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

我曾投票给特朗普,现在我后悔死了

更新时间:2017-8-20 10:03:07 来源:纽约时报中文网 作者:佚名

I Voted for Trump. And I Sorely Regret It.
我曾投票给特朗普,现在我后悔死了

When Donald Trump first announced his presidential campaign, I, like most people, thought it would be a short-lived publicity stunt. A month later, though, I happened to catch one of his political rallies on C-Span. I was riveted.

唐纳德·特朗普首次宣布参加总统竞选时,我和大多数人一样,以为那只是昙花一现的宣传噱头。不过,一个月后,我碰巧在C-Span频道看到他的一次政治集会。我被迷住了。

I supported the Republican in dozens of articles, radio and TV appearances, even as conservative friends and colleagues said I had to be kidding. As early as September 2015, I wrote that Mr. Trump was “the most serious candidate in the race.” Critics of the pro-Trump blog and then the nonprofit journal that I founded accused us of attempting to “understand Trump better than he understands himself.” I hoped that was the case. I saw the decline in this country — its weak economy and frayed social fabric — and I thought Mr. Trump’s willingness to move past partisan stalemates could begin a process of renewal.

我在文章、电台和电视采访中数十次支持这位共和党人,尽管我的保守派朋友和同事都说我一定是在开玩笑。早在2015年9月,我撰文称,特朗普是“这场竞选中最有份量的候选人”。对支持特朗普的博客以及之后我创办的非营利杂志持批评态度的人指责我们,说我们试图显得“比特朗普本人更了解他”。我希望那是事实。我看到了这个国家的衰落——经济疲软,社会结构涣散——我曾经以为特朗普打破两党僵局的意愿会开启一场复兴。

It is now clear that my optimism was unfounded. I can’t stand by this disgraceful administration any longer, and I would urge anyone who once supported him as I did to stop defending the 45th president.

现在的事实表明,我的乐观是没有根据的。我不能再支持这一届可耻的政府了,我会敦促任何曾经和我一样支持第45任总统的人停止维护他。

Far from making America great again, Mr. Trump has betrayed the foundations of our common citizenship. And his actions are jeopardizing any prospect of enacting an agenda that might restore the promise of American life.

特朗普非但没能让美国恢复伟大荣光,反而背叛了我们的普遍公民身份的根基。他的行为导致恢复美国生活承诺的议程希望渺茫。

***

What, you may wonder, especially in the wake of Charlottesville, Va., did I possibly see in this candidate?

你可能想知道——尤其是在弗吉尼亚州夏洛茨维尔事件之后——我曾经在这位候选人身上看到过什么?

Although crude and meandering for almost all of the primary campaign, Mr. Trump eschewed strict ideologies and directly addressed themes that the more conventional candidates of both parties preferred to ignore. Rather than recite paeans to American enterprise, he acknowledged that our “information economy” has delivered little wage or productivity growth. He was willing to criticize the bipartisan consensus on trade and pointed out the devastating effects of deindustrialization felt in many communities. He forthrightly addressed the foreign policy failures of both parties, such as the debacles in Iraq and Libya, and rejected the utopian rhetoric of “democracy promotion.” He talked about the issue of widening income inequality — almost unheard of for a Republican candidate — and didn’t pretend that simply cutting taxes or shrinking government would solve the problem.

虽然几乎在整个初选阶段,特朗普的表现都很粗鲁,而且不着边际,但他没有恪守严格的意识形态立场,而是直接讨论两党更传统的候选人们倾向于忽视的主题。他没有重复对美国企业的赞歌,而是承认我们的“信息经济”几乎没有增加工资收入或推动生产力增长。他愿意批评两党在贸易上的共识,并指出很多社区所感觉到的去工业化的灾难效应。他直率地指出两党在外交政策方面的失败,比如在伊拉克和利比亚的惨败,驳斥“民主宣传”的乌托邦言论。他谈论日益严重的收入不公问题——以前从来没有哪位共和党候选人谈过这个问题——也没有假装认为,仅仅通过减税或缩小政府规模就能解决这个问题。

He criticized corporations for offshoring jobs, attacked financial-industry executives for avoiding taxes and bemoaned America’s reliance on economic bubbles over the last few decades. He blasted the Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz campaigns for insincerely mouthing focus-grouped platitudes while catering to their largest donors — and he was right. Voters loved that he was willing to buck conventional wisdom and the establishment.

