为什么很多中国人认为西方民主是削弱中国的阴谋 [美国媒体]

-------------译者：magicqueen99-审核者：ywn2008------------

Michelle Zhou Good governance is better than good Democracy

好的治理强过好的民主

upxed Sep 23
Western democracy is not a plot to make China WEAK but a plot to make the rich STRONG. The rich from the West.

西方的民主不是削弱中国的阴谋，而是让富人更强大的阴谋。让西方的富人更强大。

I think “western democracy” is not a democracy just like the “Federal Reserve” is not federal.

我认为“西方民主”并不是一种民主，正如“美联储”不是联邦的一样。

Democracy is a noun but “western democracy” has become a verb. It’s what the “rich” has been using for opening markets eliminating enemies overthrowing governments imposing sanctions and dictating the world. Instead of calling it a democracy it should be democratize. This is why “they” want China to adopt western democracy but not Saudi Arabia.

民主是一个名词，但“西方民主”已成为一个动词。“富人”们用西方民主来打开市场、消灭敌人、推翻政府、强加制裁、支配世界。与其说这是一种民主不如说这是一种民主化运动。这就是为什么“他们”希望中国而不是沙特阿拉伯采取西方的民主。

-------------译者：magicqueen99-审核者：ywn2008------------



THIS IS A TRUE DEMOCRACY

这是一个真正的民主国家



Today the U.S. has become democratized. The “western democratization” of U.S. started on December 23 1913 when President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into existence.

现在美国已经被民主化。美国的“西方民主”始于1913年12月23日，时任美国总统的伍德罗·威尔逊签署通过了美联储议案。

Later on in 1919 President Woodrow Wilson regretted saying: "I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation therefore and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."

嗣后，伍德罗·威尔逊总统在1919年痛悔地说：“我是最不幸的人。我无意之中摧毁了我的国家。一个伟大的工业国家是由它的信用体系所控制的。我们的信用体系已经过于集中。国家的发展和我们所有的经济活动，都完全掌握在少数人手中。我们已经陷入最糟糕的统治之下，一种文明世界里最完全、最彻底的控制，不再是一个自由言论支配的政府、不再是由信念和多数人表决支配的政府，而是由一小撮统治者的意见和胁迫所控制的政府。”

Western democratization of U.S. completed on November 22 1963 with the kill of JFK. The last U.S. President who fought the Federal Reserve with Executive Order 11110 - Which was giving U.S. the ability to create its own money backed by silver instead of Bank Notes with interest.

美国的西方民主化随着1963年11月22日肯尼迪遇刺而完成。他是最后一位用11110号总统令跟美联储抗争的美国总统----该法令给予美国政府银本位的铸币权，而不是用付息的银行票据来发行货币。

After seeing all that how can I not think that “Western Democracy” is not a plot to make China weak!

目睹这一切，我怎么会不把“西方民主”当成一个削弱中国的阴谋！

The western mainstream media is a plot to keep the west misinformed about China. The truth is Chinese are live and well without western democracy. So let’s stop talking about politics. LETS TALK BUSINESS.

西方主流媒体一直用错误的中国信息误导世界，这就是阴谋。真相是：中国人没有西方民主也活得好好的。所以别谈政治。我们还是来谈生意吧。




-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：115jie------------

Christopher Reiss7 votes Show
The narrative about the Federal Reserve Bank Kennedy and silver comes from the book Crossfire by Jim Marrs. I think you’ll find if you dig around you’ll find this theory pretty thoroughly discredited. (E.g. The Fed and Its Enemies )

美联储的肯尼迪和银币的故事来自吉姆·马尔斯写的交火这本书。我想你会发现如果你继续深挖下去你会发现这个理论非常令人怀疑。（比如《美联储及其敌人》）

Mick Stute28 votes Show
I just hope that the world understands that our government imposes its will by force on us its citizens just it it does on you. We don’t need a new term “western democracy” we already have one: oligarchy.

