美國(guó)權(quán)力與智力日益脫節(jié).

　　如果你相信人類還在繼續(xù)創(chuàng)造歷史，那么美國(guó)仍是你應(yīng)該待的地方。只有在美國(guó)，你才能發(fā)現(xiàn)有人正嘗試著讓汽車飛起來(lái)、讓人類長(zhǎng)生不老、讓機(jī)器人擁有感情。不過(guò)，美國(guó)政壇對(duì)新觀念的抵制是引人注目的。在缺乏創(chuàng)造力的華盛頓與蓬勃發(fā)展的美國(guó)其余地方之間，鴻溝正在擴(kuò)大。詳細(xì)請(qǐng)看下面的雙語(yǔ)信息：

　　每周都會(huì)有些大膽的初創(chuàng)公司試圖開(kāi)發(fā)科技的商業(yè)潛力。很多都太過(guò)荒唐，無(wú)法成功。而一些公司則成功得實(shí)至名歸。每周似乎都有一場(chǎng)總統(tǒng)競(jìng)選活動(dòng)啟動(dòng)。2016年大選的一些候選人對(duì)科技表現(xiàn)出咄咄逼人的敵意。迄今為止，沒(méi)有哪位候選人對(duì)解決美國(guó)的種種問(wèn)題有什么原創(chuàng)性想法，雖然肯定還是會(huì)有一個(gè)人取得這場(chǎng)名不副實(shí)的勝利。

　　The root of America’s intellectual disconnect is cultural. In Silicon Valley, “fail harder” is amotto. A history of bankruptcy is proof of business credentials. In Washington, a singlemiscue can ruin your career. Ruth Porat’s move last week fromMorgan Stanley, where she waschi financial officer, to Google for a cool $70m was taken as another sign of Silicon Valley’sincreasing edge over Wall Street. A growing share of top US graduates are bypassing a careerin investment banking for Big Data. Less noticed was the fact that Ms Porat turned down a jobin Barack Obama’s administration last year as deputy Treasury secretary. She feared theSenate confirmation process would rip her to shreds. She was probably right.

　　美國(guó)智力與權(quán)力的脫節(jié)，其根源在于文化。在硅谷，人們把“fail harder(更努力地去失敗)”作為座右銘。曾經(jīng)破產(chǎn)過(guò)，就是商業(yè)資歷的證明。在華盛頓，只要一個(gè)失誤，就可能毀掉你的事業(yè)。摩根士丹利(MorganStanley)的前首席財(cái)務(wù)官(CFO)露絲?波拉特(Ruth Porat)不久前為了整整7000萬(wàn)美元跳槽到谷歌(Google)的舉動(dòng)，被視為硅谷對(duì)華爾街優(yōu)勢(shì)擴(kuò)大的另一個(gè)信號(hào)。美國(guó)尖子畢業(yè)生沒(méi)有選擇投行而選擇以大數(shù)據(jù)(BigData)為職業(yè)的比例日益增加。更少人留意到的是，去年，波拉特還拒絕了出任奧巴馬政府財(cái)政部副部長(zhǎng)的工作機(jī)會(huì)。她當(dāng)時(shí)擔(dān)心，參議院的確認(rèn)過(guò)程將讓她萬(wàn)劫不復(fù)。她的顧慮很可能是正確的。

　　The result is a system in which the bland are leading the bland. Washington is host to thelargest collection of think- tanks in the world. Yet they are notable nowadays for their lack oforiginal thinking. The ideas shortage has nothing to do with low IQ. The post codes aroundWashington have America’s highest concentration of PhDs other than Silicon Valley. But if youwant a job in a future US administration, you risk running a gauntlet from which you maynever recover. The route to success is paved with caution. One stray remark, or risqué policyidea, can kill your prospects. Science is the basis of America’s innovative edge. Yet embracingit can be a political career-stopper. Several Republican presidential candidates reject the notionof man-made global warming while some believe child vaccines cause disease.

