I want to argue to you that in fact, politics and religion, which are the two primary factors -- not the sole, but overwhelmingly, the primary factors -- which are driving towards a war which looks extremely likely -- bordering on the inevitable at this point, whether one is in favor of that or not -- that politics and religion are, in fact, themselves better conceptualized as kinds of technology, and subject to kinds of questions that we regularly consider in the space of conceptual design.
我想要论证的观点是,事实上,政治和宗教, 是两种主要因素-- 并不是惟一的,但是绝大多数时候, 是引发一场看起来势不可挡的 战争的主要因素。 不管你是否喜欢-- 政治和宗教,本质上 都可以被理解为是一种技术, 我们可以以概念设计的方式 去看待他们。
Here's what I mean. Politics and -- let's focus on the political system in particular question here, which is the system of democracy. Democracy, as a type of politics, is a technology for the control and deployment of power. You can deploy power in a wide range of ways. The famous ones -- despotism is a good one; anarchy is a way to not deploy the power in any organized way, to do it in a radically diffused fashion; and democracy is a set of technologies, which have the effect of, in principle, diffusing the power source to a large number of people and then re-concentrating it in a smaller group of people who govern, and who themselves are, in principle, authorized to govern by virtue of what the broader public has done.
我是说,政治- 我们通过一个具体问题来着重讨论政治制度, 也就是民主政治。 民主,作为政治的一种,是一项 为了控制和使用权利的技术。 你可以通过多种方式来使用权利。 著名的,比如专制就是一个很好的例子。 无政府是一种非组织化的使用权利, 漫无章法的方式。 民主是这样一组科技, 在原则上,把权利的来源分散到 一大批人中 然后重新集中到处于掌控地位的那一小部分人中, 这些人本身,原则上,被授予掌控地位的权利 是依靠公众的选择。
Now, consider religion -- in this case Islam, which is the religion that, in some direct sense, can be said to be precipitating what we're about to enter. Let me say parenthetically why I think that's the case, because I think it's a potentially controversial statement. I would put it in the following equation: no 9/11, no war. At the beginning of the Bush administration, when President Bush, now President Bush, was running for president, he made it very clear that he was not interested in intervening broadly in the world. In fact, the trend was for disengagement with the rest of the world. That's why we heard about the backing away from the Kyoto protocol, for example. After 9/11, the tables were turned. And the president decided, with his advisors, to undertake some kind of an active intervention in the world around us. That began with Afghanistan, and when Afghanistan went extremely smoothly and quickly, a decision was made through the technology of democracy -- again, notice, not a perfect technology -- but through the technology of democracy that this administration was going to push in the direction of another war -- this time, a war in Iraq.
现在我们来看宗教--比如说伊斯兰教, 直接说,是促成了我们将要面临的境遇 的宗教。 顺便解释一句, 因为我认为这可能是个富于争议的说法。 我想用下面这个等式:没有9/11,就没有战争。 在布什政府的初期, 当布什总统,现任的布什总统,正在竞选总统的时候, 十分明确地表明过他没有兴趣过多地干涉世界上的事情。 实际上,当时的趋势是远离世界上的其他国家。 这也可以说明比如,为什么美国会退出京都议定。 9/11以后,形势变化了。 总统和他的幕僚们决定, 在世界范围内要采取主动。 先是阿富汗, 当在阿富汗的计划进行的十分顺利和迅速的时候, 在民主机制下, 请注意,虽然并不完美-- 但是通过民主这种技术 这届政府决定推行一场新的战争。 这次是在伊拉克。
Now, the reason I begin by saying "no 9/11, no war" is that we have to acknowledge that Islam, as interpreted by a very, very small, extremely radical group of people, was a precipitating cause of the 9/11 attacks -- the precipitating cause of the 9/11 attacks -- and as a consequence, at one degree of remove, the precipitating cause of the coming war that we're about to be engaged in. And I would add that bin Laden and his followers are consciously devoted to the goal of creating a conflict between democracy, or at least capitalist democracy, on the one hand, and the world of Islam as they see and define it.
