来源：英文联播
The George Soros philosophy – and its fatal flaw
In late May， the same day she got fired by the US TV network ABC for her racist tweet about Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett， Roseanne Barr accused Chelsea Clinton of being married to George Soros’s nephew。
5月末，美国电视台ABC解雇了罗西妮·巴尔，原因是他的推文对奥巴马顾问瓦莱丽·贾勒特构成种族歧视，就在当天，巴尔谴责切尔西·克林顿嫁给了乔治·索罗斯的侄子。
“Chelsea Soros Clinton，” Barr tweeted， knowing that the combination of names was enough to provoke a reaction。 In the desultory exchangethat followed， the youngest Clinton responded to Roseanne by praising Soros’s philanthropic work with his Open Society Foundations。
“切尔西·索罗斯·克林顿”，巴尔发推文说，她知道这种组合足以促使对方做出回应。接下来的互怼显然跑偏了，小克林顿回应罗西妮，她赞扬了索罗斯“开放社会基金会”的慈善工作。
To which Barr responded in the most depressing way possible， repeating false claims earlier proferred by rightwing media personalities： “Sorry to have tweeted incorrect info about you！ Please forgive me！ By the way， George Soros is a nazi who turned in his fellow Jews 2 be murdered in German concentration camps & stole their wealth – were you aware of that？ But， we all make mistakes， right Chelsea？”
巴尔以最令人沮丧的方式做出回应，重复着早先右翼媒体人士散布的错误言论：“抱歉推了关于你们的错误信息！请原谅！顺便说一句，乔治·索罗斯是个纳粹，他告发了犹太同胞并偷走他们的钱，结果他们在德国集中营被谋杀，你知道吗？但我们都弄错了，对吗？切尔西。”
Barr’s tweet was quickly retweeted by conservatives， including Donald Trump Jr。 This shouldn’t have surprised anyone。 On the radical right， Soros is as hated as the Clintons。 He is a verbal tic， a key that fits every hole。
巴尔的推文很快被保守派转推，其中包括唐纳德·特朗普。这并不令人吃惊。在极端右翼眼中，索罗斯与克林顿家族一样令人憎恶。他事事都跑不掉，他是一把适合任何孔的钥匙。
Soros’s name evokes “an emotional outcry from the red-meat crowds”， one former Republican congressman recently told the Washington Post。 They view him as a “sort of sinister [person who] plays in the shadows”。 This antisemitic caricature of Soros has dogged the philanthropist for decades。
一位前共和党议员最近对《华盛顿邮报》说，索罗斯的名字引发“劳苦大众的情感抗议”，他们把他当做“阴影下的某种邪魔”。索罗斯的反犹刻板形象，几十年来一直尾随着这位慈善家。
But in recent years the caricature has evolved into something that more closely resembles a James Bond villain。 Even to conservatives who reject the darkest fringes of the far right， Breitbart’s description of Soros as a “globalist billionaire” dedicated to making America a liberal wasteland is uncontroversial common sense。
可近年来，这种刻板形象转变为某种更接近于007电影中的恶棍。即便对反对极右翼最暗黑边缘观点的保守主义者而言，新闻网站布赖特巴特对索罗斯的描述——一个“全球主义亿万富翁”致力于将美国变成一个自由派的荒原——也成为毫无争议的共识。
In spite of the obsession with Soros， there has been surprisingly little interest in what he actually thinks。 Yet unlike most of the members of the billionaire class， who speak in platitudes and remain withdrawn from serious engagement with civic life， Soros is an intellectual。
虽说言必索罗斯，可令人吃惊的是，几乎没有人关心他究竟怎么想。不同于多数陈词滥调、严重不食人间烟火的亿万富翁阶层成员，索罗斯是个知识分子。
And the person who emerges from his books and many articles is not an out-of-touch plutocrat， but a provocative and consistent thinker committed to pushing the world in a cosmopolitan direction in which racism， income inequality， American empire， and the alienations of contemporary capitalism would be things of the past.He is extremely perceptive about the limits of markets and US power in both domestic and international contexts。 He is， in short， among the best the meritocracy has produced。
从他的作品和许多文章跃然纸上的那个人不是脱离群众的财阀，而是一个敢言、一贯的思想者，他致力于推动世界大同，让种族主义、收入不平等、美利坚帝国和当代资本主义异化成为过去。他对市场的局限性和国内和国际背景下的美国实力极度敏感。简言之，他是精英统治的翘楚。
It is for this reason that Soros’s failures are so telling； they are the failures not merely of one man， but of an entire class – and an entire way of understanding the world。 From his earliest days as a banker in postwar London， Soros believed in a necessary connection between capitalism and cosmopolitanism.For him， as for most of the members of his cohort and the majority of the Democratic party’s leadership， a free society depends on free （albeit regulated） markets。 But this assumed connection has proven to be a false one。
正因为此，索罗斯的失败才有说服力；它们不仅是一个人的失败，而是整个阶级的失败，理解世界的一整套方式的失败。从早期在二战后的伦敦做银行家开始，索罗斯就相信资本主义与世界大同主义之间存在必要联系。在他看来，对于他的多数同侪和多数民主党领导层而言，自由社会依赖自由市场（尽管要有所管理），但这种联系被证明是错误的。
