【世事关心】政府的规模与人们信上帝的程度成反比

2019保守派政治行动大会特别报导

【新唐人2019年03月19日讯】【世事关心】政府的规模与人们信上帝的程度成反比:美国的建立遵循了一个理念,在这个理念的带动下,我们走过了2百多年的历程,使自己的国家成为世界上最强大最繁荣的国家。但今天我们可能得重新审视这个理念,想想它是否真能引导我们实现人生的意义。如果它真的能,我们又将如何把它传承下去?我希望你和我们以及那些美国最优秀的思想家一样,关注这些问题。

美国依然是全球最强大的国家,但是美国是否已经和建立时不同了?

America is still the most powerful country on Earth, but does its very identity face extinction?

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席): “不错,因此我们必须反对社会主义,防止外部势力,比如极端伊斯兰恐怖分子扰乱社会秩序。”

“ Sure, if we embrace socialism or if we allow external elements like radical Islamic

terrorist of such to disrupt our society.”

美国建立在一个理念之上。这个理念是什么?

America was founded on an idea. What is that idea all about?

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“这就带来了有关人类意义的问题。什么样的政治秩序能够让人性得到发展。”

“It raises the question of what it means to be a human, what it means to have an order, a political order that is designed to allow the fulfilment of the human soul and liberty. ”

这个国家能回归到她最初的设计轨道吗?

Can the nation go back to its original design?

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“不是一切都要回到从前。我们离不开现代科技,生活方式已经改不回去了,不是要倒退,而是向上提升。”

Matt Spalding: “It is not about going back to the 18th century, it is not going about getting rid of the technology, and changing our lives. It is not going back at all. It is about looking up.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao): “您觉得美国人能在没有信仰的情况下实现真正的自由吗?”

Simone:“ Do you think America can achieve true liberty without faith?”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“问得好。我觉得个人能在没有信仰的情况下守住自由。但是从政府的角度出发,自由只能建立在天理的基础上。对天理的认识只能来自传统信仰。”

“ This is a great question. I think individuals can adhere liberty without faith. But I think for America, for the American government experience to really work,it has to be grounded on eternal truth. That emanates almost always from faith traditions. ”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“自由钟是美国历史和建国原则的象征。上有一句取自圣经的铭文:‘四海之内人人自由’。”

“which is the iconic figure of American history, of the founding of America, has one verse on it, one statement, and it’s from the Bible: ‘You shall proclaim liberty throughout your land to all its inhabitants’。”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao): 欢迎收看《世事关心》,我是萧茗。《Zooming In》参加了本年度保守派政治运动大会,简称CPAC。我们会见了保守派活动家和意见领袖。他们正在为解决国家的一些重大问题而努力。这些问题包括:边境危机、毒品泛滥、中共的威胁、中东的乱局等。这些问题都很难解决,我们必须审视自己,从美国价值观中寻找答案。国家确实正面临危机,但是真正的危险在于美国人可能会失去自己的特性。美国的建立遵循一个理念,在这个理念的带动下,我们走过了两百多年的历程,使自己的国家成为世界上最强大,最繁荣的国家。但今天,我们可能得重新审视这个理念,想想它是否真能引导我们实现人生的意义。如果它真的能,我们又将如何把它传承下去?我希望您和我们,以及那些美国最优秀的思想家一样,关注这些问题。

This year, [Zooming In] went to the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, better known as CPAC. We met with conservative activists and opinion leaders who are tackling the nation’s biggest challenges: the border crisis, drug epidemic, China threat, turmoil in the Middle East and so on. None of these challenges are easy. But the solution to all these problems ultimately hinges on who we as Americans think we are and what we stand for. Yes, we have a crisis going on in this country, but the existential threat we truly face is the threat to our identity. America was founded on an idea. This idea has carried us for over a quarter of a millennium and made us the most powerful and prosperous nation on the planet. But today, we may need to re-examine whether this idea truly facilitates mankind’s ultimate purpose. If it does, how do we carry the torch forward? I hope you enjoy these conversations as much as we enjoyed engaging with some of the finest minds in the country.