那么,我之所以说没有911,就没有战争 是因为我们必须要承认伊斯兰教, 在一群很少数,很极端的人的理解下, 是9/11袭击的决定性原因-- 9/11袭击的决定性原因-- 结果是,抛开其他的因素, 我们将要参与的这场战争的决定性原因, 而且我还要说下本拉登和他的追随者们 刻意制造一种冲突,在民主和 或者至少一方面在资本主义民主中, 他们眼中的伊斯兰教世界的冲突。
Now, how is Islam a technology in this conceptual apparatus? Well, it's a technology for, first, salvation in its most basic sense. It's meant to be a mechanism for construing the universe in a way that will bring about the salvation of the individual believer, but it's also meant by the Islamists -- and I use that term to mean people who believe that Islam -- they follow the slogan, Islam is the answer to a wide range of questions, whether they're social, or political, or personal, or spiritual. Within the sphere of people who have that view, and it's a large number of people in the Muslim world who disagree with bin Laden in his application, but agree that Islam is the answer. Islam represents a way of engaging the world through which one can achieve certain desirable goals. And the goals from the perspective of Muslims are, in principle, peace, justice and equality, but on terms that correspond to traditional Muslim teachings.
那么,在这种概念下,伊斯兰教如何成为一种技术呢? 首先,救赎是它的最基本概念。 也就是构建宇宙的一种机制 从而让信徒获得救赎, 但是也是通过伊斯兰教徒-- 我用这个词来形容那些信奉伊斯兰教的人们-- 他们追随教义,把伊斯兰教作为一系列广泛问题的答案, 不管是社会的,或者政治的,还是个人的或者是精神层面上的。 持有这种观点的人, 在穆斯林世界中非常多 他们虽然不同意本拉登的做法, 却同意伊斯兰教是解决问题的答案。 伊斯兰教提供了一种处世之道 使得他们可以完成某种预想的目标。 原则上,从穆斯林们的角度出发,他们的目标是, 和平,正义和平等, 但却是按照传统穆斯林所教导的方式。
Now, I don't want to leave a misimpression by identifying either of these propositions -- rather, either of these phenomena, democracy or Islam -- as technologies. I don't want to suggest that they are a single thing that you can point to. And I think a good way to prove this is simply to demonstrate to you what my thought process was when deciding what to put on the wall behind me when I spoke. And I ran immediately into a conceptual problem: you can't show a picture of democracy. You can show a slogan, or a symbol, or a sign that stands for democracy. You can show the Capitol -- I had the same problem when I was designing the cover of my forthcoming book, in fact -- what do you put on the cover to show democracy? And the same problem with respect to Islam. You can show a mosque, or you can show worshippers, but there's not a straightforward way of depicting Islam. That's because these are the kinds of concepts that are not susceptible to easy representation.
请不要误会, 我指出这两个提议- 或者说,这两个现象,民主或者伊斯兰教,都是技术。 我并不想说它们是你认为的同样的事物。 我认为证明这个的一个好方法是 简单地向你们展示我的思考过程 在我讲话的过程中,决定我身后的墙上应该展示些什么。 于是我立即遇到了这样一个概念性问题-- 你展示不出一幅民主的画面。 你可以展示象征民主的口号,或者符号,或者印记。 你可以展示国会大厦-- 我在设计我的新书的封面的时候也遇到了 相同的问题,实际上-- 你会在封面上放置什么来代表民主呢? 伊斯兰教也遇到同样的问题。 你可以展示清真寺,或者朝圣者, 但是却没有直观的方式去描述伊斯兰教。 这是因为它们属于那类 不容易展示和表现的概念。
Now, it follows from that, that they're deeply contestable. It follows from that that all of the people in the world who say that they are Muslims can, in principle, subscribe to a wide range of different interpretations of what Islam really is, and the same is true of democracy. In other words, unlike the word hope, which one could look up in a dictionary and derive origins for, and, perhaps, reach some kind of a consensual use analysis, these are essentially contested concepts. They're ideas about which people disagree in the deepest possible sense. And as a consequence of this disagreement, it's very, very difficult for anyone to say, "I have the right version of Islam." You know, post-9/11, we were treated to the amazing phenomenon of George W. Bush saying, "Islam means peace." Well, so says George W. Bush. Other people would say it means something else. Some people would say that Islam means submission. Other people would say it means an acknowledgement or recognition of God's sovereignty. There are a wide range of different things that Islam can mean. And ostensibly, the same is true of democracy. Some people say that democracy consists basically in elections. Other people say no, that's not enough, there have to be basic liberal rights: free speech, free press, equality of citizens. These are contested points, and it's impossible to answer them by saying, "Ah ha, I looked in the right place, and I found out what these concepts mean."
