含有〈党派〉标签的文章(6)

身份政治的反火

【2017-09-05】

从坦慕尼协会开始,民主党就惯于玩弄族裔/身份政治,身份政治是颇为有效的选票动员手段(尽管通常会变得很卑劣),但它有个问题:如果玩得太成功,就会要了自己的命,因为它奏效的前提是,在用victim叙事动员各种少数派的同时,多数派因有着足够的安全感而不感兴趣,可当它过于成功时,多数派不可能永远保持安全感。

你大可以通过victim叙事把少数民族、同性恋者、单身母亲、非法移民、流浪汉、囚犯……一个个转变成你的铁票仓,但要赢得大选,就必须确保主流人群不怎么关心这些议题(甚或因朴素同情心而对你产生好感(more...)

标签: | | | |
7643
【2017-09-05】 从坦慕尼协会开始,民主党就惯于玩弄族裔/身份政治,身份政治是颇为有效的选票动员手段(尽管通常会变得很卑劣),但它有个问题:如果玩得太成功,就会要了自己的命,因为它奏效的前提是,在用victim叙事动员各种少数派的同时,多数派因有着足够的安全感而不感兴趣,可当它过于成功时,多数派不可能永远保持安全感。 你大可以通过victim叙事把少数民族、同性恋者、单身母亲、非法移民、流浪汉、囚犯……一个个转变成你的铁票仓,但要赢得大选,就必须确保主流人群不怎么关心这些议题(甚或因朴素同情心而对你产生好感)而继续关心更直接影响他们生活的传统议题,一旦这一条件丧失,就完蛋了。 换句话说,当你玩的太成功时,就动员出了一个自己的敌人,因为现在轮到他们觉得自己才是victim了。 这一原理在美国尤其成立,因为(1)美国太强大了,你很难说服选民相信美国人是国际关系中的受害者,2)美利坚民族太大太特别了,你很难说服选民相信美利坚民族正在受周围大民族的压迫,所以那些小国能玩的花招在美国行不通。 川普的下贱之处就在于,他完全是顺着民主党的套路在玩,只不过换了个动员对象。 旨在动员少数群体的身份政治,玩过头就会变成对主流群体的反向动员,比如你想讨好穆斯林,可以在开斋节公开问候,可以呼吁为穆斯林设立公共假日,可当你头脑发热到去攻击圣诞节时,就会产生反向动员效果了,可是身份政治会顺着政治正确的方向自动滑坡,活动家们一旦得手总会变本加利,不可能操控自如。 自动滑坡的原因是,活动家和政治家必须为自己不断创造议题从而能够表现出他正在持续推进某个议程,同性恋合法化了就收手吗?显然不能,我不能让这个议题消失,否则我就失业了。 好在川普为自己找台阶的脸皮和想象力都是一流的,这一点我们不必替他担心 。 其实这件事情更有想象空间也更有趣的地方是,它可能会促使以色列下决心打击伊朗,当美国作为担保人的信誉破产之后,这是他们的唯一选择。  
成功篡夺

【2016-06-13】

@赵昱鲲: 新反动派的名字好赞。顺便问一句:辉总打算就美国大选写点什么吗?

@whigzhou: 不想多写,我就随便说几句吧

@whigzhou: 这次大选,认同问题(即你们-我们之辨)占据了核心位置(至少对共和党),结果美国/西方特殊论(或曰文化主义)占了上风,其要点是:美国/西方的文明诞生自一个极为特殊的历史过程,根植于独特的民族/文化背景,尽管有着相当大的包容性,但即便在今天,离开某些民族/文化特质,它也无法自我维持下去。

@whigzhou: 这些民族/文化特质并非由普遍人性所自动保证,所以我们若要保存这一文明,就不能无差(more...)

标签: | | | |
7209
【2016-06-13】 @赵昱鲲: 新反动派的名字好赞。顺便问一句:辉总打算就美国大选写点什么吗? @whigzhou: 不想多写,我就随便说几句吧 @whigzhou: 这次大选,认同问题(即你们-我们之辨)占据了核心位置(至少对共和党),结果美国/西方特殊论(或曰文化主义)占了上风,其要点是:美国/西方的文明诞生自一个极为特殊的历史过程,根植于独特的民族/文化背景,尽管有着相当大的包容性,但即便在今天,离开某些民族/文化特质,它也无法自我维持下去。 @whigzhou: 这些民族/文化特质并非由普遍人性所自动保证,所以我们若要保存这一文明,就不能无差别的接纳任何人作为共同体成员,成为我们的公民伙伴,换句话说,一套制度的存续可能性,对其成员特性并非中性的。 @whigzhou: 这一结果原本是好事,表明美国人终于(再次)抛弃了普世主义,但悲剧在于,这个议题被一个坏蛋窃取了,本来最积极鼓吹特殊主义的是我们新反动派,但因为新反动派始终未能在共和党在成为主流,结果让川普这个民主党中左分子成功篡夺 @whigzhou: 川普的成功将会把特殊主义安放到一个强共同体的平台上,结果将是欧式右翼(文化保守+排外+贸易保护+福利主义),如此一来,特殊主义要么走向失败,要么成功的将美国乃至整个美利坚治世引向衰弱 @whigzhou: 小罗斯福以降,我从未见过如此恶劣的局面,所以目前我所指望的最好结果就是一届瘫痪的政府 @whigzhou: 早先我认为川普政府将会瘫痪,但眼看共和党大佬一个个放弃节操为川普站台,现在我觉得希拉里政府瘫痪的机会或许更大,最好的结果是:希拉里当选,然后国会很快开始重罪调查,半年一年内进入弹劾程序 @whigzhou: 川普带来的最糟结果将是:毁掉右派手中这种重要且极具号召力的牌,他将用一系列悲剧性后果吓住选民,让他们在很长时间内不敢再考虑特殊主义 @whigzhou: 川普初选胜出靠的就是认同议题,他那些欧式右翼政策(最低工资+福利主义+贸易保护)并没有多大吸引力,这一点可以从如下反差中看出:虽然川普初选得票率很高,但在州级和地方选举中胜出的共和党人大多数是反川普的,因为认同是全国性议题,在地方选举中没位置 @whigzhou: 这次选举另一个看点是Libertarian将成为真正有分量的第三党,我要是有票也会投给Johnson,Libertarian虽然也是孤立主义者,但比川普好多了,他们的孤立主义会让美国以外世界变坏,但至少美国本身变好了,以后再出来救世界不迟,但川普将是内外皆毁。 @whigzhou: 再说Libertarian近年来也在进步,像Ron Paul这种罗斯巴德墙上挂的蠢货不多了 @盐光水灵Isabel: 追寻川普的思路,要有赛车手的素质,随时调整;他是目的主义或实用主义者,他随时根据后来的斟酌修改看法,但核心概念离不开一个以目的为主的 @whigzhou: 你们总是替他辩解某某说辞只是竞选策略不是真实立场,那如何才能了解他真实立场呢?竞选之前的态度?对啊,那时候他不就是民主党嘛  
[译文]隐藏在好莱坞的反动派

