中国成功背后的秘密 EP1 | 创新、力量与增长！| 超级大国的崛起

@jkatlantic1
Socialist utopia is a great concept that has never been successful. Chinas rise has come from state sponsored capitalism which xe is now trying to reverse. The result is lower growth and inturnal unrest. China will grow old before it grows rich

社会主义乌托邦是一个伟大的概念，但从未成功过。中国的崛起源于国家支持的资本主义，而它现在正试图逆转这一趋势，其结果是增长放缓和内部动荡。中国将在变富之前变老。

@chriswong9158
The world has become a board game in which:
USA is playing Checkers, thinking 1 move ahead.
Russia is playing Chess, thinking 5 moves ahead.

China is playing Go (Weiqi 围棋), thinking 10 moves ahead. China already plan 2050 for China PRC
世界已经变成了一盘棋局：美国在下跳棋，思考一步；俄罗斯在下国际象棋，思考五步；中国在下围棋，思考十步。中国已经为2050年做好了规划。

@simonbarrett9568
China universities for science and technology are the best in the world now UK and US universities in theirs subjects are not in the top 10 in the world now UK and US education is going downhill now as it cost to much to go for the young people now

中国的科技类大学现在是世界上最好的，而英国和美国的大学在这些学科中已不在世界前十。英国和美国的教育正在走下坡路，因为对年轻人来说，上大学的成本太高了。

@jenniferho5183
The Chinese government indeed has improved the overall quality of lives of its people. Go to China and see for yourself. The rapid speed train. The cleanliness, food is in abundance! Relatively cheap too. Many seniors are enjoying their time dancing, eating, playing mahjong. There are no homeless people. Every home in the rural areas has tv, internet connection, children use mental calculation to solve complicated maths problems! Life is good there.

中国政府确实提高了人民的整体生活质量。去中国亲眼看看吧，你会发现高速列车、干净的环境、丰富的食物！价格也相对便宜。许多老年人享受跳舞、吃饭、打麻将的时光，那里没有无家可归的人。农村地区的每个家庭都有电视和互联网连接，孩子们会用心算解决复杂的数学问题！那里的生活很棒。

@andrewcruz-nz1eb
China made tertiary quality educations affordable to her population. Likewise it is not because China force low wage to her people, but it was made possible due everything basic needs (cost of living) was much affordable.

中国使高等教育对人民来说变得负担得起。同样，这并不是因为中国强迫人民接受低工资，而是因为所有基本需求（生活成本）都非常便宜。

@ianbirkinhead4103
Chia’s government actually takes responsibility for the care of its citizens, but this paternalistic approach sees the government as a proud parent encouraging its’children’ to succeed.

中国政府实际上承担了照顾其公民的责任，但这种家长式的方式将政府视为一个骄傲的父母，鼓励其“孩子”取得成功。

@rmzk1783
Inovation in a capitalist system is primarily market driven and may not necessarily benefit society as a whole. Market driven innovation will seek to maximise profit for the few, for example by removing the human from the equation as human resource is expensive. Market driven innovation will give you driverless cars but will not improve traffic flow by developing intelligent traffic control systems as there is less money for it eventhough it may benefit society and control pollution.

资本主义制度下的创新主要是市场驱动的，不一定有益于整个社会。市场驱动的创新将寻求为少数人最大化利润，例如通过将人类从等式中移除，因为人力资源昂贵。市场驱动的创新会给你无人驾驶汽车，但不会通过开发智能交通控制系统来改善交通流量，因为这方面的资金较少，尽管它可能有益于社会并控制污染。

@SM-df9hm
A very important subject.
The ordinary Chinese individuals seem to be much more motivated to invent and create because they will most likely get something good out of it. In contrast to China, for decades the only company in the US that did bring innovation to ordinary people's attention had an ongoing advertisement "invent help caveman commercial" (they wouldn't even tell the name of their business in the ad) but were trying to make money from the people who had ideas under the guise of 'original investment' and would protect one's idea for a few months or years and after that they could get your idea and call it their own or their friends.
I personally went through it, it was both very discouraging and very disappointing.

