为什么中国政府比其他政府高效那么多？ [美国媒体]

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------



Why do you think the Chinese government is so much more effective than any other government?

你觉得为什么中国政府比其他政府效率高那么多？
-------------译者：ygytnt1001-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Richard O'Connell 20 years vegetarian. 10 of those in China
Answered Fri R26; Upvoted by Robin Daverman
Media control is the number one reason China is more succesful than other governments.

媒体控制是中国政府比其他政府成功的头号原因。

In the west we already know that media control is a necessity for governments to win elections and successfully govern.

在西方我们已知媒体控制是政府赢得选举和成功管理的必须。

Tony Blair for example knew he needed the Murdoch press on side and gave his Communications Director Alistair Campbell more power than most of his cabinet.

布莱尔把默多克传媒拉入麾下并把他内阁中的通信主管坎贝尔委以重任就是一个例子。

The next most succesful politician in the UK was David Cameron. His previous Job? PR Guy.

另一个比较成功的英国政治家是卡梅隆。他以前是干啥的呢？公关人。

Let’s look at more recent success - Donald Trump. TV celebrity turned Twitter power user who leveraged up and coming right wing press and new media to demolish his opponents. And who was anointed his de facto number two immediately after the win. Why of course Steve Bannon right wing website owner.

让我们看看当红炸子鸡-唐纳德 特朗普。电视名人转变成推特网红，利用右翼媒体和新传媒来击败他的对手。胜选后他任命的实际二把手是谁你知道吗，当然是史蒂夫班农，一个右翼网站所有者。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Jeremy Corbyn’s recent election gains for the British Labour party. His and his team’s grasp of Social Media to give a positive message (through grass roots Labour organization Momentum) led to the biggest upset since well Brexit a few months back.

杰里米·科尔宾的选举胜利令英国工党劳有所得。他和他的团队对社会媒体的控制刷足了（对英国工党）积极的信息（虽然这也是由于工人组织的运动），最终造成了几个月前英国脱欧以来最大的意外事件。

But here’s the problem. The media have so much control but all they really want is to sell more papers and increase ad revenues whether it’s Facebook Fox News or The Guardian. It’s in their interest to hype up and sensationalize. Even Facebook’s algorithm will more likely show you stories that have controversial reactions.

但是这里面反映了一个问题。媒体拥有很强的控制力，但是它们最关心的只有卖更多的报纸赚更多的钱，不管脸书、福克斯新闻还是卫报都是这样。媒体的兴趣就在于夸大事实并搞个大新闻。即使是脸书，也倾向于使用程序算法向你推送更多争议性的反馈内容。

What does this mean for the effectiveness of governments in the west? Well what’s popular becomes more important than what’s actually important. Whoever causes more outrage against their opponents will stand a greater chance to win.

这给西方政府带来了什么后果？好吧，那些最重要的新闻消息显得还没有那些哗众取宠的流行新闻惹眼。而那些能够煽动民愤来攻击对手的人或组织更容易（在政治上）获胜。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Most voters aren’t actually that far away form each other politically but the media makes them think they are and drives them apart. Slightly right leaning voters might be cast as racists and left leaning voters are deemed terrorists’ best buddies. The media in the west creates divisiveness and keeps people focussed on outrage-of-the-day rather than the strategic long term actions that are really needed to improve people’s lives.

其实大多数选民之间的政治分歧没有那么大，但是媒体洗了他们的脑，放大了这种分歧。轻度右倾选民被描述成种族主义者，而左倾选民被当成是恐怖分子的好兄弟。西方媒体生生制造出了分歧，并将人民的注意力保持在每天最惹人义愤的话题上，而不是那些高瞻远瞩的、长篇大论的、术语连篇的新闻，虽然后者才是真正能够提高人民的姿势水平的东西。

The situation in China is the state has immensely more (but not complete) control of the media. The west used to have this luxury when all governments needed to manage were a couple of news shows a day on TV and a handful of influential newspapers all with convenient easy-to-plan-for print and broadcast times.