Breitbart PolitiCon Panel: Shapiro, Milo, Davi, Marlow Wage ‘Hollywood Wars’
布莱巴特PolitiCon小组座谈:“好莱坞战争”

作者: Daniel Nussbaum @ 2015-10-13
译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
校对:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值)
来源:Breitbart,http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/10/13/breitbart-politicon-panel-shapiro-milo-davi-marlow-wage-hollywood-wars/

LOS ANGELES — If politics is truly located “downstream” from culture — as the late Andrew Breitbart was fond of saying— then three editors from Breitbart News and one Hollywood screen legend spent the afternoon on Friday knee-deep in the water, wading upstream through the muck.

洛杉矶报道——如果政治确实位于文化的“下游”——如已故的安德鲁·布莱巴特喜欢说的那样——那么来自“布莱巴特新闻网”的三位编辑和来自好莱坞的一位荧幕传奇人物本周五下午就是在没膝深的水中趟着淤泥逆流跋涉。

Three firebrand culture warriors–Breitbart Senior Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro, editor Milo Yiannopolous, and actor/singer/director/Big Hollywood contributor Robert Davi–took the stage Friday a(more...)

标签: | |
7080
Breitbart PolitiCon Panel: Shapiro, Milo, Davi, Marlow Wage ‘Hollywood Wars’ 布莱巴特PolitiCon小组座谈:“好莱坞战争” 作者: Daniel Nussbaum @ 2015-10-13 译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 校对:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值) 来源:Breitbart,http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2015/10/13/breitbart-politicon-panel-shapiro-milo-davi-marlow-wage-hollywood-wars/ LOS ANGELES — If politics is truly located “downstream” from culture — as the late Andrew Breitbart was fond of saying— then three editors from Breitbart News and one Hollywood screen legend spent the afternoon on Friday knee-deep in the water, wading upstream through the muck. 洛杉矶报道——如果政治确实位于文化的“下游”——如已故的安德鲁·布莱巴特喜欢说的那样——那么来自“布莱巴特新闻网”的三位编辑和来自好莱坞的一位荧幕传奇人物本周五下午就是在没膝深的水中趟着淤泥逆流跋涉。 Three firebrand culture warriors–Breitbart Senior Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro, editor Milo Yiannopolous, and actor/singer/director/Big Hollywood contributor Robert Davi–took the stage Friday at PolitiCon for a panel titled “The Hollywood Wars.” Led by moderator and Breitbart Editor-in-Chief Alex Marlow, the panel deconstructed Hollywood’s impact on politics and offered their own predictions for what that influence might look like in the future. 三位热情充沛的文化战士——“布莱巴特”高级特约编辑Ben Shapiro,编辑Milo Yiannopolous和演员/歌手/导演/“大好莱坞”栏目撰稿人Robert Davi,周五登上PolitiCon,举行了一场名为“好莱坞战争”的小组座谈。主持人由“布莱巴特”总编辑Alex Marlow担任。这次座谈解构了好莱坞对政治的影响,并就这一影响未来走向如何给出了各自的预测。 The discussion began with the idea that conservative actors, writers, producers, and executives are routinely blackballed by a hostile liberal Hollywood system–an idea that Davi, as a conservative actor with more than 130 credits under his belt, was uniquely qualified to weigh in on. 座谈首先讨论的是这样一个观点:保守派演员、编剧、制片人和监制经常遭到满怀敌意的好莱坞自由派体制的排挤。作为一个拥有130多部作品的保守派演员,Davi特别有资格就此观点发表意见。 “I would think so,” Davi confirmed, before explaining: “You’re just not invited to the party. You’re not going to the card games, or the fundraisers… All business is social, especially entertainment. ‘We’re doing this film, do you wanna be in it?’ But then if you’re not in their group, you’re not going to get it.” “我认为确实如此,”在加以解释之前,Davi确认了这个观点:“他们不会邀请你去参加派对。你没法去打牌,也没法参加筹款会……一切行业都是社会性的,娱乐业尤其如此。‘我们要搞个电影,你想演吗?’但如果你不是他们那个圈子里的,你就没得机会。” “Also, Hollywood is a bunch of thieves,” he added. “They’re just like politicians, they’re corrupt. You go in and say, ‘I have an idea.’ Two years later, you’ll see it on some cable network, your exact idea that’s been cannibalized in some way.” “另外,好莱坞就是一群小偷,”他补充说。“他们就跟政客一样,一群腐败分子。你要是跟他们说‘我有个想法’。两年以后,你就能在某个有线电视上看到它了,那就是你的想法,被他们想个办法给改编利用了。” Marlow asked Shapiro if the cultural landscape had changed significantly since the release of his 2012 book Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV, which examines how liberal gatekeepers use television to shape culture in America. Shapiro在2012年出了一本书,《黄金时段的宣传:关于左派如何占领你的电视的好莱坞真实故事》,讨论了自由派看门人如何利用电视来塑造美国文化。Marlow问到,自该书出版以来,文化地景是否有了很大的改变? “Obviously, there’s a tremendous amount of bias in Hollywood,” Shapiro said. “It’s quite open, actually. You just have to be a leftist in order to see it, because people who discriminate don’t typically tell people they’re discriminating against that they’re victims of discrimination.” “显然,好莱坞存在巨大的偏见,”Shapiro说。“实际上,这是相当公开的。只是你需要是个左派才能看到这一点,因为歧视者通常并不会告诉被歧视者说他们是歧视受害者。” Shapiro added that in Hollywood, “it’s not a question of leftist versus conservative, it’s a question of human versus non-human.” Shapiro补充说,在好莱坞,“问题就不是左派vs. 保守派,而是人类 vs. 非人。”
You either agree with the people in Hollywood, which makes you human, or you disagree with the people in Hollywood which means you’re somewhat less than human. And the typical kind of litmus test right now is gay marriage. If you’re pro-gay marriage, then you’re a wonderful and decent human being. If you’re anti-gay marriage, then you’re a Nazi. And you will not work. “要么你同意好莱坞的人,那样的话你就是人;要么你不同意好莱坞的人,那样的话你就比人低一等。目前典型的试金石就是同性婚姻。如果你支持同性婚姻,那你就是个善良体面的好人。如果你反对同性婚姻,那你就是个纳粹分子。并且你没法工作。 There are certain positions you can hold as a conservative, abortion is getting closer to acceptable in Hollywood if you’re pro-life, but if you’re someone who believes that traditional marriage is superior to homosexual marriage, then that is obviously springing from your inherent bigotry, and you must be cast out like a leper. “作为一个保守派,有些立场你可以持有,比如如果你反对堕胎,那么好莱坞只是个对堕胎变得更宽容的地方,但如果你相信传统婚姻比同性婚姻要优越,那这显然源自你内在的顽固偏执,必须要像对待麻风病人一样把你驱逐。”
