Jonathan Haidt: How common threats can make common (political) ground

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Morton Bast

翻译人员: Sharon Loh 校对人员: Minkai Wu

So if you've been following the news,

如果，你一直有看最近的新闻，

you've heard that there's a pack of giant asteroids

你肯定听说过有一群巨大的小行星

headed for the United States,

朝着美国冲过去，

all scheduled to strike within the next 50 years.

所有的这些小行星都会在接下来50年里，一个接一个地袭击我们。

Now I don't mean actual asteroids made of rock and metal.

当然，我并不是指那些由石头和金属组成的真正的小行星。

That actually wouldn't be such a problem,

因为，如果是的话，那对我们来讲不是一个大问题，

because if we were really all going to die,

因为，如果我们全部都面临死亡的威胁，

we would put aside our differences, we'd spend whatever it took,

我们就不会在乎我们人与人之间的差异，我们就会尽我们所能，

and we'd find a way to deflect them.

找到一种方法使那些小行星偏离方向，以至于不会冲向我们。

I'm talking instead about threats that are headed our way,

但我所讲的这个冲向我们的威胁，

but they're wrapped in a special energy field

是隐藏在一种很特别的能量场里面，

that polarizes us, and therefore paralyzes us.

这个威胁导致我们两极分化，也因此使我们麻痹瘫痪。

Last March, I went to the TED conference,

去年三月份，我去参加一个TED会议，

and I saw Jim Hansen speak, the NASA scientist

我看到NASA 宇航局科学家 Jim Hansen 在演说，

who first raised the alarm about global warming in the 1980s,

在80年代，他是第一个拉响全球变暖警钟的人，

and it seems that the predictions he made back then

现在看来，他在当时所做的预测

are coming true.

如今，已经慢慢变成现实。

This is where we're headed in terms of global temperature rises,

也就是说，这个冲向我们的威胁，就是全球气温升高的问题，

and if we keep on going the way we're going,

如果我们什么都不管，还是按照我们现在的方式生活，

we get a four- or five-degree-Centigrade temperature rise

在这个世纪末，全球气温就会升高

by the end of this century.

4到5摄氏度。

Hansen says we can expect about a five-meter rise in sea levels.

Hansen 说海平面预计会升高5米。

This is what a five-meter rise in sea levels would look like.

这个就是海平面升高5米后的景象。

Low-lying cities all around the world will disappear

世界上，那些处在低洼地区的城市全部都会消失，

within the lifetime of children born today.

而这就会发生在今天出生的孩子们还活着的时候。

Hansen closed his talk by saying,

在演讲结束的时候，Hansen 说到，

"Imagine a giant asteroid on a collision course with Earth.

“请大家想象一下，一个巨大的小行星正在冲向地球，

That is the equivalent of what we face now.

我们现在所面临的的全球气候的问题等同于这个小行星冲击地球所带来的威胁。

Yet we dither, taking no action to deflect the asteroid,

但是，我们对此犹豫不决，没有采取任何行动来使这颗‘小行星’偏离轨道。

even though the longer we wait,

尽管，我们等得越久，

the more difficult and expensive it becomes."

解决这个问题就会变得越来越困难和昂贵。“

Of course, the left wants to take action,

当然，左派人士想采取一些行动，

but the right denies that there's any problem.

但是右派人士否认这个问题的存在。

All right, so I go back from TED,

那好，所以我就回到TED,

and then the following week, I'm invited to a dinner party

然后，在接下来的星期，我会被邀请去华盛顿特区参加一个晚餐派对，

in Washington, D.C., where I know that I'll be meeting

在那里，我知道我会见到

a number of conservative intellectuals, including Yuval Levin,

一些保守派知识分子，包括 Yuval Levin,

and to prepare for the meeting, I read this article by Levin

为了准备好这次会见，我读了一篇

in National Affairs called "Beyond the Welfare State."

Levin 在 National Affair 发表的一篇文章，题目为 ”超越国家的福利与安康“。

Levin writes that all over the world,

Levin 写到， 在全世界范围内，

nations are coming to terms with the fact

所有的国家现在正面临一个不可否认的事实，

that the social democratic welfare state

那些全民社会民主福利

is turning out to be untenable and unaffordable,

正在变得难以负担

dependent upon dubious economics

和依赖于不确定的经济因素

and the demographic model of a bygone era.

以及过时的人口模型

All right, now this might not sound as scary as an asteroid,

当然，这听上去大概没有小行星冲击地球那么可怕，

but look at these graphs that Levin showed.

但是看看这些Levin展示的数据图。

This graph shows the national debt

这些图像显示出整个国家的借债

as a percentage of America's GDP, and as you see,

在全美国的GDP里所占的比重，正如你所看到的，

if you go all the way back to the founding,

如果回到（美国）建国之初，

we borrowed a lot of money to fight the Revolutionary War.

