特朗普的首席文化战士

我是诺埃尔·金。今天，在Vox的《今日解读》节目中，我要与保守派活动家、作家、煽动者克里斯托弗·鲁弗对话。为什么？因为克里斯·鲁弗总能从大学、企业、特朗普总统那里得到他想要的。他想要终结DEI。

I'm Noelle King. And today, on Today Explained from Vox, I'm talking to conservative activist, writer, and provocateur Christopher Rufo. Why? Because Chris Rufo gets what he wants from universities, from corporations, from president Trump. He wanted an end to DEI.

他成功了。

He got it.

我们已经终结了所谓多样性、公平与包容政策在整个联邦政府的暴政，并且

We've ended the tyranny of so called diversity, equity, and inclusion policies all across the entire federal government and

他希望政府除非大学屈服于他的要求，否则就切断联邦资金。他也得到了。他让一个晦涩的学术法律理论成为全国公敌。搞定。

He wanted the government to yank federal funding from universities unless they submitted to his demands. He got that too. He wanted an obscure academic legal theory to become a national boogeyman. Done.

我们已经把批判种族理论这颗毒瘤从公立学校清除出去。

We have removed the poison of critical race theory from our public schools.

他想要Cracker Barrel把标志改回去。

He wanted Cracker Barrel to change its logo back.

我们其实只需稍作努力，就能打破这个桶。

We could, in fact, break the barrel, with just a small amount of effort.

既然他一直在如愿以偿，我们觉得值得问一句：他现在还想要什么？接下来，克里斯·鲁弗的文化革命。

Since he's getting what he wants, we thought it was worth asking, what does he want now? Coming up, Chris Rufo's Cultural Revolution.

本节目由Robinhood赞助。如果能在一个平台上管理投资组合，岂不是很棒？在Robinhood，你不仅可以交易个股和ETF，还能以低成本无缝买卖加密货币。一站式交易。立即在Robinhood开始吧！

Support for this show comes from Robinhood. Wouldn't it be great to manage your portfolio on one platform? With Robinhood, not only can you trade individual stocks and ETFs, you can also seamlessly buy and sell crypto at low costs. Trade all in one place. Get started now on Robinhood!

加密货币交易风险极高。加密货币交易通过Robinhood Crypto LLC账户提供。Robinhood Crypto已获纽约州金融服务部许可从事虚拟货币业务活动。通过Robinhood Crypto持有的加密货币不受FDIC保险或CIPIC保护。投资涉及风险，包括本金损失。

Trading crypto involves significant risk. Crypto trading is offered through an account with Robinhood Crypto LLC. Robinhood Crypto is licensed to engage in virtual currency business activity by the New York State Department of Financial Services. Crypto held through Robinhood Crypto is not FDIC insured or CIPIC protected. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal.

证券交易通过Robinhood Financial LLC的账户提供，该公司是CIPIC成员、注册券商。

Securities trading is offered through an account with Robinhood Financial LLC, member CIPIC, a registered broker dealer.

本周《Net Worth and Chill》，我们将毫不留情地坦白：为何赚到第一个10万比赚到第一个100万更难。从复利如何运作的细节，到真正起作用的策略——包括24小时就能赚钱的副业，以及让人永远停滞的投资错误——我将拆解自己从学生贷款和高房租的零起点直达6位数的完整路线图。此外，我们还会回答你关于一边生活一边存钱、以及终于突破10万大关后下一步该怎么走的迫切问题。在任意播客平台收听，或在youtube.com/You're Rich BFF观看。

This week on Net Worth and Chill, we're getting brutally honest about why reaching your first 100,000 is shockingly harder than getting to your first million. From the details behind how compound interest works to the specific strategies that actually move the needle, including side hustles that pay in twenty four hours and the investing mistakes that keep people stuck forever, I'm breaking down my exact road map for hitting 6 figures even if you're starting from zero with student loans and expensive rent. Plus, we're answering your burning questions about balancing life while saving and what to do once you finally hit the big 100 k milestone. Listen wherever you get your podcasts or watch on youtube.com/ You're Rich BFF.

这里是《今日解释》。行，我……对，我给你完整介绍。Christopher Rufo，作家、记者、活动家，曼哈顿研究所高级研究员，《美国的文化革命》作者。

This is today explained. Sure. I'll yeah. I'll give you the full bio. Christopher Rufo, writer, journalist, activist, senior fellow at Manhattan Institute, author of America's Cultural Revolution.

我觉得你2023年出版的《美国的文化革命》最清晰地总结了你的一系列观点。我真心喜欢这本书，书中描述的部分内容我亲眼见过：我先是就读于一所乡村公立高中，那里的基调是“美国大体上是个好国家”；接着进入一所“精英”大学，课堂里却充斥着马克思主义、批判性白人研究和结构性特权，让我非常迷茫。

I found America's Cultural Revolution, which was published in 2023, to be the clearest summation of your ideas. And I really actually liked the book. I saw some of what you described firsthand. I went from a rural public high school where America is mostly a good country, was kind of the ethos, to a, quote, unquote, elite college. And I was really unmoored by the classroom focus on Marxism and critical whiteness studies and structural privilege.

