留美博士:朱學勤剽竊Blum 中英對照系列之四
這一節是朱學勤《道德理想國的覆滅》第八章第五節。該節除開頭298頁兩段的兩個注釋外,共標注了5個文獻來源(即注釋37至41),全部注明為“《羅伯斯庇爾全集》”。但是,此節的所有內容,除了開頭298頁的兩段和本節最后一段外,都是逐詞逐句翻譯自Blum。本節共2140字(不含注釋),其中1910字來源于Blum一書。
朱學勤:《道德理想國的覆滅》 第八章第五節:298至302頁 |
Carol Blum: Rousseau and the Republic of Virtue 布魯姆:《盧梭與德性共和國》 |
298頁—— 從牧月法令通過,到熱月政變,不到50天的時間,僅巴黎一地就處死1376人,平均每周達196人,殺人最多時每天達 50人。35 塞納河水,實在是太紅了。 美德越位,恐怖越位,斷頭臺也大大越位。盧梭的革命,開始大量吞食盧梭之子:處死者中屬于原特權等級者逐步減少,6月只占16B 5%,7月更降到5%,其余均為資產階級、下層群眾、軍人、官員,其中下層群眾則高達40%以上!36 (這兩段來源其他文獻,不在Blum一書中。) 第299頁—— 廣場上一片沉寂,洞穴內暗室四起。雅各賓派失盡人心,國民公會內種種反對派陰謀四處蔓延。有些議員自牧月令公布之日起,即不敢回家睡覺,害怕被捕 (1.Blum:260頁倒數第7行至倒數第6行)。牧月24日(6月12日),布爾東和梅蘭在議會發言,要求澄清牧月法令是否廢紙了議員不受逮捕的豁免權(2.Blum:260頁倒數第2行至261頁第2行)。羅伯斯庇爾認為,這兩個議員的發言是“企圖把救國委員會從山岳黨人分離開來” (3.Blum:261頁第4行至第6行)。 (以上全段沒有標出來源) 他說:“允許一些陰謀家分裂山岳黨人,并且自封為黨派領袖,就是對人民的殘忍,對人民的謀殺。” (4.Blum:261頁第13行至第14行) 布爾東要求出示證據:“我決不想自封為一黨領袖,我要求你拿出剛才那番指控的證據,我已經被說成一個邪惡者了”!” (5.Blum:261頁第15行至第18行) 羅伯斯庇爾:“我決不是指布爾東。誰要是對好入座,算他活該。我的職責迫使我描繪這樣一幅肖像,如果他認出這便是他,我沒有權力阻止他。是的,山岳當人是純潔的,它是高尚的,而陰謀家絕不是山岳黨成員。” (6.Blum:261頁第19行至第23行) 一個聲音高叫著:“指出他的名字!” (7.Blum:261頁第24行) 羅伯斯庇爾:“到應該指出來的時候,我會指出他的名字!” 37(8.Blum:261頁第25行) 辯論表明,羅伯斯庇爾已再現盧梭晚年的這一心態:(9.Blum:265頁倒數第6行至倒數第5行)既然我是道德的,那么反對者只可能是站在反道德立場上反對我;而反道德者不是有錯,只可能是有罪;唯我有美德,他人在犯罪……:(10.Blum:265頁最后一行至266頁第4行)羅伯斯庇爾已經進入內省確信狀態,不需要證據,他就可以憑直覺指控任何一個反對者,這樣一個直覺敏銳者、“激情迅猛者”,又是大權在握!議院內人人自危,如湯澆蚊穴,一片慌亂。 第300頁—— 牧月27日(6月15日),瓦迪埃向國民公會報告卡特琳泰奧事件。被告泰奧是個民間巫婆,逮捕是在他的草墊下發現了一封給羅伯斯庇爾的信,信中把羅伯斯庇爾稱為“神人”、“救世主” (11.Blum:265頁第三段最后4行)。泰奧于5月28日被捕,即花月法令前,拖到此時來公布,顯然是有反對派暗中活動,以此敗壞羅伯斯庇爾花月令、牧月法令的道德聲譽(12. Blum:265頁第二段第5行至第8行)。羅伯斯庇爾閉門起草反擊報告。他悲憤地寫道: “這是為什么,我們總是要提及我們自己?…… (13.Blum:266頁第6行至第7行) “我們為什么不為自己辯護,就不能為共和國辯護?(14.Blum:266頁第8行) “他們為什么總是要把我們和公共利益綁在一起,以致我們如果不為自己辯解,就不能為政府,為國民公會的各項原則辯解?” ?38(15. Blum:266頁第9行至第11行) 羅伯斯庇爾已無可挽回地進入了盧梭晚年的悲劇處境,控訴者被控訴,連語言都極其相似:(16. Blum:265頁倒數第6行至倒數第5行)。當他仰天悲問,“他們為什么總是要把我們和公共利益綁在一起?(pourquoi nous a-t-on lies a l'interet general?) ” 。:(17. Blum:266頁第三段第3行至第5行,此處法語也完全照搬Blum,一詞不多,一詞不少)他已預設了一個前提:他為自己辯護,就是為人民辯護。“我就是人民”,在這里又一次出現。奇麗斯瑪的外傾語式是“無限上綱”:不同政見者必是道德邪惡者,道德邪惡者必是道德罪惡者。:(18. Blum:266頁第三段第1行至第3行)。奇麗斯瑪的內傾語式是“預先聯系”:把自己和人民、共和國連成一體,攻擊他,就是攻擊人民,共計共和國。前者為矛,后者為盾。(19. Blum:266頁第三段第5行至第8行)“我——道德——人民”,成了奇麗斯瑪怯魅入巫所陷入的最大語言巫區。(20. Blum:266頁第三段第8行至第10行)
7月9日,羅伯斯庇爾出現于雅各賓俱樂部講演,他再一次強調花月法令的意義: 第301頁—— 所有拯救過共和國的法令中,最崇高的法令唯有這一項法令,它把共和國從腐敗者的手中奪了回來,它使所有的人民從暴君手中釋放了出來,這就是使得美德和城市成為生活秩序的法令,然而,那些只愿帶著自由面具的人,卻在美德法則的貫徹過程中投下了巨大的障礙。39(21. Blum:271頁第二段全段) 又過了一星期,離事變前10天,他再次把自己的困境歸結為花月法令激起的抵抗,他們中的大多數人對美德這一詞語的信念,僅限于家政和私人義務,決不愿將其理解為公共道德,理解為對人民事業的全部奉獻,而后一點正是美德的英雄主義、共和國的唯一支柱、人類幸福的唯一保證。40(22. Blum:271頁第三段第7行至第11行) 羅伯斯庇爾似乎朦朧意識到,所有的問題就出在這個道德邊界的認定?道德通常被人理解為私人事務,而他則堅持道德必須成為強制性的公共狀態,必須成為國家、政治、乃至文明歷史的唯一基礎。(23. Blum:271頁第三段第1行至第3行) 7月26日,臨事變前夜,他再國民公會演說,也是他生平最后一次演說。(24. Blum:272頁第三段第1行至第2行)歷史學家將其稱為他的“政治遺囑”。冥冥之中,他似乎預感到什么,急不可待地向歷史交代,他此生信仰與這一場革命統一于美德這一基點:(25. Blum:274頁第二段第1行至第2行) 我只知道有兩種人:正直的公民與邪惡的公民。(26. Blum:273頁第三段第1行、第3行)愛國主義不是一個政治黨派問題,而是心靈問題。(27. Blum:273頁第三段第4行)誰能作出這種區別?良知和正義。(28. Blum:273頁第三段第6行至第7行) 第302頁—— 我說的是什么?美德!(29. Blum:273頁最后一第1行)沒有美德,一場偉大的革命只不過是一種亂哄,是一種罪惡摧毀另一種罪惡。(30. Blum:274頁第一段第3行至第4行)拿走我的良知,我就成了一個可憐的人。41(31. Blum:274頁第一段最后一句) 7月27日晚,熱月事件發生。羅伯斯庇爾在國民公會議員們的叫罵聲中被捕,他留給這個嘈雜大廳的最后一句話是:“強盜們得勝,共和國完了。”當晚8點半至11點,他曾被短暫地營救出3個小時。但在這3個小時內,他無所作為,只是用手槍打碎了自己的下巴。在被人推上斷頭臺前,他先打碎了自己的鐵嘴——語言器官。7月28日下午6點,羅伯斯庇爾一行22人被送到停放斷頭臺的廣場。7點半,他被推上斷頭臺。他臨行前沉默不語,亦不能語,只是在沉默中最后一次聆聽廣場上的群眾歡呼:“國民公會萬歲!”(最后這一部分不知道出處,有可能是陳崇武的。不過,這個已經不重要了。朱大量剽竊了Blum,連小學生都看得出來。) 注釋: 35.迪金森:《近代法國的革命與反動》,倫敦1927年版,P33。 36.轉引自張芝聯主編:《法國通史》,北京大學出版社,1989年版, P190。 37.《羅伯斯庇爾全集》,第10卷,P492—494。 38. 同上,P 507。 39. 同上,P519。 40. 同上,P531。 41. 同上,P554—556。 |
