美國的政變製作

Saturday, October 18th, 2008 星期六， 2008年十月18日

Lew Rockwell柳羅克韋爾 | Following Plato, many moralists have associated political virtue with a reluctance to pursue and exercise power. |柏拉圖之後，有許多相關的道德政治美德與不願追求和行使權力。 To want to rule others is to be morally disqualified from doing so.為了要統治別人就是在道德上是被取消資格這樣做。 The strong tendency in traditional Western political thought to disparage a desire for power has been unfortunate.強勁的趨勢，傳統的西方政治思想詆毀的願望權力一直是不幸的。 Without some people governing others, basic social order could not exist, to say nothing of effecting desirable change.如果有些人理事等，基本的社會秩序就不可能存在，更不用說影響可取的變化。 The prejudice against power-seeking has left politics too much to people with the wrong kind of ambition, who want to rule as an end in itself.在不妨礙對權力的要求已經離開政治太多的人錯誤的野心，誰想要的規則本身就是目的。

The reason for observing that the pursuit of power need not be immoral but can be a means to good is that this article will challenge a particular manifestation of the will to power – one that finds expression in increasingly influential arguments for boosting the prerogatives of the American president and the federal government.其原因指出，追求權力不一定是不道德的，而且可以是一個很好的手段是，本文將挑戰特別體現了權力意志-一種認為表達的越來越有影響的論點提高的特權美國總統和聯邦政府。 The criticism that will be directed here against that hankering for domination must not be misunderstood as stemming from opposition to any and all efforts to acquire power.的批評，將針對在這裡對這一渴望統治絕不能被誤解為來自反對黨的任何及所有努力取得權力。 What will be rejected is an inordinate and blatantly partisan, and therefore perverse, craving to rule – a dream not just about taking over the US government but about dominating the world.什麼將被拒絕是一種過分，公然偏袒，因此有害的，渴求規則-一個夢想不只是接管了美國政府，而是稱霸世界。 The people who have this desire attempt to conceal its real nature by pretending that it comports well with the thinking of the framers of the US Constitution.誰的人有這種願望企圖掩蓋其真實性質的假裝它comports良好的思想，制定了美國憲法。 It is in fact alien to that thinking.事實上，它是外國人的思維。 Would that power of a different quality could prevail against it!將這種權力具有不同的質量可以戰勝它！

A merely self-serving desire for power cannot present itself as such.只是一個自我服務的權力慾望不能成為本等。 It must portray itself as a wish to assist others.它必須把自己作為一個願協助他人。 How best to argue for giving you or your group great power?如何能最好地說給您或您的小組偉大的力量？ If you are able to persuade others that the present world is grossly oppressive and destructive of human happiness but that you can make it much better, those others may support mobilizing massive power and placing it in your hands or the hands of people like you.如果你能說服他人，目前世界上嚴重壓迫和破壞人類幸福，但你可以使它更好，這些其他人可能支持強大的動員和把它放在你的手或雙手的人喜歡你。 The more ambitious your scheme for benevolent change, the greater the need for power.更為雄心勃勃的計劃，您仁慈的變化，需要更大的權力。

Since the French Revolution, ideologies have been exceptionally conducive to power-seeking.自法國大革命，意識形態已經非常有利於權力尋求。 Jacobinism, Communism, and National Socialism are alike in promising glorious change and assuming the desirability of giving vast power to those who claim to know what needs to be done.雅各賓主義，共產主義，社會主義和民族的前途都在光榮的變化和假設是可取的巨大力量使這些人誰知道需要做些什麼。 A few years ago, David Frum and Richard Perle provided an all-purpose justification for unlimited power: putting “an end to evil” – the title of their co-authored book.幾年前，大衛Frum和理查德珀爾提供了一個通用的理由無限的權力：把“終止罪惡” -的標題他們共同撰寫的書。 Now there is a noble and ambitious goal!現在，是一項崇高和宏偉目標！ Power beyond the dreams of avarice would be needed to realize it.電力超越夢想的貪婪將需要實現它。 That rooting out evil might be an endless task only increases its appeal to a ravenous will to power.這剷除邪惡的可能是一個無休止的任務只會增加其吸引了貪婪的權力意志。 We are, of course, supposed to believe that the connection between advocating sweeping change and needing great power is purely coincidental.我們當然，要相信，主張之間的聯繫發生翻天覆地變化和需要偉大的力量是純粹的巧合。

Jacobinism and Marxism were openly revolutionary.雅各賓主義和馬克思主義公開革命性的。 They were the ideologies of out-groups challenging existing elites.他們的意識形態了團體挑戰現有的精英。 What this writer has called neo-Jacobinism is the ideology of people on the inside, members of America’s elites, who wish to make the military and other might of the United States a more pliant and powerful tool and who are attempting a creeping coup d’état from within.什麼筆者呼籲新雅各賓主義是意識形態的人在裡面，成員美國的精英，誰願作出軍事和其他可能對美國更柔軟和功能強大的工具，誰正試圖逐漸政變政變內。 According to their ideology, America is called by history to create a better world based on universal principles.根據他們的思想，被稱為美國歷史創造一個更美好的世界的基礎上的普遍原則。 Virtuous American power must be unleashed.良性美國的力量必須得到釋放。 Their main excuse at present for exercising extra-constitutional power is to combat “Terrorism,” but any threat to their great cause is a potential justification for setting the Constitution aside.他們的主要藉口，目前額外行使憲法權力，以打擊“恐怖主義” ，但任何威脅到他們的偉大事業是一個潛在的理由設置憲法一邊。

