天涯部落

小圈子,大声音!呼朋引伴网聚部落!

创建新部落?

郴州治疗包皮多少钱最新频道

楼主:平安热点 时间:2019年11月16日 00:12:27 点击:0 回复:0
脱水模式给他打赏只看楼主阅读设置
Books and Arts; American foreign policy;Please dont go;文艺;华府外交政策;山姆大叔请留步;A handful of books convey a mix of optimism and fear;几本书,乐观与恐惧杂陈;America is irrepressible. Even authors fixated on its decline are optimists in disguise. Times may be hard and the world order is changing, but America has what it takes to bounce back, according to five new books on foreign policy. Indeed, it has to bounce back, because no successor stands y to shoulder these responsibilities.美国的地位无法撼动。每位宣扬美国没落的作者骨子里都是乐观主义者。时代艰难,世界秩序更迭交替,但美国依然可重振威风,美国政策的这五本书娓娓道来。实际上,美国一定会恢复,因为未有后继者准备担当美国重任。In “The World America Made” Robert Kagan, a prominent neoconservative, argues that the liberal order America created after the second world war may not endure if America loses the power or will to defend it. As hegemons go, America has been exceptional. Democracy has sp under its watch, and its geographical isolation has made the world surprisingly accepting of its use of force. No combination of nations has felt the need to join together to counter Americas power, leaving it free to perform vital tasks in the common good, such as keeping open trading routes.著名的新保守主义者罗伯特·卡根(Robert Kagan)的《美国塑造的世界》一书提出,二战后美国创造的自由秩序有可能因为美国失去捍卫的力量或意愿而无以为继。随着世界霸主的消逝,美国无可匹敌。在美国的捍卫下,民主得以发展,地缘的独立令世界甘愿接受其使用武力。没有国家感觉有必要联合一致共同挑战美国的大国地位,反而任其自由担当重要任务捍卫共同利益,例如保持贸易航线通畅。To those who believe that a multipolar world could be at least as peaceful as the one dominated by America, Mr Kagan says history proves otherwise. Rules rarely outlast the powers that created them. Nations go to war when they are “in doubt about which is stronger,” he writes. The world is more stable when one nation dominates, especially when it is a nation like America.对于相信多极世界至少会像由美国主导的单极世界一样保持和平的人,卡根先生说,历史明恰恰相反。规则无法抵得上创造规则的权力有效。国家彼此间“踌躇谁最强悍”时,即会以战争一决雌雄。一国主导的世界更加稳定,尤其是由像美国这样的国家主导。It is therefore fortunate, Mr Kagan concludes, that most talk about Americas decline is overblown. The country has passed through such moods before, during the trauma of Vietnam in the 1970s, for example, and then again in the 1980s during Japans breakneck ascent as an industrial power. And yet it bounced back. Although past success does not guarantee future triumph, the American system, with its relative freedom, is uniquely capable of recovering and adapting. The danger will come only if Americans believe they can put their global responsibilities on hold while they set their own house in order.故而所幸卡根先生得出结论:多数声称美国没落的说法都是言过其实。这个国家之前已历经这样的悲观情绪,例如上世纪七十年代在越南遭受重创,之后八十年代又经历日本作为一只工业力量快速崛起。然而数次还是恢复实力。尽管以往的成功并不能保未来的胜利,美国的政治体系,以其相对的自由度,完全可以从低迷中恢复、适应。要是美国觉得,整顿国内事务之时,可暂且搁置国际责任,那么灾难将在所难逃。Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carters national security adviser, is equally certain that a vigorous and powerful America is indispensable. But he shows more doubt in his new book, “Strategic Vision”. He contends that America must wrestle down its own debt, steady its financial system, reduce inequality, rebuild its infrastructure and fix its gridlocked politics. Abroad, it must promote and guarantee an expanded West (embracing Russia and Turkey) and balance the great powers of Asia.