1. Blum. P. 260: He alluded to rumors: a number of deputies to the Convention no longer slept in their beds, fearing arrest in the middle of the night. 2. Blum. P. 260-261: On 24 prairial, Bourdon (delegate from l'Oise) and Merlin (from Douai) demanded an amendment to the law of 22 prairial which would exclude the members of the Convention themselves from arrest, trial, and execution under its provisions. 3. Blum. P. 261: He stated that Bourdon was attempting to separate the Committee [of Public Safety] from the Mountain. 4. Blum. P. 261: Robespierre continued, "it would be assassinating the people to permit some schemers to drag off a portion of this Mountain and make themselves party leaders." 5. Blum. P. 261: Bourdon's reply was to deny the role Robespierre assigned him. "I never intended to make myself a party leader," he protested. "I demand that what was just claimed be proven; I have just been called a scoundrel—" 6. Blum. P. 261: "I did not name Bourdon," Robespierre replied. "Woe unto him who names himself. If he wishes to recognize himself in the general portrait that duty forces me to trace, I cannot stop him. Yes, the Mountain is untainted, it is sublime, and schemers are not part of the Mountain." 7. Blum. P. 261: A voice called out: "Name them." 8. Blum. P. 261: "I will name them when the time comes," Robespierre replied. [10: 492-94]朱文此處照搬此注解,注為: 第10卷, P. 492-494 9. Blum. P. 265: Robespierre's reaction demonstrated the parameters of self-generated virtue in the same way that Rousseau juge de Jeanjacques had done. 10. Blum. P. 265-266:Both Robespierre and Rousseau, after long, persistent, and successful efforts to center attention upon their revealed selves as incarnations of virtue, struggling with the evil of the world, uttered reactions of surprise and hurt when they suddenly experienced that attention as unfriendly. 11. Blum. P. 265: Vadier and Barere presented a report in the name of the committees of Public Safety and General Security, claiming that "the Mother of God" was addressing Robespierre as her "first prophet, the son of the Supreme Being, the Redeemer, the Messiah. 12. Blum. P. 265: but the real accused was understood to be Robespierre himself, and the accusation was that of aspiring not to dictatorship but to divinity. The records of the trial of Theot suggest an atmosphere of farce. 13. Blum. P. 266: "Why is it," he asked, "that we always have to mention ourselves?" 14. Blum. P. 266: Why can we not defend the public good without defending ourselves? 