只有中國網民罵人嗎？

黎陽

2009．10．29．

茅于軾說中國網民愛罵人，外國網民則不：“我也偶然看外國的博客和留言，我沒有看到過罵人的話。看到的是聰明的話，幽默的話，有趣的話。那些留言看一天也不會感到寂寞，它給人們快樂，高興。”（茅于軾：《中國的網民為何愛罵人？》。然后茅于軾得出結論：“中國網絡文化中罵人的東西是從哪兒來的？這是一個怪胎。我猜想這個怪胎是從文革傳下來的。”

美國福克斯電視臺播放了白宮通訊聯絡辦公室主任安妮塔．鄧恩（Anita Dunn）宣稱毛澤東是自己欣賞的政治哲學家之一的錄像后（見附錄一），我通過google搜索隨機訪問了一個網站，下載了若干網民留言，譯成了中文（見附錄二）。這跟茅于軾的“偶然看外國博客和留言”應該算旗鼓相當了。

看了這些留言，能得出茅于軾的“我沒有看到過罵人的話。看到的是聰明的話，幽默的話，有趣的話。那些留言看一天也不會感到寂寞，它給人們快樂，高興”之類結論嗎？

從留言看，“精神病”、“藥物副作用”之類似乎是美國人的罵人常用語——如此說來中國網上動不動就說別人“腦殘”、“智障”、“精神病”、“吃錯藥”之類應該是“國際接軌”，并非國粹；而美國人說毛澤東“殺人七千萬”之類結論，顯然又是中國“精英”的勤勞結晶——雙向交流，互通有無，“戰略伙伴關系”。

美國可沒搞過“文化大革命”，能說美國人網上罵人的習慣也是中國的文化大革命的怪胎嗎？

世界上怕就怕“認真”二字。稍微較個真，茅于軾的謊話就現原形了。

（本人時間有限，也不靠翻譯吃飯，只能忙里偷閑翻譯一點。如果誰認為這“隨機”、“偶然”的留言例子樣本不夠大，不足為憑，那不妨用google自己搜索，一一訪問，看其他美國網民是如何爭論的。）

=======================================
黎陽聲明：本人放棄對此文的版權。只要不違背本文主旨，任何人均可轉貼，可散發，可抄襲，可復制，可被冒名頂替，可被任何媒體拿去用，可被任何人引用到任何文章中且不寫出引文出處，本人分文不取。

附錄一．白宮通訊聯絡辦公室主任安妮塔．鄧恩（Anita Dunn）2009年5月關于毛澤東的講話（節選）
（http://mediamatters.org/research/200910150044）

And then the third lesson and tip actually come from two of my favorite political philosophers, Mao Zedong and Mother Teresa -- not often coupled with each together, but the two people that I turn to most to basically deliver a simple point, which is, you're going to make choices. You're going to challenge. You're going to say, "Why not?" You're going to figure out how to do things that have never been done before. But here's the deal: These are your choices. They are no one else's.

第三個經驗體會其實來自我喜愛的兩個政治哲學家－－毛澤東和特蕾莎修女，他們并不總是和諧一致，但這兩個我最推崇的人有一點基本相同：你要作出抉擇。你要接受挑戰。你們準會說：“為什么不呢？”因為你們要判斷如何做前人從沒做過的事。這是關鍵：是你們的選擇而不是別人的。

In 1947, when Mao Zedong was being challenged within his own party on his plan to basically take China over, Chiang Kai-shek and the Nationalist Chinese held the cities, they had the army, they had the air force, they had everything on their side. And people said, "How can you win? How can you do this? How can you do this against all of the odds against you?" And Mao Zedong said, you know, "You fight your war, and I'll fight mine." And think about that for a second.