By now, the rather large room hosting the panel on the second floor of the Los Angeles Convention Center had begun to fill up. 这时候,举办座谈的这间位于洛杉矶会议中心二层的颇为宽敞的会议室已经开始坐满。 The conversation swung to Lena Dunham and the notion that Hollywood insists on forcing Americans to care about hyper-liberal, “hip” actresses even when nobody watches their shows. Yiannopoulos said that millennials, the very target demographic that Dunham’s show Girls looks to capture, especially don’t care about her show, or about any TV, for that matter. 讨论转到了Lena Dunham身上,大家论及这样一个想法:好莱坞坚持强迫美国人去在乎那些狂热自由派的“嬉皮”女演员,即使压根没人看她们的表演。Yiannopoulos说,“千禧一代”,也正就是Dunham的电视剧《衰姐们》想要吸引的目标人口群体,恰好特别不关心她的剧,当然其实他们是不关心任何电视。 “[Millennials] are not in the slightest bit interested in tuning into her show,” Yiannopoulos said.“They’re not interested in anything, not Empire, not Breaking Bad. Hollywood doesn’t have the same purchase over them.” “千禧一代压根对她的电视剧没有一丝一毫兴趣,”Yiannopoulos说。“他们对一切都不感兴趣,管他《嘻哈帝国》也好,《绝命毒师》也好。好莱坞对他们无能为力。” Instead, he argues, they’re increasingly playing video games and creating content themselves, most of it on the Internet. But even video games have come under fire from leftist social justice elements, something Yiannopoulos has spent much of the past year documenting. And even though the video game industry is now bigger than Hollywood, Yiannopoulos lamented that, as with Hollywood, the political right is “letting it go” on video games. 他认为,取而代之的是,他们现在越来越多玩电子游戏、自己制作内容,而且大都在网上完成。不过,即使是电子游戏也已经处于左派社会正义分子的炮火之下,Yiannopoulos去年有很长一段时间就在记录这个现象。尽管电子游戏产业现在比好莱坞还大,Yianopoulos却哀叹,跟好莱坞一样,政治右派在电子游戏上也在“放手”。 “The left is engaged in this process of attacking gamers and readers for imagined sins like racism, sexism, and transphobia on the basis that playing a game online can make you a worse person in real life,” he said. “[The right] is not fighting on video games.” “左派正在以想象的罪名攻击游戏玩家和读者,诸如种族主义、性别歧视和变性恐惧,理由是玩在线游戏能让你在现实生活中变坏,”他说。“右派并没有在电子游戏问题上进行反击。” The discussion then focused on the tools of narrative, which the panel agreed have a conservative bias. 随后,讨论聚焦于叙事工具,小组成员一致认为,现在的叙事工具对保守派存在偏见。 “The left has taken all these right-wing tropes that they reject, and then they turn around and use them in their films,” said Shapiro. “The left uses the right’s tools and the right uses the left’s tools, and the right loses with the right message and the wrong tools, and the left wins with the wrong message and the right tools.” “左派已经把所有他们反对的右派使用的修辞手法占为己有,然后一转身将之用到了自己的电影中,”Shapiro说。“左派用了右派的工具,右派则用左派的工具。右派用正确的信息加上错误的工具而失败了,左派则用错误的信息加上正确的工具而成功了。” “I look at it through a whole different prism,” added Davi. “In the past you had films like Death Wish and Dirty Harry. There’s something I have to go back to, when Cecil B. DeMille made the Ten Commandments. That was a big cultural moment; Judeo-Christian values at its apex… When that Noah film came out, there was a secularization in that experience.” “我是透过一个完全不同的棱镜来看待这一点的,”Davi补充说。“过去,我们有像《猛龙怪客》和《警探哈里》这样的电影。有种东西我必须回头去找,回到Cecil B. Demille制作《十诫》的时候。那可是个重大的文化节点;犹太—基督教价值观达到了顶峰……当《诺亚》那部电影出来的时候,影视界经历了一次世俗化。” Still, Yiannopoulos sounded an optimistic note when he suggested that “culture is moving in a good direction,” mostly due to the rise of video games. He argued that, unlike Hollywood, video games promote conservative and libertarian values that are “baked into” the experience. 不过,Yiannopoulos还是发出了一个乐观的音符,他认为,主要由于电子游戏的兴起,“文化正在向一个好的方向前进”。他认为,电子游戏与好莱坞不同,保守派和自由意志主义的价值观“植入了”在玩游戏的体验中并得以推广。 “There’s very little you can do to break that, however much messaging, however many paraplegic Armenian lesbians you put on Level 17,” he added. “There is a limit to how many leftist tropes and messages you can shoehorn in to a game about killing prostitutes, or shooting space aliens.” “不管在游戏中出现多少信息,不管在游戏关卡里放多少半身瘫痪的美国女同,都很难取得左派想要的效果”他补充说。“对于一个内容是杀害妓女或者射杀太空外星人的游戏,能往里头塞的左派修辞和信息毕竟有限。” Because politics are truly downstream from culture, the conversation was destined to end up on Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump. 由于政治确实位于文化的下游,讨论就注定要以共和党总统竞选领跑者Donald Trump作为最后一个话题。 Davi praised Trump’s “authenticity” and said he’d recently been in New York City, where he’d heard both a Pakistani taxi driver with six kids and women in their 20s and 30s say they were for Trump. Davi赞扬了Trump的“真实”,并说他最近刚到过纽约市,他在那听到一个有6个孩子的巴基斯坦的士司机和一群20或30多岁的女士,都声称自己支持Trump。 “If I was looking at all these politicians like I was an acting coach, and they’ve all said the same thing; one speaks like a Harvard law degree that’s been well-prepped… and I’ve heard them say the right things, and do nothing! They get in office, and do absolutely not a thing.” “如果我把自己当成一个表演教练来看这些政客,那么他们所有人说的都是一样的;都是那种准备良好的哈佛法律学位获得者的说话方式……我听他们说过各种正确的话,却没做任何事!他们上台了,然后绝对不做任何事。” “Trump captures the imagination of the public,” Davi added. “There’s a likability factor that’s unconscionable.” “Trump抓住了大众的想象力,”Davi补充说。“他有种不合情理的可爱因素。” “His name recognition makes a massive difference, because when you know someone, you’re willing to cut them some slack,” added Shapiro. “Everybody feels like they know Trump. He’ll never sink below 15 percent in the polls, kind of like Hillary.” “他的知名度影响很大,因为如果你认识某人,你就会愿意对他加以优待,”Shapiro补充说。“人人都觉得自己认识Trump。他的民调绝对不会掉到15%以下,这有点像Hillary。” Yiannopoulos said millennials particularly connect with Trump because his campaign has tapped into the generation’s defining characteristics of mischief, joy, and a ridicule of the establishment. Yiannopoulos说千禧一代跟Trump特别有共鸣,因为他的竞选已经契合了这一代人的本质特征,即胡闹、欢乐和对体制的嘲弄。 “He’s almost a comment section come to life, and I mean that as a compliment,” Yiannopoulos said. “What I mean is he’s feisty, he’s irreverent, he’s rude: I think the guy’s brilliant. He speaks the way we all speak, if only we could get away with it. Look at the [political] figures who are rising and who are more popular than ever: they reject the language policing of the left.” “他几乎就是个活的留言板,我说这个是表示赞扬,”Yiannopoulos说。“我的意思是,他很活跃,很不敬,很粗鲁;我觉得这人太赞了。他说话就跟我们没顾忌地说话一样,但我们会有种种顾忌。看看那些正在上升的和比以往任何时候都更受欢迎的(政治)人物:他们拒绝左派的语言监督。” Milo added that the left’s preferred tactic for ending debate, by branding their opponents “racist” or “transphobic,” is becoming increasingly ineffective as the cultural climate slowly changes: “When they come at you and call you a misogynist, or a racist, or a transphobe, nothing bad happens if you just laugh at them. In fact, people will like you even more. And I think Trump is tapping in to that natural sense of defiance and mischief and irreverence that people now feel.” Milo补充说,随着文化气候的缓慢变迁,左派最爱用的一个用于结束辩论的伎俩——给他们的对手贴上“种族主义者”或“变性恐惧”的标签——现在正日益丧失效果。“当他们走过来把你称作厌女者,或种族主义者,或变性恐惧,如果你只是笑话他们一下,就不会有什么后果。事实上,人们会更加喜欢你。我认为Trump正在迎合人们现在感受到的那种蔑上、胡闹和不敬的自然意识。” (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

