Zeynep Tufekci: How the Internet has made social change easy to organize, hard to win

譯者: Sherry Chen 審譯者: Adrienne Lin

So recently, we heard a lot about how social media helps empower protest,

最近，我們聽聞了許多關於 社群網路如何全力支持抗議的事件，

and that's true,

說是「全力支持」的確不為過。

but after more than a decade

但是這十幾年來，

of studying and participating in multiple social movements,

我一直研究並參與了各種社會運動，

I've come to realize

如今我意識到

that the way technology empowers social movements

科技全力支持社會運動的方式

can also paradoxically help weaken them.

可能反倒會削弱它們的影響。

This is not inevitable, but overcoming it requires diving deep

這並非不可避免，但要跨越這個難關

必須要深刻探究，究竟是什麼 讓社會運動在長期有可能成功。

into what makes success possible over the long term.

And the lessons apply in multiple domains.

而這些教訓可以應用於諸多領域。

Now, take Turkey's Gezi Park protests, July 2013,

讓我們談談2013年7月 在土耳其格濟公園發生的抗議，

which I went back to study in the field.

我當時還回到抗議現場進行研究。

Twitter was key to its organizing.

推特是組織這場抗議的關鍵所在。

It was everywhere in the park -- well, along with a lot of tear gas.

它在公園裡無處不在﹣﹣ 無處不在的還包括催淚彈。

It wasn't all high tech.

它並非全是高科技。

But the people in Turkey had already gotten used to the power of Twitter

但土耳其人早已習慣了推特的力量，

because of an unfortunate incident about a year before

因為一年前的一場不幸事故，

when military jets had bombed and killed

軍用飛機轟炸並殺死了

34 Kurdish smugglers near the border region,

在土耳其邊界的34個庫爾德走私販。

and Turkish media completely censored this news.

土耳其媒體完全封殺了這條新聞。

Editors sat in their newsrooms

新聞編輯坐在他們的工作室，

and waited for the government to tell them what to do.

等著政府告訴他們下一步該怎麼做。

One frustrated journalist could not take this anymore.

一位懊惱的記者無法再忍受這一切。

He purchased his own plane ticket,

他自掏腰包買了機票，

and went to the village where this had occurred.

飛到了這次事件發生的村莊。

And he was confronted by this scene:

而他眼前的是這般景象：

a line of coffins coming down a hill, relatives wailing.

一整列棺材依次下山， 死者的親友號啕痛哭。

He later he told me how overwhelmed he felt,

之後，他告訴我，他深受打擊，

and didn't know what to do,

不知所措，

so he took out his phone,

於是他拿出手機，

like any one of us might,

正如我們任何人都可能會做的那樣，

and snapped that picture and tweeted it out.

他拍下這番景象，並發送了一條推特。

And voila, that picture went viral

好傢伙，這張圖在網路上爆紅，

and broke the censorship and forced mass media to cover it.

並且衝破了審查制度， 逼迫大眾傳媒對它進行報導。

So when, a year later, Turkey's Gezi protests happened,

於是一年後， 當格濟抗議運動在土耳其展開，

it started as a protest about a park being razed,

一開始事關一個被夷為平地的公園，

but became an anti-authoritarian protest.

卻發展成為一場反威權抗議運動。

It wasn't surprising that media also censored it,

並不令人驚訝的是， 土耳其媒體再度封殺了這條消息，

but it got a little ridiculous at times.

但有時事情會變得很荒唐。

When things were so intense,

當事態已如此緊張時，

when CNN International was broadcasting live from Istanbul,

當CNN國際頻道 正從伊斯坦堡進行直播時，

CNN Turkey instead was broadcasting a documentary on penguins.

CNN土耳其頻道正在播放 一部關於企鵝的紀錄片。

Now, I love penguin documentaries, but that wasn't the news of the day.

我很愛看企鵝紀錄片， 但它並非當天的頭條新聞。

An angry viewer put his two screens together and snapped that picture,

一位憤怒的觀眾將這兩個畫面 放在一起，拍下了一張照片，

and that one too went viral,

而那張圖也在網路上被瘋轉。

and since then, people call Turkish media the penguin media. (Laughter)

從那以後，人們將土耳其媒體 稱為「企鵝媒體」。（笑）

But this time, people knew what to do.