采访Dennis Prager

Dennis Prager是一位保守派电台主播,他的节目在全国播放。他还是保守派非营利媒体PragerU的创办人。

Dennis Prager is a nationally syndicated conservative radio talk show host. He also founded PragerU.

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“自由这个概念的哲学和信仰上的来源是什么?”

Simone: “What is the philosophical and theological origin of the concept of liberty?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“美国有一个自由钟,很可能大多数美国的年轻人都没有听说过了。因为他们没有被教过美国历史,除了一大堆奴隶、偏执狂和种族屠杀的疯子。但是自由钟,这个美国建国历史的重要象征,上面有一段话,摘录自《圣经》的第三部‘利未记’:‘你们要在你们的地上向所有的居民宣告自由’。 美国的创建者们知道自由依赖于神, 神想让我们自由。换句话说,这有点点复杂。但是你的问题非常关键。他们知道人不是天生就好,造就好人是非常困难的。任何否定这一点的人肯定是上了大学的,在大学里学了蠢东西。人们不是天生就相信蠢东西,20世纪的大屠杀和奥斯维辛集中营的事情发生了之后,只有笨蛋才会相信人天生就是好的。国父们知道我们不是天生就好。他们是深受圣经影响的人。所以他们说,看,我们有两个选择:人们要么要对政府负责,要么对神负责。为了拥有自由,我们需要有小政府,所以,人们要在道德上对上帝负责,这就是在美国历史上自由和神是怎么不可分割的。”

“ Sure. There’s a Liberty Bell in America which probably the great majority of young people in America never heard of because they’re not taught American history except that it’s a bunch of slaves and bigots and genocidal maniacs. But the Liberty Bell, which is the iconic figure of American history, of the founding of America, has one verse on it, one statement, and it’s from the Bible: “You shall proclaim liberty throughout your land to all its inhabitants,” from the third book of the Bible, Leviticus. They knew that freedom is dependent upon a God who wants us to be free. In other words, it’s a tiny bit complex, but it’s critically important what you asked. They knew that human beings are not basically good, that it’s very hard to make good people. And anyone who denies that obviously went to college because you have to learn something foolish. It doesn’t normally exist in people to believe silly things. After the 20th century’s genocides and Auschwitz to believe people were basically good is to be a fool. And they knew we’re not basically good. These were people drenched in biblical outlook. So they said, look, we have two choices: people will either be accountable to the government or to God. In order to be free, we have to have small government. So, therefore, they have to be morally accountable to God. That’s how freedom and God are utterly interrelated in American history.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“为什么神想要我们自由?”

Simone: “Why does God want us to be free?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“这个你要问神。我的回答是,当然我不是神,神想要给我们对我们最好的东西。如果神不想要我们自由,他就不会给我们自由意志。”

Dennis Prager: “You’ll have to ask God. My answer, but I’m not God, is that God wants what is best for us. If God didn’t want us to be free, he wouldn’t have given us free will. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“没有信仰的话,美国会达到真正的自由吗?”

Simone: “Can America achieve true freedom without faith?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“没可能。没有信仰什么都不会达成。美国会成为任何其他犹太-基督价值观衰落的地方的样子,那就是左派想要的。他们想要我们成为任何别的地方的样子,他们想要美国成为加拿大和墨西哥之间的比利时,那是我努力工作来对抗的噩梦,就是美国会成为别的国家的样子。”

Dennis Prager:“ It’s impossible. It won’t achieve anything. America will be like every other place with the decline of God, of Judeo-Christian values, and the Bible. And that’s what the left wants, it wants us to be like every other place. They want this to be Belgium between Canada and Mexico. That’s the nightmare that I work against, that America will be like other countries. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“没有信仰,美国不会达成真正的自由,能不能请你在哲学层面再说说?”

