美网友：中国热爱和平，为何还要实现军事科技现代化？

高山流水

先是将“瓦良格号”这一艘半成品航母成功改造成为了一艘现代化的航母，又用极快的速度成功建造了第二艘航母“山东舰”，并且我们的003和004号航母也在建造的路上，没有国力的支撑是做不到的。在军事科技的发展上，想来也能知道我国这40年来的成就，让太多曾认为“中国不行”的外国专家被打脸，可以说是越禁越强。在美版知乎Quora上，美国网友提问道：如果中国如此热爱和平，为什么要在军事科技和现代化方面花费如此之多？这个问题有些不怀好意，引起各国专家网友的质疑和反驳，我们看看他们的观点。

海外华裔网友Tis iphone Rose的回答

Few countries in the world understand the meaning of "falling behind will be beaten" as deeply as China. Think about the history of China's recent aggression and bullying, the Yugoslav embassy bombed by the United States, and the provocation of the United States in the South China Sea exercise. Now you will ask, why do you spend so much money to expand the modern army? I just think you are ridiculous. China has the right to develop and defend itself. It is a morbid state of mind not to accept China's prosperity.

世界上很少有国家像中国一样深刻地理解“落后就要挨打”的含义。想想中国最近遭受侵略和欺凌的历史，想想被美国轰炸的南斯拉夫大使馆，想想美国在中国南海演习中的挑衅。现在你会问，为什么要花这么多钱来扩充现代化军队？我只会觉得你很可笑。中国有权发展和自卫，不接受中国的强盛是一种病态的心态。

In order to maintain peace, every country should first be able to defend itself against attacks. If China does not improve its military strength, the superpowers will covet China's resources and markets and make China yield. For example, during the Opium War, China reached a ceasefire agreement by providing reparations, which plunged all Chinese into extreme poverty for several generations.

为了维护和平，每个国家首先都应该有能力防御攻击。如果中国不提高军事实力，超级大国们将觊觎中国的资源和市场，让中国屈服。比如，在鸦片战争期间，中国通过提供赔款达成停火协议，使所有中国人几代人陷入极度贫困。

History always teaches us a lesson that we should use force without signing an unequal treaty. Iraq attacked Kuwait; Britain invaded and colonized India; The United States annexed Hawaii (1898), Guam (1898) and California (1848); America invaded Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003).

历史总是给我们教训，不签订不平等条约就使用武力威胁。伊拉克袭击科威特；英国入侵并殖民印度；美国吞并了夏威夷（1898年）、关岛（1898）和加利福尼亚（1848年）；美国入侵阿富汗（2001年）和伊拉克（2003年）如此种种。

China's national defense force is currently at the top level in the world. Politicians in Europe, America and Japan call it "China's military threat" or "destructive force" in the Pacific region. I think the opposite is true: China's military strength represents the growth of regional peace forces. The reason why there is no major war in the world is that China's national defense is a major check and balance force. The key to measuring whether a country poses a military threat to other countries depends on what kind of national defense policy it pursues. China adheres to a defensive national defense policy and will not threaten the security of any country.

中国的国防力量目前处于世界顶尖水平。欧美和日本政客将其污蔑为太平洋地区的“中国军事威胁”或“破坏性力量”。我认为正好相反：中国军力的提升代表着地区和平力量的增长。世界上没有发生重大战争的原因是因为中国的国防是一个主要的制衡力量。衡量一个国家是否对其他国家构成军事威胁的关键取决于它奉行什么样的国防政策。中国坚持防御性国防政策，不会威胁任何国家的安全。

A strong country must have a strong army. If the army is not strong, the country is at most a "rich country", but never a "strong country". With a strong national defense, a country can rise with dignity. China understands this very well, so its goal of building a world-class military has always been achieved.

一个强大的国家必须有一支强大的军队。如果军队不强大，这个国家至多是一个“富国”，但从来不是一个“强国”。有了强大的国防，国家就能有尊严地崛起。中国非常理解这一点，因此其建设世界一流军队的目标始终在实现。

Although China's military budget is the second largest in the world, it is still far below that of the United States. As the second largest economy and the most populous country in the world, China's per capita defense budget in 2021 is less than US $1000. If you are really worried about whose military power will threaten world peace, then the target will not be China.