前总统吉米·卡特的国家安全顾问兹比格涅夫·布热津斯基同样同意,强大的美国必不可少。但他在自己的新书《战略眼光》中表露出更多的担忧。他坚称美国必须极力摆脱债务,稳定金融体系,减少社会不平等,重建基础设施并稳固僵持的政治。对外方针,其必须推进、保扩展西方势力,并平衡亚洲各大国家。Like Mr Kagan, Mr Brzezinski does not believe Americas decline is foreordained. Its economy is still relatively vast, its population wealthy and young, its businesses and universities innovative. But if decline is not inevitable, nor is resurgence. He states that America is in danger of sliding into “systemic obsolescence”, caused by political stalemate at home and misguided engagement abroad in “lonely and draining campaigns” against sometimes “self-generated” enemies, such as Iraq.与卡根先生一样,兹比格涅夫先生不相信美国的没落命中注定。其经济规模仍旧相对巨大,人口富裕,偏于年轻,企业与大学富有创新精神。但是,如果衰落并非注定发生,重振威风也不一定。他声称,美国因国内政治僵持,与对外受误导向间或“无中生有”的敌人(例如伊拉克)展开“孤立无援,劳民伤财的军事行动”,继而有滑向“体系滞后”的危险。If American leadership does collapse, what then? Like Mr Kagan, Mr Brzezinski argues that no single power is y to supplant it. He foresees instead a protracted period of chaotic realignments. China may be ambitious and proud, but it is still in the throes of modernisation; it knows that its continued rise depends for now on the present order. A nationalist and militaristic China would swiftly isolate itself as anxious neighbours allied against it.如果美国的领导层衰落,那会怎样?与卡根先生一样,兹比格涅夫先生坚称尚未有独立势力有实力替而代之,有所担当。他预测世界反而会长期处于动荡,势力重新划分的局面。中国可能野心勃勃,心存高远,但是其仍旧处于现代化的阵痛中;中国很清楚,其现今的持续发展有赖与当前稳定的秩序。一旦周边国家联合对抗,民族主义与军事主义的中国有可能迅速置于孤立状态。For now it seems the alternative to a world dominated by America is “No Ones World”, the title of Charles Kupchans book. A professor of international relations and a veteran of the Clinton White House, he is the gloomiest of these authors. For the first time in history, he says, the world will have no global guardian. Western policymakers are deluded to think that they can use their twilight of pre-eminence to lock rising powers into their own values and institutions.现在似乎美国主导世界的另外雏形就是“无主世界”,此为查尔斯·库普乾(Charles Kupchan)的新书名。库普乾为国际关系教授,曾为克林顿政府幕僚,他是这些作者中最为悲观的。他说,将不会再有世界守护者,此说可谓首开先河。西方决策者蒙蔽双眼,自认为他们可以利用自身统领世界的最后暮光限定崛起的力量于他们自己的价值观与体系内发展。It is going to be much harder than that, Mr Kupchan says. The sp of liberal ideas has been driven less by their intrinsic appeal than by the material dominance of Western countries. Democracy might still advance, but not fast enough to match the great rebalancing of power now under way. And even if the rising powers do come to share the Wests values, they will clash over status and prestige, because they feel that this is their turn for a place in the sun. The West “will have to give as much as it gets as it seeks to fashion a new international order that includes the rest”.现实情况并非这么简单,库普乾先生说。驱动自由思想传播的,不再是西方国家的内在吸引力,更多的是他们的物质主导。民主仍在改善,但是速度缓慢,不足抵挡正在发展的势力重新平衡的趋势。即使崛起中的力量确实共享西方的价值观,他们也会因攫取地位与威望而产生冲突,因为他们觉得该轮到他们占居尊位。西方“将倾其所有,寻求塑造全新的国际秩序,将其他国家纳入其中。”For example, the West will need to stop preaching that only liberal democracies are to be considered legitimate governments: “responsible governance” should be enough to put a state in good international standing. To his mind, Americas “overzealous” promotion of democracy in Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan did more harm than good. The West must now show greater respect for the sovereignty of other nations and treat China with “a nuanced mix of engagement and containment”.