【本章提要：被扭曲的社会意志或是通过对权力意志施加压力迫使权力进行调整，或是通过支持革命以强力更新权力，由新权力体现社会意志。这使得社会意志在总体上决定社会发展走向，然而无论压力调整还是强力更新都存在滞后。】
Chapter synopsis: The distorted societal will either forces to adjust by exerting pressure on the will to power, or forcefully renews power by supporting revolutions, with the new power embodying the societal will. This allows the societal will to determine the direction of societal development in general, but there is a lag in both pressure for adjustment and forceful renewal.
卢梭设想，当权力背离人民时，“由法律保障人民定期集会，终止一切现有的行政权，让权力回到人民手中”。然而什么地方可以装得下一个国家的人民集会？而“权力回到人民手中”的人民之手又是什么？如果开会都难，何谈推翻政权？当年美国宪法给民众持枪权也许是出于让人民有能力推翻政权，但是民众的枪与今日国家的武器已完全无法匹敌，何况多数国家禁止民众持枪，甚至在某些国家买菜刀都要求实名。
Rousseau imagined that when power deviates from the people, “the law guarantees the people’s regular assembly, terminates all existing administrative power, and returns power to the people’s hands.” However, where can a national assembly of the people be accommodated? And what is the “hand of the people” when “power returns to the people”? If it’s difficult to hold a meeting, how can we talk about overthrowing the government? The U.S. Constitution may have given the people the right to bear arms in order to give the people the ability to overthrow the government, but the people’s guns are completely unmatched with the state’s weapons today, let alone that most countries prohibit the people from bearing arms, and even in some countries, buying kitchen knives requires real-name registration.
从契约论的角度，人民推翻不履行契约的政府应是契约组成部分。其实无需用武器，只要人民共同拒绝服从，政权立刻就会垮台。问题在于人民如何做到共同不服从？那不是靠登高一呼或小道谣传可以做到，需要有能够覆盖全体人民的沟通结构，才能让人民协同行动。而政权恰是唯一能覆盖全体人民的沟通结构，它怎么会去协同人民推翻自己？人民推翻政权的权利因此只是契约论的一种道义表达。
From the perspective of contract theory, the people's overthrow of a government that does not fulfill its contract should be considered a constituent part of the contract. In fact, there is no need for weapons, as long as the people collectively refuse to obey, the regime will immediately collapse. The question is, how can the people achieve collective disobedience? It cannot be achieved by shouting from the rooftops or spreading rumors, it requires a communication structure that can cover all the people in order to coordinate the people's actions. And the regime is precisely the only communication structure that can cover all the people, how can it coordinate the people to overthrow itself? Therefore, the right of the people to overthrow the regime is just a moral expression within the framework of the social contract theory.
有人认为今日的互联网提供了沟通民众的手段。的确，互联网的沟通能力前所未有。专制政权搭建防火长城就是惧怕其沟通民众。但即使能突破封锁，实现了民众的沟通，哪怕人人认为政权该被推翻，也明白同时拒绝服从政权立刻会垮，多数人还是会旁观，希望由他人推翻政权，自己搭便车。
Some people believe that today’s internet provides a means of communicating with the public. Indeed, the communication capabilities of the internet are unprecedented. Authoritarian regimes build the Great Firewall out of fear of its ability to communicate with the public. But even if the censorship can be broken through and the communication of the people is realized, even if everyone thinks that the regime should be overthrown, and understands that the regime will immediately collapse if they refuse to obey at the same time, most people will still stand by, hoping that others will overthrow the regime and they can hitch a ride.
所谓的纳什均衡，是指博弈局中的每个当事人选用的策略都能保证自身状况不会因其他当事人改变策略变得更坏。典型案例是所谓的“囚徒困境”——两个罪犯都不供认犯罪便只能被轻判。但二人被隔离审问，警方允诺一个供认而另一个不供认时，供认者释放，不供认者重判。二人在无法沟通的状况下都会担心对方供认使自己遭重判；若对方不供认，自己供认了则会被释放；即使对方也供认，自己供认至少免被重判。于是二人都会选择供认，结果共同得到次重判决。比起二人都不供认的轻判，次重判决显然不利，却是个人理性的精心选择后形成的集体非理性。这种纳什均衡的结果是共同受损。
The so-called Nash equilibrium refers to a situation in a game where each participant’s chosen strategy ensures that their own situation will not worsen due to other participants changing their strategies. A typical example is the so-called “prisoner’s dilemma”—two criminals who do not confess to their crimes can only be lightly sentenced. However, when the two are isolated for questioning, the police promise that if one confesses and the other does not, the confessor will be released and the non-confessor will be heavily sentenced. In a situation where they cannot communicate, both will worry that the other’s confession will result in their own heavy sentence; if the other does not confess, their own confession will result in their release; even if the other also confesses, their own confession will at least avoid a heavy sentence. As a result, both will choose to confess, resulting in a jointly received a moderately heavy sentence. Compared to the light sentence when both do not confess, the moderately heavy sentence is obviously disadvantageous, but it is the collective irrationality formed after the careful choice of individual rationality. The result of this Nash equilibrium is mutual damage.
合作的前提在于沟通，能打破囚徒困境的沟通须非常充分。两个囚犯哪怕刚刚定完攻守同盟，一旦被隔离两处，也会重复上述选择，因为他们谁也没有把握对方不会一转身就叛变。这要求沟通须达到两人能互相盯着对方同时进行表达的紧密程度，才可放心地都不供认，实现共同得益的集体理性。由此看到沟通充分与否会导致完全不同的结果。
The premise of cooperation is communication, and the communication that can break the prisoner’s dilemma must be extremely sufficient. Even if two prisoners have just formed an alliance, once they are isolated, they will repeat the above choices, because neither of them is sure that the other will not turn around and betray. This requires communication to reach a close degree where two people can stare at each other and express at the same time, so that they can confidently not confess, and achieve collective rationality that is mutually beneficial. From this, we can see that whether communication is sufficient or not can lead to completely different results.
