《这个世纪，属于中国——还是印度？》之
综合篇：中印创世纪
By Zoher Abdoolcarim Thursday, Nov. 10, 2011《时代》杂志２０１１年１１月１０日特别报道
作者：谭崇翰
译者：江烈农
I saw the Indian hit movie 3 Idiots recently in an unusual location: a cineplex in Hong Kong. Very rarely do Bollywood flicks make the city's commercial circuit — the conventional wisdom holds that they do not appeal to local audiences. Yet my Sunday morning matinee was 80% filled, mostly with Chinese of all ages. Some took the movie at face value: the zany antics of Indian college kids. But the majority of viewers, it seemed to me, got the universal moral about breaking free from social straitjackets. They laughed when they were meant to, and didn't when they weren't. While the foreign 3 Idiots was a box-office monster, 1911, a China-backed war docudrama starring hometown celebrity Jackie Chan, bombed. Go figure: India 1, China 0. 我看了印度大片《三傻大闹宝莱坞》，是在一个非同寻常的地方看的：一间香港电影院。按常理，普遍认为港人对印度片没兴趣，所以宝莱坞电影极少打入香港商业院线。但礼拜天我去赶了个早场，上座率竟有八成，大多是华人，什么年纪的都有。有的观众就为图个热闹，浅触皮毛，只看到了片中三个印度大学生的滑稽搞笑；但我觉得大多数观众都领会了影片所表现的普世寓意：冲破社会禁锢，争取自由。我觉得这些观众都笑到了点子上，也晓得在什么时候应该严肃安静，他们是真正看懂了的。《三傻大闹宝莱坞》这部外国片票房狂好，而同时本土国际巨星成龙主演的文献大片《辛亥革命》却票房狂泻。你自己算吧：印度对中国，１比０。2
Introducing India's 3 Idiots to a Chinese audience won't make the cut of epic attempts to break down barriers between cultures. But it does tap into a spreading consciousness that China and India and their people share a special place among today's nations — a tandem locomotive pulling the global economy while much of the rest of the world is a train wreck. You've heard the drumbeat: stupendous growth rates; ever richer consumers; geopolitical clout — a new order trumpeted by mega-events and extravagant slogans like the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing and "Incredible India" at Davos. "The rise of India and China," writes Robyn Meredith in her seminal book, The Elephant and the Dragon, "has caused the entire earth's economic and political landscape to shift before our eyes." Indian politician Jairam Ramesh sums up the phenomenon in a neologism: Chindia. 将印度《三傻》介绍给中国观众是个很好的尝试，但还没有达到“打破文化壁垒”的史诗级别。然而，这的确深刻触及了某种广泛蔓延的认知：中、印及两国人民在当今世界舞台上共同占据了独特一席，他们是拉动世界经济的双头火车，而其他国家的经济却只是火车残骸。火车即将驶出站台，你已经听见了汽笛的声音：急剧增长的各种数率、越来越富裕的消费群，还有地缘政治影响力——新秩序的号角已然吹响，诸如北京奥运这样大型的活动，或达沃斯论坛上所谓“不可思议的印度”这样夸张的口号，全都是证据。“中国和印度之崛起”，罗萍·梅瑞狄斯在她极富影响力的著作《龙与象》中写道，“已让我们看到全世界经济及政治版图的转变。”【注一】而印度政治家扎拉姆·拉梅什则造了一个新词总结这个现象：Ｃｈｉｎｄｉａ——“中印”。
(Graphic: How the Giants Measure Up.) （这里有一张图，比较了中、印两国间的人口、文盲率、网民数量、外汇储备、黄金储备、进出口量、通胀率、军费开支占国民生产总值比例等多项数据。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
With Western economies reeling, the world is looking especially to China and India as saviors — whether it's buying Italian bonds or Italian bags. The E.U. is even begging Beijing to help bail out its euro-zone bailout fund. But that's only one side of the coin. There's a duality to China and India, a blend of reality and myth, internally as well as between them. China and India have an arabesque relationship. These two giants on the cusp of superpower-hood are more rivals than partners. Despite their achievements, they face enormous challenges. And though they add up to nearly 40% of the world's 7 billion population, they still live pretty much in parallel universes. Chinese and Indians, writes Indian journalist Pallavi Aiyar in her perceptive book, Smoke and Mirrors: An Experience of China, are "largely culturally untranslatable to each other." 西方经济步履维艰，全世界都特别把中国和印度看作是大救星——买意大利国债或意大利皮包都行。欧盟甚至乞求中国政府慷慨解囊，为欧元区提供救助资金。然而，这只是硬币的一面；无论中印内部还是中印之间，都存在两面性——现实与疑惑混在一起。中印关系盘根错节，这两个处在权力尖端的超级巨头，与其说是搭档，不如说是对手。尽管两国成就斐然，但却面临着巨大的挑战。同时，虽然两国人口占全世界７０亿人口的４０％，却各行其是，几乎就像活在平行宇宙一般。中国人和印度人——正如印度记者帕拉维·艾雅尔在她视角敏锐的新书《烟与镜：亲历中国》中所述：“文化上的鸿沟无法跨越，互不可译。”【注二】
Rivals or Allies?是对手？还是盟友？
As a Gujarati born, raised and living in overwhelmingly Cantonese Hong Kong — both tribes are brash and materialistic — I have long been privy to what local Chinese and Indians think of the other. It used to be downright ugly. Perceptions and attitudes, liberally spiced with racial epithets, went broadly like this: to the Chinese, the Indians were poor, superstitious and dirty; to the Indians, the Chinese were crass, godless — and dirty. Hong Kong is no microcosm of Chindia, but it reflects how, just as China and India have changed, so have the stereotypes. If before I were assumed by the Chinese to be someone's chauffeur, now I am a tech entrepreneur or investment banker. Local Indians see China afresh too, but often in just two superficial dimensions: wealth and might. My 17-year-old son's peers are only half-joking when they tell him that, because he is half Chinese, half Indian, he has it made.
