您当前的位置:首页 > 网贴翻译 Tips:使用 ← → 键即可快速浏览其他文章
2020-01-29 墨点er 13 收藏 纠错&举报
原文标题:Which country is most likely to be more powerful than the USA within 100 years from now?
译文简介:如果在未来的100年里,欧盟能够真正成为一个融合多元文化的社会,而不是一群只想多赚点钱的孤立的小实体,那么它就有机会再次成为全球领袖。 它肯定有最大的潜力成为未来一百年最强大的国家。 
Eduardo Marqués Collado
It is rather unpreditable. For all the claims about China’s rise being inevitable, people forget that China herself has suffered a lot of “black swan” type of events during her long history.
So I will try to aim in this answer to look at which things might see the unpredictable rise (or fall) of superpowers in the future:
Climate change will actually benefit nortern countries such as Canada, Iceland or Finland greatly. They will probably have more demographic and strategic weight due to increased crop output and better navigable, non-frozen sea routes. Same goes for Russia, which will surely be able to exploit this newfound advantage
China will face a lot of internal tensions and many structural problems that its leadership is trying to bury down, flying under the western press radar. A ginormous gender imbalance, huge real state bubbles, its public healthcare system (or its lack of thereof), an untenable pension system and zombi national business conglomerates.   Japan will be massive challenges that its leadership is proactively ignoring, and that’s without mentioning its huge economic inequality. 
Many other world regions might follow the European Union model and form free commerce unions with a proto-federation in mind. The Andean nations (Chile, Peru and Bolivia), East Africa and South Asia might be prime candidates for forming these type of blocs. They will be probably less “wide” type of unions (no “Latin American Union” nor “pan african union”, for example), but it will probably be better integrated.
Many of the current wealthiest nations of the Arab world will become stagnant as the world get less and less dependant on oil. Regimes such as Saudi Arabia, which greatly relies on generous patronage networks in order to keep stability, might outright implode
If Iran ever gets to get rid off its theocratic regime and diplomatic isolation, it might become a key world player as it has been for centuries.
The future relevance of Europe will entirely depend on the federal European project. If it dies, the little nations of Europe won’t be able to compete in the international arena, and one by one, they will be picked appart by its rivals following the old divide et impera doctrine. If it prospers, an unexpected key player might emerge, but that’s a big “if”
Sooner or latter, one populist regime is going to start a conventional war for no goddamn reason or whatsoever (I am betting on some petty nationalistic bullshit thing), and it will probably bring down whoever countries gets dragged by it. Note how this risk can be applied to almost any democracy on Earth

这非常难以预测。 尽管所有关于中国崛起的断言都是不可避免地会成真,但人们忘记了,在中国漫长的历史中,中国本身也经历了许多“黑天鹅”式的事件。 
气候变化实际上会使加拿大、冰岛、芬兰等北欧国家受益匪浅。 由于农作物产量的增加,以及更好的可航性和非冰冻海路条件,这些国家可能会在人口和战略上占据更重要的地位。 俄罗斯也是如此,它肯定能够利用这一新发现的优势 
中国将面临许多内部紧张局势和许多结构性问题,中国领导层正试图掩盖这些问题,避开西方媒体的关注。 庞大的性别失衡比例、巨大的国家实体泡沫、公共医疗体系问题(或缺乏公共医疗体系)、不太可靠的养老金体系以及僵化的国有企业集团。 日本将成为中国的巨大挑战,中国领导层正在有意地忽视这些挑战,这还不包括中国巨大的经济不平等性。 
世界上许多地区可能会效仿欧盟的模式,成立自由贸易联盟,并在心中形成一个原型联邦。 安第斯国家(智利、秘鲁和玻利维亚)、东非和南亚可能是形成这类集团的主要候选国家。 可能会出现很少的大规模联盟(例如不会出现“拉丁美洲联盟”或“泛非联盟”),但这可能会促进国家间更好地融合。 
随着世界对石油的依赖越来越少,许多目前最富裕的阿拉伯国家将陷入停滞状态。 像沙特阿拉伯这样的政权,在很大程度上依赖于慷慨的庇护网络才得以保持稳定,可能会彻底崩溃。 
欧洲未来的重要性将完全取决于联邦欧洲计划。 如果这一计划失败了,欧洲的小国将无法在国际舞台上竞争,它们将一个接一个地被其竞争对手按照旧的分裂帝国主义方式分裂开来。 如果这一计划蓬勃发展,一个意想不到的重要玩家可能会出现,但这一情况出现的概率不高。 
迟早有一天,一个民粹主义政权会无缘无故地发动一场常规战争(我打赌是一些微不足道的民族主义者挑起的),而且这一战争很可能会拖垮任何被它卷入的国家。 请注意,这种风险几乎存在于地球上的任何民主国家之中。 

