在经济全球化进程中，存在自主性与依附性“两条道路”的斗争。虽然中国和印度经济社会发展的起点相同，由于两者选择了不同的道路，导致中国和印度的经济社会发展出现了截然不同的后果。为什么会出现这样的差异？和老一辈是否强调独立自主大大相关。在美版知乎Quora上，美国网友提问道：甘地和毛主席的治国思路有何不同以致功效差距甚大？这引起各国网友的围观和热议，我们来看看他们的观点。
问题
美国网友凯文·陈的回答
Chairman Mao solved the basic problems of Chinese society, while Gandhi only wanted India to be independent from Britain, which had little impact on Indian society. This difference led to different results.
毛主席解决了中国社会的基本问题，而甘地只想让印度从英国独立出来，对印度社会没有太大影响，这种差异导致了不同的结果。
Mao Zedong was the first person who correctly defined Chinese society as 'semi colonial' and 'semi feudal' and took action to change it. I don't know if Gandhi made similar descriptions of Indian society, so these two great people didn't even start their road from the same starting line.
毛泽东是第一个正确地将中国社会定性为“半殖民地”和“半封建”并采取行动加以改变的人。我不知道甘地对印度社会有没有做过类似的描述，所以这两个伟大的人甚至没有从同一条起跑线开始他们的道路。
China was not colonized by Western powers (unlike India), but Western powers leased concessions in a few Chinese cities with extraterritorial privileges. Therefore, 'semi colony' was the correct term to describe Chinese society at that time. Driving foreign forces out of Chinese territory and foreign influence out of Chinese society has always been one of the focuses of Mao Zedong's life.
中国没有被西方列强殖民（与印度不同），但西方列强在少数享有域外特权的中国城市租赁了租让地，因此“半殖民地”是当时描述中国社会的正确术语。将外国势力赶出中国领土，将外国影响赶出中国社会，一直是毛泽东一生关注的焦点之一。
Since 221 BC, China has been a centralized country for most of its history. Administrative officials at all levels are appointed by the central government according to their merits. Therefore, Chinese society is not a typical feudal society in this respect. However, this centralized structure always made Chinese rural areas below the county level ruled by hereditary families, thus making Chinese society at that time a 'semi feudal society'. Unlike the comrades of the Comintern, Mao Zedong focused on mobilizing Chinese farmers and making them an important part of China's revolution and reform. This mobilization of Chinese farmers enabled him to lead the people to complete the new democratic revolution and socialist reform with great success.
自公元前221年以来，中国在大部分历史上一直是一个中央集权的国家，各级行政官员都是由中央政府根据其功绩任命的，因此，中国社会在这方面并非典型的封建社会。但这种中央集权结构总是让县级以下的中国农村由世袭家庭统治，从而使当时的中国社会成为“半封建社会”。与共产国际的同志不同，毛泽东专注于动员中国农民，并使他们成为中国革命和改革重要的一部分。对中国农民的这种动员使他带领人民极为成功地完成了新民主主义革命和社会主义改革。
In a word, Gandhi succeeded in independence from Britain, and Indian society did not change much. However, Mao Zedong not only overthrew the original decadent warlords, but also fundamentally freed Chinese society from the characteristics of 'semi colonial' and 'semi feudal'. What Mao Zedong did paved the way for the economic success we saw after his death, but India's development is still hindered by social problems.
总而言之，甘地成功地从英国独立出来，印度社会没有太大变化，但毛泽东不仅推翻了原有腐朽的军阀，而且从根本上使中国社会摆脱了“半殖民地”和“半封建”的特征。毛泽东的所作所为为他去世后我们看到的经济成功铺平了道路，但印度的发展仍然受到社会问题的阻碍。
中国网友雷才的回答
Of course, the Indians are glad that they have Gandhi, and the Chinese are glad that they have Mao Zedong.
当然，印度人很高兴他们有甘地，中国人很高兴他们有毛泽东。
But the difference between 'China' and 'India' is greater than that between these two people. They are completely different.
但“中国”和“印度”之间的差异比这两个人之间的差异更大，他们完全不同。
政治制度/Political system
China has been unified since the Qin Dynasty. In the following several thousand years, the rulers and people took 'unification' for granted. Except for the war during the change of dynasties, the central government governed the country for the rest of the time. On this basis, the Chinese civilization (Han civilization) was developed.
