Showing posts with label Comment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Comment. Show all posts

Monday, August 17, 2026

President Obama’s Remarks at the Opening of the Obama Presidential Center

 PRES. BARACK OBAMA: Hello, Chicago! Sweet home Chicago. Please have a seat.

Thank you, Punihei, for that outstanding introduction.

President and Mrs. Bush, President and Secretary Clinton, thank you for being with us today, and for your devotion to our country.

And President and Dr. Biden, thank you for your steadfast partnership for eight years.

Joe, we started as running mates and ended as family. And we would not be here without you, and we are grateful.

To our amazing foundation staff and our amazing board, to Governor Pritzker, Mayor Johnson, thank you for making this center possible.

To congressional leaders and foreign dignitaries who have made the trip, I cherish our partnership together and all we got accomplished together. Thank you.

To Michelle, she did me wrong. (Laughter.) She wouldn’t let me see her speech. She knew she was going to mess me up, and she did it anyway. (Laughter.) But she’s always made me better, and I could not be more grateful.

And to Sasha and Malia, what can I say? You mean everything to me.

More than 40 years ago, on a late summer afternoon in 1985, I arrived here in Chicago, entering the city through the very spot where this center now stands. I can still picture myself heading down what was then Cornell Drive in a janky used car that I’d bought in New York, with all my worldly possessions stuffed in the trunk and the back seat, so I really couldn’t see out of the rear view mirror, and I was a safety hazard. (Laughter.)

And I was 23 years old. I’d just been hired by a group of churches on the South Side to help organize a part of the city that had been battered by steel plant closings and chronic neglect. And I didn’t have much organizing experience, didn’t know anybody in Chicago, but I had been inspired by the Civil Rights movement, and I knew I wanted to make a difference.

And although I wasn’t sure exactly how I was going to do that, I was possessed with this abiding faith that if we could give people more of a say in the forces that govern their lives, if we could bridge some of the differences that drove us apart, then we could build an America where everyone counts, and everyone has a fair shot, and everyone belongs, even a mixed race kid with a weird back story and a name nobody could pronounce.

And it was here in this city, a city of broad shoulders, that I found what I was looking for. Day by day, block by block, I got to know the people who lived here, their hopes, their dreams, their tragedies, and their triumphs. I witnessed their resilience in the face of hardship and the quiet heroism of a single mom raising her kids and sending them to college on a secretary’s salary, or the priest electing to stay in the city and open his doors to at-risk youths, even as most of his flock had fled to the suburbs.

I learned that leadership has less to do with titles or rank or chasing attention than with helping others find their voice, reaching their potential. And sitting around people’s kitchen tables or on their back porches, spending time in church basements, in barber shops, I was reminded that everyone has a story to tell, if you just care to listen, sacred stories full of courage and humor and grace, and that each of those stories in some way connected to my own.

In other words, I found my purpose here, and I fortified my faith here. And I found my community here, friendships that would last a lifetime. And I found a girl from the South Side, who has been my greatest blessing.

Michelle and I, our wedding reception was over at South Shore Cultural Center. You could walk from here. Our daughters were born right down the street. This is where we bought our first home. This is where our kids took their first steps. This is where I launched my candidacy for the Illinois state senate over at the Ramada Inn on Lake Shore Drive — (laughter) — serving pretzels and soda, embarking on the path that, ultimately and improbably, led to this day.

For me, this center could not be any place else. It is an expression of thanks, an acknowledgement that so much of what I hold most dear, I owe to the people of this city and the people of these surrounding neighborhoods.

And it’s why we designed the center not to be some lifeless mausoleum — I am too young for that — not just a place to see Michelle’s dresses, although I understand that will be the top attraction. (Laughter.) We wanted it to be a vibrant, living celebration of community, where we can learn together and share the joys of art and music and sport and play, because it’s in those moments that we’re reminded of our common humanity and strengthen the bonds of trust that not only make our lives richer, but make our democracy stronger.

We also wanted this center to be a celebration of the extraordinary public servants, many of whom are here today, that made this journey possible. Some of you helped get me elected. Some of you, I had to talk into joining my administration. Some of you were seasoned veterans who helped show a rookie president the ropes, but a lot of you were younger than I was when I first drove into this city.

We’re all a bit older now. Many of you have children of your own, even grandchildren, but the passage of time has only deepened my admiration for your talent and your dedication and your skill. It’s only deepened my gratitude for how much you and your families sacrificed to make this country better.

When you visit this center today, or in days to come, I hope you see yourselves and your hard work reflected in every exhibit. And I hope you take pride in what we accomplished together. You made that happen.

Now, of course, we did not accomplish everything we set out to do. No administration does. Some of the exhibits reflect unfinished business, in some cases, my own shortcomings and mistakes, in some cases, because, as a sign I kept on the Resolute desk read, hard things are hard. And that’s especially true in a big, raucous, diverse, argumentative democracy like the United States of America.

Everybody’s got an opinion, and that means getting stuff done involves reconciling the demands of a couple of hundred million people. Democracy can be frustrating. It can be slow. It can be inefficient. And yet more than anything, I hope this center will serve as an affirmation of just how special, how precious our democracy truly is, and remind us what we can achieve when we embrace our shared responsibilities as citizens.

And since we’re a few weeks away from America’s 250th birthday, it is worth remembering just how radical the whole idea of self-government really was back in 1776. To that point, human history was a tale of conquest and caste and rigid hierarchies, a world where the strong dominated the weak, where power and wealth and status flowed through lineage and the many were ruled by the few.

But out of the fire and steel of a revolution, a different story took flight on this continent, a declaration that we are all created equal, endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, and that in the newly independent United States, there will be no kings or lords, no serfs or subjects, but only citizens, each of us free to pursue our own version of happiness and able to determine our collective fate through an elected representative government.

It had not been done. And because it hadn’t been done before, the success of this experiment was never a given. In forming our union, the founders fell terribly short of the Declaration’s promise, leaving slavery intact, allowing states to restrict the franchise to white men who owned property, but in drafting a constitution and a bill of rights, they did have the foresight, the genius to provide us with a framework that allows each generation to make our union more perfect.

And over more than two centuries, through petitions and protests, marches and strikes, moral appeals from the pulpit and conversations at the family dinner table, men and women from all walks of life of every color, every faith, every region took up the cause of democracy and made it their own, until “We the people” came to include not just some of us, but all of us.

