爱生活的晴

The wind has changed!
Recently, the wind has changed.
On one side, French President Macron visited China, shaking hands and emphasizing the vow of 'Sino-French friendship.'
On the other side, UK Prime Minister Starmer, who has always been 'ambiguous,' suddenly changed his tone, publicly delivering a speech to show goodwill towards China, acknowledging China's superpower status, clearly stating the need to strengthen trade relations with China, and mentioning that he plans to visit China soon.
The UK is different from France.
France is the kind of player who often comes to visit us, only to go back and regret it, cursing and complaining, while the UK is more straightforward; after visiting China in 2018, they haven't come back, neither visiting nor stopping the criticism.
Thus, in terms of geopolitical relations, Sino-British ties are worse.
Then, how did Europe, which once followed the US in shouting about 'de-risking,' suddenly line up to cozy up to us?
Did they suddenly fall in love with China?
No, it's just interests.
Europe is now clearly feeling a huge crisis.
First, the once big brother (the US) completely excludes the EU from the table.
A few days ago, Trump announced 28 proposals, directly ignoring Europe and planning to sign contracts with Russia to halt the Russia-Ukraine war.
In reality, Trump has always looked down on these old gentlemen (younger brothers) in Europe; after so many years of the Russia-Ukraine war, the result is that Russia has gained the upper hand.
So the best outcome is that the interests belong to the US, the land belongs to Russia, and the debts belong to Europe.
This aligns with Trump's business thinking.
But from Europe's perspective, the Russia-Ukraine war has been going on for nearly three years, their own blood is about to be drained, energy prices have skyrocketed, manufacturing has flowed out, and inflation is soaring. They thought that by following the big brother in the US and jointly attacking Russia, they would enjoy the benefits.
What happened?
The US took the lion's share of the benefits. In recent years, through the Inflation Reduction Act, they have been heavily subsidizing and forcibly drawing European manufacturing to the US, and the natural gas sold to Europe is several times the local price.
What’s even more terrifying is that Trump has defined 'America First' as an irreversible top strategy.
In Trump's logic, the EU is not just an ally, but also a delinquent tenant and a competitive opportunist. The tariff stick could strike Germany's cars, France's wine, or the UK's finance at any moment.
So the European talent finally woke up; it turns out that at the big brother’s table, they are not diners but rather a dish on the menu...
At this time, showing goodwill to China has become the only bargaining chip in Europe’s hands.
They need to use this huge market and supply chain in China to balance the pressure from the US, telling Trump: 'Don’t push me too hard; I still have Plan B.' This includes South Korea frequently showing goodwill to China recently, which follows the same logic.
But Trump currently doesn’t care about the EU's choices; whether it's A or B doesn't matter; he can cut them off whenever he likes. In the face of absolute strength, Europe feels like a discarded child of an era, very confused, so they still need to talk to China.
Because stripping away geopolitics and looking at the economic account, Europe really has no choice.
The current European economy has already slipped into the ICU. As Europe’s locomotive, Germany's GDP has been shrinking continuously, and the UK has fallen into the mire of 'stagflation' with ongoing strikes.
Their once-proud automotive industry has already entered a state of collapse in the face of electrification. The green transformation they need, such as photovoltaic panels, lithium batteries, and raw materials, is all in China's hands.
Europeans are very clear: want to solve inflation? It cannot be separated from high-cost-effective products from the East. Want to go green? It cannot do without the technology and capacity from the East. Want to sell luxury cars and high-end goods? It cannot do without the huge purchasing power of the East.
In the past, when life was good, Europe could talk about 'human rights,' discuss 'values,' and casually criticize competitors like the East, but now they can't even afford to eat, so what face do they have left?
The goodwill from the UK Prime Minister is the most typical return to British pragmatic realism:
On the surface, it’s all about ideology, but in their hearts, it’s all about business.
So, how should we view Europe’s frequent goodwill gestures?
First, don’t get too excited.
I think a line from the official response is very good. China does not need any country to prove its status.
Other countries showing goodwill and treating themselves as close brothers should also be on guard. Because this is just a transaction of interests. Once the US gives them a little sweetener or applies greater pressure, they may change their tune at any time. This is the nature of 'fence-sitters.'
Second, make full use of it.
Since they want to use China to hedge against the US, we can also use Europe to completely break the US's encirclement. As long as Sino-European relations do not break down, it will be very difficult for the US to create a 'global anti-China alliance.'
Instead of deepening cooperation, we can use production capacity to alleviate European inflation, using European technology, capital, and markets to buy time for our industrial upgrades. Once interests are bound and a dependency relationship is formed, Europe will completely lose its combat effectiveness.
Third, maintain composure.
No matter how they change, we only need to grasp one core, cultivate our internal strength. As long as China’s industrial chain is irreplaceable and China’s market size is the largest in the world, they will have to come, have to talk, and have to show goodwill.
Overall, Europe’s collective 'defection' this time is not due to a sudden awakening of conscience, but due to the pressure of the situation. At the same time, this may be a profound reorganization of the global geopolitical landscape.
Last night, Trump released the latest national security report at the White House, summarized in one sentence:
I’m withdrawing first, focusing on closing the door to work on the economy, solving domestic problems, reshaping the Americas, and reorganizing the supply chain. As for China, you’d better hold on, and as for funding, find a way yourself.
One is more debt-ridden than the other; relying on monkeys to pay to contain China’s development is, of course, unrealistic.
So we see that countries in Europe, South Korea, and Southeast Asia are lining up to come under our 'tree' to seek common development, while another category is pretending to be strong, like Japan, actually to achieve the self-interest of the military-industrial complex.
If the US really, as Trump said, wants to enter a stage of global strategic contraction, then its absolute dominance over the old order in East Asia will rapidly dissolve, and a new order will soon form.
For us, peripheral geopolitical friction will phase out.
Being able to reach today tells us a truth: only strong strength is the only reason for opponents to sit down and listen to you calmly.
This is a good thing.
Next, we will ramp up efforts, pushing all domestic production capacity outwards, with trade covering the globe, and foreign trade imports and exports will correspondingly enter a prosperous phase.
Using foreign demand to drive the economic engine will accelerate the exit from deflation, and of course, it will also nurture countless wealth opportunities. Especially many industries in coastal cities will become the upper part of the K-shaped differentiation.

This industry is about to change!
The fund circle has finally welcomed a long-overdue cleansing. Just now, a guiding document on the performance assessment of public funds was issued. It seems like only a few pages, but to me, every word is a shot at the chronic ailments accumulated in the industry over the past twenty years. For those investors who have long been numb from losses, this may be the most satisfying and closest to the essence of good news they've heard in recent years. What did we hate most when buying funds in the past? It wasn't losing money, but unfairness. The underlying logic of this industry was once extremely absurd: fund managers reaped profits regardless of drought or flood, while investors were left alone to face the storms. Even if a product lost 30% or 40%, fund managers still took home millions or tens of millions in annual salaries, with management fees intact. This mechanism, where profits belong to oneself and risks belong to the investors, is essentially a form of legal plunder.
In such a mechanism, no one truly cares about your money; they only care about scale, about whether they can gamble on a trend, hype up their fame, and then reap management fees. However, this new regulation has completely shattered that easy ride. The hardest blow has struck at the source of profits and losses. The document clearly states that if a fund underperformed its benchmark by 10% and incurred losses in the past three years, performance compensation must be reduced, and the reduction cannot be less than 30%. This is no longer just a scratch; it directly affects the cake. This means that fund managers are finally forced to sit on the side of investors. If you dare to gamble with investors' money, chasing highs and taking risks, once you lose, not only will the investors have to eat instant noodles in the dark, but your own wallet will also bleed heavily.
When the sickle feels pain, its speed in harvesting will naturally slow down. Even more shocking is the mandatory co-investment clause. Fund managers must use 40% of their performance to buy their own products, and executives must buy 30%, with a three-year lock-in period. What do you call this? This is called a loyalty oath. Previously, you were the captain, and I was a passenger; if the ship sank, you took the lifeboat first, while I fed the sharks. Now, you are locked to the mast; if the ship sinks, everyone dies together. Only by tying your life and wealth to the same boat can we trust that you will fight to steer this boat safely, rather than crashing into an iceberg for a small kickback. The 40% requirement is enough to make many hesitate before placing an order, asking themselves:
"Would I dare to buy this myself?" This reform is essentially a drastic switch from a flow logic to a stock logic. In the past, fund companies competed on who could shout the loudest or launch new products. In the future, competition will be about who can endure longer and make fewer mistakes. The money earned by luck and the bubbles inflated by marketing will ultimately reveal their true form under rigid assessments. For the industry, this is not just a salary cut, but a supply-side reform. Those who are just going through the motions and those with a strong gambling nature will gradually be cleared from the market.
What remains will be those professional players who truly respect the market and investors. Of course, changes in rules cannot reverse the trend overnight; market rises and falls will ultimately depend on national fortune and economic fundamentals. But this at least addresses the most core trust crisis. Capital seeks profit, and human nature is greedy. We cannot expect fund managers to help us make money through moral self-discipline; we can only trust the cage of the system. When the salary cards of fund managers resonate in sync with your account balance, this market can be said to have truly embraced long-termism. After all, in this world of fame and fortune, only the deep binding of interests is the most enduring confession.