中国自秦朝以来就统一了，在随后的几千年中，统治者和人民都认为“统一”是理所当然的。除了朝代更替期间的战争，其余时间，是中央政府都在治理国家。在此基础上，中华文明（汉文明）得以发展。
India has almost never been unified. Throughout its history, it has been invaded and conquered by the Persians, Greeks, Parthians, Saka, daruchi, Muslims, Portuguese, Dutch, French and British. Structurally, 'modern India' emerged after the British left.
印度几乎从未统一过，在其整个历史上，它多次被波斯人、希腊人、帕提亚人、萨卡人、达月支人、穆斯林、葡萄牙人、荷兰人、法国人和英国人入侵和征服。从结构上讲，“现代印度”是在英国人离开后出现的。
文明/civilization
Chinese civilization has a strong cohesive force. China's enemies will either be eliminated or merged with Chinese civilization to become a part of China. The point is: Chinese civilization is secular.
中华文明具有强大的凝聚力，中国的敌人要么被消灭，要么与中华文明融合，成为中国的一部分。重点是：中国文明是世俗的。
Indian civilization was destroyed by countless conquerors. Finally, only religion is the common language, and the government has to rule by religion. Even so, there are sharp contradictions between different religions.
印度文明被无数的征服者破坏了。最后，只有宗教才是共同语言，政府不得不用宗教来统治。即便如此，不同宗教之间也存在着尖锐的矛盾。
信念/Belief
I have to talk about the caste system in India. Perhaps some high-end people on quora will say that India does not have a caste system, but the fact is that everyone knows it. The caste myth fabricated by the Aryans divided India into different interest classes, and the upper class became vested interests, and firmly maintained this system. The lower strata are unable to resist and can only immerse themselves in the superstition that 'the afterlife will become a higher caste'. The country is divided by the caste system and cannot be integrated.
我得谈谈印度的种姓制度。也许一些QUORA上的高端人士会说，印度没有种姓制度，但事实是，每个人都知道。雅利安人编造的种姓神话将印度划分为不同的利益阶层，上层阶级成为既得利益，并坚决维护这一制度。底层无力抵抗，只能沉浸在“来世将成为更高种姓”的迷信中。该国因种姓制度而分裂，无法融合。
The Chinese people have a strong resistance spirit, and there was a 'noble family period', but these families were soon killed. In a famous Chinese poem, there is a saying: the streets of heaven trample on the bones of Ministers (rebels rush into the streets of the palace and trample on the bones of nobles). Especially after the modern revolution, the basic belief of the Chinese people is that everyone is born equal. If you say to a Chinese, 'I was born nobler than you', he will hit you on the nose.
中国人有很强的抵抗精神，曾有过“贵族家庭时期”，但这些家庭很快就被杀害。在一首著名的中国诗中，有这样一句话：天街踏尽公卿骨 （叛乱分子冲进宫殿的街道，踩着脚下贵族的骨头）。特别是在现代革命之后，中国人的基本信念是人人生而平等。如果你对一个中国人说“我生来比你高贵”，他会打你的鼻子。
农民起义
So, frankly speaking, India's problem is too difficult. Whether it is Gandhi, Nehru or Modi, they can only barely maintain the unity of India, and the internal contradictions in India exhausted them.
因此，坦率地说，印度的问题太难了。无论是甘地、尼赫鲁还是莫迪，他们都只能勉强维持印度的统一，而印度内部的矛盾让他们精疲力尽。
Therefore, I agree with Cai Lei's answer: if India wants to become strong, it must first thoroughly destroy the old order of the past and cannot rely on foreigners. Build a new India from scratch for all Indians. Unfortunately, this is not possible.
因此，我同意蔡磊的回答：印度要想变得强大，首先必须彻底摧毁过去的旧秩序，不能依赖外国人。为所有印度人从头开始建设一个新印度。但不幸的是，这是不可能的。
澳大利亚网友麦克斯·沙尔玛的回答
Gandhi and Nehru were the founding fathers of India. They had one thing in common: high caste and a rich childhood, which made them know little about the lower class. Most of the members of their Congress party are upper caste landlords and capitalists. They generally lack understanding of the bottom and the details of their work, which makes Gandhi's methods often divorced from reality. If Britain was as strong as it was before World War I, rather than in World War II, Gandhi's nonviolent resistance would only be hit by batons and bullets.
