美國發展模式(華盛頓共識) vs. 中國發展模式(「北京共識」)(下)

美國發展模式(華盛頓共識) vs. 中國發展模式(「北京共識」)(下)
---本文篇幅不短，請不習慣閱讀英文的鄉親跳過英文的章節或段落。
三


「華爾街日報」先前登載了一篇很重要的文章，我們現在把它轉貼出來:

"What Samuel Huntington Knew" (杭廷頓所知道的事)
---The dictators are back. The political scientist saw it coming. (獨裁者們回來了，杭廷頓看到此事正在發生或將要發生)

by Bret Stephens
Wall Street Journal
4/22/2014

What would happen," Samuel Huntington once wondered, if the American model no longer embodied strength and success, no longer seemed to be the winning model?"

The question, when the great Harvard political scientist asked it in 1991, seemed far-fetched. The Cold War was won, the Soviet Union was about to vanish. History was at an end. All over the world, people seemed to want the same things in the same way: democracy, capitalism, free trade, free speech, freedom of conscience, freedom for women.

The day of the dictator is over," George H.W. Bush had said in his 1989 inaugural address. "We know what works: Freedom works. We know what's right: Freedom is right.

Not quite. A quarter-century later, the dictators are back in places where we thought they had been banished. And they're back by popular demand. Egyptian strongman Abdel Fatah al-Sisi will not have to stuff any ballots to get himself elected president next month; he s going to win in a walk. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán presides over the most illiberal government in modern Europe, but he had no trouble winning a third term in elections two weeks ago.

In Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan has spent recent months brutalizing protesters in Istanbul, shutting down judicial inquiries into corruption allegations against his government, and seeking to block Twitter, TWTR -0.84% YouTube and Facebook, FB -0.30% the ultimate emblems of digital freedom. But his AKP party still won resounding victories in key municipal elections last month.

And then there is Russia. In a Journal op-ed Monday, foreign-policy analyst Ilan Berman pointed out that Russia had $51 billion in capital flight in the first quarter of 2014, largely thanks to Vladimir Putin's Crimean caper. That's a lot of money for a country with a GDP roughly equal to that of Italy. The World Bank predicts the Russian economy could shrink by 2% this year. Relations with the West haven't been worse since the days of Yuri Andropov.

But never mind about that. Mr. Putin has a public approval rating of 80%, according to the independent Levada Center. That's up from 65% in early February.

Maybe it's something in the water. Or the culture. Or the religion. Or the educational system. Or the level of economic development. Or the underhanded ways in which authoritarian leaders manipulate media and suppress dissent. The West rarely runs out of explanations for why institutions of freedom presumably fit for all people for all time seem to fit only some people, sometimes.

But maybe there s something else at work. Maybe the West mistook the collapse of communism just one variant of dictatorship as a vindication of liberal democracy. Maybe the West forgot that it needed to justify its legitimacy not only in the language of higher democratic morality. It needed to show that the morality yields benefits: higher growth, lower unemployment, better living.

Has the West been performing well lately? If the average Turk looks to Greece as the nearest example of a Western democracy, does he see much to admire? Did Egyptians have a happy experience of the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood? Should a government in Budapest take economic advice from the finance ministry of France? Did ethnic Russians prosper under a succession of Kiev kleptocrats?

"Sustained inability to provide welfare, prosperity, equity, justice, domestic order, or external security could over time undermine the legitimacy of even democratic governments," Huntington warned. "As the memories of authoritarian failures fade, irritation with democratic failures is likely to increase."

The passage quoted here comes from "The Third Wave," the book Huntington wrote just before his famous essay on the clash of civilizations. The "wave" was a reference to the 30 or so authoritarian states that, between 1974 and 1990, adopted democratic institutions. The two previous waves referred to the rise of mass-suffrage democracy in the 1830s and the post-Wilsonian wave of the 1920s. In each previous case, revolution succumbed to reaction; Weimar gave way to Hitler.

Huntington knew that the third wave, too, would crest, crash and recede. It's happening now. The real question is how hard it will crash, on whom, for how long.

A West that prefers debt-subsidized welfarism over economic growth will not offer much in the way of an attractive model for countries in a hurry to modernize. A West that consistently sacrifices efficiency on the altars of regulation, litigation and political consensus will lose the dynamism that makes the risks inherent in free societies seem worthwhile. A West that shrinks from maintaining global order because doing so is difficult or discomfiting will invite challenges from nimble adversaries willing to take geopolitical gambles.

At some point the momentum will shift back. That, too, is inevitable. The dictators will err; their corruption will become excessive; their cynicism will become transparent to their own rank-and-file. A new democratic wave will begin to build.

