Go homepage(回首页)
Upload pictures (上传图片)
Write articles (发文字帖)

The author:(作者)aaa
published in(发表于) 2013/12/12 9:30:08
Song Luzheng: China creates a new system in civilization

Song Luzheng: China creates a new system in civilization _ | | System | Song Luzheng news

Since the founding of new China in 1949, at the demand of the times and under the premise of lessons, in power transmission, supervision and restriction system with Chinese characteristics has been formed. This difference, and is currently mired in economic crisis, Western and stimulating contrasts of revolutionary upheaval in the Arab world. A good functioning of the system, not only to achieve flexibility, and continuity. Western models for flexibility, but the lack of continuity and often radical changes occurred with the establishment of the new Government. There is continuity in the Arab world, but the lack of flexibility, and rigid system to. Only the Chinese regime while preserving continuity, insisting that flexibility, continuity and flexibility of uniformity.


  First, the advantages of China's political system


Effective mechanism of training and selecting talent. One advantage the Chinese system is, in capacity-building for national selection, based on long-term training and experience, age limit, consequent upon the election of the Executive and legislative bodies on a regular basis. As our new leader, President and Chancellor, for example, they have lived for more than 20 years of serving grass-roots test 5 years ago and entered the supreme power centre, Member of the Standing Committee. Knows everything about circumstances, situation, public sentiments, so you can immediately carry out targeted policy, no Western leaders of at least six months of familiarization phase, which is often on the Western so-called honeymoon period. This is essentially public patience over the political figures familiar with the situation.


Contrary in a costly, generated through mass vote leaders of the Western, more often than not the first. Factors of influencing elections many, such as religious beliefs, gender, race, image, whether for show and lecture, such as whether you have enough money to support, but most important has been marginalized. Like Obama, only political experience is that State and federal Senators, even the Mayor of the day are done, can be said to have no administrative experience, and turned out to be selected to run the entire country. If you were in China, one has no grass-root or administrative experience of the CPPCC deputies overnight to become China's Supreme Leader, will handle?


Chinese window period there are no Western-style constitutional Government. Should there be a change in the West or to change the party, leaders need to wait a few months after the inauguration of the new administration. United States was nearly two months, Korea is nearly three months. Some countries with parliamentary systems, if the election is disputed or if no one party to dominate, it is usually the term unable to form a Government. Germany federal parliamentary elections of 2005, consisting of more than two months to Merkel's new Cabinet. Belgium general elections up to 541 days in "anarchy". Collectively as the national power when idling at this stage. However, in a rapidly changing era of globalization, long idle period, price clearly too high.


East and West are all from the national selection of talent, but for institutional reasons, the West cannot be used from the national level talent.


Due to the existence of different political parties in the West, the whole country was cut into several parts by party political talents, and with the party to stick together. One party wins, even if the administrative officer has the ability, all Exchange transfusion. Talent shortages caused on the one hand, on the other hand result in waste of talent again, causing non-continuity of policy. After all, the political elite is also a scarce resource, a synthesis of outstanding political talent in a variety of factors, and the political elite also has its natural life. A political party for re-election for eight years, which means that a different party political elite is idle for eight years. This is why the United Kingdom after the death of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, when will call again later in the West as a whole. China's one-party rule, multi-party politics, is the total absence of Western institutional shortcomings.


Overall, from an empirical perspective, Western election this way leader, or failed to elect the best people, either no one is optional. Even occasional responsible leaders of courage, the courage to face the reality and focus on the long term, also tended to be elected democratically elected to step down. So from a practical political experience, layer-by-layer selection system in China, conscious personnel training system, rather than elected leaders of the Western-style models.


Political independence and have final decision-making authority. 2013 session, conducted most of the system reform in China. Known as the "tie laoda," said Ministry of railways had ceased to exist. Mor, for historical reasons, which have decisive influence on the national economy, in 2003 and 2008 tried to split, but failed in various resistance has always been thought to be an administrative reform of "old". But again and again the second does not, the Ministry still eventually become the object of the reform, following the completion of its historic mission into history.


