台灣建州運動的基本信念與核心信仰: 美國秀異主義(American Exceptionalism)

台灣建州運動的基本信念與核心信仰: 美國秀異主義(American Exceptionalism)
一

由於7/25/2014的「紐約時報」在頭版(A1)及A3版全版(除了廣告之外)刊登與報導印度裔的美國保守派陣營的聞人Dinesh D’Souza的消息[網路版的報導在7/24/2014出現]，所以我們今天要藉這個機會，再度重點式地向我們的朋友們、台灣與台美鄉親們、及建州運動的工作者與支持者，介紹一個主題--------美國秀異主義(American Exceptionalism)。

對台灣建州運動與帶有使命的美國知識份子與政治工作者來說，美國秀異主義是美國政治文化的精髓與核心，美國之所以為美國，美國人之所以為美國人，對美國秀異主義的存在的承認與實踐是充分且必要的條件。套前Arkansas州的州長Mike Huckabee的話說: “To deny American exceptionalism is in essence to deny the heart and soul of this nation.(若否認或拒絕美國秀異主義，本質上就是拒絕美國這個國家的心靈與靈魂)，這句話說得直接而坦率，也說得再好不過。

二

什麼是美國秀異主義(American Exceptionalism)?簡單地說，就是承認與相信美國人是由上帝所揀選的一個族群，美國在人類社會與人類歷史中有特殊的位置與地位，它有特殊的使命或天命，它是現代文明、和平、進步、繁榮、人類福祉、民主、自由、人權、法治的締造者與推動者，沒有美國與美國人的努力，萬古將如長夜，人類與人類的文明將會倒退，人類的歷史將會黑暗，沒有美國的力量與介入，世界的和平將無法促進或維繫，用比較正面的語言來表述，它是人類最後最好的希望，是人類自由的燈塔，它是捍衛民主的長城，它是鋤強扶弱、濟弱扶傾的騎士國家，它為世人鏟除邪惡帝國與流氓政權，它以它的形象來幫助世界各國人民來再造他們自己的國家，並努力使自己的國家成為文明國際社會的負責任的成員。

美國秀異主義在每個時代會有不同的表述 ，例如，在早期，有「美國天命」(Manifest Destiny)的說法，在柯林頓時代，則出現美國是「不可或缺的國家」(indispensable nation)的表述。

Dinesh D Souza在今年(2014年)6月出版了一本書 ，書名叫 America: Imagine a World Without Her (「美國:想像一個沒有它的世界」)。這本書在過去是Amazon排名第一的暢銷書，目前在紐約時報則是非小說類排名第二的暢銷書，在其他平台上的排名則不一，但大致說來，都還能排在前十五名之內。從這本書的標題，我們不難知道作者是在宣揚美國秀異主義，他要告訴世人的是，一個沒有美國的世界或者一個美國無意介入的世界會是一個失序的、倒退的、恐怖的、黑暗的、俄羅斯與中國會為惡與猖狂的世界。


三

「美國秀異主義」這個 命題，有很多值得介紹與闡釋的地方，今天發表的這一篇只是一個開端。

四

基本上，歐巴馬的意識形態似乎有些偏離「美國秀異主義」的正軌或常軌，特別或至少在他入主白宮的前兩年。若與雷跟總統相比，歐巴馬似乎顯得有點”un-American”。

在美國，我們若說某某人”un-American”或某某人是「共產黨人」，這是很嚴重的指控，所以我們不會也沒有理由給歐巴馬貼上 un-American”的標籤，我們只能說，「基本上，歐巴馬的意識形態似乎有些偏離『美國秀異主義』的正軌，特別或至少在他入主白宮的前兩、三年。若與雷跟總統相比，歐巴馬似乎顯得有點 un-American。」

在我看來，秉持「美國秀異主義」的雷根這一類型的總統是巨人，而偏離或不強調「美國秀異主義」的美國總統、知識份子或菁英則只是侏儒，後面這一類型的美國人讓美國變成或淪為與其他國家無異的「一般國家」或「平庸國家」。

關於歐巴馬，我也許得提醒大家一件事，這樣對他才公平些: 他上台時，從小布希那裡繼承的是一個還在打兩場戰爭、人民厭戰、孤立主義高漲、戰費有如天文數字、國債高築、金融秩序殘破的美國，所以他若把注意力轉向國內，勤修內政，在國際間走動時，採取低調的策略，對外示好，這應該是可以被理解的。

