39.投降主义，把世界拱手交给共党？奥巴马这个叛徒！

Reader86

- The American exceptionalism that I grew up with. The American exceptionalism of the Cold War The American exceptionalism of the 1990s I do think has outlived its usefulness. It is no longer really even inspirational I think for many of the American for large numbers of the American people and certainly abroad it is most effective when it is a version of universalism. It's essentially universal human rights the words of the Declaration of Independence. So the notion that all human beings are created equal and they're all entitled to these basic rights much more so than this is the mission of United States. The American exceptionalism of the th century I think really did see it as a mission as a kind of missionary zeal that the United States could bring the light of democracy to the rest of the world Wilson all the way through to Clinton. In various ways that doesn't make sense to me now. I do think that the United States will do far better in the world if we're focused on living up to our values at home and above all on whether we can make the transition to being a plurality nation where we're no longer a white majority which will happen within the next couple of decades and will happen by for Americans under .If we can actually make that transition and improve inequality have strategies of equity strategies of participation strategies of genuine power shifting that will do much more for the way the world sees the United States than any amount of kind of pushing democracy abroad It doesn't mean I don't think we should stop supporting the democratic opposition in various countries in various ways but I don't think that should be the focal point of our foreign policy.


“我认为美国的优秀，伴随我成长的美国优秀，冷战的美国优秀，已经没有用处了。我认为对于许多美国人来说，它甚至不再是鼓舞人心的，对于许多美国人而言，当然在国外，当它是一种普遍主义的版本时，它是最有效的。独立宣言的字眼实质上是普遍人权。因此，“创造所有人是平等的，使所有人都享有这些基本权利” 这一观念远非美国的使命。我认为，二十世纪的美国优秀主义确实把它看作是一种传教士的热忱，认为美国可以将民主之光带到世界其他地区，直到威尔逊，一直到克林顿。现在，以各种方式对我来说已经毫无意义。我确实认为，如果我们专注于在本国实现我们的价值观，我们在世界上会做得更好，最重要的是，到2027年，30以下的美国白人不再是大多数，在这种情况下，我们是否可以实现向多元化国家的过渡。如果我们能够真正实现这一转变并改善不平等现象，那么拥有平等战略，参与战略，真正的权力转移战略将对世界产生更大的影响，世界这样看美国比以任何方式将民主推向国外更有效。这些并不意味着我不认为我们不应该以各种方式停止支持各个国家的民主反对派，但是我不认为这应该成为我们对外政策的焦点。”

Reader86

- Anne-Marie Slaughter 真是个 slaughter！

华人中，共产党的信徒不会太多！

就因为这个，大家不能投 Biden！

Reader86

（1）


- The American exceptionalism that I grew up with the American exceptionalism of the Cold War the American exceptionalism of the 1990s. I do think has outlived its usefulness.

(upbeat music)- Hello and welcome to "GZERO WORLD.

"I'm Ian Bremmer and in case there's any chance you didn't realize that the US presidential election is fast approaching but for two years now the countless robo calls the emails tweets and TV ads are there to remind you. Today we're talking about what the election means to the rest of the world and how US foreign policy could change if Joe Biden wins. I'll break it down with Anne-Marie Slaughter who was a top level state department official under President Obama and now runs the think tank New America. We'll also look at President Trump's track record:n global issues like trade and a technology battle with China. You can't say he didn't warn you.

- We will seek friendship and good will with the nations of the world but we do so with the under standing that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

- And after just a few months the world saw what "America first" looked like.

- The implementations of President Trump's travel ban--- So some tough talk today from US President Donald Trump on NAFTA--- Formally was drawing the United States from the Transpacific Partnership--- The president intended to close borders and build walls even around some of the nation's strongest allies.