例如,西方将停止宣扬只认可自由民主为合法政府的条件:“有责任的政府”便足以使一国获得适当的国际地位。以库普乾先生看来,美国在波斯尼亚、伊拉克和阿富汗“过度”推广民主利大于弊。西方当前必须对他国政府主权表示更多的尊重,以“协作与遏制相柔和的微妙政策”与中国交往。Grand theories of foreign policy are entertaining. The actual work of it is far messier, as shown in “Bending History”, a close review of President Barack Obamas first term by three scholars at the Brookings Institution. They find that for all his inspiring speeches, the presidents performance has at best been workmanlike. In fact the lofty speeches are a problem: they have often seemed detached from actual policy, raising expectations he cannot fulfil.外交政策大理论具有性。但如《弯曲的历史》一书所示,外交政策的实际工作远非有条有理。该书由布鲁金斯学会的三名学者所撰,细致剖析了奥巴马总统的首届任期。他们发现奥巴马所有激动人心的演说中,最好的表现也是经过精心设计。实际上,慷慨陈词的演说即是问题所在:似乎演说内容经常偏离实际政策,给人以无法实现的期望。The Brookings authors conclude that much of Mr Obamas agenda remains incomplete. Killing Osama bin Laden and decimating al-Qaeda were successes, but the outcome in Afghanistan and relations with Pakistan hang in the balance. Though “resetting” relations with Russia made possible the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and paved the way for tighter sanctions on Iran, Russias mercurial politics could always throw such progress into reverse. The “pivot” to Asia in November 2011 was “appropriate”, but leaves future relations with a rising China unresolved.布鲁金斯学会的作者们得出结论,奥巴马的多数议程仍未完成。击毙奥萨马·本·拉登并摧毁基地组织算是成功,但是阿富汗的未来及与巴基斯坦的关系仍悬而未决。尽管“重调”与俄罗斯的关系有可能达成《新战略武器消减条约》,为加紧对伊朗的制裁铺平道路,但是俄罗斯的政治变换不测,随时有可能反悔,放弃这一进展。2011年明为亚洲“轴心”“适时得当”,但是与崛起中国关系的未来走向仍不明朗。The abject failure of the first term was in Palestine. As these scholars see it, Mr Obamas determination to ignore Israeli public opinion while cultivating the Arab street doomed his diplomacy. In the Arab spring he balanced “prudent” support for the tide of democracy against a realistic regard for American interests. Even so, the net result is that the pillars of Americas position in the region—its strategic alliances with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and the virtuous triangle between Israel, Egypt and Turkey—are shaking.奥巴马首次任期的惨败就是在巴勒斯坦。几位学者注意到,奥巴马先生在培育阿拉伯街头运动之时,一意忽视以色列民意,毁掉了他的外交政策。阿拉伯之春期间,他权衡美国的现实利益,对这股民主浪潮的持“审慎有度”。即便如此,他获得的实际效果时就是美国在该地区的中心地位——美国与埃及和沙特阿拉伯之间及以色列、埃及和土耳其睦邻三角之间的战略伙伴关系——岌岌可危。If America cannot bend the Middle East to its will, what of China? In “Obama and Chinas Rise” Jeffrey Bader, one of the architects of Mr Obamas China strategy until leaving the White House in 2011, explains in a brisk insiders narrative just how tricky it can be to concoct the “nuanced mix” of engagement and containment that Mr Kupchan advocates. But in the end Mr Bader is one of the optimists. America prevailed over Germany, Japan and the Soviet Union, which had imperial ambitions. China, he asserts, does not—not yet, at any rate.如果美国无法使中东顺从自身的愿望,那中国又如何?担任奥巴马先生中国战略规划师之一,直至2011年离开华府的杰弗瑞·巴德(Jeffrey Bader)的《奥巴马与中国崛起》中,以知情者身份简短叙述,掌控库普乾先生所宣称的协作与遏制“相柔和的微妙政策”多么诡异多变。但是,巴德先生起码是个乐观主义者。德国、日本及前苏联都曾具有帝国野心,而美国个个战而胜之。他坚称,中国还没有这一野心——至少现在还没有。Maybe. But Americas clashes with these powers came when its own economy was growing. How will it fare if it is truly in decline? Ultimately, these authors agree, Americas power abroad stands on its health at home. If its economy cannot be restored, and America really is indispensable, then the whole world is in serious trouble.