马孔多下雨了。 ——加西亚·马尔克斯《百年孤独》 这段时间，美国强掳马杜罗并宣称"接管"委内瑞拉的事件震惊了全世界。 这起堪称魔幻的事件给我的感觉是"马孔多又下雨了"。 01 读过马尔克斯《百年孤独》的朋友都知道，马孔多 在书中是一个地名。最初布恩迪亚家族为了躲避仇家游魂的纠缠，带领一众逃避现实的年轻人离开原 来的村子，翻山越岭去寻找大海，结果大海没找到，就在一个地方停下来开辟村庄，并把村庄取名为"马孔多"。 马孔多真的是与世隔绝——东边是无法逾越的山脉；向南是广阔的大草原， 连一生都在游荡的吉卜赛人也说没见过它的边界；西边是广袤无垠的水面； 北面是潮湿幽暗的丛林，丛林外面还是海。 图源：美剧《百年孤独》 表面上看这是一个虚构出来的地方，但其实这就是马 尔克斯所在的哥伦比亚以及整个拉丁美洲在地理上的"孤独"状况，他们的发展也被孤立在世界文明 之外，再加上殖民时代欧洲殖民者的刻意分割，让拉美从一开始就埋下了封闭的种子。 书中有一段话说："世界上正在发生着不可思议的事情，就在那边，在河的另一边，各种魔法机器应有尽有，而我们却还像驴子一样生活。" 布恩迪亚家族七代人就在这样一个小镇中发生着种种魔幻故事，在这些故事里 ...

当下，个体成为个人品牌，由此自我商品化，在各类媒介中塑造"人设"，在各种直播间里把自己打造为生产情感 价值的人形机器用以牟利，甚至在亲密关系中，我们也开始把他人当作提供情绪价值的产品来使用。 与此同时，个人情绪和个体感觉成为检验真实/虚假的唯一标准："只要我喜欢……"。在"自我"蔓延，且"我"充斥 于口的当代生活中，我们不断地寻找"真我"、努力去"做自己"，似乎对自己无所不知，但却又好像一无所知。 今天的文章从最近出版的新书《我们为何迷恋真实》说起，探讨是否真的存在一个独立的、真实的"真我"？这样 一个关于"真我"的想象又是如何形成的？我们会发现，这是一个充满人的世界，"我"并非如在思辨与想象中那般 活在无人的孤岛上，因此存在主义所谓的"他人的目光"是我们必然会遭遇的。新的一年，我们或许可以尝试：更 多地活在关系中，而非"真我"的孤岛中。 撰文｜重木 现代主体的形成 我们可以把英国文化评论人艾米莉·布特尔（Emily Bootle）的《我们为何迷恋真实》（This Is Not Who I Am: Our Authenticity Obsession）放在一个更大的批评谱系中看，即对20世纪80年代随着新自由 ...

转自：北京日报客户端 随着社交平台的崛起，有些不良思潮似乎找到了新的传播阵地。一段时间以来，历史虚无主义、极端女 权主义、泛娱乐主义等不良思潮借机粉墨登场，宣扬"1644史观""男性必须无条件付出""躺平即正义"等 话题，在网上持续引发争议。 社交平台作为人们可以自由进入的公共空间，承担一定的社会责任、恪守一定的行为边界乃是应有之 义。如果任由不良思潮蔓延扩散，不仅会破坏网络生态环境，还会扰乱人心、侵蚀社会信任基础，必须 引起高度警惕。 一 这些不良思潮通过稀释理论色彩、肢解其原本易于辨识的形态，不仅可以掩盖深层的政治或社会意图， 而且可以轻松"逃过"平台初步审核，渗透进资讯、社交、娱乐甚至学习场景，无孔不入。 在这过程中，有些平台非但没有筑起堤坝，反而有意无意地为这股精心伪装过的"浑水"开了闸门，成为 不良思潮的"放大器"。平台的热搜榜、推荐流、评论区仿佛一只"看不见的手"，时常默许甚至推动那些 能挑动情绪、制造争议的内容。于是，歪曲历史的"奇谈"可能比正史科普获得更高流量权重，炫富猎奇 的视频往往比踏实奋斗的故事传播更广。 今年以来，有些平台因破坏网络生态被约谈，也反映其正在为内容管理失序付出代价。它们有 ...

