“危机来临”：美国民主面临的双重威胁
正文翻译
The United States has experienced deep political turmoil several times before over the past century. The Great Depression caused Americans to doubt the country’s economic system. World War II and the Cold War presented threats from global totalitarian movements. The 1960s and ’70s were marred by assassinations, riots, a losing war and a disgraced president.
These earlier periods were each more alarming in some ways than anything that has happened in the United States recently. Yet during each of those previous times of tumult, the basic dynamics of American democracy held firm. Candidates who won the most votes were able to take power and attempt to address the country’s problems.
在过去的一个世纪里，美国经历过几次严重的政治动荡。大萧条使美国人怀疑国家的经济体系。第二次世界大战和冷战带来了全球极权主义运动的威胁。20世纪60年代和70年代被暗杀、暴动、失败的战争和一个名誉扫地的总统所破坏。
在某些方面，这些早期时期比美国最近发生的任何事情都更令人担忧。然而，在之前的每一次动荡中，美国民主的基本动力都没有动摇。赢得最多选票的候选人能够掌权，并试图解决国家的问题。
The United States has experienced deep political turmoil several times before over the past century. The Great Depression caused Americans to doubt the country’s economic system. World War II and the Cold War presented threats from global totalitarian movements. The 1960s and ’70s were marred by assassinations, riots, a losing war and a disgraced president.
These earlier periods were each more alarming in some ways than anything that has happened in the United States recently. Yet during each of those previous times of tumult, the basic dynamics of American democracy held firm. Candidates who won the most votes were able to take power and attempt to address the country’s problems.
在过去的一个世纪里，美国经历过几次严重的政治动荡。大萧条使美国人怀疑国家的经济体系。第二次世界大战和冷战带来了全球极权主义运动的威胁。20世纪60年代和70年代被暗杀、暴动、失败的战争和一个名誉扫地的总统所破坏。
在某些方面，这些早期时期比美国最近发生的任何事情都更令人担忧。然而，在之前的每一次动荡中，美国民主的基本动力都没有动摇。赢得最多选票的候选人能够掌权，并试图解决国家的问题。
The current period is different. As a result, the United States today finds itself in a situation with little historical precedent. American democracy is facing two distinct threats, which together represent the most serious challenge to the country’s governing ideals in decades.
The first threat is acute: a growing movement inside one of the country’s two major parties — the Republican Party — to refuse to accept defeat in an election.
The violent Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress, meant to prevent the certification of President Biden’s election, was the clearest manifestation of this movement, but it has continued since then. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged. Some of them are running for statewide offices that would oversee future elections, potentially putting them in position to overturn an election in 2024 or beyond.
“There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” said Yascha Mounk, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins University who studies democracy.
当前的情况有所不同。结果，今天的美国发现自己处于一个几乎没有历史先例的境地。美国民主正面临两种截然不同的威胁，这两种威胁加在一起，代表着几十年来对美国执政理念的最严重挑战。
第一个威胁是严峻的:在美国两大政党之一的共和党内部，拒绝接受选举失败的运动正在不断壮大。
2021年1月6日，旨在阻止拜登总统当选的暴力袭击国会，是这一运动最明显的表现，但自那以后它一直在继续。全国各地数百名当选的共和党官员虚伪地声称2020年的选举被操纵了。他们中的一些人正在竞选监督未来选举的州级职位，这可能会让他们有机会推翻2024年或以后的选举。
约翰霍普金斯大学研究民主的政治学家雅斯查·蒙克说，“合法选举的总统有可能无法就职，这在美国历史上尚属首次。”
The first threat is acute: a growing movement inside one of the country’s two major parties — the Republican Party — to refuse to accept defeat in an election.
The violent Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress, meant to prevent the certification of President Biden’s election, was the clearest manifestation of this movement, but it has continued since then. Hundreds of elected Republican officials around the country falsely claim that the 2020 election was rigged. Some of them are running for statewide offices that would oversee future elections, potentially putting them in position to overturn an election in 2024 or beyond.
“There is the possibility, for the first time in American history, that a legitimately elected president will not be able to take office,” said Yascha Mounk, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins University who studies democracy.
当前的情况有所不同。结果，今天的美国发现自己处于一个几乎没有历史先例的境地。美国民主正面临两种截然不同的威胁，这两种威胁加在一起，代表着几十年来对美国执政理念的最严重挑战。
第一个威胁是严峻的:在美国两大政党之一的共和党内部，拒绝接受选举失败的运动正在不断壮大。
2021年1月6日，旨在阻止拜登总统当选的暴力袭击国会，是这一运动最明显的表现，但自那以后它一直在继续。全国各地数百名当选的共和党官员虚伪地声称2020年的选举被操纵了。他们中的一些人正在竞选监督未来选举的州级职位，这可能会让他们有机会推翻2024年或以后的选举。
约翰霍普金斯大学研究民主的政治学家雅斯查·蒙克说，“合法选举的总统有可能无法就职，这在美国历史上尚属首次。”
The second threat to democracy is chronic but also growing: The power to set government policy is becoming increasingly disconnected from public opinion.
The run of recent Supreme Court decisions — both sweeping and, according to polls, unpopular — highlight this disconnect. Although the Democratic Party has won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections, a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees seems poised to shape American politics for years, if not decades. And the court is only one of the means through which policy outcomes are becoming less closely tied to the popular will.
