含有〈政治〉标签的文章(154)

2016

说说川普吧。平时懒得说这些事情,过年集中说几句。

先说好的。

【亮点】

从已报道的人事安排看,川普的国内政策看起来不错,至少会比希拉里好很多,特别是教育部、劳工部、环保局、卫生部的人选,是其中几大亮点。

从这些人选,加上共和党在国会的多数,有几项前景比较肯定:

1)联邦最低工资不会提高,大好事;

2)势头正盛的特许学校不会受阻挠;

3)暖球党在联邦政府内将全面失势,气候与环境相关的管制会有松动,甚至许多预算和职位会被取消;

4)页岩革命的势头将不会在联邦层面受阻挠,此事的国际后果比国内后果意义更大;

【医保】

川普说要废Obamacare,但具体怎么弄不太明确,不过他挑了个重量级共和党国会大佬掌管卫生部,此人有医生背景,且此前在医保案上投入很多,提了个替代方案,貌似这事情会是川普的一个政策重点。

废Obamacare自然是好事,不过替代方案会怎么样很难说,推不推得动也大为可疑。

医保是个大坑,消耗政治资源极多,收获却很渺茫,弄不好的话,川普的势头和共和党团结很可能都被它拖垮。

【移民】

边境控制会加强,难民配额会减少甚至取消,这是好事。

不过,对于造成问题的拉丁移民,移民动力比司法控制的影响重要得多,而实际上,拉丁移民的动力近些年正在削弱,所以这件事情上川普其实没有多大发挥余地。

同时,他可能去削减技术移民,那是坏事,而且不像非法移民难控制,削减合法移民配额会有立竿见影的效果。

两类移民有着完全不同的选择机制,限制后一类属于自残。

【大法官】

稍乐观,川普提名的大法官肯定比奥巴马和希拉里的好,但也不必期望太高,我稍稍乐观是因为我觉得他可能对这事情不太感兴趣,所以会听从共和党主流意见。

【金融管制】

相比环境方面的管制,金融管制的后果严重的多,比如Sarbanes-OxleyDodd-Frank,但从川普的民粹倾向和他对待企业的态度看,不太能指望他在放松金融管制方面有多大作为。

【政治正确】

(more...)

标签: | | | | |
7500
说说川普吧。平时懒得说这些事情,过年集中说几句。 先说好的。 【亮点】 从已报道的人事安排看,川普的国内政策看起来不错,至少会比希拉里好很多,特别是教育部、劳工部、环保局、卫生部的人选,是其中几大亮点。 从这些人选,加上共和党在国会的多数,有几项前景比较肯定: 1)联邦最低工资不会提高,大好事; 2)势头正盛的特许学校不会受阻挠; 3)暖球党在联邦政府内将全面失势,气候与环境相关的管制会有松动,甚至许多预算和职位会被取消; 4)页岩革命的势头将不会在联邦层面受阻挠,此事的国际后果比国内后果意义更大; 【医保】 川普说要废[[Obamacare]],但具体怎么弄不太明确,不过他挑了个重量级共和党国会大佬掌管卫生部,此人有医生背景,且此前在医保案上投入很多,提了个替代方案,貌似这事情会是川普的一个政策重点。 废Obamacare自然是好事,不过替代方案会怎么样很难说,推不推得动也大为可疑。 医保是个大坑,消耗政治资源极多,收获却很渺茫,弄不好的话,川普的势头和共和党团结很可能都被它拖垮。 【移民】 边境控制会加强,难民配额会减少甚至取消,这是好事。 不过,对于造成问题的拉丁移民,移民动力比司法控制的影响重要得多,而实际上,拉丁移民的动力近些年正在削弱,所以这件事情上川普其实没有多大发挥余地。 同时,他可能去削减技术移民,那是坏事,而且不像非法移民难控制,削减合法移民配额会有立竿见影的效果。 两类移民有着完全不同的选择机制,限制后一类属于自残。 【大法官】 稍乐观,川普提名的大法官肯定比奥巴马和希拉里的好,但也不必期望太高,我稍稍乐观是因为我觉得他可能对这事情不太感兴趣,所以会听从共和党主流意见。 【金融管制】 相比环境方面的管制,金融管制的后果严重的多,比如Sarbanes-OxleyDodd-Frank,但从川普的民粹倾向和他对待企业的态度看,不太能指望他在放松金融管制方面有多大作为。 【政治正确】 川普带来的最好前景可能是政治正确紧箍咒的打破,许多人们敢怒不敢言的烂事将得到遏制,一些蒙尘已久的常识正义得以恢复,西方传统价值观有机会再次扬眉吐气。   再说坏的。 【宪政传统】 川普不是个尊重宪法和宪政传统的人,远远不是,在这一点上,除罗斯福外,我想不出比他表现更差的美国总统,其他政客藐视宪法还会偷偷摸摸遮遮掩掩,他连遮掩都不会,这是他最令我反感的地方。 我曾反复说过,宪法≠《宪法》,复制宪法文本、议事程序、政府结构很容易,但达致宪政均衡却很难,既有的均衡依靠参与各方对传统的尊重以及对违背传统之后果的预期。均衡一旦打破很难恢复,川普很可能是个破坏者。 以候选人身份公然威胁媒体,勒令制造企业回迁,暗示不接受选举结果……,有些恶劣做法(第三项尤其恶劣)虽不会有短期后果,但会改变人们的预期——原来这么没下限的事情也是可以被接受的啊? 【经济政策】 川普人选中最烂的一个就是[[Peter Navarro]],此人要么是蠢蛋,要么是哗众取宠的投机分子,对Navarro的青睐最清楚的展示了川普对经济问题的理解力。 【基础设施建设】 蠢。暴露了骨子里的国家干预主义。 【跨国公司】 现在还不清楚川普会如何拿跨国公司下手,如果贸易保护法案通不过或者不起作用,会不会从其他方面下阴招?比如海外利润,避税问题,EB5配额,其他管制陷阱?如果川普果真把制造业回归当成重点,跨国公司估计没好日子过。 【贸易保护】 从专门为Navarro设立新机构(National Trade Council)这个动作看,川普的保护主义看来不会是空话了。 废[[NAFTA]]的后果之一将是正在退潮的墨西哥移民猛增,这我之前说过。 假如贸易保护是专门用来打击中国的,那倒还说得过去,但必须明白这是为打击中国而付出的代价,不是收益,判断他是否明白这一点,可以看他是否为此而从其他方面寻求弥补,比如向盟友和潜在盟友提供更好的贸易条件,从川普对待TPP的态度看,不太可能。 乐观点是,国会大概不会同意将关税提至两位数,大概也不会废NAFTA和WTO,而川普能做的主要是停止推动更多自由贸易协定,在行政分支的权限内展开贸易战,设置一个个双边壁垒,推动贸易相关的管制,果若如此,其伤害将小于Smoot-Hawley法案。 【西方联盟】 川普可能做出的最坏事情将在外交方面,具体说就是:挫伤盟友,毁掉联盟。 美国总统在内政上推动能力有限,尤其是那些利益牵扯广泛的事情(比如税收、医保和最低工资),但在国际事务上行动能力要强得多,而这恰恰是川普最危险的地方。 打击中国,强挺以色列,踢开联合国,这些都很好,问题是,毁掉西方联盟这一件事,足以抵消其他全部好处百倍不止。 停掉TPP的前景已经挫伤了不少亚太盟友,未来假如在南海问题上甩手,西方联盟的这条腿就折了。 从川普对待普京的态度看,他很可能抛弃东欧和GUAM的盟友(后者实际上已经破裂了)。 最重要也最令人痛惜的被挫伤者或许将是英国,本来,英国退欧是强化盎格鲁联盟并以此为基础重建世界秩序的一次良机,但川普极可能毁掉这个机会,在这一点上他比希拉里更指望不上。 【总结】 从截止目前的表现看,川普将带来许多好东西,但不幸的是,他在最重要问题上极可能犯的错误,将让这些好处全部黯然失色。 当然,也可能我看错了,他或许不会犯下我所预料的错误,他过去的姿态或许只是一种姿态,果若如此,将是美国之幸,文明之幸。 所以我在此设定一个开关:假如未来的进展证明他的贸易保护政策仅仅用来打击文明的敌人,假如他积极拥抱退欧后的英国,不抛弃盟友,不牺牲其利益,不将他们推向敌人怀抱,我会立即黑转粉,并满心喜悦的承认自己看错了。  
读史笔记#23:封侯拜爵的神仙们

封侯拜爵的神仙们
辉格
2016年12月11日

中国民间信仰以其神仙繁多而著称,宋代仅湖州一地的寺观祠庙里供奉的神祗,有史料可查者即有92个,扣除名号重复者,还有50多个,粗略估算,全国各地的神祗数量大约介于乡镇数和村庄数之间,看来古代中国人『积极造神,见神即拜』的名声并非虚浪。

如此多神仙得到敬拜,还要归功于神仙来源的多样化,和大众在神仙制造方式上的创造性;早期神祗来源大致和其他文化相仿,比如司掌某种自然力的自然神,或者被认定为某一族群共同祖先的始祖神,然而自中古以降,一种新型神祗开始大量涌现。

这些新神都是不久前还生活于人世的真实人物,因某种显赫成就或奇特经历而被认为拥有神力;认定神力的入门标准很低——担任过高官,参加过某次战役,遭受过冤屈,或者离奇死亡——总之,任何在大众眼里有点特别的地方(more...)

标签: | | | | | | |
7495
封侯拜爵的神仙们 辉格 2016年12月11日 中国民间信仰以其神仙繁多而著称,宋代仅湖州一地的寺观祠庙里供奉的神祗,有史料可查者即有92个,扣除名号重复者,还有50多个,粗略估算,全国各地的神祗数量大约介于乡镇数和村庄数之间,看来古代中国人『积极造神,见神即拜』的名声并非虚浪。 如此多神仙得到敬拜,还要归功于神仙来源的多样化,和大众在神仙制造方式上的创造性;早期神祗来源大致和其他文化相仿,比如司掌某种自然力的自然神,或者被认定为某一族群共同祖先的始祖神,然而自中古以降,一种新型神祗开始大量涌现。 这些新神都是不久前还生活于人世的真实人物,因某种显赫成就或奇特经历而被认为拥有神力;认定神力的入门标准很低——担任过高官,参加过某次战役,遭受过冤屈,或者离奇死亡——总之,任何在大众眼里有点特别的地方都可以让他们获得候选资格,但真正确立其神灵地位的,是『灵验』事迹,即有人在向他祈求佑助时得偿所愿。 在《变迁之神》一书中,人类学家韩森考察了此类神祗的兴起,发现其数量在宋代经历了爆发性增长,而之所以神界能容得下如此规模的神口增长,是因为他们都是地方性的,其神力作用半径不过数十里,各地若想有神可求,就得自己造一个,而同时,造神逻辑本身确保了新神的供给:灵验的随机性意味着总是不断会有旧神失宠,新神崛起。 有趣的是,帝国朝廷对这场民间造神运动颇为热心,从11世纪初起,宋廷便挑选一些信众认可度较高的地方神祗予以官方承认,编入祀典,许多还授予官爵名号,拨给公款用于立碑修庙;一旦某神获得这样的官方地位,地方官便有责任定期组织祭祀敬拜活动,甚至提供财政和劳役支持。 韩森注意到,从1075年起,为地方神仙封授官爵的做法大面积铺开,并在此后成为政府的一项常规职能,其规模甚大,每年封授数十位神仙,每次封授都要经历一个繁杂的流程,涉及尚书省、礼部和太常寺的众多衙门,还有地方政府的两轮灵验性查证,那么,朝廷为何要花费大量行政与财政资源来做这样一件看起来没有实际功效的事情呢? 要理解这一点,我们最好将它和帝国的另一项重要制度——科举——对照着看;表面上,科举只是为帝国选拔官员的(它也确实有这功能),但实际上,它最重要的功能是为全民提供一部开放、全面覆盖且贯通到底的社会上升阶梯,而在此之前,上升通道往往为数十个门阀豪族所垄断,其他人只能凭借战功、偶然的恩宠、内乱造成的重新洗牌等非经常性机会来谋求晋身。 科举的这一功能对赢取精英阶层的广泛效忠从而强化帝国权力起着极为根本的作用,它让人口中最富有、最有才智、最有野心的那些人将其视为实现抱负的好机会,而假如没有这样的机会,他们很可能去支持其他潜在的权力中心,或者以官方所不愿看到的方式施展抱负,因而对帝国权力构成威胁。 科举也是推行官方价值体系和历史叙事的工具,求取功名者心甘情愿接受和传播官方说辞,而一旦取得功名便成为这一体系的既得利益者因而有足够动机去维护它,并将其渗透植入到他们拥有巨大影响力的家族传统和地方文化中。 虽然只有百分之几的成年男性参与科举,取得功名者更少,但无论是巩固还是颠覆帝国权力基础,这都是最有能量的一群人,而且,科举功名带来的权力、财富、士绅特权,甚至仅仅是读写能力,都会将他们置于家族和地方社区的领袖地位,因而笼络他们就笼络了他们所在的家族和地方。 从唐代起,帝国通过封授土司对未归化地区实施羁縻政策,科举与士绅特权的结合,其实就是对政治结构中帝权难以直接通达的部分实施羁縻,通过士绅羁縻家族与地方,类似的,为地方神仙封授官爵,则是对民间信仰与崇拜活动的羁縻。 之所以神仙也需要羁縻,是因为,对于世俗权力,神是个危险的存在,每个神灵名下都可能凝聚起一套价值观,道德规范,行为准则,乃至行动纲领,其中每一样都可能与官方版本相冲突,都有潜力在权力竞争中成为敌方的动员与组织基础,特别是当它们被一个独立的僧侣团体所控制时,就更危险了。 凭借封授制度,朝廷有机会对神祗进行筛选、约束、引导、改造和控制,很明显,他们会竭力排除最危险的那些神,比如有着另一套行为准则的道德神,或一神教中极具动员力的排他性神,或有着现成经典因而其合法性可能被僧侣组织掌握的神,还有附带着行动纲领的弥赛亚,而最合他们胃口的,将是那些不具有全国性动员能力的地方神,以及能够提供现世佑助却又毫无道德要求的功利神,或许并非巧合的是,后两种恰是此后中国最流行的神灵。  
[译文]一枚热爱本拉登的鸡蛋