事实或许如此。但美国与这些强国的冲突都是在国内经济改善之时出现。若美国果真衰落,那前景又如何?这几位作者最后一致赞同,美国的国外权力取决于国内的良性发展。如果美国国内经济无法恢复,而其又真的不可或缺,那整个世界即将陷入混乱。 /201211/209139Today Emc^2 is Einsteins most famous equation but another thoery he published the same year is more important and more controversial ,今天Emc^2是爱因斯坦最著名的方程式,但另一个他同年出版的理论更重要而且更有争议,the special theory of relativity.那就是特殊相对论。When Einstein was a teenager he enjoyed imagining what it would be like to ride a beam of light.当爱因斯坦还是一名青年的时候,他喜欢想象,就像驾驭着一束光一样。Now he returns to this daydream and changes his life.现在他返回到这个白日梦而那改变了他的生活。In the spring of 1905 Einstein was writing on a bus and he looked back at the famous clock tower that dominates Bern Switzerland .在1905年春天爱因斯坦在一辆公共汽车上写作时他回头看到著名的钟塔占瑞士伯尔尼的主导地位。And he imagine what happens if that bus racing at the speed of light.而他想象如果那辆公共汽车以光的速度行驶会发生什么。In his imagination Einstein looks back at the clock tower and what he sees is astonishing.在他的想象里爱因斯坦回头看着钟楼而且他所看到的令人震惊。As he reaches the speed of light the ends of the clock appear frozen in time .他达到了光速,时钟的两端开始将时间凝固住。Einstein later writes the storm broken in my mind.爱因斯坦后来写道暴风雨在我心中激荡。All of sudden all of sudden everything everything can gush in forward.突然间所有的一切一切滔滔不绝突然向前。Einstein knows that back to the clock tower time is passing normally.爱因斯坦知道回到钟楼的时间是正常通过。But on Einsteins light speed bus as he reaches the speed of light,但对于爱因斯坦而言,光速公交车使他达到光速,the light from the clock can no longe catch up to him .从时钟而来的光已经无法赶上他。The faster he races through the space the slower he moves through time.他穿越空间的越快,他通过的时间就越慢。This special insights sparks the birth of Einstein special theory of relativity which says that space and time are deeply connected.这种特殊的见解点亮了爱因斯坦的相对论说法,时间和空间都是紧密联系的。In fact they are one in the same,实际上它们是相同的,a flexible fabric called space time.一个被称为空间时间的柔性织物。注:听力文本来源于普特201205/182161Books and Arts; Book Review;Mass murder;文艺;书评;大屠杀;History and its woes;How Stalin and Hitler enabled each others crimes;历史及其悲哀之处;斯大林和希特勒如何纵容彼此犯下大罪;Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. By Timothy Snyder.血染之地:希特勒和斯大林之间的欧洲,作者Timothy Snyder。In the middle of the 20th century Europes two totalitarian empires, Nazi Germany and Stalins Soviet Union, killed 14m non-combatants, in peacetime and in war. The who, why, when, where and how of these mass murders is the subject of a gripping and comprehensive new book by Timothy Snyder of Yale University.在20世纪中期,欧洲大陆的两大集权帝国,纳粹德国和斯大林治下的苏联,在和平时期和战争时期杀死了1400万非战斗人员。这些大屠杀所涉及的人,屠杀的原因、时间、地点以及过程就是耶鲁大学的Timothy Snyder的这本引人而内容全面的新书的主题。The term coined in the books title encapsulates the thesis. The “bloodlands” are the stretch of territory from the Baltic to the Black Sea where Europes most murderous regimes did their most murderous work. The bloodlands were caught between two fiendish projects: Adolf Hitlers ideas of racial supremacy and eastern expansion, and the Soviet Unions desire to remake society according to the communist template. That meant shooting, starving and gassing those who didnt fit in. Just as Stalin blamed the peasants for the failure of collectivisation, Hitler blamed the Jews for his military failures in the east. As Mr Snyder argues, “Hitler and Stalin thus shared a certain politics of tyranny: they brought about catastrophes, blamed the enemy of their choice, and then used the death of millions to make the case that their policies were necessary or desirable. Each of them had a transformative Utopia, a group to be blamed when its realisation proved impossible, and then a policy of mass murder that could be proclaimed as a kind of ersatz victory.”