What if I told you that time has a race, a race in the contemporary way that we understand race in the United States? Typically, we talk about race in terms of black and white issues. In the African-American communities from which I come, we have a long-standing multi-generational joke about what we call "CP time," or "colored people's time." Now, we no longer refer to African-Americans as "colored," but this long-standing joke about our perpetual lateness to church, to cookouts, to family events and even to our own funerals, remains.
如果我說時間也有「種族」之分, 這裡的種族是指 當代美國人所了解的種族, 你覺得如何? 一般來說,我們會用 黑白問題來談種族。 在我所居住的非裔美國人社區中, 有一個流傳了數個世代的笑話, 說的是我們所謂的「CP 時間」, 即「有色人種的時間」。 我們已不再將非裔美國人 稱為「有色」的, 但這個流傳已久的笑話 講的是我們永遠會遲到, 不論是上教堂、 去野炊、去家庭活動, 連去遺體我們自己的 葬禮都會遲到。
I personally am a stickler for time. It's almost as if my mother, when I was growing up, said, "We will not be those black people." So we typically arrive to events 30 minutes early.
我個人對時間很固執。 幾乎就像是我媽媽 在我成長過程中說的: 「我們不要成為那種黑人。」 所以通常我們去哪裡 都會早到三十分鐘。
But today, I want to talk to you more about the political nature of time, for if time had a race, it would be white. White people own time.
但今天我想和各位談 比較多的是時間的政治本質, 因為如果時間也有 種族之分的話,它會是白人。 白人擁有時間。
I know, I know. Making such "incendiary statements" makes us uncomfortable: Haven't we moved past the point where race really matters? Isn't race a heavy-handed concept? Shouldn't we go ahead with our enlightened, progressive selves and relegate useless concepts like race to the dustbins of history? How will we ever get over racism if we keep on talking about race? Perhaps we should lock up our concepts of race in a time capsule, bury them and dig them up in a thousand years, peer at them with the clearly more enlightened, raceless versions of ourselves that belong to the future. But you see there, that desire to mitigate the impact of race and racism shows up in how we attempt to manage time, in the ways we narrate history, in the ways we attempt to shove the negative truths of the present into the past, in the ways we attempt to argue that the future that we hope for is the present in which we're currently living.
我知道,我知道。 做出這種「煽風點火的陳述」 讓我們感到不舒服: 種族具有影響的時候 不是已經過去了嗎? 種族不是一種強制打壓的觀念嗎? 我們不是應該帶著 開明進步的自我向前走, 把像種族意識這類無用的觀念 丟到歷史的垃圾桶嗎? 如果我們不斷談種族, 我們怎麼可能會忘懷它? 也許我們應該把種族觀念 鎖入一個時間膠囊裡, 把它埋起來,一千年後再挖出來, 讓未來很明顯更開明 更沒有種族意識的我們 來凝視這些觀念。 但你們要知道, 想要緩和種族和種族主義造 成之影響的慾望卻跑出來了, 出現在我們試圖 管理時間的方式中, 出現在我們敘述歷史的方式中, 出現在我們試圖將現在的負面真相 丟到過去的方式中, 出現在我們試圖爭論說 「我們渴望的未來其實就是 我們所處的現在」的方式中。
Now, when Barack Obama became President of the US in 2008, many Americans declared that we were post-racial. I'm from the academy where we're enamored with being post-everything. We're postmodern, we're post-structural, we're post-feminist. "Post" has become a simple academic appendage that we apply to a range of terms to mark the way we were. But prefixes alone don't have the power to make race and racism a thing of the past. The US was never "pre-race." So to claim that we're post-race when we have yet to grapple with the impact of race on black people, Latinos or the indigenous is disingenuous. Just about the moment we were preparing to celebrate our post-racial future, our political conditions became the most racial they've been in the last 50 years.
2008 年,歐巴馬當選美國總統時, 很多美國人宣稱我們 進入了「後種族」時代, 我來自學術界, 在那裡我們超愛「後」的, 我們是後現代主義的, 我們是後結構主義的, 我們是後女權主義的。 「後」已經成為一個 簡單的學術附屬品, 被我們加在各種用詞上, 來標示出我們以前的樣子。 但只靠在字首加一個字 無法把種族和種族歧視 變成過去式。 美國從來沒有「前種族」過。 所以,在我們還沒有 努力解決種族對於黑人、 拉丁裔,或原住民的影響時, 就聲稱我們進入「後種族」 時期,實在太虛偽。 就在我們準備要慶祝 「後種族」未來的時候, 我們的政治情勢卻達到 五十年來最種族歧視的高峰。
So today, I want to offer to you three observations, about the past, the present and the future of time, as it relates to the combating of racism and white dominance.
