Is Democracy Doomed? The Global Fight for Our Future | Timothy Snyder | TED

翻译人员: Cong Wei 校对人员: Bruce Wang

I'm speaking to you from the United States,

我现在正在美国录制这次演讲，

and my mind is often on the United States.

我也经常在思考美国的问题。

I'm speaking to you as a historian of Eastern Europe,

我是以一名东欧历史学家的立场来演讲的，

among other things, a historian of Ukraine.

同时我也是一名乌克兰历史学家。

So that helps a bit to define where I'm coming from.

这些身份有助于各位理解我的立场。

So the topic that I've been asked to address

我想讨论的问题是，

is whether democracy is in decline,

民主制度是否正在衰弱，

whether democracy is doomed and what can we do?

它是否已经无可救药， 而我们又该做些什么。

I think where I'd like to start is with the question itself,

而要讨论这个问题，

with the word democracy

我们首先要讨论“民主”一词的定义，

and how we think about the word democracy.

以及我们该如何思考“民主”。

What I worry about is when we treat democracy as a noun, as a thing,

我担心的是，当我们把民主当作一个名词或一样东西来讨论，

and ask questions about it. Is it advancing, is it receding,

诸如问民主是否在进步，是否在退步；

is it ascending, is it declining?

是否在扩展，是否在衰弱；

We are separating it from ourselves in a way which is unhelpful.

这样讨论会将我们自身与民主割裂开来，因而并无裨益。

Democracy is not really out there in the world as a thing.

民主不仅仅是存在于世界上的一种外物。

Democracy, if it exists at all, exists inside us.

民主如果存在，那必然与我们息息相关。

Democracy has to begin with a desire for the people to rule,

人民希望执政，才会有民主，

which of course, is what democracy is all about.

而这也是民主的根本。

So I tend to think that in a way it's more useful to think of democracy

所以我觉得更有效的思考方法应该是

as a verb rather than as a noun.

将“民主”当作动词，而非名词。

I realize grammatically that's incorrect,

我也知道这样想在语法上是错误的。

but I think you understand the spirit of what I mean,

但希望各位能理解我的意思。

that democracy is something that you do.

也就是说民主是我们的行为所决定的。

It's something that, when you speak the word,

当我们谈论民主的时候，

you have to be taking responsibility for it.

意味着我们要对民主负责。

Because ... if you’re talking about something

因为如果我们认为

that's just out there in the world,

民主外在于我们，

something that's a result of larger forces,

源自于强大力量，

something that's a result of some constellation of influences

源自于一系列影响，

that doesn't have to do with you or with the people,

认为民主与自己或人民无关，

then you're not really talking about democracy.

那我们所讨论的就不是民主。

Or, what's worse,

更糟糕的情况是，

if we talk about democracy as something that's out there in the world,

如果我们将民主视为由强大力量塑造的、

as something that's a result of larger forces,

外在于我们的东西，

such as, for example, capitalism,

比如说资本主义，

I think we're not just making an analytical mistake.

那我想我们不仅错误分析了民主，

I think we're also committing a kind of ethical and political suicide.

还犯了一种道德与政治观念上的错误。

I think the moment that we say democracy is the result of larger forces,

当我们说民主是由强大力量塑造的，

democracy is somehow natural,

这就相当于认为民主不知如何地自然生成了，

democracy is the default state of affairs,

民主是某种自然状态，

we’re not just making a mistake,

那我们不仅仅是错误认知了民主，

we’re making ourselves into the kinds of people

更使我们成为那种

who aren't going to have a democracy.

不会拥有民主的人。

So to be clear about what I mean,

明白地说，

obviously there are some conditions which favor or don't favor a democracy,

明显有人欢迎民主，有人不欢迎，

I wouldn't doubt that.

我对此毫不怀疑。

Modernity does tend to bring larger-scale politics

现代化容易促成大型国家，

that makes democracy possible, perhaps, but it certainly doesn't bring it.

这也使民主更成为可能。 但事实上现代化没能促进民主化。

Capitalism is certainly consistent with democracy.

资本主义当然与民主协调一致，

There are plenty of capitalist democracies,

的确也存在许多资本主义民主国家，

but there are also plenty of states that are capitalist

但同样也有许多资本主义国家

and are quite tyrannical.

相当专制。

So capitalism is consistent with democracy,

因此资本主义和民主制很配，

but it doesn't bring us democracy.

但资本主义并不一定会促成民主制。

And I think in the West, at least,

我认为至少在西方国家，

and especially in the English-speaking West,

尤其是西方英语国家，

this has been one of the chief mistakes of the last three decades,

这一认知是近三十年来最重要的一个错误观念。

to believe that larger forces in general,

即认为宏观作用力，

or capitalism in particular,

或者说特指资本主义，

are going to bring us democracy.

就一定会促成民主制。

The belief which was so widespread after the revolutions of 1989

在1989革命或1991年苏联解体以后

or the end of the Soviet Union in 1991,

人们普遍认为

that there were no alternatives or that history was over.

没有别的政治选择，或者民主就是历史的终结。

The problem with that, I think we've seen in the last 30 years,

但是我认为近30年来的发展 已经暴露出了这个观念的问题。

is that if you think democracy is being brought to you,

问题在于如果认为民主是外力促成的，

then you lose the sense that democracy is a struggle,

那你就不能认识到，正如弗雷德里克·道格拉斯所说，

as it always has to be, as Frederick Douglass said.

民主制的建立永远都需要斗争，

You lose the muscles and even the muscle memory

你会失去斗争所需的

of what it means to carry out that struggle.

力量与肌肉记忆。

And maybe slightly more subtly, but also, really importantly,

并且可能潜移默化地，

you lose the past and you lose the future.

失去至关重要的历史与未来，

Because if you think that democracy is inevitable,

因为当你认为民主必然在强大力量作用下

that it’s somehow being brought about by larger forces,

必然出现时，

well, then all those things that happened in the past don't really matter.

那么过去都无关紧要了，

They just kind of become cocktail-party conversation.

过去会仅仅是鸡尾酒会上的谈资。

And if you're sure that there's only one future, a democratic future,

如果坚信人类只有一种未来，那就是民主社会的未来。

then you lose the habit and the ability to talk about multiple possible futures.

那你将失去畅想多样化未来的习惯与能力，

And you also, along the way,

同时当其他不同政治体系

lose the capacity for recognizing other kinds of political systems

在21世纪

as they emerge,

诞生时，你也已失去

as they have emerged in the 21st Century.

认识它们的能力。

And then finally, and this is a little tricky,

最后一点，有点复杂，

but I think it's quite crucial.

但我想非常重要，

You also lose your ability to process facts.

你会丧失发掘真相的能力。

We're in a world where the whole notion of factuality is questioned,

我们身处一个怀疑真实性的世界，

and I think this is related to our problem with democracy.

