Geoff Mulgan: Post-crash, investing in a better world

譯者: Pin-hsien Kuo 審譯者: Marie Wu

It's hard to believe that it's less than a year since the extraordinary moment

很難相信金融危機是不到一年前發生的事，

when the finance, the credit, which drives our economies froze.

我們的經濟凍結了，

A massive cardiac arrest.

像一場嚴重的心臟病發作。

The effect, the payback, perhaps, for years of vampire predators like Bernie Madoff,

也許這是馬多夫這種吸血鬼，在吸了我們多年的血之後，

whom we saw earlier.

必然會發生的結果。

Abuse of steroids, binging and so on.

就像濫用類固醇，狂歡等等。

And it's only a few months since governments

僅僅幾個月前，政府才

injected enormous sums of money to try and keep the whole system afloat.

投入鉅額資金試圖維持系統運作，

And we're now in a very strange sort of twilight zone,

而我們現在處於一個很奇怪、像是陰陽魔界的地帶，

where no one quite knows what's worked, or what doesn't.

沒人確定什麼有用，什麼沒用。

We don't have any very clear maps, any compass to guide us.

我們沒有明確的地圖或指南針指引，

We don't know which experts to believe anymore.

我們也不知道哪個專家可以信賴。

What I'm going to try and do is to give some pointers

我想做的是指出

to what I think is the landscape on the other side of the crisis,

金融危機的另一面，

what things we should be looking out for

就是我們該小心什麼，

and how we can actually use the crisis.

以及我們能怎樣利用這次危機。

There's a definition of leadership which says,

有一種對領導力的定義是說：

"It's the ability to use the smallest possible crisis

「將最小的危機

for the biggest possible effect."

轉化成最大效能的能力。」

And I want to talk about how we ensure that this crisis,

我也要說說我們該怎麼把這不算小的危機

which is by no means small, really is used to the full.

用到極盡。

I want to start just by saying a bit about where I'm coming from.

我想先講講我的經歷。

I've got a very confused background

我的背景很複雜，

which perhaps makes me appropriate for confused times.

可能就是這樣，我很適合活在複雜的時代。

I've got a Ph.D. in Telecoms, as you can see.

我有一個電訊博士學位，

I trained briefly as a Buddhist monk under this guy.

我曾短期拜這位為師，接受成為佛僧的訓練，

I've been a civil servant,

我當過公務員，

and I've been in charge of policy for this guy as well.

也負責過這個人的政策。

But what I want to talk about begins when I was at this city, this university, as a student.

但我要說的起始於我在這城市當大學生時，

And then as now, it was a beautiful place of balls and punts, beautiful people,

跟現在一樣，那是個美麗的地方，有人踢球、划船、還有帥哥美女，

many of whom took to heart Ronald Reagan's comment

很多人都對雷根(Ronald Reagan)的說法深感同意：

that, "even if they say hard work doesn't do you any harm,

「即使大家都說辛苦工作無害，

why risk it?"

但也沒必要冒險吧？」

But when I was here,

但我在那裡時，

a lot of my fellow teenagers were in a very different situation,

我很多的青少年同儕處境相差很多，

leaving school at a time then of rapidly growing youth unemployment,

他們畢業時，正好處於青年失業率劇增的時機，

and essentially hitting a brick wall in terms of their opportunities.

在尋求機會上總是碰釘子。

And I spent quite a lot of time with them rather than in punts.

我花好多時間在他們身上，而不是在平底船上。

And they were people who were not short of wit, or grace or energy,

他們這些人不是不夠聰明、不夠優雅或體力不足，

but they had no hope, no jobs, no prospects.

而是他們沒有希望、沒有工作、沒有前景。

And when people aren't allowed to be useful,

而當人們無法一展所長時，

they soon think that they're useless.

他們很快就會覺得自己沒用。

And although that was great for the music business at the time,

雖然當時的音樂事業發展得很好，

it wasn't much good for anything else.

