high-end population is trying their best to drive away the "deserving high-end population", trying to drive these inferior people out of their life circle, thinking that they Dirty, poor quality, their moral depravity, they don't work hard, they should self-destruct and have nothing to do with us. But can the world really "fold" completely? Impossible, the high-end population and the "under-high-end population" will eventually intersect in one way or another. This is an objective law of economy. For example, there are many people in noble first-tier cities, who are struggling to seek development in big cities, and finally find that their children are still in the hands of the "high-end population". A needle from a kindergarten teacher can make "high-end babies" dare not stay at night. cry. A single fire from a rural nanny can ruin the life of the elite at the top of the pyramid. The return of a destitute prince seems to be an accidental event, but from an objective point of view, it is doomed that Wakanda encounters such a crisis. If the rich are unwilling to bring them later, they are doomed to be attacked by the "not rich" group. backlash.
Of course, we can criticize from morals and punish from the law, these maddening terrorist acts that trample human lives. But have you ever thought that the appearance of this phenomenon is actually the dialectics of nature? The fragmentation of society is growing, and we are already sliding towards social Darwinism and the law of the jungle. Cang Lin knows the etiquette in reality, and knows honor and disgrace when she has enough food and clothing. Poverty is indeed the soil of evil, but we are eradicating poverty, not the poor. The Wakanda people are actually ostriches in the desert. There is an American drama called "Frozen". The so-called "civilized people" in it think they are high above, but there are always "barbarians" who will pull you back into the barbarism. You look down on barbarians, barbarians will teach you to be human in their own way. So for the younger brother of Black Panther, he is wrong, and the world is also wrong. He wants to use the law of the jungle to solve the problem, because he has lived in the environment of the law of the jungle since he was a child. When such a person has the opportunity to touch the upper end of the food chain, there will naturally be no "civilization". level of mercy.
So the idea of the movie "Black Panther" is still good. I don't understand why many people are entangled in "black people" and "political correctness". This is actually the minutiae. Some people say that this is a "black version of "Wolf Warrior 2". To be reasonable, isn't this much better than Wolf Warrior? There is no need to make special effects, and the level of the film industry in the two countries is not on the same level. Even with other elements, Black Panther's idea is higher than Wolf Warrior, and the characters are fuller - especially the villain image, the plot is richer, and the sensationalism is not too forceful.
Let’s talk about a more in-depth question. Why, as the “rich first”, the Wakanda people have obligations to the “rich later” Africans and even the people of the world? Why Wakanda is rich is not because they have fewer children and more trees, but because meteorites fall from the sky, and this literary setting can help us understand a philosophical problem very well. Here is another excellent literary and artistic work. In the Doraemon super-long movie "Nobita and the Birth of Japan", Nobita ran away from home and said that he had been bought, and went to Houshan to encounter real estate development. Shang, and then Doraemon told him that there was no more land left in Japan. Nobita just complained to his friends, why did they occupy this land as theirs? Isn't this first come, first served? So several protagonists took the time machine and went back to the time when Japan was not yet inhabited by humans. If it is not first come, first served, then I will go back to the earliest.
The philosophical speculation of these two works is that "first come, first served" is the theoretical foundation of liberalism - for example, the Wakanda people think that they "deserve" and the gift of God, because the meteorite fell on me, and you didn't. Got it, of course it belongs to me. But if Doraemon took a time machine to go back to an earlier era before the Wakanda people appeared, would this meteorite belong to Nobita? To be precise, liberalism believes that if I work on this land first, this land will be owned by me. The specific explanation is very clear in the article I wrote about liberalism. Like Hobbes' theoretical foundation for liberalism, Rousseau also looked for arguments from the "natural state" of human beings, because those Western scholars believed that only in the natural state of human beings can they show the essential state of human beings, and can The perspective of "human beings" provides the basis for their theory. The state of nature is the state of existence of nature, and what is "human nature" is the starting point of all political discussions. Rousseau, like most Western scholars, believes that human beings are born equal, which is the same as the situation in animals. ——But this is the life of Locke’s liberalism. Since he believes that the legitimacy of private property comes from the original state of human beings, then there is a more primitive state that is generally recognized by everyone. Land, means of production, and labor results are shared , so why selectively ignore the era of human public ownership? It is precisely because of this that liberals after Locke, such as David Hume, decisively abandoned the ideological foundation of the liberal theory of natural law, and instead constructed other philosophical frameworks to explain liberalism.
Rousseau's questioning of private ownership inspired two philosophical trends, one is represented by Marx, who directly denies private ownership and puts forward the great idea of public ownership and a complete set of economic systems that go with it; the other can be said to be Rousseau's direct successor , the contemporary master of social contract theory, the author of "The Theory of Justice" Rawls. Rawls put forward the famous "veil of ignorance". I have written a detailed introduction to this philosophical statement in my previous article. Here, I can directly say the conclusion: that is, the Wakanda people have no experience with meteorites falling from the sky. "Morality deserves", they just "reincarnated" happened to be cast in this place, they just won an "ovarian lottery"; just like Wang Sicong doesn't have any "moral deserve" for being Wang Jianlin's son ; furthermore, Wang Jianlin does not have any moral due to his vast fortune. Because some are infinitely random. For example, Wang Jianlin happened to live in a good era of reform and opening up, and he also happened to catch up with many policy factors of the great development of real estate, and some unexplainable political and business relations...etc. Everything is related to randomness, and randomness cannot constitute a necessary condition for morality.
So what is the conclusion, since these "deservations" are not moral, then it should be said that these deservings should be given back to those groups that have been negatively affected by randomness - many poor, disadvantaged groups. This is Rawls's resounding slogan in "The Theory of Justice": "inequality" that favors disadvantaged groups is justice. At the end of the film, Black Panther begins social assistance and technical exchanges. This is the happy ending of the true "political correctness".
View more about Black Panther reviews