Coincidentally, the re-election of United States President Barack Obama, also tried to address United States long-standing problem "control shot". Sandy Ke Hu, Connecticut, December 2012 primary school shooting shocked the United States, causing the deaths of 26 people, including 20 children. Obama's immigration reform and gun control as the two priorities of his second term. The Obama administration has controlled gun Bill has invested enormous energy and political resources. Just two weeks before the vote in the Senate, and Obama personally led a number of Connecticut not only parents of children killed in school shooting case to Washington, lobbying members of Congress involved in, and he made a major compromise: ban on assault guns and large-capacity magazines disappeared from his control of weapon sales programme. Also need mentioning that since the campus after the tragedy, 2,243 people within 98 days did a ghost under the gun.


However, arrived in can't live life the harsh political reality-despite the sangdihuke primary school after the massacre, running around promoting the shooting victims ' families accused of gun Bill of the legislative process, they earnestly: "remember, it's not just politics". Eventually, the anti-gun Bill already discounted stillborn. United Kingdom the guardian investigation reported that the Senator voted, only three people who did not receive the shooting Association of the money. Of course more important reason is that congressional elections coming up. Advantages of Clinton Democrats control the House and Senate that year, passed a bill on controlling gun, resulting in midterm elections, national gun Association helped Republicans reverse WINS. Lesson! Which Member is chilling.


China successfully into the reform of railways tracks, United States outright. The root cause lies in the fact that compared with Western and Chinese system very distinctive feature is to have maintained political independence and ultimate decision-making power.


In the West, people, capital and power game final result of three forces are characterized by universal suffrage and democratic system. Popular by votes gained control of political power, and result in high costs for the capital provided for universal suffrage affected the political space. At this point, political power becomes weak, dominated the Western States civil rights and the power of capital, in fact, results from this model runs not only led to the United States caused by the global economic crisis--the subprime crisis is that people have financial consortia enabling more persevering in reform and political figures have been eliminated in the crisis.


On Chinese traditional politics is strong in an independent State. Today, China's political independence of the State remains unchanged. Now China, increasingly fierce game of three kinds of power, but at least at the national level, political power still has the final decision. So, some very difficult decisions, in line with the long-term interest of the State decisions, and to be able to perform.


At least from a practical point of view, a profit-focused, capital-led regime, in pursuit of the welfare-led system for the core audience, which rationality and effectiveness is much lower than the relative neutrality of political power led system. This is why, on April 30 this year in France play and raised much earlier France attention, Jean-Michel-Caleb documentaries filmed in China, the new empire, to make such a conclusion: "in the West, the financiers who control political power, in China, China is controlled by the State company and banking systems, and energy".


Power efficient, powerful learning capacity and error correction capabilities. Inefficiency has always believed that is a common problem in a Western style democracy. Because any decision would have to go through a different interest group game, accompanied by lengthy procedures. Its advantages can in theory was supposed to avoid huge mistakes. However, from a practical point of view, was not only have the disadvantages of low efficiency, its final decision due to the compromise of different interest groups, whose negative effects tend to become dominant. As the announced not participate in November 2010 election and shock United States politics of Democrats Senator Evan-Bayh in times under published of entitled why left Senate under of long articles in the by said of: "settlement financial deficit and trade deficit, and save economic, and energy policy, and medical insurance reform, relates to national future of emergency topics mountain, but Congress is is (what work are cannot do of) paralyzed State. "Congress cannot work, the biggest reason is" tough stiff factionalism and not a hint of compromise ". He also noted that during his 12 years as Senator, and United States members of Congress to put aside partisanship, in the United States within the framework of the unity of experience only in 2001


Once in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks. That is why the United States separation system could not prevent the invasion of Iraq, there is no way to prevent the outbreak of the global economic crisis, was unable to prevent the Supreme Court cancel has been in existence for more than 100 years the Consortium top limit the amount of political contributions.


