Capitalism and Democracy in an Age of Geopolitical Challenges
地緣政治挑戰時代的資本主義與民主
Francis Fukuyama interviewed by Japan SPOTLIGHT
法蘭西斯·福山接受《日本聚光燈》雜誌訪問
原文：https://www.jef.or.jp/journal/pdf/219th_Cover_Story_02.pdf
譯文：https://m.sohu.com/a/341423980_618422
Geopolitical Crises
地緣政治危機
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?
《日本聚光燈》：審視當前的全球政治經濟形勢，似乎總體上還算良好。但世界地緣政治
的威脅愈來愈多，比如關於北韓的中美全球治理對抗、俄羅斯、伊朗等問題。鑑於此，許
多人在平常生活中時常會感到不安全，尤其是日本民眾。您認為這是一種臨時狀況，還是
一種結構性問題？
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：我認為是結構性的。從1989年到2008年美國爆發金融危機，是美國霸權史上極不平
常的一段時期。一方面，美國到目前為止依然是世界最強大的國家，依然能夠按照自己的
國家利益塑造全球政治秩序，維持一種廣泛參與的、自由的、有規則的全球秩序。但另一
方面，存在全球權力再分配的問題，俄羅斯和中國又回到世界大國地位。其中，中國可能
在未來的幾年裡會比美國更加強大，俄羅斯的立場也變得越來越強硬。此外，還有朝鮮等
國家發展核武器的速度遠遠超出了許多人的預測。我認為這是正常的，美國獨霸持續二十
年的時間才是不正常的，所以可以說我們開始回歸到一種更加正常的、權力分配均衡的
全球秩序。儘管如此，這一劇變的確帶來了新的挑戰和諸多潛在的不穩定因素，原因不僅
在於美國現在已經無法像以前那樣控制整個世界，還在於向新秩序過渡的階段往往充滿危
險。國際體系中具有全球影響力的大國的崛起也有可能會造成全球動盪。這是我認為中國
崛起是當前國際秩序面臨的最大挑戰之一的重要原因，當然也可能是日本民眾感到不安全
的緣由所在。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：您認為怎樣才能緩和這種地緣政治風險？按理說，全球治理應該比現在
好一些。像美國、日本或者歐盟等國家和組織之間的合作能否呈現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：我認為，全球治理效果的好壞依賴於一種能夠應對和處理不同領域挑戰的多元化、
多功能的國際組織和國際協議體系，而不是只依靠像聯合國這樣的一個機構。這是能夠實
現全球善治的唯一路徑，當然也要看問題所處的領域和組織成員的力量。所以，如果問題
是屬於安全領域的，而俄羅斯和中國又是全球安全的最大挑戰，那麼，將這兩個國家納入
這一國際組織，就沒有什麼意義。顯然就需要日美安保條約或北大西洋公約或美韓安全合
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，如果問題是像全球變暖、疾病防控、國際反恐或全球經濟治理，那就離不開俄
羅斯和中國，那就應該將這兩個國家吸收到這一國際組織中來。所以，我認為，不存在任
何一種組織全球體系的模板，真正的決定性因素是問題出在哪個領域以及你面臨哪些特定
的問題。
Domestic Political Crises
國內政治危局
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?
