Why do you say that traditional people-based thinking is fundamentally about consolidating the rule of the exploiting class?

This is the traditional claim, which may not actually be true. It wasn't anything to consolidate the rule of the exploiting class. They were really about fighting for the rights of the people. Mencius, for example, said that the people are the most important thing, the gods of earth and grain come second, and the ruler is the least important thing. The meaning of these words is that the people are the most important, and for the sake of the people's well-being, state power can be destroyed, and the monarch is the least important, and for the sake of state power, the monarch can be deposed. How can these words have the slightest idea of serving the ruling class. To say that traditional people-oriented thinking is fundamentally for consolidating the rule of the ruling class is just a textbook statement, and textbooks are political in nature and mainly serve politics. As readers, we still have to distinguish clearly, and the key is to mobilize our own flexible minds to see whether what they say is consistent with the facts or not.

Even if they put forward the idea of a people-centered system, to a certain extent, for the sake of the ruling class, there is nothing wrong with it, because it is a win-win situation. If the people-based system is implemented, then the country's society is also stabilized and the people live happily. Why not be happy.

Now there are many experts who advocate democracy, and among the many reasons they give, some say that it is good for the ruling party, saying that democracy is also good for the stability of the ruling party, and so on, and only in this way can we promote government reform. When the Government practises democracy, the people will be able to be happy. When the people are happy, the country will be stable.