Friday, June 2, 2017

DDJ 79. 和大怨,和Unintended Consequences

第七十九章
[原文]
和大怨,必有余怨;报怨以德①,安可以为善?是以圣人执左契②,而不责③于人。有德司契,无德司彻④。天道无亲⑤,常与善人。
[译文]
和解深重的怨恨,必然还会残留下残余的怨恨;用德来报答怨恨,这怎么可以算是妥善的办法呢?因此,有道的圣人保存借据的存根,但并不以此强迫别人偿还债务。有“德”之人就像持有借据的圣人那样宽容,没有“德”的人就像掌管税收的人那样苛刻刁诈。自然规律对任何人都没有偏爱,永远帮助有德的善人。

"和大怨,必有余怨":“和大怨“的能力是必须的,然而“必有余怨”指出unintended consequence.  

"报怨以德①,安可以为善?" 孔子生前说得很多话,都像是道德经里面出来的。“或曰:'以德报怨,何如?'子曰:'何以报德?以直报怨,以德报德。”  所以孔子算半个道家。 这一句话继续阐述unintended consequence of good intentions.  

是以圣人执左契②,而不责③于人:手上很多借据,但不纠结讨债。很多成功宗教都对债权和债权引起的纠纷有类似的debt forgiveness解决方法。

"有德司契,无德司彻":  各有所司。   
冯谖客孟尝君
http://baike.baidu.com/item/%E5%86%AF%E8%B0%96%E5%AE%A2%E5%AD%9F%E5%B0%9D%E5%90%9B

"天道无亲⑤,常与善人": 天道无许诺,只有概率上的优化解。 做好事,都要承担点风险;不要说害人。

AMENDMENT XVII



Explanation


During the half century after the Reconstruction Amendments(XIII,XIV,XV),  no Amendments made through the difficult Amendment process; during the same period, ~10 new States joined the Union.
http://www.ipl.org/div/stateknow/dates.html

1909 opened flood gate for a flurry of amendments.  Amendment XVI (Income Tax Amendment) took 3+ years to ratify, XVII, XVIII, XVIII were concentrated in 1910-1920, and each took 1 year to ratify.    Legislative bodies like all people tend to have temperaments and recency bias.  It happened during this decade, surrounding WW I, stars were aligned for Amendments, some since proven duds (Liquor Prohibition Amendment XVIII), some proven profoundly society-changing,  Amendment XIX (Women's Suffrage),  some in between, like the Senate Election Rule.   All were experiments with unintended consequences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Original Senate Election Rule:
"Originally, under Article I, § 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of theConstitution, each state legislature elected its state's senators for a six-year term.[2]Each state, regardless of size, is entitled to two senators as part of the Connecticut Compromise between the small and large states.[3] This contrasted with the House of Representatives, a body elected by popular vote, and was described as an uncontroversial decision; at the time, James Wilson was the sole advocate of popularly electing the Senate and his proposal was defeated 10–1.[4] There were many advantages to the original method of electing senators. Prior to the Constitution, a federal body was one where states effectively formed nothing more than permanent treaties, with citizens retaining their loyalty to their original state. However, under the new Constitution, the central government was granted substantially more power than before; the election of senators by the states reassuredAnti-federalists that there would be some protection against the swallowing up of states and their powers by the federal government,[5]providing a check on the power of the federal government.[6]
Additionally, the longer terms and avoidance of popular election turned the Senate into a body that could "temper" the populism of the House. While the Representatives operated in a two-year direct election cycle, making them frequently accountable to their constituents, the senators could afford to "take a more detached view of issues coming before Congress".[7]
So why reform the original Senate election rule?
According to Judge Jay Bybee of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, those in favor of popular elections for senators believed that two primary problems were caused by the original provisions: legislative corruption and electoral deadlocks.[11] There was a sense that senatorial elections were "bought and sold", changing hands for favors and sums of money rather than because of the competence of the candidate. Between 1857 and 1900, the Senate investigated three elections over corruption. In 1900, for example,William A. Clark had his election voided after the Senate concluded that he had bought votes in the Montana legislature.
... Electoral deadlocks were another issue. Because state legislatures were charged with deciding whom to appoint as senators, the system relied on their ability to agree. Some states could not, and thus delayed sending representatives to Congress; in a few cases, the system broke down to the point where states completely lacked representation in the Senate

"Progressives argued forcefully, persistently, and ultimately successfully that the democratic principle required the Senate to be elected directly by the people rather than indirectly through their state legislatures. By altering the manner of election, however, they also altered the principal mechanism employed by the framers to protect federalism. The framers understood that the mode of electing (and especially reelecting) Senators by state legislatures made it in the self-interest of Senators to preserve the original federal design and to protect the interests of states as states (see Article I, Section 3, Clause 1). This understanding was perfectly encapsulated in a July 1789 letter to John Adams, in which Roger Sherman emphasized that "[t]he senators, being eligible by the legislatures of the several states, and dependent on them for re-election, will be vigilant in supporting their rights against infringement by the legislative or executive of the United States."

In addition to its impact on federalism, the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment has also had demographic, behavioral, and institutional consequences on the Senate itself. Demographically, popularly elected Senators are more likely to be born in the states they represent, are more likely to have an Ivy League education, and are likely to have had a higher level of prior governmental service. Institutionally, the states are now more likely to have a split Senate delegation, and the Senate now more closely matches the partisan composition of the House."

1910-1920年,正是第一次世界大战,美国本不愿参战.  但是
15 April 1912  Titanic sank killing 
http://www.anesi.com/titanic.htm
1915年. British Ocean Liner Lusitania was sank by German Uboat.   Of the 139 US citizens aboardLusitania, 128 lost their lives,  Public sentiment in America swung in sympathy of British side in the WWI.      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_RMS_Lusitania
How the Wilson administration declared War on Germany.  In January 1917, Germany renewed its policy of unrestricted submarine warfare that it had abandoned in 1915 after the sinking of the Lusitania. All ships trading with Britain, including those of neutral countries such as the United States would be targets for their submarines and would be sunk without warning.
In February, the British gave the American ambassador in London a copy of an intercepted German telegram. The telegram came from the German Foreign Secretary, Arthur Zimmermann, to the German ambassador to Mexico. Zimmermann proposed that in the event of war with the US, Germany and Mexico would join in an alliance. Germany would fund Mexico's conflict with the US. With victory achieved, Mexico would regain her lost territories of Arizona, Texas and New Mexico. Release of the telegram ignited a public furor further enflamed by the loss of four US merchant ships and 15 American lives to German torpedo attacks.
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/pfwilsonwar.htm


”师之所处,荆棘生焉。大军之后,必有凶年②。“ 一战在美国参战以后很快停战,但是”和大怨,必有余怨“。法国也没有学“是以圣人执左契②,而不责③于人”,坚持要求战败德国付出巨额战争赔款,德国经济崩溃,二战拉开序幕。

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.