李连杰

胡锡进：张丹丹为什么会说这番冷漠无情的话？我百思不得其解_我的网站

毛骨悚然撞鬼经

A | Last week, the predominantly conservative US Supreme Court overruled the precedent established by the Roe v. Wade and decided that states may regulate the practice of abortion. The Roe v. Wade decision upheld pregnant women’s right to seek an abortion without government restrictions. A decision in the 1992 case of Planned Parenthood v. Casey largely upheld the Roe ruling.,Effect on Midterms,In November, US citizens will go to the polls in what will be the first midterm election of the Joe Biden administration as well as a referendum of sorts on the current US president's performance. The Republicans have been projected to win back the House of Representatives and the Senate as well, as the public has been increasingly frustrated by the issues such as inflation, crime, education and jobs. The recent ruling, however, could potentially give the democrats a shot in the arm by generating excitement among their voters.,"It will certainly galvanize the Democrats' base, for sure, it will help them to raise campaign funds and it may - perhaps - make some races more difficult for Republicans, especially in the suburbs among women voters," Robert Singh, a professor of politics at Birkbeck, University of London, said, adding that most voters will still be focused on other issues and he still expects the Republicans to win both houses of the Congress.,This sentiment was echoed by Ziad Munson, a sociology professor and the chair of the department of sociology and anthropology at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, who also warned that the effect of the decision can be overstated.,"A consistent finding in political science over the last several decades is that the abortion issue, while a potent ideological symbol, seldom is a key policy issue for voters when they cast their votes," Munson explained.,Andrew Wroe, a senior lecturer in American politics at the University of Kent, agreed as well that the issue should help the Democrats, citing the effectiveness of the Republican use of cultural issues for rallying their base.,"The Democratic Party has been less successful in prosecuting the Culture Wars, but this is its great opportunity. Whether it will use it well is a different question, however," Wroe suggested.,At the same time, Christopher Kaczor, the chair of the philosophy department at Loyola Marymount University, is doubtful about the abortion issue having an impact on the US political landscape and helping Democrats to excite their voters.,"I expect that the very small minority of people for whom abortion is the key issue, on both sides, will be energized by this decision, but for most people other political and economic issues will remain more important," Kaczor stated.,New Wave of Protests?,The Supreme Court's decision has triggered a strong reaction on both sides of the issue in the United States, with hundreds of protesters, pro-life and pro-choice, gathering outside the Supreme Court last week following the decision. After the ruling, protests broke out in various US cities, showing a possibility of a nationwide backlash.,"People are angry, distraught, and ready to mobilise. It is difficult to say precisely how long the protests will persist, but it is likely to be some considerable time, given the magnitude of the policy change and the direct and indirect effects it will have on millions of people's lives," Wroe said.,Meanwhile, other experts expressed skepticism regarding the possibility of nationwide protests, including Munson, who drew attention to the fact that "the conservative majority tested for this possibility when they agreed not to stay the implementation of the Texas S.B. 8 law [also known as the Texas Heartbeat Act that bans abortion after detection of an unborn child's heartbeat] earlier this year.","Allowing that law to go into effect was the Court's political trial balloon, and it showed that widespread outrage quickly quieted down after just a few days. The outrage following the formal overturning of Roe v. Wade will last longer, but it is not likely to lead to large-scale consequential protest activity," the sociologist said.,Man Charged With Attempted Murder of LAPD Officers Amid Roe v Wade Protests26 June, 14:51 GMT,Who Judges the Justices?,Over the years, the role of courts in the US social and political life has greatly increased, with the Supreme Court becoming the final arbiter on many hot-button issues, such as same-sex marriage, gun control and abortion. This has been a prominent talking point among conservatives, who have been claiming that this practice undermines the country's constitutional principles, while liberals have been appealing to the notion of the courts standing up for human rights as well as drawing attention to the conservative movement's efforts to train and promote judges who share its principles.,"Both liberals and conservatives have always been supportive of judicial activism, they just want the judiciary to be activist in promoting the issues or outcomes that their side prefers. This despite the fact that conservatives have used 'judicial activism' as a talking point for some time," Munson pointed out.,Kaczor, for his part, drew a distinction between the original Roe decision and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, insisting that the latter actually corrects a case of judicial activism.,"The Dobbs decision is not accurately portrayed as a case of judicial activism, but rather as the reversal of judicial activism. It was Roe that established a constitutional right for abortion that had no basis in the text, history, or structure of the constitution. The decision of Dobbs undoes this judicial activism," he stated.,Nevertheless, the ruling by the current Supreme Court, which has three justices picked up by former President Donald Trump from a list compiled by the conservative legal organization Federalist Society, is likely to have the Democrats sour on the Supreme Court.,"Democrats are increasingly likely to start talking about illegitimate policy making by the Supreme Court. They will start to complain about judicial activism. But, as noted above, they can use these arguments to mobilize their base and to argue for urgency of electing more Democrats to the Senate, which of course must ratify presidential appointments to the Court," Wroe said, adding that the Democrats can also "begin to legitimately argue that the Senate has an in-built Republican advantage that needs to be addressed via constitutional change.",According to Singh, any Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential race will face the pressure to commit to enlarging and reforming the Supreme Court.,"Whether that happens, though, is another matter. I doubt the Democrats will have sufficient seats in the Senate to overcome a GOP filibuster of court reform proposals. But the fact that the conservatives number six now on the Court sets up an on-going problem for Democrats, and more conflict to come," Singh concluded.。

