《卫报》：年轻人无法凭一己之力改变美国枪支法律，但是他们可以打破这一局面 [英国媒体]

-------------译者：writetandy112-审核者：roroho------------



In May 1963 a white police officer in Birmingham Alabama tried to scare some black children as they went to protest against segregation. As fellow policemen turned hoses and dogs on black youngsters nearby the kids made it plain they knew what they were doing and continued marching towards the demonstrations. A reporter asked one of them her age. “Six” she said as she climbed into the paddy wagon.

1963年5月阿拉巴马州伯明翰，一个白人警官试图恐吓一群黑人孩子，因为他们抗议种族隔离制度。同行的警察还对附近的年轻黑人用上了警犬和软水管，这些孩子们很清楚他们自己在做什么，但却继续示威游行。一记者询问其中一位女孩的年纪，”6岁“她边说边自己爬进警车。

Events in Birmingham proved a crucial turning point in the civil rights era. Before protests started only 4% of Americans regarded the struggle for racial equality as the country’s most pressing issue; after Birmingham it was more than half.

伯明翰事件成了民权时代一个关键的转折点，抗议之前只有4%的美国人认为争取种族平等是这个国家最紧迫的问题，而事件过后超过一半人这么认为。

And young people were crucial to its success. That was no accident. Adult breadwinners had too much to lose and the campaign was faltering so Martin Luther King’s organisation trained young people to carry the mantle. Soon they were filling the city’s prison cells. “There were 12 people in [my] jail cell” Dennis Mallory who was a teenager in town at the time told me. “And 11 were from my school.”

年轻人对事件成功起了决定性作用，这并非偶然，成人参与进来对他们自身有太多损失，也会导致运动不稳定，所以马丁路德金的组织培训年轻人来主导运动。很快城里的监狱就被他们挤满了。当时在城里还是个青年的丹尼斯·马洛里告诉我，“我的拘留所里关了12个人，其中11个人跟我是一个学校的”。

The political courage and leadership of the young people in Florida who took on the gun lobby this week stands in the storied inspiring tradition of youth activismin America and beyond. Whether it was Paris Mexico or Brazil in 1968 Soweto in 1976 the intifada of the late 80s Seattle in the 90s the Prague spring of 1968 or the Arab spring of 2011 the young have often led resistance against injustice or for progressive change – and sometimes both.

本周参加了枪支管制游说的佛罗里达年轻人其政治勇气和领导能力也鼓舞着美国和其他地区的青少年活动。不管是1968年的巴黎、墨西哥、还是巴西，1976年的索韦托，80年代末的起义，90年代的西雅图，1968年的布拉格之春，还是2011年的阿拉伯之春，年轻人常常带头抵制不公正或做出些进步变革——有时两者兼有。

In Florida the familiar cycle of carnage thoughts prayers rage and stasis has been broken by an impassioned and uncompromising demand for gun control triggered by the students of Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school where 17 people were shot dead last week. There have been die-ins outside the White House and school walkouts around the country: they have grilled (and frankly toasted) their Republican senator and a spokeswoman for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and lobbied the state legislature.

我们熟悉的大屠杀循环，祈祷-愤怒-停滞，因上个星期在佛罗里达州 玛乔丽·斯通曼·道格拉斯中学致17人死亡的枪击案， 转化为对枪支管制的持续高涨。人们在白宫拟死示威，全国学校罢课，他们盘问（坦率地说是拷问）共和党参议员、步枪协会女发言人，游说州议会。

-------------译者：沈过雁-审核者：hht288------------

When liberals see young people challenging authority in this way they can start to wax romantic. Youth can be fetishised as though it holds intrinsically radical properties. It doesn’t. It is not an abstract identity. Youth interacts with class race gender nationality region and a range of other factors in different ways at different times. During the 1926 general strike in Britain students were used as scab labour. Young people aged 18 to 24 voted for Margaret Thatcher in 1979and 1983 and Ronald Reagan in 1984. The under-35s in India went for the Hindu nationalist Narendra Modi. Young white people backed Donald Trump.

