【外交政策 20151029】“国家应当补偿我”

满仓

【中文标题】“国家应当补偿我”
【原文标题】This Country Should Compensate Me
【登载媒体】外交政策
【原文作者】Bethany Allen-Ebrahimian
【原文链接】http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/29/china-one-child-policy-ending-social-media-outrage-compensation/




10月29日，中国共产党五中全会召开之前，中国政府宣布它的一项颇富争议、持续了几十年之久的、限制大部分夫妻只能生育一个孩子的政策，即将结束。当一些西方观察人士为这项残暴的（有时候甚至是被野蛮执行的）政策的终结而欢呼时，中国的一个群体已经发出了他们不满的声音——就是独生子女那一代人。

根据10月29日发布的一份措辞含混的公报，所有中国夫妻可以生育第二个孩子，这项权利到目前为止只有部分人可以享受。长期以来，这些政策的支持者认为，在中国这样人口规模已经非常庞大、资源有限的国家，任由人口增长将会让数百万人陷入贫困生活水平，必然会导致自然资源紧张。但是“计划生育政策”——中国人这样称呼它——不仅为无数的家庭带来了伤心欲绝的悲痛，他们被高额的罚款、绝育，甚至某些情况下强制堕胎等手段阻挠，不能多要一个孩子，而且扭曲了这个国家的人口统计数据。到2014年底，中国男性人口数量比女性多出3300万，原因是中国人传统上青睐男孩，有选择性的堕胎让很多人把他们唯一的生育指标留给男孩。而且，低出生率让中国的人口迅速老化。一度爆发式的经济增长缓慢下来，采取措施避免经济和人口两项指标同时下滑似乎是必然的举措。

这样的理由似乎证明，改变实行了35年的政策是合乎逻辑的。但是在中国的社交媒体上——偶尔会出现批判政府的言论，大部分发言人都是遭受当前计划生育政策约束的年轻中国人——主要充斥的情绪都是愤怒，不是喜悦。这项政策的实施，包括一些尖锐的主张，已经在中国形成了某种社会契约，其基础是政府曾经明确无误地承诺，会以慷慨的社会服务方案赔偿公民的牺牲。就像80年代一条流行的标语：“只生一个娃，政府帮养老。”

但是很多中国人都感到，他们从未在这个承诺中有任何受益。“母亲生下我之后，我们用全家所有的积蓄来缴罚款。”这是10月29日在中国的微博上出现的一条得到最多支持的发言。发言者来自中国西南省份四川，他说自己是个年轻未婚男性。“国家应该赔偿我。”自从中国在1978年开始了漫长的经济改革之后，曾经保证生活在这个贫穷的共产主义国家公民可以拥有最低生活标准的承诺，已经土崩瓦解了。尽管改革取得了辉煌的经济增长，数以亿计的中国人脱离了贫困，但中国依然缺少一个强大的社会福利网络，包括全民医疗和可靠的失业保险。随着GDP的大副增长，贫富差距越来越大，那些无法营造一个可靠的养老条件的不幸者，都被贫富差距的鸿沟所吞噬。有人认为，这不是政府可以与公民讨价还价的交易。来自中国上海，目前在华盛顿工作的年轻中国专家杰克•林认同这种观点。他在接受《外交政策》的采访时说，他认为独生子女和他们的家庭应当为曾经做出的牺牲而得到补偿。“如果你想想独生子女政策对独生子女和他们的家庭所造成的伤害，我们的确应当赔偿他们。”林说，“另一方面，如果说独生子女政策让整个国家受益，我们也应当奖励独生子女和他们的家庭。但是到目前为止还没有人提到奖励的事情。”林也是个独生子女，他认为他自己的家庭，尤其是他的母亲，做出了巨大的牺牲。“我们家只有一个孩子，为其他人节省了社会资源，而付出的代价是放弃了生育第二个孩子的机会。”

一些中国网民似乎认为，政策的改变并不表示政府具有了同情心，而是少数贪婪分子冷酷的经济逻辑所带来的结论。一位用户在10月29日贴出了一篇短小的寓言故事，内容是讲一只狼控制着所有的房地产资源，它向羊提供的抵押贷款利率极高。羊背负着沉重的贷款压力，实在无力生养更多的子女，于是羊的数量锐减。“但是狼发现如果情况持续下去，它和它的家人就没有足够的羊可以吃了，于是它宣布羊可以多生一个孩子。”这个帖子很快得到了数千个赞。另外一位用户在10月29日写到：“谁希望只要一个孩子，谁敢只要一个孩子，什么狗屁政策会干预这些问题？不管经济情况怎么样，人们不想要孩子是基于很多因素的考虑，不需要你铺天盖地的宣传。”林也支持这种观点：“从长远角度来看，政府需要更多能产奶的牛。”

