-----------------------------------------------------------------------
미투운동은 문죄인 일당이 검찰 내에 그들의 반대자들을 제거하려는 의도에서 시작했다. 그래서 초반에 더불당 당직자들이 적극적인 지지를 표시하기도 했다. 그런데 예기치 않게 좌파 연예인쪽에서 터지기 시작해 정계까지 번지고 있다. 마치 요원의 불길 같아서 누구도 감히 그 불길을 잠을 수 없고, 그것이 어떻게 끝날지도 예상할 수가 없다.
과거 노무현 시절 좌파들이 친일을 내세워 우파 정치인들을 제거하려다, 그들 자신이 친일파의 자식들이라는 게 드러나면서, 그들의 음모가 용두사미로 끝난 적이 있는데, 이번 사태도 그렇게 되지 말라는 보장이 없다.
하지만 아직 사태가 진행 중이라서 누구도 그 끝을 알 수가 없다. 과연 한국의 미투운동은 발정난 남성들에게 따끔한 맛을 보여주고 끝날 것인지, 아니면 사회 전체에 거대한 문화적(또는 정치적) 변화를 몰고 올 것인지 알 수가 없다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
대통령을 묻어버린 '거짓의 산' 62편 | [대통령 사건 설계와 음모] 윤석열·이진동·김의겸 삼각 커넥션 실체!
https://youtu.be/bDzFQNBCrzI
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
계몽주의 이후로 "나"가 주체가 되었지만, 그 이전에 우리는 동시대와 후대의 모든 공동체의 일부였다. 당시 그들은 미래 세대를 위해 열심히 일했지만, 현재는 미래 세대에 빚을 남겨주고 있다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
나는 인류 전체를 위해 영웅적인 죽음을 맞기 위해, 그리고 후손이나 책들을 생산하기 위해 이 땅에 살고 있는 것이다.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
정확히 말하면 호구가 아니라, 그들과 한 배를 타고 있는 동지들이다.
장자연과 리스트/ 출처 일베
---------------------------------------------------------------------
한국이 전라도 왕국이 되어버렸다.
---------------------------------------------------------------
그런데 위의 기사가 사라져버렸다. 구글에 검색하면 아래와 같은 검색이 나오는데, 막상 치고 들어가면 그 기사가 없다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
불투명하고 복잡한 세상에서, 과거 위험을 감춤으로써 사람들에게 해를 끼쳤던 때가 있었다.
이러한 인식의 한계 속에서, 스킨 인 더 게임만이 유일하게 취약성을 경감할 수 있는 지표이다. 수천년 전에 제정된 함무라비 법전은 간단한 해결의 예를 제시한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------
과거와 현재 사회의 주요 차이점은 영웅주의의 실종이다. 즉 과거에는 권력과 존경을 받는 사람이 그 대가로 거기에 대한 희생을 치렀는데, 현대에는 그렇지 않다는 것이다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
선진국에서도 아직 사유재산을 확정하고 보호하는 데 완전하지 못하다. 과거 깨끗한 공기와 물에 대한 시민들의 권리는 공공의 이익이라고 여겨지던 산업 개발에 가려졌고, 그로 인해 일어난 환경의 오염은 자유시장이 뒤집어 쓰고 말았다.
Why Politicians so Often Fail to Protect the Property Rights of the Poor
•Adam De Gree
Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto has devoted his life to alleviating poverty in the developing world. His research, well-received by those on the left as well as the right, documents the bureaucratic hurdles that prevent ordinary citizens in states like Egypt, Colombia, and Indonesia from obtaining business licenses. In many nations, it can take hundreds of days of waiting around in government offices to acquire permission to open a bakery or a laundromat. This prevents all but the rich and well-connected from accessing the ‘formal sector’ of legally sanctioned activity. As a result, the poor are pushed into the informal sector, which often comprises over 70% of the economy.
