Capitalism and Democracy in an Age of Geopolitical Challenges
地缘政治挑战时代的资本主义与民主
Francis Fukuyama interviewed by Japan SPOTLIGHT
法兰西斯·福山接受《日本聚光灯》杂志访问
原文：https://www.jef.or.jp/journal/pdf/219th_Cover_Story_02.pdf
译文：https://m.sohu.com/a/341423980_618422
Geopolitical Crises
地缘政治危机
JS: Looking at the global political economy, it seems to be largely in good
shape. But there is growing geopolitical risk in the world, such as the North
Korea-China-US rivalry in global governance, Russia, Iran and soon. Given
this, individuals may feel less secure in their daily lives, especially in
Japan. Do you think this is a temporary phenomenon or a structural one?
《日本聚光灯》：审视当前的全球政治经济形势，似乎总体上还算良好。但世界地缘政治
的威胁愈来愈多，比如关于北韩的中美全球治理对抗、俄罗斯、伊朗等问题。鉴于此，许
多人在平常生活中时常会感到不安全，尤其是日本民众。您认为这是一种临时状况，还是
一种结构性问题？
Fukuyama: I believe it is structural. I think that the period from 1989 up
until the financial crisis in the United States in 2008 was an unusual period
of American hegemony in which the US was by far the most powerful country in
the world and able to structure world politics pretty much according to its
own interests, which were maintenance of a broad, liberal, rules-based order.
But in the meantime you had a redistribution of power, so both Russia and
China have returned to great power status — China may be bigger and more
powerful than the US in a few years, Russia is being much more assertive, and
you have other countries like North Korea that have developed a nuclear
weapons program much faster than anyone anticipated. I don’t think this is
unusual — the American hegemony for that 20-year period was what was
unusual, so we are returning to a more normal type of international order
with more distributed power. Nonetheless, it does provide challenges and
potential instabilities which come not just from the fact that the US is not
in control the way it was at one point — with no one able to challenge it —
but also because the transition to a more powerful alternative power is
always dangerous in international affairs. Rising powers that become the
dominant power in the international system can be destabilizing and I think
that is why China is one of the biggest challenges right now, and certainly I
think that is why in a place like Japan people feel more insecure.
福山：我认为是结构性的。从1989年到2008年美国爆发金融危机，是美国霸权史上极不平
常的一段时期。一方面，美国到目前为止依然是世界最强大的国家，依然能够按照自己的
国家利益塑造全球政治秩序，维持一种广泛参与的、自由的、有规则的全球秩序。但另一
方面，存在全球权力再分配的问题，俄罗斯和中国又回到世界大国地位。其中，中国可能
在未来的几年里会比美国更加强大，俄罗斯的立场也变得越来越强硬。此外，还有朝鲜等
国家发展核武器的速度远远超出了许多人的预测。我认为这是正常的，美国独霸持续二十
年的时间才是不正常的，所以可以说我们开始回归到一种更加正常的、权力分配均衡的
全球秩序。尽管如此，这一剧变的确带来了新的挑战和诸多潜在的不稳定因素，原因不仅
在于美国现在已经无法像以前那样控制整个世界，还在于向新秩序过渡的阶段往往充满危
险。国际体系中具有全球影响力的大国的崛起也有可能会造成全球动荡。这是我认为中国
崛起是当前国际秩序面临的最大挑战之一的重要原因，当然也可能是日本民众感到不安全
的缘由所在。
JS: How do you think this geopolitical risk can be mitigated? Global
governance should work better than what we see now. Perhaps cooperation among
major countries like the US or Japan or the European Union could be the key
to better global governance?
《日本聚光灯》：您认为怎样才能缓和这种地缘政治风险？按理说，全球治理应该比现在
好一些。像美国、日本或者欧盟等国家和组织之间的合作能否呈现出更好的全球治理效果
？
Fukuyama: I think that global governance really depends on having an
overlapping multiple set of international institutions and agreements that
deal with different functional areas. This, rather than a single organization
like the United Nations, is the only way that we are going to achieve global
governance, and it really depends on the issue area and membership of the
organizations. So, if it is security and if it is Russia and China that are
the biggest threats to security, then it doesn’t make any sense to include
them in the organization and that is where you need the US-Japan security
treaty or NATO or the US-South Korea security alliance.
福山：我认为，全球治理效果的好坏依赖于一种能够应对和处理不同领域挑战的多元化、
多功能的国际组织和国际协议体系，而不是只依靠像联合国这样的一个机构。这是能够实
现全球善治的唯一路径，当然也要看问题所处的领域和组织成员的力量。所以，如果问题
是属于安全领域的，而俄罗斯和中国又是全球安全的最大挑战，那么，将这两个国家纳入
这一国际组织，就没有什么意义。显然就需要日美安保条约或北大西洋公约或美韩安全合
作。
On the other hand, issues like global warming or the control of infectious
diseases or international terrorism or management of the global economy can’
t proceed without Russia and China and so in those cases you’d want
organizations that include them. So I don’t think there is a single template
for how to organize the international system; it really depends on the
particular sector and the particular set of issues you are dealing with.
