债务与国家的崛起：西方民主制度的金融起源

by James Macdonald, 詹姆斯·麦克唐纳, 杨宇光 (Translator)

中国历史上最后三个定都北京的王朝，其灭亡的直接原因似乎都是被“缺钱”压倒了脊梁：元朝亡于滥发纸钞；明朝以元为鉴不敢发行纸币，却亡于筹集“辽饷”导致的农民大起义；清朝以明为鉴，“永不加赋”，结果导致其在国运攸关的甲午之役，以其30余倍日本之疆域，10余倍日本之人口，竟只能筹集到不足3千万两白银军费；反观日本之军费预算，却高达1亿6千万两。三朝的历史只给出了一个财政政策、货币政策双失败的反面教程。

可是反观同时代的欧洲，似乎一贯“缺钱”的欧洲王室，却从没有因为“缺钱”而亡国。因为国王们找到了一条比“滥发纸钞则全民反、过度征税则贫民反、永不加赋则亡于夷”更好的出路：借钱。为什么欧洲的君王可以借钱以缓解财政危机，中国的皇帝们却无从借贷呢？或许，中西大分流的一条线索，正在于“完善的金融市场”之有无？

本书正是以这一视角为出发点，力图证明民主制度在欧洲的建立，是在金融手段大发展的基础上的。古代的国家之所以日趋集权化，一个重要的因素是战争的需要：唯有一个集权的国家才能收集足够赋税以支持战事，从而免于亡于外族。可是，意大利城市邦国却发现了一种不同于“集权—征税—养战”的模式：向公众借款打仗。从此以后，欧洲战争的胜败，越来越取决于参战国能否从金融市场上借到被对手多的借款；而借钱的能力，自然取决于一个国家还钱的信用度；而公民控制的国家的信用，自然大于君主控制的国家的信用。从这以后，民主化的国家掌握了这个秘密武器，才在国家间的竞争中有了胜出的可能性，才促使欧洲的王权国家日益向民主的道路上前行。

Genres: Economics, History, Finance, Politics, Nonfiction, Business, Political Science

643 pages, Hardcover

First published January 8, 2003

Reviews

[Rudi Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating history of debt and how it has changed little in 1000s of years.

[Tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

Historian MacDonald delves deeply into the roots of modern debt-based mechanisms of public finance to tell a tale about the development of democracy. He suggests that high per capita incomes are at best only a partial explanation for the rise of democratic institutions. More important, he argues, was the war-driven need of the leadership of tribes, pre-modern societies, and modern states to mobilize their societies in the face of external threats, particularly threats to collective security. As a matter of historical development, some rulers and societies tied democratic practices to public borrowing with great success. Less successful societies adapted or were swallowed up. The great global conflicts of the 20th century present the pinnacle of this pattern. But World War Two may have ended it as well, MacDonald concludes. With the globalization of state financing through borrowing, citizen creditors no longer command the central role they once did though, as voters, they still wield considerable political power. However, the massive amounts of debt held by other states and people outside many nations' boundaries today wield considerable influence through the bonds they hold if not the ballots they cast. As others have suggested, today's debt regime is part and parcel of the erosion of a state-centric global polity. But what will come next politically is not so clear. MacDonald, writing before 2003, did not foresee the possibility of a new global conflict - perhaps a war on terror - that might marshal global financial resources in some new way. So far that conflict remains chiefly a regionally focused U.S.-led war funded through relatively modest borrowing, at least compared with the financing for, say, World War Two. What is particularly noteworthy is that Chinese, Japanese, European, Saudi, and other investors are essential sources of financing in this new world. Though his account carries us only to the threshold of today, MacDonald reminds us of the political significance of debt in the rise of citizen creditors, democratic elections and government, and the evolution of the state system. Three simple ideas together - debt, democracy, and the state - gave rise to the increasingly complex global polity we today inhabit.

[Bill Phillips · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dense…now using as a reference :)