我想这正与民主的困境有关，

If you think that democracy is coming inevitably,

如果你认为民主必然到来，

if you tell stories about, for example,

比如你提出一个叙事，

historical arcs that have to tend in a certain direction,

认为历史有特定的发展方向，

then what you'll tend to do is move the facts

那你就可能会篡改事实，

so that they fit the narratives.

使之与你的叙事相吻合。

And soon we find ourselves only talking about narratives

很快我们就会发现我们只谈论叙事，

and not talking about facts.

而不谈论事实。

Or we find ourselves in countries that claim to be democracies,

或者我们发现我们身在声称是民主的国家中，

but no longer have the journalists who are out there producing the facts

但却再也没有在民主社会中应有的，

that we need to have for democracy.

报导事实的记者。

So we have what we have.

因此我们找到答案了，

I mean, the answer to the question, is democracy doomed? No.

民主真的注定失败吗？不是。

Obviously, we can do things. But is it in decline? Certainly.

很明显，我们能有所作为。 民主是否正在衰败？确实。

By any measurable, by any meaningful metric,

从任何显著的、有意义的指标上看，

democracy is in decline in my home country and on average around the world.

民主都在我的祖国以及全世界范围内衰退。

And we're also in the very specific situation where a non-democracy, Russia,

并且我们正看到， 一个非民主的国家，俄罗斯

is fighting to destroy a democratic country, Ukraine,

正攻打并摧毁一个民主国家，乌克兰，

which is a sign that things have gone pretty far.

这正是民主大大衰退的表征。

Now, the Ukrainians, I would suggest,

我认为，乌克兰启示

have given us some indication of what we ought to be doing.

我们应该做什么。

What the Ukrainians are doing in resisting this invasion,

乌克兰人正通过抵抗强大的力量

is that they're resisting the larger forces.

来抵御入侵。

If we think back to the beginning of the war,

如果我们回想一下，战争初期

everyone assumed that Ukraine would collapse in a few days.

大家都以为乌克兰几天内就会投降。

That was the wisdom, not only in Moscow but also in Washington, DC.

不仅莫斯科人这样想，华盛顿的也这样想。

In defending the basic idea that you choose your own leaders,

一般认为我们自己选择自己的领导， 与此相反，

the Ukrainians are reminding us

乌克兰人启示我们，

that democracy isn't about the larger forces.

民主与强大力量无关，

It often involves ignoring the larger forces,

反而与忽视、

resisting the larger forces,

抵抗强大力量有关，

ignoring the people who tell you that it can't be done.

并且要无视那些告诉你这不可行的人的声音。

And here I think we see a sign of our crisis,

我想我找到民主危机的表征所在，

which is that many people,

就是为什么有大量的人，

at least in my country, and I think more broadly,

至少在我的国家有大量的人， 但我认为其他地方也有很多人，

the reason why they thought that the president of Ukraine,

认为乌克兰总统

Volodymyr Zelenskyy, would flee

泽连斯基会逃跑，

or the reason they thought that the Ukrainians wouldn't resist

会为什么它们认为乌克兰人会放弃抵抗，

is that they themselves would have fled

因为他们自己就会逃跑，

and they themselves wouldn't have resisted.

他们自己会放弃抵抗。

That is to say, the idea that democracy is something that you do yourself

因此，民主就是做你自己

or for which you take risks

或你愿意为之冒险的东西。

had receded so far out of our imagination

而这一概念早已淡出我们的认知，

that we couldn't really imagine

我们已无法想象

that a country would take risks for democracy.

一个国家会为了民主甘愿冒险。

Now, of course, I'm citing the example which is close to me.

我来举一些离我很近的例子。

There are many other people around the world taking risks now for freedom,

世界上有很多人正为了自由而冒险，

for example, women in Iran.

如伊朗妇女。

What I'm trying to say is that that ethical point,

我必须要说，

that democracy is about wanting democracy

从道德上说，

is essential.

民主就是指追求民主，

Without that, nothing else matters.

不去追求，一切都将没有意义。

Without the ability to think of democracy as a verb,

不讲民主当作一个动词，

as something that you do, as something for which you'll take risks,

当作你践行的方向， 当作你甘愿冒险追求的东西，

nothing else matters.

一切都将没有意义。

If there's that commitment,

如果追求民主成为一种责任，

if we think of democracy as something for which we take responsibility

如果每次我们谈到民主时，

every time we speak the word

认为我们应像对待那些即将到来的事情一样

as opposed to something that's just coming to us,

对民主负责，

then it's like we're doing politics in a different dimension,

那我们可能正在以全新的方法——

a fifth dimension of ethics.

第五种伦理学，践行政治。

And once we've done that,

一旦我们追求民主，

we can start to speak about how we would change the larger forces.

我们就能谈谈如何改变那些强大力量。

Once we make that commitment,

一旦我们承担民主的责任，

then we can say some basic things, like, for example,

我们就能谈谈一些基础概念，比如

we have to also have the fourth dimension,

我们需要时间的

the fourth dimension of time.

第四维度，

We need to have a sense of the future for democracy.

我们需了解民主的未来，

We have to care for the Earth.

我们需关心地球，

We have to care specifically about global warming,

我们尤其要关心全球性气候变暖。

because if the future collapses in on us,

因为如果未来我们灭亡，

it becomes impossible to have the kind of reasonable conversation

那将没有任何可能展开

that we need for democracy.

达成民主所需的合理的谈话。

We also need the fourth dimension in the sense of the past.

我们还需要对过去的第四种认识，

We have to have history.

我们需要有历史，

We have to be able to reckon with forces,

需要对强制外力

like, for example, colonialism,

比如殖民主义有思考，

which is so important in the Russian invasion of Ukraine,

这种思考对如今俄罗斯侵略乌克兰很重要，

but also so important in the history of the United States. ...

也对美国历史很重要。

We need the past so that we can reckon with ourselves and self-correct

我们需要通过认识过去 来反思自我、纠正自我，

because self-correction is what democratic decision-making is all about.

因为自我纠正是民主决策的核心。

We also need the first three dimensions,

我们也需要前三种伦理学，

simply being able to move about in the world

以在社会中如我们可想象的

in all the senses of moving about that one can imagine.

那样自如行动。

And all of those ways of moving about are hindered by economic inequality.

但所有自如行动的方式都为经济不平等所阻碍。

Economic inequality, oligarchy, makes it very hard to have conversations

经济不平等、寡头垄断都使我们

about democracy, the future, or the past.

难以探讨民主、将来、过去。

A lot of the space is monopolized by things that are simply ridiculous,

因为现有的财富分配方式，

but happen because of the way that wealth is distributed.

