Sitemap: http://www.cialonline.com/sitemap.xml

多語(yǔ)種黨政文獻簡(jiǎn)寫(xiě)本及專(zhuān)家解讀文庫

返回首頁(yè)

Home

中英對照:中國式現代化與中國共產(chǎn)黨的作用

2023-11-22當代中國與世界研究院

中國式現代化與中國共產(chǎn)黨的作用

Chinese Path to Modernization and the Role Played by the Communist Party of China 

(本文為復旦大學(xué)特聘教授,中國研究院院長(cháng),春秋發(fā)展戰略研究院研究員張維為教授在“中國式現代化與人類(lèi)命運共同體國際研討會(huì )”主旨發(fā)言)

(Keynote speech by Prof. Zhang Weiwei, distinguished professor of Fudan University, president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and researcher at the Shanghai Chunqiu Institute for Development and Strategic Studies, at the International Forum on Chinese Path to Modernization and Global Community of Shared Future)

中國式現代化取得了舉世矚目的成功,我們回望歷史,18、19世紀崛起的英國、法國、德國等國家,他們的人口是千萬(wàn)級別的,20世紀崛起的美國和日本,人口規模是1億級別的,到21世紀崛起的中國,人口規模是10億級別的,中國的人口規模比西方國家人口之和還要大。所以,僅僅這個(gè)規模產(chǎn)生的影響就是震撼世界的。

Chinses path to modernization has secured spectacular success that awes the world. Looking back at history, the 18th and 19th century saw the prime of the United Kingdom, France and Germany, countries that harbor populations in the tens of millions. In the 20th century, the United States and Japan emerged with populations in the hundreds of millions. However, in the 21st century, China’s rise with a population in the billions has surpassed them all, exceeding the combined population of all Western countries. The impact of the scale alone is nothing short of monumental. 

而在這個(gè)過(guò)程中,要理解中國式現代化的成功,就一定要理解中國的政治制度,特別是中國共產(chǎn)黨及其發(fā)揮的作用。

To comprehend the success of Chinese path to modernization in this process, it is imperative to grasp China’s political system, particularly the Communist Party of China and its impact.

“中國共產(chǎn)黨”這個(gè)名字中的“黨”,和西方政黨的“黨”是不同含義的?!包h”這個(gè)詞在西方語(yǔ)言中是“Party”,詞根是“Part”,所以,西方的政黨理論簡(jiǎn)單來(lái)說(shuō),就是一個(gè)社會(huì )、一個(gè)國家中的不同利益群體組成代表不同利益的政黨。它的游戲規則是這樣的,一個(gè)政黨得到51%的選票,另外一個(gè)政黨得到49%的選票,51%的就勝出,甚至贏(yíng)者通吃。如果有爭議,可以由最高法院進(jìn)行裁決,裁決之后大家都要接受,這是西方民主制度的游戲規則。

The term “party” in the name “Communist Party of China” carries a distinct meaning from the “party” in Western political parties. In Western languages, the word “party” derives from “part”, hence the theory of political party in the West is essentially a representation of various interest groups in society or a country. Its game rules are as follows: when one political party receives 51% of the vote, and the other 49%, the party with 51% wins, and the winner takes all. If there is a dispute, the Supreme Court can make a ruling, and everyone must accept it. This is game rule of Western democracy.

然而今天我們看到的現實(shí)情況是什么呢?非西方國家采用西方——我叫做“部分利益黨”模式之后(Partial interest parties或者Parties and interest parties),往往陷入社會(huì )分裂,甚至是永遠整合不起來(lái),結果現代化事業(yè)舉步維艱,發(fā)展不起來(lái)。西方這種“部分利益黨”模式確實(shí)遇到巨大挑戰,今天西方社會(huì )基本都是紛紛分裂的社會(huì )。我記得前段時(shí)間,英國《經(jīng)濟學(xué)人》雜志一篇封面文章,就把美利堅合眾國叫“美利堅分眾共和國”(The Disunited States of America)。

But what is the reality we see today? Non-Western countries that adopt the Western “partial interest parties” (or parties and interest parties) model often face social fragmentation and may never be able to integrate, crippling the course of modernization and social development. The Western partial interest party model is indeed facing mounting challenges, with Western societies today being largely divided. A case in point is a recent cover story of The Economist, where the United States of America was referred to as “the Disunited States of America”.