And that’s why the story we tell in this building begins not with Michelle’s origins or my origins, but with our nation’s, with the founding era print of the Declaration of Independence, and a pin and ink stand used by Frederick Douglas, Lincoln’s bible and a pamphlet by Ida B. Wells, suffragists’ buttons and a hard hat worn by FDR’s labor secretary, Frances Perkins.

And it’s why the exhibits here focus not just on policies but on the shared values that make democracy possible, a belief in the intrinsic dignity and worth of all people, and that no one is above the law or beneath its protection, a belief in checks and balances in our government and an accountability that comes with an independent judiciary and a robust, free press.

A belief that our military and law enforcement owe allegiance not to any president or political party but to the people and our Constitution.

A belief in the peaceful transfer of power after the people have spoken in fair and free elections, recognizing that in a large, complicated society like ours, no group or faction gets its way 100% of the time.

And a belief that qualities of character, honesty, integrity, kindness, compassion, a sense of duty and honor, those things matter in our public dealings, just as they do in our private lives.

These are the values and traditions I believe in, and they are not Republican or Democratic values. They’re American values we can all share, regardless of party, values every president here today, as different as we are, has tried our best to uphold, values that John McCain and Mitt Romney believed in, no less than I did.

It is our greatest inheritance, the story of America at its best, because it reflects a basic faith in the decency of our fellow citizens and the possibility that despite all of our differences, we can see each other and understand one another and make common cause together.

That’s what I hope every visitor to this center takes away from their experience. And that’s why, if you come for a day and you don’t have time to see everything, I would urge you to skip the clips of my speeches — you have heard them all before — in favor of the stories of those ordinary citizens who helped make that change happen.

The cancer survivor who feared rising premiums would force her out of her home and was brave enough to speak out about it, she’s why we pushed so hard for health care reform.

The small business owner trying to keep the lights on, the teenage girl who told me she was worried her dad might lose his job in the auto crisis, they’re why we focus so relentlessly on pulling our economy back from the great recession.

The wounded warrior overcoming debilitating injuries, the gay Air Force major serving her country, even when forced to hide who she was, they’re why we worked to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and care for those who have worn our country’s uniform and do right by our military families.

It’s their voices that led to our successes.

And while going through the exhibits, I’d also ask you, listen to the voices of people around the world who have been inspired by American ideas.

Yes, America has made its share of foreign policy mistakes. Our actions have not always matched our rhetoric. We’ve learned that we can’t solve every conflict or solve or stop every atrocity around the globe, but at our best the United States has been an undeniable force for good in the world.

And what I heard on every continent as President, is that when American foreign policy lives up to our highest ideals, when we champion human rights and democracy and the sound stewardship of our planet, when we take the lead in eradicating disease and feeding the hungry and educating children, when we encourage cooperation between nations, instead of trying to dominate and bully and squeeze every advantage, just because we can, and most of all, when we show through our example here at home, that even a country as big and diverse as ours can make democracy work, it turns out all nations, including ours, become more prosperous and secure, and the world gets a little bit brighter.

I recognize it’s been almost a decade since I left office. In that time, we have lived through more war and a terrible pandemic, economic disruptions, mass protests, backlash against mass protests, political conflicts that have shaken the very foundation of our democracy.

We’ve witnessed a technological revolution that promises remarkable discoveries, could revolutionize medicine, but is also accelerating inequality that puts all the world’s information in the palm of our hands, but somehow makes it harder for us to tell a truth from a lie, that connects us instantly like never before, even as it makes us more distrustful and more withdrawn and more fearful and more isolated from each other.

It is a lot. For millions of people in this country and around the world, the future feels uncertain, the ground unstable beneath our feet. And as algorithms keep feeding us a steady stream of distraction and outrage, as only the loudest, most extreme voices get attention, fanning our prejudices, appealing to our basest, most tribal instincts, it’s tempting to give in to cynicism and even despair, to stop trying.

We start thinking that appeals to democracy and civic participation are corny and old-fashioned and boring and naive, that the very idea of working on behalf of the common good is a sucker’s bet, and that in order for us to win, somebody else has got to lose.

I get it. I am not immune to anger or doubt, but I do know this: When we lose faith in each other, when we stop believing that voting matters, that citizenship matters, that our collective voices matter, that how we treat each other no longer matters, and we give away our power to decide our own futures, we open the door to the most ruthless, or the most careless, or the most fearful among us, who see some groups and some people as more equal than others, and see government as nothing more than a way to divvy up the spoils and punish enemies and keep those who are different in their place.

I do not believe that is the story of America that prevails in the end.

I don’t believe it, because for us to give up, for us to give in now, after all this country has been through, to cynicism and division would be a betrayal of our founding ideals, a betrayal of our faith.

And I remain convinced that the overwhelming majority of Americans feel the same way, that as unsettled as we are, people aren’t looking for perpetual anger and division. They are looking for fairness and common sense and mutual respect, that deep in our gut we want to find a way to turn towards each other again, not further away.

I believe this because I’ve seen it all across our country, in cities that have worked together to reclaim their streets from crime, in rural communities that have rebuilt their economy, in businesses that are finding new ways to make housing affordable, and those ordinary people in the Twin Cities who braved frigid temperatures, risked their own safety standing shoulder to shoulder to look out for their neighbors, and sometimes look out for strangers, because they knew that was the right thing to do.

I’ve seen it, and I’ve seen it in a new generation of leaders here and around the world, like Punihei and Addison, leaders who are determined to make our governments and our economies and our societies work for everyone. Obama Foundation leaders like Hannah, a Food Corps member from rural Ohio, who is helping ensure every child has access to at least one nourishing meal; or George, an entrepreneur whose nonprofit helps get unused, unexpired medicine, often at no cost to people who need it; or Zuzana, a human rights lawyer in Poland, who’s won more than 30 landmark cases.

There are thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of these young people out there making a difference right now. And this center is devoted to lifting up their stories, giving them the tools and support they need to expand their impact, for while our work is nonpartisan, we are not values neutral. We have a point of view.

The exhibits in the center are not meant to evoke nostalgia for some gauzy, bygone era, some unattainable past that we can dream about, and say, oh, we miss you, Barack. They’re meant to remind us of who we can be, to remind us of what’s possible, so we can forge ahead, clear-eyed and confident, and do the work that still needs to be done.

We can learn from the past, but America’s story isn’t frozen in the past. It has chapters yet to be written, not by one person or a few people, not by Barack and Michelle, or anybody with a fancy title or a high office, but by all of us.