我们为了独立战争借了很多钱，

Wars are expensive. But then we'd pay it off, pay it off, pay it off,

打仗是很昂贵的。但是我们不断地还钱，还钱，还钱，

and then, oh, what's this? The Civil War. Even more expensive.

然后呢？ 噢！ 这是什么？ 美国南北战争 （内战）。这个更贵。

Borrow a lot of money, pay it off, pay it off, pay it off,

又借了很多钱，然后又还啊，还啊，还啊，

get down to near zero, and bang! -- World War I.

刚刚还到差不多没有债的时候，砰！--第一次世界大战爆发。

Once again, the same process repeats.

再一次的， 同样的过程又重复进行。

Now then we get the Great Depression and World War II.

接下来，又是大萧条和第二次世界大战。

We rise to an astronomical level, around 118 percent of GDP,

我们的债已经上升到了一个天文学的数字，大概所占GDP的118%，

really unsustainable, really dangerous.

这真是让我们不堪重负的，也是非常危险的。

But we pay it off, pay it off, pay it off, and then, what's this?

但是，我们又继续还债，还啊，还啊，还啊，然后呢？ 这是什么？

Why has it been rising since the '70s?

为什么这个借债从70年代起就一直在上升呢？

It's partly due to tax cuts that were unfunded,

一部分原因是以为那些被减掉的税收没有被基金化，

but it's due primarily to the rise of entitlement spending,

但最主要的原因是社会福利支出的增长，

especially Medicare.

特别是医疗保险。

We're approaching the levels of indebtedness we had at World War II,

我们现在达到的借债水平已经跟在二战时候的水平差不多了，

and the baby boomers haven't even retired yet,

而且,那些在婴儿潮出生的人还没有退休，

and when they do, this is what will happen.

等他们都退休的时候，这就是将会发生的。

This is data from the Congressional Budget Office

这一组来自国会预算办公室的数据

showing its most realistic forecast of what would happen

对将要发生的事情，做出了最接近现实的预测，

if current situations and expectations and trends are extended.

这个预测是根据现在的情形、预期，以及趋势的延伸所做出来的。

All right, now what you might notice is that these two graphs

那好，现在你们也许会注意到，这两幅图

are actually identical, not in terms of the x- and y-axes,

实际上是一模一样的，不是他们的x,y轴一样，

or in terms of the data they present,

也不是他们所显示的数据一样，

but in terms of their moral and political implications, they say the same thing.

而是他们所暗含的道德寓意、政治寓意是一样的。

Let me translate for you.

让我来为你们解释一下。

"We are doomed unless we start acting now.

”如果我们再不采取行动，我们的末日就到了。

What's wrong with you people on the other side in the other party?

你们这些另一党派的人是怎么一回事啊？

Can't you see reality? If you won't help, then get the hell out of the way."

难道你们看不清现实吗？如果你们不帮忙的话，那就走开，别碍事。“

We can deflect both of these asteroids.

我们完全可以使这些”小行星“ 偏离撞击地球的方向。

These problems are both technically solvable.

这些问题在技术上是可以解决的。

Our problem and our tragedy is that in these hyper-partisan times,

我们的问题和悲剧来自与这个”超级党派割据”的时代，

the mere fact that one side says, "Look, there's an asteroid,"

这个党派的人说：“看，那里有一颗小行星向我们飞来。”

means that the other side's going to say, "Huh? What?

这就意味着另一个党派的人会说：“什么？

No, I'm not even going to look up. No."

不，我根本不抬头朝天上看。绝不。“

To understand why this is happening to us,

想要明白为什么这种情况会发生在我们身上，

and what we can do about it, we need to learn more about moral psychology.

并且我们要怎样解决这个问题， 需要我们学一些道德心理学。

So I'm a social psychologist, and I study morality,

我是一名社会心理学家，并且我专门研究社会道德，

and one of the most important principles of morality

在道德心理学里，最重要的一个原则是说，

is that morality binds and blinds.

道德约束人并使人变得盲目。

It binds us into teams that circle around sacred values

它使我们为了一些神圣的价值观团结在一起，

but thereby makes us go blind to objective reality.

但是它也让我们失去了对客观现实的判断力。

Think of it like this.

可以这样想。

Large-scale cooperation is extremely rare on this planet.

大规模的团体合作在这个星球上是很罕见的。

There are only a few species that can do it.

只有很少的一些物种可以做到。

That's a beehive. That's a termite mound, a giant termite mound.

那是一个蜂窝。那是一个白蚁丘，一个相当大的白蚁丘。

And when you find this in other animals, it's always the same story.