尽管中国的军事预算位居世界第二，但仍远低于美国。作为世界第二大经济体和人口最多的国家，中国2021的人均国防预算不到1000美元。如果你真的担心谁的军事力量会威胁世界和平，那么这个目标肯定不会是中国。

---

海外网友梅尔•布朗的回答

If China had not built a modern army, it would not know how many times it would be bullied after the founding of New China. They learned from their own history what would happen in a country that could not defend its own people: Western powers would have no mercy on them, completely destroyed them and took away their property.

如果中国没有建立一支现代化的军队，新中国建立以后不知道要被欺负多少次。他们从自己的历史中了解到，一个无法捍卫自己人民的国家会发生什么：西方强国将对他们毫不怜悯，完全摧毁了他们，拿走了他们的财产。

The modern world is not a peaceful world. It is a world where the strong make rules and the weak abide by rules. If the security of China's 1.4 billion people is at risk, it is meaningless to become the richest country in the world. What's the use of money? Unless you can use it for a good purpose.

现代世界不是一个和平的世界，它是强者制定规则，弱者遵守规则。如果中国14亿人口的安全面临风险，成为世界上最富有的国家就毫无意义。钱有什么用？除非你能把它用于一个好的目的。

China will not be happy unless they are self-sufficient and do not rely on any other country. They are currently cooperating with more than 180 countries in the world, and this cooperation is growing slowly without competition. As a holy land of the manufacturing, no country can provide what they can with the amazing speed and low price.

中国不会幸福，除非他们能够自给自足，不依赖任何其他国家。他们目前正在与世界上180多个国家合作，而且在没有竞争的情况下，这种合作正在缓慢增长。作为制造业圣地，并没有一个国家能像他们一样以惊人的速度，以低廉的价格提供他们所能做的。

They are now turning their attention to fields with higher quality, advanced technology and higher profit margins. As rumored, they may transfer many small market projects to other countries through the "the Belt and Road" plan, focusing on satellites, automation and military defense.

他们现在正将目光转向更高质量、技术先进、利润率更高的领域。正如传言所说，他们可能会通过“一带一路”计划将许多小型市场项目转移到其他国家，将重点放在卫星、自动化和军事防御上。

China is ahead of the United States in some aspects, even though the arrogance of the United States will not make them believe this. China is spending money to build, and the military is an important part of defending its future.

中国在某些方面领先于美国，即使美国的傲慢不会让他们相信这一点。中国正在花钱建设，而军队是捍卫其未来的重要组成部分。

---

海外军事专家迪米特里斯的回答

First of all, an obvious problem is that China really "spends so much" on military affairs? They have never given me such an impression, so let me take a look at the proportion of military expenditure of major countries.

首先，一个明显的问题是中国在军事上真的“花了这么多”？他们从来没有给过我这样的印象，所以让我看看各大国的军费占比。

Russia (4.1%), the United States (3.5%), Israel (2.8%), India (2.7%), Iran (2.3%), the United Kingdom (2.2%), Australia (2%), France (1.9%), China (1.7%), Italy (1.5%), Japan (1.1%).

俄罗斯（4.1%）、美国（3.5%）、以色列（2.8%）、印度（2.7%）、伊朗（2.3%）、英国（2.2%）、澳大利亚（2%）、法国（1.9%）、中国（1.7%）、意大利（1.5%）、日本（1.1%）。

It is obvious that China's military expenditure ratio is lower than that of other major economies (of course, relatively speaking, it is relatively small: 1.7% of China's GDP is less than that of most countries on this list).

很明显，中国在军事上的支出比例比其他主要经济体都要低（当然，相对来说，相对来说是少的：中国GDP的1.7%比这个榜单上的大多数国家都少）。

In other words, compared with most western powers, China is not so militaristic.

换言之，与大多数西方大国相比，中国远不那么穷兵黩武。

I would like to add that no one (especially the Chinese) will say that they sacrifice national interests for the peace they love. No matter what anti military prejudice Confucianism has, it is invalid because they believe that:

我要补充一点，没有人（尤其是中国人）会说他们为了所热爱的和平牺牲国家利益，无论儒家有什么反军事偏见，都是无效的，因为他们认为：

• Society is not united through etiquette, tradition or piety, but through clear, strict and enforceable laws to strengthen the establishment of the national system;

•社会不是通过礼仪、传统或虔诚而团结在一起的，而是通过明确、严格、可执行的法律来加强国家体系的建立；

• Before the law, everyone is equal, regardless of rich or poor, regardless of high or low, and punishment should be carried out according to law to prevent others from committing crimes;