本书题目中所造的词语是其主题的浓缩。“血染之地”就是指从黑海至波罗的海这片土地,在这片土地上,欧洲最杀人如麻的政权犯下了最为残暴的恶行。这片血染之地夹在两个恶魔般的计划之间:阿道夫-希特勒的种族优越思想和东扩的念头,以及苏联按共产主义模式再造世界的强烈欲望。这就意味着对于那些与这两个计划的格格不入的人,就要被毙、饿死或用毒气毒死。就像斯大林将社会主义集体化的失败归咎于农民身上那样,希特勒把在东方的军事失败归咎于犹太人。正如Snyder所说,“故斯大林和希特勒的暴政是有着某些共同之处的,他们都带来灾难,归罪他们的自己所指的敌人,然后用数百万人死亡的代价来明他们的政策是必要或理想的。二人都建立了变种的乌托邦,当发现政策根本不现实时,就归咎于一群人,然后就可以把大屠杀政策宣称为一场虚假的胜利了。”Mr Snyders book is revisionist history of the best kind: in spare, closely argued prose, with meticulous use of statistics, he makes the er rethink some of the best-known episodes in Europes modern history. For those who are wedded to the simplistic schoolbook notions that the Hitlerites were the mass murderers and the Soviets the liberators, or that the killing started in 1939 and ended in 1945, Mr Snyders theses will be thought-provoking or shocking. Even those who pride themselves on knowing their history will find themselves repeatedly brought up short by his insights, contrasts and comparisons. Some ghastly but well-known episodes recede; others emerge from the shadows.Snyder的书是一本最好的修正史:用简练而论严密的笔法,加上对统计数据的精妙运用,本书使读者对欧洲现代史上最著名的一些章节作了一番再思考。对于那些已经接受了单纯的教科书观点(即希特勒一方是大屠杀的凶手,苏联人是解放者,或者屠杀始于1939年,结束于1945年)的人来说,作者所述之事将是发人深思、震人心魄的。就算那些以自己的历史知识为傲的读者也会一再地为作者的广见识、鲜明比照和比喻手法而受益匪浅。一些苍白可怖但广为人知的历史片段逐渐模糊,另一些片段从阴影中开始浮现。Sometimes the memories are faded because so few were left to remember. Those who suffered horribly but lived to tell the tale naturally get a better hearing than the millions in unmarked graves. Mr Snyders book straightens the record in favour of the voiceless and forgotten.有时,记忆的褪色是因为没有几个人能活到现在。那些历经苦难但活下来的人,他们讲的故事自然比那数百万无名冢所述更有受众。Snyder的大作理清了曲直,只为那些已无法出声或已被忘却的冤魂。He starts with the 3.3m in Soviet Ukraine who died in the famine of 1933 that followed Stalins ruthlessly destructive collectivisation. He goes on to mark the 250,000-odd Soviet citizens, chiefly Poles, shot because of their ethnicity in the purges of 1937-38. Sometimes the NKVD simply picked Polish-sounding names from the telephone directory, or arrested en masse all those attending a Polish church service.作者从1933年造成330万人死亡的乌克兰饥荒写起,这次饥荒紧随斯大林的残酷而毁灭性的集体化运动。然后又写到25万余苏联公民,主要是波兰人,在1937-38年的大清洗中被杀害,只因为他们的种族。有时内务人民委员会只在电话号码簿上挑一些发音像是波兰人的名字,或是成批逮捕去波兰教堂礼拜的人。Some stories remained untold because they were inconvenient. About as many people died in the German bombing of Warsaw in 1939 as in the allied bombing of Dresden in 1945. Post-war Poland was in no state to gain recognition for that. The Nazi-Soviet alliance of August 1939 was “cemented in blood”, Stalin said approvingly. Few wanted to remember that two years later, when the Germans invaded the Soviet Union in Operation Barbarossa. The Western allies did little to stop the Holocaust. Few wanted reminding that the only government that took direct action to help the Jews was the Polish one: seven of the first eight operations conducted in Warsaw by the underground Polish Home Army were in support of the ghetto uprising. (After the war, the Communist authorities executed as “fascists” Polish soldiers who had helped the Jews.)