我出生于古吉拉特邦，是古吉拉特人，在香港长大，现居香港——这里是广义粤人的天下。这两族人性子都躁，也都很功利，所以我私底下很清楚本地中国人和印度人互相怎么看待对方。以前，双方是彻头彻尾地互相鄙视，很恶劣：中国人觉得印度人贫穷、迷信、不讲卫生、脏；印度人认为中国人粗鲁愚钝、没有信仰、不讲卫生、脏。香港不是“中印”的缩影，但却折射出中印两国以及这些旧有观念的改变。如果说以前我会被中国人当成是谁家的司机，那么现在我就变成个技术企业大老板或搞投资的银行家了。相应地，本地印度人也改变了对中国人的看法，但通常局限于两个肤浅的层面：财富与权势。我的儿子今年１７岁，他的同龄人常半开玩笑对他讲：你是中印混血呀，你是大赢家。
(See photos of the making of modern India.) （点击这里，欣赏一组印度重大历史事件图片集锦。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
If only it were that simple. In her book, Meredith quotes Indian tycoon Ratan Tata saying, "China is the factory of the world; India can be the knowledge center of this region ... If we orient ourselves to working together, we could be a formidable force of two nations." That's ambitious — and perhaps unrealistic. China and India were once soul mates — through the migration of Buddhism some 2,000 years ago. Later, the Indian monk Bodhidharma traveled to China to spread the message of Zen. Prominent Chinese went the other way: the devout pilgrim Xuanzang, later immortalized in the classic Ming novel Journey to the West, and the great explorer Admiral Zheng He. It was a time of mutual discovery. By the 17th century, the Middle Kingdom and the subcontinent were the planet's trading powers. They then got caught up in their own worlds of feudalism and colonialism — a decaying dynasty in China, the British Raj in India — followed by decades of serial revolution and fervent socialism. Modern relations between the two countries were marked mostly by suspicion — and the occasional border war. 要真这么简单，就好了。梅瑞狄斯在《龙与象》中援引印度企业大亨拉丹·塔塔的话：“中国是世界工厂，印度则可看作亚洲地区的知识中心……如果我们携手合作，两股绳拧成一股，势不可挡。”多么雄心勃勃！然而却不太可能实现。大约两千年前印度佛教传入中国，中印两国曾是精神伴侣，心有灵犀。之后，印度僧人菩提达摩到中国传播禅宗教义；杰出华人则前往印度：虔诚的信徒玄奘取经，以至于后来在明代小说《西游记》中被神化，还有了不起的航海家郑和大将军……那是一个相互发现、互相学习的时代。到１７世纪，神州大地和印巴次大陆成为这颗星球上的贸易列强。后来，两国又都沦为了殖民地，亦饱受封建主义之苦——中国经历了一个衰败的清朝，印度则迎来了一位英国籍的女皇。接下来，是数十年此起彼伏的革命，还有沸沸扬扬的社会主义运动。两国现代关系的亮点则主要都是相互猜忌——以及时不时来上一场的边界战争。
See photos of China's great 2011 migration. （点击这里，欣赏一组中国２０１１年春运照片。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
The contemporary period is friendlier, yet tensions are never far from the surface. Even as both governments speak of peace and prosperity, China is establishing a "string of pearls" in the Indian Ocean, unsettling New Delhi, and India is talking oil and gas exploration in the South China Sea, angering Beijing. More to the point, the close economic ties between nations that often prevent conflict do not sufficiently exist between China and India. Chinese investment in India is about 0.05% of its worldwide total, while Indian FDI in China is so low that it does not appear on many charts. Bilateral trade is growing (especially Chinese exports to India), but it's still a small proportion of their global total. Given their size and footprint, the two are nowhere as connected as they should be. Astonishingly, just a few of the two countries' cities have direct flights.
