从李世默《两种制度的传说》说起
李世默两种制度的传说
李世默两种制度的传说在中国的文学传统中，有一个非常有趣的传说，说的是李世默曾经创立了两种制度，分别是“仁政”和“法治”。
李世默是唐朝时期的一位贤明的皇帝，他一直秉持着仁政理念来治理国家。
他深信只有用仁爱的心对待百姓，才能获得百姓的拥护和支持，从而建立一个安定繁荣的国家。
因此，他制定了一系列的规章制度，以保障人民的权益和福祉。
他宣布废除重税，减轻百姓的负担，让人民有更多的钱财用于购买生活必需品。
他还开办了许多免费的学校，为穷苦百姓提供免费的教育，以提高他们的文化素养和就业能力。
李世默还非常重视社会的公平与正义，他制定了严格的法律和惩罚措施，以惩罚那些作恶多端的人。
他设立了合法的审判机构，让人民可以通过合法的途径维护自己的权益。
这样的一种法治制度，为整个社会树立了良好的法律秩序，使得社会更加和谐稳定。
然而，尽管李世默的“仁政”制度取得了一定的成果，但他发现在一些特定的情况下，单纯依靠仁政的方法往往无法解决问题。
有一次，国家发生了一起特大的灾难，许多人失去了家园，陷入困境。
李世默发现，仁政制度无法迅速有效地解决这个问题，因为国家的资源有限，无法满足所有人的需求。
他意识到，只有建立一套能够公平分配资源的法治制度，才能更好地解决这类问题。
于是，李世默决定在“仁政”制度之外，再制定一套“法治”制度。
他设立了资源分配机构，确保每个人都能够获得公平的待遇和帮助。
他坚持用法律的力量来约束那些贪污腐败、懒惰无能的官员，保证国家的资源能够最大限度地用于救灾和民生建设。
这两种制度的传说在中国的文学中被广泛传扬。
人们赞颂李世默的智慧和善良，他既有信念而又善于变通，既关心百姓的福祉又注重法治的实施。
这两种制度相辅相成，使国家得以繁荣昌盛。
这个传说也成为了中国文化中的一部分，启示人们在面对问题时应灵活运用不同的手段，以实现更大的利益和进步。
中西民主制度的两次历史分野_兼论人民代表大会制度在中国的必然性
摘要：中国与西方在民主制度上经历了两次历史分野。
第一次分野发生在各自国家的起源时期，西方走向城邦民主制，中国走向专制集权制；第二次分野发生在近现代，西方选择三权分立体制，而中国选择了人民代表大会制度。
这两次分野是一系列历史的和地理的原因造成的，并导致中西走上不同的政治道路。
同时这两次分野也表明了人民代表大会制度符合中国现实国情和历史传统，是中国人民的必然选择。
关键词：民主制度；历史分野；人民代表大会制度；三权分立中图分类号：D034.3文献标识码：A文章编号：1004-0544（2011）01-0046-04中西民主制度的两次历史分野———兼论人民代表大会制度在中国的必然性潘传表（上海大学法学院，上海200444）现代政治文明的演进和传播，使民主日益成为一种神圣价值，以至于当今的任何一种政权都必须从“民主”那里取得合法性。
然而，民主的神圣性并不意味着民主的现实性，民主要成为一种现实，必须依赖一种有效的民主制度的支撑。
在现在的中国，这个支撑点就是人民代表大会制度。
历史上，中西的民主制度经历了两次大分野，这是由一系列历史的和地理的原因造成的，而这两次分野的后果导致中西走上不同的政治道路。
一、第一次历史分野：城邦民主制和专制主义中央集权人类最初的社会形态是原始社会，在原始社会里，原始人对社会事务实行民主管理，这是原始民主。
随着国家的产生和发展，原始民主逐渐消亡。
在西方，代之而起的是城邦民主制，以古希腊城邦国家雅典最为典型；在中国，代之而起的是邦国封建制，以西周的分封制最为典型，并在秦朝发展成为专制集权制。
这是中西民主制度的第一次历史分野。
城邦民主制施行于古希腊多数城邦国，以雅典最为典型，其鲜明特征有：直接民主、主权在民、轮番而治、抽签选举和多数决定等。
城邦民主制极大地调动了城邦公民的政治热情和聪明才智，造就了城邦的繁荣与强盛。
然而，城邦民主毕竟只是人类刚迈入文明社会时期的产物，不可避免地存在许多缺陷。
为什么中国的政治模式是优越的
为什么中国的政治模式是优越的（作者上海成为基金创始人兼合伙人李世默）许多人都把中美两个大国之间的竞争说成是民主和专制之间的冲突。
但这是错误的。
美国和中国以根本不同的方式看待自己的政治制度：美国认为民主政府本身就是目的，而中国则认为，其目前的政府形式，或任何与此有关的政治制度，仅仅是一种实现更大的国家目标的手段而已。
在跨越几千年由人类治理的历史上，有过两次民主的重要试验。
首先是雅典，历时一个半世纪；第二是现代西方。
若把民主定义为每个公民一票，则美国的民主只有92岁。
在实践中，如果从1965年通过的投票权法案算起的话它只有47岁，与中国的大多数朝代相比，要短暂得多。
那么，为什么有这么多人大胆地宣称，他们已经为全人类发现了理想的政治制度，它的成功永远得到了保障？答案就在当前的民主试验的源头。
它以欧洲的启蒙运动为开端。
处于其核心的是两个基本的理念：个人是理性的，以及个人被赋予不可剥夺的权利。
这两个信念为现代世俗信仰奠定了基础。
而这种信仰的最终政治表现是民主。
在其初期，政治治理的民主思想促进了工业革命，迎来了西方世界空前的经济繁荣和军事强大时期。
然而，就在开始的时候，正是这场运动领导者中的一些人意识到了在这个试验中嵌入的致命缺陷，并试图加以遏制。
美国联邦制拥护者阐明，他们要建立的是一个共和国，而不是一个民主国家，并设计了种种手段来限制民意。
但是，就像在任何宗教中一样，信仰被证明超越了规则。
公民权范围的扩大导致越来越多的人参与越来越多的决策。
正如美国人所说：“加州就是未来。
”而这种未来就意味着无尽的公投、瘫痪和破产。
在古希腊雅典，不断提高的民众参政程度导致凭借煽动进行统治。
在今天的美国，钱是蛊惑人心的伟大推动者。
正如诺贝尔奖得主、经济学家迈克尔·斯彭斯所说，美国已经从“每个有产者一票、每个男人一票、每人一票向一美元一票发展”。
用任何标准来衡量，美国都是一个名存实亡的宪法共和国。
选出的代表没有自己的思想，在寻求当选连任时，他们表现出响应舆论的心血来潮。
【美联英语】李世默-李世默TED演讲稿：两种制度的传说2
两分钟做个小测试，看看你的英语水平/test/quwen.aspx?tid=16-73675-0前者肩负着在全世界推动民主的使命，必要时甚至可以动用武力，来打击那些不投票不选举的邪恶势力。
(老布什、小布什、奥巴马对自由、民主和选举的发言)上述宏大叙事同样传播甚广。
根据“自由之家”的统计，全世界采用选举民主制的国家，从1970年的45个已增至2010年的115个。
近20多年来，西方的精英人士孜孜不倦地在全世界奔走，推荐选举民主这一救世良方。
The good belongs to those who are democracies and are charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force, against the evil of those who do not hold elections.(。
) Now. This story also became a bestseller. According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010. In the last 20years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus.他们声称，实行多党制和全民选举是拯救发展中国家于水火的唯一良药，只要吃下它，就一定会实现繁荣，否则，永无翻身之日。
但这一次，中国敬谢不敏。
我又被愚弄了一把。
Multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on them is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world. Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success. Those who do not are doomed to fail. But this time, the Ch inese didn’t buy it. Fool me once… (Laughter)(Applause)历史是最好的裁判。
鄂尔多斯强国复兴有我知识竞赛试题及答案(判断题180题)
鄂尔多斯强国复兴有我知识竞赛试题及答案（判断题180题）鄂尔多斯强国复兴有我知识竞赛题库及答案（判断题180题）1.《野草》写于“五四,后期，是鲁迅先生的一本散文诗集。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：A2.党员的党龄，从支部大会通过他为预备党员之日算起。
（）A.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：预备党员转为正式党员之日3."发展体育运动，增强人民体质,是毛泽东的题词。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：A4.我国儒学的创始人是孟子。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：孔子6.对古代神奇的透光铜镜原理的正确推论出自于《梦溪笔谈》。
OB.错误正确答案：A7.党的支部委员会对申请入党的人，要注意征求党内同志的意见，进行严格的审查，认为合格后再提交支部大会讨论。
OA.正确8.错误正确答案：B解释：征求党内外群众的意见8.泼水节是我国少数民族苗族最盛大的节日。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：傣族9.四项基本原则是我国各族人民团结奋进的共同政治基础。
（）A.正确B.错误正确答案：A10.世界上最早提出人口论的思想家是孔子。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：韩非子∏.我国少数民族中人口最多的是蒙古族。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：壮族人口最多。
12.我国自主发射的第一颗人造卫星是东方红。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：A13.中国第一艘航空母舰叫"延安号OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：辽宁号14.党第一次全国代表大会产生的中央领导机构称为中央局。
（对）15.中国重返联合国是在第25届联大。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：26届联大16.我国出土长度第一的硅化木化石在乌海市。
正确17.党章提出的四个尊重是指：尊重劳动、尊重知识、尊重人民、尊重创造。
（）A.正确B.错误正确答案：B解释：尊重人才18.《骆驼祥子》是老舍长篇小说的代表作。
OA.正确B.错误正确答案：A19.根据《党纪律处分条例》，相互利用职权或者职务上的影响为对方及其配偶、子女及其配偶等亲属、身边工作人员和其他特定关系人谋取利益搞权权交易的，违反了党的廉洁纪律。
学习强国2022年6月第三周答题
学习强国2022年6月第三周答题每周答题1.工作责任制2.ABC3.最后贷款人4.A5.把有限的生命投入到无限的为人民服务之中去改革开放四十年丨改革2022从学术发展角度而言，中国改革开放四十年的历史，同时也是如何引进、努力吸纳西方观念和思想，并使其合法化的历史。
与之相应地，试图抗拒与消除西方思想的影响，竭力从自身文化中寻求正当资源的努力则呈现出另一种历史面相。
就前者而言，在西学东渐浪潮的冲击下，国人的认知图景不断拼贴重组，学术社会科学化的弊端日益凸显。
尽管跨学科构想的呼声日涨，试图冲破西学条块分割的壁垒，却难以拯救中国传统整体“人文”地图被蚕食鲸吞的命运。
就后者而论，突出表现为“文化保守主义”“国学热”“新儒学”此起彼伏，这些思潮表面看似一种直接抵抗的姿态，实际上不过是前者问题意识的引申而已。
如所谓“国学热”兴起的背后其实是现代民族主义的诉求，与提高民族自尊心的深层考量密不可分;当代“新儒家”则借韦伯式问题旧话重提，大谈中国为什么没有出现资本主义。
中西概念之间的渗透交融始终处于纠葛不清的状态，同时对相关知识的辨析与讨论也呈现两极对立的态势。
因此，要理解当代中国历史研究的走向和经验，就有必要从相互纠葛的概念中梳理归纳出若干问题予以辨析。
本文拟从“规范化”与“本土化”、“田野”与“文本”、“化约论”与“语境论”三对概念入手进行讨论，借以管窥四十年来中国历史学的变革轨迹，进而对西方社会科学如何规范和影响中国史学研究做出反思。
一、学术自主性的建构:“规范化”还是“本土化”在20世纪90年代的学术讨论中，“规范化”和“本土化”不时会在各种场合频繁出现，大意是要表达中国学术在与国际接轨的同时又须保持其自身特性，使两者趋于平衡。
只是在相当长一段时间内这两个词的使用比较分散，没有引起特别关注，其成为焦点对象是因为20世纪90年代末由《中国社会科学季刊》和《中国书评》杂志发起的一次讨论。
这次讨论把大陆甚至海外相当一批优秀学者卷入其中。
2020年陕西省咸阳市市渭城区底张晋公庙中学高二历史测试题含解析
2020年陕西省咸阳市市渭城区底张晋公庙中学高二历史测试题含解析一、选择题（每小题2分，共60分）1. 诗言志，史铸诗。
诗人毛泽东以其气势磅礴的诗篇反映了中国革命的峥嵘岁月。