One of the things a lot of presidential libraries now have in common is a replica of the Oval Office. And if you take a peek at the one inside this building, you will see some objects that carried some special meaning for me during the time that I was in office.

There’s a program that a friend from the South Side gave me that he had retrieved from the 1963 March on Washington. He was there. There’s a Norman Rockwell painting of the Statue of Liberty with workers hanging on ropes burnishing the torch that she holds aloft.

And on the road, you’ll read words from some of America’s greatest leaders, including a quote that inspired that arch that you see right there at the south end of the plaza by Theodore Parker. “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”

It’s a quote that was often invoked by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., but it originally comes from a Boston minister’s sermon more than 170 years ago. And at the time, the abolitionist cause seemed lost, the compromise of 1850 had made harboring fugitive slaves a crime under federal law, even in those states that had abolished slavery.

And in a case that garnered national attention, a young fugitive in Boston had been seized and tried and marched to the wharf by hundreds of armed officers, where he was summarily put on a ship bound for the south, where he would remain in shackles and chains.

It was a moment of profound uncertainty and despair, a moment the minister called darker than any New England had witnessed.

“We do not see, Reverend Theodore Parker observed, “that justice is always done on earth. Many a knave is rich, sleek, and honored, while the just man is poor, hated, and in torment. I do not pretend,” the preacher said, “to understand the moral universe. The arc is a long one. My eye reaches but little ways. I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by the experience of sight. I can divine it by conscience, but from what I see, I am sure it bends towards justice.”

The good Reverend was under no illusions about the perils and obstacles facing the abolitionist cause. His words offered no easy answers, no comforting assurances that he or his congregation would live to see the progress they so desperately sought.

Rather, his was a declaration of faith, a defiant call not to abandon hope or give way to fear, but to stay true to our better selves and true to one another, and to keep fighting to fulfill the promise of this nation, even in the face of cruelty and bitter disappointment, even in the face of impossible odds.

It is that spirit that we open the center today, the same spirit that so many of you showed all those years ago, the same spirit that inspired generations of Americans to meet the challenges of their time, the same spirit that is alive and well here on the South Side of Chicago, the same spirit that will see America and the world through its present trials.

There is a new generation out there ready to write the next chapter of our story. We intend to help them do it, and we ask that you join us.

Thank you. God bless you. God bless the United States of America.

Thursday, July 23, 2026

三位自以为是的领导人和他们的愚蠢战争

 编者:“自以为是”并不是一个特别难以察觉的特质。民主制度下的选举,短则数月,长可一年。尤其是特朗普,已经做过一届总统,他的为人世人皆知。在这种情况下,把政府行为的愚蠢归结为某个人的“自以为是”,就有点舍本逐末了。关键的问题是,民主制度如何防止自以为是的人给社会带来灾难。如果一个社会,在错误发生的时候只能束手无策的目瞪口呆,那么整个社会也该反思自己的自以为是了。

特朗普、内塔尼亚胡和普京是三个截然不同的人,但他们有一个重要的共同点:自以为是所到之处最聪明的那个人。然而可叹的是,他们都犯了领导者所能犯下的最愚蠢的错误——让身边围满了阿谀奉承之徒。结果,他们都一头撞进了没有出路的战争死胡同,如今只有咽下满满一盘认输的苦果才能脱身。

当心。没有什么比一个鲁莽的领导者面对一盘苦果更危险的了:有时,他的本能反应是在一条输定的道路上继续加码。

我们先说以色列总理。内塔尼亚胡已经脱轨的迹象——并且把大名鼎鼎的以色列情报机构摩萨德的领导层也一并带偏——体现在他做出的两个完全疯狂的决定上:第一,以色列可以凭借一次大规模空中打击推翻德黑兰政权;第二,它可以替伊朗选择新的领导人。

在我解释这何其荒唐之前,先交代一点背景:自从1982年我亲眼目睹黎巴嫩基督教民兵组织长枪党如何协助诱骗摩萨德、使其以为以色列可以通过一次快速入侵将长枪党反巴勒斯坦的领袖巴希尔·杰马耶勒扶植为贝鲁特总统之后,我就对这个被吹得神乎其神的以色列情报机构确立了如下原则:如果你想在贝鲁特或德黑兰暗杀某个人,那就找摩萨德;如果你想了解贝鲁特或德黑兰的政治和社会走势,那就千万别找摩萨德。因为摩萨德擅长前者的原因,恰恰也导致了它不擅长后者。

摩萨德之所以擅长追捕并清除以色列的敌人,很大程度上是因为它极善于在黎巴嫩、伊朗、约旦河西岸及阿拉伯世界其他地方招募心怀不满的当地人——也就是那些痛恨本国政权、愿意与以色列合作将其推翻的人。问题在于,这些线人无论出于怨恨还是金钱驱使,都倾向于夸大本国政权的脆弱程度,以及推翻它有多么容易。

他们想让以色列替自己做脏活。结果就是,像特朗普这样不了解历史的冤大头会以为,既然摩萨德擅长暗杀,那它也一定擅长预测暗杀对象死后的局势会如何发展。

这也就解释了为什么在今年2月白宫的会面中,当内塔尼亚胡和当时的摩萨德局长达维德·巴尔内亚基本上是在说——只要以色列和美国联手暗杀伊朗最高层领导人,伊朗政府就会垮台,然后一群好人便会接管政权时,特朗普并没有把他们当场轰出会议室。总统显然认为,既然摩萨德拥有超强的暗杀能力,那它也一定拥有超强的分析能力,因此伊朗也会像美国推翻委内瑞拉总统马杜罗之后那样,轻而易举地落入他的手中。

正如我的同事玛吉·哈伯曼和乔纳森·斯旺在他们那本不可不读的新书《政权更迭》(Regime Change)中所记载的,中央情报局局长约翰·拉特克利夫当时用一个词来形容内塔尼亚胡的伊朗政权更迭方案——荒唐透顶。特朗普自信地认为自己比所有人都更高明,无视了拉特克利夫等人的警告,而为此付出的代价也延续至今。

另一个更能说明内塔尼亚胡及其情报机构已经被权力冲昏头脑的证据是《纽约时报》披露的另一则令人难以置信的消息:摩萨德竟一直在扶植伊朗前总统马哈茂德·艾哈迈迪-内贾德,准备在最高领袖阿亚图拉阿里·哈梅内伊政权被消灭后,由他接掌伊朗政权。正如我的同事报道的那样:“以色列决定围绕艾哈迈迪-内贾德制定一项政权更迭计划,这在该国与这位前总统的关系史中堪称戏剧性的转折——艾哈迈迪-内贾德曾因加速伊朗核计划、经常呼吁消灭以色列以及否认犹太人大屠杀闻名。”

