【拜登Town Hall談中國】​
​
美國總統拜登2月17日參加了由CNN主辦的一場Town Hall（市政廳討論/辯論）。市政廳討論這種型式在美國非常常見，就是由政治人物直接面對群眾，回答問題。許多國會議員都會定期在自己的選區舉辦這樣子的會議，親自回答選民的問題（但由於疫情，從去年開始許多都改採線上進行了）。在台灣似乎較少有這種公開的辯論或討論機會。​
​
在這場Town Hall當中，拜登談到疫情、最低工資、政黨輪替後的狀況等等，也談到中國及人權議題。而其中和台灣最相關的，當屬他被主持人問到關於中國的人權問題，而他揭露自己和中國領導人習近平過往的談話內容。不過，他在這場講話的狀況並不是很好，有很多地方講不太清楚或口誤，所以在推特上也引起了猜話（？）大作戰。​
​
➤ 白宮逐字稿：https://reurl.cc/NXqLom​
➤ 中國問題片段：https://reurl.cc/0DE49A​
➤ 文字報導：https://reurl.cc/zbApYN​
​
台灣這邊在網路上也已經有很多片段流傳，不過在內容的解讀上似乎有許多不完整之處。這裡有一篇 Translation Matters 翻譯有要緊 的翻譯詳解，推薦大家參考：https://reurl.cc/V38Y7y 。​
​
以下是我們的看法，​
​
他回答跟習近平談話內容的那段，大致上講的有三個重點：​
​
１. 拜登認為習近平做為中國的領導者，跟歷屆領導者一樣，認為中國在歷史上是西方的受害者，而中國必須使用強力的控制來統治，這樣才能夠反映中國價值；​
​
２. 做為一個美國的領導人，拜登理解習近平所認為的這種反映中國價值的統治方式，因為美國的領導人也必須反映他所認為的美國價值；​
​
３. 美國仍然會像過去一樣，持續地在國際上扮演維護人權的角色，尤其是聯合國相關機構。中國方面一直都想要當世界老大，但假設違反人權原則的話，不太可能做到，中國將會面臨反作用力（repercussions），而習近平也知道這點。​
​
上述的內容中，尤以第二點引發許多爭論，因為除了出現明顯重大的口誤以外，語塞以及不流暢的發言也讓人難以理解部分內容，以下我們附上該段的原文，並試著針對此段中的兩項爭議做梳理。​
​
So the central — to vastly overstate it — the central principle of Xi Jinping is that there must be a united, tightly controlled China. ​ And he uses his rationale for the things he does based on that.​
​
I point out to him: No American President can be sustained as a President if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States. ​ And so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uyghurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan, trying to end the One China policy by making it forceful — I said — and by the — he said he — he gets it. ​ Culturally, there are different norms that each country and they — their leaders — are expected to follow. ​
​
But my point was that […] And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic, they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. ​ How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?​
​
🔹 新疆人權議題與文化相對論​
​
許多人在看這段時，把「so the idea I’m not going to speak out against …」（句１：我沒有要對 … 發聲反對的這個想法）和「Culturally, there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow」（句２：文化上，不同國家期待領導人要遵守的常規不同）做連結，認為這是在替中國在新疆的行為，用「不同文化的常規」開脫。​
​
這樣的說法其實是有點過度解讀。如果看過原段落的影片，拜登在句１尾段吃了螺絲，然後忘了回來講上一句話的結尾就接著講下句。如果照逐字稿的字面上翻譯，的確會變成他「沒有」要對中國在新疆、香港、台灣的作為發聲，但這就會完全變成前言不對後語，因為他在此的前一句才說「如果不能反映美國的價值，沒有一個美國總統能繼續坐在總統位上」。比較合理的解讀是，他該句末忘了加像是「… is impossible」之類的語氣，也就是其實他原本要講的是「要我對 … 不發聲的這個想法是不可能的」。這樣一來，後句的「he said he gets it」（習近平說他了解）也能順接，因為這段的旨意是拜登在向習近平闡述美國總統必須得為美國價值挺身。​
​
句２的解讀其實是延續這整段的旨意，提到不同文化下對其領導人的期待也有所不同。這裡除了再一次回應前述美國總統必須反映美國價值精神外，也順便呼應了更前面一點他說習近平的中心原則就是認為中國必須統一且高度地控制，並常以此作為他許多作為的理由。如果各位繼續往後讀，拜登接著說他當時就認為中國會結束一胎化政策，因為他們很排外（xenophobic），不讓外人進來；在這樣的情況下，未來的勞動力將無法維持經濟成長。​
​
我們可以看得出來，這幾個段落都是圍繞著美中領導階層在文化價值上的差異。不過要注意的是，這裡即便闡述了「美中雙方照自己的文化去做事」的脈絡，但是【並沒有】說要去尊重或是接受對方的做法。所以如果要對這段談話下一個註解，其實就是美中雙方的「文明衝突」。​
​
至於對於中國在新疆人權侵犯的態度，拜登自己、他的國務卿布林肯都已經用「種族滅絕」（genocide）來描述，這其實已經是很明確的表態了，因為種族滅絕在國際上的定義是沒有辦法簡單用文化相對論來帶過的。一個是現在具有政策宣示性的聲明，一個是他闡述多年前與習近平的對話內容，哪一個比較能夠作為未來美國相關政策的預測工具，相信大家都知道該怎麼解讀。​
​
🔹 結束一中政策？​
​
另一個引起爭議的是在剛剛提到的句１中，講到了要結束一中政策：「so the idea I’m not going to speak out against what he's doing in Hong Kong … and Taiwan, trying to end the One-China policy by making it forceful …」。​
​
這裡蠻明顯是口誤，因為這幾句的主詞都是習近平（he），而習近平怎麼可能會去結束「一中政策」（One China Policy）？中國只有「一中原則」（One China Priciple），沒有一中政策。支持是口誤的另一個線索是，在這之後拜登第二次說到一中政策時，他句子都還沒說完，就立刻改口成「一胎化政策」（One Child Policy）。根據這幾個段落都在強調雙方在人權、民主價值上的差異，以及拜登過去一年以來的許多公開發言都有痴 … 吃螺絲的狀況，這裡講錯話的可能性是很高的。​
​
▍感想​
​
如果把這樣的談話跟先前的幾個重要談話來對照，例如「兩國關係建立在公平、對等與尊重主權的基礎上」、「美中文明有巨大的差異」這樣的文句，其實美國理解中國的方式有許多基本相同的元素在（大家猜猜看這是誰說的）。我們先前也有說過，美國兩大黨的外交政策觀點其實是很類似的，但大家在辯論的重點在於手段的使用。​
​
最重要的問題一直都是：中共高層（尤其習近平）真的會知道違反人權的後果嗎？美國該如何確保中共須要付出的代價？拜登在這場Town Hall當中並沒有詳細說明，因為他認為這是很複雜的事情，不打算在這個場合用短短幾分鐘來講。​
​
大家就繼續看所謂面對中國的「全政府途徑」（whole-of-government approach）會怎麼發展下去吧！​
​
​
✨ 觀測站推特：https://twitter.com/ustaiwanwatch​
✨ 贊助觀測站：https://ustaiwanwatch.soci.vip/

