中国制造威力巨大 互联网加剧西方社会分化

In recent years the phrase “Made in China” has struck fear into the hearts of western workers and politicians. As China has swelled in economic might – to a point where it will soon outpace the US in size, according to data released this week – its factories have undercut western rivals, causing manufacturing jobs to move.

最近几年，“中国制造(Made in China)”一词已将恐惧注入西方工人和政界人士心中。随着中国经济实力的日益膨胀——根据不久前发布的数据，要不了多久中国的经济规模就会超过美国——中国的工厂以低廉的成本对西方对手造成了冲击，导致西方制造业岗位外流。然而，西方决策者需要关注的不仅仅是种种小器具，还有万维网(Worldwide Web)。这是因为，要理解为什么眼下有关不平等的争论会在盎格鲁撒克逊的政治世界如此盛行，为什么托马斯•皮凯蒂(Thomas Piketty)关于该话题的新书《21世纪的资本》(Capital in the Twenty-First Century)会引发如此强烈的共鸣，十分重要的一点是要认识到，全球化的面貌正在发生微妙但重要的变化。

But it is not just widgets that western policy makers need to watch, but the worldwide web. For if you want to understand why debates about inequality are all the rage in the Anglo-Saxon political world – and why Thomas Piketty’s new book on the subject, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, has struck such a powerful chord – it is important to realise that the face of globalisation is undergoing a subtle, but important, shift.

最明显的一点是，互联网正在令跨国业务发生改变。这种数字化进程一方面虽然创造了新机遇（原本印刷文化衫的孟买企业家如今可以设计出自己的款式并销往全球），另一方面却也有可能产生新型的赢家和输家（部分西方设计师可能会发现，印度同行以更低廉的价格对自己造成了冲击）。不平等问题因此引发了关注。

Most notably, the internet is transforming cross-border business. And while this process of digitisation creates opportunity – Mumbai entrepreneurs who would once have printed T-shirts might now concoct their own designs and sell them around the world – it also threatens to create new categories of winners and losers (some western designers may find themselves undercut by their Indian peers). Hence the interest in inequality.

要理解这一点，可以看看麦肯锡全球研究所（McKinsey Global Institute，简称MGI）刚刚发布的一份有关数字时代经济流动的报告。该报告估计，过去20年里跨境经济流动规模增长了4倍，从1990年的一年约5万亿美元，增长到2012年的26万亿美元，最后这个数字相当于全球GDP的36%。

To get a sense of that, take a look at a report just released by the McKinsey Global Institute on economic flows in a digital age. This analysis estimates that in the past two decades the level of cross-border economic flows has risen fivefold: it was about $5tn a year in 1990, but by 2012 had risen to $26tn, or 36 per cent of global gross domestic product.

从某种程度上说这一结果并不让人惊讶，人们都知道，如今的世界是一个“全球化”世界。然而，人们不太了解的一点是：全球化正在发生改变。在2007年之前的10年里，跨境经济流动增长最快的部分是资金流动，信贷繁荣引发了资本流动的激增，并促使市场迅速整合。随着西方制造商将生产转移至低成本国家，可交易商品的流动也急剧增加。比如说，中国在这一过程中，占世界有形商品贸易的比重就从1990年的2%增长到2012年的12%。

On one level that is unsurprising; it is commonplace that we live in a “globalised” world. What is less appreciated is that globalisation has undergone a shift. In the decade before 2007, the fastest growing component of cross-border flows was money; the credit boom sparked a surge in capital flows and market integration. Flows of tradeable goods also rose sharply, as western manufacturers shifted production to low-cost countries. In the process China, for example, went from having 2 per cent of the world’s trade in tangible goods in 1990 to 12 per cent in 2012.

然而自2007年起，全球出现了两大突出变化。第一大变化是，由于金融危机后风声鹤唳的银行在放贷上变得更为谨慎，金融全球化进程出现了倒退。据MGI估计，跨境金融流动规模比2007年低了70%。第二大变化则是，数字通信的急剧扩张，提振了从电商到咨询等诸多其他服务的贸易。

Since then two striking shifts have taken place. First, financial globalisation has gone into reverse as nervous banks became more cautious in their lending after the crisis. MGI estimates that cross-border financial flows are 70 per cent lower than in 2007. Second, a dramatic expansion in digital communication has boosted trade in other services – from ecommerce to consultancy.

换句话说，过去跨境流动的往往是资金和低成本产品。如今，在互联网的推动下，跨国流动的则是创意和服务。MGI估计，如今这种“知识密集型流动”的价值达到了惊人的12.6万亿美元，作为参照，这个数字占到跨国流动总规模的一半，相当于美国经济规模的近五分之四。

Or to put it another way, whereas it used to be money and low-cost production that jumped across borders, now ideas and services are following suit courtesy of the internet. MGI estimates that these “knowledge intensive flows” are now worth a heady $12.6tn; to set this in context, this is half of all cross-border flows, and almost four-fifths the size of the US economy.

从某种意义上说，全球化的这种新特点看起来非常不错。它可能帮助成百万人脱贫，提高业务效率，降低消费者的消费成本，令企业家能发掘新的需求来源。而这一转变存在的问题，则正如麦肯锡以轻描淡写的语气所暗示的，是“部分工人将面临挑战”。

In some senses this new twist to globalisation looks wonderful. It could lift millions out of poverty, make businesses more efficient, lower costs for consumers and enable entrepreneurs to tap new sources of demand. The rub, as McKinsey suggests with vast understatement, is that “some workers will be challenged”.

当然，不是所有西方工作岗位都面临流失的风险。不过，随着各种工作岗位被条码和字节替代，社会分化日渐明显。在美国等国家，一方面在顶层存在高技能、高薪的所谓“高尚”职位，另一方面在底层也存在低贱、低薪的所谓“劣等”岗位，中间阶层则处于被挤压的状态。全球化的新面貌不但威胁到西方的制造业岗位，也威胁到了许多服务业岗位。

Of course not all western jobs are at risk. But as roles are replaced by bar codes and bytes, a bifurcation is under way. In countries such as the US there are the so-called “lovely” high-skilled, well-paid jobs at the top, and “lousy” low-paying menial jobs at the bottom – with the middle being squeezed. The new face of globalisation does not just threaten western manufacturing jobs, but many service jobs too.

当然，乐观主义者可能会辩称，这种转变也会产生赢家。比如，永远乐观的麦肯锡就暗示，美国和德国等处于全球流动中心的国家将极大地受益，它们从中获得的增长比那些全球化关联度较低的地区高40%。这一情况对于拥有适当技能的公司和个人也同样成立。

Of course, as an optimist might argue, this shift will also create winners. The perennially chirpy McKinsey suggests, for example, that countries at the centre of global flows – such as the US and Germany – will benefit hugely, reaping 40 per cent more growth than less connected areas. So will companies and individuals with the right skills.

不过，12.6万亿美元“知识密集型”流动正在全球造成动荡。难以应对这种动荡的世界，为新一轮有关不平等的争论提供了绝佳素材——即便（或者说尤其是）如今你能够如此轻而易举地在数字化网络上买到皮凯蒂的书（甚至是直接买到此书的电子版），而根本不用与老式的书商打交道。