John Thornton 教授解讀中國為何優於美國

教授解讀中國為何優於美國

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCutY_xHTIQ

約翰·L·桑頓是一位傑出的美國商人，曾任高盛總裁，也是備受尊敬的中美關係專家。他與中國領導人和機構關係密切，在促進中美兩大超級大國對話方麵發揮了關鍵作用。除了在企業界取得的成就外，桑頓還曾擔任清華大學教授兼主任以及布魯金斯學會主席，這使他成為全球金融、外交和學術界交匯領域的傑出人物。

我心想，2050年的世界會是什麽樣子？最樂觀的估計是會有100億人，而現在大約有80億。所以我們新增了20億人口，這些人主要來自9個國家，分別是印度、尼日利亞、巴基斯坦、埃塞俄比亞、烏幹達、坦桑尼亞、剛果民主共和國、印度尼西亞和美國。所以，實際上，我們將新增20億貧困人口，主要分布在非洲和中亞地區。與此同時，財富集中度也會進一步惡化。例如，美國和中國目前的GDP占全球的42%。2050年，沒有人真正知道具體數字，但應該在50%到60%之間。也就是說，兩個國家將擁有世界50%或60%的財富，而貧困人口將增加20億。現在我們已經知道，在國家內部和國家之間都存在這種不平等會是什麽樣子。幾乎所有你能想到的事情都不好：移民、疾病、恐怖主義、氣候。改變等等。所以我看著這一切，我對自己說，如果我們有任何形式的戰略規劃正在進行，如果你認為在那個我剛才描述的世界裏，世界上最強大、最富有的10個國家，隨便選5個國家，或者兩個國家，這是一個好主意，請舉手。誰認為在那個世界裏，這兩個國家應該把大部分時間花在互相爭鬥上是個好主意呢？我的意思是，這根本說不通。所以我看著這個世界，我對自己說，等等。現在我的感覺就像我們正走向懸崖。我們在說服自己，這有點像一場不斷升級的負麵遊戲。雙方都在說服自己，對方是邪惡的，惡毒的，而且情況越來越糟，他們無法理解。所以我撓了撓頭，說：“好吧，現在我們該如何擺脫這個陷阱呢？”擺脫這個陷阱？這一點並不明顯，尤其是當你考慮到我剛才提到的Hopster的時候。因為在我看來，我們國家在國內一段時間內都會陷入政治困境。因此，如果我可以稱之為現實的話，那麽這項任務就會變得更加困難。所以我隻希望有兩件事會發生。第一，隨著時間的推移，其他國家會越來越有力地對美國和中國說，對不起。你們兩國之間沒有建設性的關係是不可接受的。如果是這樣，世界就無法存在，你必須阻止它。嗯，你現在看到一些這樣的事情正在發生。其中一件讓我感興趣的事情是，我不想離題，我隻想快速地回顧一下。如果你看看俄羅斯和烏克蘭的戰爭，如果你隻關注英語媒體，英語傳播渠道，它們主導著世界傳播渠道，你可能會認為對俄羅斯的製裁基本上是一個好主意，而且基本上是有效的。大多數人都看到了這一點。直到你看到細節，你才會意識到，在54個非洲國家中，支持製裁的國家為零；在32個拉丁美洲國家中，支持製裁的國家為零；在22個中東國家中，支持製裁的國家為零；在48個亞洲國家中，支持製裁的國家有3個，韓國、日本、新加坡、16個太平洋島國、澳大利亞和新西蘭。所以我剛才列舉了175個國家，其中5個支持製裁。所以，製裁本質上是美國、西歐和一些美國在亞洲和澳大利亞的盟友。現在，這其中的相關性在於，它確實表明了某種裂痕，這種裂痕你很少聽到，而積極的一麵或許是，這個問題或許是，所有其他國家隨著時間的推移都會對美國和中國說，正如我之前所說，你們之間不能建立良好的關係，這是不可接受的。順便說一句，中國已經是這些國家最大的貿易夥伴，其中140個是中國。我本周早些時候剛在中國聽過嗯，中國人正在使用一種新的、更突出的術語，叫做“中國現代化”。他們決心向世界表明，現代化和西方化並非同義詞，現代化在不同國家可以采取不同的形式。我聽了外交部長的講話，他列舉的這些內容沒有特定的順序。