甘地和尼赫鲁是印度的开国元勋，他们有一个共同点：高种姓和有一个富裕的童年，这让他们对下层阶级几乎不了解。他们的国大党绝大多数成员都是上层种姓地主和资本家，他们普遍缺乏对底层和工作细节的理解，这使得甘地的方法常常与现实脱节。如果英国像第一次世界大战前那样强大，而不是在第二次世界大战中，甘地的非暴力反抗只会迎来警棍和子弹的打击。
Mao Zedong was born in a farmer and had been in contact with the people at the bottom of the society since he was a child. He was the first in the party to propose uniting Chinese farmers as the main direction of work and wrote the investigation report on the Hunan peasant movement. Since the founding of the army, he has led the party's land reform work and has always been a voice for Chinese farmers. He got rid of the shackles of Western military thought, saved the Communist Party of China many times with the summarized military thought, and won the final victory.
而毛泽东出生于农民，从小就与底层人民接触。他是党内第一个提出将团结中国农民作为主要工作方向，并撰写了《湖南农民运动调查报告》。自建军以来，他领导了党的土地改革工作，并一直为中国农民发出声音。他摆脱了西方军事思想的束缚，用总结的军事思想多次拯救了中国共产党，取得了最后的胜利。
As far as social classes are concerned, Mao Zedong has been constantly breaking the gap between classes in China and realizing the mobility between different classes since the war years. Up to now, Chinese people have no distinction between high and low, and any behavior that dares to discriminate against others will not be accepted by the public. On the other hand, Gandhi put forward the idea of bridging the class gap, but he died too early to put it into practice. India is still mired in caste, religion and other class conflicts.
仅就社会阶级而言，毛泽东自战争年代以来一直在不断打破中国国内阶级之间的差距，实现不同阶级之间的流动。截至目前，中国人没有高低之分，任何敢于歧视他人的行为都不会被公众接受。另一方面，甘地提出了弥合阶级鸿沟的想法，但死得太早，无法付诸实践。印度仍然深陷于种姓、宗教和其他阶级冲突之中。
Mao Zedong's sense of purpose is firm, that is, to free China from poverty after a century of plundering and plundering by aggressive imperialism. He hoped that China would be self-sufficient, strong, progressive and economically prosperous. The general guiding principle was to make China stronger and not become a victim of oppression by the great powers.
毛泽东的目标感很坚定，就是使中国在一个世纪的侵略帝国主义的掠夺和掠夺之后摆脱贫困。他希望中国能够自给自足、强大、进步，同时经济富裕，总的指导原则是让中国变得更强大，不再成为列强打压的受害者。
今日中国
Gandhi's way was to lead his people to live in a primitive way, looking backward rather than forward. He advocated weaving cotton in a very humble way and living the simplest life of self-sufficiency. But at that time, the world had entered industrialization.
而甘地的方式是带领他的人民以原始的方式生活，向后看而不是向前看，他鼓吹以非常卑微的方式纺织棉花，过着自给自足的最简单生活，但当时世界已经进入工业化。
His sermons have played a role in the poor and destitute (who can no longer afford anything). They regard him as the Savior, but they hardly know that his cotton spinning work costs the government a lot. Cotton tread and linen must be customized for his charkha machine. In addition, whenever he takes a train, he uses a seat in the third class carriage to show that he is really a simple person with simple needs, However, the government had to book the whole carriage for him and forbid anyone to sit in the same carriage with him, thus denying the ordinary poor the only seat they could afford. In fact, the government at that time paid a huge price to maintain his image of living the simplest life.
他的布道在穷人和赤贫者（已经买不起任何东西）中发挥了作用，他们把他视为救世主，但他们几乎不知道，他的棉纺工作让政府耗费良多，棉花胎面和亚麻布必须为他的charkha机器定制，此外，每当他乘坐火车时，他都会使用三等车厢的座位，以表明他确实是一个简单的人，有着简单的需求，但政府不得不为他预订整个车厢，禁止任何人与他坐同一节车厢，从而拒绝普通穷人乘坐他们能负担得起的唯一座位。事实上，当时的政府为了维持他过着最简单生活的形象付出了巨大的代价。
德国网友凯文·安德逊的回答
One thing that distinguishes humans from animals is that our society is based on principled theory. We create principles and laws and build civilization on them. There is no better example than the United States. The declaration of independence is a document written by the so-called rebels, and now it has become the basis for the operation of the United States.
将人类与动物区分开来的关键一点是，我们的社会建立在原则理论的基础上。我们创造原则和法律，并在此基础上构建文明。没有比美国更好的例子了，《独立宣言》是一份由所谓叛军撰写的文件，现在该文件已成为美国国家运行的基础。
独立宣言
A document such as the declaration of independence or the bill of rights is effective only because it conforms to the laws of social development and is recognized by the people, and is therefore empowered. That's why Americans use these documents to make laws, not to use them as toilet paper.
