我的《信報》文章(2020年12月8日A17頁) 投稿前第二版本
《充其量僅被半數國民認同的拜登》
https://www1.hkej.com/dailynews/article/id/2655855
為了使讀者較易理解，編輯將文中“common good”的翻譯，從我的「共同善意」改為「共同利益」。我沒有異議，因為「共同善意」的哲學意義較重。
Common Good在當時(17-18世紀)當地的意思是，所有參與者都有達成一項能夠滿足基督教道德要求，並為有關各方帶來善果的協議的「共同願望」。
因為那時基督道德教義的氛圍和壓力十分沈重，St. Thomas Aquinas(1225-74), Dante (1265-1321), John Calvin (1509-65)的道德影響力強大且壓倒性。因此，重點是為善的共同意願，故此我中譯成「共同善意」在哲學上比較合適，但較難理解。
《充其量僅被半數國民認同的拜登》
「拜登不是我的總統」的衣服、口罩、貼紙，在亞馬遜及各大網店熱賣，款式五花八門，有滑稽諷刺，也有惱怒憤恨。
[Note 1]
一項票站出口民意調查顯示，投票給拜登的選民中，有多達44％只因反對特朗普，而非擁護拜登。以此簡單計算，實質支持拜登的選民只佔總數 (約1.577億)的三成。
[Note 2]
投票數據還顯示，儘管大部分主流媒體持續負面報導、評價特朗普，但與2016年相比，支持他的選民在2020年增加了超過900萬。更令民主黨人驚訝的是，他不僅從非裔、亞裔、拉丁裔獲得更多選票，且在少數族裔婦女選民比例上，縮窄了與民主黨對手的差距。民主黨期望的「藍潮」(Blue Wave)大勝利非但沒有出現，還淨失七個眾議院席位。
[Note 3]
對於近年國內的撕裂現象，來自11所大學(包括哈佛、史丹福)的15位社會科學學者，10月於《科學》期刊(Science)發表聯合研究論文，稱美國這種前所未有的新型兩極分化為「政治宗派主義」(Political Sectarianism);當中的三個核心要素是：異他者(Othering) 、厭惡感(Aversion)、道德化 (Moralization) 。簡言之，彼此憎恨的兩個陣營均認定對方，在政治道德上已經破產，毫無妥協的空間。
[Note 4]
較明顯的例子是，偏左一方將特朗普標籤為種族主義、性別歧視、污染地球，是十惡不赦的壞人。右傾的一方(包括一些黑人、南美裔人) 則認定民主黨的支持者，若非貪婪的華爾街大鱷，便是依靠福利生存的懶人，是美國傳統價值的背叛者。
在這種情況下，縱使拜登可在明年1月順利接任總統，美國的外交將隱含至少三個弱點。
首先是難以調和外交諾言與國內分裂。首當其衝是環保議題，如果拜登政府重新加入《巴黎氣候協定》，積極推動減碳排放，且建立具體目標，類似法國的「黃背心運動」(反對提高燃油稅)的強力抵制很可能會出現。因為2019年，美國的電動汽車累計量為140萬輛，但多達一半限於民主黨控制的加州;而石油行業更是不可動搖的重鎮。倒過來說，倘若拜登拖泥帶水，倡導「綠色新政」(Green New Deal)的激進左翼肯定不會放過他。
[Note 5]
醫療是另一個燙鍋。受廣泛疫情影響，世界經濟論壇倡議建立全新的環球醫療經濟秩序，稱之曰「大重置」(Great Reset)，聯合國秘書長與國際貨幣基金組織均表支持;但美國進步和保守陣營對各種形式的醫療改革一向互不相讓。因此，拜登政府的國際承諾可信度成疑。
[Note 6]
第二個弱點是介入別國事務舉步維艱。1950年以來只有兩位美國總統沒有發動新的戰爭，一是卡特(1977-81在任) ，另一就是特朗普(除非他突然襲擊伊朗) 。原因之一是奧巴馬做得太糟糕了，他支持所謂的阿拉伯之春及推動敘利亞內戰，但虎頭蛇尾，造成數百萬難民湧向歐洲，除了導致經濟問題，還有文化衝突、流血慘案。
[Note 7]
特朗普既沒有派軍到委內瑞拉，又促成以色列與阿拉伯國家建交，深受其支持者的認同、讚賞。假如拜登意圖出兵國外，尤其是中東，不僅歐洲會反對，且難以迴避特朗普信徒的非議。
第三個弱點是拜登的「健康狀況」。各國領導人都幾可肯定，已經78歲的拜登是單任總統，他(11月底摔倒後腳部有細微骨折)能否完成這四年任期也是一個疑問。
拜登考慮競選副手時，黨內激進左翼已限定人選必須是非白人女性。當選後考慮政治任命時，激左除了提交一張400人的候選名單，還猛烈批評不合意的異他者(例如有報導指耶倫被提名為財長，因拜登初始考慮的 Gina Raimondo 受激左反對) 。
[Note 8]