有些内容挺有意思，但另一些让我忍不住想：你们到底在说什么？我当时特别期待毕业，好赶快进入“真实世界”，把这些抛在身后。然而读你的书时我才发现，你的论点是：这些理论从大学跟着我一起进入了现实，我根本没甩掉它们。

Some of it was very interesting, but some of it was like, what are you guys on? And in fact, I I was very excited to graduate and get out into the real world and leave all of that behind. Right? But as I was reading your book, I see that your thesis is those theories followed me from college out into the real world. I didn't actually leave them behind.

请给我讲讲你在书中提出的核心论点。

Give me the argument that you're making in the book.

长期以来，保守派对大学的批评是：大学生把时间浪费在批判性种族马克思主义和交叉性性别理论上，毕业后进入社会才发现自己准备不足，必须迅速适应所谓“真实世界”。回头来看，这一理论错得离谱，因为事实正好相反：这些毕业生把大学里的糟糕思想带出来，四处播撒。

For a long time, the conservative critique of the universities was that college students were wasting their time on critical race Marxism and intersectional gender theory, and when they would graduate from college, they would go out into the world and find that they had been ill equipped and they would have to quickly adapt to the quote unquote real world. And in retrospect, that turned out to be a catastrophically wrong headed theory because the opposite occurred. In fact, those college graduates took these bad ideas from the universities and then implanted them everywhere. So your rural high school, I'm not sure what state. New York.

所以，你那个乡村高中——我不知道在哪个州。纽约。——几乎肯定也在教你在精英私立大学遇到的那套理论。如今，这些内容不仅被写进纽约、加州、俄勒冈、华盛顿等州的课程，也出现在你可能想不到的州。

Rural New York is probably actually most certainly teaching those same theories that you had encountered in an elite private college a number of years ago. Those are now baked into the state curriculum, not only of states like New York and California and Oregon and Washington, where I am, but in states where you might not expect it.

当你说“批判性种族理论”时，你指的是什么？需要指出，这个定义是有争议的。

When you say critical race theory, what do you mean? And I should note the definition is contested,

但你具体在说什么？

but what are you talking about?

我不觉得这个定义有争议。实际上我会说

I don't think the definition is contested. Actually would say

政治种族理论家可能会不同意，但请继续，告诉我们你的意思。

Political race theorists would probably disagree, but go ahead, tell us what you mean.

他们不会的。我实际上会接受他们的定义。论点相当简单，而且我们在过去几年里听到的一些关键套话确实源自批判种族理论。比如系统性种族主义的概念，比如美国是一个白人至上体系的概念，比如欧洲裔人群患有白人脆弱性、白人特权、白人精神病等状况，以及“公平”而非“平等”的理念，意思是不同群体应在法律下被区别对待，以实现结果的平等。

They wouldn't though. I actually would take their definition at face value. The arguments are quite simple, And some of the key kind of stock phrases that we've heard over the last couple of years really emerge from critical race theory. The idea of, you know, systemic racism, the idea of that The United States is a system of white supremacy, the idea that people of European descent suffer from conditions such as white fragility, white privilege, white psychopathology, and the idea of equity instead of equality, meaning different groups of people should be treated differently under law in order to achieve the equality of outcomes.

我们来谈谈你在美国机构中描绘的那种反革命。特朗普政府要求史密森尼博物馆对其展览做出修改，理由是“不当意识形态”。政府发布了一份它认为有问题的清单。其中一幅是一幅描绘父亲、母亲和两个孩子穿越边境进入南德克萨斯的肖像。艺术家是里戈韦托·冈萨雷斯。

Let's talk about the kind of counterrevolution that you're laying out in American institutions. The Trump administration is demanding that the Smithsonian museums make changes to their exhibits, citing, quote, improper ideology. So the administration released a list of things it found objectionable. One of them was a portrait of a father, a mother, and two children crossing the border into South Texas. The artist is Rigoberto Gonzales.

克里斯，为什么美国人不应该看那幅画？

Why, Chris, should Americans not look at that painting?

嗯，我的意思是，美国人当然可以看。这位艺术家

Well, I mean, Americans can look at it. Certainly, this artist

为什么他们不能在史密森尼博物馆看，那是我们美国的文化宝库？

Why can't they look at it in the Smithsonian Museum, which is our American repository of culture?

我觉得这个问题的框架漏掉了一个关键点。我不知道。你告诉我，这位艺术家是美国公民还是外国国民？

I I think the the framing of the question misses an essential point. I don't know. Is the artist you tell me, is the artist American or foreign national?

我不知道，这有什么关系？告诉我。

I don't know, why does that matter? Tell me.

