☆☆四星级☆☆Economist Debate阅读写作分析----Brand America

刚刚好UID: 2599482

红色：生词
青色：好句子
蓝色：自己的总结
----------------------------------------------------------
结构：
1# About this debate
2# background reading
3# Background reading
4# Background reading
5# The moderator's opening remarks
6# The opposition's opening remarks
7# 马歇尔计划（The Marshall Plan） 约翰·肯尼迪简介
8# 里根简介 柏林墙的倒塌
9# The proposer's opening remarks
10# the opposition's rebuttal remarks
11# the proposer's rebuttal remarks
12# Featured guest
13# defending the motion－－closing
14# the opposition closing remark－－closing
15# winner announcement
16# comments:

刚刚好UID: 2599482

Brand America
This house believes that Brand America will regain its shine.
http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/139

About this debate:
America has an image problem. The Bush years have seen divisive foreign policies, failed interventions, bitter rows over the environment, and a global recession triggered in large part by the lax practices of American banks and regulators. The "Washington model" seems discredited; developing countries now have others, like China's authoritarian brand of state capitalism or the EU's social democracy to look to. Can the world's biggest brand regain its lustre?

布什政府在政治,经济,外交,军事,环境等问题上留下来的烂摊子,政府使人更加不信任.在全球金融海啸的环境下,中国的专制统治的国家资本主义的品牌和欧盟的社会民主将会有值得注意的地方.美国这个作为全球最大的品牌还会重新获得原有的光彩吗?

刚刚好UID: 2599482

Background reading:

Leaders

America's new hope

Nov 19th 2008
From The World in 2009 print edition

But in 2009 Barack Obama will have to learn how to say no both at home and abroad, argues John Micklethwait

http://www.economist.com/theworldin/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12375981&d=2009

So, Mr President, what exactly are you going to do? As Barack Obama stares down at the cheering crowds at his inauguration on January 20th 2009, America’s first black president may well remember the great buzzword(时髦语) of his campaign—and smile ruefully. His mantra of “Change” propelled him all the way to the White House in some style. Mr Obama did not just win the electoral college handsomely; he has the full backing of a Democratic Congress and the overwhelming support, if national polls are to be believed, of most of the rest of the world. George Bush never had such a broad political mandate.

Yet change will constrain what President Obama can actually do in 2009. Most obviously there is the cathartic change(泻药般的改变) over the past year in the economy: whereas Mr Bush inherited a healthy budget surplus in 2001, in 2009 America’s budget deficit is projected to be as high as $1 trillion. But there is also foreign affairs. Back in 2000 the United States, the undisputed hegemon(无可争议的霸主), was mainly at peace with the world. In 2009 Mr Obama will have troops under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan, and power is shifting away from America towards the faster-growing economies of the emerging world.

How Mr Obama deals with these very different changes will determine the success of his presidency. A man who has often been accused of being all things to all people will have to start making choices. Many of these choices may disappoint his own party as well as some of his most fervent supporters around the globe.　

奥巴马接了一个烂摊子,此时人们已经把他当作救世主希望他来恢复美国在世界政治经济范围内所占的位置.在这个经济萧条的年代,奥巴马希望寻求改变,但是这种改变也许会使部分支持他的人失望.

The immediate focus in 2009 will understandably be on the economy. Mr Obama promised a lot of things to a lot of people. Even if there were more money available, he would have had to concentrate on just a few core things, such as his middle-class tax cut and his health-care plan; with fewer funds, that will be essential. He may even be able to turn the need to economise to his advantage. On health care, some of the mooted reforms in Congress look more efficient than his own one (and still deliver the universal coverage America ought to have). Meanwhile, the empty government coffers provide a perfect excuse to escape from his more pork-laden commitments.

奥巴马在今年会把目标集中经济建设上但是他的关于卫生保健的建议并不会被国会采纳,空虚的国库将成为阻碍其改变之路的很好的借口

Nevertheless, frustrations will mount, especially in his own party. With an economy in recession there will be protectionist growling from Congress which needs to be firmly resisted. There will also be reams of regulation. Many of the main Democratic constituencies have waited a long time to get their man in the White House: the unions will demand new labour rules; lawyers will want liability laws; greens will wage new environmental campaigns. All of these could slow down any economic recovery. 来自党内的阻碍将减缓经济恢复的速度

Around the world the young new president has become a symbol of what people think America should be

Young ambitious presidencies can get derailed by small causes early on: think of what the “gays in the military” fuss did to Bill Clinton in 1993. A particular worry about Mr Obama is that in his brief political career he has never obviously crossed his party on any significant issue. He will need to start saying no to Democrats soon in 2009 if he is not to betray the many independent voters who believed his campaign talk about representing the whole country.

作为美国的象征,人们认为他应该是全美国甚至是全世界的奥巴马,而不仅仅是民主党的奥巴马.但是年轻的他能否面对如此困难的局面?他履行承诺的时候到了

If expectations are too high for Mr Obama in domestic policy, they are off the scale when it comes to the world abroad. Once again, the Democratic base will be a problem: it expects him to extract America from Iraq rapidly and smoothly. That was what Mr Obama once promised; but he now seems to realise that a rapid retreat from Iraq would be disastrous both for that country and for America’s reputation in the region. Meanwhile, he will also need to re-sell the Afghanistan campaign to a weary electorate: the West’s chances of prevailing depend on having more troops there, not fewer.

棘手的伊拉克与阿富汗问题,撤军并不容易,迅速从伊拉克撤军会使美国丧失信誉.西方人普遍认为裁剪在阿富汗的军队数量会使他们失去机会

That brings in the issue of America’s allies. Around the world the young new president has become a symbol of what people think America should be. Merely because he is not the loathed Mr Bush, he may be able to deliver some things. The rapid closure of Guantánamo Bay(奥巴马在今年一月份声称将在一年内关掉关塔那摩基地) would be a good start. But other things the world hopes for, such as a global-warming pact, will take a long time. Peace in the Middle East will not break out just because the new president’s middle name is Hussein: hard compromises need to be made. Mr Obama needs to spell out what he will do; and he also needs to demand more from America’s allies. That so few of them help in Afghanistan, for instance, is a disgrace, and he should say it loudly.

奥巴马已经有了一个好的开始,但仍然有很多棘手的问题需要用很长时间来解决.如关于全球变暖的协议,中东的和平问题.在寻求盟友时需要作出让步.

Just as much as at home, the new president will be tested by events abroad. There are plenty of troublemakers like Iran who will want to test the new president’s mettle. Yet, as he scrambles to deal with these immediate challenges, Mr Obama should also look to the long term—and to one thing in particular.

Salesman to the world

When historians look back on his presidency, they may well judge him most on whether he managed to bring the emerging powers into the world order and unite them behind Western values. By the time Mr Obama leaves office, which, assuming he serves two terms, will be 2017, powers like China, India and Brazil will surely have taken larger roles in the world economy. At the moment, none of them is in the G8 club, and only China has a spot on the UN Security Council. If America cannot find a way to bring China and India into the existing global power structure, they will start drifting away to form their own clubs.

在这里提到另一个针对中国印度巴西的关键的政治态度,假设其能连任,美国在接下来的时间里如何使这些国家更好的融入当今的国际力量的框架,将成为影响世界格局的关键因素.

It is not just institutional. China especially is nervous about Western values. The financial crisis coupled with the shredding of America’s reputation over the past eight years has given weight to those people in the regime who argue that Western capitalism and democracy are flawed, old models. The new president will have to re-sell what America stands for. That will be a long process; but, even allowing for all his other priorities, President Obama needs to start work on it in 2009.

刚刚好UID: 2599482

Background reading:

United States

An end of hubris

Nov 19th 2008
From The World in 2009 print edition

America will be less powerful, but still the essential nation in creating a new world order, argues Henry Kissinger, a former secretary of state and founder of Kissinger Associates

Reuters

The most significant event of 2009 will be the transformation of the Washington consensus that market principles trumped national boundaries. The WTO, the IMF and the World Bank defended that system globally. Periodic financial crises were interpreted not as warning signals of what could befall the industrial nations but as aberrations of the developing world to be remedied by domestic stringency—a policy which the advanced countries were not, in the event, prepared to apply to themselves.

The absence of restraint encouraged a speculation(投机) whose growing sophistication matched its mounting lack of transparency. An unparalleled period of growth followed, but also the delusion that an economic system could sustain itself via debt indefinitely. In reality, a country could live in such a profligate manner only so long as the rest of the world retained confidence in its economic prescriptions. That period has now ended.

管理和限制的缺少造成了经济的投机倒把还妄想通过不断的借贷使经济系统恢复

Any economic system, but especially a market economy, produces winners and losers. If the gap between them becomes too great, the losers will organise themselves politically and seek to recast the existing system—within nations and between them. This will be a major theme of 2009.

经济系统下,尤其是市场经济下的贫富差异,这将是09年的主题

America’s unique military and political power produced a comparable psychological distortion. The sudden collapse of the Soviet Union tempted the United States to proclaim universal political goals in a world of seeming unipolarity—but objectives were defined by slogans rather than strategic feasibility.

美国消除两级分化的目标不可行

Now that the clay feet of the economic system have been exposed, the gap between a global system for economics and the global political system based on the state must be addressed as a dominant task in 2009. The economy must be put on a sound footing, entitlement programmes reviewed and the national dependence on debt overcome. Hopefully, in the process, past lessons of excessive state control will not be forgotten.