有些故事仍然未见天日,因为不便讲出。1939年德国对华沙的轰炸造成的死亡人数和盟军在1945年轰炸德累斯顿造成的死亡人数不相上下。这一牺牲,战后的波兰从未正式获得承认。纳粹和苏联在1939年8月的结盟是“鲜血凝成的”,斯大林赞许地说道。没几个人愿意记起,两年后,德国就发动“巴巴罗萨”计划入侵苏联。西方盟国对大屠杀几乎未加阻止。没几个人愿意提起,唯一一个对犹太人直接给予帮助的政府恰恰是波兰政府。在地下的波兰国民军所组织的前八次行动中,有七次是为了持犹太区的起义。(战后,波兰共产主义当局将曾经帮助过犹太人的波兰士兵当做“法西斯分子”予以处决。)Stalin regarded all Soviet prisoners-of-war as traitors. Their German captors starved them to death in their millions; nobody dared mourn them. The Holocaust, too, did not fit into Soviet historiography, especially as post-war anti-Semitism intensified (“Every Jew is a nationalist and an agent of American intelligence,” Stalin said in 1952). Memorials to murdered Jews carried not the Star of David but the five-pointed Soviet one, and referred blandly to “Soviet citizens” or “victims of fascism”.斯大林把所有苏联战俘都当成叛徒。俘获他们的德军将他们上百万地饿死,没有人敢为他们哀悼。大屠杀也不合苏联的官修史要求,在战后反犹运动日益激烈之后更是如此。(斯大林在1952年曾说道:“每个犹太人都是民族主义者和美国情报人员”),被屠杀犹太人的墓碑上不是大卫星,而是苏联的五角星,他们被淡淡地归为“苏联公民”或“法西斯主义的受害者”。Many of the stories in the book are aly known as national or ethnic tragedies. Poles focus on the Warsaw uprising; Jews on Auschwitz; Russians on the siege of Leningrad; Ukrainians on the great famine. Mr Snyders book weaves the stories together, explaining how the horrors interacted and reinforced each other. Hitler learnt a lot from Stalin, and vice versa.书中很多故事都已作为国家或民族惨案而为人知晓。波兰人关注华沙起义;犹太人关注奥斯维辛,俄罗斯人关注列宁格勒围城战,乌克兰人关注那次大饥荒。本书将这些事穿插起来一起记述,解释了恐惧是如何相互影响和逐步扎根的。希特勒从斯大林那里学到了不少,二人彼此彼此。Mr Snyder shifts the usual geographical focus away from the perpetrator countries to the places where they first colluded and then collided. Germany and Russia (and Germans and Russians) mostly fared better, or less horribly, than the places in between (there were more Jews in the Polish city of Lodz alone than in Berlin and Vienna combined). No corner of what are now Belarus and Ukraine was spared. Much of Germany and even more of Russia was unscathed, at least physically, by war.作者将地理上的关注点从传统的两个罪恶国家,转移到了两国初次勾结而后又发生冲突的地方(即波兰)。德国和俄罗斯两国(德国人和俄罗斯人也是如此)所付出的代价在大都比两国之间其他欧洲地区更小,或者没那么可怕。(只在波兰城市罗兹的犹太人就比柏林和维也纳加在一起还多)。现在的白俄罗斯和乌克兰全境的每个角落都无一幸免。 而德国的很多地方和俄罗斯的更多地方都未遭受战争的伤害,至少未受有形的伤害。He also corrects exaggerations, misapprehensions and simplifications. The bestial treatment of slave labourers in concentration camps, and the use of gas chambers, are commonly seen as the epitomes of Nazi persecution. But the Germans also shot and starved millions of people, as well as gassed and worked them to death. In just a few days in 1941, the Nazis shot more Jews in the east than they had inmates in all their concentration camps.作者同样纠正了一些对历史的夸大、误解和简单化现象。在对纳粹迫害的记述概要中,经常可以看到集中营对奴隶劳工非人的虐待和毒气室的使用。但德国人除了用毒气毒死和活活累死大批人之外,也杀和饿死了数以百万计的人。仅在1941年的几天内,纳粹在东线杀的犹太人数量,就比所有集中营的囚犯人数还要多。“Bloodlands” has aroused fierce criticism from those who believe that the Soviet Union, for all its flaws, cannot be compared to the Third Reich, which pioneered ethnic genocide. Doing this, the critics argue, legitimises ultranationalists in eastern Europe who downplay the Holocaust, exaggerate their own suffering—and dodge guilt for their own collaboration with Hitlers executioners.