喂,以色列?你们了解现代伊朗历史吗?你们听说过穆罕默德·摩萨台吗?他是1951年至1953年伊朗民选总理,在伊朗将英伊石油公司国有化后,遭到中央情报局与英国军情六处联手策动的政变推翻。那场政变扶植了一个亲西方的政权上台,而伊朗人至今仍对这场政变怒火难消。

以色列竟然认为自己可以扶植艾哈迈迪-内贾德上台——而伊朗举国上下不会像人体排斥移植器官一样排斥他,这种想法简直疯狂。内塔尼亚胡和摩萨德难道真的以为,那些骄傲而富有民族主义情绪的伊朗人——哪怕他们痛恨统治自己的宗教神权集团——会说:“哦,谢谢你,比比(内塔尼亚胡的昵称——译注),谢谢你替我们安排好了下一任领导人。”认为720万以色列犹太人能够决定9000多万伊朗穆斯林由谁统治,这种自负和越界令人瞠目结舌。

特朗普和内塔尼亚胡在这方面并不孤独,普京与他们为伍——他迷信自己编织的神话,以为乌克兰人都迫不及待地想重归俄罗斯母亲的怀抱,相信基辅那个民主选举产生的政权会轻易倒台。

军事分析人士罗宾·莱尔德去年指出:“普京最根本的错误就是相信了自己那套关于乌克兰人与俄罗斯人是‘一个民族’,乌克兰独立不过是西方人为制造的产物。正是这种意识形态上的盲点使他以为俄罗斯军队会被乌克兰人当作解放者来欢迎。”

与伊朗的情况如出一辙,俄罗斯情报部门似乎过度依赖“亲俄消息来源,他们告诉莫斯科的都是莫斯科想听的话”,莱尔德说道,“而不是如实呈现乌克兰民情和实力的真实情况。”

尽管内塔尼亚胡在对哈马斯、真主党以及德黑兰的行动中取得了一系列战术上的胜利,但他并没有把这些胜利转化为以色列新的战略现实。要做到这一点,他必须明确表示,自己在加沙、黎巴嫩和伊朗的军事行动是为了让这一地区有朝一日实现以巴和平而扫清障碍。

然而,全世界看到的却是,内塔尼亚胡试图让这一地区变得适合以色列吞并加沙和约旦河西岸,并准备为此抛弃其他一切——包括与沙特阿拉伯关系正常化、许多美国年轻人的支持、民主党的支持、西欧国家的支持,以及以色列司法体系的独立性。

与此同时,特朗普因为懒得认真谋划,在没有盟友、没有国际合法性、也没有备选方案来彻底消除德黑兰制造大规模杀伤性武器能力的情况下,就贸然入侵伊朗,从而削弱了美国,也让美国更加孤立。相反,特朗普反而让伊朗发现了两种成本极低却极其有效的大规模破坏性武器:控制霍尔木兹海峡,以及几乎每当特朗普轰炸伊朗时,就轰炸美国在波斯湾的盟友。

而普京——他没有踏踏实实地把俄罗斯建设成一个真正自由开放、能够吸引乌克兰人的社会,反而把原本脆弱的俄罗斯民主政体变成了一个彻头彻尾的警察国家,并依赖充满风险的石油经济。如今,在人工智能革命中,俄罗斯几乎毫无存在感。这就好比汽车刚刚问世,普京却说,他更愿意投资更多的马匹,以及他那个关于统一“俄罗斯母亲”的19世纪幻想。

我们今天看到的,是三个领导者都在试图用轰炸来杀出死胡同。

但我们也不要忘记那些自1979年以来一直统治伊朗的扭曲、冷酷自私、无能的领导人。他们也同样困在自己的死胡同里。伊朗的神权独裁者非但没有赋能他们才华横溢的人民,而是通过枪杀反对者、把严苛的宗教教条强行灌输给人民,以及浪费数十亿美元试图摧毁以色列,让自己在权力宝座上盘踞了47年。

但愿有一天,伊朗人民能够依靠自己的力量推翻他们,也许还会得到一种出人意料、并非主权国家的力量的帮助。伊朗领导人肆无忌惮地掠夺本国环境,又为了奖赏政权亲信而肆意修建水坝、截断太多河流,如今他们面对的敌人比特朗普或内塔尼亚胡都更强大——那就是大自然。七个月前,备受推崇的《原子科学家公报》(Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)上有一篇分析报告,对伊朗未来作出了最令人不寒而栗的预测,而全文竟一次都没有提到核武器。它谈到的只有伊朗严峻的水资源危机,而这场危机对伊朗机构造成的瘫痪可能已经超过了以色列和美国联手造成的影响。

“2025年夏季,伊朗经历了一场极端热浪,包括德黑兰在内的多个地区白天气温接近50摄氏度,迫使公共办公室和银行临时关闭,”分析人士写道。“在此期间,为德黑兰地区供水的主要水库水位降至历史最低……官员们警告,如果供水状况无法恢复,首都甚至可能不得不疏散。”

一言以蔽之,所有这些冲突最终都将以谈判收场,因为这些领导人没有一个能够无限期地维持他们的愚蠢战争。唯一的问题只是:他们何时才不得不招手唤来服务员,说一句:“年轻人,能不能给我端上一盘认输的苦果。”

文章来源:

Wednesday, January 28, 2026

“看着美国走向分崩离析” 明尼阿波利斯事件震动全美

编者:历史是什么?历史就是发生了什么。然后人们开始思考这件事为什么发生。

上周末,一场暴风雪席卷半个美国,天地一片白茫茫,却无法抹去全美民众刚目睹的明尼阿波利斯所发生的一切。再多的积雪也挡不住那些画面:怒不可遏的抗议者与蒙面执法人员发生冲突,催泪瓦斯的烟雾在社区街巷弥漫——而这也是三周内,民众第二次看到美国公民遭联邦探员枪杀的视频。


同样是三周内第二次,特朗普政府对这起致命枪击事件的描述与全美许多人相信自己亲眼所见的情况相矛盾。联邦官员称两名遇难者均为意图伤害联邦探员的“本土恐怖分子”,而政府的批评者及众多民众表示,视频证据戳穿了这种说法。

