many people blame Obama or even past-president George Bush

那麼許多人會責怪歐巴馬或甚至前總統喬治·布希

for the country's current problems and though we have seen

要為目前美國的問題負責 而且雖然我們已看到

a slew of bad news out for Obama, just to give you a handful:

歐巴馬有許多負面新聞 以下就舉例給各位看:

his approval ratings are 43%. They used to be 69%.

他目前支持率是43% 過去是69%

A NY Senate seat historically held by a Democrat

而且紐約一席參議員歷史上是由民主黨掌握

went to a Republican for the first time since 1923.

但現在自從1923年之後首次轉移給共和黨

Solyndra, the solar panel making plant who got stimulus money

Solyndra是一家太陽能板工廠 得到紓困金額

is facing bankruptcy and is now a scandal for the administration

但正面臨破產而且現在有管理醜聞

and poverty has hit record highs.

而且我們發現貧窮率達到歷史新高

But my next guest argues this is not about Obama.

但我的下一位來賓主張說問題不在於歐巴馬

It's not even about politics.

甚至與政治無關

It is about needing a total overhaul of society.

而是關於需要社會的完全檢修

And Peter Joseph, filmmaker and founder of the Zeitgeist Movement

而彼德·約瑟夫為製片者和時代精神運動的創建人

coming off of his inaugural Zeitgeist Media Festival

舉行了時代精神運動媒體節的開幕後

is here to talk about his solutions.

現在到這裡來談論他的解決方案

Thank you for being here. It's nice to see you.

謝謝你來 很高興見到你

So to start out...- Thank you for having me. - Absolutely!

主播:那麼就開始... PJ:謝謝你們的邀請 主播:當然!

You argue the solutions to social problems are not politics.

你主張說社會問題的解決方式不是政治

What exactly are the solutions called for by the Zeitgeist Movement?

時代精神運動訴求的解決方案到底是什麼?

To understand the solutions you really have to understand

為了認識到解決方案 你真的必須瞭解到

what the problems are.

問題是什麼

In the broad view what we're faced with right now is basically the end

廣泛而言 我們現在正面臨的

of a paradigm with respect to our social system.

是我們社會體系模式的一種終結

It's not ending because of some bad policy

還沒有終結是因為一些爛政策

or some political malfeasance or any kind of economic issue.

或一些政治瀆職或任何種類的經濟問題

It's ending because it can no longer sustain itself

但它也正在終結 因為它不再能維持自身

by the natural evolution of human society and technology

也因為人類社會的自然演變和科技發展

and the inherent mechanisms that define this system

以及定義此體系的內在機制

which are slowly growing out of control like a cancer.

正緩慢地逐漸像癌症般失去控制

We have a debt-based currency system.

例如我們有一個以債務為基礎的貨幣體系

Interest is charged on the money that's loaned

利息加在貸款金額上

that doesn't exist outright in the money supply.

而利息本身完全未存在於金錢供應中

That, at its very core seed

這一點 真的就是

is really why you see these sovereign debt defaults

為何你會看到這些主權債務違約的核心

corporate debt defaults, personal debt defaults across the world.

另外還有世界各地的企業債務違約 個人債務違約

We have $60 trillion of private and public debt in America alone.

光是在美國我們就有60兆美元的私人和公共債務

You can do the math on how much that is per person.

你可以用數學算一下每個人要負擔多少

It's only going to grow as well and this is just the nature of this system.

債務也只會持續增加 因為這就是這個體系的本質

We have an unemployment crisis, which is really driven by technology.

我們有失業危機 但這點其實是因為科技發展所導致

Technological unemployment has been the major attribute

科技性失業一直都是失業的主要原因

that has moved people from sector to sector.

使人們從一個部門轉移到另一個部門

The illusion of most economists is that they say

大部份經濟學家的幻想是 他們說

"Technology is actually creating jobs."

"科技實際上會創造工作"

That's actually a convoluted logic.

但實際上的邏輯是相反的

What happens is (and you can see this if you track

目前發生的是(而且如果你追蹤

the industrial revolution to the modern point you see this very clearly)

工業革命到現代的軌跡的話 就會非常清楚看到)

but what happens is we start off with a certain sector: everyone's employed.

但發生的是我們從某個部門開始:每個人都被僱用

Technology comes in, displaces human labor and slowly other sectors emerge

接著科技進來了 取代人類勞動 然後慢慢地浮現其它的部門

usually on the basis of other technologies. It's a natural consequence

這些部門又通常基於其它科技而發展 這是自然的後果

but it actually isn't a resolution and actually isn't creating anything.

但實際上這不是解決方案 而且實際上並沒有創造出任何工作

What we're going to end up with is the necessity to have everyone either a lawyer

我們將會看到的結果是 每個人要不都會變成律師

or working in the entertainment industry because there's no way

要不就是演藝人員(等無生產力的行業) 因為沒有其它方式

you're going to have a manufacturing sector with people actually employed.