相比之下,中國共產(chǎn)黨是整體利益黨模式,英文叫Holistic interest party,背后是中國源遠流長(cháng)的政治傳統,因為中國是個(gè)文明型國家(Civilizational state),文明型國家又可以稱(chēng)為“百?lài)汀?,就是歷史上成百上千個(gè)國家慢慢整合起來(lái)的。所以,它形成了自己獨特的治理傳統。這個(gè)傳統最大的特點(diǎn)是由統一的執政集團治理這個(gè)國家,英文可以叫Unified ruling entity,否則這個(gè)國家就要解體,就要分裂,就要爆發(fā)內戰,造成無(wú)數生靈涂炭。1911年辛亥革命之后,中國曾經(jīng)嘗試過(guò)西方這種部分利益黨模式,結果是軍閥混戰。我想中國共產(chǎn)黨領(lǐng)導今天的現代化,相當程度上還是中國歷史上統一執政集團傳統的延續和發(fā)展。

In contrast, the Communist Party of China follows the “holistic interest party” model, which is rooted in China’s long-standing political traditions. As a civilizational state (also known as the “sum of a hundred of nations”), China has integrated hundreds or even thousands of states in its long history and thus developed its unique governance tradition. The most distinctive feature of this tradition is the presence of a unified ruling entity, without which the country would fragment, divide, and experience civil war, causing untold suffering. After the Revolution of 1911, China tried to adopt the Western partial interest parties model, which resulted in a period of warlordism. I believe that the leadership of the Communist Party of China in modernization today is, to a significant extent, a continuation and development of the traditional practice of a unified ruling entity in Chinese history.

從今天世界的情況來(lái)看,整體利益黨模式擁有更加有意義的現實(shí)價(jià)值。首先,一個(gè)國家是多黨制、一黨制還是無(wú)黨制,并不那么重要,關(guān)鍵是這個(gè)國家是否能夠有一個(gè)代表人民整體利益的政治力量來(lái)執政。如果有這樣的力量,這個(gè)國家的發(fā)展可能就比較順利;如果沒(méi)有,它的發(fā)展過(guò)程就容易受到各種各樣的挫折。

Our world today welcomes the holistic interest party model, which is more pragmatic and relevant. First of all, as long as there exists a political force representing the overall interests of the people in power, it doesn’t matter whether a country chooses the multi-party system, one-party system or non-party system. If such a force exists, the country’s development may proceed relatively smoothly; if not, the development process is likely to encounter various setbacks. 

中國有這樣的政治力量,那就是中國共產(chǎn)黨。所以,我們的現代化事業(yè)發(fā)展得比較順利,我們可以在14億人的國度里通過(guò)協(xié)商民主等一系列的制度安排,就各種問(wèn)題達成共識,然后大家團結一心,共同謀發(fā)展。另外,我們可以進(jìn)行中長(cháng)期的規劃,五年、十年、十五年、二十年、半個(gè)世紀、一個(gè)世紀,有效地克服了西方部分利益黨模式下民粹主義盛行和短視主義泛濫的問(wèn)題。

In China’s case, the political force that represents the overall interests of the people is the Communist Party of China. With its guidance, Chinese modernization has been progressing smoothly, and through mechanisms like consultative democracy, consensus is reached in a vast nation of 1.4 billion people. Then, together we join force for a better future. With its guidance, we can engage in medium- to long-term planning, such as five-year, ten-year, fifteen-year, twenty-year, half-century, and century-long plans, avoiding the rampant populism and myopic mindset prevalent in the Western partial interest party model. 

