精選
Excerpt：亨利‧梭羅的《公民不服從》（Civil Disobedience）
2015/10/02 07:21
瀏覽1,491
迴響0
推薦7
引用0
Excerpt：亨利‧梭羅的《公民不服從》（Civil Disobedience）
《公民不服從》是亨利‧梭羅非常有名的一篇文章，內容簡單明瞭，論述的方式則是樸實無華、鏗鏘有力，而關於他對於政府的期待以及應對的態度，從今天看來，依然讓人感到欽佩不已。
他的理念啟發了甘地的不合作運動精神；影響了南非曼德拉的反種族隔離運動、80 年代的環境保護主義先驅、90 年代的反波灣戰爭運動……，以及近期的茉莉花革命、佔領華爾街運動等等。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)
Resistance to Civil Government (Civil Disobedience) is an essay by American transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau that was first published in 1849. In it, Thoreau argues that individuals should not permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that they have a duty to avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. Thoreau was motivated in part by his disgust with slavery and the Mexican–American War.
書名：公民，不服從！梭羅最後的演講
作者：亨利‧梭羅
譯者：劉粹倫
出版社：紅桌文化
原文：From “The Project Gutenberg eBook”
【Excerpt】
I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—"That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.
「政府管得愈少愈好」這句話我由衷贊同，也希望能循序漸進地實現。只要繼續這樣下去，我想最後這句話會變成「政府什麼都不管最好」。等大家都準備好了，什麼都不管的政府就會出現。政府之所以會成立，只是應一時之需；不過，大多數的政府常搞不清楚狀況，而且所有的政府都有辦事不力的時候。
……
But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.
話雖如此，我這個公民不會那麼不切實際，和那些自稱無政府主義的人一個樣兒。我不主張廢除政府，但要求政府要立即改善；如果每個人都說出自己尊敬的政府形態，我們就更有機會擁有像樣的政府。
After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?—in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents on injustice.
畢竟，人民一旦當家作主，多數人就能夠長時間地主導大局——不是多數人的想法比較正確，也不是這樣對少數人最公平，而是多數人佔了「多數決」的優勢。因此，我們也不難理解，要是政府做事都是多數人說了算，正義就無所依歸。有沒有哪個政府裡面是多數人憑著良心做事，而不是依賴表象評斷是非對錯？多數人只決定眼前需要變通的問題就好，而不是決定國家的百年大計？難道公民完全不能要求議員憑良心做事嗎？那良心是用來幹麼的？我認為，我們應該先學會做人的道理，再來才是當個好國民。政府教育人民要尊重法律、法律即正義，此舉實不可取。人民唯一的義務是：無論何時，都只憑良心做事。雖然組織本來就沒有良知可言：但若成員有良心，那麼組織就會有良知。我們要知道，法律不會讓人更講道義，每每因為遵守法律，人民反而淪為不義之事的幫兇。
……
How does it become a man to behave toward the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave's government also.
我們要怎麼面對今天這個政府？跟它扯上關係真的很令人慚愧。我一刻都無法把這個政治組織視為我的政府，因為它也是奴隸的政府！
……
Thus the state never intentionally confronts a man's sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can force me who obey a higher law than I. They force me to become like themselves. I do not hear of men being forced to live this way or that by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet a government which says to me, "Your money or your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do. It is not worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for the successful working of the machinery of society. I am not the son of the engineer. I perceive that, when an acorn and a chestnut fall side by side, the one does not remain inert to make way for the other, but both obey their own laws, and spring and grow and flourish as best they can, till one, perchance, overshadows and destroys the other. If a plant cannot live according to nature, it dies; and so a man.
