|
|
本帖最后由 Wrath 于 2010-2-3 10:05 编辑
以下为网民回帖.
回贴
1. 凯文
“would China be able to occupy the battlefield of the Western public discourse?”I find this completely scary that the extremists in both the United States and China get to control the dialog that our two nations should be enemies and do battle. There are a lot of people in both China and the United States that see each others as brothers and sisters. United we can make this century the most peaceful in history, divided we will only destroy everything we worked to accomplished. As I told my Chinese in-laws, America and China are mirror images of each other. We both have the same desires and we move in the same direction of progress, but we also have cultures and problems that are opposite of each other. America has a lot of wealth but relies too much on debt, China is growing very quickly but this growth is on the backs of migrant workers and the poor. China has a lack of human rights, but America has the lack of filial piety. America has much to learn from China as China has to learn from America, and I hope more people on both sides of the Pacific Ocean are able to see the similarities and the things we can learn from each other rather than the excuses we can use to destroy the two greatest nations that have ever existed.
“如果没有墙，我们是否能占领西方言论阵地？”我发现中美两国的极端主义分子掌控着”我们两国应为敌人并且开战”这样的讨论是一件很吓人的事情.中美两国中有很多视对方为兄弟姐妹的好人存在.我们团结起来可以让这个世纪成为历史上最和平的时代, 而对立的话,则会毁掉所有我们想去实现的事情. 就像我告诉我的中国的姻亲,美国和中国是对方的镜像. 我们有同样的愿望并且朝着同一个方向发展,但我们也有对立的文化和问题.美国拥有大量的财富但是太依靠于贷款,中国快速发展但是是建立在农民工和穷人的努力之上的.中国缺乏人权,但是美国文化里也没有孝心这个观念. 美国有太多的东西向中国学习就像中国必须学习美国一样,同时,我希望更多太平洋两岸的人民能够看到我们的相似性和一些我们能够相互学习的东西,而不是我们能用来摧毁两个依然屹立的民族的借口.
on 28 Jan 2010 at 10:30 am
2
Sly Reference
I wonder what do they consider the “battlefield of Western public discourse”? Blogs? Comment sections on articles? No one group dominates Western public discourse, and haven’t for a long time. There are some big names that a lot of people listen to, like salon.com, Rush Limbaugh and the Daily Show, but few people listen to all the writers out there. Heck, we don’t even have time to read/listen to all the people we *want* to read/listen to. Chinese writers jumping into the fray would just muddy the waters more, and probably increase the signal to noise ratio. It’s a silly question, because the discourse space is not a battlefield.
我想知道他们怎么考虑”西方舆论阵地”?博客?给文章留言的地方?没有一个团体主宰着舆论阵地,而且从来就没有. 有一些大牌媒体倒是有人会去关注,比如说salon.com, Rush Limbaugh and the Daily Show,但是并没有多少人去注意那些不入流的作家.靠,我们才没时间去管那些我们”想去”注意的人.中国的作家(指blog写手)要踩这趟浑水的话,只会把水弄得更脏,而且大概会把噪音比率提高吧.这问题太搞笑了,因为舆论并不是战场.
on 28 Jan 2010 at 12:29 pm
3
Lewis
In addition to the two excellent points above, I’m also wary of thinking of GFW policy in terms of how it looks to the outside world. China should manage/dismantle the GFW for its own long-term development, even culturally, and not to score points with the West. Dismantling the GFW would help them engage the West in a more equal relationship because it would allow Chinese people to openly discuss all aspects of their lives and history, which I think would allow Chinese culture to flourish. Chinese culture is, of course, already ancient, nuanced, and profound, but when people across a country can fearlessly express themselves and challenge each other’s ideas, creativity explodes and people’s views of the world become much more sophisticated.