当你看到其他动物像这样”协同合作“的时候，其实本质都是一样的。

They're always all siblings who are children of a single queen,

他们都是同一个女王所生的兄弟姐妹，

so they're all in the same boat.

他们都在”一条船上“。

They rise or fall, they live or die, as one.

他们同昌同衰，共生共死，就像一个个体一样。

There's only one species on the planet that can do this

但在这个星球上，只有一种物种，

without kinship, and that, of course, is us.

就算没有血缘联系，也能这样协同合作。当然就是我们人类。

This is a reconstruction of ancient Babylon,

这个是古代巴比伦的重建模型，

and this is Tenochtitlan.

这个是特诺奇蒂特兰。

Now how did we do this? How did we go

我们是怎样达到这样的成就呢？

from being hunter-gatherers 10,000 years ago

我们是怎样从10,000年前的狩猎者和采集者，

to building these gigantic cities in just a few thousand years?

就在仅仅几千年后变成修建这些庞大建筑的人了呢？

It's miraculous, and part of the explanation

这绝对是奇迹，其中一部分原因是

is this ability to circle around sacred values.

我们能够为了共同的神圣的价值观团结在一起。

As you see, temples and gods play a big role in all ancient civilizations.

正如你所知道的，寺庙和上帝在所有古代文明里扮演了重要的角色。

This is an image of Muslims circling the Kaaba in Mecca.

这是穆斯林信仰者环绕在麦加圣地的克尔白圣石。

It's a sacred rock, and when people circle something together,

它是一块神圣的石头，当人们一起环绕在某一个东西的周围的时候，

they unite, they can trust each other, they become one.

人们就团结在一起，他们可以彼此信任，他们就仿佛成为了一个个体。

It's as though you're moving an electrical wire

就像是你拿一根电线，然后

through a magnetic field that generates current.

让它绕着磁场移动，这样就会有电流产生。

When people circle together, they generate a current.

当人们围绕在一起的时候，他们就会产生电流。

We love to circle around things.

我们人类真的很喜欢围绕着某些东西。

We circle around flags, and then we can trust each other.

我们围绕在旗帜的周围，然后我们就变得来相信彼此。

We can fight as a team, as a unit.

我们可以组成一个团体，一个部队去战斗。

But even as morality binds people together into a unit,

但是，尽管道德使人们团结在一起，

into a team, the circling blinds them.

形成一个团体，但是这也使得人们变得盲目。

It causes them to distort reality.

这导致了人们无视现实。

We begin separating everything into good versus evil.

我们开始把所有的一切分割成好的和坏的。

Now that process feels great. It feels really satisfying.

这个分割的过程是很爽的。因为这给了我们强大的满足感。

But it is a gross distortion of reality.

但这是对现实极大的歪曲。

You can see the moral electromagnet operating in the U.S. Congress.

你可以看见这个道德电磁体正运行在美国国会里面。

This is a graph that shows the degree to which voting

这幅曲线图显示出国会里的

in Congress falls strictly along the left-right axis,

投票在很大的程度上完全的沿着左和右两个轴，

so that if you know how liberal or conservative someone is,

也就是说，如果你事先知道一个人是自由派还是保守派的话，

you know exactly how they voted on all the major issues.

你就可以准确的预测出这个人在很多重大问题上是怎样投票的。

And what you can see is that,

你还可以看到的是，

in the decades after the Civil War,

在内战结束后的近十年里，

Congress was extraordinarily polarized,

国会完全被两极分化，

as you would expect, about as high as can be.

就像你所预料的，这种被分化的程度是非常非常巨大的。

But then, after World War I, things dropped,

但是，在第一次世界大战以后，这种分化程度降低了，

and we get this historically low level of polarization.

这种两极分化的局面降到了历史最低点。

This was a golden age of bipartisanship,

这是两党制的黄金时期，

at least in terms of the parties' ability to work together

至少在两党合作的方面，在大家团结一致，

and solve grand national problems.

解决国家层面的问题。

But in the 1980s and '90s, the electromagnet turns back on.

但是在80、90年代，这种两极分化的电磁体又开始活跃了。

Polarization rises.

两极分化又开始了。

It used to be that conservatives and moderates and liberals

在过去，保守派、温和派和自由派

could all work together in Congress.

都可以在国会里分工合作。

They could rearrange themselves, form bipartisan committees,

他们可以不断调和，形成两党联盟委员会，

but as the moral electromagnet got cranked up,

但随着道德电磁体的转动，

the force field increased,

电磁场就增强了，

Democrats and Republicans were pulled apart.

民主党和共和党被生生地扯开了。

It became much harder for them to socialize,

两党之间的交流，

much harder for them to cooperate.

