您现在的位置: 纽约时报中英文网 >> 纽约时报中英文版 >> 观点 >> 正文

特朗普和马克思有什么共同点

更新时间:2016-10-27 10:15:28 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

What Do Trump and Marx Have in Common?
特朗普和马克思有什么共同点

HAMBURG, Germany — We have a word in German, “Wutbürger,” which means “angry citizen” — though like many German compound words, its meaning can never quite be captured in a pithy English translation. And yet nothing in either language quite frames this current political moment.

德国汉堡——德语中有个词叫Wutbürger,意思是“愤怒的公民”,不过与许多德语复合词一样,你很难用简洁有力的英语把它的意思完全翻译出来。对于当下的这个政治时刻,两种语言倒是都没有词能够予以充分表达。

It is a relatively new expression, with a derogatory connotation. A Wutbürger rages against a new train station and tilts against wind turbines. Wutbürgers came out in protest after the Berlin government decided to bail out Greece and to accept roughly one million refugees and migrants into Germany.

它是一个相对较新的表达,具有贬义色彩。愤怒的公民为一个新建的火车站大为光火,或者将矛头指向风力发电机。愤怒的公民出现在德国政府救助希腊以及接纳约100万难民和移民的抗议活动中。

Wutbürgers lie at both ends of the political spectrum; they flock to the right-wing Alternative für Deutschland (A.F.D.) and the socialist Linke (Left) Party. The left wing has long had a place in German politics, and the Linke has deep roots in the former East Germany’s ruling party. And we’ve had a fringe right wing since the postwar period began. But the populist anger of the A.F.D. is something new: Anti-establishment, anti-European Union and anti-globalization, the A.F.D. didn’t exist four years ago. Today, 18 percent of Germans would consider voting for it.

愤怒的公民存在于政坛光谱的各极,他们纷纷加入右翼的另类选择党(Alternative für Deutschland,简称AFD)以及社会主义的左翼党(Linke Party)。左翼在德国政治中一直占据一定的地位,左翼党与前东德的执政党颇有渊源。自战后时期以来,我们一直有一个处于边缘地位的右翼。但是,另类选择党的平民主义愤怒是新鲜事物:反权威、反欧盟、反全球化。该党8年前才出现,但如今,18%的德国人会考虑投票支持它。

The same thing is happening elsewhere in Europe: Many British Wutbürgers voted for Brexit. French Wutbürgers will vote for Marine Le Pen’s National Front. Perhaps the most powerful Wutbürger of them all is Donald J. Trump.

同样的事情正在欧洲其他地方发生:很多愤怒的英国公民投票支持退欧。愤怒的法国公民会投票支持马琳·勒庞(Marine Le Pen)的国民阵线党(National Front)。也许最有影响力的愤怒公民是唐纳德·J·特朗普(Donald J. Trump)。

Which raises the question: How was anger hijacked?

这引发一个问题:愤怒是怎么被劫持的?

In its pure form, anger is a wonderful force of change. Just imagine a world without anger. In Germany, without the anger of the labor movement, we would still have a class-based voting system that privileged the wealthy, and workers would still toil 16 hours a day without pension rights. Britain and France would still be ruled by absolute monarchs. The Iron Curtain would still divide Europe, the United States would still be a British colony and its slaves could only dream of casting a vote this Nov. 8.

纯粹的愤怒是一股了不起的改革力量。想像一下,如果没有愤怒,世界会是怎样的。在德国,如果没有工人运动的愤怒,我们的投票制度仍以阶级为基础,有钱人享有特权,工人仍然每天辛苦工作16个小时,而且还没有养老金。英国和法国仍由专制君主统治。欧洲仍被铁幕分开,美国仍是英国的一个殖民地,在今年11月8号的投票日,美国的奴隶们只能梦想自己拥有投票权。

Karl Marx was a Wutbürger. So were Montesquieu, William Wilberforce, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and the tens of thousands of Eastern German protesters who brought down the Berlin Wall in 1989.

卡尔·马克思(Karl Marx)是愤怒的公民。孟德斯鸠(Montesquieu)、威廉·威尔伯福斯(William Wilberforce)、牧师小马丁·路德·金博士(Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.),以及1989年推倒柏林墙的数以万计的东德抗议者,他们都是愤怒的公民。

Now: Compare these spirits to the current parties claiming to stand for necessary change. Mr. Trump vs. Dr. King. Sadly, the leaders of today’s Wutbürger movements never grasped the difference between anger driven by righteousness and anger driven by hate.

现在,把这些人与当前声称支持必要改革的政党相比较。把特朗普与金博士相比较。可悲的是,如今愤怒公民运动的领导者从不理解正义驱动的愤怒与仇恨驱动的愤怒之间的区别。

Anger works like gasoline. If you use it intelligently and in a controlled manner, you can move the world. That’s called progress. Or you just spill it about and ignite it, creating spectacular explosions. That’s called arson.

愤怒就像汽油。如果你用睿智、可控的方式使用它,你能推动这个世界。那被称之为进步。你也可以泼洒、引燃它,制造惊人的爆炸。那被称之为纵火。

Unfortunately, a lack of maturity and prudence today exists among not just the new populist class, but parts of the political establishment. The governing class needs to understand that just because people are embittered and paranoid doesn’t mean they don’t have a case. A growing number of voters are going into meltdown because they believe that politicians — and journalists — don’t see what they see.

