如何看待特朗普的口無遮攔 An appetite for aggression

Five years ago, I was part of a discussion panel on the popular Morning Joe talk show in the US when the issue of Donald Trump came up. A rowdy debate erupted and I cheerfully joked that Trump was a great businessman “barring a few bankruptcies” — and blessed with charisma even “with that hairpiece”. A few minutes later, Trump telephoned the show and demanded an on-air apology. Apparently, he was not just upset about the bankruptcy quip (he wanted to clarify that he has never personally gone bankrupt but “only” seen some of his companies go bust); he was also angry about the hair joke.

5年前，我參加了美國高人氣脫口秀《Morning Joe》的一場小組討論，話題之一是唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)。激烈的辯論隨即爆發，我樂呵呵地開玩笑稱，特朗普是一位偉大的商人，“除了幾次破產”，並且具有與生俱來的領袖風采，即使是“戴着假髮”。幾分鐘後，特朗普給節目組打來電話，要求我們在節目中公開道歉。顯然，他不僅是對破產的段子不滿（他希望澄清他個人從未破產，“只是”經歷了幾次公司破產）；他還對假髮的玩笑滿腔怒火。

So, as we sat around the table on the TV set, one of the show’s hosts read a straight-faced legal apology to camera. “He might sue,” a reporter later explained to me, as I squirmed with embarrassment and wondered whether to laugh or cry.

因此，我們在節目中圍坐在桌旁，一名主持人對着攝像機板着臉宣讀了法律道歉。“他可能會起訴，”一名記者後來跟我解釋稱，而我尷尬地扭來扭去，不知道該笑還是該哭。

Until recently, I viewed this episode as just an example of how thin-skinned some tycoons can be (and a sign that I need to take more care with early-morning hair jokes — for which I apologise, Mr Trump). But, these days, that little exchange is assuming more sinister undertones. For as the Trump bandwagon continues to gather pace, one of the most notable features of his campaign is the extraordinary level of aggression he displays towards his critics. And that raises big questions, not only about Trump’s temperament but also over the nature of political discourse in the age of social media.

直到不久以前，我只把這段插曲當成一個表明某些大亨的臉皮有多薄的例子，（以及我在一大清早說有關頭髮的笑話時應該多加小心的教訓——我謹此道歉，特朗普先生）。但是，這些天來，那次小交鋒傳遞出一些更爲惡劣的意味。因爲，隨着特朗普的人氣日益高漲，他在競選時最顯著的一個特點就是他對批評者表現出的攻擊性。這引發了一些大問題，不僅關乎特朗普的性情，還關乎社交媒體時代政治話語的性質。

One big issue — as I discovered — is that Trump is a notoriously litigious person who inspires fear by threatening to sue. When the journalist Timothy O’Brien wrote his book TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald a decade ago, Trump embarked on a $5bn lawsuit. Despite losing that, he shows no sign of losing his taste for legal threats: last Friday, he declared that America needed to “open up” (that is, tighten) its libel laws, and warned that news organisations such as The New York Times and Washington Post will “have problems” if he wins.

如我所見，其中一個問題是，特朗普出名地愛打官司，他通過威脅起訴讓別人心生恐懼。10年前，當記者蒂莫西•奧布萊恩(Timothy O’Brien)寫《特朗普國度：成爲特朗普的藝術》(TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald)一書時，特朗普發起了一宗50億美元的訴訟案。儘管他敗訴了，但是他並未表現出放棄法律威脅手段的跡象：不久前，他宣稱美國需要“放開”（意思是收緊）誹謗法律，並警告稱，如果他入主白宮，《紐約時報》(New York Times)和《華盛頓郵報》(Washington Post)等新聞機構將會“有麻煩”。

However, another issue — which is ironic given his views on libel — is that Trump hurls insults at others with unusual venom. Last week, The New York Times assembled a list of the “People, Places and Things Donald Trump Has Insulted on Twitter” in recent months — it ran to 199 subjects, including numerous prominent journalists, politicians and world leaders, many of whom were derided as “dummies”, “dopes” or “dishonest”.

