한국의 무법 시대, 아니 문법(文法) 시대가 열렸다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[종합]"제2의 국정농단" '추미애 입장문' 최강욱에 유출 정황 일파만파
연일 고공행진 하는 중국증시, 이유는? – 무엇의 데자뷰인가? – 소리 없는 인민은행 조치, 충격.. 왜?? – 2020.07.09
진자유티비
-------------------------------------------------------
[정완진TV] 대한민국 '부채공화국'...나랏빚 5000조 된다~~**[멋진아재TV]
-----------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
그 결과는 박원순과 같은 최후이다.
-----------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
좌파들이 반인종차별주의를 이용해
자본주의를 공격하는 방법
환경 오염, 빈곤, 인종차별주의 등 당대의 문제가 무엇이든 좌파들은 언제는 그 책임을 자본주의에 돌렸고, 시장과 자유의 파괴를 그 해결책으로 제시했다.
좌파들은 오랫동안 인종차별을 자유시장경제와 엮으려 해왔고, 그때 자본주의를 지칭한 용어는 “신자유주의”였다.
도슨과 프랜시스는 “인종 자본주의”라는 용어를 만들어냈고, 월터 존슨은 그의 책 <미국의 상심The Broken Heart of America >에서 그 구체적인 예를 들었다.
How the Left Exploits Antiracism to Attack Capitalism
Ryan McMaken
Joseph Schumpeter once observed, "capitalism stands its trial before judges who have the sentence of death in their pockets." Capitalism is to be condemned no matter what, even if the executioners have yet to settle on the specific reason for its condemnation.
The forces of anticapitalism have long morphed into whatever form best suits them for taking advantage of the zeitgeist. Whatever the latest injustice may be—from a polluted environment to poverty to racism—the solution is always the same: the destruction of markets and market freedom. As Ralph Raico has noted:
In earlier times, they [i.e., the anticapitalists] indicted capitalism for the immiseration of the proletariat, inevitable depressions, and the disappearance of the middle classes. Then, a little later, it was for imperialism and inevitable wars among the imperialist (capitalist) powers….
Capitalism was charged with being unable to compete with socialist societies in technological progress (Sputnik); with promoting automation, leading to catastrophic permanent unemployment; both with creating the consumer society and its piggish affluence and with proving incapable of extending such piggishness to the underclass; with "neo-colonialism"; with oppressing women and racial minorities; with spawning a meretricious popular culture; and with destroying the earth itself.
At the moment, the Left has apparently settled on racism as the justification for the latest round of anticapitalist invective. Indeed, if we delve into the Left's narrative underpinning of the current Black Lives Matter movement we find a sizable undercurrent of anticapitalism. This isn't to say antiracism has nothing to do with the controversy. Clearly it is an element of the movement. Moreover, it may certainly be the case that most of the movement's rank and file—those who demonstrate in the streets—are animated simply by a desire to end mistreatment by government police. But when it comes time to formulate policy responses to the current crises of police abuse, we're likely to discover that the Left is demanding a "solution" that goes far beyond merely holding abusive cops accountable and will focus instead on further dismantling what's left of the market economy.
"Neoliberalism" as White Supremacy
While the connection between police abuse and the evils of capitalism may not be readily apparent to some, the indictment of capitalism as the ultimate culprit will flow naturally from the fact that the Left has long attempted to connect racism to market economies. We find the evidence in countless leftist-authored books and articles which claim capitalism and racism are inseparable. The vocabulary used here employs the usual pejorative term for capitalism employed by the Left: neoliberalism.
Although many free market liberals (i.e., "classical" liberals) and conservatives have tried to reassure themselves that attacks on neoliberalism are merely benign attacks on globalist elites, this is a naïve view. The Left has consistently used the term "neoliberal" to describe nearly any ideology or policy agenda that is even moderately procapitalist. In their minds, neoliberalism is simply market capitalism.
For example, in an article titled "Black Politics and the Neoliberal Racial Order" authors Michael C. Dawson and Megan Ming Francis are quite clear that an attack on neoliberalism is no mere limited attack on an international elite of central bankers:
We define neoliberalism as a set of policies and ideological tenets that include the privatization of public assets; the deregulation or elimination of state services; macroeconomic stabilization and the discouragement of Keynesian policies; trade liberalization and financial deregulation.
Neoliberalism is any movement in the direction of less government intervention in the everyday lives of business owners, entrepreneurs, and households. To be a "non-neoliberal"—and thus ideologically correct—is to be in favor of Keynesian policies, trade controls, and more government regulation.
