特朗普如何颠覆60年民权运动

我是《连环》节目的主持人莎拉·柯尼希。我们有一档新节目，名为《预防者》，讲述的是宾夕法尼亚州东部发生的一件怪事。有父母声称他们带孩子去医院就医，结果却被迫独自离开。

This is Sarah Koenig, host of Serial. We have a new show. It's called The Preventionist. It's about something strange that happened in Eastern Pennsylvania. Parents claiming they'd walked into a hospital to get medical care for their children and then were forced to leave without them.

为什么这些父母突然失去了孩子的监护权？由Serial Productions和《纽约时报》联合制作的《预防者》即将上线。符合条件的Time订阅用户现在就可以在Apple Podcasts和Spotify上收听，快去订阅吧，或者等到10月30日全平台上线。

Why were these parents suddenly losing custody of their kids? From Serial Productions and The New York Times, it's The Preventionist. Eligible Time subscribers can listen right now on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, so head there to subscribe, or listen anywhere October 30.

我是《纽约时报》的迈克尔·比尔巴罗。这里是《每日》节目。在特朗普总统第二任期带来的所有剧变中，最被忽视却影响深远的或许是他以打击DEI为名，迅速颠覆了多年的民权成果。今天，妮可·汉娜·琼斯将为我们讲述一个时代的终结，以及民权政府给非裔美国人带来的日益加剧的恐惧。今天是10月21日，星期二。

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Bilbaro. This is The Daily. Of all the seismic changes that president Trump has made in his second term, perhaps the most overlooked and consequential is the speed with which he has upended years of civil rights, much of it under the guise of attacking DEI. Today, Nicole Hannah Jones, on the end of an era and the growing fear of what a civil rights government will mean for Black Americans. It's Tuesday, October 21.

妮可，在开始之前，我想为最近没听过你节目的听众重新介绍一下你的背景。我认为你是这个国家关于种族和民权议题的顶尖权威——不仅是在《纽约时报》，在整个美国新闻界都是如此。你创建了'1619项目'并因此获得普利策评论奖。所以当我们得知你正在调查特朗普政府在DEI方面的大动作时——这是他们的说法——我们非常期待这次对话。感谢你抽空参加。

Nicole, before we get started, I want to reestablish your background for listeners who maybe haven't heard you on the show in a little bit. You are, I would argue, the preeminent authority on the subject of race and civil rights in this country, not just, I would say, at the New York Times, but in American journalism. You're the creator of the sixteen nineteen project for which you won a Pulitzer Prize in commentary. And so when we learned that you were looking into the Trump administration's big moves around DEI, that's their description of this, we were very eager to have this conversation with you. So thank you for making time for us.

呃，我可能不敢当'顶尖专家'这个称号，不过很感谢你们的邀请。

Well, maybe I would quibble with the preeminent expert, but thank you for having me on.

首先我想承认一点：我们长期以来一直试图理解特朗普政府在DEI问题上做出的这些决定。因为这些大动作很明显是要彻底清除任何涉及'多样性、公平性和包容性'的内容，但要理解其背后的整体框架和最终目的却比较困难。而你的调查正好解答了这个问题。

And here, I wanna begin with an admission on our part. We had been trying to wrap our arms around these decisions that the Trump administration was making when it comes to DEI for quite some time. Because I think it's fair to say it was easy to see the big moves they were making and how wide ranging this effort was to root out anything, even mentioning the words diversity, equity, and inclusion. But it was harder to understand what all of it was driving at, what this larger framework was that this fit into. But that's exactly as it happens what you were trying to do.

那么你的报道是从哪里开始的？

So where did your reporting begin?

因此，我的报道工作从一开始就聚焦于特朗普在上任头三天签署的行政命令。显而易见，尽管他声称竞选是基于经济议题，并以经济焦虑为胜选理由，但其早期政策实质上是种族政策。

So my reporting began really immediately looking at the executive orders that Trump rolled out on his first, second, third day of office. And seeing that, you know, despite him saying he was running on an economic campaign and securing his victory on the idea of economic anxiety that his very early policies were racial policies.

唐纳德·特朗普重返椭圆办公室首日，便签署行政命令终止联邦机构的多元化、公平与包容项目。

On his first day back in the Oval Office, Donald Trump signed an executive order ending diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in federal agencies.

总统称DEI项目违法、不道德且具有歧视性。

The president calls DEI programs illegal, immoral, and discriminatory.

这是

This is

件大事。择优原则。我们的国家将重新以才能为根基。你能相信吗？

a big deal. Merit. Our country is going to be based on merit again. Can you can you believe it?

