Zach Carter on the Life and Legacy of John Maynard Keynes (Ep. 110)
Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Conversations with Tyler.
大家好，欢迎回到《与泰勒对话》。
Today I’m chatting with Zach Carter.
今天我正在和扎克·卡特聊天。
He’s a senior reporter at the Huffington Post, but more importantly, this year, he published a new book, as biographer, called The Price of Peace: Money, Democracy, and the Life of John Maynard Keynes.
他是《赫芬顿邮报》的资深记者，但更重要的是，今年，他作为传记作家出版了一本新书，名为《和平的代价：金钱、民主和约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯的一生》。
Just last week, Publishers Weekly selected this book as one of its best 10 titles of the year.
就在上周，《出版商周刊》将这本书评选为年度最佳 10 本书之一。
Zach, welcome.
扎克，欢迎。
Thanks so much for having me, Tyler.
非常感谢你邀请我，泰勒。
Let’s start with a simple question.
让我们从一个简单的问题开始。
Wasn’t Keynes simply wrong about the Treaty of Versailles?
凯恩斯对《凡尔赛条约》的看法难道不是完全错误的吗？
Man, tough question out of the gate.
伙计，这是个棘手的问题。
I don’t think so, but of course, there are people who made this case over the years.
我不这么认为，但当然，多年来有人提出了这个论点。
In his critique of the Treaty of Versailles, as an economic critique or a political critique, I think a few years after 1922, after the treaty had been signed, Keynes did a follow-up analysis called A Revision of the Treaty, which was basically 80,000 words of “I told you so.” He goes through the debt and resource numbers in detail and says, “Look, I was right.” I find that persuasive.
在他对《凡尔赛条约》的批判中，无论是经济批判还是政治批判，我想在1922年之后几年，条约签署之后，凯恩斯做了一个后续的分析，叫做《条约的修订》，基本上就是八万字的“我告诉过你了”。他详细检查了债务和资源数据，然后说：“看，我是对的。”我觉得这很有说服力。
There’s a very prominent critique from the 1940s by the son of the translator for Clemenceau at Versailles which says Keynes is wrong about all the economic numbers, but I don’t find that persuasive.
20 世纪 40 年代，凡尔赛宫克列孟梭的翻译者之子提出了一项非常著名的批评，称凯恩斯对所有经济数据的理解都是错误的，但我认为这没有说服力。
I don’t have it in front of me, so I can’t get into the exact details, but I don’t think so.
我面前没有它，所以我无法了解确切的细节，但我不这么认为。
If you think about the Treaty of Versailles as a political document that sets the terms for international cooperation over the coming decade, the imposition of scarcity across not only Germany, but also Britain and the victorious Allies, through the refusal to wipe out debt and to impose de facto austerity on Germany through high reparations levies results in a lot of international discord.
如果你把《凡尔赛条约》视为一份为未来十年的国际合作设定条件的政治文件，那么通过拒绝消除债务并通过高额赔款对德国实行事实上的紧缩政策，不仅对德国、而且对英国和战胜国施加了稀缺性，这会导致许多国际不和。
People see their money going to other countries, and it fuels nationalism and discontent.
人们看到自己的钱流向其他国家，这加剧了民族主义和不满情绪。
I think he’s basically right about that, but do you not agree?
我认为他基本上是对的，但你不同意吗？
Well, if we look at the numbers, it seems Germany never paid more than 2.5 percent of its GDP in a given year in terms of reparations, and that’s less than what Hitler asked Germans to pay for rearmament.
好吧，如果我们看一下这些数字，德国在某一年支付的赔款似乎从未超过其 GDP 的 2.5%，这比希特勒要求德国人支付的重整军备费用还要少。
So if Keynes had simply made a political argument, “Well, this is going to irritate the Germans politically,” but he made an economic argument that it’s impossible, and that seems entirely feasible.
因此，如果凯恩斯只是提出了一个政治论点，“好吧，这会在政治上激怒德国人”，但他提出了一个经济论点，认为这是不可能的，而且这似乎完全可行。
There were plenty of countries back then 2.5 percent poorer than Germany, or more.
当时有很多国家比德国贫穷 2.5% 甚至更多。
Didn’t Keynes in fact lend some credence to the notion that Germany had been stabbed in the back by the Allied powers, by Britain’s most prominent intellectual endorsing the notion?
事实上，凯恩斯难道没有在一定程度上相信德国是被盟军、被英国最著名的知识分子在背后捅了一刀的吗？
He had somewhat of a political critique, but on the economics he was wrong.
他有一些政治批评，但在经济方面他是错误的。
Well, you’re right that Germany never paid the reparations duties that were due, but that’s sort of inherent in the critique.
嗯，你说得对，德国从未支付应有的赔偿税，但这是批评中固有的。
If they were unaffordable, they weren’t going to pay them.
如果他们负担不起，他们就不会付钱。
Of course, by 1923, Germany is in a hyperinflation crisis, so I think the idea that Germany could afford to pay is tied up in the political circumstances of the day.
当然，到了 1923 年，德国陷入了恶性通货膨胀危机，所以我认为德国有能力支付的想法与当时的政治环境有关。
But again, countries poorer than Germany didn’t have to hyperinflate, right?
但同样，比德国贫穷的国家不必恶性通货膨胀，对吗？
The Germans brought that upon themselves.
德国人自找麻烦。
Plenty of Eastern Europe was more than 2.5 percent poorer than Germany.
东欧许多国家的贫困率比德国低 2.5% 以上。
They made various mistakes, but in terms of what it interjected into German politics, didn’t Keynes misread the situation, thinking that his message ultimately would be supporting German liberalism?
他们犯了各种各样的错误，但就其对德国政治的影响而言，凯恩斯是否误读了形势，认为他的信息最终会支持德国自由主义？
What turned out is that Europeans ended up more at each other’s throats.
结果，欧洲人最终更加互相争斗。
Again, on the economics, it just doesn’t seem that convincing.
再说一遍，从经济学角度来看，这似乎并不那么令人信服。
No one likes to pay 2.5 percent of GDP, but you go to the later 1920s — there’s the transfer-problem debate with Ohlin.
没有人愿意支付 GDP 的 2.5%，但你会回到 1920 年代后期 —— 与 Ohlin 之间存在转移问题争论。
Wasn’t Keynes wrong about that as well?
凯恩斯的观点不也是错误的吗？
Just to stick with the 2.5 percent — the task for Germany was not just paying money.
坚持 2.5%——德国的任务不仅仅是付钱。
It’s holding together a democratic coalition, so the politics of this are, I think, inseparable from the economic numbers.
它正在组建一个民主联盟，因此我认为，这其中的政治与经济数据密不可分。
When we talk about mistakes that the German government made in the 1920s, whether it’s up to hyperinflation or even later, clearly, there are a lot of mistakes.
当我们谈论德国政府在 20 年代犯下的错误时，无论是恶性通货膨胀还是后来的错误，显然都有很多错误。
Into the late 1920s, Germany is deflating in a way that I think is wrong-headed, but particularly early on, the German government is trying to hold together a political coalition, and those political realities have to be taken into account.
进入 1920 年代末，德国正以一种我认为是错误的方式陷入紧缩，但特别是在早期，德国政府正试图组建一个政治联盟，必须考虑到这些政治现实。
You have people who are suffering, particularly at the very early days of the postwar treaty, like serious material suffering throughout Germany.
人们正在遭受苦难，特别是在战后条约签订的初期，例如整个德国遭受严重的物质苦难。
People are literally starving to death, largely due to the Allied blockade, but also just because the war cost a lot of money and drained a lot of resources.
人们实际上正在饿死，很大程度上是由于盟军的封锁，但也只是因为战争花费了大量金钱并耗尽了大量资源。
So, if you want to get people to support democracy under those circumstances .
因此，如果你想让人们在这种情况下支持民主。
.
。
.
。
Remember, Germany is in literal revolt.
请记住，德国确实处于叛乱之中。
They’re executing communists in 1919 and 1920.
他们在 1919 年和 1920 年处决共产党人。
You’ve got to find some way to tell people, “Here is a better future for you.
你必须找到某种方式告诉人们：“这对你来说是一个更美好的未来。
You do not need to turn to authoritarianism on the right or the left.
你不需要转向右翼或左翼的威权主义。
We are going to provide you with things.
我们将为您提供一些东西。
We are not going to raise your taxes, and each of these political parties needs to have its own financial base.”
我们不会提高你们的税收，每个政党都需要有自己的财政基础。”
Could Germany have raised more taxes and shipped more money abroad?
德国能否提高税收并向海外输送更多资金？
Yes, probably, but how much?
是的，有可能，但是有多少呢？
I think Keynes is right.
我认为凯恩斯是对的。
What was being asked of Germany was too much.
对德国的要求太多了。
If we think of Bertil Ohlin’s critique in 1929, he’s actually saying Keynes is oddly non-Keynesian.
如果我们想想 Bertil Ohlin 在 1929 年的批评，他实际上是在说凯恩斯奇怪地不是凯恩斯主义者。
Ohlin is saying if you transfer the money abroad, the German mark will weaken.
奥林说，如果你把钱转移到国外，德国马克就会贬值。
This will boost German exports.
这将促进德国的出口。
In what later became known as Keynesian open economy macro models, Germany gets back a lot of what it sent abroad.
在后来被称为凯恩斯主义开放经济宏观模型的情况下，德国收回了很多向国外输出的资金。
Probably not all of it, but quite a bit.
可能不是全部，但也不少。
Paul Samuelson thought Ohlin was correct.
保罗·萨缪尔森认为奥林是正确的。
Was Keynes wrong about the transfer problem in the late ’20s?
凯恩斯关于二十世纪二十年代末转移问题的看法是错误的吗？
Oh, I’m much more sympathetic to this sort of broader critique that Keynes in 1919 is not Keynesian.
哦，我更同情这种更广泛的批评，认为 1919 年的凯恩斯不是凯恩斯主义。
He’s looking at these transfers as a very zero-sum game.
他将这些转会视为一场非常零和的游戏。
What Germany ships abroad, it doesn’t get back.
德国运往国外的东西，不会被退回。
There is a time problem here, though.
不过，这里有一个时间问题。
Even he accepts this critique.
甚至他也接受这种批评。
It takes time for the money to come back to Germany.
钱回到德国需要时间。
The money has to be lent back into the German economy by somebody.
这些钱必须由某人借回德国经济。
During the 1920s — I think later on, Keynes is pretty clear about this — the United States is lending money, not only to Germany but to Europe, and so long as that game keeps going, the cycle of funds is sustainable.
在 20 年代 ——我想后来凯恩斯对此非常清楚——美国不仅向德国借钱，还向欧洲借钱，只要这场游戏继续进行，资金循环就是可持续的。
Of course, by the late 1920s, the United States stops lending money for various reasons.
当然，到了 20 年代末，美国出于各种原因停止了贷款。
But right up into 1922, 1923, when you have the French government occupying the Rhine, there are political instabilities there that make the flow of funds pretty difficult.