The decades since the end of the cold war have demonstrated that， without a perceived existential enemy， capitalism tends to undermine the very culture of trust， compassion and empathy upon which Soros’s “open society” depends， by concentrating wealth in the hands of the very few。
冷战结束后的几十年已经证明，没有想象中的生死敌人，资本主义就会将财富聚敛在少数人手中，从而破坏了信任、同情和共情文化本身，而索罗斯的“开放社会”正依赖与此。
Instead of the global capitalist utopia predicted in the halcyon 1990s by those who proclaimed anend to history， the US is presently ruled by an oafish heir who enriches his family as he dismantles the “liberal international order” that was supposed to govern a peaceful， prosperous and united world。
岁月静好的九十年代，那些宣称历史终结的学者预言了一个全球资本主义乌托邦，相反，当今美国正被一个粗鄙的富二代统治，他肥富自己家族的同时，瓦解了“自由国际秩序”，后者本该治理一个和平、繁荣和统一的世界。
While Soros recognised earlier than most the limits of hypercapitalism， his class position made him unable to advocate the root-and-branch reforms necessary to bring about the world he desires。 The system that allows George Soros to accrue the wealth that he has done has proven to be one in which cosmopolitanism will never find a stable home。
尽管索罗斯最早认识到超级资本主义的局限，但他所处的阶级地位让他无法主张彻底的必要改革，实现他所欲的世界。这是一个允许乔治·索罗斯聚敛财富的体制，他也的确如此行事，可在这里，世纪大同主义找不到容身之处。
The highlights of Soros‘s biography are well known。 Born to middle-class Jewish parents in Budapest in 1930 as György Schwartz， Soros – his father changed the family name in 1936 to avoid antisemitic discrimination – had a tranquil childhood until the second world war， when after the Nazi invasion of Hungary he and his family were forced to assume Christian identities and live under false names。 Miraculously， Soros and his family survived the war， escaping the fate suffered by more than two-thirds of Hungary’s Jews。
索罗斯的生平众所周知。1930年出生在布达佩斯中产之家，父母是犹太人，原名捷尔吉·施瓦茨，父亲在1936年更换姓氏以避免遭到反犹歧视，索罗斯的童年岁月安好，第二次世界大战发生后，纳粹侵略匈牙利，他和家人被迫换上基督教身份，以假名生活。神奇的是，索罗斯和家人在战争中幸存下来，避免了三分之二强匈牙利犹太人的命运。
Feeling stifled in newly communist Hungary， in 1947 Soros immigrated to the UK， where he studied at the London School of Economics and got to know the Austrian-born philosopher Karl Popper， who became his greatest interlocutor and central intellectual influence。
因为新成立的共产主义匈牙利生活压抑，1947年，索罗斯移民英国，在伦敦经济学院读书并结识了奥地利裔哲学家卡尔·波普尔，波普尔成为索罗斯的知心人，对他的思想产生关键影响。
In 1956， Soros moved to New York to pursue a career in finance。 After spending over a decade working in various Wall Street positions， in the late 1960s he founded the Quantum Fund， which became one of the most successful hedge funds of all time。
1956年，索罗斯移居纽约从事金融业。在华尔街各种职位混迹十多年后，他六十年代末创立量子基金，量子基金成为有史以来最成功的对冲基金。
As his fund amassed staggering profits， Soros personally emerged as a legendary trader； most famously， in November 1992 he earned more than $1bn and “broke the Bank of England” by betting that the pound was priced too highly against the Deutschmark。
随着他的基金聚拢了惊人的利润，索罗斯自己也成为传奇交易商，最著名的是1992年11月，他赌英镑对德国马克价值高估，狂赚10亿美元并“打爆了英格兰银行”。
Today， Soros is one of the richest men in the world and， along with Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg， one of the US’s most politically influential philanthropists。 But unlike Gates and Zuckerberg， Soros has long pointed to academic philosophy as his source of inspiration。 Soros’s thought and philanthropic career are organised around the idea of the “open society，” a term developed and popularised by Popper in his classic workThe Open Society and Its Enemies。
今天，索罗斯是世界上最富有的人之一，与比尔·盖茨和马克·扎克伯格共同成为美国最具政治影响力的慈善家。但与盖茨和扎克伯格不同，索罗斯长期以来将学院派哲学当做自己的灵感之源。索罗斯的思想和慈善事业围绕“开放社会”理念展开，“开放社会”是波普尔在其经典作品《开放社会及其敌人》中提出并推广的概念。
According to Popper， open societies guarantee and protect rational exchange， while closed societies force people to submit to authority， whether that authority is religious， political or economic。
根据波普尔的说法，开放社会保障并保护理性交换，封闭社会则迫使人们服从权威，不论这种权威是宗教的、政治的或是经济的。
Since 1987， Soros has published 14 books and a number of pieces in the New York Review of Books， New York Times and elsewhere。 These texts make it clear that， like many on the centre-left who rose to prominence in the 1990s， Soros’s defining intellectual principle is his internationalism。
