文/HuSir

　　在这片政治叙事高度集中的社会里，权力的存在并不只体现在法律条文与制度安排中，更体现在日常生活的空气里。它通过口号、图像、仪式、算法与组织结构，持续塑造人们对“正常”的理解，对“安全”的想象，以及对“风险”的判断。

　　所谓顺民，并非天生如此。顺从并不是一种民族性格，而是一种被长期训练出来的心理结构。

　　任何一个高度集权社会的形成，都离不开三个步骤：重塑历史记忆、建立相互监督机制、将生存资源与服从绑定。

第一步，是对历史的改写与记忆的管理。

　　当社会对重大历史事件的叙述权高度集中，当不同版本的记忆被贴上标签、逐渐消失，人们便慢慢失去了判断现实的参照坐标。历史不再是可以讨论的经验，而成为必须背诵的版本。久而久之，质疑不再是一种思考习惯，而变成一种风险行为。

　　一个失去历史坐标的人群，便更容易在现实中选择沉默。

第二步，是横向社会关系的重新排列。

　　在高度组织化的社会结构中，基层网格、单位体系、社区监督、积分制度等机制，使每个人都处在彼此可见的状态中。监督不再只是来自权力中心，而开始在同事之间、邻里之间、朋友圈之间流动。

　　当社会资源与评价体系高度依赖组织背书，人们会本能地选择安全边界内的表达。久而久之，沉默成为常态，自我审查成为习惯。

第三步，是生存条件与服从行为的绑定。

　　在疫情期间，这种结构达到了一个前所未有的高度。排队成为众多马路边的日常景观，扫码成为进门前的必经动作，核酸结果和颜色成为通行证，将个体的基本行动能力与系统判断紧密连接。技术的中立外衣之下，是对个体流动权的实时调控。人民逐渐适应了在系统判断之后行动，而不是在自主判断之后行动。

　　当人们习惯于“扫描—等待—放行”这一流程时，顺从不再需要暴力维持，而成为日常动作。

　　更重要的是，这一过程并非完全通过强制完成。

　　长期高压与不确定环境，会让个体倾向于主动认同规则。认同能减少内在冲突，减少焦虑，也能带来某种安全感。于是，维护规则、重复口号、参与监督，逐渐被视为理性选择。

　　顺民的形成，往往不是因为他们不知道问题，而是因为在风险与代价的权衡中，沉默看起来更划算。

　　然而，这种结构也存在内在张力。

　　当信息渠道越来越多元，当经济压力、就业焦虑、教育成本与社会流动难度逐渐叠加，人们对现实的感受开始具体化、生活化。问题不再是抽象的政治议题，而是孩子能否就业、家庭是否负担得起医疗、收入是否稳定增长。

　　当现实体验与官方叙事之间出现越来越明显的落差时，顺从便开始出现裂缝。

　　真正的变化，往往不是发生在街头，而是发生在某个普通人的内心——
他第一次意识到，自己不必为荒谬鼓掌，也不必为沉默自豪。

　　顺民结构的稳定，依赖于持续的叙事参与。一旦表演失去观众，一旦鼓掌不再整齐，权力的声音便会开始失去回响。

　　历史从来不是在一声号令中翻页的。它是在越来越多的人不再主动重复同一句话的那一刻，悄悄改变方向。

The Process and Transformation of Obedience Among the “Nucleic Acid People”

by HuSir

In a society where political narratives are highly centralized, power does not exist solely in laws and institutional arrangements. It permeates the very air of daily life. Through slogans, imagery, rituals, algorithms, and organizational structures, it continually shapes people’s understanding of what is “normal,” what is “safe,” and what constitutes “risk.”

So-called compliant citizens are not born that way. Obedience is not a national character trait, but a psychological structure cultivated over time.

The formation of any highly centralized society generally involves three steps: reshaping historical memory, establishing mechanisms of mutual supervision, and binding survival resources to compliance.

The first step is the rewriting of history and the management of memory.

When the authority to narrate major historical events becomes highly concentrated, and alternative versions of memory are gradually labeled and disappear, people slowly lose their reference points for judging reality. History ceases to be an experience open to discussion and becomes a version to be memorized. Over time, questioning stops being a habit of thinking and becomes an act of risk.

A population that has lost its historical coordinates is more likely to choose silence in the present.

The second step is the reconfiguration of horizontal social relationships.

In a highly organized social structure, grassroots grids, work-unit systems, community monitoring, and point-based evaluation mechanisms place everyone within mutual visibility. Supervision no longer flows solely from the center of power; it circulates among colleagues, neighbors, and social networks.

When access to social resources and evaluation systems depends heavily on institutional endorsement, people instinctively choose to express themselves within safe boundaries. Gradually, silence becomes normal, and self-censorship becomes habitual.

The third step is the binding of survival conditions to compliant behavior.

During the pandemic, this structure reached an unprecedented level. Queuing became a daily roadside scene; scanning codes became a necessary step before entering buildings. Test results and color codes functioned as passes, tightly linking individuals’ basic mobility to system judgment. Beneath the neutral appearance of technology lay real-time regulation of individual movement. People gradually adapted to acting after system authorization rather than after personal judgment.

Once individuals grow accustomed to the process of “scan—wait—release,” obedience no longer requires overt coercion; it becomes routine behavior.

More importantly, this process was not accomplished entirely through force.

Prolonged pressure and uncertainty incline individuals to actively identify with rules. Identification reduces internal conflict, alleviates anxiety, and provides a sense of security. As a result, defending rules, repeating slogans, and participating in supervision gradually come to be viewed as rational choices.

The formation of compliant citizens is often not because they are unaware of problems, but because, when weighing risks and costs, silence appears more economical.

Yet such a structure also contains inherent tension.

As information channels diversify, and as economic pressure, employment anxiety, education costs, and barriers to social mobility accumulate, people’s experiences of reality become increasingly concrete and personal. Issues cease to be abstract political discussions and become practical concerns: Can children find jobs? Can families afford medical care? Is income stable and growing?

When lived experience increasingly diverges from official narratives, cracks begin to appear in obedience.

Real change rarely begins in the streets. It begins within an ordinary person—at the moment he first realizes that he does not have to applaud the absurd, nor take pride in his silence.

The stability of a compliant structure depends on continued participation in the dominant narrative. Once participation diminishes, once applause loses its uniform rhythm, the voice of power begins to lose its resonance.

History does not turn a page at the sound of a single command. It changes direction quietly, at the moment when more and more people cease to repeat the same sentence voluntarily.