西方对中国的崛起感到不安吗? [美国媒体]

Does the West feel uncomfortable with China' s rise?

西方对中国的崛起感到不安吗?





回答一：
Bevin Chu, veteran commentator on Sino-US relations
upxed Oct 29
Many people in the West are clearly uncomfortable with China’s “rise”, even though they shouldn’t be.

许多西方人显然会对中国的“崛起”感到不安，尽管他们不应该这样子。

China’s “rise” is actually not a “rise” at all. It is a “reversion to the norm” of millennia old Chinese superpower status. As the old joke has it, “China has had a couple of bad centuries, but now it’s back”.

中国的“崛起”实际上根本不是 “崛起”。这是中国几千年来的超级大国地位的“回归常态”。正如一个过去的玩笑所说的：“中国经历了几个世纪的失败，但现在它又回来了。”

The reason so many people in the West are uncomfortable with China’s reversion to its superpower norm, is mental conditioning. Many people in the West know China only as the “Sick Man Of Asia”.

西方许多人对中国回归超级大国的常态感到不安，这是心理上的条件反射。许多西方人只知道中国是“亚洲的病夫”。

They consider this historically abnormal weakness of China to be the norm. They are accustomed to perceiving China as a doormat. Any departure from this “abnormal norm”, sets off alarm bells and throws them into a panic.

他们认为中国历史上这种反常的羸弱是一种常态。他们习惯于把中国看成是一个受人践踏的国家。任何偏离这一“异常常态”的情况都足以拉响警钟，并让他们陷入恐慌当中。

The reality of course, is that when China was an unrivaled naval superpower during the Ming dynasty, it could have colonized much of the world, the way the Spanish, the British, the Dutch, and the Portuguese did soon afterwards.

当然，现实则是中国在明朝时期是一个无与伦比的海上超级大国时，它本来可以殖民世界上的大部分地区，就像西班牙、英国、荷兰和葡萄牙在不久之后所做的那样。

But it did not. China has always been a conservative, isolationist superpower, not an expansionist one. China’s most enduring symbol is the Great Wall, whose purpose was not offensive, but defensive.

但是它没有这么做。中国一直是一个保守的、孤立主义的超级大国，而不是一个扩张主义的超级大国。中国最经久不衰的象征是长城，它的目的不是进攻，而是防御。

Like the Ice Wall in “The Game of Thrones”, its purpose was to prevent invaders from pouring in. As even conservative hawk William F. Buckley noted,

就像《权力的游戏》里的北境长城一样，它的目的是防止侵略者涌入。就连保守的鹰派人物威廉·巴克利也指出：

"China... is different from the Soviet unx, with its forthright determination to conquer the world in the name of Marxism. China is passionate as an irredentist power, not as an expansionist power… China is not now a threat on the order of the Soviet threat, so that the question of appropriate behavior focuses on the moral, not the strategic, question. Here relevant is the... maxim of John Quincy Adams that the American people are friends of liberty everywhere but custodians only of their own."
William F. Buckley, circa 1997

“中国与苏联不同，后者在马克思主义的名义下以一种直截了当的决心去征服世界。中国是一个民族主义统一的大国，而不是一个扩张主义的大国。中国现在不是类似苏联这一威胁的威胁，因此，恰当行为的问题关注的是道德问题，而不是战略问题。与此相关的是，约翰·亚当斯的格言是——美国人民是各处的自由的朋友，但它们所关心的只有自己人。”——威廉·巴克利， 1997年

NB: China considers the South China Sea islands a matter of irredentism, of reclaiming what is rightfully its own. China’s historic claims to sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea went unchallenged until after WWII.

注：中国认为南海诸岛是一个民族统一主义的问题，声称这些岛屿是正当地属于它的领土。中国对南海诸岛拥有主权的历史主张在二战后才受到挑战。

——————————————

Choi Wonseok
Oct 26 · 5 upvotes
I agree with your answer on most points, but if your purpose is to convey less biased hatred by the west to China, I think your approach of stating that “it is just returning to the norm” is not a good approach.

我在大多数观点上都同意你的回答，但如果你的目的是向传达西方对中国不那么带有偏见的仇恨，我认为你所表述的“它只是回归常态”的说法并不是一个好的方法。

Though it is true China was dominant, the world has changed a lot from that time just like China has also progressed.

尽管中国过去确实占主导地位，但从那时起，世界发生了很大的变化，就像中国也在进步一样。

There cannot be a “revert” back to old China’s glory days. New glory days must be created.

现在不可能存在着“恢复”中国过去的光辉岁月的情况。新的光辉时代必定会被创造出来。

If you look at border problems like the SE China sea problem you mentioned, or disputes with countries like Mongolia, it is that the countries surrounding China are no longer what it was in the 16th or even 19th centuries- But you saying things like this is precisely what makes these people offended.

如果你看看像你提到的中国东海和南海问题，或者它与蒙古等国的争端，会发现中国周边的那些国家不再是在16世纪甚至是19世纪的模样了，但你说这正是让这些人感到冒犯之处。

If your temperament is that bellicose, and you don’t mind China in open dispute this way, then there is nothing more to be said. But I don’t think it is the best mindset or approach no matter what “western media” says bad or wrong about China- especially for China itself.

