-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
Books & arts
文艺板块
Book Review
书评
American politics
美国政治学
Orange warning
橙色警告
《幸存的独裁统治》
By Masha Gessen.
作者:玛莎·格森
Two days after Donald Trump2 was elected, Masha Gessen argued in the New York Review of Books that he was “the first candidate in memory who ran not for president, but for autocrat—and won.” The piece offered advice, such as “Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.”
唐纳德·特朗普当选两天后,玛莎·格森在《纽约书评》中表示,“记忆中,特朗普是第一位不是要竞选总统,而是要当选独裁者的候选人,而且他也获胜了。”这篇文章中提出了一些建议,比如“不要被一些正常的小迹象所迷惑。”
The years since have testified to Mr Trump’s autocratic instincts. He has been more hostile to oversight3 and dissent4, and more demanding of personal loyalty5 and displays of adulation, than any American president in memory. He has spurned6 allies and fawned7 over dictators. In a pithy8 but overstated new book, Gessen (who prefers to be referred to that way) updates and expands on that early warning. Mr Trump, Gessen writes, is qualitatively9 different from any of his predecessors10, given as he is to “ignoring and destroying all institutions of accountability”.
此后的几年证明了特朗普的专制本性。相较于记忆中的任何一位美国总统,特朗普都要更加敌视疏忽和异议,更加要求个人忠诚和炫耀奉承。他摒弃盟友,奉承独裁者。在一本简练但言过其实的新书中,格森(他更喜欢这样称呼)对那条早期提出的警告进行更新和扩展。格森写道,特朗普与所有前任总统都有质的不同,因为他“无视并破坏所有的问责制度”。
The author, who was born in the Soviet11 Union and has written acutely about Vladimir Putin’s Russia, chronicles Mr Trump’s tussles12 with those institutions. The determination of the press to appear objective and balanced, Gessen argues, as well as its weakness for hope, have prevented it from accurately13 describing Mr Trump’s predations— even as it hyped his normal-seeming moments. Pillars of the state, such as the Office of Government Ethics14, were accustomed to compliance15 from the White House and ill-equipped to counter open defiance16. Congress was riven and cowed.
作者出生于苏联,曾经文笔尖锐地描写过弗拉基米尔·普京统治的俄罗斯,他记述了特朗普与这些机构的争斗。格森认为,新闻界想要表现出客观和平衡的决心,以及对希望的向往,使其无法准确描述特朗普的掠夺行径——即使它大肆宣传特朗普似乎很正常的时刻。美国联邦政府道德办公室等政府支柱机构,习惯于服从白宫的指示,而且也没有准备好反击公开的挑衅。国会受到了猛烈的抨击和恐吓。
Civil society and the judiciary have each mounted resistance where they can; but, Gessen maintains, they “function on the assumption that they are partners in an ongoing17 negotiation18”, whereas Mr Trump “sees any attempt at negotiation as an affront19 to his power—something that needs to be quashed at any cost.”On this view, Democrats20 have too often let him dictate21 the terms of political battle. For instance, Gessen derides22 Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, for saying he had a “policy difference” with Mr Trump over the border wall, rather than straightforwardly23 calling the scheme “immoral”.
民间社会和司法机构在力所能及的情况下进行抵抗;但是,格森坚持认为,他们“假定自己是正在进行的一场谈判中的合作伙伴,并基于这样的情况进行运作”,而特朗普“认为任何谈判企图都是对其权力的侮辱,需要不惜任何代价予以制止。”在这种观点下,民主党人经常让他决定政治斗争的条件。例如,格森嘲笑参议院少数派领袖查克·舒默,因为他表示,自己与特朗普在边境墙问题上存在“政策分歧”,而没有直截了当地称该计划“不道德”。
1 autocracy | |
n.独裁政治,独裁政府 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 trump | |
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 oversight | |
n.勘漏,失察,疏忽 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 dissent | |
n./v.不同意,持异议 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 loyalty | |
n.忠诚,忠心 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 spurned | |
v.一脚踢开,拒绝接受( spurn的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 fawned | |
v.(尤指狗等)跳过来往人身上蹭以示亲热( fawn的过去式和过去分词 );巴结;讨好 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 pithy | |
adj.(讲话或文章)简练的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 qualitatively | |
质量上 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 predecessors | |
n.前任( predecessor的名词复数 );前辈;(被取代的)原有事物;前身 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 Soviet | |
adj.苏联的,苏维埃的;n.苏维埃 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 tussles | |
n.扭打,争斗( tussle的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 accurately | |
adv.准确地,精确地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 ethics | |
n.伦理学;伦理观,道德标准 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 compliance | |
n.顺从;服从;附和;屈从 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 defiance | |
n.挑战,挑衅,蔑视,违抗 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 ongoing | |
adj.进行中的,前进的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 negotiation | |
n.谈判,协商 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 affront | |
n./v.侮辱,触怒 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 democrats | |
n.民主主义者,民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 dictate | |
v.口授;(使)听写;指令,指示,命令 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 derides | |
v.取笑,嘲笑( deride的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 straightforwardly | |
adv.正直地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|