Whether that takes five years or 50 depends on what the West does now. Five years is a blip. Fifty is the tragedy of a lifetime.


四


接下來，我們要請台灣與台美鄉親們閱讀「世界日報 」(「聯合報」在北美的姊妹報)的一篇社論，這篇社論提到了老牌英國「經濟學人」雜誌今(2014)年3月1日那一期的封面主題論文「(西方)民主出了什麼錯？」，也提到已物故的杭廷頓(Samuel Huntington)「第三波民主」(The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century)一書 。
 已故的哈佛杭廷頓教授是台灣建州運動極為注意與重視的學者，他生前很多著述被建州運動引述。

「世界日報 」這一篇社論引述杭廷頓在「第三波民主」一書中的一段：「如果不能提供大眾福利，經濟繁榮，國內秩序，外在安全，即使最民主選出的政府，其合法基礎也會逐漸被侵蝕掉。對威權統治失敗的記憶逐漸淡化遺忘，對民主效能失誤的失望會增強。」這一段話真是可圈可點。


「中國模式挑戰美國 ，台灣成敗中美拉鋸」
世界日報社論
04.26.14

歐巴馬總統正在東亞四國訪問，親自推銷美國重返亞洲長期戰略。雖然眼下美國全球霸權地位面臨嚴峻考驗，烏克蘭東部局勢凶險，中東各地僵局無進展，他卻在日本高調承諾美日共同防衛釣魚台，支持日本擴大集體自衛權。歐巴馬放出的強烈信號是，不受其他區域暫時惡化影響而轉移目標，美國仍將定睛於崛起的中國，做為未來長期主要戰略競爭對手。

中國對美國的挑戰是全面性的，不僅在有形的軍事成長、經濟實力、能源需求等，在無形的政經發展模式、治理國家能力和意識形態上，中國也開始挑戰西方的傳統價值。美國想掌握全球長期主導權，必須在軟硬實力兩手都要夠強。

宏觀而言，美國必須長期堅定地在亞洲健在，積極介入亞洲事務，因為亞洲是未來全球經濟最活躍、發展最快速地區，也是決定世界未來的關鍵領域。美國不僅在軍事硬實力上與中國較量對抗，絕不退出，不做老二；美國更要證明，整合環太平洋經濟整體繁榮上，突出科技和文化創造能力，美國仍能主導，不輸給中國。長期的較量，後者甚至比前者更重要。

儘管「中國模式」一黨集權體制下，或許政府更有效率、反應能力更迅捷，可是遠遠未能證明其具可持續性和吸引力。世界主流仍以歐美的民主政治體制為主，只是移植進非西方文化的國度後產生的缺點，大家也有清楚認識。 

老牌英國「經濟學人」雜誌是正宗西方自由民主市場競爭制度的信仰者。3月1日它封面主題卻是「(西方)民主出了什麼錯？」，它指出，自2000年以來，世界各地許多民主體制出現挫敗。有兩項主要原因，一是2007-08年的美歐金融海嘯，二是中國崛起。中國聲稱「中國模式」提供更好效率，減少國家陷入政黨惡鬥，避免政治癱瘓。而西方文明如何和逐步恢復自信的中國文明之間，探索出截長補短、和諧相處的新文明？ 

一百多年來，中華民族仁人志士嚮往西方自由民主，多以實現自由民主為最高目標。可是理想邏輯推演和現實實踐教訓之間，應有更多的反省思考。對此，台灣實施西方民主是中華領土上的寶貴實驗。

台灣從威權政體轉向民主政治的和平過程，是政治學大師杭廷頓「第三波民主」的佼佼者。可是自國會全面改選、總統全民直選以來，台灣歷經政黨輪替，三位總統李登輝、陳水扁和馬英九都是風光上台，初期聲勢極高，權柄集中，不可一世，但到第二任後期，民調直線下跌，剩下幾趴，民怨高升。國民黨和民進黨政黨惡鬥不休，對人民最焦慮恐懼的問題，提不出突破困局解決之道。

最近反服貿顯現的反中、反經濟自由化民意，突然爆發的太陽花學運和核四興廢爭議，都顯示人民對政黨喪失信心，代議制無效，政事陷入癱瘓。台灣人民不免懷念蔣經國威權政府執政時期的政府效能。甚至對照中共30年來，四位領導人有序接班，威權領導創下的經濟成績。

