So I know for sure there's at least one thing I have in common with dentists. I absolutely hate the holiday of Halloween. Now, this hatred stems not from a dislike of cavities, nor was it a lifetime in the making. Rather, this hatred stems from a particular incident that happened nine years ago.
我很確定我和牙醫有一個共通點。 我非常痛恨萬聖節。 這種恨意並不是來自討厭齲齒, 也不是花了一生才形成的。 這種恨意其實源自於 一個特定的事件, 發生在九年前。
Nine years ago, I was even younger, I was 20 years old, and I was an intern in the White House. The other White House. And my job was to work with mayors and councilors nationwide. November 1, 2010 began just like any other day. I turned on the computer, went on Google and prepared to write my news clips. I was met with a call from my mother, which isn't that out the norm, my mom likes to text, call, email, Facebook, Instagram, all that. So I answered the phone expecting to hear maybe some church gossip, or maybe something from WorldStarHipHop she had discovered. But when I answered the phone, I was met with a tone that was unlike anything I had ever heard from my mother. My mother's loud. But she spoke in a hush, still, muffled tone that conveyed a sense of sadness. And as she whispered, she said, "Michael, your cousin Donnell was murdered last night, on Halloween, at a house party in Stockton."
九年前,我還年輕,才二十歲, 我在白宮裡實習。 另一個白宮。 我要和全國的市長 及議員一起工作。 2010 年 11 月 1 日, 剛開始是很平凡的一天。 我打開電腦,開始用 Google, 準備寫我的新聞報導。 我媽打電話給我,這也不奇怪, 我媽喜歡傳訊息、打電話、 寫電子郵件、上臉書、用 IG 等等。 於是我接起電話, 預期也許會聽到教堂的八卦, 或是她在 WorldStarHipHop 網站上的新發現。 但當我接起電話, 我從來沒有聽過 我媽用這種語調說話。 我媽的聲音很大。 但她用一種沉寂、靜默、 隱約的語調來說話, 傳達出一種哀傷感。 她低聲說:「麥可, 你的表親唐奈爾昨晚被謀殺了, 在萬聖節, 發生在史托克頓的 一場家中派對上。
And like far too many people in this country, particularly from communities like mine, particularly that look like me, I spent the better part of the year dealing with anger, rage, nihilism, and I had a choice to make. The choice was one between action and apathy. The choice was what could I do to put purpose to this pain. I spent a year dealing with feelings of survivor's guilt. What was the point of me being at Stanford, what was the point of me being at the White House if I was powerless to help my own family? And my own family was dying, quite literally. I then began to feel a little selfish and say, what's the point of even trying to make the world a better place? Maybe that's just the way it is. Maybe I would be smart to take advantage of all the opportunities given to me and make as much money as possible, so I'm comfortable, and my immediate family is comfortable.
就如同這個國家中的非常多人, 特別是跟我來自類似社區的人, 特別是長得像我這樣的人, 我花了大半年的時間來處理 憤怒、怒火、無政府主義, 且我得要做出一個選擇。 要在行動和漠不關心之間選擇。 這個選擇,就是我能做什麼, 來讓這種痛苦變得有意義。 我花了一年的時間 處理倖存者的罪惡感。 我讀史丹佛又怎樣, 我在白宮工作又怎樣, 如果我甚至沒有能力 幫助自己的家人? 我自己的家庭在步向 死亡,真的是如此。 我開始變得有一點自私,想說: 試著把世界變得更好 到底有什麼意義? 也許世界本來就是這樣的。 也許我該放聰明點, 抓住眼前的機會, 盡可能多賺點錢, 讓我以及直系親屬過舒服的日子。
But finally, towards the end of that year, I realized I wanted to do something. So I made the crazy decision, as a senior in college, to run for city council. That decision was unlikely for a couple of reasons, and not just my age. You see, my family is far from a political dynasty. More men in my family have been incarcerated than in college. In fact, as I speak today, my father is still incarcerated. My mother, she had me as a teenager, and government wasn't something we had warm feelings from. You see, it was the government that red-lined the neighborhoods I grew up in. Full of liquor stores and no grocery stores, there was a lack of opportunity and concentrated poverty. It was the government and the politicians that made choices, like the war on drugs and three strikes, that have incarcerated far too many people in our country. It was the government and political actors that made the decisions that created the school funding formulas, that made it so the school I went to receive less per pupil spending than schools in more affluent areas. So there was nothing about that background that made it likely for me to choose to be involved in being a government actor.
