Requiem for the American dream | 美國夢真的已經死了嗎? - FT中文網
登錄×
電子郵件/用戶名
密碼
記住我
請輸入郵箱和密碼進行綁定操作:
請輸入手機號碼,透過簡訊驗證(目前僅支援中國大陸地區的手機號):
請您閱讀我們的用戶註冊協議私隱權保護政策,點擊下方按鈕即視爲您接受。
爲了第一時間爲您呈現此資訊,中文內容爲AI翻譯,僅供參考。
FT商學院

Requiem for the American dream
美國夢真的已經死了嗎?

Has US economic stagnation destroyed the myth of an ever better life for its citizens? David Leonhardt argues that it has
美國經濟停滯是否摧毀了其公民美好生活的神話?大衛•萊昂哈特認爲是這樣的。
Prospective buyers visit a property for sale in Vallejo, California, 2017
潛在買家在2017年訪問了加州瓦列霍市的一處待售房產
The American dream, a term first used by a Depression-era historian named James Truslow Adams, is all about upward mobility. Any US citizen, if they work hard, should be able to not only succeed, but rise above the station of their parents.
美國夢是由大蕭條時期的歷史學家亞當斯(James Truslow Adams)首次提出的概念,它代表著向上流動。任何美國公民,只要他們努力工作,不僅應該能夠成功,而且能夠超越他們父母的地位。
In The Epic of America, published in 1931, Adams acknowledged that the ongoing economic crisis threatened a dream that, for most people through the country’s history, seemed attainable. But he also ended on a note of optimism — quoting a Russian immigrant called Mary Antin, who credited the country’s public library system with elevating her from being a child who knew no English to a writer who published her first book as a teenager. As Antin herself put it, “mine is the shining future”.
在1931年出版的《美國的史詩》(The Epic of America)中,亞當斯承認,正在進行的經濟危機威脅到了一個對大多數人來說似乎是可及的夢想。但他也以樂觀的筆調結束了這本書 — 引用了一位名爲瑪麗•安廷(Mary Antin)的俄羅斯移民的話,她認爲美國的公共圖書館系統使她從一個不懂英語的孩子成長爲一個十幾歲就出版了第一本書的作家。正如安廷自己所說:「我的未來是光明的(mine is the shining future)。」
But things have changed in America, as New York Times writer David Leonhardt lays out in his important new book. For the last half century, US incomes have stagnated and wealth inequality grown. A typical family in 2019 had a net worth slightly lower than the typical family in 2001. “There has not been such a long period of wealth stagnation since the Great Depression,” Leonhart writes. What’s more, life expectancy is down — a rare and disturbing anomaly for a rich nation — as is social mobility.
但是,正如《紐約時報》作家大衛•萊昂哈特(David Leonhardt)在他重要的新書中所闡述的,美國已經變了。在過去的半個世紀裏,美國的收入停滯不前,財富不平等加劇。2019年的典型家庭淨資產,比2001年的典型家庭還要低一些。萊昂哈特寫道:「自大蕭條以來,還沒有出現過如此長時間的財富停滯。」更重要的是,預期壽命下降了 — 這對一個富裕國家來說是罕見且令人不安的異常現象 — 社會流動性也在下降。
He calls this the Great American Stagnation, and for many it has turned the American dream into a myth that is impossible to imagine ever coming true. The Harvard academic Raj Chetty, whom Leonhardt helped popularise, found that while 92 per cent of children born in 1940 had higher household incomes than their parents, babies born in 1980 had only a 50/50 chance of doing better than the previous generation. This decline has come with massive economic, political and social costs, not just for the US, but for the world — everything from less willingness to engage with global crises such as climate change, to “an alarming anti-democratic movement” in the US, to a rise in racism and xenophobia.
他將這種現象稱爲美國的大停滯(Great American Stagnation),對許多人來說,這已經把美國夢變成了一個難以實現的幻想。哈佛大學的學者拉吉•切蒂(Raj Chetty)的研究得到了萊昂哈特的推廣,切蒂發現,儘管1940年出生的孩子中有92%的人家庭收入高於他們的父母,但1980年出生的嬰兒只有50%的機會超越上一代。這種下降帶來了巨大的經濟、政治和社會代價,這不僅影響了美國,也影響了全世界 — 從減少參與應對全球危機(如氣候變化)的意願,到美國內部「令人擔憂的反民主運動」,再到種族主義和排外主義的上升。」

