opportunists, profit-driven minds, or power worshippers. It is cultivating individuals with courage, principles, a sense of responsibility, and unshakable integrity.

That is the ultimate mission of education.

Priorities for future educational reform:

• Parents should teach children to take responsibility, not just protect themselves.
• Schools should encourage students to speak the truth, not simply say what sounds good.
• Public discourse should welcome critical questioning, not suppress opposing voices.
• Government institutions should uphold justice, not enable authoritarian power.
• The international order should hold wrongdoers accountable, not surrender through compromise.

Only in this way can we rebuild a character rooted in courage and integrity, restore the value of justice, and protect civilization from being devoured by cowardice and brutality.

Conclusion

The culture of cowardice and brutality in Eastern education (especially Chinese eduaction) is not just a problem for one region, but a growing threat to the future of global civilization.

If we do not see it clearly today, tomorrow we may face a world of broken order, widespread cynicism, growing violence, and the loss of justice.

Courage and responsibility are the foundation of a living, lasting civilization.

When people have backbone, society stays strong. When integrity is lost, civilizations fall. Let this be a wake-up call to us all.

The root cause does not lie in history itself, but in the way we perceive it.

When we place history on a timeline, it turns into something we can analyze, categorize, and interpret. It allows us to see how civilizations have grown and to understand the forces that shaped their institutions.

When we use past experience as a direct analogy for the present, we easily slip into a fatalistic mindset. History then appears as nothing more than a cycle of inevitability, and its lessons rarely turn into real institutional reform or breakthroughs in understanding.

This article begins with these two different ways of viewing history and explores how they shape our understanding of civilization, our collective psychology, and the institutions we build. It also seeks to answer a central question: Why do we often recognize the lessons of history, yet still find ourselves trapped in the recurring dilemmas of civilization?

I. History in sequence: restoring reality and tracing paths

Placing history along a timeline is a rational and systematic way of observing it. Grounded in facts, it unfolds events in chronological order, turning the past from vague legends or emotional recollections into historical realities that can be analyzed and understood, with clear patterns of causality and structure.

The core value of this approach lies in three aspects:

• Seeing history in its full complexity:
  No turning point in history ever happened in isolation. Each was shaped by a web of factors, both internal and external. Looking at history through a timeline makes it easier to uncover these causes and developments, and it helps us avoid oversimplifying or taking things out of context.
• Tracing the paths of civilization:
  By comparing events across regions and following their progression over time, we can sketch out the journey of humanity—from small tribes to great empires, and eventually to modern civilization. This perspective offers guidance for how today’s societies can better define their place, design their systems, and shape their social structures.
• Turning lessons into action:
  When history is grounded in concrete facts, its lessons become more than abstract warnings. They can serve as foundations for real decisions. The Great Depression of 1929, for example, pushed modern states to create systems of economic regulation, while the devastation of World War II led the international community to establish frameworks for balance of power and global cooperation.

The value of the timeline perspective is that it resists treating history as the repetition of fate. Instead, it draws attention to the role of changing variables.

It recognizes that history is open-ended and that civilizations can follow many different paths. It emphasizes human agency and the weight of institutional choices.

Progress is not dictated by some fixed “law of history,” but by how we face the present, learn from the past, and shape the future.

II. Seeing history within history: cycles of experience and the trap of fate

In contrast to the rational, timeline-based approach, a more common way of understanding history is to read the present through the patterns of the past. People look for “laws” distilled from earlier events and try to use them as guides for today.

The driving force behind this way of thinking is humanity’s natural fear of uncertainty. Faced with a complex and shifting reality, we instinctively reach for familiar experiences to explain the present and predict what comes next. This search for certainty, however, easily slips into the abyss of fatalism.

This tendency shows up in several ways:

• Historical lessons are often oversimplified.
  Phrases like “what rises must fall,” “poverty breeds chaos,” or “the world moves in cycles” are frequently treated as universal truths. When similar signs appear today, people tend to rely on these old patterns, ignoring new factors and the unique circumstances of the present, which leads to stagnant thinking.
• Current problems are normalized.
  When society faces corruption, rigid social hierarchies, or abuse of power, many respond with phrases like “it has always been this way” or “history repeats itself,” as if these issues are inevitable and require no real action or reform. This mindset allows problems to persist and crises to remain hidden.
• 3. Civilization falls into self-replication and path dependency.
  When collective thinking is trapped by historical patterns, it becomes difficult for a civilization to explore new directions. The two World Wars of the 20th century, for example, were in some ways a continuation of 19th-century imperialist expansion under a new historical context.

Ultimately, reading history through history carries a profound danger: it turns historical lessons into seemingly immutable laws, sapping contemporary society of the will to correct mistakes and drive change.

III. Why history teaches but fails to change us

Why does human society repeatedly encounter similar disasters yet fail to learn from them? The problem is not that history is unclear; rather, within civilization, there exist three deep-rooted mechanisms that systematically dilute—or even block—the lessons of the past from being passed on and applied.

1. The self-preserving mechanism of power

Rulers and entrenched interest groups often manipulate or even distort historical truths to maintain their grip on power. The fall of a previous dynasty, for example, might be explained as “the mandate of heaven ended” or “the people’s hearts were unpredictable,” rather than as a result of institutional collapse or social imbalance.

This selective retelling of history essentially serves to undermine the legitimacy of change and preserve the existing order.

2. The inertia of collective thinking

Public consciousness tends to favor familiar, linear explanations that align with traditional experience, while remaining wary of complexity and uncertainty. This cognitive inertia makes society more inclined to accept fatalistic narratives like “what rises must fall,” rather than probing the specific institutional failures behind events.

Over time, historical experience becomes simplified into patterns, serving more as a form of psychological comfort than as a practical guide for action.

