中國式現代化與典範轉移

Chinese Modernization: A New Paradigm?

本文針對現代化論丶依賴理論與中國式現代化這三種思想論式、歷史經驗與國際影響迥異的國家發展理論，進行比較；並從天下觀與國際秩序的角度進一步分析「一帶一路」倡議的意理基礎與實踐經驗，以及西方現代化論和中國式現代化對此一倡議的不同認識與理解，並指出中國式現代化目前在意理訴求上的限制與缺憾。
本文認為，中國式現代化是一連串特殊歷史經驗與特定國情與政策作為長期累積的結果，對於其他發展中國家不一定適用，因此，它和強調一體適用的「西方現代化模式」不同，並未形成容易複製的「中國模式」。但中國的天下觀、國際視野與發展經驗對於全球南方國家而言，卻有不少值得參考借鑑的資源，應予重視。事實上，中國式現代化目前已成為許多國家學習的對象，並引為典範。但此種典範並非孔恩（Thomas Samuel Kuhn）在「科與革命」討論中的「範式」（paradigm），而是常識意義下「值得學習的模範」。就此而論，現代化論丶依賴理論與中國現代化三者之間，並無誰必將取代誰的問題，而是各國自行選擇何者最為適用，以及是否符合其發展需要。

Modernization theory, dependency theory and Chinese Modernization are three prominent theories of national development and international cooperation. This article concentrates on the Chinese experience of national construction and international aid during past four decades. A comparative analysis of the Chinese modernization and the“Tianxia”concept on international order, in contrast to its Western counterparts would be introduced. A further study of the“Belt and Road Initiative”and its construction plans would be another focus. It is welcome to many developing countries, including Africa, Asia, South America, and Central-Eastern Europe.
However, the Chinese Modernization should not be labeled as a Chinese model. It is based on a complicated historical and political context which could not be easily duplicated in the Global South. It should be noted as well that a Western model of modernization is not easy to be accepted in the Third World countries.