Jennifer Burns on Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand (Ep. 197)

Then, as time went on, one thing I came more to appreciate was the way he had both a very consistent message and some change in development in his thought — the dynamism and stability at the same time.

然后，随着时间的推移，我越来越欣赏的一件事是，他既传达了非常一致的信息，又在思想发展上发生了一些变化——同时具有活力和稳定性。

That shift would happen around Friedman, and what was important is that he was there on the ground floor of that in the 1930s.

这种转变将发生在弗里德曼周围，重要的是他在 20 世纪 30 年代就在底层。

He was trained by some of the most preeminent mathematical economists of his generation at Columbia, not necessarily at Chicago.

他在哥伦比亚大学（不一定是在芝加哥）接受了他这一代中一些最杰出的数理经济学家的培训。

Over time, he came to reject that approach.

随着时间的推移，他开始拒绝这种做法。

This is something not a lot of people, particularly economists, know about Friedman.

关于弗里德曼，很多人，尤其是经济学家，都不了解这一点。

But it was significant that he rejected it, not out of ignorance but from a position of understanding mathematical economics, having actually made his mark early in his career with several papers and then deciding that, intellectually, this was unsatisfying, and this was not providing him with the portrait of the world that he thought economics could reveal if done the way that he ultimately did it.

但重要的是，他拒绝了它，不是出于无知，而是出于理解数理经济学的立场，事实上，他在职业生涯的早期就发表了几篇论文，然后认为，从理智上讲，这并不令人满意，这并没有为他提供他认为如果按照他最终的方式去做的话，经济学可以揭示的世界的肖像。

They ended up with millions of punch cards.

他们最终得到了数百万张打孔卡。

They had this very rudimentary technology, and Friedman was one of the analysts hired by the federal government in the mid ’30s to figure this information out, basically, to process this data.

他们拥有这种非常基本的技术，弗里德曼是联邦政府在 30 年代中期聘请的分析师之一，基本上是为了找出这些信息来处理这些数据。

As he grappled with that in his workaday life, he came up with a couple of statistical — shortcuts is to be a bit flippant — but techniques to enable you to get through data very quickly, and those became important papers.

当他在日常生活中努力解决这个问题时，他想出了一些统计方法——“捷径有点轻率”——但是可以让你快速获取数据的技术，这些都成为了重要的论文。

He also had a second discovery that I talk about in the book, when he was working at the Statistical Research Group, which was a secret wartime agency.

他还有我在书中谈到的第二个发现，当时他在统计研究小组工作，该小组是一个战时秘密机构。

This was a similar task in that they were given a problem by the army that said, basically, how can we know if our munitions work?

这是一个类似的任务，军队给他们提出了一个问题，基本上是，我们如何知道我们的弹药是否有效？

How can we test them more efficiently, given that we’re fighting the biggest war we’ve ever fought on two different fronts?

鉴于我们正在两个不同的战线上进行有史以来最大规模的战争，我们如何才能更有效地测试它们？

He came up with what he called the super colossal test, and he was able to conceptualize it and design it.

他提出了他所谓的超级巨大测试，并且能够将其概念化并设计出来。

But he wasn’t able to prove it mathematically because, although he was a skilled mathematician, he said, “I’m not there.

但他无法从数学上证明这一点，因为尽管他是一位熟练的数学家，但他说：“我不在那里。

I need a little bit of a better mathematician.” He ended up bringing in Abraham Wald to finalize the results of the idea they had come up with, and this became known as Sequential Analysis and ended up being a huge boon to the US military in terms of enabling them to test their ordnance and move forward.

我需要一位更好的数学家。”他最终请亚伯拉罕·沃尔德来敲定他们提出的想法的结果，这被称为序列分析，最终为美国军方带来了巨大的福音，使他们能够测试他们的弹药并向前推进。

It’s fascinating in terms of Friedman’s later life — his earlier career, his intellectual discoveries are very much embedded in a growing federal government that’s growing because of the Great Depression, that’s growing because of World War II.

就弗​​里德曼的晚年生活而言，这是令人着迷的——他早期的职业生涯、他的知识发现在很大程度上植根于一个不断壮大的联邦政府，这个政府因大萧条而成长，因第二次世界大战而成长。

This is what enables him to develop that statistical prowess.

这使他能够发展统计能力。

It gives him a very strong reputation, a field of economics.

这给了他在经济学领域非常高的声誉。

But what’s interesting is, within five years of that, he’s turning his back on those techniques and methods and saying, “This isn’t applicable to understanding human economic behavior.

但有趣的是，五年之内，他就放弃了这些技术和方法，并表示：“这不适用于理解人类经济行为。

These mathematical models and statistical techniques — these aren’t enough.”

这些数学模型和统计技术 —— 这些还不够。”

Henry Simons had a book that was a big deal in the 1930s.

亨利·西蒙斯 (Henry Simons) 的一本书在 20 世纪 30 年代引起了轰动。

It was called A Positive Program for Laissez Faire.

它被称为自由放任的积极计划。

It was an effort to talk about principles of liberalism — what we would call classical liberalism — and apply them in the New Deal context and use them to critique the New Deal.

这是一种讨论自由主义原则——我们称之为古典自由主义——并将它们应用到新政背景中并用它们来批评新政的努力。

Then Simons became very actively involved in promoting what was called the Chicago Plan, which was a monetary solution to the Great Depression.

然后西蒙斯非常积极地参与推动所谓的芝加哥计划，这是大萧条的货币解决方案。

It actually would’ve been a radical reformulation of the banking sector.

这实际上是对银行业的彻底改革。

Simons had friends in high places, was pushing this through the political system.

西蒙斯在高层有朋友，正在通过政治体系推动这一点。

I think that was an early model for Friedman.

我认为这是弗里德曼的早期模型。

At the same time — it was about the 1950s — at one point, he was offered a berth on Eisenhower’s Council of Economic Advisers, and he said no. He basically wanted to do his work at the University of Chicago.

与此同时——大约是 20 世纪 50 年代——有一次，艾森豪威尔经济顾问委员会向他提供了一个席位，但他拒绝了。他基本上想在芝加哥大学完成他的工作。

At that point, it didn’t feel done.

那时，感觉还没有完成。

He didn’t want to step into the public realm.

他不想踏入公共领域。

I think he was always paying attention, always thinking about it.

我认为他一直在关注，一直在思考。

It’s really with his connection to Barry Goldwater that he has the first phase of being a public intellectual.

正是由于他与巴里·戈德华特的联系，他才进入了成为公共知识分子的第一阶段。

That also comes after he’s completed, with Anna Schwartz, his magnum opus, A Monetary History of the United States.

这也是在他与安娜·施瓦茨合作完成其代表作《美国货币史》之后发生的。

I think he was both strategic and deliberate in that he wanted to do his major scientific work before he stepped into the public realm.

我认为他既具有战略性又深思熟虑，因为他想在进入公共领域之前完成他的主要科学工作。

There are two phases of him as a public intellectual.

作为公共知识分子，他有两个阶段。

There’s the ’60s to the ’70s, and then there’s the post-Nobel Prize, when he’s retired and when he is still out there, but that’s when he’s on Donahue and has more of a presence in the Republican establishment.

从六十年代到七十年代，然后是诺贝尔奖获得后，当他退休时，当他仍然在那里时，但那是当他在多纳休并在共和党建制派中有更多影响力的时候。

As I was reading this, I was thinking, he doesn’t have a consciousness of what we would call selective reading or bias or selective recognition of facts to fit a preexisting .