这是一个非常重要的话题。普通中国人似乎更有动力去发明和创造，因为他们很可能会从中获得好处。与中国相比，几十年来，美国唯一一家将创新带入普通人视野的公司有一个持续的广告“发明帮助原始商业”（他们甚至不会在广告中透露他们的公司名称），但他们试图以“原始投资”的名义从有想法的人那里赚钱并会保护你的想法几个月或几年，之后他们可以拿走你的想法并称之为他们自己或他们的朋友的。我个人经历过，这既非常令人沮丧，也非常令人失望。

@TheLindbergbill
I loved this discussion and found it very insightful. Thank you so much! I have great hopes for China's future. I think any discussion of a country should bring in some points on quality of life and human rights. I must admit I dont consider myself knowledgeable on these areas regarding China but I believe there have been some concerns. The Chinese people I have had a pleasure to work with were wonderful people and I am interested to learn more about this country.

我喜欢这次讨论，觉得它非常有见地。非常感谢！我对中国的未来充满希望。我认为任何关于一个国家的讨论都应该涉及一些关于生活质量和人权的问题。我必须承认我不认为自己在这些领域对中国有深入了解，但我相信存在一些担忧。我有幸与之共事的中国人都是很棒的人，我有兴趣了解更多关于这个国家的情况。

@ProfessorontheToadstoolC-nh1yz
Huawei are more vertically integrated than most Western companies
BYD is extremely vertically integrated.
They can therefore achieve the same rate of profit or better than their competitors can, because their inputs do not contain in their prices a separate rate of profit for the supplier.
Many other Chinese companies are not vertically integrated. But they are generally located in technology clusters unlike anything in the West except maybe Silicon Valley in the 60s to 80s. US suppliers are across the ocean. Their suppliers are across the street. Transportation costs, delays in acquiring parts, all are lower than anywhere else, EVER. They can supply things more cheaply AND they can iterate faster.

华为比大多数西方公司更加垂直整合，比亚迪是极度垂直整合的。因此，它们可以实现与竞争对手相同或更高的利润率，因为它们的投入成本中不包含供应商的单独利润率。许多其他的中国公司并不垂直整合，但它们通常位于技术集群中，除了上世纪60年代到80年代的硅谷外，西方没有类似的情况。美国的供应商在大洋彼岸，而中国的供应商就在街对面，其运输成本、获取零件的延迟都比其他地方低得多，所以它们可以以更低的成本供应产品并且可以更快地进行迭代。

@gryblk21
Since capitalism always seeks monopolies, it doesn't want innovation. It only wants to dig one hole and just keep digging it deeper. That's why creative destruction is necessary to bring down these monopolies and create newer, better worlds.
Since the CPC does not respect monopolies, it is willing to burst bubbles, like real estate, and redirect investment into new sectors EVs.

由于资本主义总是寻求垄断，它不希望创新，它只想挖一个洞并不断挖得更深。这就是为什么创造性破坏以打破这些垄断并创造更新、更好的世界是必要的的原因。由于中国***不尊重垄断，它愿意刺破泡沫，比如房地产，并将投资重新引导到新的领域，如电动汽车。

@tommiko8313
Same thing happened to satellite navigation. China was strangled by us GPS. China was invited to join Europe's Galileo, paif the money but was kicked out. Search China developed its own beodou system. This is not one of the world's most accurate system. They saw the need then to have technical sovereignty I'm not be strangled by others
Some of the early engineers open AI was actually from a company called Naidu so in other words some of the early origins of open AI has some Chinese roots

同样的事情也发生在卫星导航上。中国曾被美国的GPS扼杀，中国也被邀请加入欧洲的伽利略计划，它支付了费用却被踢出。于是中国开发了自己的北斗系统，这是世界上最精确的卫星定位系统之一。他们看到了拥有技术主权，不再被他人卡脖子的必要性。一些早期的OpenAI工程师实际上来自一家名为百度的公司，换句话说，OpenAI的早期起源有一些中国根源。

