（一）生物学概念的美国各种族与血缘关系
1.美国黑人是白人的孩子
当年我在美国结了婚租公寓只能找到两居室的，考虑到比一居室贵不了多少，也就租了下来。没过几天，一位白人女同学也是刚做了新娘不久，她丈夫毕业去外地工作了，她老板不让她毕业，需要完成一个试验，她觉得用不了一年了，便跟我老婆谈是不是可以跟我们分享一下公寓，她实在租不到一寝室的公寓了，算是给她一个方便，也许半年也许十个月。我们不能不帮忙啊，就答应了下来。她的名字叫垂斯，非常善良的基督徒。她的善良与柔和是我开始有时间就读圣经的起因。好在她从不给我压力去教堂，非常耐思的一个女孩。我们可以说无话不谈，也跟她学会了如何用烤箱烤制食物，就是做西餐。每天晚饭就坐在一起吃，边吃边聊。只要我们需要了解美国的人情世故，她都会热情讲解。我们从未发生过哪怕一点点不愉快的事。留在记忆里难以忘记的时光，虽然只有不足一年，回忆起来总觉得很久似的。
今天讲一件事，这事跟黑人话题有关。
我选的一门课，二三十个学生，其中还有一位大陆来的哥们和一位女同胞。那天有实验课，教授说分组，每组四五个人吧，他一扒拉就完成了，就是根据座位划分了一下。我们仨刚好在上课前坐在一起闲聊，就划在了一个组里，还有一男一女白人帅哥美女。富不富不知道，白和美肯定达标。
我们是坐在最后一排的，所以，是最后一拨去楼上做实验。早做完实验的就回家去写报告，我们就无所事事地等待，也就慢慢腾腾地走到外面去了。待5人都回到教室坐下后，白人女孩（简称L）就想找话题跟我们仨拉近关系，便对她对面的女同胞说：我很佩服你啊，一个人就从日本跑到美国来了。我都不敢想象如果是我去日本留学我能不能活下来。难道你就没有碰到过任何困难，比如碰上不顺心的事？
女同胞想起了最近发生的不顺心的事，便告诉L：“上周六我搬家，东西不多可也拉了几趟。最后一趟，里边装的是书和桌子上的东西。开到新公寓刚打开后备箱，邻居也刚好路过便帮我拿了台灯。我非常高兴他帮我忙，也就快点走到门口去开门。待我把门开开，回头一看，他不在我身后，而是把我的台灯拿到他家去了。我心想他是忘了，一会就会想起来而给我送过来。等我把东西收拾差不多了，他还没过来，我想他可能忘记了，便走过去按门铃。按了一阵子门才开，他问我找他干嘛，我说我的台灯！他说不知道我在说什么。我急了，当即吼他：你不给我我就报警！我知道我台灯是什么样子的，我有照片！他才很不情愿地把台灯给了我，然后他就咣当把门关上，非常没教养！你说黑人怎么这样啊？这不是明抢吗？”
女同胞话音刚落，L脸色突然就变了。此时上一组回来了让我们去做实验。实验做完后，我赶去下一节课，L刚好也选了那门课，我俩就一起往西走。她突然问我：“你们日本人是不是都对我们美国人满怀怨恨？”我一听丈二和尚摸不着头脑，便问她何出此言。她说：“你没听到她用种族歧视的语言抱怨黑人来着？”
我明白了，原来她是站在黑人的立场对女同胞的实话实说态度不满。我当即问她：“如果拿走台灯的事发生在你身上，你会不会报警？”她想了一下说：“应该也是先去要，如果不给我可能会报警。”我说：“那你事后会不会也跟你朋友们回忆此事？如果会，你为何指责她种族歧视？”L说：“她说话的态度很明显是专对黑人的。她没必要提黑人。黑人有抢劫的，白人也有啊。我又没问她拿走她台灯的是什么人。”
几天后晚饭时看电视，是非洲几内亚人的画面。我当即发现这电视里的非洲黑人跟我见到的美国黑人完全不是一样的，便认为是美国的气候条件导致当年从非洲拉来的黑人奴隶变成了现在这样脸上的肤色介于白人与黑人之间。也就在饭桌上说环境对基因型的表现影响竟然如此之大。同样的基因型在美国的环境下黑人仅仅十代人就跟非洲老家的黑人泾渭分明了。垂斯的专业是昆虫学，也是生物领域。她听后眼睛睁得大大的，非常吃惊。第二天她给了我一本书，书名【Roots】，读完后觉得翻成中文应该叫《寻根》比较合适。从这本书里大概知道了当年黑人是怎么从非洲拉过来的。很快垂斯就又借给了我几本书，里边涉及到黑人尤其是女性奴隶被白人男主人性侵的历史故事。我今天搜索查找这几本书，没找到，但找到了一篇2014年的综述文章： http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/11/05/10-horrifying-facts-about-the-sexual-exploitation-of-enslaved-black-women-you-may-not-know/
里边提到了几点主要内容：
男主人性侵黑女性奴隶时认为是宠幸她们（Owners of enslaved people claimed they were doing Black women a favor by having sex with them.）
明明是被强奸却被男主人说成是她们淫荡（Enslaved women known as “Jezebels” were sometimes raped and then accused of being promiscuous.）
男主人光撒种不负责，因为孩子的肤色不是白人的样子，就不认亲生的孩子为己出（Owners of enslaved women usually took no responsibility or ownership of the babies they had with these women.）
老婆常常因为丈夫与女性黑人奴隶发生性行为而暴打女奴，而丈夫眼看着也不帮女奴的忙，不敢担责（Mistresses often beat enslaved women for having sex with their husbands while the husband was never held accountable）
男主人与女性黑人奴隶发生性行为的目的是为了获得更多的后代奴隶充当大田里的劳动力（Slave owners often impregnated enslaved women on purpose so they could have more workers in the field.）
每当奥巴马公开讲把被不公平对待的男性黑人称为“我们的儿子”时，美国人不论是白人还是黑人都知道那是奥巴马在提醒白人：黑人是白人的孩子！
奥巴马提醒得很对。白人都知道，现在美国黑人的血管里都流着白人的血。
奥巴马是50%的白人血统，但他看起来要比美国其他黑人的平均水平更趋向于黑人一点，也就是说，美国黑人平均水平，白人血统超过50%，论血统是以白人为主的，但遗传学知识告诉我们，不论有多么少的黑人血统留下来，哪怕只有5%以下，他们的头发照样是卷曲的，看上去照样是黑人。
这就是为何马丁路德金从来都不认为他是反对种族歧视的领袖，因为他不认为美国黑人与白人属于不同的种族，他清楚白人们清楚美国黑人是白人的孩子。马丁路德金认为他是为了民权而战的领袖，他所领导的运动不属于反对种族歧视运动，而是属于民权运动。
