美国民主党议员 B Sanders 夸中国让几亿人脫贫。但是贫富悬殊太吓人了。
Sanders Praises Communist Capitalism.
Yes, China lifted millions out of poverty—by moving away from
By By Joshua Muravchik, Sept. 10, 2019.
Sen. Bernie Sanders’s praise for the government of China should
raise eyebrows, and not only for the obvious reasons. His
assessment of the Chinese economy knocks the pins out from under
his political and economic philosophy.
In an interview last month with the Hill, Mr. Sanders conceded that
China “is moving unfortunately in a more authoritarian way in a
number of directions.” He then asserted that “what we have to say
about China, in fairness to China and its leadership, is . . . they
have made more progress in addressing extreme poverty than any
country in the history of civilizati
Unlike most of Mr. Sanders’s past words of praise for communist
regimes—for Cuba’s health-care and education systems, the Soviet
Union’s “youth programs” and “cultural programs,” and Nicaragua’s
empowerment of “the poor people”—Mr. Sanders’s comment about China
has a basis in fact. According to the World Bank, 88% of Chinese
lived on less than $1.90 a day in 1981. Today less than 1% do.
(These figures are in 2011 dollars, adjusted for purchasing power
Yet that success didn’t come from socialism. It’s a product of
China’s move away from socialism. And it came at the cost—at least
by Mr. Sanders’s usual lights—of heightened inequality. A 2018
International Monetary Fund working paper reports that “China has
moved from being a moderately unequal country in 1990 to being one
of the most unequal countries.” The IMF dates that trend to 1980,
shortly after Beijing began its capitalist experiment.
At home, Mr. Sanders urges a “political revolution” and a
“wholesale transformation of our society” from capitalism to
socialism—the reverse of what China did 40 years ago. He burns with
hostility for capitalists. We must “no longer tolerate the greed of
Wall Street, corporate America and the billionaire class,” he
Yet Mr. Sanders’s accurate observation about China’s record in
ending poverty ought to give him pause. Mao Zedong’s China was the
apotheosis of class warfare and of formal equality. Millions were
slaughtered as “class enemies,” and, everyone wore drab tunics and
shared poverty (except Mao himself, who lived like royalty with a
few of his cohorts). With Mao gone, Deng Xiaoping called an end to
the class war.
“To get rich is glorious” became the watchword. According to
Forbes, China has more billionaires (in U.S. dollar terms) than any
other country except the U.S., and is minting new ones far faster.
At the beginning of this century, Forbes found only one in China.
Today it counts more than 300.
No doubt Mr. Sanders would decry that, but is it too high a price
to pay for a process that lifted hundreds of millions out of
poverty? This question points to the core difference between
socialism, which focuses on how to distribute wealth, and
capitalism, which is concerned primarily with how to produce it.
China’s experience teaches anew that the latter is more important
than the former, for the poor as well as the rich. Mr. Sanders
admires China for bringing its population the material benefits of
capitalism. Why would he want to saddle his own countrymen with
Mr. Muravchik is author of “Heaven on Earth: The Rise, Fall, and
Afterlife of Socialism.”