ClippingKK

The consequences of these extractive political and economic institutions in Spain were predictable. During the seventeenth century, while England was moving toward commercial growth and then rapid industrialization, Spain was tailspinning toward widespread economic decline. At the start of the century, one in five people in Spain was living in urban areas. By the end, this figure had halved to one in ten, in a process that corresponded to increasing impoverishment of the Spanish population. Spanish incomes fell, while England grew rich.

9年农村生活使我有了种田人的感情，但这并未让我感到毛泽东所谓的城里人接受农民“再教育”“很有必要”，更没让我相信（同样是毛讲的）“严重的问题是教育农民”。它只是让我感到城里人与农民同样不自由，同样是“共同体的附属物”。如果说两者有什么不同，那只是城里人比乡下人更多地受到共同体的保护（“三年困难时期”饿死的只是乡下人，而我们这些城里人当时的“上山下乡”虽被视为一种不幸，但仍因享受所谓“知青待遇”而受到老乡们的羡慕），同时也更多地受到共同体的束缚（从政治控制到“单位”的约束，包括我们这种身不由己的“插队”）。因此到了摆脱共同体的改革时代，乡下人也就更易于挣脱束缚，更少付出失去“保护”的代价。但归根结底，改革对我们的城乡社会都是一种重构，城乡的人们都要在改革中完成从peasants到citizen，即从依附性的共同体成员到有个性的自由人的过程

这种争论说破天了，也没法变化为一种近代意义上对于国家权力和责任问题的真正意义上的左、右派之争。他们只是站在皇帝和官僚的角度阐发各自的立场并抢夺施政资源，每一方的每一次失败都会带来一轮清洗，这种反复震荡都没有跳出循环的“怪圈”

The relatively inclusive economic institutions that resulted in England created unprecedented economic dynamism, culminating in the Industrial Revolution, while industrialization did not stand a chance in Spain. By the time industrial technology was spreading in many parts of the world, the Spanish economy had declined so much that there was not even a need for the Crown or the land-owning elites in Spain to block industrialization.

我们通常从人之常情讲，受宠的奴才管理不受宠的奴才，往往要比主人亲自管理奴才更糟糕，对奴才的怜惜和照顾的程度恐怕要更差。因为道理很简单，就算奴才不具人格只被视为财产，而个人的奴才不管怎么样，“产权明晰”是你自己的，这个所有权是很清楚的。比如你有一匹马，这一匹马既然是你的，你总不会无缘无故把它虐待死，杀了它对你有什么好处？你的“财产”不就损失了吗？大家都知道“兔子不吃窝边草”这个道理，那是因为窝边草是它自己的，它更愿意去吃别人的草

once pluralism and the rule of law were established, there would be demand for even greater pluralism and greater participation in the political process.

我们不要以今推古，想当然地认为不搞“右派”的自由放任，就是“左派”的福利国家。桑弘羊和商鞅、韩非一样，自由、福利都不给，他们是反对济贫，而支持惩贫的。桑弘羊是强国主义者，但是这个强国家并不是为人民服务的，而是为皇帝服务的

Extractive institutions then not only pave the way for the next regime, which will be even more extractive, but they also engender continuous infighting and civil wars. These civil wars then cause more human suffering and also destroy even what little state centralization these societies have achieved. This also often starts a process of descent into lawlessness, state failure, and political chaos, crushing all hopes of economic prosperity,