　　結(jié)果就是這么一個(gè)古板之士領(lǐng)導(dǎo)著古板之人的體系。華盛頓聚集著全世界數(shù)量最多的智庫(kù)機(jī)構(gòu)。而如今，它們?nèi)狈?chuàng)造性思維的問(wèn)題十分明顯。缺少想法跟智商低沒(méi)有關(guān)系，華盛頓周邊地區(qū)聚集著全美除硅谷以外最多的博士。但是如果你想在未來(lái)的美國(guó)政府中找一份工作，你可能要經(jīng)受一場(chǎng)可能讓你一蹶不振的暴風(fēng)雨洗禮，成功之路步步驚心。一次偏激的評(píng)論或是一個(gè)有傷風(fēng)化的政策想法，都可能毀掉你的前程?？茖W(xué)是美國(guó)創(chuàng)新優(yōu)勢(shì)的根基，然而，信奉科學(xué)可能會(huì)終結(jié)你的政治生涯。共和黨一些總統(tǒng)候選人拒不相信全球變暖是人為造成的，還有一些認(rèn)為給兒童接種疫苗會(huì)導(dǎo)致疾病。

　　Aversion to science is not a conservative monopoly. Among the 19,000 papers produced byWashington’s top 10 think-tanks in the past few years, science and technology ranked bottomamong the subjects addressed, according to a survey by Foreign Policy magazine. During thecold war, senior US officials were expected to be fluent in the language of nuclear technology— understanding it was the basis of America’s rivalry with the Soviet Union. Today few havemuch clue about the evolving threat of cyber warfare. Unlike nuclear weapons, which were toorisky to use given the certainty of overwhelming retaliation, cyber attacks are low risk.Deterrence does not work on anonymous foes. Yet cyber attacks are arguably the greatestfuture danger to US national security.

　　厭惡科學(xué)并非保守派的專利。據(jù)《外交政策》(Foreign Policy)雜志的調(diào)查顯示，華盛頓前10大智庫(kù)最近幾年寫出的1.9萬(wàn)份論文中，關(guān)于科學(xué)和技術(shù)的論文數(shù)量最少。在冷戰(zhàn)期間，鑒于核技術(shù)是美國(guó)與蘇聯(lián)對(duì)立的根本原因，美國(guó)高級(jí)官員熟練掌握核技術(shù)那一套語(yǔ)言在民眾看來(lái)是理所應(yīng)當(dāng)?shù)?。如今，幾乎沒(méi)有幾名高官對(duì)日益升級(jí)的網(wǎng)絡(luò)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)威脅有所了解。由于肯定會(huì)遭到全面報(bào)復(fù)，核武器過(guò)于危險(xiǎn)，因此不宜使用。與核武器不同的是，網(wǎng)絡(luò)攻擊的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)較低，威懾也無(wú)法對(duì)匿名的敵人起作用。不過(guò)，網(wǎng)絡(luò)攻擊可謂是未來(lái)對(duì)美國(guó)國(guó)家安全最大的威脅。

　　Some hope Silicon Valley’s growing visibility in Washington might spark new ideas. If USpolitics runs on money, Big Data’s dollars are prerable to Wall Street’s. Tech companies usedto disdain the US capital in the myopic view that their success had little to do with government.Today, the most rapid lobbying growth comes from the likes of Google and Facebook. Yet theirpriority is to repair the damage from theEdward Snowden leaks — strengthening privacy,rather than lifting research and development budgets, or opening up the US immigrationsystem. They aim to curb the National Security Agency’s incursions rather than spread boldthinking to Washington.

　　一些人希望，硅谷在華盛頓日益增加的存在感也許會(huì)激發(fā)新思路。如果美國(guó)政治依靠金錢運(yùn)作，從大數(shù)據(jù)領(lǐng)域拿錢比從華爾街拿錢更可取。科技公司曾短視地認(rèn)為它們的成功與政府沒(méi)什么關(guān)系，因而不屑于討好華盛頓。如今，游說(shuō)投入增長(zhǎng)最快的就是像谷歌和Facebook這樣的企業(yè)。不過(guò)，它們優(yōu)先考慮的是修復(fù)愛(ài)德華?斯諾登(Edward Snowden)泄密帶來(lái)的損害——加強(qiáng)隱私保護(hù)，而不是增加研發(fā)預(yù)算或是開(kāi)放美國(guó)移民系統(tǒng)。它們的目的是遏制國(guó)家安全局(National Security Agency)的侵入，而不是向華盛頓灌輸大膽的想法。