在中国的情况则是，国家对媒体拥有远多于西方的控制力（但并非绝对控制）。（曾有这么一个时代）西方政府也只需要每天在电视上投放少量新闻，在机具影响力的报纸上简单方便地发表一些照片和时事消息就行了，这种奢侈已经一去不复返。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

There are certain no no’s journalists in China and social media users should shy away from. Don’t go asking for revolutions don’t attempt to humiliate the top leaders don’t sensationalize don’t hype up issues between people who speak different languages or have different colour skin.

对于中国记者和媒体来说需要回避的话题的确很多。不要煽动革命不要把最高领导人批判一番不要随便搞个大新闻不要在不同语言和肤色的人之间制造话题冲突。

These rules may seem strict but it allows the government almost unchallenged to focus on their agenda and most pressing needs from society - lifting people out of poverty protecting the environment rational defence policies racial harmony advancing science technology global economic development to name just a few. No unpredictable media pressure allows stable political cycles of 10 years and planning decades ahead. That’s what countries really need and the Chinese people are lucky to have such a system.

这些规则似乎非常严苛，但是它使得政府在需要把工作重心放在其重要议程上并解决当前最紧迫的需求时可谓毫无压力，这些需求包括了脱贫致富、环境保护、国家防卫、政治议题、民族和谐、科教兴国、经济全球化等等等等。没有那些听得风就是雨的媒体带来的压力，中国的每个十年间的政治循环非常稳固，十年间的计划高瞻远瞩。这才是一个国家真正需要的东西，而中国人民非常有幸拥有这么一套（媒体没法随便作妖）的体制。

Who would you rather be running your country anyway? A media tycoon who’s goal is primarily profit? Or a politician who spent 30+ years giving service to their country who demonstrated again and again throughout their career they were able to obxtively improve the lives of the population they worked for?

无论如何，你希望哪种人运行你的国家？是一个致力于赚取超额利润的传媒大亨？还是一个为自己国家服务了三十年，并在这三十年间职业生涯中不断探索求证，的的确确能为人民办事，让自己人民生活改善的政治家？

I know who I would.

我很清楚我该选哪个。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Vladislav Antonov Former Military Officer/revolutionary/immigrant
Answered Fri R26; Upvoted by Robin Daverman
Because it’s one of the most technocratic governments in modern society. So what do I mean by that?

Vladislav Antonov前军事人员/革新者/移民
因为中国政府是现代社会中最为技术官员化的政府之一。为什么我这么说呢？

Let’s look at the US. Almost every single politician and decision maker in the US is lawyer.

让我们看看美国。几乎每一个美国的政治家和决策者都是律师。

But majority of Chinese politicians in order to climb high start from the bottom. Some of them start from governing position in village then in town city area province etc. So those people have idea about every single step of the whole mechanism.

但是大多数中国的政治家却需要从基层开始往上爬。他们中的一部分从政开始于乡村，然后镇级市级区级省级一步一步来。所以这些人非常清楚整个国家系统的每个部分都是怎么运作的。

In many European and Western countries things like Secretary of Defense and Head of Police are political positions rather than professional. US department of education is leaded by person who has never worked in educational field. Under Obama Administration Secretary of Defense was Ash Carter - physicist.

在很多欧洲国家或是西方国家，国防部部长或者治安首长这种职位，都是政治成分远大于专业技术成分。美国教育部的领导者从来没有在教育领域工作过。奥巴马的国防部副部长是阿什·卡特，一个物理学家。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

During Obama Administration Sylvia Mathews Burwell was a secretary of Health and Human Services. She worked 0 days in medical field.

奥巴马政府领导期间，卫生与公共服务部秘书长是西尔维娅·马修斯·伯韦尔。她一天都没在医疗领域工作过。

To compare Chinese minister of Health is Chen Zhu who is molecular biologist and hematologist.

对比一下中国的卫生部长陈竺，一名分子生物学家和一名血液方面专家。

Also unlike western society thinks those ministers are checked by other members of party and committees who consist of professionals. So it’s not like Minister by himself is professional and the rest are politicians. No he is responsible in front of other professionals. I won’t go in details because I am not an expert in Chinese governmental structure (I just know the basic structure) so you would have to ask Chinese person more in details. Don’t want to spread some false information.