去創造"製造業" 而且還能讓人們實際上受雇

There's no way you're going to have a service sector with people actually employed

你不會有其它方式去讓服務業裡的人們充份就業

because the cost efficiency that's enabled by technology

因為科技所帶來的成本效益

overrides the need for human labor.

超越了對於人類勞動的需求

What happened to Bank of America recently? They just laid off 40,000 people.

最近美國銀行發生了什麼事? 他們剛剛解雇了四萬名員工

Do they understand what they're doing? They're actually laying off...

他們瞭解他們在做什麼嗎? 他們實際上正在解雇...

I just want to get in here to continue the conversation

我想在這裡插一下話以繼續進行對話

because how do you separate out... I hear what you're saying about technology

因為你如何分離... 我聽到你在談論科技

and about the entertainment industry. I've lived in LA

和娛樂產業 我已住在洛杉磯

but I do want to know how you can separate out

但我想知道你如何能分開

all of the jobs that we've seen go overseas to countries like China

我們所看到已轉移到海外中國的所有工作

and all of the people we've seen move into

以及我們所看到的國內這些人

a financial system that people say is overbanked in this country.

他們移動至銀行過度氾濫的金融體系?

There have been a transition in industry and jobs.

在產業和工作之間已經有轉變

There absolutely have been, but the question is

絕對有 但問題是

when you have 96% of the human population mostly in the West

你在西方主要有96%的人

which has the majority of the labor working in the service sector

在服務業中 而且是主要的勞動力

which is now being replaced by automated kiosks

但現在正被自動服務機器

and many other advanced technological mediums, where is the next sector?

以及許多其它先進的科技媒介所取代 那下一個部門是哪裡?

I want to point out that I look at this on a global scale.

我想要指出 我是以全球的規模來看待

I'm not interested in American unemployment or in any country's specifics

我對美國或任何特定國家的失業不感興趣

because it's one society. It's one world, one economy.

因為這是一整個社會 這是一整個世界和經濟

The question to be asked is:

該要問的問題是:

Why will the majority of people eventually be unemployed on the planet?

為什麼地球上大部份的人最終會失業?

That's because of technology. You can forget about outsourcing and all of that.

就是因為科技 你可以忘掉外包這些所有東西

The only thing to learn from that is that industry and its prime motivation

唯一從這點可以學到的事情是 產業和它對於

to corporation shareholders, is to make sure they maintain a profit.

企業股東的主要動機 就是要確保維持利潤

Displacing human labor because of the cost-efficiency

為了成本效益而取代人類勞動

enabled by technological automation

科技自動化能做到這點

is the contradiction and collapse of capitalism

這也是過去的一百多年以來

that many economic theorists have talked about for the past 100 years

許多經濟理論家談論的資本主義的矛盾與崩潰

including John Maynard Keynes. - Right

包括約翰·梅納德·凱因斯 -對

This is an inevitable evolution and it's not going to stop.

這是無可避免的演變 而且不會停下來

You're saying the problem is capitalism.

你在說問題是資本主義

What are you saying is the solution?

那你說解決方案是什麼呢?

The solution is a completely different reordering

解決方案是一個完全不同的重新建構

of how we actually engage materials, how we create production

關於我們實際上如何運用物資的秩序 我們如何創造生產

and how people actually contribute to society. If you recognize this reality

以及人們如何實際貢獻社會 如果你認知到以下現實

that the market system as we know it which is the bedrock

即我們所知的市場體系

of the capitalist free enterprise system, whatever you want to call it...

是資本主義或自由企業體系的根基 不論你想稱呼它是什麼...

If we recognize this phenomenon as phasing out and mark my words

如果我們認知到這種淘汰人力的現象 並注意我的話

the jobs are not coming back across the board. They can't!

工作是不會回來了 因為無法回來!

The system will not enable it by its inherent logic.

這個體系由於內在的邏輯將不會允許這點

When you realize this, you start to open up your mind.

當你理解這點 你就會開始打開你的心

You think to yourself "If technology can provide

你就會自己想 "如果科技能提供

all of these tools to enhance production..."

所有這些能增強生產的工具..."

By the way, technological unemployment

順帶一提 科技性失業

is inverse to productivity across the world

在全世界範圍內與生產力成反比

which means the less people we have working in industry

也就是越少人在產業中工作

the more we apply technology, the more production capabilities

我們就越會利用科技 更增加生產能力

we actually have which is amazing.

