Chris Anderson: Welcome to this next edition of TED Dialogues. We're trying to do some bridging here today. You know, the American dream has inspired millions of people around the world for many years. Today, I think, you can say that America is divided, perhaps more than ever, and the divisions seem to be getting worse. It's actually really hard for people on different sides to even have a conversation. People almost feel... disgusted with each other. Some families can't even speak to each other right now. Our purpose in this dialogue today is to try to do something about that, to try to have a different kind of conversation, to do some listening, some thinking, some understanding. And I have two people with us to help us do that.
克里斯 安德森: 欢迎收看新一期的TED对话 在今天节目中我们打算对接沟通 大家都知道美国梦激励着数百万人 遍布全球,影响久远 现在,我想你们可以说 美国是分裂的 可能比以往任何时候还严重 而且分歧似乎还变得越来越严重 事实上,对于站在 各方面的人来说即使是 开展对话都是很困难的 大家几乎是感觉…… 你见不得我,我见不得你 现在在有些人家里 彼此之间甚至都不讲话 我们今天对话的目的 就是希望能做些事 尝试开展一个不同的对话 做一些倾听,一些思考, 一些理解 今天会有两个人同我一起做节目
They're not going to come at this hammer and tong against each other. This is not like cable news. This is two people who have both spent a lot of their working life in the political center or right of the center. They've immersed themselves in conservative worldviews, if you like. They know that space very well. And we're going to explore together how to think about what is happening right now, and whether we can find new ways to bridge and just to have wiser, more connected conversations.
他们不准备打嘴仗 这里可不像有线新闻 这两位专家都花费了很多 他们的职业生涯 在政治中心或权力中心上 他们沉浸在 保守派的世界观里 对这方面他们可是行家里手 下面我们将一起探索 怎样理解当下 所发生的事情 以及是否我们可以 找到新的办法去建立联系 开展更睿智 更有连接性的谈话
With me, first of all, Gretchen Carlson, who has spent a decade working at Fox News, hosting "Fox and Friends" and then "The Real Story," before taking a courageous stance in filing sexual harassment claims against Roger Ailes, which eventually led to his departure from Fox News. David Brooks, who has earned the wrath of many of [The New York Times's] left-leaning readers because of his conservative views, and more recently, perhaps, some of the right-leaning readers because of his criticism of some aspects of Trump. Yet, his columns are usually the top one, two or three most-read content of the day because they're brilliant, because they bring psychology and social science to providing understanding for what's going on. So without further ado, a huge welcome to Gretchen and David. Come and join me.
首先有请格雷琴·卡尔森 她在福克斯新闻 工作了十多年 主持“福克斯和她的朋友” 然后“实话实说” 后来,她大胆地提出 性骚扰声称 指控罗杰·艾尔斯 最终导致罗杰离开福克斯 大卫·布鲁克斯,他引起了 很多【纽约时报】的 左派读者的激怒 因为他的保守观点 最近有些右派的 读者也掺和进来 这是因为他对 特朗普的批评 然而,他的专栏经常是 每日最多阅读榜 的前三名之一 因为它们的很精彩的 因为它带来了心理学 社会科学的分析 去让人们知道 正在发生什么 所以,闲话少说,热烈欢迎 格雷琴和大卫 请坐
(Applause)
(观众掌声)
So, Gretchen. Sixty-three million Americans voted for Donald Trump. Why did they do this?
那么,格雷琴 6300万的美国人把票 投给了唐纳德·特朗普 他们为什么会这么做?
Gretchen Carlson: There are a lot of reasons, in my mind, why it happened. I mean, I think it was a movement of sorts, but it started long ago. It didn't just happen overnight. "Anger" would be the first word that I would think of -- anger with nothing being done in Washington, anger about not being heard. I think there was a huge swath of the population that feels like Washington never listens to them, you know, a good part of the middle of America, not just the coasts, and he was somebody they felt was listening to their concerns. So I think those two issues would be the main reason. I have to throw in there also celebrity. I think that had a huge impact on Donald Trump becoming president.
格雷琴·卡尔森:我觉得 导这种局面是有很多原因的 我的意思是:这是一个运动 但是是在很多年前就发起的 这不是一夜之间就发生的 我想到的第一个词是“愤怒” 对华盛顿的无所作为 表示愤怒 对自己的声音被无视 表示愤怒 我觉得有很一大批人 感觉到华盛顿 从来不听他们的声音 你知道,有很大一部分是 美国中部的,不仅仅是沿海的 特朗普让这些人觉得 他有在倾听他们的诉求 所以我认为这两个是主要原因 当然还得考虑他是名人 我认为这对唐纳德·特朗普 成为总统影响很大
CA: Was the anger justified?
CA:“愤怒”是正当合理的?
David Brooks: Yeah, I think so. In 2015 and early 2016, I wrote about 30 columns with the following theme: don't worry, Donald Trump will never be the Republican nominee.
大卫·布鲁克斯:对,我认为是 在2015和2016年初年初 我写了大约30篇专栏文章 是关于以下主题的: 不用担心,唐纳德·特朗普 是绝对不会被共和党提名的
(Laughter)
(笑声)
And having done that and gotten that so wrong, I decided to spend the ensuing year just out in Trumpworld, and I found a lot of economic dislocation. I ran into a woman in West Virginia who was going to a funeral for her mom. She said, "The nice thing about being Catholic is we don't have to speak, and that's good, because we're not word people." That phrase rung in my head: word people. A lot of us in the TED community are word people, but if you're not, the economy has not been angled toward you, and so 11 million men, for example, are out of the labor force because those jobs are done away. A lot of social injury. You used to be able to say, "I'm not the richest person in the world, I'm not the most famous, but my neighbors can count on me and I get some dignity out of that." And because of celebritification or whatever, if you're not rich or famous, you feel invisible. And a lot of moral injury, sense of feeling betrayed, and frankly, in this country, we almost have one success story, which is you go to college, get a white-collar job, and you're a success, and if you don't fit in that formula, you feel like you're not respected. And so that accumulation of things -- and when I talked to Trump voters and still do, I found most of them completely realistic about his failings, but they said, this is my shot.
结果错得一塌糊涂 我决定后来的一整年 都去专注特朗普世界 我发现了很多经济失调 我在西弗吉尼亚州遇到一位女士 当时,她要去参加母亲的葬礼 她说:“作为天主教徒的好处 是我们不用讲话 那是很好的 因为我们不是写手。” 那句话一直在我脑海里回响:写手 在我们的TED社区里 有很多是写手 但如果你不是,经济 将和你无缘 举个例子 1100万的人失去了工作 这些工作已经不存在了 造成了很多社会创伤 以前你可能会说, “虽然我不是世界上最有钱的 也不是最有名的 但我的邻居可以信任我 我觉得可以有些自尊。” 现在因为名气或什么的 如果你不富有或是有名 你感觉自己被当成空气 而且还有很多道德上的伤害 被背叛的感觉 坦白地说,在这个国家 我们几乎只有一个成功的故事 那就是你上完大学 找份白领的工作,你就是成功的 那么如果你不符合那个公式 你会觉得低人一等 那些事情积累起来 所以当我和特朗普的选民谈话的时候 我现在也还在做这个 我发现他们中的大部分 对他的失败是完全现实的 但他们说,这是我的机会
GC: And yet I predicted that he would be the nominee, because I've known him for 27 years. He's a master marketer, and one of the things he did extremely well that President Obama also did extremely well, was simplifying the message, simplifying down to phrases and to a populist message. Even if he can't achieve it, it sounded good. And many people latched on to that simplicity again. It's something they could grasp onto: "I get that. I want that. That sounds fantastic." And I remember when he used to come on my show originally, before "The Apprentice" was even "The Apprentice," and he'd say it was the number one show on TV. I'd say back to him, "No, it's not." And he would say, "Yes it is, Gretchen." And I would say, "No it's not." But people at home would see that, and they'd be like, "Wow, I should be watching the number one show on TV." And -- lo and behold -- it became the number one show on TV. So he had this, I've seen this ability in him to be the master marketer.
GC:然而我预测 他会被提名 因为我认识他快27年了 他是个营销大师 他做得非常好 的一件事 奥巴马总统 也做得非常好的 是简化信息 简化到到口号 还有很接地气的消息 就算他事实上做不到 听起来很不错 很多人再一次被 那种简单吸引 这可是他们能理解的: “我明白了,我要的就是这个 那听起来真的是很棒。” 我记得他以前来上我的节目 “学徒”还是那个“学徒”的时候 他就说这是排名 第一的电视节目 我回了他一句:“不,不是” 然后他说:“是的,格雷琴” 我接着说:“不,不是” 但是人们在家会看到 就会说, “哇,我得去看这个 排名第一的节目” 你瞧瞧,还真成了第一热门节目 所以说,他是很有一套的 我在他身上看到了这种能力 如何成为营销大师
CA: It's puzzling to a lot of people on the left that so many women voted for him, despite some of his comments.