老胡没有“要求”张丹丹道歉，但我昨天写道：她“也许有必要对舆论做一个回应，该说明的说明，该致歉的致歉”。我今天也这样建议。我觉得那样的话，对她本人与公众沟通，度过眼前的危机可能有好处。张丹丹在《聊一波》节目里公开声称，灵活就是一种“福利”，因此灵活就业者的社会保障就应该低一些，激怒了全网舆论，根本没得洗。那段视频传递出她脱离现实，对灵活就业群体缺乏同情心的强烈信息。老胡尤其惊讶的是，《聊一波》不是直播，而是一档录播节目，也就是说如果张丹丹录制时出现口误的话，她本人或者节目制作方应该有机会纠正问题，避免引发烈度如此高的舆论风暴。然而问题就这样放过去了。人们只能理解为：张丹丹没有觉得这段话有严重不妥；节目编辑者如果不存恶意的话，也不觉得这段话可能给她带来灾难性的声誉打击。老胡查了劳动经济学的有关说法，的确存在补偿性工资差异理论，该模型假设劳动者可以自由选择，用一部分福利保障换取时间上的自由度。但该理论成立有一个前提，即劳动者拥有充分选择权，既可以选择稳定工作，也可以选择自由度更高的灵活就业。

B | 然而当下的现实是，大部分劳动者选择灵活就业是被动的。因为现实中正规稳定的岗位不足，很多人才会加入灵活就业大军谋生，而且那个群体中很多人的劳动强度和时间比稳定岗位工作者反而可能更高更多。

C | 这种情况下把一个假设理论拿到现实中来，宣扬灵活就业者在享受“福利”,并由此得出他们的社保就该低一些的结论，确实是荒谬的，让公众无法接受。

D | 老胡很难相信张丹丹教授作为北大国发院的副院长、博士生导师，区分不了劳动经济学中一个有明显前提的理论模型与我们当下实际情况的区别，我也无法相信她骨子里就是一个“坏人”“冷酷者”，对被动的灵活就业者毫无同情心。我看了她之前的一些发言，不仅很正常，而且显示她处在为灵活就业者争取权利的一线，比如她为给平台骑手们上社保大声疾呼，并且提出了很多具体建议。她似乎是中国学界为增加灵活就业群体权益做出最大实际努力的人之一。但她为什么会在节目中说出这番冷漠无情的话呢？老胡百思不得其解。我本人参加过很多视频录制，40分钟至60分钟的节目往往要录两个小时以上。做点善意的猜测：是否在这个过程中张丹丹讲了上边所说的劳动经济学的假设理论，然后在后期剪辑中没有突出这个理论的假设性，而被当成了张丹丹对现实的一种议论了呢？但如果是这样的话，张丹丹在节目播出之前看样片，应该指出来，要求修改，视频剪辑人也应该意识到这样播出有可能导致爆炸性的舆论事件，但为什么没有阻止呢？莫非张丹丹和节目制作方都不认为如此播出不会有太大问题？他们脱离互联网、脱离群众的程度真的如此严重吗？老胡一般都反对把一个说了错话的人往最坏的情况去想，下最极端的结论。老胡66岁了，我明确说：这个世界上没有那么多极端的坏人。把一个犯了一般错误的人往罪恶的方向去想，这绝不是好习惯。而且我看了张丹丹之前的各种发言之后，我认为在我们为自己看到的事情骂她的时候，不应该拒绝了解在我们没有看到的时候，她为灵活就业者还做过什么。