下列诗句，按其所对应历史事件发生时间的先后排列正确的是①“民族阵线，救国良方。
四万万众，坚决抵抗。
” ②“金沙水拍云崖暖，大渡桥横铁索寒。
” ③“秋收时节暮云愁，霹雳一声暴动。
”④“宜将剩勇追穷寇，不可沽名学霸王。
”A.④①②③ B.②①④③ C.①②③④D.③②①④参考答案：D2. 十一届三中全会以后，我国城市经济体制改革的中心环节是（）A．强调在管理上的宏观调控B．建立社会主义市场经济体制C．发展以公有制为主体的多种所有制形式D．增强企业活力参考答案：考点：GC：经济体制改革．分析：本题考查经济体制改革．考查城市经济体制改革的中心环节．考查学生对基础知识的识记、迁移、运用能力和对城市经济体制改革相关知识的掌握．解答：结合所学可知，城市经济体制改革的中心环节是增强企业活力，故D项正确．管理体制上是政企分开，扩大企业自主权，故A项错误．建立社会主义市场经济体制是经济体制改革的目标，故B项错误．发展以公有制为主体的多种所有制形式是城市经济体制改革的内容之一，但是不是中心环节，故C项错误．故选D．3. 尼克松在1972年访华时说：“多年来我对人民共和国的态度是主席和总理全然不能同意的。
把我们带到一起来的，是认识到世界上出现了新形势。
”这里的“新形势”包括①中国恢复联合国合法席位②第三世界崛起③美国丧失了霸主地位④中苏关系不断恶化A、①②③B、②③④C、①③④D、①②④参考答案：D4. 春秋战国时期，“为国之道，食有劳而禄有功，使有能而赏必行，罚必当”方针所反映的实质是A．废除井田制B．改变世卿世禄制C．确定重农抑商政策D．加强中央集权参考答案：B5. 巴黎公社的经济措施中，最能体现其阶级性的是A.监督铁路运输和军需生产B.没收逃亡资本家工厂，交给工人合作社管理C.民主选举公职人员 D 建立工人阶级的治安、司法和立法机构参考答案：B6. 明朝废丞相设立内阁，清朝设置军机处。
李世默--两种制度的传说
李世默--两种制度的传说第一篇：李世默--两种制度的传说Good morning, and my name is Eric Li, and I was born here.No, I wasn’t born there;this was whereI was born.Shanghai, at the height of the Cultural Revolution.My grandmother tells me that she heard the sound of gunfire along with my first cries.When I was growing up, I was told a story that explained all I ever needed to know about humanity.It went like this.All human society develop in linear progression, beginning with primitive society, then slave society, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally, guess where we end up? Communism!Sooner or later, all of humanity, regardless of the culture, language, nationality, will arrive at this final stage of political and social development.The entire world’s people will be unified in this paradise on earth and live happily ever after.But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil, the good of socialism against the evil of capitalism, and the good shall triumph.That of course, was the meta-narrative distilled from the theories of Karl Marx.And the Chinese bought it.We were taught the grand story day in and day out.It became part of us, and we believed in it.The story was a bestseller.About one third of the entire world’s population lived under that meta-narrative.Then the world changed overnight.As for me, disillusioned by the failed religion of my youth, I went to America and became a Berkeley hippie.Now, as I was coming of age, something else happened.As if one big story wasn’t enough, I was told another one.This one was just as grand.It also claims that all human societies develop in a linear progression towards a singular end.This one went as follows: all societies, regardless of culture,be a Christian, Muslim, Confucian, must progress from traditional societies in which groups are the basic units to modern societies in which atomized individuals are the sovereign units, and all these individuals are, by definition, rational, and they all want one thing: the vote.Because they are all rational, once given the vote, they produce the good government and live happily ever after.Paradise on earth,again.Sooner or later, electoral democracy will be the only political system for all countries and all peoples, with a free market to make them all rich.But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil.The good belongs to those who are democracies and charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force, against the evil of those who do not hold elections.This story also became a bestseller.According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010.In the last 20 years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus: multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on then is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world.Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success.Those who do not are doomed to fail.But this time, the Chinese did not buy it.Fool me once, the rest is history.In just 30 years, China went from one of the poorest agricultural countries in the world to a second-largest economy.650 million people were lifted out of poverty.80% of th e entire world’s poverty alleviation during that period happened in China.In other words, all the new and old democracies put together amounted to a mere fraction of what a single, one-party state did without voting.See, I grew up on this stuff: food stamps.Meat was rationed to a few hundred grams per person per month at one point.Needless to say, I ate all mygrandmother’s portions.So I ask myself, what is wrong with this picture? Here I am in my hometown, my business growing leaps and bound.Entrepreneurs are starting companies every day.Middle class is expending in speed and scale unprecedented in human history.Yet, according to the grand story, none of this should be happening.So I went and did the only thing I could.I studied it.Yes, China is a one party state run by the Chinese Communist Party, the Party, and they don’t hold elections.Three assumptions are made by the dominant political theories of our time.Such a system is operationally rigid, politically closed, and morally illegitimate.Well, the assumptions are wrong.The opposites are true.Adaptability, meritocracy, and legitimacy are the three defining characteristics of China’s one-party system.Now most political scientists will tell us that a one-party system is inherently incapable of self-correcti on.It won’t last long because it cannot adapt.Now here is the facts.In 64 years of running the largest country in the world, the range of the party’s policies has been wider than another country in the recent memory, from radical land collectivization to the Great Leap Forward, then the privatization of farmland, then the Cultural revolution, then Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, then successor Jiang Zemin took the giant political step of opening up party membership to private businesspeople, something unimag inable during