The anticapitalism is apparent when researcher Felicia Rose Asbury concludes: "Black Lives Matter…operates as both a byproduct and site of resistance to the material and ideological manifestations of neoliberal projects." This, of course, makes perfect sense if neoliberalism is inextricably linked with racism, and thus Asbury goes on to describe neoliberalism as being characterized by "exclusion and erasure" of nonwhite groups, which its "structural manifestations of violence" perpetuate. Consequently, it becomes necessary to "create a black future beyond the neoliberal paradigm."
Dawson and Francis similarly lament the "the intertwined history of white supremacy and capitalist economic structures," and this is especially alarming to them, because, in the anticapitalist narrative, free market capitalism is the dominant ideology in the world today. The story behind this is a familiar one for anyone well-versed in the Left's historical narrative around neoliberalism. Specifically, as Dawson and Francis describe it:
Neo-liberalism is a set of policies and an ideology that has led to the transformation of government, starting under President Ronald Reagan, from New Deal – type social policies to policies that not only would be dictated by market principles but also would seek to have market values dominate every sphere of human existence from entertainment to science, from education to the arts. Reagan and his contemporaries Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder of Germany were mostly successful in waging war on the Keynesian social contract by attacking the social safety net, labor and its organizations, and any argument or policy that favored, even if ever so slightly, those who were not members of "the 1 percent."
Moreover, in the mind of the typical anticapitalist intellectual, the story of the 1980s and 1990s is one in which capitalists moved from victory to victory in overturning the old paradigm of the New Deal, which valued egalitarianism and social justice. An almost laissez-faire economic order has been the rule ever since.
Yet to anyone who has been paying attention, this narrative is clearly absurd. Whether we look at tax receipts, government spending, government employment, or the regulatory burden, state control of the economy—at least in the United States—is far larger today than at any time in the past. The economy has not been "deregulated" and the Keynesian paradigm has not been scaled back. Yet the narrative remains immensely powerful. Both leftists and conservatives believe it, which is why even conservatives will claim that "market fundamentalists" dominate the entire government apparatus.
"Racial Capitalism"
The centrality of racism to capitalism is further reinforced by the relatively recent term "racial capitalism." The term is employed by Dawson and Francis, who define racial capitalism as "the system that is produced by the mutually constitutive hierarchical structures of capitalism and race in the United States." This sentence may be difficult to understand for those unfamiliar with the Left's view of capitalism: capitalism is inherently hierarchical and characterized by top-down and bottom-up conflict between the social classes. In this view, capitalism is fundamentally inseparable from state coercion, which must be employed by capitalists to keep workers in their place. Capitalists then employ racial divisions to reinforce this hierarchy.
Numerous examples of this theory are fleshed out in Walter Johnson's new book The Broken Heart of America: St. Louis and the Violent History of the United States. Although Johnson focuses on the city of Saint Louis, the book is really his history of how capitalists nationwide have used racism to exploit the middle and working classes over the past two centuries. It is a history of how "racial capitalism has been one in which white supremacy justified the terms of…capitalist exploitation." Johnson makes it clear he views the promotion of racism as a necessary tactic in perpetuating capitalism at the expense of the workers. For Johnson, it is possible to control racial and ethnic minorities with shows of physical force. But the numerically superior white workers require a different strategy: specifically, "white supremacy is necessary to control the white people."1
Consequently, in Johnson's view, we find that capitalism rests on a shaky foundation in which racism is not just part of the capitalist framework. Racism must be perpetuated by capitalists in order to maintain the capitalist status quo. The conclusion becomes obvious: destroy capitalism and we destroy racism.
It's easy to see, then, how a well-meaning opponent of bigotry might conclude that the cause of decency must necessary demand the destruction of capitalism. According to the Left's intellectuals, not only is neoliberalism (i.e., capitalism) inextricably linked with racism, but the neoliberal order is the dominant one. We might then conclude that the injustices we see around us—presumably a product of the status quo—can only be fixed by overturning that dominant ideology. Moreover, the current ruling class—the ascendant capitalists—employ racism to prop themselves up at the expense of everyone else.
Who wouldn't want to strike at the capitalists after accepting this narrative?
The problem with all this, of course, is that capitalism is certainly not the dominant ideology of the status quo. If it were, Paul Krugman would not be a media darling, and the US would not be running trillion-dollar deficits each year, funded with government-printed money. Moreover, capitalism has long been the enemy of caste systems, which tend to find the most support in noncapitalist traditionalist systems of privilege and protectionism. It's no coincidence, of course, that the slave drivers of old vehemently slandered capitalism at every opportunity.
