Peter Thiel 关于美国大选的演讲
谁是 Peter Thiel？
Peter Thiel 是 Paypal 联合创始人，硅谷投资人，《从0到1》作者。Peter Thiel 向来以敏锐的眼光和独到的见解出名，用他自己的话说，叫“反主流观点”。
2016年川普竞选期间，Peter Thiel 是唯一公开支持川普的硅谷大佬。
不妨阅读演讲原文，了解 Peter Thiel 的具体想法。
Peter Thiel FULL Speech Supporting Trump at National Press Club - October 31, 2016
Thank you very much for having me here.
Everybody knows we've been living through a crazy election year. Real events seem like a rehearsal for Saturday night live. Only an outbreak of insanity would seem to account for the unprecedented fact, that this year a political outsider manage to win a major party nomination. To the people who are used to influencing our choice of leaders, to the wealthy people who give money, and the commentators who give reasons why, it all seems like a bad dream. Donors don't want to find out how and why we got here. They just want to move on. Come November 9th, they hope everyone else would go back to business, as usual.
But it's just this headlessness, this temptation to ignore difficult realities, indulged in by our most influential citizens, that got us where we are today. A lot of successful people are too proud to admit it, since it puts their success in question. But the truth is, no matter how crazy this election seems, it is less crazy than the condition of our country.
Just look at the generation that supplies most of our leaders. The baby boomers are entering retirement in a state of actuarial bankrupcy: 64% of those over the age of 55 have less than a year's worth of savings to their name.
That is a problem, especially when this is the only country where you have to pay up to 10 times as much for simple medicines as you would pay anywhere else. America's over priced health care system might help subsidize the else of the world. But that doesn't help the Americans who can't afford it. And they've started to notice.
Our youngest citizens may not have huge medical bills, but their college tutition keeps increasing faster than the rate of inflation, adding more every year, to a 1.7 trillion dollar amount of student debt. America has become the only country where students take on loans that they can never escape, not even by declaring bankrupcy. Stuck in this broken system, Millennials are the first generation who expect their own lives to be worse than the lives of their parents.
While American family expenses have been increasing relentlessly, their incomes have been stagnant. In real dollars, the median household makes less money today than they made 17 years ago. Nearly half of Americans wouldn't be able to come up with 400 dollars if they need it for an emergency.
Yet our households struggle to keep up with challenges of everyday life, the government is wasting trillions of dollars of taxpayer money on faraway wars. Right now, we're fighting five of them, in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, and Somalia.
Now, not everyone is hurting. In the wealthy suburbs that ring Washinton D.C., people are doing just fine. Where I work in Silicon Valley, people are doing just great. But most Americansf don't live by the belt way or the San Francisco Bay. Most Americans haven't been part of that prosperity. It should't be surprising to see people voting for Berny Sanders, or for Donald Trump, who is the only outsider left in the race.
Very few people who vote for president have ever thought of doing something so extreme as running for president. The people who run are often polarizing. This election year, both major candidates are imperfect people, to say the least.
I don't agree with everything Donald Trump has said and done. And I don't think the millions of other people voting for him do, either. Nobody thinks his comments about women were acceptable. I agree they were clearly offensive and inappropriate. But I don't think the voters pull the lever to endorse a candidate's flaws.
It's not a lack of judgement that leads Americans to vote for Trump. We're voting for Trump because we judge the leadership of our country to have failed. This judgement has been hard to accept for some of this country's most fortunate, socially prominent people. It's certainly hard to accept for Silicon Valley, where many people have learnt to keep quiet if they dissent from the coastal bubble.
Louder voices have sent a message that they do not intent to tolerate the views of one half of the country. This intollerance has taken on some bizzare forms. The Advocate, a magazine which once praised me as a 'gay innovator', even published an article saying that as of now I am, and i quote, 'not a gay man', because I don't agree with their politics. The lie behind the buzzword 'diversity', could not be made more clear. If you don't conform, then you don't count as diverse, no matter what your personal background.
已经有人大张旗鼓地宣称，不能容忍另一半美国人的观点。他们对这种不宽容甚至不加任何掩饰。The Advocate 杂志曾经称赞我是「同性恋中的革新者」，现在发文称目前，不再承认我属于“同性恋者”的一员，因为我不赞同这家杂志所持的政见。他们鼓吹的「求同存异」的口号只是一个谎言。如果你不向他们政见妥协，那你就不再是「求同存异」的对象，无论你的出身、背景如何。
Faced with such contempt, why do voters still support Donald Trump? Even if they think American situation is serious, why do they think that Trump, of all people, could make it any better? I think it's becaouse of the big things that Trump get right. For example, free trade has not worked out well for all of America. It helps Trump that the other side just doesn't get it.