- NATO members must finally contribute their fair share and meet their financial obligations.- President Trump reversed course on many of President Obama's key foreign policy efforts including the Paris climate agreement the Iranian nuclear deal the Transpacific Partnership and normalization of relations with Cuba. Then there were the so-called kids in cages who had been separated from their families at the US-Mexico border. The facilities were actually built in the Obama administration. Don't tell the folks on social media but Trump's separation policy did become a PR disaster. And that's despite what the first lady's coat said. People did care. No Trump's America wasn't going to be warm and fuzzy but that doesn't mean there weren't some wins along the way. The killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was a symbolic victory and clear evidence that the Islamic state was all but defeated.

- He died after running into a dead end tunnel whimpering and crying and screaming all the way.

- Moving the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem was enormously controversial but also a key first move in a policy break through few thought possible.

- There will be no separate peace between Israel and the Arab world. I want to make that very clear to all of you.- It's a first. A commercial flight has made history flying from Israel to the United Arab Emirates. It comes after the two countries agreed to normalize relations.

-我与冷战时期的美国例外主义以及1990年代的美国例外主义共同成长的美国例外主义。我确实认为它已经失去作用。

（欢乐的音乐）-您好，欢迎来到“ GZERO WORLD。

“我是伊恩·布雷默（Ian Bremmer），万一您没有意识到美国总统大选即将到来，但是两年来，无数的机器人呼叫电子邮件推文和电视广告来提醒您。今天，我们谈论选举对世界其他地方的意义，以及乔·拜登获胜后美国的外交政策将如何改变，我将与奥巴马总统领导的国务院高级官员安妮·玛丽·史劳特（Anne-Marie Slaughter）分解，我们还将看一下特朗普总统在贸易和与中国的技术战等全球性问题上的往绩：你不能说他没有警告过你。

－我们将寻求与世界各国的友谊和善意，但我们的理解是所有国家都有权利把自己的利益放在首位。

-短短几个月后，全世界看到了“美国第一”的模样。

-特朗普总统的旅行禁令的执行--今天美国总统唐纳德·特朗普就北美自由贸易协定进行了艰难的讨论--正式将美国从跨太平洋伙伴关系中吸引了--总统打算关闭边界并在周围建立隔离墙一些美国最强大的盟友。

-北约成员必须最终贡献自己的公平份额并履行其财政义务。-特朗普总统扭转了奥巴马总统许多重要外交政策努力的方向，包括巴黎气候协定，伊朗核协议，跨太平洋伙伴关系以及与古巴关系正常化。然后是所谓的关在笼子里的孩子，他们在美墨边境与家人失散。这些设施实际上是在奥巴马政府内建造的。不要在社交媒体上告诉人们，但特朗普的分居政策确实成为了公关灾难。尽管第一夫人的外套说了什么。人们确实在乎。没有特朗普的美国不会变得热情和模糊，但这并不意味着在此过程中没有任何胜利。 ISIS领导人阿布·贝克尔·巴格达迪（Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi）被杀是象征性的胜利，并且清楚地证明了伊斯兰国几乎被击败了。

-他进入死胡同的隧道，一直哭泣，哭泣，尖叫，死了。

-将美国驻以色列大使馆迁至耶路撒冷引起了极大争议，但这也是政策突破中的关键第一步，其间很少有人想到可能。

-以色列与阿拉伯世界之间不会有单独的和平。我想向大家说清楚。-这是第一次。一次商业飞行使历史从以色列飞往阿拉伯联合酋长国。两国同意使关系正常化之后。

Reader86

（2）

- First son-in-law Jared Kushner's Mideast peace plan was endorsed by several Arab nations and Israel established diplomatic relations with the UAE and Bahrain. It was a big score for the White House but the clear loser has been the Palestinians. There were trade winds like the USMCA or the new NAFTA as it's called which had rare bipartisan support. In phase one of the China trade deal Trump won concessions on issues like currency and intellectual property that have been goals for several previous US presidents. And the biggest success to date has been the president's aggressive action to combat China's growing power and influence in technology steering countries like Canada Japan and New Zealand away from China as a G provider. But a global threat that no one saw coming the coronavirus pandemic has over shadowed all other stories in the Trump presidency. Withdrawing from the World Health Organization and a refusal to cooperate globally on vaccine development and distribution make it clear that a second Trump term should there be one won't reverse the plan to put America first for better or for worse. But there is of course another possible outcome to election day. Joe Biden could become the next president. How could America's foreign policy agenda change under his leadership? That's the subject of my main interview today. Anne-Marie Slaughter senior official in the State Department and the Obama administration and CEO now think tank New America welcome to "GZERO WORLD."