There is no longer a mass movement focused on improving economic outcomes for most Americans

不再有一個大規模運動專注於改善大多數美國人的經濟成果

Ours Was the Shining Future, Leonhardt’s first book, is an attempt to explain what happened. His take, which I believe is correct, is that democratic capitalism (defined as “a system in which the government recognises its crucial role in guiding the economy”) has since the 1970s given way to a laissez-faire free-for-all in which corporations and short-termism rule. In this world, he writes, “there is no longer a mass movement focused on improving economic outcomes for most Americans. The country’s largest activist groups, on both the left and the right, are focused on other subjects.”
《我們曾有過的輝煌未來》(Ours Was the Shining Future),萊昂哈特的第一本書,試圖解釋發生了什麼。他的觀點,我認爲是正確的,那就是民主資本主義(定義爲「一個政府承認其在引導經濟中的關鍵角色的體系」)自20世紀70年代以來已經給予了無政府幹預的自由競爭,其中企業和短期主義佔據主導地位。他寫道,「不再有一個大規模運動專注於改善大多數美國人的經濟成果。國家最大的活動組織,無論是左翼還是右翼,都專注於其他主題。」
How did we get here? In Leonhardt’s analysis, changes to three things — political power, culture and investment — mean that average, working Americans have been left behind. Since the late 1960s, the “old labor” of the New Deal has been hijacked by a new and more entitled “Brahmin left”, increasingly made up of college-educated elites that talk down to workers rather than with them. In a country that fundamentally skews more socially conservative, the Democratic party has also become too radically progressive on social issues such as abortion, immigration and LGBTQ rights.
我們是怎麼走到這一步的?在萊昂哈特的分析中,政治權力、文化和投資的變化意味著普通的、勞動的美國人被拋在了後面。自20世紀60年代末以來,新政時期的「舊勞工」被新的更有權利的「婆羅門左翼」劫持,這個羣體越來越多由受過大學教育的精英組成,他們對工人指手畫腳而不是與他們交談。在一個根本上傾向於社會保守的國家中,民主黨在諸如墮胎、移民和LGBTQ權利等社會問題上也變得過於激進。
Because of this, they have lost the electoral votes needed to push through badly needed economic policies such as long-term public investment, as well as more progressive taxation, plus healthcare and educational reform, that would temper rising inequality. Add in a “greed is good” culture of self-interest and global market forces pushing only what’s good for the quarter, and you get a country in decline.
因此,他們失去了推動急需的經濟政策所需的選舉票,如長期公共投資,以及更進步的稅收、醫療保健和教育改革,這些政策將緩和不斷上升的不平等。再加上一種「貪婪是好事」的自利文化和全球市場力量只推動對當季有利的事物,你得到的是一個正在衰退的國家。
Leonhardt is at his best when he is doing the sort of data-driven analysis of economic and political trends that you might find on a newspaper opinion page. Storytelling is always harder, and authors of ideas books like this one often struggle to find the single personality-driven narrative that can weave together big trends in a way that keeps the reader moving forward. That’s what the truly great non-fiction books manage to do. I’m thinking of something such as David Halberstam’s The Best and the Brightest, which followed defence secretary Robert McNamara and his “whiz kid” group of policy experts to explain how America lost itself in Vietnam. Ours Was the Shining Future is not that book.
