倍可親

美國人看美國:美國的言論自由及其後果

作者:丹奇  於 2011-1-10 23:56 發表於 最熱鬧的華人社交網路--貝殼村

作者分類:時事評論|通用分類:熱點雜談|已有152評論


(前言:新年伊始,亞利桑那州圖桑市發生了槍擊事件,40歲的女國會議員成為槍擊目標被近距離擊中頭部,一名聯邦法官和一個年僅9歲的小姑娘失去了生命。更有20多名無辜的人受傷。這是美國歷史上第二個國會議員被槍殺,其嚴重性無須多言。在舉國震驚,全民哀悼無辜死傷者的時候,美國媒體似乎又有了新的令人興奮的話題可以喋喋不休。但是,有多少人會透過這起惡劣事件吸取教訓呢。本人的先生憤怒了,他奮筆疾書,從一個美國人的角度對美國的言論自由進行了以下的批判與反思。本人匆匆翻譯成中文,為向更多的同胞朋友傳遞一個信息:要言論自由,但更要負責任。因為信息泛濫的時代,言論的威力越來越大。如何善用言論自由,便是我們這個社會,美國或其他國家,都必須面對的問題。水可以載舟,也可以覆舟。今天的教訓可謂深刻!)

 

美國白人看美國:美國的言論自由及其後果

----------國會議員槍擊案的反思

 

/ 羅傑   翻譯/丹奇

201119

 

一月八日發生在亞利桑那州圖桑市的槍擊事件盪起了不負責任的言論自由所導致的政治和社會餘波。這次的槍擊打死了至少5個人(包括一名聯邦法官和一個9歲的女孩)並嚴重傷及其他眾人-包括槍擊目標美國女國會議員蓋布麗爾吉佛德。女國會議員在一個公共場所,被槍手距離2英尺處擊中頭部。

槍手的動機仍然不明,但是他曾經發帖抱怨政府的某些政策。

作為美國人,我們珍惜憲法保護的言論自由權利。

政治評論家們每天晚上通過電視,每天白天通過電台煽動的高度黨派之爭等毒害性言論現在籠罩著美國。

 一個典型的例子便是薩拉佩林(前副總統候選人)。她的政治行動委員會把那些他們在2010年中期選舉中要擊敗的民主黨官員作為靶子。她的營銷廣告赤裸裸地用來福槍瞄準鏡里的十字線對準這些官員,顯而易見的表明了「幹掉他們」……的射擊意義(否則,為什麼要使用槍械圖像?)。現在,我當然不認為佩林信奉或將永遠容忍這種行為或行動,但它確實毫無疑問地煽動了她的追隨者並增加了此刻的緊張氣氛。

或者以競選取代內華達參議員哈里雷德的莎倫安格爾為例如何?她在接受採訪時暗示,如果她競選失敗,她那些不喜歡競選結果的追隨者已經為此準備了第二修正案補救辦法。其含義是不滿的選民可以打著「憲法第二修正案」的幌子(即有權持有和攜帶武器)來影響並改變由選舉產生的領導人,這實際上就是武裝叛亂,試圖推翻民選政府。

再舉一例如何?大批人士仍然認為奧巴馬總統是穆斯林和伊斯蘭教的追隨者。然而,另一個反對總統的團體卻因為他參拜一個由好戰的非裔美國人(牧師賴特)領導的基督教會達20多年而自鳴得意。你不能兩者兼得- 他要麼是基督徒要麼是穆斯林。但問題是,這兩個強烈反對總統的團體將這種如硫酸般的毒素已經侵蝕了自己的團體,無非是有目的的誤傳並蓄意鬧事。其目的是詆毀總統奧巴馬,即使兩個集團持有的反對意見互相衝突和相互抵消也不在乎。諸如此類,這麼多的信息被媒體渲染,事實真相已經不足為重,重要的是他們攪亂,煽動並激起人們對政治對手們的政治觀點的仇恨。他們廣播的「真相」其實僅是謊言也無關緊要。他們用最陰險的方式利用了言論自由- 他們播出謊言,導致人民分裂,使朋友變成敵人,最後總會有人使用暴力來強求政治觀點,儘管他們的行動是基於一個的真相--一個謊言。

言論自由,被高度珍惜和保護的同時,必須與責任共存,這也是一種社會價值。當然大多數人永遠不會並從來沒有採取過暴力行為,可問題是,只需一個持槍的人就能震驚整個政治體系------並毀掉許多人的生命。

政治和媒體語言現存的毒害水平不止在國內並且在國際上傷害著我們。華盛頓DC目前的敵意已經造就了另一個無法帶領國家前進的國會並且繼續分裂著人民。一個結黨的人口和分裂的國家是不堪一擊的。

 美國一直以來作為自由,富庶,公平,正義,文明,守法的典範廣受世界各地人民世代景仰。目前政治黨派之間的交流水平已經侵蝕了這些原則,並傷害了我們的國家。

 我譴責那些熱衷誤導信息和媒體的政客們(比如Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman, Glen Beck, 等等)他們散布傳播消息,利用電波和印刷文字傳播這個國家感染的病毒,使公民之間翻臉,使政治團體人員之間成為敵人,