• 法律面前，人人平等，无论贫富，无论高低，惩罚应该依法执行，以阻止其他人犯罪；

• Only sovereign countries are not bound by laws, so that any policy is in line with the interests and needs of the country and the people;

• 只有主权国家不受法律约束，使任何政策都符合国家和人民的利益需求；

• The military should be strong, supported by all national resources, and have a clear chain of command;

• 军队应该强大，由全部国家资源支持，并拥有清晰的指挥链；

• The military should be strong, supported by all national resources, and have a clear chain of command;

• 现代中国人倾向于通过自己的智慧来强化这一点，他们认为弱国势必受到强国的剥削，其人民的权利受到侵犯，因此国家应该积蓄力量作为保护他们的必要条件。

In the eyes of the Chinese, "peace" does not mean "unarmed".

在中国人看来，“和平”并不意味着“手无寸铁”。

In Christian countries, there is an exaggerated image of negative pacifism, which is inspired by certain religious beliefs and is mainly used to laugh at others in non religious speeches.

在基督教国家，有一种夸张的消极和平主义的形象，它受到某些宗教信仰的启发，主要用于在非宗教演讲中嘲笑他人。

In ancient Greece, when trying to make people understand the necessity of resorting to violence, the expression was "kill me, my Pasha, and let me become a saint." The impression is that only saints do not use violence, and saints are weak/stupid. Such people will be used by Turks and/or aggressive people.

在古希腊，当试图让人理解诉诸暴力的必要性时，表达方式是“杀死我，我的帕夏，让我成为圣人。”人们的印象是，只有圣人不使用暴力，圣人是软弱/愚蠢的，这类人会被突厥人和/或好斗的人利用。

Westerners not only accept China's statement of "peace loving", which means this kind of meek passivity, but also actively hope that China will maintain this state. If China is weak, it is a kind, domesticated China, praised and suitable for exploitation; If it becomes powerful, it is the evil, aggressive wolf warrior who is caught in the opposite of morality. What a perfect trap.

西方人不仅接受了中国“热爱和平”的说法，认为这意味着这种温顺的被动，而且积极希望中国保持这种状态。如果中国软弱，那就是一个善良的、被驯化的中国，受到赞扬，适合被剥削；如果它变得强大，那就是邪恶的、好斗的狼武士，被打到道德的对立面，多么完美的陷阱。

A good example is the typical late Legalist emperor and the founding emperor of the Ming Dynasty, Hong Wu (1368 – 98), whose name means "extreme militarization" (Hong Wu, H ó ngw ğ）， This shows that he regards the army as the backbone of the country economically and politically. He would completely abolish Confucianism and rule by an organization composed of princes, political appointees and secret police (Qin Shihuang did similar things).

一个很好的例子是典型的已故法家皇帝和明朝的开国皇帝洪武（1368–98年在位），他自己取的名字意味着“极度军事化”(洪武, Hóngwğ），这表明他在经济和政治上都将军队作为国家的脊梁。他会彻底废除儒家思想，由王子、政治任命者和秘密警察组成的机构统治（秦始皇也做过类似的事情）。

At the same time, the emperor is the epitome of China's anti expansionist mentality. He formulated strict dynastic laws to prohibit any of his descendants from waging wars against Korea or Vietnam. He can preemptively guess that these wars are only expansion wars that waste resources and cannot meet the needs of the country. The extensive military institutions he established are not only defensive, but also reform oriented: to establish a national society composed of wealthy, armed and medium-sized farmers, directly under the command of the central government, and to hand over all national resources to the state.

与此同时，这位帝王是中国反扩张主义心态的缩影。他制定了严格的王朝法律，禁止他的任何后代对朝鲜或越南发动战争，他可以先发制人地猜测，这些战争只能是浪费资源的扩张战争，不能满足国家的需要。他建立的广泛的军事机构不仅具有防御性，而且具有改革性：建立一个由富裕、武装、中等农民组成的国家社会，直接由中央指挥，将国家的全部资源交由国家支配。

This is completely different from the docile and peaceful nation that Europeans understand they can educate; But this is also the core of China's tradition of a peaceful country that never invades its neighbors.