Yuri Kochiyama, today’s Google Doodle, fought for civil rights — and praised Osama bin Laden
今天的谷歌Doodle:为民权作斗争并歌颂本拉登的河内山百合

作者:Dylan Matthews @ 2016-05-19
译者:bear
校对:Tiff
来源:VOX,http://www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11713686/yuri-kochiyama

Thursday, May 19, this year would’ve been the 95th birthday of Yuri Kochiyama, a prominent Japanese-American activist who passed away at 93 two years ago. Google is marking the occasion with one of its trademark doodles.

今年五月十九日的这个周四是河内山百合的95岁诞辰,这位生前著名的日裔美国激进分子,于两年前93岁时去世。谷歌把这一天标记为一个Google doodle。【译注:Google doodle是谷歌为了庆祝节日、纪念伟人以及其它伟大成就的临时主页标志。

Some of Kochiyama’s work was deeply, clearly admirable. As an associate of Malcolm X, she was an important nonblack ally to the more militant end of the civil rights movement. She endured forced internment during World War II, and was an outspoken advocate for reparations to internees, which would eventually be passed in 1988. She was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and advocate for inmates she viewed as political prisoners.

河内山的一些工作是值得被深刻地、清晰地赞颂的。作为马尔科姆·艾克斯【译注:马尔科姆·艾克斯与马丁·路德·金并称为20世纪中期美国历史上最著名的两位黑人领导人,但他反对后者的“非暴力”的策略,主张通过以暴力革命的方式获取黑人的权利。】的伙伴,她是民权运动中战斗在第一线的重要的非黑人同盟。她在二战时期被强制收容【译注:由于二战时日本是美国的敌对国,日裔美国人被强制收容】,并且成为“被收容者赔偿”法案的积极倡导者,而这项政策最终在1988年通过。她也为反越战发声,并且支持那些她视为政治犯的囚犯。

But other commitments of hers were more ambiguous. She was an outspoken admirer of Mao Zedong even after the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. She praised Malcolm X for his “admiration for Mao and Ho Chi Minh,” and worked closely with the Revolutionary Action Movement, an “urban guerrilla warfare” organization based on “a synthesis of the thought of Malcolm X, Marx and Lenin, and Mao Zedong.” The activist Robert Williams gifted her with a copy of the Little Red Book, and she later thanked him for “the gift of Mao’s philosophy.”

但是她其他的追求则更为暧昧一些。她是毛的直言不讳的崇拜者,即便是在大跃进和文革之后。她因为马尔科姆·艾克斯对毛和胡志明的赞赏而赞扬他,并且和“革命行动运动”组织亲密合作—这是一个基于马尔科姆·艾克斯思想、马克思列宁思(more...)

标签: | |
7425
Yuri Kochiyama, today’s Google Doodle, fought for civil rights — and praised Osama bin Laden 今天的谷歌Doodle:为民权作斗争并歌颂本拉登的河内山百合 作者:Dylan Matthews @ 2016-05-19 译者:bear 校对:Tiff 来源:VOX,http://www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11713686/yuri-kochiyama Thursday, May 19, this year would've been the 95th birthday of Yuri Kochiyama, a prominent Japanese-American activist who passed away at 93 two years ago. Google is marking the occasion with one of its trademark doodles. 今年五月十九日的这个周四是河内山百合的95岁诞辰,这位生前著名的日裔美国激进分子,于两年前93岁时去世。谷歌把这一天标记为一个Google doodle。【译注:Google doodle是谷歌为了庆祝节日、纪念伟人以及其它伟大成就的临时主页标志。】 Some of Kochiyama's work was deeply, clearly admirable. As an associate of Malcolm X, she was an important nonblack ally to the more militant end of the civil rights movement. She endured forced internment during World War II, and was an outspoken advocate for reparations to internees, which would eventually be passed in 1988. She was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and advocate for inmates she viewed as political prisoners. 河内山的一些工作是值得被深刻地、清晰地赞颂的。作为马尔科姆·艾克斯【译注:马尔科姆·艾克斯与马丁·路德·金并称为20世纪中期美国历史上最著名的两位黑人领导人,但他反对后者的“非暴力”的策略,主张通过以暴力革命的方式获取黑人的权利。】的伙伴,她是民权运动中战斗在第一线的重要的非黑人同盟。她在二战时期被强制收容【译注:由于二战时日本是美国的敌对国,日裔美国人被强制收容】,并且成为“被收容者赔偿”法案的积极倡导者,而这项政策最终在1988年通过。她也为反越战发声,并且支持那些她视为政治犯的囚犯。 But other commitments of hers were more ambiguous. She was an outspoken admirer of Mao Zedong even after the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution. She praised Malcolm X for his "admiration for Mao and Ho Chi Minh," and worked closely with the Revolutionary Action Movement, an "urban guerrilla warfare" organization based on "a synthesis of the thought of Malcolm X, Marx and Lenin, and Mao Zedong." The activist Robert Williams gifted her with a copy of the Little Red Book, and she later thanked him for "the gift of Mao's philosophy." 但是她其他的追求则更为暧昧一些。她是毛的直言不讳的崇拜者,即便是在大跃进和文革之后。她因为马尔科姆·艾克斯对毛和胡志明的赞赏而赞扬他,并且和“革命行动运动”组织亲密合作—这是一个基于马尔科姆·艾克斯思想、马克思列宁思想以及毛思综合体的“城市游击战”组织。【译注:Revolutionary Action Movement是马尔科姆·艾克斯的伙伴Max Stanford建立的半秘密组织,制定了用马克思列宁主义建立黑人国家主义的运动纲领】社会活动家罗伯特·威廉姆斯送了她一本红宝书作为礼物,对此她以这是“一份毛思的礼物”为由表示了感谢。 Yuri Kochiyama was a supporter of the terrorist group Shining Path 河内山百合是恐怖组织光明之路的支持者 Two positions of Kochiyama's stand out as particularly alarming. First, she was an enthusiastic supporter of the Peruvian terrorist group Shining Path, a Maoist organization that has conducted a brutal insurgency killing tens of thousands of people since 1980.Peru's Truth and Reconciliation Commission found that Shining Path personally killed or disappeared at least 30,000. 河内山有两个立场尤其让人警觉。第一,她是秘鲁恐怖组织光辉道路的狂热拥护者——这是一个毛派组织,从1980年开始发起了一场导致数万人死亡的血腥叛乱。秘鲁真相与和解委员会认为至少三万人遭到了光辉道路的亲自杀害或导致失踪。 "Its tactics include the burning of ballot boxes and the public 'executions' of moderate local leaders and others, including nuns and priests, who are seen as rivals for the allegiance of the poor," according to a 1992 New York Times report. "In wildly exaggerated demonstrations of Maoist precepts, children have been killed for political 'crimes.' Amnesty International says the guerrillas routinely torture, mutilate and murder captives. 纽约时报在1992年的一则报道中提到:“它的策略包括烧毁投票箱和公开处决温和的本地领袖和其他人,包括修女和神父——他们被视为无产阶级的敌人”,“在疯狂的毛派戒律夸张示范中,孩子由于政治犯罪被杀害。大赦国际组织说这个游击队经常折磨,残害和杀害俘虏。” "We reject and condemn human rights because they are reactionary, counter-revolutionary, bourgeois rights," founder Abimael Guzmán declared in one document. "Rather than concentrate its attacks on the armed forces or police, Shining Path has predominantly singled out civilians," Human Rights Watch noted in 1997. "The Shining Path has pragmatically avoided taking captives unless it intends to execute them … Shining Path has been reported to torture captured civilians before executing them." Shining Path also used rape as a weapon of war. 创始人阿维马埃尔·古斯曼在一份文件中声称:“我们拒绝并谴责人权因为它是反动的,反革命的,资产阶级法权的。”“针对军队和警察的攻击还是次要的,光辉道路主要是甄选平民”人权观察组织在1997年写道,“光辉道路实用主义地避免抓俘虏,除非它打算处决他们……有报道称光辉道路在处决被抓的平民前会折磨他们。”光辉道路还把强奸作为一种战争武器。 This did not appear to bother Kochiyama, who joined a delegation to Peru organized by the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, which defends the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. She read, in her words, "the kind of reading materials that I could become 'educated' on the real situation in Peru; not the slanted reports of corporate America. The more I read, the more I came to completely support the revolution in Peru." In other words, she read, and believed, Maoist propaganda denying Shining Path's war crimes. 这似乎并没有对河内山造成困扰,她曾加入过一个由支持大跃进和文革的毛派共产主义革命党组织的代表团去秘鲁。她读道——她的原话:“这类读物能让我知晓秘鲁真实的现状;有别于美国企业的那些带有偏见的报道。我越读越觉得我在变得更加支持在秘鲁进行的这场革命。”换句话说,她阅读并且相信毛派的宣传,并且否认光辉道路的战争罪行。 After her return from Peru, she declared, "What has been taking place in both Peru and the US is a serious campaign to discredit Guzmán and the Shining Path movement, tainting them as terrorists, undermining their struggle with lies, isolating them, and intimidating anyone who might support them." 在她从秘鲁回来后,她声称:“在秘鲁和美国正在发生的是一场严重的运动——抹黑古斯曼和光辉道路运动,污蔑他们是恐怖分子,用谎言破坏他们的斗争,孤立他们,并且恐吓任何可能支持他们的人。” Yuri Kochiyama declared Osama bin Laden "one of the people that I admire" 河内山百合声明本拉登是“我尊敬的人之一” Kochiyama was a thorough-going opponent of what she viewed as American imperialism, and like some radical anti-imperialists this occasionally led her to admiring truly loathsome figures, because she thought they were effective at combating American empire. Abimael Guzmán was one. Osama bin Laden was another. 河内山是所有被她视作美帝主义事物的死对头,并且,就像一些激进的反帝国主义斗士一样,这偶尔使她仰慕一些真正令人讨厌的人物,因为她认为他们在有效地和美帝战斗。阿维马埃尔·古斯曼是一个,本拉登是另一个。 In a 2003 interview for the Objector: A Magazine of Conscience and Resistance, Kochiyama explained: 2003年,在《反对者:一份良心和抵抗的杂志》的采访中,河内山解释道:
I’m glad that you are curious why I consider Osama bin Laden as one of the people that I admire. To me, he is in the category of Malcolm X, Che Guevara, Patrice Lumumba, Fidel Castro, all leaders that I admire. They had much in common. Besides being strong leaders who brought consciousness to their people, they all had severe dislike for the US government and those who held power in the US. 我非常高兴你对我将本拉登视为我尊敬的人之一的理由感到好奇。对我而言,他在我心中的位置和马尔科姆·艾克斯、切·格瓦拉、帕特里斯·卢蒙巴(译注:刚果民主共和国首任总理)、菲德尔·卡斯特罗,以及所有我尊敬的领袖是一样的。他们有很多共同点。除了以强大的思想领导他们的人民之外,他们都对美国政府和那些在美国掌权的人有着强烈的厌恶。 bin Laden may have come from a very wealthy family, but by the time he was twenty, he came to loathe the eliteness and class conduct of his family… 本拉登可能是来自非常富裕的家庭,但在20岁之时,他开始憎恨精英阶级和他家人所在阶级的做法…… …You asked, "Should freedom fighters support him?" Freedom fighters all over the world, and not just in the Muslim world, don’t just support him; they revere him; they join him in battle. ……你问:“自由斗士应该支持他吗?”全世界的自由斗士,不仅在穆斯林世界,不但支持他;他们尊敬他;他们在战斗中加入他。 …You stated that some freedom fighters responded that bin Laden’s agenda is more reactionary and does not speak to the needs of the masses of people who exist under US dominance. bin Laden has been primarily fighting US dominance even when he received money from the US when he was fighting in Afghanistan. He was fighting for Islam and all people who believe in Islam, against westerners, especially the US--even when he was fighting against the Russians. ……你提到一些自由斗士回应说本拉登的事业是更加反动的,并且没有为生活在美国主导下的人民群众的需求发声。即便是在他接受美国资金在阿富汗战斗的时期,本拉登的主要精力就已经放在和美国主导做斗争上了。他在为伊斯兰和所有信仰伊斯兰的人民和西方势力斗争,特别是美国——即便是在他和俄罗斯战斗的情况下。
To be clear, this is Kochiyama defending bin Laden — who, besides being a mass murderer, was a vicious misogynist and hardly the brave anti-imperial class traitor Kochiyama fancies him as — against other leftists who correctly noted that you can oppose American imperialism without allying or supporting violent jihadism. 需要明确的是,这是河内山为本拉登所作的辩护,而另一些左派人士正确地指出,在不支持暴力圣战主义或不与之结盟的情况下,也可以反对美帝国主义,对此她持反对意见。而本拉登,除了是一个大规模的杀人凶手外,还是一个恶毒的厌恶女性的人,并且他不可能像河内山赞许的那样是一个勇敢的反帝国主义的阶级反叛者。 Kochiyama's praise for Che Guevara and Fidel Castro is also controversial, and, I think wrong, but is at least somewhat common on the left. Sympathy for Shining Path and bin Laden, by contrast, is not a common left position basically anywhere. 河内山对切格瓦拉和卡斯特罗的赞美同样是有争议的。我认为这是错的,但至少在左派中还算常见。相比之下,对光辉道路和本拉登的同情在任何的左派阵营都不寻常。 (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]总统外貌学初级教程