如果你性情好斗，而且不介意中国以这种方式进行公开辩论，那么就没什么可说的了。但我不认为这是最好的心态或方式，不管西方媒体对中国的看法是什么——尤其是对中国自身而言。

——————————————

Jose Luis Malaquias
Nov 3
I agree that China is not on a rise, but rather on a regression to the norm. I am just not as sure with your reassurances. One of the first acts of the new China that emerged from WW II was to invade Tibet, which was a weak defenseless neighbor. So, people naturally fear that a powerful China might be tempted to create a few other Tibet around. China’s aggressive economic practices in places such as Africa are also not very reassuring. Furthermore, China is not a democracy, and it does not have the mechanisms to prevent a very powerful leader from repeatin the tragedy of the Cultural Revolution, if he feels so inclines. There is no Freedom of Expression. So, while it is true that China has been a stable member of the international community, there is nothing to assure the rest of the world that a Super Power China wouldn’t, under a misguided leader, lead the world into a catastrophe. So, as those mechanisms do not exist, all we can hope is that a maniac doesn’t rise to the top job in China because, if he does, there are no checks and balances to rein him in. That’s the only reason why the world is not as comfortable as it could be with China’s rise.

我同意中国不是在崛起，而是在回归常态。我只是对你的保证不太确定。二战之后建立的新中国的第一次行动就是侵略一个软弱无力的邻居，XZ。因此，人们自然会担心强大的中国可能会被诱惑去在其周边建立一些像XZ这样的地区。中国在非洲等地的侵略性经济手段也让人无法放心。此外，中国不是一个民主国家，它也没有阻止一个非常强大的领导人重蹈WG覆辙的机制，如果他有这种倾向的话。中国没有言论自由。因此，尽管中国一直是国际社会的稳定成员，但它却没有什么能够让世界上的其他国家相信，在一个被误导的领导人的领导下，超级大国不会将世界带入一场灾难。因此，由于这些机制并不存在，我们只能希望一个疯子不会在中国担任最高职务，因为如果他这样做了，就没有制衡机制来约束他。这是世界对中国崛起感到不安的唯一原因。

——————————————

Troy Shang
Nov 4
Maybe you don't understand Chinese history idea, this is different from the so-called western idea of country, Tibet into China's territory is in 1246 yuan, it is just recovered in 1951, and two times of force is not the final means. About China's leaders, I think you may also not clear that China's current political system, the cultural revolution is also not very understanding, hope you can learn more, so that you will find the Chinese essentially free may be much more than you can imagine, the word democracy, in the laughable now.

也许你不了解中国的历史观念，这与所谓的西方国家观念是不同，XZ并入中国领土是在1246年的元朝，中国只是在1951年恢复了对它的统治，而且在这两次的行动中武力都不是最终的解决手段。关于中国的领导人，我认为你可能还不清楚中国目前的政治体制和WG，希望你能了解更多的信息，这样你会发现中国人本质上所拥有的自由可能比你想象得要多，现在民主这个词可是相当可笑的。

A huge land, a huge population, a long history. You should see how different it is.

这是一片辽阔的土地，拥有着众多的人口和悠久的历史。你应该看到它是有多么不同。

——————————————

Ben Morley
Oct 27 · 2 upvotes
I think some of the reasons we in the US are nervous about China’s “rise” is that its frxd as a return to imperial power.

我认为我们这些美国人对中国的“崛起”感到紧张的原因是：中国的崛起被认为是帝国主义的回归。

The impression we get is that China is going to return to being the Middle Kingdom and be hostile and imperialistic. China will abandon the soft power approach and go hard power and invade other countries. There is also the fear that China will take away the economic vitality of the US economy by stealing IP and using it to overcome the West and in turn taking over the global system.

我们得到的印象是：中国将回归成为一个“中央王国”，充满敌意和帝国主义色彩。中国将放弃软实力的路径，走硬实力的道路去侵略其他国家。还有一种担忧是：中国将窃取知识产权，利用知识产权来战胜西方，进而接管全球体系，从而剥夺美国经济的经济活力。

The CCP has a terrible human rights record and tries to control their people in just about every aspect of their day to day with a massive propaganda system that basically absolves the Party of any wrong doing and scapegoats people like the Japanese when politically useful.

CCP有着糟糕的人权记录，并试图通过一个庞大的宣传体系来控制自己的人民，这种宣传体系基本上是让党免于任何罪责，并在政治上有用的时候让像日本人这样的人成为替罪羊。

Their actions point to rising military interests and their actions in Asia (Dokhom, the South China Seas, etc.) are causing a headache for the USA while painting an image of China as a growing threat to stability with military ambitions.

他们的行动表明了其军事利益及其在亚洲的行动的扩张(洞郎、南中国海，等等)给美国带来了麻烦，同时把中国描绘成一个军事上野心勃勃、对秩序稳定构成了越来越大威胁的国家。

Personally I think its more a case of seeing some of our own problems reflecting in another society. Human rights? Gaze into our own history with African and Native Americans or how we drop the ball on stopping genocides or backing dictators in the Middle East and Asia. Trying to control the population through propaganda? Name a single major power or country that doesn’t have some level of societal engineering and fake news. Military interventions and imposing on others? We’ve been doing that since the Cold War.