杭廷頓在「第三波民主」一書中警告：「如果不能提供大眾福利，經濟繁榮，國內秩序，外在安全，即使最民主選出的政府，其合法基礎也會逐漸被侵蝕掉。對威權統治失敗的記憶逐漸淡化遺忘，對民主效能失誤的失望會增強。」美國與中國在治理模式上比較軟實力，爭取世人民心之際，台灣成敗是重要的考驗樣本。

台灣人民享有普世價值，自由和人權保障是「中國模式」遠遠不及的。但自由民主的道德優越性和政權的合法性，仍需要人民確實感受到有益民生福祉來支撐強固。中國大陸對台灣民主實驗的正負經驗教訓，極感興趣。

台灣民主必須讓人民對民選的領袖有信心，政府有權威，國家有方向，經濟成長，失業降低，所得增加，才能贏得大陸民心嚮往。台灣介於中、美兩強之間的存在意義，不僅關係東亞地緣戰略，更是中美政治文明融合比較活生生的經驗寶庫，也是較量不同體制優劣的樣板。不幸的是，眼前的進展看來，台灣的民主體制不但未具優勢，反而自我抵銷內耗，正走在不可知未來的十字路口上。


五


我們今天把 一個可以永續經營的民主政治必須具備的基石與條件[文化、經濟與社會條件]列出來，讓有心把台灣打造成一個成熟的、可以永續經營的民主政體的台灣人做為恆久的警惕與持續奮鬥的目標:

(1)一部在憲法位階的人權憲章;
(2)一部設立權力分立與權力制衡(橫向與縱向的制衡)的憲法;
(3)一個獨立審判、可以彰顯公平正義的司法系統(一個具有西方國家所定義的法治系統);
(4)一個中立的文官系統;
(5)國家化的武裝部隊與情治系統;
(6)多元價值與多元文化得以並存的開放社會;
(7)政黨得以輪替的責任政治;
(8)各級政府由定期、普遍與公平的選舉所產生;
(9)擁有必須由民意機關背書的緊急處分機制;
(10)階級可以自由流動的社會;
(11)一個繁榮的經濟體;
(12)依經濟規律運轉而出現週期性的經濟不景氣或蕭條且導致失業率攀升時，社會安全與社會福利制度要積極地介入;
(13)在全球化與自由化的經濟體制中，要對贏者圈之外的輸家或弱勢者給予扶助;
(14)一個可以對奉行mercantilism的威權政體的經濟掠奪加以反制的政治與財經機制以及一部可以對外來的或內部自發的反民主思想與組織加以妥善處理的「民主自衛機制」;
(15) 一個中產階級廣大的、強大的公民社會; 
(16)自由的媒體;
(17)一個由國家預算支撐的、培育公民文化與公民的公立義務教育系統;
(18)一個有適度規範的自由市場經濟與金融體制;
(19)一部可以隨時自我修護、更新、精進與振興以及可以讓兩極化的民意在軌道上論辯與運轉並可以逐漸讓它們妥協與讓步且形成新共識的辯證機制;
(20)一個懂得寬容、妥協與責任的個體主義哲學。

現階段的台灣人與台灣人的領袖們必須: (1)維護我們得來不易的雛形民主與自由。(2)妥善處理最終要埋葬台灣的民主的紅色媒體[如蔡衍明旗下的媒體]]以及背後有中國資金、香港資金及其他資金來源不明的媒體。(3)深化與精進民主，建立法治。(4)促進或鞏固不受中國dominate、併吞、統治、赤化台灣的「台灣自治」與「台灣經濟自主」[「太陽花學運」還必須持續下去，以竟未竟之功]。(5)教育與說服選民，讓他們唾棄那些主張與中國進行任何形式的政治聯合的、最終會埋葬台灣的民主的野心政客或賣台政黨。認同台灣、反中國併吞的台灣住民與台灣人的政黨必須執政，必須有能力實踐「清廉、勤政、愛鄉土」的承諾，必須有能力持續執政。(6)尋求並積極與中國之外的經濟體加強經濟合作、經貿往來與文化交流[讓許文龍與奇美因無法承受中國的壓力而必須發表屈從北京的聲明這類的事件能不再發生，也讓郭台銘與王雪紅之流的「台商」為所謂的「九二共識」背書的醜陋行徑能不再發生]。(7)打造一支能排除中共及許歷農之流的賣台敗類的滲透與顛覆、沒有「大中國意識」、有能力對中國進行「不對稱反擊戰」、有能力在共軍的攻擊下存活與支撐兩個星期以等待美國援軍或美日聯軍到來的武裝部隊。

台灣建州運動發起人周威霖
David C. Chou
Founder, Formosa Statehood Movement
(an organization devoted in current stage to making Taiwan a territorial commonwealth of the United States)