纽约时报：一个村起义能够预示中国
A Village in Revolt Could Be a Harbinger for China一个村起义能够预示中国Wukan Journal: Canny Villagers Grasp Keys to Loosen China’s 吴坎杂志：精明的村民抓住关键放松中国Wukan abuts a natural harbor that is ideal for development.吴坎紧靠一个天然良港，是理想的发展。Occupy Wukan is another matter entirely. The state press has been all but mute on why 13,000 Chinese citizens, furious over repeated rip-offs by their village elite, sent their leaders fleeing to safety and repulsed efforts by the police to retake Wukan. But the village takeover can be ignored only at Beijing’s peril: There are at least 625,000 potential Wukans across China, all small, locally run villages that frequently suffer the sorts of injustices that prompted the outburst this month in Wukan.据吴坎完全是另一回事。国家媒体已全部静音为什么13000的中国公民，愤怒的反复宰客的村庄精英，把他们的领导人逃往安全和击退经警方努力夺回吴坎。但村收购可以忽略，只在北京的危险：至少有625000个潜在的wukans在中国，所有小，本地运行的村庄，经常受到各种不公正，促使突出在这个月吴坎。“What happened in Wukan is nothing new. It’s all across the country,” said Liu Yawei, an expert on local administration who is the director of the China program at the Carter Center in Atlanta.“发生了什么事在吴坎是没有什么新的。这是在全国各地，”刘建超说亚威，专家对地方行政谁是导演的中国计划在卡特中心在亚特兰大。A second analyst, Li Fan, estimated, in an interview, that 50 percent to 60 percent of Chinese villages suffered governance and accountability problems of the sort that apparently beset Wukan, albeit not so severe. Mr. Li leads the World and China Institute, a private nonprofit research center based in Beijing that has extensively studied local election and governance issues.二分析员，李范，估计，在一次采访中，百分之50至百分之60的中国乡村治理和问责制问题遭受的那种显然吴坎困扰，尽管不那么严重。李先生是世界与中国研究所，一个非盈利研究中心在北京进行了广泛的研究，地方选举和治理问题。On paper, the Wukan protests never should have happened: China’s village committees should be the most responsive bodies in the nation because they are elected by the villagers themselves. Moreover, the government has built safeguards into the village administration process to ensure that money is properly spent.在纸的吴坎抗议，不应发生：中国村民委员会应该是最敏感的机构在国家因为他们是由村民自己。此外，政府已建立保障措施纳入行政村工艺确保钱真正花。Village self-administration, as the central government calls it, is seen by many foreigners as China’s democratic laboratory — and while elections can be rigged and otherwise swayed, many political scientists say they are, on balance, a good development.村民自治，作为中央政府的呼吁，在很多外国人作为中国民主实验室，而选举被操纵，否则动摇，许多政治科学家说他们，平衡，一个良好的发展。Actually running the villages, however, is another matter. Village committees must provide many of the services offered by governments, such as sanitation and social welfare, but they cannot tax their residents or collect many fees. Any efforts to raise additional money, for things like economic development, usually need approval from the Communist Party-controlled township or county seats above them.实际运行的村庄，但是，是另一回事。村民委员会必须提供的许多服务由政府提供，如卫生和社会福利，但他们不能税务居民或收集费。任何努力筹集更多的钱，比如经济发展，通常需要征得中共控制的乡镇或县以上。In practice, the combination of the villages’ need for cash and their dependence on higher-ups has bred back-scratching and corruption between village officials and their overseers. China’s boom in land prices has only broadened the opportunity for siphoning off money from village accounts.在实践中，结合该村对现金的需求和依赖上级孕育了开方便之门和腐败官员和他们的监管者之间村。中国繁荣的土地价格只有扩大的机会，将钱从村帐。And the checks and balances — a village legislature to sign off on major decisions, a citizens’ accounting committee to watch over the village books — have turned out to be easily manipulated by those who really hold the power.和制衡——村议会签署对重大决策，公民会计委员会关注农村读物-已被证明是容易被操纵那些真正掌握权力。