After the outbreak of the economic crisis, however, even if amended, will not eliminate its consequences, much less return to the pre-crisis status. For now, deeper crisis is such a system also hindered the generation and application of new technology. For example, in the current era of growing shortages of energy, United States California, a company that makes solar-powered bus, in the United States has repeatedly rebuffed. Because it involves the interests of traditional car industry and energy companies, there are the interests of trade unions, which all have powerful lobbying groups. Later, the company decided to come to China and try their luck, but accepted by the Guangzhou Municipal Government, and quickly replaced. Barack Obama early on decided to follow China's example development of high-speed rail, still cuntie results up to now has not been built. Planning the first short-line rail in Florida though bear most of the costs by the Federal Government (a total of $ 2.6 billion, the federal pay 2.4 billion), but because of opposition from Highway and aviation interest groups, finally got out of control. And it also accused Obama's intention of vote buying (Florida is a swing state, mostly independent voters along the rail). Was eventually approved by the California high speed rail, demonstration (real is the interest group game theory) for more than 8 years, and construction period is 20 years. High speed rail project as a well-established technology, it is difficult to understand exactly what issues need justification for 8 years, needs development for almost 20 years. In today's changing technology, I'm afraid until the completion date has technology eliminated when. Apparently, one was not abducted by the Consortium and influencing government decisions can only be made more neutral and reason.


And that's why the New York Times columnist, tuomasi·feilideman, in his new book, hot, flat and crowded, the world has turned out to be the title of the chapter as follows: If the United States can do in China. For example, he said: "if necessary, China's leaders can change the rules and regulations, standards, and infrastructure in order to maintain the long-term strategic interests of the State. If these topics discussed and implemented in Western countries, I am afraid that take years and even decades to complete. "Finally, he sighed:" I hope the United States can do one day China (just one day)-on this day, we can make all the right laws and regulations, as well as all standards in favour of clean energy systems. Once a superior Decree, we have overcome the worst of democracy on some (hard to make big decisions quickly). If we could do one day how good China...... "just one day! Just one day!


Relative to the West, China is a more responsible Government. Beijing comes, tends to set in the West with "absolute power and absolute corruption" rhetoric. This is ideological assumptions are incompatible with current political practice (certificate of serious corruption in many democratic countries is an example). And more important point is that the West did not recognize "the absolute power also tends to mean that absolute liability". In Western countries, a problem in case anything went wrong. The ruling party said opposition parties do not cooperate (such as Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party era), after the opposition party became the ruling party, Buck was caused by the former. Not only that, but project term across political parties, tend to be sacrificed first. President Obama's 2011 budget submitted to Congress, one is by taking a small Bush-era Lunar program. The Lunar program has cost $ 9.1 billion, more than 60 billion yuan, the project uncompleted. However, it is strange, but no one is responsible for so much loss.


In Western societies, many officials are selected, thus the term of protection. If not illegal, making mistakes, or omissions, and does not affect the term of Office. And once the term is up, stepped down, is what's the problem, nor will be held liable. Bush launch Iraq war was to hold it? Creates the global economic crisis, politicians be held accountable? Up to $ 50 billion (more than 300 billion yuan), the decades madoff fraud case, officials be held accountable? While in China, the accountability system for senior officials is increasingly improving, officials of incompetence or negligence, mistakes will always be accountable.


As Western politicians are elected, to cater to the population and long-term interests of countries interested in violation of such irresponsible things. Today in France, for example. Because of the debt-laden, the Government's largest expenditure is huge interest on the debt, equivalent to annual funding for education. Originally, the left-wing advocate an increase in benefits and increases in taxes, rightist advocated reducing welfare and reducing taxes. In the case of one political party to another is the norm, will strike the right balance. However, leftists came to power only after increased benefits, the right wing took office only to reduce taxes, was the last natural country into bankruptcy--2007 stand at Fei Yong, the Prime Minister of breaking taboos, openly acknowledged financial went bankrupt. France President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2012 before re-election, has ordered every company employee bonus 1000 euros, during the election period shall not be more strictly after any business conference or bankruptcy. Under the political parties in power, seriously undermined France's competitiveness. Such competitive harm, not a Word can make.


During the transition period of China to effectively curb corruption. Corruption is rigid in Western corruption, corruption, corruption in China is human nature. Western democracy, there must be elections, and elections must be rich. Politicians had accepted the Consortium's support after winning points, we need to reward. This is the rigid principles of democracy corruption. In China, the officials appointed under the influence of many factors, assessment of ability to work, and people, human relations and bribery, and so on, but such spending and weapons needed for the election compared to the costs out of all proportion, and the Consortium has no direct relationship. Upon taking office were related to corruption of the main human nature of greed, income is not high, and regulatory oversight is not perfect is the external cause. But from an objective and did not have to be rigid original rights to money transactions from the corruption.