CA:对许多左派来说 让人搞不清楚的是 很多女性给他投了票 尽管他的一些评论
GC: I wrote a column about this for Time Motto, saying that I really believe that lot of people put on blinders, and maybe for the first time, some people decided that policies they believed in and being heard and not being invisible anymore was more important to them than the way in which he had acted or acts as a human. And so human dignity -- whether it would be the dust-up about the disabled reporter, or what happened in that audiotape with Billy Bush and the way in which he spoke about women -- they put that aside and pretended as if they hadn't seen that or heard that, because to them, policies were more important.
GC:关于这个话题 我给《时代周刊》的"座右铭"栏目写过文章 文章里写到,我真的相信 很多人闭着眼睛装瞎 而且可能有史以来第一次 有些人觉得 他们认同的政策 以及他们能够被倾听 能够不再无足轻重 这些对他们来说 比特朗普身为一个人还要重要 所以人类的尊严 不管是特朗普跟 残障记者的口水战 还是跟比利·布什的录音带事件 当然还有他调侃女人的方式 他们把这些放在了一旁 装聋作哑 视而不见 对他们来说 政策才更重要
CA: Right, so just because someone voted for Trump, it's not blind adherence to everything that he's said or stood for.
CA:是的,那么仅仅因为 这些人给特朗普投票 不代表他们就盲目地 支持他所说的一切
GC: No. I heard a lot of people that would say to me, "Wow, I just wish he would shut up before the election. If he would just stay quiet, he'd get elected."
GC:没有的,我听很多人跟我讲 “老天呐,我希望他 在选举前闭嘴 他只要安静点 他是可以当选的
CA: And so, maybe for people on the left there's a trap there, to sort of despise or just be baffled by the support, assuming that it's for some of the unattractive features. Actually, maybe they're supporting him despite those, because they see something exciting. They see a man of action. They see the choking hold of government being thrown off in some way and they're excited by that.
CA:所以,也许对左派来说 这有一个陷阱 被支持者鄙视 或仅仅是对他们感到困惑 假设那是为了 一些毫无新意的事情 但实际上就算这样 他们也还是会支持他的 因为他们看到让人兴奋的东西 他们看到了在行动的人 他们看到政府桎梏 就这么被甩掉 人们对此感到兴奋
GC: But don't forget we saw that on the left as well -- Bernie Sanders. So this is one of the commonalities that I think we can talk about today, "The Year of the Outsider," David -- right? And even though Bernie Sanders has been in Congress for a long time, he was deemed an outsider this time. And so there was anger on the left as well, and so many people were in favor of Bernie Sanders. So I see it as a commonality. People who like Trump, people who like Bernie Sanders, they were liking different policies, but the underpinning was anger.
GC:但别忘了我们有看到 左派人士 - 伯尼·桑德斯 所以说,我觉得这是 今天谈论的共识之一 “外行之年”, 大卫,是不? 虽然伯尼·桑德斯 在国会有很长时间了 但这次他绝对是个外行 于是左派也很愤怒 有那么多人 赞成伯尼·桑德斯 我觉得它有共通性 喜欢特朗普的人 喜欢伯尼·桑德斯的人 他们喜欢不同的政策 但骨子里却是愤怒
CA: David, there's often this narrative, then, that the sole explanation for Trump's victory and his rise is his tapping into anger in a very visceral way. But you've written a bit about that it's actually more than that, that there's a worldview that's being worked on here. Could you talk about that?
CA:大卫,那总有这么个说法 关于特朗普获胜 并崛起的唯一正解 就是他很知道 愤怒者的心态 可你也写了 实际上远不止这些 其实还有个流行的世界观 你可不可以就此谈谈?
DB: I would say he understood what, frankly, I didn't, which is what debate we were having. And so I'd grown up starting with Reagan, and it was the big government versus small government debate. It was Barry Goldwater versus George McGovern, and that was the debate we had been having for a generation. It was: Democrats wanted to use government to enhance equality, Republicans wanted to limit government to enhance freedom. That was the debate. He understood what I think the two major parties did not, which was that's not the debate anymore. The debate is now open versus closed. On one side are those who have the tailwinds of globalization and the meritocracy blowing at their back, and they tend to favor open trade, open borders, open social mores, because there are so many opportunities. On the other side are those who feel the headwinds of globalization and the meritocracy just blasting in their faces, and they favor closed trade, closed borders, closed social mores, because they just want some security. And so he was right on that fundamental issue, and people were willing to overlook a lot to get there. And so he felt that sense of security.
DB:我会说特朗普知道 但坦白说我可不懂的 就是我们正在开展的辩论 我是在里根年代长大的 那是大小政府间的辩论 巴里·戈德华特针对乔治·麦戈文 那是我们那代人的讨论 就是:民主党想用政府加强平等 共和党想限制政府来加强自由 那就是辩论 我想特朗普清楚 而两大党派却没弄懂的 就是这个不再是辩论了 当下的辩论是开放对封闭 一方面是全球化风生水起 还有背后强大的精英团队 这些人倾向于自由贸易 有开放的边界,开放的公序良俗 因为这里有很多的机会 另一方面是逆全球化的 他们正面对抗精英主义者 这些人喜欢封闭的贸易 封闭的边界还有社会道德 因为他们只想要安全 所以他在这个 根本问题上是对的 人们愿意为了安全 而忽视许多东西 特朗普有种给人们安全的感觉
We're speaking the morning after Trump's joint session speech. There are three traditional groups in the Republican Party. There are the foreign policies hawks who believe in America as global policeman. Trump totally repudiated that view. Second, there was the social conservatives who believed in religious liberty, pro-life, prayer in schools. He totally ignored that. There was not a single mention of a single social conservative issue. And then there were the fiscal hawks, the people who wanted to cut down on the national debt, Tea Party, cut the size of government. He's expanding the size of government! Here's a man who has single-handedly revolutionized a major American party because he understood where the debate was headed before other people. And then guys like Steve Bannon come in and give him substance to his impulses.
就在联合会议特朗普发表讲话的 第二天早上,我们说: 共和党有三个传统团体 有外交鹰派 相信美国是 全球警察 特朗普完全否认这个观点 第二个是社会保守派 他们相信宗教自由 反对堕胎 学校祷告 他完全忽视这点 对于任何社会保守问题 都只字未提 剩下的就是财富鹰派 那些个想减少国债的人 还有茶党要求削减政府规模 特朗普在扩大政府规模 就这样一个人,单枪匹马 革了美国主要政党的命 因为他很懂得如何引导辩论 在其他人之前 像史蒂夫·班农这样的人参与进来 很是给与实质性的行动
CA: And so take that a bit further, and maybe expand a bit more on your insights into Steve Bannon's worldview. Because he's sometimes tarred in very simple terms as this dangerous, racist, xenophobic, anger-sparking person. There's more to the story; that is perhaps an unfair simplification.
CA:那么就那个更进一步地说 也许可以延伸下你们的看法 关于史蒂夫·班农的世界观 因为他有时候 被极简地标注为 一个危险的,种族主义者 排外的,怒火中烧的家伙 故事可没那么简单; 这种简化是相当不公平
DB: I think that part is true, but there's another part that's probably true, too. He's part of a global movement. It's like being around Marxists in 1917. There's him here, there's the UKIP party, there's the National Front in France, there's Putin, there's a Turkish version, a Philippine version. So we have to recognize that this is a global intellectual movement. And it believes that wisdom and virtue is not held in individual conversation and civility the way a lot of us in the enlightenment side of the world do. It's held in -- the German word is the "volk" -- in the people, in the common, instinctive wisdom of the plain people. And the essential virtue of that people is always being threatened by outsiders. And he's got a strategy for how to get there. He's got a series of policies to bring the people up and repudiate the outsiders, whether those outsiders are Islam, Mexicans, the media, the coastal elites... And there's a whole worldview there; it's a very coherent worldview. I sort of have more respect for him. I loathe what he stands for and I think he's wrong on the substance, but it's interesting to see someone with a set of ideas find a vehicle, Donald Trump, and then try to take control of the White House in order to advance his viewpoint.