我只希望世界明白，我们的政府将其意志强加在我们公民身上。我们不需要一个新的术语“西方民主”，我们已经有一个：寡头统治的政府。

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：miaoqing------------

Robert Zraick51 votes Show
The destruction of other countries is not caused directly by U.S. Democracy. It is cause by bad foreign policy and aggressive military action. "Democracy" or "making them safe for democracy" is only an excuse used on easy to confuse modern Americans.

对其他国家的破坏并不是由美国民主直接造成的。这是糟糕的外交政策和侵略的军事行动所导致的。”民主”或“不让他们对民主造成威胁”只是用来迷惑当代美国人的一个借口。

This might make some people angry but our country was not founded as a democracy. Just recite the Pledge of Allegiance if you doubt that. We were founded as a republic. And please do not think that these terms have anything to do with the political parties.

我们的国家不是作为一个民主国家建立的但这一事实可能会使一些人愤怒。如果你怀疑的话只要列举宣誓词就能明白。我们是作为一个共和国成立的。请不要认为这些条款与政党之间有什么关系。

The Founders were opposed to democracy. They said so in no uncertain terms in many of the writings of that period.

建国者们反对民主。他们在这一时期的许多着作中都是这样写的。

A democracy is better than a dictatorship in that majority rule is better than singular rule as that of a despot or king.

民主比独裁要好，多数人投票表决的规则比一个专制者或国王制定规则更好。

But democracy is defined by majority rule which sounds nice but it is in effect mob rule and the mob is not always right. The majority of people believed the earth was flat when Columbus convinced Queen Isabella that it was round and he wanted to sail around from Spain to India. The majority thought he would sail off the edge of the flat earth.

但民主是由多数人制定的规则，这听起来虽然很好，但它实际上是民众统治，民众并不总是正确的。大多数人相信地球是平的，当哥伦布说服了伊莎贝拉皇后说，其实它是圆的，他想从西班牙航行到印度。但是大多数人认为他会离开地球的边缘。

He didn't because the majority was wrong about the earth. Of course Columbus was wrong about something else when he arrived in America. This is why when I was a kid we played Cowboys and Indians rather than Cowboys and Indigenous Americans but I digress.

他没有，因为大多数人关于地球的看法是错误的。当然，当他到达美国时，哥伦布弄错了。这就是为什么当我还是孩子的时候，我们玩牛仔和印第安人的游戏，而不是牛仔和土着美国人的游戏，这点我离题了。

The better form of government is a republic which is rule of law. It assumes that the law is the Constitution and not just a bunch of self serving rules written by corrupt politicians.

政府的更好的形式是一个法治的共和国。它制定的法律是宪法的呈现，而不仅仅是腐败政客写的一堆自我服务的法则。

The fact that in government controlled schools today kids are taught that the terms republic and democracy are interchangeable and mean the same thing (a blatant lie) will make it impossible for future generations to think clearly or debate the issue. Actually the not thinking clearly part has pretty much already happened.

事实上，在政府控制的学校，今天的孩子们被教导，共和党和民主党是可以互换的，意味着同样的事情（一个明显的谎言）将使未来几代人不可能清楚地思考或辩论这个问题。其实没有搞清楚的部分已经发生了很多问题。

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

In a working republic everyone is equal in that they have equal rights under the law. The problem with democracy is that the majority can vote to trample the rights of the minority even if the majority created by a single vote.

在一个正常运转的共和国里，人人都是平等的，他们在法律下享有平等的权利。民主的问题是，大多数人可以投票践踏少数人的权利，即使大多数人都可以投票。

The function of government is to protect the rights of every individual equally. It really is the only valid function. Everything else flows from that.

政府的职能是平等地保护每一个人的权利。它真的是唯一有效的功能。其他的一切都遵循这个规则。

As an example murder is illegal. We have decided that murder is wrong and no one is to be deprived of life with out due process of law. If there were a vote taken to make murder legal the a majority of voters said yes that would make murder legal but not change murder at all and it would still be wrong. Stated another way the law trumps the will of the majority. Allowing a majority to vote to violate the law makes as much sense as allowing congressmen to vote on their own salaries. (oops!)

