最高相似度示例 · 非人工确认结果
目标片段把这个美国党派的初选完全民主化的话，那在2016年的共和党，他们是不会把特朗普推出来，作为他们党派候选人的，恰恰是因为美国的党派精英在1968年之后失去了掌控话语权的能力。因为这个初选变成了纯民主的一人一票的初选制度，所以才导致2016年特朗普这种人能够成为共和党候选人这个历史，我现在一笔带过具体是怎么发生的？我在第82期播客人人质疑的在位，总统应该放弃参选。第二任吗？里面已经详细介绍过了，有兴趣的朋友可以回去复习一下。
来源片段A huge number of non-white people vote for the Republican Party rather than the Democratic Party. And in fact, when you look at some of those demographic crosstabs, there's been significant change from 2016 to the current polls. White people are much more likely now to vote for the Democratic Party than they were in 2016, and non-white people, especially Hispanics, but not just Hispanics, are much more likely to vote for the Republican Party when they were in 2016. So I have, I guess, a two-part question. One is, to what extent do you buy that second description of the situation? And if that is true, then why are elections always so damn close?
查看片段位置
11 个展示片段 · 共 12 个展示片段（含上方示例）— 点击展开
S1：4 个窗口回退
来源片段
On the second image, it looks like there's actually a lot of persuasion going on. A lot of people are changing their mind. People who voted for Trump in 2016 are now voting for Biden. People who voted for Hillary in 2016 are now going to vote for Trump. But if that's the case, why are those voter flows so similar in size to each other, that even for the composition of the tribes keeps changing, it so happens that we end up with similarly close-run elections? First of all, I think the focus on ethnicity, which made sense in many past elections, is getting less significant now.
目标片段
因为这个初选变成了纯民主的一人一票的初选制度，所以才导致2016年特朗普这种人能够成为共和党候选人这个历史，我现在一笔带过具体是怎么发生的？我在第82期播客人人质疑的在位，总统应该放弃参选。第二任吗？里面已经详细介绍过了，有兴趣的朋友可以回去复习一下。不管怎么样，一直到今天2024年，有一些名声显赫的有权有势的右派，至今都跟特朗普以及特朗普代表的这种民粹主义新右派势不两立。
来源片段
The fact that this voter should look at that immigrant and say we are naturally the same category, because in the eyes of American posters, we're both Latino, is just, you know, a vast oversimplification of the world. So there shouldn't be something that's surprising that they may not be fully in solidarity with them. One statistic that I think I've cited before in the podcast is that there was around 2016 a clear majority of a population in favor of building a wall on the southern border of Mexico among Mexican voters. And so, you know, we shouldn't be entirely surprised by this.
目标片段
这个是美国新右派的出发点。我相信说到这里，大家可以看得出来，为什么这两个派系是针锋相对的，在万斯的乡下人杯歌。这本书出版在2016年的时候，我身边这群深蓝州的民主党人之所以被这个故事触碰到了，就是因为他们意识到哇哦，这是一个全新的问题。咱们之前从来没有想过这个问题，这是一个出现在美国的新问题。而且对于这种问题的敏锐度，我觉得这才是新右派。
来源片段
How did we think the people who experienced those losses and more to the point that communities that experienced those losses, how do we think they were going to feel? I have to say, looking back at the decade when that happened, it is remarkable how little discussion there was of this historic change in the American economy, which happened by historical standards in the Twinkling Ben Eye. Did we think that the people who lost those jobs were simply going to sit still, take their losses, and go work at Walmart for half the previous salaries?