当我读到这篇文章时，我在想，他没有意识到我们所说的选择性阅读或偏见或选择性识别事实以适应预先存在的事实。

.

。

.

。

He didn’t see that as a pitfall or a problem.

他并不认为这是一个陷阱或问题。

On the other hand, he does say in some of his later work, “Look, everyone has a point of view.

另一方面，他在后来的一些作品中确实说过，“看，每个人都有自己的观点。

Everyone comes from a place.” I wouldn’t say it’s radical perspectivalism, but it’s an awareness that you stand somewhere, and we can’t get away from this.

每个人都来自一个地方。”我不会说这是激进的视角主义，但这是一种意识到你站在某个地方，我们无法摆脱这一点。

Therefore, we just have to proceed anyhow.

因此，无论如何我们都必须继续。

I think he truly believed he was testing, to the best of his ability, his priors, and he believed that he was willing to revise them.

我认为他确实相信他正在尽最大的能力测试他的先验，并且他相信他愿意修改它们。

I think in some cases he was.

我认为在某些情况下他是。

In other cases, what he found matched his priors.

在其他情况下，他的发现与他的先验相符。

I don’t think that invalidates his whole intellectual project, but I think it’s interesting — his level of confidence in his ability to evaluate his own thinking.

我不认为这会使他的整个智力项目失效，但我认为这很有趣——他对自己评估自己想法的能力充满信心。

At the same time, I also think that is one way to do science.

同时，我也认为这是做科学的一种方式。

You have a hypothesis; you go in with a hypothesis and you see if it’s true.

你有一个假设；你提出一个假设，然后看看它是否正确。

That was very much how he operated.

这就是他的行事方式。

She and his son, David, also convinced him to do Newsweek.

她和他的儿子大卫也说服他去做《新闻周刊》。

They said, “You owe it to yourself, to the country.

他们说：“你对自己、对国家负有责任。

You’ve got to do this.” They really pushed him.

你必须这样做。”他们确实推动了他。

I think he would not have been so prominent in the public eye without her.

我想如果没有她，他就不会在公众眼中如此引人注目。

I think there are other contributions just allowing him to be really singularly focused on his work because she took care of everything else.

我认为还有其他贡献让他能够真正专注于他的工作，因为她照顾了其他一切。

Friedman always had a connection to those communities.

弗里德曼始终与这些社区有着联系。

There are some times, I forget exactly where, but I’ve seen some libertarian material from the ’70s where David convinced Friedman to do an interview or call in to a conference.

有时，我忘记了具体在哪里，但我看过一些 70 年代的自由主义材料，其中大卫说服弗里德曼接受采访或召集会议。

For libertarians in the late ’60s and ’70s, Friedman was a bit of a court intellectual.

对于 60 年代末和 70 年代的自由主义者来说，弗里德曼有点像宫廷知识分子。

He was too statist for their tastes, but he stayed engaged with them.

对于他们的口味来说，他过于集权，但他仍然与他们保持着联系。

I think David was the conduit.

我认为大卫是渠道。

David, at that point, was much more of an anarcho-capitalist than his father.

那时的大卫比他的父亲更像是一个无政府资本主义者。

I think he helped the elder Friedman keep his pulse on what was happening with a younger and more radical student movement.

我认为他帮助老弗里德曼掌握了更年轻、更激进的学生运动的动态。

There’s an anecdote I recount in the book, where at the end of their first year in graduate school, as they were getting ready to depart for the summer, Milton tried to kiss Rose, and she rebuffed him.

我在书中讲述了一个轶事，在研究生第一年结束时，当他们准备离开去度暑假时，米尔顿试图亲吻罗斯，但她拒绝了他。

Then they were apart for a year, and when they came back together, things had changed, and she was ready to be in a relationship with him.

然后他们分开了一年，当他们重新在一起时，事情发生了变化，她准备好与他建立关系。

Then they were in a sextet of couples who spent all their time together.

然后他们就组成了六人组，所有的时间都在一起度过。

There’s then a period where it seems unclear what is going to happen next.

然后有一段时间似乎不清楚接下来会发生什么。

I don’t think that Milton Friedman ever seriously had another girlfriend or considered another partner, and same for Rose.

我不认为米尔顿·弗里德曼真的有过另一个女朋友或考虑过另一个伴侣，罗斯也是如此。

But it was the 1930s.

但那是20世纪30年代。

Economic prospects were slim, and it was very much a cultural more that a man had to be able to support his wife and children before he would consider marriage.

经济前景黯淡，而男人在考虑结婚之前必须能够养活妻子和孩子，这在很大程度上是一种文化。

So there’s a couple-year period where they’re still together, and Rose is thinking they’re about to get married, and Milton is not so sure.

所以有几年他们仍然在一起，罗斯认为他们即将结婚，而米尔顿则不太确定。

I think at some point, his friends were like, “What are you doing?

我想在某个时候，他的朋友们会说：“你在做什么？

Just wise up and marry her.” At some point, she called his bluff and said, “Look, we have to get married,” and they did.

聪明点，娶她吧。”在某个时刻，她揭穿了他的虚张声势并说：“听着，我们必须结婚了，”他们就这么做了。

I don’t think there was ever any question of the love.

我认为爱情从来没有任何问题。

I think it was just there was some hesitation because of their economic fortunes.

我认为只是因为他们的经济状况而有些犹豫。

Though, as I think of it, this is a couple in their 90s that’s had a good life.

不过，在我看来，这是一对90多岁的夫妇，过着美好的生活。

They’re looking back, they’re reflecting; they’re not trying to settle scores.

他们在回顾，他们在反思；他们并不是想算账。

They’re trying to put the most positive spin on anything possible.

他们试图为一切可能的事情带来最积极的影响。

I think it’s generous in that spirit, but it’s not very accurate.

我认为这种精神是慷慨的，但不是很准确。

After a while, I realized the biggest person that I was writing against in my biography was not another biographer, but it was Two Lucky People.

过了一段时间，我意识到我在传记中所写的最大的反对者不是另一个传记作者，而是两个幸运的人。

That was the text that everybody had in mind that was just simply not accurate in many ways.

这是每个人脑海中的文本，但在很多方面都不准确。

I’ll tell you two ways that I see it as being inaccurate.

我会告诉你两种我认为它不准确的方式。

One is, Friedman recounts an episode of him testifying to Congress.

其中之一是，弗里德曼讲述了他向国会作证的一段经历。

He says — and this is in the early 1940s — “I had no idea how Keynesian I was.” There’s been maybe 5 to 10 books and articles that have jumped off that to say, “Well, Milton Friedman was once a Keynesian, and then he had some type of conversion.” I do not see that in any of the records I’ve looked at.

他说 —— 现在是 20 世纪 40 年代初 —— “我不知道自己是多么的凯恩斯主义者。”大约有 5 到 10 本书和文章跳出了这一点，说：“嗯，米尔顿·弗里德曼曾经是凯恩斯主义者，然后他发生了某种类型的转变。”在我看过的任何记录中我都没有看到这一点。

I go into some detail, both in the text and more detail in the footnotes, about why I don’t think this is accurate.

我在正文和脚注中详细介绍了一些细节，说明为什么我认为这不准确。

Friedman’s looking at his congressional testimony or reads it in five minutes and says, “Oh, this sounds Keynesian,” from his vantage point in the ’90s.