須知道，拜登是民主黨溫和派、反特朗普共和黨員、商界…等，為了壓制傾向於社會主義的桑德斯，共同協調出來的台前者。但左翼於幫助拜登勝選確實有汗馬功勞，因此，一旦拜登無法駕馭白宮內部氣勢洶洶的激左，「突然重病」，讓賀錦麗替代總統，不足為奇。而賀錦麗的上任很可能會深化國內分裂，外交政策亦當然更難預測。
換句話說，無論拜登的國際承諾有多美麗，它可能無法獲得國會通過;而毋須國會確認的承諾，又可能被下一任總統推翻。
如何應對這個深陷分裂的超級大國？歷史也許不會重演，但鑒古有助知今。
16世紀中葉，位於現今荷蘭、比利時一帶的17個貴族領地，因不滿宗教壓迫、貿易徵稅，反抗西班牙的統治。最終7個北部領地成功脫離帝國，組成聯盟，名為「荷蘭共和」(Dutch Republic 1588-1795) ，管治理念以Justus Lipsius (1547-1606) 倡議的「共同善意」(common good)及「賢德君主」(virtuous princely rule) 為綱。
[Note 9]
由於波羅的海貿易昌盛，地理位置極佳的荷蘭共和擁有2000艘船舶，超過當時英法兩國船隊的總數。並通過成立荷蘭東印度公司和荷蘭西印度公司，航行到全球各地，從事貿易及軍事活動，包括台灣島的殖民統治(1624-62) 。
於整個17世紀傲視全球的這個聯盟，在語言、種族、文化、宗教各方面幾乎一致，但最終因內亂成為弱國，乃源於政治取向的鬥爭。一方堅持繼續賢君統治，另一方則要求建立聯邦國會式的政府，兩個陣營都拒絕妥協，多次兵戎相見，結果是在國際舞台黯然退幕。
[Note 10]
英國能取代荷蘭共和的國際地位，原因之一是內部各方願意妥協。而這項意願植根於對「共同善意」的信念。根據歷史學者Peter N. Miller的考證，當時許多英國政論家、參政貴族， 深受西塞羅（Cicero公元前106-43，古羅馬共和首席執行官）的哲學所影響。
西塞羅對「善」(拉丁文 honestum)與「利」(utile)之間平衡關係的看法，演化成共同善意的務實觀念，推動英國政治跟隨國際形勢逐步改革，實現長期穩定(見 Defining the Common Good 1994) 。
[Note 11]
展望未來，難再有單一國家能主導環球事務，亦不可能有真正的全球合作。北京倡議的「合作共贏」、「命運共同體」觀念，雖然會繼續受阻，被妖魔化…
但若能沉着、堅毅，一個充其量僅被半數國民認同的美國總統，妨礙不了一帶一路的成功。
Notes
for Reference
[Note 1]
search
for “Biden not my president”
[Note 2]
Wiki:
2020 U.S. presidential election “as of Dec 2, 2020”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election
Biden popular vote 80,934,359 – 40% against Trump voting = net 48,560,615
實質支持拜登的選民48,560,615 /
total 157,766,781 x 100% = 30.78%
[Note 3]
2020
Nov 4, Massive
“…Recent exit polling data from Morning Consult suggests 44% of Biden voters cast their votes for the Democratic nominee as a vote “against” Trump, rather than in support of the former vice president. …”
2020
Nov 14, The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/14/joe-biden-trump-black-latino-republicans
Overall, comparing 2016 and 2020, Trump gained 4 percentage points with African Americans,
3 percentage points with Hispanics and Latinos, and 5 percentage points with
Asian Americans. The shifts described in Edison’s exit polls are verified by AP
Votecast, which showed similar movement among black and Hispanic voters this cycle.
