Dave Meslin: The antidote to apathy

翻译人员: Felix Chen 校对人员: Angelia King

How often do we hear that people just don't care?

我们多久会听到

人们说他们毫不在乎？

你多少次被告知

How many times have you been told

that real, substantial change isn't possible

不可能发生真正的、实质性的变化，

因为多数人都太自私、

because most people are too selfish,

太愚蠢或是太懒惰了，

too stupid or too lazy

不会试着在他们的社区内有所作为？

to try to make a difference in their community?

I propose to you today that apathy as we think we know it

我今天想告诉各位，那些我们自以为了解的冷漠

doesn't actually exist;

其实并不存在，

but rather, that people do care,

相反，人们真的在乎，

but that we live in a world that actively discourages engagement

我们生活的世界中，

我们不断地在我们的前方

by constantly putting obstacles and barriers in our way.

设置障碍和壁垒以阻碍参与。

I'll give you some examples of what I mean.

我会给些例子来做说明。

让我们从市政厅开始。

Let's start with city hall.

各位以前见过这类东西么？

You ever see one of these before?

这是个报纸广告。

This is a newspaper ad.

It's a notice of a zoning application change for a new office building

这是份新办公楼区划变更申请的通知

让邻近的人就能知道发生了什么。

so the neighborhood knows what's happening.

正如各位所见，这简直没法读。

As you can see, it's impossible to read.

需要半道停下来

You need to get halfway down

to even find out which address they're talking about,

去弄明白他们说的地址是哪儿，

接着往下读，用微小的10号字体

and then further down, in tiny 10-point font,

标明了如何才能参与其中。

to find out how to actually get involved.

Imagine if the private sector advertised in the same way --

想象一下私营机构也用同样的方式广告 --

if Nike wanted to sell a pair of shoes --

试想一下，耐克想销售一双鞋

(Laughter)

And put an ad in the paper like that.

并用这样的广告在报纸上做广告。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Now, that would never happen.

这永远不会发生。

各位永远不会看到这样的广告，

You'll never see an ad like that,

因为耐克是真的想让你们去购买他们的鞋子。

because Nike actually wants you to buy their shoes,

whereas the city of Toronto clearly doesn't want you involved

然而多伦多市

显然不想你们参与规划过程，

with the planning process,

otherwise their ads would look something like this,

不然他们的广告应该是这样的 --

基本上所有的信息都清楚地列出来。

with all the information laid out clearly.

只要市政府还在发布像这样的通知

As long as the city's putting out notices like this

来让人们参与其中，

to try to get people engaged,

那么人们当然不会参与。

then of course people aren't going to be engaged.

但这不是冷漠；

But that's not apathy; that's intentional exclusion.

这是有意地排斥。

Public space.

公共空间。

(Applause)

（掌声）

The manner in which we mistreat our public spaces

我们糟蹋公共空间的行为

对任何类型的进步政治变革来说

is a huge obstacle towards any type of progressive political change,

都是一个巨大的障碍。

because we've essentially put a price tag on freedom of expression.

因为本质上，我们在言论自由上贴上了价格标签。

Whoever has the most money gets the loudest voice,

最有钱的人有最大的发言权，

dominating the visual and mental environment.

并支配着视觉和心理环境。

The problem with this model is there are some amazing messages

这一观念的问题在于

有些需要传递的很棒的讯息

that need to be said, that aren't profitable to say.

是无利可图的。

So you're never going to see them on a billboard.

因此，绝不会在布告板上看到它们。

在发展我们与政治变革的关系上，

The media plays an important role

in developing our relationship with political change,

媒体扮演了一个重要的角色，

mainly by ignoring politics and focusing on celebrities and scandals,

主要是通过忽视政治，

专注于名流和丑闻做到这些的。

但甚至他们在讨论重要的政治问题时，

but even when they do talk about important political issues,

they do it in a way that I feel discourages engagement.

也是以一种阻碍参与的方式。

I'll give you an example.