以及互相合作变得越来越困难。

Retiring members nowadays say that it's become like gang warfare.

退休的党内人士描述这个现象就像是帮派斗争。

Did anybody notice that in two of the three debates,

有没有人注意到，在三场总统辩论会的其中两个里面，

Obama wore a blue tie and Romney wore a red tie?

奥巴马戴了一条蓝领带，罗姆尼戴了一条红的。

Do you know why they do this?

你们知道他们为什么要这样做？

It's so that the Bloods and the Crips will know which side to vote for. (Laughter)

因为这样的话“血滴帮”和“跛子帮”（非裔美国人组成的帮派）就知道投谁的票了。（大家笑）

The polarization is strongest among our political elites.

这种两极分化的现象在政治精英中最为强烈。

Nobody doubts that this is happening in Washington.

没人会怀疑是否华府（华盛顿）正在上演这种现象。

But for a while, there was some doubt as to whether it was happening among the people.

但过一阵子，人们会怀疑说，在老百姓里面会不会也会有这种分化的现象呢？

Well, in the last 12 years it's become

确实，在过去12年里，这种趋势

much more apparent that it is.

变得越来越明显。

So look at this data. This is from the American National Elections Survey.

看看这些数据。它们来自于关于美国大选的问卷调查。

And what they do on that survey is they ask

这个调查被称作

what's called a feeling thermometer rating.

“感觉冷暖”评级。

So, how warm or cold do you feel about, you know,

也就是说，你对

Native Americans, or the military, the Republican Party,

美国原住民、美国军队、共和党、

the Democratic Party, all sorts of groups in American life.

民主党、等等各种不同群体，有多热或者是多冷的感觉。

The blue line shows how warmly Democrats feel

这条蓝色的线显示了民主党人士对民主党的冷暖程度、

about Democrats, and they like them.

即喜欢程度的感觉。

You know, ratings in the 70s on a 100-point scale.

这些是70年代的数据，用0-100点的评分标准。

Republicans like Republicans. That's not a surprise.

共和党喜欢共和党，这并不令人惊奇。

But when you look at cross-party ratings,

但是当你看看不同党派之间的评分，

you find, well, that it's lower, but actually,

你会发现，评分降低了，但是实际上，

when I first saw this data, I was surprised.

当我第一次看到这个数据的时候，我很惊讶。

That's actually not so bad. If you go back to the Carter and even Reagan administrations,

因为这看起来并没有那么糟糕。如果回到卡特政府，甚至里根政府时代，

they were rating the other party 43, 45. It's not terrible.

人们对对立党派的评分是43和45。 这并不是非常糟糕的。

It drifts downwards very slightly,

它只是缓慢地向下移动而已。

but now look what happens under George W. Bush and Obama.

但是，看看现在，布什政府和奥巴马政府的情况，

It plummets. Something is going on here.

这个评分简直是直线下滑。其中肯定有什么不对劲的地方。

The moral electromagnet is turning back on,

“道德电磁体”又被启动了，

and nowadays, just very recently,

而且就在现今当下，尤其是最近一段时间，

Democrats really dislike Republicans.

民主党变得非常不喜欢共和党，

Republicans really dislike the Democrats. We're changing.

共和党变得非常不喜欢民主党。 我们被改变了。

It's as though the moral electromagnet is affecting us too.

被这个“道德电磁体” 改变了。

It's like put out in the two oceans and it's pulling the whole country apart,

就像是用它去搅动大洋两岸，把整个国家

pulling left and right into their own territories

分割成左右两个阵地，

like the Bloods and the Crips.

就像是 “血滴帮”和 “跛脚帮”一样。

Now, there are many reasons why this is happening to us,

现在，有很多关于这种分化原因的解释，

and many of them we cannot reverse.

很多这些原因是不可逆转的。

We will never again have a political class

我们再也不会有一个建立在

that was forged by the experience of fighting together

“团结一致，共同抗敌”的经历上的政治阶级，

in World War II against a common enemy.

就像是在二战时期，大家一起抗击一个共同的敌人那样。

We will never again have just three television networks,

我们再也不会仅仅只有三个电视网络，

all of which are relatively centrist.

而且都有相对中和的政治观念。

And we will never again have a large group of conservative southern Democrats

我们再也不会有一个宽容的大团体，在里面，

and liberal northern Republicans making it easy,

南方保守派和北方自由派可以融洽地相处，

making there be a lot of overlap for bipartisan cooperation.

在他们俩之间还允许政治观念的重合以及两党的合作。

So for a lot of reasons, those decades after the Second World War

因为很多很多的原因，二战后的那几十年的时间

were an historically anomalous time.

在历史上，实属异常。

We will never get back to those low levels of polarization, I believe.

