注册 登录
滑铁卢中文论坛 返回首页

风萧萧的个人空间 http://www.kwcg.ca/bbs/?61910 [收藏] [复制] [分享] [RSS]

日志

Kerry brown 认为西方对华虚伪 剑桥辩论社

已有 2 次阅读2026-3-1 08:01 |个人分类:Vince Cable

Kerry brown 认为西方对华虚伪  剑桥辩论社

剑桥辩论社 2025年1月12日

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIvyqifJ8iA

克里·布朗教授于2024年12月5日星期四在辩论厅就此议题发表第三条辩词。

随着西方与中国之间紧张关系的加剧,本次辩论将更深入地探讨二者之间的关系。中国在全球舞台上日益重要的地位招致了西方国家的诸多批评;然而,鉴于欧洲的殖民历史,一些人认为这些批评站不住脚。

克里·布朗教授是伦敦国王学院中国研究教授兼刘氏中国研究所所长。他曾任查塔姆研究所高级研究员兼亚洲项目负责人。1998年至2005年,他曾在英国外交和联邦事务部工作,包括担任英国驻北京大使馆一等秘书。

剑桥辩论社辩论信息:

主持人:萨米·麦克唐纳(候任主席)

记录员:利昂纳斯·鲍施

辩论主题标题前通常会加上“本院认为”、“本院相信”或简称“本院”。

无论辩论主题是否具有争议性,通常都会在投票或发言前以论点陈述的形式呈现。

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

主席:萨米·麦克唐纳

非常感谢您精彩的演讲。现在回到论文发言环节,最后一轮论文发言,第三位发言的是克里·布朗教授。克里·布朗教授是伦敦国王学院中国研究教授,也是老挝中国研究所所长。他于1998年至2005年在英国外交和联邦事务部工作,包括担任英国驻北京大使馆一等秘书。他撰写了大量关于现代中国政治的文章。布朗教授,您的发言将引起大家的重视。

里·布朗教授:

谢谢,非常感谢。祝贺前任主席,也祝贺您的团队,祝你们好运。这是我第四次在学生会发言。已经过去一段时间了,所以很荣幸能再次回到这里。

我想说四点,首先,我是我是一个改过自新的伪君子。嗯,我想,嗯,当我在上世纪90年代和本世纪初在中国工作和生活的时候,我确实坚信,我真的坚信,中国的整个发展轨迹必须包含某种形式的政治参与决策,而且我确实认为中国必须经历政治转型。我记得我在上世纪90年代中期住在蒙古。

我记得那年从北京到广州的火车上,我和一个北京大学的学生就中国收回香港必须遵守所有条约义务的问题进行了激烈的争论。我们争论了很久,她就说,嗯,我们还是聊点别的吧。所以,我确实记得那些辩论。我还记得2000年代,中国经历了有史以来最伟大的GDP增长之一,四年内经济规模翻了两番。十年间发生了很多不可思议的事情,我记得我曾为世界民主运动做过一个项目,大概是在北京奥运会前后,我走访了三国各地,考察了不同的家庭委员会,以及欧盟在云南开展的民主支持项目。

我记得在北京附近,我还考察了一些乡村民主项目,那里通过公开选举任命了3000名官员,每个政党只能有一个候选人,或者允许非党派人士参选。但我当时就想,随着中产阶级的崛起和人均GDP的增长,必须进行改革,建立像西方那样的制度。我当时就接触过民主活动人士,正如前面提到的,他们遭受了种种苦难。我记得我曾见过一些在蒙古的活动人士,他们伤得很重。我的朋友哈达达在那里经营一家书店,致力于推广多元化和开放。在监狱里15年,我的意思是,你知道,我知道人们遭受了多少苦难,所以我完全没有贬低和轻视他们,不可思议的勇气,以及那些仍在为之奋斗的中国人民,我对他们只有敬佩。然而,这不是关于他们的,而是关于我们,正如之前的发言者所说,关于我们做得如何。实际上,有四件事我认为会让任何中国官员或其他人,对韦斯顿过去30年来所说的一切都抱有怀疑。

第一点是,他们会非常清楚西方在苏联于1991年解体时对俄罗斯所说的话所带来的糟糕后果。我们带着恶意,我们带着恶意,欺骗了他们,一个经济和政治模式,结果结合我们今天所看到的,呃,俄罗斯的发展水平下降了,男性死亡率下降了,这对俄罗斯来说是一场灾难,经济也受到了巨大的影响,对中国产生了巨大的影响。