为以上精彩的两点评论做点补充,我也在谨慎的思考以外国(中国以外)的真实情况,来看中国防止防火墙政策.中国为长期发展或者文化交流,应管理或者废除防火墙,而并不是以此来取悦西方.废除防火墙能是中国与西方建立更平等的关系,因为那能让中国人民更开放的讨论他们生活和历史,我认为这能使中国文化繁荣发展.中国文化当然已经很古老,独特并且深刻,但是当人们跨越国家能够无所畏惧的表达他们自己并且挑战其他人的观点,激发创造力并且人民的对世界的看法将会更加深刻.
on 28 Jan 2010 at 1:32 pm
4
Uln
The guys at Anti-CNN are simple binary minds. They see the World as good vs evil, China vs West, black vs white… what is “to occupy the battlefield of Western discourse”? The question itself speaks lots of the mentality of the author. Debate is not about conquering, it is about participating and having access to different views and keeping your mind open. Opening the GFW would very positive to attain just that. Having an open government that lets individuals speak their minds and does not censor the media would help even more.
这些anti-cnn的人全都是二元观点(这个原词在译者看来有贬低的色彩,讽刺Acers的死脑筋和落后,用流行的话说,就是"NC"吧,我想).他们看待世界只有正vs邪,中国vs西方,黑vs白…啥是”占领西方舆论阵地”?这个问题本身也反映了作者的智力.”讨论”不应该是强迫对方接受自己的观点,而应该是参与讨论,并且能够接触到不同的观点并且保持你的头脑开放.开放防火墙本身就能达到那个目的.有一个能让人们表达自己观点并且没有媒体审查的开放政府能够更好的实现交流的目的.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 12:58 am
5
Old Tales Retold
Debating is definitely a skill and it is possible to have good ideas but lack the means of expressing them in an convincing way. The question is: what do the Anti-CNN commentators want to argue? If the internet is a battlefield, what are they battling for? What vision do they have for the world? What is everyone missing?Are the fenqing just fighting to preserve their country’s image? That’s not an idea or value or plan or anything.Of course, they might reply that power is at the heart of everything and because they were born in X nation-state, their highest goal in life should be to increase the power of X and, as netizens, the way they can do that is through strengthening X’s “soft power” by saying nice stuff about X and denying bad stuff about it. But if they don’t have any ideas in there, theories about what is fair and unfair in the world, how to help people live better lives, etc, then even the soft power thing won’t go far.It reminds me a bit of Karen Hughes, that ambassador Bush sent around the Muslim world to improve America’s image. She came back saying everyone thought the worst things about the U.S.: that we torture people, invade countries without reason and imprison people for long periods without trial. “Anti-Americanism,” she called it.Well, yes, it was anti-Americanism but it was also all entirely accurate. Hughes had no ideas she wanted to share with the world. She just wanted to disabuse people of their “misunderstandings.” But there were no misunderstandings.
讨论本身是一种技巧,而且即使缺乏表达观点的让人信服的渠道,讨论也可能产生不错的想法.问题是:anti-cnn的这些留言的人想去讨论吗?如果网络是战场,他们又为何而战?他们对世界有怎样的看法?所有人又缺失的是什么?愤青是在维护国家形象而战吗?那并不是一个观点或者一种价值,一种计划或者其他的什么.当然,他们可能会反驳权力是所有事情的核心,而且他们生在一个x(ps.暗指共产主义,以下全用x)的国家,他们生命的最高目标应该是扩张x主义的力量,而且作为一个网民,他们这么做的方式就是通过美化x主义和否定错误来增强x主义的”软实力”.但是如果他们没有对鉴定世界上公平或非公平的理论观点,又怎么能让人们过上更好的生活或者其他更好的方面?那么软实力本身就不会有什么进步.这让我想起一点Karen Hughes,她是布什送到穆斯林世界去提高美国形象的大使.她回来之后说道所有的人都在想着美国最糟糕的事:我们对人们实施酷刑,无缘由的侵略他国并且不审判就把别人长时间的下监.她把这种现象称为”反美主义”.是的,这的确是反美主义但这些是完全正确的实事.Hughes并没有她想要跟世界分享的观点.她只是想要去除人们对美国的”误解”.但是根本就没有误解存在.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 1:01 am
6
shuaige
There is no battlefield, it’s all made up to stir sentiment.Most Chinese believe in the same values as the “West” regardless or whether or not the government implements it. What it really comes down to is that China doesn’t want to be TOLD what to do. If democracy, freedom of speech, uncensored internet etc were a Chinese, homegrown movement, there would be no “patriotic backlash” against them.