马克龙在四川大学真的玩嗨了！为什么选择四川，原来有历史渊源
我们是真的太了解自己家的大学生了，一个卖速溶咖啡的网红都能排队去买，别提一个五常国家的总统了……同学们哪见过这么大官，读四年大学，估计连校长都没见过几次。总统飞奔向我，还能合影，还能握手，以后饭桌上还能吹牛逼，谁顶得住啊。这哪是马克龙在四川大学演讲，分明是四川大学组织参观马克龙。
现在马克龙非常需要这个。国内支持率屡创新低，数次组阁都以失败告终，经济持续低迷，整个欧洲右翼抬头。这次来中国，马克龙的目的就是捞一波政治资本。中法关系在欧洲地区算是中等偏上的，加上相对稳定的欧洲是符合中方的利益的，所以中方也乐于给马克龙这个机会。这次马克龙回去可有得吹了——先别提谈成了什么合作，你们就看世界第二大经济体的国民有多喜欢我吧。马克龙不容易啊！被川普指着鼻子骂，在美国车队被拦下来徒步走，俄罗斯普京压根不理他。被老婆当众扇耳光，被法国老百姓扔臭鸡蛋和扇耳光。
只有在中国马克龙才感觉到自己是法国总统，得到了一个总统应该得到的尊重。只有来到中国，红毯迎接，外长接待，到大学里面学生们争先恐后的要和他握手。这里没有人骂他，没人难为他。还有山呼海啸般的欢迎，顺带还能体会到了当巨星的快感，要我是马克龙啊回想这些年委屈，看看现在，我能哭出来。总统爱谁做谁做吧。我就要在四川大学！马克龙在四川大学演讲上，上来先给大家道歉没打领带，然后说：“会有人告诉你，欧洲老了，G7的富裕国家傲慢，西方俯视全球南方。但这些都是叙事，是编造出来的”。当着所有人的面拒绝把世界分成两半，要知道美国不断“拉帮结派、搞小圈子”，相当于打了美国一个“软耳光”马克龙还说到“某个想主宰世界的西方大国”，他批评的“美元霸权”。提到中国说，先是把欧洲的问题拉出来批评了一大堆，然后夸中国疫后投资猛，技术好。
从他的话里感觉到很想跟中国拉近关系。法国为首的欧洲集团在俄乌问题上陷了进去，本以为和美国一起就能撑住乌克兰，压垮俄罗斯。结果仗打到今天，欧洲发现自己根本掌控不了，反而被深度套牢。欧洲自己想停，但自己说了不算。乌克兰没筹码停，俄罗斯不愿意听欧洲的。现在终于想明白，美国根本不靠谱，美国根本就想让欧洲上桌。于是拎着礼物，放低姿态，过来说好话，核心就一个目的，想请中国出面，帮忙在牌桌上喊一声“先停一停，聊聊看”。中国的态度是礼节给足，面子做够，合作可以谈。但不会为了法国额外做出政策性的调整。核心还是，以我为主，为我所用。最后再说说中法的历史关系，法国是第一个跟我们建交的西方国家。1949年建国，只有苏联，保加利亚，朝鲜等多个社会主义国家跟我们建交。直到1964年，中法宣布建立外交关系，我们才正式有了第一个西方朋友。1981年，我国的成都市与法国蒙彼利埃市结成友好城市，成都也是我国第一个跟法国建立友好城市的城市。
90年代我国歼-10战斗机研发过程中，数字电传风控系统这核心技术遇到瓶颈。美国，苏联都不愿意提供帮助。最后是法国的达索公司提供了帮助，与其合作才解决了诸多核心问题。没错，就是法国那家生产"幻影","阵风"系列战斗机的达索。很多人可能不知道，法国的达索公司和我国的成飞，从90年代开始，一直合作至今。

北大一篇论文被骂上了热搜
这两天，北大一篇论文被骂上了热搜。
标题很唬人：《基于50万中国男女的前瞻性队列研究：子嗣数量与全表型疾病及死亡风险的关联谱》。
但到了媒体嘴里，就剩一句：。
你说这不是找骂吗？现在年轻人连婚都不愿结，你跟他们谈生三四个？于是评论区炸了锅：
"生30个，生死簿倒欠你两页！"
"建议专家先示范，生够十个算我输。"
"养四个孩子，上吊都得排队拿号。"
骂得挺解气，但骂错了人。
我仔细看了原文，研究者其实挺冤枉。人家明明说了——这研究只证明"有关系"，不能证明"谁导致谁"。
好比说，精神病和没孩子有关系。但到底是没孩子导致精神病，还是精神病导致找不着对象？说不清。
再比如，生三四个的女性死亡率低。但有没有可能，能活到生三四个的，本身身体就挺好？而那些难产死的、产后抑郁走的，根本没机会进你这份"50万样本"啊！
这叫什么？死人不会说话。
研究者也承认，无子女样本太少，门诊数据没录入。但媒体不管这些，他们只想要一个B点。于是"有关系"变成了"生三胎最长寿"，学术的严谨成了催生的喇叭。
要我说，这不是学术问题，这是新闻操守问题。
更扎心的是，这研究还藏着个"倒果为因"的坑。
能生三四个孩子的女性，除了身体好，还得家里有钱。有钱才能养得起，有钱才能看得了病，有钱才能活得久。
这不是子女数量影响健康，这是经济实力决定寿命。但你把"有钱"这个变量一拿掉，光谈生孩子，不就是耍流氓吗？
就像有人说"每天坐迈巴赫的人寿命长"，废话，人家坐迈巴赫是因为有钱，有钱才能好好养生。你让普通人天天坐迈巴赫试试，车贷先把你压死。
研究者未必不懂这个道理，但他们只能点到为止。
这让我想起80年代那些火箭专家的人口预测。
他们算出，如果生育率3.0不变，2080年中国人口将达到42.64亿。于是力推一胎化。
现在回头看，这不扯淡吗？全国人站着不动都得叠罗汉。但当时就得这么算，不算这么夸张，怎么显得控制人口迫在眉睫？
后来2014年，又有专家预测放开二孩后，年出生人口将冲到4995万。结果实际峰值才1786万，连一半都不到。
你看，人口预测模型受限于时代背景和数据假设，未必能完全反映复杂的社会现实。
每个时代都有每个时代的人口科学。80年代要你少生，现在要你多生。结论跟着风向走。至于是不是科学，谁在乎？
但这一次不一样。
现在的年轻人可不是当年那批听话的。你搞个研究说"生三胎最长寿"，他们第一反应不是"我得赶紧生"，而是"这专家收了多少彩礼钱？"
为什么？因为他们真有一头牛。
专家随便下下笔，女性可是真要生啊！生完孩子谁带？工作要不要？房贷谁还？奶粉钱谁出？
这些现实问题，论文里一个字不提。
媒体更绝，直接把有相关性写成最佳生育方案。仿佛女人不生三四个，就是对自己生命不负责任。
其实北大这篇研究本身没那么离谱。它老老实实说了局限，清清楚楚写了"不代表因果"。
坏就坏在，有人非要把它当枪使。
政C需要催生，媒体需要流量，专家需要课题。只有女性，需要真真实实地承受这一切。
所以每次看到这种热搜，我都想劝劝那些研究者：如果你的结论严重违背老百姓直觉，先别急着甩锅给"舆论不懂科学"，回头看看自己是不是站歪了。
老百姓不是傻子。他们能分清楚什么是科学，什么是打着科学旗号的忽悠。
少数派不代表真理，觉醒也不等于正确。
生育对女性身心影响重大，需充分的社会支持而非单纯倡导数量。
你吗？你连个责任人都不留。
学术归学术，民生归民生。别让象牙塔里的数字，成为压在普通人身上的山。
研究者请守住底线，媒体人请有点良心。
至于生育几个最长寿？
我只知道，先把自己活得像个人，再谈生不生孩子。
若忽视个体选择，最终可能让普通家庭承担更多压力。

Do not casually say 'aligning with international standards'! In the field of liberal arts, this is tantamount to 'cultural suicide', equivalent to selling out our ancestors!
The phrase 'aligning' has been like a spell for decades, overshadowing every aspect of our society. Technology must align, the economy must align, and even culture, law, and history — the foundations of our nation — are being shouted to 'align'. Today, we will expose the truth of this false proposition: blindly 'aligning with international standards' in the fields of liberal arts is not progress, but self-destruction; it is not openness, but a form of spiritual self-castration, even selling out our country!
1. The underlying message behind 'aligning': an unequal spiritual submission
First, we must clarify, what is the underlying message of the phrase 'align with international standards'?
Its underlying message is: 'Theirs is advanced, ours is backward; theirs is civilized, ours is barbaric.' Therefore, we must look to them, and we must transform ourselves according to their standards.
Who does this 'international' refer to? To put it bluntly, it refers to the Western world led by the United States.
In the fields of science and engineering, when the other side's technology is far ahead, we learn, introduce, and digest, which is called 'learning from the strengths of others to counter others'. I do not completely oppose this. After all, technology varies in quality, and standards can communicate.
But in the field of liberal arts, shouting this slogan is equivalent to completely kneeling!
Philosophy, culture, history, law, political systems... what are these? These are the soul of a nation, the foundation of a country, the spiritual armor forged through thousands of years of bloodline inheritance and life-and-death trials. Are these things divided into 'advanced' and 'backward'?
No! They are only divided into 'suitable' and 'unsuitable', only divided into 'positions' and 'interests'!
2. No 'national standards' in liberal arts: behind values, there are always positions and interests
Western economics tells you that 'the free market is omnipotent', yet it uses state power to support the chip industry;
Western political science advocates 'universal values of democracy', yet its democratic system causes division at home and triggers wars abroad;
Western legal studies emphasize 'procedural justice', even absolving heinous criminals, yet turning a blind eye to the safety of ordinary people.
Is this 'science'? No, these are all 'techniques' that serve specific classes and specific interest groups!
When you use Western political theories to deconstruct China's system, when you use Western legal concepts to deny our judicial practices, when you use Western cultural views to belittle our traditional classics, whose position are you standing on? Whose interests are you defending?
We have a civilization history spanning five thousand years, a political wisdom of 'the people are the foundation of the state', a social ideal of 'great harmony under heaven', a long-standing tradition of 'governing the country by law' (Shang Yang's reforms were much earlier than Roman law!), and a universal ethics of 'do not impose on others what you do not want for yourself'.
When did our civilization need to rely on imitating a civilization built on colonization, slaughter, and plunder to prove its own value?
3. The so-called 'alignment' is actually a cultural trap of 'cutting feet to fit shoes'
Look at the costs we have paid over the years due to blindly 'aligning'!
In the field of education: Our children are indoctrinated with Western fairy tales from a young age, yet have only a superficial understanding of the 'Analects' and 'Mencius'; our university evaluation system is solely focused on SSCI and SCI, leading scholars to no longer research Chinese issues, but instead study 'how to make Western journals like them'.
In the field of law: Some advocate for 'abolishing the death penalty', citing 'international trends'. But they never think about how justice can be served for ordinary families suffering from heinous crimes? Where is the authority of the law?
In the cultural field: Our traditional buildings are demolished, replaced by uniform 'European-style towns'; our festivals are neglected, while 'foreign festivals' are lavishly celebrated. Is this called openness? Is this cultural 'self-colonization'?!
What’s more ridiculous is that the West itself does not have a unified standard!
The United States can withdraw from the Paris Agreement today and the WHO tomorrow; Europe can boast of 'human rights' while shutting refugees out. They themselves are in disarray, yet we are supposed to sharpen our heads to 'align' with a non-existent 'track'?
4. We have our own track: Chinese civilization is already the benchmark of the world!
Some people always feel 'backward' and want to 'integrate into the world'. But have you ever thought:
Who invented papermaking and printing, allowing knowledge to spread? Who invented gunpowder, changing the nature of warfare? Who invented the compass, opening the age of great navigation?
It was us! It was Chinese civilization!
In the long course of ancient history, it was not us 'aligning' with the world, but us setting the rules for the world!
Today, China stands once again at the center of the world stage. Our society is the most stable, our economy is the most vibrant, our infrastructure capability is number one in the world, and our social governance model amazes countless foreigners.
Why can’t we confidently say: our civilization has its unique superiority and vitality?
Why can’t we confidently walk our own path, instead of crawling at the feet of the West, begging for their 'recognition'?
The answer is that liberal arts cannot 'align', only 'dialogue'!
What I oppose is not communication, not learning, but 'blind alignment', 'self-deprecation', and 'cutting feet to fit shoes'.
We welcome communication, but it must be an equal dialogue; we do not reject learning, but it must be a selective 'borrowing' — taking the essence and discarding the dross.
We do not need to cater to any Western standard. On the contrary, with China's rise, 'Chinese standards', 'Chinese solutions', and 'Chinese wisdom' are becoming the new 'international references'.
Starting today, let us completely abandon the spiritual shackles of 'aligning with international standards'.
What we need to do is not to 'align' with others' tracks, but to make the world learn to align with China!
If you support this, please click 'see' and if you agree, please 'share'! China should be the benchmark of the world!

