內(nèi)特·懷特

A few things spring to mind. Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem. For instance， he has no class， no charm， no coolness， no credibility， no compassion， no wit， no warmth， no wisdom， no subtlety， no sensitivity， no self-awareness， no humility， no honour and no grace—all qualities， funnily enough， with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed. So for us， the stark contrast does rather throw Trumps limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

Plus， we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable， he has never once said anything wry， witty or even faintly amusing—not once， ever. I dont say that rhetorically， I mean it quite literally： not once， not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility—for us， to lack humour is almost inhuman. But with Trump， its a fact. He doesnt even seem to understand what a joke is—his idea of a joke is a crass comment， an illiterate insult， a casual act of cruelty.

Trump is a troll. And like all trolls， he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers. And scarily， he doesnt just talk in crude， witless insults—he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness.

There is never any under-layer of irony， complexity， nuance or depth. Its all surface. Some Americans might see this as refreshingly upfront. Well， we dont. We see it as having no inner world， no soul. And in Britain we traditionally side with David， not Goliath. All our heroes are plucky underdogs： Robin Hood， Dick Whittington， Oliver Twist. Trump is neither plucky， nor an underdog. He is the exact opposite of that. Hes not even a spoiled rich-boy， or a greedy fat-cat. Hes more a fat white slug. A Jabba the Hutt1 of privilege.

And worse， he is that most unforgivable of all things to the British： a bully. That is， except when he is among bullies; then he suddenly transforms into a snivelling sidekick instead. There are unspoken rules to this stuff—the Queensberry rules of basic decency—and he breaks them all. He punches downwards—which a gentleman should， would， could never do—and every blow he aims is below the belt. He particularly likes to kick the vulnerable or voiceless—and he kicks them when they are down.

So the fact that a significant minority—perhaps a third—of Americans look at what he does， listen to what he says， and then think ‘Yeah， he seems like my kind of guy is a matter of some confusion and no little distress to British people， given that：

· Americans are supposed to be nicer than us， and mostly are.

· You dont need a particularly keen eye for detail to spot a few flaws in the man.

This last point is what especially confuses and dismays British people， and many other people too; his faults seem pretty bloody hard to miss. After all， its impossible to read a single tweet， or hear him speak a sentence or two， without staring deep into the abyss. He turns being artless into an art form; he is a Picasso of pettiness; a Shakespeare of shit. His faults are fractal： even his flaws have flaws， and so on ad infinitum. God knows there have always been stupid people in the world， and plenty of nasty people too. But rarely has stupidity been so nasty， or nastiness so stupid. He makes Nixon look trustworthy and George W look smart. In fact， if Frankenstein decided to make a monster assembled entirely from human flaws—he would make a Trump.

And a remorseful Doctor Frankenstein would clutch out big clumpfuls of hair and scream in anguish： ‘My God… what… have… I… created？ If being a twat was a TV show， Trump would be the boxed set.

立刻涌上心頭的答案：特朗普缺乏英國(guó)人向來崇尚的一些品質(zhì)。比如：他無風(fēng)度，無魅力，不冷靜，不可靠，同情闕如，機(jī)敏匱乏，毫無熱情，缺少智慧，欠靈活，少悟性，不自知，不謙卑，不義且無禮，凡此種種，不一而足——說來也怪，特朗普缺乏的那些品質(zhì)都是其前任奧巴馬先生充分具備的。對(duì)我們而言，這種鮮明的對(duì)比讓特朗普的種種缺陷頗為尷尬地彰顯無遺。

另外，我們都喜歡笑。特朗普或許可笑，但他從不打趣，也不風(fēng)趣，所說的話甚至絲毫都不好玩兒，從來沒有。此話毫不夸張，而是恰如其分，從來沒有。這一點(diǎn)尤其讓英國(guó)人在情感上感到硌硬，對(duì)我們來說，缺乏幽默幾乎等于缺乏人性。然而，這在特朗普身上確是事實(shí)。更有甚者，他似乎不解玩笑，玩笑在他那里就是粗暴愚蠢的評(píng)論、無知拙劣的侮辱和漫不經(jīng)心的殘忍。

