最高相似度示例 · 非人工确认结果
目标片段那么传统基金会在2022年以来发表的2025计划。这个报告之后，他们努力的方向对于共和党来说就是一个很类似的新方向。在美国政治历史上来说，他在做的事情是一个在很多历史时刻被两党内的各个革新派都做过的事情。在简单介绍完了2025计划究竟是个什么东东之后，我想要回到我播客标题中，对于这群人的描绘，为什么？我说他们是新右翼革命派，为何他们想要激进摧毁既存体制这几个关键词，革命派和摧毁体制这两个词是不是听起来就不保守，对吧？
来源片段But in terms of that kind of imprimatur of like we're serious conservatives, we know how this works. We've done this before. We've staffed previous administrations. We should be leading this effort. That really is their calling card. And I think it's why their project 2025 has gotten the most attention. And I think it accounts for their prominence in the coverage of all this. But it's a really interesting dance, of course, because they've only recently remade themselves as anything other than the policy architects of Reaganism to be Trumpy enough for the people now in positions of influence in the Republican party and Trump himself. But that kind of leads us to what I kind of want to ask you about, Matt.
查看片段位置
12 个展示片段 · 共 13 个展示片段（含上方示例）— 点击展开
S1：7 个窗口回退
来源片段
And you lead a section thinking about culture in a broad sense at a large American think tank. There's lots of very interesting elements of your work that I want to talk to you about today, including your pushback against the post-liberal right. But what I wonder about more broadly is what the role of reflection on policy and even the role of think tanks should actually be in this political moment. The idea of think tanks in particular used to be that we're going to employ really smart people who do very careful work that figures out the best way to accomplish broadly agreed-upon policy goals, so perhaps sometimes less broadly agreed-upon policy goals, like making sure that people have access to healthcare, that we don't spend too much on healthcare and that healthcare is good quality.
目标片段
他们的诉求对于国际关系，对于中国来说有什么影响，这是这一期播客。我们要讨论的话题进入这个主题之前，我必须要先讲清楚。下面这个很多不熟悉美国体制，但是喜欢对美国政治指手画脚的中国知识分子经常混淆的一点，那就是美国智库在美国政治中究竟扮演什么角色？不熟悉美国体制的人经常会给予智库一种指手遮天的能力。好像智库里的工作人员，各个都是国师，美国有各种各样大大小小，很多智库所有的智库做的最主要的一件事情就是撰写各种各样的政策报告Policy Reports我们去看最大的那几个智库，
来源片段
And part of the answer we came to is that the question of why we're not having those conversations needs itself to be a subject of work at a serious think tank like the American Enterprise Institute. And he has essentially let me build a team of scholars who are working on that question. Political scientists and historians and some journalists and others who think about the state of American society. And we look for one thing at the American constitutional system and political system, the parties, elections, Congress, the presidency, the courts, the administrative state. And we also think about the institutions that are upstream of politics, family and community, civil society, religion.
目标片段
那么另外一个American Enterprise InstituteAEI聚集的就是右翼建制派，这不代表这两个智库会强行要求，你必须同意民主党或者是共和党。我认识在Brookings Institute里面工作的保守派前程天主教徒共和党员。我也认识在American Enterprise Institute工作的左派进步。社民主义者。这些研究型智库的主要目的是为了给政府提供一些政策建议。在有需要的时候，政府可以选择采纳。在研究型智库中，我们可以看到各种各样不同的运营模式。
来源片段
But broadly speaking a lot of people who plan to vote for Trump are doing it because they want to make sure that Joe Biden is not president anymore. Those are two weak parties that don't offer the country much except a kind of defensive posture against a fear of the other party. It's a politics that does not speak about the future at all. Right what is America supposed to look like in 2050. That should be the subject of a presidential election in 2024. It is not in any way the subject. And I think that is because the draw here is two weak parties not two strong parties.
目标片段
他们的下一步，当然是就是在1992年智库内部推出了一个他们当时扶持已久的，并且支持绝大多数这个DLC智库生产的政策报道的总统候选人比尔·克林顿竞选成功成为美国总统。但是Heritage Foundation传统基金会，它现在在做的这个2025计划还是在第一步。所以我觉得那些大惊小怪的说什么，美国民主要完了要被这个2025计划解决了的人，他这个计划太危险了吧，要如临大敌了，这样大惊小怪的人，要么没有读过美国历史，要么只是在消耗民主党口舌，媒体不关心美国右派内部的权力斗争。这就是我刚才说的这一切是美国智库在美国政治中一直以来扮演的角色，这是政治游戏的一部分。
来源片段
So that in speaking to college educated voters what the conservative party in a democracy can say is that it's the party of stability. And social peace and social order. That's not what Republicans are saying right now. In winning working class voters that party can speak to some of their cultural concerns. That party can speak to some of their economic needs. It is possible to do that and patch together enough to win. But that kind of art of coalition building is not what Donald Trump is about. And I think more importantly it's not what Republican primary voters want. And the real challenge for both parties now in thinking about coalition building is to recognize.