根本不存在战场,所谓的网络战场只是为了煽动情绪而虚构的.绝大多数中国人持有”西方”所忽视的,或者是否政府以之为工具的价值.所有的一切都是因为中国并不想被教导该怎么做!如果民主,言论自由,无审查的网络或者其他的什么是一个中国本土发展而生的,就不会有任何的”爱国反弹”会针对以上的东西了.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 4:29 am
7
凯文
I am curious if there are examples of people in China have blogs that translate what English bloggers say into Chinese.
我很好奇是否有一些中国的网民有博客专门翻译英文博文?
on 29 Jan 2010 at 5:24 am
8
MAC
I’m not an expert, but I haven’t seen any blogs specifically dedicated to that. When I see translated content, it’s usually in the form of forum postings, and a lot of the longer writings supposedly from foreign sources are outright fakes, or at best unattributed (as is the general habit on Chinese forums) and impossible to verify but highly questionable. I’ve seen some translations of short comments made on bulletin, boards, but they’re usually from English-language boards within China, and the translators often seem to overlook that some of their purportedly “foreign” viewpoints seem, from their English and attitudes, to also come from Chinese.OTR said what I think much more eloquently and diplomatically, as usual- China, at present, isn’t offering a lot of values or ideas that appeal to many people except other groups that want “the west” off their backs. Obviously, there’s been more people lately saying “look at China’s economy, too bad our government can’t just make things happen like they do,” but I doubt that even those people would particularly welcome the trade-offs of going that way.
我并不是个老手,但我还从没看过任何博客专门去翻译英文博文.我每次看到翻译文章都是在论坛上,而且有一批人专门”翻译”一些根本子虚乌有的文章(这是中国论坛上的普遍习惯)而且根本就不能审核但是很让人质疑.我见过一些翻译对公报的短小评论,但是他们多数是中国境内的英文网站,并且翻译者似乎竟挑些据称是”外国人的”观点,实际上根本是中国人自己搞的.我觉得楼上说的更圆滑,中国现在不会提供那些吸引人的价值观.除了那些希望西方挺他们的人..不过很明显,最近越来越多的人在说”看人家中国的经济,我们的政府根本做不到那种成绩,”但我很怀疑那些人是不是真的希望我们的体制跟中国一样呢.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 12:03 pm
9
There is 译言, a site dedicated to translating stuff from English to Chinese. They seem to be mostly translating newspaper articles.
http://www.yeeyan.org/?from_com
这是 <译言>,一个专门翻译英文东西的网站.他们似乎绝大多数在翻译报纸文章.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 12:55 pm
10
C. Custer
yeah there’s yiyan that does news stuff. They just got blocked in China though, or so I have read.
啊,对,<译言>是翻译的报纸文章.他们刚刚在中国被禁了.
on 29 Jan 2010 at 1:48 pm
11
xyz
Yiyan was just unblocked a few days ago.http://www.infzm.com/content/407398
译言 离开的39天
作者: 南方人物周刊记者 杨潇 发自北京 2010-01-25 18:25:011月8日，译言更换域名重新开放，原来的蓝色风格也变成了红色主题。一篇“2010译言感恩”的文章这样写道：“译言的存在，是因为有太 多的人像我们一样，想要开阔视野，想要了解差距，想要获得前沿新知。只要这样的努力依然存在，译言就会存在……”在网站重开后，陈昊芝几乎马不停蹄地接受 了数家媒体的采访，他希望媒体能成为沟通上下、消除误会的桥梁。他说，译言的关停，只是大环境中的一个小案例，“Google尚且如此，我不认为自己有多 委屈。”他和他的团队，更愿意将这次事件看作一次涅槃，“我想对我们反而有两个好处，以前一些用户倾向于翻译时政内容，但通过这次他们知道这些东西对译言 没好处，他们反而理解了；我们在和《卫报》的合作中多少有些迷失，时政内容可以吸引眼球，但比较难换取长期稳定的用户，所以我们会更加注重给用户一个内容 导向。”This article about douban’s censorship of a book by 龙应台 has making the rounds lately. Another victory by the Ministry of Truth. The blog post itself is interesting in that it shows how young people are taking to these websites. The author, I believe, is a undergrad journalism student at PKU.
