关注社会:香港15年来的"变"与"不变"

Since 1997, when Hong Kong returned to Chinese sovereignty, there is one question I must have answered hundreds of times: "Has anything changed?" Of course it has, I'm tempted to say. Nowhere stays the same. But I have usually resorted to a simple: "No". After all, Hong Kong's core virtues all remain in place – its open economy, free press and personal liberties. The rule of law remains entrenched and every year on June 4, tens of thousands of people go to Victoria Park to remember those killed in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

自1997年香港回归中国以来，有一个问题我肯定已经回答过几百次了，那就是："香港有什么变化吗？"我的第一反应总是：当然有。一切都不一样了。但我最后通常会简单地回答："没有。"毕竟，香港的核心优势全都还在——开放的经济、言论自由和个人自由。法治的地位依然稳固；每年6月4日，数万民众仍会聚集到维多利亚公园(Victoria Park)，纪念1989年天安门广场事件中的死难者。

But as the city settles into life under its third post-handover chief executive – Leung Chun-ying, who was sworn into office yesterday – that standard answer has become too glib. Over the past decade and a half, subtle but profound shifts have taken place that have left the executive-driven political system bequeathed by Britain looking more and more anachronistic.

但随着香港特区第三位特首梁振英(Leung Chun-ying)的上任（他于7月1日宣誓就职），我的这个"标准"回答开始显得过于轻率了。过去15年间，香港发生了一些微小但深刻的变化，在这些变化面前，港英时期遗留下来的、由行政长官驱动的政治体制开始显得越来越不合时宜。

Three changes stand out. First, the population is better educated: in 1997, less than a quarter of people aged 18 to 32 had tertiary education; now the figure is about half. Second, the population is ageing, with the median age rising from 36 to 41. Third, rather less positively, the wealth gap has widened. A recent government study found that Hong Kong's Gini coefficient, a measure of income distribution, has made it far more unequal than even the US or the UK. In short, Hong Kong is a little smarter, a little older and a lot less equal than it was.

香港比较明显的变化有三个。第一，民众受教育程度有所提高。1997年，18岁至32岁的人群中，只有不到四分之一的人接受过高等教育，如今这个比例约为二分之一。其次，人口老龄化加剧，中位数年龄已从36岁提高到41岁。第三，财富差距扩大，这是非常不利的一个变化。政府最近所做的一项研究发现，香港的基尼系数（Gini coefficient，一种衡量收入差距的指标）甚至已远远高于美国和英国。简言之，与以往相比，香港变得"聪明"了一些，"老"了一些，社会公平度也大大下降了。

And slowly these three factors have been reworking the city's ethos. Its golden era – the years of fantastic expansion from the 1960s to the 1990s – was a period when anything seemed possible. Refugees from Communism could make fortunes. Even if they didn't, they could expect their salaries to rise and their children to be well-educated.

这三个变化正在渐渐重塑这座城市的性格。在上世纪60至90年代那段疯狂扩张的时期，也就是在香港的黄金年代，似乎凡事皆有可能。从大陆来的难民可以在香港发财致富。即便发不了财，他们也有希望看到自己能挣到更多的钱，他们的子女能受到良好的教育。

Now, however, aspirations for the future are more constrained. On paper, the city is a lot richer than 15 years ago. Despite the Asian and global financial crises, its gross domestic product is up more than 50 per cent in real terms since 1997. But little of that wealth has trickled down. Those at the top have continued to prosper as Hong Kong continues to serve as China's principal international financial gateway. But salaries for the lowest third of the population have barely risen. Those in the middle are a little better-off but soaring property prices have left the aspiration of home ownership beyond many.

然而如今，人们对未来的理想变得更加谨慎。从账目上看，香港比15年前富裕得多。尽管亚洲和全球都出现了金融危机，但香港的实际本地生产总值(GDP)自1997年以来增长了50%以上。可新增财富却很少流向了普通民众。香港继续扮演着中国主要国际金融门户的角色，顶层的富人也随之继续过着养尊处优的生活。但对工资最低的三分之一香港民众而言，薪水几乎没涨。中产阶层的收入情况略有改善，但面对房价的飙升，他们中的许多人也只能望房兴叹。

Public discontent cannot be ignored in Hong Kong. Its first post-handover chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, was forced to step down after a series of missteps, most famously his handling of anti-subversion legislation that prompted 500,000 people to go on to the streets in protest. Its second, Donald Tsang, limped through his last months in office after allegations that he had received favours from local tycoons, including flights on their private jets.

在香港，民众的不满已变得不容忽视。香港回归后的第一任特首董建华(Tung Chee-hwa)，因一系列事件处理不当被迫下台，其中最广为人知的是，他对反颠覆法问题的处理曾致使50万香港民众上街抗议。第二位特首曾荫权(Donald Tsang)在任期最后的几个月里，日子也过得不安稳，他被指从香港富豪那里收受好处，包括曾经搭乘他们的私人飞机。

This history should have the new chief executive already feeling nervous. His best approach would be to embrace change and not retreat into the comfort of existing practices. He needs to make Hong Kong's political system more flexible – able to force changes on entrenched privilege – and less susceptible to claims that only preserving current practices will allow continued economic growth. In short, Hong Kong needs a little less harmony and rather more change. This does not threaten its economic wellbeing – rather the opposite. By putting in place forces that could shake up its tycoon-dominated economy, it could open the way for a new generation of entrepreneurs. Only a move to real democracy and a directly elected chief executive offers the prospect of delivering such change.

有这样的前车之鉴，新任特首现在应该已经感受到了压力。他最好的办法就是主动迎接变化，而不是躲进避风港、维持现行做法。他必须让香港的政治体制变得更有弹性，即能够迫使已经确立的特权阶层做出改变，同时让香港的政治体制少受这样一种论调的影响——只有维持现行做法，经济才能继续增长。简言之，香港需要少一些和谐，多一些变化。这不会对香港经济的健康构成威胁。相反，这会促进香港经济健康发展。通过推出一些举措、撼动大亨主导经济的局面，香港能够为新一代企业家的成长开辟道路。只有推行真正的民主、推动特首直选，才有可能促成这种变化。

This is a message Mr Leung might share with Beijing, pointing out that what holds for Hong Kong also holds for China. As the mainland becomes more complex, socially and economically, it too is finding that economic freedom combined with a lack of direct accountability is hard to sustain. Vested interests will struggle to hold on to the wealth and power they have acquired. If the trickle-down stops – as it probably will – popular anger will build.

梁振英或许可以把这一观点和北京方面一起分享，他可以让北京方面知道：对香港有好处的事情，对中国也有好处。随着中国内地的社会、经济情况变得越来越复杂，中国政府也发现，缺乏直接问责制的经济自由将很难持续。既得利益阶层会极力维护他们已经获得的财富和权力。如果依然是国富民穷（目前看来这是有可能的），民怨将不断集聚。

As Hong Kong has shown, you don't need democracy to force a change of leadership.

香港的经历表明，不一定非得有民主，才能迫使领导层改变。