对民主的第二个威胁是长期存在的，但也在不断增长:制定政府政策的权力正日益与公众舆论脱节。
最近最高法院的一系列判决——包括广泛的和民意调查显示不受欢迎的——凸显了这种脱节。尽管民主党在过去8次总统选举中赢得了7次普选，但由共和党任命的人主导的最高法院，似乎要在未来几年，甚至几十年左右左右美国政治。而法院只是政策结果与民意联系越来越少的手段之一。
The run of recent Supreme Court decisions — both sweeping and, according to polls, unpopular — highlight this disconnect. Although the Democratic Party has won the popular vote in seven of the past eight presidential elections, a Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees seems poised to shape American politics for years, if not decades. And the court is only one of the means through which policy outcomes are becoming less closely tied to the popular will.
对民主的第二个威胁是长期存在的，但也在不断增长:制定政府政策的权力正日益与公众舆论脱节。
最近最高法院的一系列判决——包括广泛的和民意调查显示不受欢迎的——凸显了这种脱节。尽管民主党在过去8次总统选举中赢得了7次普选，但由共和党任命的人主导的最高法院，似乎要在未来几年，甚至几十年左右左右美国政治。而法院只是政策结果与民意联系越来越少的手段之一。
Two of the past four presidents have taken office despite losing the popular vote. Senators representing a majority of Americans are often unable to pass bills, partly because of the increasing use of the filibuster. Even the House, intended as the branch of the government that most reflects the popular will, does not always do so, because of the way districts are drawn.
“We are far and away the most countermajoritarian democracy in the world,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University and a co-author of the book “How Democracies Die,” with Daniel Ziblatt.
The causes of the twin threats to democracy are complex and debated among scholars.
The chronic threats to democracy generally spring from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But they did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades. One reason is that more populous states, whose residents receive less power because of the Senate and the Electoral College, have grown so much larger than small states.
在过去的四位总统中，有两位是在失去普选票数的情况下就任的。代表大多数美国人的参议员经常无法通过法案，部分原因是越来越多地使用拖延战术。即使是作为议会的分支，最能反映民意的众议院，也并非总能通过，因为选区划分的方式。
“我们无疑是世界上最反多数主义的民主国家，”哈佛大学政府学教授史蒂文·莱维茨基说，他与丹尼尔·齐布拉特合著了《民主是如何消亡的》一书。
民主面临双重威胁的原因是复杂的，在学者中争论不休。
对民主的长期威胁通常来自美国政府的持久特征，有些被写入了宪法。但在过去的几十年里，他们与多数人的意见并没有产生同样程度的冲突。一个原因是，由于参议院和选举人团制度，人口较多的州的居民获得的权力较少，这些州的人口比小州大得多。
“We are far and away the most countermajoritarian democracy in the world,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University and a co-author of the book “How Democracies Die,” with Daniel Ziblatt.
The causes of the twin threats to democracy are complex and debated among scholars.
The chronic threats to democracy generally spring from enduring features of American government, some written into the Constitution. But they did not conflict with majority opinion to the same degree in past decades. One reason is that more populous states, whose residents receive less power because of the Senate and the Electoral College, have grown so much larger than small states.
在过去的四位总统中，有两位是在失去普选票数的情况下就任的。代表大多数美国人的参议员经常无法通过法案，部分原因是越来越多地使用拖延战术。即使是作为议会的分支，最能反映民意的众议院，也并非总能通过，因为选区划分的方式。
“我们无疑是世界上最反多数主义的民主国家，”哈佛大学政府学教授史蒂文·莱维茨基说，他与丹尼尔·齐布拉特合著了《民主是如何消亡的》一书。
民主面临双重威胁的原因是复杂的，在学者中争论不休。
对民主的长期威胁通常来自美国政府的持久特征，有些被写入了宪法。但在过去的几十年里，他们与多数人的意见并没有产生同样程度的冲突。一个原因是，由于参议院和选举人团制度，人口较多的州的居民获得的权力较少，这些州的人口比小州大得多。
The acute threats to democracy — and the rise of authoritarian sentiment, or at least the acceptance of it, among many voters — have different causes. They partly reflect frustration over nearly a half-century of slow-growing living standards for the American working class and middle class. They also reflect cultural fears, especially among white people, that the United States is being transformed into a new country, more racially diverse and less religious, with rapidly changing attitudes toward gender, language and more.
The economic frustrations and cultural fears have combined to create a chasm in American political life, between prosperous, diverse major metropolitan areas and more traditional, religious and economically struggling smaller cities and rural areas. The first category is increasingly liberal and Democratic, the second increasingly conservative and Republican.
对民主的严重威胁——以及许多选民中威权主义情绪的抬头(或至少是对威权主义的接受程度)——有着不同的原因。这在一定程度上反映了美国工人阶级和中产阶级近半个世纪来生活水平增长缓慢的挫败感。它们也反映出文化上的恐惧，尤其是在白人当中，他们担心美国正在转变为一个新的国家，一个种族更加多样化、宗教色彩更少的国家，对性别、语言等的态度正在迅速转变。
经济上的挫折和文化上的恐惧交织在一起，在繁荣、多样化的主要大都市地区与更加传统、宗教和经济困难的小城市和农村地区之间，在美国的政治生活中造成了一道鸿沟。第一类是越来越多的自由派和民主党人，第二类是越来越多的保守派和共和党人。
The economic frustrations and cultural fears have combined to create a chasm in American political life, between prosperous, diverse major metropolitan areas and more traditional, religious and economically struggling smaller cities and rural areas. The first category is increasingly liberal and Democratic, the second increasingly conservative and Republican.
