Degrees of democracy

　　民主的程度

　　More education does not necessarily lead to greaterenthusiasm for representative politics

　　受教育程度越高并不一定對代表制政治產(chǎn)生更大的熱情

　　ON JUNE 20th Zine el-Abedine Ben-Ali, Tunisiasformer ruler, was sentenced in absentia to 35 yearsin prison. Many trace the origins of the popularrebellion that forced him from office to frustration over the treatment by the police of ayoung man with few job prospects. That combustible mixture of authoritarianism,unemployment and youth has played a big role in sparking many of the popular uprisingsacross the Middle East and north Africa that followed Tunisias. But some argue that increasededucation should also take credit for the Arab spring.

　　6月20號，前突尼斯總統(tǒng)Zine el-Abedine Ben-Ali在其未出席的情況下被判35年監(jiān)禁。許多人探求這場大規(guī)模的反抗的根源，由于警察部門過分的對待一個沒有就業(yè)前景的年輕人導致的反抗迫使他從當政者變?yōu)榱穗A下囚。即突尼斯之后，包括獨裁主義、失業(yè)和年輕人的易沖動的混合體在中東和北非引起許多大規(guī)模的暴動。但是一些人認為增加的教育也應該為這場阿拉伯承擔責任。

　　Many of the countries where disaffection with strongmen rulers has spilled over into revolthave seen their education levels rise sharply in recent decades. Young people in these countriesare far better educated than their parents were. In 1990 the average Egyptian had 4.4 years ofschooling; by 2010 the figure had risen to 7.1 years. Could it be that education, by makingpeople less willing to put up with restrictions on freedom and more willing to questionauthority, promotes democratisation?

　　許多由于對強硬領導人不滿情緒涌出而導致起義的國家，其教育水平在近幾十年中有大幅的提升。這些國家中的年輕人受到的教育遠好于他們的父母。1990年平均每個埃及人接受4.4年的教育，到了 2010年這個數(shù)字提升到7.1年。是教育促使民主化么?教育使得人們更少愿意忍受對自由的限制，更愿意挑戰(zhàn)權威。

　　Ideas about the links between education, income anddemocracy are at the heart of what social scientistsin the middle of the last century termed themodernisation hypothesis. One of its most famousproponents, Seymour Lipset, wrote in 1959 thateducation presumably broadens mens outlooks,enables them to understand the need for norms oftolerance, restrains them from adhering toextremist and monistic doctrines, and increasestheir capacity to make rational electoral choices.

　　關于教育、收入和民主之間聯(lián)系的看法是上世紀中期被社會科學家稱為現(xiàn)代化假說的核心。最著名的支持者Seymour Lipset在1959年寫到教育可能拓寬人們的視野，使他們能夠理解寬容的必要性，減少他們對極端主義和一元論學說的依附，提高他們做出理性的選舉決擇的能力。

　　Since then plenty of economists and political scientists have looked for statistical evidence of acausal link between education and democratisation. Many have pointed to the strongcorrelation that exists between levels of education and measures like the pluralism of partypolitics and the existence of civil liberties . The patterns are similar whenyou look at income and democracy. There are outliers, of courseuntil recently, many Arabcountries managed to combine energy-based wealth and decent education with undemocraticpolitical systems. But some deduce from the overall picture that as China and otherauthoritarian states get more educated and richer, their people will agitate for greater politicalfreedom, culminating in a shift to a more democratic form of government.

　　自那時起，許多經(jīng)濟學家和政治學家就已經(jīng)在尋找教育和民主化之間因果關系的統(tǒng)計上的證據(jù)。許多人已經(jīng)指出教育程度與像黨派政見的多元化等評測以及公民自由之間存在很強的關聯(lián)性。當你看收入和民主時，他們的增長模式是相似的。當然也存在例外，至今，許多阿拉伯國家把以能源為基礎的財富和良好的教育與非民主的體系結合在一起。但是一些人從整體推斷，當中國和別的獨裁主義國家得到更多的教育，變得更加富裕，他們的人民將煽動更大的政治自由，最終轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橐粋€更加民主的治理形式。

　　This apparently reasonable intuition is shakier than it seems. Critics of the hypothesis pointout that correlation is hardly causation. The general trend over the past half-century mayhave been towards rising living standards, a wider spread of basic education and moredemocracy, but it is entirely possible that this is being driven by another variable. Even if thecorrelation were not spurious, it would be difficult to know which way causation ran. Doesmore education lead to greater democracy? Or are more democratic countries better ateducating their citizens?

　　這個明顯的合理的直覺不像它看上去那樣穩(wěn)固。該假設的反對者指出他們之間的聯(lián)系不是因果關系。雖然過去半個世紀普遍的趨勢是不斷提高的生活水平，更加廣泛的基礎教育和更加民主，但是這個趨勢完全可能是被其他別的因素驅(qū)動的。即使這個聯(lián)系不是錯誤的，也很難知道這種因果關系是以哪種方式運行的。更好的教育導致了更大的民主?還是更加民主的國家能夠為他們的國民提供更好的教育?