既然不论白人还是黑人都清楚美国黑人是白人的孩子，那为何黑人一直认为被白人歧视呢？白人为何要歧视自己的孩子？这就涉及到除了生物学外，有关社会学的歧视范畴了。
2.在同样的肤色同一民族里，歧视是普遍现象
在朝廷里，被临幸过的妃子宫女们其在皇后眼里的地位跟奴隶与主子类似。同样都是被皇帝玩弄，妃子的年龄貌相也许比皇后还占优，照样不能跟皇后一样有主子的地位，她们的孩子也一样不能与皇后亲生的相提并论。即使皇后没儿子，宾妃生的儿子继位也得称皇后为母后。
红楼梦里赵姨娘的儿子贾环与贾宝玉都是贾政的种，但地位不可同日而语。美国黑人与白人争民权，跟贾环与贾宝玉争家权类似。这也就解释了一旦美国白人听到黄种人指责美国黑人时立刻恼羞成怒的原因，就好比贾环在大观园里没地位，但要是贾宝玉听到焦大欺负了贾环，那他绝对不会饶恕焦大的。
只是在很多华人眼里，误以为美国白人歧视过黑人而自己在白人眼里要比黑人在白人眼里更近一点。事实上，从生物学角度来讲类似于你是焦大，人家分别是贾宝玉与贾环。
上面讲的是生物学意义上的种族血缘与种族歧视的理论。这在中国传统文化上也是一样的，称为：“非我族类，其心必异。”
生物学意义上的歧视除了血缘外，还有残疾歧视、年龄歧视、貌相歧视、智商歧视、贫穷歧视等违背现代文明的各类歧视。
在千万年的进化过程中，“优胜汰劣”是保持种族不灭绝以及进化的唯一途径。这类天然的歧视行为被现代文明所不容，被称为反动的“社会达尔文主义”而遭到鞑伐。在进入现代文明之前，种族歧视、残疾歧视、年龄歧视、貌相歧视、智商歧视、贫穷歧视都是“优胜汰劣”的内容。如果不歧视残疾病患基因突变者、貌相丑陋基因突变者、智商低下基因突变者、好吃懒做（贫穷）基因突变者，这些突变个体就会有后代而把坏的突变基因遗传下来。这对种族的未来是非常不利的。
现代文明则是另一番价值观，被称为“人权”、“生而平等权”等普世价值。一个国家的文明程度，就是看该国远离生物学意义上的歧视有多远。越远，便被看成越文明。到目前为止，美国已经在法律上消除了种族歧视、在找工作时的年龄歧视貌相歧视，但在智商歧视与贫穷（好吃懒做）歧视方面依然我行我素。在生活中更是如此。尤其是在智商歧视方面非常严重，虽然哈佛等藤校即将免除SAT考试，但高中的考试分数依然是藤校主要录取标准。智商与肤色一样都是生来就决定了的，而宪法里“人人生而平等”理应包括免除各类歧视，包括生下来就带来的智商歧视（把这一部分放在最后一节讨论）。
3.西裔是白人的孩子
西裔，又称为拉丁裔，是分布在中南美洲，白人（主要是源自西班牙的男性）与黄种人（土著印第安人女性）混血的后代。与北美的英国等白人不同，中南美洲的白人军人只杀掉了土著印第安男人而把女性留下来当成二奶三奶四奶。她们生下来的孩子就成了事实上白人的孩子。与美国黑人一样，西裔也就被白人看成是白人的孩子。
倒是很多华人误以为白人会害怕更多的西裔移民到美国还大量生孩子与美国黑人也大量生孩子从而导致白人处于少数民族后而被歧视。事实上，人家知道不论是西裔还是非裔，都是白人的孩子，人家属于一家人。白人也包括中东阿拉伯人，欧洲大量引入阿拉伯人是心甘情愿的，可人家照样不会大量引入华人，因为华人与人家不是同宗同源。
4.印度人与欧洲白人同宗同源
我在前文里讲过，从人种学来讲，印度人属于高加索人，与欧洲白人同宗同源。人类四大人种（蒙古人种、高加索人种、非洲黑人、澳洲棕种人），欧洲人阿拉伯人印度人都属于高加索人种（白人）。有华人不认可印度人是白人，以为印度人比华人的肤色还黑。印度人被确定为高加索人（白种人）的人体学证据收集在这本书里《The Races of Europe》 (1939) by Carleton S. Coon：
The Indian should be classified as "Caucasoid" due to their "Caucasoid skull structure" and other physical traits such as noses, eyes and hair.
白种人跟白种人也不一样，混血都很厉害。俄罗斯人有蒙古人种血统，他依然叫白种人。东欧的白种人跟西欧的白种人差异也很大，但都属于高加索人，与黄种人黑种人棕种人在骨骼、鼻子、眼睛、头发方面不一样。不论是什么人种，只要跟黑人混血，后代的头发一定是卷的，比如奥巴马是黑人与白人的后代，他的头发是卷的。中国人与黑人的后代头发也是卷的。印度人的头发则是直的，不论皮肤是不是比奥巴马还黑。
其实，在华人眼里印度人是不是白人并不重要，重要的是美国白人认同印度人是白人。在纯生物学角度来说，人家就不存在”非我族类，其心必异“的排斥心理，在华人与印度人争位子时，人家就把印度人自然而然地看成是自己人，哪怕你是出生在美国的华人而印度人是从印度移民来的，你的英语发音是美国调儿。
这就好比在北京工作能讲非常标准普通话的新疆维吾尔族人与移民来自韩国也能讲普通话在北京工作的韩国人，北京人会把移民来的韩国人看成是自己人，而新疆维吾尔族人反而被排挤被歧视。在云南广西，那里的越南人跟中国人通婚不觉得是“涉外婚姻”，混血孩子也不会觉得父母属于不同的种族，而中国人跟黑人白人结婚混血的孩子就会纳闷为何父母不一样。你明白了这些，也就理解了在白人眼里，印度人要比华人更亲近；非裔西裔与白人争的是民权，而华裔与白人争的才是种族平等。
5.华裔、日裔、韩裔
在美国，不论是白人非裔西裔，都知道华裔日裔韩裔等黄种人属于一类，尽管国家政治上泾渭分明，比如假如中国与日本打起来了，美国会站在日本一边，但在普通百姓眼里，华裔日裔韩裔等是没有区别的。不论是华裔还是日裔韩裔，在白人眼里无法跟印度人甚至中东人一样被看成是白人，在血统上也不能与非裔西裔相提并论。
然而，上面讲的都是单从生物学角度，人类早已走出了纯生物学角度的思维，毕竟美国宪法里的平等观念已经贯彻三百年了。社会已经在从生物学天然思维走向现代文明的路上，虽然前面还有很长很长的路要走。
我在上文里提到，美国黑人已经有当上总统的例子了，这次选举是传统意义上的纯白人（民主党里的希拉里、共和党里的川普）与西裔（卢比奥、科鲁兹）、犹太人（桑德斯）竞争。即使这次西裔、犹太人竞选总统没戏，以后也是传统白人、白人的孩子西裔非裔、犹太人这四家轮流坐庄。华裔当总统的机会还要在印度人与中东人后面。
（二）社会学概念的种族平等
1.美国宪法里的“人人生而平等”是尚未实现的远大目标
美国宪法制定时，别说上面提到的各类歧视还司空见惯，黑人还处于奴隶地位。在奴隶制下何谈”人人生而平等“？显然，宪法是根本大法，是未来要一步步朝着指定的方向前进的目标。