弗里德曼看着他的国会证词，或者在五分钟内读完它，然后说，“哦，这听起来像是凯恩斯主义的”，从他 90 年代的角度来看。

It’s not an accurate depiction of his views or of his location in American economics in the 1940s, but it’s taken as gospel because he said it.

这并没有准确描述他的观点或他在 20 世纪 40 年代美国经济中的地位，但它被视为福音，因为他说过这句话。

The other thing I would say — I talk about this in some detail as well — in the 1950s, there was a large conflict at the University of Chicago between Friedman and a group associated with the economics department, the Cowles Commission.

我要说的另一件事是——“我也详细地谈论过这个问题”——在 20 世纪 50 年代，弗里德曼和一个与经济系相关的团体考尔斯委员会在芝加哥大学发生了一场巨大的冲突。

That was actually a group of mathematical economists, many leftist in nature, and Friedman didn’t like their economics, and he didn’t like their politics.

那实际上是一群数理经济学家，其中许多人本质上是左派，弗里德曼不喜欢他们的经济学，也不喜欢他们的政治。

It was basically an extended turf war.

这基本上是一场旷日持久的地盘争夺战。

They mentioned this briefly, but when you dig down a little bit more, they mentioned Tjalling Koopmans, who’s the leader of Cowles at that point.

他们简短地提到了这一点，但是当你进一步深入挖掘时，他们提到了 Tjalling Koopmans，他是当时考尔斯的领导者。

It’s along the lines of “spirited discussion, some conflict.” In reality, there are accounts that indicate Koopmans went through a mental breakdown as part of his conflict with Friedman and had to take time away from the university, had to go to a music camp to rest his mind.

它的思路是“激烈的讨论，一些冲突”。事实上，有报道称，库普曼斯在与弗里德曼的冲突中经历了精神崩溃，不得不离开大学一段时间，不得不去音乐营让自己的头脑休息。

Friedman was successful in getting their Rockefeller grant canceled, basically cutting off their funding sources.

弗里德曼成功地取消了他们的洛克菲勒资助，基本上切断了他们的资金来源。

You would know there was conflict, but you wouldn’t know that it was very intense and dark conflict.

你会知道有冲突，但你不会知道这是非常激烈和黑暗的冲突。

You don’t see that in the memoir — which, again, may be to his credit.

你在回忆录中看不到这一点——这也许是他的功劳。

He’s trying not to exhume all the negative things he did, but he’s glossing over how intense .

他试图不去挖掘他所做的所有负面事情，但他掩盖了其中的严重性。

.

。

.

。

This was like academic street fighting.

这就像学术巷战。

It really was.

确实如此。

The story I go into in some detail involves Anna Schwartz and how the Columbia faculty simply would not give her a PhD.

我详细讲述的故事涉及安娜·施瓦茨（Anna Schwartz）以及哥伦比亚大学的教员如何根本不给她博士学位。

They just wouldn’t do it.

他们就是不肯这么做。

They could not be convinced that she deserved a PhD.

他们无法相信她值得获得博士学位。

It’s very clearly sexism at work.

这很明显是工作中的性别歧视。

Friedman had to put his foot down and really chew some people out before they decided to give her the degree.

在决定授予她学位之前，弗里德曼必须坚定立场，认真地批评一些人。

Yes, I think in the absence of professional norms, you have a lot more room for power plays, for unfairness, for prejudice.

是的，我认为在缺乏职业规范的情况下，你就有更大的空间进行权力斗争、不公平和偏见。

That said, I think the professional norms can get too rigid, to the point where you cultivate groupthink and you close out the possibility of new perspectives, new ideas, new paths.

也就是说，我认为专业规范可能会变得过于僵化，以至于你会培养集体思维，从而排除新观点、新想法、新路径的可能性。

This was definitely a moment of formation.

这绝对是一个形成的时刻。

What they really did was provide a counterpoint to his natural inclinations.

他们真正所做的是与他的自然倾向形成对立。

Take A Monetary History.

以货币史为例。

This would not really have been a narrative or a history.

这实际上并不是一个叙述或历史。

It would’ve been a bunch of charts and graphs about the money supply.

这将是一堆关于货币供应量的图表。

It would’ve been closer to, say, Kuznets’ studies of national income.

比如说，它会更接近库兹涅茨对国民收入的研究。

It’s really Schwartz that has a love for history, that puts it into a narrative that convinces him to make it a much longer story.

施瓦茨确实热爱历史，将历史融入到叙事中，说服他把它写成一个更长的故事。

That’s why that book resonates — because it’s not just data.

这就是为什么这本书能引起共鸣——因为它不仅仅是数据。

It’s a narrative.

这是一个叙述。

It’s a story.

这是一个故事。

When it comes to the Theory of the Consumption Function, he was basically drawing on the women’s world of consumption economics, which was something that had been a big part of the field, but because of this professional process, which also was driven by men, there was this machismo to it.

当谈到消费函数理论时，他基本上借鉴了消费经济学的女性世界，这是该领域的一个重要组成部分，但由于这个专业过程也是由男性驱动的，所以有这种大男子主义。

A lot of men had turned away from consumption economics.

许多人已经放弃了消费经济学。

Since Friedman had not, he had an advantage.

由于弗里德曼没有，所以他有优势。

He was zigging where everyone was zagging.

他在每个人都在曲折的地方曲折前进。

Now, why was Friedman able to do this?

那么，为什么弗里德曼能够做到这一点呢？

Was he more enlightened than other economists of his day?

他比同时代的其他经济学家更开明吗？

I would say both yes and no. I had some anecdotes and stories that he was not feminist in his behavior.

我会说是和否。我有一些轶事和故事表明他的行为不是女权主义者。

On the other hand, compared to economists of his day, he very much was.

另一方面，与同时代的经济学家相比，他确实是这样。

I didn’t find any letter that mentioned anything negative about any of his collaborators as women.

我没有找到任何一封信提及他的合作者作为女性的任何负面信息。

That’s not true for other economists.

对于其他经济学家来说情况并非如此。

Some cases — I think it’s Samuelson who will write letters supposedly in support of his female students that turn out to actually be very negative and very sexist in tone.

在某些情况下，我认为萨缪尔森会写信来支持他的女学生，但结果实际上是非常消极和非常性别歧视的语气。

I tend to think that Friedman had a way of missing some social cues and social norms in ways that could be detrimental.

我倾向于认为弗里德曼错过了一些社会线索和社会规范，这可能是有害的。

When it came to the women working with him, he had an ability that maybe others didn’t, to see the person before he saw the woman.

当谈到与他一起工作的女性时，他有一种其他人可能没有的能力，在他看到女人之前先看到这个人。

If it was a very smart woman, he would recognize, first and foremost, that this was a smart woman.

如果这是一个非常聪明的女人，他首先会认识到这是一个聪明的女人。

Secondly, register that this was a woman, and then maybe that would come with some of the supposed limitations.

其次，登记这是一名女性，然后也许会带来一些所谓的限制。

But he really was generous and supportive of the women in his life as intellectuals.

但作为知识分子，他确实很慷慨并支持他生活中的女性。

I think that’s his secret sauce because no one else is really doing it at the time.

我认为这是他的秘密武器，因为当时没有其他人真正这样做。

It gives him new perspectives.