- My pleasure. I'm glad to be here.

- So much to talk about but start big picture with me. If we have a Biden administration what do you think the priorities are in foreign policy and how the United States engages with the rest of the world?

- Well the top priority will be to announce to the world that the United States they've known for decades is back. Back in a different way but still very much on the front lines of alliances of multilateral institutions of global problem solving of being a member of the global community and a leader in the global community. Beyond that I think they will be focusing tremendously on domestic renewal. They would never call it "America first" and they don't think that way but they do think that America can't play the role it needs to play in the world unless it fixes a whole lot of things at home.

- And that certainly sounds very very different and we can get into all those pieces but I want to start with the idea that you know that America's back because of course you know Vice President Biden eight years with the Obama administration president Obama I mean there were a lot of people around the world a lot of leaders around the world that were concerned that the United States wasn't back at that point. That the US was less interested in playing the kind of leadership role that it had historically or was less committed perhaps to some of the alliances even though it was still multilateral in orientation. How do you respond to them?

- I think that they are right in the sense that people will look back and seethe first part of the st centur as a period of relative US retrenchment. At least certainly compared to the s people will see that the United States in large part responding to domestic pressure started to pull back from anything that looks like a global policeman role. And that certainly begins with Obama who is deeply multilateral land very much committed to our alliances but he is not interested in sending US troops around the world. He did but in very very careful ways in Afghanistan and then the Middle East. But in general if you look at what he did on Syria refusing to engage. If you look at his general posture with respect to the Middle East it is a quieter more domestically-focused United States. Although unlike Trump it is one that wants to be very much therewith G the with our allies particularly when it comes to global problems like pandemics or climate change or migration.

-第一个女婿贾里德·库什纳的中东和平计划得到了几个阿拉伯国家的认可，以色列与阿联酋和巴林建立了外交关系。对于白宫来说这是一个很大的分数，但明显的失败者是巴勒斯坦人。诸如USMCA或所谓的新NAFTA之类的贸易风获得了很少的两党支持。在中国贸易协议的第一阶段中，特朗普赢得了在货币和知识产权等问题上的让步，这是美国前几任总统的目标。迄今为止，最大的成功是总统采取的积极行动，以打击中国在像加拿大一样提供服务的加拿大，日本和新西兰等技术指导国家中日益增长的实力和影响力。但是，没有人看到冠状病毒大流行的全球威胁笼罩了特朗普总统任期内的所有其他故事。退出世界卫生组织，以及拒绝在疫苗研发和分配方面进行全球合作，这清楚地表明，特朗普第二任期如果没有，将不会扭转将美国置于好还是坏的计划。但是，选举日当然还有另一个可能的结果。乔·拜登（Joe Biden）可以成为下一任总统。在他的领导下，美国的外交政策议程将如何改变？这就是我今天主要采访的主题。国务院高级官员安妮·玛丽·斯劳特（Anne-Marie Slaughter）以及奥巴马政府和首席执行官现在都欢迎新美国智囊团加入“零世界”。

- 我的荣幸。我很高兴来到这里。

-谈论太多了，但请与我共同展望。如果我们拥有拜登政府，那么您认为外交政策的重点是什么，以及美国如何与世界其他地区交往？

-那么，当务之急是向世界宣布他们几十年来所熟悉的美国又回来了。以不同的方式返回，但仍然非常站在解决全球问题的多边机构联盟的前线，成为全球社区的成员和全球社区的领导人。除此之外，我认为他们将非常关注国内更新。他们永远不会称其为“美国优先”，他们也不这么认为，但他们确实认为，除非美国将许多事情摆在家里，否则美国将无法发挥其在世界上应发挥的作用。

