（QUORA 讨论）为什么中国不采用西方的制度去取悦它的周边（邻居）国家 [美国媒体]

（QUORA 讨论）为什么中国不采用西方的制度去取悦它的周边（邻居）国家




Sam Qwato
(1)Nation-states do not choose a governance system to merely appease their neighbors. Governance system is serious business. It can make or break a nation-state. The chosen system may make all the neighbors happy, but may be unsuitable for the country because the country does not meet the prerequisites for the system, thus throwing the country into chaos.

一个国家政体不会选择一个特意的管制体系而仅仅去安抚他们的邻居，管制体系是非常重要的，它能制造或打碎这个国家政体， 如果按邻居们的要求去选择管制系统， 邻居们会很高兴，但是不适合的系统会让这个国家陷入纷乱。 

(2) The prerequisites for competitive, animated, boisterous Democracy, effectively ‘regulated disorder’ of sorts, are a
solidified heritage of Rule of Law (RoL), and
a functional Civil Service (state machinery).
RoL constrains the power of the political leaders.

一个有竞争力的，有活力的，喧闹的民主国家，有效的管制不规范的秩序应有如下条件，
坚固的法律信念遗产
强大的行政能力（国家机器）
法律信念遗产限定了政治领导人的能量

The Civil Service is the operation and implementation arm of the political leaders,
to deliver public services, and
to execute economic and social programs.

行政能力是政治领导操作和实行的手脚， 
提供公共服务
实行经济和社会的项目

(3) China has Rule by Law. Chinese Civilization never had RoL experience.
Democracy without a heritage of RoL will quickly downspiral to a dysfunctional democracy, e.g. Putin’s Russia.
China has a high-performing Civil Service. It had the world’s first modern state machinery bureaucracy dating back to the Qin dynasty. (Refer Max Weber’s Bureaucracy.)
A robust state machinery capacity is a good thing, but sometimes, it has the tendency to overwhelm RoL. Examples:
Militaristic eras of Japan and Germany,
military dictatorship eras of South Korea and Taiwan.

中国有法律，但是中国文明没有法律信念遗产的经验，
如果没有法律信念最为遗产的民主进很快会螺旋的下降为一个功能失调的民主，就像普京的俄国。 
中国有一个最强大行政能力， 有着世界第一的政府机器，这可以追溯到秦朝时期。 
（由于千百年来周边的游牧民族的入侵和袭扰，迫使中原王朝建立了一个强大的中央集权政府以便实现最大的效率化去应对周边的威胁，这个是中国历代王朝的传统，是有原因的）
一个坚定，精力充沛的国家机器是一个好事情，但有时会独裁会代替法律的信念，例如
日本和德国的军国时期
南韩和台湾的军事独裁时期

Simo Zane
It seems that you are truly believe that democracy is the most advanced system in the world,have you ever ask yourself,what if it’s not?I never live in a democracy country for long,but as an outsider,I think the democracy system has some inevitable flaws.

看上去你相信民主是世界上最先进的系统，你有没有问过你自己？  假如它不是呢？  我从没有在一个民主国家生活过，不过作为一个傍观者，我认为民主有着一些不可以调和的缺点。

Everyone has the right to vote,so the candidate must be the most popular one,here comes the problem,average people can’t identify the candidate with the most potential,they are more influenced by how he looks,how he talks,can’t go deeper,if you let a person make important deisions,stratigical thinking,strong logical thinking,far sight are the more desired qualities for a leader,rather than a charismatic actor.At the end,average people choose average leader,an average leader makes average decisions,and an once great country may regress to mediocre.

因为每个人都有权利去投票，所以那个候选人必须是最受欢迎的，但是问题来了，人民大众无法识别哪个候选人最有潜力，人民更容易被他们的长相，口才所影响，无法更进一步的去了解候选人，你如何让一个普通人去拥有做重要决定能力，拥有着战略想法，拥有强烈的逻辑思维和超前眼光去选择一个合格的领导人？  而不是去选一个有魅力的好演员？  最后的结果往往是一群平庸的大众选择了一个平庸的领导人，做着平庸的决定，让一个伟大的国家蜕变成一个平庸的国家。 

Other aspects can also apply a similiar analogy,average people are easily swayed by emotion,they chase after short-term interests and willing to sacrifice long-term interests,most of them lack a critical thinking ability,they just see the surface and fail to look into the essence,so if the crowd are the ones that make calls,the result won’t be that good when you review in a macro level.