第二,隨著(zhù)國際競爭日益激烈,所有國家都需要改革,應對日益變化的國際格局。但改革最大的難處在于要克服既得利益,如果沒(méi)有代表人民整體利益的政治力量來(lái)推動(dòng),改革就會(huì )受到各種各樣阻撓而寸步難行。美國就是個(gè)典型的無(wú)法進(jìn)行改革的國家,什么事都做不成。我查了一下,我們辛亥革命前美國就提出要搞全民醫保,100多年過(guò)去了還是搞不了。槍支控制,二十年之后能完成嗎?完成不了。100年之后?I don’t know。因為這背后被各種既得利益綁架了,所以沒(méi)法進(jìn)行。中國可以進(jìn)行改革,過(guò)去數十年中國現代化的成功關(guān)鍵經(jīng)驗之一,就是我們能夠不停地進(jìn)行改革,能夠與時(shí)俱進(jìn)。

Secondly, as international competition becomes increasingly fierce, all countries need to reform to respond to the changing international landscape. However, the biggest challenge of reform is to overcome vested interests. Without a political force representing the overall interests of the people, reforms will encounter various obstacles and become difficult to proceed. The US is a typical good-for-nothing when it comes to reform. I looked up our history, and found out that prior to our Revolution of 1911, the US had already proposed universal healthcare. However, over a century has passed, such a proposal is yet in suspense. Can gun control be achieved in 20 years? I doubt so. Perhaps in 100 years? I don’t know. Because vested interests are pulling the strings behind such reforms, hindering their success. China, on the other hand, unravels a different story. One of the keys to our modernization miracle in the past decades is our unremitting reform to keep up with the times. 

第三,整體利益黨以國家整體利益、民族的整體利益為依歸,執行以人民為中心的發(fā)展理念,而非選票為中心的發(fā)展理念,這兩者是完全不一樣的。

Third, a holistic interest party model upholds the interest of the whole country and its people. It implements the people-oriented philosophy of development, as opposed to the ballot-oriented philosophy. 

因為在典型的西方國家,一般參加大選的或者其他選舉的人數大概是選民的50%左右,甚至更少。以選票為中心,實(shí)際上關(guān)注的是少數人。

In typical Western countries, participants to major elections or other elections account for about 50% of the constituency, perhaps even less. Therefore, a ballot-oriented philosophy failed to consider the interests of the majority. 

一個(gè)典型的美國選舉,可能參加投票的選民是55%左右,這還是比較好的情況,他只要拿到27%-28%的選票就贏(yíng)了。而以人民為中心關(guān)注的是絕大多數人,這是兩者的差別。所以,在西方部分利益黨模式下,競選變成政治營(yíng)銷(xiāo),變成拼金錢(qián),拼表演,拼空談,拼民粹主義,拼政治極端化,結果導致社會(huì )四分五裂,國家沒(méi)有發(fā)展的動(dòng)力。

A typical US election may see 55% of the constituency voting on a good occasion, and it only takes 27% to 28% percent of the ballots to win out. However, a people-oriented philosophy focuses on the majority. Consequently, with partial interest parties as political players in the West, elections become political marketing—a game of money, shows and empty talks, populism, and extremism, which leads to the split of society and hinders national development. 

最后一點(diǎn),無(wú)論是對內還是對外,西方部分利益黨模式所遵循的原則都叫“分而治之”(divide and rule)。對內就是身份政治,少數主義和多數主義之間,伊斯蘭教徒和基督教教徒之間,同性戀者和反同性戀者之間,墮胎者和反墮胎者之間等等,結果造成矛盾重重,互不退讓?zhuān)ち覍?。對外在國際上,西方總是拉一派打一派,挑撥離間,挑動(dòng)顏色革命,輸出民主結果變成了輸出動(dòng)亂乃至戰爭。

Finally, whether on domestic or international affairs, some partial interest parties in the West follow the principle of divide and rule. Identity politics is applied to domestic affairs, intensifying unresolvable conflicts between the minority and the majority, Muslims and Christians, homosexuals and homophobes, abortionists and anti-abortionists, and the list goes on. Internationally, the West plays one side against another and provokes color revolutions—it claims to promote democracy but brings turbulences and even wars.  

