即将到来的中期选举暴露出一种分歧——这种分歧的根源比任何政治政策或政党纲领都要深刻、更久远。在每一次辩论的背后,都隐藏着一个核心问题:你究竟信任谁来管理你的生活——是你自己,还是政府?共和党人的答案,就是他们最后的论据。
The coming midterms lay bare a divide that runs deeper than policy and older than any party platform. Beneath every debate sits a single question, and it is the question on which this election turns: Who do you trust to run your life, you or the government? House Republicans' answer is our closing argument.
目前的共和党多数派于 2025 年 1 月进入国会,并在接下来的 20 个月里一直在努力回答这个问题。在乔·拜登总统执政期间,有数十万非法移民通过美国西南边境涌入美国;我们果断关闭了边境,从而实现了美国现代史上最严密的边境管控。如今,德克萨斯州埃尔帕索市的家庭再也不用担心夜间有移民在街头游荡了。自 2020 年以来,我们首次为执法部门提供了足够的资金和支持,这使得暴力犯罪率大幅下降。现在,芝加哥的一位母亲可以放心地让儿子放学后在外面玩耍。
The current Republican majority arrived in Congress in January 2025 and spent the next 20 months answering that question. After record highs of hundreds of thousands of illegals streaming over the southwest border into the country under President Joe Biden, we’ve slammed the door shut. We now have the most secure border in modern American history. Families in El Paso, Texas no longer worry about migrants roaming the streets at night. We’ve funded and empowered law enforcement for the first time since 2020, resulting in the largest recorded drop in violent crime in FBI history. Now a mother in Chicago can let her son play outside after school without worry.
根据最新民意调查,令人震惊的是:有相当比例的民主党人将自己视为“民主社会主义者”;他们指责我们的政策具有“破坏性”。我们推出的“工作家庭减税计划”为美国中产阶级带来了历史上最大的减税幅度,将税收真正返还给了那些应得的人——那些通过辛勤工作赚取收入的人。通过实施“小费免税”、“加班免税”以及对老年人的税收优惠,共和党真正把钱交到了那些辛勤工作的人手中(比如那些完成双班工作的女服务员、一线工人以及为这个国家付出了一生努力的退休人员)。
SHOCKING PERCENTAGE OF DEMOCRATS IDENTIFY AS 'DEMOCRATIC SOCIALISTS' ACCORDING TO NEW POLL: 'TOXIC POLICIES' The Working Families Tax Cuts delivered the largest tax cut for the middle class in American history, putting money where it belongs: back in the pockets of those who earned it. By delivering "No Tax on Tips," "No Tax on Overtime" and a tax break for seniors. Republicans put real money back into the hands of the waitress closing out a double shift, the lineman working and the retiree who spent a lifetime building this country.
我们减轻了华盛顿政府的负担,将其规模缩减到了 1966 年以来的最小水平。我们废除了那些导致汽车和许多家电价格上涨的繁琐官僚程序,为有抱负的美国人提供了创业所需的便利条件。这就是“小政府”带来的实际成效。我们的成就建立在这样一个信念之上:自由的人们,只要被给予机会去创造,就一定能够创造出值得珍惜的东西。
We lifted Washington's weight off your backs, shrinking the federal government to its smallest level since 1966. We rolled back red tape that drove up the price of a car and many appliances and stood between ambitious Americans and the businesses they dreamed of starting. That is what small government with big results looks like. Our record rests on a conviction the Founders would immediately recognize: Free people, left alone to build, will build something worth keeping.
对方的立场同样明确:一些知名的民主党人士要求削减对警察的经费支持;他们公然主张废除参议院、操纵最高法院的决策过程,并剥夺公民根据美国宪法第二修正案所享有的权利。当“工作家庭减税法案”提交表决时,国会中的所有民主党人都投了反对票——他们实际上是在试图从民众的口袋里榨取更多的钱。这根本不是政府在为民众服务,而是华盛顿在明目张胆地掠夺民众的财富,却还美其名曰“提供帮助”。
The other side makes its convictions just as plain. Prominent Democrats demand that we defund the police. Democrats speak openly of abolishing the Senate, packing the Supreme Court and stripping away Second Amendment rights. When the Working Families Tax Cuts came to a vote, every Democrat in Congress opposed them, voting to take more money out of your pocket. That’s not government serving its people; that’s Washington grabbing your wallet with both hands and calling it help.
民主党的这些主张源于他们认为“政府应该凌驾于个人之上”的信念;这种观念在“美国民主党社会主义者”(Democratic Socialists of America, DSA)这一组织中得到了进一步的发展。DSA主张对经济的主要部分实行集体所有制,并致力于推动更多社会主义者上台执政;他们的最终目标是彻底废除资本主义制度。
The Democrats’ ideas grow from the belief that government belongs above the individual, an idea that found fertile soil in the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). The DSA calls for collective ownership of major parts of the economy, and works to elect more socialists. Its goal is the end of capitalism.
布兰登·吉尔(Brandon Gill)严厉批评了那些支持被指控强奸青少年的非法移民的民主党人士,称他们的行为只是“附带损害”罢了。你可能会认为DSA只是美国一个无足轻重的小组织,但事实并非如此:DSA实际上是一个拥有超过12万名成员的全国性政治组织;目前,全国有超过250名民主党官员得到了DSA的支持。民主党已经与这个激进组织紧密地绑在了一起。我们必须清楚地认识到DSA的真实目标。
BRANDON GILL UNLOADS ON DEMOCRATS OVER ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT CHARGED WITH RAPING TEEN: 'COLLATERAL DAMAGE' You might think the DSA is some marginal group in this country. Unfortunately, you’d be wrong. This is a national organization with more than 120,000 members. More than 250 DSA-backed Democrats hold office across the country today. The Democratic Party is fully locked in with the radical group. We should be clear-eyed about the DSA’s goal.