这完全不同于欧洲人所理解的他们可以教化的温顺和平的民族；但这也是中国从不侵略邻国的和平国家传统的核心。

---

中国网友Bill Chen的回答

China has the world's longest land border (22000 km), shares it with 14 direct neighbors, and the tenth longest coastline (14000 km) needs protection.

中国拥有世界上最长的陆地边界（22000公里），与14个直接邻国共有，还有第十长的海岸线（14000公里）需要保护。

Chinese Mainland is only slightly smaller than Europe. Yes, it is 10% smaller than the whole continent, but its population is nearly double. Last year, it spent 250 billion dollars on national defense. In addition to Russia, European expenditures exceeded 300 billion US dollars, excluding NATO.

中国大陆仅略小于欧洲。是的，比整个大陆小10%，但人口多了近一倍，去年它在国防上花费了2500亿美元。而除俄罗斯外，欧洲的支出超过了3000亿美元，还不包括北约部分。

Most of Europe is already part of the European Union, and EDA is responsible for coordinating joint defense. And the NATO alliance, backed by Britain and the United States, ensures Atlantic security. The main security issue in Western Europe is Russia, but they have not fought since World War II. However, they spend more than $300 billion a year.

欧洲大部分地区已经是欧盟的一部分，EDA负责协调联合防御。还有北约联盟，以英国和美国为后盾，保障大西洋安全。西欧主要的安全问题是俄罗斯，但他们自二战以来就没有打过仗。然而，他们每年的支出超过3000亿美元。

China has two powerful land neighbors in Russia and India. One of them has the most powerful weapon known to mankind, while the other will surpass Japan in the next 10 or 20 years. India has refused to reach a peace agreement on the border issue since independence.

中国在俄罗斯和印度有两个强大的陆地邻国。其中一个拥有人类已知最强大的武器，而另一个将在未来十年或二十年内超过日本。印度自独立以来一直拒绝就边界问题达成和平协定。

On the east coast, China has the 7th Fleet at home, including Yokosuka's only forward deployed super aircraft carrier. Indopacom is already the largest headquarters of the US military, and the number of ships deployed by the 7th Fleet exceeds the total number of other fleets. Sader is active in south korea, while japan has f22 and f35 fighters.

东海岸，中国在家门口有第7舰队，其中包括横须贺唯一一艘前沿部署的超级航母。Indopacom已经是美军最大的司令部，而第7舰队部署的舰艇数量超过其他舰队的总和。萨德在韩国很活跃，而日本则拥有f22和f35战斗机。

For decades, Australia has invested hundreds of billions of dollars to fund the aggressive posture of the Five Eye Alliance, including the development of forward deployed nuclear submarines and offensive missile networks. The military budgets of Australia and the United States total $800 billion and are rising.

几十年来，澳大利亚正在投入数千亿美元，资助五眼联盟的咄咄逼人姿态，包括开发前沿部署的核潜艇和进攻性导弹网。澳大利亚和美国的军事预算共计8000亿美元，并且还在上升。

The quantity and quality of firepower that has poured into the Western Pacific theater of war is alarming and has been gathering in the past decade. India's border has also experienced a 60 year period of calm. During the pandemic, Indians started an arms carnival around the world.

涌入西太平洋战区的火力数量和质量令人震惊，而且在过去十年中一直在集结。印度边境也在经历了长达60年的平静期，在大流行期间，印度人在全球范围内掀起了一场军备狂欢。

In fact, China's defense is to protect China's sovereignty over its territory. There is no gunboat diplomacy, no overseas bases and no forward aggression. China is actually surrounded by the enemy at the gate.

中国的防御实际上就是保护中国领土上的主权。没有炮舰外交，没有海外基地，没有前脚侵略。中国实际上被门口的敌人包围了。

China has a vast territory and a large population, but by contrast, its military expenditure is not much. The average American spends 12-15 times more on "defense" than the Chinese.

中国幅员辽阔，人口众多，但相比之下，其军费开支并不多。美国人在“防御”上的平均花费是中国人的12-15倍。

In the past 40 years, China has never fired in anger. Can we say that Europe, Australia, India, Russia or the United States have not? Since the United States launched 20 years of war in the Middle East and North Africa, Europe is now facing a serious refugee problem.