《日本聚光燈》：我們來看一些國家的國內政治經濟形勢，某些媒體和主流思想家認為不
斷興起的民粹主義是導致不確定因素增加的重要因素之一，您是否贊同這種看法？您認為
民主制度能消除民粹主義帶來的消極影響嗎？
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，民粹主義的興起不是一種普遍現象。它已經出現在北歐和美國等國家，但日
本、韓國、澳大利亞或加拿大等國卻沒有出現。我認為這可能有兩種原因：第一，經濟領
域帶來的焦慮感。全球化在總體上促進了各國發展，但並沒惠及每個國家中的每一個人。
尤其是面臨像印度和中國等發展中國家新中產階級的競爭，富裕國家的老工人就喪失了就
業機會。第二，文化劇變。與大多數歐洲國家不同，日本或韓國禁止大規模的外來移民，
這就是這些國家不會產生民粹主義的原因。我認為，這是推動這些國家產生民粹主義的原
因之一。對此沒有太簡單的解決辦法，因為這是由長期的經濟發展趨勢和巨大的文化環境
轉變造成的。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：我認為，不斷拉大的收入差距也是民粹主義興起的因素之一。以市場為
導向的資本主義給各國經濟帶來巨大收益，也促進了經濟的增長。但是，現在很多人認為
人類幸福比經濟增長更重要，經合組織（OECD）最終推行了促進人類幸福的新舉措。您是
如何看待這些與以市場為導向的資本主義相左的觀點的？
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：顯然，國內生產總值或經濟增長並不是決定人類幸福的基礎，只是為人類幸福創造
了可能。相比於金錢和資源，人們現在更加看重的是群體、傳統和穩定性等事物，而所有
這些恰恰被快速增長的經濟瓦解了。現代資本主義本質上具有破壞性，將損害群體的穩定
性。資本主義讓一部分群體富起來，卻也使另一部分群體貧窮化，破壞整個產業，我認為
由於資本主義的破壞性本質而不斷導致的社會的不穩定狀態，讓人們不高興了。這就需要
政治和社會制度，比如各種社會保障制度、福利國家制度、收入調節制度等來緩解這種破
壞性所產生的影響，但是政治和社會制度的發展演進往往又與經濟發展的速度不一致。由
於資本主義如此有發展活力，發展的速度很快，所以政治和社會制度永遠會落後一兩步。
我想這是導致人們不高興的主要原因，尤其是在最近一段時間，隨著信息技術、自動化的
高速發展，許多人丟掉了工作。目前，我們確實沒有找到破解這一難題的妙招。
Capitalism Plus Democracy Would Still Win
資本主義加民主體制仍是贏家
JS: Against this backdrop, do you think that the nature of capitalism is
going to change in the future?
《日本聚光燈》：在此背景下，您認為資本主義的性質會在未來發生變化嗎？
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：不會的。我認為資本主義制度充滿活力，但是具體特徵可能會發生變化。例如，在
全世界範圍內，上一代人出現了大量的財富向極少數人手中集中的現象，這應該是所有資
本主義制度所固有的趨勢。但成功的制度不能僅僅靠資本主義，而是靠“資本主義+民主
”。因為政治制度能夠限制市場的力量，調控市場，並在一定程度上可以將富人的財富再
分配給窮人。成功的制度必須為這一制度中的失敗者們提供基本的社會服務和保障。只顧
贏者的制度（Winning System）而不是資本主義導致了權力和財富的集中。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：當今世界存在著各種類別的資本主義制度，比如美國就不同於日本。您
認為這些不同種類的資本主義制度在未來能夠並存嗎？是否會出現某種形式的趨同？
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：這個問題很有意思，但目前我無法預測會發生哪一種情況。如果某種制度看起來運
行得更好，其他國家就會模仿。但另一方面，其他國家也會不斷創新，不斷解決新問題，
各國制度也會越來越不同。很多時候，制度構成受文化規範的影響，也就是說國家之間不
會出現某種形式的趨同。日本人和美國人在個人主義和對待權威的態度上不同，根源在於
兩國的文化傳統不同。基於此，我認為日本的資本主義絕不會與美國的資本主義相像，反
之亦然。
The Aging Society
老齡化社會
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?
《日本聚光燈》：下一個問題是關於全世界的人口老齡化問題。例如日本，老齡化對經濟
發展造成了極嚴重的影響，未來需要更高的社會福利支出，但財政資源又極為有限。所以
這可能是與民主制度相關，民主如何實現老齡化社會的福利支出與財政資源之間的平衡呢
？
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：許多國家都是通過移民來應對人口減少的難題，日本政府當然不會這麼做。我認為
，如果允許移民的話，就不會出現人口減少的難題，但會帶來像民粹主義和反移民仇恨等
其他問題。另一方面，我之所以對美國的情況比較樂觀的原因在於，美國相對較好地解決
了移民問題，而且人口也在穩步增加。所以說，這是日本政府可以選擇但沒有選擇的一條
路。絕對人口量或國內生產總值的減少並不意味著人們生活會變得窮苦，如果生產率依然
保持著某種水平的增長速度，人們也會過得很好，但這造成了年輕人和老年人代際之間，
以及未來如何劃分經濟蛋糕的問題。這的確是任何民主制度都難以應對的棘手問題。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：我在歐洲聽到過這樣一個觀點，既然實現老齡化的社會需要與財政資源
之間的平衡很難，那麼應當讓通曉經濟學和財政學的學者和專家們來制定決策。您認為我
