20年前，北京豪華的五星級飯店每週都會舉辦各種與全球化有關的會議，與會人員提出的願景是，全球化將加強世界各國的聯繫、消除貿易投資壁壘。茶歇期間，商界人士、會計師、投行專家和律師等聚在一起暢所欲言。大家都感到有一股無法抗拒的強大力量將進一步推動世界融合，使之成為整體。
Twenty years ago, the ritzy five-star hotels of Beijing were hosting conferences every week on globalization, holding out a promise it could bring us all together and that barriers on trade and investment would be coming down. Business people, accountants, investment bankers and lawyers crowded during coffee breaks, and we all felt the buzz of something bigger than us that would somehow make the world more integrated and whole.
中國政府官員會參與主持和外國商業領袖舉行的小組討論會。在他們描繪的藍圖中，中國將積極融入國際社會，而國際社會也將參與中國的發展和未來。沒有人會料到，二十年後的今天，我們會在談論中美脫鉤，而推動脫鉤的則是意欲逆全球化潮流而行的美國政府。
Chinese officials would take the stage in panel discussions with foreign business leaders, envisioning a future where China would be part of the global community, and that community would be participating in China's growth and future. Nobody could have possibly imagined 20 years later we would be talking about a China-U.S. decoupling, driven by a political administration in Washington that wants to deglobalize the world.
Where differences began
分歧初現
沒錯，二十年前人人都在探討所謂的全球化。不過，那時候我們或許沒有意識到全球化的真正涵義，也不知道全球化會如何發展。那時候，國內外專家幾乎每週都要在北京召開商業、金融和技術會議。大家普遍認為，更緊密相連、更多樣化的世界會讓未來更美好。
Yes, 20 years ago everyone was talking about this thing called globalization. However, at the time maybe we did not realize what globalization would really mean, or how it would look as it evolved. It seemed almost every week we had a business, finance or technology conference in Beijing with world experts, foreign and Chinese alike, all promising a better future through a more connected world and more inclusive planet.
但是，每個人對全球化的理解可能不盡相同，於是便出現了分歧。彼時，大家對全球化的看法很簡單——全球化意味著全球金融、資本市場將融為一體。在數字化傳播技術的推動下，這種融合將有助於消除壁壘、促進理解，從而創造無限繁榮和持久和平。
However, everyone might not have had the same vision in mind, and this is where the differences began. At that time, the simplistic view was integration of global finance and capital markets, together with digital communication, would somehow bring down barriers and create more understanding, thus fostering unlimited prosperity and peace.
沒有人會想到，二十年後我們將經歷去全球化，而且其力度還有可能是史無前例的。當然，也沒有人能預測到美國的深層政治勢力會把互聯網當作秘密工具用以盜竊個人資料，從而操縱算法和選舉，煽動一波又一波仇恨、種族主義和憤怒情緒。這一切在此前是無法想象的。
Little did anybody realize, two decades later we would be living in a world of greater localization, maybe more so than ever before. It certainly wasn't easy to predict the Internet becoming the U.S. deep state's insidious tool for stealing personal data to manipulate algorithms and political elections, fanning the winds of hatred, racism and anger in a way previously inconceivable.
同樣讓人始料未及的是，美國會出現債臺高築的情況。其原因有很多：前所未有的國債回購，通過投資社交媒體平臺、過度槓桿化釋放流動性，人為支撐資本市場的繁榮，這些都有賴於美元的優勢貨幣地位。
Equally unpredictable was the gargantuan debt accrued through unprecedented Treasury debt buybacks, issuing over-leveraged liquidity to artificially prop up capital markets by investing in social media platforms, made possible only by the supremacy of a single currency.
Where is all this going to take us?
何去何從？
一切都始於1999年。當時，時任美國總統克林頓廢止了格拉斯—斯蒂格爾法案。該法案是二戰後為了防止再次發生經濟大蕭條而頒佈的。它將投行業務和商業銀行業務劃分開，以防止銀行拿儲戶的存款進行投資或投機——這是引發1929年經濟大蕭條並導致二戰接踵而來的關鍵原因。
It all began in 1999 when U.S. President Bill Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act, put in place after World War II to prevent another Great Depression. It separated banking from investment banking, preventing the banks from investing or gambling with people's deposits—a key factor that led to the Great Depression in 1929 and the war that followed.