Core Insights - The article discusses the pressing social dilemmas arising from economic downturns, including consumerism, climate change, and ethical concerns in biotechnology, urging a reevaluation of lifestyles and values to create a better future [1][4][6]. Economic Context - The text references historical economic crises, notably the Great Depression starting in 1929 and the 2008 financial crisis, highlighting the political and institutional factors that contributed to economic polarization and instability [3][6]. - The 2008 financial crisis is characterized as a significant event that exposed the fragility of political systems and the moral challenges faced by society, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive understanding of the historical context behind economic downturns [6][10]. Social Challenges - The article outlines various contemporary challenges, including environmental threats, increasing poverty, and the moral implications of rapid technological advancements, which have led to a decline in political stability and social cohesion [4][6][10]. - It emphasizes the need for reflection on societal conditions and the search for pathways to overcome current predicaments, suggesting that crises can serve as opportunities for generating new knowledge and expanding scientific discourse [7][10]. Political and Ethical Implications - The text critiques the response of governments to the 2008 crisis, noting that the failure to regulate the financial sector led to widespread economic hardship, with millions projected to fall into poverty as a result of the downturn [10][11]. - It discusses the transformation of social welfare institutions and the shift in language surrounding poverty, indicating a societal tendency to view poverty as a personal failing rather than a systemic issue [14][16]. Future Considerations - The article raises fundamental questions about the sustainability of modern civilization, particularly in light of ecological, ethical, and temporal crises, and whether a viable path forward can be found [1][6][25]. - It suggests that the current socio-economic landscape is marked by a transition from producer societies to consumer societies, with significant implications for identity and community structures [22][26].

"资本是逐利的，按照市场化的逻辑运作，是非常冷血的。有资本的人会更快好起来，无产者更加一无 所有。"张巧运说。 2005年的卡特里娜飓风，给美国的"爵士乐之城"新奥尔良带来极大破坏。历经20年，这个城市如今恢复 得怎么样了？ 在《制造灾难：卡特里娜飓风的人类学研究》一书中，美国人类学者温康妮·亚当斯调查了新奥尔良灾 后重建的进展，发现不同阶层所在的区域恢复水平差距很大。白人中产社区早已看不出受灾痕迹，黑人 劳工阶层聚居区域的恢复重建则遥遥无期。亚当斯因此指出，以营利为目标展开灾后重建工作，无法有 效实现目标，还会导致新的不公平出现。 灾难人类学学者、澳门理工大学副教授张巧运曾在新奥尔良的杜兰大学读博士，持续多年研究灾后社区 重建，也读过《制造灾难》一书。今年是卡特里娜飓风灾害20周年，张巧运说，最新数据显示，至今只 有接近四分之三的受灾人口回到新奥尔良，而且很大一部分劳工阶层的非裔美国人没有能力回去重建家 园。严重的阶层分化是新奥尔良灾后重建的一个突出特点。 不同社区的恢复程度差异明显 2008年，张巧运首次前往新奥尔良，在一个灾后重建研究项目中担任研究助理。距离卡特里娜飓风袭击 这座城市已过去三年，张巧运打 ...