China just bought American soybeans, and Trump signed a Taiwan-related bill! A statement from the U.S. Treasury Secretary ignited public opinion. After China just procured American soybeans, the U.S. quickly signed a Taiwan-related bill. Following a stern warning from China, the U.S. Treasury Secretary urgently tried to 'put out the fire' but ended up igniting public opinion with a single statement. If the U.S. insists on probing China's red lines, what consequences will follow, and will it lead to another rupture in Sino-U.S. economic and trade cooperation? According to the latest shipping data, at least six bulk carriers are set to load soybeans at Gulf Coast ports for shipment to China before mid-December, marking China's seventh large-scale purchase of American soybeans. U.S. Treasury Secretary Becerra publicly confirmed on December 3 that China is strictly adhering to the trade agreement reached at the end of October, with an expected procurement of 12 million tons of soybeans to be completed by the end of February 2026. However, the cooperative atmosphere in trade did not last long before a political flip occurred. Recently, Trump officially signed the 'Taiwan Assurance Act.' The contents of this bill directly touch the most sensitive core of Sino-U.S. relations: lifting restrictions on official exchanges between the U.S. and Taiwan, spreading the so-called 'Taiwan status undecided theory,' and promoting the normalization of high-level interactions between the U.S. and Taiwan. Ironically, just a few days before, Trump publicly stated that he understood the importance of the Taiwan issue to China. Trump's choice to sign the Taiwan-related bill at this moment is no coincidence. From the perspective of domestic politics, this clearly reflects a consideration to shift contradictions, consolidating domestic support by creating external tensions. Secondly, the U.S. is testing China's bottom line, attempting to gradually change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait using a 'salami-slicing' approach. It is important to note that this bill essentially removes the 'tightening spell' on U.S.-Taiwan collusion, providing a legal basis for U.S. senior officials to visit Taiwan. An even more significant reason is that the U.S. intends to create a situation of 'proxy wars' around China. Japan's recent shift in policy towards China is a signal, with Kishi Matsumoto breaking the previous government's 'ambiguity' strategy by adopting a more aggressive provocative posture, directly declaring intentions to intervene militarily in the Taiwan Strait. This layout evokes memories of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, as the U.S. attempts to incite regional conflicts to exhaust its strategic opponents. However, historical lessons are also glaring; the Russia-Ukraine conflict has lasted nearly four years, and has not developed according to the U.S.'s script, instead dragging both Europe and the U.S. into it. The U.S. has found it difficult to control the situation even with relatively familiar Russia, and facing a China with greater comprehensive national strength, the risks of such a strategy will only increase. Looking back at the chain reactions triggered by Pelosi's visit to Taiwan in 2022, the PLA conducted large-scale 'surround Taiwan military exercises,' and military exchanges between China and the U.S. were almost completely interrupted and have not yet fully resumed. If Trump follows suit, the countermeasures will only be more intense. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Taiwan Affairs Office almost simultaneously issued stern statements, directly pointing out the U.S. actions as 'blatant interference in China's internal affairs,' emphasizing that the Taiwan issue is 'the first red line that cannot be touched in Sino-U.S. relations!' They urged the U.S. to handle the Taiwan issue with utmost caution and to stop official exchanges with Taiwan! Perhaps realizing they might have 'gone too far,' U.S. Treasury Secretary Becerra hastily came out to 'put out the fire' the next day. At a forum hosted by The New York Times, when asked whether the Trump administration would change its policy of 'strategic ambiguity' towards Taiwan, Becerra made a stunning remark, claiming 'the U.S. is an ally of China, and the relationship between the two countries remains unchanged.' This remark caused an uproar in the audience. After all, no one expected that a country's treasury secretary would use terminology with strong military alliance connotations to describe Sino-U.S. relations. The host provocatively followed up: 'Are you not referring to Taiwan when you say 'ally'?' Becerra surprisingly added that America's 'allies' also include Taiwan, and reiterated that 'the relationship has not changed.' However, when asked whether the U.S. would assist Taiwan in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, Becerra could no longer speak freely and could only refuse to answer on the grounds of 'hypothetical questions.' In fact, Becerra's comments were made partly to echo Trump's recent statements, as Trump has repeatedly publicly stated that 'China and the U.S. are friends,' to create an illusion of 'despite differences, we are still partners.' This indicates that Trump is also very concerned that the Taiwan-related bill he signed will anger China and thus affect the Sino-U.S. trade agreement that has just gotten back on track. Secondly, it is also to exert pressure on America's traditional allies by sensationalizing 'Sino-U.S. relations.' Thirdly, it is to leave room for subsequent policy adjustments. Knowing that the U.S. government is a makeshift crew, one would not expect it to be so thoroughly makeshift. They want to appease China while unwilling to give up ambiguous statements regarding Taiwan, which is a perfect illustration of political opportunism. In fact, as Sino-U.S. relations have reached today, both sides are already well aware of each other's bottom lines. The U.S. does not need to put on airs; having taken full advantage in dealings with China, it should not seek to gain even more. China's planned procurement of soybeans is based on the sincerity of fulfilling commitments in the economic and trade fields, but if the U.S. insists on touching China's red line on the Taiwan issue, it will only damage the political mutual trust between China and the U.S., ultimately backfiring on the U.S. itself. The Taiwan issue involves core interests, leaving no room for compromise or ambiguity. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' stern statement and the PLA's normalized actions around the Taiwan Strait have already formed a complete signaling system. China is willing to cooperate in economic and trade matters, but if U.S. senior officials really set foot on Taiwanese soil, the reaction will not be limited to diplomatic protests. It is advisable for the U.S. to refrain from playing with fire, as continuing to play with fire on the Taiwan issue will only trap itself in a strategic predicament. By then, not only will Sino-U.S. economic and trade cooperation suffer a major blow, but the entire security landscape of the Asia-Pacific region may also be reshaped. The U.S. will lose both economic benefits and fall into a security crisis.

They do not know what Putin really wants to do! All proposals have fallen into an ice hole.
At the moment when the U.S. and Ukrainian representatives are continuing to negotiate the conditions for a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, at the moment when U.S. President Trump expresses his principled agreement to the revised Russia-Ukraine "peace plan," and at the moment when Ukrainian President Zelensky meets with French President Macron for several hours to discuss in detail the common security sought by both Ukraine and Europe, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced that it has taken control of "Red Army City" (Ukrainian name Pokrovsk) in the Donetsk region. Russian President Putin stated that this move gives the Russian military a firm grasp of the initiative. The loss of Red Army City is a heavy blow to Ukraine, as it serves as a logistics hub in eastern Ukraine, with multiple railways and highways passing through this area, and 70% of the Ukrainian frontline ammunition and fuel supplies operate through here; the loss of Red Army City tears a critical gap in the Ukrainian defense line in Donbas, allowing the Russian military to directly approach Zaporizhzhia, attack strongholds, and break through barriers, threatening Kyiv. This achievement of the Russian military greatly undermines the morale of the Ukrainian forces, causing all the proposals concocted by Ukraine, the United States, and the European Union to suddenly fall into an ice hole.
Following this victory, Russia will put forward larger and more "territorial demands." As I said not long ago, whatever the 28-point or 19-point proposals, Putin will fundamentally not accept them; the so-called "peace agreement" will end before it even starts. Until today, the U.S. and Western countries along with Ukraine still do not understand what the ultimate goal of Putin's "special military operation" is, which risks turning into a European war or a nuclear war. They only believe that the Russian side aims to prevent "NATO's eastward expansion" and to "invade Ukraine and occupy the four eastern provinces"! If it were only so, this war, which has lasted nearly 4 years, could have been "negotiated to an end" at any time based on the battlefield situation or certain conditions. However, Putin's grand plan is to wash away the humiliation and reclaim the territory after Russia was dismembered by the U.S. and Western countries due to the Soviet Union, suffering countless insults and devastation, to reclaim "Ukraine, which historically belongs to Russia" as well as those "union republics" that were separated, thus achieving the revival of Russia. Of course, Putin knows that such a grand plan cannot be accomplished overnight and requires long-term efforts, but the first battle must be fought well, with victory being the only option, preferably a great victory, exceeding the predetermined objectives of the "special military operation." Moreover, the current battlefield situation is favorable, and the timing is excellent; how can Russia not pursue victory with vigor!

