{
  "format": "arthurs-review-publication-proof/v1",
  "createdAt": "2026-07-13T15:46:25.035Z",
  "publicUrl": "https://blog.leesaitool.com/commentary/how-much-do-your-effort-count",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-07T09:39:17.262Z",
  "updatedAt": "2026-05-11T10:33:02.772Z",
  "article": {
    "titleZh": "努力的张雪，还有你看不到的冰山",
    "titleEn": "Zhang Xue's Hard Work, and the Iceberg You Can't See",
    "slug": "how-much-do-your-effort-count",
    "category": "commentary",
    "excerptZh": "你的努力占成功的多少？",
    "excerptEn": "How much of success is actually your effort?",
    "seoDescription": "",
    "bodyZh": "我在公众号上看到一篇文章，说有一个叫张雪的人火了。文章的意思是，这个人的成功**毫无借口**——家庭、行业、出身、老师，所有的环境变量都很差，但还是成功了。\n\n这种说法听起来极为 *attractive*，确实像一个励志故事。但作为一个坚定的马克思主义者，我觉得这里面全是胡说八道。举个例子：假设做一个对比实验，比较我和这个人。可能我需要付出 x 倍的努力才能成功，这个人要付出 100x 倍。那我就问：凭什么？凭什么这个人要付出比我多得多的努力，才能达到和我一样的结果？\n\n很多励志文章都强调结果，而淡化过程，或者说把过程完全以结果为导向。但**过程才是最重要的**。比如，我们提倡男女平等，提倡的不是\"男女都可以做 CEO\"——因为确实可以——而是\"男女付出同等的努力，就能做到 CEO\"。现代社会男女不平等的主要表现，不是某些事情男性能做、女性不能做，而是女性往往要付出比男性多得多的努力，或者牺牲多得多的东西，才能达到同样的结果。这才是不公平所在。\n\n再说回这种以个人努力为成功唯一原因的叙事。还有一个很重要的问题：这个人的成功，只能代表千千万万个像他一样努力的人中的一个。假设全中国只有 1,000 个人能达到和他一样的努力程度，那么你就只有 1/1000 的概率像他一样成功。这个数据显然非常不对劲。\n\n更进一步，这个人虽然\"成功了\"，实际生活水平也没比普通人好了多少。如果这个社会要求一个出身卑微的人，付出他那样的努力，才能过上体面的中产阶级生活，那这个社会肯定有什么大问题。\n\n这种叙事还有一个更大的问题：它**剥夺了底层人民解释的权利**。如果一个工人说，\"因为工作被廉价劳动力抢了，所以失业\"，精英可以说，\"你看，张雪都没有失业\"。如果一个学生说，\"因为教育资源匮乏，所以考不上好大学\"，精英可以说，\"你看，张雪辍学都过得比你好\"。这实质上是精英阶级的一种**意识形态防御**，即把所有真实的苦难都转化为借口，要求底层阶级拥有非人的意志力。\n\n最后，按照马克思的框架还有一点：当**生产关系约束了生产力**的时候，再怎么努力也没有用。最典型的例子，就是祥子（别跟我说你没有认真看，躺平当然也是不行的）。",
    "bodyEn": "I saw an article on a public account about someone named Zhang Xue going viral. The gist was: this person's success has **zero excuses** — family background, industry, origins, teachers, every environmental variable was terrible, and yet he still made it. Sounds extremely *attractive*. It really does read like a motivational story. But as a committed Marxist, I think it's all bullshit.\n\nLet me give an example. Suppose we run a comparison experiment — me versus this person. Maybe I need to put in x times the effort to succeed, and this person puts in 100x. So I ask: by what logic? By what logic should this person have to put in so much more effort than me just to reach the same result?\n\nA lot of these motivational pieces emphasize the outcome while downplaying the process, or treating the process as entirely subordinate to the result. But **the process is what matters most**. For instance, when we advocate for gender equality, we're not saying \"both men and women can become CEOs\" — obviously they can. We're saying \"men and women, putting in the same effort, should be able to become CEOs.\" The main manifestation of gender inequality in modern society isn't that men can do certain things and women can't. It's that women often have to put in far more effort, or sacrifice far more, to achieve the same result. *That's* where the unfairness lies.\n\nComing back to this narrative that treats individual effort as the sole cause of success — there's another critical problem. This person's success can only represent one out of thousands who tried just as hard. Say only 1,000 people in all of China reached the same level of effort as this person. Then you've got a 1-in-1,000 chance of pulling off what they did. That number is obviously deeply fucked up.\n\nAnd going further — even though this person \"made it,\" their actual standard of living isn't that much better than ordinary people's. If a society requires someone from a humble background to put in that kind of effort just to live a decent middle-class life, then something is seriously wrong with that society.\n\nThis narrative has an even bigger problem: it **strips working people of their right to explain**. If a worker says, \"I lost my job because cheap labor took it,\" elites can say, \"Look, Zhang Xue didn't lose his job.\" If a student says, \"I couldn't get into a good university because educational resources were scarce,\" elites can say, \"Look, Zhang Xue dropped out and still lives better than you.\" This is essentially a form of **ideological defense by the elite class** — converting all real suffering into excuses, demanding that the working class possess inhuman willpower.\n\nFinally, within Marx's framework, there's one more point: when **production relations constrain productive forces**, no amount of effort matters. The most classic example is Xiangzi (and don't tell me you didn't read it seriously — lying flat is obviously no good either).",
    "coverImagePath": "uploads/2026/05/6390be03-4100-4f25-b0d8-638f69a6b025.webp",
    "tags": []
  }
}