[時事英文] 言論自由與冠狀病毒
　
在自由的社會中，每位公民都能依照個人的自由意志來行使權利。言論自由讓每位公民都能監督政府，要求政府改變不公不義的法規與政策。
　
In a free society, all citizens must be able to pursue their own paths, set their own goals, and think for themselves. The freedom of speech safeguards these rights as it enables us to challenge and change government regulations and laws we find oppressive and unjust.
　
歷史表明，在缺乏監督機制的情況下，政府的絕對權力將導致絕對的腐化。即便有些言論不合我們的心意，但禁止人們發聲不僅限制了言論自由，也剝奪了人們聽取他人意見的權利。禁止言論，並不能禁絕思想。唯有透過對話與協商，才能達成共識，而使社會進步。
　
History has shown that without the corrective mechanism of free speech, governments would consolidate their powers without regard for the rights and freedom of those whom they ought to serve. To deny people of free speech is a double wrong, because doing so would also deprive people of the right to listen, even though some speech would undoubtedly make us feel uncomfortable. Banning certain speech would not result in the elimination of ideas. It is through engagement and negotiation that we can reach consensus and progress as a society.
　
每個人都應享有批評政府的權利，而無需擔心遭受迫害。這也是當今公民得以贏得諸多權利的原因。言論自由是值得全體人類努力爭取的基本人權。
　
All people ought to have the right to criticize their government without fear of persecution, because it is how we have won the rights we have today. The freedom of speech is a fundamental human right and it’s worth fighting to protect.
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
《紐約時報》報導：
　
Trevor Noah, the host of “The Daily Show,” has won praise on the Chinese internet for his searing criticism of the Trump administration’s mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic. So has Jerry Kowal, an American who makes Chinese-language videos chronicling the dire situation in New York.
　
1. win praise 贏得讚賞
2. searing criticism 猛烈抨擊
3. mishandle (v.) 對⋯⋯處理不當
4. chronicle 記錄
5. a dire situation 可怕的情況
　
因為猛烈抨擊川普政府對新冠病毒疫情的應對不當，《每日秀》主持人特雷弗・諾亞（編按：中國網民給他取了一個暱稱叫崔娃）在中國的網路上備受讚賞。受到追捧的還有郭傑瑞，作為美國人，他製作的中文影片記錄了紐約的可怕情形。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
China’s response to the virus has its own sharp-eyed critics at home, and they have found a vastly different reception. One resident of the virus-struck city of Wuhan who writes under the name Fang Fang documented despair, misery and everyday life in an online diary, and has endured withering attacks on social media. Three citizen journalists who posted videos from Wuhan in the first weeks of the outbreak disappeared and are widely believed to be in government custody.
　
6. response to 回應
7. sharp-eyed 眼尖的；目光敏銳的
8. a vastly different reception 截然不同的對待
9. virus-struck 病毒侵襲
10. document (v.) 記錄
11. endure attacks 忍受攻擊
12. withering 令人難堪的；嚴厲的
13. be in government custody 被政府監禁（或拘留）
　
中國對疫情的應對在國內也引發了尖銳的批評，但這些批評者卻遭到了截然不同的對待。在病毒肆虐的武漢，一位筆名方方的居民用網路日記記錄了人們的絕望、痛苦和日常生活，結果她在社群媒體上遭到了猛烈的攻擊。在疫情暴發的前幾週，三位在武漢發布影片的公民記者失蹤了，人們普遍認為政府把他們抓走了。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
The pandemic unfolded dramatically differently in China from the way it has in the rest of the world — at least, if one believes state-run Chinese media. Chinese news outlets used words like “purgatory” and “apocalypse” to describe the tragic hospital scenes in Italy and Spain. They have run photos of British and American medical workers wearing garbage bags as protective gear. A lot of the same miseries happened in China, but those reports were called “rumors” and censored.
　
14. pandemic 全球性流行病
15. unfold 展開；顯露
16. state-run 國營；國有
17. news outlet 新聞出處
18. purgatory 煉獄
19. apocalypse 末日（天啟）
　
在中國，這場大流行的展現方式與世界其他地方截然不同——至少，如果你相信中國官方媒體的話。中國的新聞媒體用「煉獄」和「末日」這樣的詞來描述義大利和西班牙醫院裡的悲慘情形。它們還登載了英國和美國的醫務人員把垃圾袋當防護服的照片。中國也有很多類似的悲劇，但那些報導被稱為「謠言」而遭到刪除。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