嗯，我想说，如果这位艺术家是美国出生的公民，那么他当然有第一修正案的权利去画任何他想画的画，并按他认为合适的方式展出，但这并不意味着他有权利获得公共补贴，并把任何他想挂的画挂在史密森尼。史密森尼是一个与政府相关的机构，由联邦纳税人资助，而且根据宪法第二条，总统作为行政首脑有广泛的自由裁量权，可以为政府机构制定标准和规则，以人民的最高利益为出发点。很多这类机构完全被左翼意识形态分子所控制。比如那幅画，就是一幅极具政治色彩的作品。

Well, I was gonna say, if the artist is an American born citizen, then of course that individual has a First Amendment right to paint whatever picture he would like, to exhibit it as he see fits, but it doesn't mean that he has a right to a public subsidy and to hang whatever picture he would like in the Smithsonian. And so the Smithsonian is a government related institution. It's funded by federal taxpayers, and again, under Article II of the Constitution, the president has wide latitude as an executive to set the standards and to set really the rules of the road for government institutions in the best interest of the people. And what happens with a lot of these institutions that they are totally captured by left wing ideologues. In that painting for example, it's a very politically charged painting.

这并不只是

It's not simply

一件艺术品，一种审美

an It's art, aesthetic

克里斯。我是说，你不能

Chris. Mean, you can't

对许多艺术带有某种政治色彩感到震惊，对吧？

be shocked that there's some political charge to a lot of art. Right?

我觉得我们其实不。我认为那实际上是你审美上的严重误判，因为真正伟大的艺术几乎从不高度论战化。事实上，高度论战化的艺术几乎从来不是伟大的艺术；因此，它必须具有一种表达的微妙性，一种无法被立刻归类为论战或狭隘意识形态声明的表达，才能达到一种审美上的优越性，从而配得上被我们最重要的艺术文化机构收藏。所以，如果你问我，我会说这幅画并没有达到被纳入的基本审美、艺术和文化门槛。所以，我……你是

I think we do actually no. I think that that's actually a terrible aesthetic misjudgment on on your behalf because actually great art is not highly polemical. And in fact a highly polemical art is almost never great art and so need to have a kind of subtlety of expression, an expression that can't be immediately pigeonholed as a polemical or narrowly ideological statement in order to achieve a kind of aesthetic superiority that merits inclusion in one of our marquee artistic and cultural institutions. And so I think that this particular painting, if you were to ask me, I would say that it does not meet the basic aesthetic and artistic and cultural threshold to be included. So I You're think that

不是艺术专家，克里斯，你只是一个活动家，拥有乔治·斯纳比学位的人。

not an expert in art Chris, you're a guy who is an activist and you have degree from George Snabby.

我是美国纳税人，我研究过艺术，我在世界各地都研究过艺术，我是艺术的欣赏者，所以这当然是

I'm an American taxpayer, I've studied art, I've studied art all over the world, I'm a appreciator of the arts, and so certainly this is

我的观点。好吧。那我们来谈谈，你的观点如何与另一位——比如说——拥有艺术背景却与你意见完全相左的美国公民的观点相协调。这就是为什么我们有非凡的

my opinion. Right. So let's let's talk about how your opinion fits in with somebody who has, let's say, your opinion versus an American citizen who with a background in art who feels exactly the opposite that you do. That's why we have an incredible

这就是为什么我们国家有一个非凡的制度，叫做投票选举美国总统。所以，当你投票给一位保守派总统时，他就拥有美国人民的充分授权，把联邦机构带向更保守的方向；事实上，问题恰恰与你所说的相反。问题是，这几十年里，这些机构无论民主党还是共和党执政，都在单一地沿着左翼意识形态路线运行。这些公立机构几十年来都没有回应公众，因此特朗普的纠正在宪法下完全正当，而且从民主原则来看早已 overdue。

that's that's why we have an incredible system in our country called voting for president of The United States. And so when you vote for a conservative president of The United States, he has the full authority of the American people to turn the federal institutions in a more conservative direction, and in fact the problem is precisely the opposite as you're suggesting. The problem is that for multiple decades now, these institutions would run a monolithically left wing ideological line, whether a Democrat was in office or a Republican was in office. These are public institutions that have not been responsive to the public for many decades, and so Trump's correction is totally justified under the constitution and is long overdue as a matter of democratic principle.

你谈了很多，说希望这个国家回归一种古典的西方教育，以培养面对困难观念时的批判性思维。那你为什么支持抹除那些促使人们思考美国的艺术？

You've talked a lot about how you want this country to go back to a kind of classical Western education that promotes critical thinking in the face of difficult ideas. Why would you support the erasure of art that challenges people to think about America?