1947年，蔣介石和中國國民黨人占領著城市，擁有陸軍，擁有空軍，擁有一切。當時對毛澤東奪取全國勝利的基本原則連自己的黨內都有懷疑。人們問：“你怎么可能贏？你能怎么樣？面對這一切絕對的劣勢你能怎么樣？”眾所周知，毛澤東說：“你打你的，我打我的”。想想這些吧。

附錄二．評論節選（http://spectator.org/blog/2009/10/16/anita-dunn-mao-tse-tung-fan）

福克斯電視臺主持人格林．貝克（Glenn Beck）

So, the reason why this phone hasn't run all week is because the most important political philosopher for her is Mao Zedong -- oh, and Mother Teresa. The guy responsible for more deaths than any other 20th-century leader is her favorite philosopher? How can that man be your favorite anything? He killed 70 million people. That would be like me saying to you, "Oh, you know who my favorite political philosopher is? Adolf Hitler. Have you read Mein Kampf? Just fight your fight, like Hitler did." It's insanity! This is her hero's work! Seventy million dead!

這個電話一周來響個不停是因為她最重要的政治哲學家是毛澤東——噢，還有特蕾莎修女。要對20世紀最多的人口死亡負責任的領導人是她欣賞的哲學家？那個人怎么能是你欣賞的任何東西？他殺死了七千萬人。這如同我對你說：“噢，你知道誰是我欣賞的政治哲學家？阿道夫．希特勒。你讀過《我的奮斗》嗎？象希特勒那樣打你自己的仗。”簡直腦殘智障！她的英雄的杰作！七千萬人死亡！

She thinks of this man's work all the time? That was a quote. Could you please put the gulags back up here? Could you please put the images back up here of China, please, while I remind you the gulags -- not that picture. Give me the picture of the Chinese and the brutality, the gulags, the re-education camps. And he's your favorite?

她念念不忘這個人的杰作？那不過是個開頭的報價。你要讓這里也出現“古拉格群島”嗎？當我提醒你“古拉格群島”時，請想象這里變成中國的情景——不是圖片。我眼前出現的畫面是中國人和野蠻，是“古拉格群島”，是再教育集中營。這就是你的欣賞？

America, how many radicals is it going to take? How many radicals surrounding our president will it take before you understand that when the president says he wants to transform the country, well, he wants to transform it, all right. Progressives don't care what you think. They will drag you to reform if they have to. But we're not just talking about progressives now, we're talking about revolutionaries that idolize Mao.

美國人，還會出現多少激進分子？在我們醒悟之前包圍著說要改革這個國家的總統的激進分子還會走多遠？他要改革，好。改良主義者不在乎你怎么想。如果他們需要，就會硬拽著你改革。但我們現在談的不是改良主義者，而是崇拜毛澤東的革命黨人。

You tell me the difference between these phrases. Castro: "Revolution first, elections later!" Mao: "People who try to commit -- don't commit suicide, don't save them. China is so populous that we can do without a few people!" What is the difference between that and the clip I'm going to play for you next?

告訴我這些話有什么不同。卡斯特羅：“革命第一，選舉第二！”毛：“別救那些說要自殺其實并不真自殺的人。中國人多的是，去掉一些人我們照樣干！”這一切與我將為你們播放的錄像有什么區別？

I said, "It's not a crime to admire the work of Chairman Mao" -- it's not. But is it a concern to any American that so many people now in and around this administration and this president seem to love a communist revolutionary dictator? Here's our White House communications director, Anita Dunn, standing in front of a group of graduating high school students and praising him.

我說過：“仰慕毛主席的成就不是犯罪”——不是。但對任何美國人來說，本屆政府里里外外和本屆總統周圍有這么多熱愛共產革命獨裁者的人難道不值得關注嗎？眼前就是站在一群高中畢業生面前贊美他的我們的白宮通訊聯絡辦公室主任安妮塔.鄧恩。

BECK: Mao Zedong, one of the worst murderers in mankind's history, probably the worst. We don't even know how many people he actually killed. The usual number is between, what, 50 and 70 million. To put that into perspective, that would be 10 to 12 times as many people that killed -- that were murdered by Adolf Hitler in the Holocaust. Ten to 12 times.

貝克：毛澤東，人類歷史上最壞的殺人犯之一，也許是最壞的。我們甚至不知道他到底殺了多少人。通常的數字是五千萬到七千萬。也就是說，相當于阿道夫．希特勒的大屠殺人數的10到12倍。10到12倍。

Would you be a little alarmed if somebody in the White House had cited Adolf Hitler in a speech to high school students as the person they turn to the most? What is the difference? Mao was worse. Plus, he took away the freedom of hundreds of millions of Chinese, and now he's being revered? How did we get here?