但,最後,在那一年末, 我了解到我想要採取行動。 我在大學四年級時 做了一個瘋狂的決定, 競選市議會。 那個決定希望渺茫,有幾個理由, 不只是我太年輕。 要知道,我的家庭 完全不是政治王朝。 我的家庭成員中,被監禁的 人數比上大學的人數還多。 事實上,今天,我在演說時, 我爸就還被監禁著。 我媽還是青少女時就懷了我, 而政府從來沒有 給我們溫暖的感覺。 要知道,正是政府 把我兒時成長的鄰里給劃分出來。 滿是販售酒精的商店, 卻沒有雜貨店, 在那裡缺乏機會, 貧窮都集中於此。 是政府和政治人物 做了選擇, 就像對毒品宣戰以及三振出局法, 在我們的國家中監禁了太多人。 是政府和政治行為者 做出的決策,創造了 學校資助的公式, 造成我就讀的學校能取得的 每位學生平均開銷會低於 富裕地區的學校。 那樣的背景沒有任何理由 讓我選擇要去從政。
And at the same time, Stockton was a very unlikely place. Stockton is my home town, a city of 320,000 people. But historically, it's been a place people run from, rather than come back to. It's a city that's incredibly diverse. Thirty-five percent Latino, 35 percent white, 20 percent Asian, 10 percent African American, the oldest Sikh temple in North America. But at the time I ran for office, we were also the largest city in the country at that time to declare bankruptcy. At the time I decided to run for office, we also had more murders per capita than Chicago. At the time I decided to run for office, we had a 23 percent poverty rate, a 17 percent college attainment rate and a host of challenges and issues beyond the scope of any 21-year-old.
同時,史托克頓也是個 非常沒機會的地方。 史托克頓是我的家鄉, 這個城市有 32 萬居民。 但,在歷史上,大家都想要 脫離這裡,而不是回來這裡。 這個城市非常多元。 35% 拉丁裔、35% 白人、 20% 亞裔、10% 非裔美國人。 還有北美最古老的錫克教寺廟。 但,在我競選的時候, 我們也是全國宣布破產的城市中 最大的一個。 在我決定競選時, 我們的人均謀殺數目 也比芝加哥高。 在我決定競選時, 我們的貧窮比率是 23%, 17% 的大學畢業率, 還有一大堆的挑戰和問題, 都不是 21 歲小毛頭可以處理的。
So after I won my election, I did what I usually do when I feel overwhelmed, I realized the problems of Stockton were far bigger than me and that I might need a little divine intervention. So as I prepared for my first council meeting, I went back to some wisdom my grandmother taught me. A parable I think we all know, that really constitutes the governing frame we're using to reinvent Stockton today.
所以,在我勝選之後, 我做了我在感到 無法招架時都會做的事, 我了解到史托克頓的 問題比我大太多了, 我可能會需要一點神聖的干預。 所以,在我準備我的 第一次市議會會議時, 我返回我祖母教導我的一些智慧。 這是大家都知道的寓言, 它構成了我們在重塑 現今的史托克頓時 所使用的治理框架。
I remember in Sunday school, my grandmother told me that at one time, a guy asked Jesus, "Who was my neighbor? Who was my fellow citizen? Who am I responsible for?" And instead of a short answer, Jesus replied with a parable. He said there was a man on a journey, walking down Jericho Road. As he was walking down the road, he was beat up, left on the side of the road, stripped of all his clothes, had everything stolen from and left to die. And then a priest came by, saw the man on the side of the road, maybe said a silent prayer, hopes and prayers, prayers that he gets better. Maybe saw the man on the side of the road and surmised that it was ordained by God for this particular man, this particular group to be on the side of the road, there's nothing I can do to change it.