今天,我想提出 三項觀察給各位參考, 分別是關於過去、現在,及未來。 因為它們和對抗 種族主義和白人支配有關。
First: the past. Time has a history, and so do black people. But we treat time as though it is timeless, as though it has always been this way, as though it doesn't have a political history bound up with the plunder of indigenous lands, the genocide of indigenous people and the stealing of Africans from their homeland. When white male European philosophers first thought to conceptualize time and history, one famously declared, "[Africa] is no historical part of the World." He was essentially saying that Africans were people outside of history who had had no impact on time or the march of progress.
首先:過去。 時間有段歷史, 黑人也有。 但是我們把時間 當成是無時間性的, 好像它一直都是如此, 好像它沒有一段 和掠奪原住民土地相關的歷史, 對原住民進行大屠殺的歷史, 將非洲人從家鄉綁架過來的歷史。 當白種男性的歐洲哲學家最初想將 時間和歷史給概念化時, 其中一位提出了這段著名的聲稱: 「非洲不是世界歷史的一部份。」 基本上他說的是 非洲人是不在歷史裡的人種, 他們對於時間或是進步發展 一直都沒有影響。
This idea, that black people have had no impact on history, is one of the foundational ideas of white supremacy. It's the reason that Carter G. Woodson created "Negro History Week" in 1926. It's the reason that we continue to celebrate Black History Month in the US every February.
這種黑人過去一直 對歷史沒有影響的想法, 就是白人至上主義的 基礎想法之一。 它也是 1926 年卡特 G. 伍德森 創立了「黑人歷史週」的原因。 這也是我們在美國每年二月都要 慶祝「黑人歷史月」的原因。
Now, we also see this idea that black people are people either alternately outside of the bounds of time or stuck in the past, in a scenario where, much as I'm doing right now, a black person stands up and insists that racism still matters, and a person, usually white, says to them, "Why are you stuck in the past? Why can't you move on? We have a black president. We're past all that."
我們還會看到一種想法, 認為黑人若不是在時間的邊界之外, 就是困在過去裡, 在一個和我現在情況 很像的情境當中, 一個黑人站出來, 堅持認為種族問題依舊存在, 然後有個人──通常是白人, 對他們說:「為什麼 你們還困在過去? 為什麼你們不能向前走? 我們已有一位黑人總統了。 種族問題都已經過去了。」
William Faulkner famously said, "The past is never dead. It's not even past." But my good friend Professor Kristie Dotson says, "Our memory is longer than our lifespan." We carry, all of us, family and communal hopes and dreams with us. We don't have the luxury of letting go of the past. But sometimes, our political conditions are so troubling that we don't know if we're living in the past or we're living in the present. Take, for instance, when Black Lives Matter protesters go out to protest unjust killings of black citizens by police, and the pictures that emerge from the protest look like they could have been taken 50 years ago. The past won't let us go. But still, let us press our way into the present.
威廉福克納有句名言: 「過去從來沒有死亡, 過去甚至還沒有過去。」 但我的好朋友 克莉絲蒂道森教授說: 「我們的記憶比 我們的壽命更長。」 我們所有人身上都背著 家庭和社區的希望和夢想。 我們沒有放下過去的奢侈權力。 但有時候, 我們的政治情勢十分混亂, 以致於我們不知道我們 是活在過去,還是活在現在。 舉例來說,當「黑命貴」的抗議者 走上街頭抗議警方 不公正地射殺黑人公民時, 那些流出來的抗議照片 感覺就像五十年前拍的照片一樣。 「過去」不肯放我們走。 但,我們還是要奮力 朝「現在」前進。
At present, I would argue that the racial struggles we are experiencing are clashes over time and space. What do I mean? Well, I've already told you that white people own time. Those in power dictate the pace of the workday. They dictate how much money our time is actually worth. And Professor George Lipsitz argues that white people even dictate the pace of social inclusion. They dictate how long it will actually take for minority groups to receive the rights that they have been fighting for.