3. The mechanism of controlling the narrative

Whoever controls the narrative controls the meaning of history. In most societies, history is written by official sources, while reflective voices from the public are marginalized or even suppressed. As a result, even when real lessons exist, they rarely make their way into mainstream education or public discourse, cutting off access to collective awareness.

These three mechanisms intertwine, making it difficult for civilizations to develop effective self-correction. History is not only forgotten—it is formatted and exploited, becoming a tool to perpetuate old patterns rather than a resource to open new paths.

Consequently, even when disasters recur, society may still choose familiar but failed approaches, falling into cycles that seem, again and again, “inevitable.”

IV. Realistic pathways for civilization to break through

To truly learn from history, civilization must break free from both blind reliance on past experience and fatalistic thinking, returning to an understanding of history rooted in facts, logic, and changing circumstances. This kind of breakthrough is not just an abstract shift in ideas—it requires a deep reconstruction of collective understanding and institutional practice in the real world.

This means:

• 1. Embracing the full complexity of history and resisting simplified narratives.History should be analyzed within its specific context, taking into account multiple variables, so that we understand the deeper causes of events rather than reducing them to explanations like “destiny” or “human nature.”
• 2. Acknowledging civilization’s openness and capacity for choice.Civilization’s path is not predetermined. Its future depends on whether society can tackle complex problems, improve collective understanding, build self-correcting systems, and make rational institutional decisions at key moments.
• 3. Turning historical lessons into practical governance.Historical tragedies should not be treated as inevitable. By studying them, we can identify the human and systemic factors—such as institutional collapse, power imbalances, and social disorder—and use these insights to design better institutions and strengthen the resilience of a society.

Conclusion

When we look at history along a timeline, it reveals its true form, serving as a guide to how civilizations evolve.

But if we try to understand the present and predict the future by simply applying past patterns, we risk falling into cycles of repetition and the trap of fatalism. Lessons fail to take hold, and civilizations become stuck in self-reinforcing loops.

Progress does not happen automatically with the passage of time, nor is it dictated by some hidden law of history. It depends on a few clear-sighted individuals—those willing to question old paradigms, break free from habitual thinking, and rebuild institutions and social order. They create ruptures in history and drive the renewal of civilization. They are the ones who give true meaning to the lessons of the past.

But class exploitation isn’t just about who holds more money or influence. It’s an entire framework—built from legal systems, cultural norms, education, and economic structures. It shapes not just how society works, but how people think about society.

Wherever a small group holds concentrated power, others inevitably get left behind. It has been repeated in human history.

This isn’t merely the result of inequality—it is a selfish system carefully designed to keep certain groups at the top while making upward mobility difficult for the rest.

What makes it so resilient is that the ruling class doesn’t just control wealth or political decisions—they also shape public values, dominate media narratives, and define what’s considered “normal” or “possible.” Over time, this creates a sense of inevitability. People begin to believe the system is just “the way things are.” And that’s how inequality sustains itself—by making the cage look invisible.

Even in today’s modern world, class structures don’t just happen—they’re carefully maintained through systems built to protect those already at the top.

• The legal system, while presented as fair and impartial, often reinforces existing power dynamics. Laws tend to favor those with resources and influence, making it harder for the disadvantaged to seek justice on equal footing.
• Political institutions, through electoral systems, lobbying, and backroom deals, tend to channel power and public resources toward a small elite, leaving the majority with limited real influence.
• The economy may claim to reward hard work and competition, but in reality, markets are shaped by large corporations and financial interests. Capital is highly concentrated, and social mobility becomes more of a myth than a reality.
• Culture and media also play their part. Through education systems, news outlets, and popular entertainment, people are subtly taught to accept social inequality as natural—even necessary. This normalizes the status quo and discourages challenges to the system.

At its core, a class-based society is about the double monopoly of power and wealth. Those at the bottom are often forced to spend all their energy just trying to survive, while those at the top enjoy the means to shape the rules—and keep everyone else in their place.

I. No real citizenship, no real political power

In a society built on class exploitation, ordinary people aren’t treated as citizens—they are subjects, tools, or resources. Political power and institutional design exist almost entirely to serve a privileged few. What is left for the majority is mostly symbolic participation, rituals that give the illusion of inclusion but deny real influence.

Historically, systems like Rome’s massive slave economy or China’s imperial examination system helped sustain rigid social hierarchies.On the surface, they offered a path for upward mobility—but in reality, these were control mechanisms, designed to preserve order and prevent meaningful change. By giving people just enough hope, they kept them in their place.

In modern times, capitalist democracies offer voting rights, but the reality is more complicated. Economic power often steers political outcomes. Capital controls the media, shapes policy, and influences public opinion—turning elections into performances choreographed by vested interests, not true exercises in civic decision-making.

Meanwhile, in class-based societies, those in power often treat public resources as if they personally own them. Even when the government rolls out welfare programs or companies raise wages, it’s usually packaged in a way that makes people feel grateful—like they’re receiving a favor, not claiming something that should already be theirs as a matter of fairness. By controlling both the resources and the narrative around them, the ruling class positions itself as generous and benevolent—while reinforcing its dominance behind the scenes.

II. Law and institutions: decoration or weapon?

1. The true role of law in a class-based society: creating the illusion of equality

In theory, laws are meant to uphold justice and fairness. But in a deeply divided society, how laws are applied often depends on your status, wealth, or connections.

Throughout history, legal systems have tended to impose strict rules on ordinary people while showing leniency—or even blatant favoritism—toward the ruling class. For instance, during medieval Europe’s feudal era, nobles could often pay a fine instead of facing real punishment, while peasants and serfs might suffer harsh penalties for even minor offenses.

