I come from one of the most liberal, tolerant, progressive places in the United States, Seattle, Washington. And I grew up with a family of great Seattlites. My mother was an artist, my father was a college professor, and I am truly grateful for my upbringing, because I always felt completely comfortable designing my life exactly as I saw fit.
Potičem iz jednog od najliberalnijih, najtolerantnijih, najprogresivnijih mesta u Sjedinjenim Državama, Sijetla u Vašingtonu. Odrastao sam uz porodicu sjajnih stanovnika Sijetla. Moja majka je bila umetnik, moj otac je bio profesor na fakultetu, a zaista sam zahvalan zbog mog vaspitanja, jer sam uvek imao slobodu da osmišljavam svoj život upravo onako kako sam smatrao podesnim.
And in point of fact, I took a route that was not exactly what my parents had in mind. When I was 19, I dropped out of college -- dropped out, kicked out, splitting hairs.
Zapravo, pošao sam putem koji moji roditelji baš i nisu imali na umu. Sa 19 godina sam napustio fakultet - napustio, izbacili me, da ne cepidlačimo.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And I went on the road as a professional French horn player, which was my lifelong dream. I played chamber music all over the United States and Europe, and I toured for a couple of years with a great jazz guitar player named Charlie Bird. And by the end of my 20s, I wound up as a member of the Barcelona Symphony Orchestra in Spain. What a great life.
Krenuo sam da putujem kao profesionalni svirač horne, što je bio moj životni san. Svirao sam kamernu muziku širom Sjedinjenih Država i Evrope. Išao sam na turneju par godina sa sjajnim džez gitaristom po imenu Čarli Berd. Pred kraj dvadesetih godina, postao sam član simfonijskog orkestra Barselone u Španiji. Kakav sjajan život!
And you know, my parents never complained. They supported me all the way through it. It wasn't their dream. They used to tell their neighbors and friends, "Our son, he's taking a gap decade."
Znate, moji roditelji se nikad nisu žalili. Podržavali su me u tome sve vreme. To nije bio njihov san. Imali su običaj da kažu svojim susedima i prijateljima: „Naš sin je uzeo deceniju pauze.“
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And -- There was, however, one awkward conversation about my lifestyle that I want to tell you about. I was 27, and I was home from Barcelona, and I was visiting my parents for Christmas, and I was cooking dinner with my mother, and we were alone in the kitchen. And she was quiet, too quiet. Something was wrong. And so I said, "Mom, what's on your mind?" And she said, "Your dad and I are really worried about you." And I said, "What?" I mean, what could it be, at this point? And she said, "I want you to be completely honest with me: have you been voting for Republicans?"
Došlo je, međutim, do jednog nelagodnog razgovora u vezi sa mojim životnim stilom o kome želim da vam govorim. Imao sam 27 godina i došao sam kući iz Barselone, u posetu roditeljima za Božić. Spremao sam večeru sa majkom i bili smo sami u kuhinji. Bila je tiha, previše tiha. Nešto nije bilo u redu. Upitao sam: „Mama, o čemu razmišljaš?“ Rekla je: „Tvoj tata i ja smo jako zabrinuti zbog tebe.“ Uzviknuo sam: „Šta?“ Mislim, šta može da bude, u ovom trenutku? Rekla je: „Hoću da budeš potpuno iskren prema meni. Da li si glasao za republikance?“
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
Now, the truth is, I wasn't really political, I was just a French horn player. But I had a bit of an epiphany, and they had detected it, and it was causing some confusion. You see, I had become an enthusiast for capitalism, and I want to tell you why that is. It stems from a lifelong interest of mine in, believe it or not, poverty.
Istina je da nisam baš bio politički orijentisan; bio sam samo svirač horne. Međutim, imao sam nekakvo prosvetljenje, što su oni primetili, a to je stvorilo zabunu. Vidite, počeo sam da gajim entuzijazam prema kapitalizmu, a hteo bih da vam ispričam zašto. To proizilazi iz mog dugotrajnog zanimanja za, verovali ili ne, siromaštvo.
