贝淡宁：中国的“贤能政治”为什么符合世情、国情和民情？_风闻

由解读中国工作室与国家创新与发展战略研究会联合策划制作的“读懂中国”TEDx系列演讲，邀请了香港中文大学（深圳）全球与当代中国高等研究院院长郑永年和山东大学政治学与公共管理学院院长贝淡宁担任演讲嘉宾。

两位学者的演讲题目分别是：

郑永年：中国的政治改革停止了吗？

贝淡宁：中国的“贤能政治”为什么符合世情、国情和民情？

今天推出的演讲题为**《中国的“贤能政治”为什么符合世情、国情和民情？》**，演讲者为山东大学政治学与公共管理学院院长贝淡宁。

以下为演讲内容全文。

△贝淡宁演讲现场照片

What I would like to talk about today is what is the single biggest misunderstanding about China? And actually, if you read the Western media, or if you talk to people from the West, whether it’s journalists or intellectuals or academics or political leaders, there’s this kind of standard trope.

今天我要和大家探讨的话题是外界对中国最大的误解是什么。相信大家在平时阅读西方媒体报道或与西方的人士交谈时都会发现，不论是记者、学者、专家、还是政治领导人，他们对中国都抱有这样一种成见。

**西方人对中国存有怎样的误解？****为什么？**What are some common misunderstandings about China, and why?

There’s been lots of economic reform over the past forty years, more market reforms and so on, but no political reform, things have stayed the same politically over the last four decades. Now for those of you who are in China, namely all of you now, know probably that that’s probably a wrong view, there’s been so much change over the past four decades.

他们认为在过去的四十年里中国推出了一系列的经济改革，例如市场经济改革等，但是没有任何政治改革。四十年来政治层面毫无变化。现在，所有生活在中国的人，包括在座的各位都知道，这一观点是错误的。过去的四十年里出现了诸多变化。

Remember the Cultural Revolution, 1966-1976, was a time of chaos. What happened after that? Shortly after the Cultural Revolution, in the late 1970s, China’s political leaders decided that we have to adopt what we can call a political meritocracy, in Chinese, it’s xian neng zheng zhi, and this is the ideal that the political system should aim to select and promote officials with superior ability and virtue. Education matters more for officials, experience, superior performance.

记得在文革时期，也就是1966年到1976年这段时间，中国社会一片混乱。在那以后发生了什么？二十世纪七十年代末，文革结束后不久，中国政治领导者们决定推行贤能政治。这一理念旨在选拔和擢升具有卓越能力和美德的公职人员。对于官员来说变得更为重要的是教育经历、工作经验以及优秀政绩。

And institutionally what this means is we need to have a complex bureaucracy that has the mission of selecting and promoting public officials who have above average ability and virtue. And that is what has happened over the past four decades, there has been a gradual implementation of the ideal of political meritocracy, along with its institutionalisation in the form of a complex bureaucracy that aims to select and promote public officials that serve the public good. It’s an ongoing project.

在体制层面，这意味着中国需要建立一个复杂的政府体制，在擢升官员时会选贤任能。这正是过去四十年里出现的情况。中国正在逐步采用贤能政治这一理念，也在致力建设擢升为民服务的官员的政府体制。这是一个不断推进的事业。

**是什么导致了“中国没有进行政治改革”的误解？**What did result in this misunderstanding?

There is still a big gap between the ideal and the practice, but this is the big difference. Why is it that people in the West have this kind of fundamental misunderstanding about China?

尽管理想和现实之间仍旧存在着不小的差距，但这的确是一种变化。那为什么西方人士会对中国抱有如此之深的成见？

Frankly speaking, because they work with a very simple dichotomy that there are two types of political systems. One is the good democracy, an electoral democracy, where public officials are selected by means of elections. Two, there’s the bad authoritarian regimes, all the rest that use non-electoral means of selecting leaders. So they lump all the different countries together: China, North Korea, family run dictatorships, Egypt, military dictatorships,

坦白说，因为他们一直以来认为世界上只存在两种政治体制。一种是“好”的选举式的民主制度，公职人员通过选举当选。另外一种是“坏”的集权体制，通过非选举的方式选拔官员。因此，他们把与他们不同体制的国家划入一个阵营。中国、朝鲜，世袭独裁统治；埃及，军事独裁。

All of those countries are lumped in the same category. That’s ridiculous. The most obvious difference is that there has been this effort to re-establish and re-implement a strong form of political meritocracy with a complex bureaucracy that serves the people.