Updated
2020 Nov 7, CNN
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2020/11/politics/election-analysis-exit-polls-2016-2020/
Democrats didn’t get the landslide win they’d hoped for,
but their efforts to rebuild the party’s “blue wall” paid off with Joe Biden
winning Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, according to CNN projections, and
securing the presidency.
While the full picture of how Biden won the White House is
not yet clear, we do know a little bit about how the country changed during
four years under President Donald Trump.
For starters, we know that turnout this cycle far exceeded 2016.
But that didn’t signal a blue tidal wave as some Democrats expected.
Rather, Trump’s supporters kept pace, defending the President from Democrats
motivated to defeat
2020
Dec 3, CNN
https://edition.cnn.com/election/2020/results/house
Democrats
gained 3 seats, lost 10 seats,
Controlling
a total of 222 seats, barely exceeding the 218 majority requirement
[Note 4]
‘Science’ 30 Oct 2020:
Vol.
370, Issue 6516, pp. 533-536
DOI:
10.1126/science.abe1715
“Political sectarianism in America”
Political
sectarianism in America | Science (sciencemag.org)
Eli
J. Finkel1, Christopher A. Bail2, Mina Cikara3, Peter H. Ditto4, Shanto
Iyengar5, Samara Klar6, Lilliana Mason7, Mary C. McGrath1, Brendan Nyhan8,
David G. Rand9, Linda J. Skitka10, Joshua A. Tucker11, Jay J. Van Bavel11,
Cynthia S. Wang1, James N. Druckman1
1Northwestern
University, Evanston, IL, USA.
2Duke
University, Durham, NC, USA.
3Harvard
University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
4University
of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
5Stanford
University, Stanford, CA, USA.
6University
of Arizona, Tuscon, AZ, USA.
7University
of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
8Dartmouth
College, Hanover, NH, USA.
9Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
10University
of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
11New
York University, New York, NY, USA.
Summary
Political
polarization, a concern in many countries, is especially acrimonious in the
United States (see the first box). For decades, scholars have studied
polarization as an ideological matter—how strongly Democrats and Republicans
diverge vis-à-vis political ideals and policy goals. Such competition among
groups in the marketplace of ideas is a hallmark of a healthy democracy. But
more recently, researchers have identified a second type of polarization, one
focusing less on triumphs of ideas than on dominating the abhorrent supporters
of the opposing party (1). This literature has produced a proliferation of
insights and constructs but few interdisciplinary efforts to integrate them. We
offer such an integration, pinpointing the superordinate construct of political
sectarianism and identifying its three core ingredients: othering, aversion,
and moralization. We then consider the causes of political sectarianism and its
consequences for U.S. society—especially the threat it poses to democracy.
Finally, we propose interventions for minimizing its most corrosive aspects.
2020
Oct 29, Scientific American
The Science paper
addresses the rise of political sectarianism—the growing tendency of one
political group to view its opponents as morally repugnant.