其他的產業則不然。

And ever since then, I've wondered why it is that capitalism

從那時開始，我不禁納悶為什麼資本主義

is so amazingly efficient at some things, but so inefficient at others,

在某方面能出奇地有效率，在其他方面則又不然，

why it's so innovative in some ways and so un-innovative in others.

在某方面可以如此創新，在其他方面又恰恰相反。

Now, since that time,

那段時間過後，

we've actually been through an extraordinary boom,

我們的景氣確實蓬勃發展了一陣子，

the longest boom ever in the history of this country.

是我國有史以來最久的一次，

Unprecedented wealth and prosperity,

史無前例的富裕和繁榮，

but that growth hasn't always delivered what we needed.

但那成長並不總是帶來我們所需要的。

H.L. Mencken once said that, "to every complex problem,

孟肯（H.L.Mencken，美國知名社會評論家）曾說：「每個複雜的問題，

there is a simple solution and it's wrong."

都有個簡單的解法，但那個解法是不對的。」

But I'm not saying growth is wrong,

我不是說經濟成長不好，

but it's very striking that throughout the years of growth,

然而駭人的是，經過這些年的成長，

many things didn't get better.

很多事並沒有好轉。

Rates of depression carried on up, right across the Western world.

憂鬱症比例節節升高，遍及整個西方世界。

If you look at America, the proportion of Americans

看看美國，原本只有十分之一的人

with no one to talk to about important things

找不到可以傾訴重要事情的對象，

went up from a tenth to a quarter.

現在已經升到1/4了。

We commuted longer to work, but as you can see from this graph,

人們通勤的時間增長，而你們可以從這張圖表看出，

the longer you commute the less happy you're likely to be.

通勤的時間越長，就越不可能快樂。

And it became ever clearer that economic growth

我們漸漸明白，經濟成長

doesn't automatically translate into social growth or human growth.

並不一定等於社會成長、或人性提升。

We're now at another moment

我們現在又再次面臨

when another wave of teenagers are entering a cruel job market.

青少年即將進入殘忍的就業市場的一刻，

There will be a million unemployed young people here

年底前即將有一百萬名

by the end of the year,

失業的年輕人。

thousands losing their jobs everyday in America.

美國每天有上千人失去工作，

We've got to do whatever we can to help them,

我們必須盡其所能幫助這些人，

but we've also got to ask, I think, a more profound question

但我們同時也該提出一個更深層的問題:

of whether we use this crisis to jump forward

我們能否利用這次危機將我們的經濟

to a different kind of economy that's more suited to human needs,

轉型成一個更符合人性需求、

to a better balance of economy and society.

讓社會與經濟更協調的狀態。

And I think one of the lessons of history is that

我覺得歷史的教訓之一就是：

even the deepest crises can be moments of opportunity.

即便是最大的危機，也可以是轉機。

They bring ideas from the margins into the mainstream.

危機可以為主流思想帶入新觀念，

They often lead to the acceleration of much-needed reforms.

並加速必要改革的腳步。

And you saw that in the '30s,

這在三十年代就曾發生過，

when the Great Depression paved the way

大蕭條造就了

for Bretton Woods, welfare states and so on.

布雷頓森林協議、福利國家等等。

And I think you can see around us now,

我想你們現在可以看看周遭，

some of the green shoots of a very different kind of economy and capitalism

我們可以培育某些不同的經濟

which could grow.

和資本主義的幼苗。

You can see it in daily life.

在日常生活裡就可以看見這些幼苗，

When times are hard, people have to do things for themselves,

每當時機不好，人們凡事就得自己來，

and right across the world, Oxford, Omaha, Omsk,

現在整個世界，包括牛津、奧馬哈、歐姆斯克等地，

you can see an extraordinary explosion of urban farming,

你都可以見到都市耕作大量增加，

people taking over land, taking over roofs,

人們把土地、屋頂、

turning barges into temporary farms.

大型平底船改造成暫時性農場。

And I'm a very small part of this.

我也參加了一小部分，

I have 60,000 of these things in my garden.

我花園裡有六萬隻這類的東西，

A few of these. This is Atilla the hen.

