On Liberty - 续
关闭了某一群体的通道后，对于得到的数据进行分析从而得出的结论是片面的。
少数服从多数这条原则本质上是为了使做出的决策能够被最低阻力地执行而诞生的 我个人觉得，在生活化琐碎的事件中，可以为了效率而实行少数服从多少的策略。但在一些重要场合，少数群体的言论也应当被理性认真地看待和讨论，这无疑是对真理的获得和理解更进一步，同时也避免了社会因完全的趋同性而丧失多元化发展。
你知道为什么史学家们常拿某一地区的男女权利平等的水平来衡量该地区文明发展的水平吗？因为在野蛮人看来，力量具有绝对性权威。同理，野蛮人组成的社会群体亦是如此，也就是一个群体的文明水平越低下，它们越没有平等的意识，与其权利平等者，必然为其之敌。它们只有而男性与女性的生理力量差异是最为明显，也是最为普遍的。人和野兽的区别是什么？人有道德感，野兽没有。
为少数人群体发声，并不是强迫多数人群体变成少数人群体，而是让少数人群体不受多数人群体的强制并维护少数人群体的权利。这属于积极自由的范畴，它并不简单地意味着个人有权去做自己喜欢做的事情而不受其他人的阻挠，它还意味着，个人能够真正按照自己的个性去追求自己的自主性，而将世俗的、社会的观点置于一边。
维护权利：当有权绝对地支配社会以强力和控制的方式处置个人的事情时，无论采取合法惩罚形式下的物质力量，还是公众舆论下的道德强压的手段，其准绳是自我保护，即人类可以个别地或集体地对任何成员的行动自由进行干涉，其唯一正当理由是旨在自我保护。对于文明群体中的任何一名成员，可以违反其意志而正当地行使权力的唯一目的，就是防止对他人的伤害。
"仔细品位密尔引用的这些关于出售烈酒侵犯社会权利的说法，这些说法至今仍然构成保守主义政治理论的基调。保守主义与自由主义的根本区别在于，前者或多或少会持一种社会有机体理论，而后者则大多以机械主义为出发点。德国社会学家滕尼斯用社群（community）和联合体（association）来描述二者对社会群体的基本看法。有机体理论把社会看作一个具有内在联系的共同体，个人是该共同体的成员；而机械主义则倾向于把社会看作是个人的联合体，除了个人利益之外，不存在抽象的社会利益或群体利益。"
现如今仍然有很多群体权益并未得到伸张，歧视抵制乃至压迫与剥削。世界仍是不完美的，但正因为人类在不断朝着变得更好的目标前进和努力，才会有今天。这其中也许有你，也许没有，但总有人是这么想的，也因此迈出了步伐去改变。（此处的好表示很多方面，但我不知道如何去表达。在此引用来自《全球通史》作者序言中的一段话：人类历史中许多灾难都源于这样一个事实，即社会的变化总是远远落后于技术的变化。这是不难理解的，因为人们十分自然地欢迎和采纳那些能提高生产率和生活水平的新技术；但是，人们却拒绝接受新技术所必需的社会变化，因为采纳新思想、新制度和新做法总是令人不快的。今天，第一世界、第二世界和第三世界的人民已发觉自己陷入的困境，当今技术革命与技术革命所需要的相应的社会革命之间的时间滞差是造成这一困境的一个根本原因。——5.17＼\٩( 'ω' )و //／
Analyzing data collected after shutting off the channels of a certain group inevitably leads to one-sided conclusions.
The principle of "majority rule" inherently emerged to ensure that decisions can be executed with the path of least resistance. I personally feel that in trivial, everyday matters, adopting a majority-rule strategy for the sake of efficiency is acceptable. However, on important occasions, the voices of minority groups must be treated and discussed with rationality and seriousness. This undoubtedly brings us a step closer to obtaining and understanding the truth, while also preventing society from losing its pluralistic development due to absolute conformity.
Do you know why historians often use the level of gender equality in a region to measure its level of civilized development? Because in the eyes of barbarians, physical strength holds absolute authority. By the same logic, this applies to social groups composed of "barbarians": the lower the civilization level of a group, the less awareness they have of equality. Anyone claiming equal rights is inevitably seen as an enemy. The biological difference in physical strength between males and females is simply the most obvious and universal. What is the difference between humans and beasts? Humans possess a moral sense; beasts do not.
Speaking up for minority groups is not about forcing the majority to become the minority; it is about protecting the minority from the coercion of the majority and safeguarding their rights. This falls under the realm of positive liberty. It doesn't simply mean an individual has the right to do what they please without interference from others; it also means the individual can truly pursue their autonomy according to their own individuality, casting aside secular and societal dogmas. Defending rights: When power absolutely dominates society and handles individual affairs through coercion and control—whether through physical force in the form of legal penalties or the moral coercion of public opinion—the only justification for it is self-protection. As John Stuart Mill famously wrote, "the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
“Carefully pondering Mill's cited arguments regarding how the sale of strong liquor infringes upon "social rights," we see that these arguments still form the undertone of conservative political theory today. The fundamental difference between conservatism and liberalism is that the former more or less holds an organic theory of society, while the latter mostly takes mechanism as its starting point. German sociologist Ferdinand Tönnies used the concepts of Gemeinschaft (community) and Gesellschaft (association) to describe these two basic views of social groups. The organic theory views society as an internally connected community where individuals are its members; the mechanistic view, on the other hand, tends to see society as an association of individuals, where no abstract social or group interests exist beyond individual interests.”
Today, the rights of many groups still remain unrealized, facing discrimination, boycotts, and even oppression and exploitation. The world is still imperfect, but it is precisely because humanity is constantly striving and moving forward toward the goal of becoming better that we have arrived at where we are today. You might be part of this process, or you might not, but there are always people who think this way and thus take the steps to make a change.
(The word "better" here encompasses many aspects, though it's hard to express perfectly. Here, I would like to quote a passage from the preface of A Global History by L.S. Stavrianos: "Many of the great disasters of human history have resulted from the fact that social change inevitably lags behind technological change. It is not difficult to understand why this should be so. People naturally welcome and adopt new technologies that raise productivity and living standards; but they resist the social changes necessary to accommodate the new technologies because adopting new ideas, institutions, and practices is always uncomfortable. Today, the peoples of the First, Second, and Third Worlds find themselves in a predicament, and a fundamental cause of this predicament is the time lag between the current technological revolution and the corresponding social revolution it requires.") ——5.17＼\٩( 'ω' )و //／