“Land sales are where the big money is,” Edward Friedman, a political science professor and a China scholar at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said in a telephone interview. “Every level can see how much better the level above it is doing. And each one wants to live at least that well. The system has within it a dynamic which makes people feel it’s only fair that they get their share of the wealth.”“土地是最赚钱的，”爱德华弗里德曼，政治学教授和中国学者在威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校，在电话采访中说。“每一级可以看到更好的上面级的做。每个人都想生活至少那个好。该系统内的动态，使人感到这是唯一公平的，他们有他们自己的财富。”The opportunities to get that share are vast, apparently. In 2003, a candidate for village committee chairman in Laojiaotou village, in Shanxi Province, spent two million renminbi — then about $245,000 — to campaign for an office that paid 347 renminbi a month, the Chinese journal Legal News reported at the time.机会去分享是巨大的，明显的。2003，候选人在laojiaotou村村民委员会主席，在山西省，花了二百万人民币约245000美元的竞选办公室，花了347人民币一个月，中国法制新闻报道的时候。In interviews this month, leaders of the Wukan protest said it was common knowledge that local government and Communist Party officials had spent millions of renminbi to buy potentially lucrative posts. They maintained that Wukan’s village committee stayed in power in part by threatening any challenges to its continued rule.在这个月，领导的抗议说，这是共同的知识吴坎地方党政官员花了数百万元人民币买潜在利润丰厚的职位。他们认为吴坎村村委会呆在动力部分由任何挑战威胁其持续的规则。None of those allegations could be quickly confirmed. One verified statistic, however, is compelling. Of the nine members of Wukan’s village committee, five had held their posts since the committee system itself was set up under Mao Zedong’s successor, Deng Xiaoping.没有这些指控可以迅速确认。一核实统计，然而，令人信服的。这九个成员吴坎的村民委员会，五个进行了从委员会制度本身都是建立在继承毛泽东，邓小平。The same was true of the village’s Communist Party secretary, Xue Chang, who had held office since 1970 before being replaced amid Wukan citizen protests in September.同样是真实的村党委书记，薛长，谁举行了办公室自1970之前在九月取代吴坎公民抗议。Though a village in legal terms, Wukan is bigger than most such entities. It sits in urban Guangdong Province, abutting a natural harbor on the Pacific Ocean that is ideal for development.虽然一个村的法律条款，吴坎是最大的实体。它坐落在城市的广东省，毗邻的天然海港上太平洋，是理想的发展。
Leaders of the protest contend, however, that the village committee sold off or granted long-term leases to nearly 60 percent of the village’s 11 square miles over an 18-year period beginning in 1993. The sales were said to include roughly four-fifths of the village’s 1.5 square miles of farmland and much of its forests.领导的抗议抗衡，然而，那村民委员会出售或长期租赁，近百分之60的村11平方英里超过18年期间开始在1993。销售被认为有大约五分之四村1.5平方英里的农田和大部分的森林。Just how the land was sold remains unclear. Under Chinese law, such sales are supposed to require approval of the villagers, who collectively own the land and are supposed to share in the proceeds. But the approval process is vague; in practice, most decisions are left to the elected village committee or an appointed village legislature that acts on behalf of the residents.如何土地出售仍不清楚。根据中国的法律，这样的销售也应该需要审批的村民，集体拥有的土地，应该分享收益。但审批过程是模糊的；在实践中，大多数决定留给当选的村民委员会或者指定村议会，居民代表。The sales also required approval by Donghai township, the level of government just above Wukan. In some cases, officials in Lufeng, the county seat whose territory includes Wukan, were also involved in setting up sales.销售还需要批准东海乡，政府一级的上方吴坎。在某些情况下，官员在陆丰县，其领土包括吴坎，还参与建立销售。The land went to hotels, homes, factories, power companies and even private funerary temples. One wealthy villager, Chen Wenqing, gained a business interest in Wukan’s harbor and a 50-year lease on a large tract of land used as a pig farm.土地去宾馆，家庭，工厂，电力公司、甚至私人葬礼的寺庙。一个富裕的村民，陈文情，获得商业利益吴坎的港口和50年的租赁一大块土地，作为一种猪场。