俄羅斯公民社會尚未被埋葬

The Moscow School was planned as Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev’s policy of openness allowed the exhumation of the suppressed people, histories and literature of pre-Soviet times and the USSR’s early years. Lena Nemirovskaya and Yuri Senokosov were Soviet intellectuals, she an art historian, he a philosopher; comfortably placed in the official intellectual hierarchy, uncomfortable in their Soviet skins. They were the planners — planning to illuminate how freedom might be used.

蘇聯領導人米哈伊爾•戈爾巴喬夫(Mikhail Gorbachev)的開放政策允許蘇聯成立之前以及蘇聯早期受打壓的人物、歷史和文學作品重見天日，在這種背景下，列娜•內米洛夫斯卡婭(Lena Nemirovskaya)和尤里•塞諾科索(Yuri Senokosov)醞釀創辦莫斯科政治研究學院(Moscow School of Political Studies)。這兩個人是蘇聯時期的知識分子，前者是藝術史學家，後者是哲學家；他們舒適地位列官方知識分子階層，卻對自己的蘇聯人身份感到不自在。作爲學院的規劃者，他們計劃向人們闡明如何利用自由。

They were guided by Georgian philosopher Merab Mamardashvili. “Russia,” he told an American interviewer in 1989, “jumped out of history and committed the metaphysical suicide of trying to bypass reality for the ideal.” The task this middle-aged couple took on was to help Russians, especially the rising generation, to construct a grounded reality of democratic process, civil society, rights and, above all, responsibility.

他們受到了格魯吉亞哲學家邁拉卜•馬馬達舍維裏(Merab Mamardashvili)的影響。後者在1989年對一位美國記者說：“俄羅斯跳出了歷史，試圖繞過現實達到理想，這等同於形而上的自殺。”這對中年人的使命，是幫助俄羅斯人，特別是年輕一代，實事求是地認識民主進程、公民社會、權利，最重要的是責任。

Thus the Moscow School of Political Studies, later the Moscow School of Civic Education, was founded as the USSR crumbled. From the start its funding was largely foreign: a succession of western ambassadors told their governments that here was a centre to which support could be given that would not be wasted or diverted to Switzerland.

因此，莫斯科政治研究學院——後來更名爲莫斯科公民教育學院(Moscow School of Civic Education)——隨着蘇聯解體而成立。從一開始，其資金就主要來自國外：許多西方大使告訴本國政府，支持這個中心的資金不會被浪費，也不會被轉移到瑞士。

Ms Nemirovskaya taught herself English then buttonholed politicians, officials, institution presidents, journalists and corporate bosses to imbue in them the urgency she believed the civic education of Russia required. As throughout the post-Communist world, money from financier George Soros was vital. The school’s success, most evident in the late 1990s and early 2000s, attracted imitation: there are a dozen Moscow School-type institutions in the world now, modelled on the original.

內米洛夫斯卡婭自學了英語，之後，她向政治家、官員、機構負責人、記者以及企業老闆灌輸了一種緊迫感——她認爲俄羅斯需要公民教育。對整個後共產主義世界來說，來自金融家喬治•索羅斯(George Soros)的資金至關重要。學院的成功（最明顯的是在20世紀90年代末和21世紀頭十年初期）吸引了效仿者：現在全世界有12所仿照莫斯科學院建立的機構。

Foreign money paid for most of it, from seminars and conferences to a lively website, all run by dedicated young staff. Seminars were addressed by Russians and foreigners. The former included Yegor Gaidar, the economist and former acting prime minister, and Alexei Kudrin, a previous finance minister. The foreigners included Boris Johnson, London mayor; Lord Mandelson, former UK cabinet minister; Lord Skidelsky, the biographer of John Maynard Keynes; and many more.

國外資金幫助解決了學院的大部分開支，從召開研討會、舉行會議到運營一個活躍的網站，這些都由甘於奉獻的年輕工作人員負責。在研討會上發言的既有俄羅斯人，也有外國人士。前者包括經濟學家、前代總理葉戈爾•蓋達爾(Yegor Gaidar)和前財政部長阿列克謝•庫德林(Alexei Kudrin)。外國人士包括倫敦市長鮑里斯•約翰遜(Boris Johnson)、英國前內閣大臣曼德爾森勳爵(Lord Mandelson)、約翰•梅納德•凱恩斯(John Maynard Keynes)的傳記作者斯基德爾斯基勳爵(Lord Skidelsky)，等等。

The participants — usually well educated, confident, clamouring to be heard — grew more self-assured, less impressed by western attitudes. In one session during Nato action against Serbia in 1999, French policy analyst Dominique Moïsi and I were subjected by the audience — mainly journalists — to a tirade of protests, pointing out that “the west” had attacked a traditional Russian ally (we were reminded that Anna Karenina’s lover, Vronsky, goes off to assist Serbia against the Turks).

研討會的參與者——通常都受過良好教育、自信並且渴望被傾聽——變得更加自信，更不容易被西方的態度所影響。1999年北約(Nato)軍事打擊塞爾維亞期間，在一次會議上，我和法國政策分析家多米尼克•莫伊西(Dominique Moisi)遭到了聽衆（主要是記者）的激烈抗議，他們指責“西方”攻擊了俄羅斯的傳統盟友（我們被提醒說，安娜•卡列尼娜(Anna Karenina)的情人渥倫斯基(Vronsky)就曾去塞爾維亞幫助抗擊土耳其）。

Now the Moscow School has been closed. Identified as a “foreign agent” under the 2013 law that stigmatises non-governmental organisations operating in the field of politics and accepting money from abroad, it struggled to survive — but, shorn of funds, denied venues and faced with a vicious, co-ordinated attack in the pro-Kremlin media, Ms Nemirovskaya and Mr Senokosov were obliged to shut up shop and try to chart a new course.

現在，這家莫斯科學院已被關閉。根據2013年的一條法律，學院被認定是“外國代理機構”。該法律針對在政治領域運作、接受國外資金的非政府機構。學院艱難地試圖辦下去，但是面對缺少資金、辦公地點被拒以及親克里姆林宮媒體的聯手惡毒攻擊，內米洛夫斯卡婭和塞諾科索被迫關閉學院，並嘗試開創一項新事業。

The aFTermath of the murder of pro-democracy activist Boris Nemtsov (another former speaker) is both a good and a drear time to craft a memorial — but not an obituary. The energy powering the Moscow School was a determination on the part of many, more than is now obvious, to grapple with Russia’s historic default[NOT QUITE SURE OF THIS SENTENCE- CLARIFY WORDING?] to authoritarianism.

親民主活動家鮑里斯•涅姆佐夫(Boris Nemtsov)——他也曾在該學院發表演講——被謀殺既使人悲痛，也是樹立一座紀念碑（而非寫一份訃告）的好時機。推動莫斯科公民教育學院的力量，是許多人（比現在所看到的要多）表現出來的、應對俄羅斯歷史上默許威權主義這一現象的決心。

“We have to lift up our heads and liberate independent social forces,” said Mamardashvili, the School’s philosophical inspiration. “When nobody is independent no politics is possible.” Civic politics is still possible. And it will be fashioned by Russians, not — as the Kremlin believes — by foreign plotters.

“我們必須昂起頭，解放獨立的社會力量。”馬馬達舍維裏說，“若無獨立人格，便無民主政治。”

The writer, an FT contributing editor, is chairman of the Moscow School’s advisory council

公民政治仍然是可能的。而且，公民政治將由俄羅斯人所塑造，而非如克里姆林宮所認爲的那樣，由外國陰謀家所塑造。