推翻政权成功，搭便车者一样享受成果，却不必付出代价；推翻政权失败，搭便车者则能避免惩罚。因此无论其他人怎么做，搭便车者的状况都不会更差，是在不能充分沟通状态下的最优策略。当这种状况不断趋向纳什均衡，搭便车的人越多，革命成功的可能性越小，参与者支付的成本越高，失败受到的惩罚越重，最终会使所有人都放弃参与，推翻政权的人民起义就不会发生。
The overthrow of the government, whether successful or not, allows free riders to enjoy the benefits without incurring any costs. If the regime is successfully toppled, the free rider still enjoys the rewards without contributing; if the attempt fails, the free rider avoids punishment. Therefore, regardless of what others do, the situation for the free rider will not worsen, making it the optimal strategy in a scenario where communication is limited. As this situation continuously approaches a Nash equilibrium, with more free riders, the likelihood of a successful revolution diminishes. The participants bear higher costs, and the punishment for failure becomes more severe. Ultimately, this discourages everyone from participating, preventing the occurrence of a people’s uprising to overthrow the government.
现实中搭便车的现象比比皆是，是对各种集体行动和公共事务（如维权、环保、卫生等）的主要瓦解因素。规模有限的熟人圈子之所以容易发动并坚持群体抗争，原因就在于沟通充分，搭便车会被发现和受到谴责，积极参与者则会得到赞扬与奖励，搭便车从而不再是最优策略。
In reality, the phenomenon of free riding is ubiquitous and is a major factor undermining various collective actions and public affairs such as rights protection, environmental conservation, and public health. The reason why small social circles are easily mobilized and can sustain group resistance is precisely due to sufficient communication. Free riders are likely to be identified and condemned, while active participants receive praise and rewards, making free riding no longer the optimal strategy.
期望通过重复博弈改变搭便车的状况，前提需要参与者的行为能被他人了解和记住，以在下轮博弈做出回应，从而形成约束和激励。但群体规模过大则同样会失效。生活中可看到村内小店要讲信用，否则会在重复博弈中受到村民杯葛。但是旅游景点的商家对众多游客每人宰一次就够，不在乎回头客，就形不成重复博弈。
Expecting to change the situation of free riding through repeated games requires that participants' actions are observable and memorable to others, allowing for responses in subsequent rounds of the game to establish constraints and incentives. However, this approach is also rendered ineffective when the group size becomes too large. In daily life, one can observe that small village stores need to maintain trustworthiness, as a lack of credibility would lead to ostracism from the villagers in repeated games. However, businesses at tourist attractions may exploit each visitor once, unconcerned about repeat customers, thus failing to establish a framework for repeated games.
比搭便车更具破坏性的是“违约优势”。在普遍遵守契约的环境中，不守契约者往往会在竞争中占上风，其得到的好处正是守约者所失。无法充分沟通的群体不能有效约束违约者，竞争便会促使违约者不断增加，最终导致契约解体。亚当斯密的“无形之手”立足的原理——个人追求一己利益会自然促进社会利益，被这种纳什均衡颠覆。
More destructive than free riding is the concept of "violation advantage." In an environment where contracts are generally adhered to, those who breach contracts often gain an upper hand in competition, reaping the benefits lost by the adherents. Groups that lack sufficient communication mechanisms are unable to adequately constrain violators, and competition can lead to a continual increase in contract breaches, ultimately resulting in the disintegration of contracts. The principle upon which Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is based — the idea that individual pursuit of self-interest naturally promotes societal interests — is subverted by this form of Nash equilibrium.
霍布斯推崇利维坦，也是需要一个能沟通整个社会的强大政府，看管所有人不得违约，避免出现囚徒困境。这就进入一个怪圈——被赋予推翻违背契约政府之权利的人民，需要政府的看管才能遵守社会契约，也就排除了契约论给予人民推翻政府的权力。而政府不但不像霍布斯期待的那样单纯和中立，反会有意利用其对沟通的控制，充当囚徒困境中的警察，切断人民的沟通，制造猜忌，诱导背叛，让人民只能按照权力的沟通行事。
Hobbes advocates for Leviathan, a powerful government capable of communicating with the entire society, overseeing everyone to prevent breaches of contract and avoid falling into the Prisoner's Dilemma. This sets up a paradox — the people endowed with the right to overthrow a government that violates the contract need the government's oversight to adhere to the social contract. This, in turn, negates the power given to the people by the social contract theory to overthrow the government. Moreover, the government, contrary to Hobbes' expecting of simplicity and neutrality, tends to intentionally utilize its control over communication, acting as a sort of police force in the Prisoner's Dilemma. It restricts people's communication, fosters suspicion, induces betrayal, leaving the people with no choice but to act according to the communication dictated by the government.
造成囚徒困境的关键是沟通。切断囚徒沟通的是警察，而切断人民沟通的，站在前面的是政权，站在后面的是规模。规模造成的无法沟通相当于天然隔离了人民的警察，使人民成为规模的囚徒。解决囚徒困境首先要解决大规模沟通的问题，其次才是解决政权的问题，因为政权切断人民沟通归根结底也是利用规模。
The key factor leading to the Prisoner's Dilemma is communication. While the police cut off communication among prisoners, the government stands at the forefront, and behind it is the issue of scale that hinders communication. The inability to communicate caused by scale is akin to a natural isolation imposed on the people by the "police" of scale, turning the people into prisoners of that scale. Resolving the Prisoner's Dilemma requires addressing the issue of large-scale communication first, followed by tackling the issue of government, as the government ultimately uses the scale to cut off communication among the people.