我記得,在主日學校時, 我祖母告訴我, 有一次,有個人問耶穌: 「我的鄰居是誰? 我的居民夥伴是誰? 我要為誰負責?」 耶穌沒有給他簡短的答案, 反而說了一個寓言。 他說,有一個人在旅行, 走在耶利哥城路上。 他在路上走著時, 他被打了一頓,丟在路邊, 衣服都被剝掉, 東西都被偷了,被留下來等死。 接著,一位神父經過, 看到路邊的這個人, 也許做了一段無聲的禱告, 希望和禱告,祈禱他能恢復。 也許看到路邊的這個人, 推測這是神的旨意, 要讓這個人,這個團體, 留在路邊,我無法 做什麼來改變這件事。
After the priest walked by, maybe a politician walked by. A 28-year-old politician, for example. Saw the man on the side of the road and saw how beat up the man was, saw that the man was a victim of violence, or fleeing violence. And the politician decided, "You know what? Instead of welcoming this man in, let's build a wall. Maybe the politician said, "Maybe this man chose to be on the side of the road." That if he just pulled himself up by his bootstraps, despite his boots being stolen, and got himself back on the horse, he could be successful, and there's nothing I could do." And then finally, my grandmother said, a good Samaritan came by, saw the man on the side of the road and looked and saw not centuries of hatred between Jews and Samaritans, looked and saw not his fears reflected, not economic anxiety, not "what's going to happen to me because things are changing." But looked and saw a reflection of himself. He saw his neighbor, he saw his common humanity. He didn't just see it, he did something about it, my grandmother said. He got down on one knee, he made sure the man was OK, and I heard, even gave him a room at that nice Fairmont, the Pan Pacific one.
神父走過去之後, 也許有個政治人物經過。 比如,一名 28 歲的政治人物。 看到路邊的這個人, 也看到他被打得多慘, 看到這個人是暴力的受害者, 或是逃過暴力的受害者。 政治人物便決定:「你知道嗎, 不要讓這個人進來, 咱們來築一座牆。 也許這個政治人物說: 「也許這個人選擇要待在路邊。」 如果他能用拔靴帶把自己 拉起來(靠自己努力), 雖然他的靴子被偷了, 讓自己爬回到馬背上, 可能他辦得到,我無能為力。」 接著,終於,我祖母說, 有個善良的撒馬利亞人經過, 看到路邊的這個人, 看著他時,並不是看到 猶太人和撒馬利亞人之間 數個世紀的仇恨, 並不是看到他的恐懼被反映出來, 不是經濟的焦慮, 不是「一切都在改變, 我會發生什麼事?」 而是看到他自己的反映。 他看到他的鄰居, 他看到他的共同人性。 他不只是看到, 他還為此採取了行動, 我祖母說。 他單膝跪下, 他確認那個人還好, 我聽說,甚至還給他 費爾蒙特的一間好房間, 環太平洋的那間飯店。
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
And as I prepared to govern, I realized that given the diversity of Stockton, the first step to making change will be to again answer the same question: Who is our neighbor? And realizing that our destiny as a city was tied up in everyone. Particularly those who are left on the side of the road. But then I realized that charity isn't justice, that acts of empathy isn't justice, that being a good neighbor is necessary but not sufficient, and there was more that had to be done. So looking at the story, I realized that the road, Jericho Road, has a nickname. It's known as the Bloody Pass, the Ascent of Red, because the road is structured for violence. This Jericho Road is narrow, it's conducive for ambushing. Meaning, a man on the side of the road wasn't abnormal. Wasn't strange. And in fact, it was something that was structured to happen, it was supposed to happen.