Core Points - The European Commission has announced an emergency fund of €30 billion to address its dependency on critical raw materials, highlighting a significant strategic failure over the past thirty years [1][3] - The funding is intended to kickstart the Critical Raw Materials Act, which aims for the EU to source at least 10% of its strategic raw materials domestically, process 40% within the EU, and recycle 25% by 2030 [5][3] - A key stipulation is that dependency on any single third country cannot exceed 65%, implicitly targeting China as the main concern [5][3] Historical Context - The article traces the roots of Europe's current predicament back to the 1980s when European elites outsourced mining and processing to developing countries, believing that developed nations should focus on R&D and finance [9][11] - This outsourcing led to a significant decline in mining capabilities and expertise in Europe, resulting in a talent gap in geological sciences [13][16] - The 2010 spike in rare earth prices due to China's export restrictions prompted a brief reconsideration of mining in Europe, but interest waned as prices fell [15][16] Current Challenges - The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has exposed Europe's vulnerability in critical raw materials, leading to a realization of their over-reliance on imports [16][23] - Even if new mining projects are initiated, such as the lithium mine in Serbia, they face significant opposition and delays, complicating the recovery of the industry [18][20] - Europe's current dependency on China for rare earths is alarming, with two-thirds of Germany's imports coming from China, and over 90% when including finished products [23][26] Economic Implications - Rebuilding the rare earth supply chain in Europe is projected to take at least 10 to 15 years, with immediate supply disruptions potentially crippling industries [26][30] - The high costs associated with domestic mining and processing, coupled with bureaucratic inefficiencies, hinder investment confidence in new projects [28][30] - The recycling efforts in Europe are hampered by high costs compared to importing new materials, leading to a paradox where valuable electronic waste is exported rather than recycled [32][34] Political and Financial Landscape - The article emphasizes that breaking the current deadlock will require substantial investment, potentially in the range of hundreds of billions of euros, which is unlikely given the current political climate and fiscal constraints in Europe [36] - The €30 billion fund is viewed as insufficient to make a meaningful impact, reflecting the fragmented approach among EU member states and various governmental departments [36]

文：奇史怪谈 编辑：奇史怪谈 它说这些年美联储用的量化宽松等非常规政策，没怎么刺激到经济，反而让资源分配乱了套，还动摇了 自己的独立性。 2025年12月2日，特朗普内阁会议刚开场就抛出个大消息。 他当着镜头跟财政部长贝森特确认，贝森特不会去争美联储新主席的位置。 这事看着简单，实则藏着一场围绕美国经济走向的暗战。 论文成"准入证"？有点绝 贝森特虽然不参选，但新任美联储主席的面试工作全由他主持。 更让人意外的是，面试标准居然是他自己2025年春季发的一篇论文。 这操作我还是头回见，用自己的学术观点当遴选门槛，相当于给未来的美联储主席定了调子。 这篇发表在《国际经济》上的论文，核心就是吐槽美联储管得太宽。 可就因为降息的事，两人闹得不可开交。 9月的时候，贝森特又在《华尔街日报》发了简化版评论，跟特朗普"改革美联储"的口号凑到了一起。 本来想美联储这种金融核心机构，遴选主席该看资历和能力，后来发现还是躲不开政治诉求。 贝森特这篇论文，就是给特朗普的经济政策打铺垫。 他主张美联储放弃银行监管职能，专心管通胀、就业和利率，这正好契合特朗普想推的"大漂亮法案"， 也就是给富人减税那套。 换帅拉锯战，背后有门道 现任 ...