以往历史一直没有产生打破大规模社会之囚徒困境的方法，民众始终被规模分隔，既然社会意志的体现全靠权力意志与之“吻合”。权力决定一切似乎不言而喻。然而若权力意志果真是绝对主宰，就免不了与社会意志“剪刀差”式地越走越远，不会回头。事实却是权力意志虽然不断脱离社会意志，却总会与之再度“吻合”。其中是否存在必然性？是否即使在囚徒困境中，社会意志也能对权力意志有一种制约，可以把力图为所欲为的权力意志不断拉回到“吻合”呢 ？
Throughout history, there has been no method to break the Prisoner's Dilemma of large-scale societies. The populace has always been isolated by scale, as the embodiment of societal will seems entirely dependent on the alignment with the will of power. The idea that power determines everything appears self-evident. However, if the will of power is indeed the absolute dominator, it inevitably drifts further and further away from the will of society, with no intention of turning back. The reality, however, is that even though the will of power continually diverges from the will of society, it always manages to "coincide" with it once again. Is there inevitability in this process? Is it possible that even in the Prisoner's Dilemma, the will of society can constrain the will of power, repeatedly pulling it back towards "coincidence"?
首先，当个人意志受到扭曲，便会本能地不满意，产生反抗冲动。尽管有时可能被压抑，甚至不被自身所意识，实际却在一刻不停地寻求突破，为消除扭曲提供行动力，若始终得不到释放，甚至可能导致盲目的爆发。那种对抗扭曲、力图消除扭曲的力可称作“反扭力”。方向与所受扭曲的方向相反，大小与所受扭曲的大小成正比。反扭力是能被感知的。只要是被强迫做的事，人就没有积极性，怠工、不负责、拆台、刁难、幸灾乐祸、“上有政策、下有对策”。无论在什么样的社会条件下，无论是在什么社会结构中，这种反扭力都可存在且发自社会的每个“细胞”，传递于社会的每条“神经”和“血脉”，导致千千万万的个人力图消除所受的扭曲，去言说、上访、对抗、不合作、参加革命或要求民主……
Firstly, when individual will is distorted, an instinctive dissatisfaction arises, leading to a rebellious impulse. Although at times it may be suppressed or not consciously acknowledged, in reality, it continuously seeks breakthroughs, providing the driving force to eliminate the distortion. If this force is consistently not released, it may even lead to blind explosions. The force that resists distortion and seeks to eliminate it can be referred to as "anti-distortion force." Its direction is opposite to the direction of the distortion, and its magnitude is proportional to the magnitude of the distortion. The anti-distortion force is perceptible. Whenever individuals are compelled to do something, they lose their initiative, leading to sabotage, irresponsibility, subversion, difficulties, schadenfreude, and the creation of countermeasures against policies. Regardless of societal conditions or structures, this anti-distortion force can exist in every "cell" of society, transmitted through every "nerve" and "vein" of society, causing millions of individuals to strive to eliminate the distortions they experience through various means, such as expressing opinions, petitioning, resisting, non-cooperation, participating in revolutions, or advocating for democracy.
不同的个人意志所受到的具体扭曲可能千差万别，但是力图消除扭曲的反扭力是同质的——体现为对权力的不满和否定，因此便可在数量求和结构中，借助日常社会网络求和成社会总体的反扭力。如社会意志自发地在数量求和结构中形成满意与否的判断那样。
The specific distortions to which different individual wills are subjected may vary greatly, but the anti-distortion force of trying to eliminate the distortion is homogeneous — manifested in dissatisfaction and negation of power, so that it can be summed into the anti-distortion force of society as a whole with the help of daily social networks in a scalar summation structure. Just as the will of society spontaneously forms a judgment of satisfaction or non-satisfaction in the structure of scalar summation.
社会意志反扭力求和而成总体，构成对权力的压力。权力面对这种反扭力，会感受统治和管理受阻，或是社会处于离心状态，难以推动。权力意志对社会意志的扭曲越大，反扭力也随之增大，权力感到的压力也越大，以致不得不自我调整，减小对社会意志的扭曲。二者之间这种作用力与反作用力的关系，是约束权力意志终将自觉或被迫地与社会意志“吻合”的关键所在。
The aggregate of societal will's anti-distortion forces forms a collective entity, creating pressure on those in power. Faced with this anti-distortion force, those in power experience obstacles in governance or may find society in a state of disarray, making it difficult to advance their agendas. As the distortion of power's will towards societal will increases, so does the anti-distortion force, intensifying the pressure on those in power. This dynamic creates a necessity for power to self-adjust, reducing its distortion of societal will. The relationship between this action force and the reactive force is the key to restraining the will of power, eventually compelling it, consciously or involuntarily, to "coincide" with societal will.
一般来讲，社会意志的反扭力在达到极限前，对权力始终是压力状态，超过极限才可能爆发为强力。强力是特殊情况，压力则是日常状态，时刻都在或大或小地发生作用。
Generally speaking, the anti-distortion force of societal will remains in a state of pressure on those in power until it reaches its limit. Only beyond this limit does it have the potential to erupt into a strong force. Strong force is a special circumstance, whereas pressure is the daily state, constantly exerting its influence to varying degrees.
压力本质上是社会对权力实施的沟通进行抵制，导致社会紧张。压力根据不同的社会形态、历史条件、权力集团的态度与能力而变化，除了造成权力体系指挥不灵， 也会因为社会活力下降，内耗增加，影响社会财富增殖和运行效率，对权力集团自身利益与目标造成损失，甚至动摇权力统治。因此明智的当权者不会铁了心与社会意志对抗，一条道走到黑的偏执也与统治的基本原理不容。相对明智的当权者会辨察来自社会意志的压力，调整权力意志与社会意志“吻合”，从而减小社会意志扭曲，缓解所受的压力。有些王朝维持数百年未遭强力改朝换代，正是权力意志在社会意志压力下不断调整，缓解社会意志扭曲的结果。如果没有这种调整，一味脱离社会意志，再强大的权力也不可能一直维持。
The pressure is essentially a resistance to the communication implemented by power in society, leading to societal tension. Pressure varies according to different societal forms, historical conditions, attitudes and capabilities of power groups. In addition to causing the power system to be unresponsive, it can also cause a decline in societal vitality, an increase in internal conflict, affect the growth of societal wealth and operational efficiency, cause losses to the interests and goals of the power group, and even shake the rule of power. Therefore, wise rulers will not be determined to confront the societal will, and a dogmatic, uncompromising approach is incompatible with the basic principles of rule. Relatively wise rulers will discern the pressure from the societal will, adjust the will of power to "align" with societal will, thereby reducing the distortion of the societal will and alleviating the pressure they are under. Some dynasties have maintained for hundreds of years without being forcibly changed, which is the result of the power will constantly adjusting under the pressure of the societal will and alleviating the distortion of the societal will. If there is no such adjustment, no matter how powerful the power is, it cannot be maintained if it blindly deviates from the societal will.
