【纽约客】《让中国再次伟大》 reddit 评论 [美国媒体]

Making China Great Again

【纽约客】《让中国再次伟大》 reddit 评论





[-]Chronoz42[S]
Submission Statement:

提交声明：

A good (if not somewhat circumstantial) read on howChina's attempts to become a global leader seems to be coinciding with the USretreat into nationalism and protectionism. The author argues that China is increasinglyattempting to take global center-stage on a number of issues (environment,trade) and the lack of a concerted effort by other global players is givingChina the impetus to fill the void left by the United States. That said, in theface of a variety of issues faced by China (pollution, authoritarianism, etc),this global emergence may not happen any time soon.

中国想成为全球领导者，而美国转向民族主义和贸易保护主义，文章对此进行了很好的解读。作者认为在环境、贸易等领域，中国越来越接近世界舞台中心，而其他国家不能齐心协力，促进了中国填补美国留下的空缺。不过，中国也面临着污染，独裁等很多问题。中国崛起短时间内不会发生。

On the flip side, the article is somewhatone-dimensional.

另外，我们文章有点缺乏深度。

An illuminating paragraph that also summarizes thearticle.

文中有启发的一段可以概括全文：

In a speech to Communist Party officials last January 20th, MajorGeneral Jin Yinan, a strategist at China’s National Defense University,celebrated America’s pullout from the trade deal. “We are quiet about it,” hesaid. “We repeatedly state that Trump ‘harms China.’ We want to keep it thatway. In fact, he has given China a huge gift. That is the American withdrawalfrom T.P.P.” Jin, whose remarks later circulated, told his audience, “As theU.S. retreats globally, China shows up.”
中国国防大学战略家金一南少将，去年1月20日在党员讲话中庆祝美国退出贸易协议。“我们没什么感觉，我们反复说这家伙‘伤害中国’，我们就静观其变。其实，他给中国送了个大礼包。这个大礼包就是美国退出‘跨太平洋伙伴关系协定’。”金教授对他的话进行了进一步解释，告诉听众：”美国要全球撤退，中国就出现了。”

[-]thicket
Man, this is what a submission statement shouldlook like! Succinct summary, basic analysis, well chosen quotation. Thanks fordoing it so right!

老兄，正确的声明应该是：简洁明了、分析基本扎实、很棒的引用。感谢作者。

[-]libelecsBlackWolf
Why would authoritarism be an issue that would stopChina from becoming a world power? The USSR was a world power not long ago andwas just as authoritative.

为什么权威主义会成为阻止中国成为世界强国的一个问题呢?不久前，苏联曾是世界强国，同样具有权威性。

[-]deleted
I really don't see any of the big democracies"agreeing to play by China's rules" if China keeps their attack onfree speech and human rights in general.

如果中国继续打击对言论自由和人权问题，我觉得没有民主大国会“同意遵守中国规则”。

[-]libelecsBlackWolf

You think big democracies agreed to live by theUS's rules because they thought it was a moral beacon of freedom, respect andhuman rights? No, it's because they had big ass armed forces that allowed themto avoid spending so much on military themselves and because it lent them moneycheap. That's why they looked the other way with Guantánamo, the severalneo-colonial wars they fought and the several times they overthrewdemocratically elected governments throughout the world because they didn'tlike it.

你认为民主大国愿意遵守美国规则，是因为美国是自由、人权的道德灯塔？不，是因为美国特么的军事强大，能帮助民主大国节省军费；因为美国提供利息贷款。这就是民主大国为什么对关塔纳摩，美国新殖民战争，美国因为不喜欢而推翻民选政府视而不见的原因。

[-]hakkzpets
The world is already playing by China's rules.
If the western countries truly cared about humanrights violations, they would put an outright ban on imports from China.
But since China is the production power house ofthe world, and people like cheap products, this will never happen.
China is one Hollywood away from becoming a realsuperpower, and by the looks of it, they seem pretty darn determined ofcreating a Hollywood of their own to export their culture. Not to mention howHollywood itself is trying to adapt their movies for the Chinese market.

