奧巴馬能否躋身改變美國(guó)的十大總統(tǒng)之列？

A decade ago, Barack Obama was already contemplating his presidential legacy. I know because I talked to him about it in 2006, during a long interview for a now-defunct men’s magazine. In a reflective mood after finishing his second book, his suit coat off and necktie loosened, the 44-year-old freshman senator opened up about his political ambition.

10年前，巴拉克•奧巴馬(Barack Obama)已經(jīng)在考慮自己作為美國(guó)總統(tǒng)的政治遺產(chǎn)了。我知道這一點(diǎn)，因?yàn)樵?006年，在為如今已不存在的一份男性雜志所作的長(zhǎng)篇采訪(fǎng)中，我與他談過(guò)此事。當(dāng)時(shí)這位44歲的新當(dāng)選參議員剛寫(xiě)完他的第二本書(shū)，他沒(méi)穿西裝外套，領(lǐng)帶松著。他帶著深思的神情談起了自己的政治抱負(fù)。

“My attitude about something like the presidency is that you don’t want to just be the president,” he told me. “You want to change the country. You want to make a unique contribution. You want to be a great president.”

“我對(duì)總統(tǒng)任期之類(lèi)的態(tài)度是，你不想僅僅當(dāng)個(gè)總統(tǒng)，”他告訴我， “你想改變這個(gè)國(guó)家。你想做出獨(dú)特的貢獻(xiàn)。你想成為一個(gè)偉大的總統(tǒng)。”

Mr Obama described visiting the Washington Hilton and walking down a long corridor decorated with pictures of all America’s presidents. “You go through, and you think, who are these guys? There are, what, maybe 10 presidents in our history out of 40-something who you can truly say led the country? And then there are 30 who just kind of did their best. And so, I guess my point is, just being the president is not a good way of thinking about it.”

奧巴馬描述了他訪(fǎng)問(wèn)華盛頓希爾頓酒店(Washington Hilton)，漫步掛著美國(guó)歷任總統(tǒng)畫(huà)像的長(zhǎng)走廊時(shí)的感受。“你走過(guò)這些畫(huà)像，心里會(huì)想，這些家伙是誰(shuí)?在我國(guó)歷史上的40多位總統(tǒng)中，也許有10位你真正可以說(shuō)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)了這個(gè)國(guó)家?另外30位總統(tǒng)只能說(shuō)是盡了力。所以，我想我要說(shuō)的關(guān)鍵是，僅僅當(dāng)個(gè)總統(tǒng)并不是思考這一點(diǎn)的好方法。”

In his final days in office, I’ve been remembering the bar Mr Obama set for himself that summer afternoon and wondering whether he feels that he cleared it. Should Mr Obama be remembered as a top 10 president, one who changed the country? Or as one of the perhaps admirable but not-quite transformational others?

在他的總統(tǒng)任期進(jìn)入尾聲之際，我一直記得奧巴馬在那個(gè)夏天的下午為自己設(shè)定的標(biāo)桿，并且揣測(cè)他是否覺(jué)得自己躍過(guò)了這根標(biāo)桿。奧巴馬應(yīng)該被銘記為改變了國(guó)家的10位偉大總統(tǒng)之一嗎?或者是也許令人欽佩、但算不上改變了國(guó)家的其他總統(tǒng)之一?

During his race against Hillary Clinton in 2008, Mr Obama articulated the same distinction in a way certain to annoy her by saying that “Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that, you know, Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not.” Mr Obama aspired to be a liberal Reagan who would not just change policy but embody the emergence of a diverse and progressive society.

