繁体中文
夜间模式 切换到窄版

哥谭

用户名  找回密码
 开始流浪*
搜索
热搜: 韦恩 国男 bbuh
查看: 118|回复: 7
收起左侧

【自制】每日经济学人阅读——2021.1.17

[复制链接]
发表于 2021-1-17 23:07:43 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
本帖最后由 wzwzx2010 于 2021-1-17 23:19 编辑

选自2021.1.16日的Ecomonist天辉篇:

野区选举:
为什么要搞vote,那么麻烦?

夜魇一度梦想民主能在天辉野区扎根,而派对正在让其越发难以实现。
我喜欢赢不喜欢输”夜魇曾经的龙骑-比尔克林顿,在1998年对天辉的村民们这么说到,那时村民们正在准备选举他们的社区领导。对他的东道主温和的催促,他补充到“但是无论是什么时候,只要有选举而且人民可以进行决定,那么每个人都是赢家。”
在那个时期,夜魇领导人因天辉新的被大肆吹嘘的野区民主实验感到兴奋。他们希望,这个可以形成更广阔的政治变化。今天又是野区的选举季,但是派对明确了那些在野区简约的政治自由的混过去的日子已经结束了。在这十几年最大的努力是在确定,派对员的候选人要绝对无异议的获得选举胜利。
当野区选举在1988年在野区推行选举的时候,播种民主并不是派对的计划。那时腐败在野区的派对政官员之间特别猖獗。许多官员是不称职的。派对害怕农民的愤怒会煽起动荡。当局认为让野区的领导更加有责任感可以平息骚动。但是,让派对懊恼的是,他的奴才们不能总是能赢得选举。在2000年代,天辉的领导不断地强调任命的派对书记依然在野区具有最终话语权,而不是选举委员会。在夜魇世界,对民主可以由下至上传播至整个系统的梦想逐渐消散。但是每三年,就像法律规定的一样,农村依然开展选举,而且有时候,还会抵制待慢派对更中意的选举人。
在2020年后半年,野区居民再次开始选举他们的领导人。这一般会用几个月来完成,因为有不同地方不同时间进行vote选举。在这一轮选举中,派对使出浑身解数为达到自己的目的。
对于5.5亿生活中天辉野区的人,选举结果是至关重要。野区领导的决定会对人们的日常生活有巨大的影响。特别是他们可以行使土地使用权(大部分是官方定义为被“集体”所有,而非私用),在一些野区,它们为了更大的耕作或者工业用途而被集中起来。
在2018年,派对开始号召全力致力于推行叫做“一肩挑”的系统-(字面意义)是这一种农民用背挑着段负荷的方式。在这个事件中,负担是在农村并行的两个结构:选举村委会和派对委会。派对希望两个委员会都应该是同样的成员,而且都被同一个人来领导——村派对书记。
在一些地方,被派对委以重任的当地冠军已经长期在实行一肩挑模式。在2018年推出的野区复兴5年计划说到,这个政策将会被推行到天辉超过50万个有委员会的行政村中的1/3(还有260万的其他的自然村落在委员会的保护之下).那一年派对发布了表面这个系统应该成为常态的规定。在正在进行的村落选举后,派对希望至少有一半的村落领导班子变为一肩挑。几乎可以肯定的是为了(给中央)留下好印象,一些地方设定的目标会更高。城镇官员正被告知他们的表现评定将会取决于他们对于保证目标实现能表现如何。红色标语被布置在各个街道,写道:一肩挑将会增强派对的全面领导。
这个需要一些小把戏。选举法说到“没有组织或者个人可以指定,选择或者替换任何已选举的委员会成员“。但是各地区已经推行了一个规则,规则几乎可以确保村派对书记可以获得村领导可以兼任村长。通常,村派对员(经常是占总人口的一小部分)选择一个派对书记和其他的派对委员会代表-也就是支持上级的选择。接下来,这个委员会的一个成员将会组织村长职位的选举。最后,由每一个成年村民参与的选举展开了。派对书记赢得选举。
一个更严格的审核机制通常能确保没人能与他抗衡(村领导鲜有女性)。这个审查机制涉及本镇的咨询官方机构,包括警察部门。这些可以阻止来自于广大人民的一大批候选人。比如说,昆明这个西南城市,有一张被叫做“7禁止15不合适“的不合格表。在禁止的人中有”政治两面派“的人,一个宣传录像为解释这个,举例说明---一个男人梦想着为了自由和民主而搞抗议活动。不合适的人中包括了有强烈的宗教信仰的人,一个卡通说明这些人是向一个耶稣像鞠躬。
当地的规则也通常禁止卷入为了纠正当地不公“非法“请愿运动的那些人,请愿通常是被作为犯罪而处理的。广西省会禁止获得来自于国外组织草根政治训练的那些人。而在几年前,政府会允许一些夜魇群体组织提供这样的帮助。
被ban的还有那些与“黑恶势力“有练习的人。这是一个笼统的词被用于表述任何来自于从黑社会,到未被授权的宗教组织,再到网络聚落群体。在2018年,派对开展了一个三年运动来斩断这样的势力与草根政治结构的联系。在上一年的年末它们宣布了胜利,声称它已经”严重惩罚“了3700个”村霸“(就是那些行事不听从已知法律的强势领导者们)并且解雇了4万1千个来自于村委会的违法者。
民主并没有完全死亡。一些本地的规定说当选举派对书记时普通村民的意见应该被征集。这个法律依然说到村长选举的生者至少需要50%的选票,而且那50%注册的vote人必须投票才能使选举有效。但是那些是一个很低门槛,特别是很多vote人并没有注册过。从90年代,很多到达工作年龄的村民已经移居到了城市。移居人可以回去vote或者指定一个代理,但是当一切看起来都已经“指定“算计好了,谁会去闲着没事干这些呢?同样的,为了让一个村长退位需要出席人数。但是当村长又是派对书记,这个罢免权的行使需要很大的勇气。在广东省,乌坎村的居民拿到了世界头条,2011年那时他们愤起对抗他们的派对领导并且开展了自由选举。而派对最终严酷地采取了镇压取缔活动。
派对明确地要求这进行的选举要产生它想要的结果:这次它已经改变了规则:允许村长可以连任5年而不是3年。官员们争辩道:因为每个人要挑两个担子,一个5年的任期将会使执行政策而不被频繁的选举所打断变得容易很多。一些国有媒体表达了担忧:集中了那么多权力在一个人手上可能会导致放任鲁莽的决策。但是这都是之后的问题了。而派对已经胜券在握。