在「現在」,我會主張 我們現在正在經歷的種族鬥爭 都是因時間和空間所發生的衝突。 我是什麼意思? 我剛剛已經告訴各位, 白人擁有時間。 有權的人掌控了工作日的步調。 他們能決定我們的時間 到底值多少錢。 喬治利普茲教授主張 白人甚至掌控了社會包容的步調。 他們能決定弱勢團體要花多少時間 才能取得他們在爭取的權力。
Let me loop back to the past quickly to give you an example. If you think about the Civil Rights Movement and the cries of its leaders for "Freedom Now," they were challenging the slow pace of white social inclusion. By 1965, the year the Voting Rights Act was passed, there had been a full 100 years between the end of the Civil War and the conferral of voting rights on African-American communities. Despite the urgency of a war, it still took a full 100 years for actual social inclusion to occur.
讓我很快地繞回過去, 給各位一個例子。 想想看非裔美國人民權運動, 及運動領導人大喊著 「現在就要自由」, 他們就是在挑戰 白人社會包容的緩慢步調。 到了 1965 年, 選舉法案通過的那一年, 從內戰結束,到將投票權 賦予非裔美國人社區, 已經過了整整一百年。 儘管戰爭一觸即發, 仍然花了整整一百年, 才讓真正的社會包容實現。
Since 2012, conservative state legislatures across the US have ramped up attempts to roll back African-American voting rights by passing restrictive voter ID laws and curtailing early voting opportunities. This past July, a federal court struck down North Carolina's voter ID law saying it "... targeted African-Americans with surgical precision."
自從 2012 年, 美國各地的保守派州議院 花費越來越多的心力 試圖撤回非裔美國人的投票權, 手段包括通過限制性的 「選民身份法」 以及削減提早投票的機會。 去年七月,一個聯邦法庭駁回了 北卡羅來納州的選民身份法, 理由是「針對非裔美國人, 且這針對性精準到 和要動手術一樣。」
Restricting African-American inclusion in the body politic is a primary way that we attempt to manage and control people by managing and controlling time. But another place that we see these time-space clashes is in gentrifying cities like Atlanta, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, New Orleans and Washington, DC -- places that have had black populations for generations. But now, in the name of urban renewal and progress, these communities are pushed out, in service of bringing them into the 21st century.
限制非裔美國人融入國家, 是我們試圖藉由管理和控制時間, 來管理和控制人民的主要方式。 還有一個地方,也會 看見時間和空間的衝突。 是在中產階層化的城市, 如亞特蘭大、布魯克林、費城、 紐奧良,和華盛頓特區—— 在這些地區,黑人 已經存在數個世代。 但現在,假借 都市更新和進步的名義, 這些社區被趕出去, 為的竟是要帶他們 進入二十一世紀。
Professor Sharon Holland asked: What happens when a person who exists in time meets someone who only occupies space? These racial struggles are battles over those who are perceived to be space-takers and those who are perceived to be world-makers. Those who control the flow and thrust of history are considered world-makers who own and master time. In other words: white people. But when Hegel famously said that Africa was no historical part of the world, he implied that it was merely a voluminous land mass taking up space at the bottom of the globe. Africans were space-takers. So today, white people continue to control the flow and thrust of history, while too often treating black people as though we are merely taking up space to which we are not entitled. Time and the march of progress is used to justify a stunning degree of violence towards our most vulnerable populations, who, being perceived as space-takers rather than world-makers, are moved out of the places where they live, in service of bringing them into the 21st century.
雪倫荷蘭教授問道: 「當一個存在於時間內的人, 遇到一位只佔有空間的人, 會發生什麼事?」 這些種族的鬥爭 是為了被認為是「佔據空間者」的人 及被認為是「世界製造者」的人 所打的仗。 那些控制歷史洪流和推進的人, 被認為是世界製造者, 他們擁有並掌管時間。 換言之:他們就是白人。 但當黑格爾說出 「黑人不是歷史的一部份」 那句名言時, 他的本意是,非洲只是一大塊地, 佔據了全球最底層的空間。 非洲人是佔據空間者。 今天,白人繼續掌控 歷史的洪流與推進, 同時,他們太常認為 黑人只是在佔據空間, 而我們無權這麼做。 時間和進步發展被用來當作工具, 為要找到正當理由 來殘酷暴力對待最弱勢的族群, 這些人被視為佔據空間者, 而非世界製造者, 他們被趕出自己的家園, 為了帶他們進入二十一世紀。
Shortened life span according to zip code is just one example of the ways that time and space cohere in an unjust manner in the lives of black people. Children who are born in New Orleans zip code 70124, which is 93 percent white, can expect to live a full 25 years longer than children born in New Orleans zip code 70112, which is 60 percent black. Children born in Washington, DC's wealthy Maryland suburbs can expect to live a full 20 years longer than children born in its downtown neighborhoods.