隐藏在社交媒体黑色幽默之下的是广泛的不信任感，人们觉得政策的变化不是来源于政府的同情和人权概念的伸张，而是源于政府对维持经济继续增长的需求。很多网民半开玩笑地说，所谓的“二孩政策”很快就会变成强制性的。一位微博用户说：“老的政策执行靠罚款、强制流产和节育环，在新的‘二孩政策’下，政府要提供现金奖励，免费派发伟哥和情趣内衣了。”另一个人写到：“下一步：不生二孩的统统罚款。”

五中全会标志着中国生育政策的第二次重大转折，这对政府的公信力是一次严峻的考验。在已故的共产主义强人毛泽东的指引下，无处不在的宣传口号鼓励人民多生多育，让国家变得更加强大。但是在独生子女政策出现之后，为了改正毛所营造出的人口与资源关系的错觉，政府把手指向了另一个方向。当代很多年轻人的成长都伴随着那些刷在墙上和挂在街道上的宣传口号，提醒他们只生一个孩子的好处，比如“只生一个，利国利民”，或者提醒他们不守法的后果，比如“该扎不扎，房倒屋塌”。而最近这次政策的转向表明，道德论据并不是问题所在。一位网络用户在一篇相关新闻的评论中，修改了早期政策的口号，来迎合新政策，充满了对政府反复无常举措的讽刺。“我已经想到了今后要使用的口号：‘强迫生育，利国利民。’”还有一个是“该生不生，房倒屋塌”。

公平地说，并不是所有的人都发出了批评的声音。有些人认为，虽然计划生育在某些情况下是一项过分严苛的政策，但是毕竟让国家有所受益。一位网络用户写到：“简直不敢想想，没有计划生育政策中国将会变成什么样。”还有一些人把政策的变化视为进步的表现，说批评一项正确的决定没有必要。“你可以生第二个孩子，不需要缴纳罚款，你也可以不要，这有什么错误？”一位用户说自己是来自贫穷的西南省份贵州的21岁女孩，她不认同那个狼和羊的寓言故事：“允许生两个孩子之前，你说政府没有人性。现在可以生两个孩子了，你又说政府缺少奴隶！政府该怎么办？”

中国史无前例控制人口的实验，基本已经结束了，但对于未来几代人依然会产生深远、不可预见的影响。但是目前看来，很多中国人仅仅在试图消化这个新的现实，中国的家庭必将再次发生巨大的变化。一位网络用户说：“80后和90后会是中国文明历史上唯一一代没有兄弟姐妹的人吗？我的心被伤透了。”



原文：

With China's one-child policy finally ending, those who suffered under the old rules are lashing out in anger.

On Oct. 29, in the wake of the Fifth Plenum, a meeting of top leaders, the Chinese government announced that its controversial, decades-long policy of limiting most couples to a single child was to come to an end. While some Western observers are cheering at the end of the repressive (and sometimes brutally-enforced) policy, one group within China is already speaking up in dissatisfaction: China’s only children themselves.

According to a vaguely worded communiqué released on Oct. 29, all Chinese couples will now be allowed to have two children, a right that has thus far only been extended to some. Policy supporters have long argued that in a country like China, with an already huge population and limited resources, unchecked population growth would keep millions mired in poverty and place unbearable strain on natural resources. But the “planned birth policy,” as it is known in Chinese, has not only caused heartache for countless families prevented from having more than one child through massive fines, sterilization, and in some cases forced abortions — it has also wildly distorted the country’s demographics. At the end of 2014, Chinese men outnumbered Chinese women by 33 million, due to a traditional preference for sons and the gender-selective abortions that many have opted for in order to guarantee that their single child is male. Additionally, low birth rates mean that China’s population is aging swiftly. And as the country’s once-explosive economic growth slows, the move to prevent a double economic and demographic decline is unsurprising.

That would suggest a shift from the current 35 year-old policy is in order. Yet on Chinese social media, a place where criticism of government can sometimes take root and one populated in large part by young Chinese who grew up under the current planned-birth regime, the primary reaction was anger, not joy. The implementation of the rule, critics argue, has became a kind of social contract within China, based on an often explicit promise that the government would repay the sacrifices of its citizens with generous social services. As one common government slogan in the 1980s went: “Have just one child; the government will take care of the elderly.”

