“为什么印度无法取得类似中国的成功”李光耀09年的回应时过16年再次得到应验
正文翻译
视频全文搬运：
In today's video, you'll hear the late Singaporean founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, explain exactly why India can't match China's success. His insights are sharp, honest, and to the point. Don't miss this. Five years ago at the founding dinner, you predicted great things for China and India. I'm cited to India's secular democracy as key to its future success. Five years on, I just wanted to ask your opinion on how well you think India's government is doing in separating religion and politics. And perhaps what advice could you give to India's new breed of leaders? I think all the governments want your advice. It's nearly as sensitive and difficult a question as the last one. But I'll give you my experience of India. I think despite all the failings, highly bureaucratic, red tape, inefficient lixages between central and state governments, unwieldy coalitions in the center and unwieldy coalitions in the states, the progress it's made is quite remarkable.
在今天的视频中，你将听到已故新加坡开国元勋李光耀准确解释为什么印度无法匹敌中国的成功。他的见解犀利、坦诚、直击要害，不容错过。
提问者：
五年多前，在一次立国晚宴上，您曾预测中国和印度将取得巨大成就。我提到印度的世俗民主是其未来成功的关键。五年过去了，我想请教您对印度政府在政教分离方面的表现有何看法？您对印度新一代领导人有什么建议？我想所有政府都希望得到您的建议。
李光耀：
这几乎和上一个问题一样敏感且困难。但我会分享我对印度的经验。我认为，尽管存在诸多缺陷，比如高度官僚化、繁琐的行政程序、中央与州政府之间的联系低效、中央和州的联盟复杂而难以管理，印度取得的进步还是相当显著的。
Six, seven, eight percent growth. Once Manwan Singh and Chidambaram opened up, in the 90s after the IMF said you've got to open up. I think India is under some constraints. Not the result of the politicians, but the result of the nature of the constitution and the nature of the society. China is homogeneous. 90% Han. So when the president stands up, and the biggie is on more than 90% understanding because the minorities are also learning Chinese. Putonghua. So given those constraints, it's done well. Any Indian leader speaking in any language at one time doesn't reach more than say 40%. You speak in Hindi, you might get the Hindi North. You speak in English, you get the upper classes throughout the country, maybe 30%. You speak in Tamil, you get 70 million. You speak in Tamil Nadu, you speak in Malayalam, I don't know how many there are, 40 million.
经济增长率达到6-8%。自从曼莫汉·辛格和奇丹巴拉姆在90年代国际货币基金组织要求开放后开始开放以来，我认为印度面临一些限制。这些限制并非政治家的原因，而是宪法和社会性质的结果。
中国是同质化的，90%是汉族。因此，当领导人站出来讲话时，超过90%的人都能理解，因为少数民族也在学习汉语也就是普通话。因此，考虑到这些限制，印度的表现已经不错了。任何印度领导人在某一时刻用任何语言讲话，最多只能覆盖约40%的人口。你说印地语，可能覆盖北方印地语地区；说英语，可能覆盖全国上层阶级，约30%；说泰米尔语，能覆盖7000万人；在泰米尔纳德邦说泰米尔语，或者说马拉雅拉姆语，我不知道有多少人，大概4000万。
So that is an enormous diversity which makes it difficult to get the same policies through. And you can see that after each election you get a tussle of how to form governing coalitions. But on the other hand, because it's kept this, the constitution fluid, so a country with about 30, 40 different ethnic groups and 320 dialects and languages has held together. That's quite an achievement. Then you have the problem of the constitution. I was in Bombay two years ago, and this is a fact, I don't think, but the Deputy Chief Minister will take offence at my recounting what actually took place and his position. So he asked me if I would spend three hours discussing how to make Bombay a world financial centre. So I thought, well why not. So he brought all his main ministers, state ministers and his officials. Halfway through the dialogue, I asked him, who governs Bombay?
这种巨大的多样性使得统一政策难以推行。你可以看到，每次选举后，都会有一场关于如何组成执政联盟的争斗。但另一方面，正因为宪法保持了流动性，一个拥有大约30到40个不同族群、320种方言和语言的国家能够团结在一起，这是一项了不起的成就。
然后是宪法的问题。两年前我在孟买，这是事实，我认为副首席部长不会因为我复述实际发生的事情和他的立场而生气。他问我是否愿意花三个小时讨论如何使孟买成为世界金融中心。我想，为什么不呢。于是他带来了所有主要部长、州级部长和官员。在对话进行到一半时，我问他，谁在治理孟买？
He said, that's a committee that runs Bombay. I said, but who provides it with the revenue? He said, we do, the state government. What happens to Bombay's revenue if it goes to the state government? I said, then how do you dispense with the revenue? He said, well we spread it throughout our Russia Strait. Because there are so many farmers and so on, everybody has got to be looked after. I then said to him, if you want Bombay to become like Shanghai, Putong, then you make it a self-governing unit, which the Chinese have done in Shanghai, in Tianjin, in Chongqing, and a few other cities recently. Then they deal direct with the central government. The central government gives them the funds for the infrastructure, and the revenue is shared with the central government, not with the... Shanghai doesn't share revenue with either Jiangsu or Zhejiang or any of the neighbouring states.
他说，是一个委员会在管理孟买。我问，但谁为它提供收入？他说，是我们，州政府。如果孟买的收入都给了州政府，会发生什么？我问，那你们如何分配这些收入？他说，我们把收入分散到整个马哈拉施特拉邦。因为有太多农民等等，每个人都需要照顾。
我对他说，如果你们想让孟买成为像上海、浦东那样的地方，就要让它成为一个自治单位，就像中国对上海、天津、重庆以及最近几个其他城市所做的那样。然后它们直接与中央政府打交道。中央政府为基础设施提供资金，收入与中央政府分享，而不是与……上海不与江苏、浙江或任何邻近的省份分享收入。
It shares it with the central government. And the central government has invested enormous sums of money to make it a dragon head that goes up the Yangtze River right up to the Tibetan mountains. And there was a period when you had empty building blocks, but it doesn't matter. The central government has decided this is going to be a great international centre and they set out to make it one and now it is one. So I said, do that. He looked at me and says, what will happen to my farmers? I said, you just got to deal with the central government. He says, the central government won't give me anything more. So, the discussion ended there. So I said, well, then how do you solve this airport which is not world-class, a road from the airport to the city which is not what you expect of a first world financial centre, and the city itself, the planning is not as good as it would be if it were governed separately.