The rise of the huge, centralized Federal government and the corresponding decline of limited, decentralized government resulted from changes deep in the American mind and imagination.崛起的巨大的，集中聯邦政府和相應下降有限，政府權力下放造成深部的變化在美國銘記和想像力。 The new Jacobins take advantage of the fading of the old ethos and hasten its disappearance by advocating notions incompatible with it.新雅各賓派利用褪色的舊精神和加速其失踪倡導的概念不符合它。

The old American idea of government was indistinguishable from the commandment to “love thy neighbor.” That morality stressed the importance of the person trying to control his own evil and weakness.這位美國政府的想法是區分的戒律，以“愛你的鄰居。 ”這強調道德的重要性的人試圖控制自己的罪惡和弱點。 Strength of will – character – had to be built up so that the person would become capable of more loving familial and local relationships and more responsible citizenship.意志的力量-性質-要建立起這樣的人將成為能夠更加熱愛家族和地方的關係和更負責任的公民。 This morality made for strong communities and self-reliance and minimized the need for government.這種道德了強有力的社區和自力更生和最大限度地減少需要的政府。 Alexis de Tocqueville pointed to the great reluctance among Americans in the early 19th century to give up power over their own lives to any distant authority.托克維爾指出，偉大的美國人不願意在19世紀初放棄權力，自己的生活遙遠的任何權力。

The Constitution rested on an unwritten constitution, which was America’s religious, moral, intellectual, cultural, and social habits and beliefs.憲法取決於一個不成文的憲法，這是美國的宗教，道德，智力，文化和社會習慣和信仰。 Traditional America encouraged a strong attachment to life lived up-close.美國傳統的強有力的鼓勵依戀生命辜負關閉。 It fostered self-restraint, modesty, respect for law, and a willingness to compromise.它促進自我克制，謙虛，尊重法律，並願意妥協。 It was this heritage that brought into being the constitutional personality.正是這一文化遺產，被帶入憲法的個性。 Just as people were in the habit of imposing internal checks on desire, so were they predisposed to accept and respect external constitutional and other legal constraints.正如人的習慣，實行內部檢查的願望，所以他們傾向於接受和尊重外部憲法和其他法律的限制。 Without such people, the Constitution could not work as intended.如果沒有這樣的人，憲法不能工作打算。

But the self-understanding of Americans slowly changed.但是，自我理解的美國人慢慢地改變。 Throughout the Western world a very different moral ethos was spreading that shifted attention away from intimate associations and local community.在整個西方世界的一個非常不同的道德風氣正在蔓延的轉移注意力從親密協會和當地社區。 It rejected the old notion of original sin and of personal responsibility for people up close.它反對舊的概念原罪和個人責任的人了密切的。 It found morality not in acts of character toward particular individuals – neighbors – but in “idealistic,” sentimental caring for unfortunate collectives and mankind at large.它發現沒有道德行為的性質特別是對個人-鄰居-但在“理想”，感傷的照顧不幸的集體和人類在逃。 The older personality, which the Constitution both assumed and required, began to wither.老年人的人格，這兩個假定憲法和需要，開始枯萎。 Americans started to abdicate authority to benevolent-sounding politicians far away.美國人開始放棄權力，仁慈的冠冕堂皇的政客遙遠。

Increasingly, doing good became perceived as the responsibility of government, which alone could take on the large projects now said to be demanded by morality.越來越多行善成為視為政府的責任，這本身就可以採取對大型項目現在說是道德的要求。 Governmental, collective action gradually replaced individual, private and communal responsibility.政府，集體行動，逐步取代個體，私營和社區的責任。 The moral momentum behind the old decentralized society weakened.道德動力分散的舊社會受到削弱。 Today strong, centralized Federal power seems to more and more Americans not merely acceptable but desirable.今天，強有力的，集中的聯邦權力似乎越來越多的美國人不僅可以接受，但可取的。 This is so because they are absorbing the anti-traditional moral sensibility now dominant not only in the universities, the arts, the news media, and the entertainment and publishing industries but in many churches.之所以如此，是因為它們吸收的反傳統道德的感覺現在佔主導地位不僅在大學，藝術，新聞媒體，以及娛樂和出版業，但在許多教堂。 Hence Americans say increasingly to government: “Act for us!”因此說，越來越多的美國人對政府： “對我們來說法！ ”