嗯，我认为那是一个非常方便的委婉说法。这并不是挑战人们的艺术。实际上，它是不挑战人们的艺术。这幅特别的画——我记得一些报道里提过——是如此单一、如此肤浅、如此狭隘地带有宣传性，以至于它根本没有挑战我们本应发展的任何审美或文化能力。

Well, think that's a very convenient euphemism. This is not art that challenges people. Actually, it's art that doesn't challenge people. This particular painting, which I can remember from some of the reporting, is so one dimensional, is so shallow, is so narrowly polemical that it actually doesn't challenge any of the aesthetic or cultural faculties that we should be developing.

照你这么说，我得插一句，照你这么说，我的意思是另一个热爱艺术、支持艺术的人可能会有完全不同的感受。

According to you, I just gotta step in and say, according to you, I mean another person who lives art and back down the art might feel very differently.

他们可能会有，但他们实际上是错的。哦，哇。而且不是“照我说”，对吧？我们确实有——你知道的——某些关于美学、艺术创作、创造力的标准，这些标准我们已经争论了几个世纪、几千年。艺术不仅仅是个人偏好。

They might but they would be actually wrong. Oh wow. And not according to me, right? We actually have, you know, there are certain standards of aesthetics, artistic production, of creativity that we've been of course debating over centuries, over millennia. Art is not just a matter of personal preference.

它不仅仅是“他说，她说”的问题，而是事实上存在着持久的艺术标准和传统，当代作品可以而且应该被这些标准衡量。而这正是文化策展人的职责所在。

It's not just a matter of he said, she said, but in fact there are enduring artistic standards and traditions by which contemporary works can and should be measured, And that is precisely the role of the curators of culture.

是啊，那些把这件作品放进史密森学会的策展人，对吧。人们做了

Yeah the curators who put this faith against Smithsonian, right. People made

那些人是反文化的策展人。什么是反文化？艺术和文化机构实际上催生了一种反文化，一种虚无主义的文化表达，把艺术降格为政治，把文化降格为否定，并且赞美丑陋而非美。我认为这幅引起如此多关注的画作，正属于这种反文化传统，这是理所当然的。

Those this are curators of an anti culture. What's the anti culture sorry? Artistic and cultural institutions really brought into being an artistic anti culture, meaning a kind of nihilistic cultural expression that reduces art to politics, that reduces culture to negation and that celebrates ugliness instead of beauty. And I think that this painting, which has drawn so much attention, is rightly in that tradition of anti culture.

特朗普总统最近在史密森学会、在教育等方面的举措，是否证明你们的革命已经胜利？

Are president Trump's recent moves in the Smithsonian, for example, in education, for example, are they evidence that you have won your revolution?

我认为我们当然取得了一场巨大的胜利，但战争尚未结束。这实际上是反革命的第一步，这是一项需要许多年才能完成的代际工程，因此，虽然我们当然应该为到来的胜利庆祝，但我们也应保持谦逊，记住没有永久的胜利，胜利可能在眨眼之间就被逆转。

I think that we have certainly won an enormous victory, but the battle is not won. This is really the first part of the counter revolution, and it's a generational project that will take many, many years to conclude, and so while we should certainly celebrate victory as it comes, we should have enough humility to remember that there are no permanent victories, and victories can be undone in the blink of an eye.

作家兼活动家克里斯·鲁福。接下来，我们去Cracker Barrel。

Writer and activist Chris Ruffo. Coming up, we're going to the Cracker Barrel.

本期节目由Shopify赞助支持。当你创业时，你得同时扮演很多角色：营销、销售、外联、设计。Shopify可以简化这一切。Shopify是全球数百万家企业背后的商务平台，据该公司称，美国10%的电商交易都通过它完成，从美泰、Gymshark这样的家喻户晓的品牌，到刚刚起步的品牌——也许，我不知道，可能是你的。他们说他们有数百种即用型模板，帮你打造品牌风格，还说能通过创建邮件和社交媒体活动让营销更轻松，让你无论客户在哪里都能与他们建立联系

Support for the program today comes from Shopify. When you're creating your own business, you have to juggle a lot of roles, marketing, sales, outreach, design. Shopify can simplify all of that. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and according to the company, 10% of all ecommerce in The US from household names like Mattel and Gymshark to brands just getting started like maybe, I don't know, yours. They say they have hundreds of ready to use templates to help design your brand's style, and they say they can make marketing easier by creating email and social media campaigns so you can connect with customers wherever they be

刷手机中。

scrolling.

Shopify 也推出了专为商业设计的 AI 工具，据说能帮你撰写商品描述、生成折扣码等等。有 Shopify 助力，你可以把宏大的商业构想变成现实。现在就去 shopify.com/explained 注册，只需 1 美元即可开启月度试用，今天就能开始销售。访问 shopify.com/explained。

Shopify also has AI tools created for commerce. They say can help you create product descriptions, generate discount codes, and more. You can turn your big business idea into reality with Shopify on your side. You can sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at shopify.com/explained. You can go to shopify.com/explained.