权力意志与社会意志的“吻合”有的是出自权力集团的派别斗争。在 “凡是敌人反对的我们就要拥护”的权斗中，争权者为了战胜对手，往往打起“为民”旗号，扮演社会意志的代言人。他们有意利用社会意志的压力，把人心向背当作权斗武器。尤其是权力集团的新生代，更是需要以此弥补自身弱势，虽然他们内心深处并非真有人民的位置。
The "alignment" between the will of power and societal will sometimes arises from power struggles within the ruling group. In the political struggle of "supporting whatever our enemies oppose," contenders for power often raise the banner of "for the people" to portray themselves as advocates of societal will in order to defeat over their opponents. They intentionally exploit the pressure from societal will, using people's sentiment as a weapon in the power struggle. This is particularly true for the new generation within the power group, as they need to compensate for their inherent weaknesses, even if their true sentiments do not align with the genuine interests of the people.
权力集团内部层出不穷的“改革派”、“保守派”、“温和派”、“强硬派”，表面看只是政见不同，或是出于野心的争斗，与社会意志无关，但是细究一下，为什么他们要打“为民”的旗号？为什么把人心向背当作武器？归根结底是社会意志的压力在起作用。迎合了社会意志的当权人物，的确也常常在权力集团内部的你上我下中成为赢家。
Within power groups, there is a constant emergence of "reformists," "conservatives," "moderates," and "hardliners." On the surface, it may seem like mere differences in political views or struggles driven by ambition, unrelated to the will of society. However, upon closer inspection, why do they often raise the banner of "for the people"? Why do they use public sentiment as a weapon? Ultimately, the pressure of societal will is at work. Those in power who cater to the will of society often become winners in the internal power struggles within the group.
即使不是出于权斗，仅出于当权者为了自身利益——诸如政权稳定、流传功名，或是职责感和功名心等——去迎合社会意志，也等于是受到社会意志的制约。
Even if it is not out of power struggle, but only because of the self-interest of those in power, such as the stability of the regime, perpetuating prestige, or fulfilling a sense of duty, or aspiring for recognition and acclaim, etc., to cater to the will of society is tantamount to being constrained by the will of society.
社会意志形成对权力的压力，不需要专门结构，也不需要组织，通过完成其他社会功能——经济的、生活的或社会交往的——网络和管道就能传递与汇合，作用于社会各个层面。这种特点使得社会意志利用压力远比使用强力安全、方便、收发自如，因此成为社会意志制约权力意志的主要方式，持久地作用于权力。
The pressure on power formed by the will of society does not require a special structure or organization, but can be transmitted and converged through networks and channels that fulfill other social functions – economic, living or social communications, acting at all levels of society. This characteristic makes the use of pressure by the societal will far more safe, convenient, and free to send and receive than the use of force, so it has become the main way for the societal will to constrain the will to power, and it has a lasting effect on power.
专制权力属于当权者私有，权力意志是否自我调整依赖当权者的明智。如果其昏聩或被佞臣包围，甚至可能感受不到社会意志的压力存在，或是宁愿镇压也不让步，那时不断积累的压力就可能逐步演化成强力，以更新权力的方式使社会意志得到体现。
Authoritarian power belongs to the ruler's private domain, and the self-adjustment of the will of power depends on the wisdom of those in authority. If the ruler is misguided or surrounded by flatterers, they may not even perceive the existence of societal will pressure or may choose to suppress it rather than yield. In such cases, the steadily accumulating pressure may gradually evolve into a forceful manifestation, prompting a renewal of power to reflect the will of society.
首先社会意志的反扭力会促使人们寻找并发展权力之外的沟通。产生体现社会不满和要求变革的思想，为社会意志树立目标。那种思想通过权力结构外的其他沟通结构传播，如沙龙、读书社、传法布道、地下出版等，也可利用手机、互联网、卫星电视……人们对那些思想产生兴趣，甚至不畏镇压形成体制外的传播网络，正是因为反扭力，才会有这样做的热情与动力。
Firstly, the anti-distortion force of societal will encourages people to seek and develop communication beyond the realm of power. This leads to the generation of thoughts that reflect societal dissatisfaction and demand change, setting goals for societal will. Such thoughts spread through communication structures outside of the power hierarchy, such as salons, book clubs, preaching, underground publications, and can also utilize mobile phones, the internet, satellite television, etc. People develop an interest in these ideas, and, undeterred by repression, form networks for disseminating information outside the established power system. It is precisely because of this anti-distortion force that there is enthusiasm and motivation for engaging in such activities.
社会意志的目标是由思想者提出，为什么说思想者只是体现社会意志，而非塑造社会意志呢？这是因为能提出思想的人有成百上千，但是哪些思想会成为社会意志的目标取决于社会意志的选择。社会意志的“判断”部分对此起决定的作用，不被这种“判断”接受的思想也不会对现实发生影响。即使那些看似引导了社会意志的思想，也要先被社会意志的判断所接受。
The goals of societal will are proposed by thinkers. Why is it said that thinkers merely embody societal will rather than shape it? Because there are hundreds or thousands of people who can propose ideas. However, which ideas become the objectives of societal will depends on the choices made by societal will itself. The judgment part of societal will plays a decisive role in this process. Only ideas accepted through the judgment of societal will have a tangible impact on reality, while those not accepted will not substantially influence the current state. Even ideas that seemingly guide societal will must first be accepted through the judgment process of societal will.