过去40年来，中国从来没有在愤怒中开枪。我们能说欧洲、澳大利亚、印度、俄罗斯或美国也没有过吗？由于美国在中东和北非发动了20年的战争，欧洲现在面临着一个严峻的难民问题。

In the early 1980s, the number of Chinese soldiers was about 4 million. It was 3 million in 1990, 2.5 million in 2000 and 2.3 million in 2007. The current scale is 2 million. What they really developed was the modernization of military technology and tactics.

1980年代初，中国军人人数约为400万。1990年为300万，2000年为250万，2007年为230万。现在的规模为200万。他们真正发展的是军事科技和战术的现代化。

If you understand the motivation behind the development of the Chinese army, you can understand that its goal is always to protect itself. Development is not intended to threaten other countries, but to deter those countries that fear China's economic challenges and will use all means (especially military means) to confront China.

了解中国军队发展背后的动机，你就能明白，其目标永远是自我保护。发展并不是为了威胁其他国家，而是为了威慑那些害怕中国经济挑战并会动用一切手段（特别是军事手段）对抗中国的国家。

高山流水

印度网友崩溃问：怎样看待美国媒体称中国至少领先印度三十年？

在国外社交网站上，虽然一些印度民族主义者认为印度已经可以和中国齐头并进，甚至超过了中国，但是，仍然有一些理智的印度网民能够客观地看待印度与中国的差距。在他们看来，印度在GDP、城市建设等各项指标上已经和中国差距较大。在美版知乎Quora上，印度网友问：怎样看待美国媒体称中国至少领先印度三十年？这引起各国网友的热议，我们看看他们的观点。

印度网友萨尔文的回答

The answer is no. China is ahead of India only because it has more population, more working population, more natural resources and more foreign direct investment.

答案是否定的。中国领先于印度，只是因为它拥有更多的人口，更多的劳动人口，更多的自然资源以及更多的外国直接投资。

In China, about 82% of women work. In India, the figure is only 27%. In addition, the average age in China is 37, while in India it is 27. If this factor is taken into account, China's population contributing to GDP is 1.5 times that of India.

在中国，约82%的女性工作。而在印度，这一数字仅为27%。此外，中国的平均年龄为37岁，而印度为27岁。如果考虑到这个因素，中国贡献GDP的人口是印度的1.5倍。

This reduced the gap between India's gross domestic product (PPP) of US $10 trillion and China's US $24 trillion in 2018, only 1.6 times.

这减少了2018年印度国内生产总值（PPP）10万亿美元与中国24万亿美元的差距，仅为1.6倍。

The remaining gap comes from natural resources. China's reserves of oil, natural gas and iron ore are five times that of India. Because China is three times the size of India, and enjoys an unfair advantage in natural resources. If you look at the largest companies in China, they are all oil and energy companies.

其余的差距来自自然资源。中国石油、天然气和铁矿石的储量是印度的5倍。因为中国是印度的3倍大的国家，在自然资源方面享有不公平的优势。如果你看看中国最大的公司，它们都是石油和能源公司。

China's natural resource industry has created a GDP gap of at least 3-4 trillion US dollars.

中国自然资源产业造成了至少3-4万亿美元的GDP缺口。

Then, what is left after adjusting these factors. There is hardly any gap.

那么，调整这些因素后剩下的是什么。几乎没有任何差距。

If all women start to work in India and contribute to India's GDP, you will see that India's economic output will easily reach 14-15 trillion yuan.

如果所有女性都开始在印度工作，并为印度的GDP做出贡献，那么你会看到印度的经济产出会轻松达到14-15万亿元。

Once India is no longer dependent on oil imports from the Middle East, the Indian currency will appreciate. The gap between India's nominal GDP and PPP GDP will be reduced by two times.

一旦印度不再依赖从中东进口石油，印度货币将升值。印度的名义GDP和购买力平价GDP差距将减少2倍。

For software, hardware, research and other industries, India can catch up with China within five years, while industries that need development time take 15 years, such as manufacturing, aerospace, and space.

对于软件、硬件、研究等行业，5年内，印度可以赶上中国，而需要开发时间的行业需要15年，比如制造业、航空航天、太空。

---

越南网友阿瓦特的回答

China uses its huge population to carry out large-scale production, which is essentially to put its manpower into national construction. Now, they are fighting with the United States for the status of "the largest economy in the world". With the growth of manufacturing, per capita growth has also been boosted. This in turn promotes domestic consumption. At present, China is the largest automobile market in the world.

