John Thornton 教授解读中国为何优于美国

教授解读中国为何优于美国

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

约翰·L·桑顿是一位杰出的美国商人，曾任高盛总裁，也是备受尊敬的中美关系专家。他与中国领导人和机构关系密切，在促进中美两大超级大国对话方面发挥了关键作用。除了在企业界取得的成就外，桑顿还曾担任清华大学教授兼主任以及布鲁金斯学会主席，这使他成为全球金融、外交和学术界交汇领域的杰出人物。

我心想，2050年的世界会是什么样子？最乐观的估计是会有100亿人，而现在大约有80亿。所以我们新增了20亿人口，这些人主要来自9个国家，分别是印度、尼日利亚、巴基斯坦、埃塞俄比亚、乌干达、坦桑尼亚、刚果民主共和国、印度尼西亚和美国。所以，实际上，我们将新增20亿贫困人口，主要分布在非洲和中亚地区。与此同时，财富集中度也会进一步恶化。例如，美国和中国目前的GDP占全球的42%。2050年，没有人真正知道具体数字，但应该在50%到60%之间。也就是说，两个国家将拥有世界50%或60%的财富，而贫困人口将增加20亿。现在我们已经知道，在国家内部和国家之间都存在这种不平等会是什么样子。几乎所有你能想到的事情都不好：移民、疾病、恐怖主义、气候。改变等等。所以我看着这一切，我对自己说，如果我们有任何形式的战略规划正在进行，如果你认为在那个我刚才描述的世界里，世界上最强大、最富有的10个国家，随便选5个国家，或者两个国家，这是一个好主意，请举手。谁认为在那个世界里，这两个国家应该把大部分时间花在互相争斗上是个好主意呢？我的意思是，这根本说不通。所以我看着这个世界，我对自己说，等等。现在我的感觉就像我们正走向悬崖。我们在说服自己，这有点像一场不断升级的负面游戏。双方都在说服自己，对方是邪恶的，恶毒的，而且情况越来越糟，他们无法理解。所以我挠了挠头，说：“好吧，现在我们该如何摆脱这个陷阱呢？”摆脱这个陷阱？这一点并不明显，尤其是当你考虑到我刚才提到的Hopster的时候。因为在我看来，我们国家在国内一段时间内都会陷入政治困境。因此，如果我可以称之为现实的话，那么这项任务就会变得更加困难。所以我只希望有两件事会发生。第一，随着时间的推移，其他国家会越来越有力地对美国和中国说，对不起。你们两国之间没有建设性的关系是不可接受的。如果是这样，世界就无法存在，你必须阻止它。嗯，你现在看到一些这样的事情正在发生。其中一件让我感兴趣的事情是，我不想离题，我只想快速地回顾一下。如果你看看俄罗斯和乌克兰的战争，如果你只关注英语媒体，英语传播渠道，它们主导着世界传播渠道，你可能会认为对俄罗斯的制裁基本上是一个好主意，而且基本上是有效的。大多数人都看到了这一点。直到你看到细节，你才会意识到，在54个非洲国家中，支持制裁的国家为零；在32个拉丁美洲国家中，支持制裁的国家为零；在22个中东国家中，支持制裁的国家为零；在48个亚洲国家中，支持制裁的国家有3个，韩国、日本、新加坡、16个太平洋岛国、澳大利亚和新西兰。所以我刚才列举了175个国家，其中5个支持制裁。所以，制裁本质上是美国、西欧和一些美国在亚洲和澳大利亚的盟友。现在，这其中的相关性在于，它确实表明了某种裂痕，这种裂痕你很少听到，而积极的一面或许是，这个问题或许是，所有其他国家随着时间的推移都会对美国和中国说，正如我之前所说，你们之间不能建立良好的关系，这是不可接受的。顺便说一句，中国已经是这些国家最大的贸易伙伴，其中140个是中国。我本周早些时候刚在中国听过嗯，中国人正在使用一种新的、更突出的术语，叫做“中国现代化”。他们决心向世界表明，现代化和西方化并非同义词，现代化在不同国家可以采取不同的形式。我听了外交部长的讲话，他列举的这些内容没有特定的顺序。嗯，中国在过去十年对全球增长的贡献超过了七国集团（G7）所有国家的总和。中国有14亿人口，比所有发达国家的总和还要多。嗯，他们是与140个国家进行贸易的主要贸易国。嗯，中国和东盟之间的贸易额令人惊叹。中国和东盟之间的贸易额超过了美国和欧盟之间的贸易额。所以，当你开始深入研究这些事情时，你会意识到，美国人迟早要接受一个现实。我个人认为，越早理解和接受这一点越好，两国关系必须改善，因为如果两国关系不改善，那么我所做的一切我说的是2050年，更不用说2070年或2100年，简直就是悬崖勒马。约翰·克里告诉我，我记得是在2013年。他当时是奥巴马因各种原因未能出席的一次国际会议的美国高级官员。所以，他就是与习近平会面的人。习近平在那次会面中对约翰·克里说：“顺便说一下，我想跟你说说我正在考虑的事情。” 克里提出了“一带一路”倡议。凯莉对他说：“这很有意思。我们为什么不一起做呢？” 习近平说：“这是一个好主意。我们一起做吧。”凯莉回到华盛顿后，