Simone: “Can you elaborate from maybe a more philosophical perspective on why America cannot achieve true liberty without faith?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“首先,因为如果没有神,也就没有自由意志。如果没有神,我只不过就是物质。物质是没有自由意志的,我就是星际物质制造的,我和星星是同样的物质制造的,星体是没有自由意志的。(没有神)我也就没有自由意志,没有世俗型的哲学家相信我们有自由意志,如果他相信,他就是不是世俗型的。他们认为是神经的放电让我们做出决定,没有自由意志一说。只有信神的人,才会相信有一个自由意志的存在,是因为有我,Dennis,和我的物质不相关的我。所以第一,自由本身、自由意志,取决于神的存在。第二点,就是建国之父们理解的。只有政府缩小了,人民才会自由。但是只有人们道德上为神负责,政府才会缩小。”

Dennis Prager: “Because I am—well, first of all, we can’t achieve true freedom without faith because if there is no God, there is no free will. If there is no God, then all I am is matter. Matter has no free will. I am made out of stellar matter. Stars and I are made out of the same thing. Stars don’t have free will. I don’t have free will. There is no secular philosopher who believes we have free will, and if he does, he’s not secular. They acknowledge that it’s just a bunch of neurons that are firing that make any decision. There is no free will. Only those who believe in God believe that there is free will because there is a me, a Dennis, independent of my chemistry. So number one, to answer you, freedom itself, free will, is dependent upon there being a God. And number two is the one that the Founding Fathers understood. People can only be free as the government shrinks. But the government can only shrink if people feel morally accountable to God. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“你认为美国的身份认同现在有生存性的危机吗?我是说让美国成为美国的特性的危机?”

Simone: “Do you think there is an existential threat to America’s identity? I mean a threat to what makes America, America?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“完全有。左派担忧全球变暖这样的生存危机,我现在担心左派的生存危机。”

Dennis Prager: “Completely. The Left is worried about the existential threat of global warming, and I am worried about the existential threat of the Left.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):“你是否认为今天的美国仍然能回到国父们定下的路子上去吗 ?”

Simone: “Do you think today’s America can still go back to the path our Founding Fathers.”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“是的,我相信。但就是现在我个人做的事情。我的圣经的五卷本评论,让没有信仰的人们能意识到圣经的伟大。叫做《理性的圣经》,听起来像广告,但是我不在乎。没有人通过写圣经评论致富,所以我有信心说,如果人们读了《理性的圣经》,有很大可能他们会说,嗯,也许真的有上帝。”

Dennis Prager: “Yes, I do believe that. And that’s what my life’s work at this time, just personally, is involved in. My five-volume commentary on the Bible, to make people who have no religious background aware of how great a work it is. It’s called the ‘Rational Bible’, I know this sounds like an ad, I don’t care. Nobody writes a Bible commentary to get rich, so I have no problem in stating that people, if they read the‘Rational Bible’, there’s a good chance they will say, hmm, maybe there really is a God.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “所以你这样想?”

Simone: “So you think that’s the way?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“这是唯一的办法,我们必须这样做,而且我们必须讲出道理。因为我们不能只讲信,我们必须说明为什么要信,离开信仰谈论理和离开论理谈信仰都是错误的。上帝希望我们做理性推理,在《圣经》里专门提到过。上帝希望我们做理性推理,做理性推理必然带来对上帝的信仰。我是通过理性推理获得了对上帝的信仰,我的信仰是建立在理性推理的基础上。”

Dennis Prager: “That’s the only way. We have to. And we have to use reason because we can’t just say believe, believe, believe. We have to say there is reason to believe. Reason without God is as useless as God without reason. God wants us to use reason, God wants us to use reason, and reason necessitates God.I come to God 100 percent through reason. My faith is completely dependent upon reason. I admit it. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “您能解释一下吗?”

Simone: “Can you explain that?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“我不是随随便便就信什么。我需要证据,我要眼见为实,而上帝存在的证据不容置疑。我多次采访过已故保守派政论家Charles Krauthammer。不是有关政治的采访,他完全是不可知论者,彻底世俗的人。他说无神论是最愚昧的,最愚昧的是相信万事万物都来自虚无。他的说法让我感到惊奇,他是完全没有信仰的人。他从未谈到过,我也从未听说过他信什么教,但他懂得,即使从理性推理的角度出发,有神论也比无神论来得更有道理。”

Dennis Prager: “Yeah. I’m not prepared to take anything just on faith. I want to see the evidence. I want to see—the evidence for God’s existence is overwhelming. Charles Krauthammer, may he rest in peace, I interviewed him a number of times, and I didn’t interview him on politics. He was an agnostic, total agnostic, totally secular man, and he said the only stupid idea is atheism. The idea that everything came from nothing is just stupid. I mean, it was amazing the way he put it down, and the guy was a completely secular man, no religion in his life that I knew of or that he spoke of, but he understood that on rational grounds alone, the case for God is much stronger than the case for atheism. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “您是在说上帝存在的证据?比如奇迹?”