DB:我觉得那部分是对的 但这有其它部分 也有可能是对的 他是全球化运动的一部分 像1917年兴起的马克思主义者 这里有他,有UKIP党 还有法国国民阵线 有普京,土耳其 菲律宾 所以我们要体会出 这是全球知识分子运动 人们认为 有些人的言谈举止跟品德不沾边 从启蒙运动上来说 我们很多人是这样的 在德语中的“Volt”是人民的意思 那是藏在平头老百姓 与生俱来的智慧里 这些人的本质 总受到外界的威胁 特朗普知道如何到达目的 他有一套政策 来引导人们 而不去管外界怎么想 不管是伊斯兰 墨西哥人,媒体 东西海岸的精英们... 这有一整套的世界观; 是非常一致的世界观 我多少有点尊敬他 我很不喜欢他的主张 而且我觉得他本质上不对 但是有趣的是 看到有这些想法的人 找到了带头大哥唐纳德·特朗普 然后意图控制白宫 为了宣扬他的观点
CA: So it's almost become, like, that the core question of our time now is: Can you be patriotic but also have a global mindset? Are these two things implacably opposed to each other? I mean, a lot of conservatives and, to the extent that it's a different category, a lot of Trump supporters, are infuriated by the coastal elites and the globalists because they see them as, sort of, not cheering for America, not embracing fully American values. I mean, have you seen that in your conversations with people, in your understanding of their mindset?
CA:所以这几乎成了当下的核心问题: 你可不可以保持爱国的心 但同时又有一个全球化的思维 这两个是势不两立吗? 我想说,有很多保守党 在某种程度上 这属于不同的类别 很多特朗普的支持者 他们被东西岸精英 和全球主义者给气疯了 因为在他们看来,这些人 不会给美国带来喝彩 不会完全拥抱美国价值观 你在跟人交流时,有没有看出来过 从你对他们思维的理解中?
GC: I do think that there's a huge difference between -- I hate to put people in categories, but, Middle America versus people who live on the coasts. It's an entirely different existence. And I grew up in Minnesota, so I have an understanding of Middle America, and I've never forgotten it. And maybe that's why I have an understanding of what happened here, because those people often feel like nobody's listening to them, and that we're only concentrating on California and New York. And so I think that was a huge reason why Trump was elected. I mean, these people felt like they were being heard. Whether or not patriotism falls into that, I'm not sure about that. I do know one thing: a lot of things Trump talked about last night are not conservative things. Had Hillary Clinton gotten up and given that speech, not one Republican would have stood up to applaud. I mean, he's talking about spending a trillion dollars on infrastructure. That is not a conservative viewpoint. He talked about government-mandated maternity leave. A lot of women may love that; it's not a conservative viewpoint. So it's fascinating that people who loved what his message was during the campaign, I'm not sure -- how do you think they'll react to that?
GC:我觉得这是有很大的区别的 我很讨厌把人分类,但是 美国中部对照沿海人士 这一个完全不同的状况 我是在明尼苏达长大的 所以我对中部很了解 我从来没有忘记过 也许这是我为什么 可以体会到发生了什么 因为这些人老觉得 没人在倾听他们 而且人们只专注 加利福尼亚和纽约 所以我认为这是特朗普 能当选的一个很大的原因 我的意思是 这些人觉得他们有被听到 爱国主义是否牵涉其中 我不是很清楚 但我知道一件事 特朗普昨晚讲的很多 不是保守党的事情 要是让希拉里•克林顿 来做那个演讲 没有一个共和党人 会起身鼓掌的 他提到在基础设施上要花上万亿 那不是保守的观点 他谈到法定产假 很多女士会爱上这点 这也不是保守观点 所以这是很精彩的 那些人在竞选期间 喜欢他的讯息 我不确定 - 你觉得 他们会怎么反应?
DB: I should say I grew up in Lower Manhattan, in the triangle between ABC Carpets, the Strand Bookstore and The Odeon restaurant.
DB:我可能会说, 我在曼哈顿下城区长大 在ABC地毯公司和Strand书店 还有Odeon餐厅之间的三区
(Laughter)
(笑声)
GC: Come to Minnesota sometime!
GC:有空到明尼苏达州来玩!
(Laughter)
(笑声)
CA: You are a card-carrying member of the coastal elite, my man. But what did you make of the speech last night? It seemed to be a move to a more moderate position, on the face of it.
CA:你可是如假包换的 沿海精英,我的朋友 可是对于昨晚的演讲 你怎么看? 这好像是更 温和地进步 起码从大面上看起来
DB: Yeah, I thought it was his best speech, and it took away the freakishness of him. I do think he's a moral freak, and I think he'll be undone by that fact, the fact that he just doesn't know anything about anything and is uncurious about it.
DB:是的,我觉得 这是特朗普最好的演讲 这个打消了他怪伽的形象 我的确觉得他有点无厘头 而且认为他会被那个事实给抵消: 事实是他就是对于 所有的事一无所知 而且没有好奇心
(Laughter)
(笑声)
But if you take away these minor flaws, I think we got to see him at his best, and it was revealing for me to see him at his best, because to me, it exposed a central contradiction that he's got to confront, that a lot of what he's doing is offering security. So, "I'm ordering closed borders, I'm going to secure the world for you, for my people." But then if you actually look at a lot of his economic policies, like health care reform, which is about private health care accounts, that's not security, that's risk. Educational vouchers: that's risk. Deregulation: that's risk. There's really a contradiction between the security of the mindset and a lot of the policies, which are very risk-oriented. And what I would say, especially having spent this year, the people in rural Minnesota, in New Mexico -- they've got enough risk in their lives. And so they're going to say, "No thank you." And I think his health care repeal will fail for that reason.
但如果你不去理会这些小毛病 我想我们会看到他最赞的一面 看到他最好的一面 对我来说是有揭示性的 因为对我来说,这揭示出了 他所必需面对的重要矛盾 他做的很多事情 都是有关提供安全保障的 于是:“我现在命令封闭边界 我要保护你们,我的人民。” 但是,当你实际上看到 他的很多经济政策 比如新医改 关乎个人医保账户 那个不是安全的,那是风险 教育凭证:那是风险 去除管制:那是风险 真是有点两难:心里想要求安全 可还有那么多风险高的政策 而且我要说的是,尤其 是在今年 明尼苏达州乡间的人 新墨西哥州的农民 他们的生活里有了足够的风险 所以他们会说 “不,谢谢你。” 然后我认为他的废除医改议案 会因此而失败
CA: But despite the criticisms you just made of him, it does at least seem that he's listening to a surprisingly wide range of voices; it's not like everyone is coming from the same place. And maybe that leads to a certain amount of chaos and confusion, but --
CA:尽管你刚才对他的批评 但看起来他至少有在 广纳雅言 不是所有人都 来自同一个地方 也许这会导致 一定的混乱和困惑,但是-
GC: I actually don't think he's listening to a wide range of voices. I think he's listening to very few people. That's just my impression of it. I believe that some of the things he said last night had Ivanka all over them. So I believe he was listening to her before that speech. And he was Teleprompter Trump last night, as opposed to Twitter Trump. And that's why, before we came out here, I said, "We better check Twitter to see if anything's changed." And also I think you have to keep in mind that because he's such a unique character, what was the bar that we were expecting last night? Was it here or here or here? And so he comes out and gives a looking political speech, and everyone goes, "Wow! He can do it." It just depends on which direction he goes.
GC:我其实不觉得他 有在听那么多的声音 我认为他就只听 少数几个人 这是我的感觉 我认为他昨晚说的 有些事情 伊万卡有在全程参与 所以我认为他在演讲前 有听过她的话 昨天晚上的特朗普是那么的义正言辞 和推特上的他截然相反 这就是在此之前,为什么我会说: “我们最好检查下推特 看有没有任何事有变化。” 而且我认为你们要记住 因为他是个很有个性的人 昨晚我们对他的期待有多少? 在这么高?还是这么高? 所以他的政治演讲 像模像样 然后每个人都说,“哇!他是可以做到的。” 这完全取决于 他要朝哪个方向走
DB: Yeah, and we're trying to build bridges here, and especially for an audience that may have contempt for Trump, it's important to say, no, this is a real thing. But as I try my best to go an hour showing respect for him, my thyroid is surging, because I think the oddities of his character really are condemnatory and are going to doom him.
DB:是的,我们在这里 试图对接 特别是对那些 会瞧不上特朗普的观众来说 这是要说的很重要的事 不,这是真实的事 但是尽管在一个小时里 我尽最大的努力去尊重他 我的喉头在上涌 因为我认为他 古怪的性格 真的是会让他搞砸
CA: Your reputation is as a conservative. People would you describe you as right of center, and yet here you are with this visceral reaction against him and some of what he stands for. I mean, I'm -- how do you have a conversation? The people who support him, on evidence so far, are probably pretty excited. He's certainly shown real engagement in a lot of what he promised to do, and there is a strong desire to change the system radically. People hate what government has become and how it's left them out.