需要有一个牢固的经济基础

The debate will be over priorities, transcending the longstanding debate between idealism and realism. Economic constraints will oblige America to define its global objectives in terms of a mature concept of the national interest. Of course, a country that has always prided itself on its exceptionalism will not abandon the moral convictions by which it defined its greatness. But America needs to learn to discipline itself into a strategy of gradualism that seeks greatness in the accumulation of the attainable. By the same token, our allies must be prepared to face the necessary rather than confining foreign policy to so-called soft power.

Every major country will be driven by the constraints of the fiscal crisis to re-examine its relationship to America. All—and especially those holding American debt—will be assessing the decisions that brought them to this point. As America narrows its horizons, what is a plausible security system and aimed at what threats? What is the future of capitalism? How, in such circumstances, does the world deal with global challenges, such as nuclear proliferation or climate change?

从经济带来的问题联系到核扩散和环境的变化

America will have to learn that world order depends on a structure that participants support because they helped bring it about

America will remain the most powerful country, but will not retain the position of self-proclaimed tutor. As it learns the limits of hegemony, it should define implementing consultation beyond largely American conceptions. The G8 will need a new role to embrace China, India, Brazil and perhaps South Africa.

美国的自省

The immediate challenge

In Iraq, if the surge strategy holds, there must be a diplomatic conference in 2009 to establish principles of non-intervention and define the country’s international responsibilities.

The dilatory diplomacy towards Iran must be brought to a focus. The time available to forestall an Iranian nuclear programme is shrinking and American involvement is essential in defining what we and our allies are prepared to seek and concede and, above all, the penalty to invoke if negotiations reach a stalemate. Failing that, we will have opted to live in a world of an accelerating nuclear arms race and altered parameters of security.

In 2009 the realities of Afghanistan will impose themselves. No outside power has ever prevailed by establishing central rule, as Britain learnt in the 19th century and the Soviet Union in the 20th. The collection of nearly autonomous provinces which define Afghanistan coalesce in opposition to outside attempts to impose central rule. Decentralisation of the current effort is essential.

All this requires a new dialogue between America and the rest of the world. Other countries, while asserting their growing roles, are likely to conclude that a less powerful America still remains indispensable. America will have to learn that world order depends on a structure that participants support because they helped bring it about. If progress is made on these enterprises, 2009 will mark the beginning of a new world order.

http://www.economist.com/theworldin/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12574180&d=2009

刚刚好UID: 2599482

Background reading:

A critical American view

Lost sheep

Aug 28th 2008
From The Economist print edition

Kalman Zabarsky Don’t ask for more, says Mr Bacevich

REPENT ye! cries Andrew Bacevich. With the fervour of the prophet Jeremiah, but with more wit, he denounces the profligacy of modern America. If there is one word that defines the identity of what the republic has become, he says, echoing a later prophet, Saul Bellow, it is “more”.

Mr Bacevich’s strongly felt and elegantly written book is indeed a jeremiad. He claims that the constitution has been perverted by the expansion of the presidency and by national security, at the expense of Congress. Concluding that America’s military power “turns out to be quite limited”, he argues that the country “doesn’t need a bigger army. It needs a smaller—that is, more modest—foreign policy, one that assigns soldiers on missions that are consistent with their capabilities.”

This might sound as though his was a shrill voice of the left. It is not. Mr Bacevich is a former colonel in the American army who is now a professor of international relations and history at Boston University. But he does share much of the left’s analysis of what has gone wrong. This includes both its dislike of what he calls (quoting the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr) the “most grievous temptations to self-adulation” brought about by American exceptionalism, and its perception that America has long been accumulating an empire. But he comes to these conclusions from the position of a genuine conservative.

He expresses his judgments, some grumpy, some anguished, in sharp, epigrammatic language. “A grand bazaar”, he writes, “provides an inadequate basis upon which to erect a vast empire.” Americans have recast the Jeffersonian trinity—life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—to read: “Whoever dies with the most toys wins”; “Shop till you drop(尽兴)”; and “If it feels good, do it.”

“Citizens”, he remarks with justice, “yearn for a restoration of a mythical Old Republic. Yet one might as well hope for the revival of the family farm or for physicians to resume making house calls.” Beginning with the election of John Kennedy, he writes, “the occupant of the White House has become a combination of demigod(半人半神), father figure(领袖), and, inevitably, the betrayer of inflated hopes.”

自我膨胀

People complain of what Arthur Schlesinger called “the imperial presidency”. But this, snorts Mr Bacevich, is “mere posturing”. For members of the political class, serving, gaining access to, reporting on, second-guessing or gossiping about the emperor-president (or about those aspiring to succeed him) has become an abiding preoccupation.

He is an acidulous critic of the incumbent administration and its military servants. Yet he does not comfort himself with the idea that the election of a new president would easily change things for the better. “No doubt the race for the presidency matters. It just doesn’t matter as much as the media’s obsessive coverage suggests.”

This is an astringent book and at times, like any Old Testament prophet, its author is too harsh in his demands on mere mortal politicians and generals. It is also painfully clear-sighted and refreshingly uncontaminated by the conventional wisdom of Washington, DC. Listen to Jeremiah again: “My people, saith this prophet, hath been lost sheep: their shepherds have caused them to go astray.”

刚刚好UID: 2599482

The moderator's opening remarks

Feb 17th 2009 | Mr Christopher Lockwood

Even its best friends—and The Economist numbers itself among those—would concede that America's international image has taken a terrible battering during the past eight years. Most people beyond America's shores opposed the war in Iraq, and even those who saw the need to remove the tyrannical Saddam Hussein were appalled by the chaos that Iraq then descended into and the long failure of the occupying American army to grapple with it. The abuses in Abu Ghraib and the continuing existence of the prison camp at Guantanamo are dreadful stains on America's national character that will not easily be washed away, and which have sharply diminished America's ability to urge greater respect for human rights on recalcitrant regimes. The failure to make progress in the Middle East or in Afghanistan also seems to many to be symptoms of a nation that has lost its potency and its way.

Economically, too, the Bush administration squandered the admiration the world once felt for America. The collapse of much of America's banking system has discredited the deregulated version of capitalism that it sought to export, and has imposed huge costs on the rest of the world as well. American cars have long since ceased to be the world's best, and now the big companies that make them face the once unthinkable prospect of bankruptcy. Unemployment in the country that lectured the rest of the world on the virtues of an unfettered labour market is rising at the rate of 600,000 a month. Many countries now start to look to China, rather than America, for lessons on how to develop. America now looks to Europe for ideas about how to improve the health-care system that fails so many of its citizens.

The inauguration of Barack Obama was watched by more than a billion people around the world, and his election did great credit to America's powers endlessly to renew itself. But how completely its reputation in the eyes of foreigners can be restored remains a question for debate. Has the American version of capitalism suffered such a terrible blow that it will not fully recover? Is Mr Obama really willing, or able, to make America a less arrogant and unilateral power? Will other countries ever again trust it to lead the world as it once did? Will their citizens follow their governments if they do? 提出了问题

We are fortunate indeed to have two distinguished and articulate thinkers to lead us in our debate. Mark Medish, who will propose the motion, served on the National Security Council in the Clinton White House and is now a senior adviser to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Kishore Mahbubani, who will oppose it, is a former ambassador of Singapore to the UN and is now the dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. They will begin our debate, but it is the interventions of our readers that will bring it alive. Mr Medish, Mr Kishore, the floor is yours.

刚刚好UID: 2599482

The opposition's opening remarks

Feb 17th 2009 | Prof. Kishore Mahbubani

Once upon a time the world was in love with America. And America loved the world too. It was a magical love affair, with America acting as a shining beacon of freedom and prosperity for billions around the world.
That love affair is over. The unique circumstances which created it can never be replicated again.
最后一句为全文的主题句，第二句很好的比喻

For decades, America stood taller than the rest of the world, producing magic to ignite the imagination很擅于用比喻句
of the world: from the Marshall Plan to Kennedy's bold commitment to "pay any price, bear any burden ... to assure the survival and the success of liberty"; from the first man to walk on the moon to Reagan's demolition of the Berlin Wall. It was a truly extraordinary country with no feat too great to achieve.

用了两个from…to强调美国看起来无所不能。这段涉及的一些历史背景（Marshall Plan国际援助。kennedy推崇民主与自由，与尼克松是政敌。First man to walk on the moon政治与科技进步，kennedy拨款。Reagan劝说戈尔巴乔夫推到柏林墙），在文章后面有介绍。

This extraordinary country has become an ordinary country. This was inevitable. It was somewhat unusual for 300m people, 5% of the world's population, to outperform the rest of the world for ever. Faced with the same sorts of challenges as other ordinary countries, America has shown that it is no better and no worse than most other countries.

首句TS很简洁

The one area where America could really claim to stand out from the rest of the world was its commitment to its moral values. It looked with disdain at the cynical realpolitik-minded Europeans and believed that unlike Europe, America did not sacrifice its values—until 9/11 came along. To the total shock of the rest of the world, America became the first modern country to reintroduce torture（拷问）这里是指虐囚事件. Many Americans want to believe it was a Bush-Cheney aberration, a brief national nightmare. Yet if Bush or Cheney had tried to reintroduce slavery, there would have been a huge national outrage. The whole world noticed the lack of moral outrage when torture was reintroduced. Amazingly, the American Supreme Court, globally regarded as the ultimate bastion of rule of law, remained relatively silent and weak on this issue.插入语 American society cannot escape its own accountability. The most intelligent and the most compassionate souls around the world believe that American society has lost its moral compasses. The moral shine has gone from "the shining city upon a hill". 两个关于失去道德的比喻。一直以来令美国引以为傲的道德价值观在虐囚事件发生后荡然无存

And the material shine has also taken a severe beating. For a long time, America claimed to have the best economy in the world. And for a long time, it did. America's superior free-market economy buried the ideologically hidebound command economy of the Soviet Union.