收入与中央政府分享。中央政府投入了巨额资金，使其成为一条沿长江直达西藏山脉的龙头。
曾经有一段时间，上海有许多空置的建筑群，但这没关系。中央政府决定要将上海打造成为一个伟大的国际中心，他们着手实现这一目标，现在上海已经成为这样的中心。我说，那就这样做吧。
他看着我说，那我的农民怎么办？我说，你得直接跟中央政府谈。他说，中央政府不会给我更多。于是，讨论到此结束。我说，那你们怎么解决这个不符合世界级标准的机场、从机场到市区的道路——这不是你期望的国际金融中心的样子，还有城市本身的规划？如果单独治理会更好。
He says, can't be done. So, I said, so, two days later I was in Delhi and I met the prime minister. I said, this problem can be solved. You see, it's China making an independent unit. The prime minister looked at me and said, you don't understand. I will never get this passed through parliament. I said, why? You have to go to parliament. He said, all this requires an amendment in the legislation, in the constitution, and that requires a two-thirds majority in the central government and in the states. You will never get it passed. So, Bombay will always be at the mercy of the Maharashtra government, and the Maharashtra government quite wisely takes its revenue and gives it to the farmers because they are the people who voted them in. So, until you break that chain, I said, how do you break the chain?
他说，这不可能。我说，好吧，两天后我在德里见到了总理。我说，这个问题可以解决。你看，中国是通过设立独立单位来实现的。总理看着我说，你不明白，这永远不可能通过议会。我问，为什么？要通过议会。他说，这需要修改法律、宪法，需要中央政府和各州三分之二的多数同意。你永远无法通过。所以，孟买将永远受马哈拉施特拉邦政府的摆布，而马哈拉施特拉邦政府很明智地将收入分给农民，因为他们是投票选出政府的人。所以，除非打破这个链条。我说，怎么打破这个链条？
Lee Kuan Yew had a knack for getting straight to the point, and his take on why India struggles compared to China is a perfect example. He highlighted two key reasons, both rooted in how these countries are structured and governed. The first reason is about population and culture. China is largely homogenous. Over 90% of its population are Han Chinese. That might sound like a small detail, but it actually matters a lot. When the central government or the president speaks, most people across the country understand the message. There's a shared language, shared values, and a sense of national identity that makes it easier to roll out policies quickly. India, by contrast, is incredibly diverse. It has over 1.4 billion people speaking hundreds of languages, following different religions, and living under vastly different local cultures. While this diversity is a strength in many ways, it complicates governance.
解说员：
李光耀擅长直击要害，他对印度为何难以匹敌中国的分析就是一个完美的例子。他强调了两个关键原因，都根植于两国的结构和治理方式。
第一个原因是人口和文化。中国基本上是同质化的，超过90%的人口是汉族。这看似是个小细节，但实际上非常重要。当中央政府或总统讲话时，全国大部分人都能理解信息。共同的语言、价值观和国家认同感使得政策推广更加迅速。相比之下，印度极其多样化，拥有超过14亿人口，讲数百种语言，信奉不同宗教，生活在截然不同的地方文化中。虽然这种多样性在许多方面是优势，但它使治理变得复杂。
Policies that work well in one state may not fit another. For instance, agricultural reforms that help Punjab could be irrelevant or even counterproductive in Tamil Nadu. The central government often has to negotiate with multiple states to get buy-in, slowing down decision-making and development. China, with its more unified population, can push nationwide initiatives like infrastructure projects or poverty alleviation programs much faster. The second reason Li highlighted is how China balances central authority with local autonomy. Take Shanghai, for example. The central government gives the city enough freedom to experiment and innovate, while still aligning with the local government. This creates a powerful synergy, broad obxtives from the top, but tailored solutions on the ground. The results are clear, Shanghai has become a global financial hub, driving economic growth for itself and the country.
在一个州行之有效的政策可能不适合另一个州。例如，有助于旁遮普邦的农业改革在泰米尔纳德邦可能无关紧要甚至适得其反。中央政府常常需要与多个州协商以获得支持，这减缓了决策和发展的速度。中国凭借更统一的人口，可以更快地推行全国性的基础设施项目或扶贫计划等举措。
李光耀强调的第二个原因是，中国如何平衡中央权威与地方自治。以上海为例，中央政府给予城市足够的自由度去实验和创新，同时仍与地方政府保持一致。这创造了一种强大的协同效应，自上而下制定广泛目标，地方则提供量身定制的解决方案。结果显而易见，上海已成为全球金融中心，推动了自身和国家的经济增长。
India faces a very different scenario. Bureaucracy and red tape often prevent states from acting quickly or trying new approaches. Policies must pass through multiple layers of approval and political factors, and political conflicts or corruption can create further delays. States don't have the same freedom to innovate, which slows down growth and makes large-scale reforms much harder to implement. In short, Lee Kuan Yew argued that China's relative homogeneity, combined with its system of central guidance plus local autonomy, gives it a clear advantage over India. India's diversity and slower bureaucracy make rapid, coordinated development far more challenging. China can move fast, adapt locally, and create synergy between the center and its regions, a combination India struggles to match. And these are some of core reasons why India cannot match China's success. What do you think? Do you agree with Lee Kuan Yew? Well, share your thoughts and leave your comments below. If you like what you watched, hit the like button and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more interesting content.
印度面临截然不同的情况。官僚作风和繁琐的行政程序常常阻止各州迅速采取行动或尝试新方法。政策必须经过多层审批和政治因素的考量，政治冲突或腐败可能导致进一步延误。各州没有同样的创新自由，这减缓了增长速度，使大规模改革更难实施。
简而言之，李光耀认为，中国的相对同质化及其中央指导与地方自治相结合的体系，使其比印度具有明显优势。印度的多样性和较缓慢的官僚体系使得快速、协调的发展更具挑战性。中国能够快速行动、地方适应，并创造中央与地区之间的协同效应，这是印度难以匹敌的组合。
这些是印度无法匹敌中国成功的一些核心原因。你怎么看？你同意李光耀的观点吗？请在下方分享你的想法并留言。如果喜欢这个视频，请点赞，别忘了订阅我们的频道以获取更多有趣内容。
（完）
视频全文搬运：
In today's video, you'll hear the late Singaporean founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, explain exactly why India can't match China's success. His insights are sharp, honest, and to the point. Don't miss this. Five years ago at the founding dinner, you predicted great things for China and India. I'm cited to India's secular democracy as key to its future success. Five years on, I just wanted to ask your opinion on how well you think India's government is doing in separating religion and politics. And perhaps what advice could you give to India's new breed of leaders? I think all the governments want your advice. It's nearly as sensitive and difficult a question as the last one. But I'll give you my experience of India. I think despite all the failings, highly bureaucratic, red tape, inefficient lixages between central and state governments, unwieldy coalitions in the center and unwieldy coalitions in the states, the progress it's made is quite remarkable.