将思想变成行动离不开组织。尤其对权力进行更新，需要建立新的沟通结构替代原有权力的沟通结构。一般而言，权力垄断武器和资源，占尽优势。民众不希望承担风险，更愿意以压力方式表达不满。只要权力意志能及时自我矫正，舒缓社会意志的扭曲，以强力更新权力便不会获得民众支持。但若权力意志坚持对社会意志的扭曲，社会意志的反扭力会成为产生新沟通结构（革命党、起义军、权力分裂另立山头）的土壤。说到底，强力是通过组织起来的人实现，反叛者组织起来就有了强力，开始弱小，但是只要与社会意志相吻合，民众支持或参与造反的人就会越来越多，使其发展壮大。在山头林立的地下组织或揭竿而起的队伍中，最终哪个能脱颖而出，浮在上面的看似种种偶然的或个人的因素，究其深处也有社会意志的选择。社会意志以提供追随者的方式发挥作用。追随者增加意味着新的沟通结构——也是新的权力结构的不断壮大。旧权力则处处受反扭力的抵触，日趋没落，众叛亲离。最终得民心者得天下，至少是失民心者失天下——即使足以颠覆政权的力量无法形成，政权也可能在受到外敌入侵或巨大天灾时，因为得不到人民的支持而覆灭。
Turning ideas into action cannot be separated from organizing. Especially for the renewal of power, it is necessary to establish a new communication structure to replace the original power communication structure. Generally speaking, power monopolizes weapons and resources, taking all the advantages. The public does not want to take risks and prefers to express dissatisfaction in the form of pressure. As long as the power will can self-correct in time, alleviate the distortion of societal will, and forceful renewal of power will not gain support from the people. But if the power will insists on distorting the societal will, the anti-distortion force of societal will will become the soil for the formation of a new communication structure (revolutionary party, rebel army, power split and stand on its own). In essence,strong force is realized by organized people. Once the rebels are organized, they have strong force. They start weak, but as long as they align with societal will, more and more people will support or participate in the rebellion, making it grow and develop. Among the underground organizations or teams that rise up, which one can stand out in the end, the seemingly various accidental or individual factors on the surface, also have the choice of societal will at their core. Societal will works by providing followers. The increase in followers means the continuous growth of the new communication structure — also the new power structure. The old power is resisted everywhere by the anti-distortion force, and it is declining and losing support. In the end, those who win the public sentiment will win the world, at least those who lose the public sentiment lose the world — even if the power to overthrow the government cannot be formed, the government may also be destroyed when it is invaded by foreign enemies or suffers a great natural disaster, because it cannot get the support from the people.
冷兵器时代的武力差距有限，政权控制下有诸多盲区可以让新沟通结构生长。然而现代极权国家政权的力量有压倒性优势，可以彻底封杀体制外的组织空间。民众唯一的优势是人多，但沟通被严密限制，人多只是散沙。这时表面看似稳定，社会意志的反扭力若始终得不到舒缓，往往会在突然之间被意料不到的事引爆。偶然事件、谣言传闻、天灾人祸、甚至迷信征兆（彗星、日食）或政治人物去世，都可能成为总攻信号，瞬时掀起社会动乱。简单口号在最短时间成为沟通社会意志的目标，同时以 “墙倒众人推”的数量方式实现社会意志的行动决定，原本分散的群体反抗一旦集中于一个时间点，形成不服从的连锁扩大，一呼百应，百呼万应，权力原本靠集中兵力分头镇压的优势就会变成首尾难顾，杯水车薪，往往措手不及便陷入瘫痪乃至崩溃。
In the era of cold weapons, the disparity in military power was limited, and there were many blind spots under government control where new communication structures could grow. However, modern authoritarian states possess overwhelming advantages, allowing them to completely suppress the space outside power system. The only advantage the people have is many people, but communication is tightly restricted, and the large number of people is just scattered sand. While it may appear stable on the surface, if the anti-distortion force of societal will remains unrelieved, it often explodes unexpectedly due to unforeseen events. Incidental occurrences, rumors, natural disasters, man-made calamities, or even superstitious omens (comets, solar eclipses) or the death of a political figure, could serve as signals for a general uprising, sparking instantaneous societal unrest. Simple slogans quickly become the targets for communicating societal will within the shortest period. Simultaneously, societal will's action decisions are realized through a numerical approach of "the collapse of the wall by the crowd." Once the originally dispersed resistance groups converge at a single point in time, forming a chain reaction of disobedience, the advantage that power had in concentrating forces for suppression becomes a dilemma, overwhelmed and caught off guard, often leading to paralysis and even collapse.
尤其在有了新的沟通科技后，民众可以用这种集中反抗的方式直接推翻政权。类似的突变发生在伊朗、菲律宾、罗马尼亚、突尼斯、埃及、利比亚、乌克兰。当政权的强力组织不再听从指挥，甚至可能掉转枪口，原本的当权者就只好投降或逃亡，让位给新的当权者。在民主意识普及和传播技术发达的今天，这种大规模不服从的“颜色革命”已经成为更新政权的主要形式。
Especially with the advent of new communication technologies, the public can use this concentrated resistance approach to directly overthrow a regime. Similar upheavals have occurred in Iran, the Philippines, Romania, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Ukraine. When the powerful organization of a regime no longer obeys commands and may even turn against its own leaders, the incumbent authorities often have no choice but to surrender or flee, making way for new leaders. In today's era of widespread democratic consciousness and advanced communication technologies, this large-scale, non-compliant form of "color revolution" has become the main form of renewing the regime.
社会意志在权力更新中拥戴与自身吻合的新沟通结构及当权者，追随其树立的目标，按其决定行动，使得新沟通结构取代旧政权，再由新政权实施吻合社会意志的目标和决定。
Societal will supports the new communication structure and the rulers that align with itself in the renewal of power, follows the goals they set, acts according to their decisions, allows the new communication structure to replace the old regime, and then the new regime implements the goals and decisions that align with societal will.