See, when I was a kid growing up in Seattle, I remember the first time I saw real poverty. We were a lower middle class family, but that's of course not real poverty. That's not even close. The first time I saw poverty, and poverty's face, was when I was six or seven years old, early 1970s. And it was like a lot of you, kind of a prosaic example, kind of trite. It was a picture in the National Geographic Magazine of a kid who was my age in East Africa, and there were flies on his face and a distended belly. And he wasn't going to make it, and I knew that, and I was helpless. Some of you remember that picture, not exactly that picture, one just like it. It introduced the West to grinding poverty around the world. Well, that vision kind of haunted me as I grew up and I went to school and I dropped out and dropped in and started my family. And I wondered, what happened to that kid? Or to people just like him all over the world? And so I started to study, even though I wasn't in college, I was looking for the answer: what happened to the world's poorest people? Has it gotten worse? Has it gotten better? What?
Vidite, kada sam bio klinac, odrastajući u Sijetlu, sećam se kada sam prvi put video pravo siromaštvo. Mi smo bili porodica niže srednje klase, ali to, naravno, nije pravo siromaštvo. To nije ni približno. Prvi put sam video siromaštvo i lice siromaštva kada sam imao šest ili sedam godina, ranih 1970-ih. Bilo je kao i kod većine vas, prozaičan primer, nekako otrcan. Bila je to slika u časopisu „Nacionalna geografija“ deteta koje je bilo mojih godina u istočnoj Africi. Bilo je muva na njegovom licu i imao je naduven stomak. On neće preživeti, znao sam to i bio sam bespomoćan. Neki od vas se sećaju te slike, ne baš te slike, već neke slične. Predstavila je Zapadu mučno siromaštvo širom sveta. Taj prizor me je nekako proganjao dok sam odrastao i išao u školu, napuštao je i vraćao se i osnivao svoju porodicu. Pitao sam se šta se dogodilo sa tim detetom ili sa ljudima poput njega širom sveta. Stoga sam počeo da izučavam, mada nisam išao na fakultet, tražio sam odgovor na to šta se dešava najsiromašnijim ljudima sveta. Da li se pogoršalo? Da li se poboljšalo? Šta?
And I found the answer, and it changed my life, and I want to share it with you.
Pronašao sam odgovor, promenio mi je život, i želim da ga podelim sa vama.
See -- most Americans believe that poverty has gotten worse since we were children, since they saw that vision. If you ask Americans, "Has poverty gotten worse or better around the world?", 70 percent will say that hunger has gotten worse since the early 1970s. But here's the truth. Here's the epiphany that I had that changed my thinking. From 1970 until today, the percentage of the world's population living in starvation levels, living on a dollar a day or less, obviously adjusted for inflation, that percentage has declined by 80 percent. There's been an 80 percent decline in the world's worst poverty since I was a kid. And I didn't even know about it. This, my friends, that's a miracle. That's something we ought to celebrate. It's the greatest antipoverty achievement in the history of mankind, and it happened in our lifetimes.
Vidite, većina Amerikanaca veruje da se siromaštvo pogoršalo otkad smo bili deca, otkad su videli taj prizor. Ako upitate Amerikance: „Da li se siromaštvo pogoršalo ili poboljšalo širom sveta?“, Sedamdeset posto će vam reći da se glad pogoršala od ranih 1970-ih godina. Međutim, evo istine. Evo prosvetljenja koje sam doživeo koje mi je promenilo razmišljanje. Od 1970. do danas, procenat svetske populacije koji živi na nivou gladovanja, na samo jednom dolaru dnevno ili manje - očito, to je prilagođeno zbog inflacije - taj procenat je opao za 80 odsto. Došlo je do pada od 80 odsto najgoreg siromaštva na svetu otkad sam bio dete. Nisam ni znao za to. To je, prijatelji moji, čudo. To je nešto što treba da slavimo. To je najveće postignuće u borbi protiv siromaštva u istoriji čovečanstva, a dogodilo se u našem životnom veku.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)
So when I learned this, I asked, what did that? What made it possible? Because if you don't know why, you can't do it again. If you want to replicate it and get the next two billion people out of poverty, because that's what we're talking about: since I was a kid, two billion of the least of these, our brothers and sisters, have been pulled out of poverty. I want the next two billion, so I've got to know why. And I went in search of an answer. And it wasn't a political answer, because I didn't care. You know what, I still don't care. I wanted the best answer from mainstream economists left, right and center.