所以說，政府從未刻意與人民的判斷、智識或道德起正面衝突，只對付人民的身體與感官。政府不是以智慧或誠信取信於人民，倒是四肢發達，精力旺盛。我生來不是要受人逼迫的，我按照自己的方式度過分分秒秒，看看我跟政府誰能撐到最後。群眾有什麼力量？除非他們信仰的真理比我所服膺的真理更高明，我才有可能順從。但是，他們要我變得跟他們一樣。我從來沒有聽過有人被烏合之眾逼著，一定要過這樣或那樣的生活。那種日子要怎麼過？碰到問我「要錢還是要命」的政府，為什麼我就要趕快把錢送上？政府可能處境艱難，狗急跳牆，只是我也愛莫能助。政府必須跟我一樣，自己想辦法，哭哭啼啼解決不了問題。我的責任不是讓社會這臺機器好好運轉，我老爸又不是工程師。我發現，橡實跟栗子同時落下，彼此不會呆呆地讓路給對方，而是會各自照著自己的法則生長，努力發芽長大、開枝散葉，直到長得比另一棵還茂盛，弱小的便枯萎凋零了。如果植物不能照天性生長就會死掉；人也一樣。
……
The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to—for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well—is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.
儘管如此，我還是願意服從政府的權威。如果政府裡的人都比我懂得更多、更能幹，那我也樂得聽從指揮，不過就算沒我厲害，很多事情我也照辦。然而，就算政府裡都是能人，政府的權威仍有瑕疵：要完全實現正義，必須要人民的認可與同意，政府的權限才算成立。除非有我的允許，否則政府就不能對我主張任何人身、財產的權利。由君主專制進步到 君主立憲，再由君主立憲變成民主政治，這個過程愈來愈尊重個人的權利。中國古代的哲學家早就把人民視為帝國的根基。我們所知的民主政治，已經無法再進步成別的政體了嗎？難道不可能承認更多個人的權利，創造更多個人的價值？個人是政府權力與權限的源頭，除非政府能承認個人的力量更為崇高且獨立不可侵犯，平等地對待每個人，否則就永遠無法成為真正自由與開明的國家。
I please myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which I have also imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.
我光用想像的就很高興：有個政府終於以正義對待人民，尊重個人如尊重鄰居；有個政府不會因為國內少數人雖然履行公民和同胞的義務，卻不願意跟政府攪和在一起，走得太近，也不想被收買，就因此食寢難安。當國家孕育出這樣的民主果實，任憑瓜熟蒂落，就等於開創了美好的光輝大道。可惜一切只在我的想像之中，至今尚未實現。
《公民不服從》是亨利‧梭羅非常有名的一篇文章，內容簡單明瞭，論述的方式則是樸實無華、鏗鏘有力，而關於他對於政府的期待以及應對的態度，從今天看來，依然讓人感到欽佩不已。
他的理念啟發了甘地的不合作運動精神；影響了南非曼德拉的反種族隔離運動、80 年代的環境保護主義先驅、90 年代的反波灣戰爭運動……，以及近期的茉莉花革命、佔領華爾街運動等等。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Disobedience_(Thoreau)
Resistance to Civil Government (Civil Disobedience) is an essay by American transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau that was first published in 1849. In it, Thoreau argues that individuals should not permit governments to overrule or atrophy their consciences, and that they have a duty to avoid allowing such acquiescence to enable the government to make them the agents of injustice. Thoreau was motivated in part by his disgust with slavery and the Mexican–American War.
書名：公民，不服從！梭羅最後的演講
作者：亨利‧梭羅
譯者：劉粹倫
出版社：紅桌文化
原文：From “The Project Gutenberg eBook”
【Excerpt】
I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe—"That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes, inexpedient.
「政府管得愈少愈好」這句話我由衷贊同，也希望能循序漸進地實現。只要繼續這樣下去，我想最後這句話會變成「政府什麼都不管最好」。等大家都準備好了，什麼都不管的政府就會出現。政府之所以會成立，只是應一時之需；不過，大多數的政府常搞不清楚狀況，而且所有的政府都有辦事不力的時候。
……
But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves no-government men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it.
話雖如此，我這個公民不會那麼不切實際，和那些自稱無政府主義的人一個樣兒。我不主張廢除政府，但要求政府要立即改善；如果每個人都說出自己尊敬的政府形態，我們就更有機會擁有像樣的政府。
After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases can not be based on justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?—in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed are daily made the agents on injustice.