When Democracy Meets the Ghost of Evolution: Why Short Presidents Have Vanished
当民主遭遇进化的幽灵:矮个总统为何不再有

作者:Lixing Sun @ 2016-03-02
译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
校对:明珠(@老茄爱天一爱亨亨更爱楚楚)
来源:The Evolution Institute,https://evolution-institute.org/article/when-democracy-meets-the-ghost-of-evolution-why-short-presidents-have-vanished/

Size matters in politics: America hasn’t seen a president shorter than 5’7” since William McKinley. A main culprit, unbeknownst to many, comes from voters’ cognitive biases—the work of evolution. And the conundrum took a theatrical turn early this year when Marco Rubio, a Republican presidential hopeful, was spotted wearing a pair of new boots.

身高在政治中很重要。自威廉·麦金利以后,美国已经没有出现过身高低于5英尺7英寸的总统了。一个不为许多人所知的主要原因是选民的认知偏差——这是进化的产物。本年初,这个谜案出现了一个戏剧性转变:来自共和党的总统强力候选人马克·卢比奥穿出了一双新靴子。

“Marco Rubio’s Republican rivals literally are hot on his heels,” opened a New York Post news article on January 6. Speculatio(more...)

标签: |
7409
When Democracy Meets the Ghost of Evolution: Why Short Presidents Have Vanished 当民主遭遇进化的幽灵:矮个总统为何不再有 作者:Lixing Sun @ 2016-03-02 译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 校对:明珠(@老茄爱天一爱亨亨更爱楚楚) 来源:The Evolution Institute,https://evolution-institute.org/article/when-democracy-meets-the-ghost-of-evolution-why-short-presidents-have-vanished/ Size matters in politics: America hasn’t seen a president shorter than 5’7” since William McKinley. A main culprit, unbeknownst to many, comes from voters’ cognitive biases—the work of evolution. And the conundrum took a theatrical turn early this year when Marco Rubio, a Republican presidential hopeful, was spotted wearing a pair of new boots. 身高在政治中很重要。自威廉·麦金利以后,美国已经没有出现过身高低于5英尺7英寸的总统了。一个不为许多人所知的主要原因是选民的认知偏差——这是进化的产物。本年初,这个谜案出现了一个戏剧性转变:来自共和党的总统强力候选人马克·卢比奥穿出了一双新靴子。 “Marco Rubio’s Republican rivals literally are hot on his heels,” opened a New York Post news article on January 6. Speculations followed as to how expensive the boots were. The Rubio camp wasted no time to clarify that they were nothing more than Men’s Florsheim, costing about $100. “卢比奥的党内对手的热情名副其实地只落后他一个脚跟”,1月6日的《纽约邮报》新闻报道如此开头。随后就有人开始猜测这双靴子有多贵。卢比奥的竞选团队即刻澄清说那只是一双富乐绅男款鞋,价格约100美元。 But the core of Rubio’s “bootgate” brouhaha wasn’t about luxury; it was about the heels—a whole two inches high. “A vote for Marco Rubio” tweeted Rick Tyler, Ted Cruz’s commuatsnications director, “is a vote for Men’s High-Heeled Booties.” 但卢比奥“靴子门”事件喧闹的核心不在于它是不是奢侈品,而在于它的鞋跟——厚达2英寸。“投票支持卢比奥”,泰德·克鲁兹的公关联络主管Rick Tyler在Twitter上说,“就是投票支持男式高跟靴子。” Why would Rubio sport a pair of, as Rand Paul teased, “cute new boots”? As far as we know, tall men have scores of advantages in life, work, and romance. Among CEOs, for example, 90% are taller than the average man, and only 3% are below 5’7”. In fact, for every inch added to their height, men can get an extra 1.8% (about $800) in wages, an amount duly dubbed by economists as a“height premium.” 为什么卢比奥会穿着一双如兰德·保罗所戏称的“可爱小靴靴”出来卖弄呢?据我们所知,高个子男人在生活、工作和爱情方面都有优势。比如,CEO中90%身高高于男性平均水平,只有3%身高不到5英尺7英寸。事实上,身高每增加1英寸,男性可以多拿1.8%的工资(约800美元),经济学家恰如其分地把这个增加额称为“身高溢价”。 Rubio may be aware that since the beginning of the last century, nearly 70% of the presidential campaigns between the two major parties have been won by the taller candidate. This wasn’t always the case, though. In fact, of the presidents elected before 1900, eleven were shorter than 5’9”, and only nine were taller (see the chart). 卢比奥可能意识到,自上个世纪初以来,两大党之间70%的总统竞选最终是身材更高的候选人获胜。但是,情况并非从来如此。实际上,在1900年以前获选的总统中,11人身高低于5英尺9英寸,只有9人身材比这高(见下图)。 screen-shot-2016-03-02-at-12-35-20-pm   After that, however, all short candidates have lost to their tall rivals—James M. Cox (5’6”) to Warren G. Harding (6’0”) in 1920, Thomas Dewey (5’8”) to FDR (6’2”) in 1944, then to Harry S. Truman (5’9”) in 1948, and Michael Dukakis (5’8”) to George H. W. Bush (6’2”) in 1988. 但是,自那以后,所有矮个候选人都输给了他们的高个子对手:1920年,詹姆斯·M·考克斯(5英尺6英寸)输给了沃伦·G·哈丁(6英尺);1944年,托马斯·杜威(5英尺8英寸)输给了F·D·罗斯福(6英尺2英寸),1948年他又输给了哈里·S·杜鲁门(5英尺9英寸);1988年,迈克尔·杜卡基斯(5英尺8英寸)输给了老布什(6英尺2英寸)。 At 5’10”, Rubio is taller than the average American man. Still, he is 5” shorter than the front-runner Donald Trump, a difference you can easily see on the screen during Republican primary debates. By adding two inches to his stature, he hoped to up his chance—if only his rivals weren’t paying attention. 卢比奥身高5英尺10英寸,高于美国男性平均水平。但是,他还是比领跑者唐纳德·特朗普矮5英寸。这一差别在共和党初选辩论的屏幕上看得很清楚。他想通过给自己身高增加2英寸来提高机会——只盼对手不要注意。 Do tall men make good leaders—presidents in particular? I pulled out data from Wikipedia.com and did some statistics (such as the Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman’s rank correlation analysis). And I found no relationship whatsoever between height and performance ranking for all elected presidents before 1900. (Obviously, I can’t do so for the period after 1900 because no short presidents have been elected.) 高个子就能当好领袖吗?特别是,高个子就能当好总统吗?我从维基百科上找数据做了一些统计工作 (比如曼—惠特尼U检验、斯皮尔曼等级相关分析)。我发现,1900年前获选上任的所有总统的身高和他们的任职表现排名之间找不出任何关系。(1900年以后显然无法做这种分析,因为这段时间没有矮个总统获选。) Why have short American presidents suddenly vanished since 1900? 为什么美国在1900年后突然就没有矮个总统了呢? The answer, apparently, lies in the use of images in the media. In fact, the advent of the televised debate in 1960 has ushered in even more public scrutiny on candidates’ looks. As a result, no short or bald candidates have made it into the White House since Dwight Eisenhower. (Perhaps, that’s why Trump is careful about his hair—in case people think he is bald.) 答案显然在于媒体对照片的大量使用。实际上,1960年出现的电视辩论使公众对候选人的外貌审查进一步增加。于是,自艾森豪威尔以来,再没有任何矮个或秃顶候选人入主白宫了。(这也许就是特朗普特别在意发型的缘故,他担心人们以为他秃顶。) How can a candidate’s physical appearance hold such a strong sway on voters’ choices? Psychologists and behavioral economists will point to the halo effect, where a perceived strength—here, the height of a candidate—eclipses all weaknesses. Why, then, are our cognitive systems so naïve as to swoon for something utterly irrelevant (namely, the body size) of a potential leader? 为什么候选人的身体外形如此强烈地左右选民的选择呢?心理学家和行为经济学家可能会说这是因为存在光环效应:人们感知到的某一力量(此处就是候选人的身高)会遮蔽所有弱点。那么,我们的认知系统为什么如此幼稚,竟会被准领导人完全无关的某些特征(即体型大小)迷住心神呢? The answer lies in our evolutionary past. Research shows that in a vast number of animals, from insects to mammals, body size can robustly predict winners when resources and mates are at stake. In primates, alpha males are usually large and assuming. (That’s why, even for a novice, it often takes just a glance to spot them in a bunch.) Not only do they win more fights, but females also fall for them. 答案就是我们的进化史。研究表明,对于从昆虫到哺乳类的大量动物而言,在资源和配偶成问题的情况下,体型大小能牢靠的预测谁会胜出。灵长类的雄性领袖通常都高大专横。(因此即便是新手也能从一群动物中一眼认出它们。)它们不但能赢取更多战斗,而且能收获雌性的喜爱。 This process favoring large body size is known as sexual selection, and apparently, it also worked for our Stone-Age ancestors. Even in modern tribal societies, from the Amazons to Papua New Guinea, tall, husky men are still widely preferred as chiefs—or “Big Men,” in Polynesia and other Pacific islands. No wonder our cognitive systems are tuned to looking for tall guys as leaders or mates—the hunks, in our colloquial lingo. 这一偏爱大块头体格的进程叫作性选择,我们石器时代的祖先们显然也受到了影响。即便在现存的部落社会中,从亚马逊丛林到巴布亚新几内亚,人们依然普遍更喜欢接受高大魁梧的男性当首领——或者“大人”,波利尼西亚和其他太平洋岛屿上就用这种称呼。因此,我们的认知系统会调整到找高个男人(——就是俗话说的hunk)做领袖或配偶,这毫不奇怪。 Since 1900, apparently, our liking for hunks hadn’t hit a major hitch until Harding was elected. In appearance, Harding was tall, virile, and gracious with thick eyebrows, wide shoulders, and a deep voice—features that can provoke a feeling of being macho, resolute, and competent. 显然自1900年以来,我们对大个头肌肉男的喜爱直到哈丁当选都没有遭遇什么大挫败。哈丁眉毛浓密、肩膀宽阔、声音低沉,身材高大雄壮且和蔼可亲。这些特征让人觉得他富于男性气概、做事果断干练。 Indeed, he rose from being a small town newspaper editor to an Ohio state senator, a US senator, and finally the president. But just after two years in the Oval Office, Harding’s impressive suite of manly features turned out to be all fake. They did nothing but make him a womanizer. 实际上,他最早只是一个小镇的报纸编辑,后来当上俄亥俄州参议员,然后是国会参议员,最后成为总统。但入主白宫椭圆办公室才2年,哈丁那些令人印象深刻的全套男性气质完全变成了假相。它们没有什么用处,只是让他风流成性而已。 He is called, according to the U.S. News, “an ineffectual leader who played poker while his friends plundered the U.S. treasury.” Even Harding himself confessed, “I am not fit for this office and should never have been here.” When he died, rumors had it that his wife had poisoned him, not out of jealousy but to salvage his reputation from the charges of corruption in his administration. 据《美国新闻杂志》,他被称为“当同伙们洗劫美国国库时还在玩扑克牌的无能领袖。”连哈丁本人都承认,“我不适合这个职位,一开始就不应该到这来。”他死后,有传言说他是被妻子毒害的,原因不是嫉妒,而是为了补救他被控任内腐败的名声。 As the ghost of our evolutionary past lingers on, there is no reason why hunks with Harding’s physique won’t be elected again. If you have any doubt, think about Arnold Schwarzenegger. How much of a halo did he draw from his muscles as a body builder and his fame as an action movie star to win the Californian gubernatorial race in 2002? 进化史的幽灵一直在徘徊,因此没有理由认为拥有哈丁那种体格的大个头肌肉男不会再次被选上。如果你有任何疑虑,想想阿诺德·施瓦辛格。他那身健身运动员的肌肉和作为动作电影巨星的名气到底为他赢得2002年加州州长竞选贡献了多少光环? It’s disconcerting for all concerned citizens to realize that in our age of television and the Internet, presidential elections share much with pageants for Mr. America. If our guts are all we rely on in the process, even the 5’7” John Adams or the 5’4” James Madison may not stand a chance to be elected today. 在电视和互联网时代,总统选举和美国先生选美有很多共同点。所有关心公共事务的公民因意识到这一点而心神不安。如果我们只依赖本能的话,那么5英尺7英寸的约翰·亚当斯或者5英尺4英寸的詹姆斯·麦迪逊今天若参选可能就没有机会胜出。 By forgoing a vast pool of talents from women, short men, and minority citizens (except Obama), how can we find the most capable person to lead our nation? In this sense, putting a woman in the White House will mark a new milestone in American democracy: it can break the entrenched spell—our cognitive biases for hunks—imposed by the ghost of evolution. 把妇女、矮个子、少数族裔(奥巴马除外)中的大量天才排除在考虑之外,我们怎么找出最有能力领导我们国家的人呢?从这个角度来说,选出一位女性入主白宫将成为美国民主新的里程碑:它将破除进化幽灵加在我们身上根深蒂固的魔咒,即我们钟情大个头肌肉男的认知偏差。 (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]为何那么多选民胡乱投票