所有这些国家被归到同一类下。这是非常荒谬的。最为明显的区别是中国致力于重建和推行一种以“为民服务”的官员制度为基础的贤能制度。

Now, here we are in times of COVID, China has done relatively well at dealing with COVID. Why? Because we have a strong and complex meritocratic system that implements policies that serve the public good.

如今，我们正处于新冠疫情期间。中国的疫情应对做得不错，为什么呢？因为中国拥有强有力的复杂的尚贤制度，能够推行为民服务的政策。

**贤能政治体制为什么适用于中国？**Why does political meritocracy suit China？

**“贤能政治”的定义？**The Definition of “Political Meritocracy”

Political meritocracy is the ideal that everybody should have equal opportunity to be selected and to be promoted as a public official with above average ability and virtue.

贤能政治这一理念指的是大家机会均等，都能有机会因为卓越才能和美德被选拔为公职人员。

So I’m going to argue that there’s been this gradual implementation of a political meritocracy, it’s political reform, right? Political change, yes, political progress since the chaotic days of the Cultural Revolution, and that this political reform should continue to be informed by the ideal of political meritocracy over the next few decades.

因此我在这里提出，贤能政治的逐步推行是一种政治改革，是一种政治层面的进步，特别是文革动荡时期以后。我认为这种政治变革应该在未来几十年里继续以贤能政治这一理念作为指导。

**为什么贤能政治适合中国国情？**Why does political meritocracy suit china the best?

Well, I’m going to give three reasons, and the first has to do with the size of the country. China is a huge country. It’s different than Canada, where I’m from, in terms of population. I mean, relatively speaking in terms of population, Canada is quite small.

有三个原因。第一，国家大小。中国是一个大国。它和我的祖国加拿大在人口方面截然不同。相对而言，加拿大人口数量较小。

Now, what happens in a big country like China? The top leaders, those who are at the top, they make policies that are so complex, think of climate change, or think of foreign policy, it requires a lot of complex empirical information.

中国这个大国现状如何呢？国家领导人们要做出一些复杂的决策。例如气候变化政策、外交政策，这些都需要丰富的理论知识和实践经验。

On climate change, you have to have knowledge of environmental science, you have to have knowledge of economics, you have to have knowledge of international relations. And these policies affect so many different stakeholders, not just the people now, but future generations, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty years from now, and affects the rest of the world.

制定气候变化政策时，他们需要一定的环境科学知识，同时还需具备经济学以及国际关系方面的知识。这些政策会影响到不同的利益攸关方，不仅是现在的人民，还包括子孙后代，和未来的10年、20年，甚至是50年。还会影响到其他国家的人。

Those policies need to be made by public officials who have a good, proven track record, who have political experience, who have informed political judgment, who have superior ability, frankly speaking, who are intelligent and who have a good record of being committed to serving the public good.

制定这些决策的人需要的是那些具有良好的从政记录、丰富的政治经验、准确的政治判断、卓越的政治远见的公职人员。简单来说，就是那些聪明睿智、一心为民的官员。

You can’t randomly select such officials or sometimes leave it to low information voters. They have to have a good, strong record of public experience, of public service, and they have to have education and knowledge that allows them to make informed public judgments.

我们不能随机选拔官员或是把选择权留给那些掌握信息不那么多的选民。选拔出的官员应该具有良好的从政经验、教育背景以及知识储备，从而帮助他们做出正确的政治判断。

Now, it’s different at lower levels of government. I work at Shandong University, it’s actually pretty much in the countryside. I go to local communities, the issues there are much more easier, in some sense, less complex, right? Like how much compensation should we give to farmers who are being expropriated to build a hospital.

基层官员的遴选则有所不同。我在山东大学任教。它位于城郊。我去过当地社区。那些地方的问题较为简单，没有那么复杂，对吧？例如如何给予那些土地被征用修建医院的农民相应的赔偿。

And for that, there’s actually elections whereby the village’s choose their own leaders, and they know who these leaders are, who’s corrupt, who’s not, it doesn’t require a lot of education experience. Elections work very well in that context.

事实上，村民们会进行选举，推选出自己的领导人。他们对那些领导人很熟悉，知道谁腐败，谁清廉。这不需要读过很多书就知道。在那种情况下，选举是一种很好的方式。

In fact, Western political theorists in the past, prior to the twentieth century, were not so, kind of, dogmatic about what counts as a legitimate way of selecting leaders. It’s only after World War II that there’s been this kind of dogmatic consensus in the West that the only way of selecting public officials is by elections. It doesn’t depend on a country’s history, doesn’t depend on a country’s size, doesn’t depend on a country’s national conditions and so on.