們應該重視這類專家在這一議題上發揮的作用嗎？
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：現代社會完全依賴專家是不靠譜的，這有很多原因。首先，我認為在一個人人都可
以討論和批判政府政策的民主社會裡，沒有什麼專家能夠贏得所有人的信任。或許在一個
集權國家裡，你可以做到這一點，但在民主社會卻不行，因為人們擁有選舉權，如果他們
認為這些專家違背自己的利益，就會在選舉時利用自己手中的權利撤換這些專家，抗議或
埋怨這事那事。在一百年前的一些亞洲國家裡，出現過人們依靠專家來決策的情況，但在
現代的任何一個國家裡，這都是不可能的，因為專家們根本無法獲得完全信任。
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，專家也會犯一些糟糕的錯誤。相對於那些擔心自己和自己的孩子的人，我們所
認為的一群聰明的人在沒有利害關係的情況下所做的決策是否就是正確的，對此我並不確
定。在民主社會裡，如果依賴於專家，就意味著將聽從他們的建議。如果想在一場經濟辯
論中引入專家的力量，是沒問題的，但在做實際決策時，也要將自己的權利交給專家，就
是不靠譜的了。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：在老齡化社會，由於利益訴求的不同，青年人和老年人之間可能會不斷
滋生新的衝突和矛盾，當前的日本就是如此。而且在一個老年人多於青年人的民主國家裡
，或許老年人的觀點和主張更能影響政治發展，那麼青年人可能就處於比較糟糕的境地。
您認為應該如何緩解這種情況？
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：實際情況可能比你描述的更嚴重一些，因為老年人的確比青年人多。而且另一個問
題在於，相比於青年人，老年人在政治上活躍得多，參與投票的人數也更多，並且擁有能
夠代表自身利益的群眾組織。因此，老年人在政治中的代表性越來越強。青年人則忙碌於
找工作、結婚、養家餬口等。如果你是一名退休人員，就可以整天尋思養老金的事情以及
如何維護養老金制度等當代政治問題。我不知道解決這一問題有什麼好的方法，除了讓更
多的政府領導人多多教育民眾用長遠眼光來看待自己的個人利益，而不是只關心下次養老
金的來源問題。他們應該明白，如果只是謀取自己這一代的福利，那麼子孫後代將無法獲
得更好的福利。我同樣不確定，該如何從制度上來解決青年人和老年人之間的不平衡問題
。
JS: Japanese politicians recently decided to lower the voting age to 18.
Might this be a solution?
《日本聚光燈》：日本政治家最近把選舉投票年齡下調到滿18歲。這是否是一種解決方法
？
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：這可能會幫一些小忙，而且還必須勸說這些青年人去投票。當前選舉制度中有一些
瑕疵是可以糾正的，比如，相比於城市，日本農村的代表性過強了，因為住在農村的人比
城市裡的人年紀更大。如果要解決這個問題，就必須提升青年人的代表性。所有這些措施
都可能有助於糾正選舉制度中的瑕疵，但不一定能徹底解決問題。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：在日本，有一種觀點認為青年人應該擁有更多的選舉權。老年人有一票
的話，青年人就得有兩票。這能管用嗎？
Fukuyama: I have never seen a country that has made such a decision. It would
be difficult politically to implement.
福山：我從未見過哪個國家能這種做。這在政治上很難實行。
The Rising Income Gap
不斷拉大的收入差距
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?
《日本聚光燈》：剛才我說過，不斷拉大的收入差距是導致民粹主義興起的原因之一。您
認為這是資本主義發展的必然結果嗎？
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：這是法國經濟學家托馬斯·皮凱蒂的觀點，他認為這是資本主義的內在趨勢，這是
正確的。解決這一問題的途徑只能是通過政治手段，因為任何資本主義制度都不能是不受
監督和調節的資本主義。但是我認為，當前面對的真正問題並不是資本主義的這一發展趨
勢，而是技術發展。與信息、通信有關的最新技術促進了教育、技能和認知能力的優先發
展，但是它們在全社會的分配是不均衡的。隨著技術的廣泛傳播，這種不平等現象愈加嚴
重。我認為情況可能更為糟糕。人工智能與自動化相結合是一種嶄新的事物。對此，政治
學家們沒有找到好的解決方法。
JS: Certainly, technology is one factor causing such an income gap, but
should globalization be considered as the culprit for such rising inequality?
《日本聚光燈》：當然，技術是導致收入差距的因素之一，是否全球化也是導致這種收入
差距產生的罪魁禍首？
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：全球化與技術問題無法分割。之所以產生全球化，原因在於某些交通與傳播技術的
發展使得跨國流動愈加便利，所以全球化與技術是密切相關的。全球化的發展肯定會對收
入差距的形成產生一定影響。這是許多像美國著名經濟學家丹尼·羅德里克（Danny
Roderick）這樣的人嘗試遠離全球化的原因，也是人們通常會想到的事情。
JS: How about education? Do you think it offers a solution?