我相信，我们永远都不会回到那个低分化的年代了。

But there's a lot that we can do. There are dozens

但是我们可以做的还有很多。

and dozens of reforms we can do that will make things better,

很多的改革可以使情况好转，

because a lot of our dysfunction can be traced directly

因为很多这些“功能失调”可以被直接追溯到

to things that Congress did to itself in the 1990s

1990年代国会所做的事情，

that created a much more polarized and dysfunctional institution.

这些事件直接导致了整个机构的两级分化和功能失调。

These changes are detailed in many books.

有很多书讨论了这些变化的细节。

These are two that I strongly recommend,

我强烈推荐其中的两本，

and they list a whole bunch of reforms.

这两本列出了很多改革的提议。

I'm just going to group them into three broad classes here.

我就干脆把它们都归到三个大类里。

So if you think about this as the problem of a dysfunctional,

所以，如果你同意这些问题是“功能失调”，

hyper-polarized institution, well, the first step is,

“超级党派割据”造成的，那好，第一步所要做的就是，

do what you can so that fewer hyper-partisans get elected in the first place,

尽己所能，尽少投票给那些支持“党派割据”的人士，

and when you have closed party primaries,

因为当你们关起门来进行党内初选，

and only the most committed Republicans and Democrats are voting,

并且只有最忠诚的共和党和民主党党员投票的时候，

you're nominating and selecting the most extreme hyper-partisans.

你们所提名、所选出来的就是那些狂热的 “党派割据”分子。

So open primaries would make that problem much, much less severe.

所以开放的党内初选会在很大程度上，减弱问题的严重性。

But the problem isn't primarily that we're electing bad people to Congress.

但问题的关键并不在于我们为国会选举出了不好的人。

From my experience, and from what I've heard from Congressional insiders,

以我自身的经验，和我所听到的那些在国会工作的内部人士所说的，

most of the people going to Congress are good, hard-working,

大多数要去国会工作的都是好的、都是辛勤工作的人，

intelligent people who really want to solve problems,

都是非常聪明的人，他们真的很想倾其所能地解决问题，

but once they get there, they find that they are forced

但是当他们真正到了国会里面，他们发现自己被逼着

to play a game that rewards hyper-partisanship

参与一种奖赏 “党派割据”，

and that punishes independent thinking.

同时惩罚独立思考的游戏。

You step out of line, you get punished.

如果你超出界限了，你就会被惩罚。

So there are a lot of reforms we could do

所以，有很多改革方案

that will counteract this.

可以阻碍事情朝这方面发展。

For example, this "Citizens United" ruling is a disaster,

比如说，这种“联合公民”管理的方式是极其错误的，

because it means there's like a money gun aimed at your head,

因为这意味着有一把由钱做的枪在对着你的脑袋，

and if you step out of line, if you try to reach across the aisle,

一旦你越过界限，试图联系走道的另一边的人（另一党派），

there's a ton of money waiting to be given to your opponent

有大量的钱就会流入你的竞争对手的腰包，

to make everybody think that you are a terrible person through negative advertising.

所有人就会认为你是一个通过负面广告宣传自己的烂人。

But the third class of reforms is that we've got to change

第三类改革方法是我们必须改变

the nature of social relationships in Congress.

国会里党与党之间社交的方式。

The politicians I've met are generally very extroverted,

我所见过的政治家们，基本上都是很善于社交的，

friendly, very socially skillful people,

很友好的，社会技能非常优秀的人，

and that's the nature of politics. You've got to make relationships,

这些都是政治的本质。你必须要建立关系网，

make deals, you've got to cajole, please, flatter,

做一些交易，你必须要用说好听的话，去讨好，奉承，

you've got to use your personal skills,

你必须善于运用你的个人的技能，

and that's the way politics has always worked.

这些都是政客们一直以来所做的事。

But beginning in the 1990s, first the House of Representatives

但是从1990年达开始，首先是众议院

changed its legislative calendar

改变了它的立法日程，

so that all business is basically done in the middle of the week.

所有事情必须在一周的中间几天完成。

Nowadays, Congressmen fly in on Tuesday morning,

现在，众议员们在星期二早上飞到国会，

they do battle for two days, then they fly home Thursday afternoon.

在里面争论两天，然后星期四下午飞回家。

They don't move their families to the District.

他们并没有把家搬到到华盛顿特区，

They don't meet each other's spouses or children.

他们也不会与彼此的配偶、孩子见面。

There's no more relationship there.

也就是说，根本没有任何 “关系网” 在里面。

And trying to run Congress without human relationships

如果国会里面缺少了这些必要的“关系网”，

is like trying to run a car without motor oil.