嗯，中國在過去十年對全球增長的貢獻超過了七國集團（G7）所有國家的總和。中國有14億人口，比所有發達國家的總和還要多。嗯，他們是與140個國家進行貿易的主要貿易國。嗯，中國和東盟之間的貿易額令人驚歎。中國和東盟之間的貿易額超過了美國和歐盟之間的貿易額。所以，當你開始深入研究這些事情時，你會意識到，美國人遲早要接受一個現實。我個人認為，越早理解和接受這一點越好，兩國關係必須改善，因為如果兩國關係不改善，那麽我所做的一切我說的是2050年，更不用說2070年或2100年，簡直就是懸崖勒馬。約翰·克裏告訴我，我記得是在2013年。他當時是奧巴馬因各種原因未能出席的一次國際會議的美國高級官員。所以，他就是與習近平會麵的人。習近平在那次會麵中對約翰·克裏說：“順便說一下，我想跟你說說我正在考慮的事情。” 克裏提出了“一帶一路”倡議。凱莉對他說：“這很有意思。我們為什麽不一起做呢？” 習近平說：“這是一個好主意。我們一起做吧。”凱莉回到華盛頓後，
他說在他下飛機前，
財政部官員已經把他的腿砍斷了，
而且根本不可能
發生這種事。所以這件事從未送到奧巴馬的辦公桌上，
作為一個戰略問題。但我
告訴你這個故事是因為，如果你
讀到今天對
“一鍾一路”的描述，你會認為這是某種
中國為了控製世界而采取的惡意手段。
但事實並非如此。它正是
人們所說的，就是
將一種發展模式推廣到盡可能多的國家，
這些國家迫切需要這種模式。我之前談到中國現代化的時候，
我參加了上周一的會議。
所以，中國的現代化，我就不詳細說了，但它基本上有五個核心特征。其一是和平的世界，其二是共同繁榮，其三是人與自然和諧相處。所以，外交部長說經曆了整件事，然後我們五個人被要求對此發表評論，我在評論中說，
聽著，我們這些做過任何事的人都知道，計劃是一回事，執行是另一回事，執行才是最重要的。所以我給你們中國人的建議是，
如果你們要堅持相信這些事情，我的意思是，誰會反對這些事情呢？
誰會反對世界和平？誰會反對人與自然的和諧？誰會反對共同繁榮？在座的十個人中，沒有一個人會反對這些事情。所以這不是問題所在。問題在於，你們
真的會說到做到嗎？如果你不做到，你就會遭受和美國一樣的負麵反擊，
當他們被視為虛偽時。所以這是第一點，第二點，也是極其重要的一點，
我想向你們所有人強調，也就是我向中國人強調的，
石頭炸在臉上。我第一次在中國待了很長時間，但沒有成功。當時我擔任高盛亞洲區董事長，時間是90年代中期到2000年。當時，中國體製才剛剛開始開放，他們才剛剛開始將國有企業打入西方市場。祖蘭當時是總理或副總理，後來又當了總理。他是一位非常不尋常的人，他非常關心如何做好這件事。我碰巧在場，而且我的資曆很高，所以我在恰當的時機，恰好在恰當的地點，以一種可能永遠不會再發生的方式向他提供建議，因為中國人非常需要這種建議。但有一點讓我印象深刻，那就是中國領導人在幾乎所有話題上都保持著係統性的開放態度，不是每個話題，而是幾乎每個話題，他們都從這樣一個前提出發：世界上肯定有人比我們更了解這個話題。讓我們把
那個人帶到北京，讓我們耗盡他的
大腦，讓我們研究一下他說了什麽，看看
這是否適用於我們，根據我們的情況進行改進和定製，然後執行。他們一次又一次地這樣做，這就是為什麽你，為什麽你
在那些日子裏，你會我見過約翰·齊曼和習近平定期與西方CEO、西方傑出學者、諾貝爾獎獲得者等等會麵，以及西方國家科學戰略的負責人。他們定期與他們進行一對一的會麵，因為他們知道他們從那些並非為他們工作的人那裏獲得了非常高質量的信息，而好的信息卻反過來傳回來了。這種情況幾年前就開始停止了。那是另一個話題。好吧，我們到了。當今世界的權力格局不應該被定義為中美之間的霸權競爭。相反，我們正見證著從單一文明主宰全球到多元文明共同繁榮的轉變。中國開啟的不是中國世紀，而是一個多元文明的世紀。一個新時代，
將不再存在單一的文明霸權。而這正是
