英語資源頻道為大家整理的china daily 雙語新聞：布坎南終生反對特權(quán)的經(jīng)濟學(xué)家，供大家學(xué)習(xí)參考:)
James Buchanan, who has died aged 93, was a distinctive and controversial economist who, with his collaborator Gordon Tullock, founded what became known as the “Virginia school” of public choice.
享年93歲的詹姆斯·布坎南(James Buchanan)是一位杰出而富有爭議的經(jīng)濟學(xué)家，他與戈登·圖洛克(Gordon Tullock)合作創(chuàng)立了被稱為“維吉尼亞學(xué)派”的公共選擇理論。
For them it was inconsistent to analyse market decisions on a working assumption that economic agents are self-interested yet examine political decisions on the basis that political agents are altruistic. They were the inspiration for Ronald Reagan’s remark: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help’.”
在布坎南和圖洛克看來，在分析市場決策時采用“經(jīng)濟人”假設(shè)（認為人的一切行為都是為了程度地滿足私利），而在研究政治決策時假設(shè)政治行為人是無私的，這相互矛盾。羅納德·里根(Ronald Reagan)那句名言——“英文中最令人膽戰(zhàn)心驚的幾個字莫過于，‘我為政府工作，我來這兒是為了幫助你”——其靈感源泉就是他們的觀點。
That Buchanan, who won the 1986 Nobel Prize for economics, was right is confirmed by observing the politics of protectionism or farm subsidies. Why, then, the controversy? Much of it is due to confusing Buchanan’s subtleties with the brasher views expressed by other, more Chicago-oriented economists who pretend everyone is always selfish.
布坎南是1986年諾貝爾經(jīng)濟學(xué)獎得主?？疾炷切┥婕氨Ｗo主義或農(nóng)場補貼的政治博弈，可以印證他的觀點。那么，圍繞布坎南的爭議從何而來？絕大多數(shù)爭議源于，布坎南的精致理論，被人們與其他偏芝加哥學(xué)派經(jīng)濟學(xué)家的一些不夠嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)挠^點混淆在一起。那些經(jīng)濟學(xué)家不顧事實地認為，每個人在任何時候都是自私的。
Take Buchanan himself, who endowed scholarships at his alma mater, Middle Tennessee State University (he later gained a Chicago doctorate). It is proper to suspect citizens’ claims to altruism. But they are not always bogus.
以布坎南自己為例，他在母校田納西州立大學(xué)(Middle Tennessee State University)設(shè)立了多項獎學(xué)金（他后來又取得了芝加哥大學(xué)博士學(xué)位）。懷疑別人自稱的無私并無不妥，但自稱無私者并不總是在故作姿態(tài)。
This inconsistency affects Buchanan’s own work. With Tullock, he argued in The Calculus of Consent (1962, the first work mentioned in his Nobel citation) that free uncoordinated action in the polity and the market both need to operate under a unanimously agreed constitutional contract. But they never explained how selfish human beings would ever get together.
這種矛盾對布坎南自己的研究也有影響。在與圖洛克合著的《計算共識》（The Calculus of Consent，1962年出版，該書是諾貝爾委員會對布坎南的頒獎詞中提到的第一本著作）一書中，他指出，在政治領(lǐng)域和市場中，自由的、不經(jīng)協(xié)調(diào)的行動，都應(yīng)在各方一致同意的憲法契約下進行。但他們始終未能解釋的是，自利的人類個體如何能達成一致意見。
Buchanan was profoundly anti-elitist. Born in Tennessee in 1919 to a locally illustrious but poor family, he said of himself and his Appalachian background: “All of my known ancestors?.?.?.?[were] these hardy Scots-Irish, who were solidly Presbyterian and fiercely independent .?.?.?I grew up as a member of a defeated people in a war still remembered by my grandparents.”
布坎南對精英主義極為反感。布坎南于1919年出生于田納西州一個在當(dāng)?shù)仡H有聲望、但比較貧困的家庭。談到自己的出身以及阿巴拉契亞山脈背景時，他曾說：“我所知道的所有祖輩……（都是）堅強的愛爾蘭裔美國人，他們是虔誠的長老教徒，非常獨立……我是南方人，我們是南北戰(zhàn)爭中的戰(zhàn)敗方，我的祖父母還記得那場戰(zhàn)爭的情形?！?BR> This did not make him a Confederate apologist. Appalachian farmers were not slaveholders. But it made him a fierce enemy of privilege – he never taught at an elite university – and deeply suspicious of claims to public service made by privileged people. The ferocity of his and Prof Tullock’s seminars at the Public Choice Center was legendary: as a survivor recalls, “Jim was relentless and Gordon was cutting”.