在今天的视频中，你将听到已故新加坡开国元勋李光耀准确解释为什么印度无法匹敌中国的成功。他的见解犀利、坦诚、直击要害，不容错过。
提问者：
五年多前，在一次立国晚宴上，您曾预测中国和印度将取得巨大成就。我提到印度的世俗民主是其未来成功的关键。五年过去了，我想请教您对印度政府在政教分离方面的表现有何看法？您对印度新一代领导人有什么建议？我想所有政府都希望得到您的建议。
李光耀：
这几乎和上一个问题一样敏感且困难。但我会分享我对印度的经验。我认为，尽管存在诸多缺陷，比如高度官僚化、繁琐的行政程序、中央与州政府之间的联系低效、中央和州的联盟复杂而难以管理，印度取得的进步还是相当显著的。
Six, seven, eight percent growth. Once Manwan Singh and Chidambaram opened up, in the 90s after the IMF said you've got to open up. I think India is under some constraints. Not the result of the politicians, but the result of the nature of the constitution and the nature of the society. China is homogeneous. 90% Han. So when the president stands up, and the biggie is on more than 90% understanding because the minorities are also learning Chinese. Putonghua. So given those constraints, it's done well. Any Indian leader speaking in any language at one time doesn't reach more than say 40%. You speak in Hindi, you might get the Hindi North. You speak in English, you get the upper classes throughout the country, maybe 30%. You speak in Tamil, you get 70 million. You speak in Tamil Nadu, you speak in Malayalam, I don't know how many there are, 40 million.
经济增长率达到6-8%。自从曼莫汉·辛格和奇丹巴拉姆在90年代国际货币基金组织要求开放后开始开放以来，我认为印度面临一些限制。这些限制并非政治家的原因，而是宪法和社会性质的结果。
中国是同质化的，90%是汉族。因此，当领导人站出来讲话时，超过90%的人都能理解，因为少数民族也在学习汉语也就是普通话。因此，考虑到这些限制，印度的表现已经不错了。任何印度领导人在某一时刻用任何语言讲话，最多只能覆盖约40%的人口。你说印地语，可能覆盖北方印地语地区；说英语，可能覆盖全国上层阶级，约30%；说泰米尔语，能覆盖7000万人；在泰米尔纳德邦说泰米尔语，或者说马拉雅拉姆语，我不知道有多少人，大概4000万。
So that is an enormous diversity which makes it difficult to get the same policies through. And you can see that after each election you get a tussle of how to form governing coalitions. But on the other hand, because it's kept this, the constitution fluid, so a country with about 30, 40 different ethnic groups and 320 dialects and languages has held together. That's quite an achievement. Then you have the problem of the constitution. I was in Bombay two years ago, and this is a fact, I don't think, but the Deputy Chief Minister will take offence at my recounting what actually took place and his position. So he asked me if I would spend three hours discussing how to make Bombay a world financial centre. So I thought, well why not. So he brought all his main ministers, state ministers and his officials. Halfway through the dialogue, I asked him, who governs Bombay?
这种巨大的多样性使得统一政策难以推行。你可以看到，每次选举后，都会有一场关于如何组成执政联盟的争斗。但另一方面，正因为宪法保持了流动性，一个拥有大约30到40个不同族群、320种方言和语言的国家能够团结在一起，这是一项了不起的成就。
然后是宪法的问题。两年前我在孟买，这是事实，我认为副首席部长不会因为我复述实际发生的事情和他的立场而生气。他问我是否愿意花三个小时讨论如何使孟买成为世界金融中心。我想，为什么不呢。于是他带来了所有主要部长、州级部长和官员。在对话进行到一半时，我问他，谁在治理孟买？
He said, that's a committee that runs Bombay. I said, but who provides it with the revenue? He said, we do, the state government. What happens to Bombay's revenue if it goes to the state government? I said, then how do you dispense with the revenue? He said, well we spread it throughout our Russia Strait. Because there are so many farmers and so on, everybody has got to be looked after. I then said to him, if you want Bombay to become like Shanghai, Putong, then you make it a self-governing unit, which the Chinese have done in Shanghai, in Tianjin, in Chongqing, and a few other cities recently. Then they deal direct with the central government. The central government gives them the funds for the infrastructure, and the revenue is shared with the central government, not with the... Shanghai doesn't share revenue with either Jiangsu or Zhejiang or any of the neighbouring states.
他说，是一个委员会在管理孟买。我问，但谁为它提供收入？他说，是我们，州政府。如果孟买的收入都给了州政府，会发生什么？我问，那你们如何分配这些收入？他说，我们把收入分散到整个马哈拉施特拉邦。因为有太多农民等等，每个人都需要照顾。
我对他说，如果你们想让孟买成为像上海、浦东那样的地方，就要让它成为一个自治单位，就像中国对上海、天津、重庆以及最近几个其他城市所做的那样。然后它们直接与中央政府打交道。中央政府为基础设施提供资金，收入与中央政府分享，而不是与……上海不与江苏、浙江或任何邻近的省份分享收入。
It shares it with the central government. And the central government has invested enormous sums of money to make it a dragon head that goes up the Yangtze River right up to the Tibetan mountains. And there was a period when you had empty building blocks, but it doesn't matter. The central government has decided this is going to be a great international centre and they set out to make it one and now it is one. So I said, do that. He looked at me and says, what will happen to my farmers? I said, you just got to deal with the central government. He says, the central government won't give me anything more. So, the discussion ended there. So I said, well, then how do you solve this airport which is not world-class, a road from the airport to the city which is not what you expect of a first world financial centre, and the city itself, the planning is not as good as it would be if it were governed separately.