当自由主义者看到年轻人以这种方式挑战权威时，他们就开始变得浪漫起来。年轻人可以被盲目崇拜，仿佛他们拥有内在的激进的属性。它并不是。它不是一种抽象统一性。年轻人在不同时刻以不同方式与各阶级、种族、性别、民族、地区以及一系列其他因素进行互动。1926年间发生在英国的全国大罢工行动中，学生被用作罢工破坏者。18-24岁的年轻人在1979年和1983年投票支持玛格丽特·撒切尔，在1984年支持罗纳德·里根。35岁以下的印度人支持印度教民族主义者纳伦德拉·莫迪。年轻白人支持唐纳德·特朗普。
 
And while the young can at times make an impact on the streets they are among the least likely to vote – if indeed they are even eligible to vote – and cannot withdraw their labour to any devastating effect. There is a limit to what they can achieve alone. In the days after the shooting Emma González 17 who was at the school when the shooting happened emerged as an impressive articulate champion for gun control saying: “We are going to be the last mass shooting.” There have been four since their school attack and at the rate things are going this year the United States is due another school shooting before the end of the month.

当年轻人会偶尔上街制造轰动的同时，他们却是最不太会去投票的人——即使他们有投票资格——并且他们的劳动力撤回不会产生任何毁灭性的影响。他们仅凭一己之力行动能达到的目标是有限的。枪击案后的几天，曾出现在学校案发现场的17岁爱玛·冈萨雷斯（Emma González）作为一名令人钦佩的敢于发声的控枪拥护者现身：“这将是我们最后一次大规模枪击案。”然而在他们这场枪击案后其校园内又发生了四起枪击案，并且按照今年枪击案件发生的频率，美国这个月结束前还会再发生一场校园枪击案。
 
But at a moment like this far more problematic than overstating the impact of young people’s protest is underestimating it. If there is one unifying element in the nature of youth and student protest over the past 50 years it has been the likelihood of it finding its greatest potency precisely when established political structures have shown themselves to be obsolete – structures young people feel neither beholden to nor indebted to.

但在这种情形时刻下，比夸大年轻人的抗议行为更有问题的是低估这种行为。如果过去50年中青年学生的抗议性质中存有一种统一因素，当已建立好的政治结构展示出他们的陈腐时，这种因素能精确地找到自己最好的力量就是可能的——各种年轻人既不受其恩惠对此毫不感激的（政治）结构。
 
There are few better illustrations of this than guns in the US. A consistent majority favours stricter gun laws and support for background checks is almost unanimous. Yet thanks to a combination of big money gerrymandering and political spinelessness each mass shooting is received in a mood of learned hopelessness. Citing Sandy Hook people understandably insist that if nothing changed when the kids were younger and the president cried and called for action then nothing ever will change.

在美国，没有比枪支更好的例证了。大多数人赞成更严格的枪支法，并且对背景审核的支持几乎是没有异议的。但是由于大资金操纵的选区不合理划分，以及党派懦弱的综合原因，每次枪击事件都在一种习得性无助的氛围中发生。以桑迪胡克引证，民众可理解地坚持着，如果在受到伤害的孩子们年龄更小并且总统大声疾呼要付诸行动的情况下也仍然什么都没有改变的话，那么之后也不会再有任何改变了。
（译注：习得性无助”是美国心理学家塞利格曼1967年在研究动物时提出的，他用狗作了一项经典实验，起初把狗关在笼子里，只要蜂音器一响，就给以难受的电击，狗关在笼子里逃避不了电击，多次实验后，蜂音器一响，在给电击前，先把笼门打开，此时狗不但不逃而是不等电击出现就先倒在地开始呻吟和颤抖，本来可以主动地逃避却绝望地等待痛苦的来临，这就是习得性无助。） 

When reporting for my book about all the children and teens shot dead in one random day in America I asked each family an open-ended question: what did they think had made the tragedy possible? Not one mentioned guns. When I asked the more leading question of what they thought about guns most had an opinion: they were too easily accessible. After a while I concluded that they looked on gun deaths as being a bit like traffic fatalities. If your child was run over by a car you might call for a traffic light speed bump or lower speed limit – and no one would claim that was unconstitutional. But you wouldn’t call for an end to traffic. Who could imagine a world without traffic? To these parents that would be as bizarre as a world without guns.