布坎南并未因此成為南部邦聯(lián)政府的辯護者。阿巴拉契亞地區(qū)的農(nóng)民在南北戰(zhàn)爭前并非奴隸主。不過，南北戰(zhàn)爭讓布坎南堅決地站在了特權(quán)的對立面（他從未在任何精英大學(xué)中任過教），對于特權(quán)階層人士所稱的他們是服務(wù)于公共利益的說辭，他也深感懷疑。他和圖洛克在公共選擇研究中心(Public Choice Center)舉辦的研討班以風(fēng)格犀利而聞名。一名經(jīng)歷過這種犀利風(fēng)格“洗禮”的研修班學(xué)員回憶道：“布坎南講話毫不留情面，戈登也言辭尖銳?！?BR> His relentlessness was directed as much at Chicagoan as at Keynesian fallacies. Brash Chicagoans are Panglossian: a free market is the best of all possible worlds because all gains from trade have already been made. Buchanan was radically sceptical: “The potential participants do not know until they enter the process what their own choices will be. From this it follows that it is logically impossible for an omniscient designer to know, unless, of course, we are to preclude individual freedom of will.” Buchanan was a much subtler thinker than his reputation has allowed for.
他不僅毫不留情地抨擊凱恩斯主義的謬誤，對芝加哥學(xué)派的錯誤觀點也毫不手軟。芝加哥學(xué)派過于輕率和樂觀，他們認為：自由市場是所有可能選擇中最理想的，因為通過交易所能獲得的所有收益都已被創(chuàng)造出來。布坎南對此表示強烈懷疑：“潛在的參與者直至進入市場才知道自己將會作何選擇。由此可以推出，從邏輯上來說根本不可能存在一位無所不知的設(shè)計師——當(dāng)然，除非我們打算剝奪個體的自由意志?！辈伎材系乃枷脒h比人們通常以為的更精妙。
James McGill Buchanan is survived by two sisters and three nephews.
詹姆斯·麥吉爾·布坎南現(xiàn)在在世的親人還有他的兩個姐姐和三個外甥。
James Buchanan, who has died aged 93, was a distinctive and controversial economist who, with his collaborator Gordon Tullock, founded what became known as the “Virginia school” of public choice.
享年93歲的詹姆斯·布坎南(James Buchanan)是一位杰出而富有爭議的經(jīng)濟學(xué)家，他與戈登·圖洛克(Gordon Tullock)合作創(chuàng)立了被稱為“維吉尼亞學(xué)派”的公共選擇理論。
For them it was inconsistent to analyse market decisions on a working assumption that economic agents are self-interested yet examine political decisions on the basis that political agents are altruistic. They were the inspiration for Ronald Reagan’s remark: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help’.”
在布坎南和圖洛克看來，在分析市場決策時采用“經(jīng)濟人”假設(shè)（認為人的一切行為都是為了程度地滿足私利），而在研究政治決策時假設(shè)政治行為人是無私的，這相互矛盾。羅納德·里根(Ronald Reagan)那句名言——“英文中最令人膽戰(zhàn)心驚的幾個字莫過于，‘我為政府工作，我來這兒是為了幫助你”——其靈感源泉就是他們的觀點。
That Buchanan, who won the 1986 Nobel Prize for economics, was right is confirmed by observing the politics of protectionism or farm subsidies. Why, then, the controversy? Much of it is due to confusing Buchanan’s subtleties with the brasher views expressed by other, more Chicago-oriented economists who pretend everyone is always selfish.
布坎南是1986年諾貝爾經(jīng)濟學(xué)獎得主?？疾炷切┥婕氨Ｗo主義或農(nóng)場補貼的政治博弈，可以印證他的觀點。那么，圍繞布坎南的爭議從何而來？絕大多數(shù)爭議源于，布坎南的精致理論，被人們與其他偏芝加哥學(xué)派經(jīng)濟學(xué)家的一些不夠嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)挠^點混淆在一起。那些經(jīng)濟學(xué)家不顧事實地認為，每個人在任何時候都是自私的。
Take Buchanan himself, who endowed scholarships at his alma mater, Middle Tennessee State University (he later gained a Chicago doctorate). It is proper to suspect citizens’ claims to altruism. But they are not always bogus.