《日本聚光燈》：教育呢？您認為教育是一種解決方案嗎？
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：經濟學家可能會認為教育是一種解決路徑，但問題在於從很多方面來看，這不是一
種可行的方案。許多國家的教育制度是不可能改革的。理論上有可能，但實際上會受到很
多守舊派的掣肘，比如教師工會和強大的政治制度都不允許進行教育改革。再者說，教育
的功能也是有限的。部分問題是由於認知能力和數字能力的不同。如果擅長定量分析，你
可以找到一份好工作，可以在許多領域獲得較高的收入。這在一百年前是不可能的，那時
候你可能就是一個圖書管理員或會計，掙不到很多錢，但是今天你就可以成為數據分析師
、遺傳學學者、計算機程序員，這些工作崗位都可以讓你獲得較高的收入。不幸的是，這
些技術能力因人而異，也不是每個人都具備的。如果一名卡車司機在50歲時失去工作，肯
定無法把他訓練成為一名遺傳學家或大數據分析師。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：在這種技術創新和全球化的大背景下，提高勞動力的流動性可能是非常
重要的事情。勞動力市場改革應該成為促進經濟增長和縮小收入差距的關鍵。您認為推行
終生教育能夠實現這一目的嗎？
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：這是兩個獨立的問題。終身學習是一種好的學習理念，每個人都應當將其納入自己
的人生計畫。勞動力流動則是一個更為複雜的問題，因為這在歐洲和美國是指勞動力從低
收入的國家如墨西哥和東歐流入本國，進而取代本國的工人。但這其實擴大了收入差距，
因為許多移民工人願意從事工資比本國工人低得多的工作。這是一種此消彼長的過程，因
為更強的流動性可能會降低失業率。目前法國青年的失業率是25%，如果他們擁有一個靈
活的勞動力市場，這些年輕人就可能找到工作。另一方面，收入差距也會進一步拉大，原
因在於其中的許多人會選擇低收入的工作。因此，這就是就業和收入之間某種程度上的此
消彼長。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：您提到種族多樣性是導致歐美國家政治動盪或民粹主義興起的原因之一
，而日本不會出現這一問題。但是，日本也出現了永久就業工人和臨時就業工人之間收入
差距拉大的問題，這也帶來了衝突。是否多樣性總會帶來這種類似的衝突呢？
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：我認為，種族多樣性跟勞動力市場的多樣性是完全不同的，相比之下，文化越來越
與種族捆綁在一起，因為不同種族群體擁有完全不同的價值觀。對這兩個問題的思考應該
是有些不同的。正如我所指出的，在日本，這是一種此消彼長的過程。日本現在正面臨著
嚴重的人口危機，原因在於日本政府不允許大量外來移民，這的確是難以應對的巨大挑戰
；沒有大量外來移民，你就不必擔心會滋生種族衝突、民粹主義和反移民團體等問題。所
以，這麼做既有優勢，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.
我還是認為保持多樣性在本質上是件好事，因為如果不具備某種多樣性，大家做事的方式
都會相同，而如果有了不同文化背景的人來相互競爭和獻言獻策的話，將會是一件好事。
這是硅谷成功的秘訣之一。當然，多樣性和差異性不能過度，因為這會導致共同價值觀的
缺失，這是歐洲和美國當前正面臨的挑戰。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：歐盟和美國把種族多樣性看成社會難題，而日本卻把其看成未來發展的
動力。您認為，日本政府應該做出更多的努力來提升社會的多樣性嗎？
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。我認為這是解決人口問題的路徑之一。存在不同的做事方式和文化觀點，對
日本來說是一件好事。
Japanese Socioeconomic System
日本經濟社會制度
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?
《日本聚光燈》：依我看，就我們剛才談到的問題，不僅日本人而且全世界的人對於自己
的未來都缺少信心。但日本有著自己的問題，人們受到企業終身僱傭制度和資歷晉陞制度
的保護，他們在退休後期盼得到子女的贍養，這些價值觀現在處於一種不穩定的狀態。您
認為由於這些變化，日本正在逐步喪失其發展的動力嗎？
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：我認為日本的資歷工資制度和終身僱傭制是為戰後一段時期量身打造的，並非一直
存在。在19世紀晚期（明治時期）和20世紀初期，日本擁有更靈活的勞動力流動制度，大
企業也沒有終身僱傭制。我認為，只要日本經濟不斷增長，就證明了這些制度運行良好。
在日本經濟高速增長期，這些制度保障了工人的終身僱傭和穩定性，是非常管用的制度。
但是這一時期已經結束了，日本現在需要更高的生產率和更好的創新能力，不能再指望實
現人均GDP的高增長，所以這種制度已經成為創新的障礙。日本需要企業的破產，需要新
公司的不斷湧現，需要被保護行業內有更多的競爭。所有這些在終身僱傭制度裡都是不可
能實現的。我認為這種制度自1990年代爆發金融泡沫以來就不斷面臨壓力，這實際上標誌
著日本經濟增速放緩的開始和高速增長期的終結。
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，我認為這種制度面臨壓力已經有了二三十年的時間了，從長期看來，這將是不可持
續的。這種制度在日本不是一種文化的產物，日本在1940年代晚期之前並沒有這種制度，
它是在戰後日本的特殊背景下創立的，目的在於穩定經濟。也只有在經濟高速增長期，這
一制度才得以存在，但它絕不是一種必然存在的制度，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?