Mao’s rule.So the party self-corrects in rather dramatic fashions.Institutionally, new rules get enacted to correct previous dysfunctions.For example, term limits.Political leaders used to retain their positions for life, and they used that to accumulate power and perpetuate their rules.Mao was the father of modern China, yet his prolonged rule les to disastrous mistakes.So the party instituted term limits with mandatoryretirement age of 68 to 70.One thing we often hear is political reforms have lagged far behind economic reforms and China is in dire need of political reform.But this claim is a rhetorical trap hidden behind a political bias.See, some have decide a priori what kinds of change they want to see, and only such changes can be called political reform.The truth is political reform have never pared with 30 years ago, 20 years ago, even 10years ago, every aspect of Chinese society how the country is governed, from the most local level to the highest center, are unrecognizable today.Now such changes are simply not possible without political reforms of the most fundamental kind.Now I would venture to suggest the Party is the world’s leading expert in political reform.The second assumption is that in a one-party state, power gets concentrated in the hand of the few, and bad governance and corruption follow.Indeed, corruption is a big problem.But let’s first look at the larger context.Now this may be counterintuitive to you.The party happens to be one of the most meritocratic political institutions in the world today.China’s highest ruling body, the Politburo, has 25 members.In the most recent one, only five of them came from a background of privilege, so-called princelings.The other 20, including the President and the Premier, came from entirely ordinary backgrounds.In the larger central committee of 300 or more, the percentage of those who were born into power and wealth was even smaller.The vast majority of senior Chinese leaders worked and competed their way to the pare that with the ruling elites in both developed and developing countries, I think you will find the Party being near the top in upward mobility.The question then is, how could that be possible in a system run by one party? Now we come to a powerful politicalinstitution, little-known to Westerners: the Party’s Organization Department.The Department functions like a giant human resource engine that would be the envy of even some of the most successful corporations.It operates a rotating pyramid made up of three components: civil service, state-owned enterprises, and social organizations like university or community program.They form separate yet integrated career paths for Chinese officials.They recruit college grads into entry-level positions in all three tracks, and they start from the bottom, called keyuan.Then they could get promoted through four increasingly elite ranks: fuke, ke, fuchu, and chu.Now these are not moves from karate kids, okay? It’s serious business.The range of position is wide, from running health care in a village to foreign investment in a city distract to manger in a company.Once a year, the department reviews their performance.They interview their superiors, their peers, their subordinates.They vet their personal conduct.They conduct public opinion surveys.Then they promote the winners.Throughout their careers, these cadres can move through and out of all three tracks.Over time, the good ones move beyond the four base levels to the fuju, and ju levels.There, they enter high officialdom.By that point, a typical assignment will be to manage a distract with population in the millions or a company with hundreds of millions of millions of dollars in revenue.Just show you how competitive the system is, in 2012, there were 900,000 fuke and ke levels, 600,000 fuchu and chu levels, and onlu 40,000 fuju and ju levels.Afer the ju levels, the best few move further up several more ranks, and eventually make it to the Central Committee.The process takes a two to three decades.Does patronage play a role? Yes, of course.But merit remains the fundamental driver.In essence, theOrganization Department runs a modernized version of China’s centuries-old mandarin system.China’s new president, Xi Jinping, is a son of a former leader, which is very unusual, first of his kind to make the top job.Even for him, the career tool a 30 years.He started as a village manager, and by the time he entered the Politburo, he had managed areas with total population of 150 million people and combined GDPs of 1.5 trillion US dollars.Now, please don’t get me wrong, okay? This is not a putdown of anyone, it is just a statement of fact.George W.Bush, remember him? This is not a putdown.Before becoming Governor of Texas, or Barack Obama before running for President, could not make even a small county manager in China’s system.Winston Churchill once said that democracy is a terrible system except for all the rest.Well, apparently he hadn’t heard of the Organization Department.Now, westerners always assume that multi-party election with universal suffrage is the only source of political legitimacy.I was asked once, “the party wasn’t voted in by election.Where is the source of legitimacy?”Isaid, “how about competency?” we all know the facts.In 1949, when the party took power, China was mired in civil wars, dismembered by foreign aggression, average life expectancy at that time, 41 years old.Today it is the second largest economy in the world, an industrial powerhouse, and its people live in increasing prosperity.Pew research polls Chinese public attitudes and here are the numbers in recent years.Satisfaction with the direction of the country: 85 percent.Those who think they’re better off than five years ago: 70%.Those who expect the future to be better