But many Chinese feel they never received those promised benefits. “When mom gave birth to me, we had to pay our entire family savings as a fine,” went the most up-voted comment on one Oct. 29 post announcing the news on China’s Twitter-like Weibo, written by a user who identified himself as a young single male in China’s southwestern Sichuan province. “The country should compensate me.” After China began its long process of economic reform after 1978, the social services that had guaranteed at least a minimal standard of living in the previously poor communist country were systematically dismantled. Though reform brought spectacular economic growth, lifting hundreds of millions of Chinese out of poverty, China still lacks a strong social safety net, such as universal healthcare or reliable unemployment insurance. Along with dramatic GDP growth has come an ever-widening gap between rich and poor, meaning that those not fortunate enough to maintain a comfortable nest egg may all too easily fall through the cracks. This was not the bargain the government struck with its citizens, some argue. Jake Lin, a young Chinese professional from Shanghai now working in Washington, DC, echoed the point. He told Foreign Policy that he believes only children and their families should be compensated for the sacrifices they made. “If we think the one-child policy caused damage to all the only children and their families, then we should compensate them,” said Lin. “On the other hand, if we think the one-child policy [created] some social benefit for the entire country, we should reward the only children and their families. But no one is talking about the reward.” Lin, who is himself an only child, believes that his own family, and especially his mother, made sacrifices. “We followed the rule and regulations set by the government,” said Lin. “By having only one child, my family saved social resources for others. The cost is giving up the opportunity to have a second child.”

Some Chinese web users seemed to believe that the change in policy reflected not a more compassionate government, but rather a cold economic calculus by a greedy few. One user posted a short parable on Oct. 29 about a wolf that controlled all the real estate, and would only give mortgages to the sheep at sky-high rates. The sheep were so deeply in debt that they could no longer afford to raise children, and so the number of sheep declined. “But the wolf realized that if it stayed like this, his family would have no more sheep to eat,” the parable concluded, “so he announced that the sheep could all be allotted one more birth.” The post quickly garnered thousands of likes. “Those who want to have a child — those who dare to have a child — what kind of dog-fart policy tries to manage that? ” wrote another user on Oct. 29. “It doesn’t matter how the economy is doing. People who don’t want to give birth have many different considerations. They don’t need your ubiquitous propaganda.” Lin also held to this view. “In the long run,” he told FP, “the government needs more cows to milk.”

Underlying the dark humor on social media is a widespread suspicion that the policy change is based not on compassion or an expansion of human rights, but rather on what the government has deemed necessary for continued economic development. Many netizens quipped, only half-jokingly, that the so-called “two-child policy” might soon become mandatory. “The old policy measures used to be heavy fines, forced sterilization, and vaginal rings,” wrote one Weibo user. “Now with the ‘two-child’ policy, the government will offer cash incentives and prizes, and send installments of Viagra and sexy underwear.” Another wrote in a popular comment, “The next step: Fines for those who don’t have two children!”

The plenum marked the second major about-face in Chinese birth policies, one that’s straining the credibility of government propaganda. Under late Communist strongman Mao Zedong, ubiquitous posters encouraged citizens to make the country strong by having as many children as they could. But with the advent of the one-child policy, intended partly as a corrective to the mismatch between population and available resources that Mao’s exhortations had created, the government made moral arguments in the other direction. Many contemporary youth grew up surrounded by government slogans painted on walls, or on signs draped across boulevards, reminding them of the virtues of having only one child — it’s “good for the country, good for the people” — or the consequences of not obeying the law, such as, “If you don’t get sterilized, your house will be demolished.” The latest turn suggests the moral arguments were never really the point. One web user, in a popular comment in response to the news, reworked earlier slogans to reflect the new policy, reflecting cynicism at government caprice. “I’ve come up with the slogans that will be used in villages from now on,” wrote the user. “Forced birth is good for the country and good for the people” went one; another, “If you are supposed to give birth but don’t, there will be no one to take care of the elderly.”

To be sure, not all have been critical of the move. Some believe the one-child policy, despite its sometimes-draconian measures, has benefitted the country. As one web user wrote, “I don’t even dare to think about what China would be like now without the planned-birth policy.” Others saw the change to the policy as a positive measure, arguing that it made little sense to criticize a step in the right direction. “You can have a second child without being fined, but you don’t have to have a second child,” wrote one web user. “What’s wrong with that?” One user, who identified herself as a 21 year-old woman from the underdeveloped southwestern province of Guizhou, took exception to the wolf-sheep parable. “Before it allowed two children, you denounced the government as inhumane,” she wrote. “Now that it’s letting us have two children, you’re saying it’s because the government lacks slaves! What can the government do?”

China’s unprecedented experiment in population control, now largely at an end, will continue to have long-reaching and likely unforeseen implications for generations to come. For now, though, many in China are simply trying to adjust to the sudden new reality, one in which the structure of Chinese families is being overturned yet again. “For those born in the 80s and 90s, will they be the only generation in the entire history of Chinese civilization to be without brothers and sisters?” asked one user. “My heart hurts.”