许多社会空间被那些荒谬但真实存在的事物所垄断。

And economic inequality, in very simple sense,

非常简单地说，经济不平等

also hinders social mobility, economic advance.

也妨害了社会流动性， 阻碍了经济发展。

Finally, democracy, at least in my country,

最后，至少在我的国家，

but not only in my country, has to be understood as a spirit.

但不仅在我的国家， 民主应被看作有一种精神，

That is, the way that the laws should be interpreted,

法律以民主精神诠释，

the way that the future should arrive,

未来应是民主制的，

rather than as a matter of legalism.

而非条文主义的。

In the Supreme Court of the United States, but not only,

不仅在美国最高法院，

this has advanced much further in other countries like Hungary,

条文主义也在其他国家比如匈牙利得到发扬，

taking the procedures as being more important than the democracy,

他们认为程序正义远比民主、

more important than the right,

权力更重要，

is a way of leading the country away from democracy.

这使国家与民主制渐行渐远。

And in my country, it could lead us all the way away from democracy

在我的国家，未来短短几十年内，

as soon as the next couple of years.

条文主义将推动我们远离民主。

It doesn't have to do so.

但条文主义并非必须的，

We can think about these larger structures.

我们可以从更大的结构层面考虑一下，

We can think in a non-legalistic and in a more ethical way.

想象一个没有法律但更道德化的治理方式。

We can get our minds around this.

我们可以思考一下。

Whitney Pennington Rodgers: Maybe a good place to start is,

Whitney Pennington Rodgers: 我想这是这场对话的一个很好的开始，

and it's sort of a big question, but just how did we get to this place?

也是一个很大的问题， 我们是怎么沦落至此的？

How did we end up here where we are grappling with these questions,

我们怎么就要解决这些问题了呢？

especially, you know, you're based in the United States, as am I,

尤其是我们在美国，

and lots on this call are from all over the world,

这个电话会议中的很多人来自世界各地，

but I think are struggling with these things wherever they are.

但无论哪里的人都受此问题困扰。

But how did we find ourselves in this place?

但我们如何发现我们陷于此境地的呢？

Timothy Snyder: I think in our country,

Timothy Snyder: 我认为在我们国家，很多人很自满，

we have a big empty middle space between, you know, complacency,

the view that we just are a democracy

认为我们就是民主国家，

because we're America.

因为我们是美国。

You know, by definition, or the past has given it to us.

根据定义，或者因为我们的历史，

The Founding Fathers did something two and a half centuries ago,

因为两个半世纪前我们国父们的所作所为，

and therefore we just are a democracy.

所以我们就是民主的。

Or as I said, we have capitalism,

或者是因为我们有资本主义，

therefore we just are a democracy,

所以我们是民主的。

or we just say it over and over again,

或者就是因为我们反复强调，

and therefore we are democracy, right?

所以我们就是民主的了，不是吗？

We have ... various flavors of exceptionalism.

我们有各种各样的美国例外论。

We have that.

我们确实有。

And then on the other side,

而另一方面，

we have a history

我们的历史提醒我们，

that reminds us of how difficult it's been for us to be a democracy

我们经历了怎样的艰辛以求取民主，

where women were excluded from the vote

我们的妇女在我国历史一大半的时间里

for more than half of the history of the country,

都没有投票权，

where African-Americans are still de facto excluded

而美国黑人实际上

from the vote in much of the country, right?

在很多州仍然没有投票权，不是吗？

The entire thing has been a struggle.

所有这些事情都构成民主的困境，

So there's this gap which can only be filled, I think,

而我们与真正的民主之间的隔阂

by historical knowledge and by ethics.

我想只能由历史知识和道德情感来弥补。

I think we've had trouble getting through that gap,

我们之所以难以跨越这一隔阂，

partly because in the last 30 years we sort of convinced ourselves

部分因为过去30年间我们使自己相信，

that the facts about the past don't really matter.

过去的事实不足为道。

And then the other thing which I think is going on, which is related,

另一个与民主有关的，

is that people are so worried about the future

是人们正在担心未来，

that it's hard for them to imagine that like, counting votes

对很多人来说很难理解

and representation and these basic things are really what matters.

选票统计、代表等基本概念是美国政治的关键。

And I think that, you know, everyone, almost everyone is afraid of the future,

我认为所有人，几乎所有人都害怕未来，

whether you’re afraid of climate change, which I think is reasonable,

无论是我认为比较合理的，害怕气候变化，

or whether you're afraid of demography, which I think is not reasonable.

还是我认为比较不合理的，害怕人口问题。

It's all part of one big sense that the future is crashing down.

未来正在崩塌是一个普遍的感觉，

And if you think the future's crashing down,

如果你认为未来正在崩塌，

then democracy becomes a kind of secondary concern.

那民主就会变成次一级的考虑。

And then you kind of look up and look around and you think,

然后你仰望苍天，四下环顾，

“Oh, it’s slipping away.”

心想：实现民主的机会悄然而逝了。

WPR: I think to this idea of thinking about the future,

WPR: 我想过这个思考未来的问题，

so in 2017, you released the book “On Tyranny,”

2017年你出版了《论暴政》，

which was positioned as a sort of a guide to resistance.

可以被看作对反抗的某种指导，

And you start that book by saying

在书的开始你说

"history does not repeat, but it does instruct."

“历史不会重复，但会指导未来”。

And I'm curious,

我很好奇——

just maybe as a place to jump off to other questions,

从这句话我联想到另一个问题，

to think about how you,

作为一个对当下有大量思考的历史学者，

as a historian who gives a lot of thought to the current moment,

你是如何

use that thinking to guide you.

用这些思考来指引自己的。

TS: Oh, thank you, that's a really kind question.

TS:谢谢，一个很好的问题，

I appreciate the assumption that history matters.

这个问题基于历史有用的假设，我很喜欢。

I think you've named the way that history matters the most,

我想你提到了历史对当下起作用的 最重要的方式，

which is pattern recognition.

即模式认识。

So, for example,

比如，

when the book was invented,

书籍的诞生

that caused 150 years of mental chaos and religious war.

导致了150年的思想混乱和宗教战争。

And now books are a very nice thing, right,

但现在书是好东西，

now we all love books.

我们都很喜欢书。

And we're in the internet

而我们现在有互联网，

and we're kind of in that same stage where it's causing all sorts of chaos.

我们也认为互联网导致了各种混乱。

Eventually, we'll probably get it under control.

最终我们可能能控制这些混乱。

But we shouldn't be surprised it's causing all kinds of chaos.

但我们不应对互联网的这一影响感到奇怪。

Another good example is the way that, historically speaking,

另一个很好的例子是，

the people who have cared about democracy

历史上看，关心民主的人

have also been the ones who have talked about risk.