中國人的看法。正如喬·拜登所說，
這是一個民主對抗專製的世紀。
其中一些更有趣。更聰明的中國人會說：“不，不，這是官僚體製與精英體製的對決。”這涉及到中國共產黨。中國共產黨。思考這個問題的最佳方式是，中國共產黨本質上是精英統治的政黨，就像你回顧中國曆史，你會發現，先有一位皇帝，然後是那種官僚階層，統治著國家。現在的情況就是這樣。如果你能力不夠，你就進不了中國共產黨。如果你能力不夠，你就進不了欽努瓦大學。你知道嗎，每年有1000萬孩子參加國家考試，去上大學。其中前3000名進入欽努瓦大學，3000人被錄取，3000人繼續讀大學。所以，欽努瓦大學占據了國家領導層的50%。所以，存在了2000年的應試教育文化仍然存在。本質上，這就是驅動所有教育投入的動力。這些機構，用通俗的話來說，如果你能達到中國體製的頂層，你不可能不聰明能幹。在我看來，這個國家唯一像中國共產黨的機構就是美國軍隊。當我告訴他們這一點時，他們會抓狂。這個國家唯一像中國共產黨的機構就是美國軍隊。也就是說，如果你和我18歲，我們一起去西點軍校，我們參軍，一直待在軍隊裏。有一天，我們成了四星上將。我們彼此認識了40年，你知道嗎？我們坐在同一張桌子旁。這就是中國的體製。所以，他們彼此非常了解。他們有真正的工作。他們失敗或成功。如果他們成功了，他們就會繼續前進。如果他們失敗了，他們就會失敗。就像所有大型組織一樣，當然，也存在著大量的粗暴司法和內鬥。所有這些事情都發生在美國和其他任何地方的每個公司裏。但這基本上就是
體製。所以我認為“共產主義”這個詞
在某種程度上會影響到
美國人的思維方式，讓他們無法理解自己正在麵對的是什麽。嗯，這不是共產主義體製。
但這並不意味著他們在談論共同富裕時沒有
例如，你可能會說這相當於試圖解決我們經常討論的收入不平等問題。但前幾天，另一個中國人對我說，
資本主義製度本質上是一個分而治之的製度，而中國的現代化是一個統一的製度。所以習近平回到他身邊，他決心要實現共同富裕，盡管他們還沒有想出如何做到這一點。他們為使8億人擺脫貧困而感到自豪，這是曆史上最大的脫貧目標。他們為此感到自豪，他們認為這些人應該繼續進步，而貧富之間的巨大差距實在太大了。嗯，嗯，而且這就是為什麽你看到他現在對其中一些采取嚴厲措施

Professor Explains WHY China is BETTER THAN the US

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCutY_xHTIQ

John L. Thornton is a prominent American businessman, former president of Goldman Sachs, and a respected expert on U.S.-China relations. Known for his deep ties with Chinese leaders and institutions, he has played a key role in fostering dialogue between the two superpowers. In addition to his corporate achievements, Thornton has served as a professor and director at Tsinghua University in Beijing and as chairman of the Brookings Institution, making him a unique figure at the intersection of global finance, diplomacy, and academia.

