Where do you live?

　　你生活在哪里?

　　IN DAYI COUNTY, a couple of hours drive down a motorway from the city of Chengdu, thecapital of Sichuan Province, Chinese tourists stroll through the meandering courtyards of arural mansion. In the 1950s, soon after Mao seized power, the mansion was turned into amuseum, intended as a showcase of evil. It once belonged to Liu Wencai, a landownersupposedly notorious for ill-treating his tenant farmers. Liu embodied a class despised by Mao,who came to power on the back of a promise to give land back to the peasants.

　　在大邑縣，距離四川省府成都市數(shù)小時車程的一個縣城里，中國游客漫步于一家鄉(xiāng)間宅所那曲折的庭院里。在1950年代，在毛澤東掌權(quán)后不久，這棟宅所被辟為了一家博物館，以作為罪惡的展品。它曾一度歸屬為劉文彩，作為地主，劉文彩因被斷定虐待他自己的長工而臭名昭著。劉文彩代表了為毛澤東所鄙視的那樣一個階級。而毛澤東在掌權(quán)后，推動了將土地交還給農(nóng)民的這樣一個承諾的兌現(xiàn)。

　　In its Maoist heyday the museum was a place of pilgrimage. Red Guards swarmed there forritual denunciations of Liu and his ilk. A high point of their visit was a trip to the waterdungeon, a room with several inches of water covering the floor where Liu had allegedly keptdisobedient farmers. Another was a series of life-size sculptures of peasants and their viciousoppressors. A politically disfavoured curator from Beijings Forbidden City who happened tolook like Liu was forced to stand next to the sculptures as a living Liu Wencai so that visitorscould shout and spit at him, according to Geremie Barm ofAustralian National University.

　　在毛澤東思想的全盛期，這個博物館就是個圣地。紅衛(wèi)兵掃蕩了這里，為的就是儀式性的宣示劉文彩和他的同類。他們的串聯(lián)的一個高潮是參觀水龍，即劉文彩非法拘禁不守規(guī)矩的長工的地方：一間數(shù)尺深的水漫過地面的房間。而另外一個高潮是，一套由長工和他們惡毒的壓迫者組成的真人大小的雕塑。據(jù)澳洲大學的Geremie Barm講，一位來自北京紫禁城的，在政治上的失寵的館長，因碰巧長得像劉文彩而被作為活劉文彩強迫站在這些個雕塑邊上，以讓參觀者能夠?qū)χ舐暫敖校笸驴谒?/p>

　　The sculptures are still there, but in recent years awave of revisionism has been sweeping across Dayi.Local officials were already having second thoughtsby the early 1980s. But it was a book reassessingLius life published by an outspoken journalist in1999 that finally convinced many that the man wasreally not that bad. His water dungeon was agovernment fabrication, the museum now pointsout. He spent a lot of money on local schools andpaid for a road to be built from Chengdu to Dayi.Last year a grandson organised a get-together inDayi for the extended Liu clan, whose members would once have been terrified of revealingtheir ties. More than 1,000 turned up.

　　那些雕塑還在，但是近年來的一波回頭客在大邑縣境內(nèi)來了次舊地重游。當?shù)毓賳T在1980年代就已經(jīng)有了另外一種想法。在1999年，一本由一位率性直言的記者出版的一本重估劉文彩的人生的書最終證實了劉文彩這個人也并沒有那么壞得透頂。現(xiàn)在的博物館方面指出到，他的水龍是政府捏造的。劉文彩為當?shù)貙W校花費了大量錢財，出資相互修建從成都到大邑縣的公路。去年，劉文彩的一位重孫為了延續(xù)劉氏的香火，在大邑縣組織了一次大團聚。這些人員曾一度對于自己身份的泄露而倍感恐懼，而那次團聚的出場人數(shù)超過1000人。

　　The slaughter of many thousands of landlords byofficials and vengeful peasants shortly after the communist takeover resulted in profoundchanges in the system of rural land ownership. Peasants got the land Mao promised them,but only briefly. In the late 1950s the party took it back again and forced farmers intocollectively owned peoples communes. The legacy of that disastrous decision, whichcontributed to a famine that left tens of millions dead, still weighs heavily on rural China. Sotoo does a decision to confer hereditary status on peasants, who would be all but barredfrom cities to stop them rushing in to find work.