1987年以来，索罗斯出版了14部作品并在《纽约书评》《纽约时报》等刊物上发表文章。这些文本表明，和许多九十年代成名的中左翼人士一样，索罗斯最典型的知性原则是他的国际主义。
For Soros， the goal of contemporary human existence is to establish a world defined not by sovereign states， but by a global community whose constituents understand that everyone shares an interest in freedom， equality and prosperity。
对索罗斯而言，当代人类生存的目标是建立一个没有主权国家的世界，世界应该成为一个全球社区，其成员明白，所有人都在自由、平等和繁荣中共存。
In his opinion， the creation of such a global open society is the only way to ensure that humanity overcomes the existential challenges of climate change and nuclear proliferation。
在他看来，这种全球开放社会的产生是确保人类克服气候变化与核扩散等生存挑战的唯一方式。
Unlike Gates， whose philanthropy focuses mostly on ameliorative projects such as eradicating malaria， Soros truly wants to transform national and international politics and society。 Whether or not his vision can survive the wave of antisemitic， Islamophobic and xenophobic rightwing nationalism ascendant in the US and Europe remains to be seen.What is certain is that Soros will spend the remainder of his life attempting to make sure it does。
与慈善事业主要集中在消除疟疾等改善型项目的盖茨不同，索罗斯真心希望改变国家和国际政治及社会。在美欧日益高涨的反犹、仇视伊斯兰和排外右翼民族主义浪潮中，他的愿景能否存活下来尚有待观察。肯定的是，索罗斯的余生准备为之奋斗。
Soros began his philanthropic activities in 1979， when he “determined after some reflection that I had enough money” and could therefore devote himself to making the world a better place。 To do so， he established the Open Society Fund， which quickly became a transnational network of foundations。
索罗斯1979年开始慈善活动，当时他“仔细考虑后认为我有很多钱”，因此可以致力于让世界更美好。他为此成立“开放社会基金”，并很快发展为一个跨国的基金会网络。
Though he made some effort at funding academic scholarships for black students in apartheid South Africa， Soros’s primary concern was the communist bloc in eastern Europe； by the end of the 80s， he had opened foundation offices in Hungary， Poland， Czechoslovakia， Bulgaria and the Soviet Union itself。
尽管他为南非种族隔离制度下的黑人学生设立了一些奖学金，索罗斯主要关切是东欧的共产主义联盟；到八十年代末，他在匈牙利、波兰、捷克斯洛伐克、保加利亚和苏联本国开立基金会。
Like Popper before him， Soros considered the countries of communist eastern Europe to be the ultimate models of closed societies。 If he were able to open these regimes， he could demonstrate to the world that money could – in some instances， at least – peacefully overcome oppression without necessitating military intervention or political subversion， the favoured tools of cold war leaders。
和他之前的波普尔一样，索罗斯认为东欧共产主义国家是封闭社会的终极范本。如果他能开放这些政体，就可以向世界证明，至少在某些情况下，钱可以和平地战胜压迫，而无需采用军事干涉或政治颠覆的方法，后者是冷战时期领导人最青睐的工具。
Soros set up his first foreign foundation in Hungary in 1984， and his efforts there serve as a model of his activities during this period。 Over the course of the decade， he awarded scholarships to Hungarian intellectuals to bring them to the US； provided Xerox machines to libraries and universities； and offered grants to theatres， libraries， intellectuals， artists and experimental schools。
1984年，索罗斯在匈牙利建立了第一家外国基金会，他在那里做的事是他那一时期工作的典范。十年间，他为匈牙利知识分子提供奖学金，让他们来美国学习；向图书馆和大学提供施乐复印机；捐赠剧院、图书馆、知识分子、艺术家和实验性学校。
In his 1990 book Opening the Soviet System， Soros wrote that he believed his foundation had helped “demolish the monopoly of dogma [in Hungary] by making an alternate source of financing available for cultural and social activities”， which， in his estimation， played a crucial role in producing the internal collapse of communism。
1990年出版的《开放苏联体制》一书中，索罗斯写道，他相信他的基金会有助于“为文化和社会活动提供另一种财源从而摧毁（匈牙利）的教条独尊”，他估计，那在促进共产主义内爆过程中发挥了关键作用。
Soros’s use of the word dogma points to two critical elements of his thought： his fierce belief that ideas， more than economics， shape life， and his confidence in humanity’s capacity for progress。
索罗斯所说的“教条”指他思想中的两个关键概念：他强烈主张思想而非经济学塑造着生活以及他相信人类具备取得进步的能力。
According to Soros， the dogmatic mode of thinking that characterised closed societies made it impossible for them to accommodate to the changing vicissitudes of history。 Instead， “as actual conditions change”， people in closed societies were forced to abide by an atavistic ideology that was increasingly unpersuasive.When this dogma finally became too obviously disconnected from reality， Soros claimed， a revolution that overturned the closed society usually occurred.By contrast， open societies were dynamic and able to correct course whenever their dogmas strayed too far from reality。