市场经济将指令性经济埋葬Then, in a great historical irony,作者的态度很明显是否定的，这么说比however更好

the American economy became ideologically hidebound too. Alan Greenspan believed that markets could best regulate themselves. Governments should step aside. 格林斯潘认为造成经济危机的因素就是政府对市场经济的过度放纵This extreme ideology has created the biggest economic crisis in 70 years. Five leading New York investment banks disappeared—in a matter of months. The once invincible Citibank, the world's greatest banking brand, stands tottering. 经济危机下摇摇欲坠的花旗银行And the rest of the world is left asking: "How the hell did we think that America was a country of financial geniuses?" To make matters worse, America is now the world's most indebted country. Which intelligent soul is now going to turn to America to say: "Teach me how to run a modern economy."

Yes, America still has its Google and Microsoft, its Silicon Valley and the world's greatest universities. It still does most of the leading-edge research and development in science and technology.还有coca cola还有Wal-Mart…还嫌少啊But it has also lost a significant chunk of its manufacturing base. A century ago, Henry Ford taught the world how to build a car. Today, America teaches the world how not to do so.
这一段出现了很多美国标志性的品牌

Sadly, most Americans are not aware that a new historical era has emerged. As I document in "The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East", we have reached the end of the era of Western domination of world history (but not the end of the West, which will now be one of many successful civilisations) and the return of Asia. The last 200 years of European domination, followed by American domination, were a historical aberration. From the year 1 to 1820, China and India were the largest economies of the world. In a few decades, they will resume their natural place. Though many young Chinese and Indians dream of going to America, many more believe that they can create equally great societies at home. There is no longer a one-way brain drain to America. The Chinese take pride in their outer-space walk and Indians take pride in sending a moon probe. The American dream is no longer the only big dream on our planet.
美国梦不再是唯一的梦想，中国和印度崛起的趋势已经势不可挡，使国际社会需要考虑将来世界经济的体系结构。

The one area where Americans will never cede second place is in their political system. America remains the most successful democracy in the world, whose magic has been reaffirmed by the election of Barack Obama. All over the world people are whispering again that "only in America" could the son of an African become president. Brand Obama is shining in all corners of the world. But Brand Obama is not Brand America. Even if Obama succeeds eventually in stabilising the American economy, it is unclear whether he can single-handedly regain America's lost goodwill. This honeymoon between Obama and the world cannot last, unless Obama fundamentally changes some American policies. And that will not be easy.

因为政策的改变是痛苦和不受欢迎的，一定会触及一部分人的利益，所以奥巴马需要时间去完成他的使命去履行许下的诺言。

One issue that has divided America from the Islamic world is the Israel-Palestine issue. Many Muslims feel humiliated that Palestine remains the only occupied territory in our modern age and now, after Gaza, the most brutally occupied. Muslims blame Israel but they also hold America responsible, as they know that only unconditional American support perpetuates this occupation. Obama could magically transform America's relations with the Islamic world by delivering a two-state solution. But he is powerless because of the political gridlock in Washington. Over time, Muslims may whisper, "So what's the difference?"
在处理加沙问题这个难啃的骨头上上，奥巴马遭遇到很大的阻碍

America is not a perfect society. But neither is any other society. In its heyday, America did a lot of good for the world for which it will always retain a reservoir of 海海的多goodwill. But it will never again be viewed as an exceptional country. The days when American society could claim to be superior are now gone. America, like any other country in the world will have to establish its reputation (as in the old Smith Barney ad) "in the old fashioned way"; it will have to earn it.

刚刚好UID: 2599482

马歇尔计划（The Marshall Plan）
马歇尔计划（The Marshall Plan），官方名称为欧洲复兴计划（European Recovery Program），是二战后美国对被战争破坏的西欧各国进行经济援助、协助重建的计划，对欧洲国家的发展和世界政治格局长生了深远的影响。

二战欧洲战场胜利后，美国提出凭借其在二战后的雄厚实力帮助其欧洲盟国恢复因世界大战而濒临崩溃的经济体系，并同时抗衡苏联和共产主义势力在欧洲的进一步渗透和扩张而提出此计划。该计划因时任美国国务卿乔治·马歇尔而得名，但事实上真正提出和策划该计划的是美国国务院的众多官员，特别是威廉·克莱顿和乔治·凯南。
重建计划最初于1947年7月在一个由欧洲各个国家普遍参加的会议上被提出。马歇尔计划最初曾考虑给予苏联及其在东欧的卫星国以相同的援助，条件是苏联必须进行政治改革，并允许西方势力进入苏联的势力范围。但事实上，美国担心苏联利用该计划恢复和发展自身实力，因此美国故意提出许多苏联无法接受的苛刻条款，最终使其和东欧各国被排除在援助范围之外。
该计划于1947年7月正式启动，并整整持续了4个财政年度之久。在这段时期内，西欧各国通过参加经济合作发展组织（OECD）总共接受了美国包括金融、技术、设备等各种形式的援助合计130亿美元。若考虑通货膨胀因素，那么这笔援助相当于2006年的1300亿美元。

当该计划临近结束时，西欧国家中除了德国[1]以外的绝大多数参与国的国民经济都已经恢复到了战前水平。在接下来的20余年时间里，整个西欧经历了前所未有的高速发展时期，社会经济呈现出一派繁荣景象，可以说这与马歇尔计划不无关系。同时马歇尔计划长期以来也被认为是促成欧洲一体化的重要因素之一。因为该计划消除，或者说减弱了历史上长期存在于西欧各国之间的关税及贸易壁垒，同时使西欧各国的经济联系日趋紧密并最终走向一体化。该计划同时也使西欧各国在经济管理上系统地学习和适应了美国的经验。

近年来史学家又开始注意对于马歇尔计划的深层动机及影响的研究。现在一些历史学家认为，马歇尔计划之所以能取得一定的成效，其实应归功于新的自由放任政策，以及这一政策下市场对经济增长的稳定作用。而当下也有某种意见认为，美国施行该计划的本意是为了通过援助使欧洲经济恢复，并使之成为抗衡苏联的重要力量和工具，同时也可使美国更方便地控制和占领欧洲市场。但事实上欧洲经济后来的发展趋势并未使其成为美国的附庸，反而通过一体化等途径成为了世界经济舞台上可以和美国抗衡的一支重要力量。同时在美国国内也有不少批评意见认为马歇尔计划开了使用本国纳税人金钱援助他国的先例。
早期研究马歇尔计划的学者大多把它看作美国式慷慨的又一成功范例。而对马歇尔计划的批评大多来自于受1960年代到1970年代间的修正主义学派影响的历史学家。他们认为马歇尔计划是美国经济帝国主义的表现。美国企图通过这一计划全方位控制西欧，正如苏联控制东欧一样。美国还试图利用马歇尔计划实现其地缘政治目标，因此这绝不是什么慷慨。
而其他一些历史学家所强调的则是此计划给美国带来的经济利益。正是由于两次世界大战给欧洲造成的破坏，才使美国的工业和农业占据了世界领先地位。从中成长起来的众多美国私人企业需要在贸易自由政策下开辟的新市场来获得利润。虽然此时的欧洲重建也正需要来自美国的产品，但还没有从二战的阴影中走出的欧洲人没有足够的美元来进口这些必需物资。这体现了一个基本的经济问题——欧洲的资本主义本质上正为美元荒（dollar shortage）所困扰。而美国却积聚了大量的贸易顺差，其庞大的储备也在不断增长。与此同时，国际货币基金组织（IMF）和国际复兴开发银行（International Bank for Reconstruction and Development）的信贷机制已完全无法应付西欧的大额贸易赤字。前者只能够通过一些数目不是很大的贷款，帮助欧洲解决短期内的赤字问题。至于重要的财政和重建问题，他们就无能为力了。因此美国就开始通过多种途径向欧洲提供所谓的“美元信贷”（dollar credits），来帮助欧洲解决这些问题。而马歇尔计划正是这众多途径之一。
到了1980年代，又有一种新的观点认为，马歇尔计划并不像人们之前所认为的那样在欧洲的复兴过程中起了决定性的作用。第一个提出这一观点的是经济历史学家艾伦·米尔沃德（Alan S. Milward）。德国历史学家格尔德·哈达赫（Gerd Hardach）在他1994年出版的著作《马歇尔计划》（Der Marshall Plan）中进一步阐述了这一观点。这些历史学家指出，早在美国的大规模援助到达之前，许多欧洲国家就已经转入了经济增长阶段。而且一些接受援助较少的国家，其发展速度反而更快一些。虽然马歇尔计划确实减轻了欧洲重建过程中的许多困难，并对一些关键部门的恢复起了重要作用，但总体来说，欧洲在战后低谷之后的经济增长与马歇尔计划的联系并不是很密切。此外也有不少欧洲的社会主义者认为，由于许多欧洲富人在二战期间把他们的资金转移到了安全的美国，欧洲各国政府完全可以通过把他们手中的企业股份收归国有来获得数目同样可观的重建资金。

约翰·肯尼迪简介
美国第35位总统(1961年1月20日--1963年11月22日)
姓名：约翰·肯尼迪
绰号："JFK"
出生：1917年5月29日，布鲁克兰里，马萨诸塞州
死于：1963年11月22日，在达拉斯，得克萨斯
父亲：约瑟夫·帕特里克·肯尼迪
母亲：罗斯·伊丽莎白·菲茨杰拉德·肯尼迪
夫人：杰奎琳·李·布维尔(1929-1994)，于1953年9月12日结婚
孩子：卡洛琳·布维尔·肯尼迪·施洛斯伯格(1957-)；
小约翰·菲茨杰拉德·肯尼迪（1960）；
帕特里克·布维尔·肯尼迪(1963)
宗教：罗马天主教
教育：毕业于哈佛学院(1940)
职业：作者，官员
政党：民主党
其他政府位置：美国众议院成员，1947-53
国家参议员，1953-61