人人生而平等实现的那一天，不仅仅没有了种族歧视、貌相歧视、年龄歧视、智商歧视、贫穷歧视、职业歧视，也没有了宗教歧视。我们知道，宗教的第一特征就是对异教徒的歧视甚至敌视。信仰伊斯兰教的，歧视不信伊斯兰教的；信仰基督教的，歧视不信仰基督教的。即使有教养的基督徒也很少有人能做到“我不下地狱谁下地狱”而祈祷基督徒下地狱把天堂让给异教徒，反而道德低下到诅咒异教徒下地狱令人难以置信地步。在信仰排他性的意义上来讲，只有人人都走出教堂，才能杜绝宗教歧视。我们从北欧绝大多数人从教堂里走了出来而那里的人人平等程度最高这一点可以看出，美国实现“人人生而平等”的那一天已经不再是遥不可及了。这次大选，桑德斯就公开提出要走北欧社会主义道路，虽然他这次无法胜选，但他胆敢公开提出这样的竞选纲领，在过去是无法想象的，毕竟经过半个世纪与共产主义阵营的冷战使得美国人认为所谓的社会主义是洪水猛兽。
2.智商歧视与宗教歧视往往以财富歧视为依归
欧洲的例子表明：越是贫穷的国家信仰宗教的越多，越是富裕的国家去教堂的人数比例越少，北欧现在只剩下一些老人去教堂了。
而且，越是贫富差距小的国家去教堂的人越少，而且智商歧视的程度越低。在美国的调查发现：智商与财富成正比。
也就是说，欧洲的事实表明，贫富差异越小的国家，智商歧视宗教歧视也越小。随着现代文明朝着美国宪法里的“人人生而平等”的逐步实现，美国藤校在录取时不仅宗教、种族不再受影响，智商也不再受影响。这需要靠财富分配政策的改进。只有到了智商高的也不比智商低的富裕多少的北欧社会主义阶段，智商歧视、宗教歧视才能消除，因为智商歧视与宗教歧视必然导致财富歧视。反过来，没有了财富歧视，智商歧视与宗教歧视也就不存在了。二者不是鸡与蛋的关系而是互动良性循环的关系。当财富歧视消除后，种族歧视才与智商歧视、宗教歧视、貌相歧视等各类歧视一起消失。
美国近代走入的“政治正确”受到了富裕阶层与宗教狂热分子们的极大抵制，也受到了无知的华人的反感。因为华人们不知道，政治正确不仅仅是消灭财富歧视的唯一途径，也是美国宪法的精神，更重要的是：政治正确之路是走向种族歧视消亡的唯一途径。当美国走到了北欧的社会主义那一步，华人才能在没有了财富歧视（等于没有了各类歧视的人人平等）的前提下走出种族歧视的牢笼。
这是从社会学方面取消种族歧视的途径与未来展望。如果从血缘也就是生物学意义上消灭种族歧视，对华人来说基本上无解，因为我们不能人人都做皮肤更换手术、骨骼整容手术。唯一的是与白人通婚。这对华人男人来说，基本上不现实。
（三）小结：
1.从生物学意义上来讲，在美国的华人（以及日裔韩裔越裔）才具有与白人存在种族的事实，而西裔非裔都是“白人的孩子”、印度人阿拉伯人犹太人也都是与白人同宗同源的高加索人人种，这与华人等蒙古人种属于完全不同的人种。就是根据中国的传统文化，也照样有“非我族类其心必异”、“血浓于水”的认知。地球人有一个共同点：虽然文化不同，大家都遵循着同样的思维逻辑。人家照样有天然的亲属远近观念，这是生物在进化中产生的“种群群落学”所描述的基本原理。在生物学意义上，要想彻底消除种族歧视，是违背进化论的，是与大自然斗争的反天然行为，其难度可想而知。美国历史上唯一的种族歧视法律便是臭名昭著的“排华法案”。二战中美国把在美国的日本人关进集中营而未把美国真正的第一战争对手德国人关进集中营。这些都是人性里的生物学天性所支配的行为。
2.人类的发展到了近代已经走到了现代文明阶段。在这个阶段中，人类通过司法与教育把社会达尔文主义彻底抛弃而最终要走向“人人平等”的和谐社会，最关键的指标是没有了财富歧视。没有了财富歧视，其种族歧视、智商歧视、宗教歧视、貌相歧视（包括肤色歧视、年龄歧视）、残疾歧视也就减小了，因为这五花八门的歧视最终体现在财富的争夺上。作为第一代华人移民，其传统文化与西方的文化有着极大的差异，而第二代移民，在文化上基本上与美国文化接轨。所以，第一代移民感受到的歧视不仅仅是生物学意义上的原因，也有文化上的原因。
3.即使财富歧视消失后，人类本能的生物学歧视也或多或少存在，目前的例子便是：贫穷的白人女人也未必愿意嫁给富豪黑人。但反过来，只要财富歧视存在，生物学意义上的歧视更变本加厉。考虑到属于蒙古人人种的华人无法在血缘方面与高加索人种的白人（也包括犹太人印度人阿拉伯人）甚至他们的混血后代（西裔非裔美国人）彻底融合，唯一能减少种族歧视的途径便是在社会学意义上的融合，这就是逐步实现美国宪法里的“人人生而平等”所谓的“政治正确”途径。从这次美国大选可以看出，传统的美国白人（我这个说法目的是为了区分来自欧洲的美国白人与也属于白人的犹太人印度人阿拉伯人）在与犹太人西裔竞争中依然占优。假如川普的反“政治正确”观点不是川普提出来的，而是犹太人桑德斯西裔科鲁兹提出来的，他就很难走到今天这一步。最后不论是希拉里上位还是川普上位，都是传统白人不心甘情愿放弃本族人的代表而进行的拼搏。川普提出他如果当选，就不再用美国的军队去保护日本韩国。在绝大多数美国人眼里，日本人韩国人中国人都与他们无关，他这么说就是为了拉选票。一旦他当政，那他还是要根据美国的利益而制定外交政策，而非根据种族因素，人类毕竟早就走出了“种族高于一切”、“种族决定一切”的生物学里动物阶段而逐步从社会达尔文主义大踏步走向“政治正确”的现代文明社会。这是我为何要投给民主党希拉里的票的根本原因。远离了政治正确之路，华人是无法走出被歧视的地位的，因为从血缘上讲，我们也有“非我族类其心必异”的常识认知。那些跟着美国白人起哄反对政治正确的华人，要么是无知，要么是眼前利益蒙蔽了眼睛而对长远利益不屑一顾。
后记：
美国主流媒体也在发表有关在美华人对歧视的分析文章，这篇就值得一看：
The hated question
Asian Americans are regularly made to feel like foreigners in their own country through “innocent” racial microaggressions. Microaggressions are“ everyday insults, indignities and demeaning messages sent to people of color by well-intentioned white people who are unaware of the hidden messages being sent.” An example is being asked “Where are you really from?” – after answering the question “Where are you from?” with a location within the United States. Another is being complimented on one’s great English-speaking skills. In both cases, the underlying assumption is that Asian Americans are outsiders.