因此,它们是非常具有争议性的。 因此,世界上所有声称自己是穆斯林的人 原则上都 对伊斯兰教持有不同的观点。 对于民主也是这样。 换句话说,和“希望”这个词不同, 我们可以查阅字典追溯根源, 而且,或者使用某种一致性使用分析, 这两样概念本质上是争议性的。 它们是人们在最深层次上的分歧。 这种分歧的结果是 任何人都说不出, “我知道伊斯兰教的正确含义。” 你知道,9/11以后,我们面对的是这样奇怪的现象, 乔治W布什说,“伊斯兰教意味着和平。” 好吧,那是布什的看法。 其他人可能会说伊斯兰教是其他的东西。 有些人可能说伊斯兰教意味着服从。 有些人可能说伊斯兰教意味着感谢 或者神的主权的认知。 对于伊斯兰教的理解可以是五花八门。 表面上看,民主也是一样。 有些人认为民主就是各种选举。 其他人说不对,这还不够, 必须有最基本的自由权利:演讲自由,舆论自由,公民平等。 这些就是争议之处,而且我们也不可能这样回答, “啊哈,我已经查过了,我知道了这些概念究竟是什么意思。”
Now, if Islam and democracy are at present in a moment of great confrontation, what does that mean? Well, you could fit it into a range of different interpretative frameworks. You could begin with the one that we began with a couple of days ago, which was fear. Fear is not an implausible reaction with a war just around the corner and with a very, very high likelihood that many, many people are going to die as a consequence of this confrontation -- a confrontation which many, many people in the Muslim world do not want, many, many people in the American democracy do not want, many people elsewhere in the world do not want, but which nonetheless is favored by a large enough number of people -- at least in the relevant space, which is the United States -- to actually go forward. So fear is not a crazy response at all. And I think that that's, in fact, probably the first appropriate response.
那么,如果伊斯兰教和民主都在现场 在终极对峙的时刻, 那意味着什么? 你可以将其放入一系列不同的框架中去理解。 你可以从我们前几天开始讨论的问题开始, 那就是恐惧。 如果战争在一触即发之际,恐惧并非一种不可思议的反应 很多人可能都会送命。 作为这次对决的结果-- 这种许多穆斯林世界中 的人不希望看到的对决, 许多怀有美国式民主情节的人不希望看到的, 许多其他世界各地的人不希望看到的对决, 但是,这也是有相当多的人所希望看到的-- 至少在利害相关的地区,也就是美国-- 认为应该进行的。因此恐惧根本不是一种疯狂的反应。 我认为,实际上,可能是第一个合理的反应。
What I want to suggest to you, though, in the next couple of minutes is that there's also a hopeful response to this. And the hopeful response derives from recognizing that Islam and democracy are technologies. And by virtue of being technologies, they're manipulable. And they're manipulable in ways that can produce some extremely positive outcomes. What do I have in mind? Well, all over the Muslim world there are people who take Islam deeply seriously, people who care about Islam, for whom it's a source either of faith, or of civilization, or of deep values, or just a source of powerful personal identity, who think and are saying loudly that Islam and democracy are in fact not in conflict, but are in fact deeply compatible. And these Muslims -- and it's the vast majority of Muslims -- disagree profoundly with bin Laden's approach, profoundly. And they furthermore think overwhelmingly -- again one can't speak of every person, but overwhelmingly, and one can find this by reading any of the sources that they have produced, and they're all over the Internet and in all sorts of languages -- one can see that they're saying that their concern in their own countries is primarily to free up themselves to have choice in the spheres of personal life, in the sphere of economics, in the sphere of politics, and, yes, in the sphere of religion, which is itself closely regulated in most of the Muslim world.