在波士顿“城中之城”的布鲁克兰市，一条茂密树荫掩映下的宁静街巷里，有着一栋不太起眼的家庭住宅：比尔斯街八十三号(83 Beals Street
)，美国第三十五位总统（1961－1963）约翰·肯尼迪总统的出生地。
约翰·肯尼迪，美国历史上最年轻的总统，一九一七年五月二十九日，出生在这栋不大的两层住宅里。约翰·肯尼迪的父亲约瑟夫·肯尼迪为了迎娶新娘，一九一四年买下了这栋住宅。父亲是金融巨子，也是民主党坚定的后台。?
当时年轻的老肯尼迪在布鲁克莱市购置房产之时，可谓“财学两成”，一九一二年从哈佛大学法学院毕业，随后投入股票金融业，在他二十五岁（与约翰·肯尼迪的母亲结婚的前一年）之时已成为哥伦比亚信托公司的总裁。这位来自东波士顿区爱尔兰后裔的年轻人，与珞丝·菲兹杰若德
结成连理，在比尔斯街八十三号生活了七年。老肯尼迪九个孩子当中，有四个是在这里出生。约翰·肯尼迪排行老二。
一九二一年，当约翰·肯尼迪四岁的时候，老肯尼迪将这这栋房子卖给了他的生意上的一个伙伴。他们一家人搬到了距离比尔斯街不远处那不勒斯路（Naples Road）的另一栋房子，直至一九二七年肯尼迪一家迁离布鲁克莱市前往纽约。
肯尼迪自幼受到良好的教育，最后读了哈佛大学和斯坦福大学，1940年毕业。第二次世界大战中肯尼迪加入美国海军，在对日作战中负伤。战后，肯尼迪29岁即当选为议员，后三次连任。他在1953 年9月12 日与杰奎琳·布维尔结婚，生有二子一女。
1960年肯尼迪参加总统竞选。他提出“新边疆”的竞选口号，倡导在科学技术、经济发展、战争与和平等各个领域开拓新天地。1961年，肯尼迪在选民投票过程中以极小的差距赢得总统的位置，击败了共和党人尼克松，成为美国历史上最年轻的总统，也是第一个罗马天主教总统。肯尼迪
成为美国总统后，布鲁克莱市在比尔斯八十三号这栋住宅前设立了纪念牌。
在肯尼迪的就职演说中：“不要问你的国家能为你做什么？而要问你能为你的国家做什么。”作为总统，他开始履行他的战役保证再次使美国运转起来。他上台后并非一切如愿。任职开始就遇到了美国入侵古巴惨败的事实。他为了寻得平等的权利采取有力措施，要求新公民权利立法。他
给予民族文化的质量和艺术在一起至关重要的社会中心角色。他希望美国恢复老的任务作为致力于人权的革命的最早的民族。
由于发展和和平小
组的联盟，他对发展中国家的帮助为美国人带来理想主义。
1962年，他又处理了古巴导弹危机。除此之外，肯尼迪政府还干涉了刚果事务，派兵越南，开始了长达10年之久的侵越战争。1962年10月，苏联核武器仅离美国城市约150公里。尼基塔.赫鲁晓夫 (Nikita hrushchev) 应菲德尔.卡斯特罗(Fidel Castro) 的请求，把核武器部署在古巴。
肯尼迪政府内部对究竟应采取何种措施进行了几天激烈的辩论。可供考虑的选择之一是参谋长联席会议(Joint Chiefs of Staff) 提出的突然空袭随之全面进攻。毫无疑问全面进攻意味着种种风险，以至最终导致核战争。
肯尼迪并未作出如此决定，而是对古巴进行海上封锁，要求将核导弹移出境外。理查德.里夫斯(Richard Reeves) 写道：“在那紧张的两周内，种种幻想都破灭了，出现的却是一个意义深长的现实，至少有两个人，也就是舞台中心的两个人-赫鲁晓夫和肯尼迪-认识到任何心态正常的政治
家都不会首先使用核武器，那样做代价太高了，历史对他们的审判将会非常严厉。”
1963年，正当肯尼迪踌躇满志要进一步干一番事业的时候，他遇刺身亡。两年后，比尔斯83号被命名为国家历史文物；1967年，国会批准将这栋住宅划入国家公园系统使其成为国家历史遗址。
前美国总统肯尼迪的儿子小约翰·肯尼迪不久前驾驶飞机失事，机毁人亡。在这宗惨剧及其引起的震撼为人淡忘以前，我们也许值得花上一点点时间看看两封既温暖人心又发人深省的短简。这两封短简都存放在一个似乎不可能的地方：加州约巴林达镇“尼克松故居图书馆”。
理查·尼克松与肯尼迪曾是势不两立的政敌，1960年，肯尼迪在大选中击败尼克松，入主白宫。肯尼迪遇刺身亡以后,肯尼迪夫人和她的孩子们就再也没去过白宫。

1971年，白宫为肯尼迪及其夫人杰奎琳所绘制的画像完成，随时可以揭幕。肯尼迪夫人不愿参与其事，怕触景伤情。为此，这时已成为美国总统的尼克松及其夫人。于1971年2月3日邀请杰奎琳和她的孩子赴白宫参加私人晚宴，好让他们看看那两幅画像。现场没有新闻记者，没有闪光灯，
有的只是尼克松一家和肯尼迪的家人。
目前在尼克松的档案库里有两封手写的致谢信。其中一封是由当时才10岁的小肯尼迪写的，所用的褐色信纸上印有“约翰·肯尼迪”几个黑字。信中有几个字拼错了，然而措辞谦恭有礼，感情跃然纸上：
敬爱的总统先生，敬爱的尼克松夫人：
我不大记得白宫了，日前能再见到它，我真的很高兴……我很喜欢那些印第安人图画……我从来没吃过那么好吃的蛋奶酥。我参观了总统办
公室，很开心。
约翰·肯尼迪敬上
杰奎琳·肯尼迪的信是用深蓝色墨水写在淡蓝色的信笺上的：
敬爱的总统先生，敬爱的尼克松夫人：
你们可知道你们给了我一份多大的厚礼吗?谢谢你们让我带我的孩子再回白宫，让我的孩子能够重温童年时光……如今约翰每晚入睡以前，我可以取出我丈夫和他在一起拍的照片，在他床边给他解释了：“那是你和你的总统爸爸，他在解说国玺……”
全仗你们好意招待，他模糊的印象已经成为真实的记忆。
我衷心感谢你们。
杰奎琳
尼克松夫妇邀请肯尼迪的家人去白宫，杰奎琳母子写信致谢，这两件事对我们有什么启示?那就是：在今天这个人情淡薄而心胸狭窄的时代，此事使我们想起了一种渐已为人遗忘的美德——宽宏大度。

刚刚好UID: 2599482

里根简介

[英文] Reagan
[陆译] 里根
[港译] 列根
[台译] 雷根
罗纳德·威尔逊·里根(Ronald Wilson Reagan)，1911年2月6日-2004年6月5日)是美国第40任总统。（1981年1月20日—1985年1月20日，1985年1月20日—1989年1月20日）历任总统之中，他就职年龄最大。他是历任总统中唯一一位演员出身的总统。
前任总统: 吉米·卡特
后任总统:乔治·赫伯特·沃克·布什
出生: 1911年2月6日，伊利诺伊州坦皮科
逝世: 2004年6月5日，加州洛杉矶贝莱尔
夫人: (1) 珍·惠曼 (离婚)
(2) 南希·里根
政党: 共和党
副总统:乔治·赫伯特·沃克·布什
[编辑本段]概述
美国政治家，第33任加利福尼亚州州长（1967年-1975年），第40任总统（1981年-1989年）。在踏入政坛前，里根也担任过运动广播员、救生员、报社专栏作家、电影演员、电视节目演员、和励志讲师，并且是美国影视演员协会（Screen Actors Guild）的领导人。他的演说风格高明而极具说服力，被媒体誉为“伟大的沟通者”(The Great Communicator）。
里根在1980年的选战中击败了现任的吉米·卡特，同时共和党在那年选举中也赢得了26年来首次在参议院过半数的席次。里根推行的经济政策为供应面经济学，被人称为里根经济学，将所得税降低了25%、减少通货膨胀、降低利率、扩大军费开支、增加政府赤字和国债，以暂时解决社会福利的问题，排除了税赋规则的漏洞，继续对商业行为撤销管制，使美国经济在历经1981—1982年的急剧衰退后，于1982年开始了非常茁壮的经济成长。在国内议题上，里根并没有成功的解决如社会福利和堕胎等问题，但他也经由最高法院及其他联邦法院的法官任命而转移了联邦的司法权。他始终强调他对于联邦政府在处理问题上的能力抱持著怀疑态度，尤其是在经济问题方面。他的解决方式是撤回政府的干涉并减少税率和撤销管制，以此让自由市场机制能自动修正所面临的问题。他在就职典礼那天说道：“政府并不是解决问题的方法，政府本身才是问题所在。”
他的支持者盛赞他振奋了美国人在1980年面临的低昂士气和挫折感，并且让积极不干预的资本主义体制超越政府的管制。在对外政策上，他大幅度扩张军备，对苏联的政策则由原本的围堵改为直接的对抗。里根在政治意识形态上贯彻了反共主义与民主资本主义。