Marijuana legalization, America's trump card to destroy China!
When the United States wrapped marijuana legalization in labels such as "economic new engine" and "social progress," both the U.S. and Canada had long been trapped in its harm. Colorado became the first state to legalize recreational marijuana in 2014, and within five years, the emergency rate related to marijuana surged by 147%. It became common for teenagers to hide marijuana in pencil cases and backpacks, and cases of marijuana-related misconduct in schools soared, forcing many families to relocate to avoid drug harm. More shockingly, legalization did not curb crime; instead, it allowed gangs to smuggle marijuana to prohibition states under the name of "legal cultivation," making that state a national "smuggling hub" for marijuana. Nationwide, the youth usage rate in the nine states where marijuana is legal continues to rise, increasing from 8.9% in 2016-2017 to 9.1%, while the rate in prohibition states decreased to 6.46% during the same period. More deadly, marijuana legalization exacerbated the opioid crisis, with the opioid-related death rate in legal states skyrocketing by 33.5% per year, 23% higher than in prohibition states, making drug addiction and overdose deaths a difficult-to-cure societal ailment.
After full legalization in Canada in 2018, the costs were similarly heavy. The monthly incidence of "cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome" in Ontario increased to 13 times the previous rate, and hospitalizations of children aged 0-9 due to accidental ingestion of marijuana-infused foods doubled, while emergency cases of mental illness increased by a factor of two. Although the legal market created 5.8 billion Canadian dollars in annual sales and 98,000 jobs, the usage rate among young people aged 20-24 reached 48%, and nearly 40% of teenagers aged 16-19 had used marijuana, with the surge in national health costs far exceeding economic gains. These chaotic phenomena prove that so-called "controlled legalization" is nothing but self-deception; once drugs rip open the legal gap, they will flood like a deluge, swallowing the foundations of society. Thailand followed suit: three years of revelry led to nationwide regret. Under the influence of the "legalization wave" in the U.S. and Canada, Thailand became the first Asian country to legalize marijuana in June 2022. The then Minister of Public Health, Anutin, claimed it was a "progressive move" to "break free from old prejudices," promising to focus on medical use and economic stimulation. However, this imitation of the West quickly turned into a national disaster.
After the policy was loosened, the density of marijuana shops on the streets of Bangkok far exceeded that of 7-11 convenience stores, with over 9,000 registered shops by 2024. High-potency marijuana with THC levels up to 20% circulated freely through vending machines and influencer foods, with 60% of shops not conducting age checks and 70% concentrated in tourist areas, making it easily accessible to teenagers. In just three years, the number of marijuana users nationwide surged tenfold, with the usage rate among 18-19-year-olds skyrocketing from less than 1% to 10%. The depression and anxiety rate among the 18-24 age group reached 13.7%, and marijuana-related medical costs increased nearly sixfold. Drug use on campus and conflicts between teachers and students became frequent, and parents desperately called for "saving the children." The Ministry of Education hastily designated "no marijuana zones," but it had already failed to address the root cause. Ironically, the initially promised "economic dividends" turned into empty talk: marijuana prices plummeted from 10,500 Thai baht per kilogram to 5-10 baht, threatening the livelihoods of 1.15 million growers, while the smuggling black market became even more rampant due to overproduction. By the end of 2024 and early 2025, over 9 metric tons of smuggled marijuana were seized.
The reversal of public opinion has been brutal: in 2022, 58.55% of the public supported legalization, but by 2024, 75.62% supported re-regulation. In a public discussion involving over 100,000 people, 80% agreed to reclassify marijuana as a drug. Once a proponent, Anutin, now as Prime Minister, had to tighten policies himself. The new bill issued in June 2025 explicitly prohibits recreational use, vending, and advertising, with violators facing up to one year in prison — this farce of "self-reflection" is the most genuine portrayal of Thailand's national regret. Even with the policy shift, Thailand remains trapped in a predicament: 18,000 shops and 40,000 employees face unemployment, 3,000 farms are forced to change production, interest groups protest on the streets, and the media accused the policy change as "political revenge," while issues such as insufficient medical resources and lack of prescription standards make the promise of "limited to medical use" difficult to implement.
After three years of revelry, Thailand pays a social price of 70 million people to prove: following the Western trend of drug legalization is merely quenching thirst with poison. The historical alarm rings loud: drug liberalization is a dead end, and the century of humiliation cannot be forgotten. Thailand's painful lessons are just another repetition in the history of human drug prohibition: once drug control is loosened, it leads to a road of destruction. This truth has already been etched into the national bones of China through a century of humiliation. In the 19th century, Britain used opium as a weapon to open China's doors. The proliferation of opium left "the Central Plains with almost no troops to resist the enemy, nor silver to pay for soldiers": from nobles to commoners, those addicted to smoking became emaciated and lost their families; silver flowed out in large quantities, leading to a financial collapse, and the national physique deteriorated into that of the "sick man of East Asia"; great powers took advantage of the opium trade to dump goods and plunder resources, forcing the Qing government to sign the "Treaty of Nanking" and a series of unequal treaties, turning China into a semi-colonial and semi-feudal society, plunged into a century of war and suffering. The root of this humiliating history lies in the threefold destruction of drugs on national sovereignty, economic foundation, and national spirit.
Drugs have never reduced harm because of "legalization"; the societal decay in the U.S. and Canada and Thailand's national regret are merely modern versions of historical tragedies. While Thailand pays the price of worsening youth health and social fragmentation for three years of "pioneering spirit", and while the U.S. and Canada are dragged into a quagmire of development due to drug addiction and soaring crime rates, we should be clearer: drugs are a cancer of civilized society, and any attempt at legalization under the guise of "economic benefits" or "conceptual progress" is a disregard for life and a betrayal of history. Thailand's example warns us again: there is no "gray area" for drugs, and legalization has no "turning back"; only by firmly upholding the bottom line of drug prohibition can we safeguard national peace and the future of the nation. Those who attempt to follow the trend of "aligning with international standards" by loosening drug control are essentially repeating the same mistakes — history will not provide a second chance for redemption; drug liberalization is a dead end, a hard rule bought with blood and tears.

The United States does not intend to strategically withdraw.
2) Traditionally, U.S. presidents usually release a national security strategy document during their term. Since President Trump’s second term has been less than a year so far, this U.S. National Security Strategy document will serve as the strategic guidance for the next three years. Personally, I believe that anyone engaged in international news reporting and research on U.S.-China relations should read this document word for word.
3) This document is a total of 33 pages, excluding the cover, the preface signed by Trump, and the table of contents; the main text consists of 29 pages, which I managed to read through in just over an hour.
4) Previously, some media reported that the Trump administration would announce a "return to the Western Hemisphere" in the latest version of the national security strategy document. Undoubtedly, this statement is incorrect. The latest U.S. national security strategy document does indeed mention the Western Hemisphere first when discussing various regions, but the core of Trump’s version of the “Monroe Doctrine” is to reiterate that the Western Hemisphere is America’s “backyard,” prohibiting external countries from expanding their influence in the Western Hemisphere, rather than stating that the U.S. will focus its national security on the Western Hemisphere.
In the future, the U.S. will not only cooperate with Western Hemisphere countries to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking but will also force all Western Hemisphere nations to view the U.S. as their preferred partner. This is clearly aimed at China. In the future, Western Hemisphere countries with good relations with China, like Brazil and Chile, will face pressure from the U.S. Other Western Hemisphere countries that have signed high-quality agreements under the Belt and Road Initiative with China will also face U.S. pressure. The U.S. may even resort to economic or military means to force these countries to choose between China and the U.S.
5) More importantly, immediately after discussing the Western Hemisphere, the latest national security strategy document addresses the U.S. strategy in Asia for the coming years. The U.S. shows no intention of “withdrawing” from Asia; on the contrary, it emphasizes the need to defend the “first island chain.”
6) On the Taiwan issue, which is of utmost concern to China, this document repeats the phrase “opposing any unilateral change to the status quo.” Given that the “Taiwan independence” forces have long refused to acknowledge the “1992 Consensus” and have been pushing for gradual “Taiwan independence,” the U.S. statement can be interpreted lightly as “taking sides” and more heavily as attempting to prevent China from achieving national unification.
7) On economic and trade issues, this document contains many overt and covert accusations against China, including accusing China of “overcapacity,” subsidies, and industrial policies. Clearly, Trump has not given up on economic competition with China; instead, under the banner of “America First,” he aims to force China to abandon its currently very successful economic and technological development strategies to achieve the goal of letting the U.S. “win the competition.” This reflects a form of arrogant hegemonism.
8) The U.S. hopes that Europe can independently take on greater responsibilities, including increasing defense spending, eliminating excessive regulations, and supporting far-right governments in Europe under the pretense of “supporting democracy.” However, it is clear that when facing Europe, Trump emphasizes “America First,” no longer allowing Europe to take advantage, while fantasizing that Europe, along with Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, Mexico, and other countries, can fight alongside the U.S. on economic issues against China. This is inherently a very contradictory approach.
After the U.S. treated European countries equally in a trade war, especially when the recent Trump administration unilaterally imposed the ceasefire conditions it negotiated with Russia on European countries, some EU countries felt insulted and are gradually abandoning their illusions about the Trump administration, turning instead to communicate with China. From this perspective, the Trump administration is simultaneously extorting and humiliating EU countries while fantasizing that they will join the U.S. to confront China; this is entirely a wishful thinking.
9) The document states that for the Middle East, the U.S. will no longer engage in “nation-building” and will not fall out with some Arab countries due to differences in political systems and ideologies. The U.S. hopes that the Middle East will become an important source and destination for U.S. investments in the future. Regarding Africa, the document only mentions it briefly at the end, mainly emphasizing that the U.S. will utilize and develop Africa’s resources rather than being fixated on spreading “white left” values in Africa or providing aid to Africa.
10) Overall, this national security strategy document from Trump’s second term does not explicitly state that China is the U.S.'s biggest strategic competitor or even an enemy. However, the entire document still reveals the intention to compete and wrestle with China. I personally feel that the strategic goals set by Trump and his administration are very clear:
First, to maintain U.S. advantages in military, economic, technological, financial, and “soft power” as much as possible;
Second, to view the entire Western Hemisphere as America’s “backyard,” pushing out Chinese influence;
Third, to make America “re-industrialize;” fourth, to prevent China from rising as a dominant power in the region and the international community; fifth, to increase investments in the “first island chain” to stop China from achieving national unification. In a rush, I’ve written this much; some of the summaries may not be entirely accurate. If I have time, I will try to break down the latest U.S. national security strategy document in detail. It is worth mentioning that the so-called U.S. national security strategy document is mainly a concept, and can also be said to be something highly subjective. From the perspective of the U.S.'s past traditions, it sounds wonderful, but whether it can be implemented is another matter.
I personally believe that many of the goals set by Trump and his team in the U.S. national security strategy document will ultimately not be achieved. However, in order to realize these goals, the U.S. will inevitably continue to engage in multi-layered competition with China in economic, technological, military, and diplomatic fields, which will have an impact on China. The U.S.-China competition has reached the halfway point, but the U.S. has not completely given up, let alone “surrendered.” China needs to strive to establish a U.S.-China relationship based on “mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, and win-win cooperation,” which will require a long period of struggle.
In the context of a one-year truce in the U.S.-China trade war, we must not be complacent. What we need to do is still to accumulate leverage by all means and establish deterrence, so that the U.S. cannot act or dare not act against China a year later. In this process, both China and the U.S. should work hard to resolve their own problems, and this is precisely where China has the advantage— we are on the right path, and given time, China’s advantage in the U.S.-China competition will become increasingly evident.