收入与中央政府分享。中央政府投入了巨额资金，使其成为一条沿长江直达西藏山脉的龙头。
曾经有一段时间，上海有许多空置的建筑群，但这没关系。中央政府决定要将上海打造成为一个伟大的国际中心，他们着手实现这一目标，现在上海已经成为这样的中心。我说，那就这样做吧。
他看着我说，那我的农民怎么办？我说，你得直接跟中央政府谈。他说，中央政府不会给我更多。于是，讨论到此结束。我说，那你们怎么解决这个不符合世界级标准的机场、从机场到市区的道路——这不是你期望的国际金融中心的样子，还有城市本身的规划？如果单独治理会更好。
He says, can't be done. So, I said, so, two days later I was in Delhi and I met the prime minister. I said, this problem can be solved. You see, it's China making an independent unit. The prime minister looked at me and said, you don't understand. I will never get this passed through parliament. I said, why? You have to go to parliament. He said, all this requires an amendment in the legislation, in the constitution, and that requires a two-thirds majority in the central government and in the states. You will never get it passed. So, Bombay will always be at the mercy of the Maharashtra government, and the Maharashtra government quite wisely takes its revenue and gives it to the farmers because they are the people who voted them in. So, until you break that chain, I said, how do you break the chain?
他说，这不可能。我说，好吧，两天后我在德里见到了总理。我说，这个问题可以解决。你看，中国是通过设立独立单位来实现的。总理看着我说，你不明白，这永远不可能通过议会。我问，为什么？要通过议会。他说，这需要修改法律、宪法，需要中央政府和各州三分之二的多数同意。你永远无法通过。所以，孟买将永远受马哈拉施特拉邦政府的摆布，而马哈拉施特拉邦政府很明智地将收入分给农民，因为他们是投票选出政府的人。所以，除非打破这个链条。我说，怎么打破这个链条？
Lee Kuan Yew had a knack for getting straight to the point, and his take on why India struggles compared to China is a perfect example. He highlighted two key reasons, both rooted in how these countries are structured and governed. The first reason is about population and culture. China is largely homogenous. Over 90% of its population are Han Chinese. That might sound like a small detail, but it actually matters a lot. When the central government or the president speaks, most people across the country understand the message. There's a shared language, shared values, and a sense of national identity that makes it easier to roll out policies quickly. India, by contrast, is incredibly diverse. It has over 1.4 billion people speaking hundreds of languages, following different religions, and living under vastly different local cultures. While this diversity is a strength in many ways, it complicates governance.
解说员：
李光耀擅长直击要害，他对印度为何难以匹敌中国的分析就是一个完美的例子。他强调了两个关键原因，都根植于两国的结构和治理方式。
第一个原因是人口和文化。中国基本上是同质化的，超过90%的人口是汉族。这看似是个小细节，但实际上非常重要。当中央政府或总统讲话时，全国大部分人都能理解信息。共同的语言、价值观和国家认同感使得政策推广更加迅速。相比之下，印度极其多样化，拥有超过14亿人口，讲数百种语言，信奉不同宗教，生活在截然不同的地方文化中。虽然这种多样性在许多方面是优势，但它使治理变得复杂。
Policies that work well in one state may not fit another. For instance, agricultural reforms that help Punjab could be irrelevant or even counterproductive in Tamil Nadu. The central government often has to negotiate with multiple states to get buy-in, slowing down decision-making and development. China, with its more unified population, can push nationwide initiatives like infrastructure projects or poverty alleviation programs much faster. The second reason Li highlighted is how China balances central authority with local autonomy. Take Shanghai, for example. The central government gives the city enough freedom to experiment and innovate, while still aligning with the local government. This creates a powerful synergy, broad obxtives from the top, but tailored solutions on the ground. The results are clear, Shanghai has become a global financial hub, driving economic growth for itself and the country.
在一个州行之有效的政策可能不适合另一个州。例如，有助于旁遮普邦的农业改革在泰米尔纳德邦可能无关紧要甚至适得其反。中央政府常常需要与多个州协商以获得支持，这减缓了决策和发展的速度。中国凭借更统一的人口，可以更快地推行全国性的基础设施项目或扶贫计划等举措。
李光耀强调的第二个原因是，中国如何平衡中央权威与地方自治。以上海为例，中央政府给予城市足够的自由度去实验和创新，同时仍与地方政府保持一致。这创造了一种强大的协同效应，自上而下制定广泛目标，地方则提供量身定制的解决方案。结果显而易见，上海已成为全球金融中心，推动了自身和国家的经济增长。
India faces a very different scenario. Bureaucracy and red tape often prevent states from acting quickly or trying new approaches. Policies must pass through multiple layers of approval and political factors, and political conflicts or corruption can create further delays. States don't have the same freedom to innovate, which slows down growth and makes large-scale reforms much harder to implement. In short, Lee Kuan Yew argued that China's relative homogeneity, combined with its system of central guidance plus local autonomy, gives it a clear advantage over India. India's diversity and slower bureaucracy make rapid, coordinated development far more challenging. China can move fast, adapt locally, and create synergy between the center and its regions, a combination India struggles to match. And these are some of core reasons why India cannot match China's success. What do you think? Do you agree with Lee Kuan Yew? Well, share your thoughts and leave your comments below. If you like what you watched, hit the like button and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more interesting content.
印度面临截然不同的情况。官僚作风和繁琐的行政程序常常阻止各州迅速采取行动或尝试新方法。政策必须经过多层审批和政治因素的考量，政治冲突或腐败可能导致进一步延误。各州没有同样的创新自由，这减缓了增长速度，使大规模改革更难实施。
简而言之，李光耀认为，中国的相对同质化及其中央指导与地方自治相结合的体系，使其比印度具有明显优势。印度的多样性和较缓慢的官僚体系使得快速、协调的发展更具挑战性。中国能够快速行动、地方适应，并创造中央与地区之间的协同效应，这是印度难以匹敌的组合。
这些是印度无法匹敌中国成功的一些核心原因。你怎么看？你同意李光耀的观点吗？请在下方分享你的想法并留言。如果喜欢这个视频，请点赞，别忘了订阅我们的频道以获取更多有趣内容。
（完）
评论翻译
视频全文搬运：
In today's video, you'll hear the late Singaporean founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, explain exactly why India can't match China's success. His insights are sharp, honest, and to the point. Don't miss this. Five years ago at the founding dinner, you predicted great things for China and India. I'm cited to India's secular democracy as key to its future success. Five years on, I just wanted to ask your opinion on how well you think India's government is doing in separating religion and politics. And perhaps what advice could you give to India's new breed of leaders? I think all the governments want your advice. It's nearly as sensitive and difficult a question as the last one. But I'll give you my experience of India. I think despite all the failings, highly bureaucratic, red tape, inefficient lixages between central and state governments, unwieldy coalitions in the center and unwieldy coalitions in the states, the progress it's made is quite remarkable.
