英美民主政體遭遇危機 瀕臨崩潰
Two of the great political parties in the west — the Republicans in the US and Labour in the UK — are in a state of near collapse. That, in turn, threatens the health of democracy on both sides of the Atlantic.
西方兩家偉大政黨——美國的共和黨和英國的工黨——瀕臨崩潰，這相應威脅到大西洋兩岸民主體制的健康。
The crises in the Republican and Labour parties are strikingly similar. In both cases, a leader has emerged from the fringes of politics and taken the party in a different and radical direction. The emergence of Donald Trump and Jeremy Corbyn threaten to destroy the electoral prospects of their two parties — and will sow division and ideological confusion long into the future.
共和黨和工黨的危機驚人地相似。在兩個例子裏，都有一名領導人崛起於政治生態的邊緣，將各自黨派帶向了新的激進方向。唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)和傑里米•科爾賓(Jeremy Corbyn)的崛起可能破壞兩黨的選舉前景，將在未來很長時間內造成分歧和意識形態的混亂。
Even if Mr Trump and Mr Corbyn never make it into the White House or 10 Downing Street, their ascendancy is also damaging to the wider political system. Well-functioning democracies need a credible opposition to hold the government to account. But in the UK and the US, that basic function is no longer being properly performed.
即便特朗普和科爾賓永遠不會問鼎白宮或唐寧街10號，他們的崛起也在破壞更廣泛的政治體制。運轉正常的民主政體需要可靠的反對黨來問責政府。但在英國和美國，這種基本功能已不再正常發揮作用。
In Britain, the challenge of negotiating the UK’s exit from the EU cries out for an alert and responsible opposition. The government, led by Theresa May, has managed to acquire a reputation for competence, partly because Labour is such a shambles. Yet, although two months have elapsed since Britain voted to leave the EU, there is very little sign that the May government has any idea of how to handle the issue. Simply repeating “Brexit means Brexit” is no substitute for a strategy.
在英國，談判英國退歐事宜是一個巨大的挑戰，亟需一個警覺而負責任的反對黨。特里薩•梅(Theresa May)領導的政府成功獲得能幹的名聲，一定程度上是因爲工黨非常爛。然而，儘管英國退歐公投已經過去了兩個月時間，但幾乎沒有跡象顯示梅政府知道如何操作這件事。只是重複“退歐就是退歐”代替不了戰略。
A competent opposition would, by now, be all over the May government. It would highlight the infighting among the ministers who are charged with negotiating Brexit. And it would hammer the prime minister for failing to articulate her priorities on crucial issues, such as the trade-offs between immigration and access to the EU’s internal market.
一個稱職的反對黨現在肯定早已把梅政府批得體無完膚了。它會呼籲大家關注負責談判英國退歐事宜的部長們的內訌。它會抨擊梅未能闡明她在一些關鍵問題上的優先度排序，比如移民與進入歐盟內部市場這兩件事之間的權衡。
But Mr Corbyn’s Labour party has failed to do any of this. This may be because Mr Corbyn is actually a secret supporter of Brexit. Or it may simply be incompetence. Either way, the Labour party is failing in its duty.
但上述這些事情科爾賓的工黨全都沒有做到。這可能是因爲科爾賓私底下實際上是支持英國退歐的。抑或工黨可能就是沒有能力。無論哪一種情況，英國工黨都沒有盡到自己的職責。
The situation in the US is more dire. Mr Trump’s idea of opposition is to seize upon any crackpot conspiracy theory circulating on the internet or on talk radio. The Trump campaign is so obsessed with painting Hillary Clinton and the Democrats as “crooked” that it has failed to highlight real problems that have festered under the Obama administration. These include the unfolding disaster in Syria and the worry that the US economy is addicted to ultra-loose monetary policies. In a well-functioning democracy these issues would be at the centre of the presidential election. As it is, they have been lost in an endless series of controversies generated by the Trump campaign.
美國的情況更爲糟糕。在特朗普的觀念裏，反對黨就是要利用互聯網或談話類節目上流傳的任何異想天開的陰謀論。特朗普的競選活動一門心思描繪希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)和民主黨人“不誠實的”形象，以致於它未能揭示出奧巴馬政府治下一些不斷惡化的真正問題。這些問題包括敘利亞正在發生的災難以及對美國經濟沉溺於超級寬鬆貨幣政策的擔憂。在一個正常運轉的民主體制中，這些問題將處於總統大選的核心位置。但實際上，特朗普競選活動製造的沒完沒了的爭議已經將這些問題淹沒了。
The similarities between the Corbyn and Trump phenomena are disguised by the almost comic differences between the two politicians. Mr Corbyn primly insists that he “doesn’t do” personal abuse; Mr Trump does almost nothing else. The Labour leader is most at home in his allotment garden; Mr Trump’s natural environment is a penthouse suite. Mr Corbyn is on the far-left. Mr Trump is on the far-right. Mr Corbyn is an internationalist; Mr Trump is a nationalist.