-听起来确实很不一样，我们可以讨论所有这些内容，但是我想开始的想法是，您知道美国回来了，因为您当然知道拜登副总统和奥巴马政府总统奥巴马在一起了八年，我的意思是世界各地的很多人，世界各地的许多领导人担心美国还没回来。美国对扮演历史上的领导角色兴趣不大，或者对某些联盟的承诺不那么大，尽管它的取向仍然是多边的。您如何回应他们？

-我认为这是对的，因为人们会回头看看stcentur的第一部分是美国相对紧缩的时期。至少可以肯定的是，与人民相比，美国将在很大程度上响应国内压力，开始撤出任何看起来像全球警察角色的行动。毫无疑问，这始于奥巴马，他是一个致力于建立我们同盟的非常多边的土地，但他对向全球派遣美军不感兴趣。他在阿富汗，然后在中东，但以非常非常谨慎的方式做到了。但总的来说，如果您看看他对叙利亚拒绝参与的行为。如果您看一下他对中东的总体立场，那将是一个更加安静，更注重国内的美国。尽管与特朗普不同，它是一个非常希望与我们的盟友保持联系的人，尤其是在涉及大流行，气候变化或移民等全球问题时。

Reader86

（3）

- Now you said it won't look won't sound like America first. He's certainly not going to use that term no question. And yet taking office in the middle of an enormous crisis a pandemic one whose pain is being felt primarily on the backs of the poorest in the United States. You mentioned when I asked you about foreign policy domestic renewal is a top priority. How do you not fall to claims of more isolationism greater American retrenchment away from international obligations especially when you're taking office in the middle of such incredible domestic pain.

- I think you'd do it two ways. One you make domestic renewal part of our ability to compete abroad. And already if you read Jake Sullivan Jennifer Harris other people who are around Biden they've said that our competition with China will depend in many ways on how well we steward the domestic economy. And they argue for massive investment in infrastructure in technology and innovation in education. I would include equity in that and that that's really part of our ability to to compete. So you just fuse the two arguments. But the second is I think to redefine isolationism versus international engagement and to say "Look we absolutely want to be engaged in the world." We think we the United States has a critical role to play. I'm not sure they'll goas far as indispensable but a critical role to play particularly with other liberal democracies but that it is not our burden alone. They will be somewhat orthogonal to the Trump "America first." They will say we need to be working with all of our allies. We the United States can't hold the bag for global problem solving.

- You mentioned the need to focus on domestic capacity to be able to compete more effectively. And when you think about competition of course the first thing you think about is China. And at least at first blush what the Biden foreign policy team has to say and what Trump has been doing seem to be reasonably well aligned when it comes to the United States and China. So talk me through a little bit of where we see that connection and where we'll see differences.

- So that is the area I think that of greatest convergence between the Trump posture and the Biden position really Democrats and Republicans more broadly. And it's the greatest shift from the Obama administration. And you saw it already with Hillary Clinton in .You're seeing it much more now. And it is essentially the view that the decades-long consensus of" Let's help China grow and develop let's welcome China into the post-war liberal order And China itself will adapt and loosen up and become more more democratic if not a liberal democracy" that that has not worked that China has its own ideas. It is a great power it's a returning power. It indeed will try to shape the liberal order and the regional order in Asia to suit its own interests just as the United States and Britain and other liberal democracies tried to use the post-war order. And so that instead of simply embracing China we have to draw really clear lines about where China can legitimately pursue its interests and where we and we the United States but also our allies are gonna push back. And that means militarily in the South China Sea and the East China Sea making very clear that we are not going to simply sit by as China expands its territorial waters. It means in areas like trade like intellectual property certainly terms of technological competition in various ways. I hope that the Biden administration will be more nuanced. I think they will understand that there are ways to communicate to cooperate with China on issues like global health or climate change or even some norms regulating the internet. But overall they will be tougher than Democrats have been in the past.