特朗普是個(gè)怪獸。像所有怪獸一樣，他總是板著臉，不茍言笑;他只會(huì)夸夸其談或冷言奚落。更恐怖的是，他不僅說起話來粗魯無知，污言穢語，簡(jiǎn)直連思考起來也是如此。他的思維就是自動(dòng)程序般的簡(jiǎn)單算法，包含著狹隘的偏見和本能的惡意。

他的言談從無任何潛藏的反諷、復(fù)雜、微變或深意，一切流于表面。有些美國(guó)人或許認(rèn)為這一點(diǎn)別具一格，其人坦誠(chéng)直爽。我們可不這么看，我們覺得這是內(nèi)心空虛，沒有靈魂。在英國(guó)，我們一向崇尚大衛(wèi)，而不是哥利亞。我們心目中的英雄都是勇敢的弱勢(shì)者，例如：羅賓漢、狄克·惠廷頓、奧利弗·特維斯特。特朗普恰好與他們相反，既不勇敢，也非弱勢(shì)。與其說他是一個(gè)嬌生慣養(yǎng)的公子，或者貪婪成性的大亨，不如說他是一個(gè)又白又胖的鼻涕蟲，一個(gè)享受特權(quán)的赫特人賈巴。

更可恨的是，他恃強(qiáng)凌弱，這一點(diǎn)最為英國(guó)人難以原諒。但與其他恃強(qiáng)凌弱者在一起時(shí)，他卻搖身一變，立馬紆尊降貴，可憐兮兮起來。這等事一般都遵循一種不成文的規(guī)則——最起碼的昆斯伯里文明規(guī)則，但他打破了一切規(guī)則。他專攻下三路，招招瞄準(zhǔn)褲帶以下部位，從理性、意愿和規(guī)則上講，這些均非君子所為。他尤喜打擊最脆弱、最沉默的人群，而且，就算他們倒下了，他照樣打擊。

大約三分之一的美國(guó)人——雖是少數(shù)，但卻舉足輕重——察其言，觀其行，認(rèn)為“他似乎是我喜歡的家伙”。這令英國(guó)人不解，也讓我們深感憂慮，尤其是考慮到以下兩點(diǎn)：

·美國(guó)人應(yīng)該比我們友善，而且大多的確如此;

·在這個(gè)人身上找出幾處毛病并不需要什么洞察入微的法眼。

第二點(diǎn)令英國(guó)人特別費(fèi)解和失望，也令其他很多人百思不得其解，他的毛病似乎太難失察。畢竟，讀他一條推文，聽他說一兩句話，就不難“發(fā)覺”且深受影響。他經(jīng)常把拙劣說成藝術(shù)，他是無聊王國(guó)的畢加索，胡扯界的莎士比亞。他的錯(cuò)誤生發(fā)錯(cuò)誤，甚至連毛病也存在著毛病，循環(huán)往復(fù)，無窮盡焉。眾所周知，世上總有蠢貨，也充斥著不堪之徒，但愚蠢至如此不堪，不堪至如此愚蠢，卻甚為罕見。相對(duì)于他，尼克松都顯得可信，小布什也顯得聰敏起來。說實(shí)話，如果弗蘭肯斯坦決意用人類的缺點(diǎn)組裝一個(gè)怪物，他一定會(huì)制造出一個(gè)特朗普。

果真如此，悔恨不已的弗蘭肯斯坦博士一定會(huì)揪住大把頭發(fā)，痛苦萬分地呼號(hào)：“天哪！我—?jiǎng)?chuàng)—造—了—什—么？”假如裝瘋賣傻是一檔電視節(jié)目，那么特朗普便是此類節(jié)目之集大成者。

（譯者單位：廣東省珠海市兆征紀(jì)念學(xué)校）