SAT人文必读之国家诞生篇 （二）- 自由的呼声：《不自由毋宁死》

查看原文

其他

SAT人文必读之国家诞生篇（二）- 自由的呼声：《不自由毋宁死》

Original Willey willey的书房 2021-07-22

阅读目录

一、楔子

二、用脚投票：思想启蒙——披荆斩棘——历史必然

三、《不自由毋宁死》：主战、主和与主降——《不自由毋宁死》——战国策

四、英雄末路：历史的残酷玩笑——英雄末路

一、楔子：

在上一篇文章中，我们谈到《五月花号公约》，也可以理解成在一个社会形成的幼年时期所拥有的基本信仰。详见拙作：

SAT人文必读之国家诞生篇（一）- 从《五月花号公约》说起

《五月花号公约》的厉害之处，就在于签署人立誓创立一个自治团体，基于被管理者的同意而成立，且将依法而治。这里有两个重点词：自治与法治，是西方民主的精髓所在。用这两个词作为标尺，去衡量品评美国历史文化的边边角角，会豁然开朗。

说到自治，就需要好好谈谈我们本次的重要文献，这篇被评为“感动美国十大文章之一”的《不自由毋宁死》了。

二、用脚投票

1、思想启蒙

我们上次谈到的五月花号（1620年），只是驶向北美殖民地的千百艘船中的一艘。大量的移民，尤其是在欧洲受到各种宗教迫害，土地兼并压力等，需要到北美谋生的人，还在源源不断的来到北美。百十年后，这种殖民地的移民，以及在殖民地安家并繁衍后代的所谓“殖民地居民”，数量就极其可观了。当时英属殖民地的行政管理模式，就是在每个州建立一个殖民政府，由大英帝国直属，而当地居民需要向英国政府缴税。

这个模式，如果换成东方人的话，是比较容易接受的。毕竟，在我们的民族基因里，是习惯被人管理的。即使出现一些贪官污吏，作威作福、鱼肉百姓，东方人也更希冀于天子的圣明和包青天这种虚构人物的出现，而不会想到由自我管理。毕竟，明清两代的政治核心，是以提升皇权、压抑人性为前提的。

但是，到了西方，情况就不同了。就在我们经历明清两代（14世纪-19世纪），国家性格从扩张变为保守，民族性格从张扬变为压抑时，西方社会恰恰在经历三次大规模的思想文化革新：宗教改革（14世纪-17世纪）、文艺复兴（15世纪-17世纪）和启蒙运动（17世纪-18世纪）。三次革新的核心，是人性的解放。因此，当从宗教、艺术、政治中，逐渐达到人性觉醒和人性解放时，他们又凭什么非要选择顺从于政府的统治，尤其是这个政府中，还多了些不公平的政策和不善良的官员？

2、披荆斩棘

介绍一个有意思的想法：人是用脚投票的。

所谓用脚投票，就是人选择过什么样的生活，就会去寻找可以过上这种生活的地方。拿我本人来说，也是在国内完成大学学业，然后去北美走了一圈，最终选择回到北京，教书为乐，因为这就是我所喜欢的生活，所以我最终选择留在帝都。而我的很多同学，散于四方，或国内、或国外，或欧洲、或美洲、或澳洲，也是各自选择使然。

同样的情况，试想一下，300年前，什么人会选择北美？

千万不要用现在的超级大国，去想象300年前的样子。五月花号时期（1620年）的北美，几乎可以说是蛮荒之地。去参观费城大陆会议（1774）旧址，即使到了那个年代，北美都还是以农耕为主，称不上富裕。而殖民地时期的北美，最吸引人的地方，莫过于大量的未开发土地，对于在欧洲饱受土地兼并之苦、没有自有耕地的农民来说，拥有自己的土地，哪怕是要去拓荒，也是梦寐以求的事情。

3、历史必然

因此，经历了人性觉醒，又是实打实地通过自己的努力，拥有土地，过上相对富足生活的北美居民，在面对当时的殖民地政府随意加税，而不需要经过他们同意时，会采取什么手段呢？

没说的，他们选择反抗。

这中间还有三次重要的导火索，分别是由于英法七年战争所导致的北美军费传导（加税），波士顿惨案和波士顿倾茶。这三个事件，将来有机会单辟话题细说。历史有偶然，也有必然。当大趋势已然如此，具体的事件，都只是必然中的偶然罢了。

三、《不自由毋宁死》

1、主战、主和与主降

以上就是帕特里克亨利(Patrick Henry)在弗吉尼亚州议会上发表《不自由毋宁死》（1775.3.23）这篇著名演讲的前期历史背景。我喜欢多分享一些的，是一篇重要文献发生前的思想背景和历史情状。理解好这些，就能明晰一件事情为何发生（Why）；至于如何发生（What），反而是次要的。