就我个人而言，我认为这更像是在另一个社会所反映的我们自己的问题。人权？请看看我们对待非洲和美洲原住民的历史，或者看看我们在阻止中东地区和亚洲的种族灭绝与支持独裁者方面所犯下的错误的。试图通过宣传来控制人民？请举出一个没有做到这种程度的社会工程和假新闻的大国。军事干预和将自己的意志强加于人？自冷战以来，我们一直在这么做。

So its not so much fear of another nation rising as said nation rising and doing to others, including us, what we did to others. I also think its the fear that they’ll repeat many or all of the same mistakes we have, and the consequences will be just as terrible as ours.

因此，不需要对其他国家的崛起如此恐惧，因为这些国家的崛起和它们对其他国家——包括我们——所做的事情只是在重复我们对其他国家曾经做过的事情而已。我也认为应该害怕的是他们将会重复我们所犯过的许多错误，而后果也将像我们所导致的后果一样可怕。

The problem with one party rule is that it only takes one bad election or leader to make things go the hell in a hand basket. Think Caligula or Domition of ancient Rome. The reason we value democracy is not because it supposedly gives voice to the people, its because it creates more hurdles and accountability mechanisms for our leaders. Its more difficult to amass power in a democracy because there are so many other people vying for your power and its only the people who really give the power to you. That means we have to see many more things go wrong in our current system before we have terrible leaders or tyrants.

一党专政的问题在于只消一场糟糕的选举或一个糟糕的领导人就能把事情搞得很糟。想想古罗马的卡里古拉或多米西安。我们之所以重视民主，并不是因为它理应为人民发声，而是因为它为我们的领导人创造了更多的障碍和问责机制。在一个民主国家中集中权力的难度更大，因为有那么多的人在争夺你的权力，而只有人民才能真正赋予你权力。这意味着我们在遇到糟糕的领导人或暴君之前必定会目睹我们现有体系出现更多的问题。

Lastly, I don’t think China will replace the USA as global hegmon any time soon. That took many decades to do, and we’re not headed towards a world of single super power dominance. That time was a historical anomaly, one that made the USA both the global superpower and responsible for leadership. That means we’re stuck in a damned if you do, damned if you don’t status in any action we do globally and its expensive. China has a far way to go before reaching superpower status, such as developing their rural regions and tackling economic inequality.

最后，我不认为中国将会很快取代美国，成为全球霸主。这需要几十年的时间，我们并没有走向由一个超级大国统治的世界。那段时间只是一种历史的反常现象，它使美国成为全球超级大国，并负责领导全球。这意味着我们陷入了一个被诅咒的境地，如果你去这么做了，你就会被诅咒，如果做了我们在全球范围内所做的事情，代价将会非常高昂。在登上超级大国的地位之前，中国还有很远的路要走，比如发展他们的农村地区，解决经济不平等问题。

——————————————

Cristian Ariel Rodriguez
Oct 29 · 3 upvotes
One thing that always amazes me is that the US people really believe the rest of the world is stupid and at that any other country that have strength will go around invading other countries for no reason at all, just for the fun of the sport.

让我感到惊奇的一件事是，美国人民真的相信世界上的其他国家都是愚蠢的，而其他任何有实力的国家都将会无缘无故地侵略其他国家，这只是为了好玩。

The only current country that fits in that descxtion is the US itself. China has no reason to invade anyone, nothing to gain about it.

唯一符合这一描述的国家是美国自己。中国没有理由侵略任何人，这么做没有任何好处。

If they need resources, instead of supporting brutal absolutist monarchies and dictatorships like the US does, or killing democratically elected presidents that started to industrialize their countries and take control of their resources; the chinese go and buy what they need, the couldn’t care less about ideology, government type or what countries you trade for.

如果他们需要资源，他们并不需要像美国那样支持残暴的专制君主和独裁政权，或者杀害民主选举产生的总统——这些总统刚刚开始工业化他们的国家并控制他们的资源；中国人回去去买他们需要的东西，他们不在乎意识形态、政府类型，或者与你进行交易的是哪个国家。

They go and ask for what they need and give you what you ask.

他们径直过去求购他们需要的东西，并且给你提供你所想要的东西。

Instead of bombing an entire country electric grid, water supply, schools and hospitals to take its oil they go build highways, railroads, urban centers, give credits, modernize the host country and take the resources they need negotiating a mutual beneficial deal.

他们没有轰炸掉整个国家的电网、供水系统、学校和医院来获取石油，而是修建高速公路、铁路、城市中心、提供信贷、让这个国家变得现代化，并利用他们需要的资源来协商一项互惠互利的协议。

——————————————

Bob Henderson
Nov 3 · 1 upvote
Europe let Hitler do that. It was called “Peace in Our Time”, or Appeasement. Oh and there was Uncle Joe and the Soviet unx.

欧洲让希特勒这样做。它被称为“我们时代的和平”，或绥靖政策。哦，还有乔叔叔和苏联。

So why did Hitler invade Poland? Or Belgium? Or France? Why did the Soviets invade Afghanistan? What a country “gains” from invading another country depends on who is deciding for that country and what THEY want. In case you haven’t learned from history, a strong country invades a weak country when it wants something from that weak country and thinks invasion is an option. Russia did that with Georgia when Georgia started talking about joining the EU, thus their invasion and de facto annexation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

那么，希特勒为什么要入侵波兰呢？还有比利时？还有法国？为什么苏联要入侵阿富汗？一个国家从入侵另一个国家获得的“收益”取决于是谁在为这个国家做出决策，以及他们想要什么。如果你还没有从历史中吸取教训，当一个强大的国家想要从一个弱小的国家获得某些东西并且认为入侵是一个选项的时候，它就会入侵后者。当格鲁吉亚开始谈论加入欧盟的时候，俄罗斯就对格鲁吉亚这么做了，因此他们入侵并且在事实上吞并了阿布哈兹和南奥塞梯。

——————————————

Cristian Ariel Rodriguez
Nov 3
This are other times.