世界已经开始遵守中国规则了。
如果西方国家真在乎侵犯人权，就应该全面禁止进口中国产品。
不过中国是世界制造大国，人们喜欢便宜货，这种事情永远不会发生。
除了想要成为真正的超级大国，中国还想再建一个好莱坞，中国想建造自己的好莱坞来输出文化。且不说好莱坞是如何改变自己来适应中国市场的。

[-]WrenBoy
If the western countries truly cared about humanrights violations they would likely stop committing them.

如果真的在乎侵犯人权，那西方国家可能就不会侵犯人权了。

[-]CNoTe820
If you are an economic super power then it doesn'tmatter if people "acknowledge" it, the power doesn't come from theacknowledgement. I don't think there's ever been an economic superpower who gotthere any way besides brute force.

经济超级大国才不会在意别人是否“认同”呢，实力不是来自认同。没有哪个经济强国不是通过暴力争取来的。

I am not a trump fan but I am glad the us isstepping back. We need to spend more on butter and less on guns, use our wealthto help our own people like Western Europe does instead of using it to projectmilitary force.

我不是特朗普粉，但我很高兴美国让步了。我们的钱要多花在黄油上，少花在枪上，用财富来帮助自己的人民，就像西欧国家一样，而不是建设军事力量。

[-]flatcoke
Only problem is, he's not cutting down on"guns", but rather things like foreign aid, UN memberships, etc. He'sasking for more guns, as a matter of fact.

问题是，他并没有削减枪支，他削减的是国外援助、联合国会费等。事实上，他想要更多的枪。

[-]rods_and_chains
The problem with authoritarianism is that it is alot of power concentrated in a very few individuals. If those individuals makethe wrong decision(s) or are simply capricious, the superpower status becomesdifficult to maintain. If China continues to have broad economic success, it isnot at all clear to me that the growing wealthy class there will be content notto have political power. How the authoritarians in China accommodate thoseaspirations could have a significant impact on its chances on the world stage.

威权主义的问题在于，权利过度集中在少数几个人手里。如果这些人决策错误，或反复无常，那超级大国地位就保不住了。如果中国继续其巨大的经济成就，增长的富裕阶层就会因为没有权力而不满。中国权力人士如何适应这种情况，这将对中国能否登上世界舞台影响深远。

You brought up the USSR. By the end it was abankrupt shell pretending to be a superpower. Having all decisions top-downappears to me to have been a significant contributing factor to its economicfailure. It collapsed when the pretense could no longer be sustained.

至于你提到的苏联，最后也不过是假装超级大国的破产空壳。在我看来自上而下的决策失误，是苏联经济崩溃的决定性因素。当虚假情况再也无法维持的时候，就崩溃了。

Meanwhile, I count the U.S. as down but not out. Achange in politics plus a surge in cheap energy could bring the U.S. back outon top. I also readily admit that the 21st century could well be the centuryChina fully emerges as the dominant superpower. We live in interesting times.

还有，我觉得虽然美国实力下降，但是没有出局。只要出现政治变化以及廉价能源的涌现，美国就会重回巅峰。我承认21世纪中国会成为重要的超级大国。我们生活在一个有趣的时代。

[-]Pisoo
You could argue authoritarian governments areinherently less stable than democratic governments because they are (typically)less representative of their citizens? There are demands within China forgreater representation? I'm not sure.

你可能会说，专制政府天生就不像民主政府那么稳定，因为他们(通常)不代表他们的人民吗?中国国内有要求更大的代表吗?我不确定。

[-]delaynomoar
Functioning democratic governments tend to haverelatively calm transition of power. That’s always a plus for stability. Thelast transition of power in China would be more enjoyable if it were a mere TVdrama personally speaking.