他批评企业将工作外包给其他国家,抨击金融业高管逃税,悲叹美国在过去几十年里对经济泡沫的依赖。他痛斥杰布·布什(Jeb Bush)和特德·克鲁兹(Ted Cruz)在竞选中不真诚地发表针对特定受众的陈词滥调,而实际上是为最大的捐款者服务——他说的没错。选民们喜欢他乐于抨击传统智慧和建制势力。

He flouted GOP orthodoxy on entitlements, infrastructure spending and, at times, even health care and “culture war” issues like funding Planned Parenthood. His statements on immigration were often needlessly inflammatory, but he correctly diagnosed that our current system makes little sense for most Americans, as well as many immigrants, and seems designed to benefit the wealthy at the expense of working people.

他嘲笑“老大党”在福利权益、基础设施支出,甚至医疗保险以及资助计划生育等“文化战”问题上的正统观点。他关于移民的声明往往毫无必要地充满煽动性,但他正确地判断出,我们目前的体制对大部分美国人以及很多移民来说都不合理,而且似乎是牺牲劳工阶层的利益,为富人服务。

Yes, Mr. Trump’s policy positions were poorly defined, but these days, most candidates’ positions are. And yes, he had little support from the Republican Party leadership. But many of us thought even this might be a positive if it forced him to focus on “making deals” rather than on Washington’s usual ideological posturing. He was never going to fulfill all of his over-the-top promises, but we believed that his administration might achieve some meaningful successes.

是的,特朗普的政策定位不太明确,但如今的大部分候选人都是这样。是的,他几乎没有得到共和党领导层的支持。但我们中的很多人曾经认为,甚至连这一点都可能是有利的,因为那可能会迫使特朗普把注意力放在“做交易”上,而非华盛顿通常的意识形态表态上。他从未打算兑现自己所有的夸张承诺,但我们相信,他的政府可能会做出一些有意义的成就。

In my writing, I tried to steer this administration in the right direction. During the presidential primaries, the blog I helped organize, called the Journal of American Greatness, was one of the leading voices supporting certain themes of Trump’s campaign. (Michael Anton, now a National Security Council adviser, was our most prolific writer.) Then, after the election, I founded a quarterly journal, American Affairs, largely to question elements of what is often called the neoliberal policy consensus — totally open borders for capital and labor; transferring power from national governments to transnational technocracies; unfettered markets; and democracy promotion as the sole premise of foreign policy. In other words, the disappointing legacy we inherited from the Bushes and the Clintons that helped pave the way to Mr. Trump’s election.

我试图通过自己的文章把这个政府引向正确的方向。在总统初选期间,我参与创办的名叫《美国荣光杂志》(Journal of American Greatness)的博客是支持特朗普竞选某些主题的主要声音(现任国家安全委员会[National Security Council]顾问的迈克尔·安东[Michael Anton]曾是我们最多产的撰稿人)。大选结束后,我创办了一个季刊,名叫《美国事务》(American Affairs),主要是质疑通常被称为新自由主义政策共识的一些内容,比如,为获得资本和劳动力而完全开放边境;将国家级政府的权力转让给跨国技术官僚;对市场不进行任何限制;将民主宣传作为外交政策的唯一前提。换句话说,就是我们从布什家族和克林顿家族继承的那些令人失望的遗产,正是那些遗产为特朗普赢得大选铺平了道路。

In this role, as one of the few people in the media who has been somewhat sympathetic to Mr. Trump, I am often asked to comment on his surprise victory, or more recently on his statements, policies and the gusher of news pouring out of this White House. For months, despite increasing chaos and incoherence, I have given Mr. Trump the benefit of the doubt: “No, I don’t really think he is a racist,” I have told skeptical audiences. “Yes, he says some stupid things, but none of it really matters; he’s not really that incompetent.” Or: “They’ve made some mistakes, but it’s still early.”