时过境迁了。

China does not need to invade to get resources, they can get them easier and cheaper helping the country than destroying it like the US does.

中国不需要通过侵略来获取资源，相比于像美国所做的摧毁一切的勾当，他们可以通过帮助这个国家来更容易、更廉价地获得它们。

Georgia attacked Russia with the ok of the US, it was te test the russian response capacity.

格鲁吉亚获得美国的允许去攻击俄罗斯，这是对俄罗斯应对能力的考验。

——————————————

Bob Henderson
Nov 4 · 1 upvote
Times change, but politics doesn’t. Stronger nations invade weaker nations. The reason Russia invaded Georgia was not because of any “attacks”, it was because Russia knew stationing Russian troops on Georgian soil meant Georgia couldn’t join the EU. The USA had nothing to do with it either, it was entirely Georgia deciding not to be a vassal of Russia anymore, and Russia wanting a buffer between the “West” and Russia. It doesn’t help that Georgia is geographically part of a larger natural gas pipeline that Russia uses to export to the West, and if Georgia joined the EU, Georgia could change the energy market by diverting the natural gas pipelines in their country.

时代变了，但政治却没变。强大的国家入侵弱小的国家。俄罗斯入侵格鲁吉亚的原因不是因为任何“攻击”，而是因为俄罗斯知道在格鲁吉亚领土上驻扎俄罗斯军队将意味着格鲁吉亚无法加入欧盟。美国与这件事毫无关系，完全是格鲁吉亚决定要不再成为俄罗斯的附庸国，而俄罗斯则希望在“西方”和俄罗斯之间建立一个缓冲地带。格鲁吉亚在地理上是俄罗斯用来向西方出口天然气的更大规模气管道的一部分，如果格鲁吉亚加入欧盟，格鲁吉亚可能会通过转移流动在他们国土上的天然气来改变能源市场。

China doesn’t invade other countries for natural resources? Yeah I doubt that will last when China gets more power and the water starts to dry up in the Himalayas. They can invade for many other reasons, like taking territory away or to impose their will on others. The USA didn’t invade Afghanistan for oil, they invaded because the Taliban hosted Osama bin Ladin and refused to hand him over after the 9/11 attacks. I doubt China would let a terrorist like bin Ladin stay nice and warm in another country to plot more attacks.

中国不会为了自然资源入侵其他国家？是的，我怀疑当中国的力量变得更加强大，并且喜马拉雅地区的水源枯竭之后，这种情况是否会持续下去。他们可能会因为其他许多原因而入侵他国，比如夺取领土或者把自己的意志强加给别国。美国不是为了石油而入侵阿富汗，他们入侵了阿富汗是因为塔利班组织藏匿了奥萨马·本·拉登，并在911事件后拒绝交出他。我怀疑中国是否会让像本·拉登这样的恐怖分子在另一个国家舒舒服服地策划更多的袭击活动。

Besides, China has followed a time honored tradition in the West of making deals with dictators and autocrats for resources extracted from other nations. They’ll deal with anyone to get what they want, and it saves face since they don’t have to invade to get what they want. They just pay the strongman of a country to sell them the resources they need, like arable land in Africa.

此外，中国已经遵循西方的传统，为了从其他国家获取资源而与独裁者进行交易。他们会和任何人打交道，以得到他们想要的东西，这样就可以挽回面子，因为他们不需要入侵就能得到他们想要的东西。他们只是付钱给一个国家的铁腕人物，让他们出售自己所需要的资源，比如非洲的可耕地。

——————————————

Ben Morley
Oct 30
Its not that every other country is stupid, its that major powers do all the same things. Look at the history of any major regional or imperial power and its very similar- you gain power by economic and military methods, and project that power on those who are weaker or more compliant. China itself has been a military and imperial power longer than most Western countries had been countries. They also have a long history of invading other nations for every reason one can expect from an empire. Just ask the Tibetans, the Vietnamese, the Indians, or Turks.

不是每个国家都是愚蠢的，大国做的事情都是一样的。看看任何主要区域性强国或帝国的历史，它是非常相似的——你通过经济和军事手段获得权力，并将权力投射到那些较弱或更顺从的人身上。与大多数西方国家相比，中国作为一个军事强国和帝国的历史要长得多。他们在很长一段时间里也会因为人们对一个帝国做出的各种预期的原因去侵略其他国家。只要问问XZ人、越南人、印度人或突厥人就可以了。

Now assuming China replaces the USA as global hegemon, that means it’s military would have to replace the USA military as the military of a global hegemon. That means China would have fundamentally changed, it would not be the insular and non committed hermit nation, it would be the active global power house everyone either respects, fears, or plots against. Just as we are expected today to intervene on humanitarian crises and to fight a global war against the latest threat, so too would be expected of China. Would they step up and follow through? Maybe, maybe not. It depends on their internal politics and international calculus. China currently shows no real problems selling arms to genocidal regimes like the Burmese junta before their nominal move towards democracy. They had no problems supporting Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. They also sold arms as part of the global arms trade, and have no problems propping up dictatorships like North Korea. I doubt this will change if they assume hegemonic status, it certainly didn’t change for us.