就好比说是一辆车没有机油。

Should we be surprised when the whole thing freezes up

这所有的两极分化、功能瘫痪，

and descends into paralysis and polarization?

以及制度冻结、僵化，难道还会令我们惊讶吗？

A simple change to the legislative calendar,

其实只要在立法日程上做一些小小的改变，

such as having business stretch out for three weeks

像是把商务日程延长到三个星期，

and then they get a week off to go home,

然后给他们一个星期的假期，

that would change the fundamental relationships in Congress.

这样的话，国会里的关系网会有本质性的改变。

So there's a lot we can do, but who's going to push them to do it?

所以其实我们可以做出很多改变，但是谁来推动这种变革呢？

There are a number of groups that are working on this.

有很多的团体正在积极解决这个问题。

No Labels and Common Cause, I think,

我认为这些组织没有任何头衔，但是却是有共同的目标。

have very good ideas for changes we need to do

他们有很多关于这样变革的好点子。

to make our democracy more responsive and our Congress more effective.

这些点子使我们的民主制度能对所产生的社会问题作出快速准确的反应，使国会能够更加有效率。

But I'd like to supplement their work

但是我要对他们的工作补充一点心理学上的小技巧

with a little psychological trick, and the trick is this.

这个技巧就是，

Nothing pulls people together like a common threat

没有任何东西能比“全民威胁”更有效地使人们团结在一起

or a common attack, especially an attack from a foreign enemy,

或者外来的进攻，尤其是来自国外敌人的进攻

unless of course that threat hits on our polarized psychology,

当然，除非这个威胁正好使我们在心理上更加地分化，

in which case, as I said before, it can actually pull us apart.

就像我之前所讲，这类威胁将使我们我们分开得更远。

Sometimes a single threat can polarize us, as we saw.

有些时候，单一的威胁反而能让我们更加分化，正如我们曾经经历过的一样

But what if the situation we face is not a single threat

但是，如果我们所面临的威胁不是单一的呢？

but is actually more like this,

而是

where there's just so much stuff coming in,

有很多很多的不同的威胁来挑战我们，

it's just, "Start shooting, come on, everybody,

就像是，“开战了，来吧，大伙们，”

we've got to just work together, just start shooting."

我们必须要团结一致，一起开枪迎敌。“

Because actually, we do face this situation.

实际上这正是我们所面临的。

This is where we are as a country.

这才是作为一个整体的国家应该有的样子。

So here's another asteroid.

下面是另一颗 ”小行星“。

We've all seen versions of this graph, right,

我们已经看了这幅图很多的版本了，对吧?

which shows the changes in wealth since 1979,

这些版本都显示出从1979起，美国的财富状况，

and as you can see, almost all the gains in wealth

正如你所看到的，几乎所有的财富收益

have gone to the top 20 percent, and especially the top one percent.

都跑到了前20%的富人那里去了，特别是前1%的富人，

Rising inequality like this is associated

造成不公平分配的问题，

with so many problems for a democracy.

和其它民主政治的诸多问题

Especially, it destroys our ability to trust each other,

更重要的是，它毁掉我们彼此的信任，

to feel that we're all in the same boat, because it's obvious we're not.

毁掉“大家都身处同一条船”的感觉，因为很明显的，我们不在一条船上（因为不平等）。

Some of us are sitting there safe and sound in gigantic private yachts.

有些人坐在私人游艇上悠闲、安全地享受着生活，

Other people are clinging to a piece of driftwood.

而有些人却趴在漂流木上挣扎求生。

We're not all in the same boat, and that means

我们没有同坐一条船，这就意味着

nobody's willing to sacrifice for the common good.

没有人愿意为了社会共同利益做出牺牲。

The left has been screaming about this asteroid for 30 years now,

左派份子子们已经连续30年提醒大家这颗“小行星“的威胁了，

and the right says, "Huh, what? Hmm? No problem. No problem."

但是右派的人却说：“啊？什么，什么？没有问题，没有问题。”

Now,

现在，

why is that happening to us? Why is the inequality rising?

为什么这些会发生在我们身上，为什么“不平等”的现象会一直有增无减？

Well, one of the largest causes, after globalization,

恩，除开全球化以外另外一个最大的原因，

is actually this fourth asteroid,

也就是这第四颗 “小行星”，

rising non-marital births.

就是非婚生子率的上升。

This graph shows the steady rise of out-of-wedlock births

这幅图表显示出，从1960年代起，

since the 1960s.

非婚生子率稳步上升。

Most Hispanic and black children are now born to unmarried mothers.

大多数的西班牙裔和非裔的孩子都出生于未婚母亲。

Whites are headed that way too.

白人也在朝这个方向发展。

Within a decade or two, most American children

在10到20年的时间内，大多数的美国小孩

will be born into homes with no father.