这给了他新的视角。

When you look at the work he was cited for in the Nobel Prize, most of it has a major woman collaborator: A Monetary History, A Theory of the Consumption Function.

当你看他获得诺贝尔奖的作品时，你会发现其中大部分都有一位主要的女性合作者：《货币史》、《消费函数理论》。

There’s a third, which isn’t coming to mind, but those two would not have been done without a female collaborator.

还有第三个，我还没想到，但是如果没有女性合作者，这两件事就不会完成。

I knew nothing about this when I started, and I was like, “This is strange.”

当我开始时我对此一无所知，我想，“这很奇怪。”

I also think it’s why he wrote books.

我也认为这就是他写书的原因。

He wouldn’t have written books without these collaborators.

如果没有这些合作者，他就不会写书。

I think books still are very, very powerful.

我认为书籍仍然非常非常有力量。

Even in a field that’s moving toward papers, books retain their power.

即使在一个逐渐走向论文化的领域，书籍仍然保持着它们的力量。

My sense is that he didn’t consider Hayek an economist because he wasn’t empirical enough.

我的感觉是，他不认为哈耶克是经济学家，因为他不够实证。

When Friedman turned away from mathematical economics, he was turning away from theoretical models.

当弗里德曼放弃数理经济学时，他也就放弃了理论模型。

He wasn’t turning away from data per se, and he really believed you had to have theory, which for him, was price theory; empirics, such as his collaborators gathered through the study of consumption; and you had to test that theory with the empirics.

他并没有放弃数据本身，他真的相信你必须有理论，对他来说，这就是价格理论；经验主义者，比如他的合作者通过消费研究收集到的；你必须用经验来检验这个理论。

He saw Hayek — although Hayek really did influence and teach him intellectually, I would say — he saw him not as a proper economist because he wasn’t doing that empirical research.

他看到了哈耶克——尽管哈耶克确实在智力上影响并教导了他，但我想说——他不认为哈耶克是一个合适的经济学家，因为他没有进行实证研究。

He wasn’t trying to test his theories with empirical data sets.

他并没有试图用经验数据集来检验他的理论。

I don’t think he wanted Hayek training graduate students.

我认为他不希望哈耶克培养研究生。

He was happy to put Hayek on the syllabus, happy to have him teaching seminars, very involved with him in the broader intellectual endeavors.

他很高兴将哈耶克列入教学大纲，很高兴让他在研讨会上授课，并积极参与他更广泛的智力活动。

But I think he had an idea of what and how economics should be, and Hayek didn’t fit into that at that point.

但我认为他对经济学应该是什么以及如何经济学有自己的想法，而哈耶克当时并不适合这一点。

The presidential lecture he gave in 1967, saying there wasn’t a long-run tradeoff between inflation and unemployment — there are definitely several key figures in the British political establishment who found that made a big impact on their thinking because they felt like they were living that.

他在 1967 年发表的总统演讲中表示，通货膨胀与失业之间并不存在长期的权衡——英国政治机构中肯定有几位关键人物发现这对他们的思维产生了重大影响，因为他们觉得自己就是这样生活的。

“We’ve been trying to spend money to bring down unemployment, and now we’ve spent all this money, and unemployment is still going up, and inflation is going up.” In a lot of ways, Friedman seemed to be explaining what was happening in Britain, and it happened sooner.

“我们一直在努力花钱来降低失业率，现在我们已经花光了所有这些钱，但失业率仍在上升，通货膨胀也在上升。”在很多方面，弗里德曼似乎正在解释英国正在发生的事情，而且它发生得更早。

On the other hand, he also became a symbolic figure very quickly in British politics because the British monetary system is different.

另一方面，由于英国的货币体系不同，他也很快成为英国政坛的象征性人物。

It was different at that time, so his advice wasn’t technically suitable in many ways.

当时情况不同，所以他的建议在很多方面在技术上都不适合。

Secondly, he became a much more prominent figure after the Nobel Prize and after his controversy over his connection to the Pinochet regime in Chile.

其次，在获得诺贝尔奖以及因与智利皮诺切特政权的关系而引发争议之后，他成为了更加突出的人物。

He then became a whipping boy of left and right.

然后他就成了左派和右派的替罪羊。

He does have, one, a substantive intellectual impact, and two, a symbolic impact.

他确实具有，第一，实质性的智力影响，第二，象征性的影响。

I don’t think his celebrations of individual freedom maybe have the same cultural resonance in Britain as they do in the United States.

我认为他对个人自由的庆祝在英国可能不会像在美国那样产生同样的文化共鸣。

In the United States, he’s in some ways tapping into the rugged-individualism, frontier spirit.

在美国，他在某种程度上利用了粗犷的个人主义和前沿精神。

We’re Americans, and we’re free.

我们是美国人，我们是自由的。

He’s got more of that to play with than I think he did have in Britain.

他有比我认为他在英国有更多的东西可以玩。

You don’t see “capitalism” and “freedom” falling off people’s lips in the same way in England as it did in the United States.

在英国，你不会像在美国那样看到“资本主义”和“自由”从人们嘴里脱口而出。

He really didn’t want to make that choice because, one, freedom was his God, and two, he was not an egalitarian, but he definitely was concerned about those who had less, and he wanted there to be fewer poor people.

他实在不想做出这样的选择，因为一，自由是他的上帝，二，他不是一个平等主义者，但他绝对关心那些拥有较少的人，他希望穷人少一些。

He didn’t really want to confront that tension.

他真的不想面对这种紧张。

He spent a lot of time trying to massage it.

他花了很多时间尝试按摩它。

I think that’s where his interest in what we would call UBI comes from.

我认为这就是他对我们所说的 UBI 的兴趣的来源。

The other thing I really do want to stress is, in his era, it looked plausible that you didn’t have to choose.

我真正想强调的另一件事是，在他的时代，你不必选择似乎是合理的。

In other words, it’s the era of the convergence of incomes.

换句话说，这是一个收入趋同的时代。

It’s the era where, as countries develop economically, their income inequality goes down, so he’s seeing a very different set of figures than we look at today.

在这个时代，随着各国经济的发展，收入不平等现象逐渐缩小，因此他看到的数字与我们今天看到的非常不同。

As a result, he was much more optimistic that the more capitalism spread, the more inequality would decline, the better off everybody would be.

因此，他更加乐观地认为，资本主义传播得越多，不平等现象就会减少得越多，每个人都会过得更好。

He really didn’t wrestle very much, although he started to a bit at the end of his life, with the conundrum, what if capitalism spreads and things get worse for a lot of people?

他确实不怎么摔跤，尽管他在生命的尽头开始了一点摔跤，但他面临着一个难题：如果资本主义蔓延并且很多人的情况变得更糟怎么办？

What do I do then?

那我该怎么办？

He was then tagged as the architect and Western endorser of the regime, which was not the case.

然后他被标记为该政权的设计师和西方支持者，但事实并非如此。

I think he came to stand in for people’s discomfort with the idea that the Nixon administration had perhaps supported the coup.

我认为他代表了人们对尼克松政府可能支持政变的想法的不满。

There’s another piece of it, that the dream of Allende was there could be a peaceful road to socialism.

还有一点是，阿连德的梦想是可以有一条和平的社会主义道路。

The coup seemed to suggest that that was not true, that the peaceful road to socialism could not happen.

这次政变似乎表明事实并非如此，和平的社会主义道路不可能实现。

If the coup was not inevitable because it was manufactured by Western economists and Western governments, then perhaps we could get back on the vía chilena and make our way to the peaceful redistribution of property and power and the success of a socialist government.