在今天的视频中，你将听到已故新加坡开国元勋李光耀准确解释为什么印度无法匹敌中国的成功。他的见解犀利、坦诚、直击要害，不容错过。
提问者：
五年多前，在一次立国晚宴上，您曾预测中国和印度将取得巨大成就。我提到印度的世俗民主是其未来成功的关键。五年过去了，我想请教您对印度政府在政教分离方面的表现有何看法？您对印度新一代领导人有什么建议？我想所有政府都希望得到您的建议。
李光耀：
这几乎和上一个问题一样敏感且困难。但我会分享我对印度的经验。我认为，尽管存在诸多缺陷，比如高度官僚化、繁琐的行政程序、中央与州政府之间的联系低效、中央和州的联盟复杂而难以管理，印度取得的进步还是相当显著的。
Six, seven, eight percent growth. Once Manwan Singh and Chidambaram opened up, in the 90s after the IMF said you've got to open up. I think India is under some constraints. Not the result of the politicians, but the result of the nature of the constitution and the nature of the society. China is homogeneous. 90% Han. So when the president stands up, and the biggie is on more than 90% understanding because the minorities are also learning Chinese. Putonghua. So given those constraints, it's done well. Any Indian leader speaking in any language at one time doesn't reach more than say 40%. You speak in Hindi, you might get the Hindi North. You speak in English, you get the upper classes throughout the country, maybe 30%. You speak in Tamil, you get 70 million. You speak in Tamil Nadu, you speak in Malayalam, I don't know how many there are, 40 million.
经济增长率达到6-8%。自从曼莫汉·辛格和奇丹巴拉姆在90年代国际货币基金组织要求开放后开始开放以来，我认为印度面临一些限制。这些限制并非政治家的原因，而是宪法和社会性质的结果。
中国是同质化的，90%是汉族。因此，当领导人站出来讲话时，超过90%的人都能理解，因为少数民族也在学习汉语也就是普通话。因此，考虑到这些限制，印度的表现已经不错了。任何印度领导人在某一时刻用任何语言讲话，最多只能覆盖约40%的人口。你说印地语，可能覆盖北方印地语地区；说英语，可能覆盖全国上层阶级，约30%；说泰米尔语，能覆盖7000万人；在泰米尔纳德邦说泰米尔语，或者说马拉雅拉姆语，我不知道有多少人，大概4000万。
So that is an enormous diversity which makes it difficult to get the same policies through. And you can see that after each election you get a tussle of how to form governing coalitions. But on the other hand, because it's kept this, the constitution fluid, so a country with about 30, 40 different ethnic groups and 320 dialects and languages has held together. That's quite an achievement. Then you have the problem of the constitution. I was in Bombay two years ago, and this is a fact, I don't think, but the Deputy Chief Minister will take offence at my recounting what actually took place and his position. So he asked me if I would spend three hours discussing how to make Bombay a world financial centre. So I thought, well why not. So he brought all his main ministers, state ministers and his officials. Halfway through the dialogue, I asked him, who governs Bombay?
这种巨大的多样性使得统一政策难以推行。你可以看到，每次选举后，都会有一场关于如何组成执政联盟的争斗。但另一方面，正因为宪法保持了流动性，一个拥有大约30到40个不同族群、320种方言和语言的国家能够团结在一起，这是一项了不起的成就。
然后是宪法的问题。两年前我在孟买，这是事实，我认为副首席部长不会因为我复述实际发生的事情和他的立场而生气。他问我是否愿意花三个小时讨论如何使孟买成为世界金融中心。我想，为什么不呢。于是他带来了所有主要部长、州级部长和官员。在对话进行到一半时，我问他，谁在治理孟买？
He said, that's a committee that runs Bombay. I said, but who provides it with the revenue? He said, we do, the state government. What happens to Bombay's revenue if it goes to the state government? I said, then how do you dispense with the revenue? He said, well we spread it throughout our Russia Strait. Because there are so many farmers and so on, everybody has got to be looked after. I then said to him, if you want Bombay to become like Shanghai, Putong, then you make it a self-governing unit, which the Chinese have done in Shanghai, in Tianjin, in Chongqing, and a few other cities recently. Then they deal direct with the central government. The central government gives them the funds for the infrastructure, and the revenue is shared with the central government, not with the... Shanghai doesn't share revenue with either Jiangsu or Zhejiang or any of the neighbouring states.
他说，是一个委员会在管理孟买。我问，但谁为它提供收入？他说，是我们，州政府。如果孟买的收入都给了州政府，会发生什么？我问，那你们如何分配这些收入？他说，我们把收入分散到整个马哈拉施特拉邦。因为有太多农民等等，每个人都需要照顾。
我对他说，如果你们想让孟买成为像上海、浦东那样的地方，就要让它成为一个自治单位，就像中国对上海、天津、重庆以及最近几个其他城市所做的那样。然后它们直接与中央政府打交道。中央政府为基础设施提供资金，收入与中央政府分享，而不是与……上海不与江苏、浙江或任何邻近的省份分享收入。
It shares it with the central government. And the central government has invested enormous sums of money to make it a dragon head that goes up the Yangtze River right up to the Tibetan mountains. And there was a period when you had empty building blocks, but it doesn't matter. The central government has decided this is going to be a great international centre and they set out to make it one and now it is one. So I said, do that. He looked at me and says, what will happen to my farmers? I said, you just got to deal with the central government. He says, the central government won't give me anything more. So, the discussion ended there. So I said, well, then how do you solve this airport which is not world-class, a road from the airport to the city which is not what you expect of a first world financial centre, and the city itself, the planning is not as good as it would be if it were governed separately.