对民主的严重威胁——以及许多选民中威权主义情绪的抬头(或至少是对威权主义的接受程度)——有着不同的原因。这在一定程度上反映了美国工人阶级和中产阶级近半个世纪来生活水平增长缓慢的挫败感。它们也反映出文化上的恐惧，尤其是在白人当中，他们担心美国正在转变为一个新的国家，一个种族更加多样化、宗教色彩更少的国家，对性别、语言等的态度正在迅速转变。
经济上的挫折和文化上的恐惧交织在一起，在繁荣、多样化的主要大都市地区与更加传统、宗教和经济困难的小城市和农村地区之间，在美国的政治生活中造成了一道鸿沟。第一类是越来越多的自由派和民主党人，第二类是越来越多的保守派和共和党人。
The political contest between the two can feel existential to people in both camps, with disagreements over nearly every prominent issue. “When we’re voting, we’re not just voting for a set of policies but for what we think makes us Americans and who we are as a people,” Lilliana Mason, a political scientist and the author of “Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity,” said. “If our party loses the election, then all of these parts of us feel like losers.”
These sharp disagreements have led many Americans to doubt the country’s system of government. In a recent poll by Quinnipiac University, 69 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Republicans said that democracy was “in danger of collapse.” Of course, the two sides have very different opinions about the nature of the threat.
对于两个阵营的人来说，两者之间的政治竞争都是存在的，双方在几乎所有重大问题上都存在分歧。“当我们投票时，我们投的不仅仅是一系列政策，而是我们认为是什么让我们成为美国人，以及我们是谁，”政治学家、《不文明的协议：政治如何成为我们的身份》的作者莉莉安娜·梅森说，“如果我们的党在选举中失败，那么我们所有人都会觉得自己是失败者。”
这些尖锐的分歧导致许多美国人怀疑美国的政府制度。昆尼皮亚克大学最近进行的一项民意调查显示，69%的民主党人和69%的共和党人表示，民主“有崩溃的危险”。当然，双方对这一威胁的性质有截然不同的看法。
These sharp disagreements have led many Americans to doubt the country’s system of government. In a recent poll by Quinnipiac University, 69 percent of Democrats and 69 percent of Republicans said that democracy was “in danger of collapse.” Of course, the two sides have very different opinions about the nature of the threat.
对于两个阵营的人来说，两者之间的政治竞争都是存在的，双方在几乎所有重大问题上都存在分歧。“当我们投票时，我们投的不仅仅是一系列政策，而是我们认为是什么让我们成为美国人，以及我们是谁，”政治学家、《不文明的协议：政治如何成为我们的身份》的作者莉莉安娜·梅森说，“如果我们的党在选举中失败，那么我们所有人都会觉得自己是失败者。”
这些尖锐的分歧导致许多美国人怀疑美国的政府制度。昆尼皮亚克大学最近进行的一项民意调查显示，69%的民主党人和69%的共和党人表示，民主“有崩溃的危险”。当然，双方对这一威胁的性质有截然不同的看法。
Many Democrats share the concerns of historians and scholars who study democracy, pointing to the possibility of overturned election results and the deterioration of majority rule. “Equality and democracy are under assault,” President Biden said in a speech this month in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia. “We do ourselves no favor to pretend otherwise.”
Many Republicans have defended their increasingly aggressive tactics by saying they are trying to protect American values. In some cases, these claims rely on falsehoods — about election fraud, Mr. Biden’s supposed “socialism,” Barack Obama’s birthplace, and more.
In others, they are rooted in anxiety over real developments, including illegal immigration and “cancel culture.” Some on the left now consider widely held opinions among conservative and moderate Americans — on abortion, policing, affirmative action, Covid-19 and other subjects — to be so obxtionable that they cannot be debated. In the view of many conservatives and some experts, this intolerance is stifling open debate at the heart of the American political system.
许多民主党人和研究民主的历史学家和学者一样担心，他们指出选举结果可能被推翻，多数决原则可能恶化。“平等和民主正在受到攻击，”拜登总统本月在费城独立厅前发表演讲时说。“假装不是这样对我们自己没有好处。”
许多共和党人为他们日益激进的策略进行辩护，称他们是在努力保护美国的价值观。在某些情况下，这些说法依赖于谎言——关于选举舞弊、拜登所谓的“社会主义”、巴拉克·奥巴马的出生地等等。
在其他情况下，它们源于对现实发展的焦虑，包括非法移民和“取消文化”。一些左翼人士现在认为，保守派和温和派美国人普遍持有的观点——关于堕胎、治安、平权行动、新冠肺炎和其他主题——非常令人反感，以至于无法进行辩论。在许多保守派人士和一些专家看来，这种不宽容扼杀了美国政治体系核心的公开辩论。
Many Republicans have defended their increasingly aggressive tactics by saying they are trying to protect American values. In some cases, these claims rely on falsehoods — about election fraud, Mr. Biden’s supposed “socialism,” Barack Obama’s birthplace, and more.
In others, they are rooted in anxiety over real developments, including illegal immigration and “cancel culture.” Some on the left now consider widely held opinions among conservative and moderate Americans — on abortion, policing, affirmative action, Covid-19 and other subjects — to be so obxtionable that they cannot be debated. In the view of many conservatives and some experts, this intolerance is stifling open debate at the heart of the American political system.
