不要用單一身份標(biāo)簽加劇分裂

I’m a fan of Catalonia but Catalan separatists are separating people. Their slogans say, “Spain steals from us!” or “Catalonia is not Spain”. Rhetoric like this divides people into opposite groups, each with a single identity: us (Catalans) and them (Spaniards). You must be one thing or the other. The government in Madrid unintentionally sharpens this divide by locking up separatist leaders.

我非常喜歡加泰羅尼亞，但加泰羅尼亞的分裂主義者正在讓人民分裂。他們的口號(hào)是，“西班牙偷走了我們的東西!”或者“加泰羅尼亞不是西班牙”。此類(lèi)口號(hào)把人民分成了兩個(gè)對(duì)立的群體，每個(gè)人都有一個(gè)單一身份：我們(加泰羅尼亞人)和他們(西班牙人)。你必須是非此即彼。西班牙政府拘禁分裂主義領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人，無(wú)意中加劇了這種分裂。

Someone else who thinks in terms of single identity is Donald Trump. As he tells it, you’re American or Muslim; you’re a real American or a liberal elitist. There’s an uncomplicated joy to single identity: find your essence, then taunt an enemy who doesn’t share it. And along with your identity comes a free set of opinions that you never need to test against reality.

還有一個(gè)以單一身份來(lái)思考問(wèn)題的人是唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)。正如其所言，你是美國(guó)人或者是穆斯林，你是一個(gè)真正的美國(guó)人或者是自由主義精英。單一身份有一種簡(jiǎn)單的快樂(lè)：找到本質(zhì)身份，然后嘲諷非同類(lèi)身份的敵人。與你的身份一起出現(xiàn)的還有一套永遠(yuǎn)不需要經(jīng)過(guò)現(xiàn)實(shí)檢驗(yàn)的隨意觀點(diǎn)。

But thinking in single-identity terms breeds conflict. JH Elliott, the British historian and expert on Spanish history, describes Catalonia as “a very unhappy society over the last year or two”, in which “families have not been talking to each other”. Some disappointed Catalan separatists could easily morph into a terrorist movement like the Basque ETA or the IRA.

但是以單一身份思考問(wèn)題會(huì)導(dǎo)致沖突。專(zhuān)注研究西班牙歷史的英國(guó)歷史學(xué)家JH•埃利奧特(JH Elliott)將加泰羅尼亞描述為“過(guò)去一兩年來(lái)一個(gè)非常不快樂(lè)的社會(huì)”，在這個(gè)社會(huì)里，“家人之間互不溝通”。一些不滿的加泰羅尼亞分裂主義者可能很容易演變?yōu)?ldquo;巴斯克祖國(guó)與自由組織”(ETA)或愛(ài)爾蘭共和國(guó)軍(IRA)這樣的恐怖主義集團(tuán)。

Amartya Sen, the philosopher who won the Nobel Prize for economics in 1998, has a better idea: ditch single identity, and understand that every person has multiple identities. Sen began thinking about these issues aged 11. One day in 1944, a Muslim labourer named Kader Mia staggered bleeding into the Sen family garden in Dhaka (then in British India). Mia had just been knifed during Hindu-Muslim street riots. Sen recalls in his book Identity and Violence, “I could not do much for Kader Mia as he lay bleeding with his head on my lap.” Mia was rushed to hospital by Sen’s father but died there.

1998年獲得諾貝爾經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)獎(jiǎng)的哲學(xué)家阿瑪?shù)賮?bull;森(Amartya Sen)有一個(gè)更好的想法：摒棄單一身份，并且明白每個(gè)人都有多重身份。森在11歲的時(shí)候就開(kāi)始思考這些問(wèn)題。1944年的一天，在達(dá)卡(當(dāng)時(shí)在英屬印度)，一個(gè)名叫卡德•米亞(Kader Mia)的穆斯林工人流著血，跌跌撞撞地走進(jìn)了森家的花園。米亞在印度教徒與穆斯林的街頭騷亂中被捅傷了。森在《身份與暴力》(Identity and Violence)一書(shū)中回憶說(shuō)：“卡德•米亞躺在我腿上流血的時(shí)候，我無(wú)能為力。”米亞很快被森的父親送往醫(yī)院，但終因傷勢(shì)過(guò)重死在了那里。

Sen could never forget him. Mia would have lived if his Hindu assailant had recognised him as a fellow Indian, Bengali or poor male, instead of seeing him as a Muslim. So who was Mia? Who are we? Sen has a brilliantly simple answer: Mia had multiple identities. So do we all.