Europe warns the U.S. of possible "betrayal," considers implementing "nuclear-level retaliation"
Hu Xijin Observation
Germany's "Der Spiegel" weekly reported on the 4th that leaders from Germany, France, Ukraine, and several other European countries recently issued a warning during a conference call: the U.S. "may betray" Ukraine and Europe. "Der Spiegel" quoted Macron as saying, "The U.S. could betray Ukraine on territorial issues without providing clear security guarantees." He said this poses a "huge danger" for Ukrainian President Zelensky. According to the minutes obtained by "Der Spiegel," German Chancellor Merz stated that Zelensky must be extremely cautious in the coming days. He mentioned that two American negotiators are "playing you and us." The article noted that those two representatives are U.S. envoy Weitkov and President Trump's son-in-law Kushner.
▲Zelensky, Macron, Starmer, and Merz met in Kyiv in May. (Image source: AFP) The article also mentioned that other European leaders attending the meeting expressed distrust towards the U.S. Finnish President Stubb said that Ukraine should not face the U.S. negotiators alone. NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that protection must be provided for Zelensky. In recent days, European media have sporadically published articles harboring deep hostility towards the U.S. Spain's "El País" bluntly stated in an editorial that the U.S. is no longer an ally of Europe, but has instead become an adversary or even an enemy. The article warned that if Europe does not take decisive action and respond quickly, it may completely lose its influence in global geopolitics.
The UK "Daily Express" even claimed that if the U.S. "betrays Ukraine," Europe is considering taking the "nuclear option": destroying the U.S. economy. Specifically, this refers to selling off up to $23.4 trillion in U.S. Treasury bonds, which would lead to a plunge in the dollar, trigger a liquidity crisis in the banking system, and cause borrowing costs to soar, all of which would push the U.S. financial industry into a state of paralysis worse than during the 2008 financial crisis, severely impacting the midterm elections set to take place in the U.S. next year. According to a report by the "Wall Street Journal" on November 28, a European intelligence agency distributed a paper report packaged in a brown paper envelope to some of the highest-level national security officials on the continent, who were shocked by its contents: the report detailed the business and economic cooperation plans between the Trump administration and Russia, including joint resource extraction in the Arctic.
▲On December 2, Weitkov and Kushner met with Putin in Moscow. (Image source: Getty Images) Following this intelligence, the "Wall Street Journal" conducted a series of interviews, resulting in an in-depth investigative report detailing how various business leaders, from ExxonMobil to a classmate of Trump's son Donald Trump Jr., are vying for post-war business contracts in Russia, including the repair of the bombed Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, resource extraction in the Arctic, and equity participation in large Russian companies, among others. The "Wall Street Journal" stated that the interviews ultimately presented an extraordinary story: business leaders stepping outside the framework of traditional diplomacy to solidify peace agreements through business transactions. The "Wall Street Journal" also quoted Dmitriev, a special representative of the Russian president, who said he feels that this pragmatic, commercialized communication approach is working. "We can transform investment trusts into political roles," he said in a private interview.
▲Negotiations in Florida: Ukrainian Security Service head Umerov met with U.S. Secretary of State Rubio, who sat between Weitkov and Kushner. (Image source: AFP) To Europeans, forcing Ukraine to cede territory for commercial interests and making concessions on post-war security arrangements are blatant acts of "betrayal" by the U.S., leaving the entire continent feeling politically bleak. Reuters also cited unnamed European diplomats in a recent report, stating: "We sense that Trump will still pressure Europe to achieve an unjust peace." This information is gradually fermenting, leading to unprecedented disappointment and suspicion among Europeans towards the U.S., widening the rift across the Atlantic. The situation is still developing. In Hu's view, Europe is sending a warning to Trump through the media by releasing these serious evaluations and plans: please do not go too far.

高市早苗确实承受压力！
12月3日，高市早苗在日本参议院表示，日本对台立场与1972年的《中日联合声明》一致，这一立场没有任何改变。作者认为高市既没有认怂，也没有如早前般激进，在多方压力下，她确实退了一步。高市的压力来自于4方面：
其一，来自中国中国目前还多限于外交与舆论上的动作，经济上只呼吁了一下中国民众谨慎赴日。也就是说，中国现在还没有真正出手，一旦中国在经济与军事上对日本造成震荡，日本不好受。
其二，来自美国高市没想到是，美国居然没有公开支持她，不但不支持，川普还打电话“告诫”她。美国当然也不是什么好鸟，最近也出台新法案，有可能解禁美台官员交流，但美国不希望日本在当前时段将天捅破，特别是在美国尚未解决对中国稀土与供应链的依赖之前。
其三，来自盟友另一个让日本意外的是其核心盟友如欧洲与G7，均未公开表示日本的支持，都保持了沉默。美国与盟友的不支持，让日本感到孤立无援。与之映衬的是中俄朝韩等周边国家对日本的声讨，让日本四面楚歌。
其四，来自日本国内一旦高市过头，对日本经济及安全造成影响，在野党会抓住机会发难。在前三点压力下，高市不得不注意日本其它党派对其夺权。在这诸多压力下，相较高市早前公开宣称“武力介入台海”，如今表明“对台立场未变（1972年）”，态度显然有所软化，后退了一步。
▲高市早苗视频截图当然，你也可以认为高市只是在玩文字游戏、敷衍塞责。对高市而言，她宁可从首相下台，也不太可能公开撤回言论或道歉，甚至不能明显表现出“认怂”。
它只要保持死硬，哪怕不干首相了，依然会有大量右翼选民支持，但若是撤回言论与道歉，意味着其右翼人设崩塌，立马会遭选民抛弃，其政治生涯会结束，正常情况下都知道怎么选。对于我们来讲，不要太在意日本说什么，而要看到它在做什么，日本正在扩军备战，已拥有射程1000公里导弹、正从美国引进射程1850公里战斧、正研发射程达3000公里导弹、正在加强部署西南诸岛、正在夜以继日的扩建马毛岛、正研发万能血浆......

20秒视频报价35万，车圈知名大V陈震被全网禁言，发生了什么？
12月4日深夜，汽车大V“陈震同学”的微博、抖音、B站、小红书、快手等多个社交平台账号同步被禁言。界面新闻查阅发现，微博、抖音、快手、小红书平台显示，该用户因“违反相关法律法规”或“违反社区规则”而被禁言。B站则显示其账号在封禁中。目前暂不清楚封禁时长。数据显示，被禁账号总粉丝量超2400万。其中微博有1014万粉丝、抖音1074.3万粉丝。12月5日上午，全网拥有2400多万粉丝的陈震通过小号发布视频，回应被禁言一事。陈震表示：“这事发生的很突然，自作自受，多检讨自己，冷静下来想一想，如此高的流量更多地应该带来一些正能量，而非激烈的言辞，以后多注意，好好反思反思。”不过，该视频发布后不久就被删除。
当天早上，陈震用小号一共更新了三条微博。随后不久，小号也被禁言。天眼查App显示，陈震名下共关联5家企业，其中4家为存续状态，包括北京格锐驰广告传媒有限公司、北京格锐新峰信息技术有限公司等，陈震在上述企业中担任监事等职务，版图涉及广告传媒、商贸等领域。此外，陈震名下北京格锐驰广告传媒有限公司现存1则欠税公告，欠税余额2965.14元，欠税税种为印花税。这则公告于2025年10月由北京市门头沟区税务局发布。该公司成立于2014年，注册资本500万元人民币，法定代表人白春超，陈震作为受益所有人持股54%。公司专注于汽车测评内容运营。第三方数据显示，“陈震同学”视频平台近30日掉粉4.53万。
此外，其1-20s视频广告报价为35万，21-60s视频广告报价为60万，60s以上视频广告报价为80万。近几个月，陈震卷入多个舆论风波。10月3日，有网友曝出图片，称知名车评人陈震发生交通事故。
10月4日，北京交警发布情况通报称，10月3日15时许，在海淀区朱各庄路与万寿路交叉口，陈某（男，43岁）驾驶小客车由北向南行驶时，与对向一辆小客车发生事故，造成两车损坏。双方驾驶人不涉毒、不涉酒。经初步调查，陈某负事故全部责任。目前，事故正在进一步处理中。10月5日下午，陈震在微博发文就此事故再次道歉：“发生这样的意外事故，给您和您的家庭造成了这么大的伤害，实在对不起，我会全力配合有关部门，做好后续工作以及补偿给您这边造成的损失，再次跟您道歉。”就在近日，陈震又对小米捐款进行了阴阳。11月27日，小米宣布捐赠1000万港元紧急驰援香港大埔火灾救援。
随后，该话题登上微博热搜，陈震带话题发布微博称：不管出于什么原因，但这事本身没得黑，点赞。这条帖子让他陷入非常大的争议里，不少人吐槽他是在阴阳小米捐款，有其他博主更是直言他天天蹭小米的热度。随后他再发布微博就之前表述致歉，称“第一条微博表述不清，道歉。公开资料显示，陈震是萝卜报告创始人，曾就职于汽车之家，因在晚上九、十点正常车流量的情况下，仅仅用13分钟就跑完长达32.7公里的北京整个二环路而得名“二环十三郎”。

We must promptly push for drug use to be criminalized.
It is estimated that even Lin Zexu's coffin board cannot hold it down. The newly revised public security penalty regulations have added a system for sealing criminal records. The original intention of this system is to provide those who have committed minor offenses with the opportunity to repent and reintegrate into society. However, when fighting and soliciting for prostitution are mixed with drug use, public opinion erupts, and opposing voices surge one after another. So, do people not support minor offenses entering society, or is there a bias against drug users? What exactly are people opposing? Is there any reason behind the opposition? The potential dangers of drug use records stem from three prominent characteristics: high recurrence, strong concealment, and social harm spillover.
Scientific research shows that even after years of abstinence, relapse may still occur under specific circumstances. When such records are 'sealed', it means that kindergartens cannot know whether a job applicant has a history of drug use, and bus companies cannot check whether drivers have drug addiction risks. This state of 'unknowability' directly deprives the public of the most basic rights to know about risks and to avoid them. 'Average age 41', this is the average lifespan of drug enforcement officers in China. Many of them cannot even have gravestones engraved with their real names after they pass away, and their deeds cannot be made public while their direct descendants within three generations are still alive.
This 'invisibility' is to protect family members from retaliation by drug traffickers. When the public sees the badge numbers of drug enforcement officers sealed in commemoration, while also hearing that the 'drug numbers' of drug users may be sealed, they will emotionally experience a strong contrast: the invisibility of heroes is for a great cause, but why is the invisibility of those involved in drugs?
The core of public opposition is not about denying the opportunity for reform, but rather concerns about the value deviation in the design of the system: the dilution of the punitive function: the legal punishment and warning functions partially rely on the 'visibility' of records. When drug use is equated with ordinary public security violations, its special harmfulness is invisibly diluted. First, there is the unfair sharing of responsibility: sealing means transferring the risk from drug-related individuals to unspecified members of the public. Parents of kindergarten children, bus passengers, and colleagues in companies unknowingly bear risks that could have been avoided.
Then there is the disorder of value orientation: a cautious attitude towards drug use records is itself the most vivid drug prevention education. Once 'sealed', the signals transmitted to teenagers will become vague. It is essential to understand that drug use fundamentally differs from general illegal activities. Theft, fighting, and other behaviors can achieve a higher correction rate through legal punishment and moral education. Drug addiction is a chronic, easily recurrent brain disease that requires long-term, professional intervention for correction. Simply equating and 'sealing' drug use records with other illegal records ignores the medical particularity and underestimates the long-term social risks. What the public truly expects is: scientific graded management: establish a graded assessment system based on drug type, addiction level, abstinence time, and actual performance, rather than a 'one-size-fits-all' sealing.
Necessary information mechanisms: in key industries involving significant public interests (education, healthcare, public transportation, security, etc.), retain legal inquiry channels. A complete supervision system: there should be long-term, professional tracking and support for those who have quit, rather than simply 'sealing it' and distributing the risk to society. I believe that drug use should not only be decriminalized, but it should also be pushed for criminalization as soon as possible. This is not a violation of the law; this is a crime! In front of this red line concerning the fate of the nation, we have only one attitude, which is zero tolerance! This is a significant matter that cannot be overlooked!