许多民主党人和研究民主的历史学家和学者一样担心，他们指出选举结果可能被推翻，多数决原则可能恶化。“平等和民主正在受到攻击，”拜登总统本月在费城独立厅前发表演讲时说。“假装不是这样对我们自己没有好处。”
许多共和党人为他们日益激进的策略进行辩护，称他们是在努力保护美国的价值观。在某些情况下，这些说法依赖于谎言——关于选举舞弊、拜登所谓的“社会主义”、巴拉克·奥巴马的出生地等等。
在其他情况下，它们源于对现实发展的焦虑，包括非法移民和“取消文化”。一些左翼人士现在认为，保守派和温和派美国人普遍持有的观点——关于堕胎、治安、平权行动、新冠肺炎和其他主题——非常令人反感，以至于无法进行辩论。在许多保守派人士和一些专家看来，这种不宽容扼杀了美国政治体系核心的公开辩论。
The divergent sense of crisis on left and right can itself weaken democracy, and it has been exacerbated by technology.
Conspiracy theories and outright lies have a long American history, dating to the personal attacks that were a staple of the partisan press during the 18th century. In the mid-20th century, tens of thousands of Americans joined the John Birch Society, a far-right group that claimed Dwight Eisenhower was a secret Communist.
Today, however, falsehoods can spread much more easily, through social media and a fractured news environment. In the 1950s, no major television network spread the lies about Eisenhower. In recent years, the country’s most watched cable channel, Fox News, regularly promoted falsehoods about election results, Mr. Obama’s birthplace and other subjects.
These same forces — digital media, cultural change and economic stagnation in affluent countries — help explain why democracy is also struggling in other parts of the world. Only two decades ago, at the turn of the 21st century, democracy was the triumphant form of government around the world, with autocracy in retreat in the former Soviet empire, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, South Korea and elsewhere. Today, the global trend is moving in the other direction.
左翼和右翼的危机意识分歧本身就会削弱民主，科技的发展加剧了这种情况。阴谋论和赤裸裸的谎言在美国有着悠久的历史，可以追溯到18世纪党派媒体的主要内容——人身攻击。在20世纪中期，成千上万的美国人加入了约翰·伯奇协会，这是一个极右翼组织，声称德怀特·艾森豪威尔是一个秘密的共产主义者。
然而，如今，通过社交媒体和支离破碎的新闻环境，谎言的传播要容易得多。在20世纪50年代，没有一个主要的电视网络散布关于艾森豪威尔的谎言。近年来，美国收视率最高的有线电视频道福克斯新闻经常在选举结果、奥巴马的出生地等话题上宣传虚假信息。
这些同样的力量——数字媒体、文化变革和富裕国家的经济停滞——有助于解释为什么民主在世界其他地方也在挣扎。仅仅20年前，在21世纪之交，民主还是世界各地成功的政府形式，独裁在前苏联帝国、阿根廷、巴西、智利、南非、韩国和其他地方都在衰落。今天，全球趋势正在向另一个方向发展。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Conspiracy theories and outright lies have a long American history, dating to the personal attacks that were a staple of the partisan press during the 18th century. In the mid-20th century, tens of thousands of Americans joined the John Birch Society, a far-right group that claimed Dwight Eisenhower was a secret Communist.
Today, however, falsehoods can spread much more easily, through social media and a fractured news environment. In the 1950s, no major television network spread the lies about Eisenhower. In recent years, the country’s most watched cable channel, Fox News, regularly promoted falsehoods about election results, Mr. Obama’s birthplace and other subjects.
These same forces — digital media, cultural change and economic stagnation in affluent countries — help explain why democracy is also struggling in other parts of the world. Only two decades ago, at the turn of the 21st century, democracy was the triumphant form of government around the world, with autocracy in retreat in the former Soviet empire, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, South Africa, South Korea and elsewhere. Today, the global trend is moving in the other direction.
左翼和右翼的危机意识分歧本身就会削弱民主，科技的发展加剧了这种情况。阴谋论和赤裸裸的谎言在美国有着悠久的历史，可以追溯到18世纪党派媒体的主要内容——人身攻击。在20世纪中期，成千上万的美国人加入了约翰·伯奇协会，这是一个极右翼组织，声称德怀特·艾森豪威尔是一个秘密的共产主义者。
然而，如今，通过社交媒体和支离破碎的新闻环境，谎言的传播要容易得多。在20世纪50年代，没有一个主要的电视网络散布关于艾森豪威尔的谎言。近年来，美国收视率最高的有线电视频道福克斯新闻经常在选举结果、奥巴马的出生地等话题上宣传虚假信息。
这些同样的力量——数字媒体、文化变革和富裕国家的经济停滞——有助于解释为什么民主在世界其他地方也在挣扎。仅仅20年前，在21世纪之交，民主还是世界各地成功的政府形式，独裁在前苏联帝国、阿根廷、巴西、智利、南非、韩国和其他地方都在衰落。今天，全球趋势正在向另一个方向发展。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Some experts remain hopeful that the growing attention in the United States to democracy’s problems can help avert a constitutional crisis here. Already, Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election failed, partly because of the refusal of many Republican officials to participate, and both federal and state prosecutors are investigating his actions. And while the chronic decline of majority rule will not change anytime soon, it is also part of a larger historical struggle to create a more inclusive American democracy.
Still, many experts point out that it is still not clear how the country will escape a larger crisis, such as an overturned election, at some point in the coming decade. “This is not politics as usual,” said Carol Anderson, a professor at Emory University and the author of the book, “One Person, No Vote,” about voter suppression. “Be afraid.”
一些专家仍然希望，美国对民主问题越来越多的关注，可以帮助避免这里的宪法危机。唐纳德·特朗普推翻2020年大选的努力已经失败，部分原因是许多共和党官员拒绝参与，联邦和州检察官都在调查他的行为。
尽管多数决定原则的长期衰落不会在短时间内改变，它也是创造一个更具包容性的美国民主的更大的历史斗争的一部分。
尽管如此，许多专家指出，目前还不清楚该国将如何在未来十年的某个时刻摆脱更大的危机，比如选举被推翻。
“这不是以往的政治，”埃默里大学教授卡罗尔·安德森说，她著有关于选民压制的《一人无票》一书。“害怕”。
Still, many experts point out that it is still not clear how the country will escape a larger crisis, such as an overturned election, at some point in the coming decade. “This is not politics as usual,” said Carol Anderson, a professor at Emory University and the author of the book, “One Person, No Vote,” about voter suppression. “Be afraid.”