Even though modern societies have adopted legal frameworks and systems like the separation of powers, in practice, law enforcement is still heavily influenced by money and power. For example:

• Corporate legal privilege: After the 2008 financial crisis, major Wall Street firms were exposed for widespread fraud and reckless risk-taking. Yet very few top executives faced criminal charges. Most banks simply paid fines and went back to business as usual. In contrast, ordinary people struggling with debt—missing mortgage payments or defaulting on credit cards—often faced far harsher legal consequences.
• Wealth skews justice: In the U.S., wealthy defendants can afford elite legal teams who use complex legal tactics to delay proceedings or secure favorable outcomes. Meanwhile, low-income individuals usually rely on overburdened public defenders, making equal justice nearly impossible. A stark example is the Stanford rape case, where Brock Turner received just six months in jail for sexual assault—while someone without money or status might have faced years behind bars for a similar crime.
• Legal immunity for politicians: In many countries, political leaders and senior officials use their positions to interfere with judicial processes. Even after leaving office, they often remain shielded by powerful networks, making them nearly untouchable by the law.

Law is meant to be the foundation of social order—something that stands above class and wealth. But in reality, the way laws are applied often depends on who holds the power and resources.

Court rulings, law enforcement, even reforms may all follow legal procedures on the surface. Yet in practice, they often end up protecting the interests of the powerful more than delivering real justice or fairness.

2. Legal and political theater fuels division

Legal systems often create the illusion of progress, but real change is slow—and often blocked by those in power. People are left stuck between rising hopes and constant letdowns.

Meanwhile, political discourse shifts focus to identity and culture wars, distracting the public from deeper economic and structural issues. As division grows, the real winners are those at the top—quietly reinforcing their control while everyone else fights among themselves.

This is no accident. Politicians have mastered the art of shaping narratives and stirring conflict, turning people against one another while those in power sit comfortably above the chaos, untouched and in control.

III. Control through fools, flattery, and fear

A system built on class exploitation never empowers the wise or the independent. It prefers the clueless—easy to control—and the obedient—eager to please. Together, they keep the machine running with a mix of ignorance and cruelty.

Throughout history, every ruling class has raised its own loyal enforcers. From imperial eunuchs to secret police, from court elites to modern spin doctors, their job is to silence dissent, shape narratives, and protect the system from within.

The real threat isn’t protest—it’s unity. This is why those in power constantly sow division. They pit region against region, class against class, and group against group, turning potential solidarity into scattered frustration.

IV. Economy and finance: poverty is a carefully designed trap

1. Using economic and financial tools to keep people poor

In a system built on class exploitation, poverty isn’t just a side effect — it is a tool of control. Through high taxes, sky-high housing prices, inflation, and debt traps, the working population is forced to live just above the survival line. With little time or energy left to question the system or fight back, people are stuck in survival mode. Modern consumerism only makes it worse, encouraging people to overspend and fall into debt, tightening the leash around their freedom and choices.

2. Using power to harass and extract at every turn

In the past, heavy taxes drained people’s resources. Today, it is hidden under things like extra fees, fines, and ever-changing policies that just add more stress. These changes are often claimed to be for “better governance,” but in reality, they are just ways to take more from the people. This constant uncertainty creates what’s called a “fatigue society,” where people are so worn out and worried that they can barely keep up with life, let alone fight back.

V. Mental Control: The Double Opium and Cultural Poison

1. Shaping Social Values Through Desire

Class exploitation goes beyond physical oppression. It also involves controlling people’s minds. The elites promote ideals like “wealth and status” and “power above all,” creating a sense of dependence on the system, even leading people to believe they could someday join the ruling class.

The rise of “wealth flaunting” culture and the idea of the “self-made success” myth encourages people from lower-income backgrounds to dream of joining the “upper class.” This cultural influence subtly shifts their focus toward wealth and power, making them mentally align with the elite—without realizing they’ve actually been stripped of their own rights and opportunities.

2. The Glorification and Brainwashing of Exploitation

The ruling class doesn’t just rely on force—they have mastered the art of using cultural brainwash to maintain their power. In the past, it was all about things like the “divine right of kings” and “the three cardinal bonds.” Today, we get billionaire success stories and the magical myth of the “self-made man.”

Mainstream education and the media deliberately avoid addressing structural inequality. Instead, they push the narrative of “changing your destiny through hard work,” creating a competitive, “rat race” culture. People at the bottom end up fighting each other, wasting energy, and never seeing the real issue.

Conclusion: The Ultimate Cost and Reflection on Class Exploitation

At first glance, an exploitative society may appear stable, but in reality, it is fragile. When the economy collapses, the spirit breaks down, and the lower class falls into complete despair, civilization is on the brink of collapse. History has shown that any system built on extreme exploitation eventually destroys itself through the corruption and ignorance it accumulates.

True civilization should be based on respecting humanity and ensuring fairness. Real laws should serve citizens, not privileges. Real politics should foster unity, not division.

This is why we propose the concept and solution of a “society of social citizens.” This concept holds immense potential and can lead to true equality in politics, economy, education, and rule of law. It is not just an idea, but a practice that returns control over social matters to the citizens, giving everyone the power to participate in decision-making and influence change, thus breaking the existing power structures and fostering a fairer and more inclusive society.

Only then can civilization truly endure, no longer sinking into the cycle of exploitation and collapse.

In the pursuit of civilization, goodness has always been a key to harmony and progress. However, good will can sometimes lead to conflict and division. This happens when its purpose is distorted, causing more harm instead of healing.

A civilized society needs a goodness that transcends opposition and connects hearts. It does not aim to judge or seek to prove its own righteousness. Instead, it attempts to resolve conflicts with compassion, guide with care, and build connections through inclusive conversations. Practicing such goodness helps avoid clashes and harm. It creates mutual respect and dialogue, paving the way for a better society.

I. When Good will becomes a source of division

Articulating for justice and the vulnerable is both a civic duty and a reflection of human kindness. Yet, while many acts are carried out in the name of kindness, they are not rooted in universal love but in opposing ideological camps. Such actions often result in group bullying, intensified conflict, and societal division.

