Smartness and stupidity

Many Han Chinese think themselves are smart or the smartest in the world. And they think westerners quite stupid. But why did they lose to their rivals in their history? They think the problem is because it was easy for Han Chinese to fight against each other and other ethnic groups took advantage of it. Their failed history doesn’t mean they are not smart.

So what’s the Han Chinese definition of smartness or stupidity?

If you can play tricks to hurt others, or if you can make others accept unfair treatment, you are smart, because you can make others lose benefit to you. If you keep your promise, or if you treat others friendly or fairly, you are deadly stupid, because it is easy for you to lose benefit.

But why did the smart group get defeated or conquered by other ethnic groups? “It is because we are too smart.” That’s Han Chinese answer. So, the conquest by foreigners doesn’t prove Han Chinese stupid, but proves Han Chinese smarter.

—————

The truth is Han Chinese are extremely evil because they can’t take advantage of the power of human intelligence or society. But the westerners can by adhering to their values, and by examining their values.

Why do Han Chinese have such behaviors/values? And why do they explain their history in that way?

It is because Han Chinese relationship is one-sided. You can never find any equal opportunity in their relationship in their moral codes. And the one-sided relationship forces all of them to fight over the higher position. And if they can hurt others to benefit themselves, they think themselves superior. No wondering such relationship makes people have the values/behaviors opposite to the normal ones. And their relationship can’t make them stronger than those in normal human relationships. The relationship also makes them have fewer chances to take advantage of human intelligence, because rank difference affects life much more.

When Han Chinese are still in such a relationship, they are still in the state fitting the relationship. They can’t realize their evil, but explain their failed history by stating that they were “too smart”. Or, they simply don’t admit any failure in their history. That’s smarter.

The robber and the coward, the value and the price

Nature is different from human. Nature affects human life. It is technically controlable (if scientists have already discover the secret), but the natural principles are unchangable. It is because human has a controlling part to control its wish, will, idea, attitude, and behavior towards others, while nature has none. If you find something naturally harmful, you should avoid it. You can’t fight against the nature or punish the nature to change its natural property. But if you find somebody treat you unfairly and threaten you that he/she will treat you more unfairly if you stand up to fight againt him/her, and if you treat him/her as the nature, you appease the criminal or enemy, and you will get treated more unfairly definitely, because those people think they can get more by hurting you more. So, there’s fighting between human groups or personels, but only techniques being used to control nature.
You can’t reverse them. If you treat human as nature, or if you treat nature as human, you will harm yourself.

We reveal the natural principles to develop techniques to control nature for our life. And we change others’ controlling part to change their attitude/behavior towards us. But what’s the relationsihp between you and others? What should right/obligation be assigned to all the parties because of the relationship? And  what can we do and how can we do if some part failed to fulfill the obligation?
There are multi ways to solve the conflicts between humans. Sometimes, negociation works. Sometimes, violent fighting works. Which one is better? It doesn’t depend on your wish, but depend on the other side. How other side changes his/her attitude/behavior towards you, the conditions, limits your choice to reach your wish or goal in the conlict. It doesn’t depends on your wish good or not.

Usually, Han Chinese don’t let others choose between this fair one or that fair one, but let others choose between the unfair and the unfairer. And usually, Han Chinese do make choice between the bad and the worse, while not make choice between fairness and fairness, or between goodness and goodness, or between honor and death.
Please don’t think the people, who accept the choice between the bad and the worse, are good-willed people, or kind people, or peace-loving people, or better world pursuer, or only stupid. They are also evil, because they think people should surrender to the predominant offender. And once they are predominant, they do offend others by letting others choose between the bad and the worse. Real good people don’t tolerate the violent offender by offering peace in any case.

Those people, who choose between the unfair and the unfairer, don’t need honor, or don’t fight for right values. They are cowards, offenders, and they are stupid.