但這一次，大家都知道該做什麼了。

They just took out their phones and looked for actual news.

他們只需拿出了自己的手機， 查看真實的新聞報導。

Better, they knew to go to the park and take pictures and participate

更讚的是，他們知道要去公園， 拍下圖片並參與其中，

and share it more on social media.

將圖片在社群媒體上廣泛分享。

Digital connectivity was used for everything from food to donations.

網路連接被應用於方方面面， 從抗議中的食物供給到捐款。

Everything was organized partially with the help of these new technologies.

一切食物的組織都部份依靠了 這些新科技的幫助。

And using Internet to mobilize and publicize protests

而利用網路調動人群， 並宣傳抗議運動，

actually goes back a long way.

這樣的做法其實並不新鮮。

Remember the Zapatistas,

還記得薩帕塔民族解放軍嗎？

the peasant uprising in the southern Chiapas region of Mexico

那些來自墨西哥恰帕斯州南部的農民，

led by the masked, pipe-smoking, charismatic Subcomandante Marcos?

以帶著面目、抽著煙槍、 充滿魅力的副司令馬科斯為領袖？

That was probably the first movement

那或許是第一場獲得全球矚目的運動了，

that got global attention thanks to the Internet.

多虧了網際網路。

Or consider Seattle '99,

或者思考一下1999年的西雅圖，

when a multinational grassroots effort brought global attention

當跨國性民眾的努力 獲得了全球性的關注，

to what was then an obscure organization, the World Trade Organization,

讓這個當時還不知名的組織， 「世界貿易組織」進入世人眼簾，

by also utilizing these digital technologies to help them organize.

同樣也是通過利用這些電子科技 來幫助他們組織實現的。

And more recently, movement after movement

最近，不斷出現的民眾運動

has shaken country after country:

撼動了一個又一個國家：

the Arab uprisings from Bahrain to Tunisia to Egypt and more;

從巴林蔓延到到突尼斯、埃及， 甚至更多國家的阿拉伯起義；

indignados in Spain, Italy, Greece; the Gezi Park protests;

在西班牙、意大利、希臘的「憤怒者」； 格濟公園起義；

Taiwan; Euromaidan in Ukraine; Hong Kong.

台灣的太陽花運動；烏克蘭的 「親歐盟示威」；香港的佔中運動。

And think of more recent initiatives, like the #BringBackOurGirls hashtags.

再想想更近期的自發性團體， 比如推特標籤「#釋放我們的女孩」。

Nowadays, a network of tweets can unleash a global awareness campaign.

如今，推特網路能夠發動 一場全球性的覺醒運動。

A Facebook page can become the hub of a massive mobilization.

一篇臉書主頁就能成為 大規模性動員的中流砥柱。

Amazing.

太神奇了。

But think of the moments I just mentioned.

但是思考一下我剛剛 提到過的幾個瞬間。

The achievements they were able to have, their outcomes,

他們得以實現的成就，他們的成果，

are not really proportional to the size and energy they inspired.

與他們所激發的規模和能量 並不完全成正比。

The hopes they rightfully raised are not really matched

他們正當提出的期望與 他們最終得到的結果並不匹配。

by what they were able to have as a result in the end.

And this raises a question:

問題就來了：

As digital technology makes things easier for movements,

隨著電子科技令民眾運動 變得更為簡單可行，

why haven't successful outcomes become more likely as well?

為什麼運動獲得成功的可能性 並沒有相應地增加呢？

In embracing digital platforms for activism and politics,

我們在行動主義和政治中 欣然接受了網路平台的同時，

are we overlooking some of the benefits of doing things the hard way?

是否忽略了用老辦法做事的一些好處？

Now, I believe so.

我相信正是如此。

I believe that the rule of thumb is:

我相信一條經驗法則：

Easier to mobilize does not always mean easier to achieve gains.

動員民眾變得更加容易 並不意味著取得成果就會更加容易。

Now, to be clear,

讓我把話說清楚，

technology does empower in multiple ways.

科技的確在很多方面有助於民運，

It's very powerful.