共产主义在中国仍然是一个活跃议题的最大原因,是因为他们目睹了苏联的所作所为,并了解到最糟糕的是什么,比共产主义更糟糕的是什么,共产主义之后是什么。他们看到了。

第二个原因是2001年的恐怖袭击。

当时我在北京的大使馆工作,我记得,就在一分钟前,我们还在告诉中国,它,必须遵守世贸组织的义务,而且,你知道,小布什一直在喋喋不休,说中国会如何,你知道,我们的,人权,这是一个巨大的,价值观问题,但就在美国,遭受袭击的那一刻,它突然变成了我们的盟友,我们把一些,呃,UA,组织,新疆组织,ETIM和其他一些组织,列入了恐怖分子名单。

我的意思是,我们几乎一夜之间,第三件事发生了改变,那就是2008年那场巨大的经济危机。当时,我正在为世界民主运动工作,在中国各地奔走考察潜在的模式。我记得,这产生了多么深远的影响,我们西方国家不仅是一些非常糟糕的政治改革理念的传播者,如果中国听从了我们的建议,那将是一场灾难。

而且我们还是糟糕的资本家。

我的意思是,如果中国采纳了美国和其他国家采取的那些导致2008年危机的资本主义措施,很可能会失败。实际的结果是,中国变得非常怀疑。我认为,如果没有2008年那场巨大的经济危机,我们就不会有政治上的。

最后一点是

过去十年里,美国、欧洲和其他地方发生的一系列奇怪事件表明,我们的政治制度没有中国真正可以学习并知道哪些东西是有效的,我不认为中国不想改革,我相信它想改革,但我们没有特别好的模式,我不认为我们再也没有任何好的模式了,这就是为什么我是一个改过自新的伪君子,所以我认为有两件事与我们陷入这种境地的深层原因密切相关。


第一件事是

有人之前提到过特别是关于英国,我们想要什么?我刚刚写了一本关于英国自1600年至今与中国关系的历史大逆转,在大学出版社出版。

广告​​上有一个章节是关于英国最强大的时候,英国在中国最强大的时候是19世纪末,当时帝国海事海关在罗伯特·哈特·奥尔斯特的领导下。

中国财政体系的三分之一,,当时的中国政府,英国拥有绝对的霸权。我们在中国拥有世界上最大的领事体系,我们修建铁路,我们开采矿藏,我们拥有大约70%的在华外商投资。我们在清朝叛乱中拯救了清朝,通过与清军并肩作战,我们拥有绝对的隐私。然而我们从未谈论价值观。

在我们权力的巅峰时期,我们不希望中国成为一个像我们一样的强国,我们想要的政策非常非常简单,我们希望中国不要强大到对我们构成威胁,我们也不希望它弱到崩溃。我们
受自身利益驱动,这一直是我们关系的历史基础。

我们不想要的,我们想要的,我们对中国的政策,通常是我们不希望中国成为什么,而不是我们希望中国成为什么。当我们进入21世纪时我们,面临着一个非常非常明显的战略选择,而我认为我们虚伪的原因,在于我们必须非常坦诚地说明,我们为什么对中国现状以及其运作方式感到不满。

我们行事不真诚,因为从20世纪90年代开始,直到加入世界贸易组织,我们一直押注于一个看起来有点像我们,但不会因为过于强大而构成问题,也不会崩溃。

问题是,我们从未预料到中国会在一个截然不同的模式下取得成功,而这就是今天发生的事情。我们拥有这样一个令人难以置信的中国,它对我们来说是个问题,不是因为它不是资本主义,而是因为它是一个比我们更优秀的资本主义,它是一个实践了达伦·B

美国一位非常优秀的辛詹学者恐怖资本主义,一种资本主义没有任何劳动权利,一种资本主义没有任何约束,它比我们更更像资本主义。我们对中国的问题,在于它把我们自认为擅长的事情,做得比我们更好。

这就是为什么我认为我们是伪君子,最后,我们所有人无论我们来自哪里,仅仅因为我们身处这所大学,在这个环境中,我们都是启蒙运动的子孙后代。伟大的启蒙运动,如果你看看启蒙运动的价值观,欧洲人对中国的价值观被三位伟大的人物——李·蒙努和乌姆·沃勒——很好地概括了。

他们非常非常清楚地解释了为什么300年前,今天,我们作为启蒙时代的欧洲人,或者启蒙文化中的人们,无论我们在西方政治的哪个角落,对于中国,他们一方面展现了对中国的伟大理想主义。

沃勒在百科全书中写道,中国的制度比英国,你知道,比欧洲人更好,它是一种理想的儒家精英统治制度。

而蒙努则写道,它是一种专制的、邪恶的制度,实际上,你知道,它除了糟糕的后果之外,什么也做不了。李·蒙努是像今天这样的制度。

所以,我认为这概括了我们今天看待中国时的感受。我们看到的是一种实体。从根本上来说,它与美国对抗,并非因为所有这些可怕的人权问题。

是的,我完全承认我们政治精英的这些行为,而是因为中国正在做一件,我们从未想过它会做的事我们不希望它做,我们也无法容忍它这样做,那就是在它现有的体制下取得成功

谢谢

Professor Kerry Brown | This House Believes the West is Hypocritical Towards China | Cambridge Union

Cambridge Union  2025年1月12日  

Professor Kerry brown speaks as the third proposition for the motion in the Debating Chamber on Thursday 5th December 2024.