[译文]保守派选民喜欢何种嗓音?

Republicans prefer politicians with deep voices
共和党选民更青睐声音低沉的政治家

作者:Aarhus University @ 2015-11-24
译者:Luis Rightcon(@Rightcon)
校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
来源:EurekAlert,http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-11/au-rpp112415.php

A deep voice and a square jaw are important assets for conservative politicians. For politicians on the liberal side, it’s more important to have gentle features. That’s the conclusion of two recent scientific articles from Aarhus University. Th(more...)

标签: | |
6709
Republicans prefer politicians with deep voices 共和党选民更青睐声音低沉的政治家 作者:Aarhus University @ 2015-11-24 译者:Luis Rightcon(@Rightcon) 校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 来源:EurekAlert,http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-11/au-rpp112415.php A deep voice and a square jaw are important assets for conservative politicians. For politicians on the liberal side, it's more important to have gentle features. That's the conclusion of two recent scientific articles from Aarhus University. The implication is not only that physical features have a larger impact on voter preferences than previously thought but also that different physical features appeal to different voter segments. 拥有低沉嗓音和方形下巴对于保守派政客而言是非常重要的资产。而对于自由派政客,拥有相对柔和的特性则更为重要。这是最近两篇出自奥尔胡斯大学的科学论文所得出的结论,这两篇文章不仅表明身体特征对选民倾向的影响比以前所认为的要更大,而且指出不同的身体特征会吸引不同的选民群体。 The results run counter to the ideal that voters in democratic societies make their decisions after carefully weighing the pros and cons of the political programs put forward by the various parties, according to Lasse Laustsen and Michael Bang Petersen from the university's Department of Political Science, who carried out the research. 这项研究是由奥尔胡斯大学政治科学系的Lasse Laustsen和Michael Bang Petersen做的,研究所得出的结果与那种认为民主社会选民会在仔细权衡各政党所推行的政治纲领的利弊之后再做出选择的设想恰好背道而驰。 "A deep tone of voice appeals to conservative voters. More generally, conservative voters seem to have a preference for politicians who look physically strong and masculine, while liberal voters prefer those who have less dominant features and seem more accommodating, perhaps even slightly feminine," said Laustsen. Laustsen指出:“低沉的嗓音会吸引保守派选民。更一般的来说,保守派选民似乎倾向于外表看上去更强壮,更阳刚的政客,而自由派选民则更喜欢不那么强势而且更随和,甚至可能有点轻微女性化的政客。” The new studies form an example of how political scientists can achieve a deeper understanding of political behavior by using a broader variety of research tools. The approach is increasingly adopted by political scientists all over the world, including John Hibbing, a professor of political science at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. 这一使用多种研究工具的新研究为政治学家树立了深入理解政治行为的典范。全世界的政治学家正在逐步采用这种研究方式,内布拉斯加-林肯大学政治学教授John Hibbing就是其中之一。 "It's a fairly limited niche, but it's growing. What Laustsen and Petersen do is both exciting and important. Some people may be uncomfortable knowing that our preferences are determined by forces that we don't entirely understand. But of course, as scientists we still have to deal with it," said Hibbing, who didn't take part in the Laustsen and Petersen's research. “这是个相当有限的细分领域,但是在不断发展壮大。Laustsen和Petersen的工作既令人兴奋又非常重要。我们的(政治)倾向被我们没有完全理解的力量所决定,这一点会令许多人感到不舒服。但是我们作为科学家当然还是要应对它。”Hibbing说。Hibbing本人没有参与Laustsen和Petersen的研究。 One of the articles is based on data from US politics and demonstrates that Republican voters are more likely than voters from the Democratic camp to vote for politicians with deep voices. To understand why this is, you have to dig a little deeper, according to Laustsen. Republican voters prefer strong politicians - or politicians whose deep voices make them sound like they are strong - because they believe the world is a more dangerous and menacing place than Democratic voters, he said. 其中一篇论文基于美国政治的数据,证明了共和党选民较之民主党阵营选民更倾向于选择嗓音低沉的政客。在Laustsen看来,要理解其中原因,需要进一步挖掘这项事实。他认为共和党选民倾向于身体强壮的政客,或者嗓音低沉的政客——嗓音低沉使得他们听起来比较强壮——是因为共和党选民相信真实世界要比民主党选民所认为的更加险恶。 "If you hold up images of objects that people consider dangerous or unpleasant, for example of large spiders, and then measure the production of sweat from people's fingertips (skin conductance response), you get an indication of spontaneous physical reaction. In these cases, conservative voters react more strongly than liberal ones. This could indicate a large visceral difference in the way these voter groups perceive the world," Laustsen said. Laustsen说:“如果你举起人们觉得危险或者令人不适的物体图片,比如说巨型蜘蛛,然后测试观察者指尖的出汗量(皮电反应),你会看到身体自发的应激反应。在这类试验中,保守派选民比自由派选民的反应更为激烈。这可能表明这些选民群体在认知世界的层面上有着很大的本能上的差别。” Laustsen and Petersen's research proceeds from the observations that in order to understand the behavior of modern humans, you need to look into the evolutionary history that has shaped the psychology producing this behavior. 为了理解现代人类的行为,必须从产生行为的心理着手,而人类的进化史塑造了自身的心理。基于这样的看法,Laustsen和Petersen的研究就由此入手。 In prehistoric times when the ancestors of modern humans were roaming the East-African savannah in small groups, it made sense to support the strongest members of the tribe when confronted with danger. Psychological mechanisms which 30,000 years ago saved our ancestors from being devoured by saber-toothed tigers and other fierce animals continue to be at work today, explaining, among other things, why people vote as they do along the left-right continuum. 史前时代,现代人类的祖先组成许多小群体漫游在东非稀树大草原上。这样,在遇上危险时支持群体里的最强壮者就显得尤为重要。三万年前的心理机制保护了我们的祖先不被剑齿虎和许多其他猛兽吞噬殆尽,而同样的心理机制至今仍在发挥作用。这就能解释许多事情,包括为什么人类在投票时(所表现出的政治倾向)会沿从左到右的光谱排列。 "There are evolutionarily important reasons for the structure of our psychology. Our ancestors had to make a decision about which leader to follow, and it was crucial for their survival and reproduction that they picked the right one. As a species we are pre-programmed to think in a certain way about who we would like to be in charge. This affects choices that we make even today," said Petersen. “我们的心理结构是具有进化意义上的重大缘由的。我们祖先必须就领袖人选作出抉择,选择正确的人选对于他们的生存和繁衍极其重要。作为一个物种,我们被预先设定好以某种特定方式来考虑谁才是我们中意的领导者。这甚至一直在影响今天我们所作出的决定。”Petersen说。 Is this knowledge useful for the politicians? For example, would it be helpful for conservative politicians to tone down their dominant, masculine personality traits in hopes of snatching voters further to the left who tend to find less dominant features more attractive? 这项知识对政客有用吗?举例来说,保守派政客是否可以通过软化他们的强势个性特征来吸引更加左翼、更加青睐没有太多强势特征的人选的选民? "Democrats are often seen as empathic, compassionate types. Republicans, by contrast, are often considered as strong leaders with a moral compass. This kind of subjective views may have real importance in cases where a Republican candidate is seen as more empathic than his Democratic opponent and trespasses into his territory. Perhaps he can gain some votes there," he said. Petersen指出:“民主党人往往被视为富于同情怜悯的类型。与之相对,共和党人往往被认为是具有道德模范特性的强大领袖。这样的主观印象也许会在某些场合发挥重大作用,比如在一个共和党候选人比他的民主党对手显得更具有同情心,侵入了后者的基本盘的情况下,这位共和党候选人将会挣来一些(偏左翼的)选票。” Can the voters use these new insights for anything? It's always better to be aware of what causes you to have the preferences you have. But the roots of our likes and dislikes are buried so deep in the subconscious that the two authors doubt there is very much to do about them. 选民们能通过这些新洞见干些什么呢?了解到你的倾向由何而来当然是很不错的。但是我们喜恶的根源是如此深埋在潜意识中,以至于两位作者不觉得我们能在此有什么作为。 "We can't necessarily do very much to control this. Some American research indicates that participants in lab tests are able to determine which of two unknown candidates they like more after having been exposed to images of them for less than 0.1 second. This suggests that these processes are really fast and subconscious. So I think it's hard to rein in," Laustsen said. Laustsen说“我们不一定能够控制这个。一些来自美国的研究指出,实验室测试的参与者们会在看到两位陌生候选人图片的0.1秒之内决定出他们的偏好。这显示了做出选择的过程非常快速,且深深扎根于潜意识中。所以我认为很难去驾驭这一过程。” (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

[译文]硅谷的深柜共和党人

The Secret Republicans of Silicon Valley
硅谷的深柜共和党人

作者:Rebecca Nelson @ 2015-4-8
翻译:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值)
校对:乘风(@你在何地-sxy),小橘子(@sw小橘子)
来源:《国家杂志》(National Journal),http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/gop-silicon-valley-20150408/

In an industry where only liberal ideas are “allowed,” many libertarians and conservatives keep their political views secret.