它的效果非常強大。

In Turkey, I watched four young college students

在土耳其，我看著四個年輕的大學生

organize a countrywide citizen journalism network called 140Journos

組織了一個全國性的市民新聞網路， 名為 140Journos ，

that became the central hub for uncensored news in the country.

而那成為了這個國家裡 不受審查的新聞中心。

In Egypt, I saw another four young people use digital connectivity

在埃及，我見證了四個年輕人 利用數位連結

to organize the supplies and logistics for 10 field hospitals,

為10家戰地醫院組織了 物資供給和後勤工作，

very large operations,

都是非常大規模的操作，

during massive clashes near Tahrir Square in 2011.

正是在2011年解放廣場附件 發生大規模衝突的那段時期。

And I asked the founder of this effort, called Tahrir Supplies,

我問了這個叫做 「解放供給」組織的創始人，

how long it took him to go from when he had the idea to when he got started.

他花了多久將這個想法轉化成現實。

"Five minutes," he said. Five minutes.

「五分鐘，」他說道。只花了五分鐘。

And he had no training or background in logistics.

他本人在物流方面 並沒有任何訓練或背景。

Or think of the Occupy movement which rocked the world in 2011.

又或者想想在2011年 震撼了世界的佔領運動吧。

It started with a single email

它僅僅從一封電郵開始，

from a magazine, Adbusters, to 90,000 subscribers in its list.

一封來自 Adbusters 雜誌 向它的9萬名訂閱者發送的電郵。

About two months after that first email,

第一封電郵發出的兩個月後，

there were in the United States 600 ongoing occupations and protests.

在美國有600場持續進行的 佔領運動和抗議。

Less than one month after the first physical occupation in Zuccotti Park,

祖科蒂公園第一場佔領運動 發生後一個月之內，

a global protest was held in about 82 countries, 950 cities.

一場全球性抗議在82個國家， 950個城市進行。

It was one of the largest global protests ever organized.

這是史上規模最大的全球性抗議運動。

Now, compare that to what the Civil Rights Movement had to do in 1955 Alabama

將它和1955年阿拉巴馬州的 民權運動相比較一下，

to protest the racially segregated bus system, which they wanted to boycott.

那場抗議是為了爭取罷免 種族隔離的公車系統。

They'd been preparing for many years

他們準備了多年，

and decided it was time to swing into action

就在羅薩．派克斯被捕之際， 決定是時候實施這個運動了。

after Rosa Parks was arrested.

But how do you get the word out --

可是這麼才能散佈這個消息呢？

tomorrow we're going to start the boycott --

告訴大家： 「明天我們要進行聯合抵制啦！」

when you don't have Facebook, texting, Twitter, none of that?

當時並沒有臉書、短訊、推特， 什麼都沒有的那個年代該怎麼辦呢？

So they had to mimeograph 52,000 leaflets

於是他們不得不油印 5萬2千張宣傳單，

by sneaking into a university duplicating room

偷偷溜進一間大學的複印室，

and working all night, secretly.

秘密地油印了一晚上。

They then used the 68 African-American organizations

然後，他們發動了遍佈全城的 68個非裔美國人團體，

that criss-crossed the city to distribute those leaflets by hand.

由專人發散了這些傳單。

And the logistical tasks were daunting, because these were poor people.

這項運輸任務令人望而卻步， 因為他們都是窮人。

They had to get to work, boycott or no,

他們必須去工作，不論參加抵制與否。

so a massive carpool was organized,

因此，他們組織了大規模的汽車共乘，

again by meeting.

同樣也是通過見面的方式。

No texting, no Twitter, no Facebook.

沒有短訊，沒有推特，沒有臉書。

They had to meet almost all the time to keep this carpool going.

他們必須不斷的見面， 才能讓共乘得以進行下去。

Today, it would be so much easier.

如今，這會簡單得多。

We could create a database, available rides and what rides you need,

我們可以創建一個數據庫， 顯示可供乘搭的和你所需要的便車，

have the database coordinate, and use texting.

使用數據庫座標， 並且利用短訊來聯繫。

We wouldn't have to meet all that much.

我們不用那麼頻繁地見面。

But again, consider this:

但話說回來，考慮下這一點：

the Civil Rights Movement in the United States

美國的民權運動

navigated a minefield of political dangers,

跨越了政治危險的雷區，

faced repression and overcame, won major policy concessions,

面臨壓迫，衝破阻礙， 贏得了重大的政策讓步，

navigated and innovated through risks.