另一方面，如果问题是像全球变暖、疾病防控、国际反恐或全球经济治理，那就离不开俄
罗斯和中国，那就应该将这两个国家吸收到这一国际组织中来。所以，我认为，不存在任
何一种组织全球体系的模板，真正的决定性因素是问题出在哪个领域以及你面临哪些特定
的问题。
Domestic Political Crises
国内政治危局
JS: Looking at each country’s domestic political and economic situation, the
media and some leading thinkers mention rising populism as a factor in
increasing uncertainty. This rising populism could stem from our own
loneliness. Do you agree with this observation or do you think democracy will
work well in eliminating the negative aspects of populism?
《日本聚光灯》：我们来看一些国家的国内政治经济形势，某些媒体和主流思想家认为不
断兴起的民粹主义是导致不确定因素增加的重要因素之一，您是否赞同这种看法？您认为
民主制度能消除民粹主义带来的消极影响吗？
Fukuyama: First of all, populism is not a universal phenomenon; it has
appeared in Northern Europe and the US but on the other hand not in Japan or
South Korea or Australia or in Canada. I think it is driven by a couple of
things: firstly, economic anxieties. Globalization that has benefited
countries in the aggregate does not benefit every individual in every
country. In particular, older working-class people in rich countries have
been losing employment to new middle-classes in developing countries like
India and China. The other factor is rapid cultural change. That is why there
is no populism in Japan or South Korea, as they do not permit large-scale
immigration as opposed to most European countries and in the US where you
have extremely high levels of foreign people who have arrived within the last
generation. I think that is part of what is stimulating populism in those
countries. I don’t think there is an easy solution because it is rooted both
in these long-term economic trends and in big cultural shifts.
福山：首先，民粹主义的兴起不是一种普遍现象。它已经出现在北欧和美国等国家，但日
本、韩国、澳大利亚或加拿大等国却没有出现。我认为这可能有两种原因：第一，经济领
域带来的焦虑感。全球化在总体上促进了各国发展，但并没惠及每个国家中的每一个人。
尤其是面临像印度和中国等发展中国家新中产阶级的竞争，富裕国家的老工人就丧失了就
业机会。第二，文化剧变。与大多数欧洲国家不同，日本或韩国禁止大规模的外来移民，
这就是这些国家不会产生民粹主义的原因。我认为，这是推动这些国家产生民粹主义的原
因之一。对此没有太简单的解决办法，因为这是由长期的经济发展趋势和巨大的文化环境
转变造成的。
JS: I believe that increasing income inequality could be a factor behind the
rise of populism. Market-oriented capitalism has had tremendous benefits for
national economies and also is a source of economic growth. But many people
today believe that human happiness is more important than economic growth and
the OECD has finally developed a new measure for happiness. What do you think
about these views vis-a-vis market-oriented capitalism?
《日本聚光灯》：我认为，不断拉大的收入差距也是民粹主义兴起的因素之一。以市场为
导向的资本主义给各国经济带来巨大收益，也促进了经济的增长。但是，现在很多人认为
人类幸福比经济增长更重要，经合组织（OECD）最终推行了促进人类幸福的新举措。您是
如何看待这些与以市场为导向的资本主义相左的观点的？
Fukuyama: I think it should have been obvious all along that GDP or economic
growth by itself is not the base for human happiness; it just facilitates the
possibility of happiness. Human beings value other things than money and
resources — community, tradition, and stability — and in many ways rapid
economic growth disrupts all of these. Modern capitalism by its nature is
disruptive and tends to undermine stable communities; it enriches some people
while impoverishing others, it destroys entire industries, and I think that
the problem is that the disruptive nature of capitalism is constantly
creating this instability in society that makes people unhappy. The political
and social institutions then have to mitigate that through various kinds of
social protections, welfare state, income transfers — but society never
catches up because capitalism is so dynamic and evolves so rapidly that
society is always a few steps behind. I think this is one of the major
sources of unhappiness and particularly recently when you’ve had very rapid
growth in information technology and job loss through automation and other
things of that sort. We really don’t have answers as to how to fix some of
those problems.
福山：显然，国内生产总值或经济增长并不是决定人类幸福的基础，只是为人类幸福创造
了可能。相比于金钱和资源，人们现在更加看重的是群体、传统和稳定性等事物，而所有
这些恰恰被快速增长的经济瓦解了。现代资本主义本质上具有破坏性，将损害群体的稳定
性。资本主义让一部分群体富起来，却也使另一部分群体贫穷化，破坏整个产业，我认为
由于资本主义的破坏性本质而不断导致的社会的不稳定状态，让人们不高兴了。这就需要
政治和社会制度，比如各种社会保障制度、福利国家制度、收入调节制度等来缓解这种破
坏性所产生的影响，但是政治和社会制度的发展演进往往又与经济发展的速度不一致。由
于资本主义如此有发展活力，发展的速度很快，所以政治和社会制度永远会落后一两步。
我想这是导致人们不高兴的主要原因，尤其是在最近一段时间，随着信息技术、自动化的
高速发展，许多人丢掉了工作。目前，我们确实没有找到破解这一难题的妙招。
Capitalism Plus Democracy Would Still Win
资本主义加民主体制仍是赢家
JS: Against this backdrop, do you think that the nature of capitalism is
going to change in the future?
