在經濟全球化進程中，存在自主性與依附性“兩條道路”的斗爭,。雖然中國和印度經濟社會發(fā)展的起點相同,，由于兩者選擇了不同的道路，導致中國和印度的經濟社會發(fā)展出現(xiàn)了截然不同的后果,。為什么會出現(xiàn)這樣的差異,？和老一輩是否強調獨立自主大大相關。在美版知乎Quora上,，美國網(wǎng)友提問道：甘地和毛主席的治國思路有何不同以致功效差距甚大,？這引起各國網(wǎng)友的圍觀和熱議，我們來看看他們的觀點,。

問題

美國網(wǎng)友凱文·陳的回答

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.

毛主席解決了中國社會的基本問題,，而甘地只想讓印度從英國獨立出來，對印度社會沒有太大影響,，這種差異導致了不同的結果。

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.

毛澤東是第一個正確地將中國社會定性為“半殖民地”和“半封建”并采取行動加以改變的人,。我不知道甘地對印度社會有沒有做過類似的描述,，所以這兩個偉大的人甚至沒有從同一條起跑線開始他們的道路。

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.

中國沒有被西方列強殖民（與印度不同）,，但西方列強在少數(shù)享有域外特權的中國城市租賃了租讓地,，因此“半殖民地”是當時描述中國社會的正確術語。將外國勢力趕出中國領土,，將外國影響趕出中國社會,，一直是毛澤東一生關注的焦點之一,。

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年以來，中國在大部分歷史上一直是一個中央集權的國家,，各級行政官員都是由中央政府根據(jù)其功績任命的,，因此，中國社會在這方面并非典型的封建社會,。但這種中央集權結構總是讓縣級以下的中國農村由世襲家庭統(tǒng)治,，從而使當時的中國社會成為“半封建社會”。與共產國際的同志不同,，毛澤東專注于動員中國農民,，并使他們成為中國革命和改革重要的一部分。對中國農民的這種動員使他帶領人民極為成功地完成了新民主主義革命和社會主義改革,。

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.

總而言之,，甘地成功地從英國獨立出來，印度社會沒有太大變化,，但毛澤東不僅推翻了原有腐朽的軍閥,，而且從根本上使中國社會擺脫了“半殖民地”和“半封建”的特征。毛澤東的所作所為為他去世后我們看到的經濟成功鋪平了道路,，但印度的發(fā)展仍然受到社會問題的阻礙,。

中國網(wǎng)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.

當然，印度人很高興他們有甘地,，中國人很高興他們有毛澤東,。

But the difference between 'China' and 'India' is greater than that between these two people. They are completely different.

但“中國”和“印度”之間的差異比這兩個人之間的差異更大，他們完全不同,。

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.

中國自秦朝以來就統(tǒng)一了,，在隨后的幾千年中，統(tǒng)治者和人民都認為“統(tǒng)一”是理所當然的,。除了朝代更替期間的戰(zhàn)爭,，其余時間，是中央政府都在治理國家,。在此基礎上,，中華文明（漢文明）得以發(fā)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.

印度幾乎從未統(tǒng)一過,，在其整個歷史上,，它多次被波斯人、希臘人,、帕提亞人,、薩卡人、達月支人,、穆斯林,、葡萄牙人,、荷蘭人、法國人和英國人入侵和征服,。從結構上講,，“現(xiàn)代印度”是在英國人離開后出現(xiàn)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.

中華文明具有強大的凝聚力,，中國的敵人要么被消滅,，要么與中華文明融合，成為中國的一部分,。重點是：中國文明是世俗的,。

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.

印度文明被無數(shù)的征服者破壞了。最后,，只有宗教才是共同語言,，政府不得不用宗教來統(tǒng)治。即便如此,，不同宗教之間也存在著尖銳的矛盾,。

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.

我得談談印度的種姓制度。也許一些QUORA上的高端人士會說,，印度沒有種姓制度,，但事實是，每個人都知道,。雅利安人編造的種姓神話將印度劃分為不同的利益階層,，上層階級成為既得利益，并堅決維護這一制度,。底層無力抵抗,，只能沉浸在“來世將成為更高種姓”的迷信中。該國因種姓制度而分裂,，無法融合,。

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.

中國人有很強的抵抗精神，曾有過“貴族家庭時期”,，但這些家庭很快就被殺害,。在一首著名的中國詩中，有這樣一句話：天街踏盡公卿骨 （叛亂分子沖進宮殿的街道,，踩著腳下貴族的骨頭）,。特別是在現(xiàn)代革命之后，中國人的基本信念是人人生而平等,。如果你對一個中國人說“我生來比你高貴”，他會打你的鼻子,。

農民起義

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,，坦率地說,，印度的問題太難了。無論是甘地,、尼赫魯還是莫迪,，他們都只能勉強維持印度的統(tǒng)一，而印度內部的矛盾讓他們精疲力盡,。

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：印度要想變得強大，首先必須徹底摧毀過去的舊秩序,，不能依賴外國人,。為所有印度人從頭開始建設一個新印度。但不幸的是,，這是不可能的,。

澳大利亞網(wǎng)友麥克斯·沙爾瑪?shù)幕卮?/p>

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.

甘地和尼赫魯是印度的開國元勛，他們有一個共同點：高種姓和有一個富裕的童年,，這讓他們對下層階級幾乎不了解,。他們的國大黨絕大多數(shù)成員都是上層種姓地主和資本家，他們普遍缺乏對底層和工作細節(jié)的理解,，這使得甘地的方法常常與現(xiàn)實脫節(jié),。如果英國像第一次世界大戰(zhàn)前那樣強大，而不是在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)中,，甘地的非暴力反抗只會迎來警棍和子彈的打擊,。

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.