中国利用其庞大的人口进行大规模生产，这实质上是将其人力投入到国家建设工作中。现在，他们正与美国作战，争取“世界上最大的经济体”的地位。随着制造业的增长，人均增长也得到了推动。这反过来促进了国内消费。目前，中国是世界上最大的汽车市场。

By contrast, India must be lagging behind. China has obvious advantages in terms of GDP, quality education, infrastructure and facilities. For China, there are two sides to a coin, but what one or two generations have given the country is that it is a stable country with great influence in geopolitics.

相比之下，印度肯定落后。无论是GDP、优质教育、基础设施、设施等，中国都具有明显的优势。对于中国来说，硬币有两面，但一代或两代人给这个国家的东西是，它是一个在地缘政治上有着巨大影响力的稳定大国。

China has introduced stealth aircraft into the air force, and has the longest sea crossing bridge. In general, China's highways can definitely transport faster. China has the largest high-speed railway network, and some of the routes are profitable, or may be profitable in the near future.

中国已将隐形飞机引入空军，拥有最长的跨海大桥，总的来说，中国的高速公路绝对可以更快地运输，中国拥有最大的高速铁路网络，其中一些航线正在盈利，或可能在不久的将来盈利。

If India gives priority to the long-term goals of population control, quality education and utilization of existing human capital (to a certain extent, significantly reduce unemployment and underemployment), India's catching up time will be greatly shortened.

如果印度优先考虑：控制人口、优质教育、利用现有人力资本的长期目标（在某种程度上，大幅降低失业率和减少就业不足），印度的追赶时间将大大缩短。

---

中国网友夏添的回答

We Chinese really don't like this comparison, which is meaningless. Especially between China and India. I will explain why this is meaningless from the economic, cultural and political perspectives.

我们中国人真的不喜欢这种比较，这毫无意义。尤其是在中国和印度之间。我将从经济、文化和政治三个层面解释为什么这将毫无意义。

1. China's GDP is quite different from India's. Obviously, China's GDP comes from the primary and secondary industries. The GDP of such goods is called effective GDP, which is different from GDP. The GDP of the tertiary industry in the United States is obviously financial GDP. It has not produced any positive benefits, asset prices have been pushed up, the polarization between rich and poor has intensified, and even the financialization of education and medical care has pushed up the cost of living. India's GDP is often confusing. I have tried to use Google to translate the algorithm and statistical method of India's GDP. However, the answer is depressing and confusing. In my opinion, such GDP obviously lacks foundation and persuasion.

1.中国的GDP与印度的GDP大不相同。显然，中国的GDP来自第一和第二产业。这类商品的GDP称为有效GDP，与GDP不同。美国第三产业的GDP显然是金融GDP。没有产生任何积极效益，资产价格被推高，贫富分化加剧，甚至教育和医疗金融化也推高了生活成本。印度的GDP经常令人困惑。我尝试过用谷歌翻译印度GDP的算法和统计方法。然而，答案令人沮丧，令人困惑。我认为，这样的GDP显然缺乏基础和说服力。

2. Chinese culture and Confucian culture have influenced the whole East Asia and Vietnam. You will find that these countries are basically rich countries. Vietnam's GDP growth rate exceeds 10% every year. This is a remarkable achievement. Although not entirely attributable to the Confucian culture, the superiority of Confucian culture is obvious. However, I have not found conclusive evidence that Indian culture is sufficient to achieve modernization. In the Tang Dynasty 1500 years ago, we were inspired by the Buddhist culture of India, but this country was already destroyed by the Peacock Dynasty. Similarly, the Persian Dynasty and the Roman Empire disappeared. Today's India is just a product of British colonial aggression. Although it is cruel, I don't think you have inherited the culture of the Peacock Dynasty.

2.中国文化和儒家文化影响了整个东亚和越南。你会发现这些国家基本上都是富裕国家。越南的GDP增长率每年都超过10%。这是一项了不起的成就。虽然不完全归因于儒家文化，但儒家文化的优越性是显而易见的。然而，我没有找到决定性的证据证明印度文化足以实现现代化。1500年前的唐朝，我们受到了天竺佛教文化的启发，但这个国家早已被孔雀王朝摧毁。同样，波斯王朝和罗马帝国也消失了。今天的印度只是英国殖民侵略的产物。虽然很残酷，但我不认为你继承了孔雀王朝的文化。

3. Due to the progressiveness nature of our culture, we never care about the westerners splitting the country into capitalism and communism. All theories are just differences in the way resources are allocated. Although we often talk about this with Westerners, we never really believe it. Socialism with Chinese characteristics is our answer to Westerners. No way out. The right to speak in the global knowledge system is now in the hands of Westerners.

