評論
打印
But today, graduates, I want to urge you to do just the opposite.
但在今天，畢業生們，我想敦促你們做相反的事情。
Today, I want to suggest that if you truly wish to carry on the Oberlin legacy of service and social justice,
今天，我想建議你們，如果你真的希望繼續秉承歐柏林學院的服務社會和社會正義的傳統，
then you need to run to, and not away from, the noise.
那么你需要走進這些噪音，而不是遠離噪音。
Today, I want to urge you to actively seek out the most contentious, polarized, gridlocked places you can find.
今天，我要敦促你們去積極尋找你所能找到的最有爭議、兩極分化和僵局最嚴重的地方。
Because so often, throughout our history, those have been the places where progress really happens
因為常常，在我們整個歷史中，這些地方是真正發生進步的地方，
the places where minds are changed, lives transformed, where our great American story unfolds.
改變思想，改變生活，這是我們偉大的美國歷史所在。
For example, think back to the struggle for women's suffrage and the story of a leading suffragist and Oberlin alum named Lucy Stone.
例如，回想一下爭取婦女選舉權的斗爭，以及著名的選舉權主義者、歐柏林學院的校友露西·斯通的故事。
People screamed at her. They spat on her. They even threw prayer books at her as she tried to speak.
人們喊著抗議她。人們對她吐口水。當她演講時，他們甚至向她扔了祈禱書。
Her opponents declared that letting women vote was "unnatural," would lead to child neglect and all kinds of social ills.
她的反對者宣稱讓婦女投票是違反自然的，這將導致兒童被忽視和各種社會弊病。
So I'd say that debate was pretty polarized, wouldn't you?
所以我想說辯論是兩極分化很嚴重的，不是嗎？
And think about President Roosevelt's struggle to pass the New Deal a few decades later.
想想羅斯福總統在幾十年后為通過新政做的努力。
FDR's plan for Social Security was called "socialist," a "fraud on the workingman."
羅斯福的社會保障計劃被稱為“社會主義的”，是“對工人的欺騙”。
One opponent even stated that it would "end the progress of a great country."
一位反對者甚至表示，它將終結一個偉大國家的進步。
So that debate was pretty contentious, too.
因此，這場辯論也頗具爭議。