森永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)忘記他。如果那個(gè)行兇的印度教徒把他看作是印度人、孟加拉人或者貧窮的男人，而不是把他視為穆斯林的話，那么米亞就不會(huì)死。那么米亞是誰(shuí)?我們又是誰(shuí)?森有一個(gè)非常簡(jiǎn)單的答案：米亞有多重身份，我們都有多重身份。

Nobody is just one thing. It’s misguided to say, for instance, “I am Hindu but you are Muslim” (although many in today’s India of Hindu nationalist prime minister Narendra Modi are saying exactly that). No person is “only” Muslim, or only Catalan. It’s ludicrous to file millions of people — of different life experiences, genders, ages, classes and passions — under just one category. Worse, dividing people into single identities automatically sets them against each other. If you keep telling somebody that he’s only Catalan and utterly unlike non-Catalans, he might eventually believe it.

沒(méi)有人只有一種身份。例如，一個(gè)受到誤導(dǎo)的說(shuō)法是，“我是印度教徒，而你是穆斯林”(盡管在當(dāng)今印度教民族主義總理納倫德拉•莫迪(Narendra Modi)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下的印度，許多人正是這么說(shuō)的)。沒(méi)有人“只是”穆斯林，或者“只是”加泰羅尼亞人。將數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)有著不同生活經(jīng)歷、性別、年齡、社會(huì)階層和情感的人僅僅歸于某一類(lèi)是很荒唐的。更糟糕的是，將人們以單一身份自動(dòng)區(qū)分開(kāi)，會(huì)讓他們彼此對(duì)立。如果你不斷告訴某個(gè)人，他只是加泰羅尼亞人，與非加泰羅尼亞人完全不同，他最終可能會(huì)相信這一點(diǎn)。

In fact, in a poll by Metroscopia for El País newspaper last month, 76 per cent of people in Catalonia said they were both Catalan and Spanish. That’s why demonstrators in Barcelona for Spanish unity carried banners with the Catalan, Spanish and European flags surrounded by a heart. Other protesters used a slogan in Spanish and Catalan: “Hablemos/parlem” (“Let’s talk”). My favourite was a banner saying, “A flag is just a piece of cloth.”

實(shí)際上，在民調(diào)機(jī)構(gòu)Metroscopia上月為西班牙《國(guó)家報(bào)》(El País)進(jìn)行的一項(xiàng)民意調(diào)查中，76%的加泰羅尼亞人表示，他們既是加泰羅尼亞人也是西班牙人。在巴塞羅那，支持西班牙統(tǒng)一的示威人群高舉的橫幅上畫(huà)的是，加泰羅尼亞區(qū)旗、西班牙國(guó)旗和歐洲旗幟被一顆心環(huán)繞著，原因就在這里。還有一些抗議者使用的是西班牙語(yǔ)和加泰羅尼亞語(yǔ)口號(hào)：“Hablemos/parlem”(讓我們討論吧)。我最喜歡的一面橫幅上寫(xiě)著：“國(guó)旗只是一塊布。”

Only 19 per cent of people in Metroscopia’s survey called themselves exclusively Catalan. And each of them will have had many other identities besides. A Catalan separatist might be a thirtysomething mother, daughter, pharmacist, Barcelona native, Katy Perry fan, European et cetera. She probably shares some of these identities with a Spanish nationalist in Madrid. As Sen says: “The main hope of harmony in our troubled world lies in the plurality of our identities, which cut across each other and work against sharp divisions.” Nobody is a caricature made of one or two demographic factors. We’re not all the same but we do have commonalities.

