TED演讲：两种制度的传说(3)

　　Now, if this is not legitimacy, I’m not sure what is. In contrast, most electoral democracies around the world are suffering from dismal performance. I don’t need to elaborate for this audience how dysfunctional it is from Washington to European capitals. With a few exceptions, the vast number of developing countries that have adopted electoral regimes are still suffering from poverty and civil strife. Governments get elected, and then they fall below 50 percent approval in a few months and stay there and get worse until the next election. Democracy is becoming a perpetual cycle of elect and regret. At this rate, I’m afraid it is democracy, not China’s one-party system, that is in danger of losing legitimacy.

　　当然，我不想造成一种误会，认为中国成为超级大国已经指日可待了。中国当前面临重大挑战，巨大变迁带来的经济、社会问题数不胜数，譬如环境污染，食品安全、人口问题。在政治领域，最大的挑战是腐败。目前，腐败猖獗，危及中国的政治制度及其道德合法性。但是，很多分析人士误判了腐败的原因，他们声称腐败是一党制导致的，只有终结一党制才能根绝腐败。更严谨一点儿的分析将证明这种观点毫无根据。

　　Now, I don’t want to create the misimpression that China’s hunky-dory on the way to some kind of superpowerdom. The country faces enormous challenges. Social and economic problems that come with wrenching change like this are mine-boggling. Pollution is one. Food safety. Population issues. On the political front, the worst problem is corruption. Corruption is widespread and undermines the system and its moral legitimacy. But most analysts mis-diagnose the disease. They say that corruption is the result of the one-party system, and therefore, in order to cure it, you have to do away with the entire system. But a more careful look would tell us otherwise.

　　据透明国际发布的全球清廉指数排名，在近170个国家里，中国近年来的排名在第70到80名之间。且有上升趋势，印度是世界上人口最多的选举民主制国家，排名第95位，且逐年下滑;希腊排名第80位;印度尼西亚与阿根廷排名并列第100位;菲律宾排名第129位。排名在中国后的约100个国家中，超过一半是选举民主制国家。如果选举是根治腐败的万灵药，为何在这么多国家不灵呢?

　　Transparency International ranks China between 70 and 80 in recent years among 170 countries, and it’s been moving up. India, the largest democracy in the world, 94 and dropping. For the hundred or so countries that are ranked below China, more than half of them are electoral democracies. So if election is the panacea for corruption, how come these countries can’t fix it?

　　我是做风险投资的，擅长于预测。因此，不做几个预测就结束今天的讨论似乎不妥。以下是我的三个预测：

　　未来十年：

　　1. 中国将超过美国成为世界第一大经济体，按人均收入计算也将在发展中国家里名列前茅。2. 腐败虽然无法根绝，但将得到有效控制。在透明国际的全球清廉指数排行榜上，中国有望继续提升10到20名，跨入全球最清廉的前60国之列。3. 经济改革会加速实施，政治改革也将继续推进，中共仍稳固执政。我们正在见证一个时代的落幕。共产主义和选举民主制，都是基于普世价值的“元叙事”。在20世纪，我们见证了前者因极端教条而失败;到21世纪，后者正重蹈同样的覆辙。“元叙事”就像癌症一样，正在从内部吞噬民主。我想澄清一下，我并不是要谴责民主。

　　Now, I’m a venture capitalist. I make bets. It wouldn’t be fair to end this talk without putting myself on the line and making some predictions. So here they are. In the next 10 years,

　　1、 China will surpass the U.S. and become the largest economy in the world. Income per capital will be near the top of all developing countries.

　　2、 Corruption will be curbed, but not eliminated, and China will move up 10 to 20 notches to above 60 in T.I. ranking.

　　3、 Economic reform will accelerate, political reform will continue, and the one-party system will hold firm.

　　We live in the dusk of an era. Meta-narratives that make universal claims failed us in the 20th century and are failing us in the 21st. Meta-narrative is the cancer that is killing democracy from the inside. Now, I want to clarify something. I’m not here to make an indictment of democracy.

　　相反，我认为民主政治对西方的崛起和现代世界的诞生居功至伟。然而，很多西方精英把某一种民主形式模式化、普世化，这是西方当前各种病症的病灶所在。如果西方的精英不是将大把的时间花在向外国推销民主上，而是更多关心一下自身的政治改革，恐怕民主还不至于像今天这样无望。

　　On the contrary, I think democracy contributed to the rise of the West and the creation of the modern world. It is the universal claim that many Western elites are making about their political system, the hubris, that is at the heart of the West’s current ills. If they would spend just a little less time on trying to force their way onto others, and a little bit more on political reform at home, they might give their democracy a better chance.

