歷史上的尼克松 真的是演說家和騙子?大綱

“I am not a crook.” Richard Nixon resigned as president of the US 40 years ago this week, and of all the things he said in his political career this quote is the one that lives on. He did also popularise the phrase “the silent majority”, although it is seldom attributed to him.
“我不是騙子。”40年前的這一週，理查德•尼克松(Richard Nixon)辭任美國總統，他在政治生涯發表的所有言論中，這一句流傳下來。他也讓“沉默的大多數”這個短語廣爲人知，不過人們很少提到這是他說的。

To state the obvious: we remember the first quote because it seems to us in hindsight to have been so audacious a lie. It takes its place with “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky” (another US president, Bill Clinton) and the promise to “cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism in our country with the simple sword of truth and the trusty shield of British fair play”, by a man jailed after admitting perjury and perverting the course of justice (Nixon biographer Jonathan Aitken).
說一句顯而易見的話：我們之所以記住前面那一句，是因爲事後看來，那是一句如此大膽的謊言。可以跟這句話媲美的還有，“我沒跟那個女人、萊溫斯基(Lewinsky)女士發生性關係”（出自另一位美國前總統比爾•克林頓(Bill Clinton)），和承諾“以簡單的真理之劍和英國式公平競爭的信任之盾，切除腐敗扭曲的新聞業之癌”，說這話的人在承認僞證罪和妨礙司法公正罪之後被投入監獄，他就是尼克松傳記的作者喬納森•艾特肯(Jonathan Aitken)。

But in the moment it was uttered, it is reasonable to assume it would have been pretty effective as a piece of rhetoric. “I am not a crook” is a special use of ethos (the speaker’s connection with the audience). Logically speaking, it is redundant: if you are accused of X, to say X is untrue is to deny, rather than to disprove, the charge. But by adding the barefaced lie to the mix you raise the stakes. It puts doubt in your audience’s mind. Indignation sounds – even though it is not – like evidence of innocence.
但在尼克松說出那句謊話時，人們可以合理地假定它作爲一種辭令是有效的。“我不是騙子”是一種對精神特質（發言者與聽衆之間的聯繫）的特殊使用。從邏輯上講，它是多餘的：如果你被指控犯有X罪，表態稱X罪不屬實，是在否認指控，而不是在證明指控不正確。但加上一句厚顏無恥的謊言，你就加大了賭注。這讓聽衆心裏產生不確定性。憤慨聽上去像是（即便實際上不是）無辜的證據。

Something in all of us resists believing that people can look into a camera, or into our eyes, and shamelessly fib. Hitler argued that “the big lie” was effective with ordinary people because it “would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously”. Can anyone think that the fierceness of Lance Armstrong’s repeated doping denials was not part of what kept his lie afloat for so long?
在我們所有人心裏，都有些東西讓我們拒絕相信，有人竟可以瞪眼對着鏡頭或我們的眼睛，不知羞恥地撒謊。希特勒(Hitler)曾主張，“彌天大謊”能騙得過普通人，是因爲“他們從未想過撒大謊，他們也不相信別人放肆到如此無恥地扭曲真相的地步”。有誰會認爲，蘭斯•阿姆斯特朗(Lance Armstrong)情緒激動地反覆否認吸毒，不是使他的謊言延續那麼久的原因之一？

Nixon welcomed the Watergate investigation because “people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook”. He had triumphed by going on the offensive in a tight spot before. Whatever his ethical shortcomings, he was a brilliant speaker. Take his 1952 “Checkers Speech” – delivered to counter criticism of an election-expense slush fund when he was running for vice-president. He used the accusation to turn the tables on his accusers: making himself a spokesman for the honest common man against the corrupt Washington establishment. His wife Pat didn’t own a mink coat, he said, but “a respectable Republican cloth coat. And I always tell her that she’d look good in anything.”
尼克松歡迎水門(Watergate)調查，是因爲“民衆必須知道他們的總統到底是不是一個騙子”。他以前曾在困境中採取攻勢，結果取勝了。無論他在道德上有何瑕疵，不可否認他是一個傑出的演說家。以他在1952年發表的“跳棋演講”爲例，那次演講是爲了迴應他競選副總統時一個競選費用小金庫招致的批評。他巧妙利用對方的指控猛轟對方：把自己包裝成誠實普通人的代言人，對抗着華盛頓的體制內人士。他說，他妻子帕特(Pat)連一件貂皮大衣都沒有，只有“一件像樣的共和黨式布外衣。我總是告訴她，她穿任何衣服都很靚麗。”

He famously poured on the pathos, revealing that a political supporter had sent him a gift: a cocker-spaniel puppy. “Our little girl – Tricia, the six year old – named it Checkers. And you know, the kids, like all kids, love the dog and I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we’re gonna keep it.” Now that really was shameless. And without Checkers, we probably would never have had “I am not a crook”.
廣爲人知的是，他竭力引起人們的憐憫，透露一名政治支持者送了他一件禮物：一隻可卡犬幼崽。“我們的小女兒，6歲的特里西婭(Tricia)給它起名叫‘跳棋’。你們知道，孩子們，就像所有的孩子那樣，都喜歡狗，我現在想說的是，不管他們怎麼說，我們都要把它留下。”現在看來，那真是太無恥了。而且，要不是“跳棋演講”的話，我們很可能根本沒有機會聽到他說出“我不是騙子”。

The personal, flat, categorical denial is the all-or-nothing bet: a manoeuvre of absolute last resort. If you are lucky it works and the caravan moves on. But when the wheels fall off: oh boy.
個人層面發出的斷然而明確的否認屬於孤注一擲：拼命的最後一搏。如果你夠幸運，這辦法管用了，大篷車將繼續前行。但如果車輪掉下來，那就慘了。

The high-stakes poker player who goes all-in with 7-2 unsuited, the worst hand possible, and comes unstuck is the one we remember. We do not even notice the one who does the same thing and quietly wins the pot when his opponent folds.
這個高籌碼撲克玩家把一切籌碼都押進去了，拿到的是最差的牌7-2非同花，於是我們記住了這個賭輸的傢伙。我們甚至沒有注意那個做了同樣的事、然後在對手罷手時悄悄賭贏的那個人。

That is why Nixon’s quote lives on. It might just as easily not have. And had he not been a crook, he might have been remembered as a great orator.
這就是尼克松那句知名謊話流傳至今的原因。這句話也很有可能不會流傳下來。如果他不是騙子，那麼他可能被人們銘記爲一位偉大的演說家。