Kada sam saznao ovo, zapitao sam se: „Čime se to postiglo? Šta je to omogućilo?“ Jer, ako ne znate zašto, ne možete to da ponovite. Ako želite to da ponovite i izvučete iz siromaštva naredne dve milijarde ljudi, jer to je ono o čemu govorimo, a otkad sam bio dete, najmanje dve milijarde njih, naše braće i sestara, izvučeno je iz siromaštva. Hoću da tako bude i sa naredne dve, stoga moram da znam zašto. Krenuo sam u potragu za odgovorom. To nije bio politički odgovor, jer me nije bilo briga. Znate šta, i dalje me nije briga. Hteo sam najbolji odgovor od vodećih ekonomista, levice, desnice i sredine.
And here it is. Here are the reasons. There are five reasons that two billion of our brothers and sisters have been pulled out of poverty since I was a kid. Number one: globalization. Number two: free trade. Number three: property rights. Number four: rule of law. Number five: entrepreneurship. It was the free enterprise system spreading around the world after 1970 that did that.
I evo ga. Evo razloga. Postoji pet razloga zašto je dve milijarde naše braće i sestara iščupano iz siromaštva otkad sam bio dete. Broj jedan: globalizacija. Broj dva: slobodna trgovina. Broj tri: pravo svojine. Broj četiri: vladavina prava. Broj pet: preduzetništvo. Sistem slobodnog preduzetništva koji se širio po svetu nakon 1970. godine je to postigao.
Now, I'm not naive. I know that free enterprise isn't perfect, and I know that free enterprise isn't everything we need to build a better world. But that is great. And that's beyond politics. Here's what I learned. This is the epiphany. Capitalism is not just about accumulation. At its best, it's about aspiration, which is what so many people on this stage talk about, is the aspiration that comes from dreams that are embedded in the free enterprise system. And we've got to share it with more people.
E, sad, nisam naivan. Znam da slobodno preduzetništvo nije savršeno i znam da slobodno preduzetništvo nije sve što nam je potrebno da bismo izgradili bolji svet. Ipak, to je sjajno i to je iznad politike. Evo šta sam shvatio. Ovo je prosvetljenje. Kapitalizam se ne odnosi samo na gomilanje. U svom najboljem obliku, odnosi se na stremljenje, a to je ono o čemu toliko ljudi na ovoj bini govori, o stremljenju koje proizilazi iz snova koji su ugrađeni u sistem slobodnog preduzetništva. Moramo ga deliti sa još ljudi.
Now, I want to tell you about a second epiphany that's related to that first one that I think can bring us progress, not just around the world, but right here at home. The best quote I've ever heard to summarize the thoughts that I've just given you about pulling people out of poverty is as follows: "Free markets have created more wealth than any system in history. They have lifted billions out of poverty."
E, sad, hoću da vam pričam o drugom prosvetljenju koje je u vezi sa prvim koje smatram da nam može doneti napredak, ne samo širom sveta, već i ovde, u domovini. Najbolji citat koji sam čuo da rezimira misli koje sam vam upravo izneo o izvlačenju ljudi iz siromaštva je sledeći: „Slobodna tržišta su stvorila više bogatstva od bilo kog sistema u istoriji. Izdigla su milijarde iz siromaštva.“
Who said it? It sounds like Milton Friedman or Ronald Reagan. Wrong. President Barack Obama said that. Why do I know it by heart? Because he said it to me. Crazy. And I said, "Hallelujah." But more than that, I said, "What an opportunity."