很多，這是母雞阿提拉。

And I'm a very small part of a very large movement,

我在這個大趨勢中，只不過是一個非常小的參與者，

which for some people is about survival,

但對某些人來說卻攸關生死，

but is also about values, about a different kind of economy,

關係到價值觀和不同類型的經濟體，

which isn't so much about consumption and credit,

不再只是繞著消費和信貸打轉，

but about things which matter to us.

而是回到對我們來說更重要的事。

And everywhere too, you can see a proliferation of time banks

各地都可以見到時間銀行(貢獻彼此專長的社群網站)

and parallel currencies,

及平行貨幣逐漸普及，

people using smart technologies to link up

人們開始用先進科技連結

all the resources freed up by the market -- people, buildings, land --

被市場、人群、建築、土地釋放出來的資源，

and linking them to whomever has got the most compelling needs.

並連結到那些需求最迫切的人們。

There's a similar story, I think, for governments.

我想政府那邊也有類似的故事。

Ronald Reagan, again, said the two funniest sentences

雷根用英語說過

in the English language are,

最好笑的兩句話是：

"I'm from the government. And I'm here to help."

「我是政府派來的，而且我是來幫忙的。」

But I think last year when governments did step in,

但我認為去年政府介入時，

people were quite glad that they were there, that they did act.

民眾對政府有挺身而出還蠻高興的，

But now, a few months on,

但是現在過了幾個月，

however good politicians are at swallowing frogs

即使有人說這些政客厲害到連吞青蛙

without pulling a face, as someone once put it,

也面不改色，

they can't hide their uncertainty.

但他們也沒辦法隱藏自己的不確定感。

Because it's already clear

因為事實就擺在眼前，

how much of the enormous amount of money they put into the economy,

丟了那麼多錢在救經濟，

really went into fixing the past, bailing out the banks, the car companies,

其實大部分都用來補以前的洞、拯救銀行、拯救汽車公司，

not preparing us for the future.

而不是在為我們的未來鋪路。

How much of the money is going into concrete and boosting consumption,

花了這麼多錢在鞏固和刺激消費，

not into solving the really profound problems we have to solve.

卻沒有治到我們應該治的根。

And everywhere, as people think about the unprecedented sums

當我們想著我們所支出的空前鉅額款項，

which are being spent of our money and our children's money,

全都是我們以及我們小孩的錢時，

now, in the depth of this crisis, they're asking:

處在水深火熱危機中的我們該問：

Surely, we should be using this with a longer-term vision

「我們應該要用更有遠見的方法，

to accelerate the shift to a green economy,

來加速轉型成綠色經濟，

to prepare for aging, to deal with some of the inequalities

為人口老化做準備，解決這個把美國和其他國家

which scar countries like this and the United States

搞得坑坑疤疤的不均衡問題，

rather than just giving the money to the incumbents?

而不是一味把錢送給闖禍的人吧？」

Surely, we should be giving the money to entrepreneurs, to civil society,

我們當然也該提供資金給那些能夠創新的

for people able to create the new,

企業、社團或個人，

not to the big, well-connected companies,

而不是給那些又大又到處有關係的公司，

big, clunky government programs.

或既大又笨重的政府計畫。

And, after all this, as the great Chinese sage Lao Tzu said,

畢竟，偉大的中國聖人老子也說過：

"Governing a great country is like cooking a small fish.

「治大國，

Don't overdo it."

若烹小鮮。」

And I think more and more people are also asking:

我覺得越來越多人在問：

Why boost consumption, rather than change what we consume?

為什麼寧願刺激消費，卻不願意改變我們消費的東西？

Like the mayor of São Paulo who's banned advertising billboards,

像聖保羅的市長就禁用廣告看板，

or the many cities like San Francisco

或很多跟舊金山一樣的城市，

putting in infrastructures for electric cars.

都為電動車裝設了基礎設施，

You can see a bit of the same thing happening in the business world.

你也可以在商場上看到類似的演變。

Some, I think some of the bankers

我認為有些銀行家

who have appear to have learned nothing and forgotten nothing.