同样也是关注危机的人。

And, I cited Frederick Douglass,

我引用了道格拉斯的话，

there's a whole African-American tradition of this.

美国黑人有一个完整的为民主而斗争的传统，

But there's also a deep tradition which goes all the way back

但同样还有一个深远的民主传统，

to the meaning of the word democracy in ancient Greece,

追溯民主在古希腊时期的含义，

where, when Pericles is talking about democracy,

当伯里克利在谈论民主时，

he can't talk about democracy without physical risk.

他绕不开人身危险。

There's not an assumption that democracy is just brought.

不能假设民主是自然而来的，

There's the conviction -- this is important --

一个很重要的信念是

there's the conviction that it's better.

民主相较于其他更好。

And then there's the assumption that it will take lots of work, right?

我们假设了形成民主需要大量工作，

And that, you know, democracy ... usually fails.

而且民主常常会失败，

History shows us it usually fails.

历史告诉我们民主常常失败，

But when it's out there, when it's on the rise,

但当民主正在实现时，

there's this knowledge that it's difficult

大家认识到很难实现民主，

and then there's this conviction that it's better.

但又坚信民主相对更好。

And in my talk, my little tiny talk,

在我这段简短的谈话中，

I was trying to get across this conviction. ...

我试图说明这种信念，

You can’t just say it’s like, out there

你不能就说，民主就在那儿，

and it's either there or it's not there.

或者是民主要么存在，要么不存在。

Because the moment that you think it's brought by the outside forces,

因为当你认为民主因外力而实现时，

if the outside forces aren't going your way,

如果外力不按你想的来，

then you just turn tail and run.

你就会落荒而逃，

But if you think,

但如果你坚信

"Actually, I'm convinced this is much better than the alternatives,"

民主比其他制度更好，

then you might react a little bit differently.

那你就会和只依靠外力有所不同。

WPR: It's better, but harder.

WPR: 民主更好但更难

TS: Better, but harder.

TS:更好但更难

WPR: Better but harder.

WPR: 更好但更难

Well .. you have a book out now, “The Road to Unfreedom,”

你有本书《通往不自由之路》，

and it looks at basically

主要是关于

how tyranny has been able to thrive in spaces in Europe,

暴政如何能够在欧洲迸发，

particularly, you know, you talk a lot about Russia.

很多内容涉及俄罗斯

And this book came out in 2018,

而且这本书出版于2018年，

which preceded the war in Ukraine.

先于乌克兰战争，

But there are a lot of things there

但书中很多内容，

that I think sort of signpost what's really to come

那些你详细书写的好几十年的历史，

and what's been happening there for, as you detail, many, many decades.

我想是当下局势的征兆和原因。

And, you know, I think one thing that you outline in there

你在书中概括了

is this idea of two different types of tyrannical politics

两种不同类型的暴政，

that I think is sort of helpful

我认为对我们思考应

in thinking about how we might see these threats to democracy

如何看待全球范围内的

that are happening globally.

民主威胁很有帮助。

You know, you talk about this idea of inevitability politics,

一种是不可避免政治观，

and eternity politics.

一种是永恒政治观，

And I’d love for you to spend a few minutes sort of describing these two.

我希望你可以花几分钟介绍一下，

How did they come to exist

这两种政治观念如何形成，

and what is the threat that they each pose?

以及它们各自对民主的威胁。

TS: Thank you for that.

TS:谢谢。

So the politics of inevitability

不可避免型政治

is what I was talking about earlier in my little talk,

就是我刚刚提到的，

just without using the name.

只不过没有点明这个观念。

It's the idea that everything is coming to you.

这种观念就是认为所有的事情为你而来，

It's the idea of progress.

一种历史进程观，

It's the idea that there are no alternatives,

认为没有什么可以替代当下的政治制度，

that history is over

历史已经终结，

and that we’re all just kind of on a vector

我们正处于事事向好的

where things are going to turn out OK.

康庄大道上。

And the problem with that is not just that it's not true,

这种观念的问题不仅在于它是错误的，

but that it paves the way for worse things.

而在于它为坏事铺平了道路。

So if you think there's only one future,

如果你认为未来只有一个，

it's a short step to thinking there are no futures.

那几乎就是认为没有未来。

If you think technology is always going to be good,

如果你认为科技永远是好的，

it's very easy not to notice when technology starts to turn against you

那就很难发现科技开始对你

or against democracy.

或对民主不利。

If you think capitalism is going to bring democracy,

如果你认为资本主义将带来民主，

then you're not going to be as alert to inequality as you should be.

那你就会对不平等不够警觉，

Or you might say inequality is fine,

或可能会说不平等是可以接受的。

it's a sign the system is working,

我想这些标志着

which is, I think, completely wrong.

这个观念体系是错的。

And then at some point, all of this snaps

在某个时间点，所有的可能性砰然关上，

and you lose the one future you thought you had

你就失去了你认为能实现的一种未来，

and you make a turn towards, as we've already seen in the US,

然后你就转向了一种永恒型政治，

a politics of eternity,

正如我们在美国可见，

where suddenly nobody's talking about the future.

突然间没人再谈论未来，

Everything's a cycle back towards the past.

所有事情都是向过去的轮回，

The leading politicians are talking

政治领导人们在说

about how to make the country great again,

如何使美国再次伟大，

you know, which is, I think, senseless.

我觉得这种说法毫无意义。

The ability to make connections across different kinds of people is lost

连结不同人群的能力消失了，

because it's all about nostalgia

政治只关乎怀旧，

and it's about the innocence that we once lost

关乎我们已失去的纯真，

rather than the good policy that we might make.

而不关乎我们能做出的良好政策。

And then there's a third kind of politics, which follows after that,

随之而来的是第三种政治，

which we’re edging into if we’re not very careful --

我们一不小心就滑入了

I think of as the politics of catastrophe.

灾难型政治种。

Because one of the features of the politics of eternity

因为永恒型政治的一个特点

is that it almost always denies climate change.

就是永远否认气候变化。

The politics of inevitability says, yeah, there's climate change,

不可避免型政治观认为存在气候变化，

but it's going to be okay, we're going to figure it out.

但是走向还行，我们正在着手解决。

The politics of eternity tends to deny science in general

而永恒型政治倾向于整体否认科学，

and climate change in particular,

特别是气候变化，

which then sets us up for something much worse.

这会给我们带来更恶劣的影响。

You can pretend that politics is all about the past,

你可以假装政治只关乎过去，

but while you're doing that,

但当你践行这种政治时，

climate change is still happening

气候仍在变化，

and that means that a real catastrophe is coming.

真真切切的灾难在不断迫近。

So the politics of eternity sets us up for something which is worse even.

