——从官本位教育到走向民主
作者：林小龙
编辑：何清风 责任编辑：鲁慧文 翻译：鲁慧文
引言
我曾经是一名中国的法官。在法庭与现实的双重场域中，我亲眼目睹了无数腐败的案例，也见证了许多干部的蜕变。他们中有的出身寒门，有的原本勤勉正直，但在体制逻辑与文化氛围的共同作用下，逐渐变得冷漠、贪婪，甚至与犯罪勾结。
流亡海外后，我有了更多的时间与空间去反思。在国际社会的对比之下，我更清楚地看到，中国腐败问题的特殊性与顽固性：它既不是单纯的制度缺陷，也不是个体失德，而是一种文化与体制合谋的结果。一方面，延续千年的“官本位”思想，使整个社会普遍将权力作为成功的唯一象征；另一方面，中共的独裁体制不仅没有打破这种思想，反而把它变成了巩固统治的工具。在这种环境下，底层出身的干部尤显矛盾，他们在成长经历中积累的匮乏感和身份焦虑，使他们在掌权后往往走向“反噬式压迫”。
这正是我试图揭示的主题：中国腐败的根源在于文化与体制，而摆脱腐败的唯一道路是结束独裁、走向民主。
一、官本位思想的文化基因
1. 家庭教育与社会价值的单一化
在中国，几乎所有家庭教育都绕不开一个主题：“孩子要有出息，就要考公务员。”我在司法实践中见过很多家庭，即便已经供养孩子读到研究生博士，最终的目标依旧是进入体制内。社会的评价体系单一，将“官员”视作“人上人”，而忽略其他职业的社会价值。
2. 乡土社会的心理积淀
在广大农村与底层社会，父母对子女的期望往往简单直白：“只有当官，家族才能翻身。”这种观念代代相传，逐渐形成群体性的心理积淀。孩子们在耳濡目染中成长，早早内化了“官即成功”的价值判断。
3. 社会流动焦虑
改革开放以来，社会流动的门槛逐渐提高。普通人若想改变命运，体制内的身份仍是最稳定、最可靠的路径。由此形成的“社会焦虑”，使官本位文化在现代社会愈加牢固。
二、底层出身干部的反噬逻辑
1. 匮乏记忆的补偿性心理
农民或工人家庭出身的干部，往往有着“穷怕了”的童年记忆。这种匮乏感会转化为补偿心理，使他们在掌权后急于通过权力换取财富，以弥补内心的不安全感。
2. 身份焦虑与社会区隔
他们担心被人看不起，担心被揭露“原本不过是个农民的孩子”。于是，他们会刻意通过压制底层群体来划清界限。比如，在征地拆迁、税费征收、治安管理中，底层出身的干部常常比出身优渥者更冷酷无情。这种行为是一种“身份宣誓”，以证明自己已完全脱离原阶层。
3. 权力依赖与腐败惯性
当权力成为确认身份的唯一依靠时，腐败就成为必然选择。许多落马官员都有类似经历：出身寒门，发迹之后却贪得无厌。他们的腐败，不仅是贪婪，更是心理补偿的本能反应。
三、体制与文化的共谋
作为法官，我深知：单靠法律是无法遏制腐败的，因为体制本身在助长腐败。
• 政绩导向的考核机制，逼迫干部追求短期数据，忽视长期民生。
• 社会对“官”的过度尊崇，让干部心理压力倍增，进而依赖特权。
• 缺乏有效监督，使得腐败行为可以长期隐藏，甚至被纵容。
最终，文化的执念与体制的设计结合在一起，构成了腐败的温床。
四、中共独裁体制的放大效应
1. 权力高度集中
独裁体制将所有资源与权力集中在少数人手中，使“当官”成为几乎唯一的社会上升通道。这不仅没有打破官本位，反而使它合法化、常态化。
2. 监督的缺失
没有司法独立，没有新闻自由，没有民间组织监督，权力几乎零成本滥用。在这样的体制下，腐败成为一种安全的“制度性收益”，而非高风险行为。
3. 底层群体的双重受害
最残酷的是，底层群体在这种体制下既是腐败的受害者，也是官本位文化的受害者。他们本寄希望于“草根干部”能体恤民情，但现实往往相反：草根干部最先背弃底层。这种“背叛”，是我在司法案件与现实观察中最痛心的发现。
五、走向民主的必要性
1. 民主打破官本位
民主制度通过多元价值与社会认同，让不同职业都能获得尊重。成功不再等于“当官”，工人、农民、学者、企业家都可以实现自我价值。
2. 民主遏制腐败
在民主制度下，权力分立、司法独立、媒体监督、选举问责，可以让腐败的成本高得难以承受。
3. 民主带来公平流动
个人不再依赖体制身份来改变命运，而是可以通过教育、创业、技能等多种途径实现阶层跃升。这能大大减轻干部的身份焦虑，从根本上减少“反噬”现象。
六、历史逻辑与中国的未来
从东欧到拉美，从韩国到台湾，历史已经证明：独裁与腐败如影随形，而民主与清廉相辅相成。独裁体制必然制造腐败，民主制度才能逐渐削弱腐败。
中国也不可能例外。结束中共独裁，走向民主，既是政治选择，也是历史必然。这不仅是对制度的重建，更是对文化的重塑。只有在民主环境下，才能淡化官本位，培养公民意识，重建社会信任。
结论
作为一名流亡法官，我的结论是明确的：中国官场腐败并非偶然，而是文化与体制的合谋。官本位思想提供了腐败的文化基因，而中共独裁体制提供了腐败的制度保障。底层出身干部的反噬现象，更是揭示了这一合谋的残酷逻辑。
因此，中国若要真正根治腐败，必须迈出关键一步：结束独裁，走向民主。唯有民主，才能逐渐淡化官本位文化，重建公平与正义，让干部回归公共服务的本位，让人民真正成为国家的主人。这是我林小龙作为流亡法官的亲身见证与沉痛呼吁，也是中国未来必须面对的历史课题。
The Cultural Roots and Institutional Reflections on Corruption in China’s Officialdom
— From “Official Supremacy” Education to the Path Toward Democracy
Author: Lin Xiaolong
Editor: He Qingfeng Executive Editor: Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen
Abstract:
