Why Does Ma Yun Not Trust Economists?

I once talked to an independent economist and asked him why he called it independence. He replied, "no inducement." I think it is necessary to emphasize independence. We should not be an intellectual who will only flatter the masses. We should have our own independent thinking and opinions. Why did Ma Yun not believe in economists? Why did Ma Yun not believe in economists?

Recently, the chairman of Alibaba's board of directors, Ma Yun, said publicly that entrepreneurs could not listen to economists in the future. The prophet of the Spring River Plumbing duck, the entrepreneur can feel the changes of the times and the economic changes. If we go to the economist's prediction at this time, the disaster will be great.

Just now, when the stock market went up and down, Ms. Zuo Xiaolei, the managing director of galaxy securities, responded to Ma Yun's viewpoint when she appeared in my program "reform". "If Ma Yun, who has knowledge, tells the truth, goes all out with Ma Yun, Ma Yun is over confident." She believes that economists say that the stock market is not an economist. Economists will never say what the stock will be like tomorrow. He will not understand or benefit, or he is not an economist. He was originally a Speculator and a shareholder.

When it comes to economists, we have to say the status quo of Chinese intellectuals. "Intellectuals are a historical and cultural category, acting on a social stratum, which is generated in a certain historical stage and certain cultural conditions of human development." This is the interpretation of the Chinese version of intellectuals. Many people are discussing the standards of intellectuals and the concept of public intellectuals.

The emergence of micro-blog can make China's "public knowledge" enter the outbreak period. As a result, the Korean War, Wu Fatian was beaten and other events. The continuous development of the political environment and social environment has also made our team of intellectuals different views. The social status of intellectuals is no longer recognized and respected as they used to be. Whether intellectuals exist in the modern age and whether independent academic research can get their due academic support under the intervention of contemporary political democratization? For many people, it is necessary for the left and right sides to be allocated. Therefore, the left is regarded as a puppet, while the rightist is a pioneer in reform.

Once upon a time, the self orientation of Chinese intellectuals was to build knowledge and knowledge, to cultivate themselves, to live in harmony, and to rule the country. Such an intellectual is almost always the way out for "learning to be superior to official". Take the world as our responsibility. Such intellectuals' identity and way out create a kind of social value orientation and atmosphere that "all kinds of products are inferior, only high reading". Intellectuals at that time actually represented a channel for upward mobility of social elite in the bottom. Their main task is to take the responsibility of the whole world. Help rulers rule the common people.

Since modern times, intellectuals have been beaten into bad habits. Intellectuals have become the object of reform and the status of social strata has declined. It has become the tail of capitalism. It is embarrassing. Since the reform and opening up, the social status of intellectuals has gradually improved, and the labor value of intellectuals has been gradually recognized.

Now, the intellectuals in China are undoubtedly on the verge of marginalization. Some people say that the enhancement of the practicality of intellectuals is a good thing or a bad thing. This is the surface prosperity of intellectuals. Deep academic attainments or ideological pursuits have not been promoted. But when knowledge goes to the public, the development of ideas can no longer stick to the thinkers of some thinkers. There are few intellectuals with real ideas. Most of them are complying with the public's thinking. This is also the limitation of the times. It can not be popularized and can only be kept at its own doorway without relying on the masses.

When it comes to intellectuals, they must be linked to the system. I think this can be seen from the perspective of social solidarity. The relationship between the so-called elite groups is actually interrelated. stay market economy Many short term behaviors and utilitarianism orientation are hard to tell.

At this stage in China, intellectuals have several ways to participate in political life, but they may not have the initiative. Including research topics and research process. On the contrary, it will face the plight of research funding. Of course, there is no chance to enter political life. Most of the intellectuals with official status are of high status. For example, the central bank has a Monetary Commission position. Actually, this position does not have the core right to make monetary policy, but it only wants to have the right to recommend it. But in fact, they have been labeled with official labels, so these people earn a lot in the same kind of intellectuals. And those intellectuals who did not enter the system were divided into two kinds, one is jealousy which can not be squeezed in, and the other is independent intellectuals.

I once talked to an independent economist and asked him why he called it independence. He replied, "no inducement." I thought, emphasizing Independence It is necessary not to be an intellectual who will only flatter the masses. He should have his own independent thinking and opinions. Of course, it is wrong to live in the wrong way. Thinking behind closed doors makes your mind lose the foundation of the life world, and becomes a pure thinker, and thus obtains the sense of self superiority.

I have seen it before. Intellectual A lot of research, such as Xu Jilin's words, impressed me deeply: how many Chinese intellectuals can jump out of the various kinds of political education after the baptism of various forms of political education? Since the humanities themselves are very empty, what can we do to save our people? Especially after the loss of the past charm of orthodox thinking, in such an era of diversified values, many people have been awakened to know that they are ill, but they are in a situation where myrrh can be cured. Perhaps, as Nietzsche said, God is dead, and now everyone is his own God, and everyone finds his own belonging.

In fact, in the development of history, they are all willing to be attached to the mainstream. We all seem to need an authority, the authority we can identify with ourselves or the authority constructed by the speaker, but reality is not. We can't agree with what is built. Should intellectuals play such a role? But they are not a discourse leader or a "beast of call".