里根任内也经历了数次严重的政治丑闻—并导致不少官员和幕僚被定罪，但他仍然得以安然度过这些危机。
许多的观察家，尤其是美国的保守派，称赞里根是美国得以拖垮苏联的主要功臣。历史学家对此还没有形成共识，一些人认为里根是使苏联于1991年垮台的主要推手
；一些人则认为苏联于他任内开始的转变，只不过是时间上的巧合。
在里根两届任期结束后，同党的乔治•H•W•布什于1988年的选战中，挟著里根的高昂人气而大获全盛，为共和党60年来首次成功接任的总统。里根的总统任期影响了美国1980年代的文化，80年代常被称为“里根时代”。
他也是唯一一个遭到刺客以子弹击中（1981年3月30日）而得以存活的美国总统。1989年退休后里根定居于加州，在罹换阿兹海默症的10年后，于2004年死于肺炎，享年93岁，并获得了隆重的国葬。

柏林墙的倒塌
柏林墙（德语：Berliner Mauer），东德称此墙为“反法西斯防卫墙”（Antifaschistischer Schutzwall），柏林墙约155公里长，约3至4米高。于1961年开始建造，一开始以铁丝网为材料，后才被换成更为坚固耐久的砖墙。
德国首都柏林在第二次世界大战以后被分割为东柏林与西柏林，东德为了隔绝东德人民与西德的接触与投敌，于是沿着边界在己方的领土上建立围墙，将西柏林整个包围起来。柏林墙的建立是二战以后德国分裂和冷战的重要标志性建筑。1989年11月9日，屹立了28年柏林墙倒塌，两德重归统一。


1945年同盟国占领德国二次大战以后，德国和柏林被苏联，美国，英国和法国分成四区。1949年，苏联占领区包括东柏林在内成立德意志民主共和国（简称东德或民主德国），首都定在东柏林，而美英法占领区则成立德意志联邦共和国（简称西德或联邦德国），首都设在波昂一直到两德统一为止。美英法苏的占领协定保证西德和西柏林之间的空中走廊。西柏林在西德法律和西柏林基本法都规定是西德的领土，由于西柏林的领土完全在东德境内，苏联为迫使西德放弃西柏林，强迫西柏林断水断粮，此举让西方国家团结一致，每日有多班飞机把物资由西德运到西柏林，1949年4月更成立北约，而苏联于1949年5月解除封锁。然而，美英法三国认为规定和现状相抵触而推迟实施，所以西柏林一直都不是西德的领土，直至冷战结束、两德统一。
最初柏林市民是能在各区之间自由活动的，但随着冷战紧张气氛的提升，为了防止东德人逃到西德，造成东德严重缺少工人，1952年东西柏林的边界开始关闭。1949年到1961年大约有250万东德人冒着被东德边防射杀的危险逃入西柏林。
柏林墙在1961年8月13日开始建造，一开始只是铁丝网，后来被大量换成真正的围墙。东德称此围墙为“反法西斯防卫墙”，但多数西方国家认为建围墙的真正目的是禁止东德人逃入西柏林。
在该墙建立后，有人采用跳楼、挖地道、游泳等方式翻越柏林墙，共有5043人成功地逃入西柏林，3221人被逮捕，239人死亡，260人受伤。

1962年8月17日，18岁的东德人彼得·费查（Peter Fechter）试图攀越围墙，被东德士兵开枪射杀。当时，有西方记者在场，东西两边的人民都看到他中枪，但没有人施予援手，事件在冷战时期哄动一时。他成为第一个因试图攀墙而被射杀的人。

1987年6月12日，美国总统里根在勃兰登堡门发表著名的 "Tear Down This Wall!" 演说，建议当时的苏联领导人戈尔巴乔夫拆掉柏林墙。


1989年11月9日，新东德政府开始计划放松对东德人民的旅游限制，但由于当时东德的中央政治局委员君特·沙博夫斯基（Günter Schabowski）对上级命令的误解，错误地宣布柏林墙即将开放，导致数以万计的市民走上街头，拆毁围墙，整个德国陷入极度兴奋状态。此事件也称为“柏林墙倒塌”，虽然围墙不是自己结构倒塌，而是被人为拆除。当时的柏林人爬上柏林墙，并且在上面涂鸦，拆下建材当成纪念品。11个月后，两德终于统一，成为“柏林墙倒塌”后的最高潮。
柏林围墙的倒塌被历史学家认为是东西方冷战终结和东西德统一的标志。1990年10月3日，德意志民主共和国（东德）加入德意志联邦共和国，德国和柏林完成统一。东西柏林的道路、铁道及桥梁在围墙倒塌后迅速接连在一起。两德统一后，虽然柏林墙不再存在，但仍有其他无数障碍存在，西德的资本主义席卷东德企业，导致数百万的东德人失业。东德人认为西德人贪得无厌，西德人觉得东德人好吃懒做，此一现象并反映在德东与德西地区之间的社会及经济现象，而此事亦导致共产政党成员于90全年纷纷移居英国、法国和荷兰等地。
今天，在柏林仍保留有一小段围墙的遗迹以作为纪念和历史见证，不断吸引着大量游客前来参观。柏林墙的查哨站，原是东西柏林的通道，现在旁边建了一座围墙博物馆。

刚刚好UID: 2599482

The proposer's opening remarks

Feb 17th 2009 | Mr Mark Medish

A few weeks ago when I was visiting London, a taxi driver struck up a conversation. When he learned I was from America, he shared his views about the former British colony. He said he knew that many people found Americans overbearing and naive, but he saw things differently. He said that the United States, despite its faults, had shown the world "greatness as a nation". He spoke of America as "a source of new ideas" and "a land of self-made people".

若以一个故事作为开头，注意使用时间连词

I did not get the taxi driver's name, but his optimistic thinking stayed with me. From across an ocean, it captured something fundamental about America.

It reminded me of Walt Whitman's great line: "O America because you build for mankind I build for you."

文章多次引用惠特曼的话

Whitman wrote those words at a time of impending crisis—on the eve of civil war—but with a clear sense of America's winning purpose.

Today America finds itself in crisis again, mostly self-inflicted. It is not difficult to see that the US global image has suffered in recent years. The Iraq war, was misguided and has taken an enormous toll in lives and treasury. Confidence in the market economy has been deeply shaken by the financial meltdown on Wall Street（华尔街的金融危机）.

The names Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo就冲这两个地方以后美国佬就再也别想拿人权说事了,看看自己干的好事 have joined Korematsu and My Lai as deep stains on the national reputation. And the names Enron and Madoff are the new shorthand for greed and corruption in the market economy.

Pessimists talk about national decline and even make comparisons with the fall of Rome. But, if the pessimists were right, America would have declined long ago.

Yes, the United States has made some big mistakes, even lost its way. But it would be a profound misunderstanding to conclude that America cannot regain its shine. To the contrary, history shows that America has an uncanny ability to pull itself together, mend its ways and reach new heights.

Indeed, history gives me more, not less, confidence that America will rise to today's challenges and shine again.

The United States has endured major national challenges and low points. Think of slavery and the Civil War, the destruction of Native American tribes, the Great Depression, the internment of Japanese-Americans during the second world war and the witch-hunts of the McCarthy period.

美国曾经遇到的困难

I grew up in the era of Vietnam and Watergate. I watched a US president resign in shame, and I can clearly remember how badly tarnished Brand America was then.

But in any serious narrative, the dark chapters are merely prologue to new births of freedom, peace and prosperity. 这个比喻，赞The headline of history is not that America failed, but that America finds the wherewithal（必要的资金） to overcome evils and disasters. It will do so again.

There is no question that America today faces enormous challenges at home and abroad. But there is no reason to doubt America's innate ability to meet them. As President Obama promised in his inaugural address, "they will be met".
One could almost hear the lips of millions of rapt listeners whispering to themselves, "Yes, we can".狂热的信徒们

I would venture that if Americans cannot rise to the challenges the world now faces, no other nation can.这句十分hubris. And most world opinion shares this view. Isn't this why so many people around the world were so closely watching the US election campaign last year—remember the crowds at the Brandenburg Gate—and watching Barack Obama's inauguration?

America is a country, and America is also an idea. 这句我喜欢America the country is a nation-state, with its own borders and national interests. It belongs to its citizens. But America the idea—the idea of limited government by the people, the idea of "liberty and justice for all"—belongs to every citizen of the world.   an idea象征公平和自由

但在这里引用一下前面background 中的一篇叫做　lost sheep的文章中的话

He expresses his judgments, some grumpy, some anguished, in sharp, epigrammatic language. “A grand bazaar”, he writes, “provides an inadequate basis upon which to erect a vast empire.” Americans have recast the Jeffersonian trinity—life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—to read: “Whoever dies with the most toys wins”; “Shop till you drop(尽兴)”; and “If it feels good, do it.”

John F. Kennedy said: "Our hopes must be tempered with the caution of history—but with our hopes go the hopes of all mankind." His point adds an important psychological dimension to the notion of global interdependence with US leadership.

We are talking about eternal aspirations that belong to humankind. Americans have no moral superiority over other peoples. America has no monopoly on hopes and dreams, but in our time this country seems specially positioned and called upon to lead the way.

很明显说的是屁话，什么叫be called upon to lead the way难道美国所做的一切是众望所归?

Immigrants have come to America's shores for centuries and become Americans. But you need not be an American, immigrant or native-born, to share the American idea.

America the country may at times fall short of America the idea, but the big idea lives on, and the big country eventually catches up.

To repeat: America is not perfect. As a nation, we are proud, and at times arrogant. As a people, we are diverse, at times incoherent. We are dynamic, at times excessively so. The United States is a big country, and it can make big mistakes.