目标片段
这种思维模式在美国当今的新右翼眼中，这种思维模式带来的是美国现在根深蒂固的社会问题和阶级问题，他没有真正顾及普通工人和落后地区的情况。这种做大蛋糕水涨船高的经济思维模式，在他们眼中犯了一个什么错呢？就是他取了平均值。比如说他取了比尔盖茨和一千名非常穷的人的平均财富是多少。然后他说哇，我们的平均财富值增加了。现在的这群新右翼。他们认为我们必须要重新思考经济学。
来源片段
And countries that are dominated by people like that can get into trouble. So let me restate this as a question that perhaps a relatively young listener to this podcast might pose, somebody who, let's say, is an undergrad and is trying to figure out what next steps to take. If you want to be influential in politics in some kind of way, one path is to study very concrete public policy, right, become great at running statistical models or doing microeconomics or something like that. Another is to go to the heights of abstraction, to really think about the grand theories of the social world and so on. It sounds like you're suggesting that there's a kind of middle path in which you are thinking about big theoretical questions that allow you to have greater purchase on the world, to develop a more distinctive perspective, to see through the follies of the current position, which always exists and which
目标片段
我想在这里跟大家强调的一个关键点，就是我觉得对于这群美国新右派来说，他们首先是对于美国国内的政治经济产生了一种逻辑自洽的思考和反应。对于美国社会正在面临什么样的紧急的问题，做出了一个他们自己的诊断，他们自己的诊断。然后在这个诊断之上，他需要找到一些政治动力来推动后面的这个政策思考。比如说我们要造成怎么样的改变，这是一个新右派的政治运动。他并不能够仅仅被一句特朗普的跟辟虫这种评论来简化，或者说概括。
S2：4 个窗口回退
来源片段
And on the other hand, he has ambitious programs at Tennessee Valley Authority, a massive national program to bring hydroelectric power, agricultural development, to one of the poorest areas in America, all of its state funded and state administered. He has a major program to transform American agriculture and bring prosperity back to American farmers. He has a major relief program for the unemployed. So there are different elements of this, but it lacks coherence. And the programs that seem to work or get the most publicity immediately are those favoring elite interests in American society. Put the banks together, and if we put the banks back together, the rest of the economy will follow.
目标片段
如果我们把这些巨头排除在外，那以整个美国经济领域实际上没有真的做出什么真正的增长。这几个就那么几个最引人瞩目的企业，掩盖了美国经济的根本问题。那就是在绝大多数的人群集中最多的领域。比如说工人，比如说贫困地区的生产业，中产阶级地区都没有从美国经济增长中受益。这才是美国经济的问题所在。不管是奥巴马克林顿代表的中间偏左，还是里根罗姆尼代表的中间偏右的这些主流政客，他们都以为美国经济可以水涨船高，对吧？
来源片段
And this turn on Roosevelt's part is what excites the voting public and leads to his landslide victory in 1936. If he had not turned in this direction, I think the results of 1936 would have been quite different. So he is reading the political situation clearly, intelligently, strategically, and he makes the right call, not because he suddenly himself has become a socialist or a social Democrat, even though the programs he's encouraging bring America a version of social democracy. He feels he has to turn in this direction in order to survive politically. As he said last time, thereby he bridged the gap that had opened up and seemed insuperable for the Democratic Party between that rural agrarian Southern tradition and working men and now women in the cities in the North.
目标片段
我想在这里跟大家强调的一个关键点，就是我觉得对于这群美国新右派来说，他们首先是对于美国国内的政治经济产生了一种逻辑自洽的思考和反应。对于美国社会正在面临什么样的紧急的问题，做出了一个他们自己的诊断，他们自己的诊断。然后在这个诊断之上，他需要找到一些政治动力来推动后面的这个政策思考。比如说我们要造成怎么样的改变，这是一个新右派的政治运动。他并不能够仅仅被一句特朗普的跟辟虫这种评论来简化，或者说概括。
来源片段
They believe in the New Deal programs, they believe, especially in 1934 and 35, that the programs being put in place will benefit blacks economically, that the opportunity to join unions, the opportunity to get certain benefits will benefit them economically so that even though they're not getting racial justice, they are increasing their economic opportunity. So this marks the beginning of Democratic Party's ability to convince not just white Americans, but Americans of multiple races that it is the party of the people. It is in incipient form the origins of the modern Democratic Party, which defines itself not just in terms of economic opportunity for the poor and the middling orders, but as an institution that pushes forward the rights for all Americans regardless of race.
目标片段
因为廉价劳动力对于企业有利，企业可以通过获得廉价劳动力带来更便宜的产品，获得更高的利润。这是传统共和党的观点。现在这种新右派的政治正确的观点完全反对我刚才这个想法，现在他们的认识是美国的老百姓，不仅仅是消费者，美国老百姓也是劳动者。在很多方面，他们首先是一个劳动者，然后再是一个消费者。这就意味着一个成功的经济政策，必须能够让这些劳动者有权利去维护他们的利益。其实这点就是很奇怪，对吧？新右派的这个工人权利的主张，是我们想象中的左派劳动阶级对于劳工权利的主张。
来源片段
And I think actually politics, including maybe American politics, is littered with stories of the outsider who's going to come in and work this thing out from an outside perspective, being paralyzed in Washington. And it's the career politicians, it's the insiders. But it's also the people who look like they are politicians who will find it hard to move because they are party men who are the flexible ones. I think that is the definitive version of that contrast. The great presidents are the politicians. I would agree, although the great politicians, I would also say, have their unscrupulousness tethered to some core beliefs somewhere. And I think Roosevelt had that tethering.
