金融時(shí)報(bào):印度特色的咖喱資本主義

印度特色的咖喱資本主義

本文作者為Omidyar Network India Advisors董事總經(jīng)理 亞蘭特·辛哈(Jayant Sinha),和布朗大學(xué)政治學(xué)教授托什·瓦爾什尼(Ashutosh Varshney)

測(cè)試中可能遇到的詞匯和知識(shí)：

erratic [?'ræt?k] adj.不穩(wěn)定的；古怪的

disarray [d?s?'re?] n.無(wú)秩序；雜亂；衣冠不整

stealth [stelθ] n.秘密；秘密行動(dòng)；鬼祟

pivotal ['p?v?tl] adj.關(guān)鍵的；中樞的

unshackle [?n'?æk(?)l] v.除去……鐐銬；釋放

India must harness the profit motive in the spirit of Nehru (651 words)

Normal life has resumed in India since last week’s devastating power cuts, but there is no guarantee they will not recur. The power sector – an erratic blend of state-run companies and private sector players – is in disarray, just one reflection of India’s disappointing economic performance.

Economic growth in the past year was just 6.5 per cent, well below the previous year’s 8.4 per cent. Since 1990, at 6.6 per cent per annum, India’s growth rate has been the third highest in the world, surpassed only by China and Vietnam. But to resume this impressive run, India’s flawed capitalism has to be fixed.

One thing stands out in India’s embrace of pro-market policies since the early 1990s. No political party has mounted an ideological defence of capitalism, which is still to acquire political legitimacy. The spirit of Jawaharlal Nehru, to some extent, endures. He wrote 75 years ago: “It would be absurd to say that the profit motive does not appeal to the average Indian, but it is nevertheless true that there is no such admiration for it in India as there is in the west. The possessor of money may be envied but he is not particularly respected or admired. Respect and admiration still go ... to those who sacrifice themselves ... for the public good.” Doubts about the profit motive are lower today, but they have not vanished. India is embracing capitalism by stealth.

The country has witnessed the rise of three distinct flavours of capitalism: state capitalism, crony capitalism and entrepreneurial capitalism. Together these three constitute what might whimsically be termed “curry capitalism”.

Though India’s public sector companies do not exercise the dominance of state-owned companies in China, the state has substantial or complete control of a host of pivotal sectors. Even when publicly listed, state-owned companies are run as bureaucracies and managed as instruments of the state. Politics play a big role: for example, India’s vast rural electorate gets huge power subsidies, making power generation unattractive commercially. Despite new investments, demand has outstripped supply for decades.

Crony capitalism has taken two forms. In sectors such as aviation and telecommunications, cronyism and entrepreneurship go hand in hand. While the government has awarded licences and contracts in an opaque way, competition has been so vigorous that millions of consumers benefited. But in power generation, mining and property, business conglomerates have operated primarily as crony capitalists, pursuing opportunities in collusion with government; an extractive elite has made vast fortunes.

Entrepreneurial capitalism, the child of liberalisation, dominates knowledge-based industries, capital markets and consumer goods. In these sectors, innovation and rising productivity have driven growth, job creation and wealth generation. This is the form of capitalism that the polity ought to encourage.

But two factors complicate the consolidation of entrepreneurial capitalism. First, India’s turn to markets has coincided with the rise of coalitions in politics. Since 1989, almost every government in Delhi has been a coalition of many parties. To survive, governments have had to satisfy more political players than ever before, often leading them to overlook graft.

Second, politicians have come under increasing pressure to show sensitivity towards poorer, especially rural voters, who have voted more than the urban middle classes. Keeping electricity prices artificially low for farmers is one of the ways in which the polity has responded to this pressure, but more creative solutions are clearly needed to respond both to political necessities and to economic imperatives.

Government policy must rest on three pillars: to unshackle India’s entrepreneurial energies by making markets more competitive, to reduce graft by simplifying regulation and making it more transparent, and to use tax revenues from higher growth to develop an efficient welfare state that attends to the poor.

Nehru’s invocation against capitalism requires reformulation. India’s key challenge is to harness the profit motive for the larger national purpose, not to shackle the private sector.

請(qǐng)根據(jù)你所讀到的文章內(nèi)容，完成以下自測(cè)題目：

1.What can be deduced from ''the spirit of Jawaharlal Nehru''?

A. Today's India leader is Nehru.

B. Some parties make capitalism their ideology, though they are not very powerful.

C. Nehru was very vigilant against capitalism.

D. Doubts about the profit motive are always strong in India.

答案(1)

2.The writers mention several types of ''capitalism'', but they appreciate only one of them, which one?

A. Curry capitalism.

B. Entrepreneurial capitalism.

C. State capitalism.

D. Crony capitalism.

答案(2)

3.''Keeping electricity prices artificially low'' has been Indian government's policy for a long time.

According to the passage, what are the consequences of this policy?

A. It pleases the poor farmers who possess a lot of voting power.

B. It continually requires huge amounts of government subsidies.

C. It discouraged private capital to invest in power generation industry.

D. All of the above is correct.

答案(3)

4.To solve the problems in India, according to the passage, which one is not viable?

A. To make markests more competitive and spark India's entrepreneurial energies.

B. To reduce corruption by simplifying regulation and making it more transparent.

C. To make good use of state capitalism to do ''macroscopic readjustment and control''.

D. To use tax revenues from higher growth to develop an efficient welfare state that helps the poor.

答案(4)

* * *

(1) 答案：C.Nehru was very vigilant against capitalism.

解釋?zhuān)耗岷蒸斒怯《泉?dú)立后首任總理，他將“資本主義”與“帝國(guó)主義”聯(lián)系起來(lái)，對(duì)它們保持著警惕，實(shí)行偏社會(huì)主義的政策。B是錯(cuò)誤的，原文第三段中說(shuō)：No political party has mounted an ideological defence of capitalism. D項(xiàng)也是錯(cuò)誤的，原文第三段中說(shuō)：Doubts about the profit motive are lower today, but they have not vanished.

(2) 答案：B.Entrepreneurial capitalism.

解釋?zhuān)鹤髡哒f(shuō)：In these sectors, innovation and rising productivity have driven growth, job creation and wealth generation. This is the form of capitalism that the polity ought to encourage.作者認(rèn)為國(guó)家資本主義、權(quán)貴資本主義，以及上述三種資本主義的混合物：印度特色的“咖喱資本主義”，都不值得推崇。

(3) 答案：A，B，C

解釋?zhuān)篈BC三項(xiàng)都是正確的，文中第五段有這么一句：India’s vast rural electorate gets huge power subsidies, making power generation unattractive commercially.

(4) 答案：C.To make good use of state capitalism to do ''macroscopic readjustment and control''.

解釋?zhuān)?ABD三項(xiàng)都是作者在文中的主張。C項(xiàng)“用國(guó)家資本主義進(jìn)行宏觀(guān)調(diào)控”不僅不是作者的主張，相反，他們認(rèn)為這正是印度電荒問(wèn)題的根源而不是解藥。