Ko je to rekao? Zvuči kao Milton Fridman ili Ronald Regan. Greška. Predsednik Barak Obama je to rekao. Zašto to znam napamet? Jer je to rekao meni. Ludo. Rekao sam: „Aleluja.“ Štaviše, rekao sam: „Kakva prilika.“
You know what I was thinking? It was at an event that we were doing on the subject at Georgetown University in May of 2015. And I thought, this is the solution to the biggest problem facing America today. What? It's coming together around these ideas, liberals and conservatives, to help people who need us the most.
Znate li o čemu sam razmišljao? Bilo je to na događaju koji smo održavali na ovu temu na Univerzitetu u Džordžtaunu u maju 2015. godine. Pomislio sam da je to rešenje za najveći problem sa kojim se Amerika suočava danas. Šta? To je udruživanje oko ovih ideja, liberala i konzervativaca, da bismo pomogli ljudima kojima smo najviše potrebni.
Now, I don't have to tell anybody in this room that we're in a crisis, in America and many countries around the world with political polarization. It's risen to critical, crisis levels. It's unpleasant. It's not right. There was an article last year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which is one of the most prestigious scientific journals published in the West. And it was an article in 2014 on political motive asymmetry. What's that? That's what psychologists call the phenomenon of assuming that your ideology is based in love but your opponents' ideology is based in hate. It's common in world conflict. You expect to see this between Palestinians and Israelis, for example. What the authors of this article found was that in America today, a majority of Republicans and Democrats suffer from political motive asymmetry. A majority of people in our country today who are politically active believe that they are motivated by love but the other side is motivated by hate. Think about it. Think about it. Most people are walking around saying, "You know, my ideology is based on basic benevolence, I want to help people, but the other guys, they're evil and out to get me." You can't progress as a society when you have this kind of asymmetry. It's impossible.
Nije potrebno da nikome u ovoj prostoriji kažem da smo u krizi, u Americi i mnogim zemljama širom sveta sa političkom polarizovanošću. To je poraslo do kritičnog, kriznog nivoa. Neprijatno je. Nije kako treba. Objavljen je jedan članak prošle godine u „Zborniku Nacionalne akademije nauka“, koji je jedan od najprestižnijih naučnih časopisa koji se izdaju na Zapadu. Bio je to članak iz 2014. godine o asimetriji političkih motiva. Šta je to? To je ono što psiholozi nazivaju pojavom pretpostavke da je vaša ideologija zasnovana na ljubavi, a protivnikova ideologija ima osnovu u mržnji. Učestala je u svetskim konfliktima. Očekujete da ćete to videti između Palestinaca i Izraelaca, na primer. Autori ovog članka su otkrili da u današnjoj Americi većina republikanaca i demokrata boluje od asimetrije političkog motiva. Većina ljudi koji su politički aktivni u našoj zemlji danas veruje da ih motiviše ljubav, dok drugu stranu motiviše mržnja. Razmislite o tome. Razmislite o tome. Većina ljudi ide okolo govoreći: „Znate, moja ideologija zasniva se na osnovnoj dobronamernosti, želim da pomognem ljudima, ali ovi drugi, oni su zli i nameračili su se protiv mene.“ Ne možete napredovati kao društvo ako imate takvu asimetriju. Nemoguće je.
How do we solve it? Well, first, let's be honest: there are differences. Let's not minimize the differences. That would be really naïve. There's a lot of good research on this. A veteran of the TED stage is my friend Jonathan Haidt. He's a psychology professor at New York University. He does work on the ideology and values and morals of different people to see how they differ. And he's shown, for example, that conservatives and liberals have a very different emphasis on what they think is important. For example, Jon Haidt has shown that liberals care about poverty 59 percent more than they care about economic liberty. And conservatives care about economic liberty 28 percent more than they care about poverty.