收入与中央政府分享。中央政府投入了巨额资金，使其成为一条沿长江直达西藏山脉的龙头。
曾经有一段时间，上海有许多空置的建筑群，但这没关系。中央政府决定要将上海打造成为一个伟大的国际中心，他们着手实现这一目标，现在上海已经成为这样的中心。我说，那就这样做吧。
他看着我说，那我的农民怎么办？我说，你得直接跟中央政府谈。他说，中央政府不会给我更多。于是，讨论到此结束。我说，那你们怎么解决这个不符合世界级标准的机场、从机场到市区的道路——这不是你期望的国际金融中心的样子，还有城市本身的规划？如果单独治理会更好。
He says, can't be done. So, I said, so, two days later I was in Delhi and I met the prime minister. I said, this problem can be solved. You see, it's China making an independent unit. The prime minister looked at me and said, you don't understand. I will never get this passed through parliament. I said, why? You have to go to parliament. He said, all this requires an amendment in the legislation, in the constitution, and that requires a two-thirds majority in the central government and in the states. You will never get it passed. So, Bombay will always be at the mercy of the Maharashtra government, and the Maharashtra government quite wisely takes its revenue and gives it to the farmers because they are the people who voted them in. So, until you break that chain, I said, how do you break the chain?
他说，这不可能。我说，好吧，两天后我在德里见到了总理。我说，这个问题可以解决。你看，中国是通过设立独立单位来实现的。总理看着我说，你不明白，这永远不可能通过议会。我问，为什么？要通过议会。他说，这需要修改法律、宪法，需要中央政府和各州三分之二的多数同意。你永远无法通过。所以，孟买将永远受马哈拉施特拉邦政府的摆布，而马哈拉施特拉邦政府很明智地将收入分给农民，因为他们是投票选出政府的人。所以，除非打破这个链条。我说，怎么打破这个链条？
Lee Kuan Yew had a knack for getting straight to the point, and his take on why India struggles compared to China is a perfect example. He highlighted two key reasons, both rooted in how these countries are structured and governed. The first reason is about population and culture. China is largely homogenous. Over 90% of its population are Han Chinese. That might sound like a small detail, but it actually matters a lot. When the central government or the president speaks, most people across the country understand the message. There's a shared language, shared values, and a sense of national identity that makes it easier to roll out policies quickly. India, by contrast, is incredibly diverse. It has over 1.4 billion people speaking hundreds of languages, following different religions, and living under vastly different local cultures. While this diversity is a strength in many ways, it complicates governance.
解说员：
李光耀擅长直击要害，他对印度为何难以匹敌中国的分析就是一个完美的例子。他强调了两个关键原因，都根植于两国的结构和治理方式。
第一个原因是人口和文化。中国基本上是同质化的，超过90%的人口是汉族。这看似是个小细节，但实际上非常重要。当中央政府或总统讲话时，全国大部分人都能理解信息。共同的语言、价值观和国家认同感使得政策推广更加迅速。相比之下，印度极其多样化，拥有超过14亿人口，讲数百种语言，信奉不同宗教，生活在截然不同的地方文化中。虽然这种多样性在许多方面是优势，但它使治理变得复杂。
Policies that work well in one state may not fit another. For instance, agricultural reforms that help Punjab could be irrelevant or even counterproductive in Tamil Nadu. The central government often has to negotiate with multiple states to get buy-in, slowing down decision-making and development. China, with its more unified population, can push nationwide initiatives like infrastructure projects or poverty alleviation programs much faster. The second reason Li highlighted is how China balances central authority with local autonomy. Take Shanghai, for example. The central government gives the city enough freedom to experiment and innovate, while still aligning with the local government. This creates a powerful synergy, broad obxtives from the top, but tailored solutions on the ground. The results are clear, Shanghai has become a global financial hub, driving economic growth for itself and the country.
在一个州行之有效的政策可能不适合另一个州。例如，有助于旁遮普邦的农业改革在泰米尔纳德邦可能无关紧要甚至适得其反。中央政府常常需要与多个州协商以获得支持，这减缓了决策和发展的速度。中国凭借更统一的人口，可以更快地推行全国性的基础设施项目或扶贫计划等举措。
李光耀强调的第二个原因是，中国如何平衡中央权威与地方自治。以上海为例，中央政府给予城市足够的自由度去实验和创新，同时仍与地方政府保持一致。这创造了一种强大的协同效应，自上而下制定广泛目标，地方则提供量身定制的解决方案。结果显而易见，上海已成为全球金融中心，推动了自身和国家的经济增长。
India faces a very different scenario. Bureaucracy and red tape often prevent states from acting quickly or trying new approaches. Policies must pass through multiple layers of approval and political factors, and political conflicts or corruption can create further delays. States don't have the same freedom to innovate, which slows down growth and makes large-scale reforms much harder to implement. In short, Lee Kuan Yew argued that China's relative homogeneity, combined with its system of central guidance plus local autonomy, gives it a clear advantage over India. India's diversity and slower bureaucracy make rapid, coordinated development far more challenging. China can move fast, adapt locally, and create synergy between the center and its regions, a combination India struggles to match. And these are some of core reasons why India cannot match China's success. What do you think? Do you agree with Lee Kuan Yew? Well, share your thoughts and leave your comments below. If you like what you watched, hit the like button and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more interesting content.
印度面临截然不同的情况。官僚作风和繁琐的行政程序常常阻止各州迅速采取行动或尝试新方法。政策必须经过多层审批和政治因素的考量，政治冲突或腐败可能导致进一步延误。各州没有同样的创新自由，这减缓了增长速度，使大规模改革更难实施。
简而言之，李光耀认为，中国的相对同质化及其中央指导与地方自治相结合的体系，使其比印度具有明显优势。印度的多样性和较缓慢的官僚体系使得快速、协调的发展更具挑战性。中国能够快速行动、地方适应，并创造中央与地区之间的协同效应，这是印度难以匹敌的组合。
这些是印度无法匹敌中国成功的一些核心原因。你怎么看？你同意李光耀的观点吗？请在下方分享你的想法并留言。如果喜欢这个视频，请点赞，别忘了订阅我们的频道以获取更多有趣内容。
（完）
视频全文搬运：
In today's video, you'll hear the late Singaporean founding father, Lee Kuan Yew, explain exactly why India can't match China's success. His insights are sharp, honest, and to the point. Don't miss this. Five years ago at the founding dinner, you predicted great things for China and India. I'm cited to India's secular democracy as key to its future success. Five years on, I just wanted to ask your opinion on how well you think India's government is doing in separating religion and politics. And perhaps what advice could you give to India's new breed of leaders? I think all the governments want your advice. It's nearly as sensitive and difficult a question as the last one. But I'll give you my experience of India. I think despite all the failings, highly bureaucratic, red tape, inefficient lixages between central and state governments, unwieldy coalitions in the center and unwieldy coalitions in the states, the progress it's made is quite remarkable.