But even if we were to win that argument, the anticapitalist narrative would simply switch to environmentalism or the moral turpitude of consumerism. This year, the popular anticapitalist narrative is about race. Next year, it may be something else entirely. The evidence presented at capitalism's trial will change. But the presumed death sentence will remain.
1.It should be noted that Johnson did not invent this theory, although he employs it extensively. Martin Luther King, Jr., hinted at a similar theory in 1965 when he claimed: "The segregation of the races was really a political stratagem employed by the emerging Bourbon interests in the South to keep the southern masses divided and southern labor the cheapest in the land." The "Bourbon interests" were the Bourbon Democrats of the late nineteenth century, who were notable for their support of hard money, decentralization, and market capitalism in general. The most famous Bourbon Democrat was Grover Cleveland of New York, probably the last true economic liberal in the White House.
--------------------------------------------------------
중국 궁정의학 속의 역병 치료
中国宫廷医学里的防疫经验举隅
编者按：新冠肺炎是一种呼吸道病毒疾病，可发生于各个年龄段和不同地域，传染性强，中医学将本病归于“瘟疫”范畴。瘟疫自古有之，通过千百次的抗疫实践，对于瘟疫诊治积累了丰富的临床经验，御医们将其严谨诊疗思想与处方经验著书立说，使很多疫病的防治方法流传下来，成为宫廷医学的学术成果。近日，新华网邀请了中国中医科学院西苑医院心血管病中心、北京中医药学会宫廷医学研究专业委员会主委张京春教授及团队成员张珊、徐嘉唯 、徐琪武系统梳理了如何充分发挥宫廷医学的特色和优势，运用宫廷医学理论和方法防治新冠肺炎。
明代御医对瘟疫的认识及防治经验
明代龚信及其子龚廷贤均供职于太医院，任职期间所撰写的《古今医鉴》，辨证详明，选方恰切，理、法、方、药俱全，切合临床实用，具有一定参考价值。
《古今医鉴·卷之三·温疫》载：“脉：阳濡弱，阴弦紧，更遇温气，变为温疫。左手脉大于右手，浮缓而盛，按之无力。证：众人病一般者，乃天行时疫也。悉由气运郁发，迁正退位之所致也。治：冬应寒而反温，春发温疫，败毒散主之；春应温而反凉，夏发燥疫，大柴胡汤主之；夏应热而反寒，秋发寒疫，五积散主之；秋应凉而反淫雨，冬发湿疫，五苓散主之。凡温疫，切不可作伤寒症治，而大汗大下也。但当从乎中治，而用少阳、阳明二经药，少阳小柴胡汤，阳明升麻葛根汤。看所中阴阳，而以二方加减和治之，殊为切当。人参败毒散，治四时温疫。通用羌活冲和汤，治温疫初感，一、二日间服之取汗，其效甚速。”
瘟疫篇首言脉象，其次为病因病机，最后列其治则、述其方药，龚氏父子指出：瘟疫为时令不正，天行暴厉之气流行，众人相似而病，又互相传染，其作与伤寒相似，然伤寒因寒而得，此乃疫气，不可与寒同论也，法当辟散疫气，扶助正气为主。根据新冠肺炎病人四诊资料，此次疫情确为湿毒疫，病机特点为湿、毒、虚，因地域体质不同，兼有热或寒或燥，病程缠绵，可予五苓散、败毒散配合使用。