According to a 2005 study by Sapna Cheryan and Benoit Monin, Asian Americansare right to feel excluded. The study shows Asian Americans are seen as less American than other Americans. A 2008 study by Thierry Devos and Debbie Ma confirmed this result. The study found that in the mind of the average American, a white European celebrity (Kate Winslet) is considered more American than an Asian American celebrity (Lucy Liu).
But while Asian Americans are perceived as less American by other ethnic groups, Cheryan and Monin found that Asian Americans are just as likely as white Americans to self-identify as American and hold patriotic attitudes. This makes attacks on their identity as Americans hurtful. The impact of racial microaggressions on exclusionary feelings can be magnified in political contexts, such as advertisements, political rhetoric, and policy positions on issues related to Asians like immigration.
How is this politically consequential?
We posit that rhetoric from Republicans insinuating that nonwhite “takers” are taking away from white “makers,” as well as their strong anti-immigrant positions, has cultivated a perception that the Republican Party is less welcoming of minorities. Since the Democratic Party is seen as less exclusionary, we find that triggering feelings of social exclusion makes Asian Americans favor Democrats.
We conducted an experiment in which Asian Americans were brought into a university laboratory. Half were randomly subjected to a seemingly benign racial microaggression like Trump’s clueless remarks to Choe before being asked to fill out a political survey. The white assistant was instructed to tell half of the study participants, “I'm sorry. I forgot that this study is only for US citizens. Are you a US citizen? I cannot tell.”
Asian Americans who were exposed to this race-based presumption of “not belonging” were more likely to identify strongly as a Democrat. They were also more likely to view Republicans generally as close-minded and ignorant, less likely to represent people like them, and to have more negative feelings toward them.
Our finding is remarkable given that the racial microaggression was mentioned only once, and was of the most benign nature. Our experiment confirms that Asian Americans associate feelings of social exclusion based on their ethnic background with the Republican Party.
Social exclusion based on race is common
When we examined the 2008 National Asian American Survey (NAAS), a nationally representative sample of over 5,000 Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, we found that self-reported racial discrimination, a proxy for feelings of social exclusion, was positively correlated with identification with the Democratic Party over the Republican Party.
Analyzing the NAAS data, we find that racial discrimination is not rare. Nearly 40 percent of Asian Americans suffered at least one of the following forms of racial discrimination in their lifetime:
being unfairly denied a job or fired
being unfairly denied a promotion at work
being unfairly treated by the police
being unfairly prevented from renting or buying a home
treated unfairly at a restaurant or other place of service being a victim of a hate crime.
It is important to note that our findings do not mean that social exclusion is the only reason why Asian Americans are Democrats. However, they do provide some insight on why Asian Americans are leaning left today.
来源: 唵啊吽 于 2016-02-21 19:02:15 [档案] [博客] [旧帖] [给我悄悄话] 本文已被阅读：2754 次 (6606 bytes)
字体：调大/重置/调小 | 加入书签 | 打印 | 所有跟帖 | 加跟贴 | 当前最热讨论主题
一个人到馒头铺吃饭，吃了一个馒头不饱，吃完第二个馒头还不饱，吃完第三个馒头才饱。买单时他只付一个馒头的钱，他说前边两个馒头没有用，第三个馒头才有用。读者请不要笑，如果你认为这位食客应该付三个馒头的钱的话，那么，请在 10 月 2 日的国际非暴力日和1月份的马丁路德金日纪念民权运动先驱王清福。马丁路德金是民权运动非暴力运动的第三个馒头，而王清福是民权运动和非暴力运动的第一个馒头。
谈到美国族裔平等反对种族歧视的社会环境的时候，有些人总认为是华裔沾了黑人民权运动的光，实际上正好相反，因为马丁路德金是民权运动非暴力运动的第三个馒头，而王清福是民权运动和非暴力运动的第一个馒头。马丁路德金著名的《我有一个梦》的演说发生在 1963 年 8 月 28 日，甘地在南非的纳塔拉成立反对英联邦种族歧视的“印度国民大会”是在 1894 年 8 月 22 日，而王清福在纽约成立“美国华人平等权利联盟” (The Chinese Equal Rights League of America) 是在 1892 年 9 月 1 日。作为现代西方文化一部分的非暴力争取族裔平等的民权文化，作为不分种族在法律面前人人平等的社会诉求的文化，王清福是第一个馒头，甘地是第二个馒头，而马丁路德金是第三个馒头。如今，联合国以甘地的生日 10 月 2 日作为国际非暴力日，而美国把马丁路德金生日 1 月 15 日前后的一个周末定为国家节日。社会的肚子感受到第二个和第三个馒头的作用，不要忘了了第一个馒头的功劳。对于一个饥饿的人，第一个馒头最重要，他或许可以没有第二个和第三个馒头，但不能没有第一个馒头。所以，在纪念马丁路德金日和国际非暴力日的时候，各族裔都应该缅怀民权运动先驱王清福。如果甘地和马丁路德金能够成为人类文化一部分的话，王清福作为民权运动先驱更是当之无愧的应该成为这种文化的鼻祖。
1882 年美国通过了《排华法案》， 1892 年美国国会又通过了吉尔里法案（ Geary Act ）将《排华法案》延长十年，并要求所有华裔登记注册，要求华裔随身携带注册证，如果不随身携带，即以违法逮捕，荷以重罚。这是种族歧视，希特勒就是要求所有犹太人注册，并随身携带标记。吉尔里法案通过几个月之内，王清福就成立了“美国华人平等权利联盟”，反对吉尔里法案的种族歧视，并于 1893 年出席国会听证指出吉尔里法案的反人道的违宪本质。王清福领导的“美国华人平等权利联盟”印发了《联盟向全体美国人民的请愿书》（ Appeal of the League to People of the United States) ，谴责吉尔里法案违反了法律的基本原则。
1897 年 1 月 27 日，“美国华人平等权利联盟”在芝加哥注册为“ Chinese Equal Rights League of America ”，拥有会员约 200 人。会员证上印有“我们要求华裔美国人有平等的投票选举权”（ We ask and demand for an equal franchise for the Americanized Chinese of the United States ）。美国宪法第十五修正案于 1870 年 2 月 3 日正式生效，该修正案禁止以种族和肤色为由剥夺公民的选举权。美国华人平等权利联盟的诉求是反对美国政府的违宪行为。而 1882 年的《排华法案》剥夺了华裔美国公民的选举投票权利，《排华法案》一再延长期限，直至 1943 年 12 月 17 日《排华法案》才被终止，华裔才重新取得选举投票的公民平等权利。论民权运动，王清福比马丁路德金早，而华裔争取到平等选举投票权在马丁路德金 60 年代黑人民权运动之前，不知道为何总有人认为华裔沾了黑人民权运动的光？