我們實際上擁有的能力是驚人的

What this means is that we can use technology. We can free ourselves

這意味著我們可以利用科技 我們可以解放自己

create an entirely different social system

創造一個完全不同的社會體系

based on maximizing our efficiency hence our sustainability

基於最佳化我們的效率和我們的永續性

through advanced methods of production and eventually providing

透過先進的生產方法 並最終

for literally the entire human species if we put our mind to it

真正提供富足給整個人類 如果我們下定決心去做

and overcome all the traditionalized barriers that are stopping us

並克服阻礙我們的傳統障礙

because of this traditionalized notion we think is empirical in society.

因為這種傳統觀念 讓我們認為社會經驗就是如此

- You're calling for something really untraditional, but what is it?

你正在訴求的東西是非傳統的 它是什麼呢?

It kind of sounds like getting rid of capitalism and putting in what?

聽起來有點像除掉資本主義然後放入新的什麼?

You can give it names. It's about appreciating a train of thought

你可以給它一個名稱 但它實際上是關於體會到一連串的思考

about what we're doing and how it can actually benefit human society

關於我們正在做什麼 以及如何能真正利益人類社會

and create the best public health and safety

並創造最佳的公共醫療和安全

providing for as many people on the planet as possible.

盡可能提供給地球上的所有人

If you want to give it a name, you can call it a Resource-Based Economy

如果你想給它一個名稱 可以叫作資源導向型經濟

or a resource-based economic model because really

或資源導向型經濟模型 因為說實在話

what is the foundation of human society? It's resources.

人類社會的基礎到底是什麼? 是資源

It's resources, not only of the physical gold

資源不只是實體的黃金

food and all of those attributes, it's also the mental resource.

食物和所有這些屬性 也包括心理上的資源

We have people wasting their lives as secretaries

有人浪費生命在當秘書

and in industries that don't produce anything

以及在未生產任何事物的產業中工作

such as Wall Street and advertising.

像華爾街和廣告

Can you tell me what they're producing that actually helps anybody directly?

你可以告訴我 他們有生產什麼直接幫到任何人的東西嗎?

There really isn't anything. These are filler concepts

真的沒有任何東西 這些都是灌輸的概念

that actually don't contribute. If you take the approach

確實沒有貢獻 如果你採用的方法

that we live off of resources and you organize those resources

認知到我們靠資源過活並且組織這些資源

you make the most efficient production system you can

利用最有效率的生產體系

based on what technical knowledge allows us to do: scientific understanding.

根據科學科技的理解知識允許我們能做到的程度

You reorient society to let people actually engage in occupations

那麼你就能重新定位社會 讓人們能真正地從事於

that actually do something, instead of spending all of our high...

有貢獻的職業 而不是花費大量的...

taking all of our scientists and putting them on military operations right now.

像是現在召集所有的科學家們進行軍事活動

They could be using that same engineering resource and mental capacity

科學家們能利用這些同樣的工程資源和腦力

to benefit all the world's people and create a material abundance.

來造福世界上的所有人們 並創造物質上的富足

No one could ever be starving on this planet.

地球上可以沒有人受餓

This is statistically proven, even with the current inefficiencies we have now.

在統計上已證明 即使我們現在有不足之處仍能達成

To summarize, we have resource-based economic model.

簡言之 我們提倡資源導向型經濟模型

It's a ground-up approach to resource management

這是一種從基礎開始管理資源的方式

and we make everything as efficient

我們會讓所有東西盡量有效率

and productive as possible, technically. No monetary evaluation

和在技術上有生產力 沒有金融貨幣的評斷

no monetary association because all that does is interfere

與金融貨幣無關 因為這些只會干擾我們

and cause more problems and limit our possibility.

並造成更多的問題 限制我們的可能性

- I want to keep this conversation going because I do want to hit on

我想要繼續對話 因為我在這裡想要

a number of things here: What about government?

切入一些重點:政府怎麼辦?

What does that look like?

看起來會怎樣?

What about individual freedom?

個人的自由如何?

- Ask yourself a question: What is individual freedom?

問你自己一個問題:個人自由是什麼?

Is it walking into a job that you probably had no control over

是進入一個你可能無法掌控的工作嗎?

in the sense of your necessity for income

而這份薪水對你的生活也是必要的

more or less a private dictatorship that people go into from 9 to 5?

但其實或多或少都是朝九晚五的私人獨裁

Is that freedom? Is freedom what you get money for to go and buy?

這是自由嗎? 自由是你拿金錢去買東西嗎?

Is it your freedom to go into a store and pick between 28 different

你的自由是走進一家商店

varieties of cereal that you can choose from. What is freedom?

並且在28種不同麥片中挑選嗎? 自由是什麼?

Maybe not. - The system that we talk about...- Go ahead.

或許不是這樣 -我們談論的體系... -請繼續

The system that we speak of actually will enable

我們談論的(資源導向型經濟)體系實際上將能夠

a level of freedom for human society never before seen.

提升人類社會的自由至史無前例的高度

To answer your question: what is government?