15. Blum. P. 266: Why have they so bound us to the public interest, that we cannot speak in favor of the government, of the principles of the National Convention, without seeming to speak of ourselves? [10: 507] 朱文此處照搬此注解,注為:同上, P.507 16. Blum. P. 265: Robespierre's reaction demonstrated the parameters of self-generated virtue in the same way that Rousseau juge de Jeanjacques had done. 17. Blum. P. 266: When Robespierre asked "Why have they bound us to the public interest? (pourquoi nous a-t-on lies a l'interet general?)," 18. Blum. P. 266: Robespierre, like Rousseau, was claiming the right to experience in a passive way as external evil the situation he had actively created, as internal good. 19. Blum. P. 266: the identity between himself and the people, upon which he had so intensely insisted, he now described as an alien and suspicious connection, one designed to make him seem contemptible. 20. Blum. P. 266: It was as if the heroic figure that he called himself were suddenly exposed in a different light, in which it took on a comic aspect. 21. Blum. P. 271: Of all the decrees which have saved the Republic, the most sublime, the only one that wrenched it from corruption's grasp and freed all the people from tyranny, is the one which made virtue and probity the order of the day [18 floreal]. If this decree had been executed, liberty would have been perfectly established and we would not need to make the grandstands ring with our voice; but the men who wear only the mask of virtue put the greatest obstacles into the execution of virtue's own laws. [10: 519] 朱文此處照搬此注解,注為:同上, P.519 22. Blum. P. 271: At most they understand by the word virtue a faithfulness to certain domestic and private obligations, but never the public virtues, never the generous devotion to the cause of the people which is the heroism of virtue and the only support of the Republic, the only pledge of the happiness of the human race. [10: 531] 朱文此處照搬此注解,注為:同上, P.531 23. Blum. P. 271: When virtue was solemnly made the order of the day, the enemies of the Republic did not associate the idea of every man and every citizen's sacred and sublime duties toward the Fatherland and humanity with the word virtue. 24. Blum. P. 272: Robespierre's last speech, on 8 thermidor, took place before the Convention, where he had not appeared since 24 prairial. 25. Blum. P. 274: This impassioned discourse described, for the last time, Robespierre's dynamic model of the French Revolution as a fusion in virtue. 26. Blum. P. 273: "I know of only two parties," he continued, "that of the good citizens and that of the bad citizens; 27. Blum. P. 273: patriotism is not a question of party but of the heart. 28. Blum. P. 273: Who will make this distinction? Good sense and justice." 29. Blum. P. 273: What am I saying, Virtue!
30. Blum. P. 274: without which a great revolution is but a dazzling crime which destroys another crime. 31. Blum. P. 274: Take away my conscience and I am the most miserable of men. [10: 554-56] 朱文此處照搬此注解,注為:同上, P.554-556 |
相關文章
「 支持烏有之鄉!」
您的打賞將用于網站日常運行與維護。
幫助我們辦好網站,宣傳紅色文化!
歡迎掃描下方二維碼,訂閱烏有之鄉網刊微信公眾號