Of course, corruption in China compared with other countries at the same stage of development can be more effectively curbed, most important reason lies in the existing system, the ability to fight. Ukraine former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko has said: "I sometimes envy China. As you know, in China, the death penalty will be cut off the hand of corruption and corrupt officials, all this is needed. And we, as European countries, though sometimes also feel itchy, but impossible to implement such a penalty. "Due to the restriction of the stage of economic development, could not meet the standards of the developed Western countries are now, but in the period of social transformation in a given space and time, can be said to be the most acceptable results. Clean Hong Kong ranked second in Asia to know names, the 70 's of the last century is a totally separate look quite different. Due to corruption is too great, the then British Hong Kong Government had to set up the ICAC to fight, the result has thrown Hong Kong police riot, will be occupied by the ICAC. The degree of corruption can be gauged.


The effective containment of corruption, according to three Western experience. One is economic development, high salary, establish and improve the supervision system of banks. Second is to improve the rule of law. Third is the right trade legalized. We can look at the global and most corrupt countries are among the poorest countries, and do, clean and rich countries. Familiarity is considered democratic by Western countries of Singapore, corruption ranked first in Asia, the world's fifth. Corruption ranks second in Asia is Hong Kong, China. By coincidence, both of a Chinese society. Therefore, China's economic development to the level of medium-developed countries, under the premise of rigid one-party system there is no corruption, is also at or near Singapore which is the world's leading standard of integrity. Source: red flag presentation

December 11, 2013 People's daily online
(
宋鲁郑:中国创造新的制度文明|中国|制度|宋鲁郑_新闻资讯

  新中国1949年成立以来,在时代需求和吸取经验教训的前提下,在权力传接、监督和制约方面形成了中国特色的制度模式。这种特色,与目前深陷经济危机的西方和激发革命动荡的阿拉伯世界形成了鲜明对比。一个制度要想良好运转,不仅要做到灵活性,还要做到延续性。西方的制度模式有灵活性,但缺乏延续性,往往随着新政府的建立而出现大幅度的改变。而阿拉伯世界有连续性,但缺乏灵活性,最后制度走向僵化。只有中国制度既保持了连续性,又坚持了灵活性,做到了连续性和灵活性的统一。


  一、中国政治制度的优势


  有效的人才培养和选拔机制。中国的制度优势之一是,建立在能力为基础之上的全国性选拔、长期培养和历练、年龄的限制、定期的更替、行政和立法机构的差额选举。以新一届领导人国家主席和总理为例,他们均经历过长达20年左右的基层任职考验,并在5年前进入最高权力中心中央政治局常委。对国情、政情、民情了如指掌,所以可以立即开展针对性地施政,根本没有西方新领导人至少长达半年的熟悉情况的阶段,也就是西方常说的所谓蜜月期。这实质上就是民众对政治人物熟悉情况的忍耐期罢了。


  相反在耗资巨大、通过大众投票方式产生领导人的西方,能力往往不是第一位的。影响选举的因素众多,如宗教信仰、性别、 种族、形象、是否会作秀和演讲、是否有足够的金钱支持等,但最重要的能力却被边缘化。像奥巴马,唯一的从政经历是州和联邦的参议员,连一天的市长都没有做过,可以说没有丝毫的行政经验,结果却被选出来管理整个国家。假如在中国,一位没有任何基层行政经验的政协委员或者人大代表一夜之间就成为中国的最高领导人,可否胜任?