All of our elites preach free trade. The highly educated people who make public policy explain that cheap imports make everyone a winner, according to economical theory. But in actual practice, we've lost tens of thousands of factories and millions of jobs to foreign trade. The heartland has been devastated. Maybe policy makers really believe that nobody loses, or maybe they don't worry about it too much, because they think they're among the winners.
The sheer size of the US trade deficit shows that something has gone badly wrong. The most developed country in the world should be exporting capital to less developed countries. Instead, the United States are importing more than five hundred billions dollars every year. That money flows into financial assets. It distorts our economy in favor of more banking and more financialization. And it gives the well connected people who benefit a reason to defend this status quo. But not everyone benefits, and the Trump voters know it.
Trump voters are also tired of war. We have been at war for fifteen years, and we have spent more than 4.6 trillions dollars. More than two million people have lost their lives, and more than five thousand Americans soldiers have been killed. But we haven't won. The Bush administration promised that fifty billion dollars could bring democracy to Iraq. Instead, we've sqandered 40 times as much to bring about chaos.
Yet even after these bipartisan failures, the Democratic Party is more hawkish today than at any time since it began the war in Vietnam. Harking back to the no-fly-zone that Bill Clinton enforced over Iraq before Bush's failed war, now Hillary Clinton has called for a no-fly-zone over Syria. Incredibly, that would be a mistake even more reckless than invading Iraq, since most plains flying over Syria today are Russian plains. Clinton's proposed course of action would do worse than involve us in a messy civial war, it will risk a direct nuclear conflict.
What explains this eagerness to escalate the dangerous situation? How can Hillary Clinton be so wildly over optimistic about the outcome of war. I would suggest it comes from a lot of practice. For a long time, our elites have been in the habit of denying difficult realities. That's how bubbles form. Whenever there is a hard problem, but people want to believe a easy solution, they will be tempted to denying reality and inflate a bubble.
Something about the experience of the baby boomers, who's lives have been so much easier than their parents' or their children's, has lead them to buy into bubbles again and again. The trade bubble says everyone is a winner. The war bubble says victory is just around the corner. But those over optimistic stories simply haven't been true. And voters are tired of being lied to.
It is both insane and somehow inevitable that D.C. insiders expect that this election to be a rerun between the two political dynasties who led us through the two most gigantic financial bubbles of our time. President George W. Bush presided over the inflation of a housing bubble so big that it's collapse is still causing economic stagnation today. But what strangely forgotten is that last decade's housing bubble was just an attempt to make up for the gains that had been lost in the decade before that. In the 1990s president Bill Clinton presided over an enormous stock market bubble, and a devastating crash in 2000 just as his second term was coming to an end. That's how long the same people has been pursuing the same disastrous policies.
Now that someone different is in the running, someone who rejects the false, reassuring stories that tell us everything is fine. His larger than life persona attacts a lot of attention. Nobody would suggest that Donald Trump is a humble man. But the big things that he is right about, amount to a much needed dose of humility in our politics. Very unusually for a presidential candidate, he has question the core concept of America exceptionalism. He doesn't think the force of optimism alone can change reality without hardwork.
Just as much as it's about to make America great, Trump's agenda is about making America a normal country. A normal country doesn't have a half a trillion trade deficit. A normal country doesn't fight five simultaneous undeclared wars. In a normal country the government actually does it job.
And today it's important to recognize the government has a job to do. Voters are tired to hear conservative politicians say that government never works. They know that the government was never this broken. The Manhattan Project, the interstate highway system, the Apollo Program, whatever you think of these ventures, you cannot doubt the competence of the government that got them done.
But we have fallen very far from that standard. We cannot let free market ideology serve as an excuse for decline. No matter what happens in this election, what Trump represents isn't crazy, and it's not going away. He points toward a new Republican Party beyond the dogmas of Reaganism. He points even beyond the remaking of one party, to a new American politics that overcomes denial, rejects bubble-thinking, and reckons with reality.
When the distracting skeptical of this election seasons are forgotten, and the history of our time is written, the only important question will be: whether or not that new politics came too late.