3.由于我们文化的先进性，我们从不关心西方人将国家分裂为资本主义和共产主义。所有的理论都只是资源分配方式的不同。尽管我们经常与西方人谈论这方面的问题，但我们从未真正相信过。中国特色社会主义，这是我们给西方人的答案。没有办法。在全球知识体系中的话语权现在掌握在西方人手中。

Therefore, I sincerely hope that Indians can seriously manage their country and make India rich. Don't always compare with China. It's meaningless.

因此，我衷心希望印度人认真管理自己的国家，让印度变得富有。不要总是和我们的中国比较，这没有意义。

---

中国网友凯西•王的回答

I don't think infrastructure or facilities are the most important thing. They look shiny, but if India succeeds in industrialization, it will be easy to catch up.

我不认为基础设施或设施是最重要的东西。它们看起来很闪亮，但如果印度成功工业化，很容易赶上。

Back 15 years ago, most Chinese people do not believe that our GDP will soon catch up with Japan, because it is three times larger than ours. I remember in 2002, when a Japanese economist claimed that China could not catch up with Japan in 20 to 30 years in one of the most important media in China, most Chinese people agreed with him. Ironically, China's GDP surpassed that of Japan in only seven years. Today, 16 years later, it is nearly three times larger than Japan. I don't know what the Japanese economist is going to say now? But if economists cannot make reasonable predictions, neither can we.

回到15年前，大多数中国人不相信我们的GDP会很快赶上日本，因为它比我们大3倍。我记得2002年，当一位日本经济学家在中国最重要的媒体之一声称中国在20到30年内赶不上日本时，大多数中国人都同意他的观点。讽刺的是，中国的GDP仅用了7年就超过了日本。16年后的今天，它比日本大了近3倍。我不知道这位日本经济学家现在要说什么？但如果经济学家不能做出合理的预测，我们也不能。

From the answers, I saw many smart Indians and valuable comments. In fact, infrastructure, government, education... are all important. However, from the perspective of Chinese people, I would say that huge economic growth comes from industrialization, which is always accompanied by social revolution.

从答案中，我看到了许多聪明的印度人和有价值的评论。事实上，基础设施、政府、教育……它们都很重要。然而，从中国人的角度来看，我会说，巨大的经济增长来自工业化，而工业化总是伴随着社会革命。

At present, China's industrial GDP is more than 8 times that of India. It is important to point out that no matter how small India's share is, the proportion of GDP in the global GDP mainly depends on industry. The whole western world relies on industrialization to become a developed country. After full industrialization, some low-end industries will transfer, and GDP will naturally decline. However, India seems to be very satisfied that its economic structure is similar to that of developed countries. They forget the history of India being squeezed by the West. It is absolutely wrong to maintain an economic structure similar to that of developed countries. Do what they are doing, not what they have done.

现在，中国的工业GDP是印度的8倍以上。重要的是要指出，无论印度的份额有多小，GDP占全球生产总值的比重主要还是看工业，整个西方世界依靠工业化成为发达国家。在完全工业化之后，部分低端工业转移，GDP自然会下降。可印度似乎对其经济结构与发达国家相似感到非常满意。他们忘记了印度被西方压榨的历史。与发达国家保持类似的经济结构绝对是错误的做法。做他们正在做的事，而不是他们做过的。

What they have done to industrialization is revolution, I do not mean democracy. The West believes that democracy is the key to success, but when the Western world realizes industrialization, this is the worst human rights period in history. No, it is actually the worst period of social evolution (for workers and slaves). After becoming a developed country, they are very willing to forget what they have done and are eager to tell the world what they are doing and force the world to do what they have done.

他们对工业化所做的是革命，而不是指所谓民主。西方认为民主是成功的关键，但当西方世界实现工业化时，却是历史上最糟糕的人权时期，不，实际上是最糟糕的社会进化时期（对工人和奴隶而言）。在成为发达国家之后，他们非常乐意忘记自己的所作所为，并渴望告诉世界他们现在所做的，并迫使世界做他们所做的。

Fortunately, China's experience shows the existence of another way of social revolution, which is less cruel but more effective. When so many people have no land or houses, and people are divided into different classes, society needs revolution, not industry. The social revolution accelerated industrialization, which gradually eliminated the caste system or slavery. This is the case with the American Civil War. Without the American Civil War and the abolition of slavery, there would be no industrialization of the southern United States.