So, what then accounts for the undeniable resilience of Brand America? It is simply this: America does not fear change.

终于说到正事了,change也就是奥巴马所要做的事情

America's brand is change. In so many countries and in so many cultures, the governing instinct is to deny mistakes, to hide errors and to suppress dissent,  in the name of order, tradition or some ideology.这个可以用作描述政府类的负面作用

Yet American culture has embraced the opposite view. 这个主题句很好It demands transparency, encourages criticism and asks us to come to grips with(对付) our own mistakes. It can be a messy, unflattering and difficult process. There is nothing automatic about success. It all depends on the unfettered voice of the people and the undaunted will of individuals to do better.

This capacity for change and reinvention is quintessentially American. Largely self-made throughout their history, Americans know how to make and re-make themselves. They are builders, as Whitman said.

Kennedy said in his famous 1963 speech, "Peace is a process, a way of doing things." His words well describe the nature of the American idea: it is a process, a way of doing things. America is in motion. America the idea is a journey to the future, not a final destination or a resting place.

America is often considered an adolescent republic compared with the wise countries of the Old World, such as the mature social-democratic countries of the European Union, or China in its latest incarnation as an authoritarian emerging market, to take two examples.

对三个政权的描述

America is indeed relatively young. And the American way of life is in many ways adolescent: boisterous, impatient and wasteful. Yet, in the broader perspective, American democracy is wise beyond its years:

"The quality and spirit of our own society," said Kennedy, "must justify and support our efforts abroad." In other words, change begins at home. As he said, "[We] should begin by looking inward."

Last year, a clear majority of Americans looked inward and implicitly agreed with many of the concerns about their country's direction voiced worldwide.

On election day 2008, Americans chose between Achilles and Odysseus: between John McCain, who spoke a great deal of the long wars ahead, and Barack Obama, who promised a journey homeward to America's founding ideals. The people's choice has been greeted with hope and expectation around the world.
将McCain和Obama分别比作Achilles（刀枪不入，但是脚后跟是致命弱点）和足智多谋Odysseus

Electing Barack Obama, the brilliant son of a black African and a white American, is a sign not of fear or anxiety about the United States, but of confidence in America's inner strength and the fundamental health of the American model. What could be a more decisive first step in yet another journey of national renewal?

Again, Whitman: "The Republic is ever constructive and ever keeps vista".

President Obama knows that we must rebuild America's credibility and that the country must demonstrate through deeds that it can make good on the American idea for a new generation both at home and abroad.

Millions and millions of people around the world seem to be looking to America to lead the way out of this time of global peril, economic, security, environmental. They would appear to believe that America can and will regain its shine, for its own sake and for theirs. They would be right.

没有切合实际情况进行描述，尤其如何处理医疗经济军事和外交等人们关注的问题也没有给出明确的答案，文章将要结尾时才提到了change，但是却没有解释如何改变和从哪改变。文章中充斥着一种美国人乐观的自信的态度，多出引用惠特曼的话来鼓舞,振作身心俱疲的美国人。但是看到最后也没有看到我想要的答案，也许在作者看来，拥有一个乐观积极的心态就足够了。

刚刚好UID: 2599482

the opposition's rebuttal remarks

There are many points of agreement between Mark Medish and me: that Brand America once shone brightly around the world; that America can recover from its current travails and that Americans believe that Brand America can shine again. These points are beyond dispute. But this is not what this debate is all about. The key issue is whether brand America will regain its shine in the eyes of 6.2 billion people who live outside America.

But之前由三个that引出的排比句，指出了双方的相同之处，but之后指出了问题所在：不在美国生活的人的看法

The only way to answer this question is to step into the hearts and minds of these 6.2 billion people to understand how much their perceptions of America and of their own societies have changed. In their eyes, Brand America has been tarnished and, in some cases, tarnished beyond repair. Equally important, many believe that their societies' prospects are not inferior to America's prospects. In short, the world has changed. Americans have not noticed these changes.

The key issue is whether。。。The only way to answer this question is。。。

In the eyes of 6.2 billion people。。。Step into the greats and minds of these people

Equally important表示并列

注意提示词的使用

It is difficult to underestimate how badly Brand America has been tarnished in the eyes of the rest of the world. From the practice of torture in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib to the illegality and incompetence of the American invasion of Iraq, from the many failures of the American space programme (once a symbol of American pride) to the near-total collapse of the American financial system, the world now associates Brand America not just with spectacular successes but with spectacular failures also. In the past, when Americans walked in foreign lands they could stand tall and say proudly they came from a great country. Now many of them almost want to hide their passports.

在举例子时，作者连着用两个from…to…

Associate…not just with…but with…also

In the past…now…对比

The collapse of Brand America in the eyes of the rest of the world is confirmed by some surveys. The East West Global Index does a global ranking of countries in the area of "national brand perceptions". The latest index was released on February 10th 2008. It showed the United States in the 131st place out of 200 nations, a far cry from its previous global standing. Singapore ranks first and Afghanistan last. The president of East West Global Index, Thomas Cromwell, said that the indexes help a country see how it is viewed in the world compared with other countries.

The other big shift in world history that Americans have not noticed is the rising level of optimism outside America. One of America's most deserved moments of national pride was when Neil Armstrong walked on the moon in 1969. At that time, China was just emerging from the Cultural Revolution. Indeed by then China had experienced a national nightmare of almost 140 years, starting with the humiliating opium war of 1842.

文化大革命与耻辱的鸦片战争

In the last three decades, however, China has been the fastest growing economy in the world, with an average growth rate of almost 10%. This has led to a major transformation of Chinese society: 400m Chinese have been lifted out of absolute poverty; almost 300m Chinese are entering the middle class. Many young Chinese still yearn to go to America to study in the world's greatest universities. In the past, they only wanted to stay in America. Now many want to return to participate in the spectacular rebirth of Chinese civilisation.

In the past。。。Now 。。。又用了这种对比
这段运用具体数字描述了中国发展速度之快

In my book, "The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East", I explain how the economic revitalisation of Asian societies is leading to a massive Asian cultural renaissance. Modernisation, paradoxically, is also leading to de-westernisation. Gone is the myth that Western societies, including America, are inherently superior. I happened to be in China on the day when the first Chinese astronaut took a space walk. Every Chinese TV channel broadcast this for virtually 24 hours a day. The surge in national pride was palpable, comparable to American pride when Neil Armstrong walked on the moon.

The Chinese felt equally proud when they hosted the Olympics in 2008 with spectacular success. The Olympics episode also showed how detached the American narrative has become from the Chinese narrative. The American media reported the anti-Chinese demonstrations in Western cities and constantly reminded Americans that China was not a free society. This distorted Western coverage angered the Chinese people. Many now believe that America and the West do not want China to succeed. This is also why virtually all Chinese believe that the American bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade on May 7th 1999 was deliberate, not accidental. As the vast majority of the 1.3 billion Chinese have become skeptical of America's intentions towards China, how can Brand America shine brightly in their eyes?

The 1.2 billion Indians do not share the Chinese skepticism of America's intentions. However, they are as optimistic as the Chinese about their own society's future. The latest Goldman Sachs projection shows that the three largest economies in the world in 2050 will be (in that order) China, India and the United States. Paradoxically, the success of the immigrant Indian community in America (and indeed they are the most successful in socio-economic terms) has given Indian cultural confidence a huge boost. The Indian elite are now convinced that India's future is also very bright. Many of them would only have dreamt of migrating to America a few decades ago. Now many of them want to stay at home to participate in the great Indian economic rejuvenation and cultural renaissance. In their eyes, Brand India can shine as brightly as Brand America once did.

The 1.2 billion Muslims are among the most skeptical of Brand America, and they have good reason to be. From the one-sided American policy on the Israel-Palestine issue to the disastrous invasion of Iraq, from the wanton killing of civilians in Afghanistan to the discrimination against Muslims when they apply for American visas, the Muslim narrative of the world has abundant stories to tell of how American power has damaged Muslim societies and peoples. Survey after survey has shown how high anti-Americanism has become in Islamic societies, including in pro-American countries like Turkey and Egypt. The election of Barack Hussein Obama has given this anti-Americanism a brief respite but until American policies towards the Islamic world change dramatically, Brand America will not shine brightly in the Muslim eyes.

For their own historical reasons the nearly 600m Latin Americans have become deeply skeptical of American intentions towards their societies. American intentions in Latin America have rarely been benign. This is why a Nobel Laureate, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, told the American people after 9/11, "How does it feel, Yank, knowing that on September 11th the long war finally reaches your home?"

Hence, it is only in Europe, and perhaps Africa, that America can ever hope to regain its old shine. But the combined populations of these two regions make up a minority of the world's population. The vast majority of the world has lost its earlier fascination with Brand America. They will not view America solely through negative lens. They will continue to appreciate the many strengths of America: from its great universities to its generous traditions of philanthropy, from its welcoming arms to foreign immigrants to its support of a liberal multilateral world trading order. In short, the good that America has done will be recognised. But the harm America has done will also be recognised.

The populations of the world have become both better educated and more sophisticated in their perceptions of America in recent years. They can see the good, the bad and the ugly. The old one-dimensional Brand America can never regain its original shine in the eyes of most of the 6.2 billion people who live outside America.

刚刚好UID: 2599482

the proposer's rebuttal remarks

Some of Kishore Mahbubani's concerns about America's recent failings are well taken; however, his conclusion that Brand America is over does not follow. A selective use of history undermines his analysis. At the heart of his thesis lies a blurred view about the nature of the brand itself, namely America's irrepressible dynamism.