The death of Li Wenliang, the whistle-blowing doctor in Wuhan, on Feb. 6 galvanized many Chinese people into demanding freedom of speech. Online sentiment became much more skeptical, and many young people openly challenged the party’s message.
　
20. a whistleblower 吹哨者
21. galvanize somebody into… 激起；使震驚
22. freedom of speech 言論自由
23. online sentiment 網路輿情
24. skeptical 存疑的；持懷疑態度的
25. openly challenge 公開挑戰（或質疑）
　
２月６日，武漢吹哨醫生李文亮的去世激起了許多中國人對言論自由的要求。網路上的懷疑情緒更多，許多年輕人公開質疑黨的訊息。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
Then the United States and other countries bungled their own responses, and China’s propaganda machine saw an opportunity. Using the West’s transparency and free flow of information, state media outlets chronicled how badly others have managed the crisis. Their message: Those countries should copy China’s model. For good measure, the propaganda machine revved up its attacks on anybody who dared to question the government’s handling of the pandemic. For many people in China, the push is working. Wielding a mix of lies and partial truths, some young people are waging online attacks against individuals and countries that contradict their belief in China’s superior response.
　
26. bungle 弄糟；（笨手笨腳地）把……搞砸
27. propaganda machine 宣傳機器
28. see an opportunity 看見機會
29. manage a crisis
30. transparency 透明度
31. free flow of information 資訊的自由流動
32. chronicle (v.) 記錄
33. rev up sb/sth（使）活躍；（使）積極
34. dare to question 敢於質疑
　
後來，當美國和其它國家搞砸了各自的疫情應對時，中國的宣傳機器看到了機會。中國官媒利用西方媒體的透明度和資訊的自由流動，記錄了其它國家在應對危機時的糟糕表現。他們的訊息是：這些國家應該效仿中國模式。此外，宣傳機器還加大力度，攻擊那些敢質疑中國政府處理疫情方式的人。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
Many of the same people praising Mr. Noah have been slinging arrows and rocks at Fang Fang, whose real name is Wang Fang, for telling the truth about China. Her diary was moderate and personal, and a place where many of us turned for comfort during the darkest hours of China’s epidemic. But after Harper Collins announced plans to publish it in English, tens of thousands of online users descended on her Weibo account, saying she was a traitor for supporting the enemy’s narrative.
　
35. sling arrows and rocks 口誅筆伐
36. tell the truth about 說了關於⋯⋯的實話
37. moderate 溫和的
38. turn to comfort 尋求慰藉
39. the darkest hours 最黑暗的時刻
40. descend on 突襲；向⋯⋯湧來
41. a traitor 叛徒；賣國賊
　
在這些讚美諾亞的人中，有很多卻對真名為汪芳的方方口誅筆伐，就因為她說了關於中國的實話。她的日記是溫和而私人的，在中國疫情蔓延最黑暗的時刻，我們中的許多人都在這裡尋求安慰。但在哈珀柯林斯出版社宣布計劃出版該日記的英文版後，成千上萬的網民攻擊了方方的微博帳號，說她在支持敵人的敘事，是個賣國賊。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
The online backlash has been so severe, Fang Fang wrote on Weibo, that it reminds her of the Cultural Revolution, the decade of political violence and chaos that she saw as a child. The only comfort, she wrote, is that “this type of Cultural Revolution is only conducted in cyberspace.”
　
42. online backlash 網路上的強烈反對
43. the Cultural Revolution 文化大革命
44. remind sb of sth 使⋯⋯想起⋯⋯
45. political violence and chaos 政治暴力與混亂
　
方方在微博上寫道，這種網路叫罵是如此嚴重，令她回想起兒時目睹文化大革命的政治暴力和混亂的十年。唯一的寬慰是「這種文革只在網路空間進行著」，她寫道。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
May everyone in the world have the freedom to criticize their governments without fear. May we, no matter what our opinions are, speak out to safeguard human rights.
　
願世人都能享有言論自由，批評政府時無須擔驚受怕。即便意見相左，都能為捍衛人權而奮鬥。
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
《紐約時報》完整報導：https://nyti.ms/35aI90l
　
圖片出處：https://bit.ly/2y6iN7X
　
★★★★★★★★★★★★
　
時事英文講義：https://bit.ly/2XmRYXc
　
時事英文大全：http://bit.ly/2WtAqop
　
如何使用「時事英文」：https://bit.ly/3a9rr38
　
＃疫情英文