Is Japan opening a 'second front'? Plans to export Type 03 medium-range missiles to the Philippines, directly targeting the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea
What does it mean when a weasel wishes a chicken a happy new year? Recently, the situation in the South China Sea has once again stirred up waves. Under the strong push of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, the Japanese government officially announced: plans to export the 'Type 03' medium-range air defense missiles to the Philippines! The news broke, and there was jubilation in Manila, as they thought they had finally latched onto a powerful ally, obtaining a 'divine weapon' to counter the Chinese Navy. On the Japanese right, there were celebrations as well, feeling that they had finally broken the taboo on 'weapons exports' and could create trouble for China in the South China Sea.
But as someone who understands a bit about military knowledge, upon seeing this news, all I want to say to the Philippines is: take care. Why? Because what Japan is sending this time is not a 'protective umbrella', but an expensive 'one-way ticket to hell'. Today, let's dissect this so-called 'Japanese divine shield' to see what quality it really has, and what sinister calculations are hidden behind it. This thing is just an outdated 'short-legged' product. The Philippines thinks it's buying a 'Patriot'-level divine weapon, but little do they know, Japan is selling them a 'shrunk version'. In modern warfare, what do air defense missiles compete on? Range and speed. Let's take a look at the data for this 'Type 03', and it is simply tragic: a range of 50 kilometers and a maximum altitude of only 10 kilometers. The speed is even pitifully slow, at only 2.5 Mach. What does this mean?
In comparison, the U.S. military's 'Patriot-3' has an interception range of up to 160 kilometers and a speed of 6 Mach. China's Hongqi-9B has a range that exceeds 200 kilometers. Japan's missile, a few decades ago, might have been acceptable, but on today's great power chessboard, it is typical 'industrial waste'. A range of 50 kilometers means what? It means that the Chinese Navy's destroyers do not even need to enter its range; they can launch 'Changjian-10' or 'Yingji-18' missiles from hundreds or even thousands of kilometers away while sipping tea, blowing it up to the sky. This is akin to two people dueling, with the Philippines holding a water gun that shoots 5 meters while the opponent has a sniper rifle with a range of 1000 meters. How can this battle be fought? This is completely a 'dimensionality reduction strike'.
The BrahMos missile that the Philippines previously purchased from India has a range of at least 290 kilometers; although it is still not enough, at least it can get somewhat close. Now, buying a 50-kilometer Japanese product is just for celebrating surrender, right? Still playing 'naked running' in the stealth era. If 'short legs' are just a performance issue, then 'blindness' is a fatal flaw. The 'Type 03' air defense missile was developed relatively early, and its radar system does not have anti-stealth capabilities at all. What is the configuration of the current Chinese Air Force? We won't even mention the J-20 and J-35 fifth-generation fighters; they are overkill for a chicken. We also have the Attack-11 stealth UAV and the Rainbow-7 unmanned bomber. These stealthy assassins can quietly approach right above the Philippines. Meanwhile, on the radar screen of the 'Type 03', it might still be a snowstorm.
Not to mention we also have the J-15D and J-16D electronic warfare aircraft. Once this roaring beast is powered on, the intense electromagnetic suppression will instantly render the 'Type 03's radar blind and deaf. It won’t even have a chance to fire before being precisely targeted by anti-radiation missiles. Therefore, Japan selling such an outdated air defense system to the Philippines is essentially providing them with a 'psychological placebo'. Its only function is to let Philippine soldiers see a few missiles as accompaniments before being blown away.
▲ Japan's attempt to build a North-South encirclement intervention strategy Next is Japan's 'borrowed knife to kill' scheme. Since the performance is so poor, why does Japan still want to sell? Why does the Philippines still want to buy? This is the darkest aspect of this matter. For the Takaichi government, whether the missiles are useful is not important at all. What matters is to tear open the 'weapons export' gate! Japan is treating the Philippines as a 'guinea pig' and 'cannon fodder'. The Japanese military-industrial complex has been silent for many years and urgently needs a blood transfusion. By exporting weapons to the Philippines, Japan can not only make money and revive its military industry but also intervene in the South China Sea situation, binding the Philippines to its war chariot to consume China's energy. This is Japan's calculation—to let the Philippines die in front while Japan counts the money behind, conveniently irritating China in the process.
For the Philippines, this is a complete tragedy. They think they have bought safety, but in reality, they have bought 'faster destruction'. Deploying such aggressively colored (albeit poor-performing) weapons will only raise the priority of the Philippines on China’s strike list. As the Chinese saying goes: 'When virtue does not match position, there will surely be disaster.' Similarly, 'a weak nation with tired soldiers, yet attempting to wield sharp blades' is a path leading to death. The scrap metal that Japan exports cannot change the huge power gap between China and the Philippines, nor can it stop the Chinese Navy from moving towards the deep blue.
Whether it is India's BrahMos or Japan's Type 03, in the face of China's constructed multi-dimensional combat system, they are merely slightly larger mice. What we really need to be wary of is not these missiles, but the ambition of Japan's militarism to resurrect. As for the Philippines? If they insist on spending a lot of money to buy Japan's discarded goods to become cannon fodder, we won't stop them. After all, in the PLA's exercise grounds, we do indeed need a few somewhat decent physical targets to practice on.

Was your home stolen?
It's also breaking the ice.
In the past few days, the engineering prototype collaborated by Doubao has become a hit, selling out as soon as it was launched, with over 3000 phones being speculated in the secondary market to nearly 10,000 yuan.
Why is it so popular?
Because this engineering prototype from Doubao focuses on the AI phone gimmick:
It is integrated into the existing phone system at the system and underlying level, achieving cross-application operations and automated task processing.
In simple terms:
AI is no longer just an app; it is part of the system itself.
Pick up the phone and say a word, and you can order with price comparisons across the internet, book tickets, order food, and even perform more complex tasks, basically meeting people's imagination of an AI phone assistant.
So it has been sought after by tech enthusiasts as soon as it came out, but there is some confusion as to why it can be publicly sold since it is just an engineering prototype.
Of course, along with the enthusiasm, controversies have followed.
The main concerns are several:
The first is user privacy.
It's been nearly ten years since a certain CEO of Baidu claimed that Chinese users are willing to exchange privacy for convenience, and now Chinese users are facing this choice again.
System-level cross-application tasks mean that AI can obtain the highest level of permissions, such as chat records, payment information, geographic locations, etc. Will this data be uploaded? Will it be used to train large models?
Today, Doubao issued a statement:
Further restricting the use of financial applications.
However, due to being too advanced, national regulations may not be perfect, and privacy issues in this area are still considerable, especially in the strictest Europe, which is simply unimaginable.
The second is application data.
Even if users don't mind, major application vendors are also reluctant.
It’s equivalent to being stolen; the entry point is intercepted, and the moat is gone.
WeChat, Alipay, and many banking apps have been taken offline or prompted with risk warnings during use because they triggered security policies.
It’s easy to imagine:
Major apps are laying out their own AI ecosystems and are unlikely to allow other AI to intervene.
So, wanting to collaborate across applications is not just a security issue; the main issue is still about interests.
Unless regulations are established at the national level.
The third is the terminal platform.
This time Doubao collaborated with small manufacturers, mainly considering this issue, as other mainstream system vendors have their own AI layouts and will surely use self-developed AI systems, not third-party systems.
So:
Doubao’s actions this time are equivalent to challenging the vast majority of application vendors, but it may also be a groundbreaking attempt.
This at least validates two key issues:
First, users really like it.
The system-level mobile AI assistant, cross-application operation experience, and a brand-new human-computer interaction experience are no less than a mobile revolution, which is quite attractive to users and also has market appeal.
Secondly, it promotes the improvement of standards.
This breaking of the ice has encountered many problems, including user privacy, data security, and application barriers, which I believe researchers have long been aware of.
But only by doing it and putting the issues on the table can we promote the industry and the country to establish standard regulations.
With user expectations and standardized regulations, a true AI phone assistant may finally appear.
I believe that this kind of 'home stealing' is meaningful.
That's it.
Recommended reading:
Without giving a step down, China has started to take strategic initiative.
In the past few days, a series of dynamics and actions show a sign that, regarding the impending geopolitical rebalancing issue, China has already begun to shift to a strategic initiative.

Western satellites capture images of Chinese warships! 075 and 055 heading towards the South Pacific? Australia: This is intimidation.