Political Animals by Rick Shenkman: why we shoot our democracies in the foot
Rick Shenkman新书《政治动物》:为什么我们会搬起石头砸民主的脚

作者:Olivia Archdeacon @ 2016-01-22
译者:babyface_claire(@许你疯不许你傻)
校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
来源:CapX,http://capx.co/political-animals/

Best-selling historian and Emmy award-winning investigative reporter Rick Shenkman is back. He explains in the latest of his seven books, Political Animals – How our Stone-Age Brain Gets in the Way of Smart Politics, that despite our species’ pride of rational thinking, our world is anything but rational.

畅销历史书作家和艾美奖调查记者获得者Rick Shenkman回来了。他在最新的第七本书《政治动物:石器时代的大脑如何妨碍政治精(more...)

标签: | |
7402
Political Animals by Rick Shenkman: why we shoot our democracies in the foot Rick Shenkman新书《政治动物》:为什么我们会搬起石头砸民主的脚 作者:Olivia Archdeacon @ 2016-01-22 译者:babyface_claire(@许你疯不许你傻) 校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 来源:CapX,http://capx.co/political-animals/ Best-selling historian and Emmy award-winning investigative reporter Rick Shenkman is back. He explains in the latest of his seven books, Political Animals – How our Stone-Age Brain Gets in the Way of Smart Politics, that despite our species’ pride of rational thinking, our world is anything but rational. 畅销历史书作家和艾美奖调查记者获得者Rick Shenkman回来了。他在最新的第七本书《政治动物:石器时代的大脑如何妨碍政治精明》里解释到,尽管我们人类以理性思考为傲,但是世界却一点也不合理。 Like economists, political scientists base their models on rational choice, and do not want to think that a one off event like a shark attack can have a significant effect on voting. Yet it has been proven time and again that when times are bad, people vote against the incumbents. If a meteor hit Arizona, they’d vote against the incumbents. Extraneous forces have political consequences. Unfortunately for politicians, this is especially the case when the effect is negative. 像经济学者一样,政治学者以理性选择为基础建构其模型,并且不愿意认为一件像鲨鱼攻击这样的一次性事件可以对投票结果产生重大影响。然而事实一次又一次证明,一旦碰上光景不好,人们就会投票反对当权者。如果有陨石击中亚利桑那州,他们会投票反对当权者。外来力量能够造成政治后果。 不幸的是,对政治家而言,如果这种影响是负面的,情况更是如此。 Readers of Shenkman’s previous book, ‘Just How Stupid Are We? Facing the truth about the American voter’ may be reluctant to pick up another anthology of painfully embarrassing truths about the general public of the world’s most powerful economy. But they should be reassured that Political Animals is a forgiving, empathetic and motivational read. 读过Shenkman上本书《我们是多么愚蠢?正视美国选民的真相》的人,可能不愿再读一本关于世界最大经济体的一般公众的痛苦尴尬真相的汇编。但是我可以向他们保证,《政治动物》是一本宽容、体贴且激励人心的读物。 It is tough love, however. Shenkman points out that despite the human brain being packed with eighty-six billion neurons – making human beings smarter than the smartest computer that ever existed (yet) – when it comes to politics, the public is very easily fooled. What is more alarming is that we’re fooling ourselves. We cannot blame the politicians or the Illuminati. 然而,这是严厉的爱。Shenkman指出,尽管人类的大脑挤满了860亿个神经细胞(使人类比迄今为止最聪明的电脑更加聪明),可是一旦涉及政治,公众却非常容易被欺骗。更令人担忧的是,是我们自己在欺骗自己。我们不能把责任推给政治家或“光照派”。 “We often lie about out reasons for doing what we do in politics. We don’t just lie to others, we lie to ourselves. Therefore we can only detect what people are thinking when we study patterns of behaviour in groups.” “我们经常会在我们政治行为的缘由方面撒谎。我们不止对别人撒谎,我们对自己也撒谎。因此,我们只能通过研究群体的行为模式来检测人们在想什么。” Shenkman’s genuine passion for his subject matter shines through. As much as we rationalise our actions in hindsight, we’re not in a position to truly know ourselves seeing as so much of what happens in our brain happens outside of conscious awareness. So attempting to understand why people vote the way they do simply by asking them will get us nowhere. We need science. Shenkman 对他的研究主题闪耀着真正的热情。我们会在事后尽力合理化自己的行为,鉴于大脑中发生的大量事情处于我们的自觉意识之外,我们就处在一个不能真正了解自己的境地。所以,只是追问人们为什么如此这般投票,对我们理解这一问题毫无益处。我们需要科学。 Political Animals does this. It uses breakthroughs in neuroscience, genetics, evolutionary psychology, anthropology, behavioural economics, political science, political psychology and game theory to give new insights into political behaviour. 《政治动物》要做的就是这件事。它利用了神经科学、遗传学、进化心理学、人类学、行为经济学、政治科学、政治心理学和博弈论等学科的新突破,寻求对于政治行为的新见解。 The basic premise of the book is that our brain evolved roughly 1.8 million years ago and so the instincts that were baked into human DNA then are now often not the most appropriate or efficient response to our environment: “In politics, [instincts] often don’t work: they malfunction, misfire and lead us astray.” Shenkman even goes as far as to argue that “when it comes to politics, the times when we can unquestioningly go with our instincts is almost nil.” 这本书的基本前提是:我们的大脑大约在180万年前进化形成,因此那些整合到人类DNA中的本能通常并非我们对环境所能做出的最合适或最有效反应。“在政治中,[直觉]通常不可行,他们会失灵,无法奏效,还会带我们误入歧途。” Shenkman走得很远,他甚至认为,“当谈到政治时,我们可以毫无疑问的跟随直觉走的时候基本为零”。 In essence: we frequently sabotage ourselves, upending democracy in ways none of us intended. 从本质上说,我们经常会在没有人刻意如此的情况下伤害自己、颠覆民主。 Shenkman focuses on four problems that we continually make: political apathy; failure to correctly size up our political leaders; a habit of punishing politicians who tell us the hard truths we don’t want to hear; and our failure to show empathy in situations that clearly demand it. Shenkman关注我们经常犯的四个错误:政治冷漠,不能正确地认识政治领袖,习惯性地惩罚跟我们讲述我们不愿意听的残酷事实的政治家,在明确需要的情况下不能表示同情。 Hearing all of this, it is sorely tempting to conclude that democracy is hopeless. But all is not lost. 听到这一切,让人很容易得出结论,民主是无望的。但这并不意味着一切。 Throughout the book we are reminded that the way our brain is constructed does not mean we are fated to behave as cavemen, even though we might be inclined to think that based on the morning’s headlines. He shows us with numerous thought experiments (that readers can conduct on themselves) that is better to think of our brains as being pre-wired rather than hard-wired. We have certain innate traits but whether they determine how we behave in a particular situation depends on a range of factors. This shouldn’t be so surprising – think how easily and dramatically our energy levels can affect our decision making and self-control. 这本书从头到尾一直在提醒我们,我们的大脑如此构造,并不意味着我们注定要像穴居人那样行动,尽管根据早上的头条新闻我们可能倾向于这样认为。他通过许多思想实验(读者可以自己进行)向我们表明,我们最好将大脑看作是预设的而并非是固设的。我们有某些天生的特质, 但这些特质是否会决定我们在特定情况下的行为则取决于一系列因素。这并不应该让人感到惊讶——想想我们的精力水平能如何容易、如何显著地影响我们的决策和自控能力吧。 What is more controversial is Shenkman’s challenge to the convention that the main political problem society faces is a lack of information: “Modern Platos raise a huge cry over the problem ignorance poses to democracy, turning alarmism about ignorance into a virtual cottage industry” 更有争议的是Shenkman对社会面临的主要政治问题乃是缺乏信息这一传统观念的挑战,“现代柏拉图们大声疾呼,宣称无知威胁民主。他们已经把对无知的担忧警惕几乎变成了一种祖传家酿。” And he’s right – critics have been beating the same horse for generations, crying ‘mass man is ignorant!’ After the Second World War and the rise of Nazism, university professors became consumed with the problem of public ignorance. It is not that simple, unfortunately. Proving that unknowledgeable voters can be turned into knowledgeable ones doesn’t prove much we didn’t already know. We send children to school because we believe they can learn. The truth is more unsettling: it is not an intelligence or information problem. It’s a motivation, environment, social and, above all else, a human being problem. The problem is that voters on their own don’t try to learn. 他是对的——评论家们世世代代都在鞭打同一具尸体,喊叫“大众是无知的!”第二次世界大战和纳粹主义兴起之后,大学教授们开始全心关注公众无知的问题。不幸的是,这不是那么简单。证明了无知的选民可以转变为有知的选民,这并不能证明多少我们事先就不知道的事情。我们送孩子去学校是因为我们相信他们有学习的能力。真相是更让人不安的:这不是一个智力或者信息问题。这是激励、环境、社会的问题,最重要的是,这是人性问题。问题在于选民们自己不尝试去学习。 Perhaps voters need to be motivated, probably financially. But no government has tried this (directly) because voters would find it insulting – anyone who dared suggest that voters need to be paid because they are citizen delinquents would instantly be branded as elitist. 或许选民需要刺激,比如经济刺激。但是没有任何政府(直接地)试图这么做,因为选民们会感到这是侮辱——任何人若胆敢建议给选民支付费用【编注:从上下文看,意思好像是付费让选民接受公民培训,但也可能是指为投票行为付费。】,而且给出的理由是因为他们是公民群氓,那他立马就会被贴上“精英主义”的标签。 Equally, the Scandinavian experience shows culture can be just as effective (75% of Swedes participate in adult civics-study circles at some point in their lives having retained an interest in politics from school-age). But why should it take either money or culture to get people to perform their civic responsibilities? Shouldn’t people want to be involved? 同样的,北欧的经验表明文化同样奏效 (瑞典人中凡是曾在生活中某一时间参与过成人公民学习圈的,有75%都保留了从学生时代起培养出的政治兴趣)。但是为什么需要钱或者文化的驱使才能让人们履行公民责任呢?难道人们不想参与吗? So this is not a guidebook for how to be the perfect citizen. Shenkman is far from being an idealist. Instead, he offers un-patronising, concrete steps to ‘do politics’ better: don’t place a lot of confidence in your natural curiosity; don’t delude yourself into believing you can read politics; whenever possible, try to put yourself in a position where you can experience politics directly. 所以这不是一本怎样成为完美公民的指南。Shenkman远非一个理想主义者。相反,他提出的是并不高高在上的、具体的步骤,来更好地“做政治”:不要过分信赖你天生的好奇心上;不要欺骗自己说你可以读懂政治;有可能的话,尝试坐到某个位置上,直接体验政治。 In this engaging, illuminating and often humourous portrait of our political culture, Shenkman probes the depths of the human mind to reveal what we must do to fix our floundering democracy, and to become more political, less animal. 在这幅引人入胜、发人深省且常常带些幽默的政治文化肖像中, Shenkman窥探到人类心灵的深处,告诉我们必须做什么来修复我们挣扎的民主,多一些政治性, 少一些动物性。 Political Animals was first published on the 21st January 2016 by Basic Books, £17.99 RRP, hardback. 《政治动物》由基本图书公司在2016年1月21日首次出版,精装版标价£17.99 。 (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——