《日本聚光灯》：在此背景下，您认为资本主义的性质会在未来发生变化吗？
Fukuyama: Not particularly. I think it is a very dynamic force, and the
specific characteristics will change. For example, the last generation has a
great deal of concentration of wealth in the hands of a relatively small
amount of people around the world; I think this is probably intrinsic to all
capitalistic economic systems and so successful systems are not capitalism by
itself, but capitalism plus democracy, because the political institutions
have to put limits on the market and they have to regulate the market and
equalize outcomes to some extent by redistributing wealth from the rich to
the poor; they have to provide basic social services and protections for
people who are not winners in the system. That is the winning system — it is
not capitalism by itself because that only leads to this concentration of
power and wealth.
福山：不会的。我认为资本主义制度充满活力，但是具体特征可能会发生变化。例如，在
全世界范围内，上一代人出现了大量的财富向极少数人手中集中的现象，这应该是所有资
本主义制度所固有的趋势。但成功的制度不能仅仅靠资本主义，而是靠“资本主义+民主
”。因为政治制度能够限制市场的力量，调控市场，并在一定程度上可以将富人的财富再
分配给穷人。成功的制度必须为这一制度中的失败者们提供基本的社会服务和保障。只顾
赢者的制度（Winning System）而不是资本主义导致了权力和财富的集中。
JS: I think there are many kinds of capitalistic institutions in the world:
American capitalism is different from Japanese capitalism and so on. Do you
think these different capitalistic systems can co-exist in the future? Or
could some kind of convergence process occur?
《日本聚光灯》：当今世界存在着各种类别的资本主义制度，比如美国就不同于日本。您
认为这些不同种类的资本主义制度在未来能够并存吗？是否会出现某种形式的趋同？
Fukuyama: That is an interesting question. I think that it’s not clear to me
which one of those will happen because if one particular system looks like it
is doing better, the tendency is for other countries to copy that system and
that tends to converge things. On the other hand, other societies are
continually innovating and doing new things and so that tends to lead them to
diverge. A lot of times, the system is structured according to cultural norms
and that means that countries are never going to converge in a certain sense.
Japan and the US are very different with regard to individualism and
attitudes toward authority. I think this is rooted in the culture of the two
countries and for that reason I don’t think Japanese capitalism will ever
resemble American capitalism and vice versa.
福山：这个问题很有意思，但目前我无法预测会发生哪一种情况。如果某种制度看起来运
行得更好，其他国家就会模仿。但另一方面，其他国家也会不断创新，不断解决新问题，
各国制度也会越来越不同。很多时候，制度构成受文化规范的影响，也就是说国家之间不
会出现某种形式的趋同。日本人和美国人在个人主义和对待权威的态度上不同，根源在于
两国的文化传统不同。基于此，我认为日本的资本主义绝不会与美国的资本主义相像，反
之亦然。
The Aging Society
老龄化社会
JS: Next, the issue of aging societies around the world. In the case of
Japan, it has very serious consequences and implications for our economy. We
will need higher social welfare expenditure, but our fiscal resources are
limited so it will be perhaps related to the question of democracy. How can
democracy strike a balance between the needs of an aging society and the
limits on financial resources?
《日本聚光灯》：下一个问题是关于全世界的人口老龄化问题。例如日本，老龄化对经济
发展造成了极严重的影响，未来需要更高的社会福利支出，但财政资源又极为有限。所以
这可能是与民主制度相关，民主如何实现老龄化社会的福利支出与财政资源之间的平衡呢
？
Fukuyama: I think that many countries deal with population decline through
immigration, and Japan has simply not been willing to accept immigration. I
think you wouldn’t have this declining population if you permitted
immigration; that brings on other issues like populism and anti-immigrant
sentiment and so forth. On the other hand, one of the reasons that makes me
optimistic about the future of the US is that it has been relatively good at
dealing with immigration, and the population of the US is still growing; so
that’s one path that Japan could take but chooses not to. If you decide not
to go down that path, it is not obvious that a decline in the absolute size
of population and therefore GDP will necessarily make the country poorer; if
you continue to have productivity growth on an individual level people can
continue to do well but it sets up the problem of inter-generational problems
between young and old people and how you are going to divide an existing
economic pie. This is a really difficult issue for any democracy to try and
deal with.
福山：许多国家都是通过移民来应对人口减少的难题，日本政府当然不会这么做。我认为
，如果允许移民的话，就不会出现人口减少的难题，但会带来像民粹主义和反移民仇恨等
其他问题。另一方面，我之所以对美国的情况比较乐观的原因在于，美国相对较好地解决
了移民问题，而且人口也在稳步增加。所以说，这是日本政府可以选择但没有选择的一条
路。绝对人口量或国内生产总值的减少并不意味着人们生活会变得穷苦，如果生产率依然
保持着某种水平的增长速度，人们也会过得很好，但这造成了年轻人和老年人代际之间，
以及未来如何划分经济蛋糕的问题。这的确是任何民主制度都难以应对的棘手问题。
JS: There is an argument which I have heard in Europe that achieving a
balanced approach between the needs of an aging society and limited budget
resources is extremely difficult, and we should leave that kind of decision
to academics and scholars who are well-versed in economics and public
finances. Would you agree that the role of experts should be highly regarded
in this context?