-现在您说它听起来不会听起来像美国。毫无疑问，他肯定不会使用该术语。然而，在一场巨大的危机中上台的是一场大流行病，其痛苦主要在美国最穷的人的背上感受到。您在我向您询问外交政策时提到国内更新是当务之急。您如何不落于更孤立主义的主张上，使美国更多地缩减国际义务，特别是当您在如此令人难以置信的国内痛苦中上任时。

-我认为您可以通过两种方式做到这一点。您可以将国内更新作为我们竞争国外能力的一部分。而且，如果您读过拜登附近的杰克•沙利文•詹妮弗•哈里斯（Jake Sullivan Jennifer Harris），他们已经说过，我们与中国的竞争将在许多方面取决于我们对国内经济的管理能力。他们主张在技术基础设施和教育创新方面进行大量投资。我要在其中包括平等，这实际上是我们竞争能力的一部分。因此，您只需要融合两个参数即可。但是第二点是，我认为应该重新定义孤立主义而不是国际参与，并说：“我们绝对希望参与世界。”我们认为我们美国可以发挥关键作用。我不确定他们是否会发挥不可或缺的作用，但尤其要与其他自由民主国家一起发挥至关重要的作用，但这并不只是我们的负担。他们将与特朗普“美国优先”正交。他们会说我们需要与所有盟友合作。我们美国不能为解决全球性问题而束手无策。

-您提到必须关注国内能力，以便能够更有效地竞争。当您想到竞争时，首先想到的就是中国。至少乍一看，拜登外交政策团队所说的和特朗普在美国和中国方面所做的事情似乎相当吻合。因此，请与我谈谈我们在哪里看到这种联系以及在哪里看到差异。

-所以我认为这是特朗普立场和拜登立场之间最大程度融合的领域，实际上是民主党和共和党人。这是奥巴马政府的最大转变。在希拉里·克林顿（Hillary Clinton）的帮助下，您已经看到了它。现在，您看到的更多了。从本质上来说，“让我们帮助中国发展和发展，欢迎中国加入战后自由秩序，中国本身将适应和放松，如果不是自由民主国家，则将更加民主”，这是数十年来共识。中国有自己的想法并没有奏效。这是一种强大的力量，它是一种回报力量。确实，它将像美国和英国以及其他自由民主国家试图利用战后秩序一样，试图塑造亚洲的自由秩序和地区秩序，以适应自己的利益。因此，除了简单地拥抱中国，我们还必须就中国可以在哪里合法地追求自己的利益以及我们和我们的美国以及我们的盟友将要退缩的地方划清界限。这意味着在南中国海和东中国海的军事行动非常明确，随着中国扩大领海，我们将不会袖手旁观。这意味着在诸如知识产权之类的贸易领域中，技术竞争肯定以各种方式出现。我希望拜登政府会更加细微。我认为他们会理解，在全球健康或气候变化甚至某些规范互联网的规范等问题上，存在与中国合作进行交流的方法。但总的来说，他们将比过去的民主党人更加坚强。

Reader86

（4）

- I certainly don't expect that a president Biden would be calling the corona virus "the China flu" but we do know that the Chinese have not in any way been transparent with the US or the international community around the pandemic. President Trump has not joined the COVAX initiative on global vaccine production and distribution. He has said that the US will be leaving the World Health Organization because of China's influence over it. Is that an area where you think that Biden would be a radical departure or do you think they'll be close?

- No that will be a radical departure. We will rejoin the WHO. We will certainly join the COVAX initiative. We will once again be actively participating in global efforts because we I think Biden's certainly understands that to be absent from the field is really to leave the field to China and other nations who have very different views than ours. I expect also that a President Biden will work much harder to make common cause with other liberal democracies. One of his advisors has talked about a cooperative network of democracies a league of democracies. He said that he'll call a summit of democracies. And that won't just be to sit around and praise democracy. It will be to try to push hard on issues like climate or pandemics. And I also think that Biden's going to be careful about blaming the Chinese too much for the pandemic. The United States looks really bad when it comes to hiding information from our own people much less looking at the rest of the world. We're not going to be in a position to lecture other countries. And certainly we can continue to insist that China was responsible initially but China has also played an important role in fighting the pandemic both at home within China and elsewhere in the world.

