The status quo in India is better than jumping up and down. Why is it best to do nothing in the face of the division of Northeast China?

Because the current situation in India is very chaotic. If you are tough, not only will it cause a counterattack, but he will also have no way to balance the forces of all parties. Under such circumstances, if India jumps up and down and makes a lot of tough changes, it will cause a strong counterattack from the people. In this case, India had better not do anything to separate the Northeast. Let it develop naturally.

The first reason is to respect the fait accompli, and we can't deny the long-accumulated institutional arrangements and come up with a new one out of thin air. This is not good. You must make some fine-tuning according to the established institutional arrangements and the changes of the times. This is what you should do. Nothing is moving or right.

The government should not always think about fooling around. At some point, the government often doesn't know what to do, but it always feels that it is doing the right thing. I want to do such a thing, but the final result is not good. Inaction means that the government should not make random ideas and let the people develop themselves and let nature take its course. In order to maximize their own interests, ordinary people will do things well. So the natural result is often better than the hard cover.

Governing by doing nothing, that is, governing by nature, is the core idea of the Taoist school founded by Lao Zi, a famous thinker in the Spring and Autumn Period, and also the earliest theory of governing the country in China. Because it played an important role in the prosperous period of ancient China, it was of great reference significance and was valued by the rulers of past dynasties. At present, China is in a period of social transformation, which requires today's leaders to "transform" synchronously, complete the transformation from traditional bureaucratic leadership to modern leadership with new ideas and new thinking, and realize a "qualitative" leap in leadership concepts and methods. ?