極速前進:序言

王丹(Dan Wang) 
網站danwang.co
是一位加拿大科技分析師和作家,專攻當代中國。[ 1 [ 2 [ 3 ]王丹曾任Gavekal Dragonomics分析師、耶魯大學法學院保羅·蔡中國中心訪問學者以及胡佛研究所研究員。[ 4 [ 5 [ 6 [ 7 [ 8 ]王丹從科技角度,包括半導體製造和社交媒體,對美中關係 進行了廣泛的評論。 [ 9 [ 10 [ 11 [ 12 [ 13 ] 2025年8月,他的著作《Breakneck: China's Quest to Engineer the Future》(《飛速發展:中國的未來工程探索》)出版。[ 4 ]


王丹
九月在海灣的約旦
喬丹·施耐德 和 莉莉·奧廷格
2025年8月28日

施耐德一家將於9月9日起在舊金山灣區居住至月底。如果您有興趣與他們見面,或者想在曼哈頓與他們交換一套兩居室的房子,又或者您正好有一套空置的公寓可以容納幾位成年人和一個非常可愛的寶寶,請聯繫jordan@chinatalk.media。

王丹終於在ChinaTalk上首次亮相!我們今天將討論並慶祝他的第一本書《Breakneck》。

我們進入…

工程界與律師

1980年代中國留下的相互競爭的遺產:獨生子女政策和天安門事件與知識分子辯論、文化活力和搖滾樂。

了解中國的方法,從《人民日報》和《尋求真理報》到實地調查,

如何比較中國便利卻又壓抑​​的社會價值觀與美國混亂多元的社會價值觀?

李強在上海封城後的職業生涯可以告訴我們,在習近平的中國,忠誠與能力孰輕孰重。


  • 了解美國和中國的運作方式和互動模式
  • 政治局那些表情嚴肅的委員們可不是鬧著玩的。對他們來說,「偉大」不僅僅是一句口號,而是一場生死攸關的全力以赴的追求。
  • 中國政府建造光鮮亮麗的公共設施,卻毫不猶豫地拘禁少數民族或封鎖整座城市。
  • 太多外人看到的只是繁榮或壓抑。生活在那裡,你既能感受到生活水準的持續提高,又能感受到北京散發出的威權氣息。
  • 事情在好轉 和 惡化上並無矛盾。我看到中國既有強大的企業家 ,也 有強大的政府,這個國家既行動迅速,但 也破壞一切;既 行動迅速,也摧毀人民。
  • 中國的政治體制 真的能夠 孕育出科技巨頭嗎?當世界其他國家紛紛設置貿易壁壘時,先進製造業能否成功?經濟疲軟將如何影響北京對台灣的戰略佈局?
  • 金融界人士很容易陷入哲學思辨,促使我深入思考一些重要議題。
    • 如果我不能給出令人滿意的答案,對話就會變成一場蘇格拉底式的拷問,而不是輕鬆愉快的溝通。
  • 去中國那些鮮為人知的城市旅行 樂趣無窮。無論走到哪裡,我都能發現令人驚豔的美食、奇特的景象和令人難忘的人們。
  • 當中國效法美國過去的成功模式時,美國政府卻忙著削弱自身的優勢。
    • 一個過於注重程序的左派與一個不計後果、破壞力極強的右派沆瀣一氣,試圖限制 政府權力。
    • 無論是左派還是右派,都不允許國家提供公眾所期望的基本服務。
  • 兩國之間最鮮明的對比在於將定義21世紀的競爭:
    • 美國精英階層主要由律師組成,擅長阻撓;
    • 而中國技術官僚階層主要由工程師組成,擅長建設。
    • 這正是本書的核心觀點。
  • 中國是一個 工程強國,以驚人的速度進行大規模建設,
  • 這與美國 律師主導的社會形成鮮明對比,後者會竭盡所能地阻撓一切,無論好壞。

Introduction

Each time I see a headline announcing that officials from the United States and China are once more butting heads, I feel that the state of affairs is more than just tragic; it is comical, too, because I am sure that no two peoples are more alike than Americans and Chinese.

A strain of materialism, often crass, runs through both countries, sometimes producing veneration of successful entrepreneurs, sometimes creating displays of extraordinary tastelessness, overall contributing to a spirit of vigorous competition. Chinese and Americans are pragmatic: They have a get-it-done attitude that occasionally produces hurried work. Both countries are full of hustlers peddling shortcuts, especially to health and to wealth. Their peoples have an appreciation for the technological sublime: the awe of grand projects pushing physical limits. American and Chinese elites are often uneasy with the political views of the broader populace. But masses and elites are united in the faith that theirs is a uniquely powerful nation that ought to throw its weight around if smaller countries don’t get in line.