在今天的视频中，你将听到已故新加坡开国元勋李光耀准确解释为什么印度无法匹敌中国的成功。他的见解犀利、坦诚、直击要害，不容错过。
提问者：
五年多前，在一次立国晚宴上，您曾预测中国和印度将取得巨大成就。我提到印度的世俗民主是其未来成功的关键。五年过去了，我想请教您对印度政府在政教分离方面的表现有何看法？您对印度新一代领导人有什么建议？我想所有政府都希望得到您的建议。
李光耀：
这几乎和上一个问题一样敏感且困难。但我会分享我对印度的经验。我认为，尽管存在诸多缺陷，比如高度官僚化、繁琐的行政程序、中央与州政府之间的联系低效、中央和州的联盟复杂而难以管理，印度取得的进步还是相当显著的。
Six, seven, eight percent growth. Once Manwan Singh and Chidambaram opened up, in the 90s after the IMF said you've got to open up. I think India is under some constraints. Not the result of the politicians, but the result of the nature of the constitution and the nature of the society. China is homogeneous. 90% Han. So when the president stands up, and the biggie is on more than 90% understanding because the minorities are also learning Chinese. Putonghua. So given those constraints, it's done well. Any Indian leader speaking in any language at one time doesn't reach more than say 40%. You speak in Hindi, you might get the Hindi North. You speak in English, you get the upper classes throughout the country, maybe 30%. You speak in Tamil, you get 70 million. You speak in Tamil Nadu, you speak in Malayalam, I don't know how many there are, 40 million.
经济增长率达到6-8%。自从曼莫汉·辛格和奇丹巴拉姆在90年代国际货币基金组织要求开放后开始开放以来，我认为印度面临一些限制。这些限制并非政治家的原因，而是宪法和社会性质的结果。
中国是同质化的，90%是汉族。因此，当领导人站出来讲话时，超过90%的人都能理解，因为少数民族也在学习汉语也就是普通话。因此，考虑到这些限制，印度的表现已经不错了。任何印度领导人在某一时刻用任何语言讲话，最多只能覆盖约40%的人口。你说印地语，可能覆盖北方印地语地区；说英语，可能覆盖全国上层阶级，约30%；说泰米尔语，能覆盖7000万人；在泰米尔纳德邦说泰米尔语，或者说马拉雅拉姆语，我不知道有多少人，大概4000万。
So that is an enormous diversity which makes it difficult to get the same policies through. And you can see that after each election you get a tussle of how to form governing coalitions. But on the other hand, because it's kept this, the constitution fluid, so a country with about 30, 40 different ethnic groups and 320 dialects and languages has held together. That's quite an achievement. Then you have the problem of the constitution. I was in Bombay two years ago, and this is a fact, I don't think, but the Deputy Chief Minister will take offence at my recounting what actually took place and his position. So he asked me if I would spend three hours discussing how to make Bombay a world financial centre. So I thought, well why not. So he brought all his main ministers, state ministers and his officials. Halfway through the dialogue, I asked him, who governs Bombay?
这种巨大的多样性使得统一政策难以推行。你可以看到，每次选举后，都会有一场关于如何组成执政联盟的争斗。但另一方面，正因为宪法保持了流动性，一个拥有大约30到40个不同族群、320种方言和语言的国家能够团结在一起，这是一项了不起的成就。
然后是宪法的问题。两年前我在孟买，这是事实，我认为副首席部长不会因为我复述实际发生的事情和他的立场而生气。他问我是否愿意花三个小时讨论如何使孟买成为世界金融中心。我想，为什么不呢。于是他带来了所有主要部长、州级部长和官员。在对话进行到一半时，我问他，谁在治理孟买？
He said, that's a committee that runs Bombay. I said, but who provides it with the revenue? He said, we do, the state government. What happens to Bombay's revenue if it goes to the state government? I said, then how do you dispense with the revenue? He said, well we spread it throughout our Russia Strait. Because there are so many farmers and so on, everybody has got to be looked after. I then said to him, if you want Bombay to become like Shanghai, Putong, then you make it a self-governing unit, which the Chinese have done in Shanghai, in Tianjin, in Chongqing, and a few other cities recently. Then they deal direct with the central government. The central government gives them the funds for the infrastructure, and the revenue is shared with the central government, not with the... Shanghai doesn't share revenue with either Jiangsu or Zhejiang or any of the neighbouring states.
他说，是一个委员会在管理孟买。我问，但谁为它提供收入？他说，是我们，州政府。如果孟买的收入都给了州政府，会发生什么？我问，那你们如何分配这些收入？他说，我们把收入分散到整个马哈拉施特拉邦。因为有太多农民等等，每个人都需要照顾。
我对他说，如果你们想让孟买成为像上海、浦东那样的地方，就要让它成为一个自治单位，就像中国对上海、天津、重庆以及最近几个其他城市所做的那样。然后它们直接与中央政府打交道。中央政府为基础设施提供资金，收入与中央政府分享，而不是与……上海不与江苏、浙江或任何邻近的省份分享收入。
It shares it with the central government. And the central government has invested enormous sums of money to make it a dragon head that goes up the Yangtze River right up to the Tibetan mountains. And there was a period when you had empty building blocks, but it doesn't matter. The central government has decided this is going to be a great international centre and they set out to make it one and now it is one. So I said, do that. He looked at me and says, what will happen to my farmers? I said, you just got to deal with the central government. He says, the central government won't give me anything more. So, the discussion ended there. So I said, well, then how do you solve this airport which is not world-class, a road from the airport to the city which is not what you expect of a first world financial centre, and the city itself, the planning is not as good as it would be if it were governed separately.