幸运的是，中国的经验表明了另一种社会革命方式的存在，不像那么残酷，但更有效。当如此多的人没有土地和房子，当人们被分成不同的阶级时，社会需要革命，而不是工业。社会革命加速了工业化，工业化使种姓制度或奴隶制逐渐消解。美国内战就是这样，没有美国内战，没有废除奴隶制，就不会有美国南部的工业化。

In Western history, human rights before the revolution were to feed thousands of hungry sharecroppers, while human rights now are to protect the property of landlords after industrialization. This is just an example of why they think you should do what they do and criticize you when you do what they do. I have seen many comments referring to infrastructure, transportation, quality education... They are just the result of industrialization and revolution. If the land belongs to several landlords, why does the government invest so much money in infrastructure? How can we achieve this without developed industrialization? Since so many cheap people are willing to do this work, why should landlords industrialize their land?

在西方历史上，革命前的人权是养活成千上万饥饿的佃农，而现在的人权是在工业化后保护地主和资本家的财产。这只是一个例子，说明他们为什么认为你应该做他们做的事情，并在你做他们做了的事情时批评你。我看到很多评论提到基础设施、交通、优质教育……它们只是工业化和革命的结果。想想看，如果土地属于几个地主，为什么政府会在基础设施上投资这么多钱？没有发达的工业化，如何做到这一点？既然有这么多廉价的人愿意做这项工作，为什么地主要把他们的土地工业化？

For many of us, we believe that democracy is the result of industrialization, not the cause or premise of industrialization. Only when democracy serves us better can we love it, and we do not believe that it is the best regime that human society can have (hundreds of years later, from the perspective of people, how stupid it is).

对我们许多人来说，我们相信民主是工业化的结果，而不是工业化的原因或前提。只有当民主更好地为我们服务时，我们才热爱它，我们不相信它是人类社会所能拥有的最好的政权（几百年后，从人们的角度来看，这是多么愚蠢的事情）。

Here are some additional points. First, let's take a look at which countries/regions succeeded after World War II. Not much, only East Asia. When they created huge economic growth, did they adopt Western style democracy? No, obviously, Western style democracy is not the cause of economic growth and industrialization. But is democracy an obstacle to economic growth? I don't think so, otherwise you can't explain India's good economic growth in recent years.

在这里再补充几点。首先，让我们看看二战后哪个国家/地区取得了成功。不太多，只有东亚。当他们创造了巨大的经济增长时，他们采用西式民主了吗？没有，很明显，西式民主不是经济增长和工业化的原因。但是，民主是经济增长的障碍吗？我不这么认为，否则你无法解释印度近年来的良好经济增长。

So, what is the key to success? A strong government can unite the whole country, focus on the economy and do something useful, which is why India's economic growth is better after the reform. It is foolish to think that if one establishes a Western style democracy, the economy will grow and industrialization will proceed on its own. No country has succeeded in doing so.

那么，成功的关键是什么？一个强大的政府，能够把整个国家团结在一起，专注于经济，做一些有用的事情，这就是改革后印度经济增长更好的原因。认为如果一个人建立了西式民主，经济就会自行增长，工业化就会自行进行，这是愚蠢的。没有一个借此成功做到这一点的国家。

India does not have a strong government. A strong government will not allow a free and turbulent social order to exist. It opens markets, enacts laws, builds schools and infrastructure, and invites international investment. Any successful country has had a strong government focused on open markets during industrialization. Later, the country will develop a new middle class, who will have more demands and more rights. This is the cycle of history. But I can't see this in India. Therefore, India will grow at a high speed, but there will be no revolutionary progress.

印度没有一个强大的政府。一个强大的政府不会允许一个自由动荡的社会秩序存在，它开放市场，制定法律，建设学校和基础设施，并邀请国际投资。任何一个成功的国家都曾在工业化期间拥有一个专注于开放市场的强大政府。之后，这个国家会发展出新兴的中产阶级，他们将有更多诉求，要求更多的权利，这就是历史的循环，但我在印度身上没能看到这一点，因此印度会高速增长，但不会有革命性的进展。