Much of the intellectual opposition to this trend has been confused and self-defeating.許多知識分子反對這種趨勢一直困惑，弄巧成拙。 A prime example is the way many conservatives, thinking that they were shoring up traditional beliefs, attached themselves to the ideas of Leo Strauss (1899–1973), whose disciples became a major force in American academia and national politics.一個主要例子是，許多保守派的方式，認為他們是支撐傳統觀念，重視自己的想法施特勞斯（ 1899年至1973年），其弟子成為一支主要力量在美國學術界和國家政治。 A refugee from Nazi Germany, Strauss taught for many years at the University of Chicago.難民從納粹德國，斯特勞斯教授多年來在美國芝加哥大學。 Because he appeared to defend a classical, ancient notion of universal moral right, many did not notice that he was actually discrediting respect for tradition.因為他似乎捍衛經典，古老的概念，普遍的道德權利，許多沒有注意到，他實際上是詆毀尊重傳統。 Strauss and his disciples advocated an anti-historical, un-conservative notion of moral universality.斯特勞斯和他的弟子鼓吹反歷史的，取消保守的道德觀念的普遍性。

According to Strauss, no real philosopher gives any credence to “the conventional” or “the ancestral,” to use his terms.據斯特勞斯，沒有真正的哲學家提供任何可信的“傳統”或“祖傳” ，利用他的職權。 To respect them represents the greatest of all intellectual sins, “historicism.” Inherited ways are, he insisted, mere accidents of history.要尊重他們代表了最偉大的所有智慧的罪孽， “歷史主義” 。繼承的方式是，他堅持認為，僅僅事故的歷史。 Respect is owed solely to “the simply right,” which is ahistorical and rational.尊重是只欠“的根本權利” ，這是ahistorical和合理的。 Strauss sharply criticized Edmund Burke, who saw the possibility of moral universality acquiring historical form.斯特勞斯尖銳批評埃德蒙柏克，誰看到的可能性，獲得道義上的普遍性的歷史形式。 Strauss’s abstract notion of natural right ruled out the idea that a particular tradition might, despite inevitable flaws, embody the quest for moral universality and be, for that reason, worthy of allegiance.施特勞斯的抽象的概念，自然權利排除的想法特別傳統的可能，儘管不可避免的缺陷，體現了追求道德的普遍性和，因此，值得效忠。

Strauss’s ideas were blithely absorbed by many Christians, not least philosophically unsophisticated and naïve Roman Catholics, who perceived him as a defender of moral right.施特勞斯的想法，愉快地吸收了許多基督信徒，而不是簡單的至少有哲理和天真的羅馬天主教徒，誰認為他是一名後衛的道義上的權利。 They did not realize that his conception of universality was markedly different from that of Christianity and related philosophical currents.他們沒有意識到，他的普遍性概念明顯不同，基督教和相關的哲學電流。 They did not understand or care that in rejecting tradition as a proper source of guidance Strauss was attacking one of the pillars of their faith.他們不理解或照顧，拒絕傳統，正確的指導斯特勞斯是進攻的支柱之一，他們的信仰。 They did not comprehend that by sharply separating the universal from the particular Strauss ruled out universality becoming selectively incarnate in history and was striking at the very core of their professed beliefs.他們不理解，通過大幅度的普遍分離的特殊斯特勞斯排除普遍性的化身成為選擇性的歷史和顯著的核心其宣稱的信仰。 Specifically, he was denying the possibility of the Incarnation, of the Word becoming flesh.具體來說，他是否定的可能性化身，在Word中成為一體。

Straussian political philosophy has sought to detach Americans from their historically existing tradition of constitutionalism with its deep and distinctive roots in history and to make them loyal instead to abstract principles of Straussian design that have been attributed to the founders. Straussian政治哲學試圖分離美國人從他們的歷史上現有的傳統的憲政與深和獨特的歷史根源，使他們忠實而不是抽象的原則Straussian設計，已歸入創始人。 Straussians are not all alike – in a few, the anti-historical prejudice is diluted to some extent by respect for America’s actual past – but prominent disciples of Strauss such as Allan Bloom, Harry Jaffa, and Walter Berns, who differ in some ways, all agree that what is admirable about America is not its concrete, historical self but the abstract principles of the founders. Straussians是不是所有的都一樣-在少數，反歷史的偏見稀釋至一定程度上受到尊重，美國的實際過去-但著名的施特勞斯的弟子，如布魯姆，哈里月2 7日，和沃爾特伯恩斯，誰在一些不同方式，大家都同意，是令人欽佩的是美國不是它的具體的，歷史的自我，但抽象原則的創始人。 In the last few decades, Straussian conceptions of Americanism, patriotism and virtue have been widely advocated in academia, including America’s military academies.在過去的幾十年裡， Straussian概念主義，愛國主義和美德已被廣泛倡導在學術界，包括美國的軍事院校。 That terms like these can be given a distinctly anti-traditional meaning has been little noticed.該條款可以這樣得到一個明顯的反傳統的意義已經不大注意。

By propagating a rationalistic, anti-historical notion of moral right Strauss and his disciples have created a deep prejudice against cherishing America’s distinctive, historically evolved Christian and British past.通過傳播理性的，反歷史的概念，道義上的權利，斯特勞斯和他的弟子創造了一個深偏見珍惜美國的特色，歷史演變和英國基督教過去。 But this was the cultural heritage that nurtured the inner and outer restraints of American constitutionalism.但是，這是豐富的文化遺產，培育了內部和外部約束的美國憲政。 Because Straussian anti-traditionalism has confused and weakened so many who wanted to defend that heritage, it has been in some ways more destructive of it than standard liberal anti-traditionalism.由於Straussian反傳統的困惑，並削弱了這麼多誰要捍衛這一遺產，它已經在某些方面更具破壞性的，這比標準的自由主義反傳統。

