航空日志两则

钱宏（ArcherHong Qian）

2025年10月21日于新加坡

一个世纪性的一个逻辑陷阱

谢谢每一位耐心读完我这即兴写下的文字《聪明人一入官场究何就丢了灵魂？——“贪腐与欺诈”的体制性根由》（聪明人入官场究何会丢失灵魂？ - 全球共生研究院）。

其实在表述上，我还是比较含蓄，没有直接点出副标题中“贪腐与欺诈”背后冠冕堂皇的意识形态谎言始作俑者——俄罗斯贵族阶级、对沙皇有杀兄之仇的话术天才佛拉基米尔·伊里奇·乌里扬诺夫（列宁），在《国家与革命》小册子中布下的逻辑陷阱：

大前提（扭曲马克思）：“只有承认阶级斗争，同时也承认无产阶级专政的人，才是马克思主义者。”强词夺理扭曲马克思（众所周知，可怜的马克思面对那些形形色色自称“马克思主义者”发出这样无奈的怒吼：“我只知道我不是‘马克思主义者’”——“tout ce que je sais，c'est que moi，je ne suis pas marxiste”，见恩格斯1890年致《社会民主党人报》编辑部，《马恩全集》历史考证版第1部分第31卷）；

中前提（塞进大私货）：俄国社会民主黨中的布尔什维克（意为“多数派”，其实相当于“极左派”）承认并在革命斗争中坚持“无产阶级专政”；

小前提（塞进小私货）：“没有革命的理论，就没有革命的实践”（语出列宁革命初期导师普列汉诺夫，也是普把马克思的“实践唯物主义”杜撰出“辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义”，但悲剧再次发生在普身上，普被一心要复仇的学生列宁划入孟什维克，意为“少数派”即“右派反黨集团”之首），而“无产阶级革命理论”的制定者即布尔什维克领袖们，是“无产阶级革命实践”的引领者、代表者、“先锋队”；

结论（私货畅行无阻）：布尔什维克黨就是“无产阶级专政”的主体（Subject，普通黨人、其他异己者，统统都是可支配、操纵、掠夺的Object），就是“无产阶级革命家”（无论出身什么阶级，哪怕是贵族、地主、资产阶级，革命斗争中的赢家，就是“无产阶级革命家”，反之，那些内斗外斗中斗争失败者，无论对革命作出过什么贡献，都不在其列，包括那些后来被斯大林清除的列宁的革命战友，非但不是“无产阶级革命家”，反而是敌人、是革命者必须划清界线的瘟神，应当毫不留情地开除黨籍甚至肉体消灭）。

天才般善于发现并抓住机会的列宁，说过最诚实的一句话，是：（贵族出身最后抛弃一切离家出走的伟大作家）“托尔斯泰是俄国革命的一面镜子”。

不妨借用这个句式：列宁是中国革命的一面镜子！

面对现代政治经济组织文明的冲击，东方民族国家的车尔尼雪夫斯基，发问并写出了第一个《怎么办》，天才革命家列宁直接写出过第二个《怎么办》！

当然，由列宁逻辑陷阱缔造的苏联帝国的生命，早在35年前就寿终正寝，那么，身处21世纪的我们中国人民（We the Chinese People），该怎么办？

最后，如果说近代以来“中国向何处去？”的命题，随着向“前苏联”和“前美国”（对不起特指MAGA-MAHA运动兴起之前，那个掏空家底和红脖子的大资本政客与专政特权既沆瀣一气又勾心斗角的美国）“两个一边倒”的历史性终结（获利后反目成仇）而终结，是时候转换一下，We the People该问问：中国何以处世待人，又何以自处高贵？

有道是，往者不可忆，来者犹可追，愿我们中国人民尽早走出“凡是过往，皆为序章”的文化心理定势思维方式——灵魂陷阱！

Archer Hong Qian

2025年10月19-20日于太平洋高空跨国际日期变更线

第三个“怎么办？”