畢竟，人民一旦當家作主，多數人就能夠長時間地主導大局——不是多數人的想法比較正確，也不是這樣對少數人最公平，而是多數人佔了「多數決」的優勢。因此，我們也不難理解，要是政府做事都是多數人說了算，正義就無所依歸。有沒有哪個政府裡面是多數人憑著良心做事，而不是依賴表象評斷是非對錯？多數人只決定眼前需要變通的問題就好，而不是決定國家的百年大計？難道公民完全不能要求議員憑良心做事嗎？那良心是用來幹麼的？我認為，我們應該先學會做人的道理，再來才是當個好國民。政府教育人民要尊重法律、法律即正義，此舉實不可取。人民唯一的義務是：無論何時，都只憑良心做事。雖然組織本來就沒有良知可言：但若成員有良心，那麼組織就會有良知。我們要知道，法律不會讓人更講道義，每每因為遵守法律，人民反而淪為不義之事的幫兇。
……
How does it become a man to behave toward the American government today? I answer, that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that political organization as my government which is the slave's government also.
我們要怎麼面對今天這個政府？跟它扯上關係真的很令人慚愧。我一刻都無法把這個政治組織視為我的政府，因為它也是奴隸的政府！
……
Thus the state never intentionally confronts a man's sense, intellectual or moral, but only his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical strength. I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can force me who obey a higher law than I. They force me to become like themselves. I do not hear of men being forced to live this way or that by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet a government which says to me, "Your money or your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do. It is not worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for the successful working of the machinery of society. I am not the son of the engineer. I perceive that, when an acorn and a chestnut fall side by side, the one does not remain inert to make way for the other, but both obey their own laws, and spring and grow and flourish as best they can, till one, perchance, overshadows and destroys the other. If a plant cannot live according to nature, it dies; and so a man.
所以說，政府從未刻意與人民的判斷、智識或道德起正面衝突，只對付人民的身體與感官。政府不是以智慧或誠信取信於人民，倒是四肢發達，精力旺盛。我生來不是要受人逼迫的，我按照自己的方式度過分分秒秒，看看我跟政府誰能撐到最後。群眾有什麼力量？除非他們信仰的真理比我所服膺的真理更高明，我才有可能順從。但是，他們要我變得跟他們一樣。我從來沒有聽過有人被烏合之眾逼著，一定要過這樣或那樣的生活。那種日子要怎麼過？碰到問我「要錢還是要命」的政府，為什麼我就要趕快把錢送上？政府可能處境艱難，狗急跳牆，只是我也愛莫能助。政府必須跟我一樣，自己想辦法，哭哭啼啼解決不了問題。我的責任不是讓社會這臺機器好好運轉，我老爸又不是工程師。我發現，橡實跟栗子同時落下，彼此不會呆呆地讓路給對方，而是會各自照著自己的法則生長，努力發芽長大、開枝散葉，直到長得比另一棵還茂盛，弱小的便枯萎凋零了。如果植物不能照天性生長就會死掉；人也一樣。
……
The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to—for I will cheerfully obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know nor can do so well—is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it. The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy, is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.
儘管如此，我還是願意服從政府的權威。如果政府裡的人都比我懂得更多、更能幹，那我也樂得聽從指揮，不過就算沒我厲害，很多事情我也照辦。然而，就算政府裡都是能人，政府的權威仍有瑕疵：要完全實現正義，必須要人民的認可與同意，政府的權限才算成立。除非有我的允許，否則政府就不能對我主張任何人身、財產的權利。由君主專制進
I please myself with imagining a State at last which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the duties of neighbors and fellow men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which I have also imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.
我光用想像的就很高興：有個政府終於以正義對待人民，尊重個人如尊重鄰居；有個政府不會因為國內少數人雖然履行公民和同胞的義務，卻不願意跟政府攪和在一起，走得太近，也不想被收買，就因此食寢難安。當國家孕育出這樣的民主果實，任憑瓜熟蒂落，就等於開創了美好的光輝大道。可惜一切只在我的想像之中，至今尚未實現。
自訂分類：Selected & Extracts
你可能會有興趣的文章：
限會員,要發表迴響,請先登入