在2008年對(duì)陣希拉里•克林頓(Hillary Clinton)的初選中，奧巴馬以一種肯定會(huì)惹惱她的方式說(shuō)出了相同區(qū)別：“羅納德•里根(Ronald Reagan)改變了美國(guó)的軌跡，你知道，理查德•尼克松(Richard Nixon)和比爾•克林頓(Bill Clinton)都沒(méi)有做到里根那樣。”奧巴馬渴望成為一個(gè)自由派里根，不僅改變政策，而且打造一個(gè)多元化和進(jìn)步的社會(huì)。

The political journalist Jonathan Chait’s new book Audacity , hastily updated for Donald Trump’s unforeseen victory, makes the case that Mr Obama’s substantive accomplishments are both momentous and likely to survive the authoritarian circus now arrived in town. Mr Chait points to the president’s handling of the 2008 financial crisis, the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Paris Agreement on greenhouse gas reduction, as well as less heralded changes in education, financial regulation and economic distribution.

政治記者喬納森•柴特(Jonathan Chait)的新書(shū)《無(wú)畏》(Audacity)——該書(shū)根據(jù)唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)的意外勝選進(jìn)行了倉(cāng)促更新——主張，奧巴馬的實(shí)質(zhì)性成就不僅是重大的，而且很可能不會(huì)被即將在華盛頓走馬上任的威權(quán)馬戲團(tuán)抹殺。柴特提到了奧巴馬對(duì)2008年金融危機(jī)的應(yīng)對(duì)、《平價(jià)醫(yī)療法》(Affordable Care Act)的通過(guò)、旨在減少溫室氣體排放的《巴黎協(xié)定》(Paris Agreement)，以及在教育、金融監(jiān)管和經(jīng)濟(jì)分配方面宣傳較少的變革。

Mr Chait’s case about the significance of Mr Obama’s achievements is more persuasive than his prediction about their durability. After a votes in Congress, Obamacare faces blunt repeal. During the campaign, Mr Obama said that if Mr Trump were to be elected, eight years of accomplishment would go out the window. Afterwards, Mr Obama put it rather differently, telling David Remnick of The New Yorker that he had done “70 or 75 per cent” of what he intended. “Maybe 15 per cent of that gets rolled back, 20 per cent, but there’s still a lot of stuff that sticks.”

柴特對(duì)于奧巴馬成就的重大性的論述，比他對(duì)于這些成就的延續(xù)時(shí)間的預(yù)測(cè)更令人信服。在國(guó)會(huì)投票后，“奧巴馬醫(yī)改”(Obamacare)面臨無(wú)情的廢止。在競(jìng)選期間，奧巴馬表示，倘若特朗普當(dāng)選，8年的成就將毀于一旦。大選后，奧巴馬改變了說(shuō)法，他告訴《紐約客》(New Yorker)的大衛(wèi)•雷姆尼克(David Remnick)，他完成了自己心愿的“70%或75%”。“或許其中有15%會(huì)被逆轉(zhuǎn)，或許是20%，但仍有很大一部分會(huì)留下來(lái)。”

Alas, the earlier warning looks more accurate. But whether universal health insurance survives in some form, the larger question is the one Mr Obama pointed to in his comments contrasting Mr Reagan with Mr Clinton. “Reagan put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it,” he said.

可惜，早先的那個(gè)警告看來(lái)更準(zhǔn)確。但是，無(wú)論全民醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)能否以某種形式留下來(lái)，更大的問(wèn)題是奧巴馬曾經(jīng)提到的將里根同克林頓進(jìn)行對(duì)比的問(wèn)題。“里根把我們帶上了一條在根本上不同的道路，因?yàn)槟菚r(shí)國(guó)家準(zhǔn)備好了這么做，”他說(shuō)。

To count as transformative, a president needs to synthesise the moment and mood of the country. Where Mr Reagan channelled disenchantment with overweening government, Mr Obama symbolised America’s transformation into a multiracial country.

要算得上改變了國(guó)家，一名總統(tǒng)需要讓時(shí)代和民意產(chǎn)生共振。里根疏導(dǎo)了民眾對(duì)“管得太多”的政府的幻滅感，奧巴馬則象征著美國(guó)轉(zhuǎn)型為一個(gè)多種族國(guó)家。

That demographic change is inevitable, but Mr Obama was a precocious avatar. America remains 62 per cent white; not until mid-century will minorities become the majority. As Mr Chait persuasively argues, the headwinds Mr Obama faced were mostly racial blowback. In many cases, Republican politicians and white voters abandoned policies they had long supported once they were endorsed by an African-American president.