实际情况当然不是如此单纯。只要社会仍是权民分离的二元结构，就不会存在与社会意志完全一致的权力意志。新政权是新的权组织，新的当权者也是为了自身权力和利益。但是其既然打着为民旗号上台，在掌权初始总是要有所兑现，哪怕打了折扣，也会使社会意志得到一定程度的体现。
The actual situation is, of course, not so straightforward. As long as society remains a dualistic structure with a separation of power and the people, there won't be a power will that aligns completely with societal will. The new regime constitutes a fresh power organization, and the new leaders are driven by their own power and interests. However, since they often come to power under the banner of "serving the people", there is usually an initial effort to fulfill these promises, even if they are compromised, leading to a partial manifestation of societal will.
二元社会的任何一元都不是单一的，存在着不同的集团、派别或敌对阵营；有地域划分、民族不同、文化差别、职业不同、社会地位高低等；有分立的政治权力、企业权力、传媒权力、团体权力、党权、军权、地方权……不同的权力、派别、集团或阵营各有不同意志。社会发展直接表现出来的，并非个人意志的求和，而是不同集团相互争斗与交易的结果，充满偶然的故事和戏剧。
None of the unary in a dualistic society is monolithic, and there are different groups, factions, or opposing camps; There are geographical divisions, different ethnic groups, cultural distinctions, varied professions, and disparities in social status. Within this framework, there are distinct political powers, corporate powers, media powers, group powers, party powers, military powers, local powers, and more. Different powers, factions, groups, or camps harbor distinct wills. The societal development that unfolds is not a simple sum of individual wills but rather the outcome of the struggle and trading among different groups, filled with incidental stories and dramas.
不过所有不同的权力、派别、集团或阵营都离不开“民”。无民则权无处可施；进行权力斗争的党派、阵营也需民的支持，因此或是利用社会意志的反扭力壮大自身，或是缓解社会意志的反扭力防止民反。在这些过程中形成权力意志对社会意志的“吻合”。
However, all these different powers, factions, groups, or camps are inseparable from the "people." Without the people, power has no place to exert itself. The political parties and camps engaged in power struggles also require the support of the people. Therefore, they either use the anti-distortion force of societal will to strengthen themselves or alleviate the anti-distortion force to prevent the people from rebelling. In these processes, the alignment of power will with societal will is formed.
把权力斗争的各方视为“大向量”，每个大向量自身内部都是数量求和的二元结构。由其君主、领袖、党魁、帮主们的权力意志决定大向量的方向，大向量的大小则取决其拥有的数量——管辖人口、拥护者、成员人数乃至民意和人心向背，形成国家、民族、阶级、政党、群众运动或山头帮派。
Considering the various parties engaged in power struggles as "large vectors," each large vector internally represents a dualistic structure that is the scalar sum. The direction of each large vector is determined by the power will of its monarchs, leaders, party heads, or gang leaders. The size of the large vector depends on the quantities it possesses—such as the population under its jurisdiction, supporters, members, and even public opinion and sentiment. This results in the formation of entities like nations, ethnic groups, classes, political parties, mass movements, or factional groups.
历史上，大向量之间首先是力图把对方作为数量相“加”——征服、吞并、招安、收编……或者将其作为数量“减”掉——民族仇杀、阶级斗争、宗教圣战、思想迫害、专政、镇压、清洗……分歧往往被强行扩大到 180°，非此即彼，你死我活。只有在谁都没有绝对优势、无法完全加掉或减掉对方时，才不得不进行妥协、交易，互为制衡，形成联盟、“远交近攻”或“合纵连横”……得到的结果并非社会意志，仍然是权力意志。参与求和的大向量都不是为了社会意志，而是为了争权，但是社会意志的反扭力会被当作一种能量和资源，有助夺取或扩大权力，因此大向量求和会比仅有一元的权力更多地与社会意志出现“吻合”。
In history, the interactions between large vectors primarily involve attempts to "add" the other as a scalar—conquer, annex, assimilate, incorporate. Or to "subtract" the other as a scalar—ethnic conflicts, class struggles, religious wars, ideological persecutions, tyranny, repression, purges. The differences are often forcefully magnified to 180°, creating a situation of either this or that, a life-and-death struggle. Only when neither side has absolute dominance and it is impossible to entirely add or subtract the other, do compromises, trades, mutual constraints, alliances, "make distant alliances while attacking nearby," or "join forces in all directions" come into play. The result obtained is not societal will but still reflects the will of power. The large vectors involved in these summation are not driven by societal will but by the pursuit of power. However, the anti-distortion force of societal will is treated as a form of energy and resource that aids in seizing or expanding power. Therefore, the interaction between large vectors tends to show more "alignment" with societal will than a unipolar power structure.
大向量求和是以数量求和为基础的，没有足够数量就不具备参与求和的实力，只能被其他大向量加或减。这必然会促使大向量强化自身的数量，一方面内部统一意志，不容异端；一方面知道民心所向是根本。当有多个大向量并存时，民众的以脚投票便有了决定胜负之力。挑战统治权力的新兴力量正是靠争取民心从小到大，直至问鼎天下。
The summation of large vectors is based on the scalar summation, and without sufficient quantities, they do not have the strength to participate in the summation, and can only be added or subtracted by other large vectors. This will inevitably prompt the large vector to strengthen its own quantity, on the one hand, the internal unity of will, and do not tolerate heresy; On the one hand, knowing the aspirations of the people is fundamental. When there are multiple large vectors, the people's vote with their feet has the power to decide the winner. The emerging forces that challenge the ruling power rely on winning the hearts and minds of the people, from small to large, until they dominate the world.