《日本聚光灯》：我在欧洲听到过这样一个观点，既然实现老龄化的社会需要与财政资源
之间的平衡很难，那么应当让通晓经济学和财政学的学者和专家们来制定决策。您认为我
们应该重视这类专家在这一议题上发挥的作用吗？
Fukuyama: Simply deferring to experts would not work in a modern society for
a number of reasons. First of all, I don’t think that any group of experts
will have the trust of the population as a whole to make these decisions in a
democratic society where people can criticize and talk and so forth. You
might be able to do that in an authoritarian society but not in a democratic
one where people can vote, and if they don’t think that the experts are
promoting the interests of particular groups then people will exercise their
power at election time to unseat them or they are going to protest or
complain or one thing and another. A hundred years ago in Asian countries,
you would have had populations that would have deferred to experts to make
decisions but I don’t think that any modern country can do this today
because there isn’t the kind of trust.
福山：现代社会完全依赖专家是不靠谱的，这有很多原因。首先，我认为在一个人人都可
以讨论和批判政府政策的民主社会里，没有什么专家能够赢得所有人的信任。或许在一个
集权国家里，你可以做到这一点，但在民主社会却不行，因为人们拥有选举权，如果他们
认为这些专家违背自己的利益，就会在选举时利用自己手中的权利撤换这些专家，抗议或
埋怨这事那事。在一百年前的一些亚洲国家里，出现过人们依靠专家来决策的情况，但在
现代的任何一个国家里，这都是不可能的，因为专家们根本无法获得完全信任。
The other problem is that experts make really bad mistakes — it’s not clear
to me that a bunch of supposedly wise people who don’t actually have their
own interests at stake when they make these decisions are going to do the
right thing as opposed to people who actually have to worry about protecting
themselves and their children. In a democracy, you rely on expertise, meaning
that you listen to people with expertise and they can advise you. It is fine
that you want to inject expertise into an economic debate, but I think the
idea that you will delegate the actual decision to experts is a non-starter.
另一方面，专家也会犯一些糟糕的错误。相对于那些担心自己和自己的孩子的人，我们所
认为的一群聪明的人在没有利害关系的情况下所做的决策是否就是正确的，对此我并不确
定。在民主社会里，如果依赖于专家，就意味着将听从他们的建议。如果想在一场经济辩
论中引入专家的力量，是没问题的，但在做实际决策时，也要将自己的权利交给专家，就
是不靠谱的了。
JS: In an aging society, there could be growing conflict between the young
and the elderly as their interests are very different. It’s happening in
Japan, and in a democracy where older people are a larger population than
younger people perhaps the older people’s opinions are much better reflected
in politics than those of the young. So younger people may be in a very
frustrating situation. How could this be mitigated in your view?
《日本聚光灯》：在老龄化社会，由于利益诉求的不同，青年人和老年人之间可能会不断
滋生新的冲突和矛盾，当前的日本就是如此。而且在一个老年人多于青年人的民主国家里
，或许老年人的观点和主张更能影响政治发展，那么青年人可能就处于比较糟糕的境地。
您认为应该如何缓解这种情况？
Fukuyama: The problem is even worse than you outline because there are
relatively fewer young people than old people. But the other thing is that
old people are much more easily mobilized politically; they vote in higher
numbers and higher proportions, and they usually have organizations to
represent their interests. So they tend to be over-represented in a political
system. The young people are too busy looking for a job, trying to support
families, getting married and so on, whereas if you are a retired person you
can spend all day thinking about your pension and how to protect it and about
politics and so forth. I don’t know that there is any clear solution to this
other than a certain amount of leadership where leaders try to educate people
that they need to understand their own self-interest in a longer-term sense,
other than simply where their next pension check is going to come from. They
have to understand that their children and children’s children are not going
to have good opportunities if they insist on taking all the benefits for
themselves in their generation. I am not sure if there is an institutional
fix to correct this imbalance between young and old people.
福山：实际情况可能比你描述的更严重一些，因为老年人的确比青年人多。而且另一个问
题在于，相比于青年人，老年人在政治上活跃得多，参与投票的人数也更多，并且拥有能
够代表自身利益的群众组织。因此，老年人在政治中的代表性越来越强。青年人则忙碌于
找工作、结婚、养家餬口等。如果你是一名退休人员，就可以整天寻思养老金的事情以及
如何维护养老金制度等当代政治问题。我不知道解决这一问题有什么好的方法，除了让更
多的政府领导人多多教育民众用长远眼光来看待自己的个人利益，而不是只关心下次养老
金的来源问题。他们应该明白，如果只是谋取自己这一代的福利，那么子孙后代将无法获
得更好的福利。我同样不确定，该如何从制度上来解决青年人和老年人之间的不平衡问题
。
JS: Japanese politicians recently decided to lower the voting age to 18.
Might this be a solution?