索罗斯认为，封闭社会中思想的教条化让这些社会不可能兼容历史的多样变动。相反，“真实条件改变了”，封闭社会中的人们被迫遵守返祖的、越来越缺乏说服力的意识形态。当这种教条最终明显脱离现实时，索罗斯认为，推翻封闭社会的革命通常就会发生。相反，开放社会是动态的，能够在教条脱离现实时自我纠正。
As he witnessed the Soviet empire’s downfall between 1989 and 1991， Soros needed to answer a crucial strategic question： now that the closed societies of eastern Europe were opening， what was his foundation to do？
1989年到1991年见证了苏联帝国的垮台，索罗斯该问一个关键的战略性问题：既然东欧的封闭社会开放了，他的基金会还能干什么？
On the eve of the Soviet Union’s dissolution， Soros published an updated version of Opening the Soviet System， titled Underwriting Democracy， which revealed his new strategy： he would dedicate himself to building permanent institutions that would sustain the ideas that motivated anticommunist revolutions， while modelling the practices of open society for the liberated peoples of eastern Europe。
苏联解体前夜，索罗斯出版了《开放苏联体制》的更新版《认同民主》，表明了他的战略：他致力于构建永久性机制，推动反对共产主义的革命，同时为东欧被解放的人民构建开放社会的典范。
The most important of these was Central European University （CEU）， which opened in Budapest in 1991。 Funded by Soros， CEU was intended to serve as the wellspring for a new， transnational， European world – and the training ground for a new， transnational， European elite。
最重要的做法是建立中欧大学，1991年在布达佩斯开张。在索罗斯的资助下，中欧大学旨在成为跨国欧洲新世界的源泉，成为跨国欧洲新精英的训练场所。
How could Soros ensure that newly opened societies would remain free？ Soros had come of age in the era of the Marshall Plan， and experienced American largesse firsthand in postwar London.To him， this experience showed that weakened and exhausted societies could not be rehabilitated without a substantial investment of foreign aid， which would alleviate extreme conditions and provide the minimum material base that would enable the right ideas about democracy and capitalism to flourish。
索罗斯如何确保新开放的社会保持自由呢？索罗斯在马歇尔计划时代成年，战后的伦敦，他亲身感受到美国的慷慨赠与。对他而言，这种经历表明，没有外国援助的大笔投资，羸弱无力的社会难以恢复，援助可以缓解极端贫困，提供最低物质基础，让有关民主和资本主义的正确思想繁荣起来。
For this reason， in the late 80s and early 90s Soros repeatedly argued that “only the deus ex machina of western assistance” could make the eastern bloc permanently democratic。 “People who have been living in a totalitarian system all their lives，” he claimed， “need outside assistance to turn their aspirations into reality。”
出于这个理由，在八十年代末和九十年代初，索罗斯反复强调，“只有西方援助的外力”才能让东欧集团永远保持民主。“在极权体制下生活了一辈子的人们”，他说，“需要外部援助，将他们的渴望变成现实。”
Soros insisted that the US and western Europe give the countries of eastern Europe a substantial amount of pecuniary aid， provide them with access to the European Common Market， and promote cultural and educational ties between the west and the east “that befit a pluralistic society”。 Once accomplished， Soros avowed， western Europe must welcome eastern Europe into the European community， which would prevent the continent’s future repartitioning。
索罗斯坚持要美国和西欧给予东欧国家大笔金钱援助，让他们进入欧共体市场，促进西方与东方之间建立“适合多元化社会”的文化和教育联络。一旦实现，索罗斯称，西欧必须欢迎东欧进入欧洲社会，这可以避免欧洲大陆在未来再次分裂。
Soros’s prescient pleas went unheeded。 From the 1990s on， he has attributed the emergence of kleptocracy and hypernationalism in the former eastern bloc to the west’s lack of vision and political will during this crucial moment。 “Democracies，” he lamented in 1995， seem to “suffer from a deficiency of values … [and] are notoriously unwilling to take any pain when their vital self-interests are not directly threatened。”
索罗斯颇有先见之明的请求没人听。从九十年代，他将前东欧联盟的贪腐政府和超级民族主义的兴起归因于西方在这一关键时刻缺乏远见和政治意愿。“民主社会“，他1995年哀叹，貌似”因缺少价值而受难……在他们核心利益并未直接受到挑战时，丝毫不愿承担痛苦。“
For Soros， the west had failed in an epochal task， and in so doing had revealed its shortsightedness and fecklessness.But it was more than a lack of political will that constrained the west during this moment。 In the era of “shock therapy”， western capital did flock to eastern Europe – but this capital was invested mostly in private industry， as opposed to democratic institutions or grassroots community-building， which helped the kleptocrats and anti-democrats seize and maintain power。