Despite plentiful ceremonial praise for the Constitution and virtual orgies of constitutional legalism, we are living through the progressive dismantling of America’s proudest political achievement.儘管有豐富的禮儀讚揚憲法和虛擬orgies憲政法制，我們正在經歷逐步拆除美國的值得驕傲的政治成就。 One sign of the precarious condition of the Constitution is that many imagine that it could be restored by electing more politicians sympathetic to its tenets and by having more “strict constructionists” appointed to the US Supreme Court.一個跡象不穩定的狀況，憲法是，許多想像，它可以通過選舉恢復更多的政治家同情其原理和有更多的“嚴格constructionists ”任命為美國最高法院。

But the old American constitutionalism is inseparable from the moral-spiritual and other culture that gave it birth.但是，舊的美國憲政是分不開的道德精神和其他文化，賦予它出生。 Limited government and liberty were made possible by people who, because of who they were, put checks on their appetites, ran their own lives and communities, and behaved more generally in ways conducive to freedom under law.有限政府和自由成為可能的人們誰，因為他們是誰，把檢查的胃口，跑自己的生活和社區，更普遍的行為方式有利於自由的法律規定。 Restoring American constitutionalism would presuppose some kind of resurgence of that old culture.美國恢復憲政將假定某種死灰復燃，舊文化。 Americans would have to begin viewing life rather differently from how they are viewing it now.美國人將不得不開始檢視生命，而不同於他們是如何看現在。 They would have to rearrange their priorities and start acting differently, placing more emphasis on family, private groups and local communities.他們將不得不重新安排其優先次序，並開始採取行動不同，將重點放在家庭，民間團體和地方社區。 They would have to want to take back much of the power ceded to politicians.他們將要收回大部分權力割讓給政治家。 Is that likely to happen?是可能發生的呢？ If not, the Constitution may not be salvageable.如果沒有，憲法可能無法回收。

The time has certainly come to consider what might take the place of American constitutionalism.時間當然應該考慮可能採取什麼地點的美國憲政。 That so many admirers of the old Constitution are prone to nostalgic dreaming and elaborate defenses of what is long gone is a sign of moral and intellectual paralysis.如此眾多崇拜者的舊憲法很容易懷舊的夢想，並制定防禦的是什麼早已是一個跡象，道德和智力癱瘓。

But there are people who have thought for a rather long time about what should replace the Constitution of 1789.但是，有些人誰想到一個相當長的時間什麼應取代1789年憲法。 They include leading Straussians and neoconservatives who have masked their agenda by pretending to defend what is being lost.他們包括領導Straussians和新保守派誰也掩蓋其議程假裝捍衛什麼是正在喪失。 It is only fair to add that the strategic designs of secretive and obfuscating leaders are not always obvious to the rank and file.只有公平地補充說，戰略設計的秘密和混淆的領導人並不總是顯而易見的職級和文件。

Straussians and neoconservatives have warned against the consequences of abandoning America’s “founding principles,” but they are not referring to the ways and beliefs of the founders but to abstractions of their own devising that they falsely attribute to revered historical figures. Straussians和新保守派已警告的後果放棄美國的“基本原則” ，但他們沒有提到的方法和信仰的創始者，而是抽象自己的設計，他們虛假屬性崇敬的歷史人物。 Those principles are more reminiscent of the French Jacobins than of the founders.這些原則是更讓人想起法國雅各賓派比的創始人。

Straussians and neoconservatives have also warned of the consequences of the “closing of the American mind” – the title of Allan Bloom’s 1987 best-selling book – but the mind that they want kept open is not the old American mind but what they would have preferred it to be, their own version of the Enlightenment mind. Straussians和新保守派也警告的後果“關閉美國心” -的標題布魯姆的1 987年暢銷書-但記住，他們希望保持開放並非歲的美國人銘記但他們將希望它是，他們自己版本的啟示銘記。

The same people have warned of American cultural decline, as measured some years back by William Bennett’s “cultural indicators,” but what they want is not the old American virtues of neighborliness, localism, self-control, compromise, and the rule of law, but the purported virtue of vigorously asserting universal principles in the world.同樣的人警告說，美國文化下降，作為衡量幾年前的威廉貝內特的“文化指標” ，但他們想要的不是歲的美國人美德的睦鄰友好，地域性，自我控制，妥協，和法治的法，但聲稱憑藉大力主張普遍性原則，在世界上。 The new Jacobins disdain moral hesitation and ambiguity, demanding what they call “moral clarity.” You are either on the side of good, spreading “democracy” or “freedom,” as they understand them, or you are siding with the enemy.新雅各賓派的蔑視道德猶豫和含糊之處，要求他們所謂的“道義上的明確。 ”你是不是一方的好，推廣“民主”或“自由” ，因為他們了解他們，或站在你的敵人。