如果政变不是不可避免的，因为它是西方经济学家和西方政府制造的，那么也许我们可以回到智利之路，并为财产和权力的和平重新分配以及社会主义政府的成功开辟道路。

I think he got really tangled up in all these questions about, is it possible to have a peaceful transition to a socialist or communist government?

我认为他真的很纠结于所有这些问题：是否有可能和平过渡到社会主义或共产主义政府？

Making Friedman the problem enabled you to focus on Friedman or Nixon, rather than the very real problems created by the Allende government in Chile.

让弗里德曼成为问题使你能够关注弗里德曼或尼克松，而不是智利阿连德政府造成的真正问题。

When the junta comes in, they basically keep doing everything they’ve been doing in terms of state control of the economy.

当军政府上台时，他们基本上继续做他们在国家控制经济方面所做的一切。

They reprivatize a little bit, but they don’t really know what to do.

他们重新私有化了一点，但他们真的不知道该怎么做。

Say the socialist governor of the mine is replaced by a military governor of the mine, and then nothing is improving economically.

假设矿井的社会主义管理者被军事管理者取代，那么经济上就没有任何改善。

About a year, a year and a half in, there’s a changing of the guard internally in the Chilean regime.

大约一年、一年半之后，智利政权内部发生了换岗。

A group of economists — several of whom did have Chicago training — basically are able to get the ear of the dictator and say, “Look, we need to do things differently.

一群经济学家——“其中几位确实接受过芝加哥培训”——基本上能够听取独裁者的意见并说：“看，我们需要以不同的方式做事。

We need to reprivatize.

我们需要重新私有化。

We need to open markets to international trade, and we need to do all this stuff.” Pinochet basically says, “Okay, let’s do it.” It’s at that point that they’re like, “Let’s bring in Milton Friedman.”

我们需要向国际贸易开放市场，我们需要做所有这些事情。”皮诺切特基本上会说：“好吧，让我们开始吧。”就在那时，他们就像，“让我们引入米尔顿·弗里德曼。”

Then Friedman comes in.

然后弗里德曼进来了。

The policy has been decided, and basically, his role is to speak to what I jokingly call the Chilean deep state.

政策已经决定，基本上，他的角色就是与我戏称的智利深层政府对话。

He goes around and he meets with all the military functionaries who will carry out these policies.

他四处走访，会见了所有将执行这些政策的军事官员。

He explains in his very lucid way, here’s why this is the right medicine for Chile.

他以非常清晰的方式解释说，这就是为什么这对智利来说是正确的药物。

He does interviews.

他做采访。

He meets a lot of different people.

他遇到了很多不同的人。

He meets Pinochet very briefly.

他与皮诺切特的会面非常短暂。

He tells him, “You have to cut spending to cut inflation.” He also reportedly says, according to someone who is in the meeting, “If you give the people economic freedom, eventually, it’s going to mean political freedom.” Apparently, Pinochet is like, “Yeah.

他告诉他，“你必须削减支出才能降低通货膨胀。”据与会人士透露，他还表示，“如果给予人民经济自由，最终将意味着政治自由。”显然，皮诺切特说：“是的。

yeah, whatever.

是的，无论如何。

Sure.” What I found in the records that I read, the big question that everyone had for Friedman was, “This is going to be too painful.

当然。”我在读到的记录中发现，每个人对弗里德曼提出的最大问题是：“这将是太痛苦了。

We can’t do this.

我们不能这样做。

This is going to hurt too many people.”

这会伤害太多人。”

Even in the military regime, they are worried.

即使在军政权下，他们也感到担忧。

“If we cut all the state supports that have been created, and we try to stop printing money and stop inflation, this is going to cause a huge amount of economic pain.” Friedman’s like a broken record.

“如果我们削减所有已设立的国家支持，并试图停止印钞并阻止通货膨胀，这将造成巨大的经济痛苦。”弗里德曼就像一张破纪录。

“Yes, but you have to do this, and the quicker you do it, the quicker it’ll be over.

“是的，但是你必须这样做，而且你做得越快，事情就会越快结束。

Cut the spending, provide emergency economic support, and you’ll get through it.” Basically, he uses the metaphor of cutting off a dog’s tail, which is a horrific metaphor, but he says, “You’ve got to do it all at once.

削减支出，提供紧急经济支持，你就能渡过难关。”基本上，他用了切断狗尾巴的比喻，这是一个可怕的比喻，但他说，“你必须一次性完成这一切。

You can’t drag it out.”

你不能把它拖出来。”

I would say his function is to certify and explain a policy change that has already happened.

我想说他的职责是证明和解释已经发生的政策变化。

He is basically a big name flown in to tell everybody, “Here’s a new program.

他基本上是一个大人物，飞来告诉大家：“这是一个新项目。

Here’s why it’s going to work.

这就是为什么它会起作用。

Let’s get psyched and do it.” He’s not the mastermind in any way.

让我们打起精神，去做吧。”无论如何，他都不是主谋。

The real reason his presence there is so controversial is the Nobel Prize, which is awarded, I think, about a year later.

他的出现如此有争议的真正原因是诺贝尔奖，我认为诺贝尔奖是在大约一年后颁发的。

The really unfortunate part is, the Nobel Prize announcement comes just a few weeks after Pinochet’s goons have assassinated a regime critic on the streets of Washington, DC.

真正不幸的是，就在皮诺切特的暴徒在华盛顿特区街头暗杀一名政权批评者几周后，诺贝尔奖的宣布就公布了。

They blow up his car on the streets of Washington, DC.

他们在华盛顿特区的街道上炸毁了他的汽车。

Then a couple weeks later, Friedman wins the Nobel Prize.

几周后，弗里德曼获得了诺贝尔奖。

Now, there’s no connection between these events, but it appears that these right-thinking people of the Western world are patting the dictator on the head.

现在，这些事件之间没有任何联系，但西方世界的这些思想正确的人似乎正在拍拍独裁者的头。

That’s how it’s framed.

这就是它的框架。

Nobody cares about what’s happening in Chile.

没有人关心智利正在发生什么。

Look, they’re celebrating this economist who’s somehow responsible for what has happened.

看，他们正在庆祝这位对所发生的事情负有某种责任的经济学家。

It all gets mushed together to make a political point.

所有这些都被混合在一起以表达一个政治观点。

Within economics, no one’s going to say, “Oh, I’m a Friedmanite,” or fewer people are, but this is someone whose major work was done half a century or more ago, so I don’t think that’s surprising.

在经济学领域，没有人会说，“哦，我是弗里德曼派”，或者更少的人会说，但这是一个主要工作是在半个世纪或更早之前完成的人，所以我认为这并不令人惊讶。

It would be surprising if economics had been at a standstill as Friedman still called the tune.

如果经济像弗里德曼仍然主调那样陷入停滞状态，那将是令人惊讶的。

When you think about the way we accord importance to the modern Federal Reserve, of course, there were things that happened in the world, but Friedman’s ideas did so much to shape that understanding.

当你思考我们如何重视现代美联储时，当然，世界上发生了一些事情，但弗里德曼的想法在很大程度上塑造了这种理解。

He’s still in policymakers’ minds.

他仍然在政策制定者的心中。

He’s still in the monetary policy establishment’s minds, even if they’re not fully following him.