我来举个例子：上周的现在杂志 --

The "Now" magazine from last week: progressive, downtown weekly in Toronto.

进步者，多伦多市中心每周发行。

这是个封面故事。

This is the cover story.

It's an article about a theater performance,

它是一篇关于剧场演出的文章，

and it starts with basic information about where it is,

以在哪儿演出的基本的信息开始，

in case you actually want to go and see it after you've read the article --

在你阅读了这篇文章后，一旦你真的想去看看 --

where, the time, the website.

地点，时间，网址一目了然。

Same with this -- it's a movie review.

这篇也一样 -- 这是篇电影评论，

An art review.

一篇艺术评论，

A book review -- where the reading is in case you want to go.

一篇书评 --假若你想去读读，在哪儿能读到。

A restaurant -- you might not want to just read about it,

一家餐馆 -- 或许你不仅仅是想读读，

也许你想去那家餐馆美餐一顿。

maybe you want to go there.

So they tell you where it is, the prices, the address, the phone number, etc.

因此他们告诉你餐馆在哪儿，价格，

地址，电话，等等。

Then you get to their political articles.

然后我们看看政治文章。

Here's a great article about an important election race that's happening.

这是一篇关于正在进行的重要选举的很好的文章。

论及候选人 -- 写的非常棒 --

It talks about the candidates, written very well,

但没有信息，没有寻根问底，

but no information, no follow-up, no websites for the campaigns,

没有竞选者的网站，

no information about when the debates are, where the campaign offices are.

没有关于辩论时间，竞选办公室的地址等信息。

这另一篇好文章

Here's another good article,

about a new campaign opposing privatization of transit,

是关于反对交通运输私有化的一场新运动

without any contact information for the campaign.

其中没有任何关于这一运动的联系信息。

The message seems to be

这似乎表明

that the readers are most likely to want to eat, maybe read a book,

读者最有可能想去品尝美食，

或是读一本书，或是看一场电影，但并没在他们的社区中参与活动。

maybe see a movie, but not be engaged in their community.

各位也许会认为这是小事，

You might think this is a small thing, but I think it's important,

但我认为这很重要，因为这树立了一个榜样

because it sets a tone

and it reinforces the dangerous idea that politics is a spectator sport.

并且加强了政治是项观赏性活动

这一危险看法。

Heroes: How do we view leadership?

英雄：我们怎么看待领导力？

Look at these 10 movies. What do they have in common?

看看这10部电影。它们有什么共同之处？

Anyone?

有人知道么？

它们中都有被选中的英雄。

They all have heroes who were chosen.

有人走到他们面前说，“你就是被选中的那个人。

Someone came up to them and said, "You're the chosen one.

这是预言。你必须去拯救世界。”

There's a prophecy. You have to save the world."

接着有人动身去拯救世界，因为他们被告知要这么做，

And then they go off and save the world because they've been told to,

身边只跟随了几个人。

with a few people tagging along.

这让我理解了

This helps me understand

why a lot of people have trouble seeing themselves as leaders --

为什么许多人很难把自己视为领导者。

because it sends all the wrong messages about what leadership is about.

因为关于什么是领导力有太多的错误信息。

英雄式的壮举是集体的努力，

A heroic effort is a collective effort,

第一点。

number one.

第二点，它不完美；它不是很迷人；

Number two, it's imperfect; it's not very glamorous,

它不是突然开始并突然结束的。

and doesn't suddenly start and suddenly end.

它是个持续一生的过程。

It's an ongoing process your whole life.

但最重要地是，它是自愿的。

But most importantly, it's voluntary.

它是自愿的。

It's voluntary.

只要我们还在教导我们的孩子

As long as we're teaching our kids

that heroism starts when someone scratches a mark on your forehead,

英雄事迹从有人在你额头画上标记时开始，

or someone tells you you're part of a prophecy,

或是有人告诉你，你是预言的一部分时开始，

他们错过了领导力中最重要的特质，

they're missing the most important characteristic of leadership,

而这是来自于内心的。

which is that it comes from within.