不幸的是,现在,不仅新的平民主义阶层缺乏成熟和审慎,政界的某些部分也是如此。统治阶级需要明白,人们愤怒多疑并非没有理由。越来越多的投票者正走向爆发,因为他们认为,政客——以及记者——没有看到他们所看到的东西。

Sure, the injustices they see are, in historical perspective, less stark and obvious than in the days of Marx or King. The injustices of today are smaller, but they are more complex. And this is what makes them all the more terrifying.

当然,从历史角度讲,他们看到的不公正不像马克思或金博士所处的时代那般鲜明、突出。如今的不公正没那么严重,但更复杂,因此才更令人恐惧。

If John Steinbeck could travel the West today as he traveled America three generations ago, leaving the highways to visit forgotten towns, documenting people’s struggles as he did in “The Grapes of Wrath,’’ he would find much the same to write about. Globalization and its masters have capitalized on enormous pay gaps between West and East, at a huge profit for them, and huge cost to others.

如果约翰·斯坦贝克(John Steinbeck)现在能像70多年前周游美国那样去美国西部旅行,离开高速公路,探访遭人遗忘的小镇,像写《愤怒的葡萄》(The Grapes of Wrath)那样记录人们的挣扎,他会发现有很多相同的东西可写。全球化及其主导者利用东西方之间的巨大薪酬差距,为自己攫取巨额利益,让他人付出巨大代价。

The upper class has gained much more from the internationalization of trade and finances than the working class has, often in obscene ways. Bankers get bonuses despite making idiotic decisions that trigger staggering losses. Giant enterprises like Facebook or Apple pay minimal taxes, while blue-collar workers have to labor harder — even taking a second or third job — to maintain their standard of living. And this is as true in Germany, France or Austria as it is in Ohio or Florida.

上层阶级从贸易和金融全球化中攫取的利益远远多于工薪阶级,而且往往是通过不道德的方式。银行家们就算做出愚蠢的决定,导致惊人的损失,依然能够获得分红。Facebook和苹果(Apple)等大公司缴纳最少的税,而蓝领工人却不得不更加努力地工作——甚至再打一份或两份工——才能维持自己的生活水平。不管在德国、法国、奥地利,还是在俄亥俄州、佛罗里达州,都是这样。

In Germany, some 60 percent of A.F.D. supporters say globalization has “mainly negative” effects. We live in a world, the liberal British historian Timothy Garton Ash noted lately, “which would have Marx rubbing his hands with Schadenfreude.”

在德国,约60%的另类选择党支持者称,全球化“主要带来了负面”影响。不久前,英国自由主义史学家蒂莫西·加顿·阿什(Timothy Garton Ash )指出,如果马克思看到我们现在生活的世界,“他会幸灾乐祸地直搓手”。

The grievances of white, often less-educated voters on both sides of the Atlantic are often dismissed as xenophobic, simplistic hillbillyism. But doing so comes at a cost. Europe’s traditional force of social change, its social democrats, appear to just not get it. When Hillary Clinton calls half of Mr. Trump’s voters a “basket of deplorables,” she sounds as aloof as Marie Antoinette, telling French subjects who had no bread to “eat cake.” In Germany, a deputy Social Democrat leader, Ralf Stegner, displays a similar arrogance when he calls A.F.D. supporters “racists” and “skunks.” Media reports often convey the same degree of contempt.

大西洋两岸受教育程度较低的白人投票者的抱怨,常常被斥为仇外的、过于简单化的乡巴佬主义。但是,这么做是有代价的。欧洲的传统社会改革力量,也就是它的社会民主人士,似乎不明白这一点。希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)称特朗普的一半支持者是“遭人唾弃之辈”,听起来和让吃不上面包的法国民众去“吃蛋糕”的玛丽·安托瓦内特(Marie Antoinette)一样高高在上。德国的社会民主党(Social Democrat)副党魁拉尔夫·施戴格纳(Ralf Stegner)表现出类似的傲慢,称另类选择党的支持者是“种族主义者”和“臭鼬”。媒体报道往往传达出同等程度的轻蔑。

In Germany a recent poll showed that only 14 percent of the citizens trusted the politicians. This is an alarming figure, in a country where faith in a progressive, democratic government has been a cornerstone of our postwar peace. But this presumes that legitimate anger will be acknowledged as such. If this faith is rattled, democracy loses its basic promise.

德国最近的一项民意调查显示,只有14%的公民信任政治人物。这个数字令人担忧,因为对一个进步民主政府的信任是我们战后和平的基石。但前提是正当的愤怒会得到认可。如果这种信仰被粉碎,那么民主就失去了其基本的承诺。

Amid their mutual finger-pointing, neither populist nor established parties acknowledge that both are squandering people’s anger, either by turning this anger into counterproductive hatred or by denouncing and dismissing it. Mrs. Clinton has the chance to change, by leading a political establishment that examines and processes anger instead of merely producing and dismissing it. If she does, let’s hope Europe once again looks to America as a model for democracy.

平民主义者和各党在相互指责的过程中,都没有承认自己是在浪费民众的愤怒——要么把愤怒变成适得其反的仇恨,要么谴责、蔑视它。克林顿有机会做出改变,领导一个政治权力阶层去分析、解决愤怒,而不是制造、排斥愤怒。如果她能做到这一点,我们可以期待欧洲再次将美国视为民主典范。

“全文请访问纽约时报中文网,本文发表于纽约时报中文网(http://cn.nytimes.com),版权归纽约时报公司所有。任何单位及个人未经许可,不得擅自转载或翻译。订阅纽约时报中文网新闻电邮:http://nytcn.me/subscription/”

相关文章列表