他们攻击的目标被他笼统称为DEI。嗯。特朗普总统最先采取的行动之一，就是废止了林登·B·约翰逊总统1965年签署的行政令。

They were targeting what he was broadly describing as DEI. Mhmm. And one of the very first things Trump did President Trump provoked an executive order signed by president Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965.

该法令规定雇主不得基于种族、性别等因素歧视求职者或雇员

Which stipulates that employers can't discriminate against job applicants or workers on the basis of race, gender, and other

在他上任的第二天，他就撤销了林登·B·约翰逊作为民权运动一部分签署的一项行政令，该行政令旨在试图打击就业歧视。

On his second day in office, he rescinded an executive order that Lyndon B. Johnson had issued as part of the civil rights movement in order to try to enforce against employment discrimination.

嗯。

Mhmm.

所以特朗普的做法是废除该命令。但他通过称其为非法的DEI（多元化、公平与包容）来废除该命令。这立刻引起了我的警觉。

And so what Trump does is he repeals that order. But he repeals that order by calling it illegal DEI. And my antenna immediately went up.

为什么？

Why?

因为那显然不是DEI。DEI是另一回事。

Well, because it's clearly not DEI. DEI is something different.

而且很可能在林登·B·约翰逊担任总统时，DEI这个概念甚至还不存在。

And presumably didn't even exist back when Lyndon B. Johnson was president.

没错。所以我非常震惊，他最初的行动之一就是撤销这项试图执行民权法的行政令，更令人震惊的是他将此称为DEI，并将DEI定性为非法。

Exactly. And so I was really startled that one of his very first acts was to rescind this executive order that's trying to enforce civil rights law, but also that he was labeling it DEI and labeling DEI illegal.

所以一旦你的天线竖起，感觉到总统针对DEI的行动另有隐情，你会怎么做？你看到了什么？

So once your antennae are up and your sense is that the president's campaign to go after DEI is something else, what do you do? What do you see?

嗯，这是第二天。你知道，我是杂志撰稿人，所以我不报道突发新闻。

Well, this was day two. You know, I'm a magazine writer, and so I you know, I don't cover breaking news.

你以最好的方式从容不迫。

I You take your time in the best possible way.

没错。我试着退后一步，真正看清这里正在展开的更大故事。所以我只是观察一切，早期阶段发生了很多事。

Right. I try to sit back and really see what's the larger story that is unfolding here. So I'm just watching everything, and a lot is happening in those early days.

截至今天下午五点，全国所有联邦DEI办公室都关闭了。DEI员工今早醒来发现邮箱被停用，他们已被强制休假。

As of five this afternoon, every federal DEI office in the country got shuttered. DEI employees woke up this morning and found out their emails were suspended and they've been put on leave.

NBC新闻获悉，国防情报局已下令暂停所有与马丁·路德·金纪念日或黑人历史月相关的活动。

NBC News has learned that the Defense Intelligence Agency has ordered a pause on all events related to MLK Day or Black History Month.

六月节、骄傲月、女性历史月、大屠杀纪念日，全部暂停。你看到的是某种——

Juneteenth, Pride Month, Women's History Month, Holocaust Remembrance Day, all paused. You were seeing kind of

联邦网站上关于黑人优先或女性生育的内容被清除。

the purging of federal websites that were talking about black first or women's birth.

国家公园管理局从其专门介绍地下铁路的网页上删除了对废奴主义者哈丽特·塔布曼的提及。

The National Park Service has removed a reference to abolitionist Harriet Tubman from its webpage that's dedicated to the underground railroad.

军事网站也撤下了对传奇的塔斯基吉飞行员、二战中著名的纳瓦霍密码通讯员以及原住民海军陆战队员艾拉·海耶斯的致敬内容——他是在硫磺岛战役中升起国旗的士兵之一。

Military websites also taking down tributes to the legendary Tuskegee Airmen, the fabled Navajo code talkers of World War II, and Ira Hayes, a native American and one of the marines who raised the flag at

在这场针对多元文化国家历史记录工作的闪电战中，各种形式的抹除行为正在以多种方式大规模发生。

There was a lot of erasure that was happening in a lot of different ways in this blitzkrieg of targeting, of all sorts of efforts to really catalog the history of this multicultural country.

嗯。

Mhmm.

我正在和编辑讨论，她非常希望我做一篇记录这种抹除现象的报道。我认为这很重要。但同时，我也观察到所有这些联邦机构正在发生的事情。我意识到，这里发生的远不止是抹除，而是涉及基本公民权利的更重大事件。

So I'm talking with my editor, and she's really wanting me to do a story that is cataloging that erasure. And I thought that was important. And yet at the same time, I'm also looking at what's happening across all of these different federal agencies. And I'm like, there's something much, much bigger that's happening here that is more than erasure that's actually about basic civil rights.