将会出生在一个没有父亲的家庭里面。

This means that there's much less money coming into the house.

这就意味着，这个家庭所的收入会大打折扣，

But it's not just money. It's also stability versus chaos.

但并不只有钱减少了。这也是安稳与混乱的转变。

As I know from working with street children in Brazil,

根据我在巴西跟那些街头小孩接触的经验，

Mom's boyfriend is often a really, really dangerous person for kids.

妈妈的男朋友通常对孩子来讲是很危险，很危险的人物。

Now the right has been screaming about this asteroid since the 1960s,

右派分子从1960年代起就在呼吁这颗”小行星“的问题，

and the left has been saying, "It's not a problem. It's not a problem."

但是左派的人却说：“这个不是问题，根本没有这个问题。”

The left has been very reluctant to say

左派的人很不愿意承认，

that marriage is actually good for women and for children.

婚姻其实对妇女和孩子是非常有益的。

Now let me be clear. I'm not blaming the women here.

现在让我澄清一点，我并没有责怪某些妇女的意思。

I'm actually more critical of the men

我其实是对男性有所批评，

who won't take responsibility for their own children

特别是那些对自己的孩子都不负责任的男性，

and of an economic system that makes it difficult

以及当前的经济体系，

for many men to earn enough money to support those children.

让很多男人要抚养自己的孩子变得异常艰难

But even if you blame nobody, it still is a national problem,

但是，就算你不怪任何人，这仍然是一个国家级的问题，

and one side has been more concerned about it than the other.

并且，一个党派比另一个更加关心这个问题。

The New York Times finally noticed this asteroid

纽约时报最终注意到了这颗可怕的“小行星”，

with a front-page story last July

并且在去年七月的头版上

showing how the decline of marriage contributes to inequality.

发文阐述了结婚率的下降是如何导致贫富悬殊的。

We are becoming a nation of just two classes.

我们正在变成一个只有两个阶级的国家。

When Americans go to college and marry each other,

当美国人们接受了大学教育，并且结婚的话，

they have very low divorce rates.

他们的离婚率是很低的。

They earn a lot of money, they invest that money in their kids,

他们会赚很多钱，并且给孩子的教育做很多的投资，

some of them become tiger mothers,

其中的一些人成了“虎妈”（Amy Chua的书），

the kids rise to their full potential,

她们孩子的潜能被发挥到了最大，

and the kids go on to become

这些孩子因此成长为

the top two lines in this graph.

这张图里的前两条线的人群。

And then there's everybody else:

然后呢？ 这些就是剩下的阶级：

the children who don't benefit from a stable marriage,

这些孩子没有得到稳定婚姻所带来的好处，

who don't have as much invested in them,

也没有受到很好的教育投资，

who don't grow up in a stable environment,

也没有稳定的成长环境，

and who go on to become the bottom three lines in that graph.

因此他们就成为了底下三条线里的阶层。

So once again, we see that these two graphs are actually saying the same thing.

所以，再一次的，其实这两副图说明的是同一件事情。

As before, we've got a problem, we've got to start working on this,

就像之前一样，我们有了问题，那我们就要着手解决，

we've got to do something,

我们必须做一点什么事情，

and what's wrong with you people that you don't see my threat?

而你们这些人是怎么了？看不到这些威胁吗？

But if everybody could just take off their partisan blinders,

但是如果人们能取下党派的有色眼镜，

we'd see that these two problems actually

我们就会发现，其实这两个问题

are best addressed together.

最好是在一起解决。

Because if you really care about income inequality,

因为如果你真的关心收入不平等的问题，

you might want to talk to some evangelical Christian groups

你可能会想跟那些福音派基督教组织谈谈，

that are working on ways to promote marriage.

因为这些组织积极提倡婚姻。

But then you're going to run smack into the problem

但是，你会遇到另一个问题，

that women don't generally want to marry someone

就是女性通常不愿意

who doesn't have a job.

嫁给一个没有工作的人。

So if you really care about strengthening families,

所以如果你真的关心增强家庭关系，

you might want to talk to some liberal groups

你可能会想跟一些自由团体谈谈，

who are working on promoting educational equality,

这些人士致力于增强教育机会的公平性，

who are working on raising the minimum wage,

增加最低收入，

who are working on finding ways to stop so many men

并寻找多种方式来阻止这么多人陷入犯罪的泥潭

from being sucked into the criminal justice system and

并且遭受

taken out of the marriage market for their whole lives.

一辈子都无法成家立业的命运。

So to conclude, there are at least four asteroids headed our way.

总的来说，一共有四颗小行星正向我们迎面而来。

How many of you can see all four?

