Today, I’m talking about two news items that simultaneously trended on the hot search, and I felt quite “marvelous” when I saw them one after another.
The first one is a company that bought 370 yuan worth of gifts to “bribe” a bureau director, ultimately profiting 110,000 yuan. The company was investigated, and the director who received the gifts was also dismissed.
I suddenly thought of the TV series where Hou Liangping refused his childhood friend Cai Chenggong’s “hometown specialties,” and wouldn’t even drink a bottle of wine provided by the other party on the spot, insisting on drinking his own wine at home… I laughed at the time, what a show. Now it seems I was being shallow; this show wasn’t for the audience.
If Hou Liangping had drunk the wine brought by Cai Chenggong, even just one bottle, the subsequent plot wouldn’t have developed, let alone promotion, he would at least have been dismissed.
Of course, for officials, this is also a way of “living clearly.”
Thinking about it now, I understand why that drama initially had a particularly good reputation, but later it was hard to say… To put it bluntly, time has made the audience aware of the “flaws” in art from reality: you can’t claim to satirize reality, but your actions and behavior are not at all realistic. This makes the audience feel like fools.
I can also write a standard answer like some authors: that’s how it should be, 370 yuan worth of gifts in two years has broken the threshold, it’s a “corrosive key.” And once the door is tried to be turned by the key, what comes in later is not just human feelings. Integrity does not equal less taking, integrity must not take. Receiving something is receiving something, there is no relative fairness…
Look how well I’m saying this, I’m moved to tears. But isn’t this the Hou Liangping-style refusal? Not to mention a carton of cigarettes, I wouldn’t even drink your bottle of wine at the dinner table, it’s simply not realistic… To be honest, if I could be an official, I really couldn’t do this. It’s not that I have to be greedy for that bottle of wine, but it’s damn awkward. Just imagine, an old friend you haven’t seen in years comes to see you to reminisce, brings you two bottles of wine and a pack of cigarettes, and you say: take it away quickly, are you trying to kill me?
If he’s like Cai Chenggong, coming to you for help with something, that’s fine. But what if he’s just well-off now, and the memories of his childhood are increasingly precious, and he’s thinking of this past friendship to come and see you? And if he sends me a car, sends some gold, then it’s reasonable not to accept it. But he gives me two boxes of cherries, two durians, and I have to send them back? After all, these things have long exceeded 370 yuan.
Let’s look at the second trending search, a staff member of a “service window” who received 16.14 million yuan in benefits over 8 years.
One is a bureau director who received a 370 yuan gift during the Mid-Autumn Festival.
One is a staff member at a government affairs window who received 16.14 million yuan in benefits over 8 years.
Don’t just look at the difference in numbers, the 8 years is also a magical time: why can a grassroots window collect wealth for 8 years without falling? The key is still this huge amount of wealth. You see others, a director of the tax bureau, receiving a gift of more than 300 yuan, can’t hide it.
This is the difference. Some people, they are on the right track, and they will get some strange help. And some people, they are not on the right track, and two hundred yuan will become their biggest black spot.
So you don’t think I seem to be sympathizing with the guy who was dismissed, you should remove the words “seem to.” Because in my opinion, if an official can refrain from receiving thousands or tens of thousands of yuan, then he won’t be moved by something worth more than 300 yuan. He already lives as “clearly” as Hou Liangping, how could he suddenly get carried away in front of a gift of more than 300 yuan?
I can think of three possibilities, either he really didn’t consider the 300-plus yuan gift as a bribe (I wouldn’t either), or he tried his best to show his “on the right track.”
Or, the 300-plus yuan gift that led to the dismissal of this director in the report is just the most presentable problem number.
Discover more from 自由档案馆
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.