运转正常的民主政府权力过渡相对平静。这有助于国家稳定。就算是电视连续剧，中国最后的权力交接也绝对精彩。

[-]RandomFlotsam
Even when China was great, and for most of fourthousand years, China was the place to trade with, the various Chinese governmentshave never engaged with the outside world terribly much.

四千年来，中国大部分时间都很强大，中国是很好的贸易中心，虽然朝代更迭，但是中国从来也没与外部世界有过太多的接触。

China sold tea, silks and porcelain to traders inexchange for silver. They wouldn't take trade goods.
At least until the British fought a war so thatthey could sell the Chinese opium, China only accepted hard currency inexchange for their trade goods.

中国外销茶、丝绸和瓷器，赚了不少银子。中国不接受货物贸易。
英国对中国发动了鸦片战争，然后就卖鸦片给中国，在这之前中国只接受硬通货。

The impressive treasure fleet of Zheng He traveledthroughout the Indian Ocean tradeways, establishing trading missions. But theEmperor changed his mind and had the fleets burned.

郑和船队建立贸易团队，在印度洋开辟航线，带来了很多财富。但是中国皇帝改变主意，将船队烧了。

China has always been a big entity, and capable ofself-sufficiency. China has always been able to feed itself, provide enoughfuel, minerals and fiber for whatever it needed. Outside trade was only a wayof accumulating wealth, it was never a necessity to actually engagemeaningfully.

中国一直都是大国，可以自给自足，能养活自己，有足够的能源，矿产和纤维。对外贸易只是一种积累财富的方式，并不是充分参与国际事务的必需品。

Finally, after centuries the global andtechnological situation has changed enough for China to seek to engage theworld.

几百年来世界和中国技术已经发生了很大变化，中国有能力参与国际事务。

[-]delaynomoar 46 points 8 days ago
... until they are hit with the next internalpolitical turmoil. That's the general pattern pretty much since the Han dynasty(territorial expansion - internal political turmoil - retreat).
I'll let you guys decide how long you think thisterritorially-massive multi-ethnic centralized authoritarian one-party statewill last.

直到中国下次出现内部动乱。中国自汉朝以来就是这种模式：领土扩张→内部动乱→战略撤退。
你觉得幅员辽阔、民族众多的国家在一党独裁的中央集权政府的统治下能持续多久。

[-]hsyfz
And how long do you think any democratic stateright now would last without a major revolution coming their way? You seem tohave an unfounded confidence that internal political turmoil will never be aproblem for democratic systems.

你认为如果没有出现大的革命，民主国家能持续多久？民主系统内部就不会发生内部政治动乱？你哪来的自信？

Keep in mind the most robust and prosperousdynasties in Chinese history lasted longer than any democratic institutions inthe world at the moment. There is plenty of time for things to go wrong, andsigns are already showing.

中国最繁荣的朝代比现在任何民主制度历史都要长。民主国家还有很长的路要走，现在不是已经出现不好的苗头了。

[-]delaynomoar
The US democratic institutions survived the GreatDepression. It’s no small feat given the scale. I don’t think the Chinesegovernment today were to face the same challenge can make it. They aren’t anyoutlets for people to vent their everyday frustrations or miseries for one thing.It will end up as a pressure cooker waiting to implode.

美国的民主制度在大萧条时期幸存。以美国的规模，这确实是个壮举。我认为如果中国面临同样的挑战，肯定无法幸存。中国人民受到的挫折和失败无法找到发泄口。这就像不断增压的高压锅，最终会从内部爆炸。

And some of those robust prosperous dynasties takesseveral generations to finally die off in long drawn out power struggle. Iwon’t count the beginnings and ends as good times.

强大的繁荣王朝，是几代人长期的权力斗争得来的。我不认为朝代的开始和结束会是好时代。

[-]hsyfz  
All speculations at this point. If all fails, theChinese government always has the option to wage a US style civil war. The factremains that no democratic institution has lasted very long at this point.There is no historical precedent, and it is overly optimistic to project anylong-term stability.