源自宋代官修方书防治疫病的古方
《太平惠民和剂局方》(简称《局方》）是我国宋代政府编成并颁布的第一部方剂药典，其雏形原是北宋“熟药所”的配方簿，最早曾名《太医局方》。书中许多治疗时疫的方剂至今仍广泛应用于临床，并取得很好的疗效。
神仙百解散
【来源】出自《局方·卷之二·治伤寒》
【主治】治伤寒遍身疼痛，百节拘急，头目昏痛、劳倦，壮热憎寒，神志不爽；感冒瘟疫瘴气。常服辟瘟疫，治劳倦。
【组成】山茵陈 柴胡（去芦） 前胡（生姜制，炒） 人参 羌活 独活 甘草 苍术（米泔浸，锉，炒） 干葛 白芍药 升麻 防风（去苗） 藁本（去芦） 藿香（去梗） 白术 半夏（姜汁炙，各一两）；立春以后不加减，立夏以后一料加：柴胡（一分） 赤茯苓 当归（各半两），立秋以后减柴胡一分，不用当归、茯苓，只加：干姜（炮） 肉桂（去粗皮，各一分） 麻黄（去节，半两），立冬以后并无加减。〔一方无当归，有黄芩（去芦，半两）〕。
【用法】上为细末。每服三钱，水一盏半，姜三片，枣二个，煎至一盏，热服，不计时候，并进二服。如要表散，加葱白三寸，淡豆豉三十粒，同煎服，以衣被盖覆，汗出而愈。
【方解】神仙百解散为主治四时伤寒、感冒瘟疫的重要方剂，常被用于治疗时疫，可供临床借鉴。该方适合外受时令之寒湿，中气本自不足之人。组成类似人参败毒散，方中取羌活、独活以发散风寒、胜湿、止痛；柴胡升清散热、前胡降气行痰，是为辅药；人参、甘草益气扶正；茵陈、苍术清燥湿热；加姜汁增散寒和胃之力。方中根据季节不同，药物配伍也有些许差别。立春、立冬之后无需加减，立夏后需加柴胡、赤苓、当归理气活血；立秋后需减柴胡恐耗气动气，不用当归、茯苓，加干姜、肉桂、麻黄等温补制品，以应秋季收藏之气。正如《内经》所云：“故智者之养生也，必顺四时而适寒暑，和喜怒而安居处，节阴阳而调刚柔”。这种随季节加减药物组成的思想也值得大家在临床中多加应用。
藿香正气散
【来源】出自《局方·卷之二·［续添诸局经验秘方］》
【主治】治伤寒头疼，憎寒壮热，上喘咳嗽，五劳七伤，八般风痰，五般膈气，心腹冷痛，反胃呕恶，气泻霍乱，脏腑虚鸣，山岚瘴疟，遍身虚肿；妇人产前、产后，血气刺痛；小儿疳伤，并宜治之。
【组成】大腹皮 白芷 紫苏 茯苓（去皮，各一两） 半夏曲 白术 陈皮（去白） 厚朴（去粗皮，姜汁炙） 苦梗（各二两） 藿香（去土，三两） 甘草（炙，二两半）
【用法】上为细末。每服二钱，水一盏，姜钱三片，枣一枚，同煎至七分，热服。如欲出汗，衣被盖，再煎并服。
【方解】藿香正气散主要功效为解表化湿、理气和中，外散风寒与内化湿滞相伍，健脾利湿与理气和胃共施，使风寒外散，湿浊内化，气机通畅，脾胃调和，清升浊降，正与此次新冠肺炎中医散寒除湿、辟秽化浊的用药原则相合。其中藿香是本方中的君药，具有辛温解表、芳香化浊之用。《药品化义》中认为藿香“其气芳香，善行胃气……除秽恶痞闷。且香能和合五脏……有醒脾开胃之功”，《本草纲目》中描述藿香为“升降诸气，脾胃吐逆为要药”。同时方中使用紫苏、白芷等药物辛温发散，半夏曲、大腹皮等药物祛除湿邪，来辅助藿香增强药物的效果。藿香正气散在宫廷医学中也得到广泛运用。在清宫医案中御医所使用的正气化饮汤（藿香正气散去白芷、桔梗、姜、枣加泽泻、枳壳、黄连）、清解正气汤（藿香正气散去大腹皮、茯苓、白术、姜、枣加羌活、枳壳、葛根、黄连）等方剂均在藿香正气散的基础上加减变化而来。
从清代宫廷寻找防疫的饮食宜忌
脾胃为后天之本，人体赖之以增强正气、抵御外邪。故而，调节饮食习惯在防疫方面及其重要。《内经》曰“饮食自倍，肠胃乃伤”，首先应节制食量。清朝太医王士雄（字孟英）是温病大家，在霍乱预防中即提倡不可过饱，《随息居霍乱论》提到：“因近人腹负者多，厚味腊毒，脏腑先已不清，故秽浊之邪易得而乘之，同气相求，势所必然之事。”力倡节饮食，忌厚味，戒醇酒，禁蛮补，以清平淡者而食之。
在疫病的病后调养中，太医王士雄非常注重食疗，著有《随息居饮食谱》，其中提到“百草、百果皆是良药”。考虑到新冠肺炎恢复期的患者多为肺脾气虚夹湿的状态，推荐：人参粥，补肺脾之气；糯米饮补肺气，充胃津；羊肺补肺气，止咳嗽；川椒除湿止泻、涤秽舒郁、消食辟邪；萝卜润肺化痰，补脾运食；茭白清湿热；冬瓜养胃生津，涤秽祛湿；梅汁可敛肺气，生津液；象梨汁为“天生甘露饮”滋阴补液；蔗汁为天生建中汤或天生复脉汤补中祛寒；金橘甘温醒脾，下气辟秽，化痰止渴，消食解酲。
----------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기