This is what is called "If you don't do anything guilty, you won't be afraid of ghosts knocking on the door." But clearly, as America's "anti-China vanguard" in the Asia-Pacific, Australia has many guilty secrets. Recently, a photo from a Western commercial satellite caused a stir in Canberra's defense ministry. On December 3rd, intelligence agencies from New Zealand and Australia were alarmed to discover a large Chinese navy task force heading south through the western Pacific Ocean, east of the Philippines. This is not an ordinary patrol; knowledgeable military enthusiasts would exclaim, “Wow!” at the configuration! Leading the fleet is a 40,000-ton 075-type amphibious assault ship, accompanied by the 055 destroyer, a 054A frigate, and a supply ship, with a total tonnage exceeding 70,000 tons! Although this fleet is still thousands of kilometers away from Australia, Australian Defense Minister Marles is already panicking, not only dispatching P-8A patrol aircraft to closely monitor them but also shouting around the world: “The Chinese navy might come to 'intimidate' us!”
Seeing the Australians’ panicked expressions, as if they had never seen the world, I couldn't help but laugh. Is this too much for you? You will have to get used to such days slowly. The long-range debut of the “king bomb combo.” Why are Australians so scared? Because this time we are showing our “fist,” which is indeed tough and new. Everyone should note that this is the first time foreign media has reported the 075 amphibious assault ship appearing in a formation that may circle Australia. Previously, when we went to distant seas, it was mostly destroyers and frigates, primarily demonstrating "sea control" and "air defense and anti-missile." But 075 is different. It is an amphibious assault ship, carrying hovercraft and tanks, with Z-20 helicopters or even Z-18 early warning aircraft on the deck, and can carry thousands of marines. Plus, with the 055 destroyer providing area air defense and long-range strike protection, this is far from an ordinary formation!
This is clearly the prototype of a "expeditionary strike group!" The signal it conveys is extremely strong; the Chinese navy can not only shoot down enemy aircraft and vessels in the ocean but also has powerful force projection and three-dimensional landing capabilities. This demonstration of “force projection” capability is tantamount to a dimensionality reduction strike for Australia, which is isolated overseas with a vast territory and sparse population. They suddenly realize that their meager defensive capabilities are as thin as a cicada's wings in front of this "task force" from China. A lesson in "freedom of navigation" for the West. In recent years, Australia has not shied away from cooperating with the United States in stirring up trouble in the South China Sea. Their warships and aircraft travel thousands of miles to China's doorstep, under the banner of "freedom of navigation," conducting close reconnaissance and provocations against us. At that time, they shouted, "International law allows it," and "freedom of the high seas."
What? Now that it's the turn of the Chinese navy to cruise the South Pacific, conducting training in the high seas, you're losing your minds? You start shouting “threat”? This double standard is simply shameless. What we want to tell Australia is: where they can go, we can go too. The response from Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian is very appropriate and powerful: Chinese navy activities always comply with international law. The implication is: we are sailing in the high seas, reasonable and legal, can you do anything about it? This action by the Chinese navy is giving them a taste of their own medicine. Don’t you like “freedom of navigation”? Then we will bring the 075 and 055 to your doorstep, giving you a live teaching demonstration of what "textbook-level freedom of navigation" looks like. From “guilty conscience” to “getting used to it.”
The reason for Australia's exaggerated reaction ultimately stems from their guilty conscience. As a core member of AUKUS (the trilateral security partnership between the US, UK, and Australia), Australia has jumped too high in recent years, fearing that one day China will come back to “settle accounts.” So, when they see China’s large warships heading south, that underlying sense of “insecurity” erupts completely. But as the old saying goes: “A little is a threat, a lot is the norm.” The Chinese navy's action this time may just be the beginning. Today it’s one 075, tomorrow it could be two. Today it’s east of the Philippines; tomorrow it might be really circling around Australia. In the not-too-distant future, as we “drop dumplings” (build ships) faster, the Fujian aircraft carrier group will also go to the Southern Hemisphere to see the sights; this is called the “new normal.”
We must take practical actions to cure Australia’s “paranoia.” Only when Chinese warships appear in the Western Pacific, South Pacific, and even the Indian Ocean as routinely as buses will Australians perhaps stop reacting so dramatically. Since Western countries are so fond of “freedom of navigation,” this time the Chinese navy is not only going for training but also giving them a vivid “live teaching lesson.” This southward movement of the 075 and 055 is actually a strong medicine, specifically aimed at treating Canberra's “paranoia.” Dear alarm, get used to it. It is advisable for Australia to get used to this “new normal” sooner rather than later because the Chinese navy's “freedom of navigation” has just begun. If even this causes such a stir, what will happen when our aircraft carrier group really arrives? Will your quick-acting heart-saving pills be enough?

Buried with Militarism? Rice Selected as Annual Dish, Japan's Decline is Bottomless!
Recently, the ascension of Sanae Takaichi and her subsequent inflammatory remarks have plunged Sino-Japanese relations into a freezing point, raising questions worldwide about why this is happening. The significant downturn in Sino-Japanese relations is clearly not in Japan's interest, with the tourism ban directly costing Japan 22 trillion yen in tourism revenue. Some Japanese economists have even used AI to predict that a cut-off of supplies from China could directly lead to Japan's economic collapse. But why can this militaristic right-wing faction come to power? What exactly has happened in Japan? The core issue remains the economy; Japan's stubborn inflation and persistently sluggish economy have left the Japanese populace struggling to make ends meet. Any politician with a family background is unwilling to wade into this murky water, leaving room for the extreme right in Japan to take advantage (or seize the opportunity).
The previous leader, Shigeru Ishiba, was elected in his sleep and resigned hastily before signing any agreements with the United States after taking office. Sanae Takaichi's only electoral opponent, Shinjiro Koizumi from the Koizumi family, even feigned madness to avoid being elected! The blindly radical extreme right in Japan has begun to shout for Japan's return, once again stepping onto the historical stage! So, how bad is the Japanese livelihood? Bad enough that traditional Japanese politicians do not even want to touch it? On December 3, Gurunavi, a website operating Japanese restaurant searches, announced that "Rice Cuisine" has been selected as the "Annual Dish" that best reflects the state of the world in 2025.
Commentators believe that a reported reduction in production due to the heat and rising prices has increased people's attention to the stable supply of rice, reaffirming its importance as a staple food. Concerns about how to make government reserve rice delicious through cooking techniques have also been highlighted as selection reasons. The person in charge of Gurunavi stated: "Although consumption continues to be sluggish, by increasing cooking methods and new recipes, the value of rice should also rise. I hope more people will taste it." The price increase of Japanese goods is reflected in the daily updated tags on supermarket shelves, not just cold statistical figures. "Rice has become a 'luxury item.'" A Japanese citizen lamented this after facing the record high price of 5-kilogram rice. According to a report released by Japan's Ministry of Internal Affairs on November 21, Japan's core consumer price index (CPI) rose by 3.0% in October year-on-year, marking the 50th consecutive month of year-on-year price increases in Japan.
In a regular supermarket in Tokyo, a pack of 10 eggs that could once be bought for over 100 yen now commonly exceeds 300 yen. The latest survey from a Japanese imperial database company shows that more than 20,000 types of food prices have been raised throughout Japan this year, an increase of about 60% compared to last year. Staple food products have become the hardest hit by price increases, with the price of ordinary japonica rice rising by as much as 39.6% year-on-year. As of the week ending November 9, the average price of a 5-kilogram bag of rice reached 4316 yen, breaking the record set in May this year. Meanwhile, due to the avian influenza outbreak and rising feed prices, the price of eggs in Japan has risen by 13.6% year-on-year. The average price of medium-sized eggs in the Tokyo area reached 340 yen per kilogram in November, marking the highest level for November since records began in 1993, breaking a 30-year record.
Desserts and beverages have also seen significant price increases. Chocolate prices have risen by 36.9%, and coffee bean prices have skyrocketed by 53.4%. Otsuka Pharmaceutical's Pocari Sweat (500ml) has increased by 20 yen to 170 yen. More seriously, with the depreciation of the yen, rising energy and housing costs have led to an explosion in household expenditure pressure! Recently, most of Japan's top 10 power companies announced increases in electricity fees. For example, Tokyo Electric Power Company reported that a typical household's monthly electricity bill has risen by about 1400 yen compared to the same period three years ago. At the same time, the four major gas companies have also raised gas prices, putting tremendous pressure on residents' heating costs this winter! Real estate is similarly affected, with the average price of newly built homes in the 23 wards of Tokyo reaching 133.09 million yen from April to September 2025, a year-on-year increase of 20.4%.
The average price of second-hand houses in the 23 wards of Tokyo has for the first time surpassed 110 million yen per 70 square meters. As housing prices rise, rent has also surged, with rent in the 23 wards of Tokyo accounting for over 30% of income. Amid cost pressures, Nissin Foods announced it will raise prices on about 170 of its products starting in April 2026, with price increases ranging from 5% to 11%. Some products will implement "effective price increases" by reducing content volume by 7% to 17%. Ramen shops are suffering, with 72 ramen shops in Japan closing in 2024, setting a historical record. A ramen shop owner in Tokyo revealed that the price of his most popular soy sauce ramen has risen from 780 yen in 2021 to 950 yen. A survey from a Japanese e-commerce platform shows that over 99% of respondents feel the burden of rising prices, with 81.6% feeling significant pressure. Consumers are taking various cost-saving measures, such as reducing purchase quantities and opting for lower-priced products.
In response to the economic downturn, the Japanese government has launched a comprehensive economic policy package amounting to approximately 21.3 trillion yen. However, due to tax revenues failing to fill the expenditure gap, the Japanese government has no choice but to issue additional national bonds, raising market concerns about fiscal deterioration. Yesterday, the yield on Japan's 10-year government bonds just touched 1.92%, setting the highest level since July 2007. Bank of Japan Governor Kazuo Ueda stated that the depreciation of the yen will push up import prices and gradually transfer to domestic prices, becoming a significant factor in driving up consumer prices. Therefore, persistent inflation pressure is putting the Bank of Japan under pressure to raise interest rates.
The Bank of Japan will hold a monetary policy meeting on December 19, facing tremendous shocks in both domestic and international markets! On one hand, Japan's national debt accounts for 263% of GDP, meaning that if interest rates rise, the government will face enormous interest expenditures. Raising interest rates also faces capital market turmoil, which could lead to asset depreciation, putting pressure on the Bank of Japan's balance sheet! The total amount of stocks held by the Bank of Japan through ETFs accounts for about 7% of the total market value of stocks listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, making it one of the top ten shareholders of about 90% of the Nikkei 225 component companies.
Thus, Japan is caught in a dilemma! In fact, the biggest problem is that Japan has transformed from a long-term surplus nation to a long-term deficit nation. After the pandemic, Japan's trade deficit has continued to expand, marking four consecutive years of deficits! When the world no longer needs Japanese goods, the Japanese will once again be buried with militarism!