如果某白宮人士對高中學生講話時把阿道夫．希特勒的話當作最欣賞的格言來引述，你會不會有所警覺？這有什么兩樣？毛更壞。而且他還剝奪了幾億中國人的自由，如今他受到崇敬了？我們是怎么搞的？

網民留言節選

Crusader| 10.16.09 @ 11:15AM
Why are lib women always so darn UGLY? And what was that thing she kept doing with her mouth?

為什么自由派女人總他媽的那么丑？她那張嘴一直在干啥？

Scary times indeed folks.

真是可怕的時代，伙計們。

Reply to this
Van Pwned| 10.16.09 @ 11:38AM
I was wondering the same thing. Reminded me of someone with tardive dyskinesia, which is a very sad side effect associated with years of anti-psychotic medication use.

我有同感。這使我想起某些因長年服用抗精神病藥而引起可悲的副作用導致遲發性運動障礙的人。

Reply to this
debra | 10.16.09 @ 12:17PM
my husband and I are in healthcare. tardive dyskinesia it is. she must be on some strong, long term meds.

我丈夫和我是搞衛生保健的。就是遲發性運動障礙。她一定是某些烈性藥吃得太久了。

Reply to this
Plan 9 | 10.16.09 @ 12:48PM
She mostly made me think of one of alien lizard people that's trying to take over the world.

她更多地讓我想起試圖占領全世界的外國蜥蜴式人物中的一個。

Reply to this
beihai| 10.16.09 @ 2:16PM
Most serious women in politics, left or right, are not attractive, the attractive ones marry rich doctors. And don't tell me talking heads like Malkin are Conservative, they are just bubble heads. Ayn Rand was a real thinker, and she was scary looking.

政界正而八經的女人都不好看，不管左派還是右派。好看的都嫁給闊大夫了。別跟我說象Malkin那樣有頭腦會說話的是保守派。他們的腦袋里空空如也。Ayn Rand是個真正的有思想的人，但她長得慘不忍睹。

Reply to this
clintpeter| 10.16.09 @ 3:58PM
frustrated, unsatisfied women often become commies.

心灰意懶滿腹牢騷的娘兒們往往變成共黨分子

Reply to this
david gorski| 10.16.09 @ 8:13PM
honestly, she's probably got dry mouth from taking SSRI or tri-cyclic anti-depressive drugs. its a common side effect especially when you talk. i'm not being facetious. i used to take zoloft, paxil, cloazepam, wellbutrin, (not all at once) and thats EXACTLY what i would do to try to re wet my mouth when speaking

老實說，她大概是各種鎮定劑吃多了而長了張臭嘴。這是常見的副作用，尤其說話的時候。不開玩笑。當我講話講得需要潤潤嗓子時我必定吃點zoloft, paxil, cloazepam, wellbutrin,（不是一起吃）。

Reply to this
barbara| 10.16.09 @ 9:12PM
I believe the constant licking with the tongue indicates a vitamin deficiency. It sure was ugly.

我確信用舌頭舔個沒完是缺乏維生素缺的征兆。丑死了。

Reply to this
john r| 10.16.09 @ 11:31AM
She is ugly and a disgrace to this country.

她真丑，而且是國家的恥辱。

Reply to this
Jaime Gonzalez| 10.16.09 @ 11:39AM
And just think, she is only a small part of todays Administration!

想想看，她僅僅是這屆政府的一小部分。

Reply to this
Dandy Don| 10.16.09 @ 11:48AM
We will all wake up some day and Obama will be gone, but she will still be ugly and have a funky mouth.

總有一天我們將覺醒，奧巴馬將滾蛋，但她的丑樣子和臭嘴卻會不會有變化。

Reply to this
Susan| 10.16.09 @ 11:54AM
I am embarrassed for those commenting on the woman's looks! Stay civil. Let's talk about the real concern, which is of utmost importance, but stop the unnecessary school yard talk.

對人家長相的這些評論真無聊！文明點。談點正題，那才最重要。停止那些沒必要的校園操場式的扯淡吧。

Reply to this
MReed| 10.16.09 @ 6:47PM
I agree, to some degree, that her physical attractiveness is not the important issue. But when the ugliness of her words is somehow "enhanced" by her looks, I can't blame people for noticing. After all, how many millions did Mao, one of her two favorite philosophers, murder?

