最高相似度示例 · 非人工确认结果
目标片段我刚才讲的是我对现代政治思想的发展一个非常宏大的巨大的观察。这个观察仍然体现在我们当代社会面对政治问题的方方面面，很多关心社会问题，关心政治的年轻人。他首先做的第一件事情就是给自己归类他做的最重要的事情就是通过学习判断这个社会上存在着哪几个立场，然后决定他属于哪个立场。比如说我通过学习鉴别这个社会，左派是什么意思？右派什么意思？自由派什么意思？保守派什么意思？激进派什么意思？女权什么意思？男权什么意思？
来源片段fancy prices from the American Political Science Association. Lee has informed my views on just about every aspect of American politics since we started talking a few years ago and he's changed my mind about a lot of things as well. But perhaps the central idea he's working out at the moment is that the basic cleavage in American politics is shifting. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, he argues, used to depend mainly on your economic views. Now, it depends on your attitude to things like race and ethnicity and social attitudes. And that, he thinks, is really dangerous.
查看片段位置
3 个展示片段 · 共 4 个展示片段（含上方示例）— 点击展开
S1：3 个窗口回退
来源片段
In a winner-take-all plurality system like the one that we have in the US, sort of we inevitably have two parties and then the parties have to figure out a way to distinguish themselves from each other. And there's two parties, right? Because there's a wasted vote problem. Yeah. That people might be like, look, I want to vote for a Green Party. I want to vote for a Libertarian Party. But they realize that, you know, that vote is likely to get wasted because unless you vote for the person who has the plurality of the vote in your district, you've lost. Whereas in say a proportional representation system like you have them in Europe, you know,
目标片段
我们的判断，我们在一个政治问题上的判断变成了判断这个人属于什么阵营，判断了判断这个人属于什么立场判断，这个人会在这个问题上应该做出什么决定这一点的危害之处。我们在美国看到的最明显，美国政治现在之所以一塌糊涂，不就是因为很多人把自己困在这种民主党共和党的判断力挣脱不得。比如说现在在美国，你只要支持警察执法去惩罚坏人，你就会被很多人判断成共和党。你只要支持堕胎自由，你就会被美国人判断成民主党。我们对判断力的想象变成了判断。
来源片段
geographical cleavage in the cities and urban areas where highly educated whites and diverse people congregate. People tend to have much more racially, socially liberal views tend to be much more global minded in their thinking. And the more rural and ex-urban areas, people tend to be more traditionalist. They don't have the same post-materialist values. They don't put the same priority on being a part of the global community. And they tend to be much, much wider and much less racially tolerant. And as the parties have really become geographic parties, as Democrats have become the party of the coasts and the cities and Republicans have become the party of the
目标片段
现代人非常警惕什么所谓的高低之分。一旦我开始说高低之分，大家心里就会立刻想到弱势群体的压迫，就会立刻想要反驳，每一个人都应该拥有话语权。每一个人应该拥有平等的话语权。没错，我并不是一个古代社会的信徒。古代社会是一个话语权，集中在特权阶级的社会，曾经的女人，曾经的黑人，曾经的同性恋、曾经的小市民，阶级曾经的农民，他们所代表的世界观自动的低于特权阶级拥有的世界观，我觉得身份上的平等、
来源片段
And so that pulls the parties further apart as well. So is there some way of thinking about the role of money in politics, the role of lobbying, the role perhaps of how we structure our primary system that can counteract that tendency? I tend to not put as much blame on the primaries as a lot of other people do. But why not? Well, because I haven't seen that many incumbents being successfully primaried, even though people, it's sort of this perpetual threat. And more in the other point. The existence of a perpetual threat might be really important.
目标片段
那就是这个世界上哪怕持有同一个观点的人，有一些人他持有这个观点的原因，是一个纯粹智障的原因。有一些人他持有这个同一个观点的原因是一个有理有据的原因。有一些人他持有这个观点的原因，是因为一些政治上的考量，也就是说同一个观点，他就是有高下之分的。我觉得政治娱乐化它带来的最大的危害就是它辅助了这个现代人本来就已经非常火热的。对于平等的渴望，在政治上，我们变得越来越只愿意承认人和人之间的不同，所以政治就可以变成一个游戏，变成一个你在玩网游的时候一样可以添加或者是减少的属性。