With tensions rising between the West and China, this debate examines their relationship in greater detail. China’s increasing position on the global stage has led to much criticism from Western nations; however, given Europe’s colonial past, some feel that these criticisms ring hollow.

Professor Kerry Brown is Professor of Chinese Studies and director of the Lau China Institute at King’s College London. He has previously worked as Senior Fellow and Head of the Asia Programme at Chatham House. From 1998-2005, he worked at the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, including as First Secretary at the British Embassy in Beijing. 

Cambridge Union Society Debate Info:

In The Chair: Sammy McDonald (Incoming President)

Taking the Minutes: Leonas Pausch

The Debate Motion title is always preceded in context by the phrase “This House Would”, “This Would Believes”, or simply “This House”.

The Debate motion is typically phrased in Proposition of the argument prior to any votes or speeches, regardless of controversial nature.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Chair: Sammy McDonald

thank you very much for that fine speech now going to turn back to paper speakers so the last round of paper speeches speaking third in proposition is

Professor krie Brown Professor krie
Brown is a professor of Chinese studies
and the director of the Lao China
Institute at Kings College London um
from 1998 to 2005 he has worked at the
British foreign and Commonwealth office
including as the first secretary at the
British Embassy in Beijing he has
written extensively on modern Chinese
politics Professor Brown you have the
ears of the house