但直到1922年、1923年，当法国政府占领莱茵河时，那里的政治不稳定使得资金流动变得相当困难。
Those political tensions are occurring.
这些政治紧张局势正在发生。
They don’t just spring up in 1923.
它们并不是在 1923 年才出现的。
They’re there from the moment the treaty is signed.
从条约签署的那一刻起，他们就在那里。
Early in his career, why was Keynes so keen to work in the India Office?
在职业生涯的早期，凯恩斯为何如此热衷于在印度办事处工作？
He chose that.
他选择了那样。
I don’t know if he was so keen.
不知道他是不是这么热心。
He really wanted to work in the Treasury Department, and it was sort of a disappointment to him.
他真的很想在财政部工作，但这让他有点失望。
I think he’d come in second or third on his big exams at the end of his time at Cambridge.
我认为他在剑桥大学毕业后的大型考试中会获得第二名或第三名。
He’d wanted to be number one.
他想成为第一。
He was recognized as this brilliant fellow, so I think he wanted to be at Treasury.
他被认为是一位才华横溢的人，所以我认为他想加入财政部。
He viewed the India Office as a bit of a disappointment, but I think one of the things he liked about working there was the way he could .
他认为印度办事处有点令人失望，但我认为他喜欢在那里工作的原因之一就是他可以做到的方式。
.
。
.
。
He did seem to take to looking at the currency situation.
他似乎确实开始关注货币状况。
He wrote a book.
他写了一本书。
His first book is called Indian Currency and Finance, from 1912 or 1913.
他的第一本书名为《印度货币与金融》，出版于 1912 年或 1913 年。
It’s his first real serious analysis of the gold standard and the way it works within the British Empire.
这是他第一次真正认真地分析金本位制及其在大英帝国的运作方式。
I think he finds it intellectually engaging in certain respects, but it’s not as prestigious as being in Treasury, which is what he really wants, and he feels a little bit guilty about that sense of ambition.
我认为他发现它在某些方面在智力上很有吸引力，但它不像在财政部那样有声望，而这才是他真正想要的，他对这种野心感到有点内疚。
His friends in Bloomsbury think that working for the government is this embarrassing sort of political thing to do.
他在布卢姆斯伯里的朋友认为为政府工作是一件令人尴尬的政治事情。
He should be pursuing art and aesthetics and writing and philosophy instead of government.
他应该追求艺术、美学、写作和哲学，而不是政府。
I don’t think he’s super happy at the India Office, but it is his introduction to the British bureaucracy, and I do think he enjoys being part of the British bureaucracy, and I do think he likes being a man of affairs who’s connected to the great problems of the day.
我不认为他在印度办事处非常开心，但这是他对英国官僚机构的介绍，我确实认为他喜欢成为英国官僚机构的一部分，而且我确实认为他喜欢成为一个与当今重大问题息息相关的人。
I don’t think in the India Office he feels like he is attached to the grandest problems of the day.
我不认为在印度办事处他会觉得自己对当今最重大的问题有执着。
He feels like it’s a lesser-than kind of post.
他觉得这是一个不太好的帖子。
What do you think of the substance of Keynes’s work for the India Office?
您如何看待凯恩斯印度办事处工作的实质内容？
It’s interesting.
这很有趣。
He has a lengthy report on — I haven’t reviewed this in years — he has a lengthy report on conditions after a type of recession in India where he says, essentially, the British government’s response has been rather lackadaisical and a lot of suffering has happened.
他有一份长篇报告，内容是“我已经好几年没有回顾过这个了”，他有一份关于印度经济衰退后的情况的长篇报告，他说，从本质上讲，英国政府的反应相当松懈，并且发生了很多痛苦。
You can see his superiors are like, “This is a little bit too much, can you tone it down?” And he does.
你可以看到他的上级说，“这有点过分了，你能小点吗？”他确实做到了。
At this point in his life, he’s thinking about liberalism and internationalism.
在他人生的这个阶段，他正在思考自由主义和国际主义。
He thinks of the British Empire as this grand liberal enterprise that is bringing freedom and democracy and prosperity to the rest of the world.
他认为大英帝国是一个伟大的自由主义事业，正在为世界其他地区带来自由、民主和繁荣。
I think he views the relationship with India like everybody in Britain — it’s the essential British colony, economically, in terms of resources.
我认为他像英国每个人一样看待与印度的关系——从经济和资源角度来看，印度都是英国重要的殖民地。
I don’t think he ever really questions seriously what the substance of that relationship means, based on the economic relationships that he is analyzing.
根据他正在分析的经济关系，我认为他从未真正认真地质疑过这种关系的实质意义是什么。
He is looking at the India issue as a very technical and narrow issue, largely on how the gold standard operates and how India, not allowing the convertibility of gold within its borders, functions.
他将印度问题视为一个非常技术性和狭隘的问题，主要是关于金本位如何运作以及不允许黄金在其境内兑换的印度如何运作。
It’s a narrow and technocratic analysis.
这是一种狭隘且技术官僚的分析。
I don’t think he’s focused on the big questions with India the way he would later be when he would be working in Treasury during the war.
我不认为他会像他后来在战争期间在财政部工作时那样专注于与印度有关的重大问题。
I think of the India Office as having been good for Keynes.
我认为印度办事处对凯恩斯有好处。
It made him less conformist.
这让他不再墨守成规。
But if you look at his writings on Malthus, he was obsessed with Malthus at the time.
但如果你看他关于马尔萨斯的著作，他当时就对马尔萨斯很着迷。
He talked about competition between the races.
他谈到了种族之间的竞争。
He was interested in eugenics.
他对优生学很感兴趣。
He has a lot of remarks about India that show a bigger-picture concern, but one that’s very non-egalitarian, so I view Keynes on India as decidedly anti-egalitarian.
他对印度有很多言论，显示出对大局的担忧，但又是非常非平等主义的，所以我认为凯恩斯对印度的看法绝对是反平等主义的。
Would you agree with that?
你同意吗？
No. I don’t have strong opinions.
不，我没有强烈的意见。
But he wants the British to rule them.
但他希望英国人统治他们。
He never entertains democracy for India, which was not that radical an idea then.
他从不考虑印度的民主，这在当时并不是一个激进的想法。
I agree with that.
我同意这一点。
Look, throughout his career, he views the British Empire as this sort of force of benevolence throughout the world.
看，在他的整个职业生涯中，他将大英帝国视为全世界的仁慈力量。
He thinks that being part of the British Empire is a way for people, from wherever they are, to participate in democracy and prosperity, and that is very much part of the liberal-imperialist conception of the time.
他认为，作为大英帝国的一部分，无论身在何处，人们都可以参与民主和繁荣，这在很大程度上是当时自由帝国主义观念的一部分。
The idea that it’s not egalitarian — that’s where I think he’s confused about that.
“这不是平等主义”的想法——“我认为这就是他感到困惑的地方。”
He’s just wrong, but he believes the way that he thinks about joining the British Empire.
他错了，但他相信自己加入大英帝国的想法。
He believes that is an egalitarian thing to do, which imperialists across time have believed when they come from a progressive perspective.
他认为这是一件平等主义的事情，各个时期的帝国主义者从进步的角度都相信这一点。
Of course, that’s often not true, and I think in the case of Britain and India, it’s not.
当然，这通常不是真的，我认为就英国和印度而言，事实并非如此。
In Indian Currency and Finance, Keynes shows this remarkable knowledge of numbers and statistics from India, which he had a phenomenal grasp on.
在《印度货币与金融》一书中，凯恩斯展示了他对印度数字和统计数据的非凡了解，他对此有着惊人的掌握。
So, he must have known the Indian growth rates under British rule were quite low, which has been confirmed by later research as one of the big problems with colonialism — not the only one.
所以，他一定知道英国统治下的印度增长率相当低，后来的研究证实这是殖民主义的大问题之一——而且不是唯一的问题。
My implicit mental model of Keynes, consistent with his interest in eugenics, is that he thought that India, on its own, was just intrinsically a slow-growth nation.
我对凯恩斯的隐含心理模型，与他对优生学的兴趣一致，是他认为印度本身本质上是一个增长缓慢的国家。
They’d have a slow growth rate under the British, but they would do worse on their own.
在英国统治下，他们的增长率会很慢，但如果他们自己的话，情况会更糟。
Do you think that’s the wrong implied mental model of how Keynes viewed this?
您认为凯恩斯对此的看法是错误的隐含心理模型吗？
I don’t know that it’s wrong.
我不知道这是错误的。
He clearly knows that something’s not quite right.
他清楚地知道有些事情不太对劲。
Otherwise, he wouldn’t be studying the financial system in India, and India’s relationship with Britain under the gold standard, and the particular way that India, not having convertibility — it’s the basic subject of Indian Currency and Finance.
否则，他就不会研究印度的金融体系，以及金本位制下印度与英国的关系，以及印度不具有可兑换性的特殊方式——这是《印度货币与金融》的基本主题。
So he does think that British rule can be improved.
所以他确实认为英国的统治可以得到改善。
But, yes, broadly, he’s a liberal imperialist.
但是，是的，从广义上讲，他是一个自由帝国主义者。
He thinks that Britain is bringing prosperity and freedom around the world.
他认为英国正在给世界带来繁荣和自由。
He thinks that if you join the British Empire, particularly at this stage of his life, then you are signing up to be led into the light.
他认为，如果你加入大英帝国，特别是在他人生的这个阶段，那么你就是在报名接受光明。
On the main message of The General Theory
关于《通论》的主要信息
I have at least 20 different friends who studied The General Theory, Keynes’s book from 1936, the big famous one.
我至少有 20 个不同的朋友研究过《通论》，这是凯恩斯 1936 年出版的著名著作。
I ask them, “What’s the central message of The General Theory?” They all give me different answers, so I’d like to know, what’s your answer?
我问他们：“《通论》的中心思想是什么？”他们都给了我不同的答案，所以我想知道，你的答案是什么？
There’s so much in the book, right?
书里有这么多，对吧？
Incredibly rich and multifaceted, but what’s the bottom-line core of The General Theory?
内容极其丰富且多面，但《通论》的底线核心是什么？
You love the hard questions.
你喜欢棘手的问题。
I wrote in the book that the bottom-line core message of The General Theory is that prosperity is not hardwired into human beings, that it has to be guided through political leadership.
我在书中写道，《通论》的底线核心信息是，繁荣并不是人类与生俱来的，它必须通过政治领导来引导。
I think that traces back, to some extent, to what you were just talking about about India.
我认为这在某种程度上可以追溯到你刚才谈到的印度。
He views the state and the government, from a very early age, as this sort of guiding hand.
他从很小的时候起就将国家和政府视为这种指导手。
In the case of India, it’s a bit paternalistic, but also, domestically, he believes that government is a necessary force to organizing human affairs.
就印度而言，这有点家长式作风，但在国内，他认为政府是组织人类事务的必要力量。
The General Theory — it’s a complicated book.
《通论》——这是一本复杂的书。
In certain respects, it’s not always consistent with itself, but I think that there’s a political message, which is that political guidance is needed for prosperity to exist, for markets to function.