多索罗斯而言，西方在划时代的任务中失败了，它们这样做，表明他们短视且不负责任。但当时制约了西方的不仅是缺少政治意愿。在”休克疗法“时期，西方资本确实流向东欧，但这些资本主要投在民营产业中，而非用于构建民主机制或基层社区，这反而帮助贪腐者和反民主者掌握并维持权力。
Soros had identified a key problem but was unable to appreciate how the very logic of capitalism， which stressed profit above all， would necessarily undermine his democratic project。
索罗斯发现了关键问题，但无法理解资本主义这种利润至上的逻辑如何使他的民主事业遭到破坏成为必然。
In the wake of the cold war， Soros dedicated himself to exploring the international problems that prevented the realisation of a global open society。
冷战后，索罗斯致力于探索解决阻碍实现全球开放社会的国际问题。
After the 1997 Asian financial crisis， in which a currency collapse in south-east Asia engendered a world economic downturn， Soros wrote books addressing the two major threats he believed beset open society： hyperglobalisation and market fundamentalism， both of which had become hegemonic after communism’s collapse。
1997年亚洲金融危机中，东南亚货币崩溃导致世界经济下行，危机发生后，索罗斯著书，应对他认为开放社会面临的两个主要威胁：超级全球化和市场原教旨主义，两者都在共产主义崩溃后霸占了世界。
Soros argued that the history of the post-cold war world， as well as his personal experiences as one of international finance’s most successful traders， demonstrated that unregulated global capitalism undermined open society in three distinct ways。
索罗斯认为，冷战后世界的历史以及他作为国际金融界最成功交易商的个人经验表明，缺乏监管的全球资本主义在三个方面破坏了开放社会。
First， because capital could move anywhere to avoid taxation， western nations were deprived of the finances they needed to provide citizens with public goods.Second， because international lenders were not subject to much regulation， they often engaged in “unsound lending practices” that threatened financial stability.Finally， because these realities increased domestic and international inequality， Soros feared they would encourage people to commit unspecified “acts of desperation” that could damage the global system’s viability。
首先，因为资本可以到处流动以避税，西方国家没有了财源，无法为公民提供公共品。第二，因为国际借贷者受到的监管不多，他们经常参与威胁金融稳定的”不稳健借贷行为“。最后，因为这些事实恶化了国内和国际不平等，索罗斯担忧这会鼓励人们做出某些”不顾一切的行为“，损害全球体系的可行性。
Soros saw， far earlier than most of his fellow centre-leftists， the problems at the heart of the financialised and deregulated “new economy” of the 1990s and 2000s。 More than any of his liberal peers， he recognised that embracing the most extreme forms of its capitalist ideology might lead the US to promote policies and practices that undermined its democracy and threatened stability both at home and abroad。
索罗斯比大多数中左翼人士更早看到了九十年代和新世纪最初十年中金融化和和去监管式”新经济“的核心问题。他比所有自由派同路人都更加深刻地认识到，采用资本主义意识形态最极端的形式会让美国推行危害其民主制度并威胁国内外稳定的政策和做法。
In Soros’s opinion， the only way to save capitalism from itself was to establish a “global system of political decision-making” that heavily regulated international finance。
在索罗斯看来，唯一从资本主义自身拯救资本主义的方法就是建立”政治决策的国际体系“，对国际金融进行严厉监管。
Yet as early as 1998， Soros acknowledged that the US was the primary opponent of global institutions； by this point in time， Americans had refused to join the International Court of Justice； had declined to sign the Ottawa treaty on banning landmines； and had unilaterally imposed economic sanctions when and where they saw fit。
但早在1998年，索罗斯承认，美国是全球机制的主要敌人；当时美国拒绝加入联合国国际法院，拒绝签署渥太华禁止地雷跳跃，在认为合适的任何时间和任何地方单方面施加制裁。
Still， Soros hoped that， somehow， American policymakers would accept that， for their own best interests， they needed to lead a coalition of democracies dedicated to “promoting the development of open societies [and] strengthening international law and the institutions needed for a global open society”。
另外，索罗斯还在希望美国决策者能在某种程度上接受符合他们最大利益的做法，即他们需要领导一个民主联盟，致力于”促进开放社会的发展并强化国际法和全球开放社会所需的机制“。
But Soros had no programme for how to modify American elites’ increasing hostility to forms of internationalism that did not serve their own military might or provide them with direct and visible economic benefits。 This was a significant gap in Soros’s thought， especially given his insistence on the primacy of ideas in engendering historical change。
但索罗斯不知道该如何改观美国精英对各种形式的国际主义日益增加的敌意，这些国际主义思想不符合本国的军事实力，无法为他们提供直接和可见的经济利益。这是索罗斯思想中的重大鸿沟，尤其考虑到他坚持认为，思想在导致历史变革中具有重要意义。