上世紀九十年代以及接下來的十年時間好比二十世紀“咆哮的二十年代”。突然之間，企業的損益評估變得毫無意義，一切都是為了贏得市場份額。每家公司都希望比別人多佔據市場份額，以推高公司股價。那時候，重要的是資本市場，而非實體業務。中國市場令人垂涎。
The 1990s and decade on were like the "Roaring Twenties" of the past century. Suddenly profit and loss evaluations of companies did not mean anything. It was all about market share. Every company wanted to claim a bigger market share than the other to kick up stock prices, as the capital market was what counted, not real business. China as a market looked delicious.
由於健忘，人類總是犯同樣的錯誤。由於缺乏監管，金融行業再次醉心於搞金融衍生品、合成衍生品，人為製造出市場虛假繁榮，最終2008年的次貸危機引爆了金融市場。
Human memory is short. We make the same mistakes. Once again, with no restrictions applied, the financial sector went berserk with something called derivatives and then synthetic derivatives, creating an artificial market boom that crashed miserably in 2008 with the subprime mortgage crisis.
量化寬鬆、通過發債為市場注入流動性等手段再次製造出市場繁榮的假象，不斷加槓桿則使得絕大多數美國家庭揹負沉重的債務。這種政策始於小布什，在奧巴馬當政期間得以延續，特朗普上臺後愈演愈烈。
Quantitative easing or liquidity issued against debt created another market boom, and leverage on top of leverage, assuring the debt serfdom of most American households. The policy started under George W. Bush., continued under Barack Obama, spiked and then rocketed under Donald Trump.
A non-option
不得已的選擇
正是在這種情況下，金融和大型高科技企業的結合得到了真正的鞏固。科技企業依靠量化寬鬆提供的大量資金紛紛上市。此時，市場份額已不再是衡量企業價值的指標。要確保企業的價值，就必須抓人眼球，必須吸引更多人敲擊鍵盤。所以，這時候最重要的是吸引人們多上網。臉書和推特正是靠這種方法發家。但是，中國企業家有自己的想法。
This is where the finance and big tech marriage really solidifies. Fast-forwarding beyond market share as a measurement of corporate value, the tech-listing boom financed through quantitative easing required eyeballs and clicks to assure the value of a company. So the game became getting people to bang on their keyboard. That worked for Facebook and Twitter, but Chinese entrepreneurs had some ideas of their own.
如果說吸引眼球的能力是衡量企業價值的指標，那在本土可以開發微博和微信等替代產品，從而使不公平的國際市場秩序有所改觀的情況下，中國為什麼還要將14億消費者拱手讓給臉書和推特呢？這正是衝突的真正根源所在。中美貿易戰不是為了美國可以出口更多大豆，而是為了美國企業可以吸引更多注意力，讓更多人敲擊鍵盤。為了金融，為了可以不斷加槓桿舉債。如果這招棋輸了，那麼後佈雷頓森林體系將跌入前所未有的大蕭條。
Moreover, if eyeballs are the measure of corporate value, why should China just give away 1.4 billion of them to Facebook and Twitter when it can create alternatives like Weibo and WeChat and make the uneven playing field a bit more even? This was where conflict really began. The trade war is not about soybeans. It's about eyeballs, clicks, finance, and unsustainable debt leveraging, which if tipped, will sink the post-Bretton Woods system into the depths of a Great Depression like never before.
金融、技術壟斷、軍工複合體和深層政府之間詭秘的結合產生了一種新的治理體系。為了維持這種治理體系，他們製造社會壓力、煽動民眾的仇恨情緒。貿易和服務業急劇萎縮。一切都只圍繞著一條原則——保持資本市場的資金充盈。具體做法是，把靠發債籌集的風險資金投入十多家壟斷科技公司。而這些公司則編寫程序，煽動仇恨，控制人們的思想、情緒和投票。
The insidious marriage between finance, tech monopolies, the military-industrial complex and deep state has created a new system of governance, assuring its sustainability by creating social stress and civil hatred. Trade and services are in free fall and everything functions around one principle—keeping the capital market pumped up, through debt-backed funny money investing in a dozen monopolistic tech companies that program hatred and control minds, emotions and votes.