《日本聚光灯》：日本政治家最近把选举投票年龄下调到满18岁。这是否是一种解决方法
？
Fukuyama: That could help a little bit. You would still have to persuade
those young people to actually vote. There are distortions in the electoral
system that you could correct; for example, in Japan rural areas are
over-represented in the electoral system relative to cities and the people
that live in rural areas tend to be older than people who live in cities. If
you fix that problem, you could also increase the representation of young
people. All of these measures might help correct the system but they won’t
necessarily fix it.
福山：这可能会帮一些小忙，而且还必须劝说这些青年人去投票。当前选举制度中有一些
瑕疵是可以纠正的，比如，相比于城市，日本农村的代表性过强了，因为住在农村的人比
城市里的人年纪更大。如果要解决这个问题，就必须提升青年人的代表性。所有这些措施
都可能有助于纠正选举制度中的瑕疵，但不一定能彻底解决问题。
JS: There is an argument in Japan that young people might as well be given
more voting rights. If there is one young person, he or she could have two
votes where older people only have one vote. Could that work?
《日本聚光灯》：在日本，有一种观点认为青年人应该拥有更多的选举权。老年人有一票
的话，青年人就得有两票。这能管用吗？
Fukuyama: I have never seen a country that has made such a decision. It would
be difficult politically to implement.
福山：我从未见过哪个国家能这种做。这在政治上很难实行。
The Rising Income Gap
不断拉大的收入差距
JS: I said earlier that I think the rising income gap is a factor behind
populism. Do you think this rising gap would be the ultimate outcome of
capitalism?
《日本聚光灯》：刚才我说过，不断拉大的收入差距是导致民粹主义兴起的原因之一。您
认为这是资本主义发展的必然结果吗？
Fukuyama: This is the argument of the French economist Thomas Picketty —
that there is an intrinsic tendency — and that may well be true. The
solution for that has always come through politics, as no capitalist system
has ever been allowed to operate unchecked and unregulated. However, I think
that the real issue right now is not this intrinsic character of capitalism;
the real fear is technology. The most recent kinds of technologies related to
information and communications privilege education and skills and cognitive
ability, which are not evenly distributed in societies, and so a lot of the
growing inequality is due to the spread of these kinds of technologies and I
think that is going to get worse. The spread of AI and automation is
something new in the mix, so I don’t see any clear solutions that have been
offered by politicians.
福山：这是法国经济学家托马斯·皮凯蒂的观点，他认为这是资本主义的内在趋势，这是
正确的。解决这一问题的途径只能是通过政治手段，因为任何资本主义制度都不能是不受
监督和调节的资本主义。但是我认为，当前面对的真正问题并不是资本主义的这一发展趋
势，而是技术发展。与信息、通信有关的最新技术促进了教育、技能和认知能力的优先发
展，但是它们在全社会的分配是不均衡的。随着技术的广泛传播，这种不平等现象愈加严
重。我认为情况可能更为糟糕。人工智能与自动化相结合是一种崭新的事物。对此，政治
学家们没有找到好的解决方法。
JS: Certainly, technology is one factor causing such an income gap, but
should globalization be considered as the culprit for such rising inequality?
《日本聚光灯》：当然，技术是导致收入差距的因素之一，是否全球化也是导致这种收入
差距产生的罪魁祸首？
Fukuyama: Globalization isn’t that separate from the technology question
because the reason you have globalization is that certain technologies for
transportation and communications have made movements across national borders
much easier, so the two are very related. Globalization has definitely had an
impact on growing inequality. That is why people like Danny Roderick, a
distinguished American economist, who have been looking at ways to safely
back away from some aspects of globalization, are probably right, that this
is something that people ought to think about.
福山：全球化与技术问题无法分割。之所以产生全球化，原因在于某些交通与传播技术的
发展使得跨国流动愈加便利，所以全球化与技术是密切相关的。全球化的发展肯定会对收
入差距的形成产生一定影响。这是许多像美国著名经济学家丹尼·罗德里克（Danny
Roderick）这样的人尝试远离全球化的原因，也是人们通常会想到的事情。
JS: How about education? Do you think it offers a solution?
《日本聚光灯》：教育呢？您认为教育是一种解决方案吗？
Fukuyama: Economists would favor education as a solution, but the trouble is
that it may not be a practical solution in several respects. Many education
systems in many countries are impossible to reform. Theoretically it is
possible but politically you have too many entrenched actors like teacher’s
unions and rigid political systems that don’t allow educational reform. The
second issue is that there are limits to what education can do. Part of the
problem is cognitive and mathematical ability. If you are good at
quantitative reasoning you can get a good job, you can earn a high income in
any number of fields. A hundred years ago that wasn’t true — you could have
been a bookkeeper or an accountant who wouldn’t earn that much money but
today you could be a statistician, a geneticist, a programmer: there are a
lot of high-income jobs. Unfortunately these kinds of abilities are
determined biologically and are not evenly distributed. If a truck driver
loses his job at 50, he can’t really train to be a geneticist or big data
analyst.