现在，假设中国取代美国成为了全球霸主，这意味着中国军队将不得不取代美国军队成为全球霸权的军事力量。这意味着中国将从根本上发生改变，它不再是孤立的、不负担义务的“隐士之国”，它将成为一个活跃的全球发动机，每个人都尊重它，害怕它，或者反对它。正如我们今天被认为会对人道主义危机进行干预，并为应对最近出现的威胁而展开一场全球战争，中国也同样会如此。他们会站出来，然后跟进吗？也许会，也许不会。这取决于他们的内部政治和国际筹算。中国目前不介意向像缅甸军政府这种实施过种族灭绝行动的政权——在他们名义上走向民主之前——出售武器。他们也曾不介意去支持布尔波特和红色高棉政权。他们出售武器，从而成为了全球军火贸易的组成部分，他们也不介意支持像朝鲜这样的独裁政权。我怀疑这种情况是否会改变，如果他们取得了霸权地位，那么肯定就不会改变了。

Lastly, the deals China strikes to acquire what they need from other nations is a lot like the arms deals they make- they will deal with anyone to get what they need. The land they bought in Africa could come from governments that came to the deal democratically and with the approval of their people, or it could come from a government that simply sold off the land without consent of the people. China would not care so long as China gets what they need.

最后，中国为了从其他国家获得它所需的东西而达成的协议，这很像他们所进行的武器贸易——他们可以与任何人打交道，以获得他们所需要的东西。他们在非洲购买的土地可能来自于那些通过民主方式达成协议的政府，它们通过了其人民的批准，也可以来自一个在未经人民同意的情况下就把土地卖掉的政府。只要中国能得到它所需要的东西，它才不会在意。

Already we see China unilaterally taking land in the South China Sea to build up their naval presence even if it violates the sovereignty of other nations like the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. They also entered Bhutan unilaterally to build roads around the Dohkam region, an area that would allow China to cut off the North Eastern states of India in case of a war between the two powers.

我们已经看到，中国单方面在南中国海占领土地，以增强其海军实力，即便它为此侵犯了菲律宾、台湾和越南等的主权。他们还单方面进入不丹境内，在洞郎地区周边修建了多条道路，这一地区将允许中国在两国交战的时候切断印度的东部地区。

In all, its unlikely China would stay the same if they became the sole hegemon. They already are acting a lot like any other major power and should be expected to wield the power of sole hegemon the same way as every other major power has in the past. Including Imperial China.

总之，如果中国成为了唯一的霸主，中国就不太可能保持不变。它已经像其他任何大国一样行事了，它应该会以同样的方式行使单极霸权的力量，就像过去的每一个大国一样。其中也包括了中华帝国。

——————————————

回答二：
Calvin Yong, lived in Shanghai (2010-2011)
Answered Nov 6
Yes, the West feel very uncomfortable with China’s rise, or any non-Western country into significant influence. This is because of:

是的，西方国家对中国的崛起，或者任何非西方国家获得重大影响里都会感到非常不安。这是因为：

History & Experience of West - Since fall of Rome, Western Europe had established themselves through constant war, family kingdoms,betrayals and slavery until last 70 years. This unlike Chinese civilization that had relative long periods of peace since her formation after Qin dynasty.

西方的历史与经验——自罗马帝国衰落以来，西欧在70年前一直陷入不断的战争、王朝、背叛和奴役当中。这与中国的文明不同，在秦朝之后，中国的文明经历了相对较长时间的和平。

Cannot interpret the Chinese - The West tends to read based on their own definitions rather than the Chinese or East Asian. The Chinese seems to operate on many rituals which seems very odd in Western eyes. Perhaps they should refer to Japanese management styles vs. US, which has been comprehensively studied. This could help them understand the Chinese better.

西方人无法理解中国人——西方倾向于根据他们自己的定义而不是中国人或东亚人的观念来进行解读。在西方人看来，中国人的行事方式似乎非常怪异。也许他们应该去看看已经被全面地研究过了的日本管理模式与美国管理模式的比较。这有助于他们更好地了解中国。

Retribution - Which is very much accepted part of Western values. The West has much to fear if China were to assert retribution and revenge, either on what as done to her for last 200 years or just following the West for how to treat lesser nations / civilizations.

赎罪——这是西方价值观的一部分。如果中国扬言要报复过去200年里西方国家对它所做的事情，或者按照西方的方式对待弱小的国家和文明的话，西方就有很多事情值得担心了。

But these fears are likely unfounded with better understanding of the Chinese’s views and values. China want to be like its great past, Tang, Song or Ming where they reach out and trade with nations in the region for hundreds of years, in peace and safety for all.
但是如果他们对中国人的想法和价值观有更好的理解的话，就会发现这些担忧很可能是没有根据的。中国想要像它的伟大的过去——唐朝、宋朝和明朝——一样，在这些时期里，它通过对所有人而言都和平和安全的方式与这个地区的各个国家进行了长达数百年的贸易。

——————————————

回答三：
Bob Henderson, works at Self-Employment
Answered Nov 8
Depends on what you mean by “rise” and whether it’s really a rise in reality or for show. China has been around for thousands of years as a nation, but only really in the last 150 years did China “fall”- colonial rule by Western powers and Japan, going into a state of economic weakness, and declining as a global power for a time.