但是，總有人不屑於這些公司出品的產品，而喜歡看更精彩的內容。這些人的思想和選票是無法左右的。現在大家開始明白，為什麼特朗普、臉書共同創始人扎克伯格和美國深層政府容不下抖音和騰訊了吧？
But you cannot control the minds and votes of people not looking at your stuff because there is better stuff to look at. Now are you beginning to understand why Trump, Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg and the deep state don't like TikTok and Tencent?
並非所有人都追捧美國模式。問題也由此產生。位於地球另一端的中國一直在開發尖端的智能基礎設施，利用綠色金融促進城市環境修復，逐漸從化石燃料發電轉向綠色能源發電。中國希望把大數據應用於醫療保健，疫情防控以及旨在支持綠色能源發展的電網轉型。
Not everyone wants the American model. That is where problems begin. China, on the other side of the planet, has been developing cutting-edge smart infrastructure using green finance for urban environmental repair, and switching the grid from fossil fuels to green energy. It wants to apply big data toward healthcare, pandemic control and prevention, and grid switching to support green energy.
中國也希望，能在貿易和服務業領域與他國，尤其是面臨相似挑戰的發展中國家，建立真正的業務關係。因此，中國首先要消除國內貧困並和他國分享相關經驗。很多發展中國家都認為，世界上沒有“放之四海皆準”的發展模式，需要推動超越意識形態的、務實的、相互融合又相互尊重的發展模式。
It also wants to build real trading and service business relations with other countries, particularly developing ones facing similar challenges. This means prioritizing an end to poverty at home and sharing such approaches worldwide. There are many developing nations who see the need for un-ideological, pragmatic, integrated but mutually respectful development processes, recognizing one model does not fit all.
中國從未想要與美國脫鉤。脫鉤，是自詡最高領導人的特朗普強加給中國的。除了應對，中國別無選擇。除中國外，很多國家都在被迫與美國脫鉤。多年來，各國為促進全球一體化付出了大量心血。因此，脫鉤著實讓人難受。
For China, decoupling from the U.S. is not a choice. It has been pushed on China as a non-option by self-styled supreme leader Trump. Decoupling is also being forced upon many other nations. It is discomforting, given all that has been done to integrate the world up to now.
在一體化的全球貿易環境下，本沒有脫鉤的理由。在本質上，這種脫鉤進程和上世紀的冷戰時期類似，會把我們推向另一場冷戰。一旦發生冷戰，就會有引發熱戰的潛在風險。
There is no reason in an integrated global trade environment to decouple. The nature of this decoupling process mirrors another era in the past century, leading us into another cold war with the dangerous potential to become hot.
如今，我們生活在一個分化的世界。將來，地球上會存在兩個世界。其中一個世界將建立在多邊主義、多元文化和務實主義等政策基礎上；另一個世界將建立在單邊主義、單一文化、宗教神學和意識形態的原則上。
We are now living in a bifurcated world. In the future, there will be two worlds. One world will be built on the policies of multilateralism, multiculturalism and pragmatism. Another will be built on the principles of unilateralism, monoculture, theology and ideology.
引領其中一個世界的是“一帶一路”倡議、5G、生態文明、扶貧以及人類命運共同體等理念；而另一個世界強調的是美元優勢地位，大型科技企業壟斷和“美國優先”。在後一個體系下，化石燃料的使用不斷增加，貧困繼續蔓延。這就是當下世界，一個分化的世界。
One system will be working with policies like the Belt and Road Initiative, 5G, ecological civilization, poverty alleviation and the vision of a community with a shared future for humanity. One system will be focused on dollar supremacy, big-tech monopoly, fossil fuel promotion, continued spreading of poverty, and a vision of "America First." This is how our bifurcated world now looks.
- END -
來源 / 北京週報
美編 / 曦嘉