This kind of “goodness” relies on a black-and-white mindset, dividing people into camps of right and wrong. It oversimplifies the complexity of human nature and the struggles of social life. By reducing problems to a battle of “us vs. them,” it assumes that attacking the “wrong” side will solve the issue. In reality, it only deepens divisions and worsens conflicts.

For example, in environmental protection, some people see unsustainable practices as “evil.” They criticize those who fail to adopt eco-friendly habits from a moral high ground. This may seem like genuine concern for the environment. However, it often excludes those who need guidance and education. Instead of encouraging change, it makes them more resistant to growth.

When goodness becomes a fight against evil, it easily leads to extremism. These expressions often come at the expense of hurting others. It can create new injustices and even worse consequences. For example, some groups use the banner of “social justice” to justify online bullying. They try to “eliminate” those they see as unjust.

Such divisive goodness destroys social trust. In a society filled with conflicts, people will inevitably become afraid to express their true opinions. They stop believing in the genuine intention of others. Over time, the distance between individuals grows. This leads to a society marked by indifference and self-protection.

II. Goodness rooted in love for all: overcoming the struggle between good and evil

The world needs a form of kindness free from confrontation. It is founded on equal love, driven by understanding, tolerance, and empathy. True goodness recognizes the struggle and pain of all sides. Thus it aims to bridge the divide, foster rational dialogue and formulate solutions to address the issues.

Such goodness does not focus on distinguishing between right and wrong. Instead, it addresses shared human needs and vulnerabilities. It acknowledges individual limitations and approaches mistakes with care and patience. By guiding those in false beliefs toward self-reflection and growth, it becomes a catalyst for positive change.

Even though some may not accept the right views and practices in the short term, the power of civilization will subtly and quietly transform everything. Over time, malice and ignorance will be ashamed of themselves and find less and less room to take root.

This principle is well-demonstrated in family education. When a child makes a mistake, parents may choose to harshly criticize them. Yet, a compassionate approach often proves more effective. By understanding a child’s limitations and emotional needs, parents can guide with care and reason. This helps children learn from their lessons. Punishment alone can lead to defiance and may undermine the purpose of education. It could create opposition between parent and child.

The same idea holds true for tackling social problems arising from unfairness rooted in the system. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the former justice of the American Supreme Court, provides a striking example. In her long journey of fighting for gender equality, rather than outright condemning the system for its gender-based discrimination, she took a sustainable and strategic approach. While advocating for women’s rights, she also defended cases where men were discriminated against to highlight the broader issue of systemic inequality. By using empathy and logic, she bridged the gap and fostered understanding, achieving real progress in gender equality. Her wisdom and approach has won her great respect from all sides of the society.

Goodness rooted in love for all avoids dividing people into camps of right and wrong or judging others from a moral high ground. It focuses on building cooperation and finding common ground, not fueling conflict or competition. Much like our collective efforts in public welfare, it combines kindness with responsibility. As Gandhi said, “We can win hearts through love and understanding, not hatred.”

A good example is also seen in social welfare programs. While some blame poverty on individual failings, others with an empathetic perspective are able to dig deeper and identify systemic issues. It advocates for education and support to help the disadvantaged overcome their struggles. This approach not only uplifts individuals but also strengthens the unity and resilience of society as a whole.

III. Rejecting contentious good will: a necessary choice for civilized societies

Civilized societies need a higher level of kindness, one that transcends the moral disputes of good and evil. Avoiding unnecessary conflicts is not only a sign of wisdom but also a step toward progress.

Disputes over good and evil often waste resources and overshadow real issues. People focus on assigning blame rather than finding practical solutions. With a universal love, people are able to focus on the core problems through rational discussions and emphasizes effective solutions.

The progress of civilization lies in respecting differences and embracing diversity. Compassionate goodness, rooted in tolerance, helps find common ground amid disagreements. It encourages people to work together on the problem, instead of fostering divisions or emotional wounds. It helps reduce internal conflicts and promotes unity.

IV. Only with a love for all can we truly distinguish good from evil

Some may ask, “Does this mean no one should be held accountable for their actions? What about those who commit crimes against humanity?” Compassionate love does not blur the lines between good and evil. In fact, it is through this deeper love that we gain the clarity to truly understand them.

When universal love becomes the standard, we see that not all goodness is equal. Some forms of goodness are narrow and conditional, quickly turning into selfishness or indifference when circumstances change. Other forms of goodness might be insincere, driven by the need to fit a certain image rather than by genuine care.

Evil, too, is not always what it seems. Sometimes it stems from ignorance or a limited worldview, a temporary state rather than a permanent trait. Some evils are born out of conformity, a lack of love, and the inability to think independently. But there are also true evils—actions and systems that inflict great harm and must be confronted.

For those who cause profound and long-lasting harm, like oppressive regimes, we must have the courage to take a stand and fight with them. Compassionate love doesn’t mean avoiding conflict or accountability. Instead, it offers a higher purpose—a call to act with wisdom and empathy. At its core, this love is boundless and universal, far greater than the narrow concept of goodness. It is this love that inspires and guides us toward justice and healing.

V. The practice of compassionate goodness: a reform of individuals and society

To embed compassionate goodness into the fabric of a civilized society, it is necessary to address both personal growth and collective action.

On an individual level, everyone can practice compassionate goodness by enhancing self-awareness and empathy. In moments of conflict, we can strive to understand the other side and use kindness to defuse tensions.

On the other hand, choosing dialogue over criticism and compromise over confrontation should become the foundation of our shared social norms. This creates warmer, more respectful relationships and a more inclusive community.

Institutions should promote the idea of compassionate goodness through education, policies, and cultural influence. Schools can incorporate lessons on empathy, tolerance, and the value of diversity. Media should shift focus from sensationalizing divisions to showcasing inspiring stories of unity and cooperation. These systemic efforts help foster a culture where inclusive kindness is celebrated and practiced widely.