福山：经济学家可能会认为教育是一种解决路径，但问题在于从很多方面来看，这不是一
种可行的方案。许多国家的教育制度是不可能改革的。理论上有可能，但实际上会受到很
多守旧派的掣肘，比如教师工会和强大的政治制度都不允许进行教育改革。再者说，教育
的功能也是有限的。部分问题是由于认知能力和数字能力的不同。如果擅长定量分析，你
可以找到一份好工作，可以在许多领域获得较高的收入。这在一百年前是不可能的，那时
候你可能就是一个图书管理员或会计，挣不到很多钱，但是今天你就可以成为数据分析师
、遗传学学者、计算机程序员，这些工作岗位都可以让你获得较高的收入。不幸的是，这
些技术能力因人而异，也不是每个人都具备的。如果一名卡车司机在50岁时失去工作，肯
定无法把他训练成为一名遗传学家或大数据分析师。
JS: Against the background of this innovation and globalization, it may be
important for us to enhance labor mobility. Labor market reform should be key
to achieving economic growth and mitigating income inequality. Would you
concur that to this end lifelong education will be very important?
《日本聚光灯》：在这种技术创新和全球化的大背景下，提高劳动力的流动性可能是非常
重要的事情。劳动力市场改革应该成为促进经济增长和缩小收入差距的关键。您认为推行
终生教育能够实现这一目的吗？
Fukuyama: These are two separate issues. Lifelong learning is a good idea and
everybody should be putting such programs in place. Labor mobility is a
little more complicated because what labor mobility has meant in Europe and
the US is that people come in from low-wage areas like Mexico or Eastern
Europe, and they displace workers in the country itself, and so this has
actually widened the income equality gap as a lot of these new workers are
willing to work for much lower wages than native workers. It is a trade off,
because greater labor market flexibility is likely to reduce unemployment
rates. France right now has a 25% youth unemployment rate and if they had a
flexible labor market a lot of those young people would be able to get jobs.
On the other hand, income inequality will likely also increase because a lot
of those jobs will be low pay and so forth, so it is a bit of a trade-off
between employment and income.
福山：这是两个独立的问题。终身学习是一种好的学习理念，每个人都应当将其纳入自己
的人生计画。劳动力流动则是一个更为复杂的问题，因为这在欧洲和美国是指劳动力从低
收入的国家如墨西哥和东欧流入本国，进而取代本国的工人。但这其实扩大了收入差距，
因为许多移民工人愿意从事工资比本国工人低得多的工作。这是一种此消彼长的过程，因
为更强的流动性可能会降低失业率。目前法国青年的失业率是25%，如果他们拥有一个灵
活的劳动力市场，这些年轻人就可能找到工作。另一方面，收入差距也会进一步拉大，原
因在于其中的许多人会选择低收入的工作。因此，这就是就业和收入之间某种程度上的此
消彼长。
JS: You mentioned ethnic diversity as another source of political instability
or populism in Western countries and that Japan would be immune to this
because it has very little ethnic diversity. However, in Japan as well we see
a growing income gap between permanent and non-permanent workers. That kind
of difference seems to be causing confrontation. Would diversity always cause
such confrontation?
《日本聚光灯》：您提到种族多样性是导致欧美国家政治动荡或民粹主义兴起的原因之一
，而日本不会出现这一问题。但是，日本也出现了永久就业工人和临时就业工人之间收入
差距拉大的问题，这也带来了冲突。是否多样性总会带来这种类似的冲突呢？
Fukuyama: I think that ethnic diversity is really quite different from this
labor market diversity; culture attaches itself much more readily to
ethnicity because different ethnic groups tend to have different cultural
values. In that respect you have to consider them a bit differently. In
Japan, as I mentioned, it’s a trade-off because you are facing this severe
demographic crisis now because you don’t allow immigrants in large numbers
and that’s a really big challenge that is difficult to meet. On the other
hand you don’t have to worry about ethnic conflict, about populism, about
anti-immigrant groups rising and so there are disadvantages and advantages.
福山：我认为，种族多样性跟劳动力市场的多样性是完全不同的，相比之下，文化越来越
与种族捆绑在一起，因为不同种族群体拥有完全不同的价值观。对这两个问题的思考应该
是有些不同的。正如我所指出的，在日本，这是一种此消彼长的过程。日本现在正面临着
严重的人口危机，原因在于日本政府不允许大量外来移民，这的确是难以应对的巨大挑战
；没有大量外来移民，你就不必担心会滋生种族冲突、民粹主义和反移民团体等问题。所
以，这么做既有优势，又有不足。
I continue to think that diversity is actually a good thing in certain
fundamental ways because if you don’t have a degree of diversity you get
fixed in a certain way of doing things, so it is good to have people from
different backgrounds compete with each other and come up with new ideas;
that was one of the great secrets of Silicon Valley. On the other hand, you
don’t want excessive diversity as this can create a lack of consensus about
basic values and this is the challenge that the US and Europe are facing
right now.
我还是认为保持多样性在本质上是件好事，因为如果不具备某种多样性，大家做事的方式
都会相同，而如果有了不同文化背景的人来相互竞争和献言献策的话，将会是一件好事。
这是硅谷成功的秘诀之一。当然，多样性和差异性不能过度，因为这会导致共同价值观的
缺失，这是欧洲和美国当前正面临的挑战。
JS: While European countries and the US may regard ethnic diversity as a sort
of problem, Japan is considering ethnic diversity as a future strength. Do
you think Japan should make more efforts to diversity?