中國的做法完全不一樣,我們是整體利益黨的做法,這源于中國自己文明的傳統和中國式現代化的成功經(jīng)驗,如果西方是divide and rule“分而治之”,中國的做法就是unite and prosper“合而富之”。我們鼓勵所有的國家要團結,全世界要團結,拉丁美洲要團結,中東要團結,非洲要團結,東南亞要團結,歐盟也要團結。這和西方的做法是完全不一樣的。我們現在推動(dòng)“一帶一路”倡議,它的黃金原則是共商、共建、共享,也反映了“合而富之”的原則。

China, led by a holistic interest party model, has an entirely different approach. Our methods originate from our time-honored traditions and successful experiences in modernization. While the West practices “divide and rule”, China’s approach is “unite and prosper”. We encourage all countries to unite: countries in Latin America, in East Asia, in Africa, in Southeast Asia, and in the EU. We are promoting the Belt and Road Initiative, the golden principle of which is consultation, contribution and sharing—a display of our principle of “unite and prosper”.

不久前,我接受《今日俄羅斯》記者的采訪(fǎng),談到對俄羅斯的制裁,我說(shuō)俄羅斯被西方孤立了,但西方被非西方世界孤立了。非西方世界幾乎沒(méi)有國家參與對俄羅斯的制裁,也就是說(shuō)非西方國家都認為我們應該unite and prosper,合而富之、團結富強。在今天這個(gè)歷史十字路口,我想起了1945年我們抗戰勝利在望,當時(shí)毛澤東主席在中國共產(chǎn)黨第七次全國代表大會(huì )上提出非常重要的命題,就是“兩個(gè)中國之命運”:“光明的中國之命運和黑暗的中國之命運”。后來(lái)證明毛主席的這篇講話(huà)和這個(gè)思路,決定了中國選擇光明的命運。

Not long ago, I was interviewed by a journalist from Russia Today about the sanctions against Russia. I said while Russia is isolated by the West, the West is also isolated by the non-Western world. Almost no countries in the non-Western world are involved in sanctions against Russia, which means that non-Western countries all think that we should unite and prosper. Today, at this historical crossroad, I recall the year of 1945 when we were on the verge of victory in the War of Resistance against Japan. At that time, Chairman Mao Zedong put forward a very important proposition at the 7th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, which was China’s two possible fates, namely the bright future and the dark one. Later, it was proved that Chairman Mao’s remarks and his idea directed China’s choice of a bright future. 

今天某種意義上,這個(gè)世界上也處在這么一個(gè)十字路口,我們面臨的是兩種世界之命運。一種是美國為代表的,我覺(jué)得沒(méi)有前途的世界,一定是以鄰為壑,零和游戲,充滿(mǎn)戰爭動(dòng)亂的世界,目的是保護鞏固西方的既得利益;另一個(gè)就是中國式現代化所代表的整體利益,這種合而富之、團結繁榮的世界。所以,我覺(jué)得中國和世界各國,特別是非西方世界和西方有識之士,應該共同追求更加光明的世界。

In a sense, the world is also at a crossroad today, facing the fate of two different worlds. One is represented by the United States, which I believe has no future. It is a world of benefiting oneself at others' expense, of zero-sum games, of wars and turbulences, and a world protects and enforces the West’s interest at others’ expense; the other is exemplified by China’s modernization, which represents our holistic interests. It is a world of shared prosperity and unity. Therefore, I think China and all countries in the world, especially the non-Western world and educated people in the West, should work together to pursue a brighter world.