往坏里带

【2016-08-20】

@whigzhou: 对比两组数据挺有意思,左图美国黑人比例最高的前10个城市(city),从84%到56%不等,右图黑人比例最高的前10个都市区(metropolis),从48%到31%,左图蓝色数字是对应都市区的黑人比例,很明显,在这些城市,白人中产者基本上放弃了内城,这个趋势估计还会延续下去,最终产生一批黑人城市。

@whigzhou: 这些城市的共同特点是犯罪率极高,1/3-1/2的成年黑人男性被关在牢里,民主党长期垄断权力,福利计划一个接一个,政府开支和税率不断上涨,公立学校一团糟,大片街区沦为废墟,官僚机构腐败透顶……

@whigzhou: 这是内城/郊区的分化,类似的分化也发生在城(more...)

标签: | | | |
7392
【2016-08-20】 @whigzhou: 对比两组数据挺有意思,左图美国黑人比例最高的前10个城市(city),从84%到56%不等,右图黑人比例最高的前10个都市区(metropolis),从48%到31%,左图蓝色数字是对应都市区的黑人比例,很明显,在这些城市,白人中产者基本上放弃了内城,这个趋势估计还会延续下去,最终产生一批黑人城市。 @whigzhou: 这些城市的共同特点是犯罪率极高,1/3-1/2的成年黑人男性被关在牢里,民主党长期垄断权力,福利计划一个接一个,政府开支和税率不断上涨,公立学校一团糟,大片街区沦为废墟,官僚机构腐败透顶…… @whigzhou: 这是内城/郊区的分化,类似的分化也发生在城市之间,未来也会发生在州与州之间。 @whigzhou: 有些城市通过土地管制、建筑管制和分区规划把房价抬的极高,也起到了挤出贫穷黑人的效果,过去二十年湾区的黑人比例就在下降 @whigzhou: 相对于现代文明生活,黑人确实有些弱点,但要是没有民主党过去半个世纪不遗余力地残害,也不至于落得这个地步 @whigzhou: 残害政策从两个方向同时下手:压制他们人性中所有积极向善的倾向,纵容娇惯他们所有坏的那些方面:用最低工资法剥夺工作机会,用福利救济削弱工作激励和家庭责任,用禁毒法施饵下套,用平权法强化种族身份,总统和司法部长赤膊上阵煽动种族对立……所有你能想到的把他们往坏里带的办法,全用上了 @路人萨维:辉总的意思是太傻了政策形同残害,还是故意的? @whigzhou: 一开始应该不是故意的,毕竟谁都没有这样的远见,只是民主党惯于玩族裔政治而已,但那么多年过去,效果这么明显,再变本加利的坚持玩,就有点故意了 @whigzhou: 动员少数群体,强化族裔身份,玩族裔政治和裙带政治,是民主党的看家本领,看看坦慕尼协会的历史就很清楚 @whigzhou: 有人可能对60年代民主党180度大转身感到困惑,其实一点不奇怪,他们的族裔/身份政治把戏是一贯的,改变的只是选择哪些族裔/身份群体建立票仓 @whigzhou: 所以无论站在哪一边,他们决不能让黑人这个身份标签消失 @whigzhou: 对黑人来说,不幸的是,他们被挑中时,正是福利主义大跃进之际,结果就被坑惨了 @whigzhou: 当然黑人自身的弱点也起了作用,自律性、延迟满足、责任心方面,比起有着数千年文明历史的民族都差一些,因而福利主义和娇惯政策负面激励效果也更显著 @沉思之后:黑人自身的问题才是主因吧。即便没有民主党的政策,全世界哪个黑人主导的国家或地区繁荣了呢?反之,北欧以及荷兰福利主义和娇惯政策也不少,但是黑人少,也还在持续繁荣中 @whigzhou: 可是平权运动之前美国黑人的状况要好很多啊,非洲人自己未能建立好国家,不等于他们不能作为少数群体在已经建立的好国家中获得良好发展 @SenatusPopulusqueRomanus: 日耳曼人没有数千年文明史,埃及、巴比伦文明史最长。 @whigzhou: 日耳曼人的文明化进程少说也有一千五百年了吧 @whigzhou: 文明化不是全部(在何种文明中被文明化也很重要),但很关键,所有中东来源的移民群体中,波斯裔表现最好,不是没缘由的  
[译文]好莱坞如何改编故事

好莱坞的误导历史
Hollywood’s misleading history

作者:Peter J. Wallison @ 2016-2-29
译者:Luis Rightcon(@Rightcon)
校对:Tankman
来源:American Enterprise Institute,http://www.aei.org/publication/hollywoods-misleading-history/

The film called The Big Short differs in a significant way from the book of the same name on which it is based, and this difference reveals how the film-makers made it more politically charged in order to blame Wall S(more...)

标签: | |
7382
好莱坞的误导历史 Hollywood’s misleading history 作者:Peter J. Wallison @ 2016-2-29 译者:Luis Rightcon(@Rightcon) 校对:Tankman 来源:American Enterprise Institute,http://www.aei.org/publication/hollywoods-misleading-history/ The film called The Big Short differs in a significant way from the book of the same name on which it is based, and this difference reveals how the film-makers made it more politically charged in order to blame Wall Street for the financial crisis. 《大空头》这部电影与其同名报告文学在历史叙事上有着很明显的不同,而且这一差异揭示了电影制作者是如何使这部影片更充满政治意味,从而把金融危机归咎于华尔街。 In the book, the Wall Street experts who were approached to bet against the housing market almost all refused. 在那本书中,几乎所有被问及是否做空房产市场的华尔街专家们都给出了否定答案。 This showed something that was true, and for that reason interesting: that even people on Wall Street, always on the lookout for a money-making opportunity, could not believe the housing market was in any danger of collapse. In the film, this was demonstrated by the skepticism of the FrontPoint group that was initially approached as investors, as well as the eagerness of the financial firms such as Goldman Sachs and others to take the other side of the bet against the housing market. 这显示了一些有趣的事实,那就是,即使是成天盯着捞钱机会的华尔街精英也无法相信(当时的)房市会有任何崩溃的风险。而在电影中,这被演绎成投资者FrontPoint集团的怀疑立场,以及像高盛集团那样的金融机构们对于做多房地产市场的渴望。 In the book, the tension in the narrative was created when the book’s protagonists — the first people to bet against the housing market — had persuaded their investors to place bets against the housing market many months before the coming failures actually became evident. As a result, in the book their financial backers became impatient. The predictions of a collapse did not happen fast enough, and they sought to withdraw their funds. Some of this impatience was present in the film, but the context was changed. 在书中,整个故事的紧张之处体现在主人公——作为第一个开始做空房地产市场的人——在金融海啸变成现实之前很多个月,就说服了他们的投资者来做空房市。结果,他们的财务支持者们变得不耐烦了,预言中的崩塌没有足够快的发生,于是他们计划撤资。电影中部分展现了这一不耐烦的情节,然而其情境却被改写了。 In the film, the collapse actually occurred, but the there was no movement in the market prices of the privately-issued mortgage-backed securities or the credit default swaps that were used to bet against them. This was attributed in the film to a conspiracy among the big banks on Wall Street: they somehow kept the market from moving against them while they sold off their holdings to less informed buyers. 在影片中,房产市场的崩溃如期发生了,但是私下发行的MBS(住房抵押贷款证券)和用来做空他们的CDS(信用违约掉期)的市场价格并没有变化。这在影片中被归结于华尔街上大银行的共谋:他们以某种方式稳定住了市场,直到把自己持有的资产卖给那些知情较少的买家。 It should be obvious that a conspiracy like this is impossible. There are too many buyers and sellers in the financial markets for something like the price of mortgage-backed securities or credit defaults swaps to be rigged. In reality, as soon as an index of housing defaults began to signal danger, investors fled the market. 显然像这样的阴谋是不可能成功的。在金融市场像CDS和MBS这类金融工具所涉及到的买家和卖家实在是太多了,以至于其价格很难被操纵。事实上,一旦房贷违约的指数开始发出危险信号,投资者马上就逃离了这个市场。 If the film had simply followed the book, it would have been a tale about how some very smart and gutsy traders outwitted Wall Street and faced down investors who had lost faith in them to win big in the end. It could have been an uplifting story that would have shone an unflattering light on the supposedly smart guys on Wall Street. 如果该影片只是简单地遵循同名报告文学的叙事,那将只会是一个某些既聪明绝顶又胆大包天的交易员以其聪明才智胜过华尔街,以及让那些对他们失去信心的投资者羞愧万分,从而在最后赢得巨额回报的故事。这或许会成为一个真实报道华尔街上的聪明伙计的励志故事。 But that was not enough for Hollywood. In Hollywood’s telling, the bad guys had to be villains, not just dumb. So the film-makers concocted a plot in which Wall Street successfully kept the market from moving against them in order to save themselves. 但这对好莱坞来说可远远不够。在好莱坞的通常叙事中,坏家伙们必须是十足的恶棍,而不是随便冒出来的草包。所以电影制作人们编造了一个情节:为了拯救自身,华尔街成功阻止了不利于自身的市场运动。 In reality, of course, Wall Street was not saved. Many of the major firms got into serious trouble when the housing bubble collapsed. Several failed and others suffered major losses. 当然,实际上华尔街并没有被拯救。房产泡沫崩溃时很多主要金融机构陷入了严重的困境。有一些破产了,剩下的也遭受到了极其严重的损失。 The lesson here is to approach Hollywood’s versions of real life events with caution. They can be good entertainment, but badly misleading history. 这里的教训是要对好莱坞版本的现实事件保持警惕。他们可以是很好的娱乐,但同时可能会严重的误导历史。 (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——

比如暖球党

【2016-07-27】

@whigzhou: Yes,Minister里描绘的那种官僚机构捕获权力,事务官戏弄选举官员的情况,在美国不太严重,原因可能是大量非官方智库和游说机构的存在,将政治纲领转变成可操作的具体法案,是桩繁重的技术活,许多智库和游说机构就是帮政客干这活的,如果这些活都被拿政府经费的研究机构包揽了,情况就完全不同。

@whigzhou: 所以尽管游说活动有种种不好,那也比用官办研究机构取代它们好,这是(more...)