网址是 shopify.com/explained。谁手边有收银机吗？

That's shopify.com/explained. Does anyone have a cash register handy?

作为创始人，你正飞速奔向产品市场契合、下一轮融资或第一笔大企业订单。但随着 AI 让初创公司构建和交付的速度加快，安全合规的期望也来得更快、更高。把安全和合规做对能助推增长，拖得太久反而会让增长停滞。Vanta 是一款信任管理平台，可帮助企业自动化完成 35 多个框架的安全与合规，如 SOC 2、ISO 27001、HIPAA 等。凭借深度集成和为高速团队打造的自动化工作流，Vanta 让你快速通过审计，并在模型、基础设施和客户不断演进的过程中，通过持续监控保持安全。

As a founder, you're moving fast towards product market fit, your next round, or your first big enterprise deal. But with AI accelerating how quickly startups build and ship, security expectations are also coming in faster, and those expectations are higher than ever. Getting security and compliance right can unlock growth or stall it if you wait too long. Vanta is a trust management platform that helps businesses automate security and compliance across more than 35 frameworks like SOC two, ISO 27,001, HIPAA, and more. With deep integrations and automated workflows built for fast moving teams, Vanta gets you audit ready fast and keeps you secure with continuous monitoring as your models, infrastructure, and customers evolve.

正因如此，Langcheng、Ryder、Cursor 等快速成长的初创公司从一开始就信任 Vanta，打造可扩展的合规基础。立即访问 vanta.com/vox，通过 Vanta 初创计划立省 1000 美元，加入已有超过 1 万家雄心勃勃的公司正在使用 Vanta 的行列。限时优惠，vanta.com/vox 立减 1000 美元。

That's why fast growing startups like Langcheng, Ryder, and Cursor have all trusted Vanta to build a scalable compliance foundation from the start. Go to vanta.com/vox to save $1,000 today through the Vanta for startups program and join over 10,000 ambitious companies already scaling with Vanta. That's vanta.com/vox to save $1,000 for a limited time.

嘿，Vox Media 的听众们，我是 Mike Murphy。当两个斗了半辈子的政治操盘手，加上一位顶级记者，会发生什么？你会得到一张——

Hey, Vox media listeners. It's Mike Murphy. What happens when you get two political hacks who've been running campaigns against each other for forever and add a world class journalist. You get a big

巨额酒吧账单。就是这样。我是 David Axelrod，告诉你吧，你还会得到一档超棒的播客，叫《Hacks on Tap》。

bar tab. That's what you get. This David Axelrod telling you you also get a great podcast called hacks on tap.

我是 John Heilman。让我告诉你我们给你什么：一档每周更新的播客，解读新闻、头条，以及驱动政治的长期趋势，视角来自三个见惯大风大浪的人——从竞选 trail 到空军一号前舱。

This is John Heilman. I'll tell you what we give you. The weekly podcast that covers news, the headlines, and also the longer term trends driving our politics with perspective of three guys who've seen it all from the campaign trail to the forward cabin of Air Force one.

每周都来加入《Hacks on Tap》吧。

Join us every week on hacks on tap.

在 Vox Media 播客网络收听。

On the Vox Media Podcast Network.

这里是《今日解读》。

This is Today Explained.

我们再次请到克里斯·鲁弗。他是一位活动家，也是《美国的文化革命》一书的作者。我们来聊聊你最近一场反文化革命的胜利之一——Cracker Barrel。在这家公司把商标上的老爷爷“叔叔赫舍尔”去掉后，你在推特上写道：“我们必须打破这个桶。”为什么？

We're back with Chris Rufo. He's an activist and author of the book America's Cultural Revolution. Let's talk about one of your more recent countercultural revolution, wins, and that is Cracker Barrel. So after the company changed its logo to remove uncle Herschel, the elderly fellow on the logo, You wrote on Twitter, we must break the barrel. Why?

嗯，哦，那是个

Well, oh, that was a

有趣的梗。Cracker Barrel那件事特别好玩，是一场非常有趣的行动。表面上看，确实有点荒唐。就连我说的“打破桶”这种话，也得带点讽刺和幽默的语气，因为实在太好笑了。

fun one. So Cracker Barrel was a lot of fun. That was a very interesting campaign. And look, on the surface, it's something that is admittedly a little ridiculous. And even my language about breaking the barrel should be taken with a tone of irony and humor because it's quite funny.

你想想，我们居然对一家南方风情连锁餐厅搞政治运动，这不是莫名其妙吗？但表面之下，有更严重的事情在发生，值得大家看清。Cracker Barrel的主要顾客群体当然是保守派，对吧？这就是它的品牌、营销和顾客体验的核心。

Like, you know, why are we running a political campaign against a southern themed chain restaurant? You know, that seems like out of left field. But under the surface, there was something more serious happening that's important to understand. Cracker Barrel of course has a predominantly conservative customer base, right? That is the brand, that is the marketing, that is the customer experience.