《日本聚光灯》：欧盟和美国把种族多样性看成社会难题，而日本却把其看成未来发展的
动力。您认为，日本政府应该做出更多的努力来提升社会的多样性吗？
Fukuyama: I think it should. I think that is one way of solving the
population problem and I think it would be good for Japan to have alternative
ways of doing things and seeing culture from a different standpoint.
福山：是的。我认为这是解决人口问题的路径之一。存在不同的做事方式和文化观点，对
日本来说是一件好事。
Japanese Socioeconomic System
日本经济社会制度
JS: In my view, not only Japanese but people all over the world are less
assured about their future due to the issues we have already talked about.
However, there are some unique problems in Japan. People have been protected
by the lifetime employment system as well as seniority-based promotion system
in their companies. After retirement they expect to be taken care of by their
children. These values are no win a state of flux. Do you think Japan is
losing its strength through such changes?
《日本聚光灯》：依我看，就我们刚才谈到的问题，不仅日本人而且全世界的人对于自己
的未来都缺少信心。但日本有着自己的问题，人们受到企业终身雇佣制度和资历晋升制度
的保护，他们在退休后期盼得到子女的赡养，这些价值观现在处于一种不稳定的状态。您
认为由于这些变化，日本正在逐步丧失其发展的动力吗？
Fukuyama: I think that the seniority wage system and lifetime employment were
deliberately designed in the postwar period. They didn’t always exist and so
in the late 19th century (in the Meiji Era) and early 20th century there was
much more labor mobility and you didn’t have this system of lifetime
employment in big companies. I think that system worked well as long as Japan
was growing. In the high-growth period this was very useful as companies
could actually guarantee lifetime employment and stability, but that period
is over and Japan needs much more productivity gains and innovation and
cannot assume a high rate of per capita GDP growth, so I think such a system
has become an obstacle to innovation, so companies need to go bankrupt and
new companies need to emerge. There needs to be more competition in protected
industries and none of that is possible with the lifetime employment system;
I think that this system has been under stress since the bursting of the
bubble in the 1990s. That really marked the moment when Japan’s growth
slowed down and you got out of this high-growth period.
福山：我认为日本的资历工资制度和终身雇佣制是为战后一段时期量身打造的，并非一直
存在。在19世纪晚期（明治时期）和20世纪初期，日本拥有更灵活的劳动力流动制度，大
企业也没有终身雇佣制。我认为，只要日本经济不断增长，就证明了这些制度运行良好。
在日本经济高速增长期，这些制度保障了工人的终身雇佣和稳定性，是非常管用的制度。
但是这一时期已经结束了，日本现在需要更高的生产率和更好的创新能力，不能再指望实
现人均GDP的高增长，所以这种制度已经成为创新的障碍。日本需要企业的破产，需要新
公司的不断涌现，需要被保护行业内有更多的竞争。所有这些在终身雇佣制度里都是不可
能实现的。我认为这种制度自1990年代爆发金融泡沫以来就不断面临压力，这实际上标志
著日本经济增速放缓的开始和高速增长期的终结。
So, I think that the stress on that system has been going on for 20-30 years
and I don’t think it will be sustainable in the longer run. This is not a
cultural thing for Japan; Japan did not have this system prior to the late
1940s, it was created under certain circumstances to build stability in
postwar Japan and was made possible by that high period of growth. But it is
not a necessary system and not one that Japan necessarily enjoyed.
因此，我认为这种制度面临压力已经有了二三十年的时间了，从长期看来，这将是不可持
续的。这种制度在日本不是一种文化的产物，日本在1940年代晚期之前并没有这种制度，
它是在战后日本的特殊背景下创立的，目的在于稳定经济。也只有在经济高速增长期，这
一制度才得以存在，但它绝不是一种必然存在的制度，也不是日本真正需要的制度。
JS: Young people in particular in Japan are frustrated by the existing
institutions dominating their lives, and prefer more individual-based
institutions. However, the old institutions in Japan still assume the large
family system and lifetime employment systems and so on. Should such values
and institutions be modified or improved?
《日本聚光灯》：尤其是日本的年轻人已经受够了这种掌控他们生活的现有制度，他们更
喜欢以个人为基础的制度。但是，日本的旧制度仍然主导著家庭制度、终身雇用制度等等
。这些价值理念和制度是否应该被修正或改进？
Fukuyama: I think they need to be. One of the reasons for Japan’s low birth
rate is that this system where the wife takes care of her husband’s parents
just doesn’t work. It doesn’t work in a world where women have a high
degree of education, and I think this needs to be the responsibility of the
state and not of the family. The Chinese are seeing this with their one-child
system — with a low birth rate it is simply not possible for working-age
children to devote enough time and energy to take care of their parents so
there needs to be some kind of public system or external subsidies for doing
that sort of thing. That is another social system that does need to change.
福山：我认为需要。日本低出生率的原因之一是妻子不工作而负责照顾公婆的制度。在一
个女性受教育水平较高的世界里，这是不行的。我认为这应是政府的责任，而不是家庭。
中国也在出现这种情况，由于一胎政策而造成的低生育率，使忙于工作的孩子不可能有充
足的时间和精力去照顾他们的父母，所以需要某种公共制度或外部给予补贴。这需要变革
。
Other Issues — NGOs, Cyber-security
其他问题
JS: In the US the role of NGOs is very important. Do you think that private
persons and businesses should be more responsible for public policy issues?