因此永恒型政治相对而言 将我们带入更糟糕的境地。

WPR: And I mean, you have detailed how sort of, these types of politics

WPR:你刚刚详细描述的这些政治种类，

including the politics of catastrophe, have existed for quite some time.

包括灾难型政治， 已经存在一段时间了。

And I think when you think about this moment that we're in right now

我想当你在思考当下

and sort of the present threats that might exist to democracy,

以及对民主现有可能的威胁时，

how do you compare the way

你如何比较

that we're experiencing these types of politics today

今天我们应对这些种类的政治的方式

versus other moments in history, for instance

和历史上其他时候，

around either of the world wars or, you know,

比如世界大战、

when you think about the Great Depression and other global crises,

大萧条或其他全球危机时期， 人们应对政治的方式？

how are we positioned in a better place or a worse?

我们应在一个更好或更坏的环境中如何自处？

TS: That's a great question, too.

TS: 也是很好的问题。

I think one way that it's better is that we do have the history.

我想当我们有历史时我们对待政治的方式会更好。

So things aren't exactly like 1933.

1933年、1917年或1939年的

Things aren't exactly like 1917 or 1939.

历史不会完全重演，

But when we have that history,

但当我们拥有历史时，

we can at least look for some patterns.

我们至少可以寻找一些事情发生的模式。

And if we're serious about it, then we realize that,

如果我们认真对待历史，我们就会意识到

oh, look, there were moments

有些时候，

where it seemed like the larger forces were definitely pushing away

强大的力量明显将我们

from democracy.

推离民主，

And those larger forces are important.

这些强大力量很重要，

You know, you can recognize them, you can say, aha,

通过历史，你能识别它们，

economic inequality mattered a huge amount in the 1930s,

你能说经济不平等在20世纪30年代

and it certainly did.

造成了很大影响。确实造成了。

The sense that there was no future mattered a huge amount in the 1930s.

没有未来的感觉也在20世纪30年代造成了很大影响，

That made it very tough for democracies.

使民主在当时很难实现。

But we can also see that democracies came back from that, right?

但是此后我们还是看到民主回归了，

That democracies recovered from that.

民主恢复了。

Countries which were at the very bottom,

当时最不民主的国家

like Germany, within a few decades were at the very top,

像德国，在短短几十年后变为最民主的国家，

if we're considering how well their democracies work.

如果我们思考这些国家的民主制度如何运作，

So we have that history where we can diagnose

我们就拥有可以用来分析的历史，

and we can see that recovery is possible.

我们就能看到民主的恢复是可能的。

And I think that does give us an advantage

历史确实给了我们一个优势，

if we choose to use that advantage.

如果我们能真正利用这个有时。

I mean, one of the things I worry about us

有一点我很担心，

is that we tend to say like, everything is new,

我们倾向于说所有事情都是全新的，

like, nothing has happened before.

没有什么是曾经发生过的。

And of course, nothing is exactly like what's happened before.

当然没有事和过去发生过的完全一样，

But the past gives us this terrific possibility to say, OK,

但是过去让我们很有可能能说，

things can go very, very, very wrong.

现在发生的事会是个巨大的错误，

They can go so wrong that it seems hopeless.

因此看起来毫无希望，

And yet, recoveries can be staged.

但是仍然可以实现民主的恢复。

WPR: TED Member Pedro asks something that's somewhat connected to this.

WPR: TED的成员Pedro提了一个与此相关的问题。

They say, "The forces against democracy today

他们说，民主的反对力量

make use of advanced technologies and methods

很好利用了科技，

and the, dare I say, romantic democratic behavior

我敢说，不切实际的民主言论、

of speaking, acting, protesting don't seem to be enough.

行动、抗议远不够有用。

What do you think about a more proactive

你怎么看待像德国那种更积极主动

or even defensive democracy like we see in Germany, for instance?

甚至更具抵抗性的民主制度？

Do we need to do more to update mindsets?"

我们是否应该更新我们的思维方式？

TS: Yeah, I'm all aboard for that.

TS:我赞同。

Number one,

首先，

I'm going to go back to my obscure book comparison

我要做一个有些难懂的书本比方，

because this is one of the things that historians do.

因为这是历史学者的工作之一。

If we look at the book, like, I’m looking at a bunch of books,

我们看书的时候 ——比如我在看一堆书，

in my background, there are a bunch of books,

在我背后就有——

they're in covers,

会发现这些书是有封面的，

they have copyright, they have authors.

有版权，有作者，

All that stuff had to be invented.

所有这些都是被发明出来的，

When the printing press was created, there wasn't copyright or authorship.

在刚有印刷机的时候， 世界上没有版权或作者可言，

There was all kinds of plagiarism and slander and libel and abuse.

剽窃、诽谤、辱骂比比皆是，

And it did, in fact, lead to war.

而这事实上导致了战争，

It led to wars in which a third of the population of Europe were killed.

欧洲三分之一的人口因之死亡。

So here we are again with another communications technology.

而我们现在又有了一种新的交流技术，

And with this other communications technology, we cannot think, oh,

我们不能认为，这种新技术

let's just let it do whatever it does.

想怎么发展怎么发展，

And like, the magical free market of blah blah, you know,

就像一个神奇的自由市场一样，

there is no magical free market of blah blah.

你知道，不存在一个神奇的自由市场，

You have to have conventions which allow people to express themselves

你需要有约定俗成的规范，

in a way which is consistent with basic decency

使人们能长久地在你所想要的如民主制度中

and with the kinds of institutions that you want to have, like democracy.

得体地表达自我，

So the web is set up,

所以网络建立了。

the internet is set up in the way it is basically accidentally.

因特网并非人为有意建立的，

There's no reason to say like,

不能说某种基础性的奇迹力量

oh, this accident has some kind of foundational magical power

建立了互联网，

and it can't be changed.

也不能说互联网是不可改变的。

There's no reason why social media

也没有任何理由说

has to be the way that it is right now.

社交媒体一定要以当下的方式运作。

There's no reason why Facebook, for example, can't propose

也找不到任何理由说为什么脸书

that, you know, algorithmically,

不会用算法建议你

that you go to local investigative reporting.

去使用本地的调查报告。

There's no reason why we can't use proceeds from social media's huge profits

也找不到任何理由说为什么我们不能用 社交媒体的巨额利润

to prop up that local media reporting,

来促进本地线下媒体报导的发展，

which would give people access to facts.

以使人们更能接触到真相。

In other words, it's a kind of magical thinking to say

换言之， 认为现在的互联网就是互联网该有的样子，

that the internet is the way that the internet has to be.

本身是种很奇特的想法。

And, you know, this is -- so I'm very much on board with that

所以我很能接受你们的看法，

because I think that one of the things we got wrong in the last 30 years

因为我认为过去30年间

was the idea that like, this "high technology"

我们错认为高科技

would necessarily advance us.