　　Might 2016 produce an original debate over America’s future? It is tempting to believe so.Yet the contest is shaping into a traditional slugfest between those who want to shrink federalgovernment and those who would conserve it. In the coming days, Hillary Clinton will launchher official candidacy. Having strung it out so long, she is expected to justify the wait withoriginal thinking. In 2008 she won ovations by saying she was born in the middle of the lastcentury, into the middle class in the middle of America. That will no longer bring blue collarvoters to their feet. It is possible Mrs Clinton has spent the time coming up with new ideas toaddress America’s middle class squeeze — but unlikely. As it stands, her chi originality willbe a promise to break the White House gender barrier. Nor should we expect Jeb Bush, or hisrivals, to restock Washington’s intellectual cupboard. Gridlock suits the conservative base.

　　2016年可能會(huì)發(fā)生一場(chǎng)關(guān)于美國(guó)未來(lái)的原創(chuàng)性討論嗎?人們很容易相信答案是肯定的。不過(guò)，這場(chǎng)爭(zhēng)論正在演化為希望縮小聯(lián)邦政府者與希望聯(lián)邦政府保持現(xiàn)有規(guī)模者之間的傳統(tǒng)激戰(zhàn)。希拉里?克林頓(Hillary Clinton)將于近日正式參選。這一天已經(jīng)拖延了太久，她有望用創(chuàng)造性思維來(lái)證明等待是值得的。2008年，她自稱出生于上世紀(jì)中期、美國(guó)中部的中產(chǎn)階級(jí)家庭而贏得一片喝彩，如今這不會(huì)再拉攏到藍(lán)領(lǐng)選民。希拉里有可能已花時(shí)間想出了解決美國(guó)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)受擠壓?jiǎn)栴}(middle class squeeze)的新思路——但這種可能性比較低。照現(xiàn)在看來(lái)，她的主要?jiǎng)?chuàng)意會(huì)是承諾打破白宮的性別障礙。我們也不應(yīng)指望杰布?布什(Jeb Bush)或是其競(jìng)選對(duì)手會(huì)重新補(bǔ)充華盛頓的智力庫(kù)。僵局對(duì)保守派有利。

　　If the US is recovering in spite of Washington, might conservatives have a point? Alas not.Much of America’s innovative edge comes from public research. Washington tends to come upwith new ideas during emergencies — necessity being the mother of invention. Silicon Valley’sprowess dates from the breakthroughs produced by cold war Pentagon spending. Even thetechnology behind hydraulic fracking, which has helped power the US job market recovery,comes from public investment in the aftermath of the 1970s oil shortages. The secret sauce ofUS capitalism is a history of collaboration with federal government. The two are nowincreasingly disconnected. Do not look to White House hopuls to restore it.

　　如果即便華盛頓如此，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)仍在復(fù)蘇的話，那么保守派是不是可能有些道理?可惜的是，答案是否定的。美國(guó)創(chuàng)新優(yōu)勢(shì)大部分來(lái)自公共研究。華盛頓往往在緊急時(shí)期能夠拿出新想法——必要時(shí)還會(huì)成為發(fā)明的孕育者。硅谷的輝煌可以追溯到冷戰(zhàn)時(shí)期五角大樓開(kāi)支增加所帶來(lái)的突破。即使是助推美國(guó)就業(yè)市場(chǎng)復(fù)蘇的水力壓裂法(hydraulic fracking)背后的技術(shù)，也來(lái)自于上世紀(jì)70年代石油短缺之后的公共投資。美國(guó)資本主義發(fā)展的秘訣就在于與聯(lián)邦政府的合作史，兩者如今卻日益脫節(jié)。不要指望角逐白宮的種子選手能修復(fù)二者關(guān)系。