Instead of thinking through this problem， however， he simply declared that “change would have to begin with a change of attitudes， which would be gradually translated into a change of policies”。Soros’s status as a member of the hyper-elite and his belief that， for all its hiccups， history was headed in the right direction made him unable to consider fully the ideological obstacles that stood in the way of his internationalism。
然而，他没有把这个问题想清楚，只是宣称”变革将从态度的变革开始，后者会逐渐转化为衡策的变革“。索罗斯作为高级精英阶层成员，他相信历史纵然有反复，却将走向正确的未来，这让他不能充分考虑阻碍国际主义实施的意识形态障碍。
The George W Bush administration’s militarist response to the attacks of September 11 compelled Soros to shift his attention from economics to politics。 Everything about the Bush administration’s ideology was anathema to Soros。
小布什政府对911袭击事件的军事主义回应迫使索罗斯将注意力从经济转向政治。小布什政府的一切思想都让索罗斯厌恶。
As Soros declared in his 2004 The Bubble of American Supremacy， Bush and his coterie embraced “a crude form of social Darwinism” that assumed that “life is a struggle for survival， and we must rely mainly on the use of force to survive”。
索罗斯2004年在《美国至上的泡沫》一书中宣布，布什一伙人支持”粗俗的社会达尔文主义“，这种思想假定”生活是你死我活，你必须靠武力才能活下去“。
Whereas before September 11， “the excesses of [this] false ideology were kept within bounds by the normal functioning of our democracy”， after it Bush “deliberately fostered the fear that has gripped the country” to silence opposition and win support for a counterproductive policy of militaristic unilateralism。
911之前，”虚假意识形态的过剩被保持在民主正常功能的边界之内“，911之后，布什”故意煽动恐惧控制国家“，压制反对派并支持一种适得其反的军事单边主义政策。
To Soros， assertions such as “either you are with us， or you are with the terrorists” eerily echoed the rhetoric of the Nazis and Soviets。 Soros worried， wisely， that Bush would lead the nation into “a permanent state of war” characterised by foreign intervention and domestic oppression。 The president was thus not only a threat to world peace， but also to the very idea of open society。
对索罗斯而言，例如”要不然和我们一头，要不然和恐怖主义一头“这种主张让人想到纳粹和苏联人的措辞，索罗斯睿智地担忧，布什会将国家引入”永久性战争状态“，对外干涉和对内压制成为常态。总统不仅对世界和平构成威胁，也对开放社会这种思想构成威胁。
Nevertheless， Soros was confident that Bush’s “extremist ideology” did not correspond “to the beliefs and values of the majority of Americans”， and he expected that John Kerry would win the 2004 presidential election。 Kerry’s victory， Soros anticipated， would spur “a profound reconsideration of America’s role in the world” that would lead citizens to reject unilateralism and embrace international cooperation。
然而，索罗斯相信，布什的”极端主义思想“不符合”大多数美国人的观念和价值’，他期待约翰·克里赢得2004年总统选举。索罗斯预测，克里胜利会引发“美国世界角色的深刻重置”，让公民们拒绝单边主义，拥抱国际合作。
But Kerry did not win， which forced the philanthropist to question， for the first time， ordinary Americans’ political acumen。 After the 2004 election， Soros underwent something like a crisis of faith。 In his 2006 book The Age of Fallibility， Soros attributed Bush’s re-election to the fact that the US was “a ‘feel-good’ society unwilling to face unpleasant reality”。
但克里没有获胜，这迫使这位慈善家头一次质疑普通美国人的政治水准。2004年大选后，索罗斯经历了某种信仰危机。2006年作品《易谬时代》中，索罗斯将布什的连任归因于美国是“自我感觉不错”的社会，不愿意面对“不愉快的事实”。
Americans， Soros avowed， would rather be “grievously misled by the Bush administration” than confront the failures of Afghanistan， Iraq and the war on terror head-on。 Because they were influenced by market fundamentalism and its obsession with “success”， Soros continued， Americans were eager to accept politicians’ claims that the nation could win something as absurd as a war on terror。
索罗斯宣称，美国宁愿“被布什政府可悲地误导”，也不愿面对阿富汗、伊拉克和正面反恐战争的失败。因为他们受到市场原教旨主义的影响，执迷于“成功”，索罗斯继续说，美国人太容易接受政客的说辞，即国家可以在反恐战争这种荒谬的行动中赢得什么东西。
Bush’s victory convinced Soros that the US would survive as an open society only if Americans began to acknowledge “that the truth matters”； otherwise， they would continue to support the war on terror and its concomitant horrors。 How Soros could change American minds， though， remained unclear。
布什的胜利让索罗斯相信，只有美国人开始承认“真相重要”，美国才能成为开放社会；否则，他们会继续支持反恐战争，并面对相伴随的恐惧。可索罗斯想如何改变美国人的思想，依然不得而知。