似乎什麼都沒學到，也全都忘記了，

But ask yourselves: What will be the biggest sectors of the economy

但請捫心自問：在未來的10、20、30年間，

in 10, 20, 30 years time? It won't be the ones lining up for handouts,

整個經濟體中貢獻最大的產業會是什麼？不會是那些排隊領取

like cars and aerospace and so on.

政府補助的汽車業或航太工業；

The biggest sector, by far, will be health --

最大塊的是，以目前來講，是醫療產業～

already 18 percent of the American economy,

已經佔美國總體經濟的18%，

predicted to grow to 30, even 40 percent by mid-century.

預計將在世紀中期成長到30%甚至40%。

Elder care, child care, already much bigger employers than cars.

老人照顧、孩童照顧產業的從業人員，都已超過汽車業。

Education: six, seven, eight percent of the economy and growing.

教育，佔總體經濟的6%、7%或8%，且仍在成長。

Environmental services, energy services, the myriad of green jobs,

環保服務、能源服務、數不清的綠色工作，

they're all pointing to a very different kind of economy

都指向一個截然不同的經濟產業，

which isn't just about products, but is using distributed networks,

這個產業提供的不只是產品，還搭配運用了配銷網路，

and it's founded above all on care, on relationships,

強調關懷、關係、

on what people do to other people, often one to one,

和人們對他人做了什麼，通常是一對一，

rather than simply selling them a product.

而不只是銷售產品。

And I think that what connects the challenge for civil society,

我認為現在各個社團、

the challenge for governments and the challenge for business now

政府及企業所面臨的挑戰，

is, in a way, a very simple one, but quite a difficult one.

看起來很簡單，但其實又蠻難的。

We know our societies have to radically change.

大家都知道我們的社會必須徹底改變，

We know we can't go back to where we were before the crisis.

也知道再也不能回到金融危機發生之前的過去，

But we also know it's only through experiment

但我們也知道只有透過不斷嚐試，

that we'll discover exactly how to run a low carbon city,

才能打造低碳城市、

how to care for a much older population,

照顧老年人口、

how to deal with drug addiction and so on.

解決毒品上癮等問題。

And here's the problem.

問題就來了。

In science, we do experiments systematically.

在科學上，我們會有系統地做實驗，

Our societies now spend two, three, four percent of GDP

現在國內生產總值的2%、3%、或4%

to invest systematically in new discovery, in science, in technology,

是有系統地投資在新發現、科學及科技領域上，

to fuel the pipeline of brilliant inventions

給優秀的發明加加火力，

which illuminate gatherings like this.

就像照亮這些的東西。

It's not that our scientists are necessarily much smarter

現代的科學家不一定就比

than they were a hundred years ago, maybe they are,

一百年前的科學家聰明，即便如此，

but they have a hell of a lot more backing than they ever did.

那是因為他們有以前科學家留下的知識做後盾。

And what's striking though,

但令人驚訝的是，

is that in society there's almost nothing comparable,

社會科學是沒法比較的，

no comparable investment,

我們沒有投入對稱的資金，

no systematic experiment, in the things capitalism isn't very good at,

我們也不能針對同情心、同理心、關懷或關心等

like compassion, or empathy, or relationships or care.

這些資本主義所不擅長的事物，進行系統化的實驗。

Now, I didn't really understand that until I met this guy

在我遇見這個人之前，我還不太明白這個道理。

who was then an 80-year-old, slightly shambolic man

他那時候80歲了，是個有點雜亂無章的男人，

who lived on tomato soup and thought ironing was very overrated.

他喝蕃茄湯過活，還認為燙衣服太高級。

He had helped shape Britain's post-war institutions,

他曾幫忙塑造英國戰後的機構，

its welfare state, its economy,

包括福利國家、經濟等，

but had sort of reinvented himself as a social entrepreneur,

但是有點像是重新把自己改造成一個社團創辦者，

became an inventor of many, many different organizations.