在某些方面，它并不总是与自身一致，但我认为其中有一个政治信息，那就是繁荣的存在和市场的运作需要政治指导。
There’s also a reevaluation of what economics is doing and how economics functions.
人们还重新评估经济学正在做什么以及经济学如何运作。
Keynes is not focused on scarcity at this point, and I think Michał Kalecki has written about this.
凯恩斯目前并不关注稀缺性，我认为米哈乌·卡莱茨基（Michał Kalecki）已经写过这一点。
I think this idea that Keynes is refocusing the nature of economics and economic humanity, from competition for scarce resources towards the idea that uncertainty about the future is the most important psychological condition for economics.
我认为凯恩斯的这一观点正在重新关注经济学和经济人性的本质，从对稀缺资源的竞争转向未来的不确定性是经济学最重要的心理条件的观点。
If you believe in scarcity as the overriding issue, you’re going to come to different conclusions about how the world works than if you believe uncertainty is the overriding issue.
如果你相信稀缺性是最重要的问题，那么你将会对世界如何运作得出不同的结论，而不是相信不确定性是最重要的问题。
I’m not sure which one of those is the most important, but those are the two that I think are key.
我不确定其中哪一个是最重要的，但我认为这两个是关键。
I think this idea that Keynes is refocusing the nature of economics and economic humanity, from competition for scarce resources towards the idea that uncertainty about the future is the most important psychological condition for economics.
我认为凯恩斯的这一观点正在重新关注经济学和经济人性的本质，从对稀缺资源的竞争转向未来的不确定性是经济学最重要的心理条件的观点。
At the more specific level of macroeconomics, some people will say it’s wage and price stickiness.
在宏观经济更具体的层面上，有人会说是工资和价格粘性。
Some say it’s fiscal policy.
有人说这是财政政策。
Some say it’s the theory of liquidity preference.
有人说这是流动性偏好理论。
That’s what Milton Friedman thought.
这就是米尔顿·弗里德曼的想法。
Which of those makes it all work?
其中哪一个可以让一切顺利进行？
It’s interest rates.
这是利率。
Look, I think chapter 12, where he talks about financial markets, is a really critical chapter for me.
看，我认为第 12 章，他谈论金融市场，对我来说是非常关键的一章。
That’s where the uncertainty really comes to be key.
这就是不确定性真正成为关键的地方。
We don’t know what the future brings, and so if we don’t know what the future brings, the way that we think about markets as being things that correct for errors or social problems really is much more complicated.
我们不知道未来会带来什么，所以如果我们不知道未来会带来什么，我们将市场视为纠正错误或社会问题的东西的方式实际上要复杂得多。
If we don’t know what the future is going to bring, then we may hoard money when it may not be good for us to hoard money.
如果我们不知道未来会发生什么，那么我们可能会在囤积金钱对我们不利的时候囤积金钱。
We will make spending choices that are different.
我们将做出不同的支出选择。
Paul Krugman has a fairly famous — at least among liberal economists — analysis of Keynes, where he says there are chapters 1 through 4 Keynesians and chapter 12 Keynesians.
保罗·克鲁格曼（Paul Krugman）有一个相当著名的“至少在自由派经济学家中”对凯恩斯的分析，他说有第一章到第四章凯恩斯主义和第12章凯恩斯主义。
I don’t really like that breakdown.
我真的不喜欢这种崩溃。
I think chapter 12 is really essential to understanding the critique of Say’s law, which you get in the first four chapters.
我认为第 12 章对于理解对萨伊定律的批判非常重要，你可以在前四章中了解到这一点。
On technocratic governance
论技术官僚治理
Did Keynes have significant misgivings about technocratic governance?
凯恩斯对技术官僚治理有重大疑虑吗？
And should he have had more misgivings, given how British rule over India went, given how the postwar settlement went?
考虑到英国对印度的统治以及战后解决的情况，他是否应该有更多的疑虑？
Those people were, by and large, technocrats.
总的来说，这些人都是技术官僚。
Yes.
是的。
With a lot of these questions, it depends on which Keynes you ask.
对于很多这样的问题，这取决于你问哪个凯恩斯。
There’s a great memoir that he presents to his friends in Bloomsbury in 1938, I think, where he says, “When I was young, I didn’t realize that civilization was this thin crust that was preserved through the skillful acts of a few.” That’s a very non-egalitarian way of conceiving of human progress.
我想，他 1938 年在布卢姆斯伯里向他的朋友们写了一本很棒的回忆录，其中他说：“当我年轻的时候，我没有意识到文明是通过少数人的熟练行为保存下来的薄薄的外壳。”这是一种非常非平等主义的人类进步构想方式。
But at other times, he seems to think that people are capable of this spontaneous flowering of goodness and light through aesthetic achievements, arts, or whatever.
但在其他时候，他似乎认为人们能够通过审美成就、艺术或其他方式自发地绽放善良和光明。
To believe in progress the way he does, he has to have a certain faith in the ability of ordinary people to make good decisions.
为了像他那样相信进步，他必须对普通人做出正确决定的能力有一定的信心。
He certainly thinks that good ideas will conquer bad ones, and this isn’t just because the smartest, best people will be persuaded.
他当然认为好的想法会战胜坏的想法，这不仅仅是因为最聪明、最优秀的人会被说服。
He thinks people in general have this sort of rational rationality about them, where they will come to see things that are true as true.
他认为人们普遍具有这种理性的理性，他们会认为真实的事情是真实的。
I think, yes, he probably does have too much faith, on the balance of his life, in the ability of technocrats to order affairs to the good.
我认为，是的，从他一生的平衡来看，他可能确实过于相信技术官僚有能力让事情向好的方向发展。
Certainly, he has far too much faith in the ability of the British Empire to order its affairs, although I think the experience of Versailles sort of jaundices that view for him a bit.
当然，他对大英帝国管理其事务的能力过于相信，尽管我认为凡尔赛宫的经历对他来说有点偏见。
He sees the British Empire in a new light after the war, largely because his friends in Bloomsbury are telling him he’s this terrible, horrible sellout for participating in the war.
战后，他以新的眼光看待大英帝国，很大程度上是因为他在布卢姆斯伯里的朋友告诉他，他参与战争是一个非常非常可怕的出卖行为。
But he never totally loses that sense of at least the desire to view the British Empire as this fountain of goodness.
但他从未完全失去那种至少将大英帝国视为善良源泉的愿望。
Even in World War II, when he’s much more influential as a policymaker, he’s perplexed that the Americans desire to carve up the British Empire.
即使在第二次世界大战期间，当他作为政策制定者的影响力大得多时，他也对美国人想要瓜分大英帝国的愿望感到困惑。
He just sort of takes for granted that, obviously, we would want to keep all of these different colonies and territories under British rule.
他只是想当然地认为，显然，我们希望将所有这些不同的殖民地和领土置于英国的统治之下。
That would be good for the world.
这对世界来说是件好事。
He can’t even really come to see that Roosevelt is going in that direction when it’s really quite obvious, at least in hindsight, what Roosevelt is doing.
当罗斯福正在做的事情非常明显时（至少事后看来），他甚至无法真正看到罗斯福正在朝那个方向前进。
Yes, I think he probably does have too much faith in technocrats, but also, a lot of his legacy as a policymaker is forged by technocratic policymaking at the end of the war.
是的，我认为他可能确实对技术官僚抱有太多信心，而且，他作为政策制定者的许多遗产都是由战争结束时的技术官僚决策所铸造的。
The British National Health Service is still with us.
英国国民医疗服务体系仍在我们身边。
That’s innovation of British technocracy at the hands of the Socialist Labour Party at the time, and Keynes was —
这是当时社会党工党手中英国技术官僚的创新，凯恩斯是——
But that’s not Keynes’s doing.
但这不是凯恩斯做的。
Well, he is the sort of financial architect of it.
嗯，他是那种金融架构师。
He works very closely with getting the numbers right and having the papers to wave around to say that this stuff adds up.
他密切合作，确保数字正确，并让报纸到处宣扬这些东西加起来。
There’s a decent argument to be made, at the time, that the numbers don’t add up, but I certainly think Keynes is an important player in that view.
当时有一个不错的论点，即这些数字并不能相加，但我当然认为凯恩斯是这个观点中的重要参与者。
On whether Keynes was too flexible in his views
关于凯恩斯的观点是否过于灵活
Do you think Keynes was, in some ways, too flexible a thinker?
您是否认为凯恩斯在某些方面是一位过于灵活的思想家？
You discuss in your book his 1933 essay on national self-sufficiency, which is quite protectionist, though usually Keynes was a strong free trader.
您在书中讨论了他 1933 年关于国家自给自足的文章，这篇文章相当保护主义，尽管凯恩斯通常是一位坚定的自由贸易主义者。
What’s striking to me in that essay is not that he makes the Keynesian jobs argument — you need tariffs to protect domestic jobs — that you would expect, but that there is a whole section talking down the benefits of division of labor, saying, “Oh, these aren’t so great.
这篇文章中令我印象深刻的并不是他所提出的凯恩斯主义就业论点——“你需要关税来保护国内就业”——正如你所期望的那样，而是有一整节内容都在贬低劳动分工的好处，说：“哦，这些并不是那么好。
We don’t need it.”
我们不需要它。”
Didn’t he, too many times, put on the hat of a kind of advocate and played too often the role of debater?
难道他不是太多次戴上辩护者的帽子，太多次地扮演辩手的角色吗？
He certainly loved to play debater.
他当然喜欢扮演辩手。
That starts very early.
这很早就开始了。
He loves being part of the Cambridge Union Society.
他喜欢成为剑桥联盟协会的一员。
He loves debating conservatives in particular, in his early days.
他早年尤其喜欢与保守派辩论。
I think it’s impossible to separate Keynes the political activist from Keynes the economic analyst, and I don’t know that he would want us to separate those things, at least from this stage in history.
我认为不可能将政治活动家凯恩斯与经济分析师凯恩斯分开，而且我不知道他是否会希望我们将这些事情分开，至少从历史的这个阶段来看。
Certainly, during his lifetime, he occasionally put on the hat of “I’m just looking at the numbers.
当然，在他的一生中，他偶尔会戴上“我只看数字”的帽子。
This is just what the numbers say.” But he’s a philosopher first and an economist second.
这就是数字所表明的。”但他首先是一位哲学家，其次才是一位经济学家。
In a lot of ways, I think his economics are just this dressed-up mathematical justification for philosophical views that he’s been wrestling with on a deeper level, particularly when he’s at Cambridge.
在很多方面，我认为他的经济学只是他一直在更深层次上思考的哲学观点的数学论证，尤其是当他在剑桥时。
He’s embroiled in these debates with Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein and all of his friends in Bloomsbury about what constitutes a good life.
他卷入了与伯特兰·罗素、路德维希·维特根斯坦以及他在布卢姆斯伯里的所有朋友关于什么是美好生活的辩论。
I think that social vision stays with him over the course of his lifetime.