虽然历史展现的往往是大向量求和决定历史的结果，社会走向似乎与社会意志无关。但那只是外在的。大向量之间的竞争导致各方对社会意志反扭力的利用，以及与社会意志有意无意的吻合，决定了社会意志在历史峡谷的幽深处引导着万宗归一的走向。单看每个大向量，无一真正代表社会意志，显露的多为权力之恶，但当它们凑到一起进行求和，却会在相互的左突右冲中，泥沙俱下地沿着历史峡谷的方向奔腾。即使是在极权的一元权力中，也有潜在的多元势力明争暗斗，为社会意志的体现提供契机。
Although history often shows that the result of history is determined by the summation of large vectors, the direction of society seems to have nothing to do with societal will. But that’s just the external. The competition between large vectors leads to the use of the anti-distortion force of societal will by all parties, and the intentional or unintentional alignment with societal will, which determines that societal will guides the convergence of all doctrines in the deep valley of history. Looking at each large vector alone, none truly represents societal will, and what is revealed is mostly the evil of power. However, when they come together for alignment, amid their mutual jostling and clashes, a multitude of elements collectively surges along the direction of the historical canyon. Even within the monolithic power of authoritarian unipolarity, there are latent struggles among diverse forces, providing opportunities for the manifestation of societal will.
而开放社会的自由多元更会提高权力与社会意志的吻合程度。代议制的进步在于给政党、选区议员、压力团体和 NGO 开放空间，把以往少数僵硬的大向量分解为规模较小的更多向量，从而让民众选择大大增加。这种向量间的互动不再是你死我活，而是认可体制，遵循规则，互相容纳，以妥协换让步，内部则以求同存异取代大一统，统一意志让位给个人意志自由选择。这种进步体现了历史发展的趋势。不过只到这一步，仍然还是精英在权力元之内玩的权力游戏，对社会意志的体现还是为了权力本身，因此社会意志的体现不会是完整的，也不会是即时的。
The freedom and diversity of an open society will further enhance the alignment between power and societal will. The progress of representative democracy lies in providing space for political parties, district representatives, pressure groups, and NGOs, decomposing the few rigid large vectors in the past into smaller and more vectors, thereby greatly increasing the choices of the public. The interaction between these vectors is no longer a zero-sum game,but rather an acknowledgment of the system, adherence to rules, mutual accommodation, compromise, and concession, and internally replaces the unity with seeking common ground while reserving differences, and the unified will gives way to individual will free choice. This progress reflects the trend of historical development. However, up to this step, it is still a power game played by elites within the power unary. The manifestation of societal will is still for power itself, so the manifestation of societal will will not be complete, nor will it be immediate.
尽管从大历史看，社会意志能制约权力意志，然而制约总是滞后。首先，反扭力的形成是因为社会多数成员已经感受到恶果且恶果达到了相当规模——这是产生压力的滞后。其次，二元结构中的权力对压力的感知并不及时，当权者也不会一感受到压力就进行调整，直到压力大到相当程度——这是压力作用的滞后。在此期间，恶果将继续扩大。第三，已经形成的恶果不会随权力意志的调整立即消失，有些恶果甚至不可逆——这是恶果消除的滞后。
Although societal will can constrain the will of power in the broader historical context, constraints always lag behind. First, the formation of anti-distortion force occurs because a significant portion of society has already experienced adverse consequences, and these consequences have reached a considerable scale—this is the lag in the emergence of pressure. Secondly, the perception of pressure by those in power within the dualistic structure is not immediate, and those in authority do not necessarily adjust their stance as soon as they feel the pressure. Adjustment often occurs only when the pressure has reached a significant level—this is the lag in the impact of pressure. During this period, the adverse consequences will continue to expand. Thirdly, the consequences that have already manifested do not immediately disappear with the adjustment of the will of power. Some consequences may even be irreversible—this is the lag in the elimination of adverse consequences.
以强力更新权力则造成更严重的滞后。革命导致动荡和战争，形成大规模流血和死亡，经济后退，文明破坏、财富毁灭。即使革命成功能促进社会新的发展，但死者无法重生，家破难以重圆，每个具体生命的损失都无可挽回。
Using strong force to update power results in more serious delays. Revolutions result in upheaval and war, leading to large-scale bloodshed and death, economic regression, destruction of civilization, and the obliteration of wealth. Even if a revolution succeeds in promoting new societal development, the dead cannot be reborn, the broken family is difficult to reunite, and the losses incurred by each individual life are irreparable.
民众大规模不服从的方式，某些情况下可以让旧权力倒台，却不见得具备建设性。社会意志的反扭力盲目释放，并非就是体现社会意志。如果没有新的沟通结构迅速替代和覆盖整个社会并被人民接受，革命狂欢的第二天就会陷入混乱。在旧政权垮台后的权力真空中，会涌现形形色色的权组织跑马圈地，彼此争夺。权组织的本性就是追求扩大权力，最终如何达到稳定，或是由谁一统天下，往往要经过长久争夺才会尘埃落定。
Massive disobedience by the people can, in certain situations, lead to the downfall of the old power, but it does not necessarily guarantee a constructive outcome. The blind release of the anti-distortion force of societal will is not necessarily a reflection of societal will. If there is no new communication structure rapidly replacing and covering the entire society and being accepted by the people, the day after the revolutionary fervor may plunge into chaos. In the power vacuum after the collapse of the old regime, various power structures will emerge, each vying for dominance. The inherent nature of power organizations is to seek an expansion of power, and the final establishment of stability or the determination of who will rule often involves prolonged struggles before reaching a resolution.
更糟的是，由于权力意志与社会意志的脱离不可避免，无论压力调整还是强力更新都不能一劳永逸。新的当权者和权组织在与社会意志短暂拥抱后，必然重新渐行渐远，进入下一个轮回。权力调整和更新的滞后将不断发生，恶果反复重现，人民也将周而复始地遭受损害——这几乎成了历史难逃的宿命。
Even worse, due to the inevitable disconnect between the will of power and societal will, neither pressure adjustments nor forceful updates can provide a permanent solution. After a brief embrace with societal will, the new leaders and power structures are bound to drift apart again, entering into the next cycle. The continuous lag in power adjustments and updates will persist, adverse consequences will recur, and the people will repeatedly suffer damages — this has almost become an inescapable fate in history.