然而，正如我那位专揭黑幕的记者朋友罗比·斯塔巴克所揭露的那样，在总部，Cracker Barrel的高管们已经全面觉醒。他们拥抱多元化、公平与包容（DEI），拥抱骄傲月活动，拥抱性别新代词，拥抱给儿童的变装皇后表演，实际上与近年来我们看到的其他左翼企业高管毫无区别。这再次与他们的顾客群体形成了巨大反差，因此，如果我们的目标是让美国机构中的觉醒意识形态回退，就应该从那些我们拥有最大影响力的机构开始。由于Cracker Barrel高管与顾客之间的这种差异，很明显，只需付出一点点努力，我们就能“砸碎这个桶”。最后一点，Cracker Barrel只是达成目的的手段。说实话，我从未去过Cracker Barrel。

And yet at corporate headquarters, as my friend the muckraking journalist Robbie Starbuck uncovered, at corporate headquarters Cracker Barrel executives had gone full woke. They had embraced DEI, embraced pride programming, embraced gender neo pronouns, embraced drag queens for kids, and really were indistinguishable from any of the other left wing corporate executives that we've seen in recent years. That is again a huge distinction from their customer base, and so if our goal is to roll back woke ideologies in America's institutions, you want to start with institutions where you have the most leverage, and it was obvious because of this discrepancy between the executives and the customers at Cracker Barrel that we could in fact break the barrel with just a small amount of effort. And then the final point is that Cracker Barrel is a means to an end. Again, I've actually never been to Cracker Barrel.

我不确定我是否愿意去Cracker Barrel消费，那不是我的菜，但关键在于，Cracker Barrel这场争议如果获胜——也确实获胜了——将向其他企业高管发出信号：如果你拥抱左翼意识形态事业，就会给公司、品牌好感度和利润带来重大风险。

I'm not sure I would want to patronize Cracker Barrel, that's not my kind of food, but the idea is that Cracker Barrel is a controversy that if it can be won, and it was won, will send a signal to other corporate executives that if you embrace left wing ideological causes, you're opening up significant risk to your company, to your brand favorability, and to your bottom line.

我们来谈谈Cracker Barrel的历史，好吗，以及它作为一家私营公司的权利。九十年代初，Cracker Barrel因解雇同性恋员工而受到审查。随后在二十一世纪初，我记得是2002或2004年，它和解了一场诉讼，指控白人员工可以拒绝为黑人顾客服务，餐厅按种族隔离，黑人顾客被投喂垃圾桶里的食物。那是21、22年前的事？于是Cracker Barrel转型，说我们要支持骄傲月。

Let's talk about Cracker Barrel's history, okay, and its its rights, if it has any, as a private company. So Cracker Barrel came under scrutiny in the early nineteen nineties after it fired gay employees. Then in the early two thousands, I think it was 02/2004, it settled a lawsuit in which the allegations were white employees were allowed to refuse to serve black customers, Diners were segregated based on race, and black diners were served food from the trash. Twenty, twenty one years ago? So Cracker Barrel pivots, and it says, we're gonna support pride.

我们要搞DEI项目。为什么一家私营公司不能自己做这个决定？这不是大学，克里斯。你的税款可没流向它。

We're gonna have a DEI program. Why can't a private company make that decision for itself? This is not a college, Chris. Your tax dollars are not going there.

我认为你犯了两个巨大的跳跃，而且很可能是事实错误。当然，如果那是真的——我没看过那份诉讼，也没看过和解协议——但如果他们真的拒绝为黑人顾客服务，那就是违反了《民权法案》。我很高兴听到Cracker Barrel为此付出代价并纠正了行为。我想我们都会同意这违反了反歧视条款，但你假设资助儿童变装皇后表演就能弥补九十年代门店的种族歧视，这似乎是巨大的跳跃，根本说不通，也无法解释这种行为。

I I I think you're making two huge leaps and likely errors of fact. So certainly if that's true, I haven't read the lawsuit, I didn't read the settlement, but certainly if they were, for example, refusing to serve black customers, that's a violation of the Civil Rights Act. I'm glad to hear that Cracker Barrel paid a penalty for that and rectified its behavior. I think we can all agree that that is a violation of non discrimination provisions, but you're assuming that somehow funding drag queens for kids rectifies racial discrimination at its stores in the 1990s. That seems like an enormous leap, and that is not really justifiable or not explanatory of the behavior.

然后你的第二个论点是，他们难道没有权利为员工支持they/them代词吗？我的意思是，当然可以，他们有权这么做。这是一家私人公司，他们可以用they/them代词，可以用it/itself代词，甚至可以用frog/frogself代词，都没问题，完全没问题。

And then your second thing is like, well, don't they have the right to support theythem pronouns for their employees? I mean, sure, they're allowed to do that. It's a private company. They can use theythem pronouns, they can use ititself pronouns, they can use frog frog self pronouns for that matter. That's totally fine.