CA:你可一直是保守人士 人们说你有点老顽固 然而你在这里 可是心底里反对他 还有他所持的某些立场 我的意思是,-那你怎么 跟人交流? 现有的迹象都表明 支持他的人 都是非常兴奋的 他绝对是展示出了 实实在在地参与 在很多他之前承诺过的东西里 而且带着很强烈的欲望 来彻底变革 人们讨厌现在的政府 以及如何对他们不理不睬
GC: I totally agree with that, but I think that when he was proposing a huge government program last night that we used to call the bad s-word, "stimulus," I find it completely ironic. To spend a trillion dollars on something -- that is not a conservative viewpoint. Then again, I don't really believe he's a Republican.
GC:我完全同意这一点 但我觉得,当他昨晚提出 一个庞大政府计划 以前,我们常用“刺激”来讲坏话 现在发现真的很讽刺 在某些事上 花费一万亿美元 那不是保守派的立场 再一次,我真不觉得 他是共和党人
DB: And I would say, as someone who identifies as conservative: first of all, to be conservative is to believe in the limitations of politics. Samuel Johnson said, "Of all the things that human hearts endure, how few are those that kings can cause and cure." Politics is a limited realm; what matters most is the moral nature of the society. And so I have to think character comes first, and a man who doesn't pass the character threshold cannot be a good president. Second, I'm the kind of conservative who -- I harken back to Alexander Hamilton, who was a Latino hip-hop star from the heights --
DB:我认为,作为 一个保守派 首先 保守派相信政治有局限性 赛缪尔·约翰逊说过: “凡人心所载, 君王定夺有几何。” 政治是有限度的 最重要的是 社会的道德品质 所以我首先 会考虑人性 一个没有人格底线的人 是不会成为好总统的 第二,我是保守的人 这让我回想起亚历山大·汉密尔顿 在音乐剧里,他成了拉丁裔的 嘻哈明星,从身高上 -
(Laughter)
(笑声)
but his definition of America was very future-oriented. He was a poor boy from the islands who had this rapid and amazing rise to success, and he wanted government to give poor boys and girls like him a chance to succeed, using limited but energetic government to create social mobility. For him and for Lincoln and for Teddy Roosevelt, the idea of America was the idea of the future. We may have division and racism and slavery in our past, but we have a common future. The definition of America that Steve Bannon stands for is backwards-looking. It's nostalgic; it's for the past. And that is not traditionally the American identity. That's traditionally, frankly, the Russian identity. That's how they define virtue. And so I think it is a fundamental and foundational betrayal of what conservatism used to stand for.
可他对美国的定义 是非常面向未来的 他是一个小岛上的穷小子 快速而惊人地 转身成功人士 他希望政府能给像他 一样贫穷的男孩和女孩 一个成功的机会 通过有限的但是有干劲的政府 来创造社会流动性 对他,对林肯 和泰迪•罗斯福来说 关于美国的想法 是关于未来的想法 我们过去有分裂 种族主义,还有奴隶制 但我们有一个共同的未来 史蒂夫·班农主张的 美国定义是倒退的 是旧社会的;是过去式的 而这可不是传统意思上 的美国身份 坦白讲,在传统意义上 是俄罗斯身份 那是他们如何界定美德 所以我认为这是一个 彻头彻尾的背叛 关于保守主义所持的立场
CA: Well, I'd like actually like to hear from you, and if we see some comments coming in from some of you, we'll -- oh, well here's one right now. Jeffrey Alan Carnegie: I've tried to convince progressive friends that they need to understand what motivates Trump supporters, yet many of them have given up trying to understand in the face of what they perceive as lies, selfishness and hatred. How would you reach out to such people, the Tea Party of the left, to try to bridge this divide?
CA:那么,我真的很想 听听你的发言 如果我们让观众当中 有人发表些见解,那我们 刚刚好有一个 杰弗瑞·艾伦·卡内基: 我试图说服开明的朋友 他们需要了解是什么 激励着特朗普的支持者 然而他们中很多人已经 放弃了去试图理解 在他们看来是 谎言,自私和仇恨 你怎么跟左派茶党 这些人打交道? 去试图弥合鸿沟?
GC: I actually think there are commonalities in anger, as I expressed earlier. So I think you can come to the table, both being passionate about something. So at least you care. And I would like to believe -- the c-word has also become a horrible word -- "compromise," right? So you have the far left and the far right, and compromise -- forget it. Those groups don't want to even think about it. But you have a huge swath of voters, myself included, who are registered independents, like 40 percent of us, right? So there is a huge faction of America that wants to see change and wants to see people come together. It's just that we have to figure out how to do that.
GC:我其实认为 在愤怒里有共性 正如我前面提过的 所以我认为大家可以把自己充满热情 的事情都摆到台面上来 至少你关注 我愿意去相信 C字也变成了 一个很糟糕的词 --“妥协”,对吧? 所以我们有最左的 和最右的 妥协 - 算了吧 那些团体想都 不会去想的 但你有一大堆选民 包括我在内 作为登记在册的独立人士 可能有40%,对吧? 所以在美国有很多人 希望看到变革 希望看到人们聚在一起 事情是我们得弄清楚 如何去做
CA: So let's talk about that for a minute, because we're having these TED Dialogues, we're trying to bridge. There's a lot of people out there, right now, perhaps especially on the left, who think this is a terrible idea, that actually, the only moral response to the great tyranny that may be about to emerge in America is to resist it at every stage, is to fight it tooth and nail, it's a mistake to try and do this. Just fight! Is there a case for that?
CA:所以让我们再对此多谈一下 因为我们在做的TED对话 我们在尝试对接沟通 外面有很多人 现在,尤其是左派的 他们认为这是个糟糕的想法 但事实上,对美国大独裁 唯一道义上的反应 那也许是会即将发生的: 是在每个阶段都抵制它 拼了命地反抗 试图这么做是个错误 就斗争么! 有这样的例子吗?
DB: It depends what "fight" means. If it means literal fighting, then no. If it means marching, well maybe marching to raise consciousness, that seems fine. But if you want change in this country, we do it through parties and politics. We organize parties, and those parties are big, diverse, messy coalitions, and we engage in politics, and politics is always morally unsatisfying because it's always a bunch of compromises. But politics is essentially a competition between partial truths. The Trump people have a piece of the truth in America. I think Trump himself is the wrong answer to the right question, but they have some truth, and it's truth found in the epidemic of opiates around the country, it's truth found in the spread of loneliness, it's the truth found in people whose lives are inverted. They peaked professionally at age 30, and it's all been downhill since. And so, understanding that doesn't take fighting, it takes conversation and then asking, "What are we going to replace Trump with?"
DB:这要看“斗争”的意思 如果仅字面上来说,那没有 如果是指游行,那么 也许游行会提高意识 那似乎不错 但如果你想要在这个国家改变 我们是通过党派和政治来实现的 拉帮结派的,这些庞大 多元而凌乱的同盟 和我们一起参与政治 政治总是在道德上 是不满意的 因为它总是 一堆妥协 但政治本质上是一个 部分真理间的竞争 支持特朗普的人 对美国现状还是有些真相的 我觉得特朗普自身 是对正确问题的错误答案 但他们有一些道理 在全国上下集体 麻木中得到的真相 在孤单寂寞的迷雾 中发现的真相 在被生活打败的人 身上发现的真相 30岁时,他们在职业上达到顶峰 然后就一直走下坡路 所以,理解那不需要抵抗 需要对话,然后问问自己 “我们拿什么来替换特朗普?”
GC: But you saw fighting last night, even at the speech, because you saw the Democratic women who came and wore white to honor the suffragette movement. I remember back during the campaign where some Trump supporters wanted to actually get rid of the amendment that allowed us to vote as women. It was like, what? So I don't know if that's the right way to fight. It was interesting, because I was looking in the audience, trying to see Democratic women who didn't wear white. So there's a lot going on there, and there's a lot of ways to fight that are not necessarily doing that.
GC:但昨晚你看到了斗争 即使是在演讲 因为你看到了民主党的女士 穿着白衫来到这里 以纪念妇女参政运动 我记得那时的运动 一些特朗普的支持者 很想摆脱修正案 - 允许女性投票 这算什么? 所以我不知道是否 这是正确的斗争方式 这很有趣 因为我在观众席 想看看有没有 没穿白衫的民主党女士 所以那里有很多事情 在发生 而且有很多斗争的方式 但不一定要这样做
CA: I mean, one of the key questions, to me, is: The people who voted for Trump but, if you like, are more in the center, like they're possibly amenable to persuasion -- are they more likely to be persuaded by seeing a passionate uprising of people saying, "No, no, no, you can't!" or will that actually piss them off and push them away?
CA:对我来说关键的 问题之一是: 投票选特朗普的人 更多的是在中部 好像他们更容易被说服 他们更有可能群情奋起: “不,不,不,你不能这样!” 或者那会惹毛他们 然后使他们对此置之不理?