Practical actions can further amplify this message. Community events to support vulnerable groups, for example, or sharing real-life stories of kindness on social platforms can inspire others to join in. Through these small but meaningful efforts, the power of genuine love can spread, touching more lives and gradually transforming society as a whole.

VI. Conclusion: goodness rooted in universal love as the foundation of civilization

A civilized society thrives on compassionate goodness, a wisdom and strength that transcends the conflicts of good and evil. This force soothes wounds with warmth, bridges divides with tolerance, and infuses society with endless harmony and hope.

Rejecting divisive actions in the name of goodness paves the way for greater unity and progress. It starts with each of us—practicing compassion and care in our daily lives to bring warmth and possibility to the world around us. Only by doing so can the seeds of civilization truly take root, flourish, and bear fruit.

The Nostalgic Trend in the Cultural Industry

Globally, the cultural industry is experiencing a wave of nostalgia. From films to music, fashion to gaming, many works are being remade or revisiting classic themes. This trend not only fulfills people’s longing for the past glory but also reflects a certain anxiety within contemporary culture. For instance, the recent surge of remakes and reboots of old shows often resonates with audiences, sparking collective nostalgia and becoming hot topics on social media.

This cultural trend not only extends beyond the entertainment sector, but also impacts advertising and brand marketing. Brands are harnessing nostalgic elements to attract consumers, appealing to their emotions through a “return to classics” approach. While this strategy may prove effective in the short term, a lack of innovation in cultural products could lead to audience fatigue over time.

Stagnant Civilization and Mental Emptiness

Beneath the phenomenon of societal nostalgia lies a sense of helplessness and disillusionment with current realities. Despite ongoing economic development, the evolution of social and civilizational thought appears to have stagnated. We witness rapid technological advancements, yet in areas such as moral values, social ethics, and interpersonal relationships, there seems to be little substantive progress. This disconnect leaves many feeling spiritually empty even as they pursue material gains. Nostalgia thus becomes an emotional refuge, where people seek comfort in memories.

Bombarded with an overwhelming tide of information and choices, the feeling of loneliness intensifies, as ideological contradictions and cultural conflicts leave individuals feeling isolated amid the noise. Mental lives seem increasingly hollow, and nostalgia serves as a mechanism of self-protection, helping us to find warmth in the remnants of a bygone era amidst the chaos of modern life.

A Call for the Advancement of Civilization

Without effective advancements in civic values, the growing nostalgia will continue to spread, pushing the cultural industry into a more serious state of innovation crisis. The fleeting satisfaction that nostalgia brings cannot substitute for a proactive exploration of the future. Relying only on past achievements without a commitment to innovation will inevitably drain the cultural sector of its vitality.

In the face of rampant societal nostalgia, Diagnosing the root of the problems and taking action to change the status quo will help advance civilization. This involves critically examining the issues within our existing social systems and proposing innovative ideas across all sectors of society, leading to practical changes that foster civilizational progress, which is exactly what Yicheng Commonweal has been doing.

Conclusion

Only in this way can we liberate ourselves from the confines of nostalgia and unite to promote social progress, opening the door to a brighter and more fulfilling future. Engaging in future-oriented actions is the best antidote to a life marked by hopelessness.

This article will discuss dictatorship, a political form common throughout human history, and its impact. The article is divided into four sections:

I. The Impact of Dictatorship on Various Social Fields

II. How Dictatorship Limits Freedom

III. The Impact of Dictatorship on Education

IV. The Mindset of Dictators

I. The Impact of Dictatorship on Various Social Field

Dictatorship, along with its collaborators and associated organizations, stands as the greatest enemy to building a civilized society. It is the common adversary of all citizens, the poison that erodes democratic progress, and the root cause of man-made disasters. Combating and preventing dictatorship is the starting point and safeguard for creating a civilized society. Now, let’s examine how dictatorship undermines civilized societies and list some of the typical, widespread impact it has across different fields:

1. Economy:

• Control and Monopoly: Dictatorships tend to concentrate economic resources in the hands of a small elite, creating monopolies. This stifles market competition and leads to unfair distribution of resources.
• Corruption and Inefficiency: The lack of transparency and accountability fosters widespread corruption. Decisions are often driven by political interests rather than economic efficiency.

2. Agriculture:

• Forced Collectivization: Dictatorships often impose collectivization or nationalization to control agricultural production, which can lead to reduced agricultural output and lower living standards for farmers.
• Misallocation of Resources: Agricultural resources may be diverted to non-productive projects, resulting in food shortages and the collapse of rural economies. They might also expropriate land from farmers for state projects or other uses.
• Suppression of Innovation: Dictatorships might stifle agricultural innovation and technological advancement by suppressing independent research and development or limiting access to modern farming techniques.

3. Industry:

• Centralization and State Control: Industrial production is often tightly controlled, leading to reduced innovation, rigid industrial structures, and an inability to adapt to changing market demands.
• Labor Exploitation: Dictatorships may increase industrial output through forced labor and suppressing wages, resulting in deteriorating living conditions for workers.

4. Society:

• Social Division: Dictatorships often maintain power by inciting hatred and mistrust, leading to social fragmentation and heightened hostility between groups.
• Control and Oppression: Strict control over speech, assembly, and association stifles social vitality and diversity. Extreme nationalism is often encouraged and causes intolerance and exclusion.

5. Civil values:

• Human Rights Violations: Citizens’ rights are often severely violated, with restrictions on freedoms such as speech, religion, and political movements.
• Political Persecution: Opponents and dissidents are frequently arrested, imprisoned, and subjected to organ harvesting, the trafficking of babies and children, the sale of corpses, or even execution. Citizens live in constant fear. Often, these acts are conducted secretly to avoid public awareness, which explains the rise of direct online video reporting as a last resort for exposing such abuses.