Professor Kerry Brown
thank, you great thanks very much congratulations to the ex president and congrat ulations and good luck for your Team uh and this is the fourth time
that I've spoken at the union it's beensome time so it's a great honor to be
back um and I guess I'm going to say four things first of all um I am a reformed hypocrite I come here uh I guess um when uh I you know kind of was was working and living in China in the 1990s and 2000s I did passionately believe I really did passionately believe that the whole trajectory in China would have to embrace some kind of political participation in decision-making and I did think that China would have to go through a political transition I remember I lived
in in Mongolia in the mid 1990s and I remember having a massive argument on a
train trip from Beijing to guango that year uh with a student from Beijing University about how uh you know China in taking back Hong Kong uh had to
observe all of the treaty obligations and we kind of had this massive round
she just said um let's just about something else um so I do remember you
know kind of those debates I remember in the 2000s when China underwent one of the great kind of explosions of GDP growth of all time it quadrupled its
economy in four year for in a decade I mean incredible and I remember doing a
project for the world movement for democracy where I went around around
about the time of the Beijing Olympics uh and looked at different places in San
household committees I looked at uh democracy um supporting projects the
European Union was running I think in yunan I remember looking near Beijing at
some of the projects there for Village democracy and 3,000 um 3 million officials had been appointed through these uh open elections only one party could stand or nonp party members but I kind of thought with the rising middle class with per capita GDP Rising you would have to have uh reforms that would bring about systems like in the west so I had that experience and I remember uh dealing with democracy activists and seeing as the person said
earlier how they suffered I remember
looking at some of the activists in in
Mongolia who'd been banged up very badly
one of my friends hadada who ran a
Bookshop there kind of promoting
pluralism and openness uh was put in
jail for 15 years I mean you know I know
how people have suffered so I'm not at
all denigrating and belittling their
incredible courage and the people that
still struggle for this in China I have
nothing but admiration for them however
this is not about that it's about us as
the previous speakers have said it's
about how did we do and actually there
are four things that I think would have
made any Chinese official or otherwise
really skeptical of anything Weston has
said over the last 30 years the first is
that they would have been really aware
of the absolutely awful outcomes of what
the West told Russia when the USSR
collapsed in 1991 uh we went with bad faith we went
with bad faith and foed on them uh
economic and a political model which has
resulted with the things we see today uh
developmental levels in Russia fell male
mortality fell it was a Calamity for the
economy it had a huge impact in China
the greatest reason why communism is
still a live issue in China is because
of what they saw happened in the USSR
and learning that what's the worst thing
uh what is a worst thing than communism
what comes after it they saw that the
second is the 2001 terrorist attacks I
was in Beijing serving at the embassy at
the time and I remember from one minute
we went from telling China about how it
had to observe the WTO obligations and
it had to you know kind of George Bush
the younger was going on all the time
about how um you know China would our
human rights it was massive massive
issues of values but the moment America
was attacked it suddenly became our Ally
and we put I think a couple of uh UA
groups xinjang groups etim and others on
the terrorist list I mean we changed
almost overnight the third was the great
economic crisis in 2008 about the time
that I was working for the world
movement democracy in China going around
and looking at potential models and I
remember how the profound impact of not
only were we purveyors in the west of
really terrible uh political reform
ideas which have been C would have been
a catastrophe if China had listened to
us but we were also lousy capitalists I
mean if China had adopted some of the
capitalist measures that led to 2008
that American others had it would have
probably Fallen by the wayside the
actual result was that it became deeply
skeptical I don't think we would have
siing ping and he St of politics if we
hadn't had the 2008 great economic
crisis but the final thing is the
absolute calvacade of kind of strange
and weird events over the last 10 years
in America and Europe and elsewhere that
have shown that our political systems do
not have things that China can really
learn from and know would be functional
I don't think it is that China doesn't
want to reform I'm sure it does want to
reform but we don't have particularly
good models I don't believe that we have
any good models anymore that's why I'm a
reformed hypocrite so I think that there
are two things that I would say really
relevant to the deeper reason why we're
in this situation the first is and
someone alluded to it to it earlier
particularly about Britain what do we
want I've just uh written a history of
Britain's relations with China since
1600 to the present day great reversal
out in all good book y University press
advert over that has uh you know kind of
a section on when Britain was most
powerful when was Britain most powerful
in China it was in the late 19th century
when the Imperial Maritime custom ran
under Robert Hart a olster a third of the Chinese fiscal
system under the chin government at that
time Britain had absolute Supremacy we
had the world's largest consal system in
China we were building Railways we were
building mines we had something like 70%
of all foreign investment in China we
had literally saved the Ching in the
typing Rebellion uh by fighting on the
side of the Imperial troops we had
absolute privacy we did not however ever
talk about values we did not at the peak
of our power want China to be a power
like us what we wanted our policy was
very very simple we wanted China not to
be so strong that it would be a threat
to us and we didn't want it to be so
week that it would fall apart we were
driven by self-interest that has been the historic
basis of our relationship what we don't
what we want what we our policy towards
China is often what we don't want China
to be it's not what we do want China to
be when we come to the 21st century we
have a kind of really really obvious
strategic choice and the reason why I
think that we are hypocrites is because
we me to be very honest about why we have
an issue with China being the way it is
and functioning the way it is we acted
in bad faith because we engaged from the
1990s onwards and through the World
Trade Organization entry all those
things hedging on a bet that we would
end up with a China that looked a bit
like us but was um not a problem by
being too strong and wouldn't Lord
forbid Fall Apart but the problem is what we didn't
ever expect is a China that would
succeed under a very different model and
that's what's happened we have today
this incredible anomaly of a China which
is a problem to us not because it isn't
a capitalist the problem is that it is a
capitalist that's better than us it's a
capitalist that practices what Darren B
very good scholar in America on shinjan
cus Terror capitalism a capitalism
without any labor rights a capitalism
without any restraints it is a better
capitalist than us our problem with
China is that it is doing the things
that we thought we were good at better
than us that is why I think that we are
hypocrites and very finally all of us
here wherever we're from just because
we're at this University in this
environment we are children of the
Enlightenment the great Enlightenment
values if you look at the enlightenment
Europeans values the kind of ideas about
China were really well captured by three
great figures liit monu and um um voler
and they capture very very well 300
years ago why today we are still so
conflicted as Enlightenment Europeans or
people in the enlightenment culture
wherever we are in the political West up
towards China they captured on the one
hand the great idealism towards China
volter wrote in the encyclopedia about
how China was a better system than
Britain you know than Europeans it was a
kind of ideal Confucian meritocratic
system uh monu wrote about how it was
despotic an evil system that couldn't
really you know kind of deliver anything
except terrible outcomes and liit was
the abstainer like the kind of system
tonight and so this kind of I think
captures who we are when we look at
China today we kind of see an entity
which antagonizes US fundamentally not
because of all of these terrible human
rights issues yeah I completely
recognize those for our political Elite
it is because China is doing the one
thing that we never thought it would do
and we didn't want it to do and we can't
stomach it doing and that is succeeding
under the system it has today thank you
very much I put them up
[Applause]

路过

雷人

握手

鲜花

鸡蛋

评论 (0 个评论)

facelist

您需要登录后才可以评论 登录 | 注册

法律申明|用户条约|隐私声明|手机版|小黑屋|联系我们|www.kwcg.ca

GMT-5, 2026-3-1 13:32 , Processed in 0.026960 second(s), 17 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2021 Comsenz Inc.  

返回顶部