<译言>几天前刚刚解禁.这个是最近传播较广的一篇关于豆瓣审查龙应台的书的文章.”真相署”(ps.这个是引用反乌托邦小说1984中的一个组织,其职责是对文章内容进行审查及删改.没有看过的同学请去补习 ^_^)的另一个胜利.这个博客对表现青年人对这些网站的看法很感兴趣.我觉得作者是一个北大新闻系的学生.
http://www.fangkc.cn/news/internet/dictator-douban/
独裁者豆瓣
本文 隶属类别：互联网行业观察 本文发表时间：Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:18:57 +0800 版权 Comments: 132其实，在一向谨小慎微的豆瓣上，是不可能出现这本所谓“禁书”的条目的。豆瓣的图书条目以ISBN为识别依据，《大江大海一九四九》这本书的 ISBN早已被设定为不可添加了。但道高一尺魔高一丈，网友们 总能想到办法对抗。方法之一，就是盗用另一本书的ISBN号，然后填上“大江大海”的书名。当然，管理员也不是吃素的，发现一本打击一本，而网友又会去寻 找其他的书作为篡改的目标，这样的“猫鼠游戏”无时不刻不在上演。“老鼠”太多，而“猫”精力毕竟有限，所以总有些漏网之鱼。前几天，我看到不少友邻的广 播中都出现了“读过《大江大海》”。但1月22日上午，我发现大家的广播都变成了“读过《新高考题典–数学》”。看来是被管理员发现了。我点进条目（http://www.douban.com/subject/1643617/）一看，发现虽然名字被改回来了，但相关的评分、豆列仍在，所以你会看到滑稽的景象：一本《新高考题典》被打了9.4的超高分，被打上“苦难”这样的标签，还被收入“禁书目录”等豆列……
on 29 Jan 2010 at 6:11 pm
12
Kaiser
@ULN – Spot on. The problematic mentality is plain to see in the wording of the question. It shouldn’t be a battlefield. The problem is of course that there are the same binary minds on both sides — among Chinese and among Anglophone westerners, and if you look at the comments sections of blogs and online MSM stories, or YouTube comments or what have you, it sure does look like a battle.The only thing that unfettered Chinese access to the rest of the world’s Internet might do is reduce to some extent the maddeningly patronizing attitude one so often finds in online debates between Chinese and Anglophone westerners that “You guys live in an information-controlled environment, and you’re therefore ignorant and completely brainwashed.”
从问题的措辞来看,作者阴暗的心态可见一斑.网络才不是战场.不过问题是中国人和以英语为母语的人中,都有脑袋不够数的.如果你看看博客的留言区和在线MSM,或者youtube 的评论,网络是战场这就话并没有错.不过如果没有网络限制的中国人可以接触到网络世界的话,大概能减少一些中国人和让人不爽自以为是的西方人关于”你们中国佬生活在一个信息控制的环境中,所以你丫根本就是无知的被洗脑了.”的争论了.
on 30 Jan 2010 at 12:22
13
pug_ster
The person at anti-cnn is correct. The problem is that most westerners believe that they are superior culturally, mentally, politically, socially, and financially compared to the Chinese. You hear this kind of attitude projected from Western Politicians like HRC and these ‘Western ‘experts’ like Rebecca MacKinnon and James Fallows and soimehow their attitude is that they need to ‘export’ their opinions and values onto the Chinese people. The problem is that many Chinese have their own set of values which the West thinks that it is backwarded. I doubt that you will see an agreement between the 2 with or without the GFW.