当前两国关系友好一些了，但紧张的压力绝不仅仅停留在表面。虽然两国政府都说要和平、繁荣，然而中国在印度洋上的“珍珠链”战略令新德里感到不安，印度在南中国海的油气田开采计划也激怒了北京。此外，更“一刀见血”的是，国与国之间紧密的经济联系时常能够避免冲突，而这一纽带关系在中印之间却不太充分。中国在印度的投资只占其全球投资总额的０．０５％；印度对中国的海外直接投资更是微乎其微，少得来任何统计表上都找不到这个数据。双边贸易在增长（特别是中国对印度出口量），可依然只占两国全球贸易总量的一小部分。考虑到两国的规模和发展轨迹，中印间的联系绝不应仅限于此。而且，令人十分吃惊的是，两国之间只有很少几个城市之间有直航。
Houses in Order各归其位、各得其所
Before they rescue the world, china and India need to fix their own economies and societies. They are beset by some grim news. Growth is slowing, though in China's case that helps cool an overheated economy. In both countries, exports are sliding, inflation is at painful levels, income inequality is reaching chasm proportions, and injustices like land grabs are sparking widespread protests. Cronyism is a scourge. The two have lifted countless millions out of poverty (though China has done a better job), but countless other millions — youths, workers, farmers — remain marginalized and desperate for decent livelihoods. While China doesn't follow the rules, India has too many rules to follow. China is, if not at a tipping point, certainly at an inflection, struggling to contain asset bubbles and bad loans and to rebalance its economy away from state-directed investment to consumer-led growth. India's reputation, meanwhile, has been so dented by corruption that the country's top corporations have hired U.S. consultancy Bain to craft a "Credible India" campaign. Good luck.
拯救世界之前，中国和印度需要解决各自的经济与社会问题。双方都被一些棘手事务所累：增长放缓，虽然对中国来说这有助于给过热的经济降降温；出口下滑，两国都面临痛苦的通胀，收入差距已成鸿沟，非法征地激发广泛抗议；任人唯亲，这无疑是两国社会的毒瘤。即使两国都已使千百万人口脱贫（即使中国成绩更好），但仍还有千百万年轻人、工人、农民依然挣扎于边缘化的困境，因过不上体面的生活而绝望。中国常常不按规则办事，而印度则有太多规矩需要遵守。中国即使未及引爆点，至少也处在一个转捩点，这个国家正在竭力控制经济泡沫和不良贷款，努力从政府投资型经济向消费型经济转变。同时，印度此前因腐败问题名声扫地，国内一流企业雇来美国贝恩管理咨询公司大搞宣传，以期打造一个“值得信赖的印度”——祝你们好运。
(See photos of China's 90 years of communism.) （点击这里，欣赏中国共产党建党九十周年纪念庆祝活动图集。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
Perception vs. Reality“感知”对“现实”
At least India can count on a better image worldwide than China. Westerners in particular see the pair through a romantic and ideological prism. India is Gandhi, yoga, eat-pray-love. A gentle elephant; an exporter not of unfairly underpriced goods but articulate and urbane CEOs as at home in New York City as in Mumbai. China is "gutter oil"; the country you love to hate. Fiery dragon rather than cuddly panda. Mercantilist, rapacious, threatening; resented even as it is wooed.
