大卫·布鲁克斯（David Brooks）
我总是认为，当我们意识到美国面对危险的外国敌人时，我们会团结到一起。现在我们就有一个敌人：中国。愈发清楚的一点是，中国在经济、技术和认知层面已构成对美国和世界秩序的重大威胁。
而且的的确确，在有关日常政治的电视节目咆哮的表象之下，美国人正开始携手同行。迈克·彭斯（Michael Richard Pence/美国副总统）和伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren/ 国会民主党参议员，已宣布参加2020年总统竞选）谈到中国经济政策时的意见可以听来极为相近。南希·佩洛西（Nancy Pelosi / 国会众议院议长、民主党）和共和党人谈到中国侵犯人权时的意见听来极为相近。保守派和自由派的政策思考者开始讨论如何应对来自中国的挑战时的意见听来极为相近。
过去数十年间，中国实际上已经成为世界事务中的积极力量。北京违反了贸易协定，加剧了地区紧张，这是事实，但中国经济的迅猛成长降低了我们的生活成本，且在世界范围拓展了繁荣。
但眼下，有些事情已经变了。首先，中国的政制没有变得自由化，反而愈发富于攻击性和压迫性。
其次，中国人调整了他们经济上的着力点，因而他们的经济可以直接取代我们的。当局的《中国制造2025》政策试图令中国在价值链上实现升级，并主导航空航天、机器人技术和生物技术之类产业。
据参议院小型企业及创业委员会（Senate Committee onSmall Business and Entrepreneurship）主席马可·鲁比奥（Marco Rubio）刚刚发布的一份报告，过去一年中，中国的人工智能产业增长了67%，所拥有的专利数量已超过美国。有估算表明，中国在量子计算领域的投资超过美国的三十倍。我的同事托马斯·弗里德曼（Thomas L. Friedman/《纽约时报》专栏作者）指出，中国拥有全球第一和第三大无人机生产商，且在面部识别和语音识别技术上远远领先于我们。
假如中国只是展开竞争的话，所有这一切都会很美妙，但不是，中国还在进行技术剽窃。由退休海军上将丹尼斯·布莱尔（Dennis Blair）和前美国驻中国大使洪博培（Jon Huntsman）领衔的一个委员会2017年估计，因中国的知识产权剽窃，美国经济每年损失2250亿美元至6000亿美元。
有些技术剽窃是通过黑客攻击进行。有些是通过壳公司购买技术企业暗中进行，为的是攫取那些技术。有些是纯粹的间谍和流氓行径。中国间或为美国公司开放进入中国市场的渠道，以换取相关技术，随后在消化那些技术之后即关闭那些渠道。这不是竞争，这是取而代之。
第三，北京正试图占领新技术的控制中心。假如中国可以为5G通信设定标准，并主导人工智能和量子计算，那么它就能制订规则，并以我们无法媲美的方式渗透我们的社会和生活的方方面面。
第四，中国的挑战不再只是经济层面的，也是道德层面和认知层面的。中国的挑战是两套价值体系之间的冲突。全球范围内很多人眼下都认为，北京的价值观胜出一筹。
我们一向认为，中国将走上民主化的道路。错了。我们一向认为，中国的政制将变得自由化。错了。我们一向认为，中国人民将起而造反，并加入自由的民主世界。错了。
唐文方发表于《美国事务》的论文令人着迷（唐文方（Wenfang Tang），1982年毕业于北京大学，目前是美国爱荷华大学政治学系教授。他的论文题为“The ‘Surprise’ ofAuthoritarian Resilience in China”，American Affairs Spring 2018 / Volume II, Number 1）。对任何认为我们的制度具备理所当然的优越性的那些人来讲，这篇论文提供了令人惭愧的阅读感受。相较于美国人，中国人更相信他们的政府机构。2008年的一项研究显示，78%的中国人表示，政府回应了他们的需求；而认为政府回应了他们的需求的日本人是33%，韩国人是 21%。相较于美国社会，中国社会拥有多得多的信任和社会资本。唐文方指出，中国位居荷兰之后，拥有世界第二高的社会信任水平。
假如我们没有学会证明我们制度的优越性，假如我们没有改进我们的制度，世界各地的很多人就会说：我将接受他们那一套东西。
一大争议是：我们如何应对？鲁比奥的报告《“中国制造2025”与美国工业的未来》（Made in China2025 and the Future of American Industry）带来的阅读感受令人着迷且难以抗拒：“本报告的核心结论是：美国无法逃避或者躲开有关产业政策的决断。”
奉行自由市场理念的共和党人一向反对产业政策——即政府深度介入以支持关键部门——至死都不悔改。但中国的威胁正在从根本上改变所有人的想法。鲁比奥报告寻求超越自由市场与国家统制主义的截然对立，并找到前进的新办法。
最重大的改变可能关乎美国人的身份。如雷汉·萨拉姆（Reihan Salam——雷汉·萨拉姆生于1979年，美国保守派政治评论员，《国家评论》杂志执行总编。）在《大西洋》杂志所追问的那样，假如中国是与我们对自身的定义对立的“他者”，那么“我们”是谁？假如中国对自由主义国际秩序构成攸关生死的威胁，我们是否有能力改进我们的制度，这样我们就能直面挑战——去投资于人力资本，去改革我们的政府机构，修补我们的社会结构，并让我们的政治体制再度运转起来？
——译文：
How China Brings Us Together
An existential threat for the 21st century.