举一个例子，谋杀是非法的。我们已经认定，谋杀是错误的，在正当法律程序下没有人可以被剥夺了生命。另一个法律胜过多数人的意志的例子是，如果有一个投票，使大多数选民说谋杀是合法的，将使谋杀合法，但不改变谋杀案它本身的事实，它仍然是错误的。但是允许多数人可以投票来违反法律就像是允许国会议员对自己的薪水加薪。（哎呀！）

Consider the lynch mob. Say you have 40 guys (the posse) wanting to hang the one guy who is in the minority the accused horse thief.
That is a democracy. But when the sheriff (the Law) arrives and says "hold it boys you can't hang him without a trial that is the law." Find him guilty (due process of law) and then you can hang him. That is how a republic works.

考虑下暴民的私刑。假如有40人（团队）想吊死一个被指控为盗马贼的人。
这是一个民主的例子。但是当警长（法律）到达并说：“放下那个男孩你不能在没有审判情况下的吊死他，这是法律”，发现他有罪（由于法律的过程），然后你可以吊死他。这就是共和政体的作用。

It is true that the Founders saw a place where a majority decision could be used but never to deny the rights of anyone. The Supreme Court is one example. But they did not even trust it to choose the President which is why we still have the electoral college.

这是真的，建国者认为多数决定有效同时没有否认任何人的权利。最高法院就是其中的一个例子。但他们甚至不相信它来选择总统，这就是为什么我们仍然有选举团。

I will close with a quote from Benjamin Franklin. He said "Democracy is like two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. A republic works the same way but the sheep is armed to the teeth."

我将关闭本杰明富兰克林的回答。他说：“民主就像两头狼和一只羊在投票晚餐吃什么。一个共和国也以同样的方式工作，但羊是武装到牙齿的。”

-------------译者：bonjour-审核者：珂求一生------------

George Huestis11 votes Show
Democracy has nothing to do with money.
It is also not about majority rule.
Democracy is about the persistent institutionalized protection of minority rights.
This allows people to become minorities (to disagree) without putting themselves in danger of say being kidnapped by mainland thugs and “disappeared” like has recently been happening to satirists in Hong Kong. This in turn increases the rate of idea-generation and the rapidity with which ideas are vetted tested and rejected.
This is why in the United States the first amendment is held so sacred. We take it very seriously. The slippery slope argument most employed in our politics is “blah blah first amendment.”
I speak out against my government with great frequency and at great volume. I’m what people over here call a “bleeding heart treehugging liberal pussy.” I consider it my civic duty to point out things that are bad about my country so that they might be fixed.
That I feel this is my duty that I feel safe doing this and that I believe that by doing this I can enact change? That is Democracy. Power in the hands of all the people being ruled.
Not just the 51% that agree.

民主跟金钱没有关系。
民主跟多数派掌权也没关系。
民主是对于少数派权利持续的制度化的保障。
民主可以让人们在成为少数派（持反对意见）时不用置身于危险，例如被中国大陆的暴徒绑架而“失踪”，就像近来发生在香港的讽刺作家身上的事一样。这反过来增加了产生观点的几率，让观点可以快速地表达出来，接受考验，以及被拒绝。
这就是为什么在美国宪法第一修正案被看得如此神圣。我们对待它的态度非常严肃。我们政客最常说的滑坡论证就是“什么什么第一修正案”。
我非常频繁而且非常大声地反对我们的政府。我就是人们常说的“烂好人环保主义自由主义逼”。我认为这是我的公民义务，指出对我的国家有害的事，以便解决问题。
我认为这是我的义务，然后我觉得这么做很安全，然后我相信这么做了以后我可以改变这件事？这就是民主。所有被管理的人们手中的权力。
并不是所谓的少数服从多数。

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Akshat Vaidya98 votes Show
This is absurd. Japan Taiwan Korea etc are democratic nations that have surpassed China by leaps and bounds in almost every respect (other than population size I suppose). And I know many in China may be surprised to hear this about Africa but even democracies in the African continent like Botswana are robust stable countries that have been consistently clocking ~5% GDP growth per annum. Cherry picking Middle Eastern states currently in the middle of violent savage civil wars and saying “see Western democracy has failed” is beyond ridiculous.