a whopping 82%.Financial Times polls global youth attitudes, and these numbers, brand new, just came from last week.93% of China’s Generation Y are optimistic about their country’sfuture.Now if this is not legitimacy, I’m not sure what is.In contrast, most electoral democracies around the world are suffering from dismal performance.Idon’t need to elaborate this audience how dysfunctional it is from Washington to European capitals.With a few exceptions, the vast number of the developing countries that have adopted electoral regimes are still suffering from poverty and civil ernments get elected, and then they fall below 50 percent approval in a few months and stay there and get worse until the next election.Democracy is becoming a perpetual cycle of elect and regret.At this rate, I’m afraid it is democracy, not China’s one-party system, that is in danger of losing legitimacy.Now I don’t want to create the misimpression that China’s hunky-dory on the way to some kind of superpowerdom.The country faces enormous challenges.Social and economic problems that come with wrenching change like this are mind-boggling.Pollution is one, food safety, population issues.On the political front, the worst problem is corruption.Corruption is widespread and undermines the system and its legitimacy.But most analystmis-diagnose the disease.They say the corruption is the result of the one-party system, and therefore in order to cure it you have to do away with the entire system.But more careful look would tell us otherwise.Transparency International ranks China between 70 and 80 in recent years among 170 countries, and it’s still moving up.India, the largest democracy in the world, is 94 and dropping.For the hundreds or so countries that are ranked below China, more than half of them are electoral democracies.So if election is the panacea for corruption, how come these countries cannot fix it? Now, I’m a venture capitalist.I make bets.It wouldn’t be fair to end this talk without putting myself on theline and making some predictions.So here they are.In the next 10 years, China will surpass the US and become the largest economy in the world;income per capital will be near the top of all developing countries.Corruption will be curbed, not eliminated and China will move up 10-20 notches to above 60 in TI ranking.Economic reform will accelerate, political reform will continue, and the one-party system will be holding firm.We live in the dust of an era.Meta-narratives that make universal claims failed us in the 20th century and are failing us in the 21st.meta-narrative is the cancer that is killing democracy from the inside.Now I want to clarify something.I’m not here to make an indictment of democracy.On the contrary, I think democracy contributed to the rise of the west and the creation of the modern world.It is the universal claim that many western elites are making about their political system, the hubris, that is the heart of the West’s current ills.If they would spend just a little less time on trying to force their way onto others, and a little bit more on political reform at home, they might give their democracy a better chance.China’s political model will never supplant electoral democracy, because unlike the latter, it doesn’t pretend to be universal.It cannot be exported.But that is the point precisely.The significa nce of China’s example is not that it provides and alternative but the demonstration that alternatives exist.Let us draw to a close this era of munism and democracy may both be laudable ideals, but the era of their dogmatic universalism is over.Let us stop telling people and our children there is only one way to govern ourselves and a singular future towards which all societies must evolve.It is wrong and it is irresponsible and worst of all, it is boring.Let universality make way for plurality.Perhaps a moreinteresting age is upon us.Are we brave enough to welcome it? Thank you.第二篇：李世默演讲观后感如果他们在台下——李世默演讲观后感白荷菲 201355003笔者总结李世默的演讲，主要有两个方面的内容：1、元叙事危害着社会的正常发展。
李世默--两种制度的传说
Good morning, and my name is Eric Li, and I was born here. No, I wasn’t born there;this was whereI was born. Shanghai, at the height of the Cultural Revolution. My grandmother tells me that she heard the sound of gunfire along with my first cries. When I was growing up, I was told a story that explained all I ever needed to know about humanity. It went like this.All human society develop in linear progression, beginning with primitive society, then slave society, feudalism, capitalism, socialism, and finally, guess where we end up? Communism! Sooner or later, all of humanity, regardless of the culture, language, nationality, will arrive at this final stage of political and social development. The entire world’s people will be unified in this paradise on earth and live happily ever after. But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil, the good of socialism against the evil of capitalism, and the good shall triumph. That of course, was the meta-narrative distilled from the theories of Karl Marx. And the Chinese bought it. We were taught the grand story day in and day out. It became part of us, and we believed in it. The story was a bestseller. About one third of the entire world’s population lived under that meta- narrative. Then the world changed overnight. As for me, disillusioned by the failed religion of my youth, I went to America and became a Berkeley hippie. Now, as I was coming of age, something else happened. As if one big story wasn’t enough, I was told another one. This one was just as grand. It also claims that all human societies develop in a linear progression towards a singular end. This one went as follows: all societies, regardless of culture, be a Christian, Muslim, Confucian, must progress from traditional