“血染之地”已经激起了一些人的激烈批评,这些人认为苏联即使有千般缺点,也比不上第三帝国的罪恶,后者是种族屠杀的先锋。批评者认为,这种做法将使东欧的极端民族主义者合法化,这些极端分子漠视大屠杀,夸大自身遭受的苦难---而不愿直面他们与希特勒的刽子手们勾结的罪行。That argument is powerful but unfair. Many people say stupid things about history. Mr Snyder is not one. He does not challenge the Holocausts central place in 20th-century history. Nor does he overlook Soviet suffering at the hands of Hitler or the heroism of the soldiers who destroyed the Third Reich. But he makes a point that needs reinforcement, not least in Russia where public opinion and officialdom both retain a soft spot for Stalins wartime leadership. The Soviet Unions ethnic murders predated Nazi Germanys. Stalin was not directly responsible for the Holocaust, but his pact with the Nazis paved the way for Hitlers killing of Jews in the east.这理由很有力却不公平。很多人都对历史胡说八道,但作者不是其中之一。他既没有挑战大屠杀在20世纪历史中的中心地位,也没有无视苏联在希特勒的铁蹄下所受的苦难,以及摧毁第三帝国的士兵们的英勇。作者提出了的观点亟需声援,尤其是在俄罗斯这样一个国家,大众舆论和官方仍然对斯大林的战时领导心怀仰慕。苏联的种族屠杀要早于纳粹德国。斯大林对屠杀是没有直接责任,但他和纳粹的结盟为希特勒在东方屠杀犹太人铺平了道路。Mr Snyders scrupulous and nuanced book steers clear of the sterile, sloganising exchanges about whether Stalin was as bad as Hitler, or whether Soviet mass murder in Ukraine or elsewhere is a moral equivalent of the Nazis extermination of the Jews. What it does do, admirably, is to explain and record. Both totalitarian empires turned human beings into statistics, and their deaths into a necessary step towards a better future. Mr Snyders book explains, with sympathy, fairness and insight, how that happened, and to whom. Just dont it before bedtime.Snyder先生的这本严谨而微妙的著作,绕开了那些无意义的口号式的相互攻击,诸如斯大林是否和希特勒一样坏,或苏联在乌克兰或其他地方的大屠杀是不是和希特勒灭绝犹太人一样的道德犯罪。令人敬佩的是,这本书所给出的是解释和记录。这两个集权帝国都把活生生人变成了统计数字,把这些人的死亡变成了实现国家美好未来的必要步骤。Snyder的这本书怀着同情,正直而富有洞察力地解释了这一切是如何发生的,发生在了谁的头上。 只是不要在睡觉前读。 /201210/204952

If you dog-training books or watch dog trainers on television, youve probably learned that to control your dog, you have to display dominance. Its commonly thought that because dogs are pack animals, they live according to dominance hierarchies---either youre the dominant top dog or youre a submissive underling. So, according to many popular dog-training methods, youve got to show a dog whos boss in order to make it sit, stay, fetch and obey other commands.如果你读过训书籍或者在电视上看过训节目,那你可能知道想要控制你的,必须展示自己的配地位。人们通常认为是牲畜,所以它们要依靠着统治阶级而生存——不论是领头还是顺从的部下。因此根据许多流行的训方法,你应该向指示谁才是他真正的主人,谁能让它坐下、停下来、去取东西和从其它命令。But a study by researchers at the University of Pennsylvania suggests that using confrontational methods to train dogs often results in pets that are more aggressive and unmanageable. Common techniques include hitting or kicking a dog, growling, rolling a dog on its back and holding it down, staring a dog down and grabbing a dogs jowls and shaking. The researchers survey of 140 dog owners showed that these aggressive methods resulted in an aggressive response from dogs at least twenty-five percent of the time. So how should you train your dog?但是宾夕法尼亚大学研究人员进行的一项研究认为,采用对抗方式训练往往适得其反,会使变得更具攻击性和不易管理。常见的一些对抗式训练法方法包括:打、踢,对着咆哮,拖着的背部滚动,盯着看,抓住的下巴摇晃。调查发现140名主人在展示这些攻击性训练方式时,结果至少有25%的做出攻击性反应。