There is an old saying: "not a drop of rain thinks it caused the flood."

Now that everyone is canvassing, you may not realize that you are trampling on fairness.

First of all, we need to understand why we choose. Why don't a few experts decide the result as soon as they discuss it? Isn't this to let all kinds of people evaluate children from different angles? Isn't that what parents have been calling for in order to make all children compete fairly?

It is unfair for parents to canvass for their children on WeChat and QQ. If every parent does this, the selection activity will become a network competition.

And it's not good for children. Children are the shadows of their parents. If he always wins the game in an unfair way, then he will get used to this unfair way, which is terrible. They will become the main force in the future society, and a fair society cannot be established by a group of people who trample on fairness. Therefore, I think fairness is not shouted out, but maintained by each of us.

Perhaps, some people will think, "I have the freedom to vote, and the law does not stipulate that I can't canvass like this." If you don't let me canvass, you are trampling on my freedom. "

And I want to say that fairness and freedom have been relative since ancient times. You can't have these two things at the same time. Great philosophers choose the freedom to escape, and they lose the fairness of the law.

Therefore, in terms of fairness and freedom, we need the strength of each of us. When everyone gives up the freedom of a thing, they are fair.

Hu Shi said: "When they all tolerate my speech, I have the freedom to speak." The relationship between fairness and freedom is roughly the same as tolerance and freedom, with gains and losses.

Of course, absolute fairness does not exist, and we can only pursue relative fairness. When people choose the freedom to vote, this choice will inevitably lose fairness.

If each of us sacrifices a little freedom, then fairness will be our best reward.

From offline to online

Recently, various canvassing information often appears on WeChat and QQ. Parents asked everyone to canvass for the children who participated in the selection activities. Some people say it's unfair, others say it's using the media for personal gain. However, I can't agree with this view.

If you want to add a crime, why not stop here? It is really a good idea to do a good job fairly and selfishly. However, will someone not canvass? To take a step back, even if some people suffer less from netizens, didn't there be no canvassing in the offline selection in the past? This choice is never a clear spring. In the final analysis, it is the sum of personal ability and social influence. Since we have chosen online voting, we should bear the difference of network influence instead of making a fuss about fairness and purpose.

I remember reading a report the other day. Major e-commerce companies have cracked down on the water army. Amazon detects abnormal comments and identifies suspicious businesses to consumers. Some domestic websites have blocked some comments, which can only be evaluated after purchase ... But can these methods really stop the water army from attacking? Impossible, when evaluating and recommending the existence of this model, the water army is an inevitable product. Imagine, if offline can improve the reputation of the store by hiring people, will there be shopkeepers who don't do this? But in reality, it is not worth the loss, and almost no one will choose such a publicity method. However, when the screen turns to the Internet, in today's era when even batch registered accounts have software, the water army has actually become the best choice.

Let's look back at the issue of canvassing. Admittedly, this is also the best choice for parents. It's just that it's faster and easier to ask others for help online than online drop-down voting! Therefore, this is not simply a question of fairness or purpose, but a real projection of reality on the network, offline and online, which magnifies the original problem in people's eyes.

The network is just a mirror, which can only project the truth to the offline. The canvassing on WeChat and QQ was originally to select the undercurrent surging under this pool of water and rise to the surface. There is no need to shout or swear. What we see is the original appearance around us, and we look at ourselves offline from the online mirror.

Love is support, not victory.

"The children are participating in the selection activities. Please help us to vote for XX children. Trouble everyone. "

I'm tired of this kind of news. In the midst of criticism, the phrase "This is the expression of parents' love for their children" almost made me laugh out of the examination room. In my opinion, loving children depends on real support, not superficial victory.

Loving children is not a superficial victory. Why? Imagine what will happen to children who rely on their parents to help them brush their tickets when they grow up: the scholarship itself is a ticket, which is naturally loose; The child's character was destroyed by the ballooning number of votes. When he met a competitor, he thought about cheating by brushing tickets, but he thought about having his parents as his backers-incompetent and immoral, unable to be an independent adult, although hateful, but really miserable. However, parents have sacrificed their good children and enriched their growing vanity in the victory of brushing tickets again and again. The "love" they show in the act of brushing tickets is the love of honor, the envy of others and the image of "great parents" who get along with each other-but not the love of children.

The definition of "love" is extremely personalized, but it is inseparable from one sentence: "I am willing to accept the truest you, even if it is very unbearable." Therefore, "love" refers to the love of parents for their children in the competition, which should be practical understanding and support, rather than mindless brushing tickets. In the preparation of selection activities, parents understand and support their children's preparation; After the results of the selection came out, the child won, telling the child to guard against arrogance and rashness, telling the child that there are mountains besides others, and telling the child to learn to respect others; When the child loses, encourage the child to "work hard" and tell him that he loves the content of the activity itself, not the honor of putting on a show-I think this is the correct routine for parents to love their children in competitive selection activities.

Parents' love for their children is to make them an independent person. Before this goal is achieved, it is particularly important for parents to support their children. Some time ago, a screenshot of a worried mother who turned to an expert for help because her son was gay was circulated on the Internet. In the private letter, my mother's surprise, anxiety, wisdom and tolerance correspond to the sentence that all love can't be separated: "I am willing to accept the truest you, even if it is unbearable." Although the premise of saying this sentence is that parents themselves have strong enough psychology-but this is another matter that needs to be discussed.

Loving children is a support, not a superficial victory. It is the most worthwhile victory for parents to grow into an independent talent.

three