王清福争取族裔平等的民权活动早在 1882 年《排华法案》出来之前就开始了。王清福 1874 年入籍为美国公民，在 1877 年美国掀起反华种族情绪之初，王清福就写文章发表演说公开理论反对排华种族歧视，但没能阻止《排华法案》的出笼。 1882 年《排华法案》通过以后， 1883 年王清福就出版《华美周刊》，英文名称为“ Chinese American ”，为争取华裔平等权利呼号。
华裔对美国有重大的贡献。华裔建设跨大洋铁路为美国工业革命奠定了基础设施、铁路连接两大洋成就了美国优越的地缘政治环境。不但如此，华裔还对美国立国理念中的平等、自由、宪政、法制等文化有中大贡献，王清福就是平等自由宪政非暴力民权文化的先驱。我们在吃第二个和第三个馒头的时候，不要忘了第一个馒头。在国际非暴力日和马丁路德金日中，我们要宣扬王清福，宣扬华裔对美国立国理念的贡献。我们华裔的子女在学校作文的时候，一定要知道这些日子只是第二个和第三个馒头，要写文章就写写第一个馒头。
顺带呼吁一下，各华裔社团除了在马丁路德金日和 10 月 2 日国际非暴力日要纪念纪念王清福外，还应该在国际戒毒日 6 月 26 日纪念林则徐（联合国特别选取虎门硝烟的日子作为这个节日）；在国际教师节 10 月 6 日纪念孔子（联合国选取孔子生日作为教师节）。我们无需融入主流文化，我们就是主流文化的一部分，华裔对美国主流文化有重大贡献。
参考书：《 Claiming America ： Constructing Chinese American Identities during the Exclusion Era 》， Editors: Scott Wang and Sucheng Chan, 1998 Temple University Press.
王清福：华人的马丁路德金
debate
Sponsored Content
How can we make young people career-ready?
160302_donald_trump_cpac_3_gty_1160.jpg
Trump speech roils CPAC
789
Shares
? Facebook
? Twitter
? Google +
? Email
? Comment
? Print
.
.
? Most Read
? Videos
1
Hannity unloads on Rubio
2
Michelle Obama turns 52! A dance party of photos for her birthday
3
Gabbard: People warned me against endorsing Sanders
4
Trump speech roils CPAC
5
Romney rips Trump as a 'phony' and a 'fraud'
6
Wall Street readies big Trump assault
7
5 myths about Trump supporters
8
Neocons declare war on Trump
9
Trump again threatens independent bid
10
Trump releases plan for replacing Obamacare
? ? Politico Magazine
160302_shafer_trump.jpg
Did the Media Create Trump?
By Jack Shafer
Ronald Reagan (left) and children in Halloween costumes are shown. | AP Photo
How Trump Killed the Reagan Mystique
By Rich Lowry
AP-construction.jpg
Sorry, Trump, America Can’t Be Great Again
By Michael Lind
160302_polmagroundup_ap.jpg
There’s Still Time for a Primary Bombshell
By POLITICO Magazine
.
.
"Dishonesty is Trump's hallmark" Mitt Romney said.
Full transcript: Mitt Romney's remarks on Donald Trump and the 2016 race
By POLITICO Staff
| 03/03/16 11:59 AM EST
? Share on Facebook ? Share on Twitter
Below are Mitt Romney's full remarks on Donald Trump and the 2016 presidential race, as prepared for delivery. Romney delivered his remarks at the University of Utah.
I am not here to announce my candidacy for office. I am not going to endorse a candidate today. Instead, I would like to offer my perspective on the nominating process of my party. In 1964, days before the presidential election which, incidentally, we lost, Ronald Reagan went on national television and challenged America saying that it was a "Time for Choosing." He saw two paths for America, one that embraced conservative principles dedicated to lifting people out of poverty and helping create opportunity for all, and the other, an oppressive government that would lead America down a darker, less free path. I'm no Ronald Reagan and this is a different moment but I believe with all my heart and soul that we face another time for choosing, one that will have profound consequences for the Republican Party and more importantly, for the country.
.
.
I say this in part because of my conviction that America is poised to lead the world for another century. Our technology engines, our innovation dynamic, and the ambition and skill of our people will propel our economy and raise our standard of living. America will remain as it is today, the envy of the world.
Warren Buffett was 100% right when he said last week that "the babies being born in America today are the luckiest crop in history."
That doesn't mean we don't have real problems and serious challenges. At home, poverty persists and wages are stagnant. The horrific massacres of Paris and San Bernardino, the nuclear ambitions of the Iranian mullahs, the aggressions of Putin, the growing assertiveness of China and the nuclear tests of North Korea confirm that we live in troubled and dangerous times.
But if we make the right choices, America's future will be even better than our past and better than our present.
On the other hand, if we make improvident choices, the bright horizon I foresee will never materialize. Let me put it plainly, if we Republicans choose Donald Trump as our nominee, the prospects for a safe and prosperous future are greatly diminished.
Let me explain why.
First, the economy: If Donald Trump's plans were ever implemented, the country would sink into a prolonged recession.
A few examples: His proposed 35% tariff-like penalties would instigate a trade war that would raise prices for consumers, kill export jobs, and lead entrepreneurs and businesses to flee America. His tax plan, in combination with his refusal to reform entitlements and to honestly address spending would balloon the deficit and the national debt. So even as Donald Trump has offered very few specific economic plans, what little he has said is enough to know that he would be very bad for American workers and for American families.
But wait, you say, isn't he a huge business success that knows what he's talking about? No he isn't. His bankruptcies have crushed small businesses and the men and women who worked for them. He inherited his business, he didn't create it. And what ever happened to Trump Airlines? How about Trump University? And then there's Trump Magazine and Trump Vodka and Trump Steaks, and Trump Mortgage? A business genius he is not.