The new Jacobins have a double message.新雅各賓派有雙重訊息。 On the one hand, they tell Americans that their society is in great danger: It is threatened domestically by fragmentation caused by lack of virtue and patriotism, by moral nihilism, historicism, and multiculturalism.一方面，他們告訴美國人，他們的社會是非常危險的：這是威脅國內的分裂所造成的缺乏美德和愛國主義，道德虛無主義，歷史主義和多元文化。 It is threatened from abroad by Terrorism and “Islamofascism.” But, on the other hand, the new Jacobins want to be reassuring: Be not afraid!這是來自國外的威脅的恐怖主義和“伊斯蘭法西斯主義。 ”但是，另一方面，新的雅各賓派想安慰：不要怕！ We, the patriotic champions of American principles, are here to protect you!我們的愛國冠軍美國的原則，來這裡是為了保護你！ We promise you order and security and an America committed to right in the world.我們可以向你們保證秩序和安全，並承諾美國有權在世界上。

Their notion of America reveals its alien origins even in strange-sounding language, as in the name “Department of Homeland Security.” They are popularizing un-American ideas of governance, notably the so-called “unitary” executive – the notion of the preeminence of the president, who is to be as little constrained as possible by checks and balances and the rule of law.其概念的美國顯露出它的起源甚至外國人在陌生的冠冕堂皇的語言，如名稱為“國土安全部。 ”他們是推廣非美國設想的治理，特別是所謂的“單一的”行政-的概念傑出的總統，誰是那樣的限制很少盡可能制衡和法治。 Their goal is wholly at odds with the constitutionalism of the framers.他們的目標是完全不符合憲法的制定者。

Lest too many worry about the expansion and centralization of federal power, the neo-Jacobins do not let Americans forget even for a day the great and acute danger of Terrorism.為了避免太多擔心的擴大和集中的聯邦權力，新雅各賓派不要讓美國人甚至忘記了一天的偉大和急性恐怖主義的危險。 A country that spends almost as much on its military and national security as the rest of the world put together has to tremble continuously before possible threats.一個國家的花費幾乎同樣多的關於其軍事和國家安全為世界其他地區的合作提出了不斷發抖前可能出現的威脅。 People who resist the progressive erosion of American liberties are portrayed as unpatriotic and a threat to national security.人們誰抵制逐步侵蝕美國的自由是描繪成不愛國的和對國家安全構成威脅。

Those who would protect us are advancing the coup from within by teaching us to associate American security and virtue with the leadership of a strong man.這些誰保護我們的推動從內部發動政變的教學我們聯繫美國的安全和美德的領導一個強有力的人。 Here, as in other ways, Straussian and neoconservative ideas have blended with and hardened standard liberal thinking.在這裡，如同在其他方面， Straussian和新保守主義的思想混合硬化標準和自由思維。 In the mid-20th century it was academics like James MacGregor Burns who inspired a cult of the presidency.在20世紀中葉這是學者像詹姆斯麥格雷戈伯恩斯誰啟發邪教主席。 Burns, who eventually became president of the American Political Science Association, was the quintessential modern American liberal.伯恩斯，誰最終成為總統的美國政治學協會，是典型的現代美國的自由。 He advocated popular rule through strong presidential leadership in the Roosevelt-New Deal mode.他主張流行的規則通過強有力的總統領導的羅斯福，新政模式。 He knew well that this notion flatly contradicted the framers.他知道，這個概念斷然矛盾的制定。 They opposed “democracy” and assumed that if any branch of the US government were preeminent, it would be the Congress.他們反對“民主”和假定，如果有任何分行，美國政府是傑出的，這將是國會。 Now it is Straussians and neoconservatives who most extol strong executive leadership and more generally muscular federal government.現在是新保守派Straussians和頌揚誰最強有力的行政領導和更廣泛的肌肉聯邦政府。 They see the powers of the executive as trumping the powers of the other branches, especially at a time of national emergency.他們認為，權力的行政作為勝過權力的其他部門，尤其是在一次全國緊急狀態。 Then the president must embody and express the will of the nation as he sees fit.然後，總統必須體現和表達意願的國家，他認為合適的。

Harvard’s Harvey Mansfield is the intellectual figurehead of those attempting to justify the creeping coup from within.哈佛大學的哈維曼斯菲爾德是智力代表人物那些企圖辯解悄悄從內部政變。 In The Wall Street Journal (May 2, 2007) he has stressed that, now more than ever, America needs a “strong executive.” Basing his argument on a strained and transparently unhistorical interpretation of the framers, he contends that the rule of law has drawbacks, “each of which suggests the need for one-man-rule.” For one thing, the law can produce only what is mediocre, “an average solution even in the best case.” For another, the law lacks “energy.” In a crisis, government must put forth “energy,” and “the best source of energy” is “one man.” What America needs today, Mansfield declares, is “a wise man on the spot” with freedom to act for the whole.在華爾街日報（ 2007年5月2日）他強調指出，現在比以往任何時候，美國需要一個“強有力的執行。 ”根據他的論點的緊張和透明unhistorical解釋的制定，他認為法治有缺點， “每個意味著需要一個人的統治。 ”對於一件事，法律不僅能產生什麼是平庸“ ，解決平均即使在最好的情況。 ”另一方面，缺乏法律的“能源。 “在一個危機，政府必須提出”能源“和”最好的能源來源“是”一個人。 “美國需要什麼今天，曼斯菲爾德聲明，是”一個聰明的人在現場“的行動自由的整個。 To “subordinate” the president to law and the legislature is “dangerous.” Then “he could not do his job.” Not only is a strong executive needed to deal with emergencies, Mansfield contends.以“服從”總統法和立法機關是“危險的。 ”那麼“ ，他不能做他的工作。 ”不僅是一個強有力的執行需要處理緊急情況，曼斯菲爾德爭辯。 It must also be able to overpower domestic opposition, “oppose a majority faction produced by temporary delusions in the people.” Americans admire strong presidents not just in politics but also in corporations, he argues.它也必須能夠打敗國內的反對， “反對多數派產生的臨時幻想中的人。 ”強大的美國人欽佩總統不僅在政治，而且在公司，他說。