Years of research led de Soto to the conclusion that privatization in Latin America, Africa, and much of the post-Soviet world has not done enough to help the poor, precisely because it has been limited to the formal sector. Since the poor work within the informal economy, they don’t reap the benefits or the protections of private property. Their land is seized without warning, their homes are bulldozed for development projects, and they regularly face pressure from corrupt police. In The Mystery of Capital, de Soto explains that this is why it often appears that “Capitalism triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else.” The work traces the development of private property in the common-law system of the West, and juxtaposes this development to the stagnation of statutory law systems in the rest of the world.
The implications for the developing world are clear — without the proper legal structure, the market is not free at all. Privatization must come hand-in-hand with laws that recognize the property rights of the poor. Yet what about the developed world, which de Soto mines for insight into the hidden architecture of capitalism? Is the institution of private property in its ‘final’ stage of development in a country like the United States?
The answer, of course, is no — there is no final stage in the development of any social institution. Private property developed over time, and is still in development. And that may be a good thing, because the institution is not appropriately calibrated to accommodate the pressing needs of post-industrial societies.
Indeed, throughout US history, courts have often discarded ‘pure’ property rights in favor of development. Mises addresses this head-on in Human Action:
The laws concerning liability and indemnification for damages caused were and still are in some respects deficient. By and large the principle is accepted that everybody is liable to damages which his actions have inflicted upon other people. But there were loopholes left which the legislators were slow to fill. In some cases this tardiness was intentional because the imperfections agreed with the plans of the authorities. When in the past in many countries the owners of factories and railroads were not held liable for the damages which the conduct of their enterprises inflicted on the property and health of neighbors, patrons, employees, and other people through smoke, soot, noise, water pollution, and accidents caused by defective or inappropriate equipment, the idea was that one should not undermine the progress of industrialization and the development of transportation facilities. The same doctrines which prompted and still are prompting many governments to encourage investment in factories and railroads through subsidies, tax exemption, tariffs, and cheap credit were at work in the emergence of a legal state of affairs in which the liability of such enterprises was either formally or practically abated.
As Mises notes, the delimitation of private property is the result of a political, not an economic, process. Legislatures and judges decide which activities count as nuisances to be prohibited, and which do not. Corporations then base their actions on these guidelines. The implication is that environmentalists have incorrectly identified capitalism as the culprit of a crime that was in fact committed by agents of the State.
In other words, the government has done a terrible job of defining and protecting our property rights. In court case after court case, the air and water rights of individuals have been overridden in favor of industrial and transportation projects conceived to be in the ‘public interest.’ Consequent environmental degradation the result of a perversion of the free-market system. In a properly functioning market, tort law would be a much more effective way of dealing with environmental issues (Coase established this in the 1950s). Instead, massive increases in federally administered public lands are hailed by activists as victories for the common person and the environment.
This ignores the fact that ‘public’ property, including America’s air and waterways, tends to be the most polluted. The ramifications of these policies — of ignoring private rights in favor of the ‘public good’ — have been counterproductive. They have resulted in extensive environmental damage that indeed harms the ‘public good.’ As in the developing world, the only way forward is the further delimitation of private property rights. The ideology of public interests has failed.
Citizens of the Western world have good reason to apply de Soto’s insights to problems in their own societies. ‘Developed’ nations are, after all, still developing both technology and legal structures in the 21st century. If that development brings further delimitation of private property rights, it will simultaneously lower the incentive for the heavy-handed regulation that acts as an unwieldy band-aid on the loopholes that pockmark the institution of private property.