　　中国的政治模式不可能取代选举民主，因为中国从不将自己的政治制度包装成普世通用的模式，也不热衷于对外输出。这正是关键的所在。进一步说，中国模式的重要意义，不在于为世界各国提供了一个可以替代选举民主的新模式，而在于从实践上证明了良政的模式不是单一而是多元的，各国都有可能找到适合本国的政治制度。

　　China’s political model will never supplant electoral democracy, because unlike the latter, it doesn’t pretend to be universal. It cannot be exported. But that is the point precisely. The significance of China’s example is not that it provides and alternative but the demonstration that alternatives exist.

　　让我们为“元叙事”的时代画个句号吧。共产主义和民主可能都是人类最美好的追求，但它们普世化的教条时代已经过去。我们的下一代，不需要被灌输说，世界上只有一种政治模式，所有社会都只有一种归宿。这是错误的，不负责任的，也是乏味的。多元化正在取代普世化。一个更精彩的时代正缓缓拉开帷幕，我们有没有勇气拥抱它呢?

　　Let us draw to a close this era of meta-narratives. Communism and democracy may both be laudable ideals, but the era of their dogmatic universalism is over. Let us stop telling people and our children there’s only one way to govern ourselves and a singular future towards which all societies must evolve. It is wrong. It is irresponsible. And worst of all, it is boring. Let universality make way for plurality. Perhaps a more interesting age is upon us. Are we brave enough to welcome it? Thank you .

　　采访环节。

　　主持人：世默，请等几分钟，我要问你几个问题，好吗?我想在座的很多西方人会同意你的多民主制度功能失败的分析。但是，同时他们会对一个不是被选举产生的政权，没有任何监督和协商，去决定国家利益表示怀疑。中国政治模式里有什么机制，可以让人民说政权所定义的国际利益是错的?

　　Eric，stay with me for a couple of minutes, became I want to ask you a couple of questions. I thank many have and in general in Western counties would agree with your statement about analysis of democratic systems becoming dysfunctional, but at the same time, many would kind of unsetting the thought that there find is an unelected authority that, without any form of oversight or consultation, decides what the national interest is. What is the mechanism in the Chinese model that allows people to say actually, the national interest as you defined it is wrong?

　　李世默：政治学者福山曾经把中国的制度称为“响应民意的威权”。这不完全精确，但相差不远。我知道，中国最大的民意调查公司，你知道他们的最大的客户是谁吗?中国政府。不只是中央政府，还有省级市级政府，甚至最小的地方政府。他们经常进行民意调查，你对收集垃圾等服务满意吗?你们对国家的大方向满意吗?所以，中国有一个很不同的机制，去响应人民的诉求。我要说的关键是，我们应该从一种有效的政治制度的思想中解放出来，只有选举，选举，选举，才能产生响应民意的政府。其实，我不觉得当今世界的选举能够产生响应民意的政府。(掌声)

　　You known, Frank fufuyama, the political scientist called the Chinese system “responsive authoritarianism”. It’s not exactly right, but I thank it comes close. So I know the largest public opinion survey company in china, Okay? Do you know who their biggest client is? The Chinese government. Not just from the central government, the city government the provincial government to the most local neighborhood districts. They conduct surveys all the time. Are you happy with the garbage collection? Are you happy with the general direction of the country? So there’s in China , there is a different kind of mechanism to be responsive to the demands and the thinking of the people. My point is I think we should get unstuck from the thinking that there’s only political system, election, election, election. That could make it responsive. I 'm not sure, actually, elections produce responsive government anymore in the world.

　　主持人：很多人认为，民主制度的一个功能，是让公民社会表达自己，你举出数据论证，中国政府拥有民众支持，但你也讲到其他因素，比如巨大的挑战，当然，还有其他数据显示另一个方向：上万的抗议和群体事件，环保问题等等。你是否建议中国模式不允许在中国以外有公民社会的空间?

　　Many seen to be, one of the features of a democratic system is a space for civil society to express itself. And you have shown figures about the support that the government and the authorities have in China. But then you’ve just mentioned other elements like, you know big challenges and there are, of course, a lot of other data that go to a different direction: Tens of thousands of unrest and protests, and environmental problems etc,,,(yah,yah.)..So you seem to suggest the Chinese model doesn’t have a space outside of the Party for civil society to express itself.

　　李世默：中国有着相当活跃的公民社会，环保组织等等。但他们不一样，你可能认不出来，在西方经济学定义里，公民社会必须存在与政治体制以外，甚至对立于政治体制。但这种思路与中国文化格格不入。数千年来在中国，所谓的公民社会都有存在。但他们与政治体制相辅相成，我认为，这是一个很大的文化差异。

　　There’s a vibrant civil society in china, where it environment or what have you but it’s different. You wouldn’t recognize it. Because by western definition, a so-called civil society has to be separate or even in opposition to the political system. But that concept is alien for Chinese culture. For thousands for years, you have civil society, yet they are consistent and coherent and part of a political order, and I thank it’s a big culture different.

　　主持人：世默，感谢你与TED分享这些思想。

　　Eric, thank you for sharing this with TED.

　　世默：谢谢你。

　　Thank you.