Simone: “Are you talking about the existence of God, like miracles?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“奇迹属于信仰的范畴,我完全认为奇迹是信仰的产物。但是对世界起源问题的思考就不属于信仰的范畴,这是理性推理。我承认基督行走于水上是人们的信仰,摩西分开红海也是人们的信仰,这我懂,我明白。但是理性推理的结论是,世界不是偶然产生的,造物主是存在的。”

Dennis Prager: “Miracles are faith. I fully acknowledge miracles are faith. But whether or not the world came about on its own or there was a first cause, that’s not faith. That’s reason. I agree, yes. Jesus walking on water is a statement of faith. Moses splitting the sea is a statement of faith. I get it. I understand that. But that there is a Creator and it didn’t all come by itself, that’s reason. ”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “您为什么认为有反犹主义?”

Simone: “Why do you think there is anti-Semitism?”

Dennis Prager(保守派媒体PragerU创始人):“我对此写过一本书,名为《为什么犹太人招人嫉恨?》。 你的问题很好也很重要。出现反犹主义是因为有人不承认世上有绝对的真理。有人只想为所欲为,而犹太人带来了一位超然的主。这不是犹太人说的,这是基督徒在讨论反犹主义时说的。即使大多数犹太人不相信这一点也没有关系,这是反犹主义出现的根源,反犹是一种独特的现象。世界上有215个国家,只有一个成为了他人消灭的对象,只有一个。犹太国的面积只有新泽西州那么大,这个问题没有人可以回避。许多国家之间矛盾重重,比如印度和巴基斯坦,但是印度人也没有要消灭巴基斯坦,巴基斯坦也没有鼓吹要消灭印度。但是以色列的敌人们,比如伊朗就叫嚣要消灭以色列,原因是什么?反犹是一种独一无二的现象。我书中有答案。”

Dennis Prager:“ Well, I wrote a book explaining anti-Semitism. It’s called “Why the Jews.” It’s—you ask very good and very big questions I might ask. There is anti-Semitism because people hate the fact that Jews brought in a judge into the world. People want to do what they want, and the Jews brought in a transcendent judge. This is not being as a Jew saying it. This is what Christians who have written on anti-Semitism have said. And even though most Jews don’t believe this, it’s irrelevant. This is at the root of it. Jew hatred is unique. There are 215 countries or so in the world. Only one is targeted for extinction. Only one. The Jewish state the size of New Jersey. People have to explain that. You know, a lot of countries hate each other. India and Pakistan hate each other. No Indian is advocating the eradication of Pakistanis. No Pakistani is advocating the eradication of Indians. But the enemies of Israel—look, Iran admits it, we want to exterminate Israel. And there’s got to be a reason. Jew hatred is unique. I explain it in the book. ”

采访Matt Schlapp

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “美国的核心价值是自由(liberty)。告诉我自由(liberty)对你意味着什么?”

“At the center of American values is liberty. Tell me what liberty means to you.”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“ (Liberty)对我来说这意味着神给了我们能力,在我们各自的生活中做出选择。”

“ Liberty to me is a synonym of freedom. And to me that means that God gives us the ability to make choices for our own individual life.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “你认为美国能在没有信仰的情况下达到自由吗?”