成為一個發明許多許多不同組織的人。

Some famous ones like the Open University, which has 110,000 students,

其中一些有名的像是開放大學，有十一萬個學生，

the University of the Third Age, which has nearly half a million older people

還有第三年代大學，大概有50萬位年長者

teaching other older people,

傳授學問給其他年長者。

as well as strange things like DIY garages and language lines

也有一些奇怪的組織，像是自製車庫和語言學校，

and schools for social entrepreneurs.

以及給社團創辦者的學校。

And he ended his life selling companies to venture capitalists.

他的生命在把公司賣給創投業者後畫下終點。

He believed if you see a problem, you shouldn't tell someone to act,

他相信如果你看到問題，不應該去叫別人行動，

you should act on it yourself, and he lived long enough

你應該自己起而行。而他活的夠久，

and saw enough of his ideas first scorned and then succeed

看得到他那些一開始被人譏笑的想法修成正果，

that he said you should always take no as a question and not as an answer.

他說你應該總是把「不行」看做問句，而不是答案。

And his life was a systematic experiment to find better social answers,

而他的一生就是系統化的實驗，找出更好的社會解答，

not from a theory, but from experiment, and experiment involving the people

不根據定理，而是實驗。他的實驗涵蓋那些

with the best intelligence on social needs,

最瞭解社會需求的人，

which were usually the people living with those needs.

也通常就是亟需這些需求的人。

And he believed we live with others, we share the world with others

他也相信，我們和他人生活在一起，我們和他人分享這世界，

and therefore our innovation must be done with others too,

因此我們的創新也必須借助他人的力量才能完成，

not doing things at people, for them, and so on.

而不單只是為某人而做、或是為別人而做等等。

Now, what he did didn't used to have a name,

他原本沒沒無名，

but I think it's rapidly becoming quite mainstream.

但我認為現在正快速演變成主流了。

It's what we do in the organization named after him

我們在組織裡做的事是以他命名，

where we try and invent, create, launch new ventures,

在那裡我們試著發明、創造、開始新冒險，

whether it's schools, web companies, health organizations and so on.

無論是學校、網路公司、健保機構等都一樣。

And we find ourselves part of a very rapidly growing global movement

我們還發現自己已捲入一個急速成長的全球趨勢，

of institutions working on social innovation,

成為致力於社會創新的機構，

using ideas from design or technology or community organizing

利用設計、科技或社群組織引發的想法，

to develop the germs of a future world, but through practice and through demonstration

培育未來世界的幼苗，但我們不靠理論空談，

and not through theory.

而是實際演練和展示。

And they're spreading from Korea to Brazil to India to the USA

這個趨勢從韓國傳到巴西，再傳到印度和美國，

and across Europe.

並橫跨整個歐洲。

And they've been given new momentum by the crisis, by the need for better answers

金融危機帶給這股新趨勢新的動能，

to joblessness, community breakdown and so on.

為失業、社群崩解等提出更好的解釋。

Some of the ideas are strange.

有些想法怪怪的。

These are complaints choirs.

這是抱怨合唱團，

People come together to sing about the things that really bug them.

人們聚集起來唱唱他們厭煩的事情。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Others are much more pragmatic: health coaches, learning mentors, job clubs.

其他的就比較務實，像健康教練、學習輔導員、就業俱樂部等。

And some are quite structural, like social impact bonds

還有一些蠻有架構的，像「社會影響債券」，

where you raise money to invest in diverting teenagers from crime

就是籌錢去資助青少年改邪歸正，

or helping old people keep out of hospital,

或幫助老人遠離醫院，

and you get paid back according to how successful your projects are.

然後你所得的報酬是依照你計畫成功的程度來計價。

Now, the idea that all of this represents,

我認為，這所有的想法，

I think, is rapidly becoming a common sense

正迅速地發展成一種常識，

and part of how we respond to the crisis,

成為我們面臨危機時的應對方法，

recognizing the need to invest in innovation for social progress

讓我們體認到我們必須為社會的創新改革投入資金，

as well as technological progress.