　　在共產(chǎn)黨取得政權(quán)之后的極短時間里，政府官員和仇恨的農(nóng)民就屠殺了數(shù)以千萬計的地主，這導致了農(nóng)村土地所有權(quán)體制的深刻變化。農(nóng)民正如毛主席保證的那樣奪取了土地，但僅僅是短暫的取得。在1950年代晚期，黨又把土地收了回來，并強制農(nóng)民加入集體所有的人民公社。這一災難性的決策遺留下的禍害之處就是，招來了一場對中國農(nóng)村仍然造孽深重的數(shù)以千萬人死亡的饑荒。一個對只會被城市所阻止的，為了尋找工作而涌入城市的農(nóng)民的世代相傳的權(quán)利狀態(tài)進行轉(zhuǎn)變的決策，只會帶來同樣。

　　The curse of the hukou

　　戶口的詛咒

　　The hukou system, as this one-time apartheid is commonly known, applied to urban as well asrural dwellers, but peasants got a worse deal because they received hardly any welfare benefits,and job prospects in the countryside were dismal. The system has been much eroded sincethe Mao era because of the need for cheap labour to fuel Chinas manufacturing boom. But itslingering impact, combined with the still collective ownership of rural land, will retard Chinasurbanisation in the years ahead just when the country is most in need of its consumption-boosting benefits. Two researchers from Chinas finance ministry, Chen Xiaoqiang and Liu Ling,wrote in March that it was time to start returning land to the peasants, both to spurconsumption and to help defuse growing rural unrest. Most officials dare not say this sobluntly, but they admit that change is needed.

　　戶口體制，這個為人所共知的一度起著隔離體制，被同樣施加于城市和農(nóng)村居民身上。但農(nóng)民的被更加惡劣的對待，因為他們幾無福利，且在鄉(xiāng)下的工作前途簡直是凄慘。這一體制自毛澤東時代起就因為對推動制造業(yè)繁榮的廉價勞動力的需要而一步步的受到侵蝕。但是其綿延的影響，與農(nóng)村土地仍在實施的集體所有制相結(jié)合，將會在接下來的幾年里，在這個國家最為急切需要的消費拉動效益上拖累中國的城鎮(zhèn)化。3月，中國財政部的兩位研究員Chen Xiaoqiang和Liu Ling撰文指出，是該開始向農(nóng)民歸還土地的時候了，這樣既可以刺激消費，又可以幫助消解農(nóng)村持續(xù)增長的動蕩。大多數(shù)政府官員并不敢在此事上如此直抒胸臆，但是他們承認變革是必需的。

　　In 2007 Chengdu, and Chongqing to its south-east, were given licence to experiment. Theprinciple of collective ownership could not be changed, but farmers rights could be clarifiedand rural land markets of sorts could be established. In Chengdu, which is responsible for alarge rural area including Dayi county, officials spoke of initiating a new land reform . They began adrive to ensure that farmers at last got long-promised certificates showing the exactboundaries of their fields and housing as well as confirming their rights to use them .

　　2007年時，成都和位于其東南方向的重慶被授予進行探索實踐的資質(zhì)。集體所有制的根本原則不能動搖，但是農(nóng)民的權(quán)益可以進行明確，各種類別的農(nóng)村土地市場也可以建立起來。對包括大邑縣在內(nèi)的大片的農(nóng)村地區(qū)負責的成都市的官方人員都在談論對新土改的嘗試。他們開始了一輪保證農(nóng)民最終能有顯示他們的田產(chǎn)和房產(chǎn)的精確邊界的得到長期保證的證明，同時也確認農(nóng)民的使用它們的權(quán)利

　　Where do you live?

