中英对照：中国式现代化与中国共产党的作用

中国式现代化与中国共产党的作用

Chinese Path to Modernization and the Role Played by the Communist Party of China 

（本文为复旦大学特聘教授，中国研究院院长，春秋发展战略研究院研究员张维为教授在“中国式现代化与人类命运共同体国际研讨会”主旨发言）

(Keynote speech by Prof. Zhang Weiwei, distinguished professor of Fudan University, president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and researcher at the Shanghai Chunqiu Institute for Development and Strategic Studies, at the International Forum on Chinese Path to Modernization and Global Community of Shared Future)

中国式现代化取得了举世瞩目的成功，我们回望历史，18、19世纪崛起的英国、法国、德国等国家，他们的人口是千万级别的，20世纪崛起的美国和日本，人口规模是1亿级别的，到21世纪崛起的中国，人口规模是10亿级别的，中国的人口规模比西方国家人口之和还要大。所以，仅仅这个规模产生的影响就是震撼世界的。

Chinses path to modernization has secured spectacular success that awes the world. Looking back at history, the 18th and 19th century saw the prime of the United Kingdom, France and Germany, countries that harbor populations in the tens of millions. In the 20th century, the United States and Japan emerged with populations in the hundreds of millions. However, in the 21st century, China’s rise with a population in the billions has surpassed them all, exceeding the combined population of all Western countries. The impact of the scale alone is nothing short of monumental. 

而在这个过程中，要理解中国式现代化的成功，就一定要理解中国的政治制度，特别是中国共产党及其发挥的作用。

To comprehend the success of Chinese path to modernization in this process, it is imperative to grasp China’s political system, particularly the Communist Party of China and its impact.

“中国共产党”这个名字中的“党”，和西方政党的“党”是不同含义的。“党”这个词在西方语言中是“Party”，词根是“Part”，所以，西方的政党理论简单来说，就是一个社会、一个国家中的不同利益群体组成代表不同利益的政党。它的游戏规则是这样的，一个政党得到51%的选票，另外一个政党得到49%的选票，51%的就胜出，甚至赢者通吃。如果有争议，可以由最高法院进行裁决，裁决之后大家都要接受，这是西方民主制度的游戏规则。

The term “party” in the name “Communist Party of China” carries a distinct meaning from the “party” in Western political parties. In Western languages, the word “party” derives from “part”, hence the theory of political party in the West is essentially a representation of various interest groups in society or a country. Its game rules are as follows: when one political party receives 51% of the vote, and the other 49%, the party with 51% wins, and the winner takes all. If there is a dispute, the Supreme Court can make a ruling, and everyone must accept it. This is game rule of Western democracy.

然而今天我们看到的现实情况是什么呢？非西方国家采用西方——我叫做“部分利益党”模式之后（Partial interest parties或者Parties and interest parties），往往陷入社会分裂，甚至是永远整合不起来，结果现代化事业举步维艰，发展不起来。西方这种“部分利益党”模式确实遇到巨大挑战，今天西方社会基本都是纷纷分裂的社会。我记得前段时间，英国《经济学人》杂志一篇封面文章，就把美利坚合众国叫“美利坚分众共和国”（The Disunited States of America）。

But what is the reality we see today? Non-Western countries that adopt the Western “partial interest parties” (or parties and interest parties) model often face social fragmentation and may never be able to integrate, crippling the course of modernization and social development. The Western partial interest party model is indeed facing mounting challenges, with Western societies today being largely divided. A case in point is a recent cover story of The Economist, where the United States of America was referred to as “the Disunited States of America”.

相比之下，中国共产党是整体利益党模式，英文叫Holistic interest party，背后是中国源远流长的政治传统，因为中国是个文明型国家（Civilizational state），文明型国家又可以称为“百国之和”，就是历史上成百上千个国家慢慢整合起来的。所以，它形成了自己独特的治理传统。这个传统最大的特点是由统一的执政集团治理这个国家，英文可以叫Unified ruling entity，否则这个国家就要解体，就要分裂，就要爆发内战，造成无数生灵涂炭。1911年辛亥革命之后，中国曾经尝试过西方这种部分利益党模式，结果是军阀混战。我想中国共产党领导今天的现代化，相当程度上还是中国历史上统一执政集团传统的延续和发展。

In contrast, the Communist Party of China follows the “holistic interest party” model, which is rooted in China’s long-standing political traditions. As a civilizational state (also known as the “sum of a hundred of nations”), China has integrated hundreds or even thousands of states in its long history and thus developed its unique governance tradition. The most distinctive feature of this tradition is the presence of a unified ruling entity, without which the country would fragment, divide, and experience civil war, causing untold suffering. After the Revolution of 1911, China tried to adopt the Western partial interest parties model, which resulted in a period of warlordism. I believe that the leadership of the Communist Party of China in modernization today is, to a significant extent, a continuation and development of the traditional practice of a unified ruling entity in Chinese history.