DB: How are any of us persuaded? Am I going to persuade you by saying, "Well, you're kind of a bigot, you're supporting bigotry, you're supporting sexism. You're a primitive, fascistic rise from some authoritarian past"? That's probably not going to be too persuasive to you. And so the way any of us are persuaded is by: a) some basic show of respect for the point of view, and saying, "I think this guy is not going to get you where you need to go." And there are two phrases you've heard over and over again, wherever you go in the country. One, the phrase "flyover country." And that's been heard for years, but I would say this year, I heard it almost on an hourly basis, a sense of feeling invisible. And then the sense a sense of the phrase "political correctness." Just that rebellion: "They're not even letting us say what we think." And I teach at Yale. The narrowing of debate is real.
DB:要怎么说服我们呢? 要说服你,我会说 “你是个独断论者 你支持偏执 你支持性别歧视 你个蒙昧落后的 旧专制党派崛起的法西斯”。 那可能对你不太有说服力 于是大家是这样被说服的: 首先对观点以示必要的尊重 然后说 “我认为这个人是不会 让你去到你想去的地方的” 还有两个耳朵都 听得起茧子的词 只要你还在美国 一,架空的国家 这个讲了很多年了 但今年我会说 我几乎每个小时都在听 无孔不入的感觉 二,对于“政治正确”的体会 有那种逆反的心态: “他们甚至不让我们说自己想的” 我在耶鲁大学教书 辩论的收紧是实打实的
CA: So you would say this is a trap that liberals have fallen into by celebrating causes they really believe in, often expressed through the language of "political correctness." They have done damage. They have pushed people away.
CA:所以你会说是自由主义者 自己掉进了坑里 通过庆祝他们 真地相信的东西 常常以“政治的正确”的 语言来表达 他们已经造成了损害 他们已经使人对他们置之不理
DB: I would say a lot of the argument, though, with "descent to fascism," "authoritarianism" -- that just feels over-the-top to people. And listen, I've written eight million anti-Trump columns, but it is a problem, especially for the coastal media, that every time he does something slightly wrong, we go to 11, and we're at 11 every day. And it just strains credibility at some point.
DB:我会说,尽管很多争论 比如“骨子里的法西斯主义” “集权主义” 对人们来说有点太过了 听我说,我写了 800万的反特朗普专栏 但这是个问题 特别是对于沿海媒体来说 每当他只是犯点小错误的时候 我们都会小题大做 我们每天都在上纲上线 而且某种程度上 是可信度的问题
CA: Crying wolf a little too loud and a little too early. But there may be a time when we really do have to cry wolf.
CA:狼来了的故事 有点讲过头,也太早了 但可能我们还真有 对付狼来了的时候
GC: But see -- one of the most important things to me is how the conservative media handles Trump. Will they call him out when things are not true, or will they just go along with it? To me, that is what is essential in this entire discussion, because when you have followers of somebody who don't really care if he tells the truth or not, that can be very dangerous. So to me, it's: How is the conservative media going to respond to it? I mean, you've been calling them out. But how will other forms of conservative media deal with that as we move forward?
GC:但是对我来说重要的 事情之一 是传统媒体如何 应对特朗普 一旦事情不对 他们就点特朗普的名? 还是不去理会他? 对我来说这是 整个讨论的重中之重 因为当有跟屁虫 不关心主子是否说实话 这可是相当地危险 所以对我来说就是: 保守媒体怎么应对? 我的意思是你一个劲地点他的名 但是,其他保守媒体会怎么应对? 随着我们向前进
DB: It's all shifted, though. The conservative media used to be Fox or Charles Krauthammer or George Will. They're no longer the conservative media. Now there's another whole set of institutions further right, which is Breitbart and Infowars, Alex Jones, Laura Ingraham, and so they're the ones who are now his base, not even so much Fox.
DB:一切都转换了 保守媒体要么是福克斯要么是 Charles Krauthammer或George Will 现在它们不再是保守媒体 现在还有一大批的 机构继续右倾 比如说Breitbart和Infowars Alex Jones,Laura Ingraham 他们是一群他的基地 而不是福克斯
CA: My last question for the time being is just on this question of the truth. I mean, it's one of the scariest things to people right now, that there is no agreement, nationally, on what is true. I've never seen anything like it, where facts are so massively disputed. Your whole newspaper, sir, is delivering fake news every day.
CA:我最后的问题暂且 叫做问题的真相 我是想说这是现在人们面临 最可怕的事情之一 是全国上下都没在 什么是真相上达成一致 我从来没有见过像这样的事情 事实争议又如此巨大 先生,你整个报纸 每天都在提供假消息
DB: And failing.
DB:以及失败
(Laughter)
(笑声)
CA: And failing. My commiserations. But is there any path whereby we can start to get some kind of consensus, to believe the same things? Can online communities play a role here? How do we fix this?
CA:失败,深表同情 但有没有办法 可以得到一些共识 去相信同样的事情? 线上论坛可以起点作用吗? 我们如何解决这个问题?
GC: See, I understand how that happened. That's another groundswell kind of emotion that was going on in the middle of America and not being heard, in thinking that the mainstream media was biased. There's a difference, though, between being biased and being fake. To me, that is a very important distinction in this conversation. So let's just say that there was some bias in the mainstream media. OK. So there are ways to try and mend that. But what Trump's doing is nuclearizing that and saying, "Look, we're just going to call all of that fake." That's where it gets dangerous.
GC:我明白怎么回事 那是另一种群情激昂 正在美国中部地区上演 无人理会 他们认为主流媒体有偏见 当然偏见和虚假之间是有区别的 对我来说,也是这次对话中 非常重要的区别 我们暂且认为 主流媒体是有偏见的 那么,好吧,还是有办法 去尝试弥补的 但特朗普所作所为更加提炼了 这个问题,他说: “我们会打电话给 所有这些小道消息。” 那是开始变得危险的事情
CA: Do you think enough of his supporters have a greater loyalty to the truth than to any ... Like, the principle of not supporting something that is demonstrably not true actually matters, so there will be a correction at some point?
CA:你认为他有足够数量的支持者 对真相忠贞不二? 比如原则上不去支持那些 显然错得离谱的东西 真正重要的,所以 在一定程度上是可以修正的
DB: I think the truth eventually comes out. So for example, Donald Trump has based a lot of his economic policy on this supposition that Americans have lost manufacturing jobs because they've been stolen by the Chinese. That is maybe 13 percent of the jobs that left. The truth is that 87 percent of the jobs were replaced by technology. That is just the truth. And so as a result, when he says, "I'm going to close TPP and all the jobs will come roaring back," they will not come roaring back. So that is an actual fact, in my belief. And --
DB:我想真相 终会大白的 比方说,唐纳德•特朗普的 很多经济政策基于 美国人失去了制造业的工作 得设想 是因为被中国人偷走了 可能还剩下13%的工作 事实是87%的工作 被科技所取代 那就是事实 作为一个结果,当他说: “我要关掉TPP, 让工作都呼啦啦地回来,” 工作是不会呼啦啦地就回来的 在我的理念里这是实打实的事实 还有:
(Laughter)
(笑声)
GC: But I'm saying what his supporters think is the truth, no matter how many times you might say that, they still believe him.
GC:但我的意思是他的支持者 所认为的是事实 不管你说多少次 他们仍然相信他
DB: But eventually either jobs will come back or they will not come back, and at that point, either something will work or it doesn't work, and it doesn't work or not work because of great marketing, it works because it actually addresses a real problem and so I happen to think the truth will out.
DB:但最终工作要么就是会回来 要么就是不会回来 在这一点上是否 有效起作用 它不起效或是在强大的 市场下不起效 它起效因为它实际上 解决了一个真正的问题 所以我认为 真相总会大白的
CA: If you've got a question, please raise your hand here.
CA:有什么问题想问的请举手!
Yael Eisenstat: I'll speak into the box. My name's Yael Eisenstat. I hear a lot of this talk about how we all need to start talking to each other more and understanding each other more, and I've even written about this, published on this subject as well, but now today I keep hearing liberals -- yes, I live in New York, I can be considered a liberal -- we sit here and self-analyze: What did we do to not understand the Rust Belt? Or: What can we do to understand Middle America better? And what I'd like to know: Have you seen any attempts or conversations from Middle America of what can I do to understand the so-called coastal elites better? Because I'm just offended as being put in a box as a coastal elite as someone in Middle America is as being considered a flyover state and not listened to.