人口結(jié)構(gòu)的變化是不可避免的，但奧巴馬是一個(gè)超前于時(shí)代的化身。美國(guó)仍有62%的人口為白人;直到本世紀(jì)中葉，少數(shù)族裔才會(huì)變成多數(shù)族裔。正如柴特令人信服地主張的，奧巴馬面臨的逆風(fēng)主要是種族反彈。在許多情況下，相關(guān)政策原本長(zhǎng)期得到共和黨政客和白人選民的支持，但一旦這些政策獲得了一位非裔美國(guó)總統(tǒng)的支持，他們就放棄了這些政策。

Given the racially-tinged opposition he faced, it’s hard to make the case that Mr Obama could have accomplished more either by being tougher or more gentle. Yet for someone who saw himself as a political bridge, the inability to produce any durable consensus must count as a tremendous disappointment. His faith in transcending partisanship, in the face of all evidence, stands as both inspirational and somewhat naive. Mr Obama called his pre-presidential book, published in 2006, The Audacity of Hope. His post-presidential one might be titled The Triumph of Hope Over Experience.

鑒于他面對(duì)的帶有種族色彩的反對(duì)，奧巴馬如果更強(qiáng)勢(shì)或者更溫和就可能取得更大成就的說(shuō)法，是很難站得住腳的。不過(guò)，對(duì)于把自己視為一座政治橋梁的人來(lái)說(shuō)，無(wú)法產(chǎn)生任何持久共識(shí)必定是一個(gè)極大的失望。面對(duì)所有證據(jù)，他對(duì)于超越黨派界線(xiàn)的信念既令人鼓舞，又或多或少顯得幼稚。奧巴馬把自己在當(dāng)選總統(tǒng)之前、出版于2006年的書(shū)起名為《無(wú)畏的希望》(The Audacity of Hope)。他卸任總統(tǒng)之后再寫(xiě)書(shū)的話(huà)，書(shū)名或許會(huì)是《希望戰(zhàn)勝經(jīng)驗(yàn)》(The Triumph of Hope Over Experience)。

Ten years ago, Mr Obama told me that establishing universal healthcare should be his party’s highest priority and that he worried about the lack of economic opportunity as a factor in driving racial polarisation.

10年前，奧巴馬告訴我，建立全民醫(yī)保制度應(yīng)當(dāng)成為民主黨的最優(yōu)先任務(wù)，同時(shí)他對(duì)缺少經(jīng)濟(jì)機(jī)遇成為推動(dòng)種族分化的一個(gè)因素感到擔(dān)心。

Listening to the farewell address he delivered in Chicago last week, I was struck by the remarkable consistency of his views and his approach. Despite the ways in which his worst fears have been borne out, he has remained rock-steady in his calm application of reason, his respect for opponents who have not respected him, and his methodical pursuit of common ground.

聽(tīng)了他最近在芝加哥發(fā)表的離職演講后，我被他在觀(guān)點(diǎn)和態(tài)度上的了不起的一致性打動(dòng)。盡管他最糟糕的擔(dān)憂(yōu)以種種方式得到了證實(shí)，但他堅(jiān)持冷靜說(shuō)理、尊重那些不尊重他的對(duì)手，并且有條不紊地尋找共同點(diǎn)。

Mr Obama’s absence of bitterness is remarkable. He leaves a legacy of integrity, eloquence, and patient commitment in a dark hour of American politics.

奧巴馬沒(méi)有流露出怨恨，這是引人注目的。他留下了一份正直、雄辯和在美國(guó)政治的黑暗時(shí)刻耐心堅(jiān)持的政治遺產(chǎn)。

The writer is chairman of the Slate group and author of ‘Ronald Reagan’

本人作者為Slate集團(tuán)董事長(zhǎng)，著有《羅納德•里根》(Ronald Reagan)一書(shū)