中国商人如何拥有“企业家精神”？
中国商人如何拥有“企业家精神”？
How Can Chinese Businessmen Possess “Entrepreneurial Spirit”?
——从马云农产品补贴到刘强东七鲜模式与美国社区零售企业的三个案例对照
— A Comparative Study of Jack Ma’s Agricultural Subsidy Model, Richard Liu’s Seven Fresh Expansion, and American Community Retail Enterprises
钱 宏Archer Hong Qian
2025年9月1日·Richmond
摘要
本文通过三个案例对照，分析阿里与京东在社区零售赛道的两种扩张尝试。马云的“农产品补贴模式”以价格碾压为手段，最终因破坏社区生态而被叫停；刘强东的“七鲜生鲜超市”计划万店布局，实质上重走老路，存在与民争利、挤压底层业態、摧毁社会生態的问题。文章提出第三种可能：以区块链股权化技术实现社区共生，让居民成为投资者和股东——生产回归生活，生活呈现生態，生態激励生命。
进而，本文引入 共生经济学（Symbionomics） 的“仨自组织人”概念，结合“八大转变”的核心思想，重新解读三种模式，并通过中美零售巨头对比，揭示资本扩张与社区共生的制度文化分野。本文意在提出一个判断标准：富有“组织共生人”特质的企业家精神，不仅是赚钱的技艺，更是制度创新、文化转型与新文明承载的三位一体。
关键词
京东七鲜超市；社区零售；资本扩张包装；共生经济学；仨自组织人；中美企业比较；企业家精神
一、案例一：马云的农产品补贴模式
2017年前后，阿里巴巴尝试将农产品直接推向社区市场。手段很直接：
以巨额补贴打低价格；
挤压周边农贸市场与夫妻店；
形成垄断后再掌控渠道。
然而，这种模式引发了巨大的社会反弹：小摊小贩失去生计，社区生态被破坏。最终，政府介入叫停，证明 资本的掠夺式扩张难以获得社会合法性。
二、案例二：刘强东的七鲜超市扩张
2024年，京东宣布未来将在全国布局一万多家“七鲜生鲜超市”。依托京东的采购规模、智能物流和即时配送能力，京东声称能将价格进一步打压到“无可竞争”的水平。
然而，本质上这与马云的模式并无不同：
方圆两公里的小超市、小商贩“寸草不生”；
底层居民赖以维生的社区零售业被碾压；
百姓就业与微型创业机会被大幅减少。
刘强东自诩“共产主义者”，2017年还提出“机器人共产主义会提前到来”，但现实操作仍是“资本先行、民生靠后”。这种“与民争利”的模式，并非企业家的远见，而是资本猎手的短视和意识形態包装。
三、案例三：区块链股权化的共生路径
是否存在另一种模式？答案是肯定的。
有朋友就指出：假设每家七鲜超市的建店成本为100万元，京东完全可以利用区块链的 token股权化技术：
每家门店拆分为1000份股权，每份100元；
社区居民均可投资，哪怕只投入100元，也能成为股东；
收益透明结算，区块链保障无法篡改；
京东提供采购、物流与管理服务，社区居民成为真正的利益相关方。
如果能这样行，京东不再是“资本霸主”，而是“平台赋能者”；居民也不再是被动消费者，而是共享共生股东。这一模式与ESG投资、共享经济的国际趋势相呼应，但更强调“社区股东化”与“制度性透明”的“社区经济发展形態”特征。
共生经济学（Symbionomics） “社区经济、市场经济、政府经济三大经济形態交互共生”的底层逻辑，也初步显现出来。
四、文化心理对比：暴发户心机 vs 企业家精神
在中外商业史中，常见两种截然不同的文化心理：
“出人头地，占地盘”的暴发户心机
代表着一种急功近利的扩张逻辑：抢占市场、碾压Object（异己者）、垄断渠道，最终只留下资本的笑声与社会的苦难。这类模式虽能短期做大，却因缺乏社会合法性而走不远。
刘强东的“七鲜超市”扩张，就明显带有这种“有便宜不占白不占”的暴发户心机。恕直言，这与他2018年在美国明尼苏达自陷“最贵一炮”，是同一个subject（主体自居）本性所为。
“富有立法、道德、信仰的企业家精神”
代表着一种文明逻辑：不仅追求利润，还承担制度创新的责任，注重商业行为的道德约束，并以信仰般的执念推动社会整体的进步。这种企业家，既是市场的参与者，也是制度的建设者、文明的承载者。