- So let's move along a bit to the Middle East and broadly speaking of course this is an area where we have these wars that have gone on for a very long time. President Obama wanted to put and end to them. Afghanistan's still going on of course a couple of decades later. To what extent has president Trump and the Trump administration's engagement with the Taliban reduction of forces on the ground saying that all troops are going to be gone shortly. Does that kind of is that path dependent? Is there much else that really can be done especially given just how tired the American public is of this war?

- Not a lot. I actually think that a president Biden would pursue a similar policy. It might get renamed. There would be certainly more emphasis on rights of women education of women. Not that we're necessarily in a position to enforce that but to the extent we could offer economic incentives some military we would but fundamentally Vice President Biden was never supportive even of the surge back in .He was far more realist about really making sure that our vital interests were protected in terms of support of terrorism but otherwise getting out. So I don't see him reversing that now. And similarly I think in the in the Middle East he may well well he'll rejoin the US-Iran the European-Iran agreement the Iran nuclear agreement for sure.

- He will try to.

- He will try to. And I think the Europeans will certainly encourage that. So he'll try to play a more active diplomatic role. You know once you don't have troops there it gets harder to play that role. And we are no longer seen as a neutral broker in the region. I mean the region has changed so much and it's gonna continue to change that I don't expect to see huge changes there either other than to pull back from sort of unconditional support of Israel regardless of what they do. There'll be again an effort to raise Palestinian rights and the idea of a two-state solution. They'll come back to that but I don't see that being a major priority certainly not initially. And I suspect when you look other than US-Iranian relations when you look back at the end of a first Biden administration you may not see that many differences.

- We know how unpopular Trump is internationally. We know how much the foreign policy establishment including a lot of Republicans inside the United States really have been never Trump for a long time but that's very different from saying Trump's gone and suddenly great everybody loves the United States now. So that makes me want to ask the broader question which is does American exceptionalism as a concept need to die.

- I'm gonna I'll hedge but but it's very important.- Don't hedge. Tell me what you honestly think.

-我当然不希望拜登总统将日冕病毒称为“中国流感”，但我们确实知道，中国人与大流行周围的美国或国际社会没有任何透明性。特朗普总统尚未加入有关全球疫苗生产和分销的COVAX倡议。他曾表示，由于中国对世界卫生组织的影响，美国将离开世界卫生组织。您是在那个地区认为拜登将是一个根本性的离开，还是您认为他们将会接近？

-不，这将是一个根本性的偏离。我们将重新加入世界卫生组织。我们当然会加入COVAX计划。我们将再次积极参与全球努力，因为我们认为拜登当然知道，缺席这一领域确实是让该领域留给了中国和其他国家，他们的看法与我们的看法截然不同。我还期望拜登总统将更加努力地与其他自由民主国家实现共同事业。他的一位顾问谈到了民主政体和民主政体联盟的合作网络。他说，他将召开民主国家峰会。那不仅仅是坐下来赞美民主。它将试图在气候或流行病等问题上大力推动。而且我还认为，拜登会谨慎地将大流行病归咎于中国人。当涉及向我们自己的人民隐藏信息时，美国看上去真是糟糕透顶，更不用说看世界其他地方了。我们将无法向其他国家演讲。当然，我们可以继续坚持认为，中国应负起最初的责任，但中国在与中国国内以及世界其他地方的大流行抗争中也发挥了重要作用。

-因此，让我们继续走到中东，从广义上讲，当然，这是我们在那里进行了很长时间的战争的地区。奥巴马总统想提出并结束它们。几十年后，阿富汗当然仍在继续。特朗普总统和特朗普政府在多大程度上与塔利班削减军队的接触，说所有部队将在短期内撤离。那是那种依赖路径吗？真的有很多事情可以做，尤其是考虑到美国公众对这场战争有多疲倦？