在我为自己的关于在美国普通日常的一天里被枪杀的所有青少年的书做报告的时候，我都会问每个家庭一个开放式的问题：他们认为造成这种悲剧的原因是什么？没有人提到枪支。当我就他们如何看待枪支提出更多诱导性的提问时，大部分人的观点是：枪支太容易获取了。过了一会儿我总结到他们看待枪杀有点儿像看待交通事故。当你的孩子被车辆碾过时，你可能呼吁建立个交通灯、减速带或者要求较低速度限制——并且没有人会声称那是违反宪法的。但是你不能要求完全停止交通。谁能想象一个没有交通的世界呢？对那些父母来说没有枪支的世界和它一样不可思议。

 -------------译者：沈过雁-审核者：roroho------------

But González was 12 when Sandy Hook happened. She and her fellow students have not learned to be hopeless. Nobody can tell them to lobby through the proper channels because there are no working channels. So they have gone for the source. The tone of urgency rage hope and mocking disbelief in their resistance is one of the things that has been missing from this debate. America’s rate of gun death – seven children and teens a day as well as around 80 adults –is an obscenity the nation has become accustomed to.

但是桑迪胡克事件发生时冈萨雷斯才只有12岁。她和她的同学们还不曾体会过绝望。没有人告诉他们要通过适当的渠道进行游说，因为并没有什么可行的渠道。所以他们自己去寻找资源。人们急迫的、愤怒的、充满希望的，嘲弄的、怀疑的语气作为他们面对的一种阻碍也已经从这场辩论中消失了。美国的枪杀率——每天7个青少年和80个成年人遇害——这个国家对这种残忍的死亡已经变得习以为常。
 
It is not just the fact of their opposition but the tone that is thrilling. “Calling BS” on the political class and the NRA facing down senators and lobbyists they have acted independently of both political parties and a mostly white middle-aged suburban-led gun control movement that has little connection with the communities most acutely affected by gun violence.

不仅是他们所反对的事实，他们的论调也令人振奋。他们称政治阶层和全美步枪协会在“讲废话”；他们压倒参议员和说客；他们表现得独立于所有政党，以及和受到枪支暴力影响最严重的社区没有什么联系的郊区中年白人主导的枪支管制运动之外。
 
This is fantastic as far as it goes but on its own it doesn’t go far enough. History has shown that young people and students have the ability to expose a crisis and challenge it but rarely defeat or solve it unilaterally. They are more likely to be the spark for the broader struggles than the flame itself. The systemic threat youth and students pose is one of contagion – that their energy and commitment will infect others with more leverage who may join them.

这种行动的存在是极好的但是它本身做得还不够。历史已经显示年轻人和学生有能力揭露危机并挑战它，但是很难单方面地战胜或解决它。他们更有可能成为能广泛斗争的星星之火而不是成为火焰本身。青年和学生们造成的系统性的威胁就像一种传染病——他们的能量和贡献可以感染其他有可能加入他们的人，而这些人有更大的影响力。
 
Of the victory against segregation in Birmingham the historian Taylor Branchwrote: “Never before was a country transformed arguably redeemed by the active moral witness of schoolchildren.” That may have been the first time. Let’s hope it is not the last.

就伯明翰反种族隔离的胜利，历史学家泰勒·布兰奇写到：“以前从未有过可以论证是因小学生积极道德见证而国家得到救赎转型的事情。”这可能是史上第一次。我们希望它不是最后一次。


-------------译者：雨天路滑当心-审核者：龙腾翻译总管------------

corneilius 12h ago
So the American president who dodged the draft 5 times with sore feet has just called somone a coward? Well let's face it he would know a lot about cowardice wouldn't he?
You would have to have a heart of stone not to laugh.

所以借口脚疼逃避服兵役5次的美国总统刚刚叫别人懦夫？说实话，他应该对懦夫很了解，不是吗？除非你有铁石心肠，不然你肯定笑了。

ID331660  corneilius 11h ago
In a situation lile that he would be the first to run screaming shoving everyone else out of his way. Wasn't he also filmed repairing himself under an umbrella leaving his wife and son in the wind and rain? It's a small gesture but very telling about his character.