我认为社会愿景将伴随他一生。
The reason his economics keeps changing is because he’s trying to find some intellectual justification for that social vision, which is really paramount in his worldview and in his work.
他的经济学之所以不断变化，是因为他试图为这种社会愿景找到一些理智上的理由，这在他的世界观和工作中确实至关重要。
He’s embroiled in these debates with Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein and all of his friends in Bloomsbury about what constitutes a good life.
他卷入了与伯特兰·罗素、路德维希·维特根斯坦以及他在布卢姆斯伯里的所有朋友关于什么是美好生活的辩论。
I think that social vision stays with him over the course of his lifetime.
我认为社会愿景将伴随他一生。
The reason his economics keeps changing is because he’s trying to find some intellectual justification for that social vision, which is really paramount in his worldview and in his work.
他的经济学之所以不断变化，是因为他试图为这种社会愿景找到一些理智上的理由，这在他的世界观和工作中确实至关重要。
What should we make of the preface Keynes wrote for the German-language edition of The General Theory, where he basically says to the Nazis, “My ideas will work better under your system”?
我们应该如何理解凯恩斯为德语版《通论》写的序言，他在序言中基本上是对纳粹说：“我的想法在你们的制度下会更好”？
It’s not at all that I think Keynes was pro-Nazi.
我根本不认为凯恩斯是亲纳粹的。
Clearly, he was not at all, but is that another example of Keynes, in a sense, being too flexible, even philosophically?
显然，他根本不是，但这是否是凯恩斯在某种意义上过于灵活的另一个例子，甚至在哲学上也是如此？
Hayek never did that to Pinochet, right?
哈耶克从来没有对皮诺切特做过这样的事，对吗？
Friedman didn’t.
弗里德曼没有。
Well, what is the language?
嗯，语言是什么？
The language was something like, “I’m aware that in many respects, my economic system is easier to operate under an authoritarian government.” Something like that.
其措辞类似于“我知道在很多方面，我的经济体系在独裁政府的领导下更容易运作。”类似的事情。
Something like that, but in German, of course.
类似的东西，但当然是德语。
Yes.
是的。
Right.
正确的。
Look, isn’t that just true?
你看，这不是真的吗？
If you’re looking at Keynesian economics from a technical perspective, it’s a theory about how the state can organize resources better than atomized financial markets can.
如果你从技术角度看待凯恩斯主义经济学，它是一个关于国家如何比原子化金融市场更好地组织资源的理论。
The dangers of the authoritarian government for Keynes are not in the organization of resources, but in what they’re organized for.
对凯恩斯来说，独裁政府的危险不在于资源的组织，而在于资源的组织目的。
In his letter to Hayek about The Road to Serfdom, he discusses this in greater detail.
在他写给哈耶克的关于《通往奴役之路》的信中，他更详细地讨论了这一点。
He’s clearly aware that this system can be abused, but if you’re just thinking about how to create economic growth, yes, certainly you don’t have to deal with all of these inconveniences of democracy to just make things happen in an authoritarian system.
他清楚地意识到这个制度可能会被滥用，但如果你只是考虑如何创造经济增长，是的，你当然不必处理民主的所有这些不便，只是让事情在威权制度下发生。
I don’t know if I read that as Keynes being sympathetic to the German government, or advising —
我不知道我是否把这理解为凯恩斯对德国政府的同情，或者建议——
No, he’s not.
不，他不是。
He’s sympathetic to his own ideas and wants to promote them.
他同情自己的想法并希望推广它们。
But to me, there’s a discord.
但对我来说，有一个不和谐的地方。
Milton Friedman spends, what, 45 minutes talking to Pinochet, has a very long record of insisting economic and political freedom come together — maybe even too simplistically — writes against the system of apartheid in South Africa and Rhodesia, calls for free markets there.
米尔顿·弗里德曼 (Milton Friedman) 与皮诺切特 (Pinochet) 交谈了 45 分钟，长期以来一直坚持经济和政治自由结合在一起——“甚至可能过于简单化”——反对南非和罗得西亚的种族隔离制度，呼吁那里的自由市场。
And people give Friedman hell over that.
人们因此而骂弗里德曼。
Keynes writes the preface for the Nazis and favors eugenics his whole life, and that’s hardly ever mentioned.
凯恩斯为纳粹写了序言，一生都支持优生学，但这一点却很少被提及。
I don’t know that the way that Keynes talks about eugenics is as salient as you suggest.
我不知道凯恩斯谈论优生学的方式是否像你所说的那么突出。
The best article that I came across on Keynes and eugenics is by this guy — I think David Singerman.
我读到的关于凯恩斯和优生学的最好的文章是这个人写的——我认为是大卫·辛格曼。
It’s in the Journal of British Studies.
它发表在《英国研究杂志》上。
It’s a pretty in-depth look at the way Keynes came to eugenics and what he did and did not support.
这是对凯恩斯进入优生学的方式以及他支持和不支持的内容的相当深入的探讨。
It’s very clear that Keynes didn’t support eugenics in the way that Americans sterilizing poor Black workers in the South were interested in eugenics.
很明显，凯恩斯并不像美国人对优生学感兴趣那样支持优生学，因为美国人对南方贫困黑人工人进行绝育。
Keynes was broadly interested in it from the perspective of birth control.
凯恩斯从节育的角度对此广泛感兴趣。
This is a time when eugenics and genetics are not as clearly defined as they are today, so he’s thinking about heritability of eye colors — how he gets involved in this stuff.
在这个时代，优生学和遗传学的定义并不像今天那么清晰，所以他正在思考眼睛颜色的遗传性 ——他是如何涉足这一领域的。
He never really supports anything other than birth control.
除了节育之外，他从来没有真正支持过任何其他事情。
When he actually has power as a policymaker, he just doesn’t do any of this stuff.
当他真正拥有作为政策制定者的权力时，他只是不会做任何这些事情。
He is working on the Beveridge plan.
他正在研究贝弗里奇计划。
He is working on financial stuff that is much more egalitarian than what we think of him when we think about eugenics.
他正在研究的金融领域比我们在考虑优生学时对他的看法更加平等。
But he is chair of the British Eugenics Society for eight years late in his career.
但他在职业生涯后期担任了英国优生学协会主席八年。
He doesn’t do much there.
他在那里没有做太多事情。
There are big debates that are happening within that society, and he’s mostly sitting them out.
社会上正在发生一些大的争论，而他大多对此置若罔闻。
Singerman goes into this in much more detail.
辛格曼对此进行了更详细的探讨。
It’s been a while since I read the article, but Singerman seems to think that this is a useful way of understanding Keynes’s worldview, but not that Keynes is some guy who’s going around wanting to sterilize people and do the things that we think of with the eugenics movement in the United States.
我读这篇文章已经有一段时间了，但辛格曼似乎认为这是理解凯恩斯世界观的一种有用方式，但并不是说凯恩斯是一个到处想要对人们进行绝育并做我们在美国优生运动中想到的事情的人。
I don’t think he wants to sterilize people, but he has those essays on population, which are not put into the collected works.
我觉得他不想给人绝育，但是他有那些关于人口的文章，没有放进文集里。
They’re not mentioned by Roy Harrod.
罗伊·哈罗德没有提到他们。
He is greatly worried that the people from some countries — I think including India — will outbreed the people from Britain, and this will wreak havoc on prices and wages, and it’s a big crisis.
他非常担心一些国家的人——我想包括印度——会超越英国人，这会对物价和工资造成严重破坏，这是一场大危机。
He even says, “We need to worry not only about the quantity of people, but the quality of people in the world.”
他甚至说：“我们不仅要担心世界上的人口数量，还要担心世界上的人口质量。”
Yes, and if you look at him in the 1920s in particular, he has extremely disparaging things to say about working people in general.
是的，如果你特别看看 20 年代的他，你会发现他对一般劳动人民有极其贬低的话。
There’s an essay in 1926, I believe, where he is talking about the proletariat and the coming revolution, and he says, “How can I prefer a theory that holds up the working people who are the mud to the fish of the middle class?”
我相信，1926 年有一篇文章，他在谈论无产阶级和即将到来的革命，他说：“我怎么能更喜欢一个支持泥巴劳动人民而不是中产阶级鱼的理论呢？”
He’s very much a middle-class kind of pugilist.
他在很大程度上是一位中产阶级的拳击手。
He believes that the British middle class that he comes from is .
他认为他来自英国中产阶级。
.
。
.
。
Much the way that he thinks that the British Empire is this fountain of goodness and light, he thinks the British middle class is also superior.
就像他认为大英帝国是善良和光明的源泉一样，他认为英国中产阶级也很优越。
But I do think those ideas temper over the course of his career.
但我确实认为这些想法在他的职业生涯中得到了体现。
He comes to believe that prosperity is something that can be shared more broadly.
他开始相信繁荣是可以让更广泛的人分享的。
By prosperity, I mean the type of life that he and his friends in Bloomsbury lived around the turn of the century, where they were thinking about art and philosophy and doing all the stuff that intellectuals think about as fun.
我所说的繁荣，是指他和他在布鲁姆斯伯里的朋友在世纪之交所过的生活，他们思考艺术和哲学，做所有知识分子认为有趣的事情。
I think he comes to believe that that can be shared by a very broad swath of the population, but he does not believe that his whole life, certainly.
我认为他开始相信这一点可以为广大人民所认同，但他当然不相信他的一生。
Is it fair that Friedman and Hayek get a lot of flak for talking to Pinochet, and Keynes wrote a German introduction to his book?
弗里德曼和哈耶克因与皮诺切特交谈而受到严厉批评，凯恩斯为他的书写了德语介绍，这公平吗？
I think that’s up for people to make their minds about.
我认为这取决于人们自己的想法。
All of these thinkers — if you’re trying to find a hero who fits some model for decency and goodness by today’s standards, and you’re looking at intellectuals from the early, mid-20th century, you’re going to find things you don’t like about them.
所有这些思想家 ——如果你想找到一位符合当今标准的正派和善良典范的英雄，并且你正在观察 20 世纪初、中期的知识分子，你会发现他们有一些你不喜欢的地方。
Joan Robinson, who is, in a lot of ways, one of the most important intellectual partners that Keynes works with on The General Theory — what Joan Robinson goes on to say about North Korea .
从很多方面来说，琼·罗宾逊是凯恩斯在《通论》（《琼·罗宾逊接下来对朝鲜的看法》）中合作的最重要的知识伙伴之一。
.
。
.
。
North Korea is not quite as bad as it is today when she was praising it, but certainly, what she says about China and the Cultural Revolution — I don’t see how you can really defend that stuff.
朝鲜并不像今天她赞扬它时那么糟糕，但当然，她所说的关于中国和文化大革命的内容 ——我不明白你如何才能真正捍卫这些东西。
It’s pretty bad, and particularly for a theory that’s supposed to be .
这非常糟糕，尤其是对于一个理应如此的理论来说。
.
。
.
。
As I take Keynes, I take him to be thinking about economics as the field where liberalism can fight authoritarianism.