Achal Gautam (अचल गौतम)
It is almost impossible to day which country would emerge as most powerful country.
If we look the world before 1st world war (around 1912), Britain and Germany were the leading powers and France, Austria-Hungary, Japan, Russia, Italy and America were other major powers. But within 35 years, America and Russia became the leading superpowers.
If we look 100 years further back, France and Britain were the leading powers in early 19th century (before Waterloo). Ottomans, Austria, Persia, Russia etc were the leading powers. China was still relatively powerful and Mughals were still the nominal masters of India. Some Indian powers like Marathas could muster an army larger than any European power.
China and India are the leading contenders to replace America as the leading power in next 100 years. But there may be some dark horses like European Union, Russia, Japan or may be Indonesia, Mexico etc. I would say that India is most likely to success America as next super power unless China becomes a democratic country. I would rate Indian higher than China just because of democracy. The freedom to the common people to think may play a big part in deciding the next century.
Yes, Indian decision making is slower but it tries to take a consensus route. A normal citizen can stand and criticize even the PM of Indian publicly. The freedom to think was one the main reasons that Industrial revolution took place in Britain not in France (where everything was state controlled). But democracy is two edged sword and in case corrupt & incompatible people come to power then the Indian growth story may be over.

如果我们回顾第一次世界大战之前的世界(1912年前后),英国和德国是主要强国,而法国、奥匈帝国、日本、俄罗斯、意大利和美国是其他主要大国。 但在35年内,美国和俄罗斯就成为了超级大国。 
如果我们再往前回顾100年前,法国和英国是19世纪初(滑铁卢战役之前)的主要强国。 奥斯曼帝国、奥地利、波斯、俄罗斯等都是主要的强国。 中国那是也仍然相对强大,莫卧儿仍然是印度名义上的主人。 一些像马拉沙这样的印度强国(印度以前类似联邦国家,由许多小国组成)可以集结一支比任何欧洲强国都强大的军队。 
中国和印度是未来100年取代美国成为世界头号强国的主要竞争者。 但可能会有一些黑马,如欧盟、俄罗斯、日本或印度尼西亚、墨西哥等。 我想说,除非中国成为一个民主国家,否则印度最有可能取代美国成为下一个超级大国。 我认为印度比中国更有可能,仅仅是因为印度更为民主。 普通人思考的自由可能在决定下一个世纪哪个国家最强大中发挥着重要作用。 
是的,印度的决策速度较慢,但它试图采取共识路线。 一个普通公民可以站出来公开批评印度总理。 思考的自由是工业革命发生在英国而不是法国的主要原因之一(在法国,一切都由国家控制)。 但民主是把双刃剑,如果贪污腐败之人和不相容的人掌权,那么印度的变强大的故事可能就此就已经结束了。 