这都是推测。如果所有的努力都失败，中国至少可以选择进行一场美国式的内战。不过民主体系事件不长也是事实。因为没有历史先例，所以任何坚信民主制度会带来长期稳定都是过度乐观。

You can say the same for the state of working-classAmericans and British people. They responded by voting for Trump and Brexit.Are things getting better for them? No. In fact, they voted against theirinterest, and their everyday frustrations will only deepen by the choices oftheir own making. It's a vicious cycle, and it might get worse.

关于中国人民没有发泄口，美国和英国的工人阶级面临同样的问题。他们的回应是投票支持特朗普和英国脱欧。结果怎么样，有好转吗?没有，结果是他们投票反对了自己的利益，他们自己的选择只会加深他们的挫折。这是恶性循环，而且越来越糟。

[-]delaynomoar
Given each of our limited lifespan, I’ll pick oneof the stable western democracies i.e. Canada to live out my life like manyChinese nationals have done. Like them, l’ve decided the odds are better outthere.

考虑到我们有限的寿命，我会像很多中国人那样选择稳定的西方民主国家，比如加拿大来度过余生。我觉得这里的机会更好。

I’m using the Great Depression era as a specificexample, don’t drag in Trump and Brexit. Ask yourself instead how will theChinese working class get through an economic depression.

我举大萧条时期的历史，不是想扯什么特朗普和脱欧。你自己说中国工人阶级将如何挺过经济萧条。

[-]hsyfz
No. What you really want is to live in a developedand rich country. Don’t conflate that with democracy.
You should read some history on how the US gotitself out of depression. A hint: it’s done through national planning.

不，你真正想的是生活在发达的富裕国家，和民主没关系。
你应该了解下历史，看看美国是如何熬过大萧条的。给你个提示：国家计划。

[-]delaynomoar
Like you won't want to park your money at a placewith rule of law?

就像你不想把钱存在法治国家一样？

Yes. I know. I have nothing against that :)

我知道美国是如何熬过大萧条的。

[-]lizongyang
China never feel itself as multi-ethnic as othersthink it would be. Do you think the "political turmoil" isdemocratization like "Arab Spring"? why it will weaken China?

别人认为中国是多民族国家，中国不这么认为。你说的内部动乱是指“阿拉伯之春”吗？这为什么会削弱中国？

[-]Evilutionist
It's actually rather interesting. Korean-Chineseget discriminated by the Koreans. Inner Mongols get discriminated byMongolians. Manchurians are some of the most nationalistic people in China(although they often clash with the Han over the role of the Qing, with manyManchus viewing it as good, saving China from collapse of the Ming, and theearly half being a Golden Age. The Han focus on the Manchu supremacy/racism,economic and technological stagnation and it's failures in the Century ofHumiliation).

其实挺有意思的。韩国人歧视中国朝鲜族人。蒙古人歧视内蒙古人。满洲人是中国最具民族主义的民族之一，在清朝的问题上经常与汉族发生冲突，满族人认为清朝是是很好的朝代，是清朝把汉人从崩溃的明朝手里解救出来，清朝前半段确实是黄金时期。汉族关注的是清朝的满人至上主义和种族主义、清朝带来的经济和技术停滞，以及百年屈辱历史。

Many of the other minorities despite maintaing someaesthetic components of their culture have been sufficiently sinicised thatthey don't feel different (that's not to say there aren't problems, they'rejust minor).

其他少数民族虽然保持了一些文化中的美学成分，但是已经被充分汉化了，他们和汉人没两样。这并不意味着就没有问题，不过他们人数太少。

Tibetans...well, I don't know, but if China iskeeping a heavy hand over the region, it's probably not so great. Then we haveXinjiang. Very interesting. Mostly Central Asians, with the Uyghurs hating theHan (vice versa) and the other groups hating Uyghurs (while being neutral tothe Han).