目标片段
他们对于现有体制的态度是摧毁我之前有一期播客第131期讨论为何当今民主党比共和党更加保守的时候，我当时那个播客讨论的主要是民主党为什么更加保守？但是说到这里，我相信大家可以理解你把现在的民主党和这群人进行对比，对吧？我们可以理解为什么现在的这群革命派新右翼要远激进于民主党。话说回来再说一句，为什么我认为这群激进革命派新右翼以及他们所鼓吹的这个爱国主义态度之间有着某种非常深刻的矛盾。
来源片段
I do think there has to be a federal approach to higher education that is focused on reducing the cost of higher education, which has never really been how we've thought about the government's role. And on the contrary, the federal government has inflated that cost. And I do think that Republicans need a healthcare agenda that takes seriously the extraordinarily central role that healthcare plays in the cost of living concerns of American voters. Republicans have ignored that fact for 40 years in one way or another. And they're ignoring it now. They're pretending it's not a big issue, but it's still a big issue when you ask voters what worries them.
目标片段
从我刚才说的这个联邦政府部门的层面转移到高等教育大学新右翼革命派想做的另外一件事情就是改革大学。每年美国联邦政府和州政府都会给予私立大学大量的财务资助，公立大学就更不用说了。在新右翼的眼中，美国政府花费了大量的钱，不但培养出了一群不说人话、好吃懒做的精英。美国接受过大学教育的人口比例约占总人口比例不到40%，就是这样一群少数人还希望美国大多数没有上过大学的纳税者，可以帮他们还学贷，这是拜登政府的企划。
来源片段
I think that person can and should be on the right on essentially all of those issues without making them the justification for his or her election. That is to say I think that those issues are not the first things that American voters think about when they think about the future. They matter to them so if you force them to have an opinion they'll have an opinion. It can be a strong opinion and I think a Republican well let me say I'm on the right on those issues and I think a Republican presidential contender who appeals to me ought to be too but I don't think that person would actually spend a lot of time talking about those issues because again that person is trying to win voters who are not already on his side and so you do have to communicate to
目标片段
我来给大家总结一下，我觉得他们我觉得从他们回答中，我可以说在某种程度上来说，他们发现了一个真实存在的问题。但是他们给出的这个针对这个问题，给出的回答是一个很激进的回答。但是我首先想先描绘一下这个问题，然后我们再来讨论他给出的这个回答激进在哪里？这个问题就是在当今美国精英大学校园里，如果你是一个政治保守派，你是一个支持特朗普的人，你是一个共和党员，你确实需要夹着尾巴走人。
来源片段
knowledge requires a lot of freedom for expression and for inquiry and universities should be committed to a lot of freedom for expression and for inquiry they should also be willing to say that some things don't belong on the university and that there's a difference between do we invite myloinopolis and do we invite a scholar that all of our faculty disagrees with that's a very different question so I think there's a lot of room for those kinds of priorities to affect how conservatives think about the politics of higher education I think it's perfectly legitimate and appropriate for example for a state legislature to create a new school within a state university that will be committed to the the pursuit of of civic education and civic knowledge as florida has done as north carolina and texas and ohio are doing I think that's a very promising development it's a pretty assertive use of public power in a university but it's a public university and it's a use of public power that creates a new space for teaching and learning to happen it is certainly intended to push back against dei against a radicalization on campus in general it has a political purpose
目标片段
那么今天的此时此刻的校园里面有94%的哈佛本科生都自称是进步派，左派进步派是校园中的绝对主流保守派，只敢在一些特定的渠道发声，保守学生在课堂上要夹着尾巴做人，一旦出现一个就会立刻成为重视之地。那么如果我们最终的目的是为了思想上的多元化。难道作为一个学校，我们不应该给保守学生提供平权政策提供affirmative action吗？所以我想说的是，根据我的观察，这确实是一个真实存在的问题。比如说在美国留学的中国留学生，通常他们的学校越精英学生接受的观点多元化就越少。
来源片段
And the part of it that's true is that there was no infrastructure in place, this kind of White House and waiting for Trump because the conservative movement didn't want it to be Trump. So that's the difference. It's usually like, yeah, we know these think tanks are basically like the shadow cabinet for the opposition in other countries where parties are more powerful or even in American history, when parties were more powerful, there was more of an infrastructure within the party for people to rise as advisors, right, and to be trained and credentialized by the party itself. In other countries, they don't have this kind of huge think tank apparatus because, you know, the Socialist Party has its institutions within the party.