标签: | |
7333
【2016-07-27】 @whigzhou: Yes,Minister里描绘的那种官僚机构捕获权力,事务官戏弄选举官员的情况,在美国不太严重,原因可能是大量非官方智库和游说机构的存在,将政治纲领转变成可操作的具体法案,是桩繁重的技术活,许多智库和游说机构就是帮政客干这活的,如果这些活都被拿政府经费的研究机构包揽了,情况就完全不同。 @whigzhou: 所以尽管游说活动有种种不好,那也比用官办研究机构取代它们好,这是反对由政府资助研究活动的最重要理由,哪怕资助的是貌似与政治无涉的自然科学研究,最终也会变成权力捕获者,比如暖球党。 @whigzhou: 由此想到的一个问题是,川普上台后会找谁来干这活呢?那些多年来大力主张自由市场的保守派智库,难道真能厚着脸皮去帮川普草拟法案如何将关税提高到40%,如何惩罚拒绝将工厂搬回来的公司?如何解除美国对盟国的安全责任?依我看,他只能去左派那里找了。
深红区

【2016-07-21】

@海德沙龙: 《牛仔:备受排挤的濒危物种》 2014年的内华达『邦迪对峙』和今年初的俄勒冈占领行动,让牛仔这个久已被遗忘的群体又进入了公众视野,本文是一位俄勒冈牧场主写给《华盛顿邮报》的一封信,讲述了近年来联邦政府的土地与环境政策如何影响着他们的生计。

@海德沙龙: 牧场主处境恶化只是这场对抗的背景之一,更大的背景是日益膨胀的国家主义与美国传统价值观的对立,『邦迪对峙』得到了众多民兵组织的支持,这些民兵组织代表了自由、独立、自治的古老美国传统,通过支持牧场主的行(more...)

标签: | |
7322
【2016-07-21】 @海德沙龙: 《牛仔:备受排挤的濒危物种》 2014年的内华达『邦迪对峙』和今年初的俄勒冈占领行动,让牛仔这个久已被遗忘的群体又进入了公众视野,本文是一位俄勒冈牧场主写给《华盛顿邮报》的一封信,讲述了近年来联邦政府的土地与环境政策如何影响着他们的生计。 @海德沙龙: 牧场主处境恶化只是这场对抗的背景之一,更大的背景是日益膨胀的国家主义与美国传统价值观的对立,『邦迪对峙』得到了众多民兵组织的支持,这些民兵组织代表了自由、独立、自治的古老美国传统,通过支持牧场主的行动,他们展示了不惜以武力对抗联邦政府权力扩张的决心。 @whigzhou: 牧区与深红区高度重合 @whigzhou: 牛仔最多的落基山东麓各州(爱达荷、蒙大拿、怀俄明、犹他)既是保守派势力最稳固的州,也是共和党初选中川普输的最惨的州,这不是巧合 @whigzhou: 90年代以来,美国学术界急剧左倾,但这一倾向并非均匀分布,左倾最严重的是新英格兰地区的大学,而落基山东麓各州的大学是唯一的例外,保守派比例不降反升,不想放弃学术的保守派都跑那儿去了 @whigzhou: 从下图可见,美国学术界近二十年的左倾化主要是新英格兰大学贡献的 http://t.cn/RtAxkDi Figure 2. Regional Ideological Variations of Americas Professors: 1989 – 2014 @whigzhou: 美国校园的革命小将再这么闹下去,说不定到最后就是这些对学术最没兴趣的落基州保存了美国的学术和思想自由,这不由让人想起瑞士,很难说瑞士山民对金融业有什么兴趣,但正是瑞士山民的彪悍、独立和对自由的执着,在动荡年代为欧洲金融业保存了一个避难所。  
活得好好的

【2016-07-19】

@隐藏的火星人:我就想问辉总,兼顾后果和公平的最好的策略是什么,对待绿化

@whigzhou: 宪法容许范围内可做的很多,比如停止穆斯林移民,犯罪移民驱逐出境(像瑞士),取缔国内赞助恐怖主义的组织,禁止国内政治组织接受伊斯兰主义组织或政权(比如沙特政府)的捐款,在公职人员中展开忠诚调查(即麦卡锡行动)

@whigzhou: 从佛罗里达Boca Raton伊斯兰中心 (ICBR)的例子可看出有多少早该做事情没(more...)

标签: | |
7320
【2016-07-19】 @隐藏的火星人:我就想问辉总,兼顾后果和公平的最好的策略是什么,对待绿化 @whigzhou: 宪法容许范围内可做的很多,比如停止穆斯林移民,犯罪移民驱逐出境(像瑞士),取缔国内赞助恐怖主义的组织,禁止国内政治组织接受伊斯兰主义组织或政权(比如沙特政府)的捐款,在公职人员中展开忠诚调查(即麦卡锡行动) @whigzhou: 从佛罗里达Boca Raton伊斯兰中心 ([[ICBR]])的例子可看出有多少早该做事情没做,ICBR与恐怖组织的关系确凿无疑,毫不掩饰,十几年来屡屡被联邦政府抓包和定罪,却始终活得好好的,不久前还被棕榈滩县选为投票点,直到本次惨案发生遭大量抗议后才换地方 http://t.cn/RtzHREz @whigzhou: 类似例子比比皆是,几乎是常态  
一颗要命丸

【2016-07-18】

@whigzhou: 凯末尔主义终结之后,土耳其的一些可能发展:离开北约(主动或被动),占领叙利亚的部分地区,攻击伊拉克库尔德地区,在高加索和中亚扶植马仔因而与俄国发生冲突,为争夺中东霸权而与伊朗和/或沙特发生冲突……

@whigzhou: 七年前的诺贝尔和平奖不愧为史上最具预见性和最具激励效果的诺贝尔奖~

@龙与羊驼: 凯末尔主义是和纳赛尔一样的工业党,为什么不能被终结?经济只有自由化才能最终推动政治自由化,不自由的经济根本不可能推进政治社会风气的开放。

@whigzhou: 绿化是『一颗要命丸』,都不用第二颗,跟这个抉择相比,其他都不重要了

@whigzhou: 宪政基础是根,经济表现是果,经济政策、自由化、私有化,都只是小枝桠而已,都是很容易逆转的事情,花枝插在花瓶里不也能绚烂几天嘛,鸟用

@blue-tomato: 像土尔其这么大的一个国家,而且是一个有着一定经济能力的宪政民主国家,还需要依靠军队的协助才能摆脱宗教(绿化)的入侵,这是否说明绿化的强大与及宪政民主的无能呢?

@w(more...)

标签: | | |
7316
【2016-07-18】 @whigzhou: 凯末尔主义终结之后,土耳其的一些可能发展:离开北约(主动或被动),占领叙利亚的部分地区,攻击伊拉克库尔德地区,在高加索和中亚扶植马仔因而与俄国发生冲突,为争夺中东霸权而与伊朗和/或沙特发生冲突…… @whigzhou: 七年前的诺贝尔和平奖不愧为史上最具预见性和最具激励效果的诺贝尔奖~ @龙与羊驼: 凯末尔主义是和纳赛尔一样的工业党,为什么不能被终结?经济只有自由化才能最终推动政治自由化,不自由的经济根本不可能推进政治社会风气的开放。 @whigzhou: 绿化是『一颗要命丸』,都不用第二颗,跟这个抉择相比,其他都不重要了 @whigzhou: 宪政基础是根,经济表现是果,经济政策、自由化、私有化,都只是小枝桠而已,都是很容易逆转的事情,花枝插在花瓶里不也能绚烂几天嘛,鸟用 @blue-tomato: 像土尔其这么大的一个国家,而且是一个有着一定经济能力的宪政民主国家,还需要依靠军队的协助才能摆脱宗教(绿化)的入侵,这是否说明绿化的强大与及宪政民主的无能呢? @whigzhou: 说明宪政存续条件之苛刻 @blue-tomato: 非常有意思。如果是这样,谁人可以在规则既定的条件下,推翻规则,扮演最后的救世主,而且有充足的理由得到人们的信任?貌似魔兽里的守护者最终却是引进兽人的作恶者 @whigzhou: 以前是英帝,后来是美帝,现在,恐怕已经没了 @whigzhou: 多年来我已反复强调宪政基础相对于中短期变革与增长的重要性,复习一下:《从摊贩胜诉看印度法治》 《不必对南非期望太高》 《下一块金砖在哪里?》 @安德鲁杰克逊蓝卫兵:但是弗里德曼说只要经济自由,社会必定开放,政治必定自由,这个怎么讲? @whigzhou: http://headsalon.org/archives/7107.html  
先自己割了

【2016-07-17】

@whigzhou: 素食,反狩猎,反枪,反核,反帝反殖民,和平主义,支持同性婚姻,福利主义,奶嘴化教育……所有这些看似完全没关系的政治诉求,在现实中却是高度内聚的,能把这些串起来的因素,我能想到的只有阴柔化,这一点在绿党身上表现的最清楚。

@江南孤影月:漏了女权。

@whigzhou: 嗯,还有反死刑和反工业

@tuxt520:阴柔和同性恋婚姻的关系是什么?

@whigzhou: 阴柔化根本出发点就是反对传统男性角色,然后也延伸到各种让人联想到雄性力量的东西,比如枪支、核能和大型机械(more...)

标签: | |
7313
【2016-07-17】 @whigzhou: 素食,反狩猎,反枪,反核,反帝反殖民,和平主义,支持同性婚姻,福利主义,奶嘴化教育……所有这些看似完全没关系的政治诉求,在现实中却是高度内聚的,能把这些串起来的因素,我能想到的只有阴柔化,这一点在绿党身上表现的最清楚。 @江南孤影月:漏了女权。 @whigzhou: 嗯,还有反死刑和反工业 @tuxt520:阴柔和同性恋婚姻的关系是什么? @whigzhou: 阴柔化根本出发点就是反对传统男性角色,然后也延伸到各种让人联想到雄性力量的东西,比如枪支、核能和大型机械 @人格显示器: 阴柔化的原因是不是因为城市生活让人远离了耕作、狩猎、以及战争? @whigzhou: 依我看,首要原因是社会的和平化,降低了战士禀赋的社会需求,其次是机械化降低了对肌肉的需求,总之,阳刚和雄性力量不像过去那么值钱了 @tuxt520:传统男性角色也可以是同性恋啊 @whigzhou: 将古代男风等同于现代同性文化的说法很流行,但那是错误的,前者并不对婚姻和家庭构成冲击,并不挑战男性角色和雄性力量 @abada张宏兵:这些在ISIS国很推崇很值钱 @whigzhou: 没错,坏就坏在这里,当今西方物质实力如此强大,只因文化之阴柔,意志之虚弱,连几只臭虫都踩不死 @whigzhou: 1)认为某件事E不好,并认为其原因是C,不等于反对C,我当然不会反对和平化和机械化,2)指出某邪恶人群也拥有特性P,并不能驳斥『特性P是可贵的』这一论点,假如恐怖分子都爱吃肉,我们就不吃了?强奸犯都还长着鸡鸡呢不是?要反强奸就先自己割了?【这么简单的道路都需要解释,实在令人失望】  
[译文]被遗忘的马塔贝莱兰大屠杀

New documents allege Mugabe’s complicity in 1980s massacres
新文档指证穆加贝参与了80年代的一系列屠杀

作者:STUART DORAN @ 2015-05-18
译者:Tankman
校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
来源:Dailymaverick,http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2015-05-18-new-documents-allege-mugabes-complicity-in-1980s-massacres/#.V0ShIfkrKwU

Thousands of historical documents are becoming available in a raft of foreign archival collections. The documents are wide-ranging and allege what survivors and scholars have always suspected but never been able to validate: Robert Mugabe, then Prime Minister, was the prime architect of Matabeleland’s mass killings that were well-planned and systematically executed.