@tommiko8313
It is ironic that Huawei contributed much to the Android community in terms of technology and coding for example and advanced filing system which Android has incorporated Intuit self. The US is not the only country that can innovate

具有讽刺意味的是华为在技术和编码等方面为Android社区做出了很大的贡献，例如Android已经采用了其先进的文件系统。美国并不是唯一能够创新的国家。

@markmahan38
It's interesting to listen to this conversation. For it touches on things I have touched upon in videos I have posted years and years ago. I find patterns, trademarks, and intellectual property to be a barrier to progress and innovation. I also see private property or business interests as a barrier. For it keeps us shackled to the idea of money. Money shackles us to who controls business and money allocation. Now my ideas are more radical than what was said here in the video. But it is alluding to what I see as the metaphorical prison or box we put ourselves in by investing our physical and mental labor for the gains of a few. When society and community is about progressing and innovating for the collective. Of which the natural world is a part of the collective. The Earth is the womb of all life and so we must do things intelligently and with respect. So we can keep the sustainability of the womb for the future.

听这次对话很有趣，因为它触及了我多年前发布的视频中提到的一些事情。我发现模式、商标和知识产权是进步和创新的障碍，我也将私有财产或商业利益视为障碍，因为它将我们束缚在金钱的观念中，而金钱将我们束缚在控制商业和资金分配的人手中。现在我的想法比视频中说的更为激进，但它暗示了我所看到的隐喻的监狱或盒子，我们通过为少数人的利益投入体力和脑力劳动而将自己困在其中。当社会和社区是为了集体的进步和创新时，自然世界是集体的一部分，地球是所有生命的子宫，因此我们必须聪明而尊重地做事，这样我们才能为未来保持子宫的可持续性。

@rotcivlovosin9414
Everybody talks about thé growth and development of China. Much análisis is made about it's economics, but very few people allude to the fact that the only reason that this happened is due to the fact that the ruling class of China, the imperialists and their interests in China and the feeble Japanese puppet nobility was overthrown and expropriated through a revolution.
I repeat, revolution!!!
Had that not happened China may very well be a dirt port and severely colonized country; or a focus of imperialist war where the poverty of China stoked imperial conflicts regarding who takes what morcels.
Looking back at pre-revolutionary Rusia, it was known as the "sick man of Europe". Almost 90% of the population was illiterate. It was profoundly backward and as such, it constituted an imperialist dream-den. The revolution broke the back of all these ills and made it the industrial, technological and military powerhouse that it went on to become.
Today we our emphasis on elections and "left" or "right" politicians, but noone is talking about workers to power.
No one is talking about building that independent revolutionary party
No one talks about the historical power of the working class and its role in liberating humanity from the shackles of capitalism..
No one is talking about revolution and it's importance in order to save the planet.
Instead we analyse ad-nauseum but offer no way forward.
I wonder why?

每个人都在谈论中国的增长和发展，对其经济进行了大量分析，但很少有人提到这一切发生的唯一原因是通过革命，中国的统治阶级、帝国主义者及其在中国的利益以及软弱的日本傀儡贵族被推翻和剥夺。
我再说一遍，革命！！！
如果没有发生这种情况，中国很可能是一个肮脏的港口和严重殖民化的国家；或者是帝国主义战争的焦点，中国的贫困将激起关于谁夺取哪些领土的帝国主义冲突。
回顾革命前的俄罗斯，你会发现它被称为“欧洲病夫”，几乎90%的人口是文盲。它非常落后，因此成为了帝国主义者的梦想之地。而革命打破了所有这些弊病，使其成了工业、技术和军事强国。
今天我们强调选举和政治家的“左”或“右”，但没有人谈论工人掌权。
没有人谈论建立那个独立的革命政党。
没有人谈论工人阶级的历史力量及其在将人类从资本主义枷锁中解放出来的作用。
没有人谈论革命及其拯救地球的重要性。
相反，我们无休止地分析，但没有提供前进的道路。
我想知道为什么？

@PwningGerZ
China innovates better because they understand the role of money. There will always be government intervention to the economy unlike America who endorses since time immemorial abandonment of government meddling.
There will be “NO” neoliberalization of the economy of China. The Washington Consensus of “deregulation, privatization and liberalization” will not happen in China.