因居住地的郵遞區號不同, 生命就比較短, 這只是許多例子中的一個, 說明在黑人的生命中, 時間和空間如何 以不公平的方式結合。 在紐奧良郵遞區號 70124 地區, 有 93% 人口是白人, 在這裡出生的兒童 壽命預期會比生在紐奧良 郵遞區號 70112 地區的兒童 多出整整二十五歲, 在這個地區有 60% 人口是黑人。 在華盛頓特區有錢的 馬里蘭郊區出生的兒童, 壽命預期會比出生在 鄰近市中心的兒童 多出整整二十歲,
Ta-Nehisi Coates argues that, "The defining feature of being drafted into the Black race is the inescapable robbery of time." We experience time discrimination, he tells us, not just as structural, but as personal: in lost moments of joy, lost moments of connection, lost quality of time with loved ones and lost years of healthy quality of life.
塔內西科特斯主張 「被納入黑人種族的關鍵特徵, 就是無法避免時間被奪取。」 他告訴我們, 我們對時間歧視的感受 不只是結構性的, 也是個人化的: 喜樂的時刻不再, 連結的時刻不再, 與所愛的人相處時的品質不再, 還會失去多年健康的生活品質。
In the future, do you see black people? Do black people have a future? What if you belong to the very race of people who have always been pitted against time? What if your group is the group for whom a future was never imagined? These time-space clashes -- between protesters and police, between gentrifiers and residents -- don't paint a very pretty picture of what America hopes for black people's future. If the present is any indicator, our children will be under-educated, health maladies will take their toll and housing will continue to be unaffordable.
在未來, 你有看見黑人嗎? 黑人有未來嗎? 如果你剛好屬於那個總是 在和時間競爭的種族,會如何? 如果你所屬的種族 沒有任何能夠想像的未來呢? 這些時間空間的衝突—— 抗議者與警方間, 中產階層化者與居民間的衝突—— 並沒有為美國所希望的黑人未來 繪出一幅非常美麗的圖畫。 若「現在」是一種指標, 我們孩子的將無法受到良好教育, 健康問題會讓我們付出代價, 我們也仍然無法付擔住房。
So if we're really ready to talk about the future, perhaps we should begin by admitting that we're out of time. We black people have always been out of time. Time does not belong to us. Our lives are lives of perpetual urgency. Time is used to displace us, or conversely, we are urged into complacency through endless calls to just be patient. But if past is prologue, let us seize upon the ways in which we're always out of time anyway to demand with urgency freedom now.
所以,若我們真的準備好 要來談論未來, 首先我們應該承認 我們已經沒時間了。 我們黑人的時間向來不夠。 時間不屬於我們。 我們的生命是永遠緊急的生命。 時間被用來取代我們, 或者,反過來說, 無止盡地呼籲「要有耐心」 敦促我們變得自滿。 但,如果過去是序幕, 讓我們利用反正我們的時間 總是不夠的方式, 來急迫地要求: 現在就要自由。
I believe the future is what we make it. But first, we have to decide that time belongs to all of us. No, we don't all get equal time, but we can decide that the time we do get is just and free. We can stop making your zip code the primary determinant of your lifespan. We can stop stealing learning time from black children through excessive use of suspensions and expulsions. We can stop stealing time from black people through long periods of incarceration for nonviolent crimes. The police can stop stealing time and black lives through use of excessive force.
我相信未來是我們自己創造的。 但我們必須先要斷定 時間屬於我們所有人。 不,不是每個人都有同等的時間, 但我們可以決定 我們得到的時間公正且自由, 我們可以不要讓郵遞區號成為 決定你壽命長短的主要因素。 我們可以不要再透過 過度使用退學和停學 來偷走黑人孩子的學習時間。 我們可以不要再透過 非暴力犯罪的長期監禁 來偷走黑人的時間。 警可以不要再透過過度武力 來偷走黑人的時間和性命。
I believe the future is what we make it. But we can't get there on colored people's time or white time or your time or even my time. It's our time. Ours.
我相信未來是我們自己創造的。 但如果我們想要辦到, 不能用有色人種的時間, 或白人的時間, 或你們的時間, 或甚至我的時間。 應該要用的是我們的時間。 我們的。
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(掌聲)