Lawrence Lessig: The unstoppable walk to political reform

譯者: Adrienne Lin 審譯者: Willy Feng

So a chip, a poet and a boy.

一個晶片、一位詩人、一位男孩。

It's just about 20 years ago,

大約二十年前，

June 1994, when Intel announced

1994 年六月英特爾宣佈

that there was a flaw

他們的奔騰晶片核心有瑕疵，

at the core of their Pentium chip.

Deep in the code of the SRT algorithm

在計算中間商數

to calculate intermediate quotients necessary

必需進行疊代浮點除法的

for iterative floating points of divisions --

SRT 演算法程式碼內。

I don't know what that means, but it's what it says on Wikipedia —

我不知道那什麼意思， 反正維基百科這樣寫。

there was a flaw and an error

有瑕疵或錯誤，

that meant that there was a certain probability

代表計算的結果

that the result of the calculation would be an error,

有可能會出現錯誤，

and the probability was one out of every

而這可能性是

3,600 億分之一。

360 billion calculations.

So Intel said your average spreadsheet

所以英特爾說試算表平均

would be flawed once every 27,000 years.

27,000 年會出現一次錯誤。

They didn't think it was significant,

他們不認為這數字很大，

but there was an outrage in the community.

但這引起科技社群一片嘩然。

The community, the techies, said, this flaw

科技社群說，這個瑕疵

has to be addressed.

必須要改進。

They were not going to stand by quietly

他們不會坐視不管，

as Intel gave them these chips.

讓英特爾繼續販售這些晶片。

So there was a revolution across the world.

所以在全世界掀起革命。

People marched to demand --

大家都站上街頭要求...

okay, not really exactly like that —

好吧，其實沒有這麼誇張

but they rose up and they demanded

但他們站出來要求

that Intel fix the flaw.

英特爾修復這個瑕疵。

And Intel set aside 475 million dollars

英特爾也投入 4.75 億美元

to fund the replacement of millions of chips

來回收、更換上千萬張的晶片

to fix the flaw.

以及修復瑕疵。

So billions of dollars in our society

所以我們花了上億元

was spent to address a problem

處理一個

which would come once out of every 360 billion

每 3,600 億才會出現一次的問題。

calculations.

Number two, a poet.

第二個故事關於一位詩人，

This is Martin Niemöller.

馬丁．尼莫拉。

You're familiar with his poetry.

你們應該對讀過他的詩。

Around the height of the Nazi period,

在納粹盛行的時期，

he started repeating the verse,

他開始重覆這段詩句：

"First they came for the communists,

「起初他們追殺共產主義者，

and I did nothing,

我袖手旁觀，

did not speak out because I was not a communist.

我不吭聲是因為我不是共產主義者。

Then they came for the socialists.

接著他們追殺社會主義者；

Then they came for the trade unions.

後來他們追殺工會成員；

Then they came for the Jews.

再來他們追殺猶太人；

And then they came for me.

最後他們來追殺我。

But there was no one left to speak for me."

但那時已沒有人能替我站出來發聲了。」

Now, Niemöller is offering a certain kind of insight.

尼莫拉提出了一種見解。

This is an insight at the core of intelligence.

這是智慧核心的見解。

We could call it cluefulness.

我們可以稱之為先見之明 (cluefulness)。

It's a certain kind of test:

這是某種測試：

Can you recognize

你能否辨別出

an underlying threat and respond?

潛在的威脅並作出反應？

Can you save yourself or save your kind?

你能否拯救自己或同類？

Turns out ants are pretty good at this.

螞蟻對這很擅長，

Cows, not so much.

牛就不一樣了。

So can you see the pattern?

你能看出規則嗎？

Can you see a pattern and then recognize

你能夠看出、辨別規則模式

and do something about it? Number two.

並以行動來應對？這是第二個故事。

Number three, a boy.

第三個故事，一個男孩。

This is my friend Aaron Swartz.

這是我的朋友亞倫．史華滋。

He's Tim's friend.

他是提姆的朋友。

He's friends of many of you in this audience,

在座很多人許多人也認識他。

and seven years ago,

七年前，

Aaron came to me with a question.

亞倫問了我一個問題。

It was just before I was going to give my first TED Talk.

當時我正要來 TED 發表第一個演講。

I was so proud. I was telling him about my talk,

我當時感到很驕傲， 並告訴他我要講的內容：

"Laws that choke creativity."

「法律如何箝制創造力」。

And Aaron looked at me

然後亞倫看著我，

and was a little impatient, and he said,

有點不耐煩地說：

"So how are you ever

「所以你到底有沒有

going to solve the problems you're talking about?

要解決你所要探討的問題？」

Copyright policy, Internet policy,

著作權政策、網路政策，

how are you ever going to address those problems

你有要正視、解決這些

so long as there's this fundamental corruption

政府運作系統中最基本的腐敗問題？

in the way our government works?"