“ And do you think America can achieve true liberty without faith?”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“好问题。我认为个体的人可以没有信仰而保持自由,但是我认为对美国整体来说,为了美国的政府系统真正的能运作,它需要根基于永恒的事实,而这个总是萌发于信仰的传统。”

Matt Schlapp: “That’s a great question. I think individuals can adhere to liberty without faith, but I think for America, for the American government experience to really work, it has to be grounded on eternal truths that emanate almost always from faith traditions.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “美国保守联盟这个组织是极力鼓吹小政府的。告诉我为什么一个不断增长,不断搞收入再分配的政府和美国的目的是相左的。”

“ACU is all about small government. Tell me why an ever-more growing, ever-more redistributive government defeats the purpose of America.”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“你在问关于社会主义的问题。社会主义和美国精神不搭调,美国建立的首要目的是允许个人支配自己的生活,不是允许政府支配个人的生活。我认为后一种理念在任何有过尝试的地方都失败了,它伤害人民、伤害穷人、伤害中产阶级,我真的希望美国拒绝社会主义。”

Matt Schlapp: “Well, I mean, eventually—you’re asking a question about socialism. And socialism is not consistent with Americanism. America was established primarily to allow individuals to chart their life and not to have government chart our lives. So I think that type of ideology fails everywhere it’s tried. It hurts people. It hurts the poor. It hurts the middle class, and I really hope America will reject it.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “你认为那些定义美国的关键价值是不是正面临生存危机?”

“Do you think America faces an existential threat as to what makes America, America?”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“是的。如果我们拥抱社会主义,或是我们允许外来的东西,像是极端伊斯兰恐怖分子之类的扰乱我们的社会。是的, 我们面临很多挑战,我们还要担心中国,要担心全世界那些和我们的价值观不一样的人。但是,再说一次,我对我们国家的未来还是有希望的。”

Matt Schlapp: “Sure, if we embrace socialism or if we allow external elements like radical Islamic terrorists and such to disrupt our society. So, yeah, we have a lot of challenges. We have to worry about China. We have to worry about people around the globe that simply just don’t share our values. But, once again, I’m hopeful about the future of our country. And now I’m going to church.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “川普总统说我们绝不会成为一个社会主义国家。但是一些左派的人争论说只要我们还有自由的企业,我们就不会成为社会主义国家。你同意吗?”

“ President Trump pledged that we will never become a socialist country, but some people on the Left argue that as long as we have free enterprises, we aren’t going to be a socialist country. Do you agree?”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“不同意。社会主义不是只关于经济。社会主义是关于政府控制你的生活。你要自由市场,但是也要自由思想。”

Matt Schlapp: “No, I don’t agree. Socialism is not just about economics. Socialism is about the government controlling your life. So you want to have free markets, but you also want to have free minds.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “中国是朋友还是敌手?”

“ Is China a friend or foe?”

Matt Schlapp(美国保守联盟主席):“他们是我们的第一号国家安全敌人。没得说。”

Matt Schlapp: “They’re our number one national security threat on the globe. No question.”

采访Matthew Spalding

An Interview with Matthew Spalding

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “能不能解释一下自由这个概念的哲学和神学起源?”

“ Can you explain the philosophical and theological origins of the concept of freedom?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“这个问题很大。但是今早上我在论坛里说的,我认为关键是我们很多时候谈论自由都是在谈论自由本身。但是其实这个概念背后的东西才是赋予它生命的。西方传统中关于自由的讨论可以回溯到希腊和罗马时代,最后到美国建国,它的概念的发展是基于对人的本质或是人性的本质的思考。你是否认为人性是神造的,人是被创世主佑护的,像是独立宣言里说的那样,哲学角度说我们人有人的本质,人的本质是不同于动物或是物体的。这就引导你思考,成为完整的人,有什么条件。很重要的一点就是自由,有自由去做事,去选择一个人的生活,但是还有,非常重要的,更高层的表达的自由,无论是学术界的思想自由,还是信仰自由,来追求最高,最重要的东西。但是从一般意义上来说,我们也要认识到,真的实现自由,是一种超越的意义,一种超越于我们自己的意义。在我们自己之外, 比我们更完美。如果你能拥有它,就超过了对于自我的热情,超越了私。我认为这还只是旅行的起点,这会引导你认识更高的,信仰告诉我们的那些东西。”