可以用于Argument

Mr Mahbubani insists that America "has become an ordinary country". This is mostly off the mark. America the country is indeed ordinary in that it is not above the law of nations and has no monopoly on virtue. However, it still represents the most successful large-scale, multicultural democracy in history, and this is no small feat.

What's more, America the idea is truly extraordinary, although it is extraordinary in an inclusive way. The American idea is a global public good, the property of all peoples who aspire to adapt it to their own circumstances. This idea is as compelling today as it has been over the last 250 years.

Much of Mr Mahbubani's argument is a straw man. He suggests that "until 9/11 came along" America was a model in its "commitment to moral values", but afterwards everything changed. This is a caricature of American history.

He rightly singles out the torture of terrorism suspects as a moral abomination. However, he is wrong to suggest lack of moral outrage on the part of Americans. Indeed, it was Senator John McCain who led the bipartisan critics of the Bush-Cheney administration on this question. In 2005, the US Senate voted overwhelmingly (90-9) to ban the cruel treatment of detainees. Furthermore, one of President Obama's first acts in office was to announce the impending closure of Guantanamo.

A deeper weakness of Mr Mahbubani's analysis is that it paints too pretty a picture of the past and consequently misinterprets the present. In a sense, he uses selective snapshots in place of a moving picture.

Argument中过去现在的错误

There is an ancient Chinese saying—ke zhou qiu jian—which describes carving the side of a boat at the spot where your sword fell into the river. Mr Mahbubani keeps carving the side to mark the spot where he thinks Brand America ended, but the boat has moved on.

解释中国的成语

Achieving a more just society in the United States and thereby setting an example for the world has been a long struggle. The achievements have been of historic significance, but the project is still a work in progress.

Contrary to what Mr Mahbubani suggests, the pre-9/11 US Supreme Court made major mistakes, such as the infamous Dred Scott and Korematsu decisions. The Bill of Rights has not been self-executing. The civil rights movement, for example, took considerable time to prevail. It should be added that the Supreme Court rejected the Bush-Cheney administration's views on military tribunals and other abusive practices.

Brand America places a premium on self-correction. Recognising human fallibility and placing trust in evolutionary pragmatism, the constitution invites all citizens to work toward "a more perfect union". Many regimes in the world prefer to hide mistakes, make excuses, muzzle critics and punish dissenters. The American political idea rejects this authoritarian impulse in favour of free speech. It is significant that the abuses of the last few years have been exposed in the open media.

政府的负面因素

Again, Brand America is not static; the American experiment is dynamic. The United States may be impatient about other countries' failings, but it cannot be said that America rests on its own laurels. Americans are often their own biggest critics. The accusation of occasional hypocrisy, of which the United States is most assuredly guilty, is a tribute paid by vice to virtue.

Mr Mahbubani concedes that "America remains the most successful democracy, whose magic has been reaffirmed" by the 2008 election. However, his attempt to distinguish Brand Obama from Brand America does not work. Barack Obama's victory is the story both of one man's extraordinary rise and of democratic renewal on a national scale. It shows that America has once again freed itself from the grip of the past.

Mr Mahbubani observes that America's "material shine has also taken a severe beating", referring to the current economic crisis. This misses the point. The global crisis has revealed the deep interdependence of market-oriented economies. The United States has swung into deep recession, but the rest of the world is faring even worse. The notion that the large emerging markets had "decoupled" from the United States has proved illusory.

Errors of US deregulation plainly triggered the crisis; yet there can be little doubt about its overwhelming economic preponderance in the global system. Neither is there any question about alternative models such as central planning or market authoritarianism producing better results. It is no accident that the global flight to safety has strengthened the US dollar. All eyes are watching the United States for a recovery plan. And if the United States will not play a leadership role at the G20 summit in London this April, what country will?

Globalisation is not about American "exceptionalism" or Western domination. Rather, it is an inclusive, win-win proposition that depends on the economic success of the emerging markets. Those who believe that the South will ineluctably overwhelm the North, or that the East is destined to rise at the expense of the West, are indulging in almost Manichaean forms of regional pride and mercantilism.

China and India are among the major emerging market countries that have made spectacular strides in alleviating massive poverty in recent years. Mr Mahbubani is confident that "in a few decades China and India will resume their natural place" as the largest economies of the world. Indeed, one must hope that these giants can maintain their robust growth trajectories.

It is worth remembering that slogans such as "Japan as number one", "BRICs" and "Asian power shift" come and go. The key is not to confuse such alluring linear extrapolations from economic data with the fuller picture of global trends.

The metrics for "material shine" suggested by Mr Mahbubani are skewed and anachronistic, reminding us that all that glitters is not gold. For example, the boasts about space walks echo rhetoric from the cold war and raise questions about the misallocation of scarce resources.

The reference to automobile manufacturing, a vintage 20th-century technology, is quite telling. In contrast to industrial-age dreams of a billion cars, Al Gore's global campaign to raise awareness about climate change and to promote green energy is a sign that Brand America is alive and well.

In the same vein(同样), Mr Mahbubani rightly acknowledges Brand America's leadership in science, technology and university research.

Finally, Mr Mahbubani raises a question about America's relations with the Islamic world. I think all can agree that an active US role is key to lasting peace in the Middle East. The tireless work of Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton has established a model for American leadership and diplomacy.

President Obama was emphatic in his inaugural address: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." It takes two to tango.

In sum, Brand America continues to stand for multidimensional greatness: the unique confluence of a commitment to moral values, democratic success, economic vitality and global leadership.

刚刚好UID: 2599482

Featured guest

Mr Parag Khanna

On November 2nd 2008, The Economist hosted a live debate as part of its weekend of events in New York City, called "Off the Page". In this live debate, Parag Khanna argued against the proposition: "Brand America will regain its shine." Here is the basis of his position; click the thumbnail below for a video of his opening remarks from that event (note: video will open in a pop-up window).

Brand America may indeed shine again, but at this point we do not even know what brand that will be. Furthermore, it is certain that others brands will be shining too, meaning at best America will have to compete vigorously with others.

It is starting a leg down. Even with Obama as president, a man referred to globally as the "messiah", the quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan continue. These are America's wars—and ugly wars they are—and thus America's brand will remain tarnished for these reasons alone.

插入语

Furthermore, America's despicable and toxic corporate greed has undermined the global financial order. And additionally, the American dream of opportunity, meritocracy and world-leading quality of life, vaunted by generations, have become factual myths: OECD statistics show how America's global ranking in primary education achievement, life expectancy, internet access, traffic safety, poverty rates and income equality have all dropped out of the top 10 and even the top 20.

政府的正面影响

America's declining brand is also the result of competition which did not appear to exist after the end of the cold war. The 1990s seemed like America's unipolar moment, but Brand China also rose across Asia, culminating in last summer's spectacular Olympics. China has cultivated its rivals such as Japan, Taiwan and Korea, where "red fever" has taken hold. Even Australia's top diplomats view China as the destination of choice. Half the world's population lives in Asia and is getting used to having China as their de facto leader, so how can we claim that Brand America is suddenly to be first again? Even beyond Asia, China is delivering development and infrastructure in Africa in ways the West has failed for decades to do, and building 100 new Confucius institutes around the world to showcase its culture and teach Chinese.

Brand Europe has also risen steadily from the 1990s through today, with the European Union growing from 12 to 27 members and many others begging to join. Europe enjoys a stable currency and the world's highest standards of product quality, design, safety and environmental efficiency. Would you rather drive a Chevy or a Mercedes, Volkswagen, Porsche, or BMW?

好的生活环境

It is tempting to optimistically believe that despite the Bush legacy, if the United States just tinkers with public diplomacy, sets up some more satellite TV stations, attempts to work with the UN, and allows China to misplay its hand and reveal its true colors(揭示真面目), suddenly all will be OK again. But there are plenty of alternatives to American leadership already, and dozens of countries are exploring them actively: choosing a Chinese-style centralized political system with a liberalized economy; seeking investment from Arab sovereign wealth funds, development assistance from Europe, and cheaper cars and software from India.

Like the price of oil, which includes anticipated future costs, America's brand value is low not just because of the Bush administration, but because of low expectations of America in the future. Even if America pulls out of Iraq, declares support for the UN, closes Guantanamo Bay and leads a humanitarian intervention in Darfur, it will still face intensifying competition for global leadership in which it has no viable strategy to cope.

石油的价格用来比喻从现在一直到将来都比较低的水平

刚刚好UID: 2599482

defending the motion－－closing

More than a billion people around the globe tuned in to watch the US presidential inauguration in January 2009. The reason for this worldwide interest is clear, and it reminds us of what is extraordinary about America. People still look to the United States full of hope and expectation for a new beginning.

So many of the online comments from readers reflect this sense of optimism about the future and about what Brand America still has to offer. Everybody is aware of the major challenges ahead. But a clear majority of opinion appears to have a sober confidence in the ability of America to live up to its ideals and to lead anew.

Let me underscore three points in conclusion.

First, America's brand is change. From its inception as a republic, America has been all about the idea of principled change. The American idea is to apply democratic first principles in correcting old mistakes and adapting to new situations.

As one American reader commented, "Brand America has suffered a decline due to our failing to live up to our own standards. The reason why there is a Brand America is because we are willing to be judged by those standards, internally and externally."

This commitment to constant self-improvement is central to Brand America. It is not a linear process, but it has been a steady theme over America's history. It entails a radical openness to a degree of criticism and self-criticism which would make despots and unfree societies uncomfortable.

During the Vietnam war, a Canadian journalist, Gordon Sinclair, famously observed that the genius and strength of the United States is that, even during such times of crisis, Americans are willing to expose their faults "right in the store window for everyone to look at".