但当然，根据我的第一修正案权利，我可以指出他们正在这样做，并发表公开批评。然后投资者当然有权处置自己的财产，抛售该公司的股票。

But then of course, it's my First Amendment right to highlight the fact that they're doing so and to issue a public criticism. And then of course it's investors' rights of their own property to sell shares of the company.

我们来谈谈你对跨性别者的看法。八月下旬，你发推文说：“我们应该让自由主义的错觉彻底终结：跨性别主义只是个人选择或‘各活各的’的问题。它是一种意识形态，已经给数百万美国人造成了严重伤害，并在我们的社会释放了一股虚无主义的暴力浪潮。够了。”你如何定义跨性别主义？

Let's talk about your views on transgender people. In late August, you tweeted, quote, We should now put to rest the libertarian delusion that transgenderism is a matter of personal choice or live and let live. It's an ideology that has done grave damage to millions of Americans and has unleashed a nihilistic wave of violence on our society. Enough. How do you define transgenderism?

跨性别主义很简单。它是一种意识形态，认为男人可以通过采用不同的性别代词、不同的个人服饰和装扮、青春期阻滞剂、激素药物，以及在很多情况下的生殖器手术，变成女人；女人也可以变成男人。这种意识形态不仅仅是个人信仰，它还渴望在公共领域占据一席之地，因此声称所谓的跨性别人士有权获得公共补贴的医疗干预，声称拒绝承认所谓跨性别人士的性别认同是违反民权法的行为，并游说在公共教育、公共卫生、公共行政等机构中强制复制这种意识形态。这就是我对这种意识形态的定义。

Transgenderism is quite simple. It's an ideology that holds that men can become women and women can become men through the adoption of different gender pronouns, different personal dress and costume, puberty blockers, hormone drugs and in many cases genital surgeries and this ideology is not just a personal ideology but it has the aspirations of annexing its position in the public square and so claiming that so called transgender people have an entitlement to publicly subsidized medical interventions, claiming that refusing to recognize the gender identity of so called transgender people is a violation of civil rights law, and then lobbying for the of forcible ideological reproduction of the ideology within the institutions of public education, public health, public administration. And so that's how I would define the ideology.

当你谈论跨性别人士时，你使用的语言类似于那些批判“白人身份”的人，他们说“白人身份是一种意识形态”“白人身份应该被废除”“白人身份是邪恶的”。你显然不喜欢这种语言。白人是个体，把他们简化为肤色是——你知道的——疯了。

When you talk about trans people, you employ similar language to the critical whiteness people who say whiteness is an ideology. Whiteness should be abolished. Whiteness is evil. Now you understandably dislike this language. White people are individuals, and to reduce them to their skin color is you know, it's nuts.

学者会说我们误解了他们的观点，但先别管学者怎么想。你有没有意识到，你谈论跨性别人士的方式，跟你非常讨厌的那些人谈论“白人身份”的方式一模一样？

Academics would say we're misunderstanding their point, but let's let's not care for a second what academics think. Are you aware that you're talking the same way about trans people as these people that you seem to really detest?

我完全不这么认为。我——我——我觉得那不是一个准确或公平的比较。

I don't think I am at all. I I I think that's that's that's not an accurate or fair comparison.

不认为跨性别主义是意识形态，白人身份是

Don't think Transgenderism is an ideology, whiteness is an

我批评的是跨性别主义这种意识形态。它显然是一种意识形态，对吧？没有人天生就是跨性别者。

I'm criticizing the ideology of transgenderism. It's obviously an ideology, right? Nobody is born transgender.

哦，好吧，

Oh, well,

我的意思是，

I mean,

你你

you you

你知道，这，再说一次，这是一个观点和信仰。

You know, is, again, this is an opinion and a belief.

这不是观点。这不是信仰。不，不。连跨性别活动人士也不相信人们天生就是跨性别者。我的意思是，这根本说不通，对吧？

It's not an opinion. It's not a belief. No, no. Even transgender activists don't believe that people are born transgender. I mean, it doesn't make any sense, right?

所以我认为这完全是个误称，我的意思是，说跨性别身份可以与种族身份相提并论，这完全是个误称。我认为那只是一个错误的观念。

And so I think that it's a total misnomer, I mean, total misnomer to say that it's comparable, like transgender identity is comparable to racial identity. I think that's just a false sense.

这个想法是把人排除在外

The idea is it's leaving people out

在这个等式之外。把人排除在外

of the equation. It's leaving people out

在这个等式之外。跨性别者是存在的。

of the equation. Transgender people exist.

关于白人身份。这根本不是真的。是的。那那不是那不是真的。

About whiteness. It's not true at all. Yeah. That that's not that's not true.

你相信跨性别者存在并有权存在吗？

Do you believe that transgender people exist and have the right to exist?