话说话来，印度给世界的印象至少比中国更好一点。西方人观察这两个国家，总是透过一副兼具浪漫主义与意识形态的有色眼镜——
有甘地，有瑜伽，有《一辈子做女孩》里丰富的饭、祷、爱；是一只温顺的大象；是一个出口商；不出口非法压价的廉价商品，只出口文质彬彬的ＣＥＯ，他们住在纽约的家中，就如同在孟买时一样怡然自得。这不是中国，这是印度。
有“地沟油”，让你又爱又恨（通常恨多于爱）；是一条暴躁的龙，不是一只可爱的熊猫；重商主义，唯利是图，贪得无厌，颇具威胁；给脸不要脸，任谁吃力都讨不着好。这不是印度，这是中国。
There are two reasons for this dichotomy: Beijing's profile and swagger are bigger than New Delhi's, allowing India to escape the same scrutiny; and India is a democracy while China is an authoritarian state. All year, Beijing's leaders have systematically cracked down on political dissent and cyberspace activity; they would not have tolerated, for example, the Indian summer of anticorruption protests in New Delhi. (Remember Tiananmen?) Yet the hard truth is that India is not as free as it's made out to be. Democracy does not necessarily result in good governance. India's institutions are weak, human-rights abuses are not unknown, and money and power often buy impunity. "India's poor [have] a vote," writes author Aiyar, "but this [does] not always equal a voice." India even has its own Tibet: I don't mean Dharamsala but Kashmir. 两个国家天差地别，两个原因：一、北京高调，其招摇傲慢较之新德里更甚，于是印度得以免受同样的苛责；二、印度是民主政府，而中国独裁专制。
北京的领导人全年无休，全面、系统地镇压政治异见者和网络上的“非法”活动。今年夏天新德里发生了反腐抗议的活动，他们不可能容忍这样的“暴乱”在首都发生（【注三】）。然而印度说的比唱的好听，却并不像看上去那么自由，这一点无可争辩——民主不见得能带来清明的政治。印度政府机关不力，侵犯人权的情况也并非鲜为人知，而且钱权确实可以换来免罪卡。《烟与镜》的作者艾雅尔写道：“印度穷人有投票权，但这并不代表他们有话语权。”印度甚至也有自己的“西藏问题”——我不是指达兰萨拉，而是指克什米尔。
Whose economic path, China's or India's — essentially, state capitalism vs. private enterprise — is sustainable? Which society is more durable? Which nation has a stronger sense of destiny? The entire planet wants and needs to know. In the following pages, TIME's Bill Powell and Michael Schuman face off to argue the case, respectively, for China and India as to whose template of change will prevail. It's not easy to pinpoint the killer app. But given a year of restless populaces worldwide, the winner may be the one providing the greater justice and dignity to the most people. On that score, it's still China 0, India 0.
搞经济，选哪条路？中国龙还是印度象？简而言之，这也就是国家资本主义与私营经济的对抗——哪一种更具可持续性？哪一种体制下的社会能更持久？哪一国有更远大的抱负？这些问题的答案，全世界都想听，也亟需知晓。在下文里，《时代》杂志的比尔·鲍威尔将与迈克尔·舒曼对阵，分别为中国和印度辩护，争论哪一方的发展模式更胜一筹。
找出确切答案并没那么容易，这可不是什么“杀手级的应用程序”，非得争个你死我活，让你为了苹果就得放弃安卓。然而今年全世界人民都不消停，这场辩论的获胜者或许就将为多数人提供更广大的正义及尊严——论此比分，中国对印度现在仍然是０比０。
See photos of Indians protesting the arrest of Anna Hazare. （点击这里欣赏图集：印度著名社会活动家、反腐斗士阿纳·赫扎雷被捕后，印度人民抗议示威。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
（完）
译注：
【注一】《龙与象》，英文原名 The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us ，作者 Robyn Meredith 。副标题“中国与印度之崛起及其对我们的意义”。台译《龙与象：中国印度崛起的全球衝击》。作者在书中颠覆美国一般见解，主张美国不应害怕中、印两国崛起的经济实力。作者指出，印度作为世界后勤办公室于２００３年接手了从美国转移出的一千万个白领工作机会。同时，美国身为世界大买家、中国身为世界工厂，两国分别是全球第一、第四（目前中国已跃居第二）大经济体，并将于２０１５年达到同等地位。虽然美国政客指责中国产品，但作者认为，美国人民因为人民币极低的币值占尽了便宜，美国企业也靠中国生产的廉价商品大肆获利。作者还观察到，美国对外每花一美元，创造的财富将近两美元，但其中有３３美分会回馈到美国。
【注二】《烟与镜：亲历中国》，英文原名 Smoke and Mirrors: An Experience of China ，作者 Pallavi Aiyar 。该书作者是《印度教徒报》常驻北京的记者。经过五年认真观察后，作者写下了她眼里的中国，并因此获得印度普莱姆·巴提亚最佳新闻成就奖。书名“烟雾和镜子”是一个印度谚语，之所以用作书名，据作者介绍，是因为“中国是一个非常复杂的国家，没有人能真正的了解她，就像你走进一个摆满镜子和充满烟雾的房间，很快就会迷失。”作者认为，很多人对于中国的了解仅仅流于表面，虽然他们以为自己很了解中国，但其实他们并未触及真相。
【注三】此处篡改若干字，请见原文，轻触真相。
另，《这个世纪，属于中国——还是印度？》是《时代》杂志近期特别报道的一个专题，共有三篇独立文章，相辅相成，如下所示，点击篇名阅读相应文章：
《中国篇：计划显神威》
《综合篇：中印创世纪》
《印度篇：成功无压力》
《这个世纪，属于中国——还是印度？》之
综合篇：中印创世纪
By Zoher Abdoolcarim Thursday, Nov. 10, 2011《时代》杂志２０１１年１１月１０日特别报道
作者：谭崇翰
译者：江烈农
I saw the Indian hit movie 3 Idiots recently in an unusual location: a cineplex in Hong Kong. Very rarely do Bollywood flicks make the city's commercial circuit — the conventional wisdom holds that they do not appeal to local audiences. Yet my Sunday morning matinee was 80% filled, mostly with Chinese of all ages. Some took the movie at face value: the zany antics of Indian college kids. But the majority of viewers, it seemed to me, got the universal moral about breaking free from social straitjackets. They laughed when they were meant to, and didn't when they weren't. While the foreign 3 Idiots was a box-office monster, 1911, a China-backed war docudrama starring hometown celebrity Jackie Chan, bombed. Go figure: India 1, China 0. 我看了印度大片《三傻大闹宝莱坞》，是在一个非同寻常的地方看的：一间香港电影院。按常理，普遍认为港人对印度片没兴趣，所以宝莱坞电影极少打入香港商业院线。但礼拜天我去赶了个早场，上座率竟有八成，大多是华人，什么年纪的都有。有的观众就为图个热闹，浅触皮毛，只看到了片中三个印度大学生的滑稽搞笑；但我觉得大多数观众都领会了影片所表现的普世寓意：冲破社会禁锢，争取自由。我觉得这些观众都笑到了点子上，也晓得在什么时候应该严肃安静，他们是真正看懂了的。《三傻大闹宝莱坞》这部外国片票房狂好，而同时本土国际巨星成龙主演的文献大片《辛亥革命》却票房狂泻。你自己算吧：印度对中国，１比０。2