他说在他下飞机前，

财政部官员已经把他的腿砍断了，

而且根本不可能

发生这种事。所以这件事从未送到奥巴马的办公桌上，

作为一个战略问题。但我

告诉你这个故事是因为，如果你

读到今天对

“一钟一路”的描述，你会认为这是某种

中国为了控制世界而采取的恶意手段。

但事实并非如此。它正是

人们所说的，就是

将一种发展模式推广到尽可能多的国家，

这些国家迫切需要这种模式。我之前谈到中国现代化的时候，

我参加了上周一的会议。

所以，中国的现代化，我就不详细说了，但它基本上有五个核心特征。其一是和平的世界，其二是共同繁荣，其三是人与自然和谐相处。所以，外交部长说经历了整件事，然后我们五个人被要求对此发表评论，我在评论中说，

听着，我们这些做过任何事的人都知道，计划是一回事，执行是另一回事，执行才是最重要的。所以我给你们中国人的建议是，

如果你们要坚持相信这些事情，我的意思是，谁会反对这些事情呢？

谁会反对世界和平？谁会反对人与自然的和谐？谁会反对共同繁荣？在座的十个人中，没有一个人会反对这些事情。所以这不是问题所在。问题在于，你们

真的会说到做到吗？如果你不做到，你就会遭受和美国一样的负面反击，

当他们被视为虚伪时。所以这是第一点，第二点，也是极其重要的一点，

我想向你们所有人强调，也就是我向中国人强调的，

石头炸在脸上。我第一次在中国待了很长时间，但没有成功。当时我担任高盛亚洲区董事长，时间是90年代中期到2000年。当时，中国体制才刚刚开始开放，他们才刚刚开始将国有企业打入西方市场。祖兰当时是总理或副总理，后来又当了总理。他是一位非常不寻常的人，他非常关心如何做好这件事。我碰巧在场，而且我的资历很高，所以我在恰当的时机，恰好在恰当的地点，以一种可能永远不会再发生的方式向他提供建议，因为中国人非常需要这种建议。但有一点让我印象深刻，那就是中国领导人在几乎所有话题上都保持着系统性的开放态度，不是每个话题，而是几乎每个话题，他们都从这样一个前提出发：世界上肯定有人比我们更了解这个话题。让我们把

那个人带到北京，让我们耗尽他的

大脑，让我们研究一下他说了什么，看看

这是否适用于我们，根据我们的情况进行改进和定制，然后执行。他们一次又一次地这样做，这就是为什么你，为什么你

在那些日子里，你会我见过约翰·齐曼和习近平定期与西方CEO、西方杰出学者、诺贝尔奖获得者等等会面，以及西方国家科学战略的负责人。他们定期与他们进行一对一的会面，因为他们知道他们从那些并非为他们工作的人那里获得了非常高质量的信息，而好的信息却反过来传回来了。这种情况几年前就开始停止了。那是另一个话题。好吧，我们到了。当今世界的权力格局不应该被定义为中美之间的霸权竞争。相反，我们正见证着从单一文明主宰全球到多元文明共同繁荣的转变。中国开启的不是中国世纪，而是一个多元文明的世纪。一个新时代，

将不再存在单一的文明霸权。而这正是

中国人的看法。正如乔·拜登所说，

这是一个民主对抗专制的世纪。

其中一些更有趣。更聪明的中国人会说：“不，不，这是官僚体制与精英体制的对决。”这涉及到中国共产党。中国共产党。思考这个问题的最佳方式是，中国共产党本质上是精英统治的政党，就像你回顾中国历史，你会发现，先有一位皇帝，然后是那种官僚阶层，统治着国家。现在的情况就是这样。如果你能力不够，你就进不了中国共产党。如果你能力不够，你就进不了钦努瓦大学。你知道吗，每年有1000万孩子参加国家考试，去上大学。其中前3000名进入钦努瓦大学，3000人被录取，3000人继续读大学。所以，钦努瓦大学占据了国家领导层的50%。所以，存在了2000年的应试教育文化仍然存在。本质上，这就是驱动所有教育投入的动力。这些机构，用通俗的话来说，如果你能达到中国体制的顶层，你不可能不聪明能干。在我看来，这个国家唯一像中国共产党的机构就是美国军队。当我告诉他们这一点时，他们会抓狂。这个国家唯一像中国共产党的机构就是美国军队。也就是说，如果你和我18岁，我们一起去西点军校，我们参军，一直待在军队里。有一天，我们成了四星上将。我们彼此认识了40年，你知道吗？我们坐在同一张桌子旁。这就是中国的体制。所以，他们彼此非常了解。他们有真正的工作。他们失败或成功。如果他们成功了，他们就会继续前进。如果他们失败了，他们就会失败。就像所有大型组织一样，当然，也存在着大量的粗暴司法和内斗。所有这些事情都发生在美国和其他任何地方的每个公司里。但这基本上就是

体制。所以我认为“共产主义”这个词

在某种程度上会影响到

美国人的思维方式，让他们无法理解自己正在面对的是什么。嗯，这不是共产主义体制。

但这并不意味着他们在谈论共同富裕时没有

例如，你可能会说这相当于试图解决我们经常讨论的收入不平等问题。但前几天，另一个中国人对我说，

资本主义制度本质上是一个分而治之的制度，而中国的现代化是一个统一的制度。所以习近平回到他身边，他决心要实现共同富裕，尽管他们还没有想出如何做到这一点。他们为使8亿人摆脱贫困而感到自豪，这是历史上最大的脱贫目标。他们为此感到自豪，他们认为这些人应该继续进步，而贫富之间的巨大差距实在太大了。嗯，嗯，而且这就是为什么你看到他现在对其中一些采取严厉措施

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