像《独立宣言》或《人权法案》这样的文件之所以具有效力，仅仅是因为它是符合社会发展规律和人民认可的文件，并因此被赋予了权力。这就是为什么美国人使用这些文件来制定法律，而不是将其用作卫生纸。
Mao Zedong was a real theoretical master. After reading his works, you will understand that he is a man of great foresight. Only Ataturk or Napoleon can equal him.
毛泽东是一位真正的理论大师。读过他的作品后，你会了解，他是一个极富远见的人，只有阿塔蒂尔克或拿破仑等人物才能同他等量齐观。
Mao Zedong thought that you must set up a common ideal for the country to be established, instead of letting the trees fall and the monkeys scatter after hard struggle, which is what most post colonial leaders failed to achieve.
毛泽东认为，你必须为即将建立的国家树立一种共同的理想，而不能在艰苦斗争过后树倒猢狲散，这正是大多数后殖民地领导人所没能实现的。
At present, it is easy to share a common hatred with the enemy, but what happens when the enemy leaves? This is what is happening in India, where Muslims and Hindus are united against Britain, but the moment India clearly gains independence, it falls apart. China has taken a more thorough approach, letting the people revolution and fight instead of simply confronting or not cooperating.
外敌当前，同仇敌忾很容易，但当敌人离开时会发生什么？这就是印度正在发生的情况，穆斯林和印度教徒在对抗英国时团结一致，但当印度明确获得独立的那一刻，它就分崩离析了。中国采取了更为彻底的方式，他让人民去革命，去战斗，而不是简单的对抗，或者不合作。
This is the distinctive characteristic of the socialist revolutionary viewpoint. Chairman Mao created an ideal, feasible and humane world. He promised to end the colonization, pain and humiliation of the great powers, and his leadership has brought unprecedented female freedom to Chinese society. He has given people a choice to fight side by side with him, with your brothers and sisters, for the sake of the country and the nation, at all costs for this country.
不破不立，这是社会主义革命观点的鲜明特点。毛主席创造了一个理想的、可行的、符合人性的世界。他承诺结束列强殖民、痛苦和屈辱，他领导带给了中国社会前所未有的女性自由。他给人们提供了一个选择，为了国家和民族与他并肩作战，与你的兄弟姐妹并肩战斗，不惜为这个国家牺牲一切。
It can be seen from the photos that people admire Chairman Mao.
从过去很多照片上可以看出，人们敬仰毛主席。
To quote a tourist from China: 'my grandparents walk and my parents have bicycles. I can choose which car I want.' You can question some methods of realization, but in fact, after generations of struggle, their ideals are becoming reality.
引用一位来自中国的游客的话：“我的祖父母走路，我的父母有自行车，我可以选择我想要哪辆车。”你可以质疑某些实现的方法，但事实上，经过几代人的奋斗，他们的理想正在变成现实。
Gandhi had many theories, but they were not practical at all. He was not a visionary. He did not have the foundation needed to build a country, nor did he have time to be that person, because he died early.
甘地有很多理论，但不具有实践意义，他不是一个有远见的人。他没有建立一个国家所需要的基础，也没有时间成为那个人，因为他去世较早。
This is why India keeps changing the year when they finally became a world power, and why most of India's policies are defined by attacking Pakistan or dealing with domestic religious issues. What did Gandhi leave them that was really useful? A government institution invented by the British? Or a foreign and economic policy without guidance?
这就是为什么印度不断改变他们最终成为世界强国的年份，以及为什么印度的大多数政策都是以打击巴基斯坦或处理国内宗教问题为定义的。甘地留给他们什么真正有用的东西？一个由英国人发明的政府机构？还是一套没有指导的外交和经济政策？
Nevertheless, this does not mean that Indians do not have their ideals. Many Indians want a conservative Hindu country or a secular multi religious country, but this is worse.
尽管如此，这并不意味着印度人没有他们的理想。许多印度人想要一个保守的印度教国家或一个世俗的多宗教国家，但这更糟糕。
We see more and more links between China and Africa. It shows me the difference between Africa and China. In the 1950s, many African countries were richer than China. Now China is building infrastructure for them. China is turning Chairman Mao's vision into reality.
我们看到中国和非洲之间的联系越来越多，它向我展示了非洲和中国的不同。在50年代，有许多非洲国家比中国富裕。现在中国正在为他们建设基础设施，中国正在把毛主席的远见变成现实。
联系客服