Introducing India's 3 Idiots to a Chinese audience won't make the cut of epic attempts to break down barriers between cultures. But it does tap into a spreading consciousness that China and India and their people share a special place among today's nations — a tandem locomotive pulling the global economy while much of the rest of the world is a train wreck. You've heard the drumbeat: stupendous growth rates; ever richer consumers; geopolitical clout — a new order trumpeted by mega-events and extravagant slogans like the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing and "Incredible India" at Davos. "The rise of India and China," writes Robyn Meredith in her seminal book, The Elephant and the Dragon, "has caused the entire earth's economic and political landscape to shift before our eyes." Indian politician Jairam Ramesh sums up the phenomenon in a neologism: Chindia. 将印度《三傻》介绍给中国观众是个很好的尝试，但还没有达到“打破文化壁垒”的史诗级别。然而，这的确深刻触及了某种广泛蔓延的认知：中、印及两国人民在当今世界舞台上共同占据了独特一席，他们是拉动世界经济的双头火车，而其他国家的经济却只是火车残骸。火车即将驶出站台，你已经听见了汽笛的声音：急剧增长的各种数率、越来越富裕的消费群，还有地缘政治影响力——新秩序的号角已然吹响，诸如北京奥运这样大型的活动，或达沃斯论坛上所谓“不可思议的印度”这样夸张的口号，全都是证据。“中国和印度之崛起”，罗萍·梅瑞狄斯在她极富影响力的著作《龙与象》中写道，“已让我们看到全世界经济及政治版图的转变。”【注一】而印度政治家扎拉姆·拉梅什则造了一个新词总结这个现象：Ｃｈｉｎｄｉａ——“中印”。
(Graphic: How the Giants Measure Up.) （这里有一张图，比较了中、印两国间的人口、文盲率、网民数量、外汇储备、黄金储备、进出口量、通胀率、军费开支占国民生产总值比例等多项数据。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
With Western economies reeling, the world is looking especially to China and India as saviors — whether it's buying Italian bonds or Italian bags. The E.U. is even begging Beijing to help bail out its euro-zone bailout fund. But that's only one side of the coin. There's a duality to China and India, a blend of reality and myth, internally as well as between them. China and India have an arabesque relationship. These two giants on the cusp of superpower-hood are more rivals than partners. Despite their achievements, they face enormous challenges. And though they add up to nearly 40% of the world's 7 billion population, they still live pretty much in parallel universes. Chinese and Indians, writes Indian journalist Pallavi Aiyar in her perceptive book, Smoke and Mirrors: An Experience of China, are "largely culturally untranslatable to each other." 西方经济步履维艰，全世界都特别把中国和印度看作是大救星——买意大利国债或意大利皮包都行。欧盟甚至乞求中国政府慷慨解囊，为欧元区提供救助资金。然而，这只是硬币的一面；无论中印内部还是中印之间，都存在两面性——现实与疑惑混在一起。中印关系盘根错节，这两个处在权力尖端的超级巨头，与其说是搭档，不如说是对手。尽管两国成就斐然，但却面临着巨大的挑战。同时，虽然两国人口占全世界７０亿人口的４０％，却各行其是，几乎就像活在平行宇宙一般。中国人和印度人——正如印度记者帕拉维·艾雅尔在她视角敏锐的新书《烟与镜：亲历中国》中所述：“文化上的鸿沟无法跨越，互不可译。”【注二】
Rivals or Allies?是对手？还是盟友？
As a Gujarati born, raised and living in overwhelmingly Cantonese Hong Kong — both tribes are brash and materialistic — I have long been privy to what local Chinese and Indians think of the other. It used to be downright ugly. Perceptions and attitudes, liberally spiced with racial epithets, went broadly like this: to the Chinese, the Indians were poor, superstitious and dirty; to the Indians, the Chinese were crass, godless — and dirty. Hong Kong is no microcosm of Chindia, but it reflects how, just as China and India have changed, so have the stereotypes. If before I were assumed by the Chinese to be someone's chauffeur, now I am a tech entrepreneur or investment banker. Local Indians see China afresh too, but often in just two superficial dimensions: wealth and might. My 17-year-old son's peers are only half-joking when they tell him that, because he is half Chinese, half Indian, he has it made.