那么你应该怎么训练呢?Many expert trainers advocate treating a dog much as you would a small child. Gentle training techniques emphasize building a healthy relationship with your dog by opening clear lines of communication and establishing a set of rules and boundaries. This includes rewarding dogs for good behavior and not expecting your dog to obey all your commands right away. Like most kids and even many adults, learning to behave takes time and patience.许多训专家鼓励人们像对待小孩一样来训练。温和的训练技巧注重通过开放透明的交流与建立一种健康的关系,同时设立一套规则和界限。这包括表现好时给予奖励,但不要期待你的会立刻从你的命令。就像大多数孩子,甚至是有些成年人一样,学会行事需要时间和耐心。原文译文属!201208/196828

The Strength of Spinach?菠菜的神力?Don: Yaeuml;l, have you ever heard of Popeye the Sailorman? Whenever he is getting beaten up he eats some spinach and becomes really strong. His muscles bulge out and everything.你有听说过大力水手波沛吗?每次他被痛打的时候,他就会吃菠菜,吃完了之后他就变得非常强壮——肌肉凸出,一切的一切,变得好强壮啊!Yaeuml;l: I do burst your bubble Don. But eating spinach has nothing to do with strength.Don,我可就要打破你的幻想了!吃菠菜与变得强壮根本就没什么联系。D: Popeye is a lie?波沛是一个谎言?Y: Not a lie, exactly. See, some time in the 1920s it was reported that a half cup of cooked spinach has thirty-four milligrams of iron, which is a lot. Iron is important because it carries oxygen in the blood. We need oxygen for energy; without enough of it people become weak and tired.确切地说,不是谎言。在上世纪20年代,有报道称,每半杯已烹饪菠菜含有34毫克铁元素,含量相当的高。由于在血液中的运氧功能,铁元素颇为重要。氧是人类的动力之源——一旦缺氧,人类便会变得虚弱、易疲乏。D: So spinach does make you strong, or at least puts extra pep in your step.因而,菠菜确实能让人强壮——至少能积存下多余的精力。Y: Well, it might if it did have much iron. It turns out that the thirty-four milligrams was a typo. A half cup of cooked spinach really has only three point four milligrams of iron. Plus, spinach is actually worse than other iron-containing vegetables because it has a chemical that blocks most of its iron from being absorbed by the blood.But when the typo was published the idea caught on that spinach was a muscle-building vegetable. That’s where the idea for Popeye came from.嗯,如果铁元素的含量很多的时候确实如此。事实明,那34毫克的铁元素是排版的错误——每半杯已烹饪菠菜仅含3.4毫克铁元素。再者,事实上菠菜还不如其他含铁的蔬菜好。原因在于,菠菜含有一种化学物质会大大的阻碍铁元素被血液吸收。但是,当34毫克的“版本”出来的时候,人们就认定了菠菜有助于肌肉的塑成。这就是大力水手波沛的得来呐!D: So now I have to came up with another point.那么也就是说,我得重去找其他的方法啦!Y: Or, how about just being happy with who you are!抑或,就高高兴兴的做你自己!D: Or, maybe Ill learn koradji.或者,我还可以去学巫术!Y: Whatever!这个就要看你自己啦! /201211/208241

  • 郴州市治疗性功能障碍哪家医院最好
  • 湖南郴州治疗包皮包茎哪家医院最好好典范
  • 郴州包皮哪家医院比较好排名报
  • 郴州包皮治疗费用
  • 郴州哪家男子医院比较好挂号社区
  • 桂东县中医院治疗阳痿早泄最新常识郴州市哪个正规医院能割包皮
  • 健助手湖南郴州治疗龟头炎多少钱
  • QQ媒体嘉禾县男科医生百科养生
  • 安仁县前列腺炎哪家医院最好
  • 郴州东方医院网友评论乐视资讯
  • 郴州湘南学院附属医院治疗性功能障碍多少钱平安面诊郴州省妇幼保健院治疗早泄多少钱
  • 郴州哪家医院治早泄
  • 泡泡面诊郴州社保可以报销割包皮吗
  • 桂东县治疗前列腺疾病多少钱
  • 康泰指南郴州孕前检查项目京东新闻
  • 爱热点资兴市人民中妇幼保健医院割包皮
  • 桂阳县人民中妇幼保健医院治疗早泄多少钱58分享湘南附属医院男科咨询
  • 服务大全郴州包皮包茎医院哪家好99频道
  • 郴州割包皮价格多少知道面诊
  • 郴州市治疗早泄多少钱
  • 郴州那家医院包皮
  • 普及媒体郴州哪家医院包皮手术做的好
  • 导医报郴州妇幼保健医院不孕不育科
  • 郴州市人民医院南院龟头炎症快问解答
  • 桂东县看前列腺炎好吗
  • 郴州切除包皮的费用
  • 郴州哪里看泌尿科厉害
  • 郴州治疗前列腺肥大哪家医院好健康时讯
  • 中医咨询郴州什么医院治疗包皮过长的
  • 郴州人民中妇幼保健医院治疗前列腺炎多少钱
  • 相关阅读
  • 瞒天过海!集体耕地上建厂房!村民:相关部门集体哑火(三)
  • 暮影战神武灵攻略大全
  • 唐嫣赵丽颖吴昕林允儿李易峰和谁最有感(图)
  • 酒类电商双罢斗
  • 南京查处违规补缴社保证明份购房证明被注销
  • 内蒙古自治区政协原副主席赵黎平一审被判处死刑
  • 近日李念与刚斩获年北京青年电影节影帝的巩峥出现在街边
  • 徐娇穿白袜撑伞古典韵味十足邻家有女初长成
  • 单机斗地主下载:首存优惠
  • 小学生作业本开口说话曝光盗伐林木团伙
  • 相关推荐

    发表回复

    请遵守天涯社区公约言论规则,不得违反国家法律法规