Adam De Gree is a freelance writer and homeschool history & economics teacher based in Prague, Czech Republic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
人生如一小天，天不息，人亦不息，安有死理？
其所以死者，皆因万欲攻其心，万事劳其形，以致气尽而亡。殊可惜也！
---------------------------------
天以五行生万物，人得之以分五脏，而培厚土，其最要也。
脾得五行之土，若能培之，自然长养肺金，导引肾水上升，心火不能起，肝风可自息。
五行顺利，则虽恶疾，可以渐化矣。
-----------------------------------
人能保养脾土，如坤之永贞，有何生老病死？
可知与地合其德，自与地同其悠久。
此脾经握御诸经，一治而无不治者也。
子能依法而行，俾脾土博厚，必然体健身轻，而服药悉为也？
此方极为简便，出华山秘传，不可忽视也。
-------------------------------------------------------------
시호계지탕과 대황부자탕으로 신경통을 치료하다其所以死者，皆因万欲攻其心，万事劳其形，以致气尽而亡。殊可惜也！
---------------------------------
天以五行生万物，人得之以分五脏，而培厚土，其最要也。
脾得五行之土，若能培之，自然长养肺金，导引肾水上升，心火不能起，肝风可自息。
五行顺利，则虽恶疾，可以渐化矣。
-----------------------------------
人能保养脾土，如坤之永贞，有何生老病死？
可知与地合其德，自与地同其悠久。
此脾经握御诸经，一治而无不治者也。
子能依法而行，俾脾土博厚，必然体健身轻，而服药悉为也？
此方极为简便，出华山秘传，不可忽视也。
-------------------------------------------------------------
황황
春节前的门诊病人依然很多。复诊的Z老汉刚坐下就说：“好多了，好多了！能睡着觉了！”。他来自宿迁，患右胁肋部带状疱疹后遗神经痛，痛势甚剧，痛如电击，每夜痛醒七八次，病已经5年多。月初来诊时，面色憔悴，一脸痛楚。一周后来复诊，已经眉开眼笑，一夜仅醒一二次，而且疼痛程度大大减轻。春节前赶来多配点药。
我给他的方是柴胡桂枝汤与大黄附子汤：柴胡20g、黄芩15g、姜半夏15g、党参10g、生甘草5g、桂枝15g、白芍20g、干姜5g、红枣20g，此方早午服用。另：生大黄10g、制附片20g、北细辛10g，附子先煎40分钟后入大黄、细辛，开盖煎煮，临睡前顿服。
柴胡桂枝汤在《伤寒论》中是一首治疗发热性疾病的方，但在《金匮要略》中则变为止痛方，被用来治疗“心腹卒中痛”。所谓心腹，包括上腹部、胸胁部等；所谓卒中痛，提示疼痛为突发性，如电击，如针刺，临床上许多神经痛常常可以用柴胡桂枝汤。Z老汉的带状神经后遗的神经痛，就比较适合此方。
大黄附子汤是止痛方。《金匮要略》记载“胁下偏痛，发热，其脉紧弦，此寒也，以温药下之，宜大黄附子汤”。所谓胁下，指腋下至腰部。所谓偏痛，不是全腹部，疼痛或在左，或在右，比较固定。Z老汉的神经痛，与大黄附子汤证相符。
将两方分别煎煮、分别服用，基于以下两点的考虑：其一，患者夜里疼痛剧烈，大黄附子汤止痛力强，故睡前服用。其二，柴胡桂枝汤不仅止痛，也是传统的调和表里方，适用于有神经症状的免疫系统疾病，其人多见全身状况较差、情绪低落，食欲不振等。患者病已5年，不能图速效，可以柴胡桂枝汤缓图。那么，两方为何不共煎同服？因为《伤寒论》《金匮要略》中没有柴胡与附子细辛同用的例子。经方的应用，应当尊重前人用药经验，亦步亦趋、小心谨慎为好。（2018年2月17日星期六）