 也許圖桑槍擊案和失去的生命有助於引導大家更加關注目前政治話語狀況。也許分化的政客們以及極端的媒體會降低從他們的麥克風和報紙噴涌的仇恨水平。也許我們都退後一步,思考一下什麼是言論自由,如何負責任地用好它,這樣才可以激勵政治交流的成長,而不是公民之間的暴力。

長遠來說,我懷疑以上任何願望實際上會實現。因為分裂人民讓他們互相為敵實在是太有趣並且有利於政治需要,更是媒體維持現狀的利益所在。

 

附英語原文:

FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES

A POLITICAL VIEW

 

By Roger Dean (January 9th, 2011)

 

The shooting on Saturday January 8th in Tucson, Arizona highlights the potential political and societal fallout from irresponsible free speech. The shooting killed at least 5 persons ( including a Federal Judge and a 9 year old child ) and critically wounded many others – including the intended target U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The Congresswomana was shot in the head from less than 2 feet away, in a public place.

 

While the motive of the gunman is still unknown it is known that he has written and posted views and complained about the government and certain policies.

 

While we as Americans value our Constitutionally protected rights to free speech that right also implies a certain responsibility in its use. The misuse of free speech can come very close to going over the line and in effect incite violence or public mayhem.

 

The political pundits who come through out televisions every night or through our radio』s during the day incite much of this as well as the highly partisan and toxic political discourse that now envelopes the nation.

 

A case in point is Sarah Palin ( former Vice Presidential candidate ). Her Political Action Committee made 「targets」 of those Democrats they wished to defeat in the 2010 mid term elections. Her marketing literally showed those officials with 「cross hairs」 of a rifle scope over them to 「take them out」… the implication of shooting them ( otherwise, why use the gun imagery ) is there. Now, of course I certainly don』t think Sarah Palin espoused or would ever condone such behavior or actions but it did, without a doubt, incite her followers and increase the tension of the moment.

 

Or how about Sharron Angle who was campaigning to replace U.S. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada. During an interview she implied if she lost the election and her followers didn』t like the result that there were 「second amendment remedies」 for that. The implication is that disgruntled voters could hide behind the second amendment to the Constitution ( which is the right to keep and bear arms ) to effect change on elected leaders, essentially an armed rebellion to overthrow the elected government.

What about the large group of people who continue to believe that President Obama is a Muslim and follower of Islam? But, another group opposed to the President takes delight that he went to a Christian church for over 20 years led by a militant African American ( Rev. Wright )? You can』t have it both ways – he』s either Christian or a Muslim. But, the point is that both groups are vehemently opposed to the President and spread vicious vitriol to their groups that is nothing more than misinformation and intended to 「stir the pot」. The goal is discredit the President even though the two groups against Obama hold views that conflict and cancel each other out. Like so much of the information encouraged by these media types truth is not the point, stirring the pot and inciting and exciting and building hatred and a political viewpoint against the political opposition is the point. It doesn』t matter to them if the 「truth」 they broadcast is actually just a lie. They have used free speech in its most insidious manner – they broadcast lies that lead to dividing the people and make friends become enemies and eventually someone will use violence to pursue political views even though their actions are based on a 「false」 truth – a lie.

Free speech, while highly valued and protected, has to come with responsibilities that are considered a value to the society as well. While the vast majority of people will never and would never act out in a violent manner the problem is that it only takes one person with a gun to shock the political system – and destroy the lives of many.

 

The existing level of toxicity in political and media language hurts us not only domestically but internationally as well. Our current animosity in Washington D.C. has brought us another Congress that will be unable to move the country forward and continues to divide the people. A fractious population and divided country is weaker for it.

 

The United States has been admired and looked to by generations of people here and all around the world as a model for freedom and prosperity, fairness and justice, civility and adherence to the law. The current level of communication between the political parties has eroded these tenets and hurt our nation.

 

I lay the blame for this erosion squarely at the feet and doorsteps of those political officials who encourage misinformation and the media types ( Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Keith Olberman, Glen Beck , etc ) who spread and disseminate the information and turn citizen against citizen, make enemies of the population between the political groups and use the airwaves and printed word to spread the virus that now infects this country.

 

Perhaps the shooting in Tucson and the loss of life can help bring about a more focused look on the current state of political discourse. Perhaps the partisan politicians and the extreme media shows will tone down the level of hatred they spew from their micophones and newspapers. Perhaps we』ll all just step back for a moment and reflect on what free speech is and how to use it in a responsible manner that encourages growth in political communication rather than violence amongst the citizenry.

 

I doubt that any of the above will actually happen in the long run. It』s just too much fun and politically valuable to separate the people and make them enemies of each other and much to profitable for the media to maintain the status quo.