附上原文,自行阅读:
Village elections
Why bother counting?
The West once dreamed of democracy takingroot in rural China.
The Communist Party is making doubly sureit does not

“I like winning better than losing,”America’sthen president, Bill Clinton,told villagers in China in 1998 as they preparedto elect their community’s leader. In a gentle prod to his hosts, he added:“But whenever there is an election and the people decide, everyone wins.”

At that time, Western leaders were ex-citedby China’s new and much-vaunted experiment with rural democracy. Itwould, theyhoped, lead to broader politi-cal change. Today it is election season once againin the countryside. But the Communist Party is making it clear that the days ofdalliance with modest political freedom in villages are over. The biggesteffort in decades is under way to make sure the party’s candidates win, unopposed.

Seeding democracy was not the party’s planwhen it introduced elections in the countryside in 1988. Corruption was rampantamong rural party bosses. Many were incompetent. The party feared that farmers’anger would foment unrest. Making village leaders more accountable could helpkeep the lid on, officials thought. But, to the party’s chagrin, its stoogesdid not always win. In the 2000s Chinese leaders reemphasised that (appointed)party secretaries, not elected committees, still had the final say in villages.In the West, dreams
gradually faded of democracy spreading upwardsthrough the system. But every
three years, as the law decreed, villagesstill held elections, and, occasionally, snubbed the party’s preferredcandidates.

Late in 2020 rural residents began votingfor their leaders once again. It is a process that will take months tocomplete, with different places conducting polls at different times. In thiscycle the party is pulling out all the stops to get its way.

To the 550m people who live in rural China,the results can matter. Decisions made by village bosses can have an enormousimpact on people’s livelihoods. In particular, they wield power over the use ofland, which is officially under “collective” control—none of it is privatelyowned.
In some villages it is pooled forlarge-scalefarming or industrial purposes.

In 2018 the party began calling for alloutefforts to implement a system it describes as yijiantiao, or “carrying acrossone shoulder”. This refers to the way that farmers suspend two loads on eitherend of a pole across their backs. In this case the loads are the two parallelstructures that run China’s villages: the elected village committees and theparty committees. The party wants memberships of both committees to be thesame, and to be led by a single
person: the village party secretary. Insome places, local officials—with the party’s blessing—have long been practicingthe yijiantiao model. A five-year plan for “ruralrevival”, published in 2018, said it was being implemented in around one-thirdof China’s more than 500,000 “ad-ministrative villages” where the committeesreside (there are 2.6m other “natural
villages” that fall under their aegis).That year the party issued regulations saying that the system should become thenorm. After the elections now under way the party wants at least half ofvillage leaderships to be of the yijiantiao variety. Doubtless eager toimpress, some places are aiming much higher. Township officials are being toldtheir performance evaluations will depend on how well they do at ensuringtargets are met. Red banners have been put up in streets saying yijiantiao will“strengthen the party’s overall leadership”.