导言:海外的文档收集工作使得数千份历史文档正在浮出水面。这些文档涉及多个领域,并指证了幸存者和学者一直以来无法确认的怀疑:罗伯特·穆加贝,当时的总理,可能是精心策划并得以系统性实施的马塔贝莱兰大屠杀的主要策划者。

……(more...)

标签: |
7293
New documents allege Mugabe’s complicity in 1980s massacres 新文档指证穆加贝参与了80年代的一系列屠杀 作者:STUART DORAN @ 2015-05-18 译者:Tankman 校对:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 来源:Dailymaverick,http://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2015-05-18-new-documents-allege-mugabes-complicity-in-1980s-massacres/#.V0ShIfkrKwU Thousands of historical documents are becoming available in a raft of foreign archival collections. The documents are wide-ranging and allege what survivors and scholars have always suspected but never been able to validate: Robert Mugabe, then Prime Minister, was the prime architect of Matabeleland's mass killings that were well-planned and systematically executed. 导言:海外的文档收集工作使得数千份历史文档正在浮出水面。这些文档涉及多个领域,并指证了幸存者和学者一直以来无法确认的怀疑:罗伯特·穆加贝,当时的总理,可能是精心策划并得以系统性实施的马塔贝莱兰大屠杀的主要策划者。

……

From January 1983, a campaign of terror was waged against the Ndebele people of western Zimbabwe, an outbreak of obscene violence that remains the darkest period in the country’s post-independence history, notwithstanding the bloody notoriety of the last decade-and-a-half. 自1983年一月,一场针对津巴布韦西部恩德贝勒人的恐怖运动被发起,这是一场不堪入目的暴行的开端,至今仍是这个国家独立后历史中最黑暗的时期。尽管该国近十五年来的历史之血腥也已臭名昭著。【译注:2000年该国政府启动了强制土改政策。】 But now, the new light is being shed on these days of horror. 但是现在,这些恐怖的岁月正被重新审视。 Thousands of historical documents that appear to expose the perpetrators are now becoming available in a raft of foreign archival collections. The documents are wide-ranging and include, among others, diplomatic correspondence, intelligence assessments and raw intelligence garnered by spies recruited from within the Zimbabwean government. 海外的文档收集工作使得数千份历史文档正在浮出水面。这些文件似乎揭示了屠杀的真凶。这些文件涉及多个领域,包括但不限于:外交文书,情报评估和津巴布韦政府内部线人收集的原始情报。 These papers—augmented by the testimony of Zimbabwean witnesses finding courage in old age—appear to substantiate what survivors and scholars have always suspected but never been able to validate: Mugabe, then Prime Minister, was the prime architect of mass killings that were well-planned and systematically executed. 一些津巴布韦目击者在晚年鼓起勇气做出的证言进一步增加了这些文档的分量。目前看来,这些文件证实了幸存者和学者一直以来无法确认的怀疑:罗伯特·穆加贝,当时的总理,可能是精心策划并被系统实施的大屠杀的主要策划者。 The documents appear to show that the massacres were closely associated with an effort by Mugabe’s Zanu-PF party to eliminate opposition groups in the aftermath of Zimbabwe’s independence. Zapu, a party led by nationalist rival, Joshua Nkomo, represented the main obstacle to that objective. Given that Zapu enjoyed overwhelming support among Ndebele, the Ndebele as a whole came to be seen as an impediment. In the words of Mugabe, the people of Matabeleland needed to be “re-educated”. 这些文件似乎表明,大屠杀和穆加贝的政党——津巴布韦非洲民族联盟-爱国阵线(简称津民盟)——在国家独立后试图消灭反对派的努力紧密相连。津巴布韦非洲人民联盟(简称津人联)是由对手、民族主义者加西亚·恩科莫领导的政党,是津民盟达到该目标的主要障碍。津人联在恩德贝勒人中拥有压倒性优势,故而恩德贝勒人整体被视作一种障碍。按照穆加贝自己的话说,马塔贝莱兰当地人需要被“再教育”。 The little that Mugabe has said since the 1980s on this taboo subject has been a mixture of obfuscation and denial. The closest he has come to admitting any form of official responsibility was at the death of Nkomo (1999), when he remarked that the early 1980s was a “moment of madness”—an ambivalent statement that perhaps reflected a fear of Ngozi (avenging spirits) more than anything else and one he has not repeated. More recently, he blamed the killings on armed bandits who were allegedly coordinated by Zapu (the original smokescreen) along with occasional indiscipline among soldiers of the army’s North Korean-trained 5 Brigade. 自1980年代以来,穆加贝甚少谈及这个禁忌话题。他对此事的稀少评论,其实是混淆和否认的混合物。他最接近于承认官方对屠杀负有任何责任的一次,是在恩科莫1999年过世时。当时他评论说,八十年代早期是个“疯狂时刻”——这个暧昧的表述也许反映了他对怨灵复仇的恐惧甚于其他任何事,而且此后他也再未提过。后来,他将杀戮的责任归咎于据称由津人联负责协调的武装土匪(这是最早释放的迷雾),以及军队第五旅士兵偶发的违纪行为,该旅是朝鲜训练出来的。 In the documents, his alleged co-conspirators tell a different story. In doing so, they controvert theories that Mugabe was poorly informed about the activities of errant subordinates. By March 1983, when news of the atrocities had leaked, prompting Western ambassadors and others to ask awkward questions, government ministers who were overseeing the operation quickly pointed to Mugabe, documents allege. 在文档中,穆加贝所称的阴谋分子讲述了一个不同的故事。他们否定了有关穆加贝对下属违纪行为知之甚少的说法。文档称,到1983年3月,暴行的消息已经走漏,促使西方大使们和其他人问起令人尴尬的问题,监督行动的政府部长们很快指向穆加贝。 Sydney Sekeramayi, the minister in Mugabe’s office with responsibility for Defence, was one. In a conversation with Cephas Msipa, one of the few remaining Zapu ministers of what had been a government of national unity, Sekeramayi, said that “not only was Mugabe fully aware of what was going on—what the 5th Brigade was doing was under Mugabe’s explicit orders.” Msipa later relayed this discussion to the Australian High Commission, which in turn reported it to headquarters in Canberra. 悉尼·塞克拉马伊,穆加贝内阁负责防务的部长,是其中之一。矶法·姆西帕是早先的联合政府中仍在位的少数几个津人联部长之一,在一次与他的对话中,塞克拉马伊说穆加贝“不仅完全知道事件的状况——而且第五旅的所为乃是基于穆加贝的明确命令。”之后姆西帕把这次讨论发送给澳大利亚高级专员公署,后者随即向堪培拉总部做了报告。 Msipa appears to be a credible witness in view of his amicable relationship with Mugabe. He had, for instance, shared a room with Mugabe for two years during their earlier career as teachers. Msipa had also welcomed Mugabe into his home when the latter returned from Ghana in 1960 and joined the struggle against white rule. 从和穆加贝的友好关系来看,姆西帕似乎应是可信的证人。例如,在两人早年一起当教师时,他和穆加贝做过两年室友。1960年,穆加贝从加纳回国加入反对白人统治的斗争时,姆西帕也欢迎他住在自己家。 Between 1980 and 1982, when tensions were rising between Zapu and Zanu, Msipa had served as a regular go-between and had spoken to Mugabe often. He continued to do so during the killings. Within Zapu, Msipa, a Shona-speaker, had consistently advocated amalgamation with Zanu, a line that had attracted the ire of Ndebele-speaking colleagues. 在1980年到1982年间,当津人联和津民盟关系紧张时,姆西帕常常作为一位中间人,频繁的和穆加贝对话。他在屠杀期间也继续这么做。在津人联中,姆西帕作为说绍纳语的一位,一贯支持和津民盟的合并,这一立场曾引起了很多说恩德贝勒语的同事的愤怒。 He was, therefore, considerably more sympathetic to Zanu and its leader than most in Zapu. And yet, after speaking to Sekeramayi and others in Zanu, he was convinced (as he told the Australians) that “the Prime Minister was right behind what had been happening in Matabeleland.” He added that he had never before had such a “crisis of my conscience” about remaining in government. 所以相比于大多数津人联成员,他明显更加同情津民盟及其领导人。然而,在和塞克拉马伊和一些津民盟成员对话之后,他确信(正如他告诉澳大利亚方面的那样)“站在马塔贝莱兰事件后面的正是总理。”他补充道:对于留在政府内任职,他以前从未有过现在这样严重的“良心挣扎”。 Sekeramayi was more circumspect in direct discussions with Western representatives, but nevertheless made clear that the massacres were no accident. The “army had had to act ‘hard’”, he told the British defence attaché, “but … the situation was now under control”. Later, Sekeramayi admitted to the British High Commissioner that “there had been atrocities”. 塞克拉马伊在直接和西方社会代表讨论此事时说话更为谨慎,但他还是很清楚地表明,大屠杀不是意外事件。“军队不得不采取‘酷烈’行动”,他告诉英国武官,“但是……现在形势已经得到了控制”。后来,塞克拉马伊向英国高级专员公署承认“曾有暴行发生”。 The documents also record that Msipa talked to other members of Zanu who revealed that the killings were not simply the whim of a small coterie, but the result of a formal and broad-based decision by the leadership of Zanu-PF. Eddison Zvobgo, a member of Zanu’s 20-member policy-making body, spoke of a “decision of the Central Committee that there had to be a ‘massacre’ of Ndebeles”. That statement squared precisely with 5 Brigade’s ethnocentric modus operandi. 文档也记录了姆西帕和其他津民联成员的谈话,那些成员揭露出屠杀绝不是一个小团伙的心血来潮,而是出自津民联领导层正式且广泛认同的决定。艾迪森·祖沃布戈,津民盟的二十人决策层之一,提到了一份“中央委员会的决定:必须要有一场针对恩德贝勒人的‘屠杀’”。这一说法和第五旅种族中心主义的作案手法完全吻合。 Mugabe’s heir apparent, the current First Vice President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, was a member of the Central Committee. But so, too, were others who have subsequently developed a reputation for moderation, not least because of their latter-day rivalry with Mnangagwa. Former Vice President Joice Mujuru heads that list. 穆加贝的指定继承人,现任第一副总统的埃默森·姆南加古瓦曾是中央委员会的一员。当然,后来展现出温和形象的许多其他人当时也在中央委员会中,他们之所以变温和,相当程度是因为他们此后需要与姆南加古瓦竞争。前副总统乔伊斯·穆朱鲁在这份名单上居首位。 The army commanders who directed the killings, many of whom still retain key positions in a security sector that underwrites the regime, are also shown in the documents to have been eager accomplices. Zvobgo commented that the first commander of 5 Brigade, Perence Shiri, had said the “politicians should leave it to us” with regard to “settling things in Matabeleland”. 文件也曝光了指导屠杀的部队司令官是积极的从犯,其中不少人仍然在强力部门身居高位,维持着这个政权的统治。祖沃布戈提到第五旅的司令官佩伦斯·希里曾说过,对于“搞定在马塔贝莱兰的事情”,“政治家们应该交给我们去做”。 Shiri is now the head of Zimbabwe’s air force. 希里目前是津巴布韦的空军司令。 Testimony from witnesses provides evidence that Shiri worked closely with many former members of Mugabe’s guerilla army, Zanla, notwithstanding a myth that 5 Brigade operated separately from the rest of the army. Those who assisted Shiri allegedly included the now chief of Zimbabwe’s defence forces, Constantine Chiwenga, who was this month awarded a doctorate in ethics by the University of KwaZulu–Natal. 证人证言提供证据说明:希里曾和许多穆加贝游击部队——津巴布韦民族解放军——的前成员密切共事,尽管仍有传言说第五旅是脱离全军单独行动的。那些据称曾协助希里的人包括现任津巴布韦国防部长康斯坦丁·奇温加。他在这个月被夸祖鲁-纳塔尔大学授予了伦理学博士学位。 During the killings, Shiri frequently consulted with Chiwenga, who was then using the nom de guerre Dominic Chinenge and was head of 1 Brigade based in Bulawayo. Chiwenga’s unit also provided a range of practical assistance, including logistical support for 5 Brigade and a base from which Shiri’s men operated when they made punitive raids on Bulawayo’s townships. 在屠杀期间,希里经常向奇温加请教,后者那时化名多米尼克·奇内格,是驻扎在布拉瓦约的第一旅的旅长。奇温加的部队也提供了各种实际支持,包括对第五旅的后勤支持,以及在希里士兵向布拉瓦约的城镇发动惩戒性打击时,为其提供基地。 The first six weeks of 5 Brigade’s attacks were massive in their intensity, but the documentary record shows that an order was given to curtail this phase after news of the massacres began to leak to the outside world. However, the killing did not end, but was instead scaled back and conducted in a more covert manner. 在第五旅袭击的头六周,攻击的烈度极大。但文档记录显示,当大屠杀的消息开始往外界泄露时,上面有命令要求进行收缩。然而,屠杀并没有终止,只是缩小了规模,采取了更秘密的形式。 Estimates of the death toll are frequently put at 20,000, a figure first mooted by Nkomo when the campaign was still underway. But on-the-ground surveys have been piecemeal and vast areas of Matabeleland remain under-researched. Fear and the death of many witnesses provide further challenges. 通常的估计认为死者有约两万人,这个数字最早是恩科莫提出来的,当时屠杀还在进行中。然而现场调查一直是零星散乱的,而且马塔贝莱兰很大部分区域仍未被调查。人们的恐惧,加之很多目击者死亡,也增加了调查难度。 A forensically-accurate number will never be possible, yet it seems possible that the standard estimate is too conservative. Oral testimony from Zimbabweans who were in key government positions during the 1980s disinters a host of killings that were previously unknown. Cumulatively, this testimony suggests that the breadth of the violence and the extent of official involvement could have been significantly underestimated. 一个法医学标准的精确数字也许永远不可能得到,然而通常的估计可能太过保守。1980年代在津巴布韦政府重要岗位任职的一批人的口头证言揭示了许多以前不为人知的杀戮事件。总的来说,这证言暗示暴力的程度和官方牵涉的程度可能被显著低估了。 Observers have always wondered how much of this was known to Western governments—and what they did about it. It is clear from the documents that they knew a great deal, even if some of the detail remained obscure. It is also clear that the polite questions asked by diplomats were—along with courageous representations by churchmen and their allies in Zimbabwe—pivotal to the government’s decision to reduce the violence. 观察家一直好奇于对此事西方社会的政府已经知晓多少?他们对此又做了什么?文档显示,他们无疑知道很多,即使细节仍不清楚。文档也很清楚的表明,外交官有礼节的质询,和教会人士及其津巴布韦盟友们的勇敢发声,这些是政府决定收敛暴行的关键。 Up to that point, there was no indication that the brutal force of the massacres would be curtailed. Nevertheless, Western governments did little once the massacres were brought down to a lower, but still savage, intensity. Perhaps as a sign that Western censure had its limits, the campaign in Matabeleland North continued during the remainder of 1983; 5 Brigade was redeployed further south in 1984. 到那时为止,没有迹象表明当时大屠杀的野蛮暴力会终止。但是一旦大屠杀的烈度变低,即使其仍然残酷,西方社会的政府却没什么作为了。在1983年剩下的时间,北马塔贝莱兰省的战争一直在持续,这仿佛代表了西方抗议的局限性;第五旅在1984年被重新部署到更南部。 It is a fact that the Western response to violence toward black countrymen in the 1980s was a pale shadow of the reaction to his attack on white farmers in 2000. Many Ndebele remain bitter about this inconsistency. While historians debate the dimensions of Zanu’s violence, for Western policy-makers and the domestic constituencies that are meant to hold them to account there's a need to reflect again on the price of inconsistency in the developing world. Aside from the human cost, Western advocacy of democracy and international justice will continue to be viewed with skepticism while such glaring contradictions remain. 事实上,西方对2000年时穆加贝袭击白人农场主做出了强烈反应,与之相比,他们在1980年代针对黑人村民所遭受暴行的反应要小得多。许多恩德贝勒人仍对这种前后不一心怀怨愤。当历史学家争辩津民盟暴力的程度时,西方的政策制定者和想让他们承担责任的国内选民则需要再次反思这种在发展中国家采取双重标准的代价。如果这么显眼的自相矛盾继续存在,除了生命成本外,西方对民主和国际正义的支持也会继续被人怀疑。 At the same time, an inordinate focus on the international dimensions of the Matabeleland massacres is to miss the point. Mugabe has instinctively sought to racialise and internationalise internal controversies of which he is the principal author or to invoke the spectre of neo-colonialism in the hope of support from fellow African leaders. 同时,对马塔贝莱兰大屠杀的关注过多聚焦于国际视角,这没有切中要害。出于本能,穆加贝常把主要由他引起的国内争端国际化和种族化,或者试图召唤新殖民主义的幽灵,希望借此获得非洲领袖们的支持。 Zimbabwe’s Second Vice President Phelekezela Mphoko recently made the claim that the Matabeleland massacres were “conspiracy of the West” and that Mugabe had nothing to do with them. Yet the new documentary material appears to underline once more that post-independence Zimbabwe’s greatest crimes and deepest wounds lie squarely at the feet of Mugabe and Zanu-PF. 津巴布韦的第二副总统费列克佐拉·姆波科最近声明:马塔贝莱兰大屠杀是“西方的阴谋”,穆加贝和此事没有任何干系。然而新的文档材料似乎再次昭示穆加贝和津民盟-爱国阵线应该为津巴布韦独立后最大的罪行和最深的创伤负责。 The documents appear to show that the killings were an internal affair, neither provoked nor sustained by outsiders, and that the atrocities were driven from the top by Zanu-PF in pursuit of specific political objectives. 现在看来,文档揭示了屠杀是个内政事件,并非由外部力量发起或支持,而且是津民盟-爱国阵线的领袖为了达到特定政治目的而发动。 Viewed across a period of several years and hundreds of files, the documents appear to provide evidence that—far from being a “moment of madness” in which supporters of rival parties went at each other— the massacres were but one component of a sustained and strategic effort to remove all political opposition within five years of independence, as Zanu leaders were determined to secure a “victory” against non-existent opposition in elections scheduled for 1985, after which there would be a “mandate” from the people to impose a one-party state. 经几年时间把数百份文件放在一起审阅,文档似乎证明了大屠杀绝对不是所谓的对立政党支持者相互攻击的“疯狂时刻”。津民盟领袖决意要压制尚未出现的反对,确保在计划于1985年举行的大选中“取得胜利”,以便之后顺应“人民的选择”施行一党专制,因此,大屠杀只是独立后五年内消灭一切政治反对派的持续行为和战略努力中的一环。 Dr Stuart Doran is an independent historian and author of a forthcoming book based on the new documentary material—Kingdom, power, glory: Mugabe, Zanu and the quest for supremacy, 1960–87. 【作者】斯图加特·道朗博士是一位独立历史学家,基于新的文档材料,他所著的《国度,权柄,荣耀:穆加贝,津民盟和对权力巅峰的追求,1960-87》一书即将问世。 Photo: A file picture dated 25 March 2005 shows Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe gesturing during a ZANU-PF rally near the town of Mbaira south of Harare, Zimbabwe. EPA/STR 【图注】一份摄于2005年3月25日的档案照片显示,在哈拉雷以南的玛巴拉镇,津巴布韦总统罗伯特·穆加贝在津巴布韦非洲民族联盟-爱国阵线(ZANU-PF)的集会上振臂高呼。 (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——