societies in which groups are the basic units to modern societies in which atomized individuals are the sovereign units, and all these individuals are, by definition, rational, and they all want one thing: the vote. Because they are all rational, once given the vote, they produce the good government and live happily ever after. Paradise on earth,again. Sooner or later, electoral democracy will be the only political system for all countries and all peoples, with a free market to make them all rich. But before we get there, we’re engaged in a struggle between good and evil. The good belongs to those who are democracies and charged with a mission of spreading it around the globe, sometimes by force, against the evil of those who do not hold elections. This story also became a bestseller. According to the Freedom House, the number of democracies went from 45 in 1970 to 115 in 2010. In the last 20 years, Western elites tirelessly trotted around the globe selling this prospectus: multiple parties fight for political power and everyone voting on then is the only path to salvation to the long-suffering developing world. Those who buy the prospectus are destined for success. Those who do not are doomed to fail. But this time, the Chinese did not buy it. Fool me once, the rest is history. In just 30 years, China went from one of the poorest agricultural countries in the world to a second-largest economy. 650 million people were lifted out of poverty. 80% of the entire world’s poverty alleviation during that period happened in China. In other words, all the new and old democracies put together amounted to a mere fraction of what a single, one-party state did without voting. See, I grew up on this stuff: food stamps. Meat was rationed to a few hundred grams per person per month at one point. Needless to say, I ate all my grandmother’s portions. So I ask myself, what is wrong with this picture? Here I am in my hometown, my business growing leaps and bound. Entrepreneurs are starting companies every day. Middle class is expending in speed and scale unprecedented in human history. Yet, according to the grand story, none of this should be happening. So I went and did the only thing I could. I studied it. Yes, China is a one party state run by the Chinese Communist Party, the Party, and they don’t hold elections. Three assumptions are made by the dominant political theories of our time. Such a system isoperationally rigid, politically closed, and morally illegitimate. Well, the assumptions are wrong. The opposites are true. Adaptability, meritocracy, and legitimacy are the three defining characteristics of China’s one-party system. Now most political scientists will tell us that a one-party system is inherently incapable of self-correction. It won’t last long because it cannot adapt. Now here is the facts. In 64 years of running the largest country in the world, the range of the party’s policies has been wider than another country in the recent memory, from radical land collectivization to the Great Leap Forward, then the privatization of farmland, then the Cultural revolution, then Deng Xiaoping’s market reform, then successor Jiang Zemin took the giant political step of opening up party membership to private businesspeople, something unimaginable during Mao’s rule. So the party self-corrects in rather dramatic fashions. Institutionally, new rules get enacted to correct previous dysfunctions. For example, term limits. Political leaders used to retain their positions for life, and they used that to accumulate power and perpetuate their rules. Mao was the father of modern China, yet his prolonged rule les to disastrous mistakes. So the party instituted term limits with mandatory retirement age of 68 to 70. One thing we often hear is political reforms have lagged far behind economic reforms and China is in dire need of political reform. But this claim is a rhetorical trap hidden behind a political bias. See, some have decide a priori what kinds of change they want to see, and only such changes can be called political reform. The truth is political reform have never stopped. Compared with 30 years ago, 20 years ago, even 10years ago, every aspect of Chinese society how the country is governed, from the most local level to the highest center, are unrecognizable today. Now such changes are simply not possible without political reforms of the most fundamental kind. Now I would venture to suggest the Party is the world’s leading expert in political reform. The second assumption is that in a one-party state, power gets concentrated in the hand of the few, and bad governance and corruption follow. Indeed, corruption is a big problem. But let’s first look at the larger context. Now this may be counterintuitive to you. The party happens to be one of the most meritocratic political institutions in the world today. China’s highest ruling body, the Politburo, has 25 members. In the most recent one, only five of them came from a background of privilege, so-called princelings. The other 20, including the President and the Premier, came from entirely ordinary backgrounds. In the larger central committee of 300 or more, the percentage of those who were born into power and wealth was even smaller. The vast majority of senior Chinese leaders worked and competed their way to the top. Compare that with the ruling elites in both developed and developing countries, I think you will find the Party being near the top in upward mobility. The question then is, how could that be possible in a system run by one party? Now we come to a powerful political institution, little-known to Westerners: the Party’s Organization Department. The Department functions like a giant human resource engine that would be the envy of even some of the most successful