能够使我们进步。

But in fact, a lot of this high technology

但事实上，很多这种高科技

is basically incredibly low-tech behaviorist brain hacks,

基本上是以极低科技含量的行为 弱化我们的大脑思维。

which are just carried out on a massive scale

大量使用这些高科技

and have the result that people find themselves more alienated,

使人与人之间更疏远、

more isolated, and with more extreme views

更孤立、更容易有极端观点，

than they would have had otherwise.

而人们本不应如此。

And so if we take the position that I started with,

因此如果我们赞同我一开始提出的，

namely that democracy is a good thing

民主是好的，

and we need to commit ourselves to it, take responsibility for it,

我们需要为实现民主 而奉献自我、履行责任，

then we should say, "You know what?

然后我们应该说，你知道吗，

It's actually not that important

那些富强的大国

that big, profitable countries get to carry out,

打造出了无限多的

infinitely scaled behaviorists brain hacks.

这一事实并不重要。

That's not that important.

这不重要，

What's important is that we have means of communicating with one another,

重要的是我们与他人沟通的方式

which allow us to have the kinds of political systems

是我们能拥有有价值的

which are worth valuing.

政治体系。

So, yes is my answer to that question.

这就是我对这个问题的回答。

WPR: TED Member Tore asks,

WPR:TED成员Tore提问：

"Processing narratives that support your beliefs rather than facts

历史进程的叙事代替事实， 成为了人们信念的支撑，

is a big issue for the US and other countries.

这是美国及其他国家共有的问题。

Historically, what has been the self-correcting process

历史地来看，什么样的自我纠正

to move back towards fact-based judgments?”

能让我们重新将事实作为判断标准？

Which I think is in some ways connected to this idea

我想这应该和我们使用

of the ways we use social media.

社交媒体的方式有关。

TS: Yeah, that question is, I mean ...

TS:对这个问题

but that question is bang on.

这个问题很有道理。

And one of the answers is we have to change the algorithms.

一种回答是，我们必须改变算法。

But another answer is that we used to have -- not just in the US,

但另一种回答是，

but in other countries too, although it’s really striking here --

不仅在美国，即使在其他国家，

we used to have investigative reporting,

我们也曾有过调查性报告，

and we really don’t anymore.

但现在没有了。

We're in this very weird situation

我们正处于非常奇怪的境地中，

where all of us stare at screens all day long

整天盯着屏幕，

and what we're looking for is the news, you know?

搜寻的是新闻。

And me too, I do this, too.

我也这样。

I’m looking for the latest thing

我每天搜乌克兰部分地区的

that's happened in some region of Ukraine.

最新消息。

But we don't actually have our system set up in such a way

但是我们事实上不再有一个职业体系，

as to make it a way that people can make a living

人们可以以撰写调查报告谋生，

and actually go hunt down those stories.

并对那些事件做追根究底的调查。

So we have this mechanism, the internet,

我们有机械，有互联网，

which reproduces and which spins and which aims for profit.

信息可以直接复制，报导变得有倾向性， 从而获取大量利润。

And the reason the facts are important is not just so that you kind of have them.

事实之所以重要并不仅仅因为你能获取它们，

It's also because facts are surprising.

更因为事实有颠覆人心的力量，

Like, the only thing that can challenge a narrative is a fact.

比如唯一可以动摇叙事的就是事实，

My narrative, your narrative, doesn’t matter.

我的叙事，你的叙事都不重要，

But if there aren't any facts,

但如果没有事实，

our narratives are just going to rush forward unchallenged, right?

我们的叙事就所向披靡，无可动摇了，

And ... if I have a narrative and you have a narrative,

而如果我们各有自己的叙事，

those two aren’t going to correct each other.

这些叙事不会互相纠正，

The only thing that corrects the narrative

能纠正叙事的

is surprising things that come in from the outside,

只有那些颠覆人心的、客观存在的事，

which you're not really ready for, but which you kind of can't deny

那些你没有做好面对的准备， 但又无法否认

are maybe true, right?

可能正确的事，

Like, that there’s mercury in your water

像你的水里有水银，

or that your city council member just took a 50,000-dollar bribe

或是你的市政委员会成员收取了5万元的贿赂

or whatever it is, those things you’re not going to find out

或是其他一些事情，

without the investigative reporting.

这些事情如果不看调查报告， 你自己是不会去搞明白的。

So I agree with that, with the premise to this question,

因此我同意这个问题的前提，

I'm giving investigative reporting as my answer.

我的答案是调查报告。

There are other answers,

我还有其他答案，

but I'm going to move on because I know there are other questions.

但因为还有其他问题， 我不能在这个问题上多说了。

WPR: We still have a lot of great member questions coming in.

WPR: 我们还有很多成员提出的很好的问题。

This one sort of looks at an issue that we haven't gotten into very much yet.

下面这个涉及的问题我们还没深入谈过。

TED Member Gabriela asks,

TED 成员 Gabriela 问，

"How serious is the role of fossil fuels, particularly oil,

化石燃料，尤其是石油在全球各国中

in threatening democracies in countries all over the world

对民主的威胁有多大，

and consequently basic human rights?"

又从而在多大程度上威胁了人类基本权利？

TS: Yeah, it'll bring it to an end.

TS:

I mean, one of the categories that I used in my book,

在我的《通往不自由之路》中

"Road to Unfreedom"

中有一部分就是关于这个。

and in the new book that I’m writing --

我正在写的一本

which is a philosophy book about freedom,

关于自由的哲学书中

where I'm trying to sketch out a positive view of freedom

我尝试着概括了一种对民主的积极看法，

and what freedom actually is ...

民主实质上是什么，

and how the world could be better --

以及世界怎样才嗯那个变得更好。

one of the concepts I use in these books is hydrocarbon oligarchy,

在这些书中我用了一个概念： 碳氢化合物的垄断，

which -- actually I think I've stripped it down to fossil oligarchy

而且特指化石燃料的垄断，

because that sounds a little bit -- maybe a little more,

因为这样稍微可以

more easy to grasp or something.

写得容易点。

But I completely agree, we're never --

我完全同意，

The hydrocarbons,

碳氢化合物，

first of all, as I said before, they collapse the future

首先如我之前所说，瓦解了未来，

and democracy needs a future.

而民主正需要一个未来。

It's like oxygen for democracy.

未来如同是民主的氧气。

I mean, if you'll forgive the simple metaphor,

这个比喻有点简陋，

it's like, if you can't see a future,

但是如果你看不到未来，

then you don't see the point of negotiations

你就看不到协商、

and long conversations and balances.

长时间对话以及寻求平衡的意义。

And, you know, if you don't see the future,

如果你看不到未来，

then you think, "I've got to take something right now."