在我準備執政時, 我了解到,既然史托克頓這麼多元, 做出改變的第一步, 也是要回答同樣的問題: 我們的鄰居是誰? 以及了解到,我們這個城市的 命運和每個人綁在一起。 特別是那些被留在路邊的人。 但,接著,我了解到, 慈悲不是正義, 出於同理的行為並不是正義, 扮演好鄰居是必要的, 但還不足夠, 還有更多需要做的事。 所以,看著這個故事, 我了解到,這條路, 耶利哥城路,有個暱稱。 它就是大家所知的 血腥關卡;上升的紅色, 因為這條路是 為了暴力而建構的。 耶利哥城路很狹窄,很適合埋伏。 意思是,路邊有一個人並不反常。 並不奇怪。 事實上,這就是這個結構的目的, 這本來就該發生。
And Johan Galtung, a peace theorist, talks about structural violence in our society. He says, "Structural violence is the avoidable impairment of basic human needs." Dr. Paul Farmer talks about structural violence and talks about how it's the way our institutions, our policies, our culture creates outcomes that advantage some people and disadvantage others. And then I realized, much like the road in Jericho, in many ways, Stockton, our society, has been structured for the outcomes we complain about. That we should not be surprised when we see that kids in poverty don't do well in school, that we should not be surprised to see wealth gaps by race and ethnicity. We should not be surprised to see income pay disparities between genders, because that's what our society, historically, has been structured to do, and it's working accordingly.
約翰•加爾通是一位和平理論家, 他談到我們社會中的結構性暴力。 他說:「結構性暴力 是基本人類需求中 可避免的損傷。」 保羅•法莫爾博士談到結構性暴力, 也談到怎麼運用它來讓 我們的制度、政策、文化 創造出有利於某些人, 而不利於其他人的結果。 接著,我了解到, 就像耶利哥城的路一樣, 在許多層面上, 史托克頓,我們的社會, 本身的結構就注定會導致 我們所抱怨的結果。 看到貧窮的孩子在學校 表現不佳,我們不應該驚訝, 看到種族和人種造成的財富差距, 我們不應該驚訝, 看到不同性別的收入不同, 我們不應該驚訝, 因為有史以來,我們的社會結構 就是被設計來造成這些結果的, 且真的就這麼發生了。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
So taking this wisdom, I rolled up my sleeves and began to work. And there's three quick stories I want to share, that point to not that we figured everything out, not that we have arrived, but we're trending in the right direction. The first story, about the neighbor. When I was a city council member, I was working with one of the most conservative members in our community on opening a health clinic for undocumented people in the south part of the city, and I loved it. And as we opened the clinic, we had a resolution to sign, he presented me a gift. It was an O'Reilly Factor lifetime membership pin.
所以,帶著這智慧, 我捲起袖子,開始工作。 我想要快速跟大家分享三個故事, 要說明的並不是 我們把一切都想通了, 不是我們已經達成目標, 而是我們正朝著對的方向前進。 第一個和鄰居有關的故事。 我還是市議員的時候, 我和我們社區中 最保守的一名成員合作 為無正式文件的人 開設一間健康診所, 位在城市的南部, 我很喜歡做這件事。 當我們開設了診所時, 有一個提案需要簽名, 他給我看了一個禮物。 是《歐萊利實情》終身會員別針。 (美國有線電視新聞和脫口秀節目)
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
Mind you, I didn't ask what he did to get such a gift. What blood oath -- I had no idea how he got it. But I looked at him and I said, "Well, how are we working together to open a health clinic, to provide free health care for undocumented people, and you're an O'Reilly Factor member?" He looked at me and said, "Councilman Tubbs, this is for my neighbors." And he's a great example of what it means to be a good neighbor, at least in that instance.
請注意,我沒有問他 做了什麼才拿到那個禮物。 什麼血誓—— 我不知道他怎麼拿到的。 但我看著他,說: 「我們怎麼可能合作 開一間健康診所 來提供免費健康照護 給沒有正式文件的人, 而且你竟同時還是 《歐萊利實情》的會員? 他看著我,說: 「圖布斯議員, 這是給我鄰居的。」 他是個很棒的例子,說明 身為好鄰居的意義, 至少在那個情況下是如此。
The robbers. So after four years on city council, I decided to run for mayor, realizing that being a part-time councilman wasn't enough to enact the structural changes we need to see in Stockton, and I came to that conclusion by looking at the data. So my old council district, where I grew up, is 10 minutes away from a more affluent district. And 10 minutes away in the same city, the difference between zip code 95205 and 95219 in life expectancy is 10 years. Ten minutes away, 4.5 miles, 10 years life expectancy difference, and not because of the choices people are making. Because no one chose to live in an unsafe community where they can't exercise. No one chose to put more liquor stores than grocery stores in the community. No one chose these things, but that's the reality. I realized, as a councilman, to enact a structural change I wanted to see, where between the same zip codes there's a 30 percent difference in the rate of unemployment, there's a 75,000 dollars a year difference in income, that being a councilman was not going to cut it. So that's when I decided to run for mayor.