我們現在來讀若干年前「洛杉磯時報」的一篇報導



By James Kirchick
Los Angeles Times
April 28, 2009

At a stop on his grand global apology tour this spring, President Obama was asked by a reporter in France if he believed in "American exceptionalism." This is the notion that our history as the world's oldest democracy, our immigrant founding and our devotion to liberty endow the United States with a unique, providential role in world affairs. [在歐巴馬上任的第一年的 春季，他展開了全球性的道歉之旅，在他訪問法國時，有一名記者問他，是否相信「美國秀異主義」。「美國秀異主義」這個概念，在傳統上傳達了幾個訊息: 即美國是世界上歷史最悠久的民主政體，美國是一個由移民建立的國家，美國對自由的奉獻讓它在世界事務上有一個特異的與被上帝賦予的角色。]

Rather than endorse the proposition -- as every president in recent memory has done one way or another -- Obama offered a strange response: "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."[ 歐巴馬沒有跟我們記憶所及的每任總統一樣，他沒有以某種形式或方式為「美國秀異主義」這個命題或概念背書，他提供了一個很奇怪的答覆: 我相信「美國秀異主義」，就如同我猜想不列巔人相信「大不列巔秀異主義」以及希臘人相信「希臘秀異主義」一樣。]

This is impossible. If all countries are "exceptional," then none are, and to claim otherwise robs the word, and the idea of American exceptionalism, of any meaning. Besides, American exceptionalism is demonstrable -- Cuban journalists, Chinese political dissidents, Eastern Europeans once again living in the shadow of a belligerent Russia and, yes, even some Brits and Greeks look toward the U.S. and nowhere else to defend freedom. [歐巴馬這種說法是鬼扯淡，如果所有國家都是秀異的，那麼就沒有任何國家是秀異的。他這種奇怪的說法，讓「美國秀異主義」這個命題失去了意義，同時讓「美國秀異主義」失去了典範或垂範的作用， ---Read More--- 讓全世界自由與民主的嚮往者失去了美國這個精神上的祖國，讓古巴的媒體人、中國的政治異議者、現在仍在好戰的俄羅斯的陰影之下的東歐人失去了希望，是的，讓我們這麼說，甚至是今天，仍有些不列巔人與希臘人仍然認為只有美國才能協助他們捍衛自由。]

Viewed within the context of the first 100 days of his presidency, Obama's nonsensical statement is part of a disturbing pattern. Since swearing the oath of office, our president has traveled the world criticizing his predecessor, confessing America's supposed sins and otherwise flagellating the nation he leads on the altar of international "public opinion."

Obama delivered his first collective mea culpa on our behalf in an interview with the Arab Al Arabiya television network, in which he said that he hoped to "restore" the "same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago." (Would that be when Iranian revolutionaries held our embassy hostage for 444 days?) Obama neglected to identify what exactly had caused the rift between the United States and the "Muslim world," leaving his audience to believe that Islamic radicalism is as much our fault as it is of the Islamic radicals themselves.

But that was a mild beginning. Obama waited to ramp up the apologetics until his first trip overseas. In Strasbourg, France, he said the United States had "failed to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world" and that "there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive." Never mind the questionable basis of these statements (even if Europe played a "leading role in the world," which it hasn't since nearly destroying itself 60 years ago, how have Americans "failed to appreciate" it?). More troubling was the impropriety of Obama's willingness to attack President George W. Bush in an obvious gambit to curry favor with Europeans.

Not content with faulting Americans for their arrogance (in France, no less!), Obama delivered a speech in Prague days later where he offered a not-so-subtle apology for America's use of nuclear weapons in World War II. "As the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act" in furtherance of total disarmament, he said.

Yet the use of the atomic bomb in ending the war with Japan saved hundreds of thousands of lives, and America's possession of nuclear weapons prevented the Cold War from becoming bloodier. More unsettling, however, was the implication that the U.S., and not regimes that have illicitly sought such technology, is at fault for nuclear proliferation.

Obama apologized some more in Turkey. "I know that the trust that binds us has been strained, and I know that strain is shared in many places where the Muslim faith is practiced. Let me say this as clearly as I can: The United States is not at war with Islam."

Here, Obama seamlessly joined the Bush administration's irritation at Ankara's refusal to allow American troops' passage to Iraq with the bogus claim that the United States has, until Obama's presence in the White House, been "at war with Islam," an assertion that essentially (and falsely) blames Bush for declaring such a war.

When not establishing false premises about the previous administration (the easier to glorify his own) or apologizing for his country, Obama has shown unusual deference to autocrats. At the Summit of the Americas, he calmly sat through a 50-minute anti-American tirade by the communist leader of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, and was disturbingly ebullient in glad-handing Venezuelan autocrat Hugo Chavez. There's nothing wrong with the president participating in a multilateral summit where criticism, even egregiously unfair criticism, of the U.S. is expressed. But if he can sit and take verbal abuse from Latin American demagogues, then surely speaking a little truth in response to their lies is appropriate.