需要回答一个问题，如果说社会意志总是可以通过压力调整或强力更新制约权力意志，使得社会的发展回归社会意志，而在任何民族和国家，人的基本性质又一样，照理说社会发展应该非常相似，为什么各自的历史会有那么大差异？
To answer the question, if societal will can always constrain the will of power through pressure adjustments or strong force renewal, ensuring that societal development aligns with societal will, and given that the basic nature of people is similar in any ethnic group or country, one would expect societal development to be very similar. Why then do histories of different societies exhibit such significant differences?
我不认为社会发展可以找出确定“规律”。历史看上去总是被各种偶然左右。但若只有偶然，任何思考就都成为多余，只有坐等偶然发生。既然偶然也有前因后果和逻辑路径，大的方向就不会全由偶然堆积。如同行进于林木茂密、河道蜿蜒的大峡谷，每迈一步都可能遇到偶然、存在多种选择，并被偶然引向下一个偶然，形成难以预料的曲折。然而所有曲折都在峡谷之内，决定最终方向的是峡谷而非偶然。
I don't believe that one can identify definite "laws" for societal development. History seems to be constantly influenced by various contingencies. However, if it were solely contingent, any form of contemplation would become redundant, and we would simply wait for contingencies to occur. Since contingencies also have causes and effects, as well as logical pathways, the overall direction is not solely determined by a heap of contingencies. It's akin to navigating through a vast canyon with dense foliage and winding waterways; every step may encounter contingencies, involve various choices, and be led by contingencies to the next one, creating unpredictable twists and turns. However, all these twists and turns occur within the canyon, and it is the canyon that determines the ultimate direction, not the contingencies.
地缘、气候差异会造成每个社会的初始不同，是导致剪刀差的起点，后面的各种偶然、随机、突变、选择和因果起的作用往往更有戏剧性。有一部名为《罗拉快跑》（Lola rennt）的德国电影，讲的是红发女孩罗拉为救男友，在二十分钟内快跑着要找一笔钱的故事。那二十分钟在电影中重复三次。每次起点一样，但是快跑过程中小小因素的不同，如误了车，或是撞到哪个人，便造成一连串错位，结局截然不同甚至完全相反。一个社会的连锁性和复杂性远超过罗拉快跑，不同因素导致的不同结果当然会更为深远丰富。尤其是一些处于特殊位置的人，他们起心动念，大小行为，说不定哪一下就会成为蝴蝶扇动的翅膀，开启环环相扣的连锁反应，形成改变历史的风暴。
Geographical and climatic differences can indeed lead to the initial divergence of each society, acting as the starting point for the "scissors effect." However, the subsequent interplay of various contingencies, randomness, mutations, choices, and causality often contributes to more dramatic developments. There is a German film titled "Run Lola Run" (Lola rennt), which tells the story of a red-haired girl, Lola, trying to find a sum of money within twenty minutes to save her boyfriend. These twenty minutes are repeated three times in the film. Despite starting from the same point each time, minor differences in Lola's fast-paced journey, such as missing a train or bumping into someone, lead to a series of deviations, resulting in vastly different or even completely opposite outcomes. The cascading and intricate nature of a society's dynamics far exceeds that of Lola's run. Different factors leading to distinct results can be even more profound and diverse. Especially for individuals in special positions, their thoughts, actions, no matter how small, might become the butterfly's wings, setting off a chain reaction, creating a storm that alters history.
尽管如此，还是可以看到，无论差异多大的社会都有一个共同的脉络——权力意志不断脱离社会意志，社会意志的反扭力则或以压力促使权力调整，或以强力更新政权——这一相同的脉络便是由社会意志决定社会走向的历史“峡谷”。“峡谷”的广阔足够给各种偶然性提供空间，似乎可以随心所欲变换方向和路径，在不同偶然性造就的路径上，有的社会走到“峡谷”左边，有的走到右边，有的路线比较直，另外的蜿蜒曲折，快慢当然也有别。但是归根结底，人的基本性质共同，普世价值一样，在此基础上形成的社会意志，成为权力意志归根结底无法跳出的“峡谷”。
Despite this, it can still be seen that no matter how different societies are, they all have a common thread—the will of power constantly deviates from the societal will, and the anti-distortion force of the societal will either pressures the power to adjust, or forcefully updates the regime—this same thread is the historical "canyon" determined by the societal will. The breadth of the "canyon" is enough to provide space for all kinds of randomness, and it seems that the direction and path can be changed at will. On different paths created by different randomness, some societies go to the left of the "canyon", some go to the right, some routes are straight, others are winding, and of course the speed is different. However, fundamentally, the basic nature of people is the same, universal values are the same, and the social will formed on this basis becomes the "canyon" that the will of power ultimately cannot jump out of.
人类穿戴不同，但都要穿衣；饮食习惯不同，但都要吃饭；语言不同，但都要交流……不同的是枝叶，相同的是根本，因此即使分为不同国家、民族、文化群，却不会渐行渐远，总是会殊途同归，走到一起。尤其是地理隔绝打破后的全球化充分证明这一点。那不能简单地归于模仿西方，之所以为普天下人所接受，正是因为人的基本性质相同，以及所有的社会意志都有对自由与公正的共同追求。
Human beings may dress differently, but they all need clothing; dietary habits may vary, but everyone needs to eat; languages may differ, but communication is universal. The branches may be different, but the fundamental roots are the same. Therefore, even though people are divided into different countries, nations, and cultural groups, they do not drift apart; instead, they always converge and come together. This convergence is especially evident after the breaking down of geographical barriers in the era of globalization. This shared essence cannot be simplistically attributed to imitation of the West. The reason why certain values are universally accepted is precisely because of the common human nature and the shared pursuit of freedom and justice in all societal wills.