So I was a little put off by this.

我好像被澆了冷水，

He wasn't sharing in my celebration.

因為他並沒有跟我共享喜悅。

And I said to him, "You know, Aaron,

我告訴他：「你知道嗎，亞倫，

it's not my field, not my field."

這不是我的領域、非我能力範圍。」

He said, "You mean as an academic, it's not your field?"

他說：「不是你的領域？ 你意思是說，因為你是學者嗎？」

I said, "Yeah, as an academic, it's not my field."

我答：「對，身為一位學者， 這不是我的領域。」

He said, "What about as a citizen?

他接著說：「那身為一位公民呢？

As a citizen."

身為一位公民。」

Now, this is the way Aaron was.

這就是亞倫。

He didn't tell. He asked questions.

他不會告訴別人該怎麼做，他只問問題。

But his questions spoke as clearly

但他的問題有如當頭棒喝

跟我四歲孩子的擁抱一樣清晰。

as my four-year-old's hug.

He was saying to me,

他就像在告訴我，

"You've got to get a clue.

「你要知道該怎麼做阿。

You have got to get a clue, because there is

你要知道怎麼解決，

a flaw at the core of the operating system

因為這個民主社會的 運作系統核心中有瑕疵。

of this democracy,

and it's not a flaw every one out of 360 billion times

而這不是每 3,600 億次的民主決定 才出現一次的瑕疵，

our democracy tries to make a decision.

It is every time,

而是每次做決定都會出錯。

every single important issue.

每次、每個重要議題時都會出錯。

We've got to end the bovinity of this political society.

我們必須終結這政治系統下 像牛一般的遲鈍愚昧。

We've got to adopt, it turns out,

我們必須要改以

the word is fourmi-formatic attitude --

螞蟻的運作模式 (fourmi-formatic) 及態度 ——

that's what the Internet tells me the word is --

這也是網路上查到的字 ——

the ant's appreciative attitude

要以螞蟻有洞察力的態度

that gets us to recognize this flaw,

讓我們辨別出這個瑕疵，

save our kind and save our demos.

拯救我們的同胞以及民主。

Now if you know Aaron Swartz,

如果你認識亞倫．史華滋

you know that we lost him

就會知道

我們約一年前失去了這位良友。

just over a year ago.

It was about six weeks

大概是我 TED 演講的前六星期時的事。

before I gave my TED Talk,

and I was so grateful to Chris

我當時很感謝克里斯

that he asked me to give this TED Talk,

邀請我發表 TED 演講，

not because I had the chance to talk to you,

不只因為我有機會與各位交流，

although that was great,

這當然是很棒的機會，

but because it pulled me out of an extraordinary depression.

但還將我從絕望憂鬱中拉了出來。

I couldn't begin to describe the sadness.

我無法形容這種心碎難過。

Because I had to focus.

因為我必須專心。

I had to focus on, what was I going to say to you?

我必須專心思考要跟各位說些什麼。

It saved me.

而這拯救了我。

But after the buzz, the excitement,

在所有的興奮過後，

the power that comes from this community,

我感受到這社群所帶來的力量，

I began to yearn for a less sterile,

但我開始希望以比較有用、

less academic way to address these issues,

以非學術的方式解決這些

the issues that I was talking about.

我所探討的問題。

We'd begun to focus on New Hampshire

我們把重心放在新罕布夏州，

as a target for this political movement,

作為這次政治運動的目標，

because the primary in New Hampshire

因為新罕布夏州的初選

is so incredibly important.

至關重要。

It was a group called the New Hampshire Rebellion

當地有個組織叫新罕布夏州反抗軍

that was beginning to talk about, how would we make

當時開始討論我們能夠如何

this issue of this corruption central in 2016?

把這種腐敗問題提升為 2016 年的重心。

But it was another soul that caught my imagination,

除外，我還注意到一個人，

a woman named Doris Haddock, aka Granny D.

她叫朵瑞絲．哈達克 (Doris Haddock)，

我們都叫她 D 奶奶 (Granny D)，

On January 1, 1999, 15 years ago,

十五年前， 1999 年一月一日，

at the age of 88, Granny D started a walk.

高齡 88 歲的 D 奶奶開始一場改革之行。

She started in Los Angeles

她從洛杉磯出發

and began to walk to Washington, D.C.

往華盛頓特區前進，

with a single sign on her chest that said,

身上掛著一個牌子，寫著：

"campaign finance reform."

「財政改革運動」。

Eighteen months later,

十八個月後，

at the age of 90,

高齡九十歲的她

she arrived in Washington with hundreds following her,

抵達華盛頓，身後上百位跟隨者，

including many congressmen who had gotten in a car

包括許多國會議員驅車前往

and driven out about a mile outside of the city

然後把車停到一英哩外市郊

to walk in with her.