作为少数对特朗普多少表示认同的媒体人,我经常被要求评论他的意外成功,近期则是评论他的声明、政策以及从白宫不断涌出的新闻。尽管近几个月的骚乱和前后矛盾越来越多,但我还是选择相信他:“不,我并不认为他是种族主义者,”我对质疑他的观众说。“是的,他说过一些蠢话,但那些都无关紧要,他并不是那么不称职。”或者:“他们是犯了一些错误,但现在时候还早。”

It’s no longer early. Not only has the president failed to make the course corrections necessary to save his administration, but his increasingly appalling conduct will continue to repel anyone who might once have been inclined to work with him.

时候不早了。总统不仅没有为拯救自己的政府修正路线,而且他日益令人震惊的行为将继续疏远任何可能曾经倾向于与他合作的人。

From the very start of his run, one of the most serious charges against Mr. Trump was that he panders to racists. Many of his supporters, myself included, managed to convince ourselves that his more outrageous comments — such as the Judge Gonzalo Curiel controversy or his initial hesitance to disavow David Duke’s endorsement — were merely Bidenesque gaffes committed during the heat of a campaign.

从特朗普竞选之初起,对他最严重的一项指控就是他迎合种族主义者。他的很多支持者,包括我自己,努力说服自己,他的那些日益令人震惊的言论——比如,关于法官贡萨洛·库列尔(Gonzalo Curiel)的争议,或者他最初在拒绝戴维·杜克(David Duke)捐款时的迟疑——只是竞选白热化阶段的拜登式失态。

It is now clear that we were deluding ourselves. Either Mr. Trump is genuinely sympathetic to the David Duke types, or he is so obtuse as to be utterly incapable of learning from his worst mistakes. Either way, he continues to prove his harshest critics right.

现在的情况表明,我们当时只是自我欺骗。特朗普要么是真的认同戴维·杜克那类人的观点,要么就是太过迟钝,完全不能从最糟糕的错误中吸取教训。不管怎样,他在继续证明,自己最激烈的批评者是正确的。

Mr. Trump once boasted that he could shoot someone in the street and not lose voters. Well, someone was just killed in the street by a white supremacist in Charlottesville. His refusal this weekend to specifically and immediately denounce the groups responsible for this intolerable violence was both morally disgusting and monumentally stupid. In this, Mr. Trump failed perhaps the easiest imaginable test of presidential leadership. Rather than advance a vision of national unity that he claims to represent, his indefensible equivocation can only inflame the most vicious forces of division within our country.

特朗普曾经夸口说,就算他在街头枪杀了什么人也不会失去他的选民们。好吧,在夏洛茨维尔的街头,的确有人被白人至上主义者杀害了。这个周末,他拒绝立即明确谴责该团体应为这种不能容忍的暴力负责,这在道德上不仅令人厌恶,而且非常愚蠢。在这件事上,特朗普没有通过对于总统级领导人来说最容易想象的考验。在他那些站不住脚的含糊其辞中没有提出一个全国团结的愿景,只能激发我们国家当中最恶毒的分裂势力。

If Mr. Trump had been speaking about the overall political climate, he might have been right to say that “many sides” are responsible for exacerbating social tensions. Yet during the events in Charlottesville this past weekend, only one side — a deranged white nationalist — was responsible for killing anyone. To equivocate about this fact is the height of irresponsibility. Even those concerned about the overzealous enforcement of political correctness can hardly think that apologizing for neo-Nazis is a sensible alternative.

如果特朗普说的是整体政治气候,那么他声称“多方面”导致了社会紧张局势加剧还可能是对的。然而,在上周末夏洛茨维尔的活动中,只有一方——一个疯狂的白人民族主义者——应为杀人负责。就这一事实含糊其辞是极为不负责任的。就连那些担心政治正确被过度执行了的人也不会认为,为新纳粹辩解会是明智的选择。

Those of us who supported Mr. Trump were never so naïve as to expect that he would transform himself into a model of presidential decorum upon taking office. But our calculation was that a few cringe-inducing tweets were an acceptable trade-off for a successful governing agenda.