明尼阿波利斯暴力动荡的画面在周末全程循环播放,盖过了极端天气和两场国家橄榄球联盟季后赛的风头。这些画面传递出一种无可辩驳的沉重后果,昭示着这是一个历史分水岭,也让人们开始反思这个国家的立国之本,以及它的未来方向。无论身处美国何处,人们都觉得明尼阿波利斯仿佛近在咫尺。

在佐治亚州,一位高中老师揣测着学生们会就最新的枪击致死事件提出怎样的问题;在印第安纳州,暴力事件的新闻播报让一场97岁的寿宴兴致全无;在艾奥瓦州,一对夫妇带着患有自闭症的儿子外出,却为明尼阿波利斯的事产生分歧;而在威斯康星州,一位特朗普的支持者对她眼中部分抗议者的愚蠢行为感到匪夷所思。

在罗得岛州,布朗大学的一名学生因暴雪被困校园,当他看到周六的视频画面时,忍不住落泪——移民执法人员向37岁的注册护士亚历克斯·普雷蒂喷射胡椒喷雾,将他按在明尼阿波利斯冰冷的地面上,最终开枪将其射杀。

23岁的学生杰克·迪普里米奥周日说,“我昨晚一夜没合眼,那个视频在我脑海里反复回放。”

明尼苏达州这个周末的局势突变,源于特朗普的一则竞选承诺。自一年前重返白宫以来,特朗普一直试图兑现誓言,将那些被他称作罪犯的无证移民驱逐出境。

美国移民与海关执法局的探员已在多个民主党控制的城市接连开展突击执法,始终遭到抗议者追堵抗议。批评者痛斥这些执法行动冷酷无情,往往违宪,还充斥着误拘、不当拘留的行为,甚至违背美国精神。

去年12月,移民与海关执法局将执法重心转向明尼阿波利斯-圣保罗地区,重点针对当地规模庞大的索马里移民社区。特朗普政府将明尼苏达州一起涉案金额达数十亿美元的联邦资金诈骗丑闻归咎于当地索马里裔移民,还曾将他们污蔑为“垃圾”,这番言论因种族偏见遭到广泛谴责。

随后在1月7日,一辆运动型多用途汽车在与执法人员对峙后驶离时,一名移民与海关执法局探员朝车辆连开三枪,导致37岁的司机勒妮·古德身亡。联邦官员坚称探员是出于自卫开枪,而州及地方官员则对这一说法提出质疑,这一致命瞬间被多个角度的镜头记录了下来。

整个1月,紧张局势持续升级,抗议活动愈演愈烈,多人被捕,一名委内瑞拉男子还遭移民执法人员开枪打伤。

然后,到了周六。

普雷蒂是退伍军人事务医院的护士,无任何犯罪记录。当时他正用手机拍摄抗议活动,在一名执法人员向一名女子喷射胡椒喷雾时,他走到两人之间试图阻止。随后他自己也被胡椒喷雾喷到,几名执法人员将他摔倒在地。在随后的混乱中,执法人员发现他身上携带有枪支——但他自始至终未掏出枪,且该枪支为合法持有。

执法人员随即开枪,这一残忍的画面被现场民众目睹、拍摄后,迅速传播开来。

在极端天气让美国大部分地区陷入停滞之际,许多人难以避免地看到了这段令人不安的视频,听到特朗普政府仓促给出的各种辩解——其中包括边境巡逻队高级官员格雷格·博维诺毫无实据的说法,他称普雷蒂意图“屠杀执法人员”——人们陷入了深深的沉思。

在印第安纳州的克朗波因特,上周六晚,十几名家人齐聚一堂,为杰里·韦伯庆祝97岁寿辰。但他们却目不转睛地盯着电视,关注着明尼苏达州传来的令人揪心的报道,其中就包括又一起枪击致死事件。

“这感觉就像同时活在两个世界里,一个是自己的世界,一个是另一个世界,”杰里的儿子、民权律师格里·韦伯说。“我们冒着暴风雪驱车赶到家里为父亲庆生,可转眼又盯着电视,看着美国走向分崩离析。”

韦伯从亚特兰大地区专程乘飞机赶来,与此同时,在佐治亚州约翰斯克里克市的北景高中,40岁的雷·布朗老师正在教授美国大学先修课程的历史课,他也在努力梳理明尼苏达州所发生的一切,思考该如何回答学生们提出的问题——关于政府这些行为的合宪性与正当性。

这位老师说,他的许多学生都来自移民家庭,他会给学生们留出空间,让他们去质疑某些联邦部门存在的意义。

“我不得不摆出一种非常圆滑的立场,”布朗说。“连我自己说出来都觉得反感,因为我认为,无论如何,剥夺他人的生命都是错误的。”

在全美诸多被冰雪覆盖的角落,人们既对明尼阿波利斯的抗议者表达敬佩,也下定决心要以他们为榜样采取行动。

在宾夕法尼亚州中南部,42岁的公关从业者布兰迪·凯斯勒上周六晚间来到哈里斯堡郊外公婆家中。她刚进门在客厅坐下,就针对时局对婆婆发出了一番辛辣的感慨。

“我当时带着讽刺的口气说:‘看来我得提前给自己写好讣告了,万一这边的抗议活动出什么事呢,’”凯斯勒回忆。“万一我去参加和平抗议——这是我完全有权做的事——却被人枪杀了呢。”

周日清晨,屋外起伏的地势被白雪覆盖,凯斯勒为当下发生的一切感到沮丧,甚至茫然,而这份情绪不仅因明尼苏达州的事件而起,还有国家的两极分化、不断发生的暴力冲突、一条条逝去的生命。

“我并不了解明尼阿波利斯事件的全部真相,”凯斯勒的声音哽咽了。“但我知道自己看到了什么。我实在无法理解,为什么有人看着同样的画面,却能说一切都没问题。”

威斯康星州沃基肖市的销售总监桑迪·利平斯基并未声称一切正常,但周日去教堂做完礼拜、办了几件杂事后,她表达了截然不同的观点。

她说自己支持特朗普政府拘留并驱逐无证移民的举措,并且对那些追着移民与海关执法局探员并时常嘲讽他们的抗议者毫无同情。

“他们带着枪,把汽车当作武器,那就得承担丧命的风险,”62岁的利平斯基说。“这纯属愚蠢。他们该呆在家里,要么上班、上学,别上街,让每个人各司其职。”

