2015考研英语阅读英文原刊《经济学人》天下之事，古已有之

　　Mr Zhao, a courteous, gentle and rather otherworldly scholar, is no tub-thumping Chinesenationalist. There is now no need, he says, as there was in the Duke of Zhou’s day, for onepredominant state. He is not advocating a world order led by China, but a system of equality.Nor is there to be compulsion. Tianxia is a voluntary choice. It is also, self-evidently, a distantdream rather than a manifesto for practical politics.

　　赵是一位彬彬有礼、温文尔雅和颇为超凡脱俗的学者，而不是一个慷慨激昂的中国民族主义者。他说，就像周公时期一样，当今的国家也没有必要追求主导地位。他所主张的并不是一个中国所主导的世界秩序，而是一个平等的制度， “天下”是自愿的选择，没有强迫。对于权术政治来说，这只是一个遥远的梦想，而不是一个宣言，这当然是不言而喻的。

　　It has, however, made an impression. Some even see its influence in the ideal adopted byChina’s Communist Party leader, Hu Jintao, whom Mr Zhao has never met, of a “harmonioussociety”. In popular culture, tianxia loomed large in “Hero”, an epic martial-arts film by ZhangYimou, one of China’s best-known directors, set at the time of the Qin unification and releasedin 2002. Some also heard tianxia echoes in the slogan for the 2008 Beijing Olympics: “Oneworld, one dream”.

　　然而“天下”这个概念也让人眼前一亮，一些人甚至在中共领导人胡锦涛(赵与他从未谋面)所倡导的“和谐社会”理想中，察觉到它的影子。在流行文化中，“天下”的概念在张艺谋(中国最著名的导演之一)史诗般的武侠片——《英雄》中赫然耸现。该片以秦统一中国时期为背景，曾经在2002年上映。一些人也在2008年北京奥运会的广告语——“同一个世界，同一个梦想”中听出了“天下”的回声。

　　Though Mr Zhao was not proposing an indigenous blueprint for a China-led new world orderto supplant the one led by America, the misconception that he was explains some of hisappeal within China. One of the most popular books on sale in China at the moment is on“The rise of a ‘civilisational state’”, by Zhang Weiwei. Mr Zhang argues that China is unique as“the world’s only amalgam of an ancient civilisation and a huge modern state”, and is“increasingly returning to its own roots for inspiration, and producing its own norms andstandards.”

　　虽然赵并未就由中国取代美国领导世界新秩序问题提出中国自己的蓝图，但是人们却误解他有提出这个蓝图，这令他在国内颇受欢迎。张维为的新书《一个文明型国家的崛起》目前进入中国最畅销书榜单。张认为，中国作为“世界仅有的古代文明与庞大的现代国家的融合之物”是很不寻常的，它正越来越多地回到根基寻求灵感，创造它自己的准则和规范。”

　　In another new book (this one in English), “Ancient Chinese Thought, Modern Chinese Power”,Yan Xuetong, a scholar at Tsinghua University in Beijing, concludes that “it is not possible tocreate a Chinese school of international-relations theory.” But he does think pre-Qin thoughtcan “develop and enrich international-relations theory”. A British commentator once dubbedMr Yan a “neo-comm”, analogous to an American neocon—ie, an assertive Chinese nationalistintent on facing down American hegemony. But Daniel Bell, also of Tsinghua, one of thebook’s editors, argues this misrepresents Mr Yan’s views by overlooking the emphasis he, likethe pre-Qin philosophers, puts on the importance of morality in politics, and in establishingChina as a “superpower modelled on humane authority”.

　　在另一本新书——《古代中国思想，现代中国力量》中(这一本是用英文写的)，北京清华大学学者阎学通断言，“创立一个国际关系理论的中国学派是不可能的”，但他认为先秦思想能够“发展和丰富国际关系理论”。一名英国评论家曾经把阎称为一个“新共产主义者”，即一个决心挫败美国霸权主义的坚定的中国民族主义者——有点儿类似于美国的新保守主义者。但是该书的编者之一丹尼尔•贝尔(也来自清华)却主张，阎的观点由于人们忽视了他所强调的重点而受到了误解，他像先秦的哲学家一样，论述了在政治活动和使中国成为一个“以人治为本的超级大国”的过程中道德的重要性。

　　Beyond the failed state

　　避免重蹈“失败的世界”

　　For scholars like Mr Yan and Mr Zhao, the pre-Qinthinkers offer fresh approaches to solving theproblems of what Mr Zhao calls a “failed world”, withits endless wars. One is that the nation-state systemof notional equality between countries fails torecognise that some are more equal than others. AsChina’s foreign minister bluntly pointed out last yearat a meeting with its South-East Asian neighbours: “China is a big country and other countries are smallcountries and that’s just a fact.” A second problem is that national governments—especially,some in China would argue, in democracies—often ignore the interests of those without a vote,such as unborn generations and foreigners.

　　对于像阎和赵这样的学者来说，先秦思想家为解决赵称之为“失败的世界(其战争没有休止)”的问题提供了新方法。其中的一个问题是国家间名义上平等的民族国家体系没有能认识到有些国家就是要比别的国家享受更多的平等，即一些国家享有特权。正如在去年与东亚邻国共同召开的一次会议上中国外长所宣扬的那样，“中国是一个大国，其他国家是小国，那就是事实”。第二个问题就是民族国家的政府(national governments)， 尤其是那些民主政府，——中国某些人有如此议论——经常无视不能参加投票选举那些人的利益， 比如未出生的后代， 以及外国人。

　　Abroad these theorists’ ideas tend to be greeted with suspicion as excuses for China’sexceptionalism and its rejection of international rules it does not like. But at home they faceequally daunting obstacles. The Communist Party, heavily pragmatic, is unlikely to adopt themoral precepts at the heart of classical Chinese philosophy. And just as fundamentally, for allthat the idea of the nation-state, inviolable in its sovereignty, is a Western idea, China hasbecome among its staunchest supporters—and is the fiercest critic of any perceived“interference”. Moreover, it is hard to maintain that China’s astonishing success in recentyears has been won in spite of the current international system. Indeed, China has arguablybeen one of its biggest beneficiaries.

　　在国外，这些理论家的思想常常被怀疑为中国卓异主义的借口，和它对自己不喜欢的国际规则进行抵制的托词。但是在国内，他们遇到的阻碍同样令人望而生畏的。极为务实的共产党不会接受这些位于中国经典哲学核心的道德戒律，并且尽管主权不容侵犯这种民族国家思想是西方的舶来品(在西方，其地位与中国经典哲学之于中国同样重要)，但是中国已成为其最坚定的支持者之一，它甚至对自己想当然的干涉，也会进行最激烈的抨击。再者，如要申论中国近些年所取得的惊人成就乃是在挣脱当前国际体系的束缚之下取得，这将很难自圆其说。实际上，中国很可能就是当前国际体系最大的受益者之一。

【英语阅读资料】这里有↑↑↑