实际上，西方的政治理论家们在二十世纪以前对于如何选出合法的领导者并没有那么教条。二战以后，西方社会才开始形成这种教条式的共识，认为遴选官员的唯一途径是选举。它不将国家的历史发展、规模大小或是基本国情纳入考虑范围。

So, in a big country like China, at higher levels of government, it’s much, much more important to have a meritocratic process to select higher level officials. That’s one reason why meritocracy is important, and why it should continue to inform political reform in China.

因此，在中国这样一个大国，高层官员的选拔更为重要的是通过尚贤制度来选拔。这也是贤能政治如此重要的原因，更是中国政治改革需要继续以此理念为指导的原因。

What’s the second reason? The second reason has to do with political culture, with history.

第二个原因，就是历史文化。

What is the dominant political culture of China? It’s political meritocracy. Confucius, Kongzi, over 2500 years ago, he changed the meaning of what it means to be a junzi, or exemplary person. Before him, a junzi is somebody who is basically an aristocrat, you’re there because of your family background, you’re there because of your bloodlines, basically.

中国的主流政治文化是什么？是贤能政治。孔子早在2500多年前已经改变了“君子”的具体含义，已经改变了“君子”的定义。在他以前，君子一般指的是贵族。成为君子的依据是家庭背景和血缘关系。

Confucius says no. To be a junzi, and exemplary person, you have to have above average ability and virtue, and those people should be put in place to serve the community as a public official. Since then, it’s only slight exaggeration that dominant political culture in China has been an argument over how to select and promote officials with above average ability and virtue. Which abilities matter? Which virtues matter? How to assess virtues? How to assess abilities? What’s the relation between abilities and virtues? How to institutionalise political meritocracy?

孔子对此提出了不同的看法。他认为，做一个君子，需要具备卓越的才能和良好的品德。他们应该成为公职人员。自那以后，中国社会的主流政治文化变成了，讨论如何遴选和擢升才德兼备的官员。哪些能力比较重要？哪些德行比较重要？如何评估德行？如何评估能力？才能和品德之间的关系是怎样的？如何实现贤能政治体制化？

贝淡宁认可中国古代的科举制度Bell praises China’s ancient examination system

Basically, the most famous invention in China is the examination system to select public officials. In Imperial China, there was a 1300 year history where public officials were selected first by examinations and then by performance evaluations at lower levels of government. Beautiful idea.

总的来说中国的一大创举是选拔公职人员的考试制度。中国的科举制度具有1300年的历史。官员选拔首先需要通过笔试进行初选，然后还要评估他们在基层政府的工作表现。这个想法很棒。

**中国当下的公务员考试体系如何？**How are the current public servant examinations?

The same idea was implemented, in form, more or less, in the last four decades. The content of the political meritocracy has differed. In the Ming and Qing Dynasty, the examinations tested more for knowledge of the Confucian classics.

在过去40年里，中国差不多也采用了这样的选拔方式。贤能政治在考试内容方面有所不同。在明清时期，科举考试的内容多为四书五经方面的知识。

Now, the examinations to be put on the road to political power, they’re more like high level IQ tests, they’re very, very, very difficult to those of you who have participated in those examinations, and then you have to prove yourself at lower levels of government, in a decades-long process to be selected and promoted at higher levels of government. That’s the dominant political culture of China.

如今的公务员考试更像高级别的智力测试。参加考试的考生们觉得难度非常大。他们还得通过长达数十年的基层政府工作来证明自己的能力，然后才能被提拔到高层政府职位。这是中国的主流政治文化。

If you want to establish a political system that is effective, and that can consolidate for the long term, it has to build on that political culture. And in the past four decades, there’s been this wave, we can call it this wave of political meritocracy, we have to continue to build on that wave and to improve it.

如果我们想要建立一个高效又稳固的政治体系，就需要以这种政治文化为基础。在过去的40年里，中国出现了这样一种贤能政治的浪潮。我们需要继续以这种浪潮为指导并进行优化。

Two reasons why we should continue to have political meritocracy: one, it depends on the size of the country, two, it depends on the political culture of that country.

之前我们说到需要继续推进贤能政治有两大原因。第一，国家的大小。第二，国家的政治文化。

And it also depends on what the people think, that’s the most important third reason.