科爾賓和特朗普現象的相似之處被兩位政客近乎滑稽的差異掩蓋了。科爾賓一本正經地堅稱，他“不會進行”人身攻擊，特朗普則除了人身攻擊以外幾乎不做其他事。科爾賓待在自己的公共花園裏最自在；而特朗普最自在的地方是頂層套房。科爾賓極左，特朗普極右；科爾賓是國際主義者，特朗普是民族主義者。
But, despite these differences, the two leaders have quite a lot in common. Both are “anti-system” politicians. Both have seized control of their parties by mobilising new groups of activists and voters. The Trump and Corbyn activists despise their parties’ old-guards and often have an undercurrent of violence in their rhetoric.
但是儘管存在上述差異，兩位領導人卻有諸多共同之處。兩人都是“反體制”的政客。兩人都利用新的活動人士和選民羣體掌控了本黨。特朗普和科爾賓活動人士都鄙視各自黨內的保守派，言辭中經常隱含暴力。
Mr Corbyn and Mr Trump are also noted for their sympathy towards Vladimir Putin’s Russia — and their scepticism about Nato. The fringes of the Corbyn and the Trump movements also seem to be infected by anti-semitism, perhaps reflecting the traditional suspicion of the far left and the far right that “the system” is controlled by Jews.
還有一點值得注意的是，科爾賓和特朗普都同情弗拉基米爾•普京(Vladimir Putin)治下的俄羅斯、懷疑北約(Nato)。科爾賓和特朗普運動的極端人士也似乎受到反猶太主義的影響，這或許反映出極左和極右派別的傳統疑慮，即“體制”被猶太人控制。
The similarities between the two movements suggest that traditional right-left divisions may no longer be the best way of understanding Anglo-American politics. Instead, the new politics is turning into a confrontation between establishment and anti-system parties. The same pattern can be observed in much of western Europe, with the rise of anti-system parties such as Italy’s Five-Star movement, France’s National Front, Spain’s Podemos and the alternative for Germany. Some of these are described as far right and some as far left. The characteristic they almost all share is a claim that the system is “rigged” and that ordinary people are being trampled by elites. In foreign policy, they tend to be pro-Russian.
兩種運動的相似之處表明，傳統的左右翼分歧可能不再是理解英美政治的最佳方式。相反，新的政治生態正轉變爲建制派與反體制派之間的對峙。隨着意大利“五星運動”(Five Star Movement)、法國國民陣線(National Front)、西班牙社會民主力量黨(Podemos)以及德國的新選擇黨(Alternative)等反體制政黨的崛起，同樣的模式在許多西歐國家都可以看到。一些政黨被描述爲極右翼政黨，還有一些被稱爲極左翼政黨。他們幾乎全都宣稱政治體制“受到操縱”，普通人受到精英人士的踐踏。在外交政策方面，他們往往是親俄羅斯的。
Given the disasters of the Iraq war and the financial crisis, combined with a long stagnation in living standards, it is not surprising that voters in the US and Europe are seeking more radical alternatives. But the standard-bearers of the new radicalism in the US and the UK are leaders who are sadly bereft of constructive ideas, unless you regard protectionism and the destruction of Nato as the keys to the future.
鑑於伊拉克戰爭和金融危機造成的災難，再加上生活水準長期停滯不前，美國和歐洲的選民尋求更激進的選擇不足爲奇。但令人遺憾的是，美英的新激進主義旗手都是缺乏建設性想法的領導人——除非你認爲保護主義和摧毀北約是通往未來的鑰匙。
Instead of introducing creative new ideas, Messrs Corbyn and Trump have merely succeeded in recycling some bad old ones: state control of the economy in the case of Mr Corbyn; and America-first isolationism in the case of Mr Trump. These two individuals may never gain real power. But their rise to prominence is a sign of a real sickness in British and American democracy.
科爾賓和特朗普先生沒有推出新的創造性想法，而只是撿起了一些老掉牙的糟糕點子：科爾賓撿起的是國家控制經濟，特朗普撿起的是美國優先的孤立主義。這兩人可能永遠也不會真正掌權。但他們的崛起表明英美民主體制真的出現了問題。