Kako da to rešimo? Pa, najpre, budimo iskreni, razlike postoje. Ne umanjujmo razlike. To bi zaista bilo naivno. O ovome je sprovedeno dosta dobrih istraživanja. Veteran TED bine je moj prijatelj Džonatan Hajt. On je profesor psihologije na Univerzitetu u Njujorku. Radi na ideologiji, vrednostima i moralu različitih ljudi da bi video kako se razlikuju. Pokazao je, na primer, da se konzervativci i liberali veoma razlikuju po onome što ističu da je važno. Na primer, Džon Hajt je pokazao da je liberalima stalo do siromaštva 59 posto više nego što im je stalo do ekonomske slobode, a konzervativcima je stalo do ekonomske slobode 28 posto više nego do siromaštva.
Irreconcilable differences, right? We'll never come together. Wrong. That is diversity in which lies our strength. Remember what pulled up the poor. It was the obsession with poverty, accompanied by the method of economic freedom spreading around the world. We need each other, in other words, if we want to help people and get the next two billion people out of poverty. There's no other way.
Nepomirljive razlike, zar ne? Nikada se nećemo složiti. Pogrešno. Ovo je različitost u kojoj leži naša snaga. Setite se šta je izvuklo siromašne. Bila je to opsednutost siromaštvom, zajedno sa metodom ekonomske slobode koja se širila po svetu. Potrebni smo jedni drugima, drugim rečima, ako hoćemo da pomognemo ljudima i izvučemo još dve milijarde ljudi iz siromaštva. Nema drugog načina.
Hmm. How are we going to get that? It's a tricky thing, isn't it. We need innovative thinking. A lot of it's on this stage. Social entrepreneurship. Yeah. Absolutely. Phenomenal. We need investment overseas in a sustainable, responsible, ethical and moral way. Yes. Yes.
Hm. Kako ćemo to da uradimo? Nezgodno je, zar ne? Potrebno nam je inovativno razmišljanje. Ima ga dosta na ovoj bini. Društveno preduzetništvo. Da, apsolutno. Fenomenalno. Potrebna su nam ulaganja izvan granica na održiv, odgovoran, etički i moralan način. Da. Da.
But you know what we really need? We need a new day in flexible ideology. We need to be less predictable. Don't we? Do you ever feel like your own ideology is starting to get predictable? Kinda conventional? Do you ever feel like you're always listening to people who agree with you? Why is that dangerous? Because when we talk in this country about economics, on the right, conservatives, you're always talking about taxes and regulations and big government. And on the left, liberals, you're talking about economics, it's always about income inequality. Right? Now those are important things, really important to me, really important to you. But when it comes to lifting people up who are starving and need us today, those are distractions. We need to come together around the best ways to mitigate poverty using the best tools at our disposal, and that comes only when conservatives recognize that they need liberals and their obsession with poverty, and liberals need conservatives and their obsession with free markets. That's the diversity in which lies the future strength of this country, if we choose to take it.
Međutim, znate li šta nam zaista treba? Potreban nam je preokret fleksibilne ideologije. Potrebno nam je da budemo manje predvidljivi. Zar ne? Da li ikada osećate da vaša ideologija postaje predvidljiva, nekako konvencionalna? Da li vam se čini da uvek slušate ljude koji se slažu sa vama? Zašto je to opasno? Zato što, kada u ovoj zemlji govorimo o ekonomiji, ako ste na desnoj strani, konzervativci, uvek pričate o porezima, regulativama i velikoj vladi. Na levoj strani, liberali, kada vi govorite o ekonomiji, uvek se radi o nejednakosti prihoda. Zar ne? To su važne stvari, zaista važne za mene, zaista važne za vas. Međutim, kada se radi o uzdizanju ljudi koji gladuju i kojima smo potrebni danas, to odvraća pažnju. Potrebno je da se udružimo oko najboljih načina da ublažimo siromaštvo koristeći najbolja sredstva kojima raspolažemo, a to nastupa tek kada konzervativci priznaju da su im potrebni liberali i njihova opsednutost siromaštvom, i da su liberalima potrebni konzervativci i njihova opsesija slobodnim tržištima. To je različitost u kojoj leži buduća snaga ove zemlje, ako odlučimo da je prihvatimo.