以布坎南自己為例，他在母校田納西州立大學(xué)(Middle Tennessee State University)設(shè)立了多項獎學(xué)金（他后來又取得了芝加哥大學(xué)博士學(xué)位）。懷疑別人自稱的無私并無不妥，但自稱無私者并不總是在故作姿態(tài)。
This inconsistency affects Buchanan’s own work. With Tullock, he argued in The Calculus of Consent (1962, the first work mentioned in his Nobel citation) that free uncoordinated action in the polity and the market both need to operate under a unanimously agreed constitutional contract. But they never explained how selfish human beings would ever get together.
這種矛盾對布坎南自己的研究也有影響。在與圖洛克合著的《計算共識》（The Calculus of Consent，1962年出版，該書是諾貝爾委員會對布坎南的頒獎詞中提到的第一本著作）一書中，他指出，在政治領(lǐng)域和市場中，自由的、不經(jīng)協(xié)調(diào)的行動，都應(yīng)在各方一致同意的憲法契約下進行。但他們始終未能解釋的是，自利的人類個體如何能達成一致意見。
Buchanan was profoundly anti-elitist. Born in Tennessee in 1919 to a locally illustrious but poor family, he said of himself and his Appalachian background: “All of my known ancestors?.?.?.?[were] these hardy Scots-Irish, who were solidly Presbyterian and fiercely independent .?.?.?I grew up as a member of a defeated people in a war still remembered by my grandparents.”
布坎南對精英主義極為反感。布坎南于1919年出生于田納西州一個在當(dāng)?shù)仡H有聲望、但比較貧困的家庭。談到自己的出身以及阿巴拉契亞山脈背景時，他曾說：“我所知道的所有祖輩……（都是）堅強的愛爾蘭裔美國人，他們是虔誠的長老教徒，非常獨立……我是南方人，我們是南北戰(zhàn)爭中的戰(zhàn)敗方，我的祖父母還記得那場戰(zhàn)爭的情形?！?BR> This did not make him a Confederate apologist. Appalachian farmers were not slaveholders. But it made him a fierce enemy of privilege – he never taught at an elite university – and deeply suspicious of claims to public service made by privileged people. The ferocity of his and Prof Tullock’s seminars at the Public Choice Center was legendary: as a survivor recalls, “Jim was relentless and Gordon was cutting”.
布坎南并未因此成為南部邦聯(lián)政府的辯護者。阿巴拉契亞地區(qū)的農(nóng)民在南北戰(zhàn)爭前并非奴隸主。不過，南北戰(zhàn)爭讓布坎南堅決地站在了特權(quán)的對立面（他從未在任何精英大學(xué)中任過教），對于特權(quán)階層人士所稱的他們是服務(wù)于公共利益的說辭，他也深感懷疑。他和圖洛克在公共選擇研究中心(Public Choice Center)舉辦的研討班以風(fēng)格犀利而聞名。一名經(jīng)歷過這種犀利風(fēng)格“洗禮”的研修班學(xué)員回憶道：“布坎南講話毫不留情面，戈登也言辭尖銳?！?BR> His relentlessness was directed as much at Chicagoan as at Keynesian fallacies. Brash Chicagoans are Panglossian: a free market is the best of all possible worlds because all gains from trade have already been made. Buchanan was radically sceptical: “The potential participants do not know until they enter the process what their own choices will be. From this it follows that it is logically impossible for an omniscient designer to know, unless, of course, we are to preclude individual freedom of will.” Buchanan was a much subtler thinker than his reputation has allowed for.
他不僅毫不留情地抨擊凱恩斯主義的謬誤，對芝加哥學(xué)派的錯誤觀點也毫不手軟。芝加哥學(xué)派過于輕率和樂觀，他們認為：自由市場是所有可能選擇中最理想的，因為通過交易所能獲得的所有收益都已被創(chuàng)造出來。布坎南對此表示強烈懷疑：“潛在的參與者直至進入市場才知道自己將會作何選擇。由此可以推出，從邏輯上來說根本不可能存在一位無所不知的設(shè)計師——當(dāng)然，除非我們打算剝奪個體的自由意志?！辈伎材系乃枷脒h比人們通常以為的更精妙。
James McGill Buchanan is survived by two sisters and three nephews.
詹姆斯·麥吉爾·布坎南現(xiàn)在在世的親人還有他的兩個姐姐和三個外甥。