[美國文化觀察]

川普前幾天說, 以後的移民要在移民美國時, 就要會說英文. 經濟學人這篇文章講的挺好: 其實移民移居美國後, 早晚都會說英文的.

在我身上其實也應證了這說法. 旅居美國十幾年, 雖然平常有跟此地的台灣同胞保持互動, 但因為身處在美語環境, 也為了生存下去, 所以我漸漸地習慣說英文, 聽英文歌, 看美國電視, 看原文書. 我也很清楚地意識到, 自己的母語(中文)能力在退化中. 所以我前幾年開始接英翻中的case, 而兩年前也開始藉著寫中文個股分析與開部落格來彌補這問題. 很多時候不是我故意在秀英文, 而是我真的不知道該用甚麼中文字來表達意思了, 或是我覺得用英文能夠更傳神地表達我的想法.

"Rather than refusing to learn English, today’s immigrants actually abandon their first language much more readily than previous generations. German, the language spoken by the president’s ancestors, is a case in point. Germans arrived in America in big waves in the middle of the 19th century. Generations later, they were still speaking German at home; a small number were even monolingual in German despite being born in America. Only with America’s entry into the first world war did German-speakers drop their suddenly unpopular language.

Today the typical pattern is that the arriving generation speaks little English, or learns it imperfectly; the first children born in America are bilingual, but English-dominant, and their children hardly speak the heritage language. This is as true of Hispanics as it is of speakers of smaller languages—and all without a lecture from the White House."