It is noteworthy that the 1776 Declaration of Independence begins with a reference to "a decent Respect for the Opinions of Mankind".

The profound openness of the American experience—its sheer dynamism—has long confounded America's critics, such as Kishore Mahbubani.

Yet this aspect of Brand America has been well recognised around the world. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, South African Nobel peace prize-winner, called the election of Barack Obama an "epoch-making event that filled the whole world with hope that change is possible".

America's book is open, and a new chapter is being written.

Second, Brand America embraces a "win-win" view of the economic world. The United States is rooting for the success of Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East.

As an online reader named Hugh said, "It's a GOOD thing that India is doing so well, and it's a GOOD thing that China is [too]…" Hugh went on to answer Mr Mahbubani's question whether America would be "the only big dream" on the planet: "No. Which is as it should be. That was [America's] dream all along."

This is not about altruism. Of course, the world knows that America is committed to humanitarian support for people in need anywhere: to alleviate poverty, to fight disease and to provide relief in the aftermath of natural disasters, such as the tsunami of 2004 and the south Asian earthquake of 2005, when Presidents George W.H. Bush and Bill Clinton mobilised international donors on an unprecedented scale.政治类

America's more general economic commitment is to promote global prosperity based firmly on a hard-headed appreciation of mutual interests. It is worth recalling that the expansion of global trade and the promotion of economic integration has been an American-led project since the 1940s.

The economic success of the emerging markets only enhances the ideals that America has stood for: trade liberalisation, fair competition, greater integration and mutual prosperity. This is why, for example, the United States pushed so vigorously for China's entry into the World Trade Organisation. This is also why American businesses have welcomed the dramatic opening up of and integration of India, with its impressive high-tech industries, into the global trading system. 社会类

Global financial and economic interdependence obviously carries substantial risks, but it is a far better option than a world of autarchy and isolationism. Today global governance once again needs serious improvement. America will play a leading role in the reform effort, in concert with all the other responsible stakeholders.

Third, and equally important, Brand America is based on multicultural identity. It is predicated upon the notion that social tolerance and cultural diversity pave the way to greater harmony both at home and abroad. This idea remains as radical today as it was at the country's founding.

The American idea holds that common humanity is the only morally meaningful identifier of people. As far as cultures are concerned, let one hundred flowers bloom.

The American idea is not about blood or caste or creed. It abhors all forms of tribalism. Brand America rejects the determinist and bloody-minded thesis of a clash of civilisations.

Instead, as one reader said, America "continuously brings in new waves of immigrants to add to our already stunning diversity. This is the only place in the world where so many different nations and races come to live together and prosper."

This multicultural brand still has powerful wings around the world. As US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton observed during her recent visit to Jakarta, the capital of the world's most populous Muslim country: "Indonesia proves that Islam, democracy, and modernity not only can coexist but thrive together."

Mr Mahbubani asserts, without any evidence, that Americans are embarrassed by their nationality when they travel abroad. What we do know is that America is a land where nobody cares what passport your mother or your father held.

Thus, America stands for a country of immigrants and a land of opportunity; it also stands for the fundamental idea of multicultural diversity. This is why the Statue of Liberty is as powerful a symbol of human aspirations today as it was 100 years ago.

In sum, Brand America, which embodies democratic change, mutual prosperity and multicultural diversity, remains a source of positive energy for the world in our troubled times.

The day after Barack Obama's election, Amartya Sen, Indian Nobel prize-winning economist, said in an interview to The Telegraph of Kolkata: "By making America more democratic (and) American policy more multilateral, we can expect major advances from an Obama administration."

President Obama, after he was sworn in, went on to say: "There are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to change."

刚刚好UID: 2599482

the opposition closing remark－－closing

In due course, we will learn many lessons from this debate on Brand America. But one lesson already stands out. We can see clearly a disconnect developing between the American narrative on Brand America and the narrative of the rest of the world.

指出其中一个关键的矛盾

Mark Medish's rebuttal to my opening argument illustrates well the problem faced by American intellectuals. They are engaged in an incestuous, self-referential and self-congratulatory dialogue among themselves when they speak on the state of our planet. In doing so, they have lost the capacity to "listen" to the voices of the 6.2 billion people who live outside America.

The issue that best illustrates how the American narrative has become disconnected is the Israel-Palestine issue. It is truly astonishing that Mr Medish can say, "The tireless work of Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton has established a model for American leadership and diplomacy" in making peace in the Middle East. Most Americans believe that they are the world's biggest peace-makers on the Middle East. In their eyes, the problems are caused by the Arabs and the Palestinians. However, any poll taken of global views will show that the world believes that Americans are the chief trouble-makers in the region.

The issue that best illustrates how…is the…issue.

In doing sth.

The real tragedy of American discourse on the Middle East is that a culture of moral and political cowardice has enveloped American politicians and intellectuals on this issue. Few dare to "speak truth to power" when it comes to challenging the power of the Israeli lobby. Hence, the American people do not know one simple fact that the whole world knows: that the 42-year-old Israeli occupation of Palestine can be sustained only because of unconditional American support for Israel.

When it comes to doing…

Instead of being honest peace-makers, the American mediators have been dishonest. In a rare act of candor, a leading American mediator, Aaron David Miller, has admitted in a Newsweek article that American intermediaries would clear their negotiating texts with the Israeli side before showing it to the Palestinians. Similarly, in a Time magazine article, Tim McGirk admitted that George W. Bush "gave Israelis all they wanted but didn't rein them in when they needed it".

Instead of being…sb. has been…

Unfortunately, the ultimate victims of this American dishonesty will be the people of Israel. As I document in my second book, "Beyond the Age of Innocence: Rebuilding Trust between America and the World", any conflict between 6m Israelis and 1.2 billion Muslims will lead to grief for Israelis in the long run. Today, a window of opportunity has opened for peace because the Arab states are troubled by the rise of Iran. Sadly, American dishonesty and incompetence on the Middle East issue will prevent this opportunity from being seized. But few Americans will realise this because the American discourse on the subject has been disconnected from the global narrative. Brand America cannot regain its shine in the world until America's shameful policies on the Israel-Palestine issue are changed.

the ultimate victims of this … will be the people of ...

Today, a window of opportunity has opened for peace比喻和平之窗

Another area where a massive disconnect has taken place is in the area of "American competence". In the eyes of many, this term has now become a virtual oxymoron. Until as late as last year, American officials and bankers used to travel widely to lecture the world on the virtues of the American financial system. And the rest of the world listened because in economic and financial areas the Americans were still perceived to be most competent. Today, in less than a year, they are perceived as among the most incompetent. Francis Fukuyama has acknowledged this. As he says, few Americans "are discussing a more intangible, yet potentially much greater cost to the United States—the damage that the financial meltdown is doing to America's 'brand'."

The Asian culture of politeness makes it difficult for Asians to tell American bankers to their face what they really think of them. Saving face is important in Asian culture. But since I have had the privilege of listening to private conversations among leading Asians, I am truly astonished to discover how sharply global attitudes towards Americans have deteriorated as a result of this crisis. Few American journalists or intellectuals can understand this change, because they only listen to their own voices, not to the voices of the rest. Let me quote what two Chinese officials have said. Tian Guoli, chief executive of Cinda Asset Management Corporation, commented: "Who would have thought that these banks we used to revere, such as HSBC and Citigroup, would have such big problems?" Gao Xiqing, the head of China Investment Corporation, has said candidly: "I have great admiration of the American people. Creative, hard-working, trusting and freedom-loving. But you have to have someone to tell you the truth. And then, start realising it. And if you do it, just like what you did in the second world war, then you'll be great again! If that happens, then of course - American power would still be there for at least as long as I am living. But many people are betting on the other side." Please note his last phrase, "many people are betting on the other side". In short, the world has lost faith in America's competence.

One reality that Mr Medish has not taken into consideration is the time-lag between the deterioration of the product and the subsequent deterioration of the brand. Brand America continues to shine in the eyes of many because of past glories, not future glories. This has happened before. Ironically, this happened with America's predecessor as the global hegemonic power: the British empire. In the minds of many, especially in the Anglo-Saxon mental universe, the British Raj continued to have a positive glow long after the British empire had effectively collapsed. The same time-lag positive glow continues to surround Brand America too.

I share Mr Medish's confidence that American society will recover from its present travails. There is an inherent dynamism in American society that cannot be underestimated. But the key question is whether Brand America will recover its unipolar position as the leading and only star in the sky. To answer that question, we need to understand the nature of the times we live in.

And the times have changed significantly. The American century is over. The Asian century has arrived. Goldman Sachs has confidently predicted that by 2050 or earlier, the four largest economies will be (and in this order) China, India, the United States and Japan. The current economic crisis will only accelerate the shift of economic power to the more prudently managed Asian economies. Equally importantly, in geopolitical terms, the unipolar moment has gone. We are moving into an era of multipolarity. With these dramatically changed and changing global circumstances, how can Brand America regain the unique shine it had in the past?

Geopolitical地缘政治学

There is an even greater danger Brand America faces in the coming years. As a result of a lack of strategic thinking in the American body politic, America has developed a number of failed or near-failing public policies in many areas: from economic and financial management to industrial competitiveness; from educational policies to health-care systems; from energy dependence to rising drug addiction, to name a few. It will require a massive and co-ordinated strategy to overcome the many challenges that America faces. Again, it is possible that America may well succeed. But the absence of any real awareness that America faces massive domestic socio-economic problems and the reluctance of American leaders to speak the truth to their own populations only means that America will face many difficult years before it eventually recovers.

And Brand America will continue to lose its lustre as this happens.