《日本聚光灯》：非政府组织在美国发挥着重要作用。您认为每个个人和企业应当更多对
公共政策的制定担负责任吗？
Fukuyama: There are different kinds of roles that NGOs play. Increasingly in
the US and Europe, NGOs are actually responsible for providing social
services — historically, this was always the case. Religious organizations
used to take care of poor relief, and many welfare functions and education,
and they were taken into the state only in the early 20th century. So
historically it has always been the case that private organizations played an
important role. I think that this will happen inevitably in modern societies
because states are not competent or responsive enough in providing services
and so sometimes private provision works better.
福山：非政府组织发挥着不同作用。在美国和欧洲，非政府组织实际上越来越多地在提供
社会服务。历史上也是这种情况。宗教机构过去提供的服务就是救护穷人，提供福利和教
育，但是这些社会服务在20世纪初才纳入政府的职能范围。所以历史上私人组织就发挥着
重要作用。我认为这一趋势在现代社会不可避免，因为国家没有办法提供足够的服务，有
时候私人机构服务得更好。
The other role of NGOs is advocacy; they are the ones who actually monitor
the state and make sure it is performing and hold it accountable, and that is
probably the most important function of an NGO today.
非政府组织的另一个作用是游说，它们能够监督政府，确保政府运行得公开透明，这或许
是今天非政府组织最重要的功能了。
JS: Do you think that the activities of NGOs are a kind of barometer of
democracy?
《日本聚光灯》：您是否认为非政府组织的活动是民主的一种晴雨表？
Fukuyama: There is a long line of thinking that says that civil society is
one of the key components of a successful democratic system and I think that
is probably right — precisely for this reason: that they are important for
holding the government accountable and ensuring that the government is not
getting away with things that they shouldn’t be doing.
福山：长期以来，人们就认为市民社会是民主制度成功的核心要素之一。我认为的确如此
，这可能基于以下原因：市民社会能够保持政府的透明度，确保政府不去做不该做的事。
JS: Cyber-security, fake news and other challenges from cyberspace could
control people’s voting behavior even if they are not conscious of it. Could
this be a challenge to our future democracy?
《日本聚光灯》：产生于网络空间的安全问题、虚假消息及其他挑战可能会控制人们的选
举行为，即使他们不是有意的。这会成为未来民主的一种挑战吗？
Fukuyama: It already is. It is pretty clear that the Russians interfered in
the American election last year and actually may be responsible for electing
Donald Trump, which is a pretty big consequence. This has been going on in
quite a few elections in many parts of the world and at the moment we don’t
know how to deal with this, we lack a system for mitigating it. My own
research center is engaged in a couple of projects to tackle this issue but
at the moment we don’t have a clear answer. In Europe they are trying to
take a regulatory approach to this. It won’t work in the US but it might
work in Europe. I think they have to be careful that they don’t undermine
freedom of speech values if they do too much regulation.
福山：事情已经如此了。我们非常清晰地看到，俄罗斯人就介入了美国去年的总统选举，
实际上他们应该对川普总统的当选负有责任。这种事情在世界许多地方的选举中都已经
出现了，不过暂时我们还不知该如何应对，因为我们缺乏缓解其影响的制度。我自己的研
究项目就聚焦于这一问题，但现在还没有找到解决办法。欧洲国家试图通过政府调节的手
段来应对。这一招在美国不管用，在欧洲或许有用。我认为他们也必须要谨慎一些，如果
采取过多的调节措施，会不会破坏言论自由等价值理念。
Overall Assessment
总体性评判
JS: As a distinguished historian, how do you assess overall the current
global political economic situation? Are we in a great transitional period or
in the process of normal development?
《日本聚光灯》：作为一名知名的历史学家，您如何评判当前全球政治经济形势？我们处
于大变革时代，还是正常发展的时代？
Fukuyama: I think we are in the midst of a really big transition. In the last
30 years we have seen this very rapid expansion of both globalization and
democracy and now there is a big backlash against it. I think that the entire
liberal international system that has been created is being threatened by
this and so it is actually quite a dangerous moment in world politics as
prosperity really depends on the continuation of this system.
福山：我认为，我们处于一个真正大变革时代的中期。过去三十年里，我们见证了全球化
与民主的快速发展，但是今天两者都出现了大的反复。我认为这已经威胁到整个自由经济
体系，所以我们确实处于世界政治中的一个危险时刻，因为整个人类的繁荣都依赖于这一
体系的延续。
JS: What do you think about the role of international organizations such as
the World Bank, UN, IMF, and OECD?
《日本聚光灯》：您如何看待像世界银行、联合国、国际货币基金组织及经合组织等国际
组织的作用？
Fukuyama: You need international cooperation in a globalized world and so
many of these organizations help with these problems. Some are not terribly
effective, like the UN, especially in domains like security, but I don’t
think we can get along without them at this point.
福山：全球化需要国际合作，这些国际组织都能帮助解决一些国际问题。其中一些国际组
织，比如联合国，在国际安全领域的作用并那么有效，但我不认为当前就不需要它了。