I’ve always thought Americans would come together when we realized that we faced a dangerous foreign foe. And lo and behold, now we have one: China. It’s become increasingly clear that China is a grave economic, technological and intellectual threat to the United States and the world order.
And sure enough, beneath the TV bluster of daily politics, Americans are beginning to join together. Mike Pence and Elizabeth Warren can sound shockingly similar when talking about China’s economic policy. Nancy Pelosi and Republicans sound shockingly similar when they talk about Chinese human rights abuses. Conservative and liberal policy thinkers can sound shockingly similar when they start talking about how to respond to the challenge from China.
For the past few decades, China has appeared to be a net positive force in world affairs. Sure, Beijing violated trade agreements and escalated regional tensions. But the Chinese economic explosion lowered our cost of living and expanded prosperity worldwide.
But a few things have now changed. First, instead of liberalizing, the Chinese regime has become more aggressive and repressive.
Second, the Chinese have changed their economic focus so that their economy can directly replace ours. The regime’s “Made in China 2025” policy is an attempt to go up the value chain and dominate high-tech industries like aerospace, robotics and biotech.
According to a report just released by Marco Rubio, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, China’s artificial intelligence industry has grown by 67 percent over the past year and has produced more patents than its U.S. counterparts. One estimate suggests China is investing as much as 30 times more capital in quantum computing than the U.S. My colleague Thomas L. Friedman notes that China already has the No. 1 and No. 3 drone manufacturers in the world, and it is way ahead of us on technologies like facial and speech recognition.
All this would be fine if China were simply competing, but it’s not. It’s stealing. A commission led by retired Adm. Dennis Blair and former U.S. ambassador to China Jon Huntsman estimated in 2017 that the annual loss to the U.S. economy from Chinese intellectual property theft was between $225 billion and $600 billion.
Some of the theft is done through hacking. Some of it is done by surreptitiously buying tech firms through shell companies in order to seize the technologies. Some of it is pure espionage and thuggery. Sometimes China offers to give American companies access to its markets in exchange for the technology, and then after China has digested the knowledge it closes off access. This is not competition. This is replacement.
Third, Beijing is trying to seize the controlling centers of the new tech economy. If China can set the standard for 5G communication and dominate artificial intelligence and quantum computing, then it will be able to write the rules and penetrate the fibers of our society and our lives in ways that we cannot match.
Fourth, the Chinese challenge is no longer just economic; it’s moral and intellectual. It’s a clash of two value systems. And many people around the globe now believe that Beijing’s values are better.
We used to think China would democratize. Wrong. We used to think the regime would liberalize. Wrong. We used to think the Chinese people would rise up and join the free democratic world. Wrong.
A fascinating essay by Wenfang Tang in American Affairs makes for humbling reading for anybody who thinks we can take the superiority of our system for granted. Chinese people have more trust in their governing institutions than Americans do. In a 2008 study, 78 percent of Chinese said their government responds to their needs, compared with 33 percent of Japanese and 21 percent of South Koreans. Chinese society has much more trust and social capital than American society. China, Tang notes, has the second-highest level of social trust in the world, after the Netherlands.
If we don’t learn to make the case for our system, if we don’t make our system better, a lot of people everywhere will say: I’ll take what they’re having.
The big debate is: How do we respond? The Rubio report — “Made in China 2025 and the Future of American Industry” — makes for compelling and fascinating reading: “This report’s central conclusion is that the U.S. cannot escape or avoid decisions about industrial policy.”
Free-market Republicans used to fight against industrial policy — heavy government intervention to support key sectors — until their dying breaths. But the Chinese threat is already fundamentally changing thinking across the board. The Rubio report seeks to move beyond the free-market/statist dichotomy and find new ways to proceed.
The biggest change may be to the American identity. As Reihan Salam asks in The Atlantic, if China is the “other” against which we define ourselves, then who are “we”? If China is an existential threat to the liberal international order, do we have the capacity to improve our system so it can face the challenge — to invest in human capital, to reform our institutions, repair the social fabric and make our political system function once again?
——网友
from 新世纪 NewCenturyNet https://2newcenturynet.blogspot.com/2019/02/david-brooks21.html