收入与中央政府分享。中央政府投入了巨额资金，使其成为一条沿长江直达西藏山脉的龙头。
曾经有一段时间，上海有许多空置的建筑群，但这没关系。中央政府决定要将上海打造成为一个伟大的国际中心，他们着手实现这一目标，现在上海已经成为这样的中心。我说，那就这样做吧。
他看着我说，那我的农民怎么办？我说，你得直接跟中央政府谈。他说，中央政府不会给我更多。于是，讨论到此结束。我说，那你们怎么解决这个不符合世界级标准的机场、从机场到市区的道路——这不是你期望的国际金融中心的样子，还有城市本身的规划？如果单独治理会更好。
He says, can't be done. So, I said, so, two days later I was in Delhi and I met the prime minister. I said, this problem can be solved. You see, it's China making an independent unit. The prime minister looked at me and said, you don't understand. I will never get this passed through parliament. I said, why? You have to go to parliament. He said, all this requires an amendment in the legislation, in the constitution, and that requires a two-thirds majority in the central government and in the states. You will never get it passed. So, Bombay will always be at the mercy of the Maharashtra government, and the Maharashtra government quite wisely takes its revenue and gives it to the farmers because they are the people who voted them in. So, until you break that chain, I said, how do you break the chain?
他说，这不可能。我说，好吧，两天后我在德里见到了总理。我说，这个问题可以解决。你看，中国是通过设立独立单位来实现的。总理看着我说，你不明白，这永远不可能通过议会。我问，为什么？要通过议会。他说，这需要修改法律、宪法，需要中央政府和各州三分之二的多数同意。你永远无法通过。所以，孟买将永远受马哈拉施特拉邦政府的摆布，而马哈拉施特拉邦政府很明智地将收入分给农民，因为他们是投票选出政府的人。所以，除非打破这个链条。我说，怎么打破这个链条？
Lee Kuan Yew had a knack for getting straight to the point, and his take on why India struggles compared to China is a perfect example. He highlighted two key reasons, both rooted in how these countries are structured and governed. The first reason is about population and culture. China is largely homogenous. Over 90% of its population are Han Chinese. That might sound like a small detail, but it actually matters a lot. When the central government or the president speaks, most people across the country understand the message. There's a shared language, shared values, and a sense of national identity that makes it easier to roll out policies quickly. India, by contrast, is incredibly diverse. It has over 1.4 billion people speaking hundreds of languages, following different religions, and living under vastly different local cultures. While this diversity is a strength in many ways, it complicates governance.
解说员：
李光耀擅长直击要害，他对印度为何难以匹敌中国的分析就是一个完美的例子。他强调了两个关键原因，都根植于两国的结构和治理方式。
第一个原因是人口和文化。中国基本上是同质化的，超过90%的人口是汉族。这看似是个小细节，但实际上非常重要。当中央政府或总统讲话时，全国大部分人都能理解信息。共同的语言、价值观和国家认同感使得政策推广更加迅速。相比之下，印度极其多样化，拥有超过14亿人口，讲数百种语言，信奉不同宗教，生活在截然不同的地方文化中。虽然这种多样性在许多方面是优势，但它使治理变得复杂。
Policies that work well in one state may not fit another. For instance, agricultural reforms that help Punjab could be irrelevant or even counterproductive in Tamil Nadu. The central government often has to negotiate with multiple states to get buy-in, slowing down decision-making and development. China, with its more unified population, can push nationwide initiatives like infrastructure projects or poverty alleviation programs much faster. The second reason Li highlighted is how China balances central authority with local autonomy. Take Shanghai, for example. The central government gives the city enough freedom to experiment and innovate, while still aligning with the local government. This creates a powerful synergy, broad obxtives from the top, but tailored solutions on the ground. The results are clear, Shanghai has become a global financial hub, driving economic growth for itself and the country.
在一个州行之有效的政策可能不适合另一个州。例如，有助于旁遮普邦的农业改革在泰米尔纳德邦可能无关紧要甚至适得其反。中央政府常常需要与多个州协商以获得支持，这减缓了决策和发展的速度。中国凭借更统一的人口，可以更快地推行全国性的基础设施项目或扶贫计划等举措。
李光耀强调的第二个原因是，中国如何平衡中央权威与地方自治。以上海为例，中央政府给予城市足够的自由度去实验和创新，同时仍与地方政府保持一致。这创造了一种强大的协同效应，自上而下制定广泛目标，地方则提供量身定制的解决方案。结果显而易见，上海已成为全球金融中心，推动了自身和国家的经济增长。
India faces a very different scenario. Bureaucracy and red tape often prevent states from acting quickly or trying new approaches. Policies must pass through multiple layers of approval and political factors, and political conflicts or corruption can create further delays. States don't have the same freedom to innovate, which slows down growth and makes large-scale reforms much harder to implement. In short, Lee Kuan Yew argued that China's relative homogeneity, combined with its system of central guidance plus local autonomy, gives it a clear advantage over India. India's diversity and slower bureaucracy make rapid, coordinated development far more challenging. China can move fast, adapt locally, and create synergy between the center and its regions, a combination India struggles to match. And these are some of core reasons why India cannot match China's success. What do you think? Do you agree with Lee Kuan Yew? Well, share your thoughts and leave your comments below. If you like what you watched, hit the like button and don't forget to subscribe to our channel for more interesting content.
印度面临截然不同的情况。官僚作风和繁琐的行政程序常常阻止各州迅速采取行动或尝试新方法。政策必须经过多层审批和政治因素的考量，政治冲突或腐败可能导致进一步延误。各州没有同样的创新自由，这减缓了增长速度，使大规模改革更难实施。
简而言之，李光耀认为，中国的相对同质化及其中央指导与地方自治相结合的体系，使其比印度具有明显优势。印度的多样性和较缓慢的官僚体系使得快速、协调的发展更具挑战性。中国能够快速行动、地方适应，并创造中央与地区之间的协同效应，这是印度难以匹敌的组合。
这些是印度无法匹敌中国成功的一些核心原因。你怎么看？你同意李光耀的观点吗？请在下方分享你的想法并留言。如果喜欢这个视频，请点赞，别忘了订阅我们的频道以获取更多有趣内容。
（完）
很赞 22
收藏