Yael Eisenstat:我对着TED录音盒讲 我叫Yael Eisenstat 我听到很多这样的对话 关于我们要如何互相之间 积极参与更多的对话 彼此了解更多 我甚至还发表过 有关这个话题的文章 但是现在,我还是会听自由主义者的 - 是的,我住在纽约 我可以被认为是个自由主义者 我们坐在这里自省: 我们做了什么不去 了解铁锈地带? 或者:我们能做些什么 来更好地了解美国中部? 我想知道的是: 你有没有看到美国中部 有任何尝试来对话? 想要更好了解所谓的沿海精英 我可以做些什么? 因为我对自己被归类到沿海精英的 小圈子里,感到有点冒犯 可作为美国中部的人 觉得被架空 没人理会
CA: There you go, I can hear Facebook cheering as you --
CA:你说到点子上了 脸书在为你叫好
(Laughter)
(笑声)
DB: I would say -- and this is someone who has been conservative all my adult life -- when you grow up conservative, you learn to speak both languages. Because if I'm going to listen to music, I'm not going to listen to Ted Nugent. So a lot of my favorite rock bands are all on the left. If I'm going to go to a school, I'm going probably to school where the culture is liberal. If I'm going to watch a sitcom or a late-night comedy show, it's going to be liberal. If I'm going to read a good newspaper, it'll be the New York Times. As a result, you learn to speak both languages. And that actually, at least for a number of years, when I started at National Review with William F. Buckley, it made us sharper, because we were used to arguing against people every day. The problem now that's happened is you have ghettoization on the right and you can live entirely in rightworld, so as a result, the quality of argument on the right has diminished, because you're not in the other side all the time. But I do think if you're living in Minnesota or Iowa or Arizona, the coastal elites make themselves aware to you, so you know that language as well, but it's not the reverse.
DB:我会说,作为向来保守的 成年人 当你中规中矩地长大成人 你得学会说两种话 因为如果我想听音乐 我不会去听泰德·牛正特 于是,很多我喜爱的摇滚乐队 都是左派 如果我要去上学 我可能会去文化 自由的学校 如果我去观看情景剧 或是午夜夜场秀 会选轻松的 我要是读一份靠谱的报纸 那会是纽约时报 因此,你学会了说 两种话 实际上,至少 有很多年 当我开始跟William F. Buckley 在开播“国家评论”的时候 这让我们变得更加尖锐 因为我们都习惯了 每天与人争论 现在的问题是 你自我设定为右派 然后你完全活在右派世界里 于是右派的争论价值就会缩减 因为你不在对方阵营 一直以来 但我到觉得,如果你住在 明尼苏达,爱荷华或亚利桑那 你会意识到 沿海精英的存在 所以你也懂这种语言 但它不是相反的
CA: But what does Middle America not get about coastal elites? So the critique is, you are not dealing with the real problems. There's a feeling of a snobbishness, an elitism that is very off-putting. What are they missing? If you could plant one piece of truth from the mindset of someone in this room, for example, what would you say to them?
CA:但是,中部人民对于 沿海精英没能理解的是什么? 有批评说 你没有抓住 问题的核心 很惹人嫌的精英主义 都很势利眼 他们少了些什么? 如果你能播种一条真理 比方说 种到在场人的心田上 你会对他们说什么呢?
DB: Just how insanely wonderful we are.
DB:仅仅是我们有如何疯狂地优秀?
(Laughter)
(笑声)
No, I reject the category. The problem with populism is the same problem with elitism. It's just a prejudice on the basis of probably an over-generalized social class distinction which is too simplistic to apply in reality. Those of us in New York know there are some people in New York who are completely awesome, and some people who are pathetic, and if you live in Iowa, some people are awesome and some people are pathetic. It's not a question of what degree you have or where you happen to live in the country. The distinction is just a crude simplification to arouse political power.
不,我拒绝分类 民粹主义和精英主义 有同样的问题 这就是偏见 对过分广义的社会阶级 简单粗俗 脱离现实 我们纽约人知道 纽约的有些人 是非常了不起的 可也有人是可悲的 如果你住在爱荷华 有些人很棒,有些人很糟 这不是你有什么 学历的问题 或者你住在哪里 区别仅仅在于政治权力 简单粗暴地简化
GC: But I would encourage people to watch a television news show or read a column that they normally wouldn't. So if you are a Trump supporter, watch the other side for a day, because you need to come out of the bubble if you're ever going to have a conversation. And both sides -- so if you're a liberal, then watch something that's very conservative. Read a column that is not something you would normally read, because then you gain perspective of what the other side is thinking, and to me, that's a start of coming together. I worry about the same thing you worry about, these bubbles. I think if you only watch certain entities, you have no idea what the rest of the world is talking about.
GC:但我会鼓励人们 去看电视新闻 或去读他们通常 不会读的专栏 所以如果你是特朗普的支持者 改天去看看其它阵营 因为你得脱离幻想 如果要想去对话 而且两方--如果你是个自由主义者 那么看些非常保守的东西 读些平时不翻的专栏 因为这样你增加对保守派 立场的一些理解 对我而言,这只是 走到一起的开始 我担心你在担心的 同样的事情 - 这些幻像 我认为如果你仅仅 看个别事例 你不知道世界上 其它地方在说什么
DB: I think not only watching, being part of an organization that meets at least once a month that puts you in direct contact with people completely unlike yourself is something we all have a responsibility for. I may get this a little wrong, but I think of the top-selling automotive models in this country, I think the top three or four are all pickup trucks. So ask yourself: How many people do I know who own a pickup truck? And it could be very few or zero for a lot of people. And that's sort of a warning sign kind of a problem. Where can I join a club where I'll have a lot in common with a person who drives a pickup truck because we have a common interest in whatever?
DB:我想不仅仅是观察 作为社团成员至少 每月去碰个头,见个面 让你有机会直面 与你完全不同的人 我们都有责任这么做 这么说可能有点不对 但我认为美国最畅销的车型 前三,前四都是小货车 所以扪心自问: 我认识的人中谁有辆小货车? 对很多人来说可能非常少 这就是问题的 一种警示 在哪里我可以加入俱乐部 在哪里我会跟驾驶小货车的人有共通? 因为我们相互之间有同好?
CA: And so the internet is definitely contributing to this. A question here from Chris Ajemian: "How do you feel structure of communications, especially the prevalence of social media and individualized content, can be used to bring together a political divide, instead of just filing communities into echo chambers?" I mean, it looks like Facebook and Google, since the election, are working hard on this question. They're trying to change the algorithms so that they don't amplify fake news to the extent that it happened last time round. Do you see any other promising signs of ...?
CA:当然互联网对此绝对少不了 下面是Chris Ajemian的问题: “你如何看待资讯架构? 特别是社交媒体和 个性化内容的普及 能否用给政治鸿沟带来新意? 而不是到社区居委会填表登记。” 我的意思是 自从选举以来,脸书 和谷歌都在努力解决这个问题 他们尝试修改算法 来防止假消息被放大 而不像上一轮普选时的那样 你有看到任何 有意义的迹象吗?
GC: ... or amplify one side of the equation.
GC:...或者是放大 等式的另一边
CA: Exactly.
CA:正式
GC: I think that was the constant argument from the right, that social media and the internet in general was putting articles towards the top that were not their worldview. I think, again, that fed into the anger. It fed into the anger of: "You're pushing something that's not what I believe." But social media has obviously changed everything, and I think Trump is the example of Twitter changing absolutely everything. And from his point of view, he's reaching the American people without a filter, which he believes the media is.
GC:我认为那是右派 吵个不停的争论 大体上讲,社交媒体和互联网 把不是他们世界观的文章置顶 我想,那是火上浇油 结果导致人们很生气: “你在推销那些 我不相信的东西。” 但是社交媒体显然 已经改变了这一切 我认为特朗普是推文 改变局势很好的例子 而从他的角度来看 他直面美国民众 他认为媒体是这样的
CA: Question from the audience.
CA:观众提问
Destiny: Hi. I'm Destiny. I have a question regarding political correctness, and I'm curious: When did political correctness become synonymous with silencing, versus a way that we speak about other people to show them respect and preserve their dignity?
Destiny:嗨!我是Destiny 我有个关于政治正确的问题 我很好奇: 政治正确什么时候 成了沉默的代名词 而不是当我们论及其他人的时候 很客气也很尊重对方?
GC: Well, I think the conservative media really pounded this issue for the last 10 years. I think that they really, really spent a lot of time talking about political correctness, and how people should have the ability to say what they think. Another reason why Trump became so popular: because he says what he thinks. It also makes me think about the fact that I do believe there are a lot of people in America who agree with Steve Bannon, but they would never say it publicly, and so voting for Trump gave them the opportunity to agree with it silently.
GC:我认为保守媒体 有点把这个问题讲烂了 在过去十年里 我认为他们真地 花费了很多时间 谈论政治正确性 以及人们应该如何 有能力表达自己的想法 特朗普变得如此受欢迎的 另一个原因: 是因为他说他所想的 这也让我想起了 我的确相信有很多美国人 认同史蒂夫·班农 但他们从来不会公开说 所以投票选特朗普 给了他们一次机会 来无声地支持
DB: On the issue of immigration, it's a legitimate point of view that we have too many immigrants in the country, that it's economically costly.