我在原則上同意她的長相如何不重要。但當她丑陋的語言在某種程度上“改進”了她的長相時，我不能怪人們留意到這些。話說回來，毛，她欣賞的那兩個哲學家之一，到底殺了幾百萬人？

Reply to this
Ken| 10.16.09 @ 11:54AM
Truly amazing - Anita Dunn is now attempting to write off her reference to Chairman Mao as a joke. While the initial part of the speech, coupling Mao with Mother Theresa, may have been a joke, her admiration for Mao's philosophy later in the speech, "you fight your war, I'll fight mine," came across loud and clear.

真令人震驚——安妮塔.鄧恩現在企圖把她關于毛主席的評價說成是開玩笑。她講話的前半段把毛和特蕾莎修女相提并論也許是開玩笑，后半段欣賞毛的哲學“你打你的，我打我的”的講話可又響亮又清晰。

Reply to this
Eric Cartman| 10.16.09 @ 3:10PM
Obviously, Ken, you are unfamiliar with Mao jokes! You are not sophisticated enough to understand the nuances we elite people have in our sense of humor. Look, Mao may have killed millions, but look at the socialist paradise he left his people. You have no regard for the working poor and the environment! If you did you would see the correctness of what we are trying to do! It was a joke, you right wingers just don't get it! Killing people = funny! See? Jeez!

Ken，你顯然不了解毛的玩笑！你還沒成熟到能理解我們精英的幽默感的微妙。注意，毛也許殺了幾百萬人，但看看他留給他的人民的社會主義天堂。你們對窮苦的勞動人民和環境漠不關心！否則你會明白我們正在試圖做的是對的！不過一個玩笑，你們右派就理解不了！殺人=可笑！懂嗎？老天爺！

Reply to this

Sandra | 10.17.09 @ 2:37AM
What paradise are you talking about?? I have Chinese friends who lived in China during the Cultural Revolution. He took the doctors and put them in the fields and sent their children to be slaves in Tibet. His ideas were that everyone should be the same, poor and bridled by the communist government. That country only started to have free interprise in the past few years. You're out of your mind to think Socialism is good. It's just lazy selfish people that want to take from those who work hard to give to deadbeats, just like the Socialist (Communist) of China and Russia.

你說的是什么天堂？我有好幾個中國朋友，他們文化大革命時生活在中國。他把醫生們送往農田，把他們的孩子們送到西藏當奴隸。他的主張是人人都得一樣，貧窮，而且被共產黨政府套上籠頭。那個國家幾年前才開始有了自由企業。你以為社會主義好，簡直腦子進了水。象中國和俄國那樣的社會主義（共產主義）不過是自私自利的懶漢把辛勤工作的人的東西拿走交給飯桶無賴。

Reply to this
Richard| 10.18.09 @ 9:39PM
Ah.... Sandra, Eric was using what we call sarcasm.
While we (U.S.) are on a bullet train to socialism, the People's Republic of China has at least 130 billionairs. Reported by FOX News on Friday.

啊，Sandra, Eric之舉真可以稱之為諷刺。

根據FOX News星期五的報道，當我們（美國）乘著高速列車奔向社會主義時，中華人民共和國已經至少有了130個十億富翁。

I'm just sayin' , maybe Mao is turning in his grave with all his hard work going down the tubes.
And one more thing, since when is Mother Teresa considered a political philosopher ?

我要說的是，或許毛在墳墓里竭盡全力扭轉了乾坤。

還有一件事：特蕾莎修女什么時候被當成了政治哲學家？

Reply to this
Michael Tabasco| 10.19.09 @ 2:49PM
Eric: "We elite people " ? What WE are trying to do ? Who is we ? And who are you to consider yourself an elitist ? If you do, you belong in the White House....It's not about right wing, it's about what this country was founded on, if you don't like it, move to a socialist nation...simple as that...WE are not going to sit by idly and watch it happen against the WILL of the majority...and, in case you have forgotten, it is the WILL of the people that matters here...not a select group of law graduates with their own agendas....As far as Ms. Baker goes, the way she struggled to verbalize and the dry mouth issues, etc., lent itself to speculation as to whether she is on mind altering medication because if you understand physcology and the meds out there to "help" people, they have those side effects....it's disturbing to hear someone like her spewing that garbage out to students given the power she now holds....wake up!!!