　　The modernisation hypothesis suggested aparticular direction of change: more education andincome should beget greater democracy. But asthe right-hand chart shows, there is virtually nostatistical association at all between changes in acountrys level of education and its measured levelof democracy. If this is true, there is no particularreason to hope that more education will lead to amore democratic world.

　　現(xiàn)代化假說表明一個特定的變化方向：更好的教育和更多的收入應該能夠?qū)е赂用裰鳌５钦缬疫叺膱D表所示的那樣，在一個國家教育水平的變化和它測量的民主水平之間確實沒有統(tǒng)計上的關系。假如真是這樣的話，就不存在特別的原因希望更好的教育導致一個更加民主的世界。

　　A recent NBER paper sheds light on why this might be the case. Those who posit that moreschooling leads to greater democracy often have specific ideas about how peoples attitudeschange as a result of their becoming more educated, arguing that it creates people who aremore willing to challenge authority. It is possible, however, that education reinforcesauthority and the power of ruling elites; indeed, it may often be designed to do precisely this.The study tried to find out which of these competing ideas of the effects of education is moreaccurate.

　　最近一個NBER論文解釋了為什么可能是這樣。那些假設更好的教育導致更加民主的人通常有一個特定的想法，認為作為人們得到更好教育的結果之一，人們的態(tài)度會發(fā)生改變，這導致了更加愿意挑戰(zhàn)權威的人。但是，教育增強了權威和管理精英的力量是可能的，事實上，教育可能經(jīng)常被設計去這樣做。研究試圖去找出這些不同的關于教育影響的觀念中哪個是更加正確的。

　　The authors compared a group of Kenyan girls in 69 primary schools whose students wererandomly selected to receive a scholarship with similar students in schools which received nosuch financial aid. Previous studies had shown that the scholarship programme led to highertest scores and increased the likelihood that girls enrolled in secondary school. Overall, itsignificantly increased the amount of education obtained. For the new study the authors tried tosee how the extra schooling had affected the political and social attitudes of the women inquestion.

　　作者在69所小學挑選了一群肯尼亞的女同學進行對比，任意挑選一些學生給予一個獎學金，一些則沒有這樣的資助。獎學金計劃導致了原先的學生有更好的成績，并增加了被高中錄取的可能性。整體來看，這明顯增加了所獲得的教育。對于這個新的研究，作者試圖去看額外的教育如何影響婦女對于政治和社會的態(tài)度。

　　Degrees of democracy

　　民主的程度

　　More education does not necessarily lead to greaterenthusiasm for representative politics

　　受教育程度越高并不一定對代表制政治產(chǎn)生更大的熱情

　　ON JUNE 20th Zine el-Abedine Ben-Ali, Tunisiasformer ruler, was sentenced in absentia to 35 yearsin prison. Many trace the origins of the popularrebellion that forced him from office to frustration over the treatment by the police of ayoung man with few job prospects. That combustible mixture of authoritarianism,unemployment and youth has played a big role in sparking many of the popular uprisingsacross the Middle East and north Africa that followed Tunisias. But some argue that increasededucation should also take credit for the Arab spring.

　　6月20號，前突尼斯總統(tǒng)Zine el-Abedine Ben-Ali在其未出席的情況下被判35年監(jiān)禁。許多人探求這場大規(guī)模的反抗的根源，由于警察部門過分的對待一個沒有就業(yè)前景的年輕人導致的反抗迫使他從當政者變?yōu)榱穗A下囚。即突尼斯之后，包括獨裁主義、失業(yè)和年輕人的易沖動的混合體在中東和北非引起許多大規(guī)模的暴動。但是一些人認為增加的教育也應該為這場阿拉伯承擔責任。

　　Many of the countries where disaffection with strongmen rulers has spilled over into revolthave seen their education levels rise sharply in recent decades. Young people in these countriesare far better educated than their parents were. In 1990 the average Egyptian had 4.4 years ofschooling; by 2010 the figure had risen to 7.1 years. Could it be that education, by makingpeople less willing to put up with restrictions on freedom and more willing to questionauthority, promotes democratisation?

　　許多由于對強硬領導人不滿情緒涌出而導致起義的國家，其教育水平在近幾十年中有大幅的提升。這些國家中的年輕人受到的教育遠好于他們的父母。1990年平均每個埃及人接受4.4年的教育，到了 2010年這個數(shù)字提升到7.1年。是教育促使民主化么?教育使得人們更少愿意忍受對自由的限制，更愿意挑戰(zhàn)權威。

　　Ideas about the links between education, income anddemocracy are at the heart of what social scientistsin the middle of the last century termed themodernisation hypothesis. One of its most famousproponents, Seymour Lipset, wrote in 1959 thateducation presumably broadens mens outlooks,enables them to understand the need for norms oftolerance, restrains them from adhering toextremist and monistic doctrines, and increasestheir capacity to make rational electoral choices.

