美国大选结果:是重蹈覆辙,还是艰难破局? | 经济学人社论

财富   2024-11-06 10:18   浙江  


1



写在前面

思维导图:

May Li,男,我要去追逐心中的太阳,还要继续努力的亚古兽

2



精读|翻译|词组

The Trumpification of American policy

美国政策川味越来越浓

英文部分选自经济学人20241019社论版块

Leaders | An echo and a choice

经济学人社论 | 特朗普影响难消,哈里斯难破其局

经济学人社论 | 换汤不换药

经济学人社论 | 是重蹈覆辙,还是艰难破局

The Trumpification of American policy

美国政策川味越来越浓

No matter who wins in November, Donald Trump has redefined both parties’ agendas

无论谁赢得11月的大选,唐纳德特朗普已经重塑两党议题

备注:

这次文章,我们对标题想出了3个译文,欢迎有想法的读者在评论留下你的翻译创意。
THE CHOICE facing America in less than a month will not be made by voters weighing rival sets of policies. Kamala Harris’s plans lack detail; Donald Trump’s are sometimes untethered from reality—and in any case divisions over culture motivate voters more than tax policy. Yet the choice matters hugely in policy terms, for America and the rest of the world. This aspect of the election has been under-covered relative to fantasies about what Haitian migrants in Ohio have for lunch. Our current issue, which contains eight concise policy briefs on the areas where we think the election will make the most difference, is intended as an antidote to that.

距离美国总统大选还有不足一个月的时间,美国将要做出选择,而这一选择不会是由权衡过两位候选人截然相对的政策的选民做出的。哈里斯的方案缺乏细节;特朗普的主张有时与现实脱节——不管怎样,更能影响选民的是文化分歧,而非税收政策。然而对美国乃至全世界而言,谁将入主白宫在政策层面尤为重要。相较于俄亥俄州的海地移民们午餐吃什么这类虚无缥缈的话题,此次选举对政策的影响反而未得到充分报道。我们本期特刊包含了八篇精炼的政策简报,聚焦于我们认为选举将产生最大影响的领域,旨在完善相关报道。

Our list is selective: we have left out subjects where the contrast between the two candidates is stark, but which have no direct bearing on public policy. These include the candidates’ characters, what the election would mean for institutions and even for American democracy. Nor have we included abortion, where the candidates’ different views are unlikely to translate into markedly different policies thanks to a Congress that neither party is likely to dominate. Strip those things out, important as they are, focus on policies that are in the president’s gift instead, and the result is surprising. Whoever gets to 270 electoral-college votes on November 5th, Mr Trump’s ideas will win. He, not Ms Harris, has set the terms of this contest. American policy has become thoroughly Trumpified.

我们所选的政策议题经过了严格筛选:排除了那些候选人立场迥然不同,但对公共政策没有直接影响的议题。这些议题包括候选人的性格特点、选举对体制的影响,甚至对美国民主的意义。我们也没有将堕胎议题纳入其中,这是因为虽然候选人们持有相对的立场,但由于国会不太会出现一党独大的局面,观念差异不太可能转化为大相径庭的政策。尽管剔除掉的那些议题很重要,但聚焦于那些总统可以直接影响的政策,我们仍得到了令人意外的结果。无论是谁在115日获得270张选票从而成功当选总统,特朗普的理念都将胜出。设定了这场竞赛规则的是特朗普,而非哈里斯。美国的政策已经彻底特朗普化。

Take Ms Harris’s domestic platform. Her immigration policy is to endorse the most conservative bipartisan reform proposal this century. Its provisions include shutting down asylum applications when the flow of irregular migrants is high. Her trade policy involves keeping, in modified form, most of the tariffs Mr Trump imposed in his first term. On tax, Ms Harris would keep most of the cuts Mr Trump signed in 2017 (raising rates only for those who earn over $400,000). On energy, she has become a convert to fracking and has been part of an administration that has seen America pump more oil and gas than ever before. Because America is so partisan, and Mr Trump is such a polarising figure, Ms Harris has been able to borrow parts of Mr Trump’s first-term agenda without most people noticing.