 

 

(後記:本人水平有限,翻譯若有不妥之處,恭請鄉親及時拍磚指正!) 


高興

感動

同情

搞笑

難過

拍磚
5

支持
23

鮮花

剛表態過的朋友 (28 人)

發表評論 評論 (152 個評論)

回復 xinsheng 2011-1-11 00:36
"要言論自由,但更要負責任。"!
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 00:42
xinsheng: "要言論自由,但更要負責任。"!
就是這個理!
回復 xqw63 2011-1-11 01:04
民主自由是雙刃劍
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 01:06
xqw63: 民主自由是雙刃劍
就看怎麼用了。
回復 xqw63 2011-1-11 01:09
丹奇: 就看怎麼用了。
沒錯,需要一個度
回復 homepeace 2011-1-11 01:12
還要反對槍支泛濫!
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 01:18
homepeace: 還要反對槍支泛濫!
關於這個問題,我讓他爹再發表一下他的看法。
回復 homepeace 2011-1-11 01:25
丹奇: 關於這個問題,我讓他爹再發表一下他的看法。
期待。
管制槍枝泛濫,就可以拯救成百上千的生命。
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 01:36
homepeace: 期待。
管制槍枝泛濫,就可以拯救成百上千的生命。
是的。這是濫用和自保之間的幾率問題。值得深思。
回復 飽暖思自由 2011-1-11 01:51
言論自由沒有錯,錯的顯然是個別人的做法。這個槍手獲得的信息,與我們獲得的信息有什麼不同嗎?大家得到的信息是一樣的,但採取行動的方式卻有天壤之別,說明什麼?以一個個人的行動來試圖說明言論自由的錯,叫什麼來著?以偏概全?以點蓋面?
只要不是造謠的信息,不應該有任何控制,否則,你們何以在此順暢地表達你們文中的觀點?
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 02:01
飽暖思自由: 言論自由沒有錯,錯的顯然是個別人的做法。這個槍手獲得的信息,與我們獲得的信息有什麼不同嗎?大家得到的信息是一樣的,但採取行動的方式卻有天壤之別,說明什 ...
沒有說言論自由錯了啊,請看懂文章再發言好嗎?
回復 飽暖思自由 2011-1-11 02:09
丹奇: 沒有說言論自由錯了啊,請看懂文章再發言好嗎?
對不起,看另一篇文章,卻把評論寫在這了。
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 02:12
飽暖思自由: 對不起,看另一篇文章,卻把評論寫在這了。
呵呵,沒關係。
回復 在美一方 2011-1-11 02:27
簡稱:美白  
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 02:41
在美一方: 簡稱:美白   
為了強調才如此區分。見諒哈。
回復 飽暖思自由 2011-1-11 02:45
這就是言論自由,這就是人類社會,是那麼紛繁複雜,但也條理清楚。越來越多的美國人由於厭惡而遠離政治,這本身就是錯誤的。你可以選擇遠離政治,但政治不會遠離你,這個世界沒有世外桃源,每個人必須親自參與才行。是美國公眾的沉默導致了象佩林這樣的所謂政治家可以呼風喚雨,實際上,她的選民所佔比例小的可憐,試想,如果多數有正義感的美國人選擇站在正義的立場上,多數人的優勢就可以輕易地擊敗她們的那些謊言,並以多數人的強大優勢震懾住那些想鋌而走險的個別人。
所以,我認為,負責任的言論當然重要,但最重要的還是有正義感的美國人要全面參與到政治當中。現在危險的信號已頻繁出現,能拯救美國和自己的只有更多的美國人的參與。
所以,不要奢求什麼負責任的言論,而應該呼喚不參與美國政治遊戲的那部分美國人心裡的良知與正義感。
回復 在美一方 2011-1-11 02:48
丹奇: 為了強調才如此區分。見諒哈。
諒啥啊,瞎逗呢
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 02:54
飽暖思自由: 這就是言論自由,這就是人類社會,是那麼紛繁複雜,但也條理清楚。越來越多的美國人由於厭惡而遠離政治,這本身就是錯誤的。你可以選擇遠離政治,但政治不會遠離 ...
同意你的觀點。這篇文章頁也只是拋磚引玉之舉,要是談及參與更多的政治,恐怕還得另外撰文。謝謝分享你的觀點!
回復 丹奇 2011-1-11 03:05
在美一方: 諒啥啊,瞎逗呢
呵呵,知道呢。
回復 cartoonyang 2011-1-11 03:31
可惜!
需要和平!!!

facelist doodle 塗鴉板

您需要登錄后才可以評論 登錄 | 註冊

關於本站 | 隱私權政策 | 免責條款 | 版權聲明 | 聯絡我們

Copyright © 2001-2013 海外華人中文門戶:倍可親 (http://big5.backchina.com) All Rights Reserved.

程序系統基於 Discuz! X3.1 商業版 優化 Discuz! © 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

本站時間採用京港台時間 GMT+8, 2019-8-23 23:34

返回頂部