上周还发生了其他令人震惊的事件,包括特朗普政府执意取得格陵兰岛。但明尼苏达州的这场危机,似乎占据了全美民众的所有思绪。

在缅因州的沃特维尔,南希·史密斯坐在自家书店“史密斯书窖”的柜台后面,心里满是对明尼苏达州的担忧——而移民与海关执法局上周也在缅因州启动了类似的执法行动。“我不希望这样的事发生在这里,”55岁的史密斯说道。“我不希望这样的事发生在任何地方。”

在亚特兰大,30岁的律师杰米·克里斯蒂是所在社区青年共和党分部的负责人,她直到周日午休时才看到普雷蒂遭枪杀的视频。很快,她开始反复播放这段视频,时而正常速度,时而慢放,想弄明白究竟是什么情况,让执法人员非使用致命武力不可。

“这完全没有道理,”她说。

在艾奥瓦州的西得梅因,气温只有零下十来度,一家高档购物中心里,詹妮弗·斯蒂茨和丈夫唐·凯夫斯周日晚上在美食广场吃完饭后,试图就明尼苏达州的事件和国家现状达成共识。凯夫斯18岁的儿子卡斯滕坐在一旁,用平板玩着游戏。

62岁的凯夫斯是高中圣经课老师,54岁的斯蒂茨是会计师,两人在2024年都把票投给了特朗普。但在谈论明尼阿波利斯的两起枪击致死事件时,他们的观点出现了分歧。

凯夫斯称这些枪击事件“糟糕透顶”,但他仍认为,古德和普雷蒂是将自己置于危险的境地。

凯夫斯说,“我就是无法理解,为什么有人要干涉他人工作,尤其是执法人员的公务,别挡他们的路,他们有枪。”

他表示自己支持和平抗议,但又说:“别挡在好人去捉坏人的行动路线上。而我们的执法人员一直面临着这样的处境。”

54岁的斯蒂茨安静地听着,随后表达了不同意见。

她说,明尼阿波利斯的两起死亡事件都让她深感不安。普雷蒂“完全有权”持有枪支,而移民与海关执法局的探员本可以任由古德开车离开,再通过车牌追踪到她。她说,两名遇难者都有抗议的权利。
“这又不是中国或者共产主义国家,你知道的,在那里抗议会丧命,”斯蒂茨说。她又补充道,“我认为必须有所改变。”

购物中心即将关门。夫妇俩收拾好剩余食物,带着凯夫斯的儿子,走进了夜色中刺骨的严寒里。

Sunday, January 18, 2026

When one man’s lack of moral value trumps on the conscience of the society

 编者:一个人的失德可以成为对整个社会良知的践踏

我们为什么要读书?读书是为了懂得道理。我们为什么要懂道理?是为了让这个世界更温暖。这个世界如何能变得更加温暖?一个值得奋斗的目标就是每个人都能够有尊严的生活。

全世界很多人向往来到美国,就是美国能够给每一个人提供一个梦想:只要你努力生活,生活就会变得更好。可是,梦想很丰满,现实很骨感。当努力工作的人们,在去工作的路上,在工作场所中,或者在自己的家里,在路人的注视中,在自己孩子惊恐的哭喊中,被当局粗暴的戴上手铐,塞入囚车。他们的尊严呢?然后家业尽失,曾经的努力化为泡影,曾经的积累毁于一旦。这一切只是因为他出生在了错误的地方?每一个人也许可以选择自己最终的栖息之所,但是又有谁能选择自己出生的地方?但是每一个对未来有所期许的人,都会为自己和自己所爱的人,争取更好的生活。这是人的本能。

哈耶克曾经说过,“如果允许人类自由迁徙,那人流的方向, 就是文明的方向”。哈耶克口中的文明,除了能吃一口饱饭,还有很多其它的东西,大概也包括司法,尊严,和彼此的包容。不过,如果只用一个词来描述文明的话,这个词一定是体面。难道现在满街的军警,手铐和枪声,就是那个所谓的文明?!

如果有其它选择,谁愿意背井离乡?谁愿意寄人篱下?移民之路,哪怕是合法的,也是历尽艰辛,更何况是冒着生命危险的非法之路?一路上有土匪,有野兽,有饥饿,有疾病,更有无数的艰难和跋涉。但是他们还是愿意去冒险,他们的每一步都是通向未来的努力,都是生命的呐喊。

如果他们来这里是为了杀人越货,作奸犯科,那么我们依法惩处,无可厚非。可是绝大多数人,只是想要一个勤劳工作的机会。他们用自己的汗水和辛劳,在田野间,在工地上,在餐厅里,在康复院,给社会带来更多的选择,给自己带来更好的生活,给他们女人的脸上带来更多的笑容,给他们孩子的眼睛里带来更多的光亮。如果我们的确不能给他们提供一个安身立命的机会,至少也可以给他们一个体面离开的选择吧?因为体面,是文明的底线。在这个世界上,任何事情都不会永远。也许有一天,他们会成为我们,而我们也会变成他们。如果彼此之间不能有善意和温暖,至少也该有一些尊重和体面。因为我们都是人。

美国是一个有250年历史的移民国家。不同时期的移民政策,有松有紧。谁走谁留,有相关的司法过程。这个过程并不完美,也随时会根据形势而调整。但是当这个过程因为某些人的表现欲望,而变成一场以践踏人的尊严为噱头的真人秀,那么我们也许该问问自己,我们是谁?哪怕抛开其中的司法程序问题,我们是不是应该提醒自己,“对待弱者的态度,体现的不仅是人的素质、还是一个社会的良心”!

Why do we need education? Because we need to understand this world. Why do we need to understand this world? Because we want to make this world better. And how can the world become better? One goal worth striving for is that everyone can live with dignity.

People around the world regard the United States as the beacon of the world for its value of freedom and democracy, also because the famous American dream, that “dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone…”. Well, it is only a dream, and reality is harsh and cruel. When hard-working people—on their way to work, at their workplaces, or in their own homes—are roughly handcuffed by authorities, thrown into detention vehicles, under the gaze of passersby and amid the terrified cries of their children, where is their dignity? Then their livelihoods are destroyed, years of effort vanish into thin air, and everything they have built collapses overnight. Is all of this simply because they were born in the wrong place?

A person may be able to choose where he is eventually buried, but who can choose where he is born? Yet anyone who has hope for the future will strive for a better life for themselves and for those they love. This is what we do as human.