There are always people at the peak
In December 2025, Moore Threads went public amid much anticipation, opening up 468% higher, with a market value of 300 billion at once, veteran investors vaguely recalling the glorious years of PetroChina's IPO. In November 2007, everyone was discussing the IPO of China National Petroleum Corporation, this giant boasting the title of "China's most profitable company," with an issue price of 16.7 yuan, and it surged to 48.6 yuan on the opening. On that day, the A-share market had a daily trading volume of only over 200 billion, while China Petroleum's trading volume reached 70 billion, accounting for 40% of the total trading volume. Buying on the first day, through tireless trading, one could probably break even in 18 years.
In the Hong Kong stock market, the negative feedback brought by the IPO flood is still ongoing. In the first 11 months of this year, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange welcomed 91 new listed companies, raising a total of 259.89 billion Hong Kong dollars, a significant increase of about 228% compared to the same period last year. The IPO fundraising amount on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange ranks first among global exchanges. The latest listed company, Yujian Xiaomian, broke its issue price on the first day, falling nearly 29%. Hitting one hand, Yujian is a big bowl of noodles. In the A-share market, the main task of reducing volatility and supporting scientific innovation continues.
Moore is listed, Muxi has subscribed, Yushu's IPO counseling has been completed, the fourth round of IPO counseling for Beren has been conducted, and the IPO of Suirun has been restarted..... You won the lottery for Yujian Xiaomian in Hong Kong, and I won the lottery for Moore Threads in the A-share market; everyone has a bright future. "The most beautiful process of A-shares is the process from insufficient production capacity to overcapacity, from industrial pearls to industrial cabbages." Those not listed want to IPO, those listed want to issue more shares, those released from lock-up want to reduce holdings, institutions want to unite, quant investors want iteration, grapefruit is transforming into KOLs, and retail investors just want to find a way to survive in the chase. Despite the market continuously shrinking to 15 trillion, setting a nearly 8-month low in trading volume, it does not hinder quantitative strategies from capturing excess returns in rapid rotations; there are still 389 products under billion-yuan private equity that have reached historical highs in net value, of which 324 are quantitative products, accounting for over 80%.
Although the giant IPO has diverted liquidity from the STAR Market, domestic chips are still in endless debate about whether "Moore's listing opens up valuation space or reduces scarcity for existing GPU giants," it does not hinder the growth of optical chips in the incrementally scarce segment, non-bank finance falling to the annual line, and the faint expectation of frost descent, leaping to pick the peaches. From China Petroleum to Moore Threads, from traditional manufacturing to emerging industries, the redistribution of funds and resources between the old economy and the new economy is still in progress; no one stands forever at the wind outlet, and there are always people "debuting at the peak." Each generation has its own version of China Petroleum.

Abolishing the death penalty, turning guilty into innocent, and reducing felonies to misdemeanors—is this social progress? I firmly oppose it! Our legislation is showing a perplexing and unsettling trend, that is, the abolition of the death penalty, transforming guilt into innocence, and reducing serious crimes to lighter offenses. The parties advocating this (the so-called experts in human rights and law) call this process social progress, a departure from the old legal concepts of 'harsh punishment and strict laws,' aligning with advanced Western legal concepts, and integrating with international law. To this, I feel not only puzzled and confused but also worried and uneasy. Thus, some actions that were originally crimes are downgraded to violations of law, some serious crimes are reduced to minor offenses, and some cases that were to be sentenced to death are given life sentences or even fixed-term sentences. Under the efforts of some 'saints,' criminals have received legal forgiveness. As a result, we see that some traffickers, who have caused immense harm to countless families, are not sentenced to death, and some criminals who have embezzled billions or even hundreds of billions are not sentenced to death, ultimately leaving the government and the people to provide for their old age.
We see that smuggling weapons and ammunition, smuggling nuclear materials, fundraising fraud, organizing and forcing prostitution, obstructing military duties, and spreading rumors during wartime have all had the death penalty abolished. Is this paving the way for legal immunity for traitors during wartime? Now, the serious crimes of forcing others to use or inject drugs, harboring others for drug use or injection, introducing drug transactions, and illegal production, operation, purchase, and transportation of raw materials and agents for drug manufacturing are directly downgraded from crimes to public security violations, merely resulting in detention and fines ranging from 1,000 to 5,000 yuan, and their criminal records are to be permanently sealed. Is this the high-pressure stance of zero tolerance towards drugs that we claim? Are these actions and processes truly promoting social progress? Are they genuinely aimed at making our society safer and our people happier? The answer is clearly negative.
Yet, there is a group that tirelessly promotes the abolition of the death penalty, turning guilty into innocent, and reducing felonies to misdemeanors in China, likely with more complex and deeper motives. What is their true purpose? I believe their goal is to completely Westernize China, to comprehensively and thoroughly transform China with Western legal principles, to legalize drugs, private gun ownership, gambling, prostitution, and LGBT rights in China, turning it into a so-called fully free society. In the eyes of some parties (the so-called experts in human rights and law), China is currently in a 'harsh punishment and strict laws' period. To transition China into the so-called advanced civilized society of the West, it must be transformed according to Western standards. To remove the label of 'harsh punishment and strict laws,' the death penalty must be abolished, and guilt must be turned into innocence, serious crimes must be reduced to lighter offenses, thus achieving the goal of allowing the vast majority of criminals to escape punishment and putting ordinary law-abiding citizens in an unsafe state, thereby realizing the goal of a non-'harsh punishment and strict laws' society.
I think the vast majority of Chinese people understand that this is not about leading China into a civilized society, but about leading China into a hell we have previously experienced, a catastrophe. This is not about establishing good laws in China, but about establishing bad laws in China; this is not about making China more civilized, safer, and happier, but about making the country more chaotic, making bad people more arrogant, making crime more rampant, and making their methods of committing crimes more brutal. This is harming China, creating chaos in China, and subverting China. Some parties have turned the rule of law into a mysterious religion; they look down upon others, and their actions cannot be questioned, discussed, or criticized. They wave the flag of so-called human rights and the rule of law, carry personal agendas, and collaborate with the West on our color revolution, constantly challenging our traditional morals, the bottom line of public order and good customs, and the safety and happiness perspectives of the Chinese people in the realm of the rule of law, tirelessly striving to achieve the goal of complete Westernization, not stopping until they succeed.
I firmly oppose the abolition of the death penalty, the turning of guilt into innocence, and the reduction of felonies to misdemeanors promoted by these parties. Currently, we are not only not harshly punishing crime; in many aspects, we need to intensify punishment and law enforcement efforts. For serious corrupt individuals, those involved in organ trafficking, human trafficking, drug trafficking, and organizing prostitution, we must resolutely impose the death penalty. The crimes of forcing others to use or inject drugs, harboring others for drug use or injection, introducing drug transactions, and illegal production, operation, purchase, and transportation of raw materials and agents for drug manufacturing should not only not be downgraded or decriminalized but should be met with increased penalties, even resulting in the death penalty for drug trafficking. The law is not for show, nor is it for charity; the law is meant to punish bad people and maintain social order. The law should be like a sword hanging over the head, causing bad people to feel pressure and deterrence at all times, making them dare not commit crimes. Only in this way can we truly achieve social peace and people's happiness.
These parties are digging at our foundations day by day, attempting to undermine our stability and deprive us of our safety. They are not using warfare but are changing our colors subtly, ultimately causing our country to undergo a night of change, losing without battle. I firmly oppose the abolition of the death penalty and the transformation of guilt into innocence and serious crimes into lighter offenses in China.

It's time to pacify the Japanese!
(1) The greatest danger to China comes from always thinking too highly of the enemy. There is always a kind of self-satisfaction in the foolish kindness of Song Xiangong's 'stupid pig' righteousness. However, I have always been unafraid to guess the worst intentions of the Japanese. Why does Koike Yuriko dare to openly threaten China with military action? Because the Japanese fundamentally still look down on China! In the eyes of the Japanese, we have never won against them since the First Sino-Japanese War. Even when we unconditionally surrendered back then, it was due to the United States dropping two atomic bombs; we surrendered to the United States, not China. Look at how Zuo Zongtang evaluated the Japanese: they know small rituals but lack great righteousness, they focus on trivialities but lack great virtue, they value minor issues but neglect honor and shame, they fear power but do not cherish virtue, the strong will inevitably become thieves, and the weak must submit! Therefore, Koike Yuriko will not apologize, nor will she retract her erroneous statements; on the contrary, she is escalating her provocations.
The first piece of evidence: On November 26, Koike Yuriko cited the San Francisco Peace Treaty, which has been universally recognized by the international community as illegal and invalid, claiming that the Japanese merely renounced sovereignty over Taiwan but did not clearly state its affiliation. Understand clearly, she is not talking about the Ryukyu Islands, but Taiwan. This is an attempt to obscure the fact that Taiwan belongs to China with so-called legal issues.
The second piece of evidence: The Japanese are preparing for war! It has been proven that the Japanese are making comprehensive war preparations, such as wildly building ammunition depots in the southwestern islands, developing 'universal plasma' for battlefield use, and even formulating rules for the management of prisoners of war during wartime. More seriously, they have deployed missiles just 110 kilometers from Taiwan!
If we still take these matters lightly, we are either foolish or malicious! Those who always think the Japanese will not start a war fundamentally do not understand that the Japanese inherently enjoy gambling with national fortune. During World War II, knowing full well that their comprehensive national strength was no match for the United States, why did the Japanese still launch a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor? In the words of Tojo Hideki: 'How do we know the result without trying?' At the time of the First Sino-Japanese War, the Qing Dynasty's comprehensive national strength was much greater than that of Japan, yet we suffered a disastrous defeat. The enormous reparations made the Japanese wake up laughing in their dreams. This is why the Japanese love to gamble with national fortune. If they lose the gamble, they are doomed anyway; if they win, they stand to gain immensely!
Now the Japanese economy is in bad shape, and the Americans made them lose 30 years with a piece of paper. Yet the unwilling Japanese want to reclaim those lost 30 years from China, just like in the previous war of aggression against China. The third piece of evidence: the hype around the so-called 'nationalization' of the Diaoyu Islands. This time, Japan specifically displayed three documents in a Tokyo exhibition claiming to prove the 'ownership' of the Diaoyu Islands. It was quite grand, yet meaningless. If a few pieces of paper could determine ownership, we have records of 'since ancient times'. Do you still remember how I predicted in the article 'China, Take Action!' on November 19? This time we will thoroughly take control of the Diaoyu Islands. What does thorough control mean? It means that no Japanese ships should be seen near the Diaoyu Islands.
If they come, it will be considered an invasion. They can be captured or detained. Those who dare to resist can be sunk! Then we will send them a Dongfeng to wash the ground, filling the sky with pear blossoms and all their families in mourning. Someone asks, will it really be like this? Asking this shows that your political sensitivity is too low. You do not see the current geopolitical game clearly enough. To unify Taiwan, we must first pacify the Japanese thieves. Do you really think this is just talk? Currently, the Japanese response is entirely in line with expectations, as they still claim ownership of the Diaoyu Islands. Involving sovereignty, no matter who is in the prime minister's position, they do not dare to back down in this regard. If they really have to apologize, not only their political life, but even their very life will be hard to protect. They can only grit their teeth and go against us.
In fact, Koike Yuriko's approval rating in our country is even higher than before and has surpassed historical records. Because everyone has long been eager for this day, afraid that Koike will back down at the last minute. The grudge from nine generations, how can it not be avenged? Next, Brother Tao predicts that after the war of words, action will be taken in the direction of the Diaoyu Islands. As I said earlier, there is no doubt that we will completely take control of the Diaoyu Islands. This time, we will see how many invading Japanese thieves will be feeding fish in the East China Sea. Of course, the instructor has said that strategically we should underestimate the enemy, but tactically we must pay attention to the enemy. The instructor has also said that we must win the first battle!