这是荒谬的结论。日本、台湾、韩国等都是民主国家，已经超过了突飞猛进的中国的几乎每个方面（除了人口规模，我想）。我知道很多在中国的人可能会惊讶地听到关于非洲甚至在非洲大陆像博茨瓦纳的民主是非常稳定的国家，一直以每年5%的GDP增长~。只挑选中东目前在激烈的野蛮内战的国家，并说“看到西方民主失败”是非常荒谬的。

Athena Ponce9 votes Show
I sense a lot of anger and cynicism in this answer but no actual flow of logical premises and a demonstrated conclusion. I think this answer needs some serious improvement to support the claim it’s making.

我意识到这个答案的愤怒和愤世嫉俗，但没有实际流动的逻辑前提和一个证明的结论。我认为这个答案需要一些严重的改进，以支持它的结论。

-------------译者：太阳最红蔡主席最亲-审核者：珂求一生------------

Matthew Cantrell1 vote by James Mitchell
Only downside of the Chinese government would be that fact of its incredibly corrupt. Transparency Internatipnal gave the country a score of 37. It tied for 83rd least corrupt country. It tied with Benin Columbia Liberia and Sri Lanka. The highest scoring country is Denmark with a 91 (the USA received a 76 and tied with Hong Kong and Austria) and the lowest would be Somalia. North Korea is a very close second.

中国唯一的缺点是中国政府难以置信的腐败。透明国际只给了她37分，在廉洁度排名上为第83位。 中国与贝宁哥伦比亚利比里亚和斯里兰卡为伍。 得分最高的国家是丹麦，91分（美国获得76分，与香港和奥地利在一阵列），最低的是索马里。 朝鲜是倒数第二。

Source: The Global Anti-Corruption Coalition

资料来源：全球反腐败联盟

Hernanday Oleary
Can you elaborate on the point about America not caring about the Saudis being a dictatorship with no human rights but constantly crying about China. I agree it is a double standard but I do not see why. What in your view causes this double standard to exist? Ie. why is China being pressured here.

你能洗一下为什么美国不关心没有人权的独裁沙特，但是不停关注中国的人权问题？我同意这是一个双重标准，但是为什么？你觉得为什么这个双重标准能够存在？为什么中国在这方面被施压？

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Gilles Reynaud3 votes Show
You can hate as much as you want but you can’t pretend to be better as long as you use the same arguments you pretend to fight.

你可以仇恨它，但是你只要用相同的论点来假装辩解，就不能假装事情变得更好。

The photo you posted at the end of your message is not better than the one at the start. I hope you realise it because you are advocating similar stands on both arguments using these pictures.

你张贴在你的邮件的结尾的照片不比一开始的更好。我希望你意识到因为你辩论的两个论点都使用了类似的论据。

You may understand that democray is never good or bad it is a system and you can’t rate it like you rate governance that has some definitive goals : numbers of kilos of bread per inhabitants life expectancy GDP growth etc.

你应该明白民主是好的或坏的这是一个系统，你不能评价它像你评价统治方式一样，因为它有明确的目标：每个居民的平均寿命增长，粮食产量增长，GDP等。

Democracy is a means to serve peoples wills not to achieve a goal and sometimes democracy leads to despotism or dictatorship.