以哈里斯的国内政纲为例。她的移民政策旨在支持本世纪最保守的两党改革提案,其政策条款包括在非法移民大量涌入时停止庇护申请。她修订后的贸易政策依然保留特朗普在其第一个任期内征收的大部分关税。在税收方面,哈里斯将保留特朗普在2017年签署的大部分减税政策(仅对年收入超过40万美元的人提高税率)。在能源方面,她已成为水力压裂技术的追捧者,并且作为现政府的一员,见证了美国石油和天然气开采量创下历史新高。因为美国的党派阵营明显过大,且特朗普又是一名极具争议的政治人物,所以哈里斯得以在大多数人未察觉的情况下,沿用特朗普第一任期的部分政治纲领。

This policy-poaching makes political sense. Mr Trump moved onto Democrats’ turf first, love-bombing trade unions and scrapping Republican plans to trim public spending on pensions and health care. Because the election will be fought in six or seven swing states, all of which were a couple of percentage points more Republican than the national average in 2020, Ms Harris’s quiet adoption of Trumpier positions could help her win. Yet the result is that a candidate who lost the last election, whose party was trounced in the 2018 midterms—a candidate who has never won the popular vote and probably never will—has remade American policy in his image.

这种政策盗用从政治角度看是合理的。特朗普在民主党的地盘上撒欢,示好拉拢工会,并且废除了共和党削减养老金和医疗健康公共支出计划。因为大选接下来会在六、七个摇摆州进入最后冲刺阶段,这些州在2020年对共和党的支持率都比全国平均水平高了几个百分点,所以哈里斯暗暗特朗普化的立场可能让她赢得这些关键摇摆州的选票。然而这带来的结果是,一个输掉上次大选、所在政党在2018年中期选举中惨败的候选人,一个从前没有、以后也不太可能赢得普选的候选人,以他的意志重塑了美国的国家政策。

The same is true in foreign policy. The two candidates have different approaches: one is built on values and alliances; the other on asking what the world can do for America. If Mr Trump wins, nervous speculation over America’s commitment to NATO will come back; with Ms Harris it is not in doubt. Yet there is surprising overlap. Mr Trump adopted a more confrontational approach to China than any recent president, even if his policies were in practice less scary than they sounded. The administration Ms Harris has been part of has been less verbally antagonistic but tougher in practice, banning technology exports to China and placing huge tariffs on imports of Chinese electric vehicles. On the Middle East, Ms Harris has not let Mr Trump outflank her on the right, despite pressure from within her own party to cut arms supplies to Israel. Nor does she seem in a hurry to revive the deal with Iran that Mr Trump tore up; this week she called the Islamist regime America’s greatest adversary. Here too, Mr Trump has set the terms.

外交政策也是一样。两位候选人采取不同的外交方针:一位是建立在价值和联盟上;另一位是问世界能如何服务于美国。如果特朗普赢得大选,美国对北约的承诺会再次引发猜测,搞得人心惶惶;若是哈里斯上台,断不会有这种情况。但两者的策略有令人惊讶的相似之处。特朗普采取的对华政策比近代任何一位美国总统都更火药,即使他的政策都是雷声大雨点小。哈里斯派则是言辞上没有那么多火药味,但行动上更强硬。她所在的政府禁止美国向中国出口技术,并且对中国的电车进口设置高昂关税。在中东议题上尽管民主党内部要求哈里斯减少对以色列的武器援助,但她也没让特朗普在右翼问题上包抄。她也没有急于伊朗恢复被特朗普撕毁的协议;这周她还称伊斯兰政权是美国死敌。这一点上,特朗普早已设定了政策走向

Support for Ukraine is where the gap seems widest. Ms Harris has been part of an administration that has led the Western effort to help Ukraine defend itself. She would continue to supply Ukraine with arms and cash, as long as Congress let her do so. Mr Trump’s policy is extraordinarily vague: he says only that the war would not have broken out on his watch and that he would end it swiftly. He does not say how, and his refusal to say which side he would like to win adds to fears that he would urge Ukraine to settle on Russia’s terms. Such a catastrophic betrayal is not certain, however.