然而,在接下来的几分钟内,我想向你提出的是 其实是有一种反应可以使人满怀希望的。 这种反应来源于认识到 伊斯兰教和民主都是一种技术。 而且因为它们是种技术,它们是可操作的。 而起它们可以以一种能产生 极端正面影响的方式被操作。 我想到了什么呢? 在穆斯林世界有这样一批人 他们十分严肃的看待伊斯兰教,关心伊斯兰教, 对于它们来说伊斯兰教是一种信仰,文化或者深刻价值观的本源, 或者仅仅是一种强有力的,个人身份的来源, 他们认为并且大声宣称伊斯兰教和民主 事实上是不存在冲突的,而且在深层次兼容。 而且这些穆斯林--他们占据了绝大多数的比例, 完全不同意本拉登的方式,完全不同意。 而且他们十分强烈的认为-- 再一次地一个人不可能代表每个人,但是十分强烈的, 我们可以发现这一点,通过搜寻他们出版的任何 资源,这些资源遍布因特网 用各种不同的语言写成--宣扬他们的想法 他们所关心的是在他们自己的国家如何解放他们自己 在个人生活上, 在经济领域,在政治领域,如何选择, 而且,是的,甚至在宗教领域 这一点在穆斯林世界被十分严格的管理着。
And many of these Muslims further say that their disagreement with the United States is that it, in the past and still in the present, has sided with autocratic rulers in the Muslim world in order to promote America's short-term interests. Now, during the Cold War, that may have been a defensible position for the United States to take. That's an academic question. It may be that there was a great war to be fought between West and East, and it was necessary on the axis of democracy against communism. And it was necessary in some way for these to contradict each other, and as a consequence you have to make friends wherever you can get them. But now that the Cold War is over, there's nearly universal consensus in the Muslim world -- and pretty close to the same here in the United States, if you talk to people and ask them -- that in principle, there's no reason that democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. And we see this among activist, practical Muslims, like the Muslims who are presently the elected, parliamentary, democratic government of Turkey, who are behaving pragmatically, not ideologically, who are promoting their own religious values, who are elected by their own people because they were perceived as honest and sincere because of their religious values, but who do not think that Islam and a democratic system of governance are fundamentally incompatible.
而且这其中有许多穆斯林教徒进一步表达了 他们反对美国(的做法) 也就是过去和目前仍存在的, 支持穆斯林世界独裁者的统治 以推进美国的短期利益。 那么,在冷战期间,也许可以说是美国 采取一种防御的态度。 那是属于专业化的问题。 也许是因为东西方之间可能会发生一场大的冲突, 用民主的本质来对抗共产主义是必须的。 在某种程度上出现相互矛盾的情况也是不可避免的, 结果就是你要尽可能的广交朋友。 但是现在冷战已经结束, 穆斯林世界几乎达成了一致-- 美国国内也差不多同样达成一致, 如果你问他们, 本质上,民主和伊斯兰教没有理由不能够共存。 我们可以见到活跃的,实事求是的穆斯林教徒, 比如刚刚当选的土耳其穆斯林政府, 民主的议会,民主的政府, 他们奉行实用主义而非理想主义, 推行自己的宗教观念, 因为他们被认为是诚实和真挚的 因为他们的宗教观念, 被自己的人民选举出来, 但是他们并不认为伊斯兰教和民主制度 有着根本的矛盾。
Now, you may say, but surely, what we've seen on television about Saudi Islam convinces us that it can't possibly be compatible with what we consider the core of democracy -- namely, free political choice, basic liberty and basic equality. But I'm here to tell you that technologies are more malleable than that. I'm here to tell you that many, many Muslims believe -- the vast majority, in fact -- in fact I think I would go so far as to say that many Muslims in Saudi Arabia believe that the core values of Islam, namely acknowledgement of God's sovereignty and basic human equality before God, are themselves compatible with liberty, equality and free political choice. And there are Muslims, many Muslims out there, who are saying precisely this. And they're making this argument wherever they're permitted to make it. But their governments, needless to say, are relatively threatened by this. And for the most part try to stop them from making this argument.