If it is suggested that there is a connection between a strong executive and imperialism, Mansfield regards it as better to err on the side of imperialism than isolationism.如果有人建議，有一個聯繫一個強有力的行政和帝國主義，曼斯菲爾德認為這是更好地犯錯的一方比帝國主義孤立主義。 The difficulties of the war in Iraq arose, he writes, “from having wished to leave too much to the Iraqis, thus from a sense of inhibition rather than imperial ambition.” It seems apposite that Mansfield, the advocate of muscular executive power capable of enforcing its will at home and abroad, should also be a champion of what he calls “manliness,” the topic of his recent book.困難的伊拉克戰爭中站起身來，他寫道， “不必想離開太多的伊拉克人，因此，從某種意義上抑制，而不是帝國野心。 ”看來適當的曼斯菲爾德，主張肌肉行政權力的能力執行其將在國內和國外，也應該是冠軍的他所謂的“男子氣概”的專題他最近的書。

The many proponents of the theory of the “unitary” executive include John Yoo, now a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley.許多主張理論的“統一”執行包括約翰柳，現在是一個法學教授在加州大學伯克利分校。 As a Justice Department lawyer in the Bush administration, Yoo, formerly at the American Enterprise Institute, famously defended broadly discretionary presidential power and the use of torture in the war against terrorism.作為司法部律師在布什政府，柳，以前在美國企業研究所，著名辯護廣泛的自由裁量總統權力和使用酷刑在打擊恐怖主義的戰爭。 Michael Goldfarb, previously at the Weekly Standard and now deputy communications director for the McCain for president campaign, has asserted that the framers “sought an energetic executive with near dictatorial power in pursuing foreign policy and war.”邁克爾戈德，以前在標準周刊，現在通信副主任麥凱恩的總統競選已經斷言，制定“積極尋求與行政權力近乎獨裁者在追求外交政策和戰爭。 ”

Voices calling for unleashing allegedly virtuous American power have long been heard in the electronic media, the major newspapers – Washington Post and New York Times prominent among them – the big news magazines, and the leading opinion periodicals.的聲音，要求釋放被美國的力量良性早就聽說在電子媒體，各大報紙-華盛頓郵報和紐約時報突出它們之間-大新聞雜誌，以及輿論的領導期刊。 Long before 9/11 Charles Krauthammer wrote in the Washington Post that America must take advantage of being the only superpower to create a world to its liking.早在9 / 11查爾斯克勞特哈默寫在華盛頓郵報，美國必須利用目前世界上唯一的超級大國創造一個世界，它的喜好。 How should it accomplish this goal?應如何實現這一目標？ “By unapologetic and implacable demonstrations of will” (March 5, 2001). “通過毫無歉意和無情的示威意願” （三月五日， 2001年）。 Why should virtuous America not be “implacable”?為什麼要良性美國不是“無情” ？ Robert Kagan wrote in the same newspaper that “America .羅伯特卡根寫在同一報紙說， “美國。 . 。 . 。 can sometimes seem like a bully on the world stage.” “But really, the 1,200-pound gorilla is an underachiever in the bullying business” (November 3, 2002).可有時似乎像一個惡霸在世界舞台上“ 。 ”但實際上，在1200磅的大猩猩是一個underachiever在欺負生意“ （ 11月3日， 2002年）。

The handwriting is all over the wall.手寫是所有的牆。 It is becoming clearer with each passing day that neo-Jacobinism and related currents, which may have seemed innocuous and “merely academic” to some, have provided ideological cover for an ever more grasping and ruthless pursuit of power.這是變得更加清晰日新月異，新雅各賓主義和相關的電流，這可能似乎無害化和“僅僅是學術”一些，提供了思想涵蓋了以往任何時候都更為殘酷的把握和追求權力。 People of great ambition who want to exercise the power being abdicated by Americans are trying to make us accept and even welcome the final disappearance of American constitutionalism and its culture of modesty and self-restraint.人民的偉大抱負誰想要行使正在退位由美國人正試圖使我們接受，甚至歡迎的最後失踪的美國憲政及其文化的謙虛和自我克制。