Friedrich Hayek once said, “If people are allowed to migrate freely, the direction of migration is the direction of civilization.” The “civilization” Hayek referred to meant more than merely having enough to eat. It likely also included justice, dignity, and mutual tolerance. But if there is one word to describe civilization, that word must be decency. Are streets filled with armed police, handcuffs, and gunfire truly our idea of civilization?!

If there were other choices, who would willingly leave their homeland? Who would choose to live at the mercy of others? The road of migration—even when legal—is filled with hardship, let alone the illegal ways, people literally risk their life for the journey. Along the way there are bandits, corrupted officials, wild animals, accidents, not even mentioning hunger and disease. And yet they are still willing to take the risk. Every step they take is an effort toward a better future, toward a better life itself. If we were they, are we going to make the journey ourselves?

If they come here to rob, to kill, or to commit crimes, then punishing them according to the law is entirely justified. But the most majority of them come here simply for an opportunity to work. With their sweat and labor—in the fields, on construction sites, in restaurants, in nursing homes—they bring lower cost to the society, bring themselves better lives, bring more smiles to the faces of their women, and more light into the eyes of their children. If indeed we cannot offer them a chance to settle and make a living, we should at least offer them a dignified way to leave. Because dignity is the bottom line of civilization.

Nothing in this world lasts forever. Perhaps one day, they will become us, and we will become them. If we cannot show goodwill and warmth to one another, we should at least show respect and dignity—because we are all human.

The United States is a nation of immigrants with a history of 250 years. Immigration policies have tightened and loosened at different times. Who stays and who leaves is decided through legal processes. These processes are imperfect and constantly adjusted according to circumstances. But when the process is turned—out of one person’s whimsical desire to impress his constituents—into a reality show that trumps on human dignity as its spectacle, then perhaps we should ask ourselves: Who are we?

Even setting aside the legal and procedural questions, shouldn’t we remind ourselves that “how we treat the vulnerable reflects not only individual character, but also the conscience of a society”?

Friday, December 12, 2025

德不配位必有灾殃 - 特朗普的二进宫

 编者:古往今来,德不配位的人很多,或者也许大多数时候都如此。天下太平,风波不惊的时候,无碍大局。不过当时局变幻,风急浪高的时候,如果舵手无能,则一招不慎,满盘皆输。大国兴衰,时运乎?人祸也!

世事难料,很多时候世事也非世人能左右。有些事情无碍大局,但是有些事情则影响深远。2024年特朗普重新当选美国总统,就属于后者。这件事给世界格局带来的变化,将会成为历史课本里浓墨重彩的一章。

特朗普之为人,在他2020年败选的时候,已经展示的淋漓尽致。民主制度下,选票定结果,参选者愿赌服输,已是百年传统。“君子和而不同“,哪怕意见相左,也可以和气相处。这就是为什么历史上经常会有败选者给当选者打电话表示祝贺。君子之风,从容大度,成为美谈。而202116日的特朗普,居然打算调动军队,干预选举结果。如此目无法纪的总统,已经给美国宪政带来了一次百年不遇的危机!如此拙劣的表现足以让世人认识到他是一个不折不扣的输不起的小人。结果这样一个厚颜无知的自恋者,居然能够在2024年重新登上总统的宝座,真是让人瞠目结舌。

当今的世界,并不太平。战争,瘟疫,气候,贸易,等等。处理好这些问题需要智慧,勇气和运气。而二进宫的特朗普,可以说给“德不配位,必有灾殃“这句老话做了一个完美的注解。

作为现有国际秩序的受益者,美国本应该是国际秩序的维护者。现有的国际秩序是以美国为主导的联合国在战后,为了维护世界的和平和发展而建立。这套秩序在战后的80年里,基本上维持了世界格局的稳定,为战后资本主义的发展提供了必要条件,这也是自由世界在冷战中能够战胜东欧集团的主要原因。因为一个基本稳定的格局,给资本的发展创造了良好的条件,让原材料,资本和市场能够更有效的运行,也让资本主义主导的自由世界在经济发展上完全战胜了以苏联为首的计划经济阵营。冷战结束后,更多的国家加入到国际贸易体系,融入世界经济合作。这对资本主义的进一步发展,提供了更为宽松的环境。世界局势的缓和,也让原来发展军备的资金得以发展民生。所以冷战以后,缓和的国际环境引出经济全球化这个概念,更多的人加入经济合作体系。合作让交易成本降低,交流让信息广泛传播,科学技术飞速发展,从台式电脑到智能手机,从互联网到人工智能。以中国为代表的制造业的转移,让更多的人走出贫困。而这一切,都因为俄国对乌克兰的悍然入侵,而戛然而止。

冷战后30年的缓和局势,给世界各国提供了发展的契机,也让各国的实力得到了改变。一些地区强国因为实力的提升,对周边地缘政治格局产生了影响。在这个纷争渐起的时候,一些政治强人和独裁者,隐隐然重新现身,重新成为不安定的因素。俄国更是狼子野心,悍然入侵乌克兰,欲图重塑前苏联。美国作为自由世界的领袖,此时本应高举道义之大旗,合纵连横,内和政敌,外结盟友,讨伐侵略,重整国际秩序。而美国曾经拥有的朋友圈,不仅是美国实力的体现,也是美国实力的坚强后盾。只可惜时也运也,看看特朗普的第二次上台,他做了什么?滥用关税,打击盟友,从加拿大到丹麦,从欧洲到澳洲,几乎和所有的盟友反目。进而,他公然和普丁勾结,背叛盟友,助俄为虐,施压乌克兰割地求和。以致二战以来,百万美军将士以血的代价所构建的国际秩序,摇摇欲坠,危如累卵。更可怕的是,如果强权可以改变国界,如果侵略可以得到益处,那么大大小小的强权一定会摩拳擦掌,对周边的小国虎视眈眈。而周边弱小的国家或者依附,或者结盟,或者致力发展军备,乃至核武!军备竞赛,兵凶战危的时候,就不远了。而所有这些后果,都是因为特朗普口中的所谓的“和平“!“自由需要代价,和平需要正义”,这是千百年来人类历史的教训。一个不学无术的人,怎么会以史为鉴,“观之上古,验之当世”?

总统作为一个国家的代表,即便不是一个君子,也要有做人的底线。但是如果是一个真小人,则没有底线可言。一个没有底线的人,不用说尊严,连信用都谈不上!“人无信不立,国无信则衰“。二战到现在,刚好80年。也许新的一个周期又将开始了?或者已经开始了?