一些专家仍然希望，美国对民主问题越来越多的关注，可以帮助避免这里的宪法危机。唐纳德·特朗普推翻2020年大选的努力已经失败，部分原因是许多共和党官员拒绝参与，联邦和州检察官都在调查他的行为。
尽管多数决定原则的长期衰落不会在短时间内改变，它也是创造一个更具包容性的美国民主的更大的历史斗争的一部分。
尽管如此，许多专家指出，目前还不清楚该国将如何在未来十年的某个时刻摆脱更大的危机，比如选举被推翻。
“这不是以往的政治，”埃默里大学教授卡罗尔·安德森说，她著有关于选民压制的《一人无票》一书。“害怕”。
评论翻译
Deirdre
As a poll worker, I have seen the Republican blue collar workers in my precinct become angrier and angrier over the last five years. They actually vibrate and seethe with rage as they wait in line to check in. It seems out of sync with what is actually going on.
Are they bathing in talk radio and Fox News so much that it has affected their perspective? These are people with 6 figure home incomes, they own their homes, they are married. Their children adult have launched. Their perception that the country is coming apart is directly tied to the bubble they choose to immerse themselves and it is tearing us all apart.
作为一名民意调查人员，我看到我所在选区的共和党蓝领工人在过去五年里变得越来越愤怒。当他们排队办理登机手续时，他们实际上会愤怒地颤抖和沸腾。这似乎与实际发生的事情不同步。
他们是否沉浸在谈话节目和福克斯新闻中，以至于影响了他们的观点?这些人有六位数的家庭收入，他们有自己的房子，他们结婚了。他们的孩子已经成年。他们认为这个国家正在分崩离析，这与他们选择沉浸在自己的泡沫里直接相关，这正在撕裂我们所有人。
As a poll worker, I have seen the Republican blue collar workers in my precinct become angrier and angrier over the last five years. They actually vibrate and seethe with rage as they wait in line to check in. It seems out of sync with what is actually going on.
Are they bathing in talk radio and Fox News so much that it has affected their perspective? These are people with 6 figure home incomes, they own their homes, they are married. Their children adult have launched. Their perception that the country is coming apart is directly tied to the bubble they choose to immerse themselves and it is tearing us all apart.
作为一名民意调查人员，我看到我所在选区的共和党蓝领工人在过去五年里变得越来越愤怒。当他们排队办理登机手续时，他们实际上会愤怒地颤抖和沸腾。这似乎与实际发生的事情不同步。
他们是否沉浸在谈话节目和福克斯新闻中，以至于影响了他们的观点?这些人有六位数的家庭收入，他们有自己的房子，他们结婚了。他们的孩子已经成年。他们认为这个国家正在分崩离析，这与他们选择沉浸在自己的泡沫里直接相关，这正在撕裂我们所有人。
Mike L
Our system of government has become a free for all. Minority states which represent a fraction of the whole population of the country, have an outsized representation in the Senate. This was on purpose. But when the filibuster was added it changed everything. Minority states now have twice the power they did before the filibuster. That’s why a few hundred thousand people can dictate the direction of our country. It’s a serious problem and one that must be addressed. The filibuster must go.
我们的政府制度已经成为全民自由的制度。少数民族州只占全国人口的一小部分，在参议院的代表人数过多。这是故意的。但当阻挠议事行动被加入时，一切都改变了。少数民族州现在的权力是阻挠议事行动之前的两倍。这就是为什么几十万人就能决定我们国家的方向。这是一个严重的问题，必须加以解决。必须取消阻挠议事。
Our system of government has become a free for all. Minority states which represent a fraction of the whole population of the country, have an outsized representation in the Senate. This was on purpose. But when the filibuster was added it changed everything. Minority states now have twice the power they did before the filibuster. That’s why a few hundred thousand people can dictate the direction of our country. It’s a serious problem and one that must be addressed. The filibuster must go.
我们的政府制度已经成为全民自由的制度。少数民族州只占全国人口的一小部分，在参议院的代表人数过多。这是故意的。但当阻挠议事行动被加入时，一切都改变了。少数民族州现在的权力是阻挠议事行动之前的两倍。这就是为什么几十万人就能决定我们国家的方向。这是一个严重的问题，必须加以解决。必须取消阻挠议事。
David Baldwin
What we have lurking beneath the surface is dark money. This money leads to intransigent politicians, anti-majoritarian and anti-democratic policies, and perhaps most seriously, tilted the balance of power on the Supreme Court. The Court's resistance to address gerrymandering and voting rights is an American tragedy. The justices, supposedly sworn to defend our constitution, aren't willing to take simple steps to bolster our democracy. They are a shameful lot.
隐藏在我们表面之下的是黑钱。这些钱导致了顽固的政客、反多数主义和反民主的政策，也许最严重的是，打破了最高法院的权力平衡。最高法院拒绝解决不公正划分选区和投票权问题是美国的悲剧。本该宣誓捍卫我们宪法的法官们，却不愿意采取简单的措施来巩固我们的民主。他们是一群可耻的人。
What we have lurking beneath the surface is dark money. This money leads to intransigent politicians, anti-majoritarian and anti-democratic policies, and perhaps most seriously, tilted the balance of power on the Supreme Court. The Court's resistance to address gerrymandering and voting rights is an American tragedy. The justices, supposedly sworn to defend our constitution, aren't willing to take simple steps to bolster our democracy. They are a shameful lot.