另外一方面也可以导出一个相似的结果，人民大众非常容易被情绪所鼓动而摇摆，他们只会选择眼前利益而不是看长远利益，大多数的普通民众缺乏深入思考能力，他们只是看表面无法深入看本质，就像如果一群人在打电话， 你从宏观上去评判是没有好结果的。 

Now look back at China,its leader is choosed by elites of the country,they are better in select the most potential leader.He must be really capable,and proved by solid performance,he may not looked like a movie star,but he understand what’s best for his countrt,and once he make a decision,it serves for the long run,won’t be changed by short-term needs of citizens.So you may find that Chinese may often curse their government,but at last they feel confident and satisfy with it,because things are getting better as time went on.Also with a powerful central goverment,it can efficiently enforce grant projects,which are necessary in the long run but will make some people suffer instantly,while democracy countries may waste a lot resource and time in arguing and achieve nothing at the end.

现在看回中国，它的领导是在国家的精英阶层中选出来的，都是从最有潜力的领导中选出来的。他必须有真正的能力，被证明可以提供坚强的能力，他看上去也许不像是一个电影明星，但是他懂得什么是对中国最好的，一旦他做了决定，效果将是长期的，也不会被人民的短期需要所改变。 搜易你可以发现中国人也许经常会诅咒他们的政府，但是最后他们觉得越来越有信心和满意政府，因为随着时间的推移事情变得越来越好。 一个强有力的中央政府能够有效率的实行庞大的计划和项目，这也许要花很长的时间同时也让一些民众遭受短期的痛苦，但是民主国家则会浪费了大量的资源和时间去争论，到最后啥也没做成。 

I’m not saying the Chinese system is perfect,if a bad leader is in control,the damage is equally huge,but so far so good.It obviously has many advantages that some of you fail to see due to stereotype opinions,as for the democracy you guys talking so frequently when you mentioned China,honestly most Chinese just don’t care,it’s not good for them,after all,who will trust crowd’s decision?No offense,but average intellegence can’t make a country great.

我不是说中国的系统是完美的，如果一个坏领导去管理一个国家，那么损失将是非常巨大的，所以目前中国还OK，很明显的由于意识形态的原因可以你们中的一些人无法看到这些中国的优势，所以民主国家的兄弟们当你们一提到中国就会经常讨论中国的政体， 但是实际上诚实的告诉您，中国人跟本就不在乎，这个对他们也不好， 毕竟谁能信任大众的决定，并不是冒犯，人民大众的智慧无法让国家变得更伟大。 

Sulav Karki, political enthusiast, history buff
Who cares what Asian neighbors think?? The only ones that decide whether China should be a democracy or not are the Chinese people and right now they seem quite content with the current communist government because of economic growth, peace and stability. The last thing any Chinese wants is a democracy leading to instability like with Russia in 1990s. Gradual steps towards more freedom are already taking place in China though and it's far more freerer than 20 yrs ago.

谁会在乎亚洲邻居怎么想？  能决定中国是否成为民主国家的只有中国人民，目前他们看上去对他们的GCD政府非满意，因为经济增长，社会和平和稳定，最后有没有任何中国人想变成一个民主国家就像俄国在1990年的那场巨变？   逐渐缓慢的迈向自由社会已经在中国发生了，而且中国也比20年前自由多了。 

Xiaoqiang Tu
Why should china appease her neighbours? Should Russia exile Putin to appease west neighbour? Should USA dismiss Trump to appease all over the world?
On other hand, even though china is a democracy country, his neighbours would not satisfy because no one wants a powerful country beside himself. So, if china is weak and poor, neighbours will be happy. Democracy of china, who’s really care.

谁会去安抚那些邻居？  普京俄国应该去安抚它的那些西方邻居吗？川普应该去安抚全世界吗？  
另外，即使中国变成了一个民主国家， 它的邻居也不会满意因为谁也不想一个超级大国挨着自己，所以，如果中国虚弱和贫穷，邻居们会高兴， 民主中国，谁会真正在乎呢？  

S. Liufu
Why should China please those suckers?
Should China give up being a superpower, and turn to be a little puppy of US ?
Then you talk about democracy, which western democratic political system are you talking about? Are you sure that it will works perfectly in China?
Should US respect Asian people’s will and get the fuck out of Asia?

为什么中国要取悦那些混蛋？  
中国为什么要放弃强大的力量而要变成美国的小狗狗？ 
所以你一说起民主，不就是说西方的民主政治制度？ 你确信它能在中国很完美的实行吗？  美国愿意尊重亚洲人民的意愿而滚出亚洲吗？  

Stuart Aitken, BSc Theoretical Physics, University of Leeds (2017)
Not Chinese but I live here. The vast majority of people I meet have literally zero interest in democracy or elections.
A lot of westerners claim democracy is ‘a right that we all fought to have’. This is wrong. Nobody really fights for (or against) democracy. They fight for a better life. In fact, Chinese people under Mao fought for communism, work that one out.
And now, thanks to the leadership of their one-party government, Chinese life in particular is getting better and better by the day. What’s to fight over, and what’s to change?