16小时航程，太平洋上空，Boeing787-9，颠簸厉害，时空意间差，呆坐两腿发胀，头有些晕，无法入眠。

闭上眼睛，脑海偏偏蒙太奇般出现的是：

车尔尼雪夫斯基和列宁的“怎么办？”

中国大陆的“两个一边倒”……

扶苏、李斯、胡亥一众朝臣，被“指鹿为马”的赵高相继杀戮，子婴被“彼可取而代之”项羽腰斩！

董仲舒上刘彻“罢黜百家独尊儒术”书，自此“儒者”们千百年至今，以黄金屋颜如玉“仕途经济”之“功名”为终身大事。

前中组部长张全景中纪副书记刘锡荣分别道出大陆官阶大一统造成“官多为患”“官满为患”的无解难题……李光耀生前也曾说过他对中国政治的观察：上面一个皇帝，下面还有无数个小皇帝。这无数个小皇帝就是一把权力的体制内党棍和官僚，还有他们的裙子带寄生人员。上面的土皇帝要极限压榨，下面的小皇帝要极限压榨。

失去“制度外部性”（邓小平说的开放就是对美国开放）逆熵效应，又不“对内开放”“还权于民”，即不让民们（家庭-社区- 社会企业组织）发挥生命自组织连接动態平衡力后的政治经济组织情势…是否就是Daron Acemoglu说的抑制性（Inclusive）制度和榨取性（Extractive）制度会从“从头部开始腐烂”而没有例外，就象熵增效应必然发生？

从世界范围看，当“LIFE（生命形態）-AI（智能形態）- TRUST（组织形態）”发生冲突的今天，能不能Intersubjective  Symbiosism而“Live and let live，Don't be evil and let evil”以至于让人类走向同归于尽的“第六次大灭绝”……怎么办？

这些个事情和问题，也就是第三个“怎么办？”从丹田，涌上心头，朝我并不怎么灵光的脑海一次次直撞，头真的很疼！

我自己怎么办？我不知道，只能强提精神眯起眼睛，在这对我这个中国人而言算是舶来品iPhone方寸之间，继续我的事工，这是我的命，或者就是我的无可推脱的Mission！我得认领啊！

可谁来发起创建Amorsophia MindsNetwork（愛之智慧孞態网 AI）——规范“LIFE-AI-TRUST”时代人类生活方式创新与再组织臻于交互主体共生的基础设施？

谁能支持举办“第五届全球共生论坛·新达特茅斯会议：AI（1956）-AM（2026）”呢？？？

Archer Hong Qian

2025年10月20日于太平洋近菲律宾上空

? Two Aerial Journals

Archer Hong Qian
Singapore · October 21, 2025

I. A Century-Old Logical Trap

I am grateful to every reader who patiently finished my impromptu piece, “Why Do Smart People Lose Their Souls Upon Entering Officialdom? — The Institutional Roots of ‘Corruption and Fraud’.”

In that essay I was still rather reserved. I did not name, head-on, the true architect of the grand ideological deception behind that subtitle — the Russian nobleman and rhetorical genius Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin), who bore a brother-killing grudge against the Tsar. In The State and Revolution he set a logical trap that would shape an entire century:

Major premise (distorting Marx):

“Only those who recognize class struggle and, at the same time, the dictatorship of the proletariat are Marxists.”
This twisted citation perverted Marx’s thought. We all recall Marx’s weary protest against his self-proclaimed followers:
“All I know is that I am not a Marxist.”
(“Tout ce que je sais, c’est que moi, je ne suis pas marxiste.” — Engels to the editors of Sozialdemokrat, 1890; Collected Works vol. 31.)

Middle premise (large smuggled goods):
Within the Russian Social Democratic Party, the Bolsheviks (meaning “majority,” though in truth the radical left minority) claimed to uphold and practice the “dictatorship of the proletariat.”

Minor premise (smuggled fine goods):

“Without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary movement.”
The saying originated with Plekhanov, Lenin’s early mentor, who himself had already recast Marx’s “practical materialism” as the doctrines of “dialectical and historical materialism.” Tragically, his pupil Lenin later branded him a Menshevik (“minority,” i.e., the rightist anti-party bloc).