強盜。 所以,在市議會四年之後, 我決定競選市長, 因為我了解到,身為 兼職市議員並不足夠 進行史托克頓 所需要的結構性改變, 這個結論是根據資料得來的。 我舊的行政區,我長大的地方, 距離另一個較富裕的地區約十分鐘。 相同城市內兩地距離僅十分鐘, 郵遞區號 95205 和 95219 之間的不同 是平均壽命相差十年。 十分鐘路程,4.5 英里, 平均壽命卻差了十年, 而這並不是因人們的選擇。 因為沒有人會選擇住在一個不安全、 他們無法出門運動的社區。 沒有人決定在社區內 開比超市更多家的酒精飲品店。 沒有人選擇這些,但這就是現實。 身為議員,我發現 要在結構上做出我想看到的改變, 在這有著相同郵遞區號的地區裡 有著相差 30% 的失業率, 有著相差七萬五千美元的年收入, 身為議員並不能縮小這些差距。 因此我決定參選市長。
And as mayor, we've been focused on the robbers and the road. So in Stockton, as I mentioned, we have historically had problems with violent crime. In fact, that's why I decided to run for office in the first place. And my first job as mayor was helping our community to see ourselves, our neighbors, not just in the people victimized by violence but also in the perpetrators. We realized that those who enact pain in our society, those who are committing homicides and contributing to gun violence, are oftentimes victims themselves. They have high rates of trauma, they have been shot at, they've known people who have been shot. That doesn't excuse their behavior, but it helps explain it, and as a community, we have to see these folks as us, too. That they too are our neighbors. So for the past three years --
身為市長,我們長期關注 搶劫案和人們的前途。 如前所述,我們在史托克頓市 一直有暴力犯罪的問題。 事實上,這就是 我最初決定參選的原因。 而我當上市長的第一個任務 就是幫助我們的社區 看清自己及鄰居 不只是暴力的受害者, 同時也是加害者。 我們發現那些在社會上 造成傷痛的人, 那些犯下凶殺案和槍枝暴力的人, 常常自己也是受害者。 他們遭受高度創傷,他們曾受槍傷, 他們認識受過槍傷的人。 這並不是他們行為的藉口, 但可以幫助解釋他們的行為, 而在社區內,我們也必須 將這些人視為我們的一員。 他們同樣是我們的鄰居。 所以在過去三年,
(Applause)
(掌聲)
So for the past three years, we've been working on two strategies: Ceasefire and Advance Peace, where we give these guys as much attention, as much love from social services, from opportunities, from tattoo removals, in some cases even cash, as a gift from law enforcement. And last year, we saw a 40 percent reduction in homicides and a 30 percent reduction in violent crime.
所以在過去三年, 我們一直在研究兩種策略: 停火和推進和平, 我們給這些人更多關注、更多來自 社福機構的愛、更多機會、刺青去除, 在某些情況下甚至是現金, 作為執法的禮物。 去年我們的凶殺案減少了 40%、 暴力犯罪減少了 30%。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
And now, the road. I mentioned that my community has a 23 percent poverty rate. As someone who comes from poverty, it's a personal issue for me. So I decided that we wouldn't just do a program, or we wouldn't just do something to go around the edges, but we would call into question the very structure that produces poverty in the first place. So starting in February, we launched a basic income demonstration, where for the next 18 months, as a pilot, 130 families, randomly selected, who live in zip codes at or below the median income of the city, are given 500 dollars a month. And we're doing this for a couple of reasons. We're doing it because we realize that something is structurally wrong in America, when one in two Americans can't afford one 400-dollar emergency. We're doing it because we realize that something is structurally wrong when wages have only increased six percent between 1979 and 2013. We're doing it because we realize something is structurally wrong when people working two and three jobs, doing all the jobs no one in here wants to do, can't pay for necessities, like rent, like lights, like health care, like childcare.