我不是中国人但我住在中国， 我遇到绝大多数的中国人对民主选举都是零兴趣。 
很多的西方人宣扬“民主是唯一正确的也是我们为此曾经斗争过的”， 这个错误的，没有人真正的去为民主战斗过，他们只是为了更好的生活战斗，实际上，中国人民在毛泽东的领导下为共产主义战斗过，奋斗过。 但是现在谢谢他们一党的领导制，中国人的生活变得越来越好，为什么奋斗，就能都到什么改变。

Cary Mcdonald, worked at Hoffmann-La Roche
Go for Free Speech first, allowing dissent, then go for democracy to sort out the directions.
Certainly Obama isn’t about to go there and preach about how good the ‘two party system’ was working during his term, now is he? (Neither would I).
Beijing learned the hard way that the crap can hit the fan, as it did in T-Square, and Xi doesn’t want that happening ever again… so things ‘get tighter’ when he smells dissension, and frankly, as evidenced by rulings of all the little courts, it would take a BLUNT overhaul to ‘enlighten’ the system even for Free Speech.
Idle hands are the devils workshop; so keeping the economy moving is key to avoiding issues; the U.S. consumer figures prominent in this equation.
The situation of ‘nebulous’ rules regarding free speech has resulted in only the fanatics being vocal (as seen in HK), and the moderates keep their mouths shut in fear of being tossed into the same basket. No judge will uate their polemic differences; criticism of Beijing remains a single issue, the degrees of it are not to be examined. Now THAT’S a problem.

先走向讨论言论自由， 允许反对意见，之后再追求民主决定发展方向。 
当然奥巴马不会去中国那里宣扬两党制是多么好，我也不会。
北京已经学到如何去处理困难方式的手段 ， 因为像以前发生在天安门广场的事情，习近平不会永远让此再发生，所以当他闻到反对意见后事情变得很压迫，公平起见的说， 如果习惯于在控制的小法庭中去做裁决，中国是需要彻底翻修整个系统以便去启蒙什么是言论自由。 
无形的手操控着一切， 所以保持经济发展是唯一解决问题的钥匙，美国人民的消费指数则跟这个相等。 
模糊的言论自由管控条例则导致了激进分子的发声（ 看看香港），温和派闭上嘴因为害怕别扔进同一个篮子里， 没有评判去评估争论者的不同，北京的批评者们只会去保持一个单一的观点，而且没有被验证过， 所以现在这成了问题。 

Michel McGill, Born, lived and worked in China.
Democracy is for the appease of its own people, not its neighbors.
China is a democracy country as it claims. Democracy is written in Chinese Constitution, not in American Constitution.
China is more democratic than many countries of Monarch Constitution. China believe man is born equal. China does not believe that some is born to have social privilege, such as the family of a monarch.
China is more democratic than America. America had about a century of slavery. Chinese do not believe a slavery society is a democratic.
China had more extreme democracy than France had, extreme democracy as anarchy and mob rule. France had a short period of mob rule during the French Revolution. China had ten years of mob rule or anarchy during the Great Cultural Revolution. Plato said that the danger of a democracy is becoming mob rule. Only France and China experience the risk of democracy into mob rule. Becoming anarchy at a time, history proved that France and China are the true countries of democracy.
For hundred years after the Opium War, China had been doing what other want it to do. It was hundred years of humiliation. No county has the right to want China to do whatever. UN principle is to respect every countries sovereignty. China has a policy of mutual respect. China will not yield what other country want it to do. China fought a hundred years for that, and it achieved it in 1949. China regard it imperialism whoever want China to do this and that by sanctions and gunboats. China never yield to that since 1949.

民主只能安抚本国人民， 而不是他们的邻居。 
中国自己宣称是个民主国家， 民主被写进中国的宪法，美国则没有。 
中国比很多君主国家都民主， 中国文化信奉生来平等，中国也相信诸侯将相，宁有种乎。
中国比美国更民主， 美国有一个世界的奴隶史，中国人不相信一个奴隶社会会是一个民主国家。 
中国比法国有更极端的民主，极端民主就是无政府状态和暴徒统治。在法国大革命期间，法国的暴徒统治时间很短。但在中国文革期间，中国有十年的暴徒统治或无政府状态。柏拉图说，民主的危险是变成暴徒统治。只有法国和中国才有民主风暴和暴徒统治的经验。在莫一时间成为无政府状态，所以历史证明只有法国和中国是真正的民主国家。
鸦片战争后的一百年，中国一直在做别人想让中国做的事情，这是整整一百年的屈辱。世界上没有一个国家有权力要让中国做任何事情。联合国的条约是尊重每个国家的主权。中国制定了相互尊重的政策。中国人不想屈服于其他国家，中国人为此奋斗了一百年，并在1949年实现了这一点。中国人认为帝国主义只会用制裁和炮舰让中国屈服。 自从1949年以来，中国再也没有再屈服于此。