就如同我們為科技發展所投入的資金一樣。

There were big health innovation funds

一些鉅額的健康創新基金，

launched earlier this year in this country,

早就在今年發行了，

as well as a public service innovation lab.

同時也啟動了公益服務創新實驗室。

Across northern Europe, many governments

北歐有很多政府部門，

now have innovation laboratories within them.

現在都有了自己的創新實驗室。

And just a few months ago, President Obama

就在幾個月前，歐巴馬總統

launched the Office of Social Innovation in the White House.

啟用了白宮「社會創新辦公室」。

And what people are beginning to ask is:

大家開始會問：

Surely, just as we invest in R and D, two, three, four percent,

我們既然花2%、3%、或4%的國內生產總值

of our GDP, of our economy,

在研發上，

what if we put, let's say, one percent of public spending

為何不把1％的公共支出經費

into social innovation, into elder care, new kinds of education,

用在社會創新、老年照護、新式教育、

new ways of helping the disabled?

和新的幫助殘疾人士的方法上？

Perhaps we'd achieve similar productivity gains in society

或許我們可以達成類似在經濟和科技上

to those we've had in the economy and in technology.

所獲得的生產報酬。

And if, a generation or two ago, the big challenges

在一兩個世代前，人類最大的挑戰是

were ones like getting a man on the moon,

像送太空人上月球之類的，

perhaps the challenges we need to set ourselves now

也許我們現在所該設定的挑戰，

are ones like eliminating child malnutrition, stopping trafficking,

應該是根絕孩童營養失衡問題、阻止走私等，

or one, I think closer to home for America or Europe,

或者，我想設立一個貼近美國人民

why don't we set ourselves the goal

和歐洲人民想法的目標，

of achieving a billion extra years of life for today's citizens.

就是給現在的人民多十億年的壽命。

Now those are all goals which could be achieved within a decade,

這些呢，都是十年內可以達到的目標，

but only with radical and systematic experiment,

但絕對要有徹底而系統化的實驗精神，

not just with technologies, but also with lifestyles and culture

不能只靠科技，也要靠我們改變生活型態、文化、

and policies and institutions too.

政策和組織機構等。

Now, I want to end by saying a little bit about what I think this means for capitalism.

最後，我想談談金融危機對資本主義有什麼意義。

I think what this is all about, this whole movement

我覺得我們所談的這整個趨勢，

which is growing from the margins, remains quite small.

還在發展階段，規模還很小，

Nothing like the resources of a CERN or a DARPA or an IBM or a Dupont.

吸引不到像歐洲核子研究組織(CERN)、美國國防高級研究計畫局(DARPA)、IBM或杜邦所會投入的資源，

What it's telling us is that capitalism is going to become more social.

這代表的是資本主義會變得比較社會化。

It's already immersed in social networks.

資本主義已經融入了社交網絡，

It will become more involved in social investment, and social care

資本主義會參與更多的社會投資和社會關懷，

and in industries where the value comes from what you do with others,

而對於那些價值來自你和他人互動的產業，

not just from what you sell to them,

價值不只在於你賣出的東西，

and from relationships as well as from consumption.

而在於關係的建立，也在於消費。

But interestingly too, it implies a future where society learns a few tricks from capitalism

但同樣有趣的是，這意味著未來整個社會會向資本主義學習，

about how you embed the DNA of restless continual innovation

學習如何把持續創新求變的基因植入社會，

into society, trying things out and then growing and scaling the ones that work.

嘗試不同方法之後，培育和擴大那些可行方案。

Now, I think this future will be quite surprising to many people.

我想這種未來對很多人來說會蠻出乎意料的。

In recent years, a lot of intelligent people thought that capitalism had basically won.

近年來，很多聰明的人都認為資本主義基本上贏了。

History was over

歷史已經過去，

and society would inevitably have to take second place to economy.

而社會難免要墊在經濟之後。

But I've been struck with a parallel in how people often talk about capitalism today

但我很訝異的是，人們談起現今的資本主義，

and how they talked about the monarchy 200 years ago,

竟和他們談起200年前法國大革命之後，

just after the French Revolution and the restoration of the monarchy in France.