DB:关于移民问题 是个合法的观点 我们国家有太多移民 那可是相当烧钱
CA: That we have too many --
CA:我们有太多...
DB: Immigrants in the country, especially from Britain.
DB:移民在国内 尤其是来自英国的
(Laughter)
(笑声)
GC: I kind of like the British accent, OK?
GC:我好像有点英国口音,是吧?
CA: I apologize. America, I am sorry.
CA:我很抱歉。对不起,美国
(Laughter)
(笑声)
I'll go now.
我立马就走
DB: But it became sort of impermissible to say that, because it was a sign that somehow you must be a bigot of some sort. So the political correctness was not only cracking down on speech that we would all find completely offensive, it was cracking down on some speech that was legitimate, and then it was turning speech and thought into action and treating it as a crime, and people getting fired and people thrown out of schools, and there were speech codes written. Now there are these diversity teams, where if you say something that somebody finds offensive, like, "Smoking is really dangerous," you can say "You're insulting my group," and the team from the administration will come down into your dorm room and put thought police upon you. And so there has been a genuine narrowing of what is permissible to say. And some of it is legitimate. There are certain words that there should be some social sanction against, but some of it was used to enforce a political agenda.
DB:但是,这成了 个谈话的禁忌 因为某种程度上 你得是某个死硬派 所以政治正确 不只打击言论 我们都会找到 完全冒犯性的 打击一些合法的言论 把原本脑子里的想法 落实到行动上 视其为犯罪 人们被解雇 人们被撵出学校 这里有书面的言论守则 现在这些五花八门的团队 在那里如果你说一些 总会有人觉得被冒犯的东西 就像“吸烟真的很危险”, 你可以说“你在诋毁我们团队” 宿管员会敲开你的房门 充当国安给你做思想工作 所以能说的话真是少到可怜 有些还是合法的 有些话应该 受到社会制裁 但是有些话被用来 巩固政治图谋
CA: So is that a project you would urge on liberals, if you like -- progressives -- to rethink the ground rules around political correctness and accept a little more uncomfortable language in certain circumstances? Can you see that being solved to an extent that others won't be so offended?
CA:那么那是不是个项目? 如果你愿意你会敦促自由派,进步派 就政治正确的基本规则 去重新思考 去接受更多一点的 有点不太舒服的语言 在特定的环境里? 你看这有用吗? 就某种程度上他人不会那么生气?
DB: I mean, most American universities, especially elite universities, are overwhelmingly on the left, and there's just an ease of temptation to use your overwhelming cultural power to try to enforce some sort of thought that you think is right and correct thought. So, be a little more self-suspicious of, are we doing that? And second, my university, the University of Chicago, sent out this letter saying, we will have no safe spaces. There will be no critique of micro-aggression. If you get your feelings hurt, well, welcome to the world of education. I do think that policy -- which is being embraced by a lot of people on the left, by the way -- is just a corrective to what's happened.
DB:我想说大多数美国大学 特别是精英大学 绝大部分是左派 就那么潜移默化地 试图用压倒性的文化 去尝试巩固一些思想 那些你认为正确的思想 所以,最好能来点自我怀疑 我们是在这么做吗? 再来,我的母校芝加哥大学 在这封发出去的信里说 我们将何处安身 这里不会有 党同罚异的评论 如果你觉得很受伤 那很欢迎来到教育的世界 我的确认为那个政策 顺带提一下 有很多左派人士投诚 也算是对当下的纠偏吧
CA: So here's a question from Karen Holloway: How do we foster an American culture that's forward-looking, like Hamilton, that expects and deals with change, rather than wanting to have everything go back to some fictional past? That's an easy question, right?
CA:接下来是Karen Holloway的问题: 我们该如何培育美国文化? 像哈密尔顿一样有前瞻性 满怀期待并拥抱变革 而不是幻想让一切都 倒退到虚构的旧社会? 那不是个容易的问题,是吧?
GC: Well, I'm still a believer in the American dream, and I think what we can teach our children is the basics, which is that hard work and believing in yourself in America, you can achieve whatever you want. I was told that every single day. When I got in the real world, I was like, wow, that's maybe not always so true. But I still believe in that. Maybe I'm being too optimistic. So I still look towards the future for that to continue.
GC:那么,我依然相信美国梦 而且我认为我们能教 孩子们的是基本 就是辛勤工作 以及相信你自己 在美国,你可以做到 你想做的 我就是这么被教导长大的 当我步入社会,我会说 喔,也许这不总是真的 但我还是仍然相信 可能我太乐观了 我仍然期待未来 那个可以延续
DB: I think you're being too optimistic.
DB:我觉得你太乐观了
GC: You do?
GC:是吗?
DB: The odds of an American young person exceeding their parents' salary -- a generation ago, like 86 percent did it. Now 51 percent do it. There's just been a problem in social mobility in the country.
DB:目前美国年轻人的薪水 超过其父母的比例 一代人之前,大概有86% 现在是51% 这只是国内 社会流动性的问题
CA: You've written that this entire century has basically been a disaster, that the age of sunny growth is over and we're in deep trouble.
CA:你写过这整个世纪 基本上是场灾难 见风就长的年代已成过去 现在我们深陷困境
DB: Yeah, I mean, we averaged, in real terms, population-adjusted, two or three percent growth for 50 years, and now we've had less than one percent growth. And so there's something seeping out. And so if I'm going to tell people that they should take risks, one of the things we're seeing is a rapid decline in mobility, the number of people who are moving across state lines, and that's especially true among millennials. It's young people that are moving less. So how do we give people the security from which they can take risk? And I'm a big believer in attachment theory of raising children, and attachment theory is based on the motto that all of life is a series of daring adventures from a secure base. Have you parents given you a secure base? And as a society, we do not have a secure base, and we won't get to that "Hamilton," risk-taking, energetic ethos until we can supply a secure base.
DB:是的,实际上我们调整 后的平均人口 50年来有2-3%增长 现在增长不到1% 所以这里有一些事情出现 所以如果我要对人们说 你们应该冒风险 我们面临的问题之一 就是流动性急剧下降 在跨州界的人数上 在千禧一代上尤为如此 年轻人越来越不动 那么我们如何给予人们可以冒风险 的安全呢? 而且,我是在培育孩子上依附理论 的相信者 依附理论来自格言: 生活的本质是基于安全的大胆冒险 父母有给你安定的后盾吗? 作为一个社会 我们没有一个安全的基础 我们不会干劲十足地 去冒“汉米尔顿式”的险 直到我们能给得起 一个安全的基础
CA: So I wonder whether there's ground here to create almost like a shared agenda, a bridging conversation, on the one hand recognizing that there is this really deep problem that the system, the economic system that we built, seems to be misfiring right now. Second, that maybe, if you're right that it's not all about immigrants, it's probably more about technology, if you could win that argument, that de-emphasizes what seems to me the single most divisive territory between Trump supporters and others, which is around the role of the other. It's very offensive to people on the left to have the other demonized to the extent that the other seems to be demonized. That feels deeply immoral, and maybe people on the left could agree, as you said, that immigration may have happened too fast, and there is a limit beyond which human societies struggle, but nonetheless this whole problem becomes de-emphasized if automation is the key issue, and then we try to work together on recognizing that it's real, recognizing that the problem probably wasn't properly addressed or seen or heard, and try to figure out how to rebuild communities using, well, using what? That seems to me to become the fertile conversation of the future: How do we rebuild communities in this modern age, with technology doing what it's doing, and reimagine this bright future?
CA:所以我好奇是否 这里有根据 去创建一个分享的议程 一个对接的对话 一方面,要认识到 这是个很深层次的问题 我们建造的的经济体制 当下似乎是熄火了 第二,也许你是对的 这不全关乎移民 可能更多的是科技 如果你能讲通这观点 在我看来,在最最争议的 两个阵营中不再显著 围绕外人的身份 在特朗普支持者和其他人之间 把其他人妖魔化 对于左派的人是很冒犯的 达到似乎被妖魔化的程度 这感觉很不道德 如你所说,左派的可能会同意 移民可能发生得太快了 而且要有个限度 远超人类社会的挣扎 可是问题变得不那么重要了 如果自动化是关键问题 然后我们要认识到 这次是来真的而通力合作 意识到问题没有被 正确地解决 所看见或所听见 然后试图为 重建社区找出路 那要用什么呢? 那对我来说似乎变成 未来谈话的养分 我们如何在这个现今时代 重建社区 随着科技的推进 重塑这远大前程?
GC: That's why I go back to optimism. I'm not being ... it's not like I'm not looking at the facts, where we've come or where we've come from. But for gosh sakes, if we don't look at it from an optimistic point of view -- I'm refusing to do that just yet. I'm not raising my 12- and 13-year-old to say, "Look, the world is dim."