社会主义和共产主义其实是一对“孪生恶魔”——它们都坚信必须信任一个拥有至高权力的中央政府。事实上,社会主义只是通往共产主义的必经阶段。卡尔·马克思在1875年发表的《哥达纲领批判》以及弗拉基米尔·列宁在1917年撰写的《国家与革命》中都明确指出:社会主义只是向共产主义过渡的第一个阶段。而历史也一再警示我们:一旦这个过渡完成,将会发生什么可怕的事情……在古巴的哈瓦那,这座曾经辉煌的城市里,那些色彩柔和的豪宅如今已在盐雾中逐渐消融、变得破败不堪。从太空中俯瞰,朝鲜宛如一片漆黑的区域——尽管那里居住着数百万人民,却毫无生机与光芒。在20世纪70至80年代的苏联,人们常常在冬夜中站在商店外等待;那些商店的货架早在顾客到达之前就已经被洗劫一空。
Socialism and communism are twin evils, bound by a shared conviction that a central, all-powerful government must be trusted. In fact, socialism is a waypoint on the road to communism. Both Karl Marx’s 1875 "Critique of the Gotha Programme" and Vladimir Lenin’s 1917 "The State and Revolution" make clear that socialism is the first phase of a social transition to communism. And history offers many warnings about what happens after that transition. In Havana, Cuba, the pastel mansions of a once-glittering city have spent six decades dissolving into the salt air. Seen from orbit at night, North Korea is a vast patch of darkness where a nation of millions ought to be glowing. In the Soviet Union in the 1970s and 1980s, people stood for hours in the winter dark outside shops whose shelves had been stripped long before they reached the door.
森·汤姆·科顿(Sen Tom Cotton)指出:民主党人声称社会主义能够带来希望,但历史却证明社会主义只会带来灾难。每次社会主义被宣传为“天堂”——承诺为所有劳动者实现经济平等、让人们摆脱资本主义的邪恶冲动时,结局总是相同的:人们被迫压抑自己的声音,以免因批评专制政府而受到惩罚;城市陷入黑暗,人们不得不排长队等待微薄的食物来维持生计。
SEN TOM COTTON: DEMOCRATS SAY SOCIALISM WILL HELP. HISTORY SAYS IT WILL HURT Each time the promise was paradise, financial equality for all working men and women, an escape from capitalism’s worst impulses. Each time the ending arrived in the same form. It came in neighborhoods where people had learned to lower their voices to avoid punishment for criticizing the all-powerful government. It came in cities where no one expected the lights to come back on. It came in lines formed where families waited for hours for meager subsistence for the dinner table.
这是一场违背常识的冲突——一方坚持历史与责任的约束;另一方则选择无视整个历史,拥抱一种完全摒弃了美国社会核心价值(即人的主体性/能动性的)政治理念。
This is a conflict with common sense and the burden of history and responsibility on one side. And on the other is a group of individuals prepared to ignore the whole of history to embrace a politics that sets aside the element that has always underpinned the American experiment: human agency.
250年来,我们始终紧紧守护着这种美好的个人主义精神。这正是美国革命背后的愿景,也是这个国家诞生的根本动力。无论是在废除奴隶制的战争中、在吞噬了穷人和中产阶级的大萧条中、在分裂国家的越南战争中、在令人震惊的恐怖袭击中,还是在多次科技革命中,我们始终依靠这一理想前行。在所有这些艰难时刻,人类自由的理想始终如明灯般照亮了我们的道路,成为我们在最黑暗时刻的指引。
We’ve clung tight to that beautiful individualism through 250 years. That’s the vision behind the Revolution that birthed this country. We’ve leaned on that ideal through a war fought to end the evil of slavery, a Great Depression that swallowed the poor and middle class, a war in Indochina that ripped the country apart, a stunning and catastrophic terror attack and multiple technological revolutions. Through it all, the radical ideal of human liberty has stayed lit like a lighthouse a ship finds on the darkest nights.
任何容得下共产主义的政党,都不是服务于这个国家建国立基之梦的政党——这个梦想是建立一个由自我治理引导的公民社会。对比正是从这一点变得清晰无误。
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION Any party that has room for communism is not a party that serves the dream this country was founded on, the dream of a citizenry guided by self-rule. And that is where the contrast becomes unmistakable.
美国建立在一个大胆而激进的思想之上:信任个人。这是我们宪法的全部基础。这一信念正是这个国家的遗产留给我们的全部财富。我们至今仍生活在这份遗产之中,而摆在我们面前的问题是:我们究竟打算保留它,还是把它 exchanged away for something sinister:由政府来管理我们的生活。如果我们在这个问题上犯错,也许有朝一日醒来会发现,历史本身,那个东西本身,终于找上了我们。
America was built on the radical idea of trust in the individual. That’s the entire basis for our Constitution. That conviction is the whole inheritance handed down to us by this nation’s legacy. We are still living inside that inheritance, and the question before us is whether we intend to keep it or trade it away for something sinister: government managing our lives for us. If we get this wrong, we may someday awaken to find that history, the thing itself, has come for us at long last.