Now not every policy Donald Trump has floated is bad. He wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. He wants to bring jobs home from China and Japan. But his prescriptions to do these things are flimsy at best. At the last debate, all he could remember about his healthcare plan was to remove insurance boundaries between states. Successfully bringing jobs home requires serious policy and reforms that make America the place businesses want to plant and grow. You can't punish business into doing the things you want. Frankly, the only serious policy proposals that deal with the broad range of national challenges we confront, come today from Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich. One of these men should be our nominee.
I know that some people want the race to be over. They look at history and say a trend like Mr. Trump's isn't going to be stopped.
Perhaps. But the rules of political history have pretty much all been shredded during this campaign. If the other candidates can find common ground, I believe we can nominate a person who can win the general election and who will represent the values and policies of conservatism. Given the current delegate selection process, this means that I would vote for Marco Rubio in Florida, for John Kasich in Ohio, and for Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. Trump in a given state.
Let me turn to national security and the safety of our homes and loved ones. Trump's bombast is already alarming our allies and fueling the enmity of our enemies. Insulting all Muslims will keep many of them from fully engaging with us in the urgent fight against ISIS. And for what purpose? Muslim terrorists would only have to lie about their religion to enter the country.
What he said on “60 Minutes” about Syria and ISIS has to go down as the most ridiculous and dangerous idea of the campaign season: Let ISIS take out Assad, he said, and then we can pick up the remnants. Think about that: Let the most dangerous terror organization the world has ever known take over a country? This is recklessness in the extreme.
Donald Trump tells us that he is very, very smart. I'm afraid that when it comes to foreign policy he is very, very not smart.
I am far from the first to conclude that Donald Trump lacks the temperament of be president. After all, this is an individual who mocked a disabled reporter, who attributed a reporter's questions to her menstrual cycle, who mocked a brilliant rival who happened to be a woman due to her appearance, who bragged about his marital affairs, and who laces his public speeches with vulgarity.
Donald Trump says he admires Vladimir Putin, while has called George W. Bush a liar. That is a twisted example of evil trumping good.
There is dark irony in his boasts of his sexual exploits during the Vietnam War while John McCain, whom he has mocked, was imprisoned and tortured.
Dishonesty is Trump's hallmark: He claimed that he had spoken clearly and boldly against going into Iraq. Wrong, he spoke in favor of invading Iraq. He said he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey celebrating 9/11. Wrong, he saw no such thing. He imagined it. His is not the temperament of a stable, thoughtful leader. His imagination must not be married to real power.
The President of the United States has long been the leader of the free world. The president and yes the nominees of the country's great parties help define America to billions of people. All of them bear the responsibility of being an example for our children and grandchildren.
Think of Donald Trump's personal qualities, the bullying, the greed, the showing off, the misogyny, the absurd third grade theatrics. We have long referred to him as "The Donald." He is the only person in America to whom we have added an article before his name. It wasn't because he had attributes we admired.
Now imagine your children and your grandchildren acting the way he does. Will you welcome that? Haven't we seen before what happens when people in prominent positions fail the basic responsibility of honorable conduct? We have, and it always injures our families and our country.
Watch how he responds to my speech today. Will he talk about our policy differences or will he attack me with every imaginable low road insult? This may tell you what you need to know about his temperament, his stability, and his suitability to be president.
Trump relishes any poll that reflects what he thinks of himself. But polls are also saying that he will lose to Hillary Clinton.
On Hillary Clinton's watch at the State Department, America's interests were diminished in every corner of the world. She compromised our national secrets, dissembled to the families of the slain, and jettisoned her most profound beliefs to gain presidential power.
For the last three decades, the Clintons have lived at the intersection of money and politics, trading their political influence to enrich their personal finances. They embody the term “crony capitalism.” It disgusts the American people and causes them to lose faith in our political process.
A person so untrustworthy and dishonest as Hillary Clinton must not become president. But a Trump nomination enables her victory. The audio and video of the infamous Tapper-Trump exchange on the Ku Klux Klan will play a hundred thousand times on cable and who knows how many million times on social media.
There are a number of people who claim that Mr. Trump is a con man, a fake. There is indeed evidence of that. Mr. Trump has changed his positions not just over the years, but over the course of the campaign, and on the Ku Klux Klan, daily for three days in a row.
We will only really know if he is the real deal or a phony if he releases his tax returns and the tape of his interview with the New York Times. I predict that there are more bombshells in his tax returns. I predict that he doesn't give much if anything to the disabled and to our veterans. I predict that he told the New York Times that his immigration talk is just that: talk. And I predict that despite his promise to do so, first made over a year ago, he will never ever release his tax returns. Never. Not the returns under audit, not even the returns that are no longer being audited. He has too much to hide. Nor will he authorize the Times to release the tapes. If I'm right, you will have all the proof you need to know that Donald Trump is a phony.
Attacking me as he surely will won't prove him any less of a phony. It's entirely in his hands to prove me wrong. All he has to do is to release his back taxes like he promised he would, and let us hear what he said behind closed doors to the New York Times.
Ronald Reagan used to quote a Scottish philosopher who predicted that democracies and civilizations couldn't last more than about 200 years. John Adams wrote this: "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." I believe that America has proven these dire predictions wrong for two reasons.
First, we have been blessed with great presidents, with giants among us. Men of character, integrity and selflessness have led our nation from its very beginning. None were perfect: each surely made mistakes. But in every case, they acted out of the desire to do what was right for America and for freedom.
The second reason is because we are blessed with a great people, people who at every critical moment of choosing have put the interests of the country above their own.
These two things are related: our presidents time and again have called on us to rise to the occasion. John F. Kennedy asked us to consider what we could do for our country. Lincoln drew upon the better angels of our nature to save the union.
I understand the anger Americans feel today. In the past, our presidents have channeled that anger, and forged it into resolve, into endurance and high purpose, and into the will to defeat the enemies of freedom. Our anger was transformed into energy directed for good.
Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture and for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit first amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.
Here's what I know. Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He's playing the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.
His domestic policies would lead to recession. His foreign policies would make America and the world less safe. He has neither the temperament nor the judgment to be president. And his personal qualities would mean that America would cease to be a shining city on a hill.
America has greatness ahead. This is a time for choosing. God bless us to choose a nominee who will make that vision a reality.
Mar.3
Mar. 2
Mar. 1
Feb. 29
Feb. 26
Feb. 25
Feb. 24
Feb. 23
Feb. 22
Feb. 19
Feb. 18
Politics Newsletter: Sign Up
Political News, Now.
8:56 am ETNew
8:56 am ET
By Alan Rappeport and Alex Thompson
Share
Tweet
A Stern Mitt Romney Attacks Donald Trump as ‘a Phony’ and ‘a Fraud’
?
Election 2016 By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS 1:53
Romney Makes Case Against Trump
Video
Romney Makes Case Against Trump
The 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney criticized Donald J. Trump in a speech to rally Republicans around one of Mr. Trump’s rivals.
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS on Publish Date March 3, 2016. Photo by Jim Urquhart/Reuters.
