|
中英对照文本 Life isn’t fair. 生活是不公平的。 And you know what? It can’t be. 而且你知道吗？它也不可能公平。 Here’s the problem: The word “fair” doesn’t mean “justice” or “equity” or, indeed, anything very specific. Instead, it’s become a sort of all-purpose statement of moral superiority—superiority tinged, paradoxically, with victimhood. 问题在于：「公平」这个词的意思不是「公正」、「平等」或任何十分具体的含义。反而，它变成了某种道德优越感的万能声明——优越中却又带点受害情结。 Now, fairness does have an exact meaning in certain contexts. For example, if we’re playing a game, fairness means that the rules should be applied impartially. When we are kids and our parents and teachers set the rules, the word still has that essential meaning: it’s a young person’s way of demanding what we might call “equality before the law.” But as we get older, the word becomes more of a whine. In the mouth of a teenager—trust me on this—“it’s not fair” means, more often than not, “You won’t let me do something I want!” 公平在特定语境中确实有确切意义。比如，当我们在玩游戏，公平意味着规则应适用于所有人。当我们还是孩子，规则由我们父母与老师制定时，这个词仍有个基本含义：它是年轻人要求我们所称「法律面前人人平等」的方式。但随着我们年纪变大，这个词变得越来越像个抱怨。年轻人嘴里说的——相信我——「这不公平」常常意味着「你不许我做我想做的事情！」 In recent years, though, something odd has happened. Adults have started using the word in much the same way that teenagers do. More than in any previous generation, people today retain their teenage sense of self-centeredness. They use “it’s not fair” as a catch-all complaint, as an assertion of wounded entitlement. 但是，近年来发生了些奇怪的事情。成年人开始像年轻人那样使用这个词。相比以往任何世代，今天更多成年人仍保留着青年时期的自我中心。他们把「这不公平」作为一种万能的抱怨，作为一种对受害者权益的主张。 Look at a Google graph of the use of the word “fairness.” From around 1965 it looks like the proverbial hockey stick—flat and then it suddenly shoots up. 看看谷歌「公平」一词使用情况的图表。约从 1965 年开始它就像是根曲棍球棒——扁平，接着突然飙升。 We’ve developed a “fairness” obsession. 我们发展出了一种对「公平」的痴迷。 But what do we mean when we use that word? Do we mean “justice”? Do we mean “equality”? Do we mean “need”? Or do we mean something else? 但当我们使用这个词时我们是指什么意思呢？我们是指「公正」吗？我们是指「平等」吗？我们是指「需求」吗？还是说我们是指别的？ Suppose you and Jane buy a cake together. You pay $6, and Jane pays $4. What would be the “fair” way to split it up? You could do it on the basis of proportionality—in other words, you get 60 percent of the cake and Jane gets 40 percent. Or you could do it on the basis of strict egalitarianism—half each, regardless of who paid what. Or you could do it on the basis of wealth. Jane has much less money than you for non-essentials like cake, so maybe she should get the larger share. 假设你和简妮一起买蛋糕。你出 6 美元，简妮出 4 美元。「公平」的切分方式是什么？你可以按比例原则分——换言之，你分到 60% 的蛋糕，而简妮分到 40%。或者你可以严格按平等主义分——一人一半，不管谁出了多少钱。或者你可以按财富的多少来分。简妮没你那么有钱买蛋糕这样的非必需品，所以也许她应该分到更多。 A case can be made for each approach. But the beauty of the word “fair” is that it doesn’t require you to come down clearly in favor of any of them. It gives you the cover of ambiguity. 每种方式都有各自的理由。但「公平」这个词的美妙就在于它不要求你明确支持哪种。它让你可以语焉不详。 So, for example, when a politician says, “We want the rich to pay their fair share,” he doesn’t usually mean that he wants the rich to pay taxes at the same rate as everyone else. He means that he wants them to pay extra. The word “fair” lets him present higher rates of taxation as a form of justice. But only if we don’t think about it too hard. 所以，比如当一个政客说「我们想让富人缴纳公平的份额」时，他通常不是指他想让富人和其他人一样按同样税率缴税。他是指他想让富人缴纳额外的税。「公平」这个词让他可以把更高税率表现成是一种公正形式。前提是我们不过于深究。 That’s the beauty of it. “Fair” doesn’t ultimately mean “proportionate” or “impartial” or “equal.” You can use it to mean almost any positive thing you like. 这就是它的美妙。「公平」从根本上不是「相称」、「公正」或「平等」的意思。你可以用它来指任何你喜欢的正面含义。 “I want fairness” generally means “Look at me—I’m a nice person.” Demanding fairness lets you tell the world how decent you are without your actually having to contribute a penny. It’s a kind of vanity: “Mirror, Mirror, on the wall, who’s the fairest of them all?” 「我想要公平」通常是指「看我——我是个好人。」要求公平让你可以告诉全世界你有多么体面，而无需真正付出一毛钱。它就像一种虚荣——「魔镜，魔镜，谁是世界上最公平的人？」 Let’s get real. The only just way to distribute the cake is to see how much people are prepared to pay for their slice. 让我们现实点。唯一公平的分蛋糕方式是看人们愿意为此付出多少。 Sure, that could leave a banker with a bigger slice than a baker. Sure, we might not like that distribution. We might feel that the baker is doing something more valuable than the banker. He is making delicious pastries, while the money man doesn’t seem to be making anything—except money for himself. 当然了，这会让银行家分到的比面包师多。当然了，我们也许不喜欢这种分配。我们也许认为面包师的工作比银行家有价值。他做的是美味甜点，而金融家似乎什么都没做——除了给自己发钱。 But how can we judge someone else’s economic worth? You might want bakers to be paid more than bankers. I might want teachers to be paid more than movie stars. Since we all have our own preferences, the only way to measure the economic value of a service is to see how much others are prepared to pay for it. 但我们如何评判其他人的经济价值？也许你想让面包师的收入比银行家多。也许我想让教师的收入比电影明星多。由于我们都有自己的偏好，衡量某样服务经济价值的唯一途径便是看其他人愿意为此付出多少。 That’s what the market does: it aggregates our preferences. It doesn’t ask us, in the abstract, what we think someone else deserves. It tests, in reality, how many hours of our own labor we are prepared to put in in exchange for a product or a service. 这正是市场所做的：它聚合我们的偏好。理论上，它不问我们认为其他人值得获得多少。实际上，它考验我们愿意付出多少汗水和时间来换取产品或服务。 Under every other economic system, our relations are mediated by accidents of birth and social caste; financial rewards are determined by favoritism. The free market alone gives everyone the same rights. My money is as good as yours. 在其他任何经济体系下，我们的关系取决于出生的偶然及社会地位；经济回报由人脉所决定。只有自由市场给予所有人同样的权利。我的钱和你的钱一样好使。 You can’t get fairer than that. 这再公平不过了。 I’m Daniel Hannan, president of the Initiative for Free Trade and author of Inventing Freedom, for Prager University. 我是丹尼尔·汉南，自由贸易倡议基金会的主席，Inventing Freedom 的作者，为 PragerU 制作。 翻译：Mangosteen 校对：FungChuh |
|
|