現在,人們的前途。 我已經說過我的社區有 23% 的貧困率。 身為來自貧困的人,這是個個人問題。 因此我決定我們不應 僅是施行一項計畫, 也不會只是做些邊緣的行動, 我們應深入探討 最初造成貧窮的結構。 因此從二月開始, 我們開始一項基本收入的演示, 在未來 18 個月, 實驗隨機挑選 130 個家庭, 選自市內收入低於中位數的地區, 每個月給他們五百美金。 我們這樣做有幾個原因。 這樣做因為我們發現 美國有一些結構性問題, 每兩人中就有一人無法負擔 一筆四百美金的緊急支出。 這樣做是因為我們 發現結構性的問題, 在 1979 至 2013 年間 工資僅增加 6%。 這樣做是因為我們 發現結構性的問題, 有些人打二到三份工, 做著這裡的人不想從事的工作, 卻無法負擔必要開銷, 例如房租、照明、 健保、托兒費用。
(Applause)
(掌聲)
So I would say, Stockton again, we have real issues. I have constituent emails in my phone now, about the homelessness issue, about some of the violent crime we're still experiencing. But I would say, I think as a society, we would be wise to go back to those old Bible stories we were taught growing up, and understand that number one, we have to begin to see each other as neighbors, that when we see someone different from us, they should not reflect our fears, our anxieties, our insecurities, the prejudices we've been taught, our biases -- but we should see ourselves. We should see our common humanity. Because I think once we do that, we can do the more important work of restructuring the road.
所以我必須再次強調 我們史托克頓市有嚴重的問題。 我手機裡有來自選民的 email, 關於無家可歸的問題、 關於我們仍在經歷的暴力犯罪。 但我必須說,我認爲 我們社會回到那些古老的、 我們從小學習的聖經故事是明智的。 我們應理解,第一, 我們應該開始將所有人視為鄰居, 看到和我們不一樣的人 不應令我們恐懼、 焦慮、不安, 想起我們被教導的偏見。 我們應該看見自己, 看見我們共有的人性。 因為我認為一旦我們這樣做, 我們就可以做更多 重建人們前途的重要工作。
Because again, I understand some listening are saying, "Well, Mayor Tubbs, you're talking about structural violence and structural this, but you're on the stage. That the structures can't be too bad if you could come up from poverty, have a father in jail, go to Stanford, work in the White House and become mayor." And I would respond by saying the term for that is exceptionalism. Meaning that we recognize it's exceptional for people to escape the structures. Meaning by our very language, we understand that the things we're seeing in our world are by design. And I think that task for us, as TEDsters, and as good people, just people, moral people, is really do the hard work necessary of not just joining hands as neighbors, but using our hands to restructure our road, a road that in this country has been rooted in things like white supremacy. A road like in this country has been rooted in things like misogyny. A road that's not working for far too many people. And I think today, tomorrow and 2020 we have a chance to change that.
因為再次強調,我理解一些聽眾會說: 「好,圖布斯市長, 你說這些結構性暴力和結構性問題。 但你能在站舞臺上, 那結構就不至於太糟糕, 畢竟你在父親入獄的情況下, 能擺脫貧困,上史丹佛, 在白宮工作並成為市長。 我的回答是,這叫「例外」。 就是說:人們逃離這種結構是例外。 換句話說, 我們知道舉目所見的世界 是有意設計出來的。 我認為我們 TED 人有個任務—— 還有那些好人、正直的人, 有道德的人—— 不僅僅是與鄰居攜手努力合作, 而是要努力用雙手重建我們的道路。 過去我國這條路 根植於白人至上主義, 也根植於厭惡女性, 這條路不適合很多人。 我認為今天、明天和 2020 年, 我們有機會去改變它。
So as I prepare to close, I started with a story from nine years ago and I'll end with one. So after my cousin was murdered, I was lucky enough to go on the Freedom Rides with some of the original freedom riders. And they taught me a lot about restructuring the road. And one guy in particular, Bob Singleton, asked me a question I'm going to leave with us today. We were going to Anniston, Alabama, and he said, "Michael," and I said, "Yes, sir."