当我看待凯恩斯时，我认为他正在将经济学视为自由主义可以对抗威权主义的领域。
Through economic policymaking, we can keep authoritarianism at bay without resorting to war and violence and all these horrors that he’s scarred by in World War I.
通过经济政策制定，我们可以遏制威权主义，而不必诉诸战争和暴力以及第一次世界大战中所遭受的所有这些恐怖。
If that’s the purpose of the project, then when you come around and start talking about the Cultural Revolution as a good idea, I think you’ve lost the plot of it.
如果这就是这个项目的目的，那么当你回过头来开始谈论文化大革命是一个好主意时，我认为你已经失去了它的情节。
There are a lot of these people who are super smart, making great innovations in their field, who are also doing things that are just politically indefensible, certainly by modern standards.
其中有很多人非常聪明，在自己的领域做出了伟大的创新，但他们也在做一些在政治上站不住脚的事情，当然以现代标准来看。
On things under and over-rated
关于低估和高估的事情
Are you ready for a bout of underrated versus overrated?
您准备好迎接被低估与被高估的较量了吗？
I’m enjoying this.
我很享受这个。
I hope you are.
我希望你是。
Yes.
是的。
Okay.
好的。
First one: overrated or underrated — traveling in Taiwan?
第一：高估还是低估 — 台湾旅游？
Underrated.
被低估了。
I love Taiwan.
我爱台湾。
Soup dumplings.
汤包。
It’s a beautiful place — big mountains, beautiful ocean.
这是一个美丽的地方——高山，美丽的海洋。
What’s not to like?
有什么不喜欢的？
Other than Taipei, where should people go next?
除了台北，下一步应该去哪里？
Well, where did we go?
嗯，我们去哪儿了？
We went to Taipei, and we went to a beach town.
我们去了台北，我们去了一个海滨小镇。
I don’t remember which town.
我不记得是哪个城镇了。
My wife’s family is from Shanghai, and then Taiwan, and then the United States.
我妻子的家人来自上海，然后是台湾，然后是美国。
We went on a trip with them about four years ago, and they were our tour guides.
大约四年前，我们和他们一起去旅行，他们是我们的导游。
It was incredible, but I really only know Taipei.
太不可思议了，但我真的只知道台北。
I can’t give you better advice.
我无法给你更好的建议。
The 1965 Immigration Reform Act — overrated or underrated?
1965 年移民改革法案 — 被高估还是低估？
Wow, you’re going right at it.
哇，你说得对。
My wife, who I just mentioned, just wrote a book about the 1965 Immigration Reform Act.
我刚才提到的我的妻子刚刚写了一本关于 1965 年移民改革法案的书。
Tell us the title, please.
请告诉我们标题。
It’s called One Mighty and Irresistible Tide: The Epic Struggle over American Immigration, 1924–1965.
它被称为“一股强大而不可抗拒的浪潮：美国移民的史诗般的斗争，1924-1965”。
I find her book really complicated.
我发现她的书真的很复杂。
I think it generally is underrated because people just don’t know what it is.
我认为它通常被低估，因为人们只是不知道它是什么。
I would say underappreciated maybe.
我想说也许是被低估了。
It’s just not very well known in American society, but there are things about this law that work.
虽然这条法律在美国社会还不太为人所知，但这条法律的某些方面是有效的。
There are things about this law that don’t work.
这条法律有些地方不起作用。
Some of the things, at least from a progressive standpoint today, I would say are good about the law are kind of an accident that take place largely because the architects of the law don’t intend them to take place.
至少从今天进步的角度来看，我认为法律中的一些好事实际上是一种意外，其发生很大程度上是因为法律的设计者不希望它们发生。
So the significant increase in Asian American immigration — certainly, the architects of the law aren’t anticipating that.
因此，亚裔美国人移民的显着增加 ——当然，法律的制定者并没有预料到这一点。
My wife’s family is here because of that law, so it’s underrated.
我妻子的家人因为这项法律才来到这里，所以它被低估了。
It’s great, I met my wife.
太好了，我认识了我的妻子。
Otherwise , that wouldn’t have happened.
否则的话，就不会发生这种事。
That was important for me.
这对我来说很重要。
Certainly, from a narrow selfish standpoint, I will say it’s underrated.
当然，从狭隘自私的角度来看，我会说它被低估了。
The Sex Pistols — overrated or underrated?
性手枪 — 被高估还是低估？
God, come on, man.
天哪，来吧，伙计。
It’s so hard because they are a one-trick pony.
这太难了，因为他们是只会一招的小马。
One album, right?
一张专辑，对吗？
The rest, you can forget.
其余的，你可以忘记。
Yes, and it’s really just one note.
是的，这实际上只是一张纸条。
All the good songs in there are basically the same song rewritten.
里面所有的好歌基本上都是同一首歌改写的。
But look, they changed the face of music.
但看，他们改变了音乐的面貌。
You wouldn’t have the Replacements.
你不会有替代品。
I’ve been reading this Bob Mehr biography of the Replacements, which was my favorite band, and you just absolutely wouldn’t have that band without the Sex Pistols.
我一直在读 Bob Mehr 的 Replacements 传记，这是我最喜欢的乐队，如果没有 Sex Pistols，你绝对不会拥有这个乐队。
I think that people get that they’re a big deal, though.
不过，我认为人们知道他们很重要。
I think very highly of the Sex Pistols.
我对性手枪的评价非常高。
I would say they’re overrated people.
我想说他们是被高估的人。
They’re deeply influential but still overrated.
他们影响深远，但仍然被高估了。
That some of these former punk rockers now support Donald Trump — is that a fluke, or is that actual consistency?
这些前朋克摇滚歌手中的一些人现在支持唐纳德·特朗普——这是侥幸，还是真正的一致性？
It’s tough with Johnny Rotten and John Lydon.
约翰尼·罗顿和约翰·莱登的处境很艰难。
It’s hard to say.
很难说。
The Sex Pistols are not anarchy for the UK.
性手枪并不是英国的无政府状态。
I mean, which kind of anarchy?
我的意思是，哪种无政府状态？
There’s anarchy from the right, from the left.
右翼和左翼都存在无政府状态。
I think “Bodies” is certainly conservative from abortion rights perspective.
我认为从堕胎权的角度来看，《身体》无疑是保守的。
My next book is a look at populism in the 1890s.
我的下一本书是对 1890 年代民粹主义的审视。
I do think you have to grapple with the way that these radical figures, radical ideas — there’s always an interpretation that makes them look good.
我确实认为你必须努力解决这些激进的人物、激进的想法 ——总有一种解释可以让它们看起来不错。
But do you think you have to wrestle with the way that radical change is often flirting with stuff that’s really not great?
但是，你是否认为你必须努力解决根本性的改变往往会与一些真正不好的东西调情的问题？
I really came to appreciate the conservative streak in Keynes, writing this book.
在写这本书的过程中，我真正开始欣赏凯恩斯的保守倾向。
He is very afraid of social change in this way that contemporary progressives are not.
他非常害怕社会变革，而当代进步人士则不然。
He likes Edmund Burke, and it’s not a con.
他喜欢埃德蒙·伯克，这不是骗局。
He’s not putting on some sort of act so that he can get more conservative subscribers to his Patreon.
他并没有做出某种行为，以便为他的 Patreon 吸引更多保守派订阅者。
He really is worried about social change and social upheaval, and I don’t think people who haven’t lived through revolutions and war often appreciate how bad things can go.
他确实担心社会变革和社会动荡，我认为没有经历过革命和战争的人通常不会意识到事情会变得多么糟糕。
With the Sex Pistols, I’m not sure that Johnny Rotten loving Donald Trump is a huge change from 1977.
就性手枪乐队而言，我不确定约翰尼·罗顿 (Johnny Rotten) 爱上唐纳德·特朗普 (Donald Trump) 与 1977 年相比是否有巨大变化。
I didn’t really follow Public Image Ltd and a lot of the stuff that he did in the ’80s musically.
我并没有真正关注 Public Image Ltd 和他在 80 年代音乐上所做的很多事情。
It’s not bad, but it’s not important, I think.
我认为这还不错，但并不重要。
It didn’t do anything for me.
它对我没有任何作用。
I’m not against it, but I remember listening to it when I was 17 or 18, the age where you get into this stuff, and it just didn’t grab me.
我并不反对它，但我记得在我 17 或 18 岁的时候听过它，那个年龄是你接触这些东西的年龄，但它并没有吸引我。
Maybe there’s a whole lot of really interesting intellectual stuff happening there that you could tell a story about, but I can’t because I just don’t know the material.
也许那里发生了很多非常有趣的知识分子，你可以讲一个故事，但我不能，因为我只是不知道这些材料。
I really came to appreciate the conservative streak in Keynes, writing this book.
在写这本书的过程中，我真正开始欣赏凯恩斯的保守倾向。
He is very afraid of social change in this way that contemporary progressives are not.
他非常害怕社会变革，而当代进步人士则不然。
He likes Edmund Burke, and it’s not a con.
他喜欢埃德蒙·伯克，这不是骗局。
He’s not putting on some sort of act so that he can get more conservative subscribers to his Patreon.
他并没有做出某种行为，以便为他的 Patreon 吸引更多保守派订阅者。
He really is worried about social change and social upheaval, and I don’t think people who haven’t lived through revolutions and war often appreciate how bad things can go.
他确实担心社会变革和社会动荡，我认为没有经历过革命和战争的人通常不会意识到事情会变得多么糟糕。
Samuel Delany — overrated or underrated?
塞缪尔·德拉尼 — 被高估还是低估？
Oh yes, how do you know this?
哦，是的，你怎么知道这个？
You did your research.
你做了你的研究。
Super underrated.
超级被低估了。
Why is it important?
为什么它很重要？
Nova.
新星。
Tell us why.
告诉我们原因。
Oh my god, I love that book.
天哪，我喜欢那本书。
I just read it for a book club.
我刚刚在读书俱乐部读过这本书。
Nova is a book about all these things we were just talking about.
《Nova》是一本关于我们刚才谈论的所有这些事情的书。
It’s about radical change.
这是关于彻底的改变。
It’s about economic competition.
这是关于经济竞争。
It’s about the shift between intellectual paradigms and material paradigms in internationalist society.
这是关于国际主义社会中知识范式和物质范式之间的转变。
It’s about all the forms of social conflict and possibility that I think exist in a globalized world, even though it’s about an interstellar society.
这是关于我认为存在于全球化世界中的所有形式的社会冲突和可能性，尽管它是关于星际社会。
It’s about freedom and art and cruelty and truth, and it’s also just a fun space opera.
它是关于自由、艺术、残酷和真理，而且它也是一部有趣的太空歌剧。
It’s all packed into an exciting tale.
这一切都包含在一个激动人心的故事中。
Nova is one of his 250-page sci-fi thriller novels from the ’60s.
《Nova》是他 250 页的 60 年代科幻惊悚小说之一。
His later stuff, where he gets into 800-page books about sexuality, I think are really good, too, but they’re not fun the way Nova is fun.