从今天世界的情况来看，整体利益党模式拥有更加有意义的现实价值。首先，一个国家是多党制、一党制还是无党制，并不那么重要，关键是这个国家是否能够有一个代表人民整体利益的政治力量来执政。如果有这样的力量，这个国家的发展可能就比较顺利；如果没有，它的发展过程就容易受到各种各样的挫折。

Our world today welcomes the holistic interest party model, which is more pragmatic and relevant. First of all, as long as there exists a political force representing the overall interests of the people in power, it doesn’t matter whether a country chooses the multi-party system, one-party system or non-party system. If such a force exists, the country’s development may proceed relatively smoothly; if not, the development process is likely to encounter various setbacks. 

中国有这样的政治力量，那就是中国共产党。所以，我们的现代化事业发展得比较顺利，我们可以在14亿人的国度里通过协商民主等一系列的制度安排，就各种问题达成共识，然后大家团结一心，共同谋发展。另外，我们可以进行中长期的规划，五年、十年、十五年、二十年、半个世纪、一个世纪，有效地克服了西方部分利益党模式下民粹主义盛行和短视主义泛滥的问题。

In China’s case, the political force that represents the overall interests of the people is the Communist Party of China. With its guidance, Chinese modernization has been progressing smoothly, and through mechanisms like consultative democracy, consensus is reached in a vast nation of 1.4 billion people. Then, together we join force for a better future. With its guidance, we can engage in medium- to long-term planning, such as five-year, ten-year, fifteen-year, twenty-year, half-century, and century-long plans, avoiding the rampant populism and myopic mindset prevalent in the Western partial interest party model. 

第二，随着国际竞争日益激烈，所有国家都需要改革，应对日益变化的国际格局。但改革最大的难处在于要克服既得利益，如果没有代表人民整体利益的政治力量来推动，改革就会受到各种各样阻挠而寸步难行。美国就是个典型的无法进行改革的国家，什么事都做不成。我查了一下，我们辛亥革命前美国就提出要搞全民医保，100多年过去了还是搞不了。枪支控制，二十年之后能完成吗？完成不了。100年之后？I don’t know。因为这背后被各种既得利益绑架了，所以没法进行。中国可以进行改革，过去数十年中国现代化的成功关键经验之一，就是我们能够不停地进行改革，能够与时俱进。

Secondly, as international competition becomes increasingly fierce, all countries need to reform to respond to the changing international landscape. However, the biggest challenge of reform is to overcome vested interests. Without a political force representing the overall interests of the people, reforms will encounter various obstacles and become difficult to proceed. The US is a typical good-for-nothing when it comes to reform. I looked up our history, and found out that prior to our Revolution of 1911, the US had already proposed universal healthcare. However, over a century has passed, such a proposal is yet in suspense. Can gun control be achieved in 20 years? I doubt so. Perhaps in 100 years? I don’t know. Because vested interests are pulling the strings behind such reforms, hindering their success. China, on the other hand, unravels a different story. One of the keys to our modernization miracle in the past decades is our unremitting reform to keep up with the times. 

第三，整体利益党以国家整体利益、民族的整体利益为依归，执行以人民为中心的发展理念，而非选票为中心的发展理念，这两者是完全不一样的。

Third, a holistic interest party model upholds the interest of the whole country and its people. It implements the people-oriented philosophy of development, as opposed to the ballot-oriented philosophy. 

因为在典型的西方国家，一般参加大选的或者其他选举的人数大概是选民的50%左右，甚至更少。以选票为中心，实际上关注的是少数人。

In typical Western countries, participants to major elections or other elections account for about 50% of the constituency, perhaps even less. Therefore, a ballot-oriented philosophy failed to consider the interests of the majority. 

一个典型的美国选举，可能参加投票的选民是55%左右，这还是比较好的情况，他只要拿到27%-28%的选票就赢了。而以人民为中心关注的是绝大多数人，这是两者的差别。所以，在西方部分利益党模式下，竞选变成政治营销，变成拼金钱，拼表演，拼空谈，拼民粹主义，拼政治极端化，结果导致社会四分五裂，国家没有发展的动力。

A typical US election may see 55% of the constituency voting on a good occasion, and it only takes 27% to 28% percent of the ballots to win out. However, a people-oriented philosophy focuses on the majority. Consequently, with partial interest parties as political players in the West, elections become political marketing—a game of money, shows and empty talks, populism, and extremism, which leads to the split of society and hinders national development. 