两者之间的分野，决定了一家企业究竟是“资本猎手”，还是“社会共生的推动者”。可见，中国商人、商帮与官人、官帮一样，要实现文化上的脱胎换骨，才能具备真正的“企业家精神”，拥抱世界。
参看《一个民族的灵魂：从文化再造到中国再造》，2007。
五、共生经济学视角：仨自组织人与三种案例
共生经济学提出：“仨自组织人”——政治自组织人、经济自组织人、文化自组织人三位一体——是任何社会可持续运行的基本单元。
把这一框架放在三种模式中，可以看清其文明逻辑：
马云模式（补贴—垄断）
政治自组织人：被架空，政府最后不得不介入叫停；
经济自组织人：小商贩被挤出市场，民生经济自组织力严重受损；
文化自组织人：消费者被迫接受平台逻辑，而非社区生活-生態-生命逻辑。
刘强东模式（七鲜扩张）
政治自组织人：企业以资本力量“替代政策”，政治失衡；
经济自组织人：社区零售被碾压，就业与创业空间消失；
文化自组织人：零售文化沦为价格逻辑，缺乏价值认同。
区块链股权化模式（共生路径）
政治自组织人：居民通过股东身份参与治理，形成社区共治；
经济自组织人：小额投资与社区创业被激活，经济力增强；
文化自组织人：居民身份转变为“消费者 + 投资者 + 参与者”，生活方式进入共生循环。
这正体现了 共生经济学“八大转变”中的第1、第5、第6个转变：
第1个转变：从“理性经济人”到“仨自组织人”或“组织共生人”，突破投资—交易-消费社会的旧逻辑；
第5个转变：从“市场—政府”两极分化摇摆，到“社区—政府—市场”三元互动的共生格局；
第6个转变：从权力与金钱的浪费型生活方式，走向人人健康、简约、可持续的普惠生活方式。
因此，由此可见，第三种模式——区块链股权化——能实现“仨自组织人”良性循环交互主体共生（Intersubjective Symbiosism）的创新路径。
参看《财政两级分化：中美“119%”公债数字巧合与本质差异——经济学范式革命应运而生》 http://symbiosism.com.cn/10712.html
六、中美零售巨头的对比：文化与制度的分野
美国零售巨头的逻辑
沃尔玛：以规模和供应链优势取胜，但逐步引入社区基金会、地方供应链合作；
Costco：以会员制为核心，强调价格透明、少而精，保障消费者长期信任与参与，彰显“仨自组织人”端倪；
二者的共同点是：在资本扩张的同时，形成了一定程度的制度性约束（工会、消费者权益法、反垄断法），保证了社区与企业间的平衡。
中国零售巨头的逻辑
阿里、京东：扩张方式以资本碾压民生为主，缺乏社区共生设计；
制度约束不足，反垄断与公平竞争机制执行有限，导致“头部企业与底部民生争利”，符合原始市场经济形態，但非社区经济形態。
文化心理差异
美国巨头虽同样有经济自组织逐利特性，但不得不在制度与文化压力下发自觉展出某种“企业家精神”；
中国巨头往往停留在“出人头地，占地盘”的暴发户逻辑，缺少“组织共生人”层面的制度文化自觉。
参看《和解的年代：从共产主义到共生主义》，2007。
结语：零售的未来——掠夺、扩张，还是共生？
三种模式，三条道路：
马云模式：掠夺 → 垄断 → 失败；
刘强东模式：扩张 → 碾压 → 隐患；
区块链共生模式：赋能 → 股权共享 → 共生。
富有“组织共生人”特质的企业家精神，不仅是赚钱的技艺，更是制度创新、文化转型与新文明承载的三位一体。
中美零售巨头的比较告诉我们：资本的规模并非问题关键，关键在于 制度与文化是否能够引导资本走向共生。唯有从“暴发户心机”跃升到“企业家精神”，并在制度层面保障“仨自组织人”的生长空间，零售业才可能真正走向现代文明的共生未来。
对中国而言，零售业不只是经济问题，更是社会组织与文化转型问题。如果不能培育“企业家精神”与组织共生机制创新，资本巨头只会沦为暴发户式的短期猎手，而非现代文明的推动者。
这背后的逻辑，已然不是非此即彼“单因论”（含因果倒置），而是进入了当代人如何处理“LIFE（生命）- AI（理性工具）- TRUST（组织形態）”三元交互的认知偏蔽与价值取向？
但这样一来，经济学思维就不仅需要超越了马克思的资本论和皮凯蒂的21世纪资本论，也亟需超越哈耶克的自由市场和凯恩斯的政府操纵“周期性世纪钟摆”困境，这就是Symbionomics（共生经济学）的事工！
How Can Chinese Businessmen Possess “Entrepreneurial Spirit”?