他后来的作品，他写了 800 页有关性的书籍，我认为也非常好，但它们并不像 Nova 那样有趣。
The Bretton Woods monetary system — overrated or underrated?
布雷顿森林货币体系 — 被高估还是低估？
Underrated.
被低估了。
We only really had it for about nine years, once all of the rules had been implemented and everything.
当所有的规则和一切都得到实施后，我们才真正拥有了大约九年的时间。
It’s not like it was this gigantic success for so long, but I agree with Paul Volcker, that was a mistake to blow up.
这么长时间以来，它并没有取得如此巨大的成功，但我同意保罗·沃尔克的观点，爆炸是一个错误。
There was a framework for international cooperation and harmony that allowed for negotiation.
有一个允许谈判的国际合作与和谐框架。
There was a shared set of norms that I think we miss today.
我认为我们今天缺少一套共同的规范。
Particularly the deterioration of the US relationship with China right now, for instance — difficult thing to imagine if the US and China were part of a Bretton Woods report.
例如，特别是目前美国与中国关系的恶化——如果美国和中国是布雷顿森林报告的一部分，那是很难想象的事情。
But didn’t it have to blow up?
但不是一定要炸掉吗？
Wasn’t the whole thing premised on the notion that the US could just keep on printing dollars, which, actually, the world wanted to have out there.
整件事不都是以美国可以继续印美元的观念为前提的吗？事实上，世界都希望拥有美元。
And other countries, but most of all, the French, would never take those dollars and convert them into gold.
其他国家，但最重要的是法国，永远不会把这些美元兑换成黄金。
Once the French started going to the gold window, which is inevitable — it’s a general way that a speculative peg gets broken — it was all over.
一旦法国开始走向黄金窗口（这是不可避免的）——这是投机挂钩被打破的普遍方式——一切都结束了。
There were particular details to how it ended, but pegs are hit by speculative attacks, and they fail.
关于它如何结束有特定的细节，但挂钩受到投机攻击的打击，并且失败了。
It’s a story that you see happening in the 1990s and all of the financial crises that happen there.
这是一个发生在 20 世纪 90 年代的故事，以及那里发生的所有金融危机。
So yeah, there’s a weakness.
是的，有一个弱点。
I don’t disagree with the critique, but everybody got along until it blew up.
我并不反对这种批评，但每个人都相处得很好，直到它爆炸。
Maybe it did have to fail.
也许它确实必须失败。
Keynes certainly didn’t like the idea of linking everything to the dollar and linking the dollar to gold, but I don’t think he necessarily was worried about it predominantly from those speculative-peg, hot-money kind of issues.
凯恩斯当然不喜欢将一切与美元挂钩以及将美元与黄金挂钩的想法，但我认为他不一定主要担心那些投机挂钩、热钱之类的问题。
I think he was more concerned about the replacement of Britain with America as a geopolitical, hegemonic issue.
我认为他更关心的是美国取代英国作为地缘政治、霸权问题。
I don’t know, it seemed to work okay until it didn’t.
我不知道，它似乎工作得很好，直到它不起作用。
Was the euro a good idea?
欧元是个好主意吗？
Because if you like Bretton Woods, you might think the euro is a more enduring version of it, but it’s not obvious to me the euro has gone well.
因为如果你喜欢布雷顿森林体系，你可能会认为欧元是它的一个更持久的版本，但对我来说，欧元进展顺利并不明显。
No, the euro has been a disaster, but was the euro a good idea?
不，欧元是一场灾难，但欧元是个好主意吗？
Which part of the euro?
欧元的哪个部分？
The idea of these countries working together and having a shared sense of cooperation and fair play — that’s good.
这些国家共同努力并具有共同的合作意识和公平竞争的想法——这很好。
You need to have monetary flexibility within the euro.
欧元内部需要有货币灵活性。
That’s a problem within the Bretton Woods system, too, but the euro is clearly just too rigid a system to work.
这也是布雷顿森林体系内部的一个问题，但欧元显然是一个过于僵化的体系，无法发挥作用。
I think it has resulted in the opposite of what it was intended to do, but was it a good idea?
我认为这导致了与预期相反的结果，但这是一个好主意吗？
It hasn’t worked.
它没有起作用。
Let’s say that.
这么说吧。
Credit card and debit card fees — what is the incidence of those fees in today’s America, 2020?
信用卡和借记卡费用 — 这些费用在 2020 年当今美国的发生率是多少？
Who actually pays them in the end final analysis?
归根结底谁真正付钱给他们？
Not where they’re levied upfront, but the actual incidents?
不是预先征收的，而是实际发生的事件？
You have an article on this.
你有一篇关于这个的文章。
Some people think consumers pay them.
有些人认为消费者付钱给他们。
Oh, swipe fees.
噢，刷卡费。
I think, ultimately, consumers probably pay something.
我认为最终消费者可能会付出一些代价。
The significance of that article — this is from 2011, the swipe fee fight — the significance of that fight is that it didn’t really matter that much at all.
那篇文章的意义在于 ——这是 2011 年的刷卡费之争 ——这场斗争的意义在于它根本没有那么重要。
Consumers, I do think, ultimately pay some of those fees in the form of higher prices, but retailers do their best to minimize that and capture those fees for themselves.
我确实认为，消费者最终会以更高价格的形式支付其中一些费用，但零售商会尽最大努力将其最小化并为自己收取这些费用。
So, who pays?
那么，谁付钱呢？
A little bit of consumer, a little bit of the merchant.
一点点消费者，一点点商家。
They share these.
他们分享这些。
It depends on the fee and the merchant.
这取决于费用和商家。
Let’s say we made it completely impossible for credit card companies to stop merchants from offering cash discounts.
假设我们让信用卡公司完全不可能阻止商家提供现金折扣。
There are, indeed right now, many cash discounts.
现在确实有很多现金折扣。
Wouldn’t that solve the whole problem, that if it were easier to use cash, those gains would be internalized through a cash discount?
如果更容易使用现金，这些收益将通过现金折扣内部化，这难道不能解决整个问题吗？
And buyers would decide credit, debit card, or cash, and receive different prices, and things will be fine.
买家会选择信用卡、借记卡还是现金，并收到不同的价格，一切都会好起来的。
Correct or not?
正确与否？
That sounds okay to me.
这对我来说听起来不错。
We’ll just see what happens.
我们只会看看会发生什么。
Then it’s an easy problem.
那么这就是一个简单的问题了。
It’s not a big problem in that worldview.
在那个世界观中这不是什么大问题。
Look, I’m mostly an empiricist on these things.
听着，在这些事情上我基本上是一个经验主义者。
You just see what happens.
你只需看看会发生什么。
Do prices go up?
价格上涨吗？
You can look into the corporate revenues or not.
您可以查看公司收入或不查看。
My general view about the swipe fee issue is not about whether merchants were taking it on the chin or consumers were taking it on the chin.
我对刷卡费问题的总体看法不是商家是否介意，还是消费者是否介意。
It’s just that it wasn’t that big a deal and that — particularly in 2011 when we were in the middle of a terrible depression — the idea that we were going to fight over this in the Senate for six months struck me as extremely minor.
只是这没什么大不了的，而且 ——尤其是在 2011 年，当我们正处于严重的萧条之中时—— 我们要在参议院为此争论六个月的想法让我觉得微不足道。
We are talking about something that mattered, largely, not even to retailers in general, but to large retailers that had to pay a lot of these fees.
我们正在谈论的事情在很大程度上甚至对一般零售商来说也很重要，但对必须支付大量此类费用的大型零售商来说却很重要。
Walmart, Target — these big companies, these fees add up over time.
沃尔玛、塔吉特——这些大公司，这些费用随着时间的推移而增加。
What you do about it?
你对此做了什么？
Depends on what works.
取决于什么有效。
Try something.
尝试一下。
On Treatise on Money
论金钱论
Now, as you know, in Keynes’s Treatise on Money he endorses Knapp’s State Theory of Money.
现在，如您所知，凯恩斯在《货币论》中赞同纳普的货币国家理论。
Does the evolution of cryptocurrency show that Knapp, in fact, was wrong, that money is a market phenomenon?
加密货币的演变是否表明纳普实际上是错误的，即货币是一种市场现象？
Ooh, great question.
哦，好问题。
I don’t think so.
我不这么认为。
I’m very critical of cryptocurrency in general.
总的来说，我对加密货币非常批评。
I’m very skeptical about it, and I think it’s often just a vehicle for fraud.
我对此非常怀疑，我认为它通常只是欺诈的工具。
Is cryptocurrency really a currency?
加密货币真的是一种货币吗？
Do people really use it the way they use dollars and euros and other currencies?
人们真的像使用美元、欧元和其他货币一样使用它吗？
There are transactions that take place.
有交易发生。
There’s a lot of gray-market, black-market transactions, but the point is they could.
有很多灰市、黑市交易，但关键是它们可以。
It’s a kind of proof by existence.
这是一种存在的证明。
You can have an asset that’s fully market based.
您可以拥有完全基于市场的资产。
We definitely have cases of cryptocurrency-disappearing frauds and the like.
我们肯定有加密货币消失的欺诈案件等。
Among cryptocurrency users, there is a common agreement that discounts for some things.
在加密货币用户中，有一个共同的协议，即对某些东西进行折扣。
Can that be sustained as a social phenomenon outside some niche users?
在某些小众用户之外，这种现象能否持续作为一种社会现象？
Particularly, I think it really does matter that so much of the use of the currency, as currency, is happening outside the political system.
特别是，我认为货币作为货币的大量使用是在政治体系之外发生的，这一点确实很重要。
A lot of the stuff that’s happening there is illegal.
那里发生的很多事情都是非法的。
We’re talking about nongovernmental activity.
我们谈论的是非政府活动。
To me, the experience with cryptocurrency points in the other direction, that you need some political management of this stuff for it to have real meaning.
对我来说，加密货币的经验指向另一个方向，你需要对这些东西进行一些政治管理才能使其具有真正的意义。
Otherwise, it’s a fleeting and not particularly useful medium.
否则，它就是一种转瞬即逝且不是特别有用的媒介。
Keynes works for, I think, seven years on Treatise on Money.
我认为凯恩斯在《货币论》上工作了七年。
It’s two volumes.
这是两卷。
At the end, what he comes up with is a tabular standard, which I’m fine with, by the way.
最后，他提出了一个表格标准，顺便说一句，我对此很满意。
Is it even a good book at all?
它到底是一本好书吗？
Hansen, Hayek — they didn’t like the model.
汉森、哈耶克——他们不喜欢这个模型。
They more or less trash it.
他们或多或少都会把它扔掉。
Hayek claims Keynes repudiated his own book.
哈耶克声称凯恩斯否定了他自己的书。
What’s in Treatise on Money?
《金钱论》讲了什么？
I think he does repudiate his own book.
我认为他确实否定了他自己的书。
There’d be no need for The General Theory if the Treatise on Money was right.
如果《货币论》是正确的，那就不需要《通论》了。
The Treatise on Money is a big mess.