目标片段
那么在我刚才描绘的这个40多分钟的新右派里面，一个我能够观察到的思想上的分歧，就是一些特别虔诚的教徒那种相信基督教、国家主义者和纯粹的民粹主义者，就是不虔诚的民粹主义者之间的斗争。比如说万思他在2019年才皈依天主教。他现在是一个很虔诚的人，他强烈反对，在任何情况下都堕台。当然我也认识一些和万思工作过的这个智库里面的一些高级学者。我跟他们聊天的时候，他们他们会认为新右派走到今天，之所以能够汇聚美国这么强的政治能量，跟基督教跟信仰没关系，基督教民族主义的这个框架，误解了新右派能否成建立如此成功的政治联盟，
S3：3 个窗口回退
来源片段
And anyone, any all of these things that politically informed lefties will know about. So Trump might be, quote, counter to the will of the people. After all, he lost the popular vote and only became president by winning the electoral vote, which we might see as a counter majoritarian and hence anti-Republican institution. Nonetheless, even with all of those sort of factors baked in, it still feels like people want to say something stronger. And Trump didn't lose, by the way, the popular vote decisively. He lost it by, what was it, 1. 5? 2 percentage points?
目标片段
把这个美国党派的初选完全民主化的话，那在2016年的共和党，他们是不会把特朗普推出来，作为他们党派候选人的，恰恰是因为美国的党派精英在1968年之后失去了掌控话语权的能力。因为这个初选变成了纯民主的一人一票的初选制度，所以才导致2016年特朗普这种人能够成为共和党候选人这个历史，我现在一笔带过具体是怎么发生的？我在第82期播客人人质疑的在位，总统应该放弃参选。第二任吗？里面已经详细介绍过了，有兴趣的朋友可以回去复习一下。
来源片段
I'm not talking about what this ideology would imply today necessarily, I'm talking about what it implied to the author, like making sense of the author's worldview as a way of understanding their core concepts. So, you know, I'm not at all saying we want to take the policy preferences from Machiavelli, you know, Machiavelli did not think mercenary armies were a great way of unifying Italy. This is not something that we're going to port over into the modern world. However, understanding that why he thought that existed in a reciprocal relationship with what he thought about freedom allows us to understand what he thought about freedom. And in turn, if we so wish, we can apply that to the modern world. So then, I've been circling the drain for long enough, let's sort of get into making sense of all of this together, and I've given you my framework for doing so.
目标片段
另外一方面，我们必须要理解他对于中国的敌意，是出于一种美国在国际政治上必须要收敛的理解。这种对于国际政治的理解，是和老右派不同的。老右派，认为我们可以通过贸易让中国自由化，这是他们的信仰。但是现在这群新右派，他们不信仰这一套。今天这期播客的目的就是我通过我在美国的观察，我的观察告诉我，这群人这群新右派，他们有着一套融会贯通、逻辑自洽的世界观，他们的世界观究竟是什么？我们去我现在去纵观这什么中文语境中的政治评论。
来源片段
Everyone sort of looks at you like, oh, that person. So what does any of that matter, right? Well, it matters because I think there's an aspect to the use of wealth here, that we're not really taking into account. And it maps to other things as well, which is that people, we look at the billionaires in our society, and we're motivated by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to say those billionaires should have less money, and they should be using it on socially good causes, I agree they should. But it's not rational, right? Like, what's the difference between having 10 billion and 11? I don't really see that there is one.
目标片段
这种思维模式在美国当今的新右翼眼中，这种思维模式带来的是美国现在根深蒂固的社会问题和阶级问题，他没有真正顾及普通工人和落后地区的情况。这种做大蛋糕水涨船高的经济思维模式，在他们眼中犯了一个什么错呢？就是他取了平均值。比如说他取了比尔盖茨和一千名非常穷的人的平均财富是多少。然后他说哇，我们的平均财富值增加了。现在的这群新右翼。他们认为我们必须要重新思考经济学。