再简单介绍一下弗吉尼亚州会议。北美独立运动期间，有两次重要的会议，第一次大陆会议（1774年）和第二次大陆会议（1775-1776年）。

大陆会议的性质，类似于人民代表大会。当时的北美十三州，每个州选举若干名代表参加。其中最重要的州之一，是弗吉尼亚州。我们熟知的美国前四任总统，都是从该州诞生的，分别是乔治华盛顿、约翰亚当斯、托马斯杰弗逊、詹姆斯麦迪逊。换句话说，弗吉尼亚州是美国独立运动时期重要的价值观输出州。

在第二次大陆会议的弗吉尼亚分会上，人们对英国的态度产生重大分歧，分为主战、主和、主降三派。凡事都有左中右，面对当时的“日不落”帝国，产生主和与主降的念头，无可厚非。看《三国演义》，三江水口，赤壁鏖兵，东吴君臣就主战和主降做出重要前期讨论，也是情势使然。反之，在战略讨论期，如果都是一言堂、搞专制，那才是可怕的。

帕特里克亨利就是著名的主战派代表人物之一。在他之前，主和与主降两派，已经各自发表过重要演说，会议氛围格外压抑，现在轮到他上场了。我们一起来看看，他是如何轻装上阵、刚柔并济、掷地有声的。

2、《不自由毋宁死》

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry has been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged,and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained -- we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable-- and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--butthere is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give medeath!

3、战国策

怎么样，是否感觉这篇文章写得荡气回肠？要知道，亨利是当时弗吉尼亚州最有名的律师之一，而这个弗吉尼亚州所独具的民主思辨特色，每每令人心驰神往。

这篇文章并不难懂。我在原文中，做了简单标注，这里再稍微串一下文章结构：

第一段，提出自己观点的不同（but different men … different lights）

第二段，指出人们寄托于幻想（illusions of hope）

第三段，说出自己的判断标准，即用以往经验判断（one lamp to guide … experience）；并指出，让人们不要自欺欺人（let us not deceive ourselves）

第四段，对于反驳者进行驳斥（they: we are weak; unable to cope with；Henry: we are not weak）

第五段，给出总结，不要再徒劳地缩小态势；不自由，毋宁死（in vain to extenuate the matter … give me liberty or give me death）

当然，亨利相当智慧，讲究策略。他知道，要想获得别人的支持，不能一开始就言语激烈，一顿雷烟火炮。因此，他先安抚一下前面的谈话者（其实之前是有人不同意对英国动武的），说大家都只是观点不同，要允许他发表自己的观点；然后循循善诱，先指出对方存在的问题（illusion），再说出自己的评判标准（past experience），再针对部分人对英国的恐惧心理进行驳斥（we are not weak），最后一锤定音，必须战斗，不自由，毋宁死（give me liberty or give me death）。

分明一篇《战国策》！

好的句子，我在原文中用红笔标注了，请大家好好体会。

三、英雄末路

1、历史的残酷玩笑

再谈一下帕特里克亨利(Patrick Henry)的后半生。

我一直很喜欢帕特里克·亨利(Patrick Henry)这个人物，之所以喜欢，是因为他之后的人生轨迹，恰恰证明了一个我们每个人都不愿意面对，却又不得不面对的事实，那就是历史的残酷玩笑。

历史的残酷玩笑，就在于迷雾重重，不管是谁都无法看清现实中的一切，而大多数人只希望看到自己想看到的和想要的现实。因此，当岁月蹉跎、英雄老去时，我们不禁感慨，这不就是一场场鲜活的悲喜剧吗？

2、英雄末路

说回到帕特里克亨利(Patrick Henry)，我们就会发现，他后面的每一个重要决定，从现在看，都是那么的时运不济，或者说，落入历史残酷的玩笑陷阱中。

作为美国的重要国父之一，也是《独立宣言》的重要执笔人之一，他在1787年，却拒绝参加制宪会议，翌年在弗吉尼亚代表大会上反对批准《美国宪法》。联邦政府成立后，他又坚持反对强大的中央政府，拒绝了华盛顿让他担任国务卿的邀请，还拒绝担任最高法院的大法官等职位。

然而，在看到法国革命的疯狂后（还记得《双城记》中的暴民统治吧？），他的政治观点又开始转变，最终成为联邦主义者，可惜为时已晚，重要的政府空缺早已花落别家，而自由斗士帕特里克亨利也垂垂老矣。

1799年6月6日，帕特里克亨利，终于走到生命的尽头，被葬在弗吉尼亚的红山，他家族的墓地。