他仍然在货币政策机构的心目中，即使他们没有完全追随他。

I think we’re in the middle of a big reckoning now.

我认为我们现在正处于一场大清算之中。

You saw all the debate about M2 and the pandemic and monetary spending.

你看到了所有关于 M2 、疫情和货币支出的争论。

I don’t know where it’s all going to settle out.

我不知道这一切将在哪里解决。

It’s a more complicated world than the one that Friedman looked at.

这是一个比弗里德曼所看到的更复杂的世界。

I tend to think he is an essential thinker, that the basics of what he talked about are going to be known 50 years from now, for sure.

我倾向于认为他是一位重要的思想家，他所谈论的基础知识肯定会在 50 年后为人所知。

Aaron Director was his brother-in-law, and George Stigler was his grad school friend and eventually became his colleague.

亚伦·迪瑞特是他的妹夫，乔治·斯蒂格勒是他研究生时的朋友，并最终成为他的同事。

This is one thing I really noticed in the book, that for Friedman, friendship and ideological sympathy and commitment to a certain political vision — they’re all intertwined.

这是我在书中真正注意到的一件事，即对于弗里德曼来说，友谊、意识形态同情以及对某种政治愿景的承诺 ——它们都是交织在一起的。

He had cordial relationships with a lot of different people, but they weren’t quite friends.

他与很多不同的人都有着友好的关系，但他们都算不上朋友。

Even, I think, the great crisis in his friendship with Arthur Burns is a policy disagreement.

甚至，我认为，他与阿瑟伯恩斯友谊的巨大危机也是政策分歧。

For Friedman, that policy disagreement just calls into question the whole friendship, although he very quickly tries to reestablish that connection.

对于弗里德曼来说，这种政策分歧只会让整个友谊受到质疑，尽管他很快就试图重建这种联系。

He won’t let that connection go, but the fact that it is so stressed by their disagreement over monetary policy, I think is really indicative.

他不会放弃这种联系，但我认为，他们在货币政策上的分歧使这种联系如此紧张，这一事实确实很能说明问题。

Yes, he walked, talked, breathed economics, all the time.

是的，他一直在走路、说话、呼吸着经济学。

The other thing that’s hard to say is, she didn’t compose a ton of original screenplays.

另一件很难说的事情是，她并没有创作大量的原创剧本。

What she would do is take an existing screenplay and tart it up a little bit, make it more interesting.

她要做的就是把现有的剧本稍微修改一下，让它变得更有趣。

I don’t know that we’ll ever fully .

我不知道我们是否能完全实现。

.

。

.

。

That would be a project, actually, to try to excavate which films did she have a hand in?

实际上，这将是一个试图挖掘她参与了哪些电影的项目？

The fact that she went from penniless immigrant to having a creative role in one of the major studios of her time — there must have been something that was recognized.

事实上，她从身无分文的移民变成了在她那个时代的主要工作室之一中发挥创意的角色——肯定有一些东西得到了认可。

Also, again, as a woman in an era when that wouldn’t have counted in her favor by any means.

而且，再说一次，作为一个女性，在这个时代，这无论如何都不会对她有利。

The pity with Atlas Shrugged is she was uneditable by that time, and she really needed to be edited.

《阿特拉斯耸耸肩》的遗憾在于她当时已经无法编辑，而且确实需要编辑。

COWEN: Sex scenes in Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead — what do you make of them as a reader today?

COWEN：《阿特拉斯耸耸肩》和《源泉》中的性爱场景——作为今天的读者，你如何看待它们？

There are a couple of other young men who she was testing as potential romantic partners.

她正在测试其他几个年轻男子作为潜在的浪漫伴侣。

I found a couple reminiscences at the archive.

我在档案馆里找到了一些回忆。

She would start a friendship.

她将开始一段友谊。

They would come visit her, and then in retrospect, they were like, “You know what, if I had wanted to pursue this romantically, she would have been willing,” or “She was trying to set me up.

他们会来看望她，然后回想起来，他们会说，“你知道吗，如果我想追求浪漫，她会愿意的，”或者“她想陷害我。

She was trying to seduce me, but she was going a little slow, and I didn’t know what was going on.”

她试图引诱我，但她动作有点慢，我不知道发生了什么。”

I think there are maybe two people that were in that position before Nathaniel Branden.

我认为在纳撒尼尔·布兰登之前可能有两个人担任过这个职位。

Then I think once she was with Branden, she was pretty content with him.

然后我想一旦她和布兰登在一起，她就对他很满意。

She wasn’t looking elsewhere.

她没有寻找其他地方。

I think her equilibrium was what she achieved briefly, which was a doting and supportive husband and an exciting secret lover, much younger than her.

我认为她的平衡是她短暂实现的，这是一个溺爱和支持的丈夫和一个令人兴奋的秘密情人，比她年轻得多。

She had it briefly, but it didn’t last.

她有过短暂的经历，但并没有持续多久。

I don’t think that it had an impact on her, but it was one of these documents that said, “To all of you who like Ayn Rand but feel like she hasn’t gone far enough, let’s go there together, and we can appreciate her without feeling like we have to stay with her understanding of the state, or her clinging to the atavistic state.”

我不认为这对她产生了影响，但其中一份文件说：“对于所有喜欢艾因·兰德但觉得她走得还不够远的人，让我们一起去那里，我们可以欣赏她，而不觉得我们必须坚持她对国家的理解，或者她对返祖状态的执着。”

My feeling on both her and Friedman in their not going all the way to anarchy — I think it has something to do with their backgrounds.

我对她和弗里德曼的感觉是，他们没有一路走向无政府状态——我认为这与他们的背景有关。

In Rand’s case, living through revolution and living in Europe.

就兰德而言，他经历过革命并生活在欧洲。

In Friedman’s case, a very real consciousness of his Jewish identity.

就弗​​里德曼而言，他对自己的犹太身份有非常真实的认识。

For both of them, while they felt the state often discriminated against minorities, I think they were more fearful of what would happen without a state in a situation of anarchy, in which they would be identified as racial or ethnic or religious minorities.

对于他们两人来说，虽然他们觉得国家经常歧视少数群体，但我认为他们更担心如果没有国家，在无政府状态下会发生什么，在这种情况下，他们将被视为种族或民族或宗教少数群体。

I think they had a visceral fear of that for themselves and for any other community that would be in that situation.

我认为他们对自己和任何其他处于这种情况的社区都有一种发自内心的恐惧。

That kept both of them from saying, “Blow everything up, and let’s just see what happens.”

这让他们俩都没有说：“把一切都炸掉，让我们看看会发生什么。”

To go back to the big schism between Ayn Rand and Leonard Read — Leonard Read was an early publisher of libertarian pamphlets and materials — came when he published Friedman and Stigler’s Roofs or Ceilings, which was an economic analysis of rent control.

回到安·兰德和伦纳德·里德之间的巨大分歧——伦纳德·里德是自由主义小册子和材料的早期出版商——是在他出版了弗里德曼和斯蒂格勒的《屋顶或天花板》时产生的，这是对租金管制的经济分析。

They were analyzing rent control from the position of economic efficiency, like rent control is economically inefficient.

他们是从经济效率的角度来分析租金管制的，比如租金管制在经济上是低效的。

They were also philosophically opposed to rent control, but they decided, really, strategically, rather than get into this whole philosophical battle, we’re just going to talk about this being economically inefficient.