你们中有几个人能看得见所有这四颗小行星呢？

Please raise your hand right now if you're willing to admit

如果有人承认

that all four of these are national problems.

这四个是威胁整个国家命运的问题，请现在就举手。

Please raise your hands.

请举手。

Okay, almost all of you.

很好，几乎所有人都举手了。

Well, congratulations, you guys are the inaugural members

那好，恭喜你们，你们正式成为

of the Asteroids Club, which is a club

小行星俱乐部的初创成员，所有属于这个俱乐部的人们，

for all Americans who are willing to admit

都愿意承认另一党派的人士

that the other side actually might have a point.

所提出的问题。

In the Asteroids Club, we don't start by looking for common ground.

在这个小行星俱乐部，我们不会一开始就去寻找我们是否有共同利益，

Common ground is often very hard to find.

其实共同利益是很难找到的。

No, we start by looking for common threats

不，我们是以寻找共同威胁为出发点，

because common threats make common ground.

因为共同利益来自于共同威胁。

Now, am I being naive? Is it naive to think

好，我真的很天真吗？

that people could ever lay down their swords,

会天真到认为人们最终会放下武器，

and left and right could actually work together?

左派右派可以协同合作吗？

I don't think so, because it happens,

我可不这样认为，虽然这发生过，

not all that often, but there are a variety of examples that point the way.

尽管并不经常发生，但是却有很多例子。

This is something we can do.

我们确实能够做一些事情去改变。

Because Americans on both sides care about the decline in civility,

因为美国的左右两派其实都很关心文化教养的下降，

and they've formed dozens of organizations,

并且也组建了很多的机构组织，

at the national level, such as this one,

有国家级的，像是这个，

down to many local organizations,

也有地方性的，

such as To The Village Square in Tallahassee, Florida,

像是在佛罗里达，塔拉哈希的村庄广场，

which tries to bring state leaders together to help facilitate

州内的领袖们聚到一起，

that sort of working together human relationship

帮助解决协同工作的问题。

that's necessary to solve Florida's problems.

这对解决佛州的很多问题是非常重要的。

Americans on both sides care about global poverty and AIDS,

美国左右两派都很关心贫穷和艾滋病的问题，

and on so many humanitarian issues,

以及其他很多人道主义的问题，

liberals and evangelicals are actually natural allies,

自由派跟福音派实际上是天然的同盟体，

and at times they really have worked together

有时候，他们真的通过合作

to solve these problems.

解决了很多问题。

And most surprisingly to me, they sometimes can even see

最令我惊讶的是，有时候，他们对于

eye to eye on criminal justice.

刑事审判的公正性竟然看法一致。

For example, the incarceration rate, the prison population

比如，关于监禁率、服刑人数，

in this country has quadrupled since 1980.

从1980年起，在美国已经翻了四倍。

Now this is a social disaster,

这已经是社会性的灾难了，

and liberals are very concerned about this.

并且自由派人们非常关注这个问题。

The Southern Poverty Law Center is often fighting

南方贫困法律中心正在

the prison-industrial complex, fighting to prevent a system

对很多监狱系统提出异议，试图阻止这些监狱系统

that's just sucking in more and more poor young men.

收押越来越多的贫穷年轻人入狱。

But are conservatives happy about this?

那保守派人士愿意看到这事发生吗？

Well, Grover Norquist isn't, because this system

嗯，Grover Norquist （保守派著名人士）是不愿意的，因为这个监狱系统

costs an unbelievable amount of money.

会花掉很大一笔钱。

And so, because the prison-industrial complex

正因为这些监狱系统

is bankrupting our states and corroding our souls,

正在使我们的国家濒临破产，并且侵蚀我们的灵魂，

groups of fiscal conservatives and Christian conservatives

财政保守人士和基督派保守人士

have come together to form a group called Right on Crime.

联合起来成立了一个名为 “罪犯权力”的组织。

And at times they have worked with the Southern Poverty Law Center

有时候，他们会合南方贫困法律中心联合起来，

to oppose the building of new prisons

阻止那些正在试图修建的新监狱。

and to work for reforms that will make the justice system

同时，他们致力于改良司法体制，

more efficient and more humane.

使它更加人性化，更加有效。

So this is possible. We can do it.

所以这是可能的，我们完全可以做到。

Let us therefore go to battle stations,

所以，让我们进入到一起战斗的状态，

not to fight each other,

不是说相互斗争，

but to begin deflecting these incoming asteroids.

而是一起抵御这些小行星的冲击。

And let our first mission be to press Congress

并且，我们的头等任务就是督促国会

to reform itself, before it's too late for our nation.

自身的改革，在为时已晚之前。

Thank you. (Applause)

谢谢。（掌声）