6. Employment:

• High Unemployment: Due to misguided economic policies and rigid industrial structures, job opportunities decline, and unemployment rates rise. When they can’t lower the unemployment rate, they manipulate the statistics—a common “scientific” method used by such regimes.
• Forced Employment: Some dictatorships compel citizens to work in designated jobs, limiting their freedom of career choice.

7. Politics:

• Political Purges: Dictatorships consolidate power by eliminating political rivals, leading to an unstable political environment and causing harm for people.
• One-Party Rule: Dictatorships often establish a one-party system or cultivate a cult of personality, suppressing all opposition voices.

8. Military:

• Military Supremacy: Dictatorships prioritize military power to maintain their rule, which can lead to arms races and frequent military conflicts.
• Conscription and Forced Military Service: Citizens are forcibly conscripted into the military, with military spending diverting resources from civilian needs.
• Military Adversaries: Dictatorships may fabricate or exaggerate the presence of national enemies to justify military actions or maintain control, creating adversaries where none exist.

9. Living Conditions:

• Decline in Living Standards: Due to economic chaos, corruption, and misallocation of resources, the standard of living for ordinary people plummets.
• Daily Fear: Dictatorships maintain control through fear and repression, causing citizens to live under constant stress and fear.

10. Beliefs:

• Religious Suppression: Dictatorships may suppress religious practices, persecute religious groups, and impose state-sponsored religious institutions or ideologies.
• Thought Control: Through education, propaganda, and cultural policies, dictatorships enforce official ideologies, suppressing diverse beliefs and worldviews.

11. Finance:

• Capital Controls: Dictatorships often implement strict capital controls to maintain economic stability, which can lead to capital flight and a deteriorating investment environment.
• Currency Devaluation: Poor economic policies can lead to significant devaluation of the currency, which causes inflation to spiral out of control.

12. Foreign Affairs:

• Isolationism: Dictatorships may choose to isolate themselves from the world, which harms their relationships with other countries and often leads to international sanctions.
• Diplomacy as a Tool: Diplomatic policy is often used to reinforce domestic rule rather than to foster international cooperation.

13. Legislation:

• Dictator-Controlled Lawmaking: The dictator makes all the laws, and the legislative process becomes a mere formality. Laws are created just to keep the dictator in power.
• Damage to the Legal System: The legal system is broken, with laws no longer being fair or equal, but instead used to oppress people.

14. Law:

• Judiciary Controlled by the Dictator: The dictator controls the courts, making them tools of the dictatorship instead of independent bodies.
• Misuse of Law: Laws are used unfairly to target anyone who opposes the regime, leading to political trials and unjust legal processes.

15. Art:

• Limited Artistic Freedom: Artistic creation is tightly controlled and censored, and freedom of expression is suppressed, making cultural creativity stagnant.
• Art as Political Propaganda: Art is turned into a tool for political propaganda, with its true artistic value of genuine expression being twisted.

16. Innovation:

• Stifling New Ideas: Dictatorships restrict the spread of new ideas and innovation to protect their power, causing technological and cultural stagnation.
• Brain Drain: Due to oppression and lack of freedom, many creative talents are forced to flee to other countries.

17. Culture and Thought:

• Cultural Uniformity: Dictatorships enforce a single ideology through cultural policies, suppressing cultural diversity.
• Thought Control: Education and media are usually used to instill the regime’s ideology, severely limiting independent thinking.
• Forced and Political Marriages: Dictatorships may manipulate marriages for political gain, trampling on personal freedom by forcing or arranging marriages to consolidate power.

Dictatorships affect every part of society in a deep and lasting way. They often choose people for important positions based on corruption, which weakens the entire society and limits opportunities for innovation and growth. Without opposing dictatorship, the construction of a civilized society is impossible.

II. How Dictatorship Limits Freedom

1. Freedom of Speech:

• Suppressing Dissent: Dictatorships control speech through censorship, surveillance, and punishment, silencing different opinions and criticism. The media is either nationalized or tightly controlled, and independent journalists and news outlets are forced into silence or persecuted.
• Atmosphere of Fear: Citizens who express dissenting views, whether in public or private conversations, may face imprisonment, torture, or even death threats, creating a climate of fear that leads to self-censorship.

2. Freedom of Association:

• Banning or Controlling Organizations: Dictatorships typically ban or heavily restrict the activities of independent organizations such as NGOs, labor unions, and religious groups. Any form of gathering, protest, or collective action is likely to be violently suppressed.
• Forced Participation: The government may force citizens to join certain state-approved organizations, making it easier to control and monitor their activities and thoughts.

3. Freedom of Religion:

• Religious Persecution: Religious beliefs are often seen as a threat because they may offer moral or ideological alternatives to the state’s ideology. Places of worship may be shut down, believers persecuted, and religious leaders imprisoned or even executed.
• Enforced Atheism or State Religion: Some dictatorships impose atheism or establish a specific religion as the state religion, suppressing the growth and practice of other faiths.

4. Freedom of Movement:

• Restricted Exit: Citizens are often unable to leave the country freely, as dictatorships fear people might escape or spread dissenting ideas abroad. Border control is strict, and exit processes are complicated, with high chances of application being denied.
• Internal Movement Restrictions: Domestically, movement may also be restricted, especially in sensitive areas or major cities. The government may use systems like household registration or other controls to limit population mobility.

5. Freedom of Thought:

• Thought Control: Dictatorships attempt to control citizens’ thoughts through the education system, media propaganda, and cultural policies. Alternative ideologies or belief systems are viewed as threats, and school curriculums are filled with political propaganda.
• Persecution of Intellectuals: Intellectuals, scholars, and thought leaders who express views contrary to the government often face persecution, imprisonment, or are forced into exile.