同样与西方社会想象大相径庭的是，这些（中国的）部长是由专家组成的党派和委员会审查推举产生。所以并不是说只有部长是专家，而委员会的其他人员是单纯的政治家。不对，部长是这个由专家组成的委员会中备受敬重的一个专家，是要受到其他专家监督的。我无法描述出里面的细节，毕竟我不是一位中国政府结构问题专家（我只是了解他们的基本结构）。所以你得去向中国人询问这里面的具体细节。别想着传播什么虚假信息。

But you got the concept.

但是你应该有个概念了。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

CC Marketing
Answered Sun R26; Upvoted by Robin Daverman
I agree with Vladislav Antonov ‘s answer i am just here to provide more details he mentioned 

我同意Vladislav Antonov（上一名答主）的回答。我仅仅为他提到的观点补充更多细节。

Now let’s first take a look at our president Xi’s experience as an example.

现在让我们以我们的XI为例看看他的政治经历。

1 he started from party branch secretary of production brigade in one county in one province and went through several different positions in different areas in the authority.

1他从一个村的生产大队党支部书记开始干到省一级，然后在不同的位置、不同的区划和不同的权力部门中任职。

2 the whole process take over 40 years for him to become the president now

2这整个过程，直到他成为主席，花了整整四十年。

3 his positions covered 150 million people

3他的治理范围涵盖了1亿5千万人。

Most Chinese politicians have come from primary levels they started from basic level and go through step by step in a very reasonable amount of time to reach the current level. They have a good understanding of each different levels and areas as well as a solid background of what they are in charge of.

大多数中国政治家来自于基层，他们从基层开始工作，在一个合理的较长时间内一步一步爬升到当前级别。他们对不同的级别和不同的地区都拥有深入的理解，这种理解来自于他们对自己从政背景中扎实的工作管理经历。

-------------译者：路人某甲-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

Mario Rossi 5th year in China
Answered Fri · Upvoted by Robin Daverman
in China there is no opposition there is a strict hierarchy the discussion is limited. Once the party decide something so It be nothing can stop it.

Mario Rossi 在中国的第五年
在中国没有反对派，社会层级分明，讨论只能有限进行。一旦党决定要做什么那就指定得做什么，没有什么事情能够阻挡。

In western countries there is:

西方国家是这样婶儿滴：

A discussion among all the parts involved and often even with the ones not involved.

各个冲突对立的群体，甚至不相关的人都来进行一场讨论。

The parts look for a compromise.

各个群体寻求折中妥协方案。

The result is a decision that makes everyone unhappy

结果产生了一项决议，这项折中的决议让每个人都不开心。

Often other branches of the government system/local communities/labor unxs and so on feel exclude accuse the decision makers to be not competent (from a legal point of view) on that topic decided than appeal to the court.

然后那些边边角角的政府系统、当地社团、劳工联盟之类的都觉得自己被排除在外了。他们质疑决策制定者在决策位上干的根本不行（以法律观点提出），然后上诉法院。

Everything has to be done again.

全部工作推倒重来。

Because of point 3 there are demostration of unhappy people. Regardless of what is the country'convenience they will find politicians support in order to get more votes for the incoming elecetions (there are always some elections).

由于第三点（折中方案使每个人都不高兴），不满意的人群发动游行示威。这些根本不在意国家利益的人会去找一些政治家来支持自己，而这些政治家只是想要在即将来临的选举中拿到这些人的选票而已。（选举满地都是，不愁找不着）

Media focus on protests that get more support

媒体聚焦于抗议示威，导致抗议越发受到支持。

Whatever was agreed is changed. Start again from point 1.

别管之前达成了什么协议，现在都得改。从第一点重新开始跑一遍。

Mervyn Locke Enlightened laowai/Decade-long China resident/Permanent China bull
Answered Fri

Mervyn Locke 被启迪的老外、长期定居中国、永远看好中国

Due to the absence of Western-style democracy of course.

（中国的高效）当然是因为这里没有西方式民主啦。