社会人真正关心的不是抽象的自由，而是具体的自由，决定这个自由的是你控制载体的能力。也即掌握财富权利影响力的能力。
街头流浪汉应该是最自由的人。但没人真心羡慕他们的自由。他们有想象的自由，但没有实现自由的能力。没有钱吃想吃东西的自由。没有平台传播他们思想的自由。更没有指挥别人的自由。
财富自由，要靠钱这个载体。必须有了贫富分化，财富自由才有意义。有钱你可以随意买到别人得不到的东西，这才能显现自由的价值。
言论自由，要靠舆论平台这个载体。任何社会都是几个大喇叭和无数的小喇叭和没喇叭。全部都是一样的小喇叭和躲厕所发牢骚差不多，只有自己能听到，也就体会不到自由的乐趣。所以争取言论自由其实是在争取得到那个大喇叭。
思想自由和言论自由差不多，也需要平台传播出去才有意义。只是自己头脑里天马行空别人不会知道，也不会影响别人。
问题是谁掌握着载体。任何人在群体社会中的自由都是相对的。你控制载体的能力越强，你的自由度就越高。
算法控制下的信息传播，更是投其所好，编织一个个信息茧房。
这种比较形成的优劣势在任何国家社会都存在。全看各自在社会中的位置。大家不会有平等的自由。
房子换瓦，包工雇了几个工人分工合作。先将屋顶一些透气管拆掉，旧瓦打碎，将屋顶扫干净。
一个工人将一些碎的瓦扫到透气管洞掉到浴室抽风机上面，换完瓦后，开抽风机发出很大声，以为吹风机坏了，直到将吹风机盖子打开，碎瓦掉下来才知道什么回事。
这个工人可以跟工头说自己是同样的水平、干同样的活？
没有限制的自由条件下，会形成赢者通吃的效应。任何形式的政府，不管古今中外都是限制赢者的利益。这是为了保证一定程度的平等，虽然还是有利于赢者。通过限制一定的自由，到底说得过去的平等，这样的政府就算不错了。
中国历代王朝最后崩溃的原因很多是，失去了对赢者自由的限制，形成了极度的不平等。
其实测验同样的工种、技术、经验，水平的工人，不是人人都能考满分。
还有年轻的工人动作就是会比大几十岁的工人快，当然做出来的东西就多。
自由的；2. 人的能力是呈正态分布的；3. 自然界万物的组织都是hierarchical的。
Life is not fair，as Westerns like to say。
契约，规则，法律都是重在事后的惩罚，如果以此作为主要的手段，社会日益堕落不可避免，所以只能是暂时的措施。整个社会风气的改善，是非观念的的提高才是根本的方式。
自由相对于更自由，仍然是不自由。永远有更自由，但是没有最自由。所以如果处在一个相对的世界里，自由是无尽的，永远到不了尽头，只能是根据现实情况有些有限的自由，现实情况则是由社会人群的总体素质，生活水平，历史传统决定的。
Why "Equal justice under the law" as principle fundamental
"Equal justice under the law" is the fundamental principle safeguarding freedom because it ensures that all individuals are treated equally and fairly by the legal system, regardless of their background, status, or identity.
"Equal justice under the law" refers to the principle that all individuals, regardless of their background, status, or identity, should be treated equally and fairly by the legal system. This principle is fundamental to the functioning of a just and equitable society for several reasons:
1/ Protection of Rights: Ensuring equal justice under the law safeguards the fundamental rights and liberties of all citizens. It guarantees that everyone has access to due process, fair treatment, and legal representation, regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender, religion, socioeconomic status, or any other characteristic.
2/ Promotion of Equality: Equality before the law fosters social cohesion and promotes a sense of belonging and inclusivity within society. It sends a message that every individual is valued and respected equally under the legal system, regardless of their differences.
3/ Prevention of Discrimination: Equal justice under the law helps to prevent discrimination and bias in legal proceedings. It ensures that decisions are based on merit, evidence, and the law itself, rather than on subjective factors or prejudices.
4/ Maintenance of Rule of Law: Upholding equal justice is essential for maintaining the rule of law, which is the cornerstone of a democratic society. It ensures that laws are applied consistently and impartially, without favoritism or undue influence.
5/ Trust in Institutions: When people have confidence that the legal system treats everyone fairly and equally, it enhances trust and legitimacy in governmental institutions. This trust is essential for social stability and the functioning of a democratic society.
Overall, equal justice under the law is paramount because it upholds the principles of fairness, equality, and justice upon which a democratic society is built. Without it, individuals may feel marginalized, disenfranchised, and alienated from the legal system, undermining social cohesion and the rule of law.
** **
Background: In society, full freedom naturally leads to political pluralism. As politics fundamentally revolves around interests, absolute injustice is unlikely to occur. However, this assumes certain prerequisites. In my experience, full freedom in society leads to chaos and violence. This, however, underscores the absence of freedom. The essence of freedom lies in the respect for individuals and is protected by social contracts. It should be noted that the lack of freedom affects only a portion of the population, as others enjoy far greater freedoms, ultimately resulting in inequality and injustice. Thus, political systems must respect three basic objective facts: 1. Human nature inclines towards love. 2. Human beings have instincts. 3. Humans have desires. In conclusion, a fixation on equality over freedom in politics ultimately harms the lower classes. Mao and the Soviet Union have already proven this. Therefore, social design should respect these three basic objective facts.
他们根本没上升到哲学和人文的层次
对一些人是自由，对另一些人就是限制。不能用抽象的自由代言所有人。
历史没有规律
说的话就像唱的歌一样动听