Matthew Spalding: “That’s a very large question. But the way I put it in my panel this morning, and I think the key thing to it is oftentimes we speak of freedom or liberty as a thing in and of itself, but it’s really—what’s the grounding behind it that really gives it life. And the argument really of the Western tradition going back to the Greeks and the Romans, and eventually up to and including the American founding, was that the development of liberty is based on as assumption of what man is or what it means to be human grounded in human nature, whether you understand that nature to be theological creation and we are endowed by our creator, as it says in the Declaration of Independence or if you understand it in a philosophical sense that we have a nature, and the nature of being human is different from the nature of being an animal or being a table, right? And that puts you on this other road to, well, what is required to fulfill that nature to be fully human. And a crucial aspect of that is freedom, freedom of being able to do things, to choose one’s life, but also, crucially, to have freedom of higher expressions, whether it’s intellectual freedom in the academic sense or especially religious freedom to pursue an understanding of the highest and most important things. But even in the general sense that I think we must understand it, what we must have for it to be truly liberty at all is a sense of the transcendence, that there is something—setting aside for a moment what it might be—but there’s something larger than us. There’s something outside of us. There’s something that is more perfect than us. And if you have that, that has the effect of kind of moderating your individual passions and your sense of it’s all about me. And that–I think that’s the beginning of the journey, if you will. And the fulfillment of that then takes you down that path, I think, towards higher understandings of what revealed religion tells us.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “你认为没有信仰能实现真正的自由吗?”

“ Do you think we can achieve true liberty or freedom without faith?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“不能。我认为问题是多大程度上,多具体的范围内,我们需要自由。但是即使是在最基本的意义上,比如说,看看独立宣言,它就可以看成是非常神学化的文献。造物主造的所有人都平等,人生来被赋予的自由,这文献讲的是神的眷顾。但是你也可以解读它是非常普遍意义的,不一定是基督教意义的。”

Matthew Spalding: “No, I don’t think you can. I think the question is how much and to what specificity do we need it. But even at the most basic sense, for instance, if you take the Declaration of Independence, you can read that as a very theological document. We are all created equal, man in endowed with rights, it speaks of divine providence. But you can also read it in a very general sense of a creator, theological understanding that’s not specifically, say, Christian.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “一种自然法则类型的东西。”

“ A natural law type kind of thing.”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“是的,是一种自然法则,自然神学。但我想说的是,你不能读那份文件,在任何有意义的意义上从它中解脱出来,而不能有一个我们所要做的基本的外表,我们称之为信念,神是真实存在的。我们之外还有比我们更伟大的东西超越我们。如果不是这样,如果没有这种可能性的话——就变成了人对人的力量的较量,只是人的较量。这非常令人沮丧,但它也不利于实现我的想法,即使是在自然的意义上,它意味着只有人类。只有人类还不完整。这是一个非常小,非常自私的自由的概念,我认为自由的概念根本不是它在几千年前的希腊和罗马时期发展起来的。自由确实失去了其内涵。现在,你可能会做什么——这种信仰可能会具体要求什么,或者它可能意味着什么,或者它的内容的细节,这实际上是脱离了是政治领域,教会和国家分离的方式实际上是一个好的概念。它创造了我们必须认识到这种普遍信念的框架。但这些细节留给你和你的教会,以及你的信仰。政府和政治的工作仅仅是保护这一点,同时也是看到它蓬勃发展。从这个意义上说,它非常友好,尤其是基督教,它对每个人都如此吸引。在上帝的眼中,每个人都是平等的,每个人都有同样的希望和机会来实现他们的信念。”

Matthew Spalding: Yeah, kind of a natural law, natural theology. But my point is you really can’t read that document and get liberty out of it in any meaningful sense without having a basic semblance of what we would call faith. Right? There is a God. There is something outside of us that’s greater than us that transcends us. And if you don’t have that, not only do you have the possibility of—well, it’s kind of man versus man and force. But it’s also just you. It’s very disheartening, but also it’s not conducive to fulfilling what I think, even in just a natural sense, what it means to be human. You’re not complete. And it’s a very small, a very selfish notion of freedom and liberty, which I don’t think was at all the idea of liberty intended as it’s developed over all these thousands of years back to the Greeks and Romans. It really loses its content. Now, what you might—what that faith might specifically require or what it might mean or the details of its content, that’s actually left, not to the political realm, this is the way in which the separation of church and state is actually a good concept. It kind of creates the framework by which we have to recognize that general sense of faith. But then the particulars of that are left to you and your church and your faith. And the job of government and politics is merely to protect that but also to see it flourish. And in that sense, it’s extremely friendly, especially to Christianity, which is so much drawn towards every individual. Everyone is equal in the eyes of God, and everyone has the same hopes and opportunities in fulfillment of their faith.