Eric說“我們精英”？這個“我們”要干什么？誰是“我們”？你這個自稱“精英”的人是誰？如果你真是精英，那你是白宮精英……這不是右派不右派的問題，而是這個國家根本原則的問題，如果不喜歡，那就搬到個社會主義國家去……就那么簡單明了……“我們”決不坐視任何違背多數人意志的事發生……如果你忘了，（那就提醒你）這個意志是指在這個國家起決定作用的人的意志，而不是法學院畢業生們按照他們自己的規則挑選出的人群的意志……根據Baker先生的報道，那個女人拼命嘮嘮叨叨的樣子和諸如爛嘴之類的話題本身就讓人不禁懷疑她是否神經錯亂，因為如果你知道心理學和心理病人“需要”的藥，就知道會有哪些副作用……聽到象她那樣大權在握的家伙對著學生滿嘴噴糞簡直令人憤慨……覺醒吧！

Reply to this
EB| 10.16.09 @ 12:42PM
My 11 year old son noticed what she was doing with her mouth and facial expressions. I explained to him at the time that it was a sign of a medical condition, either a medication or brain-function issue. It is quite obvious. Isn't it possible this condition affects more than just her facial expressions? I'm just asking the question. Anyone who agrees with the philosophy of a mass murderer is obviously off her nut.

我11歲的兒子注意到她在用她的嘴和臉在做什么。我當時向他解釋說那是醫療藥物或腦功能藥物作用的征兆。顯而易見。這些藥物的影響難道會僅僅限于她的臉部表情嗎？我只問這一個問題。任何贊同大屠殺者的哲學的人顯然跟她一樣發瘋。

Reply to this
ST| 10.16.09 @ 2:10PM
The mouth movements are a side effect (not the actual condition) of taking antipsychotic meds, which is called tardive dyskinesia. The director of communications appears to be on some pretty strong meds. Comforting.

這張嘴的動作是沒病卻吃稱為“遲發性運動障礙”的精神病藥物的副作用。這位通訊主任當時顯然藥吃多了，正在自慰。

Reply to this
paul| 10.16.09 @ 1:00PM
The real problem with the speech is the quality of the content and her delivery. She is not a very good speaker and would likely receive a D in a high school speech class for her performance.

這篇演講的真正問題是內容和表達質量。根據她的表現，她不是個好演說家，她高中的演講課成績可能是D。

Reply to this
Mike| 10.16.09 @ 3:06PM
Although her physical presentation was distracting, the real issue was not delivery but content. Out of the many notable figures throughout history, why present Mao as a credible political philosopher and present that opinion to a young and impressionable group of students? The progressive liberals of this country are systematically destroying the basic principles of our Constitution and unfortunately the Obama administration seems to be filled with them.

盡管她當時顯得心不在焉，但真正的問題不表達而是內容。那么多歷史名人，為什么把毛當成一個正面的政治哲學家并把這種觀點介紹給學生呢？這個國家的咄咄逼人的自由派正系統地消滅我們憲法的基本原則，而且很不幸，這類人似乎充斥著奧巴馬政府。

Reply to this
Andrew B| 10.16.09 @ 3:12PM
I will quote one of my favorite philosophers who said "You can't make an omelette without breaking 70 million eggs."

我將引用我欣賞的哲學家的話：“不打碎7千萬雞蛋，就做不成煎雞蛋。”

I don't know which is scarier--her speech, or the fact that it was delivered in a church.

我不知道哪個更可怕：她的講話，還是教堂里宣講的事實。

Reply to this
R.C.| 10.16.09 @ 3:50PM
You guys are funny about the meds..I personally think that her funky mouth movements can be attributed to nothing more than ill fitting dentures. (But then again I'm no doctor,maybe one of her problems could be meds ~or the LACK thereof...that's why she's so liberal!