corporations. It operates a rotating pyramid made up of three components: civil service, state-owned enterprises, and social organizations like university or community program. They form separate yet integrated career paths for Chinese officials. They recruit college grads into entry-level positions in all three tracks, and they start from the bottom, called keyuan. Then they could get promoted through four increasingly elite ranks: fuke, ke, fuchu, and chu. Now these are not moves from karate kids, okay? It’s serious business. The range of position is wide, from running health care in a village to foreign investment in a city distract to manger in a company. Once a year, the department reviews their performance. They interview their superiors, their peers, their subordinates. Theyvet their personal conduct. They conduct public opinion surveys. Then they promote the winners. Throughout their careers, these cadres can move through and out of all three tracks. Over time, the good ones move beyond the four base levels to the fuju, and ju levels. There, they enter high officialdom. By that point, a typical assignment will be to manage a distract with population in the millions or a company with hundreds of millions of millions of dollars in revenue. Just show you how competitive the system is, in 2012, there were 900,000 fuke and ke levels, 600,000 fuchu and chu levels, and onlu 40,000 fuju and ju levels. Afer the ju levels, the best few move further up several more ranks, and eventually make it to the Central Committee. The process takes a two to three decades. Does patronage play a role? Yes, of course. But merit remains the fundamental driver. In essence, the Organization Department runs a modernized version of China’s centuries-old mandarin system. China’s new president, Xi Jinping, is a son of a former leader, which is very unusual, first of his kind to make the top job. Even for him, the career tool a 30 years. He started as a village manager, and by the time he entered the Politburo, he had managed areas with total population of 150 million people and combined GDPs of 1.5 trillion US dollars. Now, please don’t get me wrong, okay? This is not a putdown of anyone, it is just a statement of fact. George W. Bush, remember him? This is not a putdown. Before becoming Governor of Texas, or Barack Obama before running for President, could not make even a small county manager in China’s system. Winston Churchill once said that democracy is a terrible system except for all the rest. Well, apparently he hadn’t heard of the Organization Department. Now, westerners always assume that multi-party election with universal suffrage is the only source of political legitimacy. I was asked once, “the party wasn’t voted in by election. Where is the source of legitimacy?”Isaid, “how about competency?” we all know the facts. In 1949, when the party took power, China was mired in civil wars, dismembered by foreign aggression, average life expectancy at that time, 41 years old. Today it is the second largest economy in the world, an industrial powerhouse, and its people live in increasing prosperity. Pew research polls Chinese public attitudes and here are the numbers in recent years. Satisfaction with the direction of the country: 85 percent. Those who think they’re better off than five years ago: 70%. Those who expect the future to be better a whopping 82%. Financial Times polls global youth attitudes, and these numbers, brand new, just came from last week. 93% of China’s Generation Y are optimistic about their country’s future. Now if this is not legitimacy, I’m not sure what is. In contrast, most electoral democracies around the world are suffering from dismal performance. Idon’t need to elaborate this audience how dysfunctional it is from Washington to European capitals. With a few exceptions, the vast number of the developing countries that have adopted electoral regimes are still suffering from poverty and civil strife. Governments get elected, and then they fall below 50 percent approval in a few months and stay there and get worse until the next election. Democracy is becoming a perpetual cycle of elect and regret. At this rate, I’m afraid it is democracy, not China’s one-party system, that is in danger of losing legitimacy. Now I don’t want to create the misimpression that China’s hunky-dory on the way to some kind of superpowerdom. The country faces enormous challenges. Social and economic problems that come with wrenching change like this are mind-boggling. Pollution is one, food safety, population issues. On the political front, the worst problem is corruption. Corruption is widespread and undermines the system and its legitimacy. But most analystmis-diagnose the disease. They say the corruption is the result of the one-party system, and therefore in order to cure it you have to do away with the entire system. But more careful look would tell us otherwise. Transparency International ranksChina between 70 and 80 in recent years among 170 countries, and it’s still moving up. India, the largest democracy in the world, is 94 and dropping. For the hundreds or so countries that are ranked below China, more than half of them are electoral democracies. So if election is the panacea for corruption, how come these countries cannot fix it? Now, I’m a venture capitalist. I make bets. It wouldn’t be fair to end this talk without putting myself on the line and making some predictions. So here they are. In the next 10 years, China will surpass the US and become the largest economy in the world; income per capital will be near the top of all developing countries. Corruption will be curbed, not eliminated and China will move up 10-20 notches to above 60 in TI ranking. Economic reform will accelerate, political reform