GC:这就是我回归乐观的原因 我不是...这不是说我没看事实 我们从何处来又要到哪里去 可是天呐,如果我们不乐观的话 我现在就不打算这样 我不会跟我12岁和13岁的 两孩子说:“看,世界很不明朗。”
CA; We're going to have one more question from the room here.
CA:现场我们再来一个问题
Questioner: Hi. Hello. Sorry. You both mentioned the infrastructure plan and Russia and some other things that wouldn't be traditional Republican priorities. What do you think, or when, will Republicans be motivated to take a stand against Trumpism?
提问者:嗨,你好!不好意思 你们都提到了 基础设施和俄罗斯 还有些不是老牌共和党 优先考虑的事情 你们怎么认为: 共和党人何时会积极行动 表明反特朗普主义立场?
GC: After last night, not for a while. He changed a lot last night, I believe.
GC:昨晚之后,不会很久 我认为他昨晚变了很多
DB: His popularity among Republicans -- he's got 85 percent approval, which is higher than Reagan had at this time, and that's because society has just gotten more polarized. So people follow the party much more than they used to. So if you're waiting for Paul Ryan and the Republicans in Congress to flake away, it's going to take a little while.
DB:他在共和党人中的 受欢迎度有85% 这比里根当年还高 这是因为社会已经 变得更加两极化 人们比以往更加跟随党派 所以,如果你在等保尔·瑞恩 和国会的共和党人 走开 这是要花点时间的
GC: But also because they're all concerned about reelection, and Trump has so much power with getting people either for you or against you, and so, they're vacillating every day, probably: "Well, should I go against or should I not?" But last night, where he finally sounded presidential, I think most Republicans are breathing a sigh of relief today.
GC:但也因为他们都担心连任 特朗普有如此多的权力去时人们 要么支持你 要么反对你 所以他们可能每天都在纠结 “我是要反对还是不呢?” 但昨晚,他最终听起来很有总统范 我想大多数共和党人今天都松了口气
DB: The half-life of that is short.
DB:主意改得好快
GC: Right -- I was just going to say, until Twitter happens again.
GC:是的,我本来要说 知道推特再次发生
CA: OK, I want to give each of you the chance to imagine you're speaking to -- I don't know -- the people online who are watching this, who may be Trump supporters, who may be on the left, somewhere in the middle. How would you advise them to bridge or to relate to other people? Can you share any final wisdom on this? Or if you think that they shouldn't, tell them that as well.
CA:好的,我打算给 所有人一次机会 想象下你们正在和-- 我不知道 和那些正在收看的人 可能是特朗普的支持者 可能是来自个左派 来自中部某个地方 如何与其他人对接或是产生联系 你会怎么建议? 你能分享一下这个睿智吗? 或者你认为他们不应该这么做 也不妨说说看
GC: I would just start by saying that I really think any change and coming together starts from the top, just like any other organization. And I would love if, somehow, Trump supporters or people on the left could encourage their leaders to show that compassion from the top, because imagine the change that we could have if Donald Trump tweeted out today, to all of his supporters, "Let's not be vile anymore to each other. Let's have more understanding. As a leader, I'm going to be more inclusive to all of the people of America." To me, it starts at the top. Is he going to do that? I have no idea. But I think that everything starts from the top, and the power that he has in encouraging his supporters to have an understanding of where people are coming from on the other side.
GC:我会这么说 我真地认为任何改变和融合 从一开就始于顶层 就像任何其它组织 不知何故,我会很高兴 不管是特朗普的支持者或者 左派都可以鼓励他们的领导人 从上层展现出同情心 因为想象下我们已经 拥有的改变 要是今天唐纳德•特朗普 发推文 向他所有的支持者 “让我们不再互相使坏 让我们了解彼此 作为一个领导者 我将更具包容性 对所有美国人民。” 对我来说,它就是从上头开始 他真要去做吗?我不知道 但我认为一切都从上层开始 而且他所拥有的权力 可以去鼓励他的支持者 去了解来自另一阵营的人民
CA: David. DB: Yeah, I guess I would say I don't think we can teach each other to be civil, and give us sermons on civility. That's not going to do it. It's substance and how we act, and the nice thing about Donald Trump is he smashed our categories. All the categories that we thought we were thinking in, they're obsolete. They were great for the 20th century. They're not good for today. He's got an agenda which is about closing borders and closing trade. I just don't think it's going to work. I think if we want to rebuild communities, recreate jobs, we need a different set of agenda that smashes through all our current divisions and our current categories. For me, that agenda is Reaganism on macroeconomic policy, Sweden on welfare policy and cuts across right and left. I think we have to have a dynamic economy that creates growth. That's the Reagan on economic policy. But people have to have that secure base. There have to be nurse-family partnerships; there has to be universal preschool; there have to be charter schools; there have to be college programs with wraparound programs for parents and communities. We need to help heal the crisis of social solidarity in this country and help heal families, and government just has to get a lot more involved in the way liberals like to rebuild communities. At the other hand, we have to have an economy that's free and open the way conservatives used to like. And so getting the substance right is how you smash through the partisan identities, because the substance is what ultimately shapes our polarization.
CA:大卫。 DB:是的,我想我会说 我认为我们不能教对方有礼貌 并对我们很客气 不是这回事 是本质,还有我们如何应对 唐纳德•特朗普好的一面 是他粉碎了界限 我们以为我们所想的 全部分类,都已经过时了 在二十世纪这些是很了不起 但今天不好使了 他有个关闭边界和贸易的议案 我不认为这会生效 我认为如果我们打算 重建社区,再造就业 我们需要另外的一套议案 摧毁我们现有部门 和当下的分类 对我来说,这个议题是 宏观经济的里根主义政策 瑞典的福利政策 跨越左右两派 我认为我们需要有个 生机勃勃的经济去创造增长 那就是里根的经济政策 但人们得有安定的基础 得有看护家庭伙伴 得普及学前教育 得有公立学校 还得有包罗万象的大学课程 为了家长和社区 我们需要协助国家 从社会危机中恢复团结 抚慰家庭 政府积极参与 就像自由主义者一样重建社区 另一方面,我们得有自由和开放的经济 保守派过去喜欢的那种方式 所以返璞归正是如何打破 派别的身份认同 因为这是最终导致 我们两极分化的本质
CA: David and Gretchen, thank you so much for an absolutely fascinating conversation. Thank you. That was really, really interesting.
CA:非常感谢大伟和格雷琴 非常精彩的对话 谢谢。真地很有意思
(Applause)
(掌声)
Hey, let's keep the conversation going. We're continuing to try and figure out whether we can add something here, so keep the conversation going on Facebook. Give us your thoughts from whatever part of the political spectrum you're on, and actually, wherever in the world you are. This is not just about America. It's about the world, too. But we're not going to end today without music, because if we put music in every political conversation, the world would be completely different, frankly. It just would.
嘿,让我们保持对话继续 我们也将不断尝试并弄清楚 是否我们可以加点内容 保持话题到脸书上 欢迎向我们提供你的想法 不管你来自哪个政治领域 或者你身处何处 这不只是美国 这还关乎全世界 今天不来点音乐 怎么能结束呢 如果我们在每个政治 对话中都放点音乐 坦白说 世界会完全不一样 一定会的
(Applause)
(掌声)
Up in Harlem, this extraordinary woman, Vy Higginsen, who's actually right here -- let's get a shot of her.
在哈林区,有这样一位了不起的女人 维恩·喜金丝,她就在现场 请给个特写镜头
(Applause)
(掌声)
She created this program that brings teens together, teaches them the joy and the impact of gospel music, and hundreds of teens have gone through this program. It's transformative for them. The music they made, as you already heard, is extraordinary, and I can't think of a better way of ending this TED Dialogue than welcoming Vy Higginsen's Gospel Choir from Harlem. Thank you.
她创建了一个聚合青少年的节目 教给他们福音的快乐和音乐感染 目前有数百位青少年参加过这个节目 对他们来说是变革 他们创作的,现场在播的音乐 非常了不起 我再找不到更好的方式 来结束今天TED对话 下面欢迎来自哈林区的 维恩·喜金丝福音合唱团 谢谢
(Applause)
(掌声)
(Singing) Choir: O beautiful for spacious skies For amber waves of grain For purple mountain majesties Above the fruited plain America! America! America! America! God shed his grace on thee And crown thy good with brotherhood From sea to shining sea From sea to shining sea
(歌声)合唱团:哦,广袤的天多美 饱硕的麦浪金黄 庄严的山峦巍峨 在这丰收的平原上 美国! 美国! 美国! 美国! 上帝保佑你 兄弟般的情谊为你 在亮闪闪的海面上 在亮闪闪的海面上
(Applause)
(掌声)