and I said to myself okay what will the world be like in 2050 Well the best estimates are there'll be something like 10 billion people And today there are approximately
8 billion So we have an incremental two billion people and those people are going to come primarily from nine countries and those countries are India Nigeria Pakistan
Ethiopia Uganda Tanzania Democratic Republic of the Congo Indonesia the United States So essentially we're going to add two billion poor people primarily in Africa
and Central Asia and at the same time the concentration of wealth will get worse
So for example the US and China today are something like 42% of global
GDP in the year 2050 No one really knows of course but it's going to be somewhere
between 50 and 60% So two countries will have 50 or 60% of the world's wealth and
there'll be two billion more poor people Now we already know what it looks like when you have that kind of uh inequality both within countries and across countries Just about everything you can think about is not good Migration disease terrorism climate change etc So I look at that and I say to myself if we had any kind of as it were
strategic planning going on for the world raise your hand if you think it's a good idea that in that world I just described that the world's pick your number most powerful wealthiest 10 countries five countries or how about the two countries Who thinks it's a good idea that in that world those two countries should spend most of their time fighting with each other I mean it can't make any sense at all And so I look at that world and I say to myself well wait a minute Right now the way I feel about it it's like we're heading over a cliff We're we're persuading ourselves
and it's kind of it's kind of like a uh escalating negative game Both sides are persu persuading themselves that the other one's uh
nefarious malevolent and it's getting
worse and worse and they can't make any
sense And so then I scratch my and say
"Well now how are we going to get
ourselves out of this trap out of out of this trap?" And it's not obvious particularly when you have regard to what I said a minute ago about Hopster because our own country
domestically is going to be in my opinion politically ill for a while
So with that if I can call it that reality that makes the that the task
that much more difficult So there only two things I'm
kind of I'm hoping will exist One is that other countries will in fact increasingly over time more forcefully say to the United States and
China I'm sorry It's simply not acceptable for the two of you not to
have a constructive relationship The world cannot exist if that's the case
and you got to stop it Um and you see some of that happening
right now One of the things that that kind of interests me it's I don't want
to take a tangent but I'll just quickly go through this If you look at the um the Russian Ukrainian war and if you were following just the
English language media English language communication channels which dominate
the world's communication channels you could be forgiven for thinking that the
sanctions on Russia are basically a good
idea and are essentially working And most people see it that
way until you get into the fine print
And you realize that of the 54 African
countries the number supporting the
sanctions is zero Of the 32 Latin American countries the
number supporting the sanctions is zero Of the 22 Middle Eastern countries
the number of supporting the sanctions is zero The 48 Asian countries number supporting the sanctions are three South Korea Japan
Singapore 16 Pacific island countries
two Australia New Zealand So I just
named you 175 countries five of which
are supporting the sanctions So the
sanctions are essentially an American
Western European and a few American
allies in essentially in Asia and
Australasia Now the relevance of that is that it
does show you a certain kind of fissure
that exists that you don't hear a lot
about uh and the positive side of which maybe
this is the question maybe that all
those other countries over time will say
to both the United States and China as I
said earlier it's just not acceptable
for you all not to have a a decent
relationship and and China by the way is
already the largest trading partner with
140 of those countries uh in China I was just in China uh
earlier this week listening to a uh there's a new sort of well a more more prominent form of a term of art the Chinese are using called
Chinese modernization and they're determined to
illustrate to the world that modernization and westernization are not
synonymous and that modernization can take different forms in different
countries And I was listening to the foreign minister lay all this out and
among the other things he cited was in no particular order uh China's contributed more to global growth in the last decade than all G7 countries put together 1.4 billion people in China are more than all the developed world put together Uh they're they're the leading trader with 140 countries uh the trade between China and ASEAN
this is amazing the trade between China and ASEAN is bigger than the trade
between the United States and EU So when you start going down through
these things you realize there's a certain reality here that sooner or
later the Americans are going to have to
accept and my own opinion is the sooner
that that gets understood and accepted
the better and that the relationship has
got to get better because if it doesn't
get better then everything I was saying
about 2050 let alone 2070 or 2100 is
just going off a cliff So John Kerry told me that in I
think it was 2013 He was the senior American at one of these international
meetings that Obama could not attend for
one reason or another And so he was the
person that took the meeting with Xijin
Ping And Xiinping in that meeting said
to John Kerry "By the way let me tell
you about something I'm thinking about."
And he laid out the one belt one
road And Carrie said to him "That's very
interesting Why don't we do this
together?" And Xiinping says "That's a
great idea Let's do this together."