在一个只“容许”自由派理念的产业,许多自由意志主义者和保守派都对他们自己的政治观点秘而不宣。

Deep in Silicon Valley, where the free market reigns and the exchange of ideas is celebrated, a subset of tech workers are hiding their true selves. Working as programmers and software engineers, they don’t want the stigma that comes wi(more...)

标签: |
5648
The Secret Republicans of Silicon Valley 硅谷的深柜共和党人 作者:Rebecca Nelson @ 2015-4-8 翻译:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值) 校对:乘风(@你在何地-sxy),小橘子(@sw小橘子) 来源:《国家杂志》(National Journal),http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/gop-silicon-valley-20150408/ In an industry where only liberal ideas are "allowed," many libertarians and conservatives keep their political views secret. 在一个只“容许”自由派理念的产业,许多自由意志主义者和保守派都对他们自己的政治观点秘而不宣。 Deep in Silicon Valley, where the free market reigns and the exchange of ideas is celebrated, a subset of tech workers are hiding their true selves. Working as programmers and software engineers, they don't want the stigma that comes with revealing who they really are. 在自由市场占统治地位、观念交流之风盛行的硅谷深处,一小撮科技从业者却把真实的自己隐藏了起来。这些程序员和软件工程师不愿因为展现真我而成为众矢之的。 They're the tech company employees, startup founders, and CEOs who vote for and donate to Republican candidates, bucking the Bay Area's liberal supremacy. Fearing the repercussions of associating with a much-maligned minority, they keep their political views fiercely hidden. 他们是向共和党候选人投票和捐赠的科技公司雇员、创业者和CEO们,默默抵抗着自由派在湾区至高无上的统治地位。人们担心与受到排挤中伤的少数派来往,会产生不良影响,因此他们把自己的政治观点深深地隐藏起来。 "It's a liberal echo chamber," Garrett Johnson, a co-founder of Lincoln Labs, which was started in 2013 to connect the right-of-center outsiders in Silicon Valley, told National Journal. "People have been convinced that Silicon Valley is reflexively liberal or progressive. And so their response is to conform." “这里是个自由派回音室,”Lincoln Labs联合创始人Garrett Johnson告诉《国家杂志(National Journal)》。Lincoln Labs创建于2013年,用来联络硅谷里处于政治右翼的局外人。“人们已经对硅谷的自由派思想和进步主义不假思索。他们的反应是一致顺从。” Silicon Valley has long been a bastion of liberalism. Since George H.W. Bush won Napa County in 1988, Republican presidential nominees have lost every county in the Bay Area. In 2012, President Obama won 84 percent of the vote in San Francisco to Mitt Romney's 13 percent and raised more for his reelection campaign from Bay Area donors than from those in New York or Hollywood. Political donations specifically from tech workers follow that trend: Google employees collectively gave $720,000 to Obama in 2012, versus $25,000 for Romney. Crowdpac, a nonpartisan political analytics firm, found that between 1979 and 2012, tech companies have overwhelmingly favored liberal candidates. 长久以来硅谷就是自由派的堡垒。自从老布什在1988年竞选中拿下加州纳帕郡以来,共和党总统候选人在湾区任何一个郡都没有赢过。2012年奥巴马总统在旧金山以84%的得票率战胜罗姆尼,后者只获得13%的选票。他从湾区筹集的连任竞选资金比从纽约或者好莱坞筹集来的都要多。科技业从业者的政治献金特别体现了这种趋势:2012年Google员工共捐给奥巴马72万美元,而只给了罗姆尼2万5千美元。无党派的政治分析公司Crowdpac发现,1979至2012年间,科技公司压倒性地倾向于自由派候选人。 Rather than ruffle feathers—or worse—Republicans who work there often just keep quiet. Rich Tafel, who coaches tech companies in politics and policy, understands the dynamic. The founder of the gay group Log Cabin Republicans, he's had many Republicans in Silicon Valley confide to him their true political views. 在硅谷工作的共和党人通常只是保持安静。他们不会触怒旁人,更别提做点别的什么了。在政治和政策方面给科技公司提供指导的Rich Tafel深知其中奥妙。Tafel是同性恋团体Log Cabin Republicans的创始人,已有许多硅谷共和党人向他吐露他们的真实政见。 "You just learn how to operate, if you will, in the closet as a Republican," Tafel told National Journal. "You keep your viewpoints to yourself." “这么说吧,作为共和党人,你就得学着做一个‘深柜’,”Tafel告诉《国家杂志》,“把你自己的政治观点埋藏在心里。” One startup CEO who has worked in Silicon Valley for more than a decade says that while it's popular to talk politics in the workplace, the underlying assumption is that everyone has similar views. 一个已在硅谷工作十多年的创业公司CEO说,尽管在工作场合谈论政治很流行,但背景假设是每个人的观点都相似。 The CEO, who generally votes Republican and donates to GOP candidates—he spoke on background to conceal his right-leaning views—said that in 2012, "you wouldn't want to say you're voting for Romney in the election." At the same time, openly expressing one's support for Obama was "incredibly common." 这位通常给共和党投票,给共和党候选人捐款的CEO——为了隐藏他的右倾观点他不愿透露自己的姓名——2012年时说:“你不会愿意告诉别人你投票给了罗姆尼。”与此同时,公开表示对奥马巴的支持则是“不可思议的普遍”。 