大功率吸尘器

【2016-07-16】

@whigzhou: 昨天跟熊也聊天时我说,川普只要不支持贸易保护和15美元最低工资,还是可以赢得我支持的,福利主义是慢性病,可以慢慢治,贸易保护和高额最低工资则是速效自杀丸,后者尤烈,而且川普粉一直没想明白一件事:贸易保护是吸引低技能移民的大功率吸尘器,你把劳动密集型工厂都弄回来,拉美移民必定暴增。

@whigzhou: 北美自由贸易协定的一个后果就是大幅降低了墨西哥移民,近两年甚至已转为净(more...)

标签: | |
7283
【2016-07-16】 @whigzhou: 昨天跟熊也聊天时我说,川普只要不支持贸易保护和15美元最低工资,还是可以赢得我支持的,福利主义是慢性病,可以慢慢治,贸易保护和高额最低工资则是速效自杀丸,后者尤烈,而且川普粉一直没想明白一件事:贸易保护是吸引低技能移民的大功率吸尘器,你把劳动密集型工厂都弄回来,拉美移民必定暴增。 @whigzhou: 北美自由贸易协定的一个后果就是大幅降低了墨西哥移民,近两年甚至已转为净流出,一旦实施贸易保护,这一趋势立刻逆转。  
梅姨

【2016-07-15】

@whigzhou: 神速,脱欧大臣David Davis公布了离欧经济战略 http://t.cn/R5FEuRb Trade deals. Tax cuts. And taking time before triggering Article 50. A Brexit economic strategy for Britain

@_bear_:新上任的女首相怎么样?从就任演讲看似乎并不怎么靠谱呢

@whigzhou: 立场跟卡梅隆差不多,你觉得不靠谱的地方(我猜)其实是延(more...)

标签: | | |
7281
【2016-07-15】 @whigzhou: 神速,脱欧大臣David Davis公布了离欧经济战略 http://t.cn/R5FEuRb Trade deals. Tax cuts. And taking time before triggering Article 50. A Brexit economic strategy for Britain @_bear_:新上任的女首相怎么样?从就任演讲看似乎并不怎么靠谱呢 @whigzhou: 立场跟卡梅隆差不多,你觉得不靠谱的地方(我猜)其实是延续了卡梅隆的纲领,即在社会议题上彻底放弃保守立场(效果是消灭了这些议题),福利问题上从撒切尔立场后撤,走所谓『一族』路线 @whigzhou: 除了这几点,在自由贸易、财政开支、税收、管制等议题上,都算得上亲市场,比川普好多了 @whigzhou: 我的理想人选是最撒切尔主义的Michael Gove,可惜党内支持不足,Gove是那种会向医疗和教育这两个福利主义坚固堡垒发动攻击的人,这对于卡梅隆和梅姨都是不可想象的,目前政治气候下可能也得不到支持,而目前这个大转变最需要的是党内团结,所以我觉得在可能结果里,梅姨还是相当理想的。 @whigzhou: 最可喜的是,梅姨在脱欧问题上完全没有拖泥带水,这一点从原帖所转声明中可以看得很清楚,几个日程期限设定都比之前大家预期的要早 【2016-07-17】 @whigzhou: 梅姨废掉了暖球部,表态支持低价能源开发,赞 http://t.cn/Rthcb1C @whigzhou: 梅姨组建的脱欧三驾马车非常给力,脱欧注定会占据这届政府的大部分注意力,她在社会议题上的倾向就没那么重要了,形势所迫,在经济方面恢复信心将是优先考虑,只要她显示出对这点的领悟,便值得看好