《金钱论》是一团糟。
It’s like 800 pages, two volumes.
大概有两卷，八百页。
Keynes himself says aesthetically, it’s a disaster, but he feels like he’s come to a great answer.
凯恩斯本人说，从美学角度来说，这是一场灾难，但他觉得自己找到了一个很好的答案。
By the end of the book, he’s got this weird justification for public works.
在书的结尾，他为公共工程找到了这种奇怪的理由。
He’s come to the conclusion, by the time he’s done with it, that the public works spending and budget deficits are necessary for getting out of the depression.
当他完成这项工作时，他得出的结论是，公共工程支出和预算赤字对于摆脱萧条是必要的。
He’s just tying himself in knots to come up with an economic theory that will justify that policy preference.
他只是在绞尽脑汁地想出一种经济理论来证明这种政策偏好的合理性。
These people may exist, but I don’t think there are many people who think the justification for public works in the Treatise on Money is more persuasive than that in The General Theory.
这些人可能存在，但我认为没有多少人认为《货币论》中的公共工程的正当性比《通论》中的更有说服力。
He basically says, “This is a one-time thing that we have to do because of the way trade relationships have worked out at this particular moment in time.” It’s very ad hoc.
他基本上是说，“这是我们必须做的一次性事情，因为贸易关系在这个特定时刻的发展方式。”这是非常临时的。
The thing that’s important about the Treatise on Money is how much fun Keynes has talking about the rise of capitalism in the 16th and 17th century and Knapp’s theory, chartalism, the theory in State Theory of Money.
《货币论》的重要之处在于凯恩斯对 16 世纪和 17 世纪资本主义的兴起以及纳普的理论、图表主义、《货币国家理论》中的理论有多么有趣。
I think that is really essential to the ideas that he develops further in The General Theory.
我认为这对于他在《通论》中进一步发展的思想非常重要。
If you take money to be a creature of the state rather than of markets, as we were talking about, then you’re just allowed to do a lot.
如果你把金钱视为国家的产物而不是市场的产物，正如我们所说，那么你就可以做很多事情。
The idea of the market as something that can function independently of the government becomes much blurrier, and the idea of the state as the thing that creates and guides markets, I think, opens up a broader realm for government intervention.
我认为，市场作为可以独立于政府运作的东西的想法变得更加模糊，而国家作为创造和引导市场的东西的想法为政府干预开辟了更广阔的领域。
But god, it’s a mess of a book.
但天哪，这本书真是一团糟。
There’s the international system where he talks about the bancor and the international super bank.
在国际体系中，他谈到了 Bancor 和国际超级银行。
That’s his blueprint for what he’s going to bring to Bretton Woods later, which he loses on all of those important fights.
这是他稍后将给布雷顿森林体系带来什么的蓝图，但他在所有这些重要的斗争中都输掉了布雷顿森林体系。
So that’s in there, but the whole thing is just a mess.
就在那里，但整个事情只是一团糟。
He himself is changing his mind so many times over the course of this book in response to political circumstances.
在本书的写作过程中，他本人为了应对政治环境多次改变主意。
Look, even General Theory is a bit of a mess, too, so it’s not like he has one definitive statement that is Keynesianism.
你看，即使是《通论》也有点混乱，所以他并没有一个明确的说法，那就是凯恩斯主义。
I reject the school of thought that it’s all in The General Theory, but I think of it as a step along the road.
我拒绝认为一切都在《通论》中的思想流派，但我认为这是前进道路上的一步。
It shows that he’s willing to change his mind, but he hasn’t figured it out yet.
说明他愿意改变主意，只是还没有想清楚。
On Keynes as biographer and art collector
论作为传记作家和艺术收藏家的凯恩斯
For me, Keynes is one of the greatest biographical writers in the entire English language — ever.
对我来说，凯恩斯是整个英语领域有史以来最伟大的传记作家之一。
What do you think is his best biographical portrait in Essays in Biography?
您认为《传记随笔》中他最好的传记肖像是什么？
Which is one of my favorite books, I might add.
我可以补充一下，这是我最喜欢的书之一。
That’s good, isn’t it?
这很好，不是吗？
I think my favorite is just Newton.
我想我最喜欢的就是牛顿。
He packed so many ideas into the way he writes about Newton.
他在描写牛顿的文章中融入了如此多的想法。
There are a couple of different essays on him.
关于他有几篇不同的文章。
I don’t know enough about Newton to know if his biography is accurate, to be clear.
澄清一下，我对牛顿的了解还不够，无法确定他的传记是否准确。
I know the big points on his life.
我知道他生活中的大事。
I haven’t read several biographies, but the way that he talks about Newton as someone who was a creative genius .
我没读过几本传记，但读过他谈论牛顿是一位创造性天才的方式。
.
。
.
。
The scientist as an artist who has the certain intuition about the way the world works, who then uses the math to explain why his aesthetically beautiful intuition about God’s plan or the nature of reality — why that makes sense.
科学家作为艺术家，对世界的运作方式有一定的直觉，然后用数学来解释为什么他对上帝计划或现实本质的美学直觉 ——为什么这是有道理的。
Maybe that’s true about Newton.
也许牛顿就是这样。
I don’t know.
我不知道。
I just don’t know the guy psychologically enough, but I think that tells us something interesting about Keynes’s own psyche.
我只是在心理上不太了解这个人，但我认为这告诉我们一些关于凯恩斯自己心理的有趣的事情。
I think that a lot of Keynes’s economic work functions in that way.
我认为凯恩斯的很多经济著作都是这样运作的。
I also think it’s useful to think about the scientist as somebody who is not just a bloodless technician.
我还认为，将科学家视为不仅仅是一个不流血的技术人员是有用的。
That scientific work is creative work, and the great scientists are people who are doing something that is aesthetically significant in addition to being technically significant.
科学工作是创造性的工作，伟大的科学家所做的事情除了具有技术意义外，还具有美学意义。
That they have an idea that they’re possessed with.
他们有一个自己着迷的想法。
We used to think of scientists as people in lab coats who just never smile, and that’s not the way people are.
我们曾经认为科学家是穿着实验室外套、从不微笑的人，但人们并不是这样的。
Did Keynes have good taste in art?
凯恩斯有很好的艺术品味吗？
His friends didn’t think so.
他的朋友们不这么认为。
What is good taste in art?
什么是好的艺术品味？
I think he had excellent taste.
我认为他的品味非常好。
He bought this Cezanne apples sketch before people understood how wonderful they are.
在人们意识到苹果有多么美妙之前，他就买下了塞尚的苹果素描。
Also, Degas ballerinas.
还有德加的芭蕾舞演员。
He didn’t pay that much for them.
他没有为他们付出那么多。
Cezanne and Degas were not undiscovered artists at that time.
塞尚和德加在当时并不是未被发现的艺术家。
No, he did get them in a fire sale, literally.
不，他确实通过甩卖的方式得到了它们，字面上的意思。
He went to Paris, and the Germans were getting close.
他去了巴黎，德国人已经接近了。
They were under bombardment.
他们正遭受轰炸。
That’s why they were liquidating it.
这就是他们清算它的原因。
I like Cezanne and Degas as much as the next guy.
我和其他人一样喜欢塞尚和德加。
I think his friends were so fussy.
我觉得他的朋友们都很挑剔。
They were envious of his social position.
他们羡慕他的社会地位。
They couldn’t do the economic work that he did.
他们无法完成他所做的经济工作。
It just was over their heads, so art was their thing.
这超出了他们的能力范围，所以艺术就是他们的事。
They were always telling him he had bad taste, but those apples were pretty good in the Cezanne.
他们总是说他品味不好，但塞尚画中的那些苹果却相当不错。
What’s the museum in Philadelphia that there was such a fine —
费城哪个博物馆有这么好的——
Barnes.
巴恩斯.
Yes, the Barnes Museum.
是的，巴恩斯博物馆。
I never saw the Barnes Museum before its transformation.
我从未见过巴恩斯博物馆改造前的样子。
These artists — not every single one of their works was amazing.
这些艺术家 ——并不是他们的每一件作品都令人惊叹。
Sometimes, there were bad Renoirs.
有时，雷诺阿的作品也很糟糕。
There were bad Cezannes.
有糟糕的塞尚。
I haven’t seen every single one of those Cezannes that Keynes talked about.
我还没有看过凯恩斯谈到的塞尚的每一幅作品。
In the archives at King’s College, there’s a lot of art that’s on display, but it’s mostly stuff from other Bloomsbury people.
在国王学院的档案馆里，陈列着很多艺术品，但大部分都是来自其他布鲁姆斯伯里人的东西。
The Bloomsburys themselves were probably overrated, as painters at least, but whatever.
布卢姆斯伯里家族本身可能被高估了，至少作为画家，但无论如何。
These tastes shift.
这些口味发生了变化。
I think Keynes was probably okay.
我认为凯恩斯可能没问题。
I don’t think he was as bad as his friends said.
我不认为他像他朋友说的那么糟糕。
Let me ask you the question Ezra asked you: In the time of Keynes, especially the earlier years, why would anyone have defended the gold standard?
让我问你以斯拉问过你的问题：在凯恩斯时代，尤其是早些年，为什么有人会捍卫金本位制？
Almost everyone did who thought about it, and I think it was tied up in a conception of liberalism and freedom that is very intuitively compelling to people who take enlightenment and liberalism seriously.
几乎每个思考过这个问题的人都这么做了，我认为它与自由主义和自由的概念紧密相关，对于认真对待启蒙运动和自由主义的人来说，这种概念在直觉上非常引人注目。
If you believe that capricious sovereigns and governments shouldn’t meddle in the affairs of the people and direct the flows of international commerce for their own short-term gains and political preferences, then the gold standard is a way to put some brakes on the government.
如果你认为反复无常的主权国家和政府不应该为了自己的短期利益和政治偏好而干涉人民事务并引导国际商业流动，那么金本位制就是对政府施加一些制动的一种方式。
To say not only that we will not meddle in the currency for domestic purposes, but we won’t interfere with international harmony and with the exchange of goods and ideas across different cultures — it’s very easy to see why people, from a progressive perspective, would see that as a good thing.
我们不仅不会出于国内目的而干预货币，而且不会干扰国际和谐以及不同文化之间的商品和思想交流——很容易理解为什么人们从进步的角度来看，会认为这是一件好事。
Why weren’t they just correct?
为什么他们不正确呢？
Christina Romer has shown GDP volatility was not higher before the Fed, and if countries had stayed on the gold standard, they couldn’t have fought World War I.
克里斯蒂娜·罗默 (Christina Romer) 的研究表明，在美联储之前，GDP 波动性并不高，如果各国坚持金本位制，他们就不可能打第一次世界大战。
That sounds pretty good to me.
这对我来说听起来不错。
Well, if she’s right, then she’s right.
好吧，如果她是对的，那么她就是对的。
Ultimately, politics exist, and it’s hard to create a system that says when your back gets up against the wall, you’ve just got to deal with it because people will break the rules.