The financial crisis of 2007-2008 encouraged Soros to refocus on economics。 The collapse did not surprise him； he considered it the predictable consequence of market fundamentalism。 Rather， it convinced him that the world was about to witness， as he declared in his 2008 book The New Paradigm for Financial Markets， “the end of a long period of relative stability based on the US as the dominant power and the dollar as the main international reserve currency”。
2007年到2008年的金融危机鼓励索罗斯专注于经济学。崩盘并不让他吃惊，他认为这是市场原教旨主义的可预期后果。另外，危机让他相信世界将会发现，政府他2008年作品《金融市场新范式》中所言，“以超级大国美国和国际储备货币美元为基础的长时间的相对稳定阶段终结了”。
Anticipating American decline， Soros started to place his hopes for a global open society on the European Union， despite his earlier anger at the union’s members for failing to fully welcome eastern Europe in the 90s。 Though he admitted that the EU had serious problems， it was nevertheless an organisation in which nations voluntarily “agreed to a limited delegation of sovereignty” for the common European good。 It thus provided a regional model for a world order based on the principles of open society。
索罗斯预测美国会衰落，他开始把全球开放社会的希望放在欧盟，尽管他此前对欧盟未能在九十年代彻底接受欧洲而耿耿于怀。虽说他承认欧盟有严重问题，但毕竟是国家自愿为了欧洲的共好“同意放弃部分主权”的机构。因此，欧盟提供了基于开放社会原则的世界秩序的地区范本。
Soros’s hopes in the EU， however， were quickly dashed by three crises that undercut the union’s stability： the ever-deepening international recession， the refugee crisis， and Vladimir Putin’s revanchist assault on norms and international law。 While Soros believed western nations could theoretically mitigate these crises， he concluded that， in a repetition of the failures of the post-Soviet period， they were unlikely to band together to do so。
然而，索罗斯对欧盟的希望很快被三场危机破灭，这些危机危害了欧盟的稳定性，它们是不断恶化的国际经济衰退、难民危机和弗拉基米尔·普京对规则和国际法的报复式攻击。尽管索罗斯相信西方国家在理论上能够缓解这些危机，但他总结说，它们不可能携手这样做，这再现了后苏联世界的失败。
In the last 10 years， Soros has been disappointed by the facts that the west refused to forgive Greece’s debt； failed to develop a common refugee policy； and would not consider augmenting sanctions on Russia with the material and financial support Ukraine required to defend itself after Putin’s 2014 annexation of Crimea。 He was further disturbed that many nations in the EU， from the UK to Poland， witnessed the re-emergence of a rightwing ethnonationalism thought lost to history。
过去十年，索罗斯感到很失望，因为西方拒绝勾销希腊债务，未能提出共同的难民政策，也没有考虑加大对俄国的实质性制裁并支持乌克兰抵御普京在2014年兼并克里米亚。从英国到波兰，多个欧盟国家中被认为已经消失在历史尘埃中的右翼民族主义复燃，这让他感到更加不安。
Once Britain voted to leave the union in 2016， he became convinced that “the disintegration of the EU [was] practically irreversible”。 The EU did not serve as the model Soros hoped it would。
英国2016年投票退欧时，他相信“欧盟解体实际上不可避免”。欧盟并未成为索罗斯希望中的典范。
Soros experienced firsthand the racialised authoritarianism that in the last decade has threatened not only the EU， but democracy in Europe generally。 Since 2010， the philanthropist has repeatedly sparred with Viktor Orbán， the authoritarian， anti-immigrant prime minister of Hungary。
索罗斯亲身经历过极端化的威权主义，过去十年，那不仅威胁了欧盟，还威胁了欧洲的整体民主。2010年以来，这位慈善家同反对移民、主张威权主义的匈牙利总理欧尔班·维克托口角不断。
Recently， Soros accused Orbán of “trying to re-establish the kind of sham democracy that prevailed [in Hungary] in the period between the first and second world wars”。 In his successful re-election campaign earlier this year， Orbán spent much of his time on the campaign trail demonising Soros， playing on antisemitic tropes and claiming that Soros was secretly plotting to send millions of immigrants to Hungary。
最近，索罗斯指责维克托“试图重建（匈牙利）一战到二战之间的那种假民主”。当年早些时候，维克托成功连任，大选中不断诋毁索罗斯，玩弄反犹伎俩，宣称索罗斯密谋将数百万移民送入匈牙利。
Orbán has also threatened the Central European University – which his government derisively refers to as “the Soros university” – with closure， and last month parliament passed new anti-immigration legislation known as the “Stop Soros” laws。
维克托还威胁要关闭中欧大学，政府嘲笑大学是“索罗斯大学”。上个月，议会通过“阻止索罗斯”的反移民立法。
But while Orbán threatens Hungary’s open society， it is Donald Trump who threatens the open society writ large。 Soros has attributed Trump’s victory to the deleterious effects market fundamentalism and the Great Recession had on American society。
虽说维克托威胁了索罗斯的开放社会，威胁开放社会的唐纳德·特朗普才算大头。索罗斯认为特朗普的胜利，原因就是市场原教旨主义和大萧条对美国社会的有害影响。