《日本聚光燈》：尤其是日本的年輕人已經受夠了這種掌控他們生活的現有制度，他們更
喜歡以個人為基礎的制度。但是，日本的舊制度仍然主導著家庭制度、終身僱用制度等等
。這些價值理念和制度是否應該被修正或改進？
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：我認為需要。日本低出生率的原因之一是妻子不工作而負責照顧公婆的制度。在一
個女性受教育水平較高的世界裡，這是不行的。我認為這應是政府的責任，而不是家庭。
中國也在出現這種情況，由於一胎政策而造成的低生育率，使忙於工作的孩子不可能有充
足的時間和精力去照顧他們的父母，所以需要某種公共製度或外部給予補貼。這需要變革
。
Other Issues — NGOs, Cyber-security
其他問題
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?
《日本聚光燈》：非政府組織在美國發揮著重要作用。您認為每個個人和企業應當更多對
公共政策的制定擔負責任嗎？
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：非政府組織發揮著不同作用。在美國和歐洲，非政府組織實際上越來越多地在提供
社會服務。歷史上也是這種情況。宗教機構過去提供的服務就是救護窮人，提供福利和教
育，但是這些社會服務在20世紀初才納入政府的職能範圍。所以歷史上私人組織就發揮著
重要作用。我認為這一趨勢在現代社會不可避免，因為國家沒有辦法提供足夠的服務，有
時候私人機構服務得更好。
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.
非政府組織的另一個作用是遊說，它們能夠監督政府，確保政府運行得公開透明，這或許
是今天非政府組織最重要的功能了。
JS: Do you think that the activities of NGOs are a kind of barometer of
democracy?
《日本聚光燈》：您是否認為非政府組織的活動是民主的一種晴雨表？
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：長期以來，人們就認為市民社會是民主制度成功的核心要素之一。我認為的確如此
，這可能基於以下原因：市民社會能夠保持政府的透明度，確保政府不去做不該做的事。
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?
《日本聚光燈》：產生於網絡空間的安全問題、虛假消息及其他挑戰可能會控制人們的選
舉行為，即使他們不是有意的。這會成為未來民主的一種挑戰嗎？
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：事情已經如此了。我們非常清晰地看到，俄羅斯人就介入了美國去年的總統選舉，
實際上他們應該對川普總統的當選負有責任。這種事情在世界許多地方的選舉中都已經
出現了，不過暫時我們還不知該如何應對，因為我們缺乏緩解其影響的制度。我自己的研
究項目就聚焦於這一問題，但現在還沒有找到解決辦法。歐洲國家試圖通過政府調節的手
段來應對。這一招在美國不管用，在歐洲或許有用。我認為他們也必須要謹慎一些，如果
採取過多的調節措施，會不會破壞言論自由等價值理念。
Overall Assessment
總體性評判
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?
《日本聚光燈》：作為一名知名的歷史學家，您如何評判當前全球政治經濟形勢？我們處
於大變革時代，還是正常發展的時代？
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：我認為，我們處於一個真正大變革時代的中期。過去三十年裡，我們見證了全球化
與民主的快速發展，但是今天兩者都出現了大的反覆。我認為這已經威脅到整個自由經濟
體系，所以我們確實處於世界政治中的一個危險時刻，因為整個人類的繁榮都依賴於這一
體系的延續。
JS: What do you think about the role of international organizations such as
the World Bank, UN, IMF, and OECD?
《日本聚光燈》：您如何看待像世界銀行、聯合國、國際貨幣基金組織及經合組織等國際
組織的作用？
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：全球化需要國際合作，這些國際組織都能幫助解決一些國際問題。其中一些國際組
織，比如聯合國，在國際安全領域的作用並那麼有效，但我不認為當前就不需要它了。