在諸多風險中航行、創新。

In contrast, three years after Occupy sparked

與之截然相反，在佔領運動引起 對不平等的全球性討論三年後，

that global conversation about inequality,

the policies that fueled it are still in place.

引起這場爭議的政策仍固若金湯。

Europe was also rocked by anti-austerity protests,

歐洲也曾被反緊縮政策 抗議運動所震撼，

but the continent didn't shift its direction.

但這片大陸並沒有改變前進的方向。

In embracing these technologies,

我們欣然接受這些科技的同時，

are we overlooking some of the benefits of slow and sustained?

是否忽視了緩慢而有持續性的方法 所帶來的一些好處？

To understand this,

為了理解這一點，

I went back to Turkey about a year after the Gezi protests

我在格濟抗議運動大約一年後 回到了土耳其，

and I interviewed a range of people,

並參訪了一些人，

from activists to politicians,

從激進分子到政治家，

from both the ruling party and the opposition party and movements.

從執政黨到反對黨和反對運動。

I found that the Gezi protesters were despairing.

我發現格濟抗議者們很絕望。

They were frustrated,

他們很懊惱，

and they had achieved much less than what they had hoped for.

他們取得的成果 和之前的期望相去甚遠。

This echoed what I'd been hearing around the world

這樣的話我在全球各地不斷聽到，

from many other protesters that I'm in touch with.

從許多其他與我保持聯絡的 抗議者口中聽到。

And I've come to realize that part of the problem

而我也逐漸意識到，問題的所在之一

is that today's protests have become a bit like climbing Mt. Everest

就是我們如今的抗議活動 有些像攀越珠穆朗瑪峰，

with the help of 60 Sherpas,

不過是在60個夏爾巴人的幫助下，

and the Internet is our Sherpa.

而網路就是我們的夏爾巴人。

What we're doing is taking the fast routes

我們正在做的則是走捷徑，

and not replacing the benefits of the slower work.

並沒有帶來「慢工出細活」的好處。

Because, you see,

因為，你看看，

the kind of work that went into organizing

組織那些令人生畏、無聊透頂的 物流任務所需要的做的，

all those daunting, tedious logistical tasks

did not just take care of those tasks,

不僅僅是處理好那些任務，

they also created the kind of organization that could think together collectively

他們還創造出一種組織， 能夠發揮集體思考的力量，

and make hard decisions together,

並且能夠共同作出決定，

create consensus and innovate, and maybe even more crucially,

獲得共識，實現創新， 或許甚至還有更關鍵的，

keep going together through differences.

也就是跨越差異，攜手同行。

So when you see this March on Washington in 1963,

因此，當你看到1963年 華盛頓的這場大遊行時，

when you look at that picture,

當年你看著那幅圖片時，

where this is the march where Martin Luther King gave his famous

正是在這場大遊行中， 馬丁．路德．金發表了他著名演講

"I have a dream" speech, 1963,

《我有一個夢想》，就在1963年，

you don't just see a march and you don't just hear a powerful speech,

你看到的不只是一場遊行， 你聽到的不只是一場有力的演講，

you also see the painstaking, long-term work that can put on that march.

還有這場遊行背後的 辛苦付出和長期努力。

And if you're in power,

而如果你是當權者，

you realize you have to take the capacity signaled by that march,

你會意識到，你必須嚴肅對待 這場遊行所顯示的能力，

not just the march, but the capacity signaled by that march, seriously.

不僅僅是遊行本身，而是 這場遊行所顯示的能力。

In contrast, when you look at Occupy's global marches

反觀佔領運動的全球性遊行，

that were organized in two weeks,

在短短兩週之內就組織完畢，

you see a lot of discontent,

卻紕漏百出，各種不滿，

but you don't necessarily see teeth that can bite over the long term.

卻看不到什麼能夠發揮 長期影響力的東西。

And crucially, the Civil Rights Movement innovated tactically

關鍵的一點是， 民權運動在策略上創新，

from boycotts to lunch counter sit-ins to pickets to marches to freedom rides.