And Carrie came back to Washington and
he said before he got off the plane the
Treasury Mandarin had cut his legs off
and there was no chance it was going to
happen So it never got to Obama's desk
as kind of a strategic question But I
tell you that story because if you were
reading the if you were reading today
the characterization of one bell one
road you would think this was some kind
of malevolent tactic to get control of
the world on the part of the Chinese
which it is not It is it is exactly what
it's said what they say it is which is
to which is to uh extend a model of development into as
many countries as it wanted who
desperately needed and when I talked
earlier about Chinese modernization that I that I attended
last this last Monday so Chinese
modernization I won't go into all the
details but there basically are five
central characterist characteristics of
it one of which is a peaceful world Second one of which is common
prosperity Third one of which is harmony
between man and nature So the foreign minister went
through this whole thing and then there
were five of us asked to comment on it
and I said in my comments I said
listen Those of us who have ever run
anything know plans are one thing
execution is another execution is the whole thing So
my piece my advice to you the Chinese
would be if you're going to hold
yourself out as believing in these
things I mean who's against any of these
things Who's against world peace Who's against harmony between man
and nature Who's against common prosperity
Nobody 10 out of 10 people there's
nobody in this room is going to be
against any of these things So that's
not the issue The issue is are you
actually going to do what you say you do
And if you don't you're going to suffer
the same uh the same negative blowback that
countries like the United States get
when they were seen as being hypocritical So that's point number one
Point number two which is extremely
important and a point I want to make to
all of you which I made to the Chinese
stone blew in the face very unsuccessfully which is when I first
started spending a lot of time in China
was in the I was chairman of Goldman
Sachs Asia in the mid '90s into
2000 at a point in time when uh the
Chinese system was just starting to open
up and they were just starting to put
stateown enterprises into western
markets and Zuran was the premier or
vice premier then premier and he was a
very unusual person and he really cared
about getting this right and I happened
to be there and I was very senior so I
was in exactly the right place at
exactly the right time to give him
advice in a way they'll probably never
occur again because the Chinese were so
needed with the advice but one thing
that struck me about them was the
Chinese leadership on almost every topic not
every topic but almost every topic was
systematically open in the following
sense they started with the premise
there's somebody in the world who knows
this topic better than we do Let's get
that somebody to Beijing Let's drain his
brain Let's study what he had to say See
if it applies to us Refine and customize
for our circumstance and then execute And they did this time after
time after time Which is why you why you
back in those days you would have seen
both John Zimman and Zuran Xi routinely
meeting with Western CEOs Western superb
academics Nobel Prize winners and so
forth Western head of NOS's They met
with them routinely one-on-one because they knew they were
getting very high quality information
coming in from people who didn't work
for them and good information was coming
back the other way that that's that
started to stop a few years ago That's
that's another topic Ah okay Here we are
The the power configuration in the
current world should not be defined as
competition between China and the United
States for hegemony Rather we witness a shift from
the situation in which a single
civilization dominated the globe to
common prosperity of diverse
civilizations What China has inaugurated is not a
Chinese century but a century of diverse
civilizations a new era in which there
will no longer be a single civilizational hedgeimon And that's
exactly the way the Chinese see it As
opposed to you know Joe Biden says this
is the this is the century of
democracies versus autocracies
Some of the some of the funnier more
clever Chinese will say "No no it's the
putoaucracy versus the
meritocracy." Which gets to the Chinese
Communist Party The Chinese Communist
Party the best way to think about that
is the Chinese Communist Party is
essentially the meritocratic elite in
the same way that if you look back
through Chinese history there was an
emperor and then there was the kind of
the mandarin class running the country
That's essentially what you have at the
moment And you don't get into the
Chinese Communist Party if you're not
very able You don't get to Chinua
University if you're not very able You
know 10 million kids a year take the
take the national examinations to go to
university The top 3,000 of those go to
Chinua University 3,000 get admitted and
3,000 go And so and and Chinua
University accounts for 50% of the
leadership of the country So so that the examinationbased culture
which has existed for 2,000 years still
exists And essentially that's what
drives the the input into all these
institutions And so to put it in in in
the vernacular if you get to the top of
the Chinese system there's no chance
you're not very smart and very able And
the only institution in this country
which is to me is at all like it and
when I tell them this it drives them
crazy The only institution in this
country that's all like the Chinese
Communist Party is the US
military Which is to say that if you and
I were 18 years old and we went to West
Point together we went in the military
and we stayed in the military One day
we're fourstar generals We've known each
other for you know whatever it is 40
years And we're sitting around the same
table That's the Chinese system And so
they know each other intimately They've
had real jobs They failed or they
succeeded If they succeeded they went
ahead If they fail they failed And like
all big organizations there of course is
plenty of rough justice and infighting
and all the rest of it that goes on in
every corporation in the United States
and anywhere else But that's basically
the system So I think the word communist
kind of gets into the gets in gets into
the mental way of Americans
understanding what you're dealing with
Um it's not a communist system period
which doesn't mean they don't have when
they talk about common prosperity for
example you might say that's the equivalent of trying to fix income
inequality that we would talk about but the other day another Chinese was saying
to me the capitalist system is essentially a divide and
conquer system the Chinese modernization is a unifying system and so there so Xiinping to go back to him he is determined although they haven't figured out how to do this yet that common prosperity is for real They're proud of the fact they've lifted 800 million people out of poverty That's the most ever in history by a long long way They're proud of that And they think those people ought to continue to advance And that this you know these big big differences between the wealthy and the poor is just it's too much Mhm Mhm And that's why you see him sort of cracking down now on some of that