##美媒对比中美政治：谁才是真正的民主？
美国“地缘政治经济报告”网站近日发表题为《美国或中国，哪个才是真正的民主？美国的寡头政治VS中国的协商民主》的文章，从多个角度比较了中美两国的民主情况。文章作者西蒙·特纳(Simon Turner)是一位作家和地缘政治分析家，现居荷兰。
文章首先援引了“爱德曼信任晴雨表”调查结果，指出中国在全球范围内被评为人们对政府信任度最高的国家，而美国信任度则远低于中国。作者认为，美国人民对政府信任度低的原因在于其双头垄断体制，导致民众对政府失去信任。
文章进一步指出，根据普林斯顿大学和西北大学学者的研究，美国自由民主进程中的公民参与对政府政策几乎没有独立影响，真正对政府政策有实质性影响的是美国的“精英和代表商业利益的组织团体”，这更符合寡头统治模式。而中国则不同，代表商业利益的精英和组织团体位于政府之下，服从于政府。
文章还批评了美国政治制度中资金对选举的影响，认为当一个候选人没有大量资金就无法赢得选举时，这个体制怎么能被称为“代议民主”？作者认为，美国政治家只对大企业负责，而忽略了普通民众的利益。
文章最后介绍了中国“协商民主”制度，指出中国积极推动公民参与和代表，为此设立了多种渠道，例如“领导信箱”平台、“12345热线”以及遍布全国的党群服务中心和基层立法联系点。作者认为，这些平台和机制有效地将人民的声音传递到政府，并让人民参与到国家治理中。
文章的观点引发了广泛关注，也引发了关于中美两国政治制度的讨论。一些人认为，文章对中国政治制度的描述过于理想化，而对美国政治制度的批评则过于片面。另一些人则认为，文章揭示了中美两国政治制度的差异，并为我们提供了思考民主的不同形式和发展方向的参考。
英语如下：
##US Media: Who is More Democratic, China or the US? Oligarchyvs. Consultative Democracy
**Keywords:** China-US democracy, oligarchy,consultative democracy
**Article Content:**
## US Media Compares China and US Politics: Who is Truly Democratic?
The website “Geopolitical Economy Report”recently published an article titled “US or China, Which is Truly Democratic? America’s Oligarchy vs. China’s Consultative Democracy,” comparing the democratic situationsof China and the US from multiple perspectives. The author, Simon Turner, is a writer and geopolitical analyst currently residing in the Netherlands.
The article begins by citing the “Edelman Trust Barometer” survey, which shows that China isranked as the country with the highest level of public trust in government globally, while the US has significantly lower trust. The author argues that the low level of public trust in the US government stems from its two-party monopoly system, leading toa loss of faith in the government among citizens.
The article further points out that according to research by scholars from Princeton University and Northwestern University, citizen participation in the US’s liberal democratic process has almost no independent influence on government policy. The real influence on government policy lies with “elites and organizations representing business interests,” which is more consistent with an oligarchic model. In contrast, in China, elites and organizations representing business interests are positioned below the government and are subject to its authority.
The article also criticizes the influence of money on elections in the US political system, arguing that how can a system be called “representativedemocracy” when a candidate cannot win an election without significant funding? The author believes that US politicians are only accountable to big corporations and neglect the interests of ordinary citizens.
Finally, the article introduces China’s “consultative democracy” system, highlighting China’s active promotion of citizen participation and representation through various channels,such as the “Leadership Mailbox” platform, the “12345 Hotline,” and party and mass service centers and grassroots legislative liaison points across the country. The author believes that these platforms and mechanisms effectively convey the voices of the people to the government and allow people to participate in national governance.
The article’s perspectives have sparked widespread attention and discussions about the political systems of China and the US. Some argue that the article’s portrayal of China’s political system is overly idealistic, while its criticism of the US political system is too one-sided. Others believe that the article reveals the differences between the political systems ofChina and the US, providing us with a reference for thinking about different forms and directions of democracy.
【来源】http://www.chinanews.com/gj/2024/08-20/10271967.shtml
Views: 4