從聯合抵制，到午餐檯靜坐、 罷工糾察、示威遊行、自由之行。

Today's movements scale up very quickly without the organizational base

今天的運動快速地形成大規模， 卻沒有組織基礎，

that can see them through the challenges.

讓他們得以承受住考驗。

They feel a little like startups that got very big

他們像是剛剛創業的公司， 規模迅速擴大，

without knowing what to do next,

卻不知道下一步該如何是好，

and they rarely manage to shift tactically

也很少能夠有策略地調整姿態，

because they don't have the depth of capacity

因為他們沒有足夠強的能力

to weather such transitions.

來經受住這些轉變。

Now, I want to be clear: The magic is not in the mimeograph.

我要把話說清楚： 勝利法寶並非油印機。

It's in that capacity to work together, think together collectively,

而是共同協作、集體思考的能力，

which can only be built over time with a lot of work.

那只有通過長期的努力才能獲得。

To understand all this,

為了理解這一點，

I interviewed a top official from the ruling party in Turkey,

我採訪了土耳其執政黨的 一位高層官員，

and I ask him, "How do you do it?"

我問他：「你是如何辦到的？」

They too use digital technology extensively, so that's not it.

他們同樣也大量使用電子科技， 所以這一定不是原因。

So what's the secret?

那秘密究竟是什麼呢？

Well, he told me.

他告訴了我這個秘密。

He said the key is he never took sugar with his tea.

他說，關鍵在於他喝茶從不加糖。

I said, what has that got to do with anything?

我說，這聽起來風馬牛不相及啊？

Well, he said, his party starts getting ready for the next election

他又說道，他的黨派極早地 開始為下一場競選做準備，

the day after the last one,

從上一場競選結束就開始了，

and he spends all day every day meeting with voters in their homes,

而他一天到晚都去投票人家中訪問，

in their wedding parties, circumcision ceremonies,

去他們的婚禮派對現場，割禮儀式，

and then he meets with his colleagues to compare notes.

然後他與同事見面，對比一下筆記。

With that many meetings every day, with tea offered at every one of them,

每天要參加那麼多次會見， 每次會見都有茶供應，

which he could not refuse, because that would be rude,

他不能拒絕送來的茶水， 因為那樣會很失禮，

he could not take even one cube of sugar per cup of tea,

在每杯茶裡，他一顆糖塊也不能放，

because that would be many kilos of sugar, he can't even calculate how many kilos,

因為那樣的話，就會攝入 數不清幾千克的糖分了。

and at that point I realized why he was speaking so fast.

那一刻，我意識到 為什麼他語速這麼快。

We had met in the afternoon, and he was already way over-caffeinated.

我們是在下午見面的， 他那天已經攝入過量咖啡因了。

But his party won two major elections

但是他的政黨贏得了兩個重大選舉，

within a year of the Gezi protests with comfortable margins.

就在格濟示威一年之內， 獲得足夠多的票數贏得了大選。

To be sure, governments have different resources to bring to the table.

誠然，政府要推上檯面有不同的資源。

It's not the same game, but the differences are instructive.

選舉和民運不一樣， 但他們的不同點是由教育意義的。

And like all such stories, this is not a story just of technology.

就像所有類似的故事一樣， 這並非只是一個關於科技的故事。

It's what technology allows us to do converging with what we want to do.

這是關於科技能讓我們實現什麼， 與我們想要實現什麼相彙聚。

Today's social movements want to operate informally.

如今的社會運動想要 以非正式的方法運營。

They do not want institutional leadership.

他們不想要領導體制。

They want to stay out of politics because they fear corruption and cooptation.

他們想要遠離政治，因為他們 懼怕貪腐和拉攏收買。

They have a point.

他們說的沒錯。

Modern representative democracies are being strangled in many countries

現代代議民主在許多國家 被強權掐住了喉嚨。

by powerful interests.

But operating this way makes it hard for them

但如此般運營對他們來說是艱難的，

to sustain over the long term and exert leverage over the system,

難以長期維繫，難以對體制施加影響，

which leads to frustrated protesters dropping out,

這就導致了許多懊惱的 抗議者退出遊行，

and even more corrupt politics.