陪她走進市區。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Now, I don't have 13 months

但是我沒有十三個月的時間

to walk across the country.

能走越美國。

I've got three kids who hate to walk,

我有三個討厭走路的小孩，

and a wife who, it turns out,

以及我的太太

still hates when I'm not there

現在仍討厭我不陪在她身邊，

for mysterious reasons,

天曉得為什麼。

so this was not an option,

所以這對我來說不可行，

but the question I asked,

不過我想問

could we remix Granny D a bit?

我們是否能稍微修改 D 奶奶的做法呢？

What about a walk not of 3,200 miles

我們別走 3,200 英哩

but of 185 miles across New Hampshire

而是走 185 英哩

於一月時橫跨新罕布夏州如何？

in January?

So on January 11,

一月十一日這天

the anniversary of Aaron's death,

也是亞倫的忌日，

we began a walk that ended on January 24th,

我們開始一場遊行，直到一月二十四日，

the day that Granny D was born.

這天是 D 奶奶生日。

A total of 200 people joined us across this walk,

總共有 200 人加入這場改革之行，

as we went from the very top to the very bottom of New Hampshire

我們從新罕布夏州最頂端走到最底端，

talking about this issue.

共同討論這個問題。

And what was astonishing to me,

令我驚訝、

something I completely did not expect to find,

我沒料到的是

was the passion and anger

大家的熱情與憤怒，

that there was among everyone that we talked to about this issue.

這是討論這個議題時眾人所展現出的。

We had found in a poll that 96 percent of Americans

根據統計，我們發現 96% 的美國人

believe it important to reduce the influence

相信減少金錢在政治界的影響是很重要的。

of money in politics.

Now politicians and pundits tell you,

政治家和政權人士會告訴你，

there's nothing we can do about this issue,

在這議題上我們無能為力，

Americans don't care about it,

而且美國人一點也不在乎。

but the reason for that is

不過他們會這麼說的原因

that 91 percent of Americans

是因為有 91% 的美國人

think there's nothing that can be done about this issue.

認為我們對此議題無能為力。

And it's this gap between 96 and 91

而 96% 與 91% 中間的隔閡

that explains our politics of resignation.

解釋了我們的政治冷感。

I mean, after all, at least 96 percent of us

畢竟，至少 96% 的美國人

wish we could fly like Superman,

希望我們可以跟超人一樣飛，

but because at least 91 percent of us believe we can't,

但因為至少 91% 的人覺得做不到，

we don't leap off of tall buildings every time

所以當我們每當有飛越大樓的衝動時，

we have that urge.

卻無法一展身手。

That's because we accept our limits,

因為我們接受了自己的能力限制，

and so too with this reform.

而這改革也一樣。

But when you give people the sense of hope,

但當你給人民希望時，

you begin to thaw that absolute sense of impossibility.

便開始將不可能化為可能。

As Harvey Milk said, if you give 'em hope,

就如哈維．米爾克 (Harvey Milk) 說的， 如果你給他們希望，

you give 'em a chance, a way to think

就是給他們一種思考的機會，

about how this change is possible.

思考如何推動改變。

Hope.

希望。

And hope is the one thing that we, Aaron's friends,

而希望是身為亞倫朋友的我們

failed him with, because we let him

沒有給他的，因為我們讓他

lose that sense of hope.

失去了希望。

I loved that boy like I love my son.

我視如己出的愛他，

But we failed him.

但我們讓他失望了。

And I love my country,

我也愛我的國家，

and I'm not going to fail that.

而這次我不會失敗。

I'm not going to fail that.

我不會失敗。

That sense of hope, we're going to hold,

我們將心存這種希望，

and we're going to fight for,

並為其奮鬥，

however impossible this battle looks.

不管這場戰役看起來有多不可能。

What's next?

那接下來呢？

Well, we started with this march with 200 people,

我們的遊行原本有 200 人加入，

and next year, there will be 1,000

明年將會有一千人

on different routes

走不同的路線，

that march in the month of January

在一月時遊行

and meet in Concord to celebrate this cause,

並在康科德齊聚一堂，為改革而走。

and then in 2016, before the primary,

然後在 2016 年初選前，

there will be 10,000 who march across that state,

還會有一萬人跨越新罕布夏州，

meeting in Concord to celebrate this cause.

並在康科德齊聚一堂，為改革而走。

And as we have marched, people around the country

當我們遊行時，其他州有許多人

have begun to say, "Can we do the same thing

開始也問：「我們能不能在自己的州也進行？」

in our state?"