所以在我準備結束的時候, 我從一個九年前的故事開始, 並將以一個故事結束。 在堂兄被謀殺後, 我很幸運能和一些 最初的民權活動家們 一起參加自由之旅。 他們教我很多重建道路的事情。 尤其是其中的鮑勃•辛格爾頓這個人 問我一個我今天要留給大家的問題。 在去阿拉巴馬州安尼斯頓的路上, 他說:「麥可,」 我回答:「先生,怎麼了? 」
He said, "I was arrested on August 4, 1961. Now why is that day important?"
他說:「我在 1961 年 8月 4 日被捕。 為什麼這一天很重要? 」
And I said, "Well, you were arrested, if you weren't arrested, we wouldn't be on this bus. if we weren't on this bus, we wouldn't have the rights we enjoy."
我回答:「你被捕了; 如果你沒被捕,我們不會在這輛車上; 如果我們不在這車上, 我們不會享有我們的權利。 」
He rolled his eyes and said, "No, son." He said, "On that day, Barack Obama was born." And then he said he had no idea that the choice he made to restructure the road would pave the way, so a child born as a second class citizen, who wouldn't be able to even get a cup of water at a counter, would have the chance, 50 years later, to be president.
他翻了翻白眼,說: 「孩子,不是的。 」 他說道:「歐巴馬在那天出生了。 」 接著他說,沒想到他 重建道路的選擇 會鋪平道路, 使得一個出生時就是二等公民的人, 在櫃檯上連一杯水都拿不到的人, 會有機會在 50 年後成為總統。
Then he looked at me and he said, "What are you prepared to do today so that 50 years from now a child born has a chance to be president?" And I think, TED, that's the question before us today. We know things are jacked up. I think what we've seen recently isn't abnormal but a reflection of a system that's been structured to produce such crazy outcomes. But I think it's also an opportunity. Because these structures we inherit aren't acts of God but acts of men and women, they're policy choices, they're by politicians like me, approved by voters like you. And we have the chance and the awesome opportunity to do something about it.
然後他看著我問: 「你今天要去做什麼, 好讓剛出生的孩子 50 年後有機會成為總統呢? 」 TED 人,我想這是今天 擺在我們面前的問題。 我知道諸事紛雜如亂麻。 我認為我們看到的近況並不奇怪, 這樣的體制註定會導致 這樣糟糕的結果。 但我認為這也是一個機遇。 因為我們繼承的這個結構 不是上帝的旨意, 而是男男女女的選擇, 像你們這樣的選民, 投給了像我這樣的政客。 我們有機會和絕好的機遇 去做點事情。
So my question is: What are we prepared to do today, so that a child born today, 50 years from now isn't born in a society rooted in white supremacy; isn't born into a society riddled with misogyny; isn't born into a society riddled with homophobia and transphobia and anti-Semitism and Islamophobia and ableism, and all the phobias and -isms? What are we prepared to do today, so that 50 years from now we have a road in our society that's structured to reflect what we hold to be self-evident? That all men, that all women, that even all trans people are created equal and are endowed by your Creator with certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
所以我的問題是: 我們今天打算做什麼 好讓今天出生的孩子 50 年後不再置身於 根深蒂固白人至上的社會, 不再置身於重男輕女的社會, 不再置身於充斥著恐同、恐跨性別、 反猶太主義、恐伊斯蘭和殘疾歧視 以及各種恐懼和主義的社會? 我們今天打算要做什麼 好讓 50 年後, 我們的社會道路可以顯現那些 我們認為是不言而喻的東西? 那就是所有的男人、女人, 甚至所有跨性別的人, 生來平等, 被造物者賦予不可剝奪的權利, 包括生命、自由和追求幸福的權利?
Thank you.
謝謝。
(Applause)
(鼓掌)