  中国还不存在西方式的宪政空窗期。在西方假如出现换人或换党,新的领导者必须等上数月就职后才能展开施政。美国是近两个月,韩国是近三个月。而一些议会制国家, 假如选举出现争执或者无一党占据优势,则往往长期无法组成政府。比如德国2005年第十六届联邦议会选举,就用了两个多月的时间才组成默克尔新一届内阁。比利时在大选后长达541天处于“无政府状态”。这个阶段可合称国家权力交接时的空转期。可是在一个瞬息万变的全球化时代,这样长的空转期,代价显然过于高昂。


  东西方虽然都是从全国选拔人才,但由于制度原因,西方却不能从全国的层面使用人才。


  西方由于不同政党的存在,整个国家的政治人才被政党切割成几个部分,并随政党共进退。一党获胜,哪怕原来的政务官再有能力,也统统大换血。这一方面造成人才的短缺,另一方面则又造成人才的浪费,更造成政策的非连续性。毕竟政治精英也是稀缺资源,一个杰出政治人才的产生也是多种因素合成的,而政治精英也有其自然寿命。一个政党连任八年,也就意味着另一个政党的政治精英闲置八年。这也是为什么英国前首相撒切尔夫人去世后,整个西方都在呼唤何时才能再有后来者。而中国一党执政,多党参政,则完全不存在西方这种体制性弊端。


  整体而言,从实证的角度看,西方选举这种方式产生的领导人,要么无法选出最优秀的人才,要么无人才可选。即使偶尔出现负责任有魄力、敢于正视现实和注重长远的领导人,也往往被选民选下台。所以从现实政治实践看,中国的层层选拔制,有意识的人才培养体系,要胜于西方式的选举产生领导人的模式。


  政治保持独立并拥有最终的决策权。2013年人代会,中国进行了大部制改革。素有“铁老大”之称的铁道部不复存在了。铁道部由于历史的原因,其对国民经济具有举足轻重的影响,2003年和2008年也曾试图对之进行拆分,但在种种阻力下未果,一向被外界认为是行政改革的“老大难”。但再一再二不再三,铁道部最终仍然成为改革的对象,在完成其历史使命后走进历史。


  无独有偶,连任的美国总统奥巴马,也试图解决美国的老大难问题“控枪”。2012年12月康涅狄格州桑迪胡可小学发生震惊全美的枪击案,造成包括20名幼童在内26人死亡。奥巴马于是把控枪与移民改革定为其第二任期的两大施政重点。之后,奥巴马为控枪法案投入了巨大的精力和政治资源。就在参议院投票前两周,奥巴马不仅亲自带领数名康州校园枪击案遇难儿童家长来华盛顿,参与对国会议员的游说工作,而且他还做了重大的妥协:禁止攻击性枪支与大容量弹夹销售就从他的控枪方案中消失了。还需要一提的是,自从这次校园悲剧之后,98天内又有2243人做了枪下冤魂。


  然而,鲜活的生命抵不住严酷的政治现实——尽管桑迪胡可小学惨案发生后,枪击案受害者家属四处奔走推动控枪法案立法进程,他们言辞恳切:“记住,这不仅仅是政治”。最终,这个已经打了折扣的禁枪法案胎死腹中。据英国《卫报》调查报道,投反对票的参议员中,只有三个人没有收枪击协会的钱。当然更重要的原因是,国会选举又快要到了。当年克林顿利用民主党控制参众两院的优势,曾通过一个控枪法案,结果中期选举,全美持枪协会帮助共和党逆转胜。前车之鉴!哪个议员不心寒。


  中国成功把铁道部纳入改革轨道,美国却再走麦城。根本原因就在于,和西方相比,中国的体制很鲜明的特点是一直保持了政治的独立性和最终的决策权。


  在西方,民众、资本和权力三种力量博弈的最后结果是以普选为特征的民主制度。民众通过选票获得了对政治的控制权,而普选导致的高成本又为资本提供了影响政治的空间。至此,政治权力成为弱势,民权和资本的权力事实上主导了西方各国,这种模式运行的结果不仅仅是导致了美国引发的全球经济危机——次贷危机就是要百姓有房,金融财团有利,更令危机中坚持改革的政治人物被淘汰。


  中国传统上政治都是强势处于独立状态的。到今天,中国政治独立性的状态依然如故。目前的中国,虽然三种权力的博弈日益激烈,但至少在全国一级,政治权力仍然有最终的决定权。所以,一些很困难的决策、符合国家长远利益的决策,都能够执行。