归根结底，政治是存在的，很难创建一个系统来告诉你，当你遇到困难时，你必须应对它，因为人们会违反规则。
The Keynesian argument against it, by the time he gets to the Treatise on Money at least, is that you have to do something about the short-term social pressures that are caused when you are up against deflation, essentially.
凯恩斯主义反对这一观点的论点是，至少在他写到《货币论》的时候，你必须对在面临通货紧缩时所造成的短期社会压力采取一些措施。
Unemployment, social unrest — that is something governments will have to respond to.
失业、社会动荡——这是政府必须应对的问题。
If they don’t, what you get will be worse than whatever you would .
如果他们不这样做，你得到的将会比你想要的更糟糕。
.
。
.
。
It will prevent the long run from coming to be.
它将阻止长期的实现。
This is one of the philosophical dimensions of the “In the long run, we’re all dead” claim.
这是“从长远来看，我们都死了”这一主张的哲学维度之一。
He’s not just saying we can make things better in the short term, and that’s important.
他不仅仅是说我们可以在短期内让事情变得更好，这很重要。
He’s saying if you don’t fix things in the short term, the long term may never actually happen if you have an authoritarian takeover or a war or something.
他说，如果你不在短期内解决问题，那么如果你发生独裁接管或战争之类的事情，那么长期可能永远不会真正发生。
At least for Keynes, once he sees the state of deprivation that’s happening across Europe after the war, he just thinks that this is an untenable system.
至少对于凯恩斯来说，一旦他看到战后欧洲各地所发生的贫困状况，他就会认为这是一个站不住脚的体系。
Before the war?
战前？
If the gold standard had been managed wisely, we never would have needed Keynesian economics.
如果金本位得到明智的管理，我们就永远不需要凯恩斯主义经济学。
There would have been no need for Keynes to come up with a complicated economic explanation for deficit spending or to try to focus on uncertainty as this key concept.
凯恩斯没有必要对赤字支出提出复杂的经济解释，也没有必要试图将不确定性作为这一关键概念。
Things just would have worked out.
事情本来就会解决的。
In a famous essay, as you know, “Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren” — I think it’s 1930 — Keynes predicted we — I’m not sure who the “we” is here — would be working 15 hours a week.
如您所知，在一篇著名的文章《我们的孙辈的经济可能性》 — 我认为这是 1930 年 — 凯恩斯预测我们 — 我不确定这里的“我们”是谁 — 每周工作 15 个小时。
What did he get wrong?
他做错了什么？
Or was he just off by a few decades?
或者他只是落后了几十年？
Well, Benjamin Friedman, I think, did the analysis most recently.
嗯，我认为本杰明·弗里德曼最近进行了分析。
Bob Solow did one 2007–2008.
鲍勃·索洛 (Bob Solow) 在 2007 年至 2008 年做过一次。
If you take living standard to be something like GDP per capita, then the actual productive output of society was pretty close to what Keynes is talking about in “Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren,” but the distribution of that output is not egalitarian.
如果把生活水平比作人均GDP，那么社会的实际生产产出与凯恩斯在《我们子孙的经济可能性》中所说的非常接近，但产出的分配并不平均。
The answer that I put in my book — that I think is basically right — is that most of these gains are captured by people at the top.
我在书中给出的答案——“我认为基本上是正确的”——是，大部分收益都被高层人士攫取了。
As a result, we have people working all the time.
结果，我们一直有人在工作。
But median family income in the US is now still past the range where Keynes would have predicted 15 hours of work a week, right?
但美国家庭收入中位数现在仍然超过了凯恩斯预测的每周工作 15 小时的范围，对吗？
Uneven distribution, but median wage in Keynes’s time was pitifully low.
分配不均，但凯恩斯时代的工资中位数低得可怜。
And now, it’s still pretty high.
而现在，它仍然很高。
You can see the decline in working hours is pretty steady over the late 19th century and into the 1940s.
您可以看到，从 19 世纪末到 20 世纪 40 年代，工作时间的减少相当稳定。
I think he writes that essay in 1928.
我认为他是在 1928 年写下那篇文章的。
It’s published in 1930.
它于 1930 年出版。
It was 1926 when he actually writes it, but it’s published in 1930.
他真正写这本书的时候是 1926 年，但它的出版时间是 1930 年。
Even in the depression, you can see this decline in working hours.
即使在经济萧条时期，你也可以看到工作时间的减少。
It is very pronounced, and then it stops in the 1960s, 1970s.
它非常明显，然后在 20 世纪 60 年代、1970 年代停止。
That to me is, do we want to be working this long?
对我来说，我们想工作这么长时间吗？
At least, I don’t want to be working 40 hours a week.
至少，我不想每周工作 40 个小时。
COWEN: You work much more than 40.
COWEN：你的工作时间远超过 40 岁。
Yes, but I would —
是的，但我会——
You wrote a book that just made a top-10 list.
您写的一本书刚刚跻身前十名。
That’s not easy.
这并不容易。
Your wife — her book is very highly regarded.
你的妻子——她的书受到高度评价。
She’s an editor for the New York Times.
她是《纽约时报》的编辑。
It’s an incredible amount of work.
这是一项令人难以置信的工作量。
You and she are going way past 40.
你和她都已经40多岁了。
So, what’s the deal?
那么，到底是怎么回事呢？
The books are an interesting question.
这些书是一个有趣的问题。
Does that count as work?
这算工作吗？
When I write about politics and economic policy and specific issues that people are fighting about in Washington — that feels like work.
当我写政治、经济政策以及人们在华盛顿争论的具体问题时，感觉就像在工作。
It’s stressful.
压力很大。
I have to learn things that I don’t necessarily enjoy learning.
我必须学一些我不一定喜欢学的东西。
Doing the book, the research, the history — that was fun.
写书、研究、历史——这很有趣。
That was exciting.
那真是令人兴奋。
That was joyful in a certain way.
从某种意义上来说，这是令人高兴的。
Now, once we had our daughter almost 15 months ago —
现在，大约 15 个月前我们有了女儿——
Congratulations.
恭喜。
Thank you.
谢谢。
To be perfectly frank, my interest in historical research has waned a bit.
坦白说，我对历史研究的兴趣有点减弱了。
I don’t know if I would think of historical work and work on the next book as the same pure expression of what I would do with my free time that I did this book.
我不知道我是否会认为历史工作和下一本书的工作与我写这本书一样纯粹地表达了我在空闲时间会做的事情。
I would probably rather be hiking in the woods with my daughter or reading through books about bears or whatever she’s into.
我可能更愿意和女儿一起在树林里徒步旅行，或者阅读有关熊或她喜欢的任何书籍。
My priorities have changed.
我的优先事项已经改变。
There’s an argument that I think Joe Stiglitz makes this in part .
有一种观点认为，我认为乔·斯蒂格利茨（Joe Stiglitz）部分地做到了这一点。
.
。
.
。
There’s a whole book on “Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren,” came out about 2008, with all these different essays from people investigating what Keynes got right and what he got wrong.
大约 2008 年出版了一本关于《我们的子孙的经济可能性》的书，里面有人们调查凯恩斯的正确和错误的各种不同文章。
One of the answers is that people actually like working and that there’s a certain class of people who do work that’s not really work, and I’d certainly consider myself to be in that class of people.
答案之一是，人们实际上喜欢工作，并且有一类人所做的工作并不是真正的工作，我当然认为自己属于这一类人。
It’s true that I like that work.
确实，我喜欢那份工作。
Even the type of work that I do, once my daughter arrived, I would just like to do less.
即使是我所做的工作，一旦我女儿来了，我也想少做一些。
I think for a lot of people with families, that’s the case.
我想对于很多有家庭的人来说都是如此。
You wouldn’t work as much as you do if you could work less and feel a sense of security about the future.
如果你能减少工作量并且对未来有安全感，你就不会像现在这样工作那么多了。
That sense of security about the future is a tricky thing because what constitutes security?
对未来的安全感是一件棘手的事情，因为什么构成安全？
You get accustomed to a certain standard of living.
你习惯了一定的生活水平。
You want that for your children.
你希望你的孩子也能这样。
I admit that there’s a gray area there — or not even gray, just kind of fuzzy.
我承认那里有一个灰色区域——或者甚至不是灰色，只是有点模糊。
But I think a lot of people choose to work more than they probably should.
但我认为很多人选择工作得比他们应该做的更多。
I’m sure that as my daughter gets older, whether I want to be writing more books or coaching basketball will be a major decision.
我确信，随着我女儿长大，我是否想写更多的书或执教篮球将是一个重大决定。
Last question: what is your next overwork project?
最后一个问题：你的下一个加班项目是什么？
The current working title is called Fields of Fire.
目前的工作标题是“Fields of Fire”。
It’s a look at the Populists of the 1880s and 1890s.
这是对 1880 年代和 1890 年代民粹主义者的审视。
Right now, it looks like we’re going to tell it through the lives of two White Populists and two Black Populists from Georgia and North Carolina, but we’ll see.
现在，看起来我们要通过来自佐治亚州和北卡罗来纳州的两名白人民粹主义者和两名黑人民粹主义者的生活来讲述它，但我们拭目以待。
You kind of got to go where the research takes you with this stuff.
你必须带着这些东西去研究带你去的地方。
In a lot of ways, I think what the Populists are working through in the 1880s and 1890s is very similar to what Keynes is working through.
在很多方面，我认为民粹主义者在 1880 年代和 1890 年代所做的事情与凯恩斯正在经历的事情非常相似。
Their economic proposals are a bit different, but they see themselves as inhabiting an era of crisis in which the economic system is not working.
他们的经济建议略有不同，但他们认为自己生活在一个经济体系不起作用的危机时代。
It’s the same economic system.
这是同一个经济体系。
They’re writing about the gold standard at its outset.
他们从一开始就在谈论金本位。
Keynes is writing about its maturity.
凯恩斯正在撰写有关其成熟度的文章。
They’re trying to come up with ways to reformulate politics to make the economic system work.
他们正在试图想出重新制定政治的方法，以使经济体系发挥作用。
I think there is — as with Keynes — an enormous amount of promise and also an enormous amount of danger in what they’re doing.
我认为——就像凯恩斯一样——他们所做的事情既有巨大的希望，也有巨大的危险。
In the same way that you talked about Keynes being enamored with the British colonial system, or at least overly enamored with it, there’s a lot of intellectual stuff happening with the Populists, this period of time, which is inspiring but also dangerous.
就像你谈到凯恩斯迷恋英国殖民体系，或者至少过度迷恋它一样，民粹主义者在这段时期发生了很多知识分子的事情，这是鼓舞人心的，但也很危险。
I just find it a fascinating era.
我只是觉得这是一个令人着迷的时代。
Hopefully, the book — it’s not a biography, but it will try to work with a lot of the same currents and themes that were in the Keynes book.
希望这本书不是一本传记，但它会尝试与凯恩斯书中的许多相同的潮流和主题合作。
Zach Carter, thank you very much.
扎克·卡特，非常感谢你。
Thanks, Tyler.
谢谢，泰勒。