--------------------------------------------------------------
대반하탕으로 위반(胃反)을 치료하다
황황
Z老，某部队歌舞团老团长，虽已经八十开外，身体尚健。今年三月他突发胰腺炎，五月再发，住院后发现有胆管结石，内窥镜下手术取石失败，只得装支架而作罢。几次大病并禁食，再加连续使用抗生素，老人体重大减，食欲全无，而且不能进食，食入即吐，每天靠输液度日，人日渐枯槁。我一周前去会诊。其人神情默默，气馁声低，其腹扁平而无弹性，其舌光无苔如猪肝，其脉弱无力。我认定是胃反病，肠内液枯，胃虚失降，是大半夏汤方证无疑。处方：生晒参10克、党参30克、姜半夏15克，蜂蜜250克，嘱咐药房技师煎药前将蜂蜜与水充分混合均匀后入煎。并嘱咐病家服药时少量缓缓咽下。下午开方，晚上药送到。初服60毫升，觉汤液可口，并无不适，继而服完150毫升。一夜好睡。翌日按时服药，竟然一天不吐，后逐日开胃进米粥、烂面条等，因缺钾，吃苹果香蕉泥等也十分香甜可口。持续近月的食入即吐现象由此消失。
大半夏汤是古代治疗胃反病的专方。首见于《金匮要略》，药仅三味，
“半夏二升，人参三两，白蜜一升，以水一斗二升，和蜜扬之二百四十遍，煮药取升半。温服一升，余分再服”。《金匮要略》谓治“胃反呕吐者”。《千金方》说本方主治“胃反不受食，食入即吐者”
。“胃反”是古代病名，以“朝食暮吐，暮食朝吐，宿谷不化”（《金匮要略》十七）为特征。张仲景时代恐是一日两餐，分在朝暮两个时段。朝暮到两餐之间隔大约为6-10小时，而暮食到朝食之间隔则要更长。“宿谷不化”提示胃的腐熟机能下降和排空障碍。总而言之，反胃病是一种比较严重的消化功能障碍，现代临床上抗生素呕吐、幽门梗阻、神经性呕吐、贲门失弛缓症、放化疗后胃肠道反应、妊娠呕吐等可以见到。
不过，这种胃反，多见于体质虚弱消耗明显的病人。或反复呕吐，或长期禁食，或屡用苦寒攻下药物，体内津液丢失殆尽。病人大多消瘦枯槁，或舌光无苔，或大便干结难出，或气短乏力。也就是说，虚人久吐，才用大半夏汤。为什么呢？我们可以看看大半夏汤的组成。方中的半夏是止呕要药，张仲景方中凡用半夏者，大多都有呕吐。人参补气液，张仲景多用于大汗大吐大下之后体液不足者，尤其适用于“心下痞硬”“不受食”者。所谓的心下痞，是上腹部不舒服；而硬，是腹肌无弹性，消瘦者多见。《外台秘要》关于大半夏汤方证的表述很清晰：“治呕而心下痞硬者”。白蜜，即蜂蜜，能“缓药势，益脾气”（《经方例释》）。张仲景是用蜂蜜的高手。《伤寒论》蜜煎导一方，单用蜂蜜熬制成饴状，外用治大便干结；还有猪肤汤一方，用白蜜与猪皮米粉熬制成羹，治阴虚咽痛。另外，陶弘景说蜂蜜能主“食饮不下”（《本草经集注》，民间也有用蜂蜜冲服治老年便结的生活常识。这些经验，都为大半夏汤用蜂蜜注解，对于瘦弱之人的胃肠道功能减退，特别是便秘干结不食者，蜂蜜不可或缺。程门雪先生说得好：“近人以半夏性燥，每多忌用，殊不知半夏得参蜜，则不燥而专行降逆之功”。可见，大半夏汤是一首润燥养胃的止呕方。
与大半夏汤相近的是小半夏汤，药用半夏、生姜两味药，也是止呕方。张仲景用于“诸呕吐，谷不得入”（《金匮要略》）。两方的区别在哪里？其一，小半夏汤以呕为主证，恶心感突出，而大半夏汤以吐为主证，通常吐之前没有恶心表现。其二，小半夏汤证是“谷不得下”，大半夏汤证是能进食，但消化障碍，被迫吐出。其三，小半夏汤证不食亦吐，甚者食不得下，而大半夏汤证食后则吐，不食则不吐。其四，大半夏汤腹证有心下痞硬，小半夏汤证至多心下痞，但不硬。
大半夏汤的煎服法特别。第一，需要久煎。一斗二升水加上一升白蜜，仅仅煎取一升半药液，可见煎煮的时间较长。第二，蜂蜜与水要充分混匀后煎药，“和蜜扬之二百四十遍”，其理何在？另据莫枚士先生考证，煎大半夏汤的水应该是泉水（《经方例释》）。其理又何在？我一时无法臆测。
-------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기