你会想，我现在就要某些东西，

You know, "I've got to take something right now,"

我现在就要某些东西，

which is where climate change will inevitably drive most of us.

因为气候变化将不可避免地影响我们绝大多数人，

Climate change is going to affect the least privileged people first.

而且首当其冲的是最底层的人。

It's already doing that,

这些人现在已经被影响到了，

but it will eventually drive all of us into this space

而且最终我们所有人都会因气候变化

where we think, "OK, I don't have time to talk.

而想，我没有事件与人谈话，

I have to look after, number one,

我首先

I've got to look after my children, I have to take what I can take."

需要照看我的孩子， 我要带上我能带上的东西。

And in that spirit, democracy can't thrive.

有了这样的想法，民主不会振兴。

And then secondly,

其次，

hydrocarbon oligarchy leads to a situation

碳氢化合物的垄断

where you have these people

使部分人，

who, whether they have to be dictators or not,

无论是否是独裁者，

have this sort of whimsical power over the rest of us.

对其余人有无比强大的权力。

So Vladimir Putin is the world’s leading hydrocarbon ... oligarch

普金就是当今世界最主要的寡头统治者，

and like other hydrocarbon oligarchs,

和其他寡头统治者一样，

he has weird political ideas.

他有很多奇怪的政治主张。

He's not the only one, though, right?

但他并不是唯一一个。

I mean, there are hydrocarbon oligarchs in the United States

美国的寡头统治者

who think things like, well,

也有很多奇怪的政治主张。

there shouldn’t really be a government ...

比如不应该有政府，一切都会变好，

and let's all be libertarians,

让大家都成为自由论者等等。

even though the only reason they have their own rights to exploit

即使他们有权压榨他们，

is that the state intervened on behalf of them, their company

仅仅是因为政府为他们、他们的企业、

or their predecessors at some point.

他们的前人背书了。

So hydrocarbons tend to concentrate wealth,

他们靠碳氢化合物积聚财富，

and by concentrating wealth they also warp conversations

从而扭曲了沟通交流，

and we end up then dealing with Russia invading Ukraine,

我们想要彻底解决俄罗斯入侵乌克兰的问题，

which wouldn't be possible without hydrocarbon dependency.

必须要实现化石燃料的独立使用。

Or we end up in the US with these weird conversations

不然我们就只能在美国，

about whether there should be a government or not,

探讨是否需要有一个政府

which wouldn’t be possible. ...

但这是不可能的。

The fact that in the United States money has a vote

碳氢化合物的垄断，在美国将导致

or money is considered to have freedom of speech

只有金钱实际拥有投票权，

is a direct result of hydrocarbon oligarchy.

或者可以说金钱才拥有言论自由。

It's a direct result of that, right?

这是这个垄断的直接结果。

So no, democracy will not make it with hydrocarbons.

因此，民主不会依靠碳氢化合物实现。

And I think these things are in a very intimate relationship,

我认为碳氢化合物的使用与民主与否紧密相关

where we have to move on to different kinds of fuels,

我们需要转向不同种类的燃料，

not just because of simple physical survival,

不仅仅是为了我们自身存货，

but also in order to protect or really to advance or to make possible

还是为了保护、促进或实现

the kind of freedom we would want in the future.

我们在未来所想要的自由。

WPR: And we have a question from TED member Tau,

WPR: 有一个TED 成员 Tau 提的问题，

which I find really interesting.

我觉得很有意思，

Really interested to hear how you respond to this.

很好奇你会如何回答。

They ask, "Why should democracy survive?

他们问，为什么民主能够留存下来？

Democracies have proved to be unstable, corrupt, filled with voter ignorance

事实证明民主不稳定，充满腐败和无知的选民

and finally, do not prevent wars or violence.

而且最终还无法阻止战争或暴力。

Why should we hold on to this imperfect ideal

为什么我们应该坚信这个不完美的信念，

and not instead make room for a new system that might emerge?"

而不是寻找一个新涌现的制度？

TS: To paraphrase Winston Churchill,

TS:借用丘吉尔的话说，

the new systems that are emerging are all just a hell of a lot worse

用刚刚提到的那些标准来看，

on all those criteria which were just mentioned,

新涌现的制度只会

whether it was corruption, ignorance or disinterest of voters,

在腐败、选民的无知与冷漠方面更糟，

there wouldn't be any more voters to be disinterested, for one thing.

可能有更多的选民变得对政治冷漠。

So, I mean, if we could look off at planet Venus and say, well, gosh,

如果我们可以观察金星，

there's a system where people are happier and freer

发现那里有比民主更好的制度，

and live longer lives than our democracies,

人民会更快乐、自由、长寿，

then maybe, yeah.

那也许可以接受。

But I’m looking at the really existing alternatives like China

但当我看了看当下存在的其他制度，

and Russia and so on,

像中国、俄罗斯的制度，

which are pushing themselves as a kind of model

他们认为他们的制度

in the world that we actually live in.

是我们所在的世界中的一个制度模板，

And on all the criteria that were just mentioned, they do worse.

的那如果以上述的标准衡量，这些制度更糟。

So the reason that -- I mean,

所以我很喜欢这个问题，

I appreciate the question because of the "should" part of it,

因为喜欢“应该坚信这个不完美的信念”这部分

because I think it's indispensable in these conversations

因为我认为在这场谈话中，

to answer the "should" question.

必须要回答“为什么坚信”这个问题。

The reason why I think democracy is a better kind of system

我相信民主是种比较好的制度，

is not because it's perfect, obviously.

很明显不是因为这是个完美的制度，

It's because I think that it, as the conceptual and ethical framework,

而是因为我认为民主 作为一种观念体系和道德框架，

gives us a place to aim for

给了我们追求

where we then can end up with better things than we have.

比当下更好事物的可能。

So premise number one,

首要前提是，

democracies are flawed,

民主并非完美无瑕，

but they can be made better or worse.

但民主可以变得更好或更糟，

And if you say, "Oh, they're all just doomed,"

如果你要说民主已衰败，

or they're not really any better than like, you know,

或民主不必其他制度好，

they’re not really any better than dying young in a prison in Russia ...

不比一个年轻人在俄罗斯的监狱里命悬一线好

or they're not really any better than being observed your entire life

不比在中国从出生到入土

from cradle to grave

都被监视

and being homogenized like in China.

并与众人同化好。

If you start from that premise,

如果你以此为前提，

then you're not going to get anywhere.

你只能得出

But whereas democracy is the idea that the people will rule.

民主就是控制人民这一结论。

And I think that's a better idea

但我认为，更合理的是

than that the people will not rule.

人不应被控制，

And the reason why I think it’s a better idea is that ...

我之所以这样想

I believe there’s something special about humans

是因为我相信，

where we prosper and thrive

人类的特殊性在于，只有在自由时

and add something to the universe when we're free.