民主的含义是服务于人民的意志的手段而不是达到一个目标，有时民主导致专制或独裁统治。

You may resent something about Western countries and in I my opinion this is good for you to express it. I just wish you were less offensive in your criticism because this criticism just spreads more hate.、

在我看来你可能对西方国家的一些东西有些怨恨，你把它表达出来这是很好的做法。我只希望你在你的批评里少一些无礼的冒犯，因为这种批评只能导致传播更多的仇恨。

 -------------译者：大汉故土-审核者：珂求一生------------

Yeming Xie6 votes Show
"Western democracy" is also an over generalization. Strictly speaking the entire concept of democracy is coined in the west so all forms of democracy today are quite western. The trouble we face today is not democracy or "western" democracy itself but the US way of promoting its narrow idea of democracy with little regard of the indigenous culture resulting all the disasters in the middle east which effective smeared a lot of sh*t on the concept itself.

西式民主同样太过笼统了。严格说来，明主的整个概念来自于西方，所以它很西式。我们今天所面临的问题不是民主或西式民主本身，而是美国不考虑文化的差异强行推销其狭隘的民主观的方式，以及在中东引发的灾难性的后果，这也使得民主这一概念被蒙上阴影。

Believe it or not China is kind of on its own course towards democracy. In the past few decades we've seen much improvement of freedom of speech more involvement from the common people in public decision making. People enjoy a quite high degree of freedom today on individual level even by Western standard.

不管你相信与否，中国正用其自己的方式朝着民主迈进，过去数十年，我们看到了言论自由的改善，以及更多的普通人参与公共决策的制定。当今中国，即便以西方的标准来看，人民也享有很高程度的自由。

All of the improvements DID make a positive contribution on the economic growth of China. One dangerous misconception I've seen in China is thinking that we got to where we are because we rejected democracy like it's a bad thing. Business only strive in certain political climate especially in China. People are overjoyed by the success on the business side and easily forget that we had a dictatorship not too long ago if we somehow revert to that all will be lost. The degree of media censorship in China isn't really justifiable and it does hurt business in the long run. I do hope we eventually become a free society on our own (as opposed to being force fed some packaged crap by the US) but it is also important to know we are not there yet and it will take tremendous conscious effort to get there.

所有的进步，正向的推动了中国的经济发展。然而我也看到了一种危险的思潮，即我们能有今天的成绩，是因为拒绝了民主，仿佛民主是洪水猛兽。某种政治环境下经济才会繁荣，特别是在中国。人们很容易就迷醉在商业成功带来的成就中，而忘了我们在不久的过去曾生活于毒菜的统治中。而一旦毒菜的余烬死灰复燃，我们将失去一切。在中国，对于霉体的审查制度并不科学，从远期来看，也会损害到商业的发展。我衷心希望，我们最终能以我们自己的方式完成到自由社会的转变（而不是美国强加给其它人的那一套垃圾） 但是同时我们也要意识到，革命尚未成功，同志仍需努力。

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Imre Kovacs
How about adding some references to truly democratic countries like most of Europe and especially Germany (which was Nazi dictatorship and now a democratic country with the strongest economy in the EU owing its prosperity and stable development to multi-party democracy). Or is cherry-picking data and being silent about counterexamples THE method of the Chinese communists?

为什么不参考一些真正的民主国家？，如欧洲，尤其是德国（最早它受到了纳粹的独裁统治，现在它是一个民主国家，由于其繁荣和稳定发展的多党民主现在是欧盟最强大的经济体）。或是挑选数据对于反例保持沉默是中共的一贯方针？

Kristoffer Harbo8 votes Show
Reminds me of what the Indian social critic Arundhati Roy wrote in her book “Listening to Grasshoppers”. 

让我想起了印度社会评论家Arundhati Roy写在她的书《听蚱蜢：民主的现场记录》里的情节。

She often describes the popular concept of democracy as “demon crazy”

她经常把民众对民主的印象描述为“疯狂的恶魔”

Best regards

诚挚的问候

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Navroj Ravi Vaghulathri10 votes Show
The whole issue is the notion that “one size fits all”.

整个问题的核心是“以一代全”的概念。

Face it. Democracy cannot be applied everywhere and to everyone. It works well in some countries but reduces others to rubble. Maybe China doesn’t need democracy let alone “western democracy”. That is up to them not the US.