我出生于古吉拉特邦，是古吉拉特人，在香港长大，现居香港——这里是广义粤人的天下。这两族人性子都躁，也都很功利，所以我私底下很清楚本地中国人和印度人互相怎么看待对方。以前，双方是彻头彻尾地互相鄙视，很恶劣：中国人觉得印度人贫穷、迷信、不讲卫生、脏；印度人认为中国人粗鲁愚钝、没有信仰、不讲卫生、脏。香港不是“中印”的缩影，但却折射出中印两国以及这些旧有观念的改变。如果说以前我会被中国人当成是谁家的司机，那么现在我就变成个技术企业大老板或搞投资的银行家了。相应地，本地印度人也改变了对中国人的看法，但通常局限于两个肤浅的层面：财富与权势。我的儿子今年１７岁，他的同龄人常半开玩笑对他讲：你是中印混血呀，你是大赢家。
(See photos of the making of modern India.) （点击这里，欣赏一组印度重大历史事件图片集锦。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
If only it were that simple. In her book, Meredith quotes Indian tycoon Ratan Tata saying, "China is the factory of the world; India can be the knowledge center of this region ... If we orient ourselves to working together, we could be a formidable force of two nations." That's ambitious — and perhaps unrealistic. China and India were once soul mates — through the migration of Buddhism some 2,000 years ago. Later, the Indian monk Bodhidharma traveled to China to spread the message of Zen. Prominent Chinese went the other way: the devout pilgrim Xuanzang, later immortalized in the classic Ming novel Journey to the West, and the great explorer Admiral Zheng He. It was a time of mutual discovery. By the 17th century, the Middle Kingdom and the subcontinent were the planet's trading powers. They then got caught up in their own worlds of feudalism and colonialism — a decaying dynasty in China, the British Raj in India — followed by decades of serial revolution and fervent socialism. Modern relations between the two countries were marked mostly by suspicion — and the occasional border war. 要真这么简单，就好了。梅瑞狄斯在《龙与象》中援引印度企业大亨拉丹·塔塔的话：“中国是世界工厂，印度则可看作亚洲地区的知识中心……如果我们携手合作，两股绳拧成一股，势不可挡。”多么雄心勃勃！然而却不太可能实现。大约两千年前印度佛教传入中国，中印两国曾是精神伴侣，心有灵犀。之后，印度僧人菩提达摩到中国传播禅宗教义；杰出华人则前往印度：虔诚的信徒玄奘取经，以至于后来在明代小说《西游记》中被神化，还有了不起的航海家郑和大将军……那是一个相互发现、互相学习的时代。到１７世纪，神州大地和印巴次大陆成为这颗星球上的贸易列强。后来，两国又都沦为了殖民地，亦饱受封建主义之苦——中国经历了一个衰败的清朝，印度则迎来了一位英国籍的女皇。接下来，是数十年此起彼伏的革命，还有沸沸扬扬的社会主义运动。两国现代关系的亮点则主要都是相互猜忌——以及时不时来上一场的边界战争。
See photos of China's great 2011 migration. （点击这里，欣赏一组中国２０１１年春运照片。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
The contemporary period is friendlier, yet tensions are never far from the surface. Even as both governments speak of peace and prosperity, China is establishing a "string of pearls" in the Indian Ocean, unsettling New Delhi, and India is talking oil and gas exploration in the South China Sea, angering Beijing. More to the point, the close economic ties between nations that often prevent conflict do not sufficiently exist between China and India. Chinese investment in India is about 0.05% of its worldwide total, while Indian FDI in China is so low that it does not appear on many charts. Bilateral trade is growing (especially Chinese exports to India), but it's still a small proportion of their global total. Given their size and footprint, the two are nowhere as connected as they should be. Astonishingly, just a few of the two countries' cities have direct flights.