　　你生活在哪里?

　　IN DAYI COUNTY, a couple of hours drive down a motorway from the city of Chengdu, thecapital of Sichuan Province, Chinese tourists stroll through the meandering courtyards of arural mansion. In the 1950s, soon after Mao seized power, the mansion was turned into amuseum, intended as a showcase of evil. It once belonged to Liu Wencai, a landownersupposedly notorious for ill-treating his tenant farmers. Liu embodied a class despised by Mao,who came to power on the back of a promise to give land back to the peasants.

　　在大邑縣，距離四川省府成都市數(shù)小時車程的一個縣城里，中國游客漫步于一家鄉(xiāng)間宅所那曲折的庭院里。在1950年代，在毛澤東掌權(quán)后不久，這棟宅所被辟為了一家博物館，以作為罪惡的展品。它曾一度歸屬為劉文彩，作為地主，劉文彩因被斷定虐待他自己的長工而臭名昭著。劉文彩代表了為毛澤東所鄙視的那樣一個階級。而毛澤東在掌權(quán)后，推動了將土地交還給農(nóng)民的這樣一個承諾的兌現(xiàn)。

　　In its Maoist heyday the museum was a place of pilgrimage. Red Guards swarmed there forritual denunciations of Liu and his ilk. A high point of their visit was a trip to the waterdungeon, a room with several inches of water covering the floor where Liu had allegedly keptdisobedient farmers. Another was a series of life-size sculptures of peasants and their viciousoppressors. A politically disfavoured curator from Beijings Forbidden City who happened tolook like Liu was forced to stand next to the sculptures as a living Liu Wencai so that visitorscould shout and spit at him, according to Geremie Barm ofAustralian National University.

　　在毛澤東思想的全盛期，這個博物館就是個圣地。紅衛(wèi)兵掃蕩了這里，為的就是儀式性的宣示劉文彩和他的同類。他們的串聯(lián)的一個高潮是參觀水龍，即劉文彩非法拘禁不守規(guī)矩的長工的地方：一間數(shù)尺深的水漫過地面的房間。而另外一個高潮是，一套由長工和他們惡毒的壓迫者組成的真人大小的雕塑。據(jù)澳洲大學的Geremie Barm講，一位來自北京紫禁城的，在政治上的失寵的館長，因碰巧長得像劉文彩而被作為活劉文彩強迫站在這些個雕塑邊上，以讓參觀者能夠?qū)χ舐暫敖校笸驴谒?/p>

　　The sculptures are still there, but in recent years awave of revisionism has been sweeping across Dayi.Local officials were already having second thoughtsby the early 1980s. But it was a book reassessingLius life published by an outspoken journalist in1999 that finally convinced many that the man wasreally not that bad. His water dungeon was agovernment fabrication, the museum now pointsout. He spent a lot of money on local schools andpaid for a road to be built from Chengdu to Dayi.Last year a grandson organised a get-together inDayi for the extended Liu clan, whose members would once have been terrified of revealingtheir ties. More than 1,000 turned up.

　　那些雕塑還在，但是近年來的一波回頭客在大邑縣境內(nèi)來了次舊地重游。當?shù)毓賳T在1980年代就已經(jīng)有了另外一種想法。在1999年，一本由一位率性直言的記者出版的一本重估劉文彩的人生的書最終證實了劉文彩這個人也并沒有那么壞得透頂。現(xiàn)在的博物館方面指出到，他的水龍是政府捏造的。劉文彩為當?shù)貙W校花費了大量錢財，出資相互修建從成都到大邑縣的公路。去年，劉文彩的一位重孫為了延續(xù)劉氏的香火，在大邑縣組織了一次大團聚。這些人員曾一度對于自己身份的泄露而倍感恐懼，而那次團聚的出場人數(shù)超過1000人。

　　The slaughter of many thousands of landlords byofficials and vengeful peasants shortly after the communist takeover resulted in profoundchanges in the system of rural land ownership. Peasants got the land Mao promised them,but only briefly. In the late 1950s the party took it back again and forced farmers intocollectively owned peoples communes. The legacy of that disastrous decision, whichcontributed to a famine that left tens of millions dead, still weighs heavily on rural China. Sotoo does a decision to confer hereditary status on peasants, who would be all but barredfrom cities to stop them rushing in to find work.