His opposition to raising the minimum wage is just one area where he diverges with most of his colleagues. "If you say something like, 'We need a higher minimum wage,' you don't get critiqued," he said. But he would never reveal his more conservative outlook on the matter. 他对提高最低工资的反对只是他与多数同事发生分歧的一个例子。“如果你说‘我们需要更高的最低工资’之类的话,你就不会被批判。”他说。但他绝不会透露自己对此较保守的观点。 "They can't fathom that somebody disagrees with them," he said. "And I disagree with them. So I'm not going to open up that box." “他们无法理解有人会与他们意见相左,”他说,“而我就是不同意他们,所以我不会哪壶不开提哪壶。” Closeted Republicans aren't just a phenomenon in the tech industry. In Hollywood, where acclaimed movie stars and directors throw lavish fundraisers for Democrats and unabashedly support liberal causes, Republicans are a rare breed. Friends of Abe, a GOP support group of sorts, caters to A-list conservatives in the entertainment industry. Only a handful of its members have made their affiliation known, and its roster is kept secret out of fears of a blacklisting reminiscent of the McCarthy era. 深柜共和党人现象并非只出现在科技产业中。在好莱坞,知名影星和导演为民主党人举行慷慨的募捐筹款,不加掩饰地支持自由派事业,而共和党人则是凤毛麟角。亚伯之友(Friends of Abe),可以算是共和党的支持团体,为娱乐界最一流的保守派人士提供服务。这个团体只有少数成员公开了自己的会员身份。出于对类似麦卡锡时代黑名单的恐惧,会员名单也秘而不宣。 For some right-leaning techies, the GOP brand itself is a liability. The startup CEO stressed that there are "a number of ideas that conservatives have that I totally disagree with," such as opposition to same-sex marriage, and he abhors the thought of being lumped in with Republicans who deny climate change or evolution. 对一些右倾的科技界人士来说,共和党这个标签本身就是一种负担。那位创业公司的CEO强调“保守派的许多观点我完全不同意”,比如反对同性婚姻。他也厌恶与那些否认气候变化或进化论的共和党人为伍。 "Republicans are regarded as assholes," he said. "And I wouldn't want to be associated with assholes." “共和党人被认为是混蛋,”他说,“而我不愿和混蛋扯上关系。” Another Republican who founded a small San Francisco-based startup told National Journal that he's worried potential partners and investors would be turned off by his libertarian views. Recently, it seems like all of his peers in Silicon Valley have been outspoken about their opposition to the thwarted religious liberty law in Indiana, he said. He thinks business owners should be allowed to decide whom they serve, and if they discriminate against gays, people can choose not to patronize their business. He won't discuss that view, though, or debate his left-leaning colleagues on Facebook or Twitter. 另一位在旧金山创建了一家小型企业的共和党人告诉《国家杂志》,他担心他的自由意志主义观点会让他失去潜在的合作者和投资人。他说,就在不久前,似乎他所有在硅谷的同行都公开表达了看法,抗议印第安纳州未能通过宗教信仰自由法案。他认为企业主应被允许由自己决定为谁服务。如果这些企业主歧视同性恋者,人们可以选择不去惠顾他们的生意。然而他不会去讨论这个观点,也不会在Facebook或Twitter上与他的左派同事辩论。 "If I were to speak out about something like that, maybe one of these companies wants to buy my company one day and the CEO is like, 'Oh, I remember this guy saying all this stuff about this thing that I really disagree with.' And that obviously could have negative effects," he said. "Getting your point across isn't worth it." “如果我毫无保留地谈这样的事,也许有一天当一家公司要收购我的公司时,那家公司的CEO说‘哦,我记得那个家伙就此事说了很多看法,而我完全不同意他的这些看法’,那么显而易见这可能带来负面影响”,他说,“不值得为了说清楚自己的观点而冒这样的险。” The consequences for being outed for conservative views can be dire. In a highly public controversy last year, newly-hired Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich, who is registered as an independent in California, stepped down after critics attacked his 2008 donation to support Proposition 8, the anti-same-sex marriage law in California. Eich, who declined to comment for this story, faced an internal uprising from within the Mozilla community, as well as boycotts from other tech companies, and quit after just two weeks on the job. 因为保守观点而被排挤的后果可能很可怕。去年就有一场喧嚣的争论。Mozilla公司新上任的CEO Brendan Eich是一位在加州注册的无党派人士,他因为在2008年捐款支持加州反同性婚姻法的8号提案而受到评论家的攻击,随后就辞职了。拒绝对此事作出评论的Eich承受了来自公司内部的激烈反对以及其它科技公司的抵制,仅仅在上任两周后便辞职了。 Though Eich's was an extreme case, some Republicans in Silicon Valley fear that if they go public, they'll face subtler, less direct repercussions. The CEO who spoke on background keeps his conservative-leaning views to himself, he said, because he doesn't want to risk people not liking him, which could hurt his job in imperceptible ways. As a leader, he needs to be able to inspire people to join and thrive in his company. If he's "contrarian," he said, he can't build the necessary camaraderie to succeed. 尽管Eich这件事是一个极端案例,但一些硅谷的共和党人害怕一旦将观点公之于众,会面对较隐蔽的不那么直接的反对。据那位不愿透露姓名的CEO说,他隐藏自己保守倾向的观点是因为他不愿冒险。一旦人们不喜欢自己,自己的工作可能以不易察觉的方式受到损害。