自由鬥士撒切爾: 當前的情況尤其需要堅守撒切爾的原則

ONLY a handful of peacetime politicians can claim to have changed the world. Margaret Thatcher was one. She transformed not just her own Conservative Party, but the whole of British politics. Her enthusiasm for privatisation launched a global revolution and her willingness to stand up to tyranny helped to bring an end to the Soviet Union. Winston Churchill won a war, but he never created an “-ism”.

在和平時期，可稱之為改變了世界的政治家屈指可數。瑪格麗特·撒切爾就是這樣一位政治家。她不僅改變了自身所在的保守黨，而且改變了整個英國政治。她對私有化的激情引發了一場全球性的革命，她對抗暴政的意願促使蘇聯走向滅亡。溫斯頓·邱吉爾贏得了一場戰爭，但他從未創造一種“主義”。

The essence of Thatcherism was to oppose the status quo and bet on freedom—odd, since as a prim, upwardly mobile striver, she was in some ways the embodiment of conservatism. She thought nations could become great only if individuals were set free. Unlike Churchill's famous pudding, her struggles had a theme: the right of individuals to run their own lives, as free as possible from micromanagement by the state.

撒切爾主義的核心是反對現狀，力爭自由——這看上去難以理解。因為作為一個循規蹈矩，並且不停向上的奮鬥者，從某種程度上來說，她是保守主義的化身。她認為，只有個人獲得解放，國家才能變得強大。同眾人皆知的“邱吉爾的布丁”所不同的是，她的奮鬥有這樣一個主題：儘可能地讓掌握自身命運的個人權利遠離國家的微觀管理。

In her early years in politics, economic liberalism was in retreat, the Soviet Union was extending its empire, and Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek were dismissed as academic eccentrics. In Britain the government hobnobbed with trade unions (“beer and sandwiches in Number 10”), handed out subsidies to failing nationalised industries and primed the pump through Keynesian demand management. To begin with the ambitious young politician went along with this consensus (see article). But the widespread notion that politics should be “the management of decline” made her blood boil. The ideas of Friedman and Hayek persuaded her that things could be different.

在她邁入政壇之初，經濟自由主義正處於節節敗退之中，蘇聯正在延伸其帝國的疆域，彌爾頓·弗裡德曼和弗雷德里希·哈耶克被當做是學術怪人而遭貶斥。在英國，政府正同工會組織打得火熱（“在唐寧街10號推杯換盞”），他們一邊給那些失敗的國有化企業提供補貼，一邊通過凱恩斯主義的需求管理論大力刺激經濟。開始時，這位年輕有為的政治家隨波逐流，對這種共識表示認同（見“非凡的政治家”）。但是，政治應當是“衰落管理”的流行觀念令她熱血沸騰。弗裡德曼和哈耶克的思想使她明白，事情可以有所不同。

Most of this radicalism was hidden from the British electorate that voted her into office in 1979, largely in frustration with Labour's ineptitude. What followed was an economic revolution. She privatised state industries, refused to negotiate with the unions, abolished state controls, broke the striking miners and replaced Keynesianism with Friedman's monetarism. The inflation rate fell from a high of 27% in 1975 to 2.4% in 1986. The number of working days lost to strikes fell from 29m in 1979 to 2m in 1986. The top rate of tax fell from 83% to 40%.

她把這種激進主義的大部分內容都隱藏起來，英國選民把她選進政府的主要是出於對工黨無能的失望。隨後，一場經濟革命拉開了大幕。她出售國有企業，拒絕同工會談判，取消國家調控，打擊罷工礦工，用弗裡德曼的貨幣主義取代了凱恩斯主義。通貨膨脹率從1975年高點時的27%下降到1986年的2.4%，因罷工而損失的工作日數量從1979年的2900萬下降到1986年200萬，最高稅率從83%下降到40%。

Not for turning

絕不掉頭

Her battles with the left—especially the miners—gave her a reputation as a blue-rinse Boadicea. But she was just as willing to clobber the right, sidelining old-fashioned Tory “wets” and unleashing her creed on conservative strongholds, notably by setting off the “big bang” in the City of London. Many of her pithiest put-downs were directed at her own side: “U-turn if you want to,” she told the Conservatives as unemployment passed 2m. “The lady's not for turning.” She told George Bush senior: “This is no time to go wobbly!” Ronald Reagan was her soulmate but lacked her sharp elbows and hostility to deficits.

她因同左派的鬥爭——尤其是同礦工的鬥爭——而贏得了“藍髮布迪卡女王”的聲譽。不過，正如她願意痛擊右派一樣，她也願意排擠保守黨內那些老朽的“溫和派”，並且還以她的信條對保守派大本營發起攻擊。她最精闢的鍼砭大都針對自己一方：“你們想掉頭就掉頭，”當失業人數超過200萬時，她對保守黨同僚說。“夫人不掉頭。”她告訴老布什：“現在不是悠閒的時候！”羅納德·里根是她的靈魂伴侶，但缺少她那種爭強好勝和對赤字的敵意。

She might not be for turning, but she knew how to compromise. She seized on Mikhail Gorbachev as a man she “could do business with” despite warnings from American hawks. She backed down from a battle with the miners in 1981, waiting until she had built up sufficient reserves of coal three years later. For all her talk about reforming the welfare state, the public sector consumed almost the same proportion of GDP when she left office as when she came to it.