藏人，我不知道，如果中国继续保持在西藏的高压政策，可能就不太好说了。还有新疆，大部分中亚人和维吾尔族人都讨厌汉人，当然反之亦然，而其他少数民族又讨厌维吾尔人，对汉人则保持中立。

[-]delaynomoar
Arab Spring is antigovernment for sure, but it’shardly pro-democracy. When I speak of potential political turmoil, I don’t havedemand for democracy in mind. The current regime is very good at turning peopleagainst the idea, Trump helps too. Is China immune to political turmoil? Ifnot, then I presume it could be weaken by it.

阿拉伯之春是反政府的，但未必支持民主。我说的潜在政治动乱，并不是指寻求民主。现政府非常擅长鼓动人民反对这种想法。特朗普提供了神助攻。中国能不能免于政治动荡的影响？我觉得如果不能，中国就会因此被削弱。

[-]huginn
it's a problem has had for as long as it has beenin the sun. When the difference between the elites and the common man grows toobroad and the peasant's revolt, China's current regime falls out of favor ofthe light of the sun as the next administration says

一直都有这个问题，如果精英阶层与普通阶层的差距变大，农民叛乱，那么下任政权就会说现在的中国失去了阳光的宠爱

[-]lizongyang
"favor of the light of the sun"? I thinkyou mean "the mandate of heaven"
阳光的宠爱，你指的是“天命”？

[-]delaynomoar
A little experiment with constitutional federalismmight break the cycle. How many more time do we need to repeat the cycle toprove that a highly-centralized government in a country of China's size andethnic makeup would fail in the long run?
This is not counting the cost of human livesinvolved in maintaining a centralized regime.

为什么不尝试下宪法联邦主义，也许可以打破循环。还需要重复循环多少次，才能证明幅员辽阔，民族众多的高度中央集权国家，长期来看肯定会失败?
这并不是在计算维持中央集权政府，需要牺牲多少生命。

[-]Evilutionist
THe problem is that 'experimenting' with Chinamight lead to another collapse...

问题是，“尝试”也许会导致中国另一种崩溃。

[-]Evilutionist
Mongol incursions up north was sapping the treasuryso they decided to switch tack :/
One reason they went out was to find superiorcivilisations (since they thought China fell behind during the Yuan)...andfound no one...

明朝，蒙古人入侵北部地区，削弱了国家财政，朝廷必须改变策略。
他们走出去的原因之一是像找到先进文明，因为他们认为汉人在元朝的时候落后了，结果却没有找到。

They actually had some rather...interesting(sometimes racist) views:

他们的观点相当有趣，当然也有点种族主义：

Indians- stingy, but smart. Drives a hard bargain,but will honor the deal. Rich place, good country to trade in. Rich in spices.Willing to provide water and food resupplies.

印度人——吝啬但聪明。和印度人做生意要讨价还价，不过印度人会遵守协定。印度富裕，是做生意的好地方。印度有很多香料，也愿意为船队提供水和食物。

Arabs - A bit brutal, but has a rich culture.Pretty rich place too but not as wealthy as China nor India. Good place forbooks. Pretty advanced. Zheng He was muslim so he was happy. He did have todefuse a situation when one of his crew insulted a Mosque...

阿拉伯人——有点野蛮，但是文化丰富。富裕，但是没有中国和印度富裕。有很多好书，文化进步。郑和是穆斯林，遇到阿拉伯人很高兴。一名船员冒犯的清真寺，他不得不出来平息事端。

Sri Lankans - fuck these rude dickheads

斯里兰卡人——粗鲁的白痴。

SEA - Good market place, attractive women, calm andwise rulers .

东南亚——市场好，女性漂亮，统治者冷静而睿智。

Africa - ...use your imagination. It wasn't verynice. The places were poor, weren't technologically or culture advanced,locations desolate, nothing really to trade or give as tribute... An AfricanKing feared invasion... Oh an interesting tidbit, a treasure ship crashedonshore, the survivors swam aboard, took African wives (after converting toIslam) and their descendants look a tad Chinese to this day (the eyes..and theporcelain found...and the gravesites...)