  至少从现实角度看,一个以追求利润为核心的、资本主导的制度,一个以追求福利为核心的民众主导的制度,其合理性、有效性要远远低于相对中立的政治权力主导的制度。这也是为什么,今年4月30日在法国播放并早早就引发法国关注、让-米歇尔-卡雷拍摄的纪录片《中国,新帝国》,提出这样的结论: “在西方,是金融家们掌控政权,在中国不同,中国是由国家控制大公司和银行系统以及能源”。


  执政高效、强大的学习能力和纠错能力。低效率一向认为是西方民主制度的通病。因为任何一项决策都要经过不同利益集团的博弈,并伴随冗长的程序。其优点理论上曾被认为可以避免巨大的失误。然而,从现实层面来看,却是不仅有低效率带来的弊端,其最终决策由于不同利益集团的相互妥协,其负面作用往往成为主导。正如宣布不参加2010年 11月选举而震撼美国政坛的民主党参议员埃文-贝赫在《纽约时报》发表的题为《为何离开参议院》的长篇文章中所说的:“解决财政赤字和贸易逆差、挽救经济、能源政策、医疗保险改革等关乎国家未来的紧急课题堆积如山,但国会却处于(什么工作都不能做的)瘫痪状态。”而国会不能工作的最大原因则是“顽固的党派主义和不知妥协的僵硬思想”。他还指出在担任参议员的12年里,美国国会成员抛开党派之争,在美国这个大框架内团结一心的经历只是在2001年9.11


  恐怖袭击事件发生后出现过一次。这就是为什么美国的三权分立制度无法阻止入侵伊拉克,也没有办法防范全球经济危机的爆发,也无法阻止最高法院取消已经实行了100多年的对财团政治捐款的顶额限制。


  然而经济危机爆发后,即使进行修正,也无法消除其后果,更无法回到危机前的状态。目前来看,更深层的危机是这种制度也阻碍新科技的产生和应用。比如在当前能源日趋短缺的时代,美国加州一家制造太阳能公交车的公司,在美国屡屡碰壁。因为这涉及传统汽车行业以及能源公司的利益, 还有工会的利益,它们各个都有强大的游说集团。后来这家公司决定到中国来试试运气,却被广州市政府所接受,并迅速更换。奥巴马上任伊始就决定以中国为榜样发展高铁,结果到现在依然寸铁未建。在佛罗里达州规划的第一条短线高铁,尽管是由联邦政府承担大部分费用(一共26亿美元,联邦承担24亿),但由于高速公路和航空利益集团的反对,最终化为泡影。而且这个项目还被指责是奥巴马意图收买选票(佛州是摇摆州,高铁沿线多为独立选民)。最终被批复的加州高铁,论证(实是各利益集团博弈)竟然长达8年,而建设周期更是长达20年。高铁作为一个技术相当成熟的项目,实在令人难以理解究竟有什么问题需要论证8年,需要建设20年。在科技日新月异的今天,恐怕等到建成之日,已是技术淘汰之时。显然,一个不被财团绑架和影响的政府才可以作出更中立和理性的决定。


  这也是为什么《纽约时报》专栏作家托马斯·费里德曼在其新书《世界又热又平又挤》有一章的标题竟然是这样的:假如美国能做一天中国。他举例道:“如果需要的话,中国领导人可以改变规章制度、标准、基础设施,以维护国家长期战略发展的利益。这些议题若换在西方国家讨论和执行,恐怕要花几年甚至几十年的时间。”最后他感叹道:“我希望美国能做一天中国(仅仅一天)——在这一天里,我们可以制定所有正确的法律规章,以及一切有利于建立清洁能源系统的标准。一旦上级颁布命令,我们就克服了民主制度最差的部分(难以迅速作出重大决策)。要是我们可以做一天中国有多好……”只是一天!仅仅一天!