隐藏在我们表面之下的是黑钱。这些钱导致了顽固的政客、反多数主义和反民主的政策，也许最严重的是，打破了最高法院的权力平衡。最高法院拒绝解决不公正划分选区和投票权问题是美国的悲剧。本该宣誓捍卫我们宪法的法官们，却不愿意采取简单的措施来巩固我们的民主。他们是一群可耻的人。
Carl Zeitz
I read this week in this paper's report on its latest poll, or in another reputable news source, that 25% of the respondents had not heard of the Inflation Reduction Act, the major climate law, and drug pricing law.
How could you not have heard of that new law unless you were totally disengaged from citizenship, totally ignorant, and ignorant of everything about your government?
You couldn't.
What we have is a nation filled with about 60 to 80 million willfully ignorant adults.
It is not that these people heard even false bad things about the law on Fox. They simply know nothing of it.
Yes, we are in and have been in a civil war now - not for the past seven years but for 20 years.
We have not broken apart geographically as in 1861 but we are entirely broken apart politically, culturally, as a nation.
Half of the nation is blue, enlightened, multi-racial and cultural and cultured, prosperous, forward-looking and forward acting, welcoming, pro-choice and pro-learning and knowledge.
The other is red, backward, reactionary, biased, bigoted, ignorant, fearful, full of hate and loathing for any who are not white, economically based in old economies and aligned against knowledge and its free expression.
You can reunite geography but this - this division more and more appears to be an irreparable dead-end street.
本周，我从本报的最新民意调查报告或另一个著名的新闻来源中读到，25%的受访者没有听说过《通货膨胀削减法案》、主要的气候法和药品价格法。
你怎么可能没有听说过这项新法律，除非你完全脱离公民身份，完全无知，完全不了解你的政府的一切?
你不可能没听说过。
我们的国家充斥着大约六千万到八千万任性无知的成年人。
这并不是说这些人在福克斯上听到了关于法律的错误的负面消息。他们对此一无所知。
是的，我们现在正在内战中，而且一直在内战中——不是过去7年，而是20年。
我们没有像1861年那样在地理上分裂，但在政治上，文化上，作为一个国家，我们完全分裂了。
这个国家的一半是蓝色的、开明的、多种族的、有文化的、有修养的、繁荣的、前瞻性的、有前瞻性的、热情的、支持选择的、支持学习和知识的。
你可以重新划分地域，但这种划分越来越像是一条无法挽回的死胡同。
I read this week in this paper's report on its latest poll, or in another reputable news source, that 25% of the respondents had not heard of the Inflation Reduction Act, the major climate law, and drug pricing law.
How could you not have heard of that new law unless you were totally disengaged from citizenship, totally ignorant, and ignorant of everything about your government?
You couldn't.
What we have is a nation filled with about 60 to 80 million willfully ignorant adults.
It is not that these people heard even false bad things about the law on Fox. They simply know nothing of it.
Yes, we are in and have been in a civil war now - not for the past seven years but for 20 years.
We have not broken apart geographically as in 1861 but we are entirely broken apart politically, culturally, as a nation.
Half of the nation is blue, enlightened, multi-racial and cultural and cultured, prosperous, forward-looking and forward acting, welcoming, pro-choice and pro-learning and knowledge.
The other is red, backward, reactionary, biased, bigoted, ignorant, fearful, full of hate and loathing for any who are not white, economically based in old economies and aligned against knowledge and its free expression.
You can reunite geography but this - this division more and more appears to be an irreparable dead-end street.
本周，我从本报的最新民意调查报告或另一个著名的新闻来源中读到，25%的受访者没有听说过《通货膨胀削减法案》、主要的气候法和药品价格法。
你怎么可能没有听说过这项新法律，除非你完全脱离公民身份，完全无知，完全不了解你的政府的一切?
你不可能没听说过。
我们的国家充斥着大约六千万到八千万任性无知的成年人。
这并不是说这些人在福克斯上听到了关于法律的错误的负面消息。他们对此一无所知。
是的，我们现在正在内战中，而且一直在内战中——不是过去7年，而是20年。
我们没有像1861年那样在地理上分裂，但在政治上，文化上，作为一个国家，我们完全分裂了。
这个国家的一半是蓝色的、开明的、多种族的、有文化的、有修养的、繁荣的、前瞻性的、有前瞻性的、热情的、支持选择的、支持学习和知识的。
你可以重新划分地域，但这种划分越来越像是一条无法挽回的死胡同。
Downtown Verona, NJ
Minority rule is a hallmark Republican family value.
To 2022 Republicans (and most Republicans since the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act passed) - mostly white, patriarchal, Christian and historically privileged - equality and democracy feels like complete oppression to them.
And the 0.1% overlords who own and operate the nation's Supremely corrupted Court and campaign finance corruption system, do their daily best to ensure that democracy will never see the light of American day in order to protect their record profits even though they are essentially creating civil war.
Decent Americans do not vote Republican because Republicans have zero interest in democracy, compromise, bipartisanship, good governance or forging a better unx.
D to go forward; R for reverse…… over the cliffs of oligarchy and civil war.