这取决于你所说的“崛起”的意思，以及它是否是现实中的崛起还是作秀。中国作为一个国家已经存在了几千年，但在过去的150年里，中国“衰落”了——它因为西方列强和日本的殖民统治而在经济上变得弱小，作为一个全球性大国，它在一段时期里衰落了。

Like India, China was one of those major civilizations that drove the world economy for millennia, the West itself was mostly just Rome followed by inter tribal wars and wars between kings. It wasn’t until the Colonial Era (1500–1800) that the West took over global leadership.

就像印度一样，中国是上千年时间里推动世界经济发展的主要文明之一，西方自身——基本上就是罗马——的历史上一直贯穿着部落间和国王间的战争。直到殖民时代(1500年至1800年)，西方才接管了全球的领导地位。

Now we have this notion of the West always having been in charge, and people are nervous with change (or return to) international norms and leadership. For the Westerner, we tend to look at governments close to our system and be more at ease than governments that are different. Case of India and China- both former colonial possessions that originally drove the global economy and now are rising powers. Both violate human rights, historically and currently, both have a populist impulse in their nationalism, and both make things the West likes. The difference, India is a democracy institutionally while China is an autocracy under single party rule.

现在我们有了这样一种观念：西方国家一直是话事者，人们对改变(或回归原有的)国际准则和领导秩序感到紧张。对于西方人来说，他们倾向于关注与我们的制度更接近的政府，而不是那些不同的政府。印度和中国的例子——这两个都曾经是殖民地的国家最初推动了全球经济的发展，现在则正在崛起为大国。无论从历史还是从现状来看，这两个国家都有侵犯人权的历史，都带有民粹主义的冲动，而且都在做着和西方一样的事情。区别在于，印度是一个实施民主制度的国家，而中国则是一个单一政党统治下的专制国家。

That makes a difference- when Westerners think of democracies they have a tradition of allies who can talk with them and have a system of decision making that makes sense to them. With autocracies we have dictatorships that run the gamut of mildly useful to the threatening to the dangerous, and their decision making is really based on what their leadership is thinking. That can be good or bad. Simply ask yourself which would be worse to a Westerner- a Donald Trump in America or a Donald Trump in North Korea. One has checks and balances, the other is entirely beholden to the leader.

由此产生了差别——当西方人想到民主时，他们有着可以与之交流的传统盟友和一个对于他们来说有意义的决策制度。而在独裁统治下，全社会都会陷入到危险当中，而他们的决策则真的是建立在领导层的想法之上的。那可能是很美妙的，也可能是很糟糕。你只消问问自己，对于西方人来说哪种情况更糟糕——美国的唐纳德特朗普，还是朝鲜的唐纳德特朗普？前者有制衡，后者则完全受制于领袖。

Now from a cultural and societal standpoint, the image of China in the West is one of mouth foaming nationalists who think all other nations are either a) vassals to the Middle Kingdom, b) enemies of the Middle Kingdom, c) the West is a threat, and d) the United States of America is an enemy to be undermined. What also doesn’t help is that while the hypernationalists, many of whom are easily rallied and directed, there is also the use of IP theft and hacking. China likes to take and deny- they take Western tech and IP and deny or downplay and even sometimes play victim. When the Westerner sees this behavior, real or imagined, they assume China is a country run by shady dealings and people who are stealing because they can’t compete fairly.

现在从文化和社会的角度来说说看，中国在西方的形象是一个口吐白沫的民族主义者，它认为：其他所有国家a、要么是中央王国的附庸，b、要么是中央王国的敌人，c、西方是一个威胁，d、美利坚合众国是一个需要被削弱的敌人。还有一点可能没有什么帮助，那就是虽然存在着很多很容易遭到操纵的超级民族主义者，但盗窃知识产权和黑客行为仍然时有出现。中国喜欢接受然后否认——他们接受西方的技术和知识产权，之后否认或淡化这件事，甚至有时会扮演受害者的角色。当西方人看到这种行为后，不管是真实的或还是想象的，他们就会认为中国是一个由非法交易和擅长偷窃的人所经营的国家，因为他们不能进行公平的竞争。

How much of that is truth or fiction is irrelevant, its really about impressions. We spy on each other all the time and steal state and business intel. I think its more of the fact that when China plays the game, they don’t play by the rules all the time and they can get caught.

这其中有多少是真实的或虚构的内容是无关紧要的，它真正影响到的是人们的印象。我们一直都在互相监视，通过网络窃取国家和企业的机密。我认为，更重要的是，当中国进来玩这场游戏时，他们不会一直遵守规则，他们可能会被抓个现行。

Last on this thought, China makes a convenient scapegoat for poor economic performance in the US. The “They Steal Our Jobs” mentality is alive an well among the stupid and poorly skilled in America. Domestically we have people blaming illegals from Mexico, abroad its China. Very little about real causes of manufacturing job loss are focused on- IT, automation, changing consumer demands. What also gets ignored is the changing nature of the economy from manufacturing to higher skilled knowledge and services and financial.

