英國退歐給美國的六點教訓

Until recently, my politically obsessed friends in America did not express much interest in British elections. No wonder. Although the iconic figure of Margaret Thatcher had inspired fascination a few decades ago, as had, a little later, the white-toothed Tony Blair, the 2015 British election elicited barely a yawn. Westminster politicians — men such as David Cameron — seemed too dull to hold any lessons for the US.

直到不久前，我那些癡迷于政治的美國朋友們還從沒表現(xiàn)過對英國大選有太多興趣。這一點也不奇怪。盡管幾十年前的標志性人物瑪格麗特•撒切爾(Margaret Thatcher)，以及她之后不久的一口白牙的托尼•布萊爾(Tony Blair)都曾大放異彩，但是2015年的英國大選可以說讓人哈欠連天。威斯敏斯特(Westminster)的政客——戴維•卡梅倫(David Cameron)等人——似乎太過乏味，不足以讓美國有任何借鑒。

No longer. Right now, Republican and Democratic strategists are gearing up for the 2016 US election campaign. And, sitting around dinner tables in recent days listening to the anguished, endless debates among pollsters, campaigners and pundits, I’ve often heard the question: what lessons does the Brexit vote hold for the US? Does the “shock” result of the UK referendum suggest that an outsider such as Donald Trump might win? Or is that comparison too simplistic?

而現(xiàn)在，時過境遷了。美國共和黨和民主黨的策略師正在為2016年美國總統(tǒng)競選摩拳擦掌。近日我坐在晚餐桌邊聽著民調(diào)專家、競選活動者和權(quán)威人士之間痛苦而無休止的辯論時，我常聽到一個問題：美國能從英國退歐(Brexit)公投中學到什么教訓?英國公投的“震撼性”結(jié)果是否意味著像唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)這樣的門外漢可能贏得美國大選?抑或這種比較過分簡單化了?

To my mind, the answer is both “yes” and “no”. Brexit was a very different vote but there are about half a dozen lessons from the UK referendum that could matter in the US this November.

依我看來，答案既是肯定的又是否定的。英國退歐是一次非比尋常的投票，但是從中可以學到大概六點教訓，可能對11月的美國大選有用。

First — and most obvious — Brexit shows just how blind a political elite can be in a socially and economically polarised world. As my colleagues Gideon Rachman and Edward Luce have recently written, the Brexit vote was partly a protest vote — a howl of rage against economic pain, immigration and a loss of cultural identity. The only thing more surprising than this vote was that the UK elite was surprised by it; and the Democratic camp could easily repeat that mistake.

第一點、也是最明顯的一點是，英國退歐表明，在一個社會和經(jīng)濟兩級分化的世界，政治精英會失明到什么程度。正如我的同事吉迪恩•拉赫曼(Gideon Rachman)和愛德華•盧斯(Edward Luce)最近寫到的那樣，英國退歐公投在一定程度上是一次抗議性投票——是針對經(jīng)濟創(chuàng)痛、移民和失去文化認同感的怒吼。唯一比此次公投更令人震驚的是英國精英竟然對此感到驚訝，美國民主黨陣營很可能會重復同樣的錯誤。

The second lesson is that the electorate is losing its fear of leaping into the unknown. Nobody can assume that Trump will lose “just” because he presents a risk. In a world where voters feel angry, taking a risk no longer seems so risky. And there is another important psychological issue at work: the electorate has just experienced a decade in which most of the rules of finance and economics have been turned upside down, as a result of the financial crisis. Turning the political rules on their head no longer seems so strange — at least, no stranger than seeing rates turn negative and big banks collapse.

第二點是，選民正在喪失對跳入未知后果的恐懼。沒有人可以假定特朗普會“單純”因為代表一種風險而輸?shù)舸筮x。當選民感到憤怒時，冒險對他們似乎不再那么危險。其中還有另外一個重要的心理問題在起作用：由于金融危機，選民剛剛經(jīng)歷了多數(shù)金融和經(jīng)濟規(guī)則被徹底顛覆的10年。顛覆政治規(guī)則也就不再那么奇怪——至少，沒有負利率和大型銀行破產(chǎn)那么奇怪。

That leads to a third lesson: revolution cannot be crushed by mere statistics or scare stories. Politicians such as Cameron tried to defeat the Brexit vote by citing economic data showing how dangerous Brexit might be; but voters dismissed it because they were too angry to listen — and too distrustful of the elite. The Brexit vote was decided on the basis of emotion — and the Remain camp failed to give voters a really positive vision of Europe. The Brexit camp, by contrast, invoked an image of an independent, proud sovereign nation that appealed to many voters.