6. Individual Right of Privacy:

• Widespread Surveillance: Dictatorships typically establish extensive surveillance networks, employing secret police, personal armies, private judiciary, communication monitoring, and a system of informants to watch citizens’ actions and thoughts. Privacy is significantly curtailed, and personal lives are heavily intruded upon.
• Control Through Technology: With advances in technology, dictatorships may utilize big data, artificial intelligence, and other tools to more effectively monitor and control citizens, further stripping away their right to privacy.

7. Freedom of Elections:

• Election Manipulation: When elections do take place, dictatorships often manipulate the process to ensure outcomes that align with their interests. Voters are intimidated, opposition candidates are restricted or disqualified, and the election itself becomes a mere formality.
• Cancellation or Postponement of Elections: In many cases, elections may be completely canceled or indefinitely postponed, allowing dictators to extend their rule through various means and maintain power indefinitely.

8. Personal Freedom:

• Control of Actions and Speech: Dictatorships enforce strict control over citizens’ daily actions and speech through laws, police forces, the military, judicial institutions, and social propaganda pressure. Any behavior that deviates from the official line is subject to punishment.
• Elimination of Dissent: Through terror and repression, dictatorships aim to eradicate any form of dissent and criticism, ensuring that citizens’ thoughts and actions are fully aligned with their own interests.
• Cultivation of a Compliant Population: Dictatorships often promote ideologies of submission and obedience, eroding citizens’ sense of individual rights and civic responsibility. This strategy is designed to suppress dissent and encourage people to passively accept the regime’s authority, reducing them to a state of subservience, with limited personal agency or power to challenge the system.

III. The Impact of Dictatorship on Education

Dictatorships typically use education as a tool to control thought, consolidate power, and maintain their regime. This has a profound impact on various aspects of the education system, including the content of textbooks, teacher autonomy, academic research, and the intellectual development of students. Here are the key effects of dictatorship on education:

1. Control of Textbooks and Curriculum:

• Political Indoctrination: Dictatorships often transform the education system into a vehicle for promoting the official ideology. Textbooks and curriculum content are strictly censored to align with the regime’s political objectives. Subjects like history, politics, and social studies are especially prone to distortion, and real historical events may be altered or covered up.
• Removal of Dissenting Content: Dictatorships tend to remove any material from textbooks that could provoke questioning or opposition. In its place, content glorifying the leadership or regime is introduced. Educational content is reduced to a single perspective, stifling the development of critical thinking.

2. Suppression of Academic Freedom:

• Persecution of Scholars: Scholars and teachers are closely monitored in dictatorships, and expressing views that challenge or question the regime can lead to dismissal, imprisonment, or exile. The independence of academia is severely compromised, and academic freedom is greatly restricted.
• Restrictions on Research Fields: Dictatorships often ban or limit research in sensitive areas such as political science, sociology, and history to prevent scholars from exposing or criticizing the regime’s corruption and oppression.

3. Indoctrination and Brainwashing:

• Imposition of a Single Ideology: From an early age, students are indoctrinated with a singular political ideology, fostering loyalty and admiration for the dictatorship. The education system becomes a tool for political brainwashing, depriving students of exposure to diverse perspectives.
• Suppression of Critical Thinking: Dictatorships suppress open discussion and debate, stifling students’ critical thinking abilities. Instead of being encouraged to question authority, students are trained to obey it. The goal of education under such regimes is to produce compliant citizens rather than independent thinkers.

4. Control and Persecution of Teachers:

• Restricted Teacher Freedom: Teachers’ content and teaching methods are tightly controlled, requiring strict adherence to government-mandated standards. Any attempt to deviate from the official curriculum can lead to punishment, dismissal, or more severe consequences.
• Fear and Self-Censorship: In a highly repressive environment, teachers often practice self-censorship to avoid touching on politically sensitive topics. They may avoid certain subjects or give vague responses to student inquiries to protect themselves from potential risks.

5. Inequitable Distribution of Educational Resources:

• Concentration of Resources in Privileged Groups: Dictatorships may concentrate high-quality educational resources among privileged or loyal groups, neglecting the educational needs of the majority of the population. This unequal distribution of resources exacerbates societal inequalities.
• Deprivation of Educational Opportunities and Misinformation: Dictatorships may limit access to education for certain groups, particularly opposition factions, ethnic minorities, or other marginalized groups, severely reducing their opportunities for education. Simultaneously, regimes often engage in misinformation or indoctrination to control public consciousness.

6. Surveillance of Thought and Reporting:

• Student Surveillance: Students may be mobilized to monitor one another and even encouraged to report peers or teachers for any “reactionary” remarks. This creates an atmosphere of fear and distrust within schools, with both students and teachers living under constant pressure.
• Thought Examination: Test content may include loyalty checks to the regime, where students’ ideological alignment is used to assess their “qualification.” This further reinforces the regime’s control over thoughts and beliefs.

7. Obstacles to the Internationalization of Education:

• Restricted International Exchanges: Authoritarian regimes may limit or completely ban students and teachers from engaging with the international academic community to prevent external ideologies from influencing the domestic education system. Opportunities for studying abroad, academic exchanges, and international cooperation programs may be significantly reduced or entirely prohibited.
• Blocking External Information: By restricting access to foreign books, internet resources, and foreign language education, authoritarian regimes attempt to block the flow of external information, confining the thoughts of students and teachers within the boundaries set by official doctrine.

8. Exploitation of Students by Authoritarian Regimes:

• Forced Participation in Authoritarian Activities: Students may be coerced into taking part in government-organized political events, such as parades, rallies, or patriotic performances, all designed to display loyalty to the regime. These activities can consume a large portion of students’ time and energy, disrupting their normal education and personal development.
• Ideological Reeducation: The education system may be used as a tool for “reeducation,” targeting students who hold dissenting views or have previously engaged in opposition. Through this process, they are pressured to conform to the regime’s official ideology, suppressing free thought and fostering allegiance to the authoritarian system.