那么,你可能会说,但是毫无疑问的是,我们在电视上看到沙特的伊斯兰教 坚决认为他们的价值观同 我们认同的民主核心价值是不可共存的, 也就是,自由政治权利,基本自由和基本平等。 但是我今天想向大家说明, 技术相当具有可塑性。 我想告诉你,许多许多的穆斯林们认为-- 实际上是绝大多数--事实上我可以说在沙特阿拉伯的 许多穆斯林认为伊斯兰教的核心价值观, 也就是对神的主权的承认 神面前人人平等的基本权利, 这和自由,平等以及自由政治选举本身上是同出一辙的。 许多的穆斯林,许多穆斯林确确实实是这样说的。 只要情况允许,他们总会竭尽所能的宣传这种观点。 但是他们的政府,不用说,被这种观点所威胁。 而且尽可能的去组织这种宣传活动的发生。
So, for example, a group of young activists in Egypt try to form a party known as the Center Party, which advocated the compatibility of Islam and democracy. They weren't even allowed to form a party. They were actually blocked from even forming a party under the political system there. Why? Because they would have done extraordinarily well. In the most recent elections in the Muslim world -- which are those in Pakistan, those in Morocco and those in Turkey -- in each case, people who present themselves to the electorate as Islamic democrats were far and away the most successful vote-getters every place they were allowed to run freely. So in Morocco, for example, they finished third in the political race but they were only allowed to contest half the seats. So had they contested a larger number of the seats, they would have done even better. Now what I want to suggest to you is that the reason for hope in this case is that we are on the edge of a real transformation in the Muslim world. And that's a transformation in which many sincerely believing Muslims -- who care very, very deeply about their traditions, who do not want to compromise those values -- believe, through the malleability of the technology of democracy and the malleability and synthetic capability of the technology of Islam, that these two ideas can work together.
比如,埃及的一群青年活跃分子, 打算组建一个叫做“Center Party”(中心党)的政党, 其宗旨是推进伊斯兰教与民主政治的和谐。 但是他们甚至不能得到许可。 他们甚至连组建一个政党都不可以 在当地的政治制度下。为什么? 因为他们一定会取得很大的成功。 在穆斯林世界的最近几次选举中-- 在巴基斯坦,在摩洛哥,在土耳其 每一个国家, 那些宣称自己为伊斯兰的民主主义者的人却远远超出其他竞选者 在他们允许自由竞选的地方 赢得大量的选票。 比如在摩洛哥,他们在政治竞选中名列第三 但他们只被允许竞争半数席位。 所以如果他们可以竞争更多的席位, 他们可以做的更好。 那么我要向大家建议的是这种例子给我们一种希望 那就是我们将要面临穆斯林世界的一个真实的大转变。 在这场变革中,那些诚挚的穆斯林们-- 那些深深关心自己传统的人们, 那些不想在传统价值上妥协的人们-- 他们相信,通过民主,这个技术的可塑性, 和伊斯兰教,这个技术的包容性以及可塑性, 这两种观念能够融合在一起。
Now what would that look like? What does it mean to say that there's an Islamic democracy? Well, one thing is, it's not going to look identical to democracy as we know it in the United States. That may be a good thing, in light of some of the criticisms we've heard today -- for example, in the regulatory context -- of what democracy produces. It will also not look exactly the way either the people in this room, or Muslims out in the rest of the world -- I don't mean to imply there aren't Muslims here, there probably are -- conceptualize Islam. It will be transformative of Islam as well. And as a result of this convergence, this synthetic attempt to make sense of these two ideas together, there's a real possibility that, instead of a clash of Islamic civilization -- if there is such a thing -- and democratic civilization -- if there is such a thing -- we'll in fact have close compatibility.