也導致了更加充滿貪腐的政治。

And politics and democracy without an effective challenge hobbles,

而沒面臨過有效性挑戰的 政治和民主好比一個跛腳人，

because the causes that have inspired the modern recent movements are crucial.

因為那些引起近期社會運動的 背後原因是極為關鍵的。

Climate change is barreling towards us.

氣候變化向我們步步緊逼。

Inequality is stifling human growth and potential and economies.

不平等正阻礙著人們的成長和潛能， 並且阻礙著經濟發展。

Authoritarianism is choking many countries.

威權主義在許多國家令人窒息。

We need movements to be more effective.

我們需要讓社會運動變得更加有效。

Now, some people have argued that the problem is

有些人爭辯說，問題在於

today's movements are not formed of people who take as many risks as before,

如今民權運動的組成者不再 像從前的人那樣敢於冒風險，

and that is not true.

這並不屬實。

From Gezi to Tahrir to elsewhere,

從格濟公園，到解放廣場， 再到其它地方，

I've seen people put their lives and livelihoods on the line.

我見過許多人用他們的生命 和生計做賭注。

It's also not true, as Malcolm Gladwell claimed,

馬爾科姆．格拉德維爾所說的也不對，

that today's protesters form weaker virtual ties.

如今的示威者們並非 「形成了較弱的虛擬關係。」

No, they come to these protests, just like before,

不是的，他們參與到抗議中， 正如他們的前人一樣，

with their friends, existing networks,

陪同著他們的友人，已有的關係網，

and sometimes they do make new friends for life.

有時他們也會結交一生的摯友。

I still see the friends that I made

我也仍然見到我交的那些朋友，

in those Zapatista-convened global protests more than a decade ago,

他們是我十多年前在 薩帕塔全球抗議活動中結交的，

and the bonds between strangers are not worthless.

而陌生人之間的那種連結 並非毫無意義。

When I got tear-gassed in Gezi,

當我在格濟遭到催淚彈襲擊，

people I didn't know helped me and one another instead of running away.

和我素不相識的人們幫助了我， 也幫助了彼此，而不是忙於逃命。

In Tahrir, I saw people, protesters,

在解放廣場，我見到人們，示威者們，

working really hard to keep each other safe and protected.

十分努力地保護彼此，以免受到傷害。

And digital awareness-raising is great,

數位化意識提升很贊，

because changing minds is the bedrock of changing politics.

因為改變想法是改變政治的基石。

But movements today have to move beyond participation at great scale very fast

但如今的民權運動不能侷限於 快速號召大規模人群，

and figure out how to think together collectively,

要想出如何能夠集體思考，

develop strong policy proposals, create consensus,

起草強有力的政策提案，達成共識，

figure out the political steps and relate them to leverage,

弄懂政治上的步驟， 並將之與談判籌碼相聯繫，

because all these good intentions and bravery and sacrifice by itself

因為所有這些良好的意圖、 勇氣和犧牲，它們本身

are not going to be enough.

是遠遠不夠的。

And there are many efforts.

這方面也有很多努力。

In New Zealand, a group of young people are developing a platform called Loomio

在紐西蘭，一群年輕人正在 研發一個叫做 Loomio 的平台，

for participatory decision making at scale.

以供大規模決議的參與。

In Turkey, 140Journos are holding hack-a-thons

在土耳其，140Journos 正在舉辦「駭客馬拉松」，

so that they support communities as well as citizen journalism.

以支持社區和公民新聞。

In Argentina, an open-source platform called DemocracyOS

在阿根廷，一個叫做 DemocracyOS 的開源平台

is bringing participation to parliaments and political parties.

正將民眾參與帶入議會和政黨。

These are all great, and we need more,

這些都很棒，而且我們需要更多，

but the answer won't just be better online decision-making,

但不僅僅是需要更好的線上決議，

because to update democracy, we are going to need to innovate at every level,

因為要讓民主更上一層樓， 我們需要在每一層面創新，

from the organizational to the political to the social.

從組織層面，到政治層面， 到社會層面。

Because to succeed over the long term,

因為如果要實現長期的勝利，

sometimes you do need tea without sugar

有時候你的確需要喝茶不加糖，

along with your Twitter.

還需要你的推特。

Thank you.

謝謝大家。

(Applause)

（掌聲）