大学教授送外卖制造舆论始末

最近在网上看见一件趣事。这是一位姓程的大学教授，利用暑假期间去美团、饿了么等外卖平台送外卖，体验生活。他跑了一个月，按他自己的说法，送了一个月的外卖，送了近2000单，一共收入了7000块钱。

因为很多人总是批评知识分子脱离现实，现在这位程教授已经有了切身体会，自然再发言就有了底气。他说外卖平台的算法设置的太紧凑了，是在压榨外卖员，外卖员的劳动量太大了，每个月7000块钱的收入还不够高，而且也没有五险一金。按他的数量算下来，跑一单才3块多钱，而国外的快递员、外卖员一单都是十几美元，差距太大了。结论就是国内的资本心太黑了，外卖员太可怜了，而他这个有良心的知识分子，根据切身体会为弱势群体发声，良心大大的好了。

当然经过他这一波操作，他的知名度显然是大大的增长，各种媒体采访也是应接不暇。但事实真的如他所说的吗？

首先，资本的压榨是个伪命题。压榨和剥削应该明确定义，判定是否有压榨和剥削的最重要的要件就是是否存在强制。在奴隶制当中，奴隶主强迫奴隶劳动，并且霸占奴隶的劳动成果，这毫无疑问是剥削。国家强制收取税收，不交税就会面临法律起诉，甚至牢狱之灾，这从某种意义上来说，也可以认为是压榨。但是美团平台和外卖员之间，是不存在强制的。每一个外卖骑手，都是他自愿加入平台的，而不是被美团绑票来的。

第二，外卖员这个职业有那么悲催吗？当然你拿国内的外卖骑手和国外的同行来比较，那确实差距巨大。但是国外的外卖行业，同样也做不到国内这么高的效率和这么好的服务，国外外卖员的收入是高，但是顾客也用不起，业务量就少，工作机会也少。对外卖员和点餐顾客来说，国外的模式，基本上是双输的局面。虽然由于疫情封控时期，给大家造成了非常恶劣的印象，但是实事求是的来说，在中国的大城市，生活水平和国外比较发达的国家，差距并不大，而在某些方面还要超过不少，点餐外卖就是其中之一。几乎在你下单一个小时之内，都能够在家里收到食物，这种效率在国外根本是不可想象的，而且价格也在可以接受的范围之内。

而快递员的收入水平，每个月7000块钱，应该还是和大城市的普通收入水平是差不多的，甚至还略高。当然他们这位教授会说，外卖员劳动强度远远大于普通的职业，每天要送餐十几个小时。但是外卖行业也有它的优点，它不是雇佣制，从业者可以自由地选择自己的时间，这一点在绝大部分职业当中，是很难满足的。很多职业都需要打卡上下班，虽然劳动强度不大，但是却没有自由安排自己时间的权利。所以说外卖员这个职业，并没有比其他的职业生存状态更糟糕，收入更少。

而且就像几乎所有的社会热点新闻一样，这位程老师在舆论场上火了之后，美团后台调用并公布了他的送餐记录，结果在一个月内，这位程老师的送餐次数，并没有他说的那么多，平均下来每送一餐的工钱是11块钱，而不是他所说的3块钱。而且这位程老师还曾经卖惨，说自己因为有一单没有按时送到，被罚款200块钱，而实际上那次他只被罚款了50块钱，由于他是新人平台还补贴了他15块钱，实际上他只被罚了35块钱而已。

显然他为了制造舆论，塑造自己为弱势群体发声的形象，在很多问题上都撒了谎。他的真正目的也绝不是为了弱势群体发声，因为如果按他所体验的真实数据报告出来，你们很容易发现他口中的弱势群体并没有那么弱势，这样这件事情就完全变成了一场闹剧。

这也说明在现实中很大一部分知识分子，实际上是起负面作用的。虽然人们越来越崇尚知识改变命运，崇尚知识的同时也对知识分子产生了迷信。因为就像儒家所说的君子喻于义，小人喻于利。普通人往往都是为了金钱利益而行动，而知识分子呢？追求的是创造观念，是影响力，似乎脱离了普通人的低级趣味。但是这不过是换了一种形式的私利而已。而就像一些小人为了利益而不择手段一样，知识分子为了获得名声和影响力也会不择手段，想起了在电视剧《走向共和》当中有一幕：光绪皇帝对他的老师翁同龢处处掣肘政敌李鸿章，不给北洋水师拨款而发了一句诛心之论：“名利，名利，名在利前。”就是说他的老师翁同龢为了自己的名声和影响力处处与李鸿章作对，甚至不惜妨害朝廷的海防，损害朝廷的利益。像程老师这样的知识分子，同样的也是为了自己的名声和影响力，不惜造假、推广错误的观念、带坏社会的绪论方向。正是古今中外的知识分子都概莫能外的毛病。

---

Recently I saw a funny thing on the Internet. This is a university professor surnamed Cheng, using the summer vacation to Meituan, Ele. me and other delivery platforms to deliver food, experience life. He ran for a month, according to his own statement, sent a month of takeout, sent nearly 2,000 orders, and a total income of 7,000 yuan.