两人最大的分歧在于援问题。哈里斯所在党派领导西方世界大力帮助乌克兰。只要国会允许,她会继续向乌克兰提供武器和资金。相较之下,特朗普的政策极其模糊:他只说了如果当时入主白宫的是他,那么这场战争都不会爆发,而且他想要快速结束战争。他没说怎么做,也拒绝提及他希望哪方胜利,这些都更让人们担心他可能敦促乌克兰接受俄罗斯定下的条款。但是,这种对乌克兰的深刻背叛并非板上钉钉

A choice and an echo

重新选择也是过往政策的回音

The second thing that is clear from our policy briefs is that while Ms Harris has moved towards the Donald Trump of the first term, Mr Trump has become more extreme, even compared with his prior self. On trade he said earlier this year he favoured a 10% universal tariff on imports and has now upped that to 20%. He wants a tariff of 60% on all Chinese imports. On tax he now wants to cut everything in sight, making all the 2017 cuts permanent and reducing corporate taxes further. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reckons that his plans would add twice the amount to the national debt that Ms Harris’s would (and hers are hardly restrained). On immigration, 2024 Trump is more extreme than 2016 Trump. He always needs a new big promise, and this time it is not merely a wall but mass deportation. Some of his policies are extreme by omission: he has no discernible plan for reducing CO2 emissions, or for helping the country adapt to climate change.

第二个不同之处在于,从我们的政策简报中可以清楚看出,当哈里斯趋同于第一任期的特朗普时,特朗普则变得更加极端了,即便是与之前的自己相比也是如此。在贸易方面,他在今年早些时候还表示赞成对进口商品征收10%的普遍关税,现在他已将关税提高到20%。他希望对所有中国进口商品征收60%的关税。在税收方面,他现在希望削减一切税率,使2017年的所有减税措施永久化,并进一步削减公司税。尽责联邦预算委员会认为,他的计划和哈里斯的相比会将国家债务增加两倍,后者的计划几乎不受限制。在移民问题上,2024年的特朗普比2016年的更加极端。他总是需要画一个新的大饼,这一次不仅仅是一堵墙,而是大规模驱逐非法移民。他的一些政策由于漏洞百出而显得极端:他没有拿出减少二氧化碳排放的明确计划,也没有设定帮助美国适应气候变化的计划。

Next week we will look more closely at how the two candidates’ policies might affect the economy. For all Mr Trump’s claims that President Joe Biden has “destroyed” it, America’s economy is currently the envy of the world. Yet it is striking how little faith either candidate places in the things that made it great, such as openness to trade, talent and competition . Clearly, Ms Harris would not seek to shut America off as vigorously as Mr Trump would. But whoever wins in November, the Trumpification of American policy seems likely to continue.

下周,我们将更密切地关注两位候选人的政策将如何影响经济。尽管特朗普声称拜登 摧毁了美国经济,但美国经济目前仍旧令全世界眼红。然而令人惊讶的是,两位候选人都对那些成就伟大美国经济的东西缺乏信心,比如贸易开放、人才储备良性竞争。显然,哈里斯不会像特朗普那样极力寻求将美国与世界隔绝。但无论谁在11月获胜,美国政策的特朗普化似乎都可能继续下去。

翻译组:

zy,当下快乐就是意义

CassieECNU口译小菜鸡,体制内摸爬滚打教书匠

Mai,男,经济学博士,世界那么大,我想活得久一点

校对组:

秋秋,仰卧起坐,都很快乐

Charlie,剃刀边缘无比锋利

RexThe one who widens your English~

3



愿景

打造

独立思考 | 国际视野 | 英文学习

小组


01 经济学人打卡营 

每周一到周六阅读经济学人

并在群里以及小鹅通内写分享

分享是文章的总结或者观点或者语音打卡

字数不少于100字,中英文都可以

群里每周免费分享最新外刊合集

点击下图,即可了解打卡营详情!


02 早起打卡营 
两年以来,小编已经带着25000多人早起打卡
早起倒逼自己早睡,戒掉夜宵,戒掉手机
让你成为更好的自己,创造早睡早起的奇迹!
早起是最简单的自律!
早起打卡营
欢迎你的加入!
点击下图,即可了解打卡营详情!

一天一篇经济学人
现在很多人都不知道自己热爱什么,追求什么,只是找到一个标签后就认为找到了人生的意义。我们是谁不重要,我们想成为谁很重要!当你什么都没有的时候,你想尽可能多的包装自己;当你内心充盈足够自信的时候,你只想做你自己,而且是更好的自己。
 最新文章