五

最後，我們來請鄉親們、朋友們及同志們來閱讀前幾天「紐約時報」那則關於Dinesh D Souza的報導，我無法把全文譯成漢文[我真希望我能有時間做翻譯]，但我選擇了我認為是重點的部分譯成漢文，幫助不習慣閱讀英文的鄉親們來了解。

我們推崇Dinesh對「美國秀異主義」的肯定與傳揚，但對他違反政治獻金法那一部分，我們沒有要替他包庇或辯護。他過去幾年來不斷挖Obama的老底與瘡疤，以至於Obama與他成為不共戴天的仇敵，歐巴馬若要藉司法來報老鼠冤、整Dinesh的冤枉或搞臭Dinesh，實在也不難理解 。

Heady Summer, Fateful Fall for Dinesh D’Souza, a Conservative Firebrand”
By Jonathan Mahler
New York Times
JULY 25, 2014

In June [2014], he [Dinesh D Souza] published, America: Imagine a World Without Her, which spent a week as the No. 1 book on Amazon, and is currently No. 2 on the New York Times nonfiction best-seller list.

In July, he released a companion film, which has grossed more than $12 million, already roughly the same as the total of such well-known documentaries as “Hoop Dreams” and “Roger & Me, counting inflation.

But in September, he will stand before a judge in a Manhattan courtroom and face a possible prison term after pleading guilty earlier this year to a violation of campaign-finance laws.

The whole experience has been undoubtedly traumatic, Mr. D Souza said of his prosecution. But Im determined not to let it deter me.

Even with the prospect of jail time looming, Mr. D Souza has emerged as the right-wing media star of the moment, a seemingly constant presence on talk radio and Fox News. During the run-up to the film s release, he appeared at screenings across the country, arriving, rock-star style, on a tour bus emblazoned with a giant image of his face.

Animating both the book and film is Mr. D Souza s claim that America is under attack from within and that the enemy is its own government, as well as its progressive collaborators in Hollywood, academia and the mainstream media. In Mr. D Souza s telling, their goal is to undermine the country s self-image and standing by replacing the narrative of American greatness and exceptionalism with one of guilt and shame. [D Souza認為，美國被從內部攻擊---而它的敵人正是  美國政府[註: 他當然是指歐巴馬政權]以及美國政府在好萊塢、學術界與主流媒體的同謀。根據D Souza的說法，他們的目標是:要以罪惡及恥辱來取代美國的偉大及秀異主義的說法，來危害美國的自我形象與地位。[註: 關於這一點，建州運動不予置評] ]

Mr. D Souza has long been known as a conservative provocateur, but his latest incarnation as a right-wing Michael Moore represents a significant departure for a man who was once seen as the next William F. Buckley Jr.[Dinesh曾被視為是美國下一個William F. Buckley, Jr.，William是美國保守派評論家與作家，對美國的保守運動與陣營產生巨大的影響]His success as a documentarian has also opened up the possibility of a new medium for conservatives, one that has mostly been dominated by liberals.

Mr. D Souza s surging popularity stems in part from his background. Born and raised in India, he graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Dartmouth and has been affiliated with some of the country’s most respected conservative think tanks.

Both his book and the film are rife with controversial assertions. How, for example, did Obama get elected as a complete unknown? Mr. D Souza asks in the book.There is a one-word answer: slavery. Americas natio nal guilt over slavery continues to benefit Obama, who ironically is not himself descended from slaves.

Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the House and co-host of CNN s “Crossfire, says Mr. D Souza s roots and scholarly bona fides give him “credibility” in right-wing circles. “A lot of conservatives feel comfortable being told things by Dinesh that they might not exactly feel comfortable being told by someone else,” he said.

After Dartmouth, Mr. D Souza worked at the Policy Review, a conservative journal in Washington, before joining the Reagan administration in 1988 as an adviser. His first book, Illiberal Education,” published in 1991, was at the center of a debate over so-called political correctness on America s college campuses.
Since then, however, Mr. D Souza s career has taken a series of unexpected turns. His views have drawn criticism not only from the left but also from the right. His 2007 book, The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, ignited outrage among some conservatives, who considered its thesis captured succinctly in the subtitle not only deeply flawed but irresponsible. [Dinesh在2007年出版的一本著作---內部的敵人:文化左翼與它在9/11事件中的責任---點燃了一些保守派人士的憤怒。那些保守派人士認為他的觀點---被濃縮在著作的副標題中---不但有很嚴重的缺陷，而且也是不負責任的。] And in 2012, Mr. D Souza abruptly resigned as president of King s College, a Christian school in Manhattan, after it surfaced that he was involved with a woman who was not his wife.,

Mr. D Souza, 53, said his foray into filmmaking began after a talk with the billionaire Joe Ricketts, a major donor to right-wing causes.