目标片段
那么另外一个American Enterprise InstituteAEI聚集的就是右翼建制派，这不代表这两个智库会强行要求，你必须同意民主党或者是共和党。我认识在Brookings Institute里面工作的保守派前程天主教徒共和党员。我也认识在American Enterprise Institute工作的左派进步。社民主义者。这些研究型智库的主要目的是为了给政府提供一些政策建议。在有需要的时候，政府可以选择采纳。在研究型智库中，我们可以看到各种各样不同的运营模式。
来源片段
So they were very Reaganite, famously Heritage was Reagan's favorite think tank but obviously then Trump emerging put them in a difficult position and during 2016 a lot of their people were pretty anti-Trump and one of the things I wanted to ask you was when I was describing my coming up through the pipeline, there was something almost organic about it, right? Like I went to a small conservative Christian college where my professor Paul Kangor, I think I've mentioned him on the podcast before, was a scholar of the Reagan presidency and so newly Edwards knew all these people at Heritage.
目标片段
比如说2016年特朗普当选的时候，我认识一些在外交政策上，就是集中在外交政策上的华盛顿智库。我跟他们聊天的时候，他就跟我说，我作为这个智库的负责人，我给我们这个智库中学者的唯一要求，就是不要签署什么，我要一辈子抵制特朗普的联名抗议书。
S2：3 个窗口回退
来源片段
They have to be loyal to Trump in the agenda, but it's not enough just to be loyal. And conservative movement bona fides may not matter as much in terms of the policy because everybody in Trump world is suspicious of so-called conservative ink and the old fusionist consensus and stuff. But in terms of that kind of imprimatur of like we're serious conservatives, we know how this works. We've done this before. We've staffed previous administrations. We should be leading this effort. That really is their calling card. And I think it's why their project 2025 has gotten the most attention. And I think it accounts for their prominence in the coverage of all this. But it's a really interesting dance, of course, because they've only recently remade themselves as anything other than the policy architects of Reaganism to be Trumpy enough for the people now in positions of influence in the Republican party and Trump himself.
目标片段
他们的下一步，当然是就是在1992年智库内部推出了一个他们当时扶持已久的，并且支持绝大多数这个DLC智库生产的政策报道的总统候选人比尔·克林顿竞选成功成为美国总统。但是Heritage Foundation传统基金会，它现在在做的这个2025计划还是在第一步。所以我觉得那些大惊小怪的说什么，美国民主要完了要被这个2025计划解决了的人，他这个计划太危险了吧，要如临大敌了，这样大惊小怪的人，要么没有读过美国历史，要么只是在消耗民主党口舌，媒体不关心美国右派内部的权力斗争。这就是我刚才说的这一切是美国智库在美国政治中一直以来扮演的角色，这是政治游戏的一部分。
来源片段
And they felt that there needed to be a sort of generational effort to sort of rebuild that infrastructure. They're both really young, right? Yeah, they're really young. And they were the sort of people who would have looked a scant at like the existing infrastructure that even Heritage had, you know, when they formed their organization, because they were like, we don't want little Matt Sipmans. We want little Nate Hawkins or, you know, much more sort of paleo oriented nativist and at least superficially populist economically welfare chauvinist types. And we need to identify them and train them and ideologically brainwash them so that those people can get jobs at the lower levels of government now.
目标片段
在对于高等教育的整顿上，我认为这种激进新右翼和万思这种已经当权的新右翼的态度是比较明确统一的。他们认为，这些精英高等教育机构应该是最重要的一个靶子。针对类似哈佛这样的大学，如果他们想要继续依靠美国政府的资助，获得研究资金，获得联邦学生贷款和助学金，那么他们就应该不能开设一些在这些新右翼眼中反制的胡说八道的研究。比如说性别研究后，性别研究、种族研究DI这种在他们眼中有害无益的，只会把年轻人培养成说话，
来源片段
There had been a time when Sam Francis was more toxic, seen as toxic, where they'd be like, oh, I don't know if we should hire this little racist. Maybe, maybe we'll get you an internship at the American Conservative. Yeah, well, for sure. If you're going to work for Paleos, for sure. But I want to point something out here, because this might be the place to point it out with this survey, that one of the important things, and I don't even know if I was able to place enough emphasis on it in my article, that one of the great coups that Heritage achieved, that was an important part of them managing to kind of dominate this space of serious planning for the transition, is that they managed to hire Johnny McInty, who was at the end of the Trump administration, the head of Trump's presidential personnel office.
目标片段
但是我首先想先描绘一下这个问题，然后我们再来讨论他给出的这个回答激进在哪里？这个问题就是在当今美国精英大学校园里，如果你是一个政治保守派，你是一个支持特朗普的人，你是一个共和党员，你确实需要夹着尾巴走人。如果你是一个长青藤大学的保守派，基督教徒，你会清楚的意识到，你说话需要轻声细语，言行，小心谨慎。你是一个少数派校园，多元化，并不会照顾到你，我们继续用哈佛来举例吧。我在今年八月份的时候，跟一个信奉天主教的哈佛女老师聊天。