A plan this year to sell Mr. Chen’s farm and an equal amount of villagers’ farmland to developers of a luxury housing and retail project was the final straw, though, mobilizing villagers to protest. Beyond seeking a public accounting of that project and others like it, angry residents called for democratic elections to replace village officials, many of whom have been in power for decades.计划今年销售陈先生的农场和同等数量的村民耕地开发一个豪华住宅及零售项目是最后一根稻草，虽然，动员村民抗议。除了寻求公共会计项目和其他类似，愤怒的居民称为民主选举取代村官员，其中许多人已在几十年。Villagers say they have no idea where the proceeds from any of the sales or rentals went. “From 1993 onward, not one time were we told,” said Lin Zuluan, a protest leader. “No voting, no compensation, nothing. We didn’t even know what was going on.”村民说，他们不知道那里的收益的任何销售或出租出去。“从1993开始，没有一个时间告诉我们，”林说zuluan，示威领袖。“没有投票，没有，没有。我们甚至不知道发生了什么事。”Mr. Lin said that most residents, unfamiliar with the workings of a village system, had no idea of their rights. That seems plausible; one recent academic study concluded that three in four residents of villages that had been surveyed had no information about village finances.林先生说，大多数居民，不熟悉的工作，一个村，都不知道自己的权利。这似乎是合理的；最近的一个学术研究的结论是，三的居民在四村已调查的信息没有收入。In Wukan, villagers did sense that something was wrong, and had complained vigorously — between July 2009 and last March, seven times to Guangdong Province officials and five times to officials of Lufeng, the county seat. But none of those complaints appear to have been addressed.在吴坎，村民意识到的东西是错误的，并抱怨-七月之间2009和去年3月，七次广东省官员和五次陆丰的官员，县城。但没有人投诉似乎已解决。It took a de facto revolt by Wukan’s residents to force Guangdong Province officials to step into the crisis, calling the villagers’ grievances legitimate and promising to address them. Wukan’s village committee chief and its party secretary are under investigation, a move that probably will end in stiff punishment.阿德花了事实上的起义吴坎居民力广东省官员步入危机，要求村民不满合法和有希望的解决。吴坎的村民委员会主任、党组书记正在调查，此举可能会结束在严厉的惩罚。The state-run press has hailed the Guangdong response as a model of government responsiveness and a template for handling public grievances in the future.官方媒体称赞广东政府反应作为模型反应和模板处理市民的不满在未来。Yet some observers of Chinese governance are less sanguine. In their view, Wukan’s uprising highlighted systemic defects in China’s local governments, and only a housecleaning — not an isolated slap on the wrist — will address them.然而，一些观察家对中国治理不太乐观。在他们看来，吴坎起义突出系统性缺陷，中国的地方政府，只有一个房间-不是一个孤立的惩罚-将解决他们。The trouble, they say, is that almost nobody benefits from a housecleaning — not village leaders or township and county officials enriched by land sales and other corrupt deals. And not higher officials whose influence is only diminished if they get rid of lower-level supplicants.麻烦的是，他们说，几乎没有人从一个房间不是村干部或乡、县官员丰富的土地和其他腐败交易。而不是高级官员的影响，只有减少，如果他们摆脱低层次的求助者。“What will change things is if you change the incentives by which make you make your money,” said Mr. Friedman, of the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Allowing peasants to own and sell their land — and not a village committee — would suggest a serious effort to break the corruption cycle, he said. So would breaking up the cozy network of village and local government officials who stand to benefit from land sales.“什么会改变的事情是如果你改变激励，让你赚你的钱，”弗里德曼先生说，美国威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校。让农民拥有和出售他们的土地，而不是一个村委员会建议认真努力打破腐败周期，他说。这样就打破了舒适的网络社区和当地政府官员谁受益的土地销售。For the moment, at least, those sorts of reforms do not appear to be in the cards. “The vested interests in the present system are very strong,” he said. “And I don’t think there’s a Deng in the office who has enough clout to change things.”目前，至少，这些改革将不会出现在卡。“既得利益在本系统非常强大，”他说。“我不认为有一个邓在办公室的人有足够的实力变化的东西。”
这是机器翻译的么？ 看不明白，求高手能不能理一下。。。 深深的红 发表于 2012-1-2 06:27 static/image/common/back.gif
这是机器翻译的么？
Q15)o3O109) {:soso_e120:}楼主太懒了，还不如看原文了
页:
[1]