— A Comparative Study of Jack Ma’s Agricultural Subsidy Model, Richard Liu’s Seven Fresh Expansion, and American Community Retail Enterprises
By Archer Hong Qian
September 1, 2025 · Richmond
Abstract
Through a comparative study of three cases, this article analyzes Alibaba and JD’s two attempts at expansion in the community retail sector. Jack Ma’s “agricultural subsidy model” relied on price crushing but was ultimately halted for destroying community ecology. Richard Liu’s “Seven Fresh Supermarket” plan to establish ten thousand stores essentially repeats the same mistake—competing with the people, squeezing grassroots retail formats, and undermining social ecology. The article proposes a third possibility: using blockchain-based equity tokenization to achieve community symbiosis, allowing residents to become investors and shareholders—production returns to life, life reveals ecology, and ecology inspires vitality.
Furthermore, the paper introduces the concept of the “Triple Self-Organizing Humans” from Symbionomics（共生经济学）, combined with the “Eight Transformations,” to reinterpret the three models. By comparing Chinese and American retail giants, it highlights the institutional and cultural divide between capital expansion and community symbiosis. The article aims to propose an evaluative criterion: entrepreneurial spirit, rich in the qualities of an “organizational symbiotic human,” is not merely a skill of making money, but a trinity of institutional innovation, cultural transformation, and civilizational stewardship.
Keywords
JD Seven Fresh Supermarket; community retail; capital expansion packaging; Symbionomics; Triple Self-Organizing Humans; China-US corporate comparison; entrepreneurial spirit
Case One: Jack Ma’s Agricultural Subsidy Model
Around 2017, Alibaba attempted to push agricultural products directly into community markets. The methods were straightforward:
Use massive subsidies to slash prices.
Squeeze nearby farmers’ markets and mom-and-pop shops.
Establish monopoly control over channels once dominance was achieved.
However, this model sparked major social backlash: small vendors lost their livelihoods, and community ecology was damaged. In the end, government intervention halted the plan, proving that predatory capital expansion cannot gain social legitimacy.
Case Two: Richard Liu’s Seven Fresh Expansion
In 2024, JD announced plans to open more than ten thousand “Seven Fresh Supermarkets” nationwide. Leveraging JD’s purchasing scale, smart logistics, and instant delivery, JD claimed it could drive prices to “unmatchable” levels.
Yet fundamentally, this was no different from Jack Ma’s model:
Small supermarkets and vendors within two kilometers were wiped out.
Grassroots residents’ community retail livelihoods were crushed.
Employment and micro-entrepreneurship opportunities were drastically reduced.
Richard Liu styled himself a “communist,” even proclaiming in 2017 that “robot communism will arrive early.” In reality, however, his operations still placed capital first and livelihood last. This “competing with the people” approach reflects not entrepreneurial foresight but short-sighted capital predation wrapped in ideological packaging.
III. Case Three: A Symbiotic Path Through Blockchain Equity Tokenization
Is there another possible model? The answer is yes.
As a friend pointed out: suppose each Seven Fresh store requires an investment of one million RMB. JD could adopt blockchain-based equity tokenization:
Split each store into 1,000 shares, each worth 100 RMB.
Allow community residents to invest—even just 100 RMB—to become shareholders.
Ensure transparent profit settlement, secured by blockchain’s immutability.
JD provides procurement, logistics, and management services, while residents become true stakeholders.
By doing so, JD would no longer be a “capital overlord” but an “enabling platform.” Residents would no longer be passive consumers but symbiotic co-shareholders. This model echoes global trends in ESG investment and the sharing economy, but with greater emphasis on community shareholderization and institutional transparency as hallmarks of a “community economic development form.”
Here, the underlying logic of Symbionomics—the interactive symbiosis of community economy, market economy, and government economy—emerges.
Cultural Psychology Contrast: Nouveau Riche Mentality vs. Entrepreneurial Spirit
In Chinese and foreign business history, two starkly different cultural mentalities are evident:
The nouveau riche mentality of “rising above others and seizing territory”
Represents a shortsighted logic of expansion: seizing markets, crushing the “Other” as Object, monopolizing channels, leaving only capital’s laughter and society’s suffering. Though such models may scale quickly, they lack legitimacy and cannot last long.
Liu Qiangdong’s Seven Fresh expansion clearly embodies this mentality of “never missing a cheap advantage.” Frankly, it mirrors the same subject-centered disposition that led him into his notorious 2018 scandal in Minnesota.
The entrepreneurial spirit of “legislation, morality, and faith”
Represents a civilizational logic: pursuing profit while bearing the responsibility of institutional innovation, observing moral constraints in business conduct, and promoting overall social progress with faith-like conviction. Such entrepreneurs are not only market participants but also institutional builders and carriers of civilization.
This distinction determines whether an enterprise is merely a “capital predator” or a “promoter of social symbiosis.” Thus, Chinese merchants and merchant guilds, like officials and bureaucratic cliques, must undergo cultural rebirth to attain true “entrepreneurial spirit” and embrace the world.