另外，它也基于民众的想法。这是最为重要的第三大原因。

Political survey after political survey shows that ordinary people use political meritocracy to assess their own leaders. They want leaders who have above average ability and virtue, and when they lack virtue, when they’re corrupt, for example, when they misuse public funds for their own or for their family interest, then those leaders lack legitimacy, and frankly speaking, the whole political system lacks legitimacy.

政治调查显示人们选择以贤能政治的标准来评价他们的领导者。他们希望领导者们具备卓越的才能与美德。如果领导者们品行不端或贪污腐败或挪用公款为自身或其家族谋利，那么他们将失去合法性，甚至整个政治体系都将失去合法性。

That’s why corruption is such an existential threat to the political system here, it has to be dealt with, so that people have faith in their political meritocracy. So those are the three main reasons why we need to have political meritocracy in China. There has been this ongoing political reform, political change, yes, political progress, based on implementation of political meritocracy, and this ideal should continue to inform political change in China.

这也是为什么腐败问题对于政治体系而言是一大威胁。我们必须解决腐败问题，这样民众才能对贤能政治抱有信心。这就是我们需要在中国推行贤能政治的三大原因。中国正在推进政治改革，努力实现以贤能政治为指导的政治变革。这一理念应当继续用于指导中国的政治变革。

Now, when I give this talk in, I’m from Canada, in Canada or other Western countries, people say, oh! This guy is against democracy. Actually, no, I love democracy, democracy is a beautiful idea, and I think we need more political participation by the people.

当我在我的祖国加拿大或是其他西方国家谈论这一观点时，人们会说，天哪，这个人反对民主。事实并非如此。我热爱民主。民主是个很棒的理念。我认为应该让更多的人参政。

As a population becomes more educated, naturally they want more say in government, and we should have much more democratic mechanisms in China. For example, I’ve already mentioned elections at lower levels of government, that’s a great idea. Or we can have sortition, to be consulted when it comes to political decisions. We should have democratic polling, is another great idea. We should have different forms of political participation, fine, we need all of that in the future.

随着受教育程度的提高，人们希望在政府中有更多的发言权。我们应该在中国建立起更多的民主机制，例如，在基层政府采用选举制度。这是个很好的想法，我们也可以采用抽签的方法，随机选择民众成为政治决策顾问。民意调查也是不错的办法。参政形式应该更为多样化，我们未来需要这些改变。

So, on the one hand, we need more democracy, on the other hand, we need to have more political meritocracy. There’s no conflict, I am in favour of both. I love democracy, and I love political meritocracy. The only little, little amendment to my love of democracy, and I confess this gets me in trouble sometimes, is that I don’t think that we should use competitive elections to select leaders at higher levels of government.

因此，一方面，我们需要更多的民主。另一方面，我们需要贤能政治。两者并不冲突。我同时支持两者。我热爱民主，我也热爱贤能政治。但我希望我热爱的民主能有一点改变，这一点常常使我陷入麻烦，我认为不应该通过竞争选举来选拔高层政府领导者。

**贤能政治有哪些优势？**What are the advantages of political meritocracy?

What are the advantages of political meritocracy? One is that all leaders have political experience, they have a proven record of good political judgment. If you were to use elections to select leaders at higher levels of government, the people could select leaders who have no political experience. Now again, think of the United States, the hopefully outgoing president, he was selected without any political experience. I mean that, frankly speaking, is dangerous.

贤能政治的那些优势是什么？首先，所有领导者都具备政治经验，他们拥有良好的政治远见。如果我们通过选举选拔政府高层官员，人们也许会推选那些毫无政治经验的人。我们可以看一下目前即将离任的美国总统。他成功当选却毫无政治经验。坦白说，这是非常危险的。

We don’t know how these people are going to act, and look what happened. So if we have competitive elections to select leaders, it would undermine this main advantage of political meritocracy, which is that we can be sure that all leaders have political experience.

我们不知道这些人当选后会采取怎样的行动。看看现在，如果我们通过竞争性选举，这将会破坏贤能政治带来的主要优势，那就是确保领导者们都具备从政经验。

Another advantage of political meritocracy, all leaders can take a long term view. On issues like climate change, they could plan for ten, twenty, thirty, forty years from now, they don’t have to worry about the whole political organization is going to change or the ruling party is going to change in four or five years time.

贤能政治的另一项优势是所有领导者能高瞻远瞩，例如气候变化问题，他们可以对未来10年、20年，甚至40年进行规划。他们不需要担心整个政治架构或是执政党派会在四五年的时间里发生变化。

If you were to use competitive election to select top leaders in the next election, you might have a totally different set of priorities. Very hard to plan for the long term. So we need to keep that advantage of political meritocracy.