萊昂哈特最擅長的是進行那種你可能在報紙觀點版面上看到的基於數據的經濟和政治趨勢分析。講故事總是更困難的,而像這本書一樣的思想類著作的作者,通常很難找到一個以個人爲驅動的敘述,能夠將大趨勢巧妙地編織在一起,讓讀者持續前進。這正是真正偉大的非虛構類書籍設法做到的。我想到的是像大衛•哈爾伯斯坦(David Halberstam)的《最聰明的人》(The Best and the Brightest),書中追隨了國防部長羅伯特•麥克納馬拉(Robert McNamara)和他的「神童」政策專家團隊,揭示了美國在越南是如何迷失自我。《我們曾有過的輝煌未來》並非此類書籍。 
This is not to say that Leonhart fails. Rather than focusing on a single narrative, he tries to isolate the key events that drove the rise and fall of the American dream over 100 years in 10 chapters, many of which could have themselves been standalone book topics. He covers everything from the rise and fall of the industrial labour movement, to the history of progressivism, to the intersection of crime and political turmoil, and of course, the Reagan/Thatcher revolution and all it wrought.
這並不是說萊昂哈特失敗了。他試圖將100年間美國夢的興衰歸結爲10個章節中的關鍵事件,而不是專注於單一的敘述。其中許多章節本身都可以成爲獨立的書籍主題。他涵蓋了從工業勞工運動的興衰,到進步主義的歷史,再到犯罪和政治動盪的交匯處,當然還有里根/撒切爾革命及其帶來的一切。
The history of redlining and the institutionalisation of economic racism in the US is fascinating, as is the rise of students and women as bourgeois political forces on the left — African American women, for example, never struggled with the “feminine mystique”, as the writer Betty Friedan dubbed the malaise experienced by some middle-class housewives in the 1960s. They always had to deal with having both kids and jobs.
美國的紅線政策歷史以及經濟種族主義的制度化是非常有趣的,同樣有趣的是學生和婦女作爲左翼的資產階級政治力量的崛起。例如,非裔美國婦女從未與20世紀60年代一些中產階級家庭主婦所經歷的「女性神祕感」有過鬥爭。她們總是不得不同時兼顧照顧孩子和工作。
Much of Leonhardt’s recounting of the Reagan-Thatcher revolution and the rise of big business is predicable. That said, I was surprised and happy to learn that then senator Joe Biden was one of those who in the 1980s questioned the ascent of federal judge Robert Bork, whose rollback of traditional American monopoly policies led to a grotesque concentration of corporate power only now being addressed by president Biden’s antitrust efforts.
萊昂哈特在回顧里根-撒切爾革命和大企業崛起的過程中,大部分都是可以預料的。話雖如此,在瞭解到上世紀80年代時的參議員喬•拜登(Joe Biden)是那些對聯邦法官羅伯特•博克(Robert Bork)的崛起提出質疑的人之一之後,我感到驚訝和高興。博克對傳統的美國壟斷政策的回滾,導致了企業權力的過度集中,而這個問題直到現在才被拜登總統的反壟斷努力所解決。
What’s fascinating — and far less known — is the way in which Old Labor hastened its own decline. The powerful Teamsters Union, for example, first supported farm workers’ leader Cesar Chavez and his efforts to build a more inclusive labour movement in the 1960s, before deciding to seize power for themselves in a way that only hastened the decline of the industrial labour movement as a whole. The continued fragmentation of the American labour movement has made it harder for unions to increase membership today, even as more and more people claim to support them.