So how are we going to do it? How are we going to do it together? I've got to have some action items, not just for you but for me. Number one. Action item number one: remember, it's not good enough just to tolerate people who disagree. It's not good enough. We have to remember that we need people who disagree with us, because there are people who need all of us who are still waiting for these tools. Now, what are you going to do? How are you going to express that? Where does this start? It starts here. You know, all of us in this room, we're blessed. We're blessed with people who listen to us. We're blessed with prosperity. We're blessed with leadership. When people hear us, with the kind of unpredictable ideology, then maybe people will listen. Maybe progress will start at that point. That's number one. Number two. Number two: I'm asking you and I'm asking me to be the person specifically who blurs the lines, who is ambiguous, who is hard to classify. If you're a conservative, be the conservative who is always going on about poverty and the moral obligation to be a warrior for the poor. And if you're a liberal, be a liberal who is always talking about the beauty of free markets to solve our problems when we use them responsibly.
Pa, kako ćemo to da uradimo? Kako ćemo to uraditi zajedno? Moram da imam neke akcione stavke, ne samo za vas, već i za mene. Broj jedan, akciona stavka broj jedan: upamtite, nije dovoljno samo tolerisati ljude koji se ne slažu sa nama. To nije dovoljno. Moramo da upamtimo da su nam potrebni ljudi koji se ne slažu sa nama, jer ima ljudi kojima smo potrebni svi mi, a koji još čekaju na ta sredstva. Šta ćete da uradite? Kako ćete to da izrazite? Gde ovo počinje? Počinje ovde. Znate, svi mi u ovoj prostoriji, mi imamo sreće. Imamo sreće da imamo ljude koji nas slušaju. Imamo sreću napretka. Imamo sreću vođstva. Kada nas ljudi čuju, sa nekom vrstom nepredvidljive ideologije, tada će možda slušati. Možda će napredak početi u tom trenutku. To je broj jedan. Broj dva. Broj dva: tražim od vas i od sebe da budemo osobe koje zamagljuju granice, koje su dvosmislene, koje je teško svrstati. Ako ste konzervativac, budite konzervativac koji uvek priča o siromaštvu i moralnoj obavezi da budemo borci za siromašne. Ako ste liberal, budite liberal koji uvek govori o lepoti slobodnih tržišta u rešavanju naših problema kada ih odgovorno koristimo.
If we do that, we get two things. Number one: we get to start to work on the next two billion and be the solution that we've seen so much of in the past and we need to see more of in the future. That's what we get. And the second is that we might just be able to take the ghastly holy war of ideology that we're suffering under in this country and turn it into a competition of ideas based on solidarity and mutual respect. And then maybe, just maybe, we'll all realize that our big differences aren't really that big after all.
Ako to uradimo, dobijamo dve stvari. Broj jedan: počinjemo da radimo na sledeće dve milijarde i da budemo rešenje koje smo toliko viđali u prošlosti i koje treba da više viđamo u budućnosti; to je ono što dobijamo. A drugo je da bismo mogli da uzmemo ovaj grozni sveti rat ideologije koji trpimo u ovoj zemlji i pretvorimo ga u nadmetanje ideja zasnovanih na solidarnosti i zajedničkom poštovanju, a tada možda, samo možda, shvatimo da naše velike razlike i nisu stvarno tako velike.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)