当前两国关系友好一些了，但紧张的压力绝不仅仅停留在表面。虽然两国政府都说要和平、繁荣，然而中国在印度洋上的“珍珠链”战略令新德里感到不安，印度在南中国海的油气田开采计划也激怒了北京。此外，更“一刀见血”的是，国与国之间紧密的经济联系时常能够避免冲突，而这一纽带关系在中印之间却不太充分。中国在印度的投资只占其全球投资总额的０．０５％；印度对中国的海外直接投资更是微乎其微，少得来任何统计表上都找不到这个数据。双边贸易在增长（特别是中国对印度出口量），可依然只占两国全球贸易总量的一小部分。考虑到两国的规模和发展轨迹，中印间的联系绝不应仅限于此。而且，令人十分吃惊的是，两国之间只有很少几个城市之间有直航。
Houses in Order各归其位、各得其所
Before they rescue the world, china and India need to fix their own economies and societies. They are beset by some grim news. Growth is slowing, though in China's case that helps cool an overheated economy. In both countries, exports are sliding, inflation is at painful levels, income inequality is reaching chasm proportions, and injustices like land grabs are sparking widespread protests. Cronyism is a scourge. The two have lifted countless millions out of poverty (though China has done a better job), but countless other millions — youths, workers, farmers — remain marginalized and desperate for decent livelihoods. While China doesn't follow the rules, India has too many rules to follow. China is, if not at a tipping point, certainly at an inflection, struggling to contain asset bubbles and bad loans and to rebalance its economy away from state-directed investment to consumer-led growth. India's reputation, meanwhile, has been so dented by corruption that the country's top corporations have hired U.S. consultancy Bain to craft a "Credible India" campaign. Good luck.
拯救世界之前，中国和印度需要解决各自的经济与社会问题。双方都被一些棘手事务所累：增长放缓，虽然对中国来说这有助于给过热的经济降降温；出口下滑，两国都面临痛苦的通胀，收入差距已成鸿沟，非法征地激发广泛抗议；任人唯亲，这无疑是两国社会的毒瘤。即使两国都已使千百万人口脱贫（即使中国成绩更好），但仍还有千百万年轻人、工人、农民依然挣扎于边缘化的困境，因过不上体面的生活而绝望。中国常常不按规则办事，而印度则有太多规矩需要遵守。中国即使未及引爆点，至少也处在一个转捩点，这个国家正在竭力控制经济泡沫和不良贷款，努力从政府投资型经济向消费型经济转变。同时，印度此前因腐败问题名声扫地，国内一流企业雇来美国贝恩管理咨询公司大搞宣传，以期打造一个“值得信赖的印度”——祝你们好运。
(See photos of China's 90 years of communism.) （点击这里，欣赏中国共产党建党九十周年纪念庆祝活动图集。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
Perception vs. Reality“感知”对“现实”
At least India can count on a better image worldwide than China. Westerners in particular see the pair through a romantic and ideological prism. India is Gandhi, yoga, eat-pray-love. A gentle elephant; an exporter not of unfairly underpriced goods but articulate and urbane CEOs as at home in New York City as in Mumbai. China is "gutter oil"; the country you love to hate. Fiery dragon rather than cuddly panda. Mercantilist, rapacious, threatening; resented even as it is wooed.