So we've started a platform called G.D. Walkers,

我們開始建立一個叫 G.D. Walkers 的平台，

that is, Granny D walkers,

表示 D 奶奶的追隨者，

and Granny D walkers across the country

而全美的 D 奶奶追隨者

will be marching for this reform. Number one.

將會為改革而走。這是第一點。

Number two, on this march,

第二點，這場遊行中，

one of the founders of Thunderclap, David Cascino,

Thunderclap 的其中一位創始人大衛．卡辛諾

was with us,

也加入我們，

and he said, "Well what can we do?"

他問：「我們能做些什麼？」

And so they developed a platform,

所以他們開發了一個平台，

which we are announcing today,

今天也宣告上線，

that allows us to pull together voters

能讓我們將關心改革的選民集結在一起。

who are committed to this idea of reform.

Regardless of where you are,

不管你在哪裡，

in New Hampshire or outside of New Hampshire,

在新罕布夏州也好，在其他州也罷，

you can sign up and directly be informed

你可以註冊並可直接得知

where the candidates are on this issue

在這議題上，不同候選人的立場為何，

so you can decide who to vote for

便能決定要投給誰。

as a function of which is going

這功能可以

to make this possibility real.

讓可能化為真實。

And then finally number three, the hardest.

最後第三點，也是最難的一點。

We're in the age of the Super PAC.

我們現處在 超級政治行動委員會 (Super PACs) 的時代。

Indeed yesterday, Merriam announced

甚至在昨天梅里亞姆 (Merriam) 宣布

that Merriam-Webster will have Super PAC as a word.

韋氏詞典將把 "Super PAC" 納為字典中。

It is now an official word in the dictionary.

現在正式成為字典中的字了。

So on May 1, aka May Day,

五月一號是五朔節， 英文也有求救的意思，

we're going to try an experiment.

我們要做個試驗。

We're going to try a launching

我們要試著推行

of what we can think of as a Super PAC

一個終結所有 Super PAC 的 Super PAC。

to end all Super PACs.

And the basic way this works is this.

簡單說明如下：

For the last year, we have been working

去年，我們開始與

with analysts and political experts

分析師及政治界專家合作，

to calculate, how much would it cost

計算要花多少錢

to win enough votes in the United States Congress

才能在美國議會中贏得足夠選票

to make fundamental reform possible?

以實現徹底改革。

What is that number? Half a billion? A billion?

要多少錢？五億？十億？

What is that number?

到底是多少錢？

And then whatever that number is,

不管金額多少，

we are going to kickstart, sort of,

我們都將開始集資

because you can't use KickStarter for political work,

但不能使用 KickStarter 集資網站作為政治用途，

but anyway, kickstart, sort of,

但我們開始集資

first a bottom-up campaign

從下往上的

where people will make small dollar commitments

向民眾募集小額資金

contingent on reaching very ambitious goals,

慢慢累積到可觀的目標，

and when those goals have been reached,

這些目標達成後

we will turn to the large dollar contributors,

我們會轉向更大額的捐款者

to get them to contribute to make it possible

請他們捐款以達成

for us to run the kind of Super PAC necessary

我們成立 Super PAC 所需的資金，

to win this issue,

以贏得這項議題，

to change the way money influences politics,

改變金錢對政治界的影響。

so that on November 8,

所以在十一月八日，

which I discovered yesterday is the day

我昨天正巧發現這天

that Aaron would have been 30 years old,

將剛好是亞倫三十歲生日。

on November 8,

十一月八日這天

we will celebrate 218 representatives

我們將慶祝 218 位眾議員

in the House and 60 Senators

以及 60 位美國參議員

in the United States Senate

who have committed to this idea

致力於這徹底改革的想法。

of fundamental reform.

So last night, we heard about wishes.

昨晚我們的演講主題是願望。

Here's my wish.

我的願望就是

May one.

實現一個人的希望。

May the ideals of one boy

請讓一位男孩的理想

unite one nation behind one critical idea

團結整個國家， 這背後最重要的想法就是，

that we are one people,

我們同舟共濟，

we are the people who were promised a government,

我們被允諾一個政府，

a government that was promised to be

一個承諾以人民為先的政府，

dependent upon the people alone, the people,

以人民為先，

who, as Madison told us,

如麥迪遜所講的， (註：美國憲法之父)

meant not the rich more than the poor.

人民不論貧富皆為平等。

May one.

盡一己之力。

And then may you, may you join this movement,

你願意嗎？

你願意加入這場運動嗎？

not because you're a politician,

並非因為你是政治人物、

not because you're an expert,

並非因為你是專家、

not because this is your field,

並非因為這是你的領域，

but because if you are,

僅因為

你是這國家的公民。

you are a citizen.

Aaron asked me that.

亞倫這麼問我。

Now I've asked you.

現在我這麼問你們。

Thank you very much.

非常感謝各位。

(Applause)

（掌聲）