Conclusion (private goods fully circulated):
Therefore the Bolshevik Party itself is the subject of the “proletarian dictatorship.” Ordinary party members and all dissenters become mere objects to be controlled, manipulated, and exploited. Thus, whoever wins in revolutionary struggle — even an aristocrat, landlord, or capitalist — is a “proletarian revolutionary,” while those who lose the inner or outer fights — no matter their sacrifice — are expelled or eliminated.

The brilliant and opportunistic Lenin once uttered his most honest sentence:

“Tolstoy is the mirror of the Russian revolution.”

By the same logic, Lenin is the mirror of the Chinese revolution.

Facing the impact of modern political-economic civilization, Russia’s Chernyshevsky posed the first “What Is to Be Done?” Lenin, the genius revolutionary, authored the second.

Yet the empire forged by Lenin’s trap died thirty-five years ago. So we — We the Chinese People — in the twenty-first century, what are we to do?

If the century-old question “Where is China heading?” has ended with the collapse of our two historic “leanings” toward the former Soviet Union and the former America (before the MAGA–MAHA movements revived the nation of red-necked patriots hollowed out by capital and bureaucracy), then perhaps it is time to ask anew:

How should China treat others and itself with dignity?

The ancient saying goes: “The past cannot be recalled; the future can yet be pursued.” May we Chinese soon escape the psychological trap that everything past is but a prologue — the trap of the soul itself.

Archer Hong Qian
Pacific Sky, Crossing the International Date Line
October 19–20, 2025

II. The Third “What Is to Be Done?”

Sixteen hours of flight. Over the Pacific, aboard a Boeing 787-9, the turbulence is severe. My legs are numb, my head dizzy, sleep impossible. Closing my eyes, images flash through like a montage:

Chernyshevsky and Lenin’s What Is to Be Done?
China’s “two one-sided leanings”…
Fusu, Li Si, Hu Hai and their courtiers slain one after another by Zhao Gao’s “calling a deer a horse,” and Ziying beheaded by Xiang Yu’s “he can be replaced.”
Dong Zhongshu’s petition to Emperor Wu — “Dismiss the Hundred Schools and Honor Confucianism Alone” — after which Confucians for two millennia pursued “fame and fortune” as the supreme path to official glory.
Former CCP Organization Minister Zhang Quanjing and Discipline Vice-Secretary Liu Xirong once admitted the unsolvable plague of “too many officials.” Lee Kuan Yew observed China thus: “One emperor on top, countless little emperors below.” These “little emperors” are the party cadres, bureaucrats, and their parasitic entourage. The greater emperor squeezes to the limit; the lesser emperors squeeze to the limit in turn.

Once a nation loses the external entropy-reducing force of “openness” (Deng Xiaoping’s “opening to America”) and refuses to open internally — to return power to the people, to let families, communities, and social enterprises regain their self-organizing vital balance — its political-economic order inevitably decays. As Daron Acemoglu argues, extractive institutions rot from the head down without exception, just as entropy always increases.

Across the world today, as LIFE (biological form), AI (intelligent form), and TRUST (organizational form) collide, can we still realize Intersubjective Symbiosism — Live and let live; Don’t be evil and let evil — before humanity rushes toward its “sixth mass extinction”? What is to be done?

These questions rise from the dantian, pounding my aching head again and again.

What am I to do? I do not know. I can only force my eyes open and keep writing on this tiny foreign-made iPhone — continuing my ministry, my work. Perhaps this is my destiny, my mission I cannot refuse. I must own it.

But who will launch the Amorsophia Minds Network (AI) — the infrastructure that will regulate and renew the human way of life in the LIFE–AI–TRUST era, bringing our civilization toward intersubjective symbiosis?

And who will support the Fifth Global Symbiosis Forum · New Dartmouth Conference: AI (1956) – AM (2026)?

Archer Hong Qian
Above the Philippine Sea, Pacific Ocean
October 20, 2025