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “您觉得美国价值观,或者说美国的基本建国理念,面临生存危机吗?”

“ Do you think there’s an existential threat to America’s principles, like what makes America, America?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“确实,这个危机早就存在了。说到这个问题。林肯在他的早期演讲中做过论述。他说外部力量不可能击败美国。哪怕当时的欧洲强国也做不到,生存危机不会以外敌入侵的形式出现。林肯说,摧毁国家的力量只会来自内部。民主的共和国的生存,我们国家的永续存在取决于我们的信仰。如果我们不再有正的信仰,如果我们不再尊从正的信仰,国势就会衰弱下去,国力会下降,国家可能还会存在,但会变得衰弱,会变得名不副实。我们的威胁来自道德层面、学术层面。 美国的传统价值观正越来越多的被一种道德相对论取代,不承认普遍真理,只讲个人的,主观的道德标准。用历史相对主义厚今薄古,否定传统价值观对现代社会的指导意义。现代学术、现代文化和媒体都在蚕食这些思想,如果你认为,如果我们的文化氛围中,一直在争论《宪法》到底如何,这其实并不重要,真正的问题是,如果我们认为有些事情是我们所知的,比如所有的人生来平等,我们做不到这一点,这就是真正的问题所在。如果不了解那些基本的东西,就像失去了轮子的汽车一样。如果是这样的话,我们的社会,我们的政治文化都将面临危机。”

Matthew Spalding: There is, there definitely is. It’s been developing for some time. And the threat here is not—let me use a quote. Abraham Lincoln, in one of his early, famous speeches said that no other country will defeat us. No country in Europe could come here and take a drink out of the Mississippi. That’s not how it’s going to happen. If we’re going to die, Lincoln said, we will die by suicide, which is there’s something about a Democratic Republic in that sense that our continued existence, our continued survival depends upon what we believe. And if we come to the point where we no longer believe these truths and we don’t live by them, then, yes, we will decline and this great nation will be something less that might exist, but it won’t be the same thing. And so the threat here is an intellectual, moral threat. More and more, a deeper understanding of our ideas has been replaced by a sense of relativism that there’s no truth, it’s merely relative what you think, what I think, and historicism, that ideas are—what we think today and what we think in the past, well, those are old ideas and we don’t need to believe those anymore. The modern academy, the modern culture and the media have really eaten away at these ideas to the point where if you think there’s—if we as a culture believe there’s—well, the Constitution, that’s always debated, that’s not important, but the real problem is if it goes behind that to say that the idea that there are things we can know, like all men are created equal or if we can’t know those fundamental things, then it’s like losing the wheels on your car. You’re in an extremely dangerous spot as a political culture, but also as a society.

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “因为美国的建立是基于一个理念。如果人们不再坚持这一理念?”

“ Right. Because America is founded on an idea. If that idea is no longer believed?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“确实有可能。 而且这一理念还有可能被歪曲。我认为人性中包含对真理的渴求。但这种渴求往往被压制。或者不见容于学界,或者于某种文化相悖,人们没有追求真理的意愿。人们只关注流行文化,干他们自己的事业,或者做其它的事情。”

Matthew Spalding: “Well that, but also if the idea becomes something else. So I believe there is a natural yearning in the human soul to know the truth of things. But more and more that that’s suppressed or the academy doesn’t teach that or our culture doesn’t uphold that, people look elsewhere. And they look to pop culture, they look to some cause or whatever it might be.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “您相信建国原则能促进人类福祉吗?”