那将会是怎样的情景? “伊斯兰民主”这个词汇意味着什么? 有一点是,它不会和我们所熟知的 美国的民主所相同。 这也许是一个好事,比如,我们现在的民主制度, 我们已经听到许多批评的声音。 它也不会跟在座的各位、 或者外面世界的穆斯林-- 我的意思并不是在座的没有穆斯林,其实很可能是有的-- 所想象的穆斯林不一样 它也会改变伊斯兰教。 这种融合的结果是, 这种试图融合这两种观念的尝试, 结果很可能不会是 伊斯兰教文明--如果有这么一种概念-- 和民主文明--如果也有这么一个概念-- 的冲突,事实上这两者也许会紧密协调。
Now, I began with the war because it's the elephant in the room, and you can't pretend that there isn't about to be a war if you're talking about these issues. The war has tremendous risks for the model that I'm describing because it's very possible that as a consequence of a war, many Muslims will conclude that the United States is not the kind of place that they want to emulate with respect to its forms of political government. On the other hand, there's a further possibility that many Americans, swept up in the fever of a war, will say, and feel, and think that Islam is the enemy somehow -- that Islam ought to be construed as the enemy. And even though, for political tactical reasons, the president has been very, very good about saying that Islam is not the enemy, nonetheless, there's a natural impulse when one enters war to think of the other side as an enemy. And one furthermore has the impulse to generalize, as much as possible, in defining who that enemy is. So the risks are very great.
那么,我从战争说起是因为这是焦点话题, 你不可能假装战争离我们很远, 当你正谈论这些话题的时候。 战争对于我正在描述的这种模型有极大的威胁 因为很有可能的事情是,作为战争的结果, 许多穆斯林会得出结论:美国 不是他们想要在政治上 效仿的对象。 另一方面,一种大的可能性是许多的美国人, 对于战争抱有很强的赞同,会谈论,感受,和认为 伊斯兰教在某种程度上是敌人-- 伊斯兰教应该被视作敌人。 而且即使如此,由于政治策略的原因, 总统已经对如何声明伊斯兰教不是敌人驾轻就熟, 尽管如此,当被牵涉进战争时,一方很自然地会有 将对方视作敌人的冲动。 并有冲动,去尽可能多的归纳和定义 敌人到底是谁。 所以,危机是很大的。
On the other hand, the capacities for positive results in the aftermath of a war are also not to be underestimated, even by, and I would say especially by, people who are deeply skeptical about whether we should go to war in the first place. Those who oppose the war ought to realize that if a war happens, it cannot be the right strategy, either pragmatically, or spiritually, or morally, to say after the war, "Well, let's let it all run itself out, and play out however it wants to play out, because we opposed the war in the first place." That's not the way human circumstances operate. You face the circumstances you have in front of you and you go forward.
另一方面,战后产生积极影响的可能 也不应当被低估, 尤其对那些 开始对是否开战争的持有保留观点的人们所低估。 那些反对战争的人应该意识到一旦战争发生了, 当战争过后,不管是实际的,精神层面的,或者道德层面的 都不可以这么说, “好吧,让他们自己来做主吧,他们现在可以想怎样就怎样了, 因为我们从一开始就反对战争。” 这不是人类环境运行的规律。 你应该正视眼前的局面 然后去处理它。
Well, what I'm here to say then is, for people who are skeptical about the war, it's especially important to recognize that in the aftermath of the war there is a possibility for the government of the United States and the Muslim peoples with whom it interacts to create real forms of government that are truly democratic and also truly Islamic. And it is crucial -- it is crucial in a practical, activist way -- for people who care about these issues to make sure that within the technology of democracy, in this system, they exercise their preferences, their choices and their voices to encourage that outcome. That's a hopeful message, but it's a message that's hopeful only if you understand it as incurring serious obligation for all of us. And I think that we are capable of taking on that obligation, but only if we put what we can into it. And if we do, then I don't think that the hope will be unwarranted altogether.
那么,我接下来想说的是, 对于那些对战争持保留态度的人, 有一点极其重要,就是意识到战争以后 美国政府有可能 和那些和他们接触的穆斯林人们 创造一个真正民主,真正伊斯兰的 政治管理体系。 而且这是至关重要的,从实事求是,活跃的角度来看, 对于那些真正关心这些事的人, 在民主科技下,在这个体系里, 他们可以表达自己的喜好,自己的选择和声音的人 去鼓励这种结果。 这是给人以希望的信息, 但只有你理解了它它才会给人以希望 同时我们也会承受艰巨的职责。 而且我认为我们有能力承担这种职责, 但是前提是我们倾尽所能。 如果我们这样做的话,我不认为希望会落空。
Thanks.
谢谢。