Nikola Tosic,在BEMapps.com工作 
Power is not a defined concept. It can be measured by GDP, military, culture, political influence, etc.
While China might have a higher GDP I don't think this is so relevant since most of it comes from manufacturing for others.
To really be more powerful that USA a country must win with soft power - cultural and content influence. USA is a multicultural society and thanks to this it has been able to create content which appeals to everyone in the world.
Only other such country can be EU. It is multicultural and a solid cultural and content force. Italy, France, Germany, Spain, etc all have enormous soft power and it grows more powerful if combined.
I do not see China or India being relevant culturally because their cultures and content are too introverted and they have a hard time relating to people outside. Also trully relatable culture must be very democratic and open, not based on inequality and opression. To be powerful one must be liked by everyone, not feared or seen just as a cheap culturally undeveloped manufacturer.
If in the next 100 years EU learns to truly be an integrated multicultural society and not a collection of small isolated entities that just want to make a bit more money, then it has a chance to be a global leader again. It definitely has the biggest potential for it.

力量不是一个好定义的概念。 它可以用GDP、军事、文化、政治影响力等来衡量。 
一个国家要想真正比美国强大,就必须以软实力获胜——即文化和内容影响力。 美国是一个多元文化的社会,正因为如此,它才能够创造出吸引世界上每一个人的内容。 
其他与之相类似的地方只有欧盟。 欧盟文化多元,拥有坚实的文化内容优势。 意大利、法国、德国、西班牙等都拥有强大的软实力,如果这些国家联合起来,欧盟会变得更加强大。 
我不认为中国和印度在文化上与此相关,因为他们的文化和内容太内向了,他们很难与外界的人相处。 真正相关的文化必须是非常民主和开放的,而不是基于不平等和压迫之上。 要想强大,就必须让所有人都喜欢它,而不是害怕它,或者只把它视为一个文化落后的廉价制造商。 
如果在未来的100年里,欧盟能够真正成为一个融合多元文化的社会,而不是一群只想多赚点钱的孤立的小实体,那么它就有机会再次成为全球领袖。 它肯定有最大的潜力成为未来一百年最强大的国家。 

Vivek Viveka
The USA will most likely continue to lead because of its human resources, depth of innovation, fundamental research and discoveries, ongoing lead in unleashing the power of individual freedom, and its spiritual turn and orientation.
Its military power far exceeds any other country’s. USA military spending is vastly larger than China's or any other country's, and it has been so for many years. The others aren't even close.
There are many secret research and development projects being funded by this money. Some are already operational, others will be as time progresses. Now that Trump and others are tightening up on security measures, China is being — and will increasingly be — thwarted in its efforts to steal these innovations and technologies.
If anyone, including China, is stupid enough to think that there are not weapon systems in the USA arsenal that they haven't even dreamed of, and want to put that brilliant idea to the test, then they will get a good taste of the consequences of their stupidity. They are not ahead in innovation ability, nor in the intelligence behind it. And they are far behind in weapon systems development.
The level and depth of innovation in the USA and its military is and will continue to be considerably beyond any other country.

美国的军事力量远远超过任何其他国家。 美国的军费开支比中国或其他任何国家都要大得多,并且多年来一直如此。 其他的国家甚至连不接近都谈不上。 
有许多秘密的研究和开发项目都是由这笔钱资助的。 其中一些项目已经投入使用,另一些将随着时间的推移而投入使用。 现在,特朗普和其他人正在加强安全措施,中国在窃取这些创新和技术的努力上正受到——而且将越来越受到——阻挠。 
如果包括中国在内的任何国家愚蠢到,认为美国军火库中没有他们从未想到过的武器系统,并想把这个自以为聪明的想法付诸实践,那么他们就会尝到愚蠢的后果。 其他国家在创新能力上并不领先,在情报方面也并不领先。 他们在武器系统开发方面也远远落后。 
请文明理性发言,请不要发布违规评论,包括但不限于(诋毁、极端、敏感、歧视、色情、引战、人身攻击)等,如发现此类评论,请不要回复,直接举报。网站意见建议请点击 意见反馈