Share
Tweet
Updated, 12:24 p.m. | Mitt Romney called Donald J. Trump “a phony” and “a fraud” in an impassioned speech on Thursday in which he urged Republicans to rally around another candidate and warned that a Trump presidency could lead American into a dark abyss.
The hastily organized speech, which was delivered in Utah, was a last-ditch effort among leaders in the Republican Party to blunt Mr. Trump’s momentum before he runs away with the presidential nomination. Mr. Romney has been criticizing Mr. Trump on social media in recent weeks, calling on him to release his tax returns and arguing that slowness to denounce the Ku Klux Klan was disqualifying for a presidential candidate.
On Thursday Mr. Romney was unsparing, eviscerating Mr. Trump as unstable, immoral and cruel.
“Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud,” Mr. Romney said to applause. “His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He’s playing members of the American public for suckers: He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.”
The former Massachusetts governor and 2012 presidential candidate, who considered making a third run in 2016, argued that Mr. Trump’s economic policies would create another recession and that he is not suited to represent America on the global stage. He lamented that Mr. Trump has called for bringing back torture and for punishing the innocent families of terrorists. And he expressed concern that, if elected, Mr. Trump would erode the foundations of American democracy.
“He cheers assaults on protesters,” Mr. Romney said. “He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit First Amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.”
The public skewering of Mr. Trump was also deeply personal. Mr. Romney accused him of being an overrated businessman, bemoaned his mockery of the disable and pointed out his history of marital affairs while predicting that Mr. Trump would be an embarrassing commander-in- chief.
“There is dark irony in his boasts of his sexual exploits during the Vietnam War while John McCain, whom he has mocked, was imprisoned and tortured,” Mr. Romney said.
In an instance of old rivals uniting, Mr. McCain praised Mr. Romney for speaking out.
“I share the concerns about Donald Trump that my friend and former Republican nominee, Mitt Romney, described in his speech today,” Mr. McCain said in a statement. “I would also echo the many concerns about Mr. Trump’s uninformed and indeed dangerous statements on national security issues that have been raised by 65 Republican defense and foreign policy leaders.”
Mr. Romney spoke for about 20 minutes before more than 600 people at the Hinckley Institute of Politics in Salt Lake City. While the audience was generally supportive, there were some skeptics in the crowd.
Max Chaz, who backed Mr. Romney in 2012, arrived in a “Make America Great Again” hat that is the hallmark of Mr. Trump’s campaign. He was turned off by Mr. Romney’s late effort to tilt the election and said it was “bordering on tyranny when the party turns around at this date after Trump has been so successful and decide they don’t like the outcome.”
It remained unclear what influence Mr. Romney still has with Republican primary voters who have become increasingly wary of “establishment” politicians. So far, he has declined to formally endorse any of the Republican candidates, although there were rumors that he might support Senator Marco Rubio.
While he did not single out a favorite on Thursday, Mr. Romney made clear that he is pulling for anyone who can stop Mr. Trump.
“Of the remaining candidates, the only serious policy proposals that deal with the broad range of national challenges we confront have come from Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich,” Mr. Romney said.
Mr. Trump responded quickly and forcefully and was expected to offer a full-throated rebuttal during an afternoon campaign rally. In an interview on MNSBC earlier Thursday, he recalled that Mr. Romney “begged” for his endorsement four years ago. “He ran one of the worst campaigns, as you know, in presidential history,” Mr. Trump said. “That was an election that should have been won by the Republicans.”
The Trump campaign also preemptively released a video on Facebook featuring clips of Mr. Romney making statements that were at odds with conservative orthodoxy on immigration, health care, abortion and climate change.
The tension between the two Republicans was a far cry from four years ago, when Mr. Romney lavished praise upon Mr. Trump when receiving his endorsement in Las Vegas. On that day, he flattered Mr. Trump for being the more successful businessman and described him as a visionary on economic issues.
“Donald Trump has shown an extraordinary ability to understand how our economy works, to create jobs for the American people,” Mr. Romney said.
Mr. Trump was equally glowing about Mr. Romney at the time, suggesting that he had the talent to make America great: “Mitt is tough, he’s smart, he’s sharp, he’s not going to allow bad things to continue to happen to this country that we all love.”
Find out what you need to know about the 2016 presidential race today, and get politics news updates via Facebook, Twitter and the First Draft newsletter.
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/03/03/mitt-romney-to-make-case-against-donald-trump-in-utah-speech/?_r=0
有些自以为智商高的却又什么也说不出来，这也不是，那也不是，搞了半天只能跟支持民主党的劳模老黑一个档次
John- 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:30:46
O8欲将美国拱手让给穆斯林，美国人不干， 就选了TRUMP
老生长谈 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:23:57
你要是相信川普会实现诺言，你就太naive了。竞选与实际主政不同。现在他或喜乐日所说的一切都是以竞选总统为目标。只要对选举有利，什么话都可以说。当上总统以后干什么那是后话了。
bbrt294 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:17:33
小布希躲扔过来的鞋子，从容又灵活。
balsam_pear_k 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:16:58
人云亦云，无脑跟媒体，没自己思考的人，更有资格是你说的低智商。
=====
neoreturn 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:13:03 选川普的人都是智商低的人。川普演讲就会罗列美国的一些问题，重复着说，但他一点解决办法也没有。可给你的感觉是选了他，这些问题就会解决。 比如美国根中国的赤字，你有办法解决吗？你敢不跟中国做生意吗？中国500lbs大猩猩会听你的吗？
neoreturn 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:13:03
选川普的人都是智商低的人。川普演讲就会罗列美国的一些问题，重复着说，但他一点解决办法也没有。可给你的感觉是选了他，这些问题就会解决。 比如美国根中国的赤字，你有办法解决吗？你敢不跟中国做生意吗？中国500lbs大猩猩会听你的吗？
indexguy 发表评论于 2016-03-03 09:10:42
玩股票
Clinton当总统:用technical analysis.
Trump当总统: Day trade. 谁也不知道明天他会说什么。
dgtlhrs 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:56:14
很期待啊，在美墨边界修建“长城”，废除奥巴马医保，驱逐非法移民/难民。。。实现一个就很了不起了，民主党想都不敢想
shakuras2000 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:55:59
小布什什么时候目不识丁了？小布什的笨那是和克林顿比，实际上智商也是120左右，属于聪明人。有文章研究过他和john kerry在yale的成绩，发现其实小布什的智商还高点。
随便说说280 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:55:22
indexguy 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:37:09 届时，收视率最高的节目是Trump总统的state of the union speech.