　　在共產(chǎn)黨取得政權(quán)之后的極短時間里，政府官員和仇恨的農(nóng)民就屠殺了數(shù)以千萬計的地主，這導致了農(nóng)村土地所有權(quán)體制的深刻變化。農(nóng)民正如毛主席保證的那樣奪取了土地，但僅僅是短暫的取得。在1950年代晚期，黨又把土地收了回來，并強制農(nóng)民加入集體所有的人民公社。這一災難性的決策遺留下的禍害之處就是，招來了一場對中國農(nóng)村仍然造孽深重的數(shù)以千萬人死亡的饑荒。一個對只會被城市所阻止的，為了尋找工作而涌入城市的農(nóng)民的世代相傳的權(quán)利狀態(tài)進行轉(zhuǎn)變的決策，只會帶來同樣。

　　The curse of the hukou

　　戶口的詛咒

　　The hukou system, as this one-time apartheid is commonly known, applied to urban as well asrural dwellers, but peasants got a worse deal because they received hardly any welfare benefits,and job prospects in the countryside were dismal. The system has been much eroded sincethe Mao era because of the need for cheap labour to fuel Chinas manufacturing boom. But itslingering impact, combined with the still collective ownership of rural land, will retard Chinasurbanisation in the years ahead just when the country is most in need of its consumption-boosting benefits. Two researchers from Chinas finance ministry, Chen Xiaoqiang and Liu Ling,wrote in March that it was time to start returning land to the peasants, both to spurconsumption and to help defuse growing rural unrest. Most officials dare not say this sobluntly, but they admit that change is needed.

　　戶口體制，這個為人所共知的一度起著隔離體制，被同樣施加于城市和農(nóng)村居民身上。但農(nóng)民的被更加惡劣的對待，因為他們幾無福利，且在鄉(xiāng)下的工作前途簡直是凄慘。這一體制自毛澤東時代起就因為對推動制造業(yè)繁榮的廉價勞動力的需要而一步步的受到侵蝕。但是其綿延的影響，與農(nóng)村土地仍在實施的集體所有制相結(jié)合，將會在接下來的幾年里，在這個國家最為急切需要的消費拉動效益上拖累中國的城鎮(zhèn)化。3月，中國財政部的兩位研究員Chen Xiaoqiang和Liu Ling撰文指出，是該開始向農(nóng)民歸還土地的時候了，這樣既可以刺激消費，又可以幫助消解農(nóng)村持續(xù)增長的動蕩。大多數(shù)政府官員并不敢在此事上如此直抒胸臆，但是他們承認變革是必需的。

　　In 2007 Chengdu, and Chongqing to its south-east, were given licence to experiment. Theprinciple of collective ownership could not be changed, but farmers rights could be clarifiedand rural land markets of sorts could be established. In Chengdu, which is responsible for alarge rural area including Dayi county, officials spoke of initiating a new land reform . They began adrive to ensure that farmers at last got long-promised certificates showing the exactboundaries of their fields and housing as well as confirming their rights to use them .

　　2007年時，成都和位于其東南方向的重慶被授予進行探索實踐的資質(zhì)。集體所有制的根本原則不能動搖，但是農(nóng)民的權(quán)益可以進行明確，各種類別的農(nóng)村土地市場也可以建立起來。對包括大邑縣在內(nèi)的大片的農(nóng)村地區(qū)負責的成都市的官方人員都在談論對新土改的嘗試。他們開始了一輪保證農(nóng)民最終能有顯示他們的田產(chǎn)和房產(chǎn)的精確邊界的得到長期保證的證明，同時也確認農(nóng)民的使用它們的權(quán)利