China and India: Suddenly Vulnerable

兜售西式民主的一篇文章，以为中国快乱了，只有赶快实行民主政制，赶快直选，中国才能平安渡过这场危机：India has a big advantage over China in coping with an economic slowdown. It has all-too extensive experience in it; and it has a political system that can cope with disgruntlement without suffering existential doubts. India pays an economic price for its democracy. Decision-making is cumbersome. And as in China, unrest and even insurgency are widespread. But the political system has a resilience and flexibility that China’s own leaders, it seems, believe they lack. They are worrying about how to cope with protests. India’s have their eyes on a looming election.。这帮人就是惟恐中国不乱，其实国家总体还是很稳定的。西方的民主义士们想推介民主，也不该用这种危言悚听的姿态吧？连我这个很讲究宪政民主的人都看不下他那传销员的模样。不过里面的有一些批评，说中国的4万亿刺激计划是all mouth and no trousers(为了这个idiom，与个朋友论了好久，后来确定文中用法是错误的，正确的该为all mouth and trousers，意为“光说不做”)。看其分析，说许多刺激措施都是老调，即使没发生经济危机，中国也会实施那样的经济政策：much of it made up by old budget commitments, double-counting and empty promises. It was thus mainly propaganda, to convince China’s own people and the outside world that the government was serious about stimulating demand at home. That may yet prove to be unfair: what matters is when infrastructure money is spent, not when it is announced. Yet there is little sign that the regime is ready to take radical steps in the two areas that would do most to persuade the rural majority to spend its money rather than hoard it: giving farmers better rights over their land; and providing a decent social safety-net, especially in health care. 。仔细想一下，还真有点道理。文章也说了，中国似乎没有太大意愿刺激农民的消费。关于印度，文中说印度政治民主社会稳定，不过经济方面无法与中国相比，无法成为解决世界问题的钥匙。这个结论太狭隘，看看印巴关系接下来的发展吧。反正整篇文章的主题是，借印度反衬中国的症结所在，希望中国走“五个现代化”道路，即在原来的“四化”再加“一化”：政治民主化。

全文：http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12773135&source=hptextfeature