他们在哲学上也反对租金管制，但他们实际上从战略上决定，而不是陷入整个哲学斗争，我们只是谈论这在经济上效率低下。

Policy choice and policy argument.

政策选择和政策论证。

Ayn Rand understood that Leonard Read had agreed to use her as a kind of ideological gatekeeper, and that he was, according to her, going to show everything the foundation published to her, and she would give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down, and then it would be published.

安·兰德明白，伦纳德·里德同意让她充当某种意识形态的看门人，据她说，他将向她展示基金会发布的所有内容，她会对它竖起大拇指或竖起大拇指，然后它就会被出版。

This may or may not have been the arrangement.

这可能是也可能不是这样的安排。

Whatever it was, Read did not follow that process.

不管是什么，里德并没有遵循这个过程。

He published Roofs or Ceilings.

他出版了《屋顶还是天花板》。

Ayn Rand read it, and she hit the roof.

艾茵·兰德读了这本书，顿时勃然大怒。

You have this fascinating situation where this one titan of the American right, Ayn Rand, is calling another figurehead of American conservatism, Milton Friedman, a communist.

你会看到这样一个令人着迷的情况：美国右翼巨头艾因·兰德（Ayn Rand）称美国保守主义的另一位傀儡米尔顿·弗里德曼（Milton Friedman）为共产主义者。

She thought that Stigler and Friedman were communists because she could tell they were using this utilitarian argument and scrupulously avoiding any moral argument.

她认为斯蒂格勒和弗里德曼是共产主义者，因为她可以看出他们正在使用这种功利主义论点，并小心翼翼地避免任何道德论点。

She viewed that as a veiled way of neutralizing discussion of economic issues such that you couldn’t make an ethical case on behalf of private property.

她认为这是一种暗中中和经济问题讨论的方式，这样你就无法代表私有财产提出道德案例。

So, she became livid.

于是，她就生气了。

She and Read had a huge fight, letters back and forth.

她和里德大吵了一架，书信来来回回。

She’s going to have nothing to do with Leonard Read.

她不会和伦纳德·里德有任何关系。

Now interestingly, Read and Friedman also had a huge fight over this.

有趣的是，里德和弗里德曼还为此发生了激烈的争论。

Part of it was because the original version of the pamphlet — although it was mostly utilitarian in its argument, it did have a nod to the idea that Friedman and Stigler would like more equality than there is now.

部分原因是该小册子的原始版本 ——尽管它的论点大多是功利主义的，但它确实承认了弗里德曼和斯蒂格勒希望比现在更加平等的想法。

They said something like, “Even if you want more equality the way we do, you should still support this on efficiency grounds.”

他们说，“即使你想要像我们一样更加平等，出于效率的考虑，你仍然应该支持这一点。”

This is that influence of Henry Simons again, who was much more egalitarian than Friedman, and when he was close to Simons, Friedman had a more egalitarian cast.

这又是亨利·西蒙斯的影响，他比弗里德曼更加平等，而当他与西蒙斯关系密切时，弗里德曼的立场更加平等。

Well, Leonard Read had a henchman, Orval Watts, who was very, very — almost a social Darwinist, I would say.

嗯，伦纳德·里德有一个心腹，奥瓦尔·瓦茨，我想说，他非常非常——几乎是一个社会达尔文主义者。

Watts did not want that in there, so Watts cut that out.

瓦茨不想把它放在那里，所以瓦茨把它删掉了。

Friedman and Stigler said, “No, no, no, you need to keep it in there.” They said, “Okay, okay, we’ll keep it in.” Then they footnoted it and said something like, “We disagree with this.” Then they published an abridged version of the pamphlet that cut it out entirely.

弗里德曼和斯蒂格勒说：“不，不，不，你需要把它放在那里。”他们说：“好吧，好吧，我们会把它保留下来。”然后他们在脚注中说了这样的话：“我们不同意这一点。”然后他们出版了小册子的缩略版，将其完全删除。

Friedman and Stigler were so mad, they wouldn’t talk to Read for like five years.

弗里德曼和斯蒂格勒非常生气，他们有五年没有和里德说话。

To me, this episode is so illuminating because it’s a question of how do we, in 1946 — coming out of the World War II era, coming out of the Depression, coming out of the success of the New Deal — how do we talk about economics, equality, and fairness?

对我来说，这一事件非常具有启发性，因为它涉及到我们如何在 1946 年——“走出二战时代，走出大萧条，走出新政的成功”——“如何谈论经济、平等和公平？”

Should we talk about it in the old idiom?

我们应该用老成语来谈论它吗？

“You get what you deserve.” Should we talk about it in a new idiom?

“你得到了你应得的。”我们应该用新的习语来谈论它吗？

“Let’s help everyone have the basics.”

“让我们帮助每个人掌握基础知识。”

Or should we not talk about it at all, and use the language of economics about what is the most efficient, which ultimately will redound to the greatest good for the greatest number?

或者我们是否应该根本不谈论它，并使用经济学的语言来讨论什么是最有效的，最终将为最大多数人带来最大的利益？

It’s not really worked out.

这还没有真正解决。

People have really different positions on this.

人们对此有着不同的立场。

This question of rent control is really huge.

租金管制这个问题确实很大。

A huge percentage of housing stock in the United States was rent-controlled at that time due to the war.

当时，由于战争，美国很大一部分住房存量受到租金管制。

There’s an enormous housing shortage.

住房严重短缺。

This was a really big issue.

这是一个非常大的问题。

It was coming up before Congress, so everyone kind of got in, and they couldn’t figure out how to talk about it.

它即将在国会面前讨论，所以每个人都参与其中，但他们不知道如何谈论它。

They just couldn’t figure out how to talk about it, period.

他们只是不知道如何谈论它，就这样。

That’s like the big explosion moment.

这就像大爆炸的时刻。

I think it’s ’46.

我认为是46年。

In another decade, they’ll be closer to figuring out these questions.

再过十年，他们将更接近解决这些问题。

I would say, this idea — she loved the phrase from Nietzsche, “The noble soul has reverence for itself.” She loved all those ideas, and they’ve just resonated with her very powerfully.

我想说，这个想法——她喜欢尼采的那句话，“高贵的灵魂对自己怀有敬畏之心。”她喜欢所有这些想法，并且它们与她产生了强烈的共鸣。

Even in her unpublished work, she really takes some a bit to the edge of madness.

即使在她未发表的作品中，她也确实有些接近疯狂的边缘。

They’re more tempered in The Fountainhead.

他们在《源泉》中脾气更加暴躁。

I’m like, “Yes, she’s a Russian novelist.” Look at those books.

我想，“是的，她是一位俄罗斯小说家。”看看那些书。

They’re huge.

它们很大。

They’re panoramic.

它们是全景的。

She’s very convinced of her role.

她对自己的角色非常有信心。

She’s very convinced of the power of intelligentsia.

她非常相信知识分子的力量。

There was a complete conviction that a salon of committed intellectuals could cause profound social and intellectual change, which, of course, she had seen happen.

人们完全相信，由忠诚的知识分子组成的沙龙可以引起深刻的社会和知识变革，当然，她已经看到了这种情况的发生。

I definitely think she’s part of that tradition, but also, she’s not just Russian.

我绝对认为她是这一传统的一部分，而且，她不仅仅是俄罗斯人。

She’s Russian Jewish, so I think there’s a counterpoint to that in her concern with the powers of the state, and her focus on rationality, and her celebration of other cultures, high European cultures beyond Russia.