话说话来，印度给世界的印象至少比中国更好一点。西方人观察这两个国家，总是透过一副兼具浪漫主义与意识形态的有色眼镜——
有甘地，有瑜伽，有《一辈子做女孩》里丰富的饭、祷、爱；是一只温顺的大象；是一个出口商；不出口非法压价的廉价商品，只出口文质彬彬的ＣＥＯ，他们住在纽约的家中，就如同在孟买时一样怡然自得。这不是中国，这是印度。
有“地沟油”，让你又爱又恨（通常恨多于爱）；是一条暴躁的龙，不是一只可爱的熊猫；重商主义，唯利是图，贪得无厌，颇具威胁；给脸不要脸，任谁吃力都讨不着好。这不是印度，这是中国。
There are two reasons for this dichotomy: Beijing's profile and swagger are bigger than New Delhi's, allowing India to escape the same scrutiny; and India is a democracy while China is an authoritarian state. All year, Beijing's leaders have systematically cracked down on political dissent and cyberspace activity; they would not have tolerated, for example, the Indian summer of anticorruption protests in New Delhi. (Remember Tiananmen?) Yet the hard truth is that India is not as free as it's made out to be. Democracy does not necessarily result in good governance. India's institutions are weak, human-rights abuses are not unknown, and money and power often buy impunity. "India's poor [have] a vote," writes author Aiyar, "but this [does] not always equal a voice." India even has its own Tibet: I don't mean Dharamsala but Kashmir. 两个国家天差地别，两个原因：一、北京高调，其招摇傲慢较之新德里更甚，于是印度得以免受同样的苛责；二、印度是民主政府，而中国独裁专制。
北京的领导人全年无休，全面、系统地镇压政治异见者和网络上的“非法”活动。今年夏天新德里发生了反腐抗议的活动，他们不可能容忍这样的“暴乱”在首都发生（【注三】）。然而印度说的比唱的好听，却并不像看上去那么自由，这一点无可争辩——民主不见得能带来清明的政治。印度政府机关不力，侵犯人权的情况也并非鲜为人知，而且钱权确实可以换来免罪卡。《烟与镜》的作者艾雅尔写道：“印度穷人有投票权，但这并不代表他们有话语权。”印度甚至也有自己的“西藏问题”——我不是指达兰萨拉，而是指克什米尔。
Whose economic path, China's or India's — essentially, state capitalism vs. private enterprise — is sustainable? Which society is more durable? Which nation has a stronger sense of destiny? The entire planet wants and needs to know. In the following pages, TIME's Bill Powell and Michael Schuman face off to argue the case, respectively, for China and India as to whose template of change will prevail. It's not easy to pinpoint the killer app. But given a year of restless populaces worldwide, the winner may be the one providing the greater justice and dignity to the most people. On that score, it's still China 0, India 0.
搞经济，选哪条路？中国龙还是印度象？简而言之，这也就是国家资本主义与私营经济的对抗——哪一种更具可持续性？哪一种体制下的社会能更持久？哪一国有更远大的抱负？这些问题的答案，全世界都想听，也亟需知晓。在下文里，《时代》杂志的比尔·鲍威尔将与迈克尔·舒曼对阵，分别为中国和印度辩护，争论哪一方的发展模式更胜一筹。
找出确切答案并没那么容易，这可不是什么“杀手级的应用程序”，非得争个你死我活，让你为了苹果就得放弃安卓。然而今年全世界人民都不消停，这场辩论的获胜者或许就将为多数人提供更广大的正义及尊严——论此比分，中国对印度现在仍然是０比０。
See photos of Indians protesting the arrest of Anna Hazare. （点击这里欣赏图集：印度著名社会活动家、反腐斗士阿纳·赫扎雷被捕后，印度人民抗议示威。）（点击这里，认领此篇原文开始翻译）
（完）
译注：
【注一】《龙与象》，英文原名 The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us ，作者 Robyn Meredith 。副标题“中国与印度之崛起及其对我们的意义”。台译《龙与象：中国印度崛起的全球衝击》。作者在书中颠覆美国一般见解，主张美国不应害怕中、印两国崛起的经济实力。作者指出，印度作为世界后勤办公室于２００３年接手了从美国转移出的一千万个白领工作机会。同时，美国身为世界大买家、中国身为世界工厂，两国分别是全球第一、第四（目前中国已跃居第二）大经济体，并将于２０１５年达到同等地位。虽然美国政客指责中国产品，但作者认为，美国人民因为人民币极低的币值占尽了便宜，美国企业也靠中国生产的廉价商品大肆获利。作者还观察到，美国对外每花一美元，创造的财富将近两美元，但其中有３３美分会回馈到美国。
【注二】《烟与镜：亲历中国》，英文原名 Smoke and Mirrors: An Experience of China ，作者 Pallavi Aiyar 。该书作者是《印度教徒报》常驻北京的记者。经过五年认真观察后，作者写下了她眼里的中国，并因此获得印度普莱姆·巴提亚最佳新闻成就奖。书名“烟雾和镜子”是一个印度谚语，之所以用作书名，据作者介绍，是因为“中国是一个非常复杂的国家，没有人能真正的了解她，就像你走进一个摆满镜子和充满烟雾的房间，很快就会迷失。”作者认为，很多人对于中国的了解仅仅流于表面，虽然他们以为自己很了解中国，但其实他们并未触及真相。
【注三】此处篡改若干字，请见原文，轻触真相。
另，《这个世纪，属于中国——还是印度？》是《时代》杂志近期特别报道的一个专题，共有三篇独立文章，相辅相成，如下所示，点击篇名阅读相应文章：
《中国篇：计划显神威》
《综合篇：中印创世纪》
《印度篇：成功无压力》