最后一点，无论是对内还是对外，西方部分利益党模式所遵循的原则都叫“分而治之”（divide and rule）。对内就是身份政治，少数主义和多数主义之间，伊斯兰教徒和基督教教徒之间，同性恋者和反同性恋者之间，堕胎者和反堕胎者之间等等，结果造成矛盾重重，互不退让，激烈对抗。对外在国际上，西方总是拉一派打一派，挑拨离间，挑动颜色革命，输出民主结果变成了输出动乱乃至战争。

Finally, whether on domestic or international affairs, some partial interest parties in the West follow the principle of divide and rule. Identity politics is applied to domestic affairs, intensifying unresolvable conflicts between the minority and the majority, Muslims and Christians, homosexuals and homophobes, abortionists and anti-abortionists, and the list goes on. Internationally, the West plays one side against another and provokes color revolutions—it claims to promote democracy but brings turbulences and even wars.  

中国的做法完全不一样，我们是整体利益党的做法，这源于中国自己文明的传统和中国式现代化的成功经验，如果西方是divide and rule“分而治之”，中国的做法就是unite and prosper“合而富之”。我们鼓励所有的国家要团结，全世界要团结，拉丁美洲要团结，中东要团结，非洲要团结，东南亚要团结，欧盟也要团结。这和西方的做法是完全不一样的。我们现在推动“一带一路”倡议，它的黄金原则是共商、共建、共享，也反映了“合而富之”的原则。

China, led by a holistic interest party model, has an entirely different approach. Our methods originate from our time-honored traditions and successful experiences in modernization. While the West practices “divide and rule”, China’s approach is “unite and prosper”. We encourage all countries to unite: countries in Latin America, in East Asia, in Africa, in Southeast Asia, and in the EU. We are promoting the Belt and Road Initiative, the golden principle of which is consultation, contribution and sharing—a display of our principle of “unite and prosper”.

不久前，我接受《今日俄罗斯》记者的采访，谈到对俄罗斯的制裁，我说俄罗斯被西方孤立了，但西方被非西方世界孤立了。非西方世界几乎没有国家参与对俄罗斯的制裁，也就是说非西方国家都认为我们应该unite and prosper，合而富之、团结富强。在今天这个历史十字路口，我想起了1945年我们抗战胜利在望，当时毛泽东主席在中国共产党第七次全国代表大会上提出非常重要的命题，就是“两个中国之命运”：“光明的中国之命运和黑暗的中国之命运”。后来证明毛主席的这篇讲话和这个思路，决定了中国选择光明的命运。

Not long ago, I was interviewed by a journalist from Russia Today about the sanctions against Russia. I said while Russia is isolated by the West, the West is also isolated by the non-Western world. Almost no countries in the non-Western world are involved in sanctions against Russia, which means that non-Western countries all think that we should unite and prosper. Today, at this historical crossroad, I recall the year of 1945 when we were on the verge of victory in the War of Resistance against Japan. At that time, Chairman Mao Zedong put forward a very important proposition at the 7th National Congress of the Communist Party of China, which was China’s two possible fates, namely the bright future and the dark one. Later, it was proved that Chairman Mao’s remarks and his idea directed China’s choice of a bright future. 

今天某种意义上，这个世界上也处在这么一个十字路口，我们面临的是两种世界之命运。一种是美国为代表的，我觉得没有前途的世界，一定是以邻为壑，零和游戏，充满战争动乱的世界，目的是保护巩固西方的既得利益；另一个就是中国式现代化所代表的整体利益，这种合而富之、团结繁荣的世界。所以，我觉得中国和世界各国，特别是非西方世界和西方有识之士，应该共同追求更加光明的世界。

In a sense, the world is also at a crossroad today, facing the fate of two different worlds. One is represented by the United States, which I believe has no future. It is a world of benefiting oneself at others' expense, of zero-sum games, of wars and turbulences, and a world protects and enforces the West’s interest at others’ expense; the other is exemplified by China’s modernization, which represents our holistic interests. It is a world of shared prosperity and unity. Therefore, I think China and all countries in the world, especially the non-Western world and educated people in the West, should work together to pursue a brighter world.