最后，中国为美国糟糕的经济表现提供了一个适当的替罪羊。“他们偷走了我们的工作”的心态在美国那些愚蠢和没什么技能的人当中很流行。在国内，我们有人指责来自墨西哥和中国的国外非法移民。几乎没有人关心制造业岗位流失的真正原因——IT、自动化、消费者需求的变化。同样被忽视的是经济结构从制造业向高技能知识产业、服务业和金融业的转移。

I think China also plays a role in this response, they don’t like to admit mistakes. Part of what makes the West distinct is that we’re always trashing our politicians and other countries. In the West, Western nations and leaders can do wrong. One of the reasons the so called Deplorables love Trump is because he says what they’re thinking, and some even see themselves in Trump. Yet Chinese leadership doesn’t admit mistakes, doesn’t like criticism, and their bots and apologists do everything to portray a China that is better and more noble than the West. It doesn’t pass the sniff test for Westerners since their own frx of reference is full of examples of the opposite, both in the West and China.

我认为中国也在这一反应中扮演了相关角色，他们不太愿意承认错误。让西方与众不同的部分原因是，我们总是在贬低我们的政客和其他国家。在西方国家，西方国家和领导人可能做错了。所谓的可悲者热爱特朗普的原因之一就是他说出了他们的想法，有些人甚至在特朗普身上看到自己。然而，中国领导层不承认错误，不喜欢批评，他们的机器人和辩护者尽一切努力地描绘了一个比西方更好、更高尚的中国。因为他们自己的参考标准中充斥着西方和中国的反面例子，所以它并没有通过对西方人的嗅觉测试。

If you bring up anything good and hold it up as an example of superior treatment, a Westerner will find something dirty in China’s closet to bring up. Instead of admitting to it, the apologists will either ignore it, claim racism, or downplay it and pretend things have changed. Fact is, the game of politics is universal and everyone plays the same way. For Westerners, anyone claiming to be better than their political rivals is lying.

如果你要把任何好的东西都拿出来夸耀一番，西方人同样也会在中国的壁橱里发现一些脏东西的。辩护者们非但不会承认，反而会忽视它，诉诸种族主义，或者淡化它，假装局势已经发生了变化。事实是，政治游戏在全天下都一样，每个人都以同样的方式在玩这个游戏。对西方人来说，任何声称自己比政治对手好得多的人都是在撒谎。

——————————————

回答四：
Nachi Sawrikar, Have followed history and alliances closely.
Answered Oct 26
Not just the West, even it’s neighbors are uncomfortable.

不仅仅是西方国家，甚至连它的邻国也感觉不安。

In reality, everyone benefits from a rising and prosperous China.

在现实中，每个国家都受益于中国的崛起和繁荣。

The cause of discomfort is twofold. Chinese Communist Party tries to gain legitimacy by giving economic growth and by projecting a muscular China. This is in contrast to a previous China that was militarily weak and economically poor.

造成不安的原因有两方面。CCP试图通过推动经济增长和展示一个强大的中国的形象来获得合法性。这与之前的中国在军事上的弱势以及经济上的贫穷形象形成了鲜明的对比。

The neighbors would have adjusted to a rising China by accommodating them. However the presence of USA in Asia ensures that they don’t compromise.

邻国会通过改变自己来适应一个正在崛起的中国。然而，美国在亚洲的存在确保了它们不会做出妥协。

That means more tensions and USA uses it as an excuse to spend more on defense.

这意味着更多的紧张局势，而美国则会以它为借口来增加国防开支。

——————————————

回答五：
Jean-Francois Dufour-Poirier
Answered Oct 26
Well, I see it from another point of view; french quebecer here.

我从另一个角度来看这个问题，我现在身处加拿大的法语区魁北克。

What I do like to say is welcome to China. I, for one, do realize the effort China is doing to open itself. It’s a shame that we do not know each other more. I’m hoping for a new Era where we all stand togheter for a better future.

我想说的是，欢迎你，中国。就我而言，我确实意识到了中国正在努力开放自己。我们彼此没有了解更多，这真是太遗憾了。我希望一个新的时代能够到来，我们都能站在一起迎接一个更好的未来。

Hopefuly, the language barrier shall fall soon enough with all the new technologies around the corner.

令人期待的是，语言障碍很快就会随着所有新技术的出现而减小。

This, the language, always has been a huge wall and only now we can start to think about it’s fall and all the possibilities coming out of this.

语言一直都是一堵高耸的墙，现在我们可以开始思考它的倒下以及随之而来的所有可能性。

——————————————

回答六：
Dewitt Cordino, lives in Xiamen, China
Answered Oct 26
it might be 2 items

可能是两种障碍：

Chinese is believed as the Communist country and it did not have democracy, which is brainwashing by media for years that democracy is the only way to make things better. however , how dare a country rise to prove they are incorrect? and dont forget that what Communist of Latins do to American and what media told how bad communist is for years
一、中国人被认为是共产主义国家，没有民主，多年来，媒体一直在进行洗脑，认为民主是使事情变好的唯一途径。然而，一个国家怎么敢证明自己是不正确的呢？别忘了拉丁美洲的共产主义者对美国人的影响，以及多年来媒体一直灌输的共产主义有多坏的言论

Everyone say China raise, but, should be say China is on the way back to its position? as the most gorgeous country for thousands of years before industy revolution, China just goes down to bottom for recent 100 years only. are westner worry about the awak of this lion, or we say dragon.what happen then after China awak completed?