她也許不會掉頭，但是她懂得如何妥協。儘管美國的鷹派時刻都在在警告她，但是她堅持認為米哈伊爾·戈爾巴喬夫是一個可以“與之打交道”的人物；1981年，她從同礦工的鬥爭中撤退，並且一等就是三年，直到積攢了足夠的煤炭儲備後才發起進攻；儘管她總在談論改革福利制度，但是，在她離任時，公共開支在GDP中的比例同她執政之初相比並沒有出現增長。

She was also often outrageously lucky: lucky that the striking miners were led by Arthur Scargill, a hardline Marxist; lucky that the British left fractured and insisted on choosing unelectable leaders; lucky that General Galtieri decided to invade the Falkland Islands when he did; lucky that she was a tough woman in a system dominated by patrician men (the wets never knew how to cope with her); lucky in the flow of North Sea oil; and above all lucky in her timing. The post-war consensus was ripe for destruction, and a host of new forces, from personal computers to private equity, aided her more rumbustious form of capitalism.

她還是一個經常受到命運女神特別垂青的人。她的幸運在於，罷工礦工的領導人阿瑟·斯卡吉爾是一個強硬的馬克思主義者；她的幸運在於，英國左派四分五裂，並且還堅持挑選了一位無法當選的領導人；她的幸運在於，當加爾鐵裡將軍決定入侵福克蘭群島時，他竟然這樣做了；她的幸運在於，在這個由貴族做派的男人（溫和派從未懂得如何與她打交道）所主導的體系中，她是一個強硬的一個女人；她的幸運在於，北海的石油滾滾而來；總之，她是一個生逢其時的人。此時，打破舊世界的戰後共識已經成熟，而從個人計算機到私募股權等各種新生力量又給她提供了更加具有活力的資本主義形式。

The verdict of history

歷史的裁決

Criticism of her comes in two forms. First, that she could have done more had she wielded her handbag more deftly. Hatred, it is true, sometimes blinded her. Infuriated by the antics of left-wing local councils, she ended up centralising power in Whitehall. Her hostility to Eurocrats undermined her campaign to stop the drift of power to Brussels. Her stridency, from her early days as “Thatcher the milk snatcher” to her defenestration by her own party, was divisive. Under her the Conservatives shrank from a national force to a party of the rich south (see Bagehot). Tony Blair won several elections by offering Thatcherism without the rough edges.

對於她的批評來自兩個方面。首先，如果她揮舞手提包的技巧在嫻熟一些，她本應會有更大的成就。的確，仇恨有時迷住了她的雙眼。當左派地方議會的古怪行把她激怒後，她把權力都收歸到白廳；她對歐洲官僚的敵意破壞了其為阻止英國將權力移交給布魯塞了所做的努力；她的強硬——從早期被稱為“擠奶工的撒切爾”到被自己的政黨所拋棄——導致爭議不斷；在她的領導下，保守黨從一個全國性的政黨淪落為南方富人階層的政黨（見“白芝浩”專欄）；託尼·布萊爾將撒切爾主義稍加修改就贏得了幾次大選。

The second criticism addresses the substance of Thatcherism. Her reforms, it is said, sowed the seeds of the recent economic crisis. Without Thatcherism, the big bang would not have happened. Financial services would not make up such a large slice of the British economy and the country would not now be struggling under the burden of individual debt caused by excessive borrowing and government debt caused by the need to bail out the banks. Some of this is true; but then without Thatcherism Britain's economy would still be mired in state control, the commanding heights of its economy would be owned by the government and militant unions would be a power in the land.

第二種批評直指撒切爾主義的實質。有人認為，她的改革給近年來的經濟危機買下了種子。如果沒有撒切爾主義，就不會有”倫敦金融城大爆炸“，金融服務業也不會在英國經濟中佔據這麼大的份額，國家也不會因過度借貸而導致的個人債務和因救助銀行業的需求而帶來的國家債務而掙扎。儘管有些論據言之有理，但是，如果沒有了撒切爾主義，英國經濟可能仍處於國家調控之下，經濟制高點可能仍掌握在政府手中，武裝起來的工會組織或許會成為這個國家中的一種勢力。

Because of the crisis, the pendulum is swinging dangerously away from the principles Mrs Thatcher espoused. In most of the rich world, the state's share of the economy has stubbornly risen. Regulations—excessive as well as necessary—are tying up the private sector. Businesspeople are under scrutiny as they have not been for 30 years and bankers are everyone's favourite bogeyman. And with the rise of China state control, not economic liberalism, is being hailed as a model for emerging markets.

由於危機的出現，鐘擺正在危險地擺離撒切爾夫人所擁護的原則。在大多數富裕國家中，經濟中的國有成分一直在頑固地增長，必要的監管和過度的監管正在束縛住私營部門，商人正在接受30年來所未曾有過的審查，銀行家成為人人眼中的妖怪。同時，隨著中國的崛起，國家調控而不是經濟自由主義正在受到新興市場的追捧。

For a world in desperate need of growth, this is the wrong direction. Europe will never thrive until it frees up its markets. America will throttle its recovery unless it avoids overregulation. China will not sustain its success unless it starts to liberalise. This is a crucial time to hang on to Margaret Thatcher's central perception: that for countries to flourish, people need to push back against the advance of the state. What the world needs now is more Thatcherism, not less.

對於這個渴望增長的世界來說，這是一個錯誤的方向。不解放市場，歐洲永遠不會繁榮；不避免過度監管，美國的復甦將被扼殺；不開啟自由化，中國的成功不會持久。這是堅守瑪格麗特·撒切爾核心思想的關鍵時刻：為了國家的繁榮，人民需要回擊國家的進攻。當前，世界需要的是更多的撒切爾主義，而不是更少。