在那样的情况下，他会是第一个尖叫着逃跑，把别人从自己的路上推开的人。他不是还被拍到自己在伞下休整，让他老婆和儿子被风吹雨淋的情景吗？这只是个小举止，但是生动形象地表现出了他的性格。

MTavernier  corneilius 11h ago 
Trump singled out that guard and bashed him because that guard makes a mockery of Trump's plan to put guns in schools. Trump's strategy is to send pistol-armed teachers into battle against maniacs armed with military assault rifles.
Guns in schools are the problem not the solution.

特朗普单叫出那个警卫并严厉批评了他，是因为那个警卫嘲笑了他准备在学校里配备枪支的计划。特朗普的对策是让教师们用手枪对付拿着军用突击步枪的疯子们。

eileanmor  corneilius 11h ago
Yes. Its people like Trump and Dubya who keep well out of harms way while others do the fighting and dying( usually young men from poor backgrounds who are asked to defend what so often kicks them in the teeth during peace time ).

说得对。特朗普和小布什这种小人就会躲在安全的地方，却让别人去打仗去流血牺牲（通常是出身贫困的年轻人。而他们被要求去保卫的东西在和平时期却经常打击、阻碍他们）。

And when little rich boy becomes President he is so often aggressive and militaristic to the point of lunacy. Because he doesn't understand fear suffering courage or cowardice. Daddy saw to it that he didn't have to.

当一个富家小公子成为了总统，他就总是好斗而且黩武到了癫狂的程度。因为他不懂得恐惧、苦难、勇气和懦弱。他爹地确保他不需要懂。

 -------------译者：willdemon-审核者：hht288------------

littlebillykershaw  ID331660 11h ago
Normally I'd agree but if you had hair as lovely as Trump I'm sure you'd do anything to protect it.

按平常我是认同你的说法的，但是你要是有一头特朗普一样可爱的头发，我保证你会为了保护你的秀发而作任何事情。

davidc929  Glimps_Holme 10h ago
He is a snivelling shit of a man who avoided his duty in Vietnam. Not from any point of principal but only the desire to save his own skin.

他（特朗普）是一个爱哭鼻子的垃圾货，他逃避了其在越南的兵役。不是出于什么高尚原则，而只是为了保护他的皮肤。

End_Of_The_World 
Well done. Your devotion to defending your President has been noted. Take the rest of the night off. Please.

做得好。我们都已经知道你愿意为保卫总统献身了。今晚请好好休息吧，请别再出来啦。

Trumpianos_ad_leones  corneilius 9h ago
As an ex-army guy I neither rate Trump nor his followers much high to be honest -
in most cases pure cowards - big mouth small hands.

作为退伍军人，讲实话，我不会支持特朗普和他的追随者们。大多数情况下他们就是一群懦夫——牛逼吹上天，干啥啥不行。

That the NRA head call Europeans "Socialist Europeans" and dare to judge their policies on gun is just proof of pure hypocrisy and how "clever" a certain part of the US electorate is as Europeans have wayyyyy less risks to be gunned down than US citizens.

美国全国步枪协会的首脑管欧洲人叫“社会主义欧洲人”， 还敢批判他们的枪支政策，这正好证明了他们的虚伪和某部分美国选民是多么的“聪明”。要知道，在欧洲挨枪子的风险可比在美国不知道要少多少。

MTavernier 12h ago 
American children are being executed in their classrooms by assailants using military-grade weapons. How is that abomination possible outside of a war zone?

美国的孩子们在他们的学校里被军用武器屠杀。为什么一个非战争的国度会允许如此的恶行？

It was simple to disarm Britain after the Dunblane and Hunger-ford massacres because there isn't a gun culture in the UK. It has been 22 years since the last school shooting. In Britain we don't need to arm teachers or turn schools into fortresses. It must be obvious to most Americans that they've taken a wrong turn. America has lost its way.

在邓布兰和亨格福德惨绝人寰的枪击案发生后，英国就禁枪了，因为英国没有拥枪文化。英国上次发生校园枪击事件都已经是22年前的事了。在英国，我们不需要给教师配枪，把学校保护的像堡垒一样。而美国的情况恰恰180度相反。美国这方面走错方向了。

A mentally unstable teacher with a gun in a locked classroom? Surely it makes sense to arm the children so they can fire back and take him down!

一个精神不正常的教师，随身带枪，和学生们独处同一间教室里？按照美国的做法学生也得配枪，才能在关键时刻还击并干掉他们的老师！