評論
打印
He saw his fate in terms of the nation's own destiny. As its horizons expanded, so did his. He had, in other words, an acute dollars-and-cents stake in the continued growth and development of his country.
他將個人的命運與國家的命運緊密相連。隨著國家的疆域變得開闊，他們的視野也隨之開闊了。換句話說，這個國家的持續成長和發展與他的經濟利益息息相關。
And that, perhaps, is where the contrast between Grant and Lee becomes most striking. The Virginia aristocrat, inevitably, saw himself in relation to his own region. He lived in a static society which could endure almost anything except change. Instinctively, his first loyalty would go to the locality in which that society existed. He would fight to the limit of endurance to defend it, because in defending it he was defending everything that gave his own life its deepest meaning.
或許，這就是格蘭特和李最顯著的不同之處吧。這位弗吉尼亞貴族不可避免地把自己同其所生存的地區聯系在一起。他生活在一個固定的社會模式中，只要不改變社會模式，它就能夠忍耐任何事。從本能上講他首要的忠誠便是維護當地社會模式的存在。他會用盡全力去捍衛它，因為在捍衛這種社會模式的同時他也在捍衛著賦予他生命最深刻意義的一切東西。
The Westerner, on the other hand, would fight with an equal tenacity for the broader concept of society. He fought so because everything he lived by was tied to growth, expansion, and a constantly widening horizon. What he lived by would survive or fall with the nation itself. He could not possibly stand by unmoved in the face of an attempt to destroy the Union. He would combat it with everything he had, because he could only see it as an effort to cut the ground out from under his feet.
相反，西部人會用同樣的堅韌精神為更廣泛的社會理念而奮斗。他為之奮斗是因為他賴以生存的一切都與發展、擴張和不斷延伸的疆域相聯系。他賴以生存的一切都與這個國家共存亡。看到有人企圖分裂聯邦，他不可能坐視不管。他愿意竭盡全力與之作戰，因為他認為這一做法就是要使他的理想落空。
