意大利学者点名美英日法德：你们给中国安的“罪名”，都是自己当年的“黑历史”|保护主义|意大利|美英日法德

导读

西方曾大力倡导经济全球化，但近年来却态度逆转，将自身产业流失归咎于开放，指责中国“扭曲市场”，以“国家安全”为名行保护主义之实。然而英美日等国在自身发展的某些阶段也曾依赖重商主义、产业政策和补贴，成功后却“踢开梯子”拥抱新自由主义。问题不在全球化本身，而在于缺乏有效的再分配和监管机制。世界需要“开明的全球化”，即开放合作与国内公共政策相结合，避免陷入新冷战。

作者：蓬佩奥·德拉·波斯塔

(Pompeo Della Posta)

北京师范大学一带一路学院教授

过去许多年来，发达国家一直将经济全球化描绘为一项宏伟的事业。人们曾期望，市场的开放、国际贸易的扩张以及经济的融合，能为每一个人带来更大的繁荣。人们常使用“水涨船高”这个比喻：只要全球经济整体增长，所有国家和社会群体都终将受益。此外，贸易自由化、消除经济壁垒，以及全球价值链的拓展，几乎被视为自然而然的发展进程。当时甚至有一种主流的观点认为，除了走向更加开放的全球经济之外，根本不存在其他出路。正如英国前首相撒切尔夫人当年提出的那句著名口号——“别无选择”。

For many years, economic globalization was presented in developed countries as a great promise. The opening of markets, the expansion of international trade and the integration of economies were expected to generate greater prosperity for everyone. The most common metaphor was that of a rising tide lifting all ships: If the global economy grew, all countries and social groups would eventually benefit. Moreover, trade liberalization, the removal of economic barriers and the expansion of global value chains were considered almost inevitable processes. The dominant belief was even that there was no real alternative to a more open global economy, as synthesized by the famous slogan "There is no alternative" (TINA), coined by the former United Kingdom prime minister Margaret Thatcher.

然而时至今日，发达国家对全球化的态度却发生了180度大转变。以美国为例，尽管其人均GDP增长速度仍快于大多数其他发达经济体，但经济全球化却越来越多地被视为引发其产业衰退和贫富差距扩大的原因之一。

Today, however, in advanced economies that narrative has changed dramatically. Economic globalization is increasingly portrayed as one of the causes of their industrial decline and growing inequality, despite the fact that the GDP per capita of the United States, for example, has continued to grow faster than that of most other advanced economies.

尤其是，发达国家指责中国通过采取所谓的“不公平”措施，成为经济全球化的主要受益者，从而形成了一种有别于西方的发展模式。

At the same time, advanced countries accuse China of being one of the main beneficiaries of economic globalization due to the adoption of what they usually call "unfair" measures, resulting in a development strategy, which is different from the model promoted by Western economies.

图源：视觉中国

诚然，中国在保持国际贸易开放的同时，政府在构建生产能力、完善基础设施以及提升技术能力等方面，均发挥了强有力的主导作用。然而，中国的做法在世界经济史上并非前所未有的特例。中国一些被批评为“不公平”或“扭曲市场”的政策，恰恰是当今这些发达经济体在它们自身崛起阶段所采用过的。例如，英国在全面推行自由贸易之前，曾长期对国内经济实行保护政策，正是凭借工业革命所确立的技术优势，英国才具备了日后转向自由贸易的条件和底气。

It is certainly true that China combined openness to international trade with a strong role for the government in building productive capacity, infrastructure and technological capabilities.

Yet the Chinese approach is not an unprecedented exception in economic history. Practices that are now criticized as unfair or distortionary were used by today's advanced economies during their own rise. The UK protected its economy before embracing unconditional free trade, made possible by the technological superiority it had gained through the Industrial Revolution.

再如，法国路易十四时期的财政大臣让-巴蒂斯特·柯尔贝尔提出了重商主义政策，以促进本国经济发展。在美国，首任财政部长汉密尔顿1791年向国会提交《关于制造业的报告》，随后政府通过适度关税、奖励金（即补贴）及其他工业化政策，对尚未成熟的新兴产业予以保护。这些政策为推动美国转型为全球领先的工业经济体发挥了关键作用。德国则强调，在经济全面融入国际竞争之前，必须着力提升国内的生产能力。日本二战后的经济转型也得益于政府与产业界的密切协作，其中通商产业省大力推行有针对性的产业政策，发挥了关键作用。

In France, in the late 17th century, Jean-Baptiste Colbert theorized mercantilist policies to favor his country's economic development. The US, following Hamilton's "Report on Manufactures" (1791), protected emerging (infant) industries through moderate tariffs, "bounties" (subsidies) and other public policies designed to foster industrialization. Those policies were instrumental in transforming the US into the world's leading industrial economy. Germany emphasized the importance of building domestic productive capabilities before fully exposing its economy to international competition. Japan's postwar economic transformation was supported by close cooperation between government and industry through the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, which promoted targeted industrial policies.

借用一个著名的比喻：当今所有发达国家之所以“发达”，无不是靠着由重商主义、产业政策与公共补贴搭成的“梯子”一步步发展起来的；然而，一旦它们爬到顶端，也就是实现高度的经济发展之后，就一脚“把梯子踢开”，转而拥抱新自由主义，并声称公共干预行为已不再具有正当性，以此来维护其技术和经济领先优势。同理，当西方经济体过去在诸多技术领域占据主导地位时，它们就普遍主张全球开放；而如今，随着中国在多个高附加值产业中崛起为主要竞争对手，它们对于开放的态度就变了。

To borrow a famous metaphor, all of today's advanced countries developed by "climbing a ladder" made of mercantilism, industrial policies and public subsidies, but once they reached the top, namely their economic development, they "kicked that ladder away", arguing that public intervention would not be legitimate anymore and embracing neoliberal policies, those that allowed them to preserve their technological and economic leadership: it is probably no coincidence that when Western economies held a dominant position in many technological sectors, they were widely in favor of global openness, while today, as China has become a major competitor in several high-value industries, their view has changed.