- 不是很多。我实际上认为拜登总统会奉行类似的政策。它可能会被重命名。当然，应该更加重视妇女的权利，对妇女进行教育。并不是说我们一定有能力执行此命令，但在一定程度上我们可以提供一些军事上的经济激励，但从根本上说，拜登副总统即使回升也从不支持。他要真正确保这一点更加现实。在支持恐怖主义方面，我们的切身利益得到了保护，但否则就逃脱了。因此，我看不到他现在能扭转这种状况。同样，我认为在中东他很可能会重新加入美国-伊朗，欧洲-伊朗协议，伊朗核协议。

-他会尽力的。

-他会尽力的。我认为欧洲人肯定会鼓励这一点。因此，他将尝试扮演更积极的外交角色。您知道，一旦您没有军队，就很难扮演这个角色。而且我们不再被视为该地区的中立经纪人。我的意思是，该地区已经发生了很大变化，并且将继续变化，以至于我不希望在那里看到巨大的变化，除非他们撤出以色列的无条件支持，无论他们做什么。将再次努力提高巴勒斯坦人的权利，并提出两国解决方案。他们会回到那个问题上来，但是我不认为这当然不是一开始的首要任务。而且我怀疑，当您回顾拜登第一届政府任期结束时，除了看美伊关系以外，您可能看不到太多分歧。

-我们知道特朗普在国际上是多么不受欢迎。我们知道，包括美国内部的许多共和党人在内的外交政策机构已经有很长时间没有真正成为特朗普了，但这与说特朗普已经走了，突然所有人都爱上了美国大不相同。因此，这使我想问一个更广泛的问题，即美国例外主义作为一个概念是否需要消亡。

-我要套期保值，但这很重要。-不要套期保值。告诉我您真实的想法。

- The American exceptionalism that I grew up with. The American exceptionalism of the Cold War The American exceptionalism of the s I do think has outlived its usefulness. It is no longer really even inspirational I think for many of the American for large numbers of the American people and certainly abroad it is most effective when itis a version of universalism. It's essentially universal human rights the words of the Declaration of Independence. So the notion that all human beings are created equal and they're all entitled to these basic rights much more so than this is the mission of United States. The American exceptionalism of the th century I think really did see it as a mission as a kind of missionary zeal that the United States could bring the light of democracy to the rest of the world Wilson all the way through to Clinton. In various ways that doesn't make sense to me now. I do think that the United States will do far better in the world if we're focused on living up to our values at home and above all on whether we can make the transition to being a plurality nation where we're no longer a white majority which will happen within the next couple of decades and will happen by for Americans under .If we can actually make that transition and improve inequality have strategies of equity strategies of participation strategies of genuine power shifting that will do much more for the way the world sees the United States than any amount of kind of pushing democracy abroad It doesn't mean I don't think we should stop supporting the democratic opposition in various countries in various ways but I don't think that should be the focal point of our foreign policy.

- Anne-Marie Slaughter thank you very much.-

Thank you it's been a pleasure.

-我长大的美国优秀主义。冷战的美国优秀主义，我认为的美国优秀主义已经没有它的用​​处了。我认为对于许多美国人来说，它甚至不再是鼓舞人心的，对于许多美国人而言，当然在国外，当它是一种普遍主义的版本时，它是最有效的。独立宣言的字眼实质上是普遍人权。因此，“创造所有人是平等的，使所有人都享有这些基本权利”这一观念远非美国的使命。我认为，二十世纪的美国优秀主义确实确实把它看作是一种传教士的热忱，认为美国可以将民主之光带到世界其他地区，直到威尔逊，一直到克林顿。现在，以各种方式对我来说已经毫无意义。我确实认为，如果我们专注于在本国实现我们的价值观，最重要的是，在白人不再是大多数的情况，我们是否可以实现向多元化国家的过渡，美国在世界上会做得更好。如果我们能够真正实现这一转变并改善不平等现象，那么拥有平等战略，参与战略，真正的权力转移战略将对世界产生更大的影响，世界这样看美国比以任何方式将民主推向国外更有效。这些并不意味着我不认为我们不应该以各种方式停止支持各个国家的民主反对派，但是我不认为这应该成为我们对外政策的焦点。


-Anne-Marie Slaughter 非常感谢。

谢谢，这是我的荣幸。