I came to this view as a Canadian who has spent almost equal amounts of time living in the United States and China. To me, these two countries are thrilling, maddening, and, most of all, deeply bizarre. Canada is tidy. I sometimes find myself relaxing as soon as I cross into its borders. Drive around America and China, on the other hand, and you’ll see people and places that are utterly deranged. That’s not a reproach. These two countries are messy in part because they are both engines for global change. Europeans have a sense of optimism only about the past, stuck in their mausoleum economy because they are too sniffy to embrace American or Chinese practices. And the rest of the world is either too mature or too young to match the impact of these two superpowers. It is Americans and Chinese—Silicon Valley, Shenzhen, Wall Street, and Beijing—that will determine what people everywhere will think and what they will buy.

They are not the only two countries in the world that matter. Far from it. But if we don’t understand how the United States and China function and interact, then in large part we won’t quite understand many of the biggest changes in the world. The two countries are reconfiguring the international order and each other too. Seeing China more clearly—its dazzling strengths, appalling weaknesses, and everything in between—also helps us to see America more clearly.

To understand China, we must start in the country’s most riveting city: Beijing.

Beijing enthralls not because it is nice but because it isn’t. By most measures, life in Beijing is dreary. It is in China’s arid north, where dust storms descend every so often upon the city’s twisting alley homes, dating from imperial times, or gray apartment blocks, built in the Soviet style. In the last decade or so, the state has bricked up many of its liveliest sites, including its many bars and roadside barbecues, turning the city into a no-fun zone. Want to take your life into your hands? Try braving the cars that speed through Beijing’s gigantic roads. Much like Moscow or Pyongyang, its avenues feel like they were built for army parades rather than for normal life. Really, everything that can go wrong in urban design has gone wrong in Beijing.

But the capital is also a city of gravity and substance. Beijing attracts many of China’s smartest people, including scientists, technology leaders, and those seeking to advance in the Communist Party. The po-faced members of the Politburo don’t fool around. Greatness isn’t only a slogan for them: It’s a full-on, life-or-death pursuit. Beijing, for the rest of this book, stands in as the Communist Party and the central government. China’s leaders are driven by intense paranoia, doing everything they can to control the future.

My parents and I emigrated from China to Canada when I was seven. During high school, we moved to the woodsy suburbs of Philadelphia (where my mom and dad still live). After going to New York for college and Silicon Valley for work, I returned to China to investigate its technology developments. I learned to appreciate something vital: The country is always in motion. Living in Hong Kong, Beijing, and then Shanghai was a good education not only because these were China’s most prosperous economic zones. For six years, I lived through a period of economic dynamism that gave way to smothering political repressiveness. I experienced top leader Xi Jinping’s ongoing mobilization of the country for great-power competition. I tracked the expanding web of US restrictions on Chinese tech companies, as well as their struggle to escape from American restraints. And I endured all three years of Xi’s pursuit of zero-Covid, which started impressively until it plunged the country into broad misery.

The Chinese state builds gleaming public works and doesn’t flinch from locking up ethnic minorities or locking down whole cities. Too many outsiders see only the enrichment or the repression. Living there puts you face to face with both a sustained rise in living standards and the authoritarian pulses emanating out of Beijing. It became no contradiction for me to appreciate that things are getting better and getting worse. I saw how China is made up of both strong entrepreneurs and a strong government, with a state that both moves fast and breaks things and moves fast and breaks people.

I was the technology analyst at Gavekal Dragonomics, an investment research firm serving a financial audience. We were a small team of analysts managed by editors who used to be economics journalists. My task consisted of writing research notes for hedge funds, endowments, and other asset managers hungry for China analysis. Dragonomics research wasn’t focused on particular companies but rather on more ambitious macro questions about the direction China was heading and what it means for the world. Portfolio managers aren’t shy about getting to the heart of the matter, asking me: Can China’s political system really breed tech giants? Will advanced manufacturing succeed when the rest of the world is throwing up trade barriers? How does a faltering economy affect Beijing’s designs on Taiwan?

If I didn’t offer good answers, the conversations could feel like a Socratic beating rather than a collegial chat. Though hedge fund managers can be obnoxious, I found conversing with them to be valuable. Folks in finance easily turn philosophical, pushing me to sharpen my views on important questions. I worked hard to decipher where Xi was taking China, which meant reading party texts, no matter how arcane, and visiting different regions, no matter how obscure.

By traveling as often as possible to smaller cities—some that are little more than urbanized industrial parks—I grasped something that most Americans, and even many Chinese, do not: Going to little-known cities in China is fun. Wherever I went I found amazing food, bizarre sights, and memorable people. I saw that China had greater dynamism than acknowledged by most headlines about the country, which fixate on Beijing’s political machinations. Just imagine what the rest of the world would miss if they understood the United States exclusively through developments from Washington, DC.