才能繁荣兴旺，为浩瀚宇宙增光添彩。

I think democracy is the best framework for that.

民主就是最能保证人类自由的制度。

An improving democracy, a better democracy.

尤其是一个改进的、更良善的民主。

So that's the first premise, right?

所以首要前提，

The fact that things are imperfect

就是事实上民主是不完美的，

doesn't mean that you toss them away.

但这并不意味着你可以将之弃如敝屣。

And the second premise is that these alternatives

第二个前提是，

are actually really bad.

那些可用来替代的制度，是真的糟糕。

So ... I’m happy to make room

所以其实我很乐于

for better forms of representation,

接受更好的代表制度，

happy to make room for local assemblies.

乐于接受地方代表大会，

But I'm not happy to make room for hydrocarbon oligarchy.

但我不了与接受碳氢化合物的垄断统治，

I'm not happy to make room for one-party rule.

不乐于接受一党统治，

I'm not happy to make room

不乐于接受

for the things which are actually out there.

现行的一些制度。

WPR: And we actually have a couple of questions

WPR:好几个成员提了

from a couple of members about kids and children,

不少关于儿童的问题，

basically how to help them think about democracy,

基本上是关于如何帮助他们思考民主。

from both TED Member Areigna, and TED Member DK.

TED 成员 Areigna 和 DK 问

How do we teach our kids to "do democracy?"

我们要如何教会我们的孩子行使民主？

TS: Yeah, I love that question.

TS: 我喜欢这个问题。

It's one that I struggle with all the time.

这是长久困扰我的一个问题，

But also it's one where I learn things from my own kids all the time,

同时一直以来从这个问题中， 我从我的孩子那里学到了很多，

like, they say some pretty fresh things which help me out,

比如他们会说出很新奇的话，很澄明的话，

some pretty clarifying things.

让我豁然开朗。

So, I mean, with kids ...

和孩子…

Look, I think you teach ...

我想如果你教育、

if you're dealing with young people,

你与孩子相处，

so I deal with younger people in my line of work and like,

我在工作时与孩子相处，

they can maybe, you know, tell me how wrong I am.

他们会告诉我我哪里错了，

But my general sense is that you can't tell young people,

我大概的判断是，你不能告诉年轻人——

students or kids, that everything's going to be OK.

学生或孩子——一切向好，

Like, the politics of inevitability is obviously dead.

因为政治很明显会不可避免地走向衰亡。

And so stories about how, you know, everything's going to be OK,

或者是讲一些故事，说明一切向好，

whether it's like, citing Martin Luther King

不管是马丁路德金

or referring to the Founding Fathers,

还是国父们的故事，

I think that's off the table.

我想这些应该是无效的。

I think you have to talk about democracy

我觉得你应该说说为实现民主

as a struggle where there are really good examples

而付出的那些努力。有很多这样的例子，

and you teach the examples of democracy.

你可以教他们这些民主的例子。

I do think it's important, in teaching it as a struggle,

我觉得告诉孩子民主的奋斗，

to also be teaching it as an ideal.

和把民主当作一个理想来教给孩子， 两者一样重要。

So America could be a democracy.

美国可能是民主的，

Here's some of the ways that people have pushed in that direction in the past,

过去有很多人以很多方式朝这个民主的方向努力，

... that we need to be pushing in the future.

而我们在未来同样需要如此努力。

And sorry that I'm talking about America.

不好意思我光谈美国了，

It's just that as soon as kids come in, I narrow down right away

就在孩子们进入直播间的时候，

to my own country.

我开始只谈我自己的国家了。

So that it's a struggle

民主的奋斗

and that it's a possible future.

是未来可能的方向。

But I think maybe even more important than all those things

不过我觉得比上述这些还要重要的，

is modeling democracy.

是营造民主的氛围。

Not in the sense that you have a vote about what you do with your kids,

这不是说你有决定如何对待自己孩子的权力，

because then it's always like,

因为这就会变成

let's eat a bag of candy or whatever.

让我们来吃一包糖，或其他什么东西。

Not in the narrow sense,

不是在这个狭小的意义上

but modeling democracy in the sense of ...

营造民主的氛围，

In the way that parents talk with their friends

而是用父母和朋友交流的方式、

and in the way that, like, people around the house behave,

从在家里的行为方式着手营造，

that you get a sense of like, horizontal conversation

从而与孩子间有平等的对话，

and different interests being taken into account

考虑孩子不同的兴趣爱好，

and things like that.

等等。

That's about as well as I could do.

我也会这样做。

I mean, if I had a magical answer to this,

我是说，如果我能给出一个很好的回答，

I'm sure my children would be much better behaved than they are.

我敢肯定我的孩子们会比现在表现得更好，

But, I mean, to repeat,

我要重复一下，

I think in a way, it's kind of the other way around.

这是一种与众不同的方式，

Like, I try really hard to make sure I am listening to my kids,

我很努力地试着让自己聆听孩子们的话，

because in a way, all this is all about them.

因为这和孩子们息息相关。

Like the big collapse that could happen

就好比民主和气候

where democracy and climate

都可能衰亡，

and all these things get intertwined.

所有这些都是密切联系的，

I mean, one of the premises of my book, which you were kind enough to ask about,

我的书有一个前提，你们也问到了，

is that we will either be free and secure

就是我们要么既有自由又有安全感，

or we will die under tyranny.

要么将在暴政统治下死亡。

That freedom and security go together.

自由与安全是一起的。

I think that freedom, democracy, security actually go together.

我想，如果我们要解决气候变化，

If we're going to get out from under climate change,

自由、民主和安全必须绑定一起，

it's going to be as free people.

我们要么成为自由的人，

And if we end up in tyrannies,

要么就会接受暴政，

those things are going to tend to accelerate climate change

而暴政是会加速气候变化，

and profit from it

并从中获利的。

so there's a negative intertwining over here

那么有一组负面的关系组，

and a positive one over here.

一组正面的关系组，

I think that's something that we can stress with kids.

我想这是我们可以和孩子强调的，

Not say, “Oh, you’re going to be in this terrible future

不要说：当你在安全和自由之间做选择时，

where you’re going to have to choose between security and freedom.” ...

你将拥有可怕的未来。

I think we have to teach,

我想我们应该教他们：

"Look, if we get the freedom and the democracy part right,

看，如果我们正确处理了自由和民主，

we can get the climate part right.

那我们也能正确处理气候环境，

And if we get the climate part right,

如果我们正确处理了气候环境，

that's going to help us get the democracy part right."

那也会有反过来促进民主。

[Want to support TED?]

想要支持TED?

[Become a TED Member!]

加入TED！

[Learn more at ted.com/membership]

详情可见 ted.com/membership