以下是全文:
DONALD TRUMP’s young administration is adept at one particular manoeuvre. Whenever the president is having a terrible time in the press, for some embarrassing statement, interview or imbroglio, the White House announces a far-reaching policy designed to stoke up his nationalist base while infuriating his opponents. In February it was the proposed ban on visitors from seven mainly Muslim countries. Last month it was the announcement on Twitter that he would not let transgender soldiers serve in the military.

In each case, the new policy tends to hurt people who can be portrayed as threatening outsiders to ordinary Americans who work hard and pay their taxes. Yesterday’s announcement to back a months-old plan to overhaul America’s immigration rules falls in the same category. If implemented, it would reward applicants with sought-after job skills who already speak English, at the expense of low-skilled workers without language skills.

This may seem perfectly sensible: after all, skilled immigrants are a good thing. But as an ongoing shortage of farm workers in California shows, unskilled immigrants are just as crucial. Equally, it is a good thing if immigrants speak English. But they need not speak it before arrival: as it is impossible to participate fully in American life without speaking English, the incentive to learn it quickly is overwhelming.

The administration’s emphasis on English skills therefore harks back to an old myth that the linguistic make-up of America, which has been an English-dominant country for a long time, is changing: that the status of English is somehow threatened, especially by Spanish, but more generally by the notion that English is no longer needed in the economy.

The myth goes something like this: today’s immigrants want to come to America to isolate themselves into communities that do not speak English. American policy tacitly encourages this by not being tough enough in requiring English. In the past, immigrants happily learned English quickly; “my grandpa came here from the old country but he refused to speak his old language; he insisted on getting by in his broken English until he was fluent.” But today’s immigrants no longer do so, as multiculturalism has replaced the melting pot.
All of this is wrong. America began as a thin band of English colonies clinging to the eastern coast, vastly outnumbered by speakers of other languages. The foreign-born percentage of the population peaked not last year—the administration likes to talk of “unprecedented” numbers—but in 1890, when the share of foreign-born residents was at an all-time high of 14.8%. This proportion has risen again after declining in the mid-20th century (it stood at 12.9% in the 2010 census). America today has multilingual big cities with their voting instructions in Korean, Chinese and Russian.

Historically, this is the norm rather than the exception: the years from 1925 to 1965, when immigration was almost completely cut off, were unusual. But those born from the 1940s to the 1960s became used to the low numbers of foreign-born residents, regarding this state as normal. That in turn supported a belief that America has always naturally belonged completely to English.
For most of its history, America was precisely the “polyglot boardinghouse” Teddy Roosevelt once worried it would become. That history has turned out very well not just for America, but for English—the most successful language in the history of the world. Along with American power, English has spread around the globe. At home, wave after wave after wave of immigrants to America have not only learned English but forgotten the languages their parents brought with them.

Rather than refusing to learn English, today’s immigrants actually abandon their first language much more readily than previous generations. German, the language spoken by the president’s ancestors, is a case in point. Germans arrived in America in big waves in the middle of the 19th century. Generations later, they were still speaking German at home; a small number were even monolingual in German despite being born in America. Only with America’s entry into the first world war did German-speakers drop their suddenly unpopular language.

Today the typical pattern is that the arriving generation speaks little English, or learns it imperfectly; the first children born in America are bilingual, but English-dominant, and their children hardly speak the heritage language. This is as true of Hispanics as it is of speakers of smaller languages—and all without a lecture from the White House.

[有字幕] Coronavirus | SOUTH AFRICA vs TAIWAN | How Our Lives Have Changed | 武漢肺炎 | 哥哥在南非的生活變了

In this video, I interview my older brother in South Africa and we discuss how each country has dealt with the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as how our lives have changed due to this pandemic. Both South Africa and Taiwan have taken vastly different approaches, which have resulted in varying degrees of success in regards to curbing the spread of the virus.

請多多支持，謝謝！Please support us here:
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thisistaiwan
PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/Thistaiwan

[請訂閱] My other channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCjArF8x9pnulWoxuWPhX_g

If you enjoyed this video, please join us on:

INSTAGRAM:
https://www.instagram.com/this_is_tai_wan/

FACEBOOK:
https://www.facebook.com/thisistaiwon/

[地點] Filming locations:
[台灣] Taiwan
[南非] South Africa

Video quality:
[1080p 60fps]

[我的裝備] My gear:
Manfrotto tripod
iPhone 8
Nikon D5600
Voical Air wireless microphone
MacBook Pro

#Taipei #Taiwan #台灣 #台北 #中國 #南非