See Archer Hong Qian, The Soul of a Nation: From Cultural Rebuilding to China’s Rebuilding (2007).
A Symbionomic Perspective: Triple Self-Organizing Humans and Three Cases
Symbionomics posits that the “Triple Self-Organizing Humans”—political, economic, and cultural self-organizing humans—form the basic unit of any sustainable society.
Applying this framework to the three models clarifies their civilizational logic:
Jack Ma Model (Subsidy → Monopoly)
Political self-organizing human: hollowed out; government forced to intervene.
Economic self-organizing human: small vendors expelled; livelihood economy severely weakened.
Cultural self-organizing human: consumers forced into platform logic rather than the logic of community life–ecology–life.
Richard Liu Model (Seven Fresh Expansion)
Political: enterprise substitutes for policy via capital power, causing imbalance.
Economic: community retail crushed; employment and entrepreneurship vanish.
Cultural: retail culture reduced to price logic, lacking value identity.
Blockchain Equity Tokenization Model (Symbiotic Path)
Political: residents participate in governance as shareholders, fostering community co-governance.
Economic: micro-investment and local entrepreneurship activated, economic strength enhanced.
Cultural: residents transform into “consumers + investors + participants,” embedding life into a symbiotic cycle.
This reflects three of the Eight Transformations of Symbionomics:
Transformation 1: From “rational economic man” to “triple self-organizing human” or “organizational symbiotic human,” breaking old investment–transaction–consumption logic.
Transformation 5: From swinging between “market vs. government” dualism to a “community–government–market” triadic symbiosis.
Transformation 6: From wasteful lifestyles of power and money to a healthy, simple, sustainable lifestyle for all.
Hence, the third model—blockchain equity tokenization—offers an innovative path to realize the healthy cyclical intersubjective symbiosis of Triple Self-Organizing Humans.
See Archer Hong Qian, Fiscal Polarization: The Coincidental 119% Public Debt Ratio of China and the US and Their Essential Differences—The Rise of a Revolutionary Paradigm in Economics, http://symbiosism.com.cn/10712.html
China-US Retail Giants Compared: Cultural and Institutional Divides
American Retail Giants’ Logic
Walmart: Wins via scale and supply chain but gradually incorporates community foundations and local supplier partnerships.
Costco: Core membership model emphasizes price transparency and curated simplicity, ensuring long-term consumer trust and participation—foreshadowing the Triple Self-Organizing Humans.
Common ground: Even amid capital expansion, institutional constraints (unions, consumer rights laws, antitrust measures) safeguard balance between communities and enterprises.
Chinese Retail Giants’ Logic
Alibaba & JD: Expansion mainly by capital crushing livelihoods, lacking community-symbiosis design.
Institutional constraints are weak; limited enforcement of antitrust and fair competition leads to head enterprises competing against grassroots livelihoods—a primitive market form rather than a community economic form.
Cultural Psychological Differences
U.S. giants, though profit-driven, must exhibit a degree of entrepreneurial spirit under institutional and cultural pressure.
Chinese giants often remain stuck in a nouveau riche mindset of “rising above and seizing territory,” lacking the institutional-cultural consciousness of “organizational symbiotic humans.”
See Archer Hong Qian, An Age of Reconciliation: From Communism to Symbiosism (2007).
Conclusion: The Future of Retail—Predation, Expansion, or Symbiosis?
Three models, three paths:
Jack Ma Model: Predation → Monopoly → Failure.
Richard Liu Model: Expansion → Crushing → Hidden Dangers.
Blockchain Symbiosis Model: Empowerment → Equity Sharing → Symbiosis.
Entrepreneurial spirit, rich in the qualities of an “organizational symbiotic human,” is not just a craft of making money but a trinity of institutional innovation, cultural transformation, and civilizational stewardship.
The comparison of Chinese and American retail giants reveals: scale of capital is not the decisive issue—what matters is whether institutions and culture can guide capital toward symbiosis. Only by rising from nouveau riche mentality to entrepreneurial spirit, and ensuring institutional space for the growth of Triple Self-Organizing Humans, can retail truly advance toward a civilized, symbiotic future.
For China, retail is not just an economic issue but one of social organization and cultural transformation. Without cultivating entrepreneurial spirit and innovating organizational symbiosis mechanisms, capital giants will remain short-term predators of a nouveau riche type, not drivers of modern civilization.
Ultimately, the underlying logic is no longer a binary “single cause theory” (including inverted causality), but about how contemporary humans handle the triadic interaction of LIFE (life), AI (rational tools), and TRUST (organizational forms) in their cognitive biases and value orientations.
Thus, economic thinking must transcend not only Marx’s Capital and Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century, but also Hayek’s free-market doctrine and Keynes’s government-orchestrated “century pendulum” of cycles. This is precisely the mission of Symbionomics.