Core Insights - The article emphasizes that achieving common prosperity requires a scientific and systematic social security system, rather than relying solely on individual and institutional charitable donations or simple wealth redistribution [2][8]. Group 1: Development Models and Economic Structures - The article categorizes countries' development models into three types based on their Gini coefficients: Neo-liberalism, Social Democracy, and State Capitalism, highlighting that high Gini coefficient countries like the US achieve wealth but not common prosperity [3][8]. - The US is presented as a unique case of achieving wealth and strength through a mature market economy, but it struggles with income inequality and social mobility issues [4][8]. - In contrast, Western European countries combine efficient market economies with strong government-led redistribution mechanisms, effectively reducing wealth disparity and promoting social mobility [9][10]. Group 2: Economic Indicators and Comparisons - The US is projected to have a nominal GDP of $29.18 trillion in 2024, accounting for 26.22% of the global economy, with a per capita GDP of $85,810 [4]. - In 2023, US social security and education spending accounted for 36.1% of GDP, while charitable donations reached $557.16 billion, approximately 2.04% of GDP [7][8]. - Western European countries exhibit lower Gini coefficients, with the EU's Gini coefficient at 0.276 compared to the US's 0.488, indicating a more equitable wealth distribution [9][10]. Group 3: Case Studies of Common Prosperity - Japan transitioned from a focus on national strength to common prosperity post-World War II, achieving a high percentage of middle-class citizens [13][14]. - Germany's post-war reconstruction led to the establishment of a social market economy that balances efficiency and equity, contributing to its status as a leading economy in common prosperity [15][16]. - The article suggests that the experiences of the US, Japan, and Germany provide valuable insights for other populous nations like China, India, and Brazil in their pursuit of development goals [17].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the stark contrast between mass layoffs in the tech industry and the soaring valuations of major companies like Nvidia and Apple, raising concerns about wealth distribution and the societal implications of AI replacing jobs [4][27]. Group 1: Layoffs in the Tech Industry - Major companies like Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta have announced significant layoffs, with Amazon cutting approximately 14,000 jobs and a total of nearly 100,000 layoffs reported in Silicon Valley this year [6][8][10]. - Despite these layoffs, many tech giants are experiencing strong financial performance, with Amazon's Q3 revenue and net profit increasing by 13% and 39% year-over-year, respectively [10]. - The layoffs are often justified by companies as a response to the accelerated application of AI technologies, with Amazon planning to invest around $125 billion in AI this year [10][11]. Group 2: Causes Behind Layoffs - A portion of the layoffs can be attributed to the previous overexpansion during the pandemic, where companies significantly increased their workforce to meet rising online demand [13]. - Data shows that tech companies announced around 160,000 layoffs in 2022, a 13-fold increase from the previous year, and approximately 260,000 layoffs in 2023, marking the highest level since the dot-com bubble burst in 2001 [14][16]. - The shift towards hiring more non-permanent workers is evident, with companies like Amazon planning to hire 250,000 temporary workers for the holiday season, reflecting a trend towards a "gig economy" [17][18]. Group 3: Societal Implications - The article discusses the historical context of layoffs in the U.S., noting that previous waves of layoffs have exacerbated social inequality, particularly affecting blue-collar and white-collar workers [20][24]. - The current wave of layoffs is seen as part of a broader trend where technological advancements and globalization have led to wealth concentration among a small elite, while many workers face job insecurity and lower wages [26][27]. - The article questions whether society is adequately prepared for the implications of AI on job displacement and wealth distribution, especially as tech giants continue to thrive amidst these layoffs [27].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the stark contrast between mass layoffs in the tech industry and the soaring valuations of major companies like Nvidia and Apple, raising concerns about wealth distribution and the societal implications of AI replacing jobs [4][28]. Group 1: Layoffs in the Tech Industry - Major companies, including Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Intel, have announced significant layoffs, with Amazon planning to cut approximately 14,000 jobs, following a previous reduction of 27,000 employees in 2022 [6][7][9]. - The tech sector has seen nearly 100,000 layoffs in Silicon Valley this year alone, with companies citing the acceleration of AI technology as a primary reason for these cuts [8][11]. - Despite these layoffs, many of these companies are reporting strong financial performance, with Amazon's Q3 revenue and net profit increasing by 13% and 39% year-over-year, respectively [11]. Group 2: Reasons Behind Layoffs - A portion of the layoffs can be attributed to the overexpansion during the pandemic, where companies significantly increased their workforce to meet heightened online demand [14][15]. - From 2020 to 2022, major tech firms expanded their employee counts dramatically, with Amazon's workforce doubling from under 800,000 to 1.6 million [15]. - The current wave of layoffs is influenced by cyclical factors and strategic adjustments within companies, rather than solely by AI advancements [16]. Group 3: Shift to Non-Regular Employment - As companies lay off full-time employees, there is a notable shift towards hiring temporary workers, particularly during peak seasons, which often lack benefits and job security [17]. - The gig economy is expanding, with 38% of the U.S. workforce engaged in freelance work, reflecting a significant increase over the past decade [17]. - Many displaced white-collar workers are forced to take on gig jobs, such as driving for ride-sharing services, highlighting the precarious nature of employment in the current economy [18]. Group 4: Societal Implications - The article discusses the growing divide between "good jobs" and "bad jobs," exacerbated by the rise of temporary and low-wage positions, which limits upward mobility for many workers [19]. - Historical context is provided, comparing the current layoffs to past waves that led to significant job losses in manufacturing and white-collar sectors, often justified by technological advancements and globalization [21][23]. - The concentration of wealth among a small elite, driven by corporate profit maximization and tax avoidance strategies, raises questions about the adequacy of current wealth distribution systems in light of technological progress [26][28].