回答你的問題:政府是什麼?

Government is really a failure of the economic system.

政府實際上是經濟體系的失敗

What does a government do? They create laws

政府做什麼? 制訂法律

to regulate economic functions, not to mention all the aberrations

管制經濟功能 更別提我們所擁有的

that come from the lack of economic efficiency that we have

異常偏差行為 來自於缺乏經濟效率

meaning violence, property crimes which is the majority of it.

即暴力 貧窮 犯罪等主要問題

They also engage in military operations against other sovereign nations

政府也從事軍事活動 對抗其它主權國家

so they can better themselves and protect themselves over time.

這樣他們才能隨著時間推移而鞏固並保護自身

These are basically the only two things that government actually does

這些基本上是政府實際上只會做的兩件事

if you really sit down and look at it. Politicians have no technical orientation.

如果你真的坐下並檢視它的話 會發現政客對技術並不熟悉

They mirror value systems. They manipulate people's values

他們反映價值體系 他們操縱人們的價值觀

so people will identify with them and say "Oh, I like them!" It doesn't matter

所以人們將會認同他們並且說:"喔 我喜歡他們!"

if they have a plan. None of these politicians running for the US presidency

他們是否有計劃並不重要 這些競選美國總統的政客們

have any plan whatsoever as far as what the unemployment issue

沒有一位對於失業或債務問題真正需要什麼

and the debt issue really require

有任何計劃之類的

what the energy issue really requires, which are firmly technical.

或能源問題真正需要什麼 這些都是技術性的

Government in the future will literally be

在未來的政府將如同字面上一樣

the management of the planet, producing exactly what we can produce

管理地球 生產我們真正所需的物資

with the highest efficiency to benefit the world's people.

利用最高的效率來造福全世界的人們

This is what a true economic model would be. What is economics?

這才是真正的經濟模型要有的樣子 什麼是經濟?

It's defined in Greek as the management of a household.

希臘字源中它被定義為家庭的經營管理

The planet is our household. A true economic model is proper

地球是我們的家庭 一個真正的經濟模型

efficient management of this household

要適當且有效率地來管理這個家庭

not the use of money as a commodity

而不是把金錢當成商品來使用

and all the distortion that has emerged from that process.

以及所有從這個過程中浮現出來的扭曲

- But Peter, it sounds a little bit like this is a utopic vision of society.

但彼德 這聽起來有點像烏托邦願景的社會

What is one example you have seen

你看過的一個例子是什麼

that you believe that this will work because you've seen it happen?

會讓你相信這能成真 因為你看過它發生過?

- First of all, utopia assumes a finality. There's no such thing as a finality.

首先 烏托邦有一種"終結"的假設涵意 但世事無常沒有"終結"

We're just trying to update society to present-day knowledge.

我們只是試圖將社會更新至目前知識的水平

Remember our notions of economics and politics are based on traditional ideas

記住 我們對於經濟和政治的概念是根據傳統的想法

that go back hundreds if not thousands of years.

如果不是數千年前 至少也可以回溯至數百年前

These are completely outdated social structures that do not

這些是完全過時的社會結構

resemble any of our scientific ingenuity at this point in time

並未呼應當時歷史上的科學巧思

and our ability to actually to care for the human population

以及我們實際上能關照人類人口的能力

which is what a society is supposed to do, right?

這才是一個社會該做的事 對吧?

The best example you can have are first nations' people

最好的例證是第一世界的人民

that actually understood what it meant to live off the land.

實際上瞭解靠土地過活是什麼意思

They understood the carrying capacity of their region

他們瞭解該區域的承載能力

and that you don't pollute the stream that they drink from

而且你不會污染溪河中的飲用水

which is something industry does every single day right now

但現在產業每天都在污染溪河

for its necessity to maintain cost-efficiency. The very simplistic notion...

因為需要維持成本效益 最根本的概念...

- Let me ask you this then. I don't want to go back and work the land.

那麼讓我問你這點 我不想退回到農耕時代

I love what I do. I'm a journalist. I enjoy it a lot.

我喜愛我所做的事 我是個記者 我很享受這份工作

I'm not just going to give that up.

我就是不打算放棄

How do you actually make what you're talking about, happen?

你如何讓你所談論的實際上成真?

The bio-social pressures that will emerge and inhibit your life

隨著時間推移 這個體系會完全惡化

and that of your family and everyone else on this planet

並且出現生理-社會壓力 妨礙你和家人

through time as this system completely deteriorates will make you question

與地球上其它每個人的生活 而這一點會讓你質疑

what you value with respect to what you like to do.

你重視的和喜歡做的到底是什麼

It's not an issue of what any of us like. It's an issue of what is right

這不是我們喜歡什麼的問題 而是什麼是正確的問題

and what's sustainable for the human species

人類種族需要什麼而永續生存