作为一个领导者,他需要具备鼓舞人们加入自己的公司并蓬勃发展的能力。如果他是一个“同大家背道而驰的人”,他说,他就无法建立成功所必需的同僚之情。 Matthew Del Carlo, the former president of the San Francisco Young Republicans and the COO of the California Young Republican Federation, said that transparent Republicans can have a much harder time finding work in the Bay Area. "I've had people tell me, 'If I found out that this person's a Republican, their resume's off the list.'" 旧金山年轻共和党人组织(San Francisco Young Republicans)的前主席,加州年轻共和党人联盟(California Young Republican Federation)的首席运营官Matthew Del Carlo说,公开身份的共和党人在湾区找工作要难得多。“有人告诉我:‘如果我发现这人是共和党人,他的简历会直接被排除。’” Prominent Republicans do openly work in Silicon Valley, and not all of them feel stigmatized for their political views. Billionaire Paypal founder Peter Thiel is a high-profile GOP supporter who has made considerable donations to presidential contender Ted Cruz's 2012 Senate run and former congressman Ron Paul's 2012 presidential super PAC. And Sarah Pompei, who handled Romney's regional press in 2012 and now serves as Hewlett-Packard's director of corporate communications, told National Journal she's never felt denigrated for her conservative views. 确实也有知名共和党人会在硅谷公开活动,他们中并非所有人都觉得自己因为政治观点而受到指责。Paypal创始人亿万富翁Peter Thiel是位高调的共和党支持者。他捐赠了数量可观的献金支持总统席位竞争者Ted Cruz的2012年参议员竞选,以及前众议员Ron Paul的2012年总统竞选超级政治行动委员会(super PAC)。2012年为罗姆尼处理地区报道事务的Sarah Pompei目前是惠普公司的企业传播主管,她告诉《国家杂志》,她从未感觉因持有保守派观点而受到抨击。 Both Pompei and Thiel, who declined to comment for this story, prove success in the tech industry is possible for Republicans who are open about their political leanings. But they wield more power and cachet than the average start-up employee. Pompei和Thiel拒绝评论此事。他们都证明公开表明自己政治倾向的共和党人在科技产业中获得成功是可能的。当然,他们较之一般的创业公司员工拥有更多的权力和威信。 "There's fearless people out there that don't care, but those tend to be people that are in a better position financially. They're secure in their job," Del Carlo said. Those with more to lose, he said, often find it easier to keep quiet. “有些胆子大的人对此无所谓,但那些人往往拥有比较好的经济地位。他们在工作上有了保障。”Del Carlo说。他说那些顾虑多的人常常觉得还是保持沉默为妙。 Still, Thiel's attention-getting fundraising for GOP candidates and libertarian causes, along with other high-profile Republicans in the tech sector, show that the climate in Silicon Valley is—albeit incrementally—becoming more politically inclusive. Lincoln Labs, the group dedicated to connecting right-of-center techies in the Bay Area, has been a big part of that effort. Earlier this year, its annual conference, Reboot, brought libertarians and conservatives from Silicon Valley to Washington to hear Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul speak on deregulation, net neutrality, and other tech-industry priorities. 尽管如此,Thiel为共和党候选人以及自由意志主义事业进行的引人注目的募捐,以及其他一些科技界的高调共和党人,都显示了硅谷的政治气候正在——尽管是渐进式地——变得更包容。致力于联合湾区右翼科技从业者的团体Lincoln Labs在推动这种政治气候变化的过程中贡献良多。今年早些时间,团体年会Reboot将硅谷的自由主义意志者和保守派聚集到华盛顿,聆听参议员Ted Cruz和Rand Paul就解除管制、网络中立以及其它一些科技产业重要事宜发表的讲话。 Throughout the year, the organization holds meetups and hackathons to build a "sense of community, so that people don't feel like they are isolated," Johnson said. He and Lincoln Labs' other co-founders, Aaron Ginn and Chris Abrams, want to empower a true exchange of ideas within the tech community, without ostracizing any one view. 该组织全年举行聚会和编程马拉松,以此建立一种“社区感,让人不会觉得被孤立。”Johnson说。他和Lincoln Labs的另外两位共同创立者Aaron Ginn和Chris Abrams想在科技行业内促成真正的意见交流,而不排斥任何一种观点。 "Silicon Valley purports to be a place where the best ideas win," Johnson said. "If we are going to encourage diversity, let's not just stop with gender and ethnicity. How about ideological perspective?" “硅谷据说是个最佳观念取胜的地方,”Johnson说,“如果我们要鼓励多样化,那就不能仅限于性别和种族方面。在意识形态上也试试怎么样?” Conservatives and libertarians in Silicon Valley like Johnson are pioneering a new kind of Republican. With a distinctly libertarian flavor, they align with the party on the principles of liberty and limited government, but don't necessarily lean right on—or care much about—social issues. 像Johnson这样的硅谷保守派和自由意志主义者正在开创一种新型的共和党人形象。他们带有鲜明的自由意志主义倾向,在自由原则和小政府原则上与共和党一致,但他们不一定在社会问题上持右倾观点——他们未必关心这些问题。 The entrepreneurs and techies of the Bay Area, said Tafel, are "very aligned to what could be a Republican party." They just need to come out. 湾区的企业家和科技工作者“几乎快要组成一个共和党团体了”,Tafel说。他们只是需要出柜。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