According to Mr. D Souza, Mr. Ricketts was taken with his 2010 book, The Roots of Obama s Rage, and wanted more Americans to be exposed to its thesis, which argues that Obama is carrying out the anticolonial agenda of his Kenyan father.



You have to make a movie,” Mr. D Souza replied.

The result was Mr. D Souza s first film, 2016: Obama s America, which was released during the 2012 campaign and is currently the second-highest-grossing political documentary of all time, behind only Mr. Moore s Fahrenheit 9/11. Mr. Ricketts invested in 2016: Obama s America, but not in the most recent film.

In the process of becoming one of the most influential voices on the right, Mr. D Souza has alienated a number of the conservative intellectuals who once looked up to him. Some accuse him of cynically using his academic credentials to advance false, reductive ideas in order to sell books and movie tickets. [在成為美國右翼最有影響力的聲音之一的過程中，Dinesh疏離了一些過去曾仰仗他勇敢發聲的保守派知識份子。]

He was the all-star, the guy every student aspired to be, said James Panero, who graduated from Dartmouth in 1998 and is now executive editor of The New Criterion, a conservative literary journal. “But I think the rewards of playing to the crowd, of throwing out red meat, have become too great.

In a sense, Mr. D Souza s trajectory is emblematic of a broader shift in the conservative movement. The policy journals and think tanks that once played a key role in shaping conservative thought have been marginalized by the grass-roots populism of talk radio, Fox News, local political movements and now, perhaps, documentary films.

The idea that American politics is made by a kind of professional elite was always a bit dubious and is becoming less and less true,” said Mr. D’Souza.

A little controversy has also helped raise Mr. D Souza s profile. Costco carried his new book when it was first published, but decided to drop it several weeks later. The move provoked an outcry on the right, which accused the retailer of political censorship; the company’s co-founder, James D. Sinegal, is a major Democratic supporter.

Costco insisted that the decision had nothing to do with the book;s author. We dont do things based on political beliefs,said Richard A. Galanti, the company&s chief financial officer.The book wasnt selling well, so we decided to pull it.

Regardless, Mr. D Souza exploited the opportunity, taking to Fox News, radio and Twitter to accuse the retailer of trying to silence him. The interest generated by the ensuing furor, coupled with the release of the companion film, drove up sales, prompting Costco to restock the book.

Mr. D Souza also spied political motives behind his campaign-finance prosecution. Earlier this year, Preet Bharara, the United States attorney in Manhattan, announced criminal charges against Mr. D Souza, accusing him of skirting contribution limits by arranging to have two people donate $10,000 each to the Senate campaign of a friend, with the understanding that he would reimburse them.
His lawyers accused the Justice Department of singling out Mr. D’Souza because of his condemnation of Mr. Obama a claim the government vehemently denied. Mr. D Souza pleaded guilty in May and faces up to two years in prison.

THE CRIMINAL INDICTMENT MAKES A BRIEF APPEARANCE NEAR THE END OF MR. DSOUZA S NEW FILM. HARVEY A. SILVERGLATE, A LAWYER AND OUTSPOKEN CRITIC OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, EXPLAINS THAT ON A NORMAL DAY, THE AVERAGE AMERICAN DOES THREE THINGS THAT COULD BE DEEMED FELONIES BY SOME AMBITIOUS DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE PROSECUTOR. SOON AFTER, MR. D SOUZA TELLS THE STORY OF THE INTERNET FOLK HERO AARON SWARTZ, WHO COMMITTED SUICIDE LAST YEAR AFTER BEING CHARGED WITH COMPUTER FRAUD.

Enter Mr. D Souza, in handcuffs: “the latest victim to be targeted by the Obama White House, says the voice-over from the Fox News host Sean Hannity.

Where will they stop? Mr. D Souza asks. At the point where we stop them.”

(A version of this article appears in print on July 25, 2014, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Heady Summer, Fateful Fall for a Conservative Firebrand.)

六

在台灣加入美國之後，我們希望做為美國公民的台灣人都能認同與繼承美國秀異主義，把美國在人類歷史與世界的天命一肩扛起來，要效法美國先賢，為人類與世界打倒、鏟除或改造邪惡帝國與流氓政權。

台灣建州運動發起人周威霖
David C. Chou
Founder, Formosa Statehood Movement
(an organization devoted in current stage to making Taiwan a territorial commonwealth of the United States)