這引出了第三點教訓：單純依靠數(shù)據(jù)或恐怖故事是無法擊垮變革的。卡梅倫等政治人士嘗試引用經(jīng)濟數(shù)據(jù)來表明英國退歐的危險性;但是選民置之不理，因為他們太憤怒了，聽不進去——也不信任精英。英國退歐的結(jié)果是由選民情緒決定的——留歐陣營沒能給選民提供一個真正積極的歐洲愿景。相比之下，退歐陣營營造了一幅獨立而自豪的主權(quán)國家的景象，吸引了很多選民。

This highlights a crucial fourth lesson: if the Democrats want to beat Trump, they cannot rely only on a US version of “Project Fear”; they need a positive and upbeat image too. Last week, the Democrats tried to create this at the Philadelphia convention. But they must recognise that Trump is campaigning on both negative and positive emotions; somehow the Democrats need to find a slogan as memorable and upbeat as Trump’s “Make America Great Again”.

這凸顯了至關(guān)重要的第四點教訓：如果民主黨想打敗特朗普，他們無法單純依靠美國版的“恐懼計劃”(Project Fear);他們還需要一個積極向上的愿景。上月，民主黨試圖在費城召開的全國代表大會上締造這一愿景。但是他們必須意識到，特朗普的競選既針對消極情緒也針對積極情緒;民主黨需要想辦法找到一個口號，就像特朗普的“讓美國再次偉大”(Make America Great Again)一樣令人難忘和鼓舞人心。

A fifth lesson is that it is not just emotions that matter: the geeky details of the electoral process do too. One reason why the Remain camp lost in the UK was that turnout was low among potential young voters (who generally favoured Remain). Another issue was a little-noticed technical detail: parents used to be able automatically to register their teenage kids to vote, but this has recently changed. There are numerous “technical” details in the US electoral process that could turn out to be even more important; particularly since strategists — on both sides — are skilled at using all the loopholes they can find to get their supporters out, or suppress the other side. Pundits who want to predict the November results must look hard at the electoral weeds.

第五點教訓是，重要的不僅是情緒：選舉過程中繁雜的細節(jié)也很重要。在英國，留歐陣營失敗的一個原因是潛在的年輕選民(他們一般傾向留歐)的投票率很低。另一個問題是一個很少有人注意到的技術(shù)細節(jié)：過去父母可以自動為青少年子女登記投票，但是這一點最近發(fā)生了改變。美國選舉過程中有很多可能會變得極重要的“技術(shù)”細節(jié);特別是由于雙方策略師擅于利用他們能找到的所有漏洞來鼓勵其支持者投票或壓制對方。想預測11月大選結(jié)果的權(quán)威人士必須認真審視選舉細節(jié)。

And that brings us to the sixth and most important lesson from Brexit: that democracy, by its nature, is unpredictable, particularly as social polarisation is increasing. Elites might hate this. So might investors or businesses, which need to plan for the long term. But if the whole point of democracy is to give people a voice, there will always be a risk that this voice will either howl in rage — or sit at home and not speak at all. Americans had better hope that the pundits learn this lesson ahead of time and — crucially — that politicians are ready to listen.

這也就引出了第六點、也是最重要的教訓：從本質(zhì)上講，民主是不可預測的，特別是當社會兩極分化不斷加深的情況下。精英階層可能痛恨這一點。需要長遠打算的投資者和企業(yè)可能也一樣。但是，如果民主的關(guān)鍵在于讓民眾發(fā)聲，那么就總是存在一種風險：民眾要么發(fā)出憤怒的咆哮，要么留在家中保持沉默。美國人最好盼望著權(quán)威人士盡快學到這點教訓，并且政治人士準備好聽取教訓，后一點是關(guān)鍵。