諸位關于吃藥的論述真有意思……我個人認為她那張臭嘴的動作只能歸咎于假牙沒鑲好（但再說一遍，我不是醫生。也許她的問題之一是吃錯了藥，或缺點什么什么……怪不得她那么自由派！）

Reply to this
Dick Wangler| 10.16.09 @ 6:08PM

Anita Dunn just gave us a compelling justification for implementing the most barbaric methods of torture on the detainees in Guantanimo. Don't listen to what others say - do what is right for you. Never mind the rule of law, never mind civility, and what happened to the "world consensus" the left was so concerned about? Didn't the left preach for EIGHT YEARS that the US was "wrong" to "go it alone" with regards to Iraq? Using this "philosophy", one could argue anything and justify it to anyone who will listen.

安妮塔.鄧恩正好給了我們一個關注對拘留在關塔拿摩的人實施殘酷虐待的正當理由。別管別人怎么說—做你該做的。別老想著法律規定。別老想著文明和會對左派如此關注的“世界共識”會有什么影響。八年來左派不是聲稱美國在伊拉克搞“單邊主義”“錯誤”嗎？運用這個“哲學”，人可以跟聽得進自己話的任何人爭論任何事，得出自己的結論。

Reply to this
CommiesAmongUs| 10.16.09 @ 8:03PM
It shouldn't be surprising any more. Every one of Obama's administration appointments is a hardcore radical lefty and all of Obama's mentors are hardcore radical socialist communist Marxist loonies. Van Jones, Ayers, Dohrn, Sebelius, Holdren, Alinsky, Fanon etc etc...

不必大驚小怪。奧巴馬政府的每個成員都是死硬極左，而且奧巴馬的所有導師都是死硬激進的社會主義共黨分子、馬克思列寧主義者。凡瓊斯，艾爾斯，多恩，西貝利厄斯，赫爾德倫，阿林斯基，范農等等等等……

Let's stop being shocked. The president is a commie.

別再震驚了。總統是個共黨分子。

But worse than that the president is actually a fascist. Fascism - the partnership of government and business. Obama is the one shaking down the taxpayer to "bail out" the big international investment banks. That's not socialism or communism. That is hardcore fascism.

但更壞的是總統實際是個法西斯主義者。法西斯主義——官商結伙。奧巴馬是犧牲納稅人保護大國際投資銀行過關的人之一。這不是社會主義或共產主義。這是死硬的法西斯主義。

Reply to this
bic| 10.16.09 @ 8:49PM
Right about the fascism and the banks.

關于法西斯主義和銀行的觀點完全正確。

Lizardlick Dunn's husband is a lawyer named Bauer who went after people in 2008 who brought up Bill Ayers. Mao would have been proud.... clinging to their little red books and Utopian mysticism.

鄧恩的丈夫叫鮑爾，是個律師。他在2008年追隨了那些制定艾爾斯法的人……毛大概已經憑著小紅書和烏托邦神秘主義而自豪了。

Reply to this
Howard| 10.19.09 @ 9:14PM
Anita Dung is Obama’s Joseph Goebbels. How dare these Marxist traitors dismantle our Constitution, and our First Amendment!!!

安妮塔．鄧恩是奧巴馬的約瑟夫．戈培爾。這些馬克思主義叛國者居然敢破壞我們的憲法和第一修正案！

Reply to this
gm| 10.20.09 @ 12:48PM
As a liberal, I'm embarrassed and ashamed by Anita's comments. I don't really care if she acknowledged him as a great thinker--many many non-communists do--but using his takeover of China as a model for the rest of us is an embarrassment. In other news, I have no earthly idea how any of you can think Obama is a communist after how he's handled the banks. He's clearly a capitalist, and for many of us not liberal enough.

作為一個自由派，我對安妮塔的評論感到尷尬和羞愧。如果她認為毛是個偉大的思想家，我不會在意——許多許多非共產黨人都這么認為——但把毛奪取中國做為我們的樣板則非常令人厭惡。至于其他新聞，在奧巴馬處理了銀行問題后，我實在想不通你們中的任何人怎么會以為他是共黨分子。他是個不折不扣資本主義者，而且對我們許多人來說，自由得很不夠。

× 烏有之鄉 WYZXWK.COM

您的打賞將用于網站日常運行與維護。
幫助我們辦好網站，宣傳紅色文化！

歡迎掃描下方二維碼，訂閱烏有之鄉網刊微信公眾號