少数党统治是共和党家庭价值观的标志。
对于2022年的共和党人(以及自1964年民权法案和1965年投票权法案通过以来的大多数共和党人)——主要是白人、父权制、基督徒和历史上享有特权的人——平等和民主对他们来说是完全的压迫。
0.1%的统治者拥有并操纵着这个国家极度腐败的法院和竞选资金腐败系统，他们每天尽最大努力确保民主永远不会出现在美国的阳光下，以保护他们创纪录的利润，即使他们实际上是在制造内战。
体面的美国人不会投票给共和党，因为共和党人对民主、妥协、两党合作、良政或打造一个更好的联邦毫无兴趣。
民主党向前走；共和党则逆向……越过寡头政治和内战的悬崖。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Minority rule is a hallmark Republican family value.
To 2022 Republicans (and most Republicans since the 1964 Civil Rights Act and 1965 Voting Rights Act passed) - mostly white, patriarchal, Christian and historically privileged - equality and democracy feels like complete oppression to them.
And the 0.1% overlords who own and operate the nation's Supremely corrupted Court and campaign finance corruption system, do their daily best to ensure that democracy will never see the light of American day in order to protect their record profits even though they are essentially creating civil war.
Decent Americans do not vote Republican because Republicans have zero interest in democracy, compromise, bipartisanship, good governance or forging a better unx.
D to go forward; R for reverse…… over the cliffs of oligarchy and civil war.
少数党统治是共和党家庭价值观的标志。
对于2022年的共和党人(以及自1964年民权法案和1965年投票权法案通过以来的大多数共和党人)——主要是白人、父权制、基督徒和历史上享有特权的人——平等和民主对他们来说是完全的压迫。
0.1%的统治者拥有并操纵着这个国家极度腐败的法院和竞选资金腐败系统，他们每天尽最大努力确保民主永远不会出现在美国的阳光下，以保护他们创纪录的利润，即使他们实际上是在制造内战。
体面的美国人不会投票给共和党，因为共和党人对民主、妥协、两党合作、良政或打造一个更好的联邦毫无兴趣。
民主党向前走；共和党则逆向……越过寡头政治和内战的悬崖。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
David
Just to be clear, these are both Republican diseases - a minority party wielding undue influence and doing whatever is necessary to hold onto that power, even if it means undermining the very foundations of democracy.
需要明确的是，这两种都是共和党的病——一个少数党施加不正当的影响力，不惜一切代价保住权力，即使这意味着破坏民主的基础。
Just to be clear, these are both Republican diseases - a minority party wielding undue influence and doing whatever is necessary to hold onto that power, even if it means undermining the very foundations of democracy.
需要明确的是，这两种都是共和党的病——一个少数党施加不正当的影响力，不惜一切代价保住权力，即使这意味着破坏民主的基础。
Harry Haff
The intractable issue just may be the Constitution itself. In the 18th century it may have made some sense to fashion it as it now stands. But none of the authors of the document could foresee our modern world.
The entire world was on the verge of the industrial revolution, which is so far separated from 18th century society as to be unrecognizable.
Society now is more separated from the 18th century than the 18th century was from Ancient Rome.
Even the structure of the document now prevents the country from addressing its issues. Can anyone seriously think it is now possible to amend the document?
棘手的问题可能是宪法本身。在18世纪，把它塑造成现在的样子也许是有道理的。但这份文件的作者们都没有预见到我们的现代世界。
整个世界都处于工业革命的边缘，与18世纪的社会相去甚远，面目全非。
现在的社会与18世纪的距离比18世纪与古罗马的距离还要远。
甚至该文件的结构现在也使美国无法解决其问题。有人真的认为现在有可能修改这份文件吗?
The intractable issue just may be the Constitution itself. In the 18th century it may have made some sense to fashion it as it now stands. But none of the authors of the document could foresee our modern world.
The entire world was on the verge of the industrial revolution, which is so far separated from 18th century society as to be unrecognizable.
Society now is more separated from the 18th century than the 18th century was from Ancient Rome.
Even the structure of the document now prevents the country from addressing its issues. Can anyone seriously think it is now possible to amend the document?
棘手的问题可能是宪法本身。在18世纪，把它塑造成现在的样子也许是有道理的。但这份文件的作者们都没有预见到我们的现代世界。
整个世界都处于工业革命的边缘，与18世纪的社会相去甚远，面目全非。
现在的社会与18世纪的距离比18世纪与古罗马的距离还要远。
甚至该文件的结构现在也使美国无法解决其问题。有人真的认为现在有可能修改这份文件吗?
Alice Hoquet
It’s time to reconsider legislation akin to the Fairness Doctrine. Speech may be guaranteed by the constitution, but reach is not.
是时候重新考虑类似于公平原则的立法了。言论可能受到宪法的保障，但言论的影响力却不受保障。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
It’s time to reconsider legislation akin to the Fairness Doctrine. Speech may be guaranteed by the constitution, but reach is not.
是时候重新考虑类似于公平原则的立法了。言论可能受到宪法的保障，但言论的影响力却不受保障。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
David G
I was born during the Eisenhower years, so I’ve seen a lot. That includes the Cuban Missile Crisis, Nixon, Watergate, Vietnam, civil rights, assassination of JFK, MLK, RFK.
But I have never seen anything like this. Trump unleashed an evil force that was probably lurking beneath the surface. And I think we’re really coming apart at the seams.
我出生在艾森豪威尔时期，所以见识了很多。这包括古巴导弹危机，尼克松，水门事件，越南，民权，刺杀肯尼迪，马丁·路德·金，肯尼迪。
但我从来没见过这样的东西。特朗普释放了一种邪恶的力量，这种力量可能潜伏在表面之下。我认为我们真要分崩离析了。
I was born during the Eisenhower years, so I’ve seen a lot. That includes the Cuban Missile Crisis, Nixon, Watergate, Vietnam, civil rights, assassination of JFK, MLK, RFK.