  相对于西方,中国是一个更负责任的政府。一谈到中国,西方往往套以“绝对权力,绝对腐败”的说词。这实是意识形态的想当然, 与当今政治实践不符(众多民主国家存在的严重腐败就是证例)。而且更重要的一点是西方没有认识到“绝对权力也往往意味着绝对责任”。在西方国家,出了问题可以推诿。执政党说是在野党不配合(如台湾的民进党时代),在野党成为执政党之后,又推卸责任是前者造成的。不仅如此,对跨越政党任期的项目,往往会首先被牺牲掉。奥巴马总统向国会提交的2011年预算案,其中一款是砍掉了小布什时代的登月计划。而这个登月计划已经耗资91亿美元,合人民币600多亿,这个项目就成了半拉子工程。然而,令人奇怪的是,没有人为这么大的损失而负责。


  在西方社会,许多官员是选上来的,因而有任期保障。只要不违法,决策失误,或者不作为,都不影响任期做满。而且一旦任期到了,下台了,就是有什么问题,也不会再被追究。小布什发动伊拉克战争有人追究吗?制造了席卷全球的经济危机,有政治人物被追究吗? 高达500亿美元(3000多亿人民币)、持续数十年的马多夫诈骗案,有官员被追究吗?而在中国,高官问责制日益完善,官员不称职或者失职,犯错,随时会被追责。


  也正由于西方政治人物是由选举产生的,为了迎合民众而有意做出违反国家长远利益这种不负责任的事情。以今天的法国为例。由于债务累累,政府第一大开支是巨额债务利息,相当于全年的教育经费。本来,左派主张增加福利和增加税收,右派主张减少福利和减少税收。在政党轮替是常态的情况下,自然会取得平衡。然而左派上台后只敢增加福利,右派上台后只敢减少税收,最后自然是国家陷于破产的境地——2007年时任总理的费永就打破禁忌,公开承认财政已经破产。法国前总统萨科奇为了2012年连任,竟然先是下令每个企业给员工分红1000欧元,后更严令任何企业在选举期间不得裁人或者破产。在各个政党如此执政之下,严重地损害了法国的竞争力。这种对竞争力的损害,绝非一言所能尽。


  在转型时期中国对腐败的有效遏制。西方的腐败是刚性腐败,中国的腐败是人性腐败。西方的民主,必须有选举,而选举必须有钱。政治人物接受了财团的支持,获胜后,必然要给予回报。这就是民主制度下腐败的刚性原理。而在中国,官员的任命受诸多因素影响,工作能力、群众测评、人情关系以及贿赂,等等,但这种开支和大规模的选举所需要的费用相比完全不成比例,因此和财团没有直接的关系。他们上任后的腐败主要是和人性的贪婪有关,收入不高和法规监督不完善则是外因。但从客观上并没有必须腐败进行钱权交易的刚性原由。


  当然,中国的腐败之所以相对于其他处于同一发展阶段的国家能够得到更有效的遏制,最重要的原因还在于中国在现行体制下,有能力对之进行打击。乌克兰前总理季莫申科曾说:“我有时羡慕中国。你们知道,在中国,贪官将被斩断腐败之手和实施死刑,这一切是需要的。而我们作为欧洲国家,尽管有时手也感到痒痒,但无法实施这一刑罚。”虽然由于经济发展阶段的制约,无法达到西方发达国家现在的水准,但在社会转型期这一特定时空内,已可算是最可接受的效果了。要知道现在名列亚洲廉洁排名第二的香港,上世纪70年代却是另一番光景。由于腐败过于严重,当时的港英殖民政府不得不成立廉政公署进行打击,结果竟然引发香港警察暴动,将廉政公署占领。其腐败的程度由此可见一斑。


  腐败的有效遏制,根据西方的经验有三条。一是经济发展,可以高薪养廉、建立完善的银行监控体系。二是完善法制。三是钱权交易的合法化。我们可以看一下全球,最腐败的那些国家都是最贫穷的国家,而做到比较廉洁的都是富裕国家。一向不被西方视为民主国家的新加坡,亚洲廉洁度名列第一,全球第五。廉洁度在亚洲名列第二的则是中国香港。极为巧合的是,它们均是华人社会。因此,中国在经济发展到中等发展国家水平,在一党制没有腐败刚性的前提下,也同样会达到或接近新加坡也就是是全球领先的廉政水准。来源:红旗文稿


2013年12月11日10:06
人民网
)


If you have any requirements, please contact webmaster。(如果有什么要求,请联系站长)





QQ:154298438
QQ:417480759