承认吧。民主不能应用于任何地方和任何人。它在一些国家执行的很好，但在其他国家是一场灾难。也许中国不需要民主，更不用说“西方民主”。这是取决他们自己而不是美国人。

It’s very ironic for the US to talk about democracy when they are a quasi-dictatorship which predominantly caters to the majority.

这是非常讽刺的是当美国人谈论民主时他们是独断地（不容他人质疑地），这主要是为了迎合大多数人的看法。

Nicholas M. Cummings
Your small group of dominant men are just the Party though. Same difference.

你的领导人的小团队仍然只是独党的一部分。没什么两样。

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Karina Rivera
I could tell you get your news from Facebook.

我可以告诉你可以从Facebook找到你说的那些新闻。

Daniel Robert Buscaglia1 vote by James Mitchell
You’re so off on so many things taking this out line by line would require more time than its worth.

你认为的这些事情之所以错误是因为它需要更多的时间来证明它的价值。

Naresh Yadav17 votes Show
“ This is why “they” want China to adopt western democracy but not Saudi Arabia.” This will hurt a lot ha ha….

“这就是为什么他们希望中国采取西方的民主而不是沙特阿拉伯采取西方的民主的原因。“哈哈这会伤害到很多人的…

Michael Phin60 votes Show
I love this answer. Look at African countries with Western Democracy. Don’t hold your breath.

我喜欢这个答案。看看非洲采用西方民主的国家。简直无法想象（别期望太高了）？！

-------------译者：messiah168-审核者：珂求一生------------

Said Twahir1 vote by Samantha Kong
I fully support your answer as I've seen the same. I'm a Kenyan who grew up in UAE and spent the last 5 years in China. From what I've seen China's done the best job out of all the other places I've been to when it comes to governing their country. As the Michelle Zhou author of the answer said western democracy is a ploy to keep the rich and powerful in power and give them and advantage over the countries that oppose them or don't share the same ideals. Proof of this can be seen in the news with what's happened in the Middle East all the countries that were destroyed such as Libya Syria and Yemen to name a few all these countries did and we're doing well up to the moment USA decided to stick their nose into their affairs. Don't get me wrong I have nothing against American people it's the people in power that will do anything to stay in power they are the ones I'm concerned about.
There's an African saying that the whites came to our lands with the bible before we realized it we had the bible and they had our lands.
This goes to show that the people who are really in control in the western world are the ones to look out for. I don't blame the people or the leaders just the people controlling them.
I got kinda emotional there and went off topic back to the main point Chinese are doing so well without western democracy and have done well for the past 5000 years. They don't need and I hope will never adopt western democracy.

我完全支持你的答案，因为我看到了相同的结果。我是肯尼亚人，在阿联酋长大，在中国度过了5年。就我所看到的是中国人治理国家和处理其他方面事务是一样出色的。作为答案的作者Michelle Zhou说，西方的民主是一种阴谋， 只为了保持富有和强大的权利，保持他们国家的先进，反对其他不同意见的国家。这一点可以从所有被摧毁的中东国家的消息中看到，如叙利亚、也门和利比亚， 这些国家做本来来做得很好，直到美国决定坚持干预他们的事务。不要误解我，我没有反对美国人民，我所说的是那些会为了把权利把持在手心而不择手段的有权势的人。
有一个非洲谚语说，白人传教士刚到非洲时，他们手里有《圣经》 ，我们（黑人）手里有土地。传教士说：‘让我们祈祷吧！，于是我们闭目祈祷。可到我们睁开眼时，发现情况颠倒过来了：我们手里有了《圣经》，他们手里有了土地。
这表明，控制西方世界的人真正想要的是什么。我不责怪人民或那些被控制的领导人。
我有点情绪化， 回到话题的主要观点上，中国人做得很好，没有西方民主，并且过去5000年也一样做的很好。他们不需要，我希望他们永远不会采用西方民主。