对我们这些支持特朗普的人而言,我们从来没有天真到期待他上任后把自己变成总统礼仪的典范。但我们的考虑是:如果政府治理议程能够成功,那么一些令人难堪的推文也是可以接受的。

Yet after more than 200 days in office, Mr. Trump’s behavior grows only more reprehensible. Meanwhile, his administration has no significant legislative accomplishments — and no apparent plan to deliver any. Wilbur Ross’s Commerce Department has advanced some sensible and appropriately incremental changes to trade policy, but no long-term agenda has been articulated. Senators Tom Cotton and David Perdue’s recently proposed legislation offers a sound basis for reforming immigration policy, but seems to have no prospects and has received comparatively little attention. The administration inexplicably downgraded infrastructure and corporate tax reform — issues with potentially broad-based support — to pursue a warmed-over version of Paul Ryan’s Obamacare repeal, which ended, predictably, in a humiliating failure.

然而,上任200多天之后,特朗普的行为变得更加可憎。这段时期,他的行政部门没有取得明显的立法成果,也没有为取得这样的成果而做出任何明确的计划。威尔伯·罗斯(Wilbur Ross)的商业部对贸易政策提出了一些明智和适当的渐进式变革,但没有阐明长期议程。参议员汤姆·科顿(Tom Cotton)和戴维·佩杜特(David Perdue)最近提出的立法法案为改革移民政策提供了坚实的基础,但似乎没有什么前景,并且受到的关注也相对较少。政府不可理喻地减少了基础设施和企业税收改革——这些事项都有潜在的广泛支持——反而跟进了保罗·瑞安(Paul Ryan)为废除奥巴马医改而提出的一个陈腐的方案,最终毫不意外地以丢人现眼的失败告终。

Nothing disastrous has occurred on the foreign policy front — yet — but the never-ending chaos within the administration hardly inspires confidence. Many senior-level appointees are still not in place, including the assistant secretaries of state, for example. And too many of those who are in office appear to be petty, clueless, and rather repulsive ideologues, like Steve Bannon, who seem to spend most of their time accusing one another of being “swamp creatures.” It’s pathetic. No wonder an increasing number of officials are simply ignoring the president, an alarming but understandable development.

迄今为止,在外交政策方面还没有发生灾难性的事情,但政府内部无休止的混乱让人很难产生信心。许多高级别任命官员还没有就位,比如助理国务卿。而那些已经就职的人当中,有太多人似乎心胸狭隘、一无所知,更像是令人厌恶的意识形态倡导者,比如史蒂夫·班农(Steve Bannon),他们大部分时间似乎都在彼此指责,说对方是“沼泽生物”。这是可悲的。难怪越来越多的官员只是无视总统,这是令人震惊但可以理解的发展。

Effectively a third-party president without a party, Mr. Trump has faced extraordinary resistance from the media, the bureaucracy and even within the Republican Party. But the administration has committed too many unforced errors and deserves most of the blame for its failures. Far from making the transformative “deals” he promised voters, his only talent appears to be creating grotesque media frenzies — just as all his critics said.

特朗普实际上是一个没有党派的第三方总统,一直遭到媒体、官僚机构甚至是共和党内部的极大抵制。但是,政府已经犯下太多主动失误,其失败大部分都是咎由自取。特朗普远远没有达成他向选民们承诺的那种变革性的“交易”,他唯一的才能似乎就是创造出怪异的媒体狂热——就像他所有的批评者都说过的那样。

Those who found some admirable things in the hazy outlines of Mr. Trump’s campaign — a trade policy focused on national industrial development; a less quixotic foreign policy; less ideological approaches to infrastructure, health care and entitlements — will have to salvage that agenda from the wreckage of his presidency. On that, I’m not ready to give up.

一些人曾在特朗普竞选中那些模糊的纲领里发现若干可贵的东西——让贸易政策更侧重于国家工业发展;让外交政策不再充满堂吉诃德色彩;减少基础设施、医疗保健和福利权益中的意识形态气息——他们必须从特朗普总统任期的烂摊子里挽回这些议程。对于这一点,我还不准备放弃。

“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