As already mentioned, some earlier assaults on traditional Western civilization were launched by openly radical agitators who saw themselves as on the outside of their societies.如前所述，一些早先攻擊西方文明的傳統發起公開激進的煽動者誰看到自己在外面的社會。 Their justifications for seizing power were revolutionary doctrines like those of Marx and Trotsky.他們的理由是奪取政權的革命理論像馬克思，托洛茨基。 Today’s rolling, gradual coup is engineered by already powerful people who want to consolidate and expand their power.今天的滾動，逐步政變策劃已經很強大的人誰要鞏固和擴大其權力。 Wishing not to antagonize too much those who still identify with an older America and still wield some power, they try not to appear too radical and so often present themselves as “neoconservatives” or even “conservatives.” As should be clear from their own words, that does not make them friends of traditional America.希望不要太多對抗那些仍然確定誰與中美洲和老年人仍然擁有一些權力，他們盡量不要出現過於激進，因此常常把自己說成是“新保守主義” ，甚至“保守派。 ”作為應該明確自己的話，這並不讓他們的朋友的傳統美。

Needless to say, neo-Jacobin ideology, though long a potent force, is not the only way of justifying the coup from within.不用說，新雅各賓主義意識形態，但長期強大武力，不是唯一的方式發動政變的理由範圍內。 Those working to centralize power are strongly entrenched in both major parties and in other influential American institutions, and they employ different ideas and symbols to woo and co-opt different constituencies.這些工作，以集中力量根深蒂固的兩個主要政黨和其他有影響力的美國機構，他們採用不同的想法和符號，雨和增選不同的組別。

Given the growing problems of the United States, why not welcome these efforts to rethink the ways of traditional America?鑑於日益嚴重的美國，為什麼不歡迎這些努力重新考慮傳統的方式合眾國？ Because they are inspired by highly dubious motives that color the proposals for change.因為它們是由高度可疑的動機色彩的改革建議。 Though those trying to impose a new power structure often speak in the name of America and their rhetoric is sometimes faintly conservative, they are not inspired by a desire to protect and reconstitute the best of the Western tradition.雖然那些試圖強加新的權力結構往往名義發言合眾國和他們的言論有時是淡淡的保守，他們沒有靈感的願望，保護和重建最好的西方傳統。 By changing the meaning of words, they are rather trying to reconcile us to the demise of that heritage and its replacement with their own enlightened and virtuous regime.通過改變含義的話，而他們試圖調和我們的消亡的文化遺產和更換自己的開明和良性制度。 Their response to the crisis is aggravating the crumbling of the American constitutional order.他們對危機的反應是加重了崩潰的美國憲法秩序。 Their prescriptions contain the outlines of tyranny and must fill the friends of traditional American and Western civilization with trepidation.他們的處方含有綱要的暴政和必須填寫的朋友傳統的美國和西方文明與惶恐。

What is ominous about these, our purported saviors, to repeat, is not that they want power.什麼是不祥對這些，我們所謂的救世主，重複，是不是他們想要權力。 It is that they represent a conceited and self-absorbed special interest and have an obsessive desire to rule others – a desire that cannot be concealed by feigned benevolence toward Americans and all mankind.這是他們代表了自負和自我吸收的特殊利益和願望的一種痴迷的統治其他人-的願望，不能掩蓋對假裝仁慈美國人和全人類。 It is necessary to expose their false solutions to what are real problems and to explore by what measures the best of our civilization might, despite daunting odds, be given a new lease on life.這是必要的，揭露其錯誤的解決辦法是什麼實際問題，並探討了什麼措施最好的也許我們的文明，儘管艱鉅的困難，給予了新生命。

Claes G. Ryn [克拉斯灣雷恩[ send him mail送他的郵件 ], professor of politics at the Catholic University of America, is chairman of the National Humanities Institute and editor of Humanitas. ] ，政治學教授在美國天主教大學，是主席的國家人文科學研究所和編輯人道。 He also is president of the Academy of Philosophy and Letters.他還會長科學院哲學和文學。 He is the author of他是作者 America the Virtuous美國的良性 . 。

Have Your Say: America’s Coup D’État in the Making 你說：美國的政變製作
Please read our請仔細閱讀我們的 posting guidelines before posting張貼在發布前的指導方針 . 。
Alternatively或者 you can discuss this report here你可以討論這份報告在這裡 . 。

RSS 的RSS TrackBack URL引用網址

Related News 相關新聞

This entry was posted on Saturday, October 18th, 2008 at 12:04 am and is filed under本條目被張貼在星期六， 08年10月18日在上午12點04分，並提交下 Contributions & Guests捐款＆客人 . 。 You can follow any responses to this entry through the您可以按照任何反應，這個項目通過 RSS 2.0 2.0 feed. You can飼料。您可以 leave a response留下一個反應 , or或 trackback引用 from your own site.從您自己的網站。