will continue, and the one-party system will be holding firm. We live in the dust of an era. Meta-narratives that make universal claims failed us in the 20th century and are failing us in the 21st. meta-narrative is the cancer that is killing democracy from the inside. Now I want to clarify something. I’m not here to make an indictment of democracy. On the contrary, I think democracy contributed to the rise of the west and the creation of the modern world. It is the universal claim that many western elites are making about their political system, the hubris, that is the heart of the West’s current ills. If they would spend just a little less time on trying to force their way onto others, and a little bit more on political reform at home, they might give their democracy a better chance. China’s political model will never supplant electoral democracy, because unlike the latter, it doesn’t pretend to be universal. It cannot be exported. But that is the point precisely. The significance of China’s example is not that it provides and alternative but the demonstration that alternatives exist. Let us draw to a close this era of meta-narratives. Communism and democracy may both be laudable ideals, but the era of their dogmatic universalism is over. Let us stop telling people and our children there is only one way to govern ourselves and a singular future towards which all societies must evolve. It is wrong and it is irresponsible and worst of all, it is boring. Let universality make way for plurality. Perhaps a more interesting age is upon us. Are we brave enough to welcome it? Thank you.。
中考历史——36条历史答题规律
中考历史——36条历史答题规律1、中国古代早期政治制度一个核心：王权。
两种制度：分封制与宗法制。
三个特点：周王是天下共主，地方建立诸侯国(分封制)；依据血缘的亲疏，血缘纽带与政治关系相结合，实行嫡长子继承制(宗法制)。
2、封建专制中央集权的认识一个集中：即所有权力集中到皇帝一人手中。
两对矛盾：即皇权与相权的矛盾、中央与地方的矛盾。
三个趋势：即分相权集皇权，形成君主专制；分散地方权力，集中于中央，形成中央集权；对思想控制日益加强的趋势。
四个发展阶段：秦汉确立发展——隋唐完善——宋元加强——明清强化。
3、选官和监察制度一个根本目的：强化皇权统治。
两个层面：选拔官吏和监察百官。
三个趋势：标准由家世门第逐渐演变为学识才能；选拔方式由推荐演变为考试选拔；选拔形式日趋严密，趋向制度化。
4、中国古代农业的特点(1)小农经济是传统农业的基本模式。
(2)精耕细作是传统农业的基本特征。
(3)铁犁牛耕是传统农业的主要耕作方式。
5、古代商业的发展一个政策：重农抑商。
两个方面：商业发展与商人地位。
三大特点：商人社会地位低，商业发展艰难曲折；受制于农业的发展；政府对商业的控制逐渐减弱。
四段历程：春秋战国(官府垄断局面被打破，商品市场和大商人出现)——秦汉隋唐(重农抑商政策；坊市严格分开，对外贸易发展)——宋元(商业经济繁荣；坊市界限打破；出现世界上最早的纸币)——明清(城镇商业发展；出现商帮；闭关锁国)。
6、影响中国资本主义萌芽发展的主要因素(1)腐朽的封建制度的束缚是资本主义萌芽发展缓慢的根本原因。
(2)统治者大力推行“重农抑商”政策，实行专卖制度，对民营商业课以重税，影响了扩大再生产的资金的积累和国内市场的扩大。
(3)长期以来抑商和歧视商人的思想观念根深蒂固，限制了商品经济的发展和资本主义萌芽的成长。
(4)严格限制对外贸易的“海禁”政策和“闭关锁国”政策，阻碍了中外经济文化交流，限制了资本主义萌芽的发展。
7、明清时期对外贸易性质、政策对社会转型的影响(1)中国古代对外贸易是政府与外国进行的朝贡贸易，目的不以获取最大的经济效益为目的，主要是加强友好往来。
政治学选择题题库1
导论、第一章政治与政治学一、选择题1、“政治”概念的提出，始于人类文明史上的（）社会时期。
A 封建B奴隶 C 资本主义 D 原始2、政治学名著《政治学》的作者是（）。
A亚里士多德B柏拉图C苏哥拉底 D 西塞罗3、道德政治观或伦理政治观最为典型的例子是中国古代的（）学说和古希腊学者们的认识。
A法家B杂家C兵家 D 儒家4、下列思想家中权力政治观的代表人物的是（）。
A孔子B韩非C庄子D 荀子5、中国古代的法家主张，政治之道在于（），即政治权力的获取、保持和运用。
A法B势C术D变6、政治学的经济学研究方法根据市场经济中人与人之间行为的互动关系，形成特定的分析模式有（），用来分析和解释政治现象。
A联盟理论模式B博弈对策模式C 制度变迁模式D理性选择模式7、西方现代政治学的研究方法主要有（）。
A政治沟通分析方法B心理研究方法C政治系统分析D社会学研究方法8、马克思主义研究政治现象的方法有（）。
A经济分析方法B历史研究方法C利益分析方法 D 阶级分析方法9、政治学研究最常见、最传统的方法是（）。
A制度研究途径 B 权力研究途径 C 政策过程研究途径 D 政治功能研究途径10、政治学研究内容可以分为（）。
A政治哲学研究 B 政治科学研究C政治经济研究 D 政治法律研究1、B2、A3、D4、B5、ABC6、ABD7、ABCD8、ABCD9、B10、AB第二章政治研究的历史与现状一、选择题1、中国古代关于政治的研究主要围绕君主的（）而展开。
A 皇位继承B 治民之术C 统治术D 治国之道2、梁启超认为君主专制政体、君主立宪政体和民主宪政政体代表政体的进化方向，通过改良途径建立（）是中国未来政治的发展方向。
A 君主专制政体B 君主立宪政体C 民主宪政政体D 共和政体3、1978年以后，随着改革开放的深化，中国基本上采用了（）的自上而下的相对分权主义的政治发展策略。
A 民粹主义B民族主义C精英主义 D 民众主义4、亚里斯多德认为政治的最高形式就是（）。
中外政治思想史答案
《中外政治思想史》期末复习综合练习题及答案一、单项选择题1．西方政治思想从古代一直到近代，始终重视如何（ D ），管理国家的问题直到19世纪末期才引起思想家们的突出的关注。
A．国之道 B．为政、从政的方法C．君臣关系、君民关系 D．认识国家、组织国家的问题2．在西方，最早的国家形式是（ A ）。
A．城邦 B．帝国 C．部落 D．村社3．古希腊城邦最显著的特征是（ B ）。
A．中央集权 B．小国寡民 C．政治中心 D．分权而立4 ．在古希腊城邦中，享有政治权利的是（ D ）。
A．奴隶 B．自由人 C．妇女 D．自由公民5．（ C ）是希腊政治思想萌芽的代表。
A．《理想国》 B．《政治学》 C．《荷马史诗》 D．《法律篇》6．（ A ）的平等思想在西方政治思想史上是一个重要的转折，它超越了城邦时代政治学在人与奴隶、公民与没有公民权的人、本邦人与外邦人之间设立的界限，开始以一种平等的、没有根本差别的眼光来看待所有的人。
A．西塞罗B．苏格拉底C．柏拉图 D．亚里士多德7．奥古斯丁的传世作（ B ）从理论上总结了基督教的政治价值观，对人们的政治观念，对教会与国家之间的关系都产生了巨大影响。
A．《世人之城》（或称《地上之城》）B．《上帝之城》C．《政治学》D．《理想国》8．在中世纪时期，西方政治思想从古代自然政治观发展转变为（ A ），开始了一个新时期。
A．神学政治观 B．人文主义 C．权利政治观 D．自由主义9．西欧中世纪社会突出的特征是（ C ）。
A．村社自治 B．公民平等 C．人的等级身份和公开的不平等 D．保护公民的私有财产权10．（ D ）是中世纪西欧政治思想的中心内容。
A．自然政治观 B．共和制 C．民族国家和个人精神 D．教会与国家的关系11．但丁的文学名著《神曲》是人文主义思想的开山之作，他最著名的政治著作是（ B ）。
A．《神学大全》B．《论世界帝国》C．《和平的保卫者》D．《君主论》12．（A ）是文艺复兴运动的核心与理论指南，同时，它也是文艺复兴运动中最伟大的贡献。
《跨文化商务沟通》课程教学大纲
《跨文化商务沟通》课程教学大纲一、课程基本信息课程代码：课程名称：跨文化商务沟通英文名称：Intercultural Business Communication课程类别：专业课学时：32学时学分：2学分适用对象:国际商务专业本科生/国际经济与贸易本科生考核方式：考查先修课程：国际商务，国际贸易实务二、课程简介中文简介：《跨文化商务沟通》是一门商务沟通实践课程，将商务、文化与沟通三者融为一体，研究文化背景不同的各类经济主体如何处理文化与商务的关系，以更好地开展国际商务和跨国公司管理活动。
其主要内容包括：文化的概念及其对商务的影响；国际商务交往中的文化价值观差异及其产生的原因；跨文化中的语言表达及非语言交流；国际商务写作沟通；国际商务交际中的礼仪；跨文化谈判沟通技巧；跨文化商务伦理及社会责任；组织中的跨文化管理及激励；跨文化团队建设等。
英文简介：“Intercultural Business Communication” is a practice curriculum of business communication which integrated three factors of business, culture and communication. It aims at doing research on how various economic entities with different culture backgrounds deal with the relationship between culture and commercein order to helping companies and individuals better carrying out international business and multinational company management activities. The main contents of this course includes: the concept of culture and its influence on business, different cultural value view in international business contacts and why these happens, language use and non-verbal communication under cross-culture situation,writing in international business, etiquettes in international business communication, cross-cultural negotiation skills, intercultural business ethics and social responsibility, cross-cultural management and motivation in organization, cross-culture team building and so on.三、课程性质与教学目的课程性质：跨文化商务沟通是国际商务类本科专业的专业课。
两种制度的传说
其实从社会最终形态上讲，民主和社会主义、共产主义 并不矛盾，只是有深有浅。但是资本主义推行的民主政治 是将人都定位为理性的个体，具有不可剥夺的权利，然后 选举出来最好的政府，实行最好的制度，可以事实上人还 不都是理性的个体，没有那么完美绝对的认识水平，因此 选举产生的政党都不可能脱离阶级局限性和个体狭隘性， 同样被选举政要也难免带有自身狭隘性，不可能完全的公 平公正民主，相反不断的选举变换执政党，对社会各方面 发展都有严重影响，因此这方面它相对于一党制没有明显 的优势。