而毛澤東出生于農民，從小就與底層人民接觸,。他是黨內第一個提出將團結中國農民作為主要工作方向,，并撰寫了《湖南農民運動調查報告》。自建軍以來,，他領導了黨的土地改革工作,，并一直為中國農民發(fā)出聲音。他擺脫了西方軍事思想的束縛,，用總結的軍事思想多次拯救了中國共產黨,，取得了最后的勝利。

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.

僅就社會階級而言,，毛澤東自戰(zhàn)爭年代以來一直在不斷打破中國國內階級之間的差距,，實現(xiàn)不同階級之間的流動。截至目前,，中國人沒有高低之分,，任何敢于歧視他人的行為都不會被公眾接受。另一方面，甘地提出了彌合階級鴻溝的想法,，但死得太早,，無法付諸實踐。印度仍然深陷于種姓,、宗教和其他階級沖突之中,。

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.

毛澤東的目標感很堅定，就是使中國在一個世紀的侵略帝國主義的掠奪和掠奪之后擺脫貧困,。他希望中國能夠自給自足,、強大、進步,，同時經濟富裕,，總的指導原則是讓中國變得更強大，不再成為列強打壓的受害者,。

今日中國

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.

而甘地的方式是帶領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紡織棉花,，過著自給自足的最簡單生活,，但當時世界已經進入工業(yè)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.

他的布道在窮人和赤貧者（已經買不起任何東西）中發(fā)揮了作用,，他們把他視為救世主,，但他們幾乎不知道，他的棉紡工作讓政府耗費良多,，棉花胎面和亞麻布必須為他的charkha機器定制,，此外，每當他乘坐火車時,，他都會使用三等車廂的座位,，以表明他確實是一個簡單的人，有著簡單的需求,，但政府不得不為他預訂整個車廂,，禁止任何人與他坐同一節(jié)車廂，從而拒絕普通窮人乘坐他們能負擔得起的唯一座位,。事實上,，當時的政府為了維持他過著最簡單生活的形象付出了巨大的代價。

德國網(wǎng)友凱文·安德遜的回答

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.

將人類與動物區(qū)分開來的關鍵一點是,，我們的社會建立在原則理論的基礎上,。我們創(chuàng)造原則和法律，并在此基礎上構建文明,。沒有比美國更好的例子了,，《獨立宣言》是一份由所謂叛軍撰寫的文件,，現(xiàn)在該文件已成為美國國家運行的基礎。

獨立宣言

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《獨立宣言》或《人權法案》這樣的文件之所以具有效力,，僅僅是因為它是符合社會發(fā)展規(guī)律和人民認可的文件,，并因此被賦予了權力。這就是為什么美國人使用這些文件來制定法律,，而不是將其用作衛(wèi)生紙。

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.

毛澤東是一位真正的理論大師,。讀過他的作品后,，你會了解，他是一個極富遠見的人,，只有阿塔蒂爾克或拿破侖等人物才能同他等量齊觀,。

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.

毛澤東認為，你必須為即將建立的國家樹立一種共同的理想,，而不能在艱苦斗爭過后樹倒猢猻散,，這正是大多數(shù)后殖民地領導人所沒能實現(xiàn)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.

外敵當前,，同仇敵愾很容易,，但當敵人離開時會發(fā)生什么？這就是印度正在發(fā)生的情況,，穆斯林和印度教徒在對抗英國時團結一致,，但當印度明確獲得獨立的那一刻，它就分崩離析了,。中國采取了更為徹底的方式,，他讓人民去革命，去戰(zhàn)斗,，而不是簡單的對抗,，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,，這是社會主義革命觀點的鮮明特點,。毛主席創(chuàng)造了一個理想的、可行的,、符合人性的世界,。他承諾結束列強殖民、痛苦和屈辱,，他領導帶給了中國社會前所未有的女性自由,。他給人們提供了一個選擇，為了國家和民族與他并肩作戰(zhàn),，與你的兄弟姐妹并肩戰(zhàn)斗,，不惜為這個國家犧牲一切。

It can be seen from the photos that people admire Chairman Mao.

從過去很多照片上可以看出，人們敬仰毛主席,。

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.

引用一位來自中國的游客的話：“我的祖父母走路,，我的父母有自行車，我可以選擇我想要哪輛車,?！蹦憧梢再|疑某些實現(xiàn)的方法，但事實上,，經過幾代人的奮斗,，他們的理想正在變成現(xiàn)實。

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.

甘地有很多理論,，但不具有實踐意義,，他不是一個有遠見的人。他沒有建立一個國家所需要的基礎,，也沒有時間成為那個人,，因為他去世較早。

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?

這就是為什么印度不斷改變他們最終成為世界強國的年份,，以及為什么印度的大多數(shù)政策都是以打擊巴基斯坦或處理國內宗教問題為定義的,。甘地留給他們什么真正有用的東西？一個由英國人發(fā)明的政府機構,？還是一套沒有指導的外交和經濟政策,？

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.

盡管如此，這并不意味著印度人沒有他們的理想,。許多印度人想要一個保守的印度教國家或一個世俗的多宗教國家,，但這更糟糕。

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.

我們看到中國和非洲之間的聯(lián)系越來越多,，它向我展示了非洲和中國的不同,。在50年代，有許多非洲國家比中國富?！,，F(xiàn)在中國正在為他們建設基礎設施，中國正在把毛主席的遠見變成現(xiàn)實,。