TOP NEWS DISCUSSIONS 頭條新聞討論	LATEST NEWS DISCUSSIONS 最新消息討論	LATEST FORUM TOPICS 最新論壇主題
Chomsky: Anti-Democratic Nature of US Capitalism is Being Exposed 喬姆斯基：反民主性質的美國資本主義正受到 The October Surprise: Global Panic 10月的驚喜：全球恐慌 Democracy Now Follows Up on NSA's Illegal Spying and War Crimes 民主現在採取行動，國家安全局非法竊聽罪和戰爭罪 Tony Benn: What went wrong in the capitalist casino? 托尼本：這是怎麼回事資本主義賭場？ Lies begin to unravel in police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes 謊言開始瓦解警察謀殺讓查爾斯德梅內塞斯 System Failure and the Need for Revolution 系統故障和需要革命	Maximus V 馬克西穆斯V commented on: 評論： Tony Benn: What went wrong in the capitalist casino? 托尼本：這是怎麼回事資本主義賭場？ I like this article. 我喜歡這個文章。 However, if you do not address the “Fraction al Banking... 但是，如果你不處理“分數基地銀行業... Continue Reading & Reply 繼續閱讀及回复 Wez the Aussie Wez澳元 commented on: 評論： Lies begin to unravel in police murder of Jean Charles de Menezes 謊言開始瓦解警察謀殺讓查爾斯德梅內塞斯 Typical Police behaviour. 典型的警察行為。 Just shoot, we will get you off the hook... 剛剛拍攝，我們將讓你擺脫困境... Continue Reading & Reply 繼續閱讀及回复 ERIC COUFAL 李家祥COUFAL commented on: 評論： System Failure and the Need for Revolution 系統故障和需要革命 The political crisis in the US began with the fraudulent election of GWB, a nefarious attack... 該國的政治危機，美國開始與該欺詐選舉GWB ，一個惡毒的攻擊... Continue Reading & Reply 繼續閱讀及回复 Charles Andrew 查爾斯安德魯 commented on: 評論： Prison interrogation techniques in Israel 監獄的審訊技術在以色列 I OWNED A VALUABLE STUDENT APARTMENT BUILDING IN STATE COLLEGE PA. 本人擁有一個寶貴的學生公寓樓州立大學巴。 THIS IS THE HOME OF... 這是家中... Continue Reading & Reply 繼續閱讀及回复

ADVERTISEMENTS廣告		SITE MAPS網站地圖
Web Desing & Hosting UK , USA, Europe網頁設計與託管英國，美國，歐洲 WOWEB - Web Design WOWEB -網頁設計 FAST GATEWAY - Web Hosting快速通道-虛擬主機 INFOTX - Web Hosting Guides and Resources INFOTX -W eb託管和資源指南 ASHLEY GUEST HOUSE - Morecambe Guest House阿什利招待所-莫克姆招待所 Skin up marijuana cannabis weed forum皮膚了大麻，大麻草論壇	Linux Web Hosting Linux的虛擬主機 Never Be Lied To Again!絕不會騙了！ Subliminal Secrets Exposed潛意識的秘密接觸 Holographic Creation: Your Own Reality全息創造：你自己的現實 Masonic Secrets Revealed共濟會秘密透露 What You Aren't Supposed To Know你不應該知道 Conspiracy DVDs Cheap DVDs陰謀DVD光盤便宜的DVD Debt Consolidation債務	7/7 7 / 7 Afghanistan阿富汗 Alternative-Energy替代能源 Art藝術 Barack Obama奧巴馬 BBC英國廣播公司 Big-Brother大兄弟 Bilderberg彼爾德伯格 Biometrics生物識別技術 Bush布什 CCTV中央電視台 Censorship檢查 CIA美國中央情報局 Climate-Change氣候變化 Cover-Up掩蓋 Cults邪教 Culture文化 Database-State數據庫的國家 David-Hicks大衛希克斯 David-Ray-Griffin大衛射線格里芬 Debt債務 Democrats民主黨 Demos演示 Drugs藥品 Education教育 Entertainment娛樂 Environmental News環境新聞 EU歐盟 False-Flag假旗 FBI美國聯邦調查局 Fraud詐騙 Free-Speech自由言論 Freemasons濟 G8八國集團 Globalization全球化 Guantanamo關塔那摩 Health-News健康新聞 History歷史 ID-Cards編號卡 Internet互聯網 Iran伊朗 Iraq伊拉克 Israel以色列 John McCain約翰麥凱恩 Law法 Marches遊行 Media News媒體新聞 MI5軍情五處 MI6軍情六處 Microsoft微軟 Military軍事 MoD國防部 Money金錢 Music音樂 NASA美國宇航局 Neocons新保守主義 New World Order新的世界秩序 NSA國安局 Oil油 Pakistan巴基斯坦 Podcast播客 Police-State警察國家 Political News政治新聞 Propaganda中宣部 Reviews評語 RFID RFID技術 RINF Rumsfeld拉姆斯菲爾德 Science科學 Science & Technology News科技新聞 Secrecy保密 Security安全 Slavery奴隸制 Space空間 Sports體育 Spy間諜 Spying從事間諜活動 Stephen-Lendman斯蒂芬- Lendman Technology Terrorism Tony-Blair Torture TV UK-News UN USA- USA-News Video Voting war War & Terrorism News Warfare White-House Wolfowitz World-News World_News Yahoo 2003 - 2005 Archives \| 2005 - 2007 Archives \| 2007 - 2008 Archives \| Current Archives \| Past Version

America’s Coup D’État in the Making美國的政變製作