在Metroscopia所做的調(diào)查中，只有19%的受訪者認(rèn)為自己只是加泰羅尼亞人。而他們每個(gè)人都還有很多其他身份。一名加泰羅尼亞分裂主義者可能同時(shí)是一名三十幾歲的母親、女兒、藥劑師、巴塞羅那本地人、名模凱蒂•佩里(Katy Perry)的粉絲、歐洲人等等。她的一些身份可能與馬德里的一位西班牙民族主義者相同。正如森所言：“在我們這個(gè)麻煩不斷的世界里，和諧的主要希望在于我們身份的多重性，它使人們彼此交織，消除嚴(yán)重分歧。”沒(méi)有人是由一兩個(gè)人口統(tǒng)計(jì)要素構(gòu)成的漫畫(huà)人物。我們并不完全相同，但我們確實(shí)有共性。

Even today’s blue- and red-state Americans would discover this, if they could ditch their single-identity rhetoric along with their fantasies of crushing the other side. But talking in single identities is infectious. Each time Trump says something racist, some liberals dismiss all his supporters as racist halfwits.

即便是當(dāng)今美國(guó)藍(lán)州和紅州的人民，如果他們能夠摒棄那套單一身份的說(shuō)詞，不再幻想壓倒對(duì)方陣營(yíng)的話，他們也會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)這個(gè)道理。但以單一身份發(fā)表的言論是有感染力的。每當(dāng)特朗普說(shuō)一些種族主義言論時(shí)，一些自由主義者就會(huì)把他的所有支持者斥為種族主義腦殘。

When Trump slurs women, or black people, he encourages those groups to cluster around a single identity. The Black Lives Matter movement and last January’s Women’s Marchers have excellent goals. But as Mark Lilla argues in his recent book The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics, these groups will probably fail if they become exclusively single-identity movements.

當(dāng)特朗普詆毀女性或黑人時(shí)，他等于鼓勵(lì)那些群體圍繞一種單一身份抱團(tuán)。“黑人的命也是命”(The Black Lives Matter)運(yùn)動(dòng)和今年1月的“女性大游行”(Women’s Marchers:)有著高尚的目標(biāo)。但正如馬克•利拉(Mark Lilla)在他的新書(shū)《昔日和未來(lái)的自由主義者：在身份政治以后》(The Once and Future Liberal: After Identity Politics)中所說(shuō)的：“如果這些群體變成單一身份運(yùn)動(dòng)，他們可能會(huì)失敗。”

If you want to persuade people who don’t share your one particular identity, you need to appeal to some of our shared identities. Lilla writes: “I am not a black male motorist . . . All the more reason, then, that I need some way to identify with one if I am going to be affected by his experience . . . The more the differences between us are emphasised, the less likely I will be to feel outrage at his mistreatment.”

如果你希望說(shuō)服那些與你的某種身份不同的人，你需要借助一些雙方共同的身份。利拉寫(xiě)道：“我不是一位黑人男性司機(jī)……因此，如果說(shuō)我會(huì)被某個(gè)黑人男性司機(jī)的遭遇觸動(dòng)的話，那么我需要有更多的理由來(lái)同情他……我們之間的差異越被看重，我就越不可能對(duì)他遭遇的不公感到憤慨。”

The economist Branko Milanovic recently described what he learnt from the bloody break-up of his native Yugoslavia: “Be considerate. Think of people as persons. And do not impute to them opinions just because of their nationality.” It’s handy advice for today’s fragile societies such as India, the US and Spain.

最近，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家布蘭科•米拉諾維奇(Branko Milanovic)從自己祖國(guó)南斯拉夫的血腥分裂中總結(jié)出了這樣的教訓(xùn)：“要體諒他人。要把人當(dāng)人看。不要僅僅因?yàn)樗麄兊膰?guó)籍就妄加評(píng)判他們。”對(duì)于當(dāng)今一些脆弱的社會(huì)，比如印度、美國(guó)和西班牙，這是再好不過(guò)的建議了。