Everywhere I felt China’s breathless and, at times, reckless speed. I tried to capture the country’s shifts and tussles, buffeted by a pandemic and a darkening international environment, by writing an annual letter. These were a journal of sorts to record everything I observed and felt. In 2020, I wrote about reading every Xi Jinping speech in Seeking Truth, the Communist Party’s flagship theory magazine; in 2021, the differences between Hong Kong, Beijing, and Shanghai; and in 2022, what it was like to wander through the mountains of Yunnan province—whose north is historic Tibet and whose south feels like Thailand—during the worst period of zero-Covid.

I thought constantly about the United States. It wasn’t only that the Trump administration was prosecuting a trade and technology war; Beijing holds America steadfastly in its gaze. China’s leaders are ready to learn from Europe, Japan, Singapore, and many others, sure. But they have looked up to the United States more than any other country, benchmarking themselves against the world’s preeminent power.

It is almost uncanny how much the United States and China have been complementary of each other. It was no accident that the two countries established, for a few decades, an economic partnership that worked tremendously well for American consumers and Chinese workers. But on a political level, these two systems are a study in contrasts. While the United States reflects the virtues of pluralism and protection of individuals, China revealed the advantages and perils that come from moving quickly to achieve rapid physical improvements.

Over the past four decades, China has grown richer, more technologically capable, and more diplomatically assertive abroad. China learned so well from the United States that it started to beat America at its own game: capitalism, industry, and harnessing its people’s restless ambitions. If you want to appreciate what Detroit felt like at its peak, it’s probably better to experience that in Shenzhen than anywhere in the United States.

As China emulated America’s past successes, the US government got busy undermining its own strengths. A procedure-obsessed left conspired with a thoughtlessly destructive right to constrain the government. Neither the left nor the right allows the state to deliver essential goods expected by the public. The Biden administration may have ushered through historic bills on industrial policy, but executive agencies were so obsessed with procedural concerns that little building actually took place before voters reelected Donald Trump, who has threatened to cancel many of these projects. The United States is still a superpower that is able to outclass China on many dimensions. But it is also in the grips of an ineffectual state where people are increasingly concerned with safeguarding a comfortable way of life.

Americans used to love the great opportunity that China represented. Nearly a century ago, they were wartime allies, with ties cemented by cultural connections and business relationships. Today, natural amity is being crowded out by mutual mistrust. Beijing and Washington are competing with each other economically, technologically, and diplomatically, casting a pall on those of us connected to both countries. In 2022, Beijing’s censors blocked the personal website where I publish my annual letters. The Great Firewall tends to block access to big platforms like the New York Times, not little sites like mine. That week, I had to seek out the Canadian consul general to ask whether I needed to organize my departure from China. Beijing had already detained two Canadians in response to Canada’s arrest of a prominent Chinese businesswoman. Many Americans who previously traveled to China for business and pleasure have lost their enthusiasm for visits.

We are now in an era where the two countries regard each other with suspicion, and often animosity. Like China, the United States is able to move fast and break people, dealing tremendous brutality at home and abroad when it feels threatened. A paramount question of our times is whether hostility between China and the United States can stay at a manageable simmer. Because if it boils over, they will devastate not only each other but also the world.

The best hedge I know against heightening tensions between the two superpowers is mutual curiosity. The more informed Americans are about Chinese, and vice versa, the more likely we are to stay out of trouble. The starkest contrast between the two countries is the competition that will define the twenty-first century: an American elite, made up of mostly lawyers, excelling at obstruction, versus a Chinese technocratic class, made up of mostly engineers, that excels at construction. That’s the big idea behind this book. It’s time for a new lens to understand the two superpowers: China is an engineering state, building big at breakneck speed, in contrast to the United States’ lawyerly society, blocking everything it can, good and bad.

Breakneck is the story of the Chinese state that yanked its people into modernity—an action rightfully envied by much of the world—using means that ran roughshod over many—an approach rightfully disdained by much of the world. It is also a reminder that the United States once knew the virtues of speed and ambitious construction. Traversing dazzling metropolises and gigantic factories, Breakneck will illuminate the astounding progress and the dark underbelly of the engineering state. The lawyerly society has virtues, too, to teach China. Each superpower offers a vision of how the other can be better, if only their leaders and peoples care to take more than a fleeting glance.

沒有留言:

張貼留言

注意:只有此網誌的成員可以留言。

選擇汪精衛中華帝國會像奧匈帝國鄂圖曼土耳其帝國一樣戰敗解體

選擇汪精衛 中華帝國會像奧匈帝國鄂圖曼土耳其帝國一樣戰敗解體 因為站錯了隊伍 北洋軍閥頭腦比汪精衛清楚 所以一戰才能拿回山東 孫文拿德國錢,他是反對參加一戰 選擇蔣介石, 中國將淪為共產主義國家 因為蔣介石鬥不過史達林 蔣介石即使打贏毛澤東 中國一樣會解體 中國是靠偽裝民族主義的...