然而，另一個問題——考慮到他對誹謗的看法，這頗具諷刺性——是特朗普熱衷於以異常惡毒的方式攻擊他人。不久前，《紐約時報》彙集了一個包含最近數月“唐納德•特朗普在Twitter上攻擊的人、地和事”的列表——199個被攻擊對象，包括衆多知名記者、政界人士和世界領袖，其中很多人被特朗普嘲笑爲“傻瓜”、“笨蛋”或“不老實”。

That is unpleasant in itself. But what makes it doubly pernicious is the presence of a cyber echo chamber: whenever Trump hurls an insult, it is amplified in cyberspace by his 6.5 million Twitter followers, creating a social-media storm. A couple of weeks ago, Trump criticised Cheri Jacobus, a Republican strategist who spoke negatively about him on TV; the comment was then retweeted in more extreme forms, creating a phenomenon akin to the type of cyber bullying more normally seen in school — you might call it a cyber flash mob.

他的這個特點本身就令人不爽。但是，更加可惡的是特朗普的網絡應聲蟲：無論特朗普何時開口辱罵，他的650萬Twitter粉絲都會在網絡上放大那些惡言惡語的火力，在社交媒體上掀起一場風暴。數週前，特朗普向在電視上負面評價他的共和黨策略顧問謝里•雅各布斯(Cheri Jacobus)發難；他的言論隨後以更極端的形式被轉發，製造了一場通常在校園比較常見的那種網絡欺凌——你或許可以稱之爲“網絡快閃族”。

Of course, this is not unique to @realDonaldTrump. Cyber flash mobs have erupted around other political campaigns too. And, in practical terms, it seems that while Trump’s verbal abuse has attracted some supporters (it makes him seem “strong”), many other voters are simply screening this language out or assuming that it is a short-term marketing tactic that will fade over time.

當然，這並非@realDonaldTrump的獨有現象。網絡快閃族也會出現在其他政治陣營中。此外，就實際而言，儘管特朗普的語言暴力吸引了一些支持者（讓他看起來“很強悍”），但是其他很多選民只是自動屏蔽了那些辱罵，或是認爲這只是短期的營銷手段，會隨着時間流逝而淡出。

Even if Trump tones down his speech in the future — and it’s a big “if” — the pattern of aggression has at least four implications. First, the litigation threats may help to explain why there has not been a more thorough media analysis of Trump’s complex business past — at least, not until now. Second, his aggression also helps to explain why Republican donors and party leaders have been relatively slow to criticise him in public.

即使特朗普未來收斂其言語風格——這只是可能性很低的假設而已——其咄咄逼人的姿態至少還有4層潛在影響。第一，訴訟威脅或許有助於解釋爲何媒體還沒有對特朗普在商場的複雜歷史進行更深入的分析——至少之前沒有。第二，他的好鬥也可以解釋共和黨的“金主”以及該黨領袖爲何遲遲不願公開批評他。

Third, Trump’s scathing attacks on the media also make it harder for journalists to empathise with citizens who do support him; that is yet another factor why the media have underestimated his potential rise.

第三，特朗普對媒體的猛烈攻擊也使得記者很難與那些支持他的公民產生共鳴；這也是媒體此前低估他領跑潛力的另一個因素。

But the fourth, and biggest, matter centres not on Trump — but on the issue of cyberspace. The limits of free speech in print and television have long been established. But what is still unclear is what is acceptable in cyberspace. Should a political leader try to control a cyber flash mob? Or must they stoke it up to win? In other words, in today’s world, is it inevitable that cyber and real speech reinforce and amplify each other, creating a spiral of vitriol?

不過，第四層（也是最重要的）潛在影響並不關乎特朗普，而在於網絡問題。紙媒和電視節目言論自由的尺度存在已久。但是網絡言論自由的可接受限度尚不明確。政治領袖應該試圖控制網絡快閃族嗎？抑或他們必須煽動起網絡快閃族才能贏得選舉？換句話說，在當今世界，網絡言論和現實言論相互強化並放大、造成語言暴力不斷升級，這是否不可避免？

I hope the answer to that last question is “no”. But we live in very angry — and uneasy — times. Which is precisely why it is so important to uphold the principles of a free press and civilised speech, even in the face of political attack. And celebrate the value of free laughter; about Trump’s (real) hair — or anything else.

我希望最後一個問題的答案是“不”。但是我們正生活在一個充滿戾氣和不安的時代。這正是堅持新聞自由和文明言論（即使是在面對政治攻擊的情況下）如此重要的原因。同時，慶祝玩笑自由——比如拿特朗普的（真）頭髮或其他事取笑——也很重要。