图源：中国日报

经济全球化无疑给发达经济体和新兴经济体都带来了巨大收益。它让全球消费者能够获得价格更为低廉的商品，促使西方企业在技术进步的助力下实现国际化扩张，从而大幅提高利润。它还推动数亿人摆脱了贫困——其中脱贫成就最为亮眼的就是中国。

Economic globalization has undoubtedly produced enormous benefits both in advanced and emerging economies. It has allowed consumers around the world to access cheaper products and enabled Western companies, aided by technological advances, to expand internationally and dramatically increase their profits. It has also contributed to lifting hundreds of millions of people — especially in China — out of poverty.

曾经，人们过于笃信自由市场的自我调节能力以及新自由主义原则，根本听不进“经济全球化应当辅以相应的监管与补偿措施”这样的观点。然而，全球化也让发达经济体中的某些社会群体付出了代价。一些传统工业区的低技能工人遭受了严重冲击，很大程度上是因为经济红利高度集中于顶层少数人手中，却没有足够的资源来支持这些弱势群体适应新的经济环境。尤其是，当2008年金融危机不仅波及蓝领和低技能工人群体，而且也将西方中产阶级一并卷入时，人们的信心开始动摇，关于经济全球化的叙事也随之发生了巨大转变。

However, it has also imposed costs on specific social groups in advanced economies. Some industrial regions, unskilled workers and vulnerable communities experienced significant disruption, mostly because of the lack of sufficient support to adapt to new economic conditions, while gains concentrated at the top.

The faith in the self-regulating virtues of free markets and in neoliberal principles was such that they refused the idea that economic globalization should be accompanied by regulatory and compensatory measures.

When the financial crisis of 2008 hit Western middle classes as well, after the disruptions suffered over the previous couple of decades by blue-collar and unskilled workers, however, confidence in that promise began to weaken and the narrative on economic globalization changed dramatically.

在那之后，中国成了西方理想的“甩锅”对象，频频被无端指责。随着中国在电动汽车、电池、半导体和人工智能等领域崛起成为一个颇具竞争力的对手，那些过去几十年来一直鼓吹“自由市场”的西方国家，重新捡起了产业政策、国家安全与战略自主等概念，针对中国的电动汽车关税、芯片出口管制、投资审查机制等限制措施也随之相继出台。

When that happened, China became the ideal scapegoat and started being blamed, especially because it emerged as a credible competitor in areas such as electric vehicles, batteries, semiconductors and artificial intelligence: the same governments that for decades had been preaching free markets started rediscovering the vocabulary of industrial policy, national security and strategic autonomy, and tariffs on Chinese EVs, export controls on chips and investment screening mechanisms started being introduced.

图源：中国日报

然而问题在于，美国为首的西方国家不但不承认这些措施的经济保护主义本质，反而大多以“维护国家安全”为由为其辩护。对某些战略性经济部门予以适当保护、加大科研投资、支持技术能力建设、关怀最弱势群体，这些政策本身是合理的，甚至是必要的。但是，不应毫无依据地随意树立“假想敌”，打着“防范外国威胁”的幌子去搞保护主义，因为这样只会把世界推向危险的“新冷战”。

The problem, however, is that rather than acknowledging the economic, protectionist nature of those measures, the US-led Western countries mostly justify them with the need to protect their national security.

Protecting certain strategic economic sectors, investing in research, supporting technological capabilities and caring about the most vulnerable citizens, can be legitimate and even necessary protectionist policies: however, they should not be disguised as measures of "protection" against generic, hypothetical and unjustified foreign threats, since doing so risks undermining peaceful relationships between countries, therefore creating an unnecessary and dangerous new Cold War environment.

发达国家不应回避保护主义问题，更不应以“国家安全”之名行保护主义之实。它们应当明确承认：问题并不在于经济全球化本身——因为它的好处有目共睹；真正的问题在于，未能通过落实再分配政策来对全球化进行有效监管。

Advanced countries should not fear calling "protectionism" by its proper name, instead of disguising it as "protection" of national security. They should recognize explicitly that the problem is not economic globalization per se, whose overall benefits are undeniable, but its lack of management and regulation, implemented through redistributive policies.

世界需要另一种形式的全球化，我称之为“开明的全球化”：这种全球化不再遵循新自由主义经济学所倡导的那一套，它的治理体系更加完善，并能对那些承受了经济转型代价的人群加以更好的保护。

The world needs a different form of globalization, what I would call "enlightened globalization": One that abandons the prescriptions resulting from neoliberal economics, is better governed and is capable of protecting those who bear the costs of economic transformation.

要实现这种“开明的全球化”，唯一的办法是把开放合作的国际环境与有效的国内公共政策相结合。发达经济体应当加大对教育与技能的投资，支持创新与战略性基础设施建设，实施以累进税制为资金来源的再分配政策，并采取措施遏制准垄断性的市场结构。

This objective can only be achieved by combining a cooperatively open international environment with effective domestic public policies: advanced economies should invest in education and skills, support innovation and strategic infrastructure, adopt redistributive policies to be financed through progressive taxation, and implement measures to contain their quasi-monopolistic market structures.