Saturday, December 6, 2025

A new world order isn’t coming, it’s already here − and this is what it looks like

编者:俄国侵乌,招致众怒。美国本当借此良机,外和盟友,内振军工,打击专制集团,捍卫国际秩序。可惜特朗普的上台,让世界重回强权。一极和两极都不长久,三极会稳定一些吗?

On Sept. 3, 2025, China celebrated the 80th anniversary of its victory over Japan by staging a carefully choreographed event in which 26 world leaders were offered a podium view of Beijing’s impressive military might.

The show of strength was deliberate and reignited a debate in Western media over whether we are on the cusp of a China-centric “new world order” to replace the U.S.-dominated international “rules-based order.”

But as someone who writes about geopolitics, I believe we are already there. It might be in flux, and the U.S. still has a big role in it, but a new world order has begun – and as it develops, it will look increasingly different than what it’s replacing.

A brief history of world orders

Global history can be understood as the rise and fall of different orders, defined as a given era’s dominant power relations and attendant institutions and norms.

From 1815 to 1880, the United Kingdom was the undisputed world superpower, with an empire and navy that spanned the globe. The period from 1880 to 1945 was one of imperial rivalries as other countries – largely European and the U.S. – sought to copy Britain’s success and replace its dominance. Supplanting that was the bipolar world of two competing superpowers, the Soviet Union and the U.S., marking the period from 1945 to 1991.

The fall of the Soviet Union was the beginning of a brief period, from 1991 to 2008, of a unipolar world centered on U.S. global dominance, military power and economic might. With the retreat of global communism, the U.S. increased its influence, and that of the international rules-based order it helped establish after 1945, through institutions such as the World Trade Organization, World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

It did not last long in the face of a long war on terrorism, the fiasco of the invasion of Iraq, the long occupation of Afghanistan and finally the 2008 global financial crisis that undermined U.S. strength and weakened domestic support for Washington’s role as the world’s policeman.

Toward a multipolar world

In recent years, a new multipolar world has emerged with at least four distinct sources of power.

The U.S. remains central to this world order. It is blessed with a huge territory, a dynamic economy and the strategic luxury of large oceans on its east and west and much smaller powers to its north and south. The U.S. had a global military presence in the previous bipolar and unipolar order. But the cost of this imperial overstretch has prompted Washington to shift the cost burden toward its former allies, leading to a new militarization in Europe and East Asia where most countries now aim to increase military spending.

There is also a change in economic arrangements. In the unipolar order, the U.S. promoted a frictionless free trade arrangement and economic globalization. This resulted in the global shift of manufacturing that in turn created a populist backlash in those countries where manufacturing employment was hollowed out.

Now, economic nationalism is becoming a much more common refrain than free trade. Long the promoter of purportedly open markets, the U.S. is now leading the way in resurrecting tariff barriers to levels that haven’t been seen on the global stage in decades.

The military realignments and growing trade barriers will make it increasingly difficult to assemble durable alliances. In the short term the U.S. can leverage its existing power to its advantage, but over the long term other countries will likely pivot away from too much reliance on the U.S. The American Century that publishing magnate Henry Luce famously described in 1941 has to all intents and purposes come to an end.

China is now a peer competitor to the U.S. in both economic and military power. Increasingly, under the powerful leadership of Xi Jinping, China openly seeks a more Sino-centric world order with institutions and a global arrangement to match. To that end, it is assembling an axis of resistance to a U.S.-dominated world order. Russia, suffering from post-imperial syndrome, is an important member but not an equal partner.

Russian power is limited to establishing a Eurasian sphere of influence across its former Soviet republics and disrupting liberal democracies. But in that, Russia is more of a spoiler than an architect of the new order.

And then there is Europe, facing what British Prime Minister Keir Starmer referred to as a “generational challenge” as the U.S. pivots away from Europe toward the Indo-Pacific just as Russia poses a more serious threat to Europe, especially for its easternmost states.

Europe is remilitarizing after decades of demilitarizing. Sweden and Finland joined NATO in 2023 and 2024, respectively. In the coming decades, Europe could emerge as an independent source of both economic and military power with a different agenda from the U.S. – more keen to confront Russia, less willing to support Israel, and perhaps more willing to engage with China.

But all three power centers – the U.S., China and Europe – will struggle with similar and unique internal challenges.

All of them have sluggish economies and aging populations. The U.S. faces growing inequality and political instability as it shifts from a liberal democracy to competitive authoritarianism. China has an untested military, a looming demographic crisis, a faltering economy and a forthcoming succession struggle.

Finally, Europe is beset with a nationalist populism and growing social welfare costs just as military expenditures are set to increase.

The growth of the Global South

This threefold division is strangely reminiscent of the tripartite global division in George Orwell’s “1984,” where Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia fought a permanent war of shifting alliances.

But Orwell was writing at a time when much of what is now called the Global South was either under the informal or formal control of the superpowers. That is no longer the case in the Global South, especially in the case of the larger countries such as BrazilIndia and Indonesia.

The Global South is not yet a coherent bloc, more an informal arrangement of independent actors that tend to hedge between the major powers.

A world in flux

Yet none of this new global reality means that things are now fixed. Indeed, the new world order is in a state of disruptive flux that promises years of growing pains. Both the U.S. and China need allies, and countries in the Global South will continue to hedge between the competing powers.

As such, the world is in for a process of constant jostling as the major powers seek alliances while dealing with domestic pressures. In that messy status quo, many questions remain: Who will be most effective in building durable alliances? Will China manage its internal challenges? Will Europe get its act together? Will Russia continue its disruptive ways? Could a post-Trump U.S., post-Putin Russia and post-Xi China move the world in yet a different direction altogether?

And there is one large question above all others: Can the major powers manage their competition through shared global interests, such as combating climate change, environmental pollution and pandemic threats? Or will mounting conflict in the newly contested areas of the Arctic, cyberspace, outer space and the oceanic realm, and in ongoing geopolitical hot spots provide the trigger for outright conflict?

All world orders come to an end. The hope is the old one is doing so with a whimper rather than a bang.


奥巴马说过不让中国人过上美国人的好日子吗?

编者:“断章取义,泛指脱离上下文语境,歪曲或片面理解他人言论和文章的行为”。奥巴马这段关于中国发展的论述的原始出处,是他2010年4月15号在白宫接受澳大利亚记者奥布莱恩的采访中说的一段话。采访的主题是  We share a world view: Obama on Rudd,...