　　關于教育、收入和民主之間聯(lián)系的看法是上世紀中期被社會科學家稱為現(xiàn)代化假說的核心。最著名的支持者Seymour Lipset在1959年寫到教育可能拓寬人們的視野，使他們能夠理解寬容的必要性，減少他們對極端主義和一元論學說的依附，提高他們做出理性的選舉決擇的能力。

　　Since then plenty of economists and political scientists have looked for statistical evidence of acausal link between education and democratisation. Many have pointed to the strongcorrelation that exists between levels of education and measures like the pluralism of partypolitics and the existence of civil liberties . The patterns are similar whenyou look at income and democracy. There are outliers, of courseuntil recently, many Arabcountries managed to combine energy-based wealth and decent education with undemocraticpolitical systems. But some deduce from the overall picture that as China and otherauthoritarian states get more educated and richer, their people will agitate for greater politicalfreedom, culminating in a shift to a more democratic form of government.

　　自那時起，許多經(jīng)濟學家和政治學家就已經(jīng)在尋找教育和民主化之間因果關系的統(tǒng)計上的證據(jù)。許多人已經(jīng)指出教育程度與像黨派政見的多元化等評測以及公民自由之間存在很強的關聯(lián)性。當你看收入和民主時，他們的增長模式是相似的。當然也存在例外，至今，許多阿拉伯國家把以能源為基礎的財富和良好的教育與非民主的體系結合在一起。但是一些人從整體推斷，當中國和別的獨裁主義國家得到更多的教育，變得更加富裕，他們的人民將煽動更大的政治自由，最終轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橐粋€更加民主的治理形式。

　　This apparently reasonable intuition is shakier than it seems. Critics of the hypothesis pointout that correlation is hardly causation. The general trend over the past half-century mayhave been towards rising living standards, a wider spread of basic education and moredemocracy, but it is entirely possible that this is being driven by another variable. Even if thecorrelation were not spurious, it would be difficult to know which way causation ran. Doesmore education lead to greater democracy? Or are more democratic countries better ateducating their citizens?

　　這個明顯的合理的直覺不像它看上去那樣穩(wěn)固。該假設的反對者指出他們之間的聯(lián)系不是因果關系。雖然過去半個世紀普遍的趨勢是不斷提高的生活水平，更加廣泛的基礎教育和更加民主，但是這個趨勢完全可能是被其他別的因素驅(qū)動的。即使這個聯(lián)系不是錯誤的，也很難知道這種因果關系是以哪種方式運行的。更好的教育導致了更大的民主?還是更加民主的國家能夠為他們的國民提供更好的教育?

　　The modernisation hypothesis suggested aparticular direction of change: more education andincome should beget greater democracy. But asthe right-hand chart shows, there is virtually nostatistical association at all between changes in acountrys level of education and its measured levelof democracy. If this is true, there is no particularreason to hope that more education will lead to amore democratic world.

　　現(xiàn)代化假說表明一個特定的變化方向：更好的教育和更多的收入應該能夠?qū)е赂用裰?。但是正如右邊的圖表所示的那樣，在一個國家教育水平的變化和它測量的民主水平之間確實沒有統(tǒng)計上的關系。假如真是這樣的話，就不存在特別的原因希望更好的教育導致一個更加民主的世界。

　　A recent NBER paper sheds light on why this might be the case. Those who posit that moreschooling leads to greater democracy often have specific ideas about how peoples attitudeschange as a result of their becoming more educated, arguing that it creates people who aremore willing to challenge authority. It is possible, however, that education reinforcesauthority and the power of ruling elites; indeed, it may often be designed to do precisely this.The study tried to find out which of these competing ideas of the effects of education is moreaccurate.

　　最近一個NBER論文解釋了為什么可能是這樣。那些假設更好的教育導致更加民主的人通常有一個特定的想法，認為作為人們得到更好教育的結果之一，人們的態(tài)度會發(fā)生改變，這導致了更加愿意挑戰(zhàn)權威的人。但是，教育增強了權威和管理精英的力量是可能的，事實上，教育可能經(jīng)常被設計去這樣做。研究試圖去找出這些不同的關于教育影響的觀念中哪個是更加正確的。

　　The authors compared a group of Kenyan girls in 69 primary schools whose students wererandomly selected to receive a scholarship with similar students in schools which received nosuch financial aid. Previous studies had shown that the scholarship programme led to highertest scores and increased the likelihood that girls enrolled in secondary school. Overall, itsignificantly increased the amount of education obtained. For the new study the authors tried tosee how the extra schooling had affected the political and social attitudes of the women inquestion.

　　作者在69所小學挑選了一群肯尼亞的女同學進行對比，任意挑選一些學生給予一個獎學金，一些則沒有這樣的資助。獎學金計劃導致了原先的學生有更好的成績，并增加了被高中錄取的可能性。整體來看，這明顯增加了所獲得的教育。對于這個新的研究，作者試圖去看額外的教育如何影響婦女對于政治和社會的態(tài)度。