Anti-cnn的用户们说的没错.问题是西方人总觉得自己不管在文化上,智力上,政治上,社会上和经济上跟中国人比起来都高人一等.你常能听到像HRC和那些”西方精英”的政客们的态度,比如说Rebecca MacKinnon 和 James Fallows.他们总觉得他们需要向中国人输出他们的观点和价值.问题是中国人有他们自己的价值观,虽然这种价值观在西方看来是落后的.不管有没有防火墙,我都怀疑你能不能看到中国人和西方人达成理解.
on 30 Jan 2010 at 6:39 am
14
Old Tales Retold
Pug_Ster,Yes, there are lots of arrogant people out there. I don’t know that MacKinnon and Fallows are at the top of that list, though. They have opinions, but they don’t seem particularly pushy about them—unless just having well-worked-out opinions about China is in and of itself pushy.Regardless, when you say that “many Chinese have their own set of values,” which Chinese people do you mean? What is their class background, specifically, i.e. what interests do they bring to their values? And what exactly are those values? What is the argument they are presenting to the world? Why should the world listen?I tend to disagree with Wahaha, but at least he (or she) goes out on a limb and argues passionately—and often persuasively—for the merits of a particular growth strategy for developing countries generally and China in particular, namely mild authoritarianism coupled with openness to foreign investment.I don’t typically hear anything that coherent from Chinese nationalists, just anger at various criticisms of their country and contempt for other cultures… which seems awfully similar to right-wingers in other countries, from the United States to Serbia to Turkey to Switzerland.
楼上说的不错,世界上总有些自以为是的东西,虽然我不清楚MacKinnon 和 Fallows是不是其中的领头羊.他们有点想法,不过他们似乎对自己的观点没什么进取心,除非这些意见就是想得好,还得指望那些观点自己推荐自己了.不论如何,当你说道”许多中国人都有自己的价值观,”你指的是哪些中国人?特别是他们的阶级立场,换句话说,他们的观点对他们有什么有利的地方?那些价值观具体又是什么?他们向世界所陈述的论点又是什么?为什么世界应该虚心听取?我不太赞同Wahaha(这里很诡异,上下文也没有提到这个名字,怀疑是个用户的ID,难道指的是哇哈哈饮料?汗),但是至少他(或她)还是积极地去辩论了,而且讲得不错,并为发展中国家,特别是中国,献计献策,比如说让相对温和的独裁国家向外资开放市场等建议.我并特别没有听过中国的民族主义者说过什么有逻辑的话,他们就是对许多的批评不爽,而且瞧不起其他的文化而已…这看起来跟其他国家的右翼一样恶心,不管是美国,塞尔维亚,土耳其还是瑞士的.
on 30 Jan 2010 at 6:45 am
15
pug_ster
Since when a common Westerner read Chinese newspaper or understand Chinese culture. Most Westerners don’t care about them, and expect Chinese to adopt Western ideas and culture. Give me a break.
除非普通的西方人看中国报纸并且理解中国文化,否则就是免谈.大多数西方人根本不在乎那些东西,而同时又希望中国人能够继承西方的观点和文化.省省吧.
on 30 Jan 2010 at 7:17 am
16
pug_ster
OTR,Regardless, when you say that “many Chinese have their own set of values,” which Chinese people do you mean? What is their class background, specifically, i.e. what interests do they bring to their values? And what exactly are those values? What is the argument they are presenting to the world? Why should the world listen?Perhaps that’s the difference of what you think of ‘universal values’ is actually Western Values, and many other people who have different set of values than you.
楼上的,无论如何,当你说”很多中国人都有他们自己的价值观”的时候,你所指的那些中国人是谁?他们是什么阶级背景的,特别是,换言之,他们为自己的价值观付出了什么?那些价值管又到底是什么?他们向世界表达的观点又是什么?为什么世界要听他们的?
大概这就是为什么你跟其他有不同价值观的人不一样的地方,你所谓的”普世价值”根本就是西方价值观吧.
ps.这只是一部分,还有更多的评论在原页.评论有时候比新闻难译得多,因为文字间有很多俏皮话和感情色彩,如果有翻译不周到的地方请见谅,一些地方我用通俗的中文尽量表达了一下作者的态度和情感,如不喜欢,我也没辙 |
评分
-
2
查看全部评分
-
|
[复制链接]
狗仔卡
楼主
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2010-2-3 09:18
发表于 2010-2-3 09:25
