最高相似度示例 · 非人工确认结果
目标片段当时在民调中遥遥领先的保守派领袖波利耶夫他在当时展现出的所有特质，在过去几个月中，这些特质突然从优点全部变成了缺点。在那个时候我说过，波利耶夫之所以在民调中遥遥领先，是因为他被一些人看作是加拿大版的清量级。特朗普温和版特朗普政治正确版。特朗普波利耶夫虽然没有特朗普这么疯狂，他就不是一个民粹领袖，他很小心，他不敢过度亲近。特朗普。他在那个时候就试图，我在那期就已经说过，一直试图与特朗普保持一定的距离。
来源片段And since Trump continues to be pretty much in control of a party for now, the Republicans are continuing to do that. Not every single Republican politician, but a large and the most influential faction of a Republican party. But of course, that makes it very tempting to then say, look, anybody on that side, they're the enemies of democracy. They don't accept anybody else's legitimate. So they're all illegitimate. And the moment I start saying that, I may have a better reason, but I'm actually in exactly the same logic.
查看片段位置
6 个展示片段 · 共 7 个展示片段（含上方示例）— 点击展开
S1：6 个窗口回退
来源片段
And I do think the situation in the United States is genuinely critical. One final thought before we move on, this is based on my own experiences of politician. One thing that I think is a problem is the erosion of the legislature, the erosion of parliament, the ways in which the site of our democratic debates is simply emptied out. One of the most shocking things to me is a democratic politician elected twice to the Canadian parliament. Nothing happens in parliament. I mean, it's an empty shell. Same thing in the United Kingdom.
目标片段
变成了加拿大的头等政治问题。自由党在一月到今天，联邦大选期间，在这个期间，他内部推上去的临时总统卡尼利用了这股能量，把自由党从崩溃边缘拽了回来。所以当时的分析在我看来没有任何问题，不是加拿大没有问题，而是加拿大问题的优先级在过去三个月被改变了一个月前大选还没有发生的时候，我读了一个我比较喜欢的加拿大经济学家、政治观察者Marshall Auerbach写的政治评论。
来源片段
And why this isn't just a sort of piece of insider political science baseball is when you're an MP yourself and you realize you have very little power. And yet your citizens are coming to your office every day saying, Michael, fix this for me. Help me. You're my representative. There's been a real waning of the representative function in our democracies, even in democracies. And as I said, I've done a pretty good job managing some major crisis. There is a crisis of representation.
目标片段
但是他在今天赢得下一任加拿大总理之前已经在实际意义上通过内部投出来，就是党内投出来。当过一段时间的加拿大总理了。你在你在那个过去几个月会看到有很多加拿大内部的政治讨论员。在分析这个人缺乏民主合法性，他就是一个技术官僚复辟。从技术上讲，怎么会有一个从来都没有当选过议员的人，可以直接成为总理来统治。加拿大呢？当然在过去几个月的马克卡尼，他是一边当总理一边宣布我会参加下次大选。就是今天的这一次，趁着当时的政治势头，我要证明我自己顺便在这个总统的总理的座位上参加下一次的总理大选。
来源片段
What's the moment when you were leader of a liberal party in Canada and leader of the opposition? When that decision of how do you treat a political adversary became particularly salient to you? Is there a moment when you treated your political opponent as an adversary and a costupto politically? Or is there a moment when you treat them as an enemy and you came to regret it? Oh, yeah. I mean, I think the central drama of my short political career plays out these issues. I'm not sure there are many experts in Canadian politics listening to this.
目标片段
这种对外的自我防御形态，变成了加拿大的主要形态。也就是说，在1月初，我那期播客讨论加拿大是否即将右转的那期播客里分析的。当时在民调中遥遥领先的保守派领袖波利耶夫他在当时展现出的所有特质，在过去几个月中，这些特质突然从优点全部变成了缺点。在那个时候我说过，波利耶夫之所以在民调中遥遥领先，是因为他被一些人看作是加拿大版的清量级。特朗普温和版特朗普政治正确版。特朗普波利耶夫虽然没有特朗普这么疯狂，他就不是一个民粹领袖，他很小心，他不敢过度亲近。特朗普。
来源片段
And the moment I start saying that, I may have a better reason, but I'm actually in exactly the same logic. And when I look certainly, you know, on the dynamics, on social media and other things now, you know, anybody who says they're not enemies, actually, they should be in some kind of way only our adversaries, let alone your phrase, our friends, they then become themselves the enemy of the people on their side of a political line. But I think there is a fundamental dilemma here, which I'm actually not quite sure how to deal with.
目标片段
加拿大现在需要的是一个能够站出来对抗特朗普，并且最大限度减轻自身利益损伤的政治领袖。在这样的一个背景下，波利耶夫在特朗普重新回到白宫之前的一整套竞选方针，反而伤害了他自己。在这点上我已经说的非常清楚了。但是下一段我还想说一个，如果你是一个观察敏锐的人，你现在可能心里面还在纳闷。另外一件事情，那就是通常来说拥有这种恐慌，拥有这种愤怒，拥有这种存在危机的民族，拥有一个外敌，在那里虎视眈眈，感到自己刚刚遭遇了背叛，正在危机状态中的人民，通常能够驾驭这种人民的人，
来源片段
And it's shadowing it because it seems like such a big problem. And it's so global and it exceeds the capacity of national governments to do anything. But only national governments have believers to do anything. And everything we do doesn't seem to be quite enough. Now, I'm not a climate alarmist, but I'm making a rather different point, which is that for millions of our fellow citizens, there is a sense that democracy just isn't up to this challenge period. I don't believe that.
目标片段
注意他说的不是无法信任的总统，而是无法信任的国家。我觉得这个区别很重要。你想这样一个被认为是冷血技术官僚的人在用如此激烈的民族主义语言，这是在西方各国领导人中非常罕见的问题在于，现在加拿大人看到的是局面已经很清楚了，即使四年之后换了一个美国总统，他们也无法确定任何由上一届政府签署的协议，是否还能够信赖人们普遍感到对美国的信任发生了深刻的裂痕。因此，加拿大不能把所有鸡蛋都放在美国这个可靠的邻居的篮子里了，对吧？
来源片段
You've written a beautiful piece for persuasion, arguing that liberal internationalism is crisis because of its mistops, because of some ways in which it's failed today with real problems, that we should nevertheless hold on to the idea that we should try and uphold something like that least-favorite term in international rules-based order. And in fact, perhaps that countries like the United States or Canada should continue to try and ensure that they show up democracies around the world, that they protect them against authoritarian advances. What's the case for that kind of liberal internationalism? What would it look like and how would it avoid some of the pitfalls that the most muscular or military forms of liberal internationalism have fallen into for the last decades?
目标片段
那就是他们的言辞变得越来越强硬。他们在这种全球主义建制自由派的特质上增加了一些带有攻击性的民族主义，开始挪用一些民族主义言语说德国真伟大，加拿大真伟大，用这种言语来进行激烈的情绪动员。当然，他们的目的跟民粹主义者不同，对吧？他不想要像民粹主义者这样建构一个全新的秩序，或者说撕裂这个冷战以来占据主导性的全球主义精英国际贸易市场的秩序，