那么如何反驳这种民主选举不适合中国发展？李顺着民主
选举制指出一党制的“弊病”：僵化、封闭、不具合法性， 然后从国家制度改革、组织部任命、民意满意度调查三个 角度阐述了中国的一党制具有与时俱进的能力、选贤任能 的体制、深植于民心的政权合法性。在指出世界大多是选 举民主制国家“惨淡经营”后，又明确地表示不存在中国 威胁论，腐败现象跟一党制没有根本关系。最后大胆做出 预测中国未来的发展，将两种制度的传说落脚到都是人类 最美好的追求，不存在某种普适的政治模式。
两种制度的传说
李世默将演讲的题目定为两种制度的传说，主要论述的就
是两种社会制度，一党专政下的社会主义和讲民主选举制 的资本主义，典型的国家就是中国和美国。
作为社会主义制度的典型代表，中国现存的一党制与西方
讲求的民主水火不容。但按照现在中国呈现出来的发展形 势是社会稳定、经济繁荣，而这些在西方政治制度逻辑中 是不可能出现在中国的，于是从中国社会的繁荣景象对西 方民主政治唯一论提出质疑。
中华人民共和国成立后，我们实施了很多改革，在演讲中
也有提到，只有不断深化改革才能做到与时俱进，不断促 进社会经济和谐稳定发展。
一党制是不个例子，在中国存在有它自身的优越性。整 个李的演说回归到了一个观点：社会制度没有一个普世通 用的模式。社会制度是完全不一样的，我们更应该因地制 宜的去接受和发展多元的政治制度。
两种制度的传说
两种制度的传说传说是指人们口口相传的故事，通常有一定的神秘色彩，并且经过了许多年的演绎和发展。
下面介绍两种制度的传说。
第一种传说是关于古代的帝王制度。
据传，很久以前，人间有一位至高无上的天神，在创造世界的时候，他把权力赋予了一位人类的领袖，称为帝王。
这位帝王天生具有超凡的才华和智慧，他的每一个举动都是天神安排好的。
他有着无与伦比的统治能力，能够管理国家的事务和领导人民。
在他的统治下，人民安居乐业，国家繁荣昌盛。
人们将帝王视为神灵的化身，对他充满敬畏和崇拜之情。
然而，随着时间的推移，帝王的后代逐渐丧失了他们的神力和智慧，统治能力也大不如前。
最终，帝王制度被人们所抛弃。
第二种传说是关于古代的封建制度。
据传，很久以前，人间有一位神秘的贵族阶层，他们被认为是神与人之间的桥梁。
这些贵族拥有土地和财富，他们是社会的最高阶层，享有绝对的权力和特权。
他们通过封地制度将人民分为不同的阶级，每个阶级都有其特定的责任和义务。
贵族们通过军队来保护自己的利益，并且与其他贵族进行频繁的战争。
封建制度下的人民需要效忠于自己的领主，为他们提供劳动力和税收。
虽然封建制度给予了人民一定的保护和秩序，但也造成了社会分化和不公平的问题。
最终，人们觉醒了自己的权利和尊严，推翻了封建社会的统治。
这两种制度的传说都反映了人们对权力和统治的追求和对不公平的抗争。
帝王制度强调了一位统治者的至高无上的权威和天命，而封建制度则强调了社会的等级和等级制度。
两种制度在不同的时期，给人们带来了一定的秩序和安定，但也带来了不公平和不满。
这些传说也提醒着我们，现代社会中制度的运行需要保证公正和平等，尊重个人的权利和尊严。
只有这样，我们才能实现真正的进步和发展。
两个制度的故事
两个制度的故事销售女神徐鹤宁/女士们、先生们：大家好！今天我首先要讲的是我自己的故事。
我出生在“文化大革命”高潮时的上海。
外婆后来告诉我，她当时抱着襁褓之中啼哭不止的我，心惊胆战地听着“武斗”的枪声。
在我少年时，我被灌输了一个关于人类社会发展规律的大故事，这个“元叙事”是这样说的：所有的人类社会都遵循一个线性的、目标明确的发展规律，即从原始社会开始，经由奴隶社会、封建社会、资本主义社会、社会主义社会，最终过渡到共产主义社会。
这个“元叙事”不仅征服了中国，也影响了全世界。
世界上曾经有整整1/3人在它的笼罩之下。
然而，忽然一夜之间，苏联崩溃，世界沧桑巨变。
我赴美留学，又被灌输了一个全新的宏大叙事：不论其文化有何异同，其民众是基督徒、穆斯林还是儒家信徒，都将从传统社会过渡到现代社会。
在传统社会中，最基本的社会单位是家庭、氏族、部落等群体；而在现代社会中，最基本的、神圣不可侵犯的社会单位是个人。
所有的个人都被认定为是理性的，都有同一个诉求：选举权！选举民主制将成为所有国家和民族唯一的政治制度。
西方主流观点认为，一党制意味着一小撮人把持权力，必然导致腐败。
的确，腐败是个大问题。
不过，让我们先打开视野看一下全景。
说起来令人难以置信，中共已在中国这个世界上最大的国家之一执政64年，其内部选贤任能竞争之激烈，可能超过世界上所有的政治组织。
2012年，中国科级与副科级干部约为90万人，处级与副处级干部约为60万人，而局级与副局级干部仅为4万人。
在局级干部中，只有最为出众的极少数人才有机会继续晋升，最终进入中共中央委员会。
这过程中有任人唯亲的问题吗，当然有。
但从根本上，干部是否德才兼备才是提拔的决定性因素。
当然，中国当前面临重大挑战，巨大变迁带来的经济、社会问题数不胜数。
在政治领域，最大的挑战是腐败。
但是，很多分析人士误判了腐败的原因，他们声称腐败是一党制导致的，只有终结一党制才能根绝腐败。
更严谨的分析将证明这种观点毫无根据。
制度的起源与变迁：
二、制度含义
诺斯的制度含义 制度是一个社会的游戏规则， 制度是一个社会的游戏规则，是为决定人们的相互 关系而人为设定的一些制约” 包括“正规约束” 关系而人为设定的一些制约”，包括“正规约束” 例如规章和法律） 非正规约束” 例如习惯、 （例如规章和法律）和“非正规约束”（例如习惯、 行为准则、伦理规范），以及这些约束的“ ），以及这些约束的 行为准则、伦理规范），以及这些约束的“实施特 性” 。 制度的主要功能在于通过内部和外部两种强制力来 约束人的行为，防止交易中的机会主义行为， 约束人的行为，防止交易中的机会主义行为，以减 少交易后果的不确定性， 少交易后果的不确定性，帮助交易主体形成稳定的 预期，从而减少交易费用。 预期，从而减少交易费用。
产权的原始起源模型
产权并非是一个自然范畴，而是一个历 史范畴
在史前，人们生活在一个共同体中，没有 私有财产。
或因为生活在共同体内的人们赖以为生的 动植物并非是稀缺的； 或因为财产的共同所有是节约交易费用的 一种有效途径。
产权的原始起源模型
随着历史的演进，资源变得稀缺了，财产 的共同所有使得为保护稀缺资源所耗费的 成本显著增加，于是共同体便逐步瓦解了。 首先是不准外来者享用归共同体所有的资 源，然后是制定规则限制共同体内部人员 开发利用资源的程度，随之便出现了私有 产权。
四、制度变迁
诺斯主要运用的是经济人概念，采用成本——收益 诺斯主要运用的是经济人概念，采用成本 收益 分析方法和均衡分析方法， 分析方法和均衡分析方法，提出了一个比较成形的 制度变迁理论框架，确立了新经济史学。 制度变迁理论框架，确立了新经济史学。 在制度变迁供给——需求分析框架的影响下，诺斯 需求分析框架的影响下， 在制度变迁供给 需求分析框架的影响下 构建了制度变迁理论的基本模型 在初始制度均衡中，由外部性、规模经济、 在初始制度均衡中，由外部性、规模经济、风险和 交易成本所引起的潜在收入增加时， 交易成本所引起的潜在收入增加时，就会使制度变 迁的收益大于成本，形成了制度的非均衡， 迁的收益大于成本，形成了制度的非均衡，从而发 生制度变迁，形成新的均衡。 生制度变迁，形成新的均衡。
【美联英语】李世默-李世默TED演讲稿：两种制度的传说6
两分钟做个小测试，看看你的英语水平/test/quwen.aspx?tid=16-73675-0中国的政治模式不可能取代选举民主，因为中国从不将自己的政治制度包装成普世通用的模式，也不热衷于对外输出。
这正是关键的所在。
进一步说，中国模式的重要意义，不在于为世界各国提供了一个可以替代选举民主的新模式，而在于从实践上证明了良政的模式不是单一而是多元的，各国都有可能找到适合本国的政治制度。
China’s political model will never supplant electoral democracy, because unlike the latter, it doesn’t pretend to be universal. It cannot be exported. But that is the point precisely. The significance of China’s example is not that it provides and alternative but the demonstration that alternatives exist.让我们为“元叙事”的时代画个句号吧。
共产主义和民主可能都是人类最美好的追求，但它们普世化的教条时代已经过去。
我们的下一代，不需要被灌输说，世界上只有一种政治模式，所有社会都只有一种归宿。
这是错误的，不负责任的，也是乏味的。
多元化正在取代普世化。
一个更精彩的时代正缓缓拉开帷幕，我们有没有勇气拥抱它呢?Let us draw to a close this era of meta-narratives. Communism and democracy may both be laudable ideals, but the era of their dogmatic universalism is over. Let us stop telling people and our children there’s only one way to govern ourselves and a singular future towards which all societies must evolve. It is wrong. It is irresponsible. And worst of all, it is boring. Let universality make way for plurality.Perhaps a more interesting age is upon us. Are we brave enough to welcome it? Thank you .采访环节。
【最新推荐】李世默TED演讲稿-两种制度的传说-范文word版 (1页)
本文部分内容来自网络，本司不为其真实性负责，如有异议请及时联系，本司将予以删除== 本文为word格式，下载后方便编辑修改，也可以直接使用==
李世默TED演讲稿:两种制度的传说
下面是由整理的《李世默TED演讲稿:两种制度的传说》，提供中英文对照，欢迎阅读。
李：早上好!我叫(Eric Li)李世默，我出生在这里(图示：高楼大厦林立，街道上星光灿烂的上海)，喔，不，不是这里，是这里，我出生在“文化大革命”高潮时的上海(图示：文革期间红卫兵游行的场面)。
外婆后来告诉我，她当时抱着襁褓之中啼哭不止的我，心惊胆战地听着“武斗”的枪声。
Good morning. My name is Eric Li, and I was born here. But no, I wasn’t born there. This was where I was born: Shanghai, at the height of the Cultural Revolution. My grandmother tells me that she heard the sound of gunfire along with my first cries.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
从《两种制度的传说》说起
一个人类社会，两种线性的发展规律，最终指向截然不同的两个方向。
资本主义社会和共产主义社会，究竟哪个才是人类社会发展的终点？是否一个必然是另外一个的终点？两大阵营的人都在宣扬着自己的理念和观点。
李世默先生关于“两种制度的传说”的演讲以此问题为起点，面向一群熟悉资本主义民主形式的西方人士介绍了一些社会主义制度的情况，最后对人类社会发展发表了自己的看法：世界上不只有一种政治模式，所有社会也不只有一种归宿，一个时代的精彩在于多元化，而非普世化，我们应该以宽广的胸怀去接受不同世界的精彩。
古人有云：因材施教。
意为要根据学习的人的志趣、能力等具体情况要进行不同的教育，切不可模式化地一刀切。
对于一个国家也当是如此。
一个国家实行什么样的治理制度、政治模式、管理办法等都需要根据这个国家的历史背景、民风民俗和文化氛围进行选择。
而最终能够作为判断标准的唯有实践。
一切没有经过实践考验的拿来主义、照抄照搬都是不可长久的。
在中国的近代史上也曾走过资本主义道路，结果失败了；新中国成立后照搬苏联工业发展模式也没能使人民生活带来新的转机。
经过历史实践和时间检验，社会主义制度适合中国的发展，一党专政、多党协商的管理模式适合中国的国情，中国可以吸取他国制度之所长，没有必要因别国之推销而不符实际地改变自己的路线方针。
邯郸学步，不得要领，反失故步；东施效颦，不知其美，反遭讥讽。
不管是社会主义还是资本主义民主制度，都有其立根生存之土壤，恰如鱼之于海河、鸟之于天空。
每种制度的存在都有其合理性，有其优越性立根，亦有其不足作蛀虫。
两利相权取其重，两害相较取其轻。
一个国家选择哪种制度，不是要看别人的选择，要看的是哪种制度更能够带来较多的幸福与和平。
宇宙之美在于它的包容与丰富多彩，普世同一是种臆想，强势灌输是种愚昧，走一条顺其自然的和谐之路，方能创福祉于众生。