“ So do you think, fundamentally, the founding principles of this country facilitate humanity’s ultimate purpose?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“ 爱国有种种理由,或者出于爱某一个事物,或者出于乡土情怀。但美国的伟大在于她超越历史的建国理念。美国的出现是建国理念的胜利。 南北战争的胜利也要归功于对建国理念的坚持。这些理念直到今天都没有过时。在这个问题上没有模糊的空间。如果建国理念不对的话,一切就失去了根本。连建国以前的历史都要被否定了。建国理念是对的,不仅仅是从历史的角度上看。建国理念是有关人生的某些基本问题的答案。它讲了在什么样的政治秩序下,人才能实现人性和自由。我认为这一点直到今天也没有改变。问题只在于今天的人们如何去复兴传统。”

Matthew Spalding: “There’s—on the one hand we can say we love America because of this particular thing, or I’m from here, or I live here, but what’s really great about it is the sense in which it transcends history. It makes a claim that these things are true, they were true in 1776. They were true at the Civil War. They’re true today. Either that’s true or it’s not. If it’s not true, then where are we? It wasn’t true before either. But if it is true, it’s not merely historically true. It raises the question about what does it mean to be human. What does it mean to have an order, a political order that’s designed to allow for the fulfillment of the human soul and liberty. I think those truths are still true today as much as they were then. And the question is how do we revive and rekindle all that.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):  “美国还能回到国父们定下的正轨吗?”

“ Can today’s America still go back to what our Founding Fathers set up?”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“我相信能,但不是完全回到从前。有人可能会误以为一切都要回到过去,那就是一种错误认识了。不是要整个回到18世纪。不是要放弃现代的科技,或者改变今天的生活方式。不是在物质形式上回到过去。而是在精神实质上向上提升。人的天性中就包含着自决,自主、和自由等精神内涵。我相信是这样。国父们只不过是在政治文件中,表达了他们自己对这些精神内涵的认识。人们当然有可能回归到自己的本性上去。问题只在于具体的作法,或者说如何唤醒人们的天性。对某一个具体事的辩论往往会变得政治化。或许某些事件会成为唤醒人们宗教意识的契机,我认为这是绝对可能的。我们身处乱世,人们生计艰困,政治上的对立日益加深,政治斗争日渐激烈,我认为,这个大环境给回归传统理念创造了条件。”

Matthew Spalding:“ Well, I think the answer is yes. But it’s not going back is my point. Because when we say go back, people—it means historically going back. Well, no, that’s not what we

mean. It’s not about going back to the 18th century. It’s not going about getting rid of technology and changing our lives. It’s not going back at all. It’s about looking up. If there’s a natural sense in the human soul to know those things, which means to rule ourselves, to self-govern, to make our own decisions about the most important things. If that is true, and I think it is true, I think the Founders were right about that because it was true a long time before they wrote about them, then there’s always a possibility of recovery. And the question is where do you go or what taps into that. It often becomes a political debate or debates over a particular thing. But also something that—but also revives a religious sense, an awakening, there might be events that shape that. But those things I think are always possible. And in a time of turmoil, which we have today, things are getting more difficult, the battles are getting more intense and more divisive, that I actually would argue, oddly enough, is a fertile ground for having a serious recovery of the most important ideas.”

萧茗(Host/Simone Gao):   “我们节目的时间有限。谢谢。我们以后再叙。”

“ I want to know about that later, but today we probably don’t have time.”

Matthew Spalding(Hillsdale学院教育系主任):“谢谢!”

Matthew Spalding: “Thanks so much.”

end

==================================================

Producer:Simone Gao

Writer:Joel Slaughter,  Simone Gao

Editors:Julian Kuo, Bonnie Yu, Frank Lin, Bin Tang, Melodie Von, York Du

Cameraman: York Du, Teddy Lin, Ken Li

Narrator: Rich Crankshaw

Transcription: Jess Beatty

Translation:Greg Yang,  Juan Li, Xiaofeng Zhang, Frank Yue

Cameraman:York Du,  Jimmy Xie

Special Effects:Harrison Sun

Assistant producer: Bin Tang,  Merry Jiang

Feedback:ssgx@ntdtv.com

Host accessories are sponsored by Yun Boutique

New Tang Dynasty Television

《Zooming In》

March,2019

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVWMVBg1RPrDlakdmbyTKBA

https://www.facebook.com/ZoomingInShow/

相关文章
评论