非洲——自己想吧。肯定不怎么好。非洲很穷，技术和文化都不发达，地处偏僻，没有什么像样的东西作贡品。还有一位非洲国王怕遭到入侵。哦，有段轶事，一艘宝船触礁沉没，幸存者们游上岸，在非洲皈依伊斯兰教后找了非洲妻子。他们的后人看起来有点像中国人，他们的眼睛，墓地形式，而且还发现了瓷器。

[-]RenegadeWild
As an American expat living in China, the averagecitizen I talk to is emphatic about how strong China is. They know they are upand coming and they absolutely believe they will over take the US in allaspects of power and influence. They are very patriotic.

作为旅居中国的美国人，我周围的普通中国人和我聊天时都会强调中国现在有多强大。他们知道中国国力在上升，他们相信中国会在实力和影响力等方面超过美国。而且他们非常爱国。

[-]delaynomoar
Ha! And how many of them will be sending their sonsto fight wars in foreign lands to maintain a hypothetical Pax Sinica? They likethe idea not the responsibilities.

哈哈，他们中有多少人会把自己的孩子派去海外战场，来维持虚假中国治下的和平？他们喜欢的是世界第一的感觉，而不是责任。

[-]RenegadeWild
From what I gather, at least with the locals I speakwith... They see the 21st century as their century. My colleague sees China asthe leader the world needs and he says "we are the savior of Europeancolonialism in Africa". They don't see themselves as Team China WorldPolice now, but in the near future - absolutely yes.

根据我的调查，和我聊过天的当地人，都认为21世纪是中国的世纪。我同事认为中国正是世界需要的领导者，他说“我们从欧洲殖民者手中拯救了非洲”。他们没有把自己当做：中国战队——世界警察，但是在不久的将来，他们肯定会成为世界警察。


[-]SuddenlyBANANAS
This article seems strange to me. There's thisweird narrative of China embracing progress and representing a future worldleader but from my reading the only thing they've embraced is free trade. Theytalk about authoritarianism but it seems like it's not really criticised in anyway. It just seems very deeply ideologically tinged with free-market worship.
Maybe the author is just one of the people for whomTrump's protectionism seems the worst aspect of him.

这篇文章对我来说很陌生。叙述方式有点奇怪，文中说中国拥抱进步，是未来的世界领袖，可是看了这篇文章，我觉得中国唯一拥有的就是自由贸易。文章谈到了中国的威权主义，但似乎并没有给出任何批评。文中流露着深深地意识形态上的自由市场崇拜。
或许，作者属于受特朗普保护主义影响最大的人之一。

[-]delaynomoar
He said their embrace of free trade is"ironic"

文章说了，说中国拥抱自由贸易是“讽刺”！

Xi reiterated his support for the Paris climatedeal and compared protectionism to “locking oneself in a dark room.” He said,“No one will emerge as a winner in a trade war.” This was an ironicperformance—for decades, China has relied on protectionism—but Trump providedan irresistible opening.
“中国重申对巴黎其后协议的支持，并将保护主义比作“把自己关进黑屋子”，他说：“贸易战争没有赢家”。这真是具有讽刺意味，几十年来，中国一直在依靠保护主义，但特朗普提供了一个不可抗拒的开局。”

and there is this paragraph:

这一段：

Across Asia, there is wariness of China’sintentions. Under the Belt and Road Initiative, it has loaned so much money toits neighbors that critics liken the debt to a form of imperialism. When SriLanka couldn’t repay loans on a deepwater port, China took majority ownershipof the project, stirring protests about interference in Sri Lanka’ssovereignty. China also has a reputation for taking punitive economic actionwhen a smaller country offends its politics. After the Nobel Prize was awardedto the dissident Liu Xiaobo, China stopped trade talks with Norway for nearlyseven years; during a territorial dispute with the Philippines, China cut offbanana imports; in a dispute with South Korea, it restricted tourism and closedKorean discount stores.
“在亚洲，中国比较谨慎。在“一带一路”倡议下，中国向邻国提供了很多贷款，批评者把这些债务比喻成一种帝国主义。当斯里兰卡无法偿还深水港的贷款时，中国获得了该项目的大部分所有权，激起了关于斯里兰卡主权被干涉的抗议。中国还因为经济惩罚政治冒犯的小国家而出名。诺贝尔奖颁发给异议人士后，中国停止了与挪威的贸易谈判近七年，在与菲律宾的领土争端中，中国切断香蕉进口; 在与韩国的争端中，中国限制了旅游业，关闭了韩国的折扣店。”