她是俄罗斯犹太人，所以我认为她对国家权力的关注、对理性的关注以及对俄罗斯以外的其他文化、高雅欧洲文化的庆祝，与此形成了对立。

She, in the end, would say, “Russia, it’s just a mystical state.”

最后，她会说：“俄罗斯，这只是一个神秘的国家。”

It’s interesting because, in recent years, when we’ve seen the glories, the fantasies of Mother Russia, or the role of the Russian Orthodox Church, the mythic importance of Kyiv, or whatever it may be, I think back to Ayn Rand grumbling, “It’s just a mystical state, and they’re all obsessed with mysticism.” I’m like, “Well.”

这很有趣，因为近年来，当我们看到俄罗斯母亲的荣耀、幻想、俄罗斯东正教的作用、基辅的神话重要性或其他任何东西时，我回想起艾因·兰德的抱怨，“这只是一个神秘的国家，他们都沉迷于神秘主义。”我想，“好吧。”

She actually loved Ludwig von Mises.

她实际上很爱路德维希·冯·米塞斯。

She said, on several occasions, “My economics is from Mises.

她多次表示，“我的经济学来自米塞斯。

Everything I know about economics, I know from Mises.” They’re both thinkers who have this rational framework, who have a few axiomatic first principles that they then build a system upon.

我所知道的关于经济学的一切都是从米塞斯那里知道的。”他们都是拥有理性框架的思想家，拥有一些公理化的首要原则，然后在这些原则上构建一个系统。

I think she really didn’t know a ton about economics and hadn’t thought about it until she read Mises.

我认为她确实对经济学了解甚少，直到她读了米塞斯之后才想到这一点。

In person, they did tend to clash.

私下里，他们确实容易发生冲突。

They’re both pretty difficult personalities, sort of in the same way, but the letters between them are always respectful.

他们都是很难相处的人，某种程度上是一样的，但他们之间的信件总是充满尊重。

Mises was one of the few living people that she didn’t cut down to her students, that she recommended her students read.

米塞斯是为数不多的几个在世的人物之一，她没有把这些人物写给她的学生，而是推荐她的学生阅读。

If you read the Objectivist Newsletter, there’s mentions of him and articles on him.

如果你读过《客观主义通讯》，里面会提到他和关于他的文章。

I think that was an important connection.

我认为这是一个重要的联系。

Once a culture tips a certain way, it kind of goes that way.

一旦一种文化朝着某种方向倾斜，它就会朝着那个方向发展。

I could certainly imagine societies — and perhaps your listeners will know ones, too — where the production of fiction is done more by conservative writers or thinkers.

我当然可以想象社会 ——也许你的听众也会知道这样的社会—— 小说的创作更多地是由保守派作家或思想家完成的。

I would imagine they have a culture to support that, even if it’s just a city, a university, a small tradition, a literary school.

我想他们有一种文化来支持这一点，即使它只是一座城市、一所大学、一个小传统、一所文学学校。

But I do think, as much as creativity is individual, it flourishes in community, so if you don’t have that community, it doesn’t get written.

但我确实认为，尽管创造力是个人的，但它在社区中蓬勃发展，所以如果你没有那个社区，它就不会被写下来。

What he did for recreation — he really enjoyed woodworking.

他的消遣——他真的很喜欢木工活。

Aaron Director was a skilled woodworker, and his basement had a whole setup.

亚伦·迪瑞特是一位熟练的木工，他的地下室有完整的设置。

I think Friedman built all the furniture for their first home by hand.

我认为弗里德曼为他们的第一个家建造的所有家具都是手工制作的。

He liked building, he played tennis, and he liked skiing.

他喜欢建筑、打网球、还喜欢滑雪。

His relaxation was with his hands or physical in nature.

他的放松本质上是用手或身体。

I think otherwise, when he was reading, he was reading for work.

我认为不然，当他读书时，他是为了工作而读书。

I’m also interested in writing sort of a history of postmodernism because I’ve been teaching an intellectual history class here at Stanford that’s been tracing it across the century, and I think that’s potentially really interesting.

我也对写一部后现代主义的历史感兴趣，因为我一直在斯坦福大学教授思想史课程，该课程一直在追踪整个世纪的后现代主义历史，我认为这可能非常有趣。

It would be quite different than what I’ve done thus far.

这将与我迄今为止所做的完全不同。

I’ll have to wait and see — do I want to strike out for new terrain or keep plowing the field I’m in?

我得等着瞧—— 我是想开拓新的领域还是继续耕耘我所在的领域？

Stay tuned, is all I have to say on that.

请继续关注，这就是我要说的。

COWEN: Just one follow-up question on that.

COWEN： 对此只有一个后续问题。

Many of us observing history have the sense that the intellectual tradition within the American right has been in decline for several decades.

我们许多观察历史的人都感觉到，美国右翼的知识传统几十年来一直在衰落。

(A) Do you agree?

（一）你同意吗？

(B) If so, what, most fundamentally, is driving that change?

(B) 如果是这样，最根本上是什么推动了这种变化？

I would say one of the reasons it’s happened is that conservatism became an establishment, and then you have a set of greatest hits, and you have a variety of ways you can make your living within this establishment, provided you adhere to the greatest hits.

我想说，发生这种情况的原因之一是保守主义成为一种体制，然后你就有了一系列最热门的歌曲，只要你坚持最热门的歌曲，你就有多种方式可以在这个体制内谋生。

There’s not a ton of incentives to do things differently.

没有太多的动力去以不同的方式做事。

I do think there’s a lot of ideological ferment on the right or amid conservatives right now.

我确实认为现在右翼或保守派中有很多意识形态骚动。

It’s heavy on ideas.

它非常注重想法。

It’s often in internet forms that are not deep engagement with ideas, I would say, in the same way as when you’re reading books and magazines.

我想说，它通常以互联网形式出现，并不能像你阅读书籍和杂志时那样深入地参与想法。

I think it’s faster and more rapid.

我认为它越来越快。

It’s really interesting.

这真的很有趣。

There’s much more competition in the realm of ideas than there was.

创意领域的竞争比以前更加激烈。

Besides reading a book or going to college, you can get ideas — they’re coming out of everywhere, coming out of the ether.

除了读书或上大学之外，你还可以获得想法 ——它们来自四面八方，来自以太。

I think that’s going to lend less coherence.

我认为这会降低一致性。

You can have a lot of people who are intellectual leaders of smaller tribes rather than having a couple of the big leaders that everyone’s heard of — Friedman, Hayek, this and that.

你可以有很多人是小部落的知识领袖，而不是有几个每个人都听说过的大领导人——弗里德曼、哈耶克，这个那个。

I just think we’re in a more fragmented place.

我只是认为我们处于一个更加分散的地方。

I tend to attribute it to the media environment we’re in, which probably isn’t going away anytime soon.

我倾向于将其归因于我们所处的媒体环境，这种环境可能不会很快消失。

So the question is, can we live and thrive in this fragmented-attention ecosphere, or are we going to recreate something akin to the three big networks to filter and manage all the information we have?

所以问题是，我们能否在这个分散注意力的生态圈中生存和发展，或者我们是否要重新创建类似于三大网络的东西来过滤和管理我们拥有的所有信息？

I think we’ll see that evolve, or not, over the next 50 years.

我认为，在接下来的 50 年里，我们会看到这种情况是否会发生变化。