要求法國君主復辟的論調一樣。

Then, people said monarchy dominated everywhere

那時候，人們說各地都需要君主制度，

because it was rooted in human nature.

因為這是基於人性考量，

We were naturally deferential. We needed hierarchy.

我們天生擅於順從，我們需要階級。

Just as today, the enthusiasts of unrestrained capitalism

就像現在，無限制資本主義的擁護者

say it's rooted in human nature,

也說這是基於人性考量，

only now it's individualism, inquisitiveness, and so on.

因為我們愛好個人主義、愛探別人隱私。

Then monarchy had seen off its big challenger, mass democracy,

然後君主制被民主這個挑戰者擊敗，

which was seen as a well-intentioned but doomed experiment,

我們認為民主是立意良善、一定要進行的實驗，

just as capitalism has seen off socialism.

就像資本主義送走社會主義一樣。

Even Fidel Castro now says that the only thing worse

連卡斯楚現在都說，

than being exploited by multinational capitalism

唯一比被各國資本主義剝削更糟的事，

is not being exploited by multinational capitalism.

是沒有被各國資本主義剝削。

And whereas then monarchies, palaces and forts dominated every city skyline

以前的君主用皇宮和堡壘，統治著各個城市，

and looked permanent and confident,

看起來恆久又自信，

today it's the gleaming towers of the banks which dominate every big city.

今天則是閃耀的銀行大樓，主宰著各個大城市。

I'm not suggesting the crowds are about to storm the barricades

我不是在暗示群眾去攻擊這些銀行大樓，

and string up every investment banker from the nearest lamppost,

或是把所有投資銀行家綁在最近的路燈柱上，

though that might be quite tempting.

雖然這可能蠻吸引人的。

But I do think we're on the verge of a period when,

但我想我們目前所處的階段，

just as happened to the monarchy and, interestingly, the military too,

就像是要結束君主制度和軍事政權一樣，

the central position of finance capital is going to come to an end,

金融首都的中心地位即將告一段落，

and it's going to steadily move to the sides, the margins of our society,

它將漸漸地移轉到旁邊，移到我們社會的邊緣，

transformed from being a master into a servant,

從主人轉變成僕人，

a servant to the productive economy and of human needs.

為生產性經濟和人類需求效力。

And as that happens,

當這件事實現時，

we will remember something very simple and obvious about capitalism,

我們將會記得資本主義是一個相當簡單又明白的事，

which is that, unlike what you read in economics textbooks,

不像你在經濟學教科書上讀的，

it's not a self-sufficient system.

這並不是自給自足的系統，

It depends on other systems,

還必須依賴其他系統，

on ecology, on family, on community,

像生態學、家庭、社群等，

and if these aren't replenished, capitalism suffers too.

而如果這些系統沒有滿足，資本主義也會跟著遭殃。

And our human nature isn't just selfish, it's also compassionate.

我們的人性不只有自私，還有同情；

It's not just competitive, it's also caring.

不只會競爭，還會關懷。

Because of the depth of the crisis, I think we are at a moment of choice.

這次的金融危機衝擊很大，我認為我們選擇的時刻到了。

The crisis is almost certainly deepening around us.

這次的金融危機幾乎可以說愈來愈糟，

It will be worse at the end of this year,

今年年底會更糟，

quite possibly worse in a year's time than it is today.

一年以後可能還會更糟。

But this is one of those very rare moments

但這也是史上少見的時刻，

when we have to choose whether we're just pedaling furiously

我們必須選擇，我們到底是要瘋狂地

to get back to where we were a year or two ago,

找回我們一、兩年前的處境，

and a very narrow idea of what the economy is for,

回到我們自以為是的狹隘經濟理念，

or whether this is a moment to jump ahead, to reboot

還是我們要利用此刻往前跳，重新出發，

and to do some of the things we probably should have been doing anyway.

並做一些我們或許本來就該去做的事情。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）