============
床铺总统的任何一个SPEECH 都会有看头。
随便说说280 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:53:58
期待
蓝靛厂 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:52:44
小布什挺机灵的,没一件事做得无厘头,包括打伊拉克干萨达姆. 包括911装傻
indexguy 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:37:09
届时，收视率最高的节目是Trump总统的state of the union speech.
liwenz 发表评论于 2016-03-03 08:32:35
好吧，期待中。。。
川普要是真的入主白宫 那就好玩了…(组图)
文章来源: 南华早报 于 2016-03-03 08:24:07 - 新闻取自各大新闻媒体，新闻内容并不代表本网立场！
打印本新闻
(被阅读 8771 次)
我倒真的希望如此。但先别骂我是疯子、说我与特朗普竞选集会上那群固执愚昧的美国人是一丘之貉，且听我解释一下。
还记得小布什当美国总统的年代吗？他几乎目不识丁，凡事又一窍不通，经常丑态百出；主政八年来，每次公开讲话总不乏笑料，给全世界带来娱乐，多好玩。
这样的人出任美国总统，也令人幸灾乐祸：美国虽然财雄势大、权倾全球，却让一个小丑当领袖。
当然，小布什也是个危险的好战者，令伊拉克沦为一片颓垣败瓦。但这一点容后再谈。
而奥巴马则是彻头彻尾的闷蛋。他有智慧有理想，并承诺带来改变；但八年任内，他没做过多少事，唯一完成的是以法外杀戮的方式杀死拉登，但当时拉登对世界已经不再构成危害。
此外，奥巴马的外交政策与前任也没有多大分别。事实上，他在中东搞出了更大的乱局──看看叙利亚和祸害各地的伊斯兰国就知道了。
特朗普在此时登场。这位地产大亨也是真人秀之星，去年六月他宣布将竞逐总统，当时无疑是一个笑话。现在他依然是一个笑话，但看看笑到最后的是谁？
此人是种族主义者，厌恶女性，令人反感，说起话来大言不惭。但无论他的言论多么惹人憎恶、发型多么难看，却愈战愈勇。他的排外主张和挑起社会恐惧的言论，也令许多美国人产生共鸣。
如今，他似乎势将与民主党热门参选人希拉里一决高下，竞逐总统宝座。你要是认为他绝无胜算，先看看可怜的杰布布什错误低估特朗普的下场吧。
特朗普的反拉丁族裔言论，令他失去佛罗里达、科罗拉多和新墨西哥等摇摆州份（swing states）的支持，但他可能只须在所谓的“铁锈地带＂（Rust Belt，如宾夕凡尼亚、俄亥俄及威斯康辛等州份）胜出──特朗普抨击美国贸易政策的言论，在这些州份甚得民心──那么就有机会在今年十一月的大选中胜出。
若他真的当选，那么会如何？无论憎恶特朗普的人怎么想，但即使他接任美国总统，也不会出现全球大灾难。事实上，对美国以外的大多数非美国人来说，情况不 会有什么不同。我们可以发表阴谋论，猜测背后有影子政府作祟；也可以单纯以常识看待情况：正是有影响力的游说团体、金融家和亿万富豪出于私心，将特朗普这 样的人送进了白宫。
谁当美国总统根本无关紧要。美国人始终会做想做的事，并继续一直以来在做的事。
2008年奥巴马当选美国总统，还记得当时香港社会的兴奋之情吗？仿佛奥巴马当了总统，就会为我们带来什么改变似的。所以，每当在香港听到有人说“天啊，要是特朗普真的当上总统，世界会变成怎样？＂我总是觉得很好笑。
世界不会改变。特朗普不会把穆斯林教徒逐出美国，也不会在边境建造长城，将墨西哥人隔绝在外。这些都是空口说白话，目的是想煽动民意、激起社会恐惧。
我等不及想看特朗普入主白宫。要是他当选，肯定有源源不绝的笑料。
小布什曾经说过：“我们的敌人既有创意又有资源，但我们也一样。他们不停想出新方法伤害我们的国家和人民，我们也一样。＂这番话既糊涂又有预见性，我再同意不过。
http://www.wenxuecity.com/news/2016/03/03/5024791.html
Deutschamerikaner
Total population
50,764,352[1][2]
17.1% of the U.S. population (2009)
Regions with significant populations
United States Throughout the entire United States, except for New England.
Plurality in Pennsylvania[3] and the Midwestern states[4]
Languages
English (American English dialects) and German
Religion
Christian (51% Protestant (significant branches: Lutheran ·
Reformed ·
Anabaptist ·
others)
·
26% Roman Catholic)
·
1% Jewish (1%) ·
16% other[5]
Related ethnic groups
Germans ·
Alsatians ·
Austrian Americans ·
Swiss Americans ·
Dutch Americans ·
Pennsylvania Dutch ·
German diaspora ·
German Canadians ·
European Americans
The German American ethnic group (German: Deutschamerikaner) consists of Americans who have full or partial German heritage. Its size of 50 million stands second to the 55 million Hispanics in the United States.[1][6][7][8][9][10][11] The group comprises about 1?3 of the German diaspora in the world.[12][13][14]
None of the German states had American colonies. In the 1670s the first significant groups of German immigrants arrived in the British colonies, settling primarily in New York and Pennsylvania. Immigration continued in very large numbers during the 19th century, with eight million arrivals from Germany. In the middle half of the nineteenth century (between 1820 to 1870) over seven and a half million immigrants came to the United States — more than doubling the entire population of the country. By 2010, their population grew to 49.8 million citizens, reflecting a jump of 6 million people since 2000.
There is a "German belt" that extends all across the United States, from eastern Pennsylvania to the Oregon coast. Pennsylvania has the largest population of German-Americans in the U.S. and is home to one of the group's original settlements, Germantown in 1683. The state has 3.5 million people of German heritage.
They were pulled by the attractions of land and religious freedom, and pushed out of Europe by shortages of land
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Americans
而民主党喜欢打压亚裔，认为亚裔overrepresented, 或者说认为亚裔站有资源太多了。它要以种族来划分资源，提升黑人和拉丁裔。基本上就是黑人与拉丁裔利益的代表者。
由于民主党占有很大的媒体资源，它们喜欢扭曲摸黑共和党的政策。
资本主义的逐利性，决定了资本家（雇主）主要看重雇员的能力。 至少在小公司是如此。 所以只要经济是靠近资本主义，那有能力的人不怕没饭吃。
人都是势利的，有能力的人有了钱，自然就受人尊敬。
政治正确的风险，在于抹杀人的能力，不搞按劳分配。按人种分配上大学名额， 对富人搞高稅收。 经济就会垮掉。 最后的结果就是今天的南非。（原来人均寿命70多， 如今人均寿命50多岁。）
而等到经济坏掉了，政治正确不可能讲下去，华人估计是第一个替罪羊。
他们对纳粹德国的态度，和今天的Rubio对卡斯特罗古巴的态度类似。 非常敌视。
当然也有极少数德国裔美国人或者是刚来美国不久的德国人比较崇拜纳粹德国，那些人中的许多在30年代美国经济不好，而德国经济似乎蒸蒸日上时又回到德国去了。