This paragraph alone suggests that the author believesChina isn't really good at this world-leadership thingy, what more are youlooking for? Calling Evan Osno "deeply ideologically tinged withfree-market worship" and that he didn't criticized authoritarianism ismischaracterization of his body of work. He called out Xi's cult of personalitya couple years ago and got push back for it. People accused him of"red-mongering" but damn it if time has proven him right.

仅这一段就表明作者认为中国领导不了世界，还需要找更多的证据吗？把欧逸文称为“深深地意识形态上的自由市场崇拜”，说他没有批评威权主义，这属于对欧逸文的作品表述不当。几年前，他就抨击了中国的个人崇拜，并受到中国的反击。人们指责他是“兜售红色”，但是时间证明，他是对的。

[-]RandomCollection
This article overlooks a few issues.

这篇文章忽略了一些问题：

One of the biggest is that China is much more longterm oriented than the US. In America it is always a short term orientation.Quarterly profits, the next election, etc, and often policy that is yieldsshort term gains at the expense of much greater long term harm passes. China ismore long term oriented.

最大的一个问题是，中国政策是长期导向的，而美国一直都是短期导向的。季度利润、下一届选举等，美国的政策通常为了获得短期的收益而损害长期的、更大的利益。中国则更注重长期发展。

On trade China is running a huge trade surplus anda largely mercantilist trade policy whereas the US has huge and unsustainabletrade deficits. China is mostly running surpluses with the nations it tradeswith. Trade surpluses is WHY China has become so powerful to begin with.

在贸易方面，中国拥有巨额贸易顺差和重商的贸易政策，而美国拥有巨大的、不可持续的贸易逆差。中国与交易国基本上保持着盈余。中国强大始于贸易顺差。

Amongst the developed nations, I'd say thatGermany, Japan, South Korea, the Nordic nations, and Switzerland are doingwell.

发达国家中，我认为德国、日本、韩国、北欧国家和瑞士表现良好。

The issue is that increased trade with China willmean increased trade deficits. That will create tensions with anyone trading,the way that Germany has created tensions with its massive current accountsurplus. In the case of China's relationships with some African nations, therehas been some pushback already.

问题在于，增加与中国贸易意味着贸易逆差的增加。这会造成交易双方的紧张关系，德国就因为大量预算结余，而与贸易伙伴关系紧张。中国与一些非洲国家的关系已经出现了一些阻力。

Another consideration is that the amount of moneythat is being spent in foreign aid would not pass in the current politicalclimate. While Trump is awful, even if say, Obama were in for a third term,hypothetically, he would have struggled to pass a foreign aid package on thescale available to China. There is the the question of if it would be betterspent on domestic priorities.

在目前的政治气候下，对外援助的资金是无法通过的。特朗普说过，如果奥巴马是在第三个任期内，他一定会努力通过和中国规模相同的外国援助计划。现实是如果这些钱优先花在国内，效果会更好。

Finally there is also the matter that growth inChina is starting to decline. It seems to have hit point of inflection yearsago. To be sure, the rate of growth is still very high but it is slowing down.
The article seems to have a very liberal bias, inthat it seems to believe that only a Western or perhaps American styledemocracy can be a superpower.

最后，中国的经济增长也开始下降。好几年前就出现了拐点。虽然增长率还很高，但是却在不断放缓。
这篇文章非常偏袒自由主义，认为只有西方或美国风格的民主国家才能成为超级大国。