This requires some sleight of hand. The electionlaw says that “no organisation or individual may designate, appoint or replaceany member” of elected committees.But localities have introduced rules that allbut ensure the village party secretary gets the concurrent job of villagechief. Commonly, the village’s party members (usually just a small fraction ofthe population)choose a party secretary and other members of the partycommittee—ie, endorse
the choice made by higher-ups. Next, a memberof this committee organises the election for the post of village chief. Finallyan election is held in which every adult villager may vote. The party secretarywins.

A tighter vetting system typically ensuresthat no one stands against him (village leaders are rarely female). It involvesconsulting official organs in the local township, including the police. Thesecan block the candidacy of a wide range of people. The south-western city ofKunming,
for example, has a list of ineligible typescalled the “seven forbiddens and 15 unsuitables”. Among the forbiddens are“politically two-faced” people. A propaganda video explains this with anillustration of a man dreaming of a protest for freedom and democracy. Theunsuitables include those with “strong religious feelings”: a cartoon showspeople bowing to a Jesus-like figure.

Local regulations also commonly barthosewho have been involved in “illegal” petition campaigns for the redress of a localinjustice; petitioning is routinely treated as criminal. In Guangxi province thereare bans on candidates who have received training in grassroots politics from anyorganisation abroad. A few years ago the government allowed some Western groupsto provide such help.

Also banned are those with links to“black and evil forces”. This is a sweeping term used to describeeverything from criminal gangs to unauthorised religious sects and clannetworks. In 2018 the party launched a three-year campaign to sever suchforces’ connections with grassroots political structures. It declared victorylate last year, claiming it had “severely punished” 3,700 “village overlords”(as powerful leaders operating without heed to the law are known), and sacked 41,000 offendersfrom village committees.

Democracy is not entirely dead. Some localregulations say ordinary villagers’views should be solicited when choosing theparty secretary. The law still says that the winner of an election for villagechief needs at least 50% of the vote, and that 50% of registered voters have tocast their ballots for an election to be valid. But that is a low bar,especially when many do not register. Since the 1990s, many working-age villagershave moved to cities. Migrants can return to vote or appoint a proxy, but whybother when it looks stitched up? The same turnout is required to force avillage chief to step down. But when the chief is also the party secretary, arecall requires daring.


In Guangdong province, residents of Wukanvillage grabbed world headlines when they rose up against their party boss in2011 and held free elections. The party eventually clamped down there, harshly.The party clearly expects the current elections to produce the results itwants: it has changed the rules this time to allow village chiefs to serve forfive years instead of three. Officials argue that, for one person carrying twoloads, a five-year term will make it easier to implement plans without beingfettered by frequent polls. Some state-owned media have aired concerns thatconcentrating so much power in the hands of one person may result in rash decisionsgoing unchecked. But that is a problem for later. The party is out to win.

随便翻的,可能有错误,准备至少两天看一篇吧,训练一下自己的外语能力。如果对外刊和英语有兴趣的韦恩当个乐子看着玩吧。

已有 1 人打赏作者

就是一条蛆 赏了楼主100金币
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。



现金: $62608

名声: 999

称号: 白领

发表于 2021-1-17 23:11:41 | 显示全部楼层
好文我看
2 2021-1-17 23:11:41 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报



现金: $2807

名声: 0

称号:

发表于 2021-1-17 23:12:23 手机 | 显示全部楼层
好文我看
3 2021-1-17 23:12:23 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报



现金: $100

名声: 0

称号:

发表于 2021-1-17 23:14:01 | 显示全部楼层
可以可以
4 2021-1-17 23:14:01 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报



现金: $13634

名声: 0

称号:

发表于 2021-1-17 23:16:31 | 显示全部楼层
不如直接发英文,看不起哥谭?
5 2021-1-17 23:16:31 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报

 楼主| 发表于 2021-1-17 23:20:48 | 显示全部楼层
blackensjk 发表于 2021-1-17 23:16
不如直接发英文,看不起哥谭?

哥谭是天辉论坛,全部都是英语,俊豪会不高兴
6 2021-1-17 23:20:48 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报



现金: $23568

名声: 0

称号:

发表于 2021-1-18 00:01:30 手机 | 显示全部楼层
哥谭是天辉论坛,全部都是英语,俊豪会不高兴
7 2021-1-18 00:01:30 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报



现金: $100

名声: 0

称号:

发表于 2021-1-18 03:00:47 | 显示全部楼层
权利合法性 和 权利的傲慢

这好像是vote唯二解决的问题,没其他优点了吧,当然这两个优势也足够大了
8 2021-1-18 03:00:47 回复 收起回复
布鲁斯韦恩只是蝙蝠侠的一个面具而已。
回复 支持 反对

举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 开始流浪*

本版积分规则

手机版|小黑屋|Gotham City

GMT+8, 2025-7-28 06:21

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表