二、每个人都说中国崛起，但是，应该说中国正在回到自己原来的位置上吗？作为工业革命之前数千年来最辉煌的国家，中国在最近的100年里才刚刚开始走入谷底。西方人担心的是这头狮子——或者是龙——的苏醒。那么在中国苏醒之后，又会发生什么呢？

——————————————

回答七：
Ludwig Nijholt, works at Marvel: Avengers Alliance
Answered Oct 26
Given the businessmen flocking to the occasion, your guess is as good as mine. The China market has been the capitalists’ wet dream since at least the 19th century, when purchasing power of the average Chinese was negligible.

有鉴于商人们正蜂拥而来，你的猜测会和我的一样准确。自19世纪以来，中国市场一直是资本家的“春梦”，而当时中国老百姓的购买力几乎可以忽略不计。

So I’d say things have started to look up, wouldn’t you?

所以我想说，我们已经开始需要仰望它了，不是吗？

——————————————

回答八：
Ameya Chavan, Enthusiast
Answered Oct 26
There are mixed reactions from West like some countries want to benefit themselves but not at the cost of national security and some countries see that rise of China as a threat. Answers simple as sweet.

西方国家的反应不一，有些国家希望自己能够从中获益，但是不要以牺牲国家安全为代价；一些国家则认为中国崛起是一种威胁。答案就像蜜一样简单。

——————————————

回答九：
Peter Jones
Answered Nov 5
As a Brit, I can say we are happy to see a sensible, large trading partner steadily developing.

作为一个英国人，我敢说，我们很高兴看到一个明智的、规模庞大的贸易伙伴在稳步发展。

I do perhaps worry that it can be hard to do business fairly in China, but that’s a problem in much of the world.

我可能担心在中国做生意很难，但这在世界上很多地方都是一个问题。

I’m actually looking forward to China putting the US in it’s place in the South China Sea in the next few years, I just wish they would not feel the urge to submit their neighbours so badly.

我真的很期待中国在未来几年里在南海让美国摆正位置，我只是希望他们这么急迫地想让邻国屈服，这样很糟糕。

——————————————

回答十：
Gregg Gray, former Worked at the White House for Six Years.
Answered Oct 26
I can only speak about my area of America. We are not concerned about China as we have fairly decent relations with them. We are vital trade partners and the economies of both countries are intertwined to the point of being dependent on each other at this time. So intertwined that a war between the two is all but inconceivable. We may both Saber Rattle in the South China Sea and the East China Sea but little will ever come of it.

我只能说说我所在的美国的情况。我们并不关心中国，因为我们与它的关系相当不错。我们是至关重要的贸易伙伴，两国的经济如此相互依存，如此相互依赖。以至于两国之间爆发战争几乎是不可想象的。我们可能在中国南海和东海地区磨刀霍霍，但几乎不会有任何事情发生。

China still has a long way to go, but is making rapid progress in the area of quality of life.

中国还有很长的路要走，但它在生活质量方面正在取得快速的进步。

——————————————

回答十一：
Thierry Etienne Joseph Rotty, studied at University of Antwerp
Answered Oct 26
Only Americans feel uncomfortable.

只有美国人会感到不舒服。

In Europe at present Chinese investors are preferred over US investors as the Chinese have proven to be more trustworthy and law-abiding.

目前，在欧洲，中国投资者比美国投资者更受到青睐，因为中国已被证明是更值得信赖和更守法的。

——————————————

回答十二：
Fredrik Payedar, studied Accounting & Economics at University of Gothenburg (2005)
Answered Nov 9
HEEEEL YES!!! Chinas rise was at least until very recently made possible with western technology. They sold or rented out their cheap labor in return they got, investment, machinery, technology.

是的！直到最近，中国的崛起至少要凭借西方的技术才会成为可能。他们出售或出租他们的廉价劳动力，作为回报，他们获得了投资、机械和技术。

It would have taken hundreds of years for China to achieve this on their own. In other words they did it with our blessing.

中国要花上几百年的时间才能实现这一目标。换句话说，他们是在我们的祝福之下这么做的。

As for China having many reasons for revenge against the west, but being sooooo gooooood that it wont= bullshieieieeiit. ‘’ the west’’ did some bad things against China and some good things, such as support them against the Japanese invasion 1937.

至于说中国有很多理由对西方国家展开报复这回事，完全是扯淡。“西方”对中国做了一些不好的事情，也做了一些好事，比如支持他们抗击1937年的日本侵略。

——————————————

回答十三：
Anthony Pilolli, studied International Relations
Answered Nov 3
It's not necessarily that the West is uncomfortable about China's rise as it about China's intentions.

西方对中国的崛起并没有感到不安，因为它关乎中国的意图。

The Chinese government is a very closed institution. It's not a democratic nation and it has it's neighbors more worried about the Chinese, more so than the West. Which is to far away.

中国政府是一个非常封闭的机构。它不是一个民主国家，它的邻国——而不是西方——更担心中国。它位于距离西方很远的地方。

China is and will be a major competitor to the West. But from all indications the Chinese like the current world order the way it is.

中国将成为西方的主要竞争对手。但是从所有的迹象来看，中国人喜欢现在的世界秩序。