听着，我的意思是，这些又是那种像虚无主义禅宗公案一样的意识形态问题。那不是真正的问题。

Look, I mean, again, these are ideological questions that are like Zen Koans of nihilism. That's not a real question.

是的，克里斯，这是真正的问题。

Yes, Chris, is real question.

那是一个用委婉语包装的问题，所以我会非常清楚地回答。你相信跨性别者存在吗？当然，我相信那些认为自己的性别认同与生理性别不同的人存在吗？当然，显而易见。但最终，这并不意味着他们说的是真的，因为这很明显。

That's question masked in a euphemism, so I'll answer it very clearly. Do you believe that transgender people exist? Sure, I believe that people who believe that their gender identity is distinct from their biological sex exist? Of course, obviously. Ultimately, it doesn't mean that what they're saying is true because it's quite obvious.

男人不能变成女人，女人也不能变成男人。

Men cannot become women, and women cannot become men.

你写了一本书，讲的是一些聪明人开始相信美国是一个邪恶的地方，坏到无可救药，只有走向极端才能改革。他们的一些极端观点可以说是荒谬且非美国的。你的一些极端观点也可以说是荒谬且非美国的。

You wrote a book about smart people who came to believe that America was an evil place, that it was bad beyond redemption, and that it could really only be reformed if people move to extremes. Some of their extremes were arguably absurd and un American. Some of your extremes are arguably absurd and un American.

说一个。说一个。我没有任何极端观点，一个都没有。

Name one. Name one. I don't have any extreme opinions, not one.

你书中描写的那些激进分子，克里斯，从来没有特别尴尬或抱歉。这是你在书中反复提到的一点。你觉得你自己会吗？

None of the radicals that you profiled, Chris, were ever particularly embarrassed or sorry. This is a point in your book you kind of return to again and again. Do you think you ever will be?

嗯，不会，再说一次，我认为你很多问题的 factual 前提本身就令人难以置信。我哪一个立场是极端的？我其实觉得我所有立场都很温和，经过深思熟虑，符合基本道德，几乎毫无争议。我发现自己处于一个很奇怪的位置，被当成激进分子，但实际上我的立场非常温和，非常主流，跨越地理和时间都有广泛支持。我真的很希望你能告诉我，我的哪一个立场那么极端。

Well, no, again, I think the factual premise of many of your questions is something hard to believe. What single position do I have is extreme? I actually think all of my positions are moderate, well reasoned, in accordance with basic decency and almost unremarkable. I find myself in this very odd position where I'm treated like a radical when in fact my positions are so moderate, so mainstream, so broadly supported across geography and time. I I really am hoping you can tell me which one of my positions is is so extreme.

我会让我们的听众自己判断。让我再问最后一个问题，可以吗？批评者有时在被要求描绘一个良好社会的愿景时会卡壳。你批评了美国目前的状况。你的愿景是什么？

I'm gonna let our our listeners make that call for themselves. Let me do one last question if I could. Critics sometimes stall when they're asked to provide a vision of a good society. You're a critic of what's been going on in America. What is yours?

对你来说，一个好的美国是什么样子？

What does a good America look like to you?

我认为，与我们的讨论相关，我们需要做的事情其实很简单。我们需要转向一种无视肤色的平等标准，让政府不论血统平等对待所有个人；同时，我们必须对如何处理公共机构有清晰的认识，确保这些机构始终反映公众的价值观。所以我相信，只要我们与美国人民站在一起，坚守我们的宪法，坚守由我们的建国者确立并指引我们解决历史诸多挑战与缺陷的自由与平等精神，我们就将继续拥有世界上最伟大的国家。我知道绝大多数美国人民与我同在，我相信我们都能团结在这一议程之下。

What I think we need to do relevant to our conversation is quite simple. We need to move to a standard of colorblind equality so that the government treats all individuals equally regardless of ancestry, and we need to have a very clear eyed vision about what we do with our public institutions and to ensure that the public institutions always reflect the values of the public. And so I think if we stick with the American people, we stick with our constitution and we stick with the spirit of liberty and equality that was entrenched by our founders who pointed us to resolve the many challenges and shortcomings of history. We will continue to have the greatest country in the world. I know that the vast majority of the American people are with me and I think we can all unite behind this agenda.

克里斯·鲁福是《美国的文化革命》一书的作者。我们会在节目注释中放上这本书的链接。克里斯，感谢你做客节目。

Chris Rufo is the author of America's Cultural Revolution. We'll put a link to the book in our show notes. Chris, thank you for coming on.

谢谢。

Thank you.

今天的团队有迈尔斯·布莱恩特、乔莉·迈尔斯、帕特里克·博伊德、阿德里安·利利和劳拉·布拉德。这里是《今日解读》。

Today's team, Miles Bryant, Jolie Myers, Patrick Boyd, Adrian Lilley, and Laura Bullard. It's today explained.