Corruption in China’s officialdom is not merely the result of individual greed or moral decline. It is an inevitable phenomenon produced jointly by deep-rooted cultural traditions and institutional structures. Culturally, the ideology of “official supremacy” is deeply ingrained; institutionally, the CCP’s dictatorial rule, through monopoly of power and lack of oversight, has normalized corruption as a systemic outcome.
Introduction
I was once a judge in China. In the dual arenas of courtroom and reality, I personally witnessed countless cases of corruption and the transformation of many cadres. Some came from humble backgrounds, some were once diligent and upright, but under the combined influence of institutional logic and cultural atmosphere, they gradually became indifferent, greedy, even colluding with crime.
After going into exile overseas, I gained more time and space for reflection. In contrast with international society, I see more clearly the uniqueness and stubbornness of China’s corruption problem: it is neither a simple institutional flaw nor individual moral failure, but a result of the collusion between culture and system. On one hand, the millennia-old ideology of “official supremacy” makes society equate power with success; on the other, the CCP’s dictatorship has not broken this ideology, but instead turned it into a tool for consolidating rule. In this environment, cadres from grassroots backgrounds are particularly conflicted: the sense of deprivation and identity anxiety accumulated during their upbringing often lead them, once in power, to exercise “retaliatory oppression.”
This is the theme I seek to reveal: the roots of corruption in China lie in both culture and system, and the only way out is to end dictatorship and move toward democracy.
I. The Cultural Gene of “Official Supremacy”
1. Family Education and Monolithic Social Values
In China, nearly every family education revolves around one theme: “For a child to succeed, they must become a civil servant.” Even families who invest in advanced education for their children—master’s, doctoral degrees—still consider entering the bureaucracy the ultimate goal. Society’s evaluation system is singular: officials are “superior beings,” while the value of other professions is ignored.
2. Psychological Imprint of Rural Society
In rural and grassroots communities, parental expectations are blunt: “Only by becoming an official can the family rise.” Passed down through generations, this belief forms a collective psychological imprint. Children grow up internalizing the judgment that “to be an official is to succeed.”