如果选择竞争性选举，那么下一届当选者就会列出不同的施政重点，很难对未来做出长远的规划。因此我们需要保留贤能政治的这一优势。

Another advantage of political meritocracy, the leaders can spend their time thinking about appropriate policies that benefit the people. If you were to have competitive elections, what would happen? Think of the United States, the leaders there spend so much time raising funds, in fact, it’s wasting time.

贤能政治还有一项优势就是领导者们可以把时间用在思考那些对民众有益的政策。如果采用竞争性选举，将会怎样？想一想美国，那里的领导者们花费大量时间筹集竞选资金。事实上，这是浪费时间。

Ideally, you want leaders to think about policy, not about raising funds. They give the same speech over and over again to different people. So my point is that if we were to have competitive elections to select top leaders, it would undermine the main advantages of political meritocracy.

大家希望领导者们能花更多时间思考政策，而不是筹集资金。他们对不同的民众重复相同的演说，我的观点是如果我们通过竞争性选举遴选政府高官，那将破坏贤能政治带来的优势。

So the basic point is that we need to have political meritocracy and we need democracy, short of one person, one vote, to select leaders at higher levels of government. It’s not a complex argument.

我认为我们需要采用贤能政治，我们也需要民主，但不是通过一人一票的方式来选拔政府高层。这个论点并不复杂。

Sometimes, when I go to the West and I give this similar talk, they say, oh! You are against human rights, because you favour a particular form of government for China, but not for the rest of the world. No, I love human rights. People should have a right not to be tortured, innocent people shouldn’t be killed, genocide is bad, slavery is bad, those are universal, we don’t have to argue about that, only crazy terrorists would disagree on those issues.

有时候我去西方国家发表类似的言论，他们会说，噢！你是在反对人权，因为你支持一种只适用于中国而不是全世界的政府体制。不是这样的，我热爱人权，人们有权不受虐待。无辜的人不应该被杀害，种族灭绝是糟糕的，奴隶制是糟糕的。这些都是普世观点，毋庸置疑的。只有疯狂的恐怖分子才会对这些问题持有异见。

But when it comes to selecting and promoting public officials, then we need to allow for a little bit of pluralism, a little bit of diversity, there is no one size fits all selection. It depends on the country’s size, on a country’s national conditions, on a country’s history and so on. It depends on what the people want. I think that’s hugely important, but when it comes to what’s an appropriate method to select public officials, then we should allow for a little bit pluralism, a little bit of open-mindedness.

但谈到选拔和擢升公职人员，我们需要一点多元性，一点多样性。世界上没有放诸四海而皆准的选举形式。这取决于国家的规模大小、基本国情以及历史文化，和其他因素。这也取决于人们的想法，我认为这非常重要。当我们探讨如何更好地选择政府官员时，我们应该允许增加一点多元性，更为开明一点。

When I go to Canada, where I’m from, and I present my views even to people that I love dearly, like my own family members, like my sister, I tell them this stuff, they look at me, and they say, you’ve been brainwashed. You’ve been living too long in China. I try to be polite. What I’m thinking in my mind, I don’t say it, in fact, I hope she doesn’t watch this video, I’m thinking you’ve been brainwashed living too long in the West, you need to be open-minded too.

当我回到祖国加拿大并与人谈论起我的观点时，比如我的家人，我的姐姐，我跟他们说我的观点，他们看着我说，你已经被洗脑了，你在中国生活太长时间了。我努力保持礼貌，我没有将内心的真实想法说出来，我希望姐姐不会看这段视频。我当时在想，你们才被洗脑了，因为你们在西方生活得太久了。你们也需要变得开明一些。

So I’m going to conclude here. All I’m asking is a little bit of open-mindedness and humility. We should allow for morally legitimate differences when it comes to what’s an appropriate method to select and promote public officials. Let’s agree that there has been substantial political reform in China, still a huge gap between the ideal and the reality, but we should continue to reform, based on this ideal of political meritocracy, at higher levels of government, and democracy, short of competitive election to select top leaders.

下面我来做一下总结。我所希望的是多一点开明和谦逊。在探讨公职人员的选拔和擢升方法时，我们应该允许一些合法的差异性。我们应该承认，中国已经进行了大量的政治改革。尽管理想和现实之间仍然存在着巨大的差距，我们应该继续改革以贤能政治理念为指导，同时民主地选拔政府高层。但不是通过竞争式选举的方式。