[Note 5]
Data:
Electric Car by country
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Electric_car_use_by_country
Green
New Deal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal
[Note 6]
World Economic Forum, The Great Reset
https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/
IMF,
Global Reset
United
Nations, Global Reset
https://news.un.org/zh/story/2020/06/1058872
2020
年 6 月 3 日
聯合國秘書長古特雷斯今天在世界經濟論壇下屆年會主題發布會上表示，全球必須建立更具抵禦力、更平等、包容和可持續的經濟和社會，以應對大流行、氣候變化和許多其他全球挑戰。
KHN,
“A Biden Win and Republican Senate might lead to Gridlock on Health issues”,
2020 Nov 4.
https://khn.org/news/no-winner-for-president-yet-and-health-care-hangs-in-the-balance/
Without a Democratic majority in the Senate, Biden
as president could not likely advance many of his top health agenda items — including lowering the eligibility age for Medicare to 60,
expanding financial assistance for health insurance under the Affordable Care
Act, and creating a “public option” government health plan.
[Note 7]
2020
Nov 6, APAC News
https://apac.news/no-wars-trumps-positive-legacy/
Brian Toohey reports on only the second US president since 1950 not to lead America into a war.
Unlike almost all of his predecessors Donald Trump fully understood that every US war of the past 70 years ended badly. Apart from his ideological aversion to foreign conflicts, his leadership style would not translate well to a military campaign which ensured he would not drag the US into armed conflict.
[Note 8]
Boston
Globe, “Biden must choose a black woman for vice-president”, 2020 July 28.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/07/28/opinion/biden-must-choose-black-woman-vice-president/
CNN,
“Progressives turned out for Joe Biden.
Now they want a big role in his administration”, 2020 Nov 17.
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/17/politics/biden-transition-progressives-pressure/index.html
The Progressive Change Institute, an organization with ties to
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, sent a letter to the Biden transition team
and made public a list of 400 names, each with a
brief biography, that should be considered for key personnel roles at every
level of government.
Progressive groups Justice Democrats and the Sunrise Movement have also released a roster of preferred names for key leadership roles in the administration, along with a call for the creation of a White House Office of Climate Mobilization.
The
Guardian, “What do progressives make of Joe Biden’s cabinet picks so far?”,
2020 Nov 28.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/24/biden-cabinet-picks-progressives-440463
Progressives don’t love Joe Biden’s first round of
Cabinet picks. But they can live with them.
Though there are many positions left to fill, Biden’s Cabinet
announcements so far fit a pattern: The former vice president has chosen people
for top positions who haven’t sparked bitter or protracted fights with the left
— without giving progressives any major wins. None of Biden’s nods have been
wildly off the mark to the left flank of the Democratic Party. And the
president-elect has also selected leaders who, despite being moderate, have
spent time building relationships with progressives.
“It could have been a lot worse,” said Rebecca Katz, a progressive
strategist who advised incoming left-wing Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s campaign, adding
that things could still change. “He’s not picking any lefties. He’s just
picking people who haven’t alienated the left, who are listening.”
For Treasury, the fear was that he might go with
Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo, a former venture capitalist who is disliked by
labor unions because she cut pensions.
[Note 9]
Martin van Gelderen (1992), “The Political
Thought of the Dutch Revolt 1555-1590”, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press.
See p.180-7 re Justus Lipsius’impacts on
the formation of the Dutch Republic.
[Note 10]
Wiki, Dutch Republic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Republic
The income from this trade allowed the Dutch
Republic to compete militarily against much larger countries. It amassed a huge fleet of 2,000 ships, larger than the
fleets of England and France combined.
…tension
between political factions: the Orangists favoured a powerful stadtholder,
while the Republicans favoured a strong States General. The Republicans forced
two Stadtholderless Periods, 1650–1672 and 1702–1747, with the latter causing national
instability and the end of Great Power status.
[Note 11]
Peter N. Miller (1994), “Defining the
Common Good: Empire, religion and philosophy in eighteenth-century Britain”, Cambridge
and New York: Cambridge University Press.
p.21-87 Chapter 1: The figure of Cicero
p.89 “… in this British reshaping of the language of common good, Cicero provided the model for the squaring of this very circle: the patriotic minister …”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cicero
zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/西塞罗