令人著迷但鮮爲人知的是傳統勞工運動(Old Labor)加速了自己衰敗的方式。例如,強大的卡車司機工會(Teamsters Union)最初支援農場工人領袖塞薩爾•查韋斯(Cesar Chavez)在1960年代建立一個更包容的勞工運動的努力,然後爲了自身利益而決定奪取權力,這一行爲加速了整個工業勞工運動的衰落。美國勞工運動的持續分裂使得工會在當今時代增加會員變得更加困難,儘管越來越多的人聲稱支援它們。
It’s also interesting to see how much the tragic murders of pivotal figures such as Martin Luther King and Robert F Kennedy, both of whom were able to speak across class and colour lines, made it significantly more difficult to create a liberal coalition that would support all working people. Both King and Kennedy had worked to build a broader based coalition of voters who could counter southern racism, trickle-down economics, and a neoliberal fear (on both sides of the political aisle) of any kind of government intervention to guide the invisible hand to a more just outcome.
有趣的是,我們還可以看到,馬丁•路德•金(Martin Luther King)和羅伯特•F•肯尼迪(Robert F Kennedy)等關鍵人物的悲劇性謀殺,使得建立一個支援所有勞動人民的自由派聯盟變得更加困難。金和肯尼迪都曾努力構建一個更廣泛的選民聯盟,以對抗南方的種族主義、自上而下的經濟體系,以及兩黨對任何政府幹預引導無形之手走向更公正結果的新自由主義恐懼。
Their deaths, and the subsequent fragmentation of the New Left into more and more finely divided interest groups, show that the talent of individual leaders can matter as much as demographics when building political power.
他們的死亡以及新左派(New Left)逐漸分裂爲越來越細分的利益集團,表明在建立政治力量時,個別領導者的才能與人口統計數據一樣重要。
Biden, who keeps a bust of Caesar Chavez in his office and has no fear of industrial policy or wealth redistribution, has tried to rebuild the power of working people. But while the US economy is now doing better than it has in a quarter century by many metrics, the polls don’t yet reflect that reality.
拜登在辦公室裏擺放著一尊塞薩爾•查韋斯的半身像,他對工業政策或財富再分配毫不畏懼,他試圖重建工人階級的力量。然而,儘管從許多指標來看,美國經濟現在比過去25年要好,但民意調查尚未反映出這一現實。
Ours Was the Shining Future ends before Bidenomics begins, although a concluding chapter supports many of the ideas that the White House has since advocated. But the US is still a democracy, and next year, there will be a presidential election. Whether America’s future will again shine may hinge on the outcome.
《我們曾有過的輝煌未來》在拜登經濟學(Bidenomics)開始之前就結束了,儘管結尾章節支援了白宮此後所倡導的許多觀點。但美國仍然是一個民主國家,明年將舉行總統選舉。美國的未來是否再次輝煌,可能取決於選舉結果。
Ours Was the Shining Future: The Rise and Fall of the American Dream by David Leonhardt Riverrun £30/Random House $32, 528 pages
《我們曾有過的輝煌未來:美國夢的興衰》大衛•萊昂哈特著,蘭登書屋(Random House)出版,售價30英鎊/32美元,528頁
Rana Foroohar is the FT’s global business correspondent
拉娜•福魯哈爾(Rana Foroohar)是FT的全球商業記者
Join our online book group on Facebook at FT Books Café
在Facebook上加入我們的在線書籍小組FT圖書咖啡館(FT Books Café)
版權聲明:本文版權歸FT中文網所有,未經允許任何單位或個人不得轉載,複製或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵權必究。

川普和海湖莊園的力量

這位前房地產開發商非常瞭解如何將建築和空間有效地用作宣傳。

爲2024年的世界感到高興的十個理由

從巴黎聖母院的修復到《抑制熱情》的大結局,這一年其實並不算太糟。

2025年德國大選:主要的競選承諾是什麼?

各大政黨提出了截然不同的計劃,以重振歐洲最大經濟體的命運。

「市場恐慌」:巴西財政赤字導致貨幣跌至新低

總統在面臨其第三個任期內的最大挑戰。

川普過渡團隊尋求在「第一天」讓美國退出世衛組織

美國的迅速退出將使全球衛生機構失去主要資金來源,並削弱其應對緊急情況的能力。

谷歌推動重新確立人工智慧領域的領先地位,提振了投資者信心

在經歷了過山車般的一年之後,人工智慧和量子計算領域的一系列突破帶來了轉機。
設置字型大小×
最小
較小
默認
較大
最大
分享×