中国创新得更好是因为他们理解金钱的作用。与美国不同，中国经济中总会存在政府干预，而美国自古以来就支持放弃政府干预。
中国经济不会出现“新自由主义化”。“放松管制、私有化和自由化”的华盛顿共识不会在中国发生。

@sergeantD14
This they put the people’s quality of life as priority one if the business owners get out of line they are actually reprimanded for any deregulation or austerity they try to implement

他们将人民的生活质量放在首位，如果企业主越界，他们实际上会因任何试图实施的放松管制或紧缩政策而受到谴责。

@GuyWhoLikesTheSnarkies1435
What happened to China in the past few decades alone is very analogous to Stalin's rapid industrialization drive, if anybody ever thought about it. It's interesting to note that Soviet had previously implemented the NEP, which is what the socialist market economy is modelled after at its core, but expanded upon it.
But I'd like to note that even though Stalin's collectivism of the countryside and industrialization policy was formally a departure of the NEP i.e. state capitalism mechanism w. a dominant party-led Dirigisme, it was nonetheless developed upon the core strength of NEP that's the access and the capacity to absorb foreign capitals and recycle them in order to grow surplus in high added-value, as well as the necessary jump in material condition and growth.
Now looking back at the China's experience since Deng's Reform & Opening Up, I'm starting to look more and more at it as an analogous event of socialist construction albeit being dialed back to a much slower, gradualist pace because.. ahem* I think the Soviet was too accelerationist in that sense and that, they failed to recognize and properly anticipate the dialectical consequences of the Stalin's model following the end of the War i.e. the underestimation of the US/West's systematic, organized, and well-coordinated retaliation against the Soviet's political economic paradigm during the Cold War.

如果有人曾经思考过的话，他会发现过去几十年中国发生的事情与斯大林的快速工业化进程非常相似。有趣的是苏联之前实施了新经济政策（NEP），这是社会主义市场经济模式的核心，但中国在此基础上进行了扩展。
但我想指出的是尽管斯大林的农村集体化和工业化政策正式脱离了新经济政策，即国家资本主义机制与主导党领导的国家干预主义，但它仍然基于新经济政策的核心优势发展，即吸收外国资本并循环利用以在高附加值领域增长盈余，以及实现必要的物质条件和增长的飞跃。
现在回顾中国自邓小平改革开放以来的经验，我开始越来越多地将其视为社会主义建设的类似事件，尽管其节奏被放慢到一个更为渐进的步伐，因为……嗯，我认为苏联在这方面过于加速主义，未能正确认识和预见斯大林模式在战后结束时的辩证后果，即低估了美国/西方在冷战期间对苏联政治经济模式的系统性、有组织和协调一致的报复。

@niccoloferrara4633
"China's socialism"..... it's more like a communist party that oversees a mixed private and public economy. But China definitely has private enterprise and therefore capitalism...it's just overseen and regulated by an authoritarian top-down government that acts as a hyper-efficient corporate state, and nominally has an egalitarian vision.