In a December 2016 op-ed， Soros argued that Americans voted for Trump， “a con artist and would-be dictator”， because “elected leaders failed to meet voters’ legitimate expectations and aspirations [and] this failure led electorates to become disenchanted with the prevailing versions of democracy and capitalism”。
2016年发表的一篇评论文章中，索罗斯认为美国人投票支持“行骗艺术家和可能的独裁者”特朗普，因为“当选领导人未能满足选民的合理期待和渴望，这种失败让选民对现行的民主和资本主义感到幻灭”。
Instead of fairly distributing the wealth created by globalisation， Soros argued， capitalism’s “winners” failed to “compensate the losers”， which led to a drastic increase in domestic inequality – and anger。
全球化创造的财富未能得到公正分配，索罗斯说，资本主义的“赢家“未能”补偿输家“，这导致国内不平等的大幅增加，因此天怒人怨。
Though Soros believed that the US’s “Constitution and institutions … are strong enough to resist the excesses of the executive branch”， he worried that Trump would form alliances with Putin， Orbán and other authoritarians， which would make it near-impossible to build a global open society。
尽管索罗斯相信美国的“宪法和机制……足够强劲以抗拒管理层无度”，他担心特朗普会和普京、为托克托和其他威权主义者结成联盟，让构建全球开放社会几乎难以实现。
In Hungary， the US and many of the parts of the world that have attracted Soros’s attention and investment， it is clear that his project has stalled。
在吸引了索罗斯关注和投资的匈牙利、美国和世界很多地方，显而易见他的计划搁浅了。
Soros’s path ahead is unclear。 On one hand， some of Soros’s latest actions suggest he has moved in a left-wing direction， particularly in the areas of criminal justice reform and refugee aid.He recently created a fund to assist the campaign ofLarry Krasner， the radical Philadelphia district attorney， and backed three California district-attorney candidates similarly devoted to prosecutorial reform。 He has alsoinvested $500mto alleviate the global refugee crisis。
索罗斯前路不明。一方面，索罗斯最近的一些举动表明，他在走向左翼，尤其在刑事司法改革和难民援助等领域。他最近开立了一个基金，援助极端的费城地方检察官拉里·卡拉斯纳竞选，支持三名加州地方检察官候选人，他们都推行检察制度改革。他还投资5亿美元救济全球难民危机。
On the other hand， some of his behaviour indicates that Soros remains committed to a traditional Democratic party ill-equipped to address the problems that define our moment of crisis。 During the 2016 Democratic primary race， he was an avowed supporter of Hillary Clinton。
另一方面，他的一些举动表明，索罗斯依然忠于一个传统的民主党，而这个党没有办法解决当下危机带来的问题。2016年民主党初选中，他明确支持希拉里·克林顿。
And recently，he lambastedpotential Democratic presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand for urging Al Franken to resign due to his sexual harassment of the radio host Leeann Tweeden.If Soros continues to fund truly progressive projects， he will make a substantial contribution to the open society； but if he decides to defend banal Democrats， he will contribute to the ongoing degradation of American public life。
最近，他抨击民主党潜在总统候选人陆天娜，因为陆天娜要求艾尔·弗兰肯辞职，弗兰肯性骚扰了电台主播丽安娜·吐登。如果索罗斯继续支持真正的进步主义事业，他会为开放社会贡献良多；可如果他决定捍卫平庸的民主党人，他只会让美国公众生活每况愈下。
Throughout his career， Soros has made a number of wise and exciting interventions。 From a democratic perspective， though， this single wealthy person’s ability to shape public affairs is catastrophic。
索罗斯的职业生涯，创造了不少睿智和令人激动的事物，可从民主角度看，这位孤独的富翁，其塑造公共事务的能力堪称灾难。
Soros himself has recognised that “the connection between capitalism and democracy is tenuous at best”。 The problem for billionaires like him is what they do with this information。
索罗斯自己意识到“资本主义和民主之间的联系说好听点是脆弱的”。像他这种亿万富翁的问题在于他们使用这一信息做了什么。
The open society envisions a world in which everyone recognises each other’s humanity and engages each other as equals。 If most people are scraping for the last pieces of an ever-shrinking pie， however， it is difficult to imagine how we can build the world in which Soros – and， indeed， many of us – would wish to live。
开放社会想象了一个世界，其中所有人都认识到他人的人性并平等接触。可如果多数人都挤破脑袋争夺逐渐缩小的最后一块馅饼，很难想象我们如何构建索罗斯和我们很多人希望生活的那个世界。
Presently， Soros’s cosmopolitan dreams remain exactly that。 The question is why， and the answer might very well be that the open society is only possible in a world where no one – whether Soros， or Gates， or DeVos， or Zuckerberg， or Buffett， or Musk， or Bezos – is allowed to become as rich as he has。
现在，索罗斯的世界大同梦依然无处安放。问题是何以如此，而答案可能是，只能在一个索罗斯、盖茨、德沃斯、扎克伯格、巴菲特、马斯克或贝佐斯都不能和索罗斯如今这么富有的一个世界中，开放社会才可能存在。
本文作者系新浪国际旗下“地球日报”自媒体联盟成员，授权稿件，转载需获原作者许可。文章言论不代表新浪观点。