The oppression of education under authoritarian regimes strips the system of its fundamental freedom, independence, and diversity. Education ceases to be a process for nurturing independent thinkers and critical citizens. Instead, it becomes a tool of compliance, aimed at fostering loyalty to the authoritarian regime. As a result, the society’s overall creativity, capacity for innovation, and cultural vitality are severely diminished. This stifling environment leads to long-term stagnation of both the nation and society, hindering the development of democratic values and civilizational progress.

IV. The Mindset of Dictators

Dictatorship is like a drug that feeds on human selfishness, where personal gain is prioritized over fairness and equality. Those who glorify authoritarian rulers are essentially promoting the dominance of power, and enforcing a culture of obedience rather than fostering independent thinking. This reflects a mentality rooted in oppression and a belief in survival of the fittest, where empathy and collective well-being are disregarded.

People who endorse such thinking often lack proper education in democracy, civil values, and the importance of compassion for others. They fail to embrace concepts like human rights, cultural inclusivity, or societal progress. Instead, they blindly surrender their moral judgment, supporting authoritarianism as if it were a natural order. This reflects a dangerous ignorance, turning a blind eye to the ideals of fairness, justice, and human dignity that sustain healthy societies.

Dictatorship steals away the inherent goodness, sincerity, and virtue of each individual and of humanity as a whole. It fuels the pursuit of selfish and extreme desires, causing people to become numb, unkind, and unwilling to help one another. It stifles the ability to grow spiritually, preventing individuals from achieving true wisdom and compassionate living.

The logic behind dictatorship revolves around the maintenance of extreme power and ideology, operating on several key principles:

1. Concentration of Power and Thought: Dictatorships centralize authority in the hands of one leader or a small elite, suppressing any form of decentralization.
2. Suppression of Dissent: Any form of opposition or criticism is swiftly eliminated, whether through legal repression, intimidation, or violence, ensuring that no alternative viewpoints can challenge the regime.
3. Manipulation of Fear: Fear is used as a tool of control, paralyzing the populace and preventing collective action against the regime.
4. Propaganda and Indoctrination: The regime promotes ideologies that dehumanize dissenters and instills obedience through media manipulation, education, and repetitive messaging, creating a culture of dependency and submission.
5. Creation of External Enemies: Dictatorships often manufacture or exaggerate threats from external forces to justify oppressive policies and unify the population under the guise of protecting national security.

In the mindset of a dictator, there are three distinct components: internal, external, and peripheral. Here is an outline of each:

1. Internal: The Core Dictator and Power Holders

• Core Objective: Control of Power The ultimate goal for a dictator is to maintain control over leadership and decision-making power. Every strategy and tactic is deployed to secure and solidify the dictator’s position at the core. Dictators are often flexible in their rhetoric, quickly adapting strategies to suit the circumstances. The potential loss of power is their greatest fear, and any perceived threat is met with swift, decisive action, with no room for compromise.

• Power and Guilt: In a dictatorial system, holding power often equates to being inherently guilty, while taking responsibility usually implies being at fault. Thus, core power holders frequently deflect blame by finding scapegoats. In this environment, savvy individuals tread cautiously, aiming to avoid becoming entangled in power struggles, though avoiding them entirely is nearly impossible. One must engage in these struggles to avoid becoming a target.

• Rise of Formalism: Formalism thrives in this internal structure, where superficial compliance becomes the standard. In the dictator’s eyes, formality can mask underlying incompetence or systemic issues, helping to maintain the appearance of stability. At this level, we can identify the “core dictator” or “power holder” figures.

2. External: Executors and Responsible Leaders

• The Role of Executors: The external circle consists of those responsible for carrying out the dictator’s orders, often referred to as “executors” or “responsible leaders.” They are tasked with implementing policies, but their position is perilous. In a dictatorship, being responsible is seen as a liability, and leadership itself is often a risk. These executors can be removed or punished for various reasons, as the dictator may view them as disposable once their utility has expired.

• Life as Dispensable: The phrase “when the ruler commands death, the subordinate must obey” aptly captures the reality faced by these leaders. Though they hold significant positions in the system, their survival is always contingent on the dictator’s whims. Even if they try to protect themselves, they often end up facing inevitable elimination. In critical moments, secret agents may be dispatched to silence those seen as threats to the dictator’s power.

• The Inevitable Tragedy: Executors in this system lead lives that resemble warriors on a doomed battlefield. They serve the dictator’s interests and often meet a tragic end. Like pawns in a larger power struggle, they fight for the regime, only to be discarded when their usefulness comes to an end.

3. Peripheral: Role of Ordinary People and Citizens

• The Position of the Ordinary People: The outer circle refers to the common people, those who are governed by dictators and their enforcers. Their fate is a never-ending symphony of suffering. In a dictatorship, they are reduced to mere “subjects” rather than citizens with rights and dignity. Dictators divide and control these masses, treating them as replaceable, with little regard for their lives. To the dictator, the people’s survival or well-being is of no significance.

• The Destructive Force of Power: No matter how reasonable a system may be, once it falls into the hands of a dictator, it is inevitably dismantled. Dictators exploit cooperation with enforcers to weaken and dismantle any opposing forces, ensuring their own grip on power. Under such a regime, ordinary people lose their voice and must passively accept the dictatorship’s rule, which represents the downfall of a society. To ensure happiness and security, we must support and protect those who bravely stand up for justice, while exposing and confronting those who collaborate with dictators.

• Resistance and Respect: Despite such oppressive circumstances, there are always courageous individuals who dare to speak out against dictatorship. These people deserve our utmost respect, admiration, and honor. On the other hand, those who remain ignorant and complacent often sink deeper into the system, failing to comprehend the true dangers of dictatorship and becoming an accomplice.

Dictatorship represents the extreme manifestation of human selfishness. It operates like an “opium” that poisons entire societies, hindering the possibility of true collective well-being and happiness. Dictatorship is the greatest obstacle to the prosperity and freedom of people in any civilization.