Because many people always criticize intellectuals for being out of touch with reality, now that Professor Cheng has had personal experience, he will naturally have the confidence to speak again. He said that the algorithm of the take-out platform is too compact, which is squeezing take-out staff, the amount of labor of take-out staff is too large, and the income of 7,000 yuan per month is not high enough, and there is no five insurance and one fund. According to his number, a single run is more than 3 yuan, while foreign couriers and takeaways are more than ten dollars a single, the gap is too big. The conclusion is that the domestic capital heart is too black, the delivery man is too poor, and he, a conscientious intellectual, speaks for the vulnerable groups according to his personal experience, and his conscience is greatly improved.

Of course, after this wave of his operation, his visibility is obviously greatly increased, and various media interviews are also overwhelmed. But is that really what he says?

First, the exploitation of capital is a false proposition. Exploitation and exploitation should be clearly defined, and the most important factor in determining whether there is exploitation and exploitation is whether there is coercion. In slavery, slave owners forced slaves to work and seized the fruits of their labor, which was unquestionably exploitation. The state forces to collect taxes, and if you don't pay taxes, you will face legal prosecution or even prison, which in a sense can also be regarded as oppression. However, between the Meituan platform and the delivery man, there is no coercion. Every takeout rider, he voluntarily joined the platform, rather than being kidnapped by the United States.

Second, is the job of delivery boy that bad? Of course, if you compare the domestic delivery riders with their foreign counterparts, there is a huge gap. But foreign take-out industry, also can not do so high efficiency and so good service, foreign take-out staff income is high, but customers can not afford to use, less business, less job opportunities. For salespeople and ordering customers, the foreign model is basically a lose-lose situation. Although the epidemic control period has caused a very bad impression to everyone, but to be realistic, in China's big cities, the standard of living and more developed countries abroad, the gap is not large, and in some aspects more than a lot, ordering takeaway food is one of them. Almost within an hour of your order, you can receive food at home, which is unimaginable in foreign countries, and the price is also within the acceptable range.

The income level of couriers, 7,000 yuan per month, should still be similar to the ordinary income level of big cities, or even slightly higher. Of course, the professor will say that the labor intensity of delivery workers is far greater than that of ordinary occupations, and they have to deliver food for more than ten hours a day. But the take-out industry also has its advantages, it is not an employment system, practitioners can freely choose their own time, which is difficult to meet in most professions. Many occupations need to clock in and out, although the labor intensity is not large, but there is no right to arrange their own time freely. Therefore, the job of food delivery worker is not worse than other occupations, and the income is less.

And just like almost all social hot news, after the Cheng teacher caught fire in the field of public opinion, the United States group backstage called and announced his food delivery records, the results within a month, the Cheng teacher's food delivery times, and not as much as he said, the average down each meal is 11 yuan, rather than the 3 yuan he said. And the Cheng teacher also once sold, said he because of a single did not deliver on time, was fined 200 yuan, but in fact he was only fined 50 yuan, because he is a new platform also subsidized him 15 yuan, in fact, he was only fined 35 yuan.

He clearly lied on a number of issues in order to create public opinion and portray himself as a voice for the underprivileged. His real purpose is never to speak out for the vulnerable groups, because if he reports the real data he has experienced, you can easily find that the vulnerable groups he says are not so vulnerable, so this matter will become a complete farce.

This also shows that in reality, a large part of intellectuals actually play a negative role. Although more and more people advocate knowledge to change fate, they also have superstitions for intellectuals while advocating knowledge. Because just like the Confucian saying, the gentleman means righteousness, and the villain means profit. Ordinary people tend to act for financial gain, but what about intellectuals? The pursuit is to create ideas, is to influence, seems to be out of the ordinary people's low taste. But this is only self-interest in a different form. Just like some small people who use all means to gain profits, intellectuals will also use all means to gain fame and influence, recalling a scene in the TV series Towards the Republic: The Emperor Guangxu has his teacher Weng Tong who obstructed his political enemy Li Hongzhang by refusing to fund the Beiyang naval forces, and he has issued a line of criticism: "Fame and wealth, fame and wealth, fame is before wealth." That is to say, his teacher Weng Tonghe fought against Li Hongzhang everywhere for the sake of his fame and influence, even compromising the imperial coastal defense and harming the interests of the imperial court. Intellectuals like teacher Cheng, also for their own reputation and influence, not hesitate to fake, promote wrong ideas, bring bad social introduction direction. This is the fault of all intellectuals at home and abroad.