3. Anxiety Over Social Mobility
Since reform and opening, barriers to upward mobility have grown. For ordinary people, bureaucratic status remains the most stable, reliable path to change fate. This social anxiety has only reinforced the culture of “official supremacy” in modern times.
II. The Retaliatory Logic of Grassroots Cadres
1. Compensatory Psychology of Deprivation
Cadres from farming or working-class families often carry childhood memories of poverty. This sense of deprivation transforms into a compensatory psychology: once in power, they rush to exchange power for wealth, seeking to soothe their insecurity.
2. Identity Anxiety and Social Separation
They fear being looked down upon, fear being exposed as “just a peasant’s child.” Thus, they deliberately oppress the lower classes to draw a line. In land requisitions, taxation, and law enforcement, grassroots-origin cadres are often more ruthless than those of privileged birth. Such behavior acts as an “identity declaration,” proof of total separation from their original class.
3. Power Dependence and Corruption Inertia
When power becomes the sole basis for identity, corruption becomes inevitable.
Many disgraced officials share similar backgrounds: born poor, once risen they became insatiable. Their corruption is not only greed, but also an instinctive response of psychological compensation.
III. The Collusion of System and Culture
As a judge, I know well: law alone cannot curb corruption, for the system itself fosters it.
• Performance-driven evaluations force cadres to chase short-term data at the expense of long-term welfare.
• Social reverence for officials adds psychological pressure, deepening reliance on privilege.
• Lack of effective oversight allows corruption to hide and even thrive unchecked.
In the end, cultural obsession and institutional design combine to form a breeding ground for corruption.
IV. The Amplifying Effect of the CCP’s Dictatorship
1. Extreme Centralization of Power
Dictatorship concentrates all resources and authority in the hands of a few, making “being an official” virtually the only path of social mobility. Far from breaking official supremacy, it legitimizes and normalizes it.
2. Absence of Oversight
With no judicial independence, no press freedom, no civil society supervision, power is abused at negligible cost. In such a system, corruption becomes a safe “institutionalized return,” not a high-risk act.
3. Double Victimization of the Grassroots
The cruelest reality is that the grassroots are both victims of corruption and victims of official supremacy culture. They once hoped “grassroots cadres” would empathize with them; instead, these cadres are the first to betray them. This betrayal is the most painful pattern I witnessed both in court and in society.
V. The Necessity of Moving Toward Democracy
1. Democracy Breaks Official Supremacy
Through plural values and diverse social recognition, democracy ensures all professions are respected. Success is no longer equated with “becoming an official.” Workers, farmers, scholars, entrepreneurs can all realize self-worth.
2. Democracy Curbs Corruption
Democracy introduces separation of powers, judicial independence, media oversight, and electoral accountability. These make corruption unbearably costly.
3. Democracy Ensures Fair Mobility
Individuals need not rely on bureaucratic identity to change fate, but can rise through education, entrepreneurship, skills. This reduces identity anxiety, thereby lessening the “retaliatory oppression” of grassroots-origin cadres.
VI. Historical Logic and China’s Future
From Eastern Europe to Latin America, from South Korea to Taiwan, history proves: dictatorship and corruption go hand in hand, while democracy and integrity reinforce each other. Dictatorship inevitably breeds corruption; democracy gradually reduces it.
China is no exception. Ending CCP dictatorship and moving toward democracy is not only a political choice, but a historical inevitability. This is not merely institutional reconstruction but cultural renewal. Only under democracy can “official supremacy” be weakened, civic consciousness fostered, and social trust rebuilt.
Conclusion
As an exiled judge, my conclusion is clear: corruption in Chinese officialdom is no accident, but the collusion of culture and system. The ideology of “official supremacy” supplies the cultural gene; the CCP dictatorship provides the institutional guarantee. The retaliatory behavior of grassroots-origin cadres further exposes this cruel logic.
Therefore, if China truly wishes to eradicate corruption, it must take the decisive step: end dictatorship and move toward democracy. Only democracy can gradually dissolve the culture of official supremacy, rebuild fairness and justice, restore officials to the role of public service, and make the people true masters of the nation. This is my personal testimony and painful appeal as a judge in exile—and the historical task China must face.