“中国式的社会主义”……这更像是***监督的混合私有和公有制经济，但中国确实存在私营企业，因此也存在资本主义……它只是由一个高效的、自上而下的威权政府监督和监管，这个政府像一个超高效的公司国家，名义上有一个平等主义的愿景。

@zizkovhoodmoments1590
yes, but theres vast structural differences between western style market economy and Chinas. in China capital is mobilized by state banks and not private bankers. They align policy with goals of development and poverty alleviation, unlike usa, which financialized, deindustrialized and moved production abroad to crush unxs and became a service economy of managers and their low-paid servants with fast shrinking middle class in between

是的，但西方市场经济与中国的市场经济之间存在巨大的结构差异。在中国，资本由国家银行而不是私人银行家动员。他们将政策与发展目标和扶贫目标对齐，而不像美国那样金融化、去工业化并将生产转移到国外以打击工会，成为一个由经理和低薪仆人组成的服务型经济，让中产阶级迅速萎缩。

@spacetimemalleable7718
The role of education, esp. in STEM fields, has been ingrained in the Chinese for generations. Their reverence for and value of science has been a key factor in their rise. The U.S. may pour money to build chips and factories but have they invested in their people's education. Consider the PISA results. Year after year China, Singapore and most Asian nations are top ranked. It is only through immigrants and their offspring from these countries that the U.S. has maintained some competitiveness. Now the U.S. is exacerbating the situation by stifling immigration. The U.S. has a systemic public education problem. Compare the education system in the U.S. vs. China and you'll find the answer. Also compare parental views on education, e.g. does China ever have a discipline problem with their students?

教育的作用，特别是在STEM领域，已经深深植根于中国人的几代人之中。他们对科学的尊重和重视是他们崛起的关键因素。美国可能会投入资金建设芯片和工厂，但他们是否会投资于人民的教育？想一想PISA的结果，你会发现年复一年，中国、新加坡和大多数亚洲国家都名列前茅。美国之所以保持一定的竞争力，仅仅是因为来自这些国家的移民及其后代。现在美国通过限制移民加剧了这种情况。美国存在系统性的公共教育问题，比较美国和中国的教育体系，你就会找到答案。你还可以比较家长对教育的看法，例如中国学生是否存在纪律问题？

@AlexRam-p9u
One major difference is that China is built on the theory of Dialectical Materialism, which is a science-based approach of analyzing and designing our physical world in order to create the right material conditions that support a healthier society. If the US wants to be able to compete, we need to move away from idealism and embrace Dialectical Materialism. Many people still want to make capitalism work, but even rich people don't seem to ever get enough nor be happy with themselves, so idealizing that capitalism is the best system we can come up with is the main issue with this country.
The book "Reason in Revolt" by Alan Woods shows how Dialectical Materialism is scientifically proven. It's truly eye-opening

一个主要区别在于中国建立在辩证唯物主义理论的基础上，这是一种基于科学的，用于分析和设计我们的物质世界以创造支持更健康社会的正确物质条件的方法。如果美国想要竞争，我们需要摒弃理想主义，拥抱辩证唯物主义。许多人仍然希望资本主义能够运作，但即使是富人似乎也永远不满足或不快乐，因此理想化地认为资本主义是我们能想到的最好制度是这个国家的主要问题。
艾伦·伍德的《理性与反抗》一书展示了辩证唯物主义如何被科学证明，这确实令人大开眼界。

@marcionphilologos5367
IT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO RETURN TO MYSTICAL THINKING. THE EMPIRE OF China HAS A 2500 YEAR OLD TRADITION OF CONFUCIAN SOCIALISM. IN CONTRAST THE WEST HAD BEEN FRAGMENTED BY FEUDALISM AND IN THE 19TH CENTURY BY NATIONALISM, lixED WITH FASCISM, RACISM, COLONIALISM, MILITARISM, IMPERIALISM, INDUSTRIAL CAPITALISM. SO, China IS A NATIONAL SOCIALIST EMPIRE, NOT SUFFERING UNDER THE WESTERN EVILS OF RACISM, FASCISM, Communism, NATIONALISM AND DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!!!!!

重要的是不要回归神秘主义思维。中华帝国有着2500年的儒家社会主义传统。相比之下，西方曾被封建主义分裂并在19世纪被与法西斯主义、种族主义、殖民主义、军国主义、帝国主义和工业资本主义相关的民族主义分裂。因此，中国是一个国家社会主义帝国，它没有受到西方种族主义、法西斯主义、共产主义、民族主义和民主的邪恶影响！！！！！！