But I have never seen anything like this. Trump unleashed an evil force that was probably lurking beneath the surface. And I think we’re really coming apart at the seams.
我出生在艾森豪威尔时期，所以见识了很多。这包括古巴导弹危机，尼克松，水门事件，越南，民权，刺杀肯尼迪，马丁·路德·金，肯尼迪。
但我从来没见过这样的东西。特朗普释放了一种邪恶的力量，这种力量可能潜伏在表面之下。我认为我们真要分崩离析了。
Rita Rousseau
An excellent look at the structural challenges to our democracy and the danger of the election denialist movement.
Other key issues not addressed:
- Citizens United, the Supreme Court decision that allows for unlimited political spending by dark money groups;
- The fracturing of our media and information climate, with the rise of right-wing talk radio, Fox “News” and then the rise of ghettoizing and rumor-spreading social media, together pushing citizens toward closed epistemic bubbles that no longer share the same view of facts and consensus reality;
- The rise of billionaires richer than entire countries, which, together with points 1and 2, means that a tiny group or even a single individual could distort national, state or local political opinions and election results.
对我们的民主制度所面临的结构性挑战，和选举否决论运动的危险的出色审视。
其他未解决的关键问题：
——联合公民案，最高法院允许黑钱集团进行无限政治支出的裁决;
——我们的媒体和信息环境的破裂，右翼谈话电台、福克斯“新闻”的兴起，以及种族隔离和散布谣言的社交媒体的兴起，共同将公民推向封闭的认知泡沫，不再对真相和共识事实持有相同的看法；
——亿万富翁比整个国家都富有，再加上第一点和第二点，这意味着一个小群体，甚至一个人，就可能扭曲国家、州或地方的政治观点和选举结果。
An excellent look at the structural challenges to our democracy and the danger of the election denialist movement.
Other key issues not addressed:
- Citizens United, the Supreme Court decision that allows for unlimited political spending by dark money groups;
- The fracturing of our media and information climate, with the rise of right-wing talk radio, Fox “News” and then the rise of ghettoizing and rumor-spreading social media, together pushing citizens toward closed epistemic bubbles that no longer share the same view of facts and consensus reality;
- The rise of billionaires richer than entire countries, which, together with points 1and 2, means that a tiny group or even a single individual could distort national, state or local political opinions and election results.
对我们的民主制度所面临的结构性挑战，和选举否决论运动的危险的出色审视。
其他未解决的关键问题：
——联合公民案，最高法院允许黑钱集团进行无限政治支出的裁决;
——我们的媒体和信息环境的破裂，右翼谈话电台、福克斯“新闻”的兴起，以及种族隔离和散布谣言的社交媒体的兴起，共同将公民推向封闭的认知泡沫，不再对真相和共识事实持有相同的看法；
——亿万富翁比整个国家都富有，再加上第一点和第二点，这意味着一个小群体，甚至一个人，就可能扭曲国家、州或地方的政治观点和选举结果。
David G
I’ve read a bunch of comments here about “Lefty Socialism Legislation.”
So I’ll remind you that the Democrats brought you Social Security, Medicare, child labor laws, the FDIC, and countless other laws that help ordinary citizens.
The Republicans have brought us guns and lower taxes on the rich and on corporations.
So, for the “Real Americans,” which programs would you like to personally give up? Social Security? Medicare? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
我在这里看了一堆关于“左翼社会主义立法”的评论。
因此，我要提醒你们，民主党人为你们带来了社会保障、医疗保险、童工法、联邦存款保险公司和无数其他帮助普通公民的法律。
共和党人给我们带来了枪支，降低了对富人和公司的税收。
那么，对于“真正的美国人”，你个人希望放弃哪些项目?社会保障?医疗保险?是啊，我认为你不会放弃。
I’ve read a bunch of comments here about “Lefty Socialism Legislation.”
So I’ll remind you that the Democrats brought you Social Security, Medicare, child labor laws, the FDIC, and countless other laws that help ordinary citizens.
The Republicans have brought us guns and lower taxes on the rich and on corporations.
So, for the “Real Americans,” which programs would you like to personally give up? Social Security? Medicare? Yeah, I didn’t think so.
我在这里看了一堆关于“左翼社会主义立法”的评论。
因此，我要提醒你们，民主党人为你们带来了社会保障、医疗保险、童工法、联邦存款保险公司和无数其他帮助普通公民的法律。
共和党人给我们带来了枪支，降低了对富人和公司的税收。
那么，对于“真正的美国人”，你个人希望放弃哪些项目?社会保障?医疗保险?是啊，我认为你不会放弃。
LaurenceB.
What you really mean is that money has taken over the country.
The decisions of government are not based on public opinion or public good, but on how they will affect the profits of a tiny class of billionaires.
This is how we have lost our democracy through the corruption of our government.
你真正的意思是金钱已经接管了这个国家。
政府的决策不是基于公众舆论或公共利益，而是基于它们将如何影响一小部分亿万富翁的利润。
这就是我们如何通过政府的腐败而失去我们的民主。
What you really mean is that money has taken over the country.
The decisions of government are not based on public opinion or public good, but on how they will affect the profits of a tiny class of billionaires.
This is how we have lost our democracy through the corruption of our government.
你真正的意思是金钱已经接管了这个国家。
政府的决策不是基于公众舆论或公共利益，而是基于它们将如何影响一小部分亿万富翁的利润。
这就是我们如何通过政府的腐败而失去我们的民主。
很赞 1
收藏