[微言]力勃儒与第三势力

【2013-02-06】

@某:抱歉,此微博已被作者删除。

@whigzhou: 将现代liberal传统追溯到罗斯福也太短了点,至少可追溯到1909年劳合·乔治政府的People’s Budget http://t.cn/zY5riUa 福利主义的大规模实施,肇端于此,上院这块宪政刹车皮也在此过程中被摧毁,社会从此向福利主义滑去

@Victor_Tianlong 其实我觉得美国从建国前乃至殖民地建立时就是两条路线的斗争,甚至可以追溯到更远的英国玫瑰战争两派~~~只是代表两条路线的派别不断在换名字~~ P.S.辉总,你觉得为什么没(more...)

标签: | |
4863
【2013-02-06】 @某:抱歉,此微博已被作者删除。 @whigzhou: 将现代liberal传统追溯到罗斯福也太短了点,至少可追溯到1909年劳合·乔治政府的People's Budget http://t.cn/zY5riUa 福利主义的大规模实施,肇端于此,上院这块宪政刹车皮也在此过程中被摧毁,社会从此向福利主义滑去 @Victor_Tianlong 其实我觉得美国从建国前乃至殖民地建立时就是两条路线的斗争,甚至可以追溯到更远的英国玫瑰战争两派~~~只是代表两条路线的派别不断在换名字~~ P.S.辉总,你觉得为什么没有出现第三条路线呢? @whigzhou: 其实第三势力总是有的,只是一到选战中就又变成两个了,这跟选举制度有关 @whigzhou: Libertarian不就是第三条路线嘛,只是选举时通常以共和党身份,假如美国采用的是比例代表制,Libertarian的立法席位应该不少。美国选举制是最不利于小党的,同时它也让大党练就了容纳和吸收各种新派系的能力和传统 @Victor_Tianlong:后来选举制确定后是好理解,我奇怪的是为什么从一开始就只有两条路线呢?保皇派革命派,联邦党民主党,这样的。 @whigzhou: 嗯,这可能有两个原因:1)英国影响,2)当一项政治议题占据压倒性地位时,两分对立就是自然的结果,而建国期刚好有这样的议题 @whigzhou: 另外,近来有些研究显示,人可能有先天的政治倾向,而这一先天倾向可能就是两极的 @Victor_Tianlong:原来又是祖传的~~ @whigzhou: “先天的”不一定是“遗传的”,比如可能跟排行有关,长子是保守派的概率似乎就比幼子大一些,再如出生的季节、胎儿期的营养状况,也会对个性有所影响(不知是否影响政治倾向),这些也是先天的,但不是遗传的 @小野猪君:实在两派都不挨边的是沉默派 @whigzhou: 沉默没关系,只要投票就挨边了