It's about following your own dreams, uninvited,

最重要的是追寻自己的梦想 --

未经邀请地，自发地 --

and then working with others to make those dreams come true.

然后与他人一起努力实现这些梦想。

Political parties: oh, boy.

政党：哇！

政党能够成为并且应该是

Political parties could and should be one of the basic entry points

人们参与政治的

for people to get engaged in politics.

基本切入点之一。

Instead, they've become, sadly,

相反，它们已经悲哀地成为

缺乏创见的和缺乏创造性的组织

uninspiring and uncreative organizations

that rely so heavily on market research and polling and focus groups

它们高度依赖市场调查、

投票和

that they end up all saying the same thing,

总是能最终达成一致的焦点群体，

pretty much regurgitating back to us what we already want to hear

我们总是听到我们想听的，

而不是提出切实大胆创新的观点。

at the expense of putting forward bold and creative ideas.

And people can smell that, and it feeds cynicism.

人们能感觉到这些，这成了冷嘲热讽。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Charitable status.

慈善组织：

Groups who have charitable status in Canada aren't allowed to do advocacy.

在加拿大，拥有慈善组织的团体不允许拥护某个候选者。

这是个大问题，也是变革的巨大障碍，

This is a huge problem and a huge obstacle to change,

because it means that some of the most passionate and informed voices

因为这意味着一些最热情的最知情的声音

将完全消失，尤其是在选举期间。

are completely silenced, especially during election time.

最后一点，

Which leads us to the last one, which is: our elections.

就是我们的选举。

As you may have noticed,

各位或许已经注意到了，加拿大的选举完全是个笑话。

our elections in Canada are a complete joke.

我们使用落后的系统

We use out-of-date systems

that are unfair and create random results.

这会产生一些不公平且随意的结果。

加拿大当前正由一个

Canada's currently led by a party

that most Canadians didn't actually want.

多数加拿大人并不认可的政党领导着。

How can we honestly and genuinely encourage more people to vote

当在加拿大投票并不算数时，

when votes don't count in Canada?

我们如何能诚实地真诚地鼓励更多的人去投票呢？

把所有这些放在一起

You add all this up together, and of course people are apathetic.

人们当然缺乏兴趣。

It's like trying to run into a brick wall.

这就像试着玩儿穿墙术。

Now, I'm not trying to be negative by throwing all these obstacles out

我现在列举出这些障碍，

说明我们面对的困难并不是想变得消极。

and explaining what's in our way.

恰恰相反：我确实认为人们很棒很聪明

Quite the opposite --

I actually think people are amazing and smart and that they do care,

而且他们真的在乎。

但正如我说过的，我们生活在一个

but that, as I said, we live in this environment

where all these obstacles are being put in our way.

充满坎坷的环境之中。

As long as we believe that people, our own neighbors,

只要我们还在认为人们，我们的邻居，

是自私的、愚蠢的或是懒惰的，

are selfish, stupid or lazy,

then there's no hope.

就没有希望。

但我们能改变所有这些我所提到的事情。

But we can change all those things I mentioned.

我们能敞开市政厅。

We can open up city hall.

We can reform our electoral systems.

我们能改良我们的选举系统。

We can democratize our public spaces.

我们能使我们的公共空间民主化。

My main message is:

我的主旨是，

if we can redefine apathy,

如果我们重新定义冷漠，

not as some kind of internal syndrome,

不把它视作某种内在症状，

but as a complex web of cultural barriers that reinforces disengagement,

而是把它视为阻止我们参与的

文化障碍的复杂网络，

and if we can clearly define, clearly identify what those obstacles are,

如果我们能清晰地定义它，我们就能清晰地识别出

哪些是障碍，

而后，如果我们能一起协作去除这些障碍，

and then if we can work together collectively to dismantle those obstacles,

一切皆有可能。

then anything is possible.

谢谢。

Thank you.

(Applause)

（掌声）