请详细说明。你究竟看到联邦机构发生了什么事情？

Well, explain that. What exactly did you see happening across federal agencies?

正如我之前提到的，第一个迹象是撤销了这项民权时代颁布的禁止就业歧视的行政令。

So the first sign, like I mentioned before, was the rescinding of this civil rights era order against employment discrimination.

嗯。

Mhmm.

随后事态迅速恶化。特朗普政府宣布将削减劳工部民权执法部门90%的人员编制，同时也在裁撤美国教育部的民权部门，并威胁要解雇住房与城市发展部所有民权律师——他们逐个机构下手，使民权执法变得不可能。例如环保署署长李·泽尔丁宣布撤销该机构全部10个区域环境正义与民权办公室。我注意到在这些行政令和行动中，特朗普将多元化平等包容（DEI）与民权混为一谈。

And then it quickly got deeper than that. So the Trump administration said they were going to slash 90% of the staff for this civil rights enforcement arm of the Department of Labor. The Trump administration was also gutting the civil rights division of the US Department of Education, threatening to, you know, lay off all of these civil rights lawyers at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, going agency by agency and making it impossible to enforce civil rights. So for instance, Lee Zeldin, who's the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, he announces that the agency is eliminating all 10 of its regional environmental justice and civil rights offices. And I'm noticing how in these orders and these actions, Trump is conflating DEI with civil rights.

他把这两者视为同一事物。因此很明显，他正在利用DEI来攻击民权。

He's treating these two as the same thing. And so it becomes pretty clear that he is using DEI to attack civil rights.

让我们先明确这些术语的定义。在你看来，总统正在利用DEI的概念来暂停、逆转，某些情况下听起来甚至是要废除民权。但简单来说，这两者究竟有什么区别？显然它们之间存在着紧密联系。

Well, let's just define these terms. In your mind, the president is using the concept of DEI to pause, reverse, in some cases, it sounds like perhaps even eviscerate civil rights. But quite simply, what exactly is the difference? Because clearly, there's a strong relationship between the two.

民权是法律和法定保护措施，主要作为1960年代民权运动的成果而确立，旨在保障基本且至关重要的权利。这些法律保护我们的思想、言论和宗教自由。在美国，我们通常认为民权是保护少数群体免受歧视的制度——我们讨论的是实打实的法定权利。而多元化、平等与包容作为一种意识形态，它源于民权及其保障的保护措施，但二者并非同一事物。

Civil rights are laws and legal protections, mostly passed in the nineteen sixties as part of the civil rights movement that exist to ensure basic and essential rights. So these laws protect our freedom of thought in speech and religion. And typically in The United States, we think of civil rights as protecting minority groups from discrimination. So we're talking about actual rights. Diversity, equity, and inclusion as an ideology, it arises out of civil rights and the protections that civil rights ensure, but they aren't the same things.

我们现在所知的DEI概念直到2010年左右才出现。而DEI在美国几乎所有机构的普及，则要等到2020年乔治·弗洛伊德遇害事件引发种族问题反思之后。如今我们通常所说的DEI其实并没有统一定义——它可能是你参加过的关于特权与种族机制的职场培训，可能是关于性别的培训，也可能是旨在让工作环境更包容有色人种或其他边缘群体的项目。

We don't really see what we today know as DEI until 2010 or so. And you don't see the proliferation of DEI across nearly every American institution until after 2020, with the murder of George Floyd and the racial reckoning. What we typically think of today as DEI, I mean, it really doesn't have a single definition. So DEI could be that corporate training that you had to go through about privilege and how race works. It could be a training about gender, or it could be programs to try to make workspaces more inclusive of people of color or other marginalized groups.

这几乎可以涉及任何事。显然，这比民权问题更模糊。说实话，我曾批评过多元化、公平与包容（DEI）倡议，因为我觉得太多只是表面功夫——比如有些公司，你可以查查他们的管理层黑人占比，再看看他们高调聘请的DEI主管既无预算又无实权，却占据着显眼职位。

It could be really just about anything. And that's a little squishier, obviously, than civil rights. And look, I myself was a critic of DEI because I felt so much of it was performative, that, you know, you had companies where you could look at their hiring track record. What percentage of Black people do you employ in management? And yet, they're putting out these statements and hiring DEI officers who would have no budget and no power and yet had this very public position.

某种程度上这成了道德作秀。

Some of it became virtue signaling.

没错，这种情况很普遍。所以很多人对DEI翻白眼——这就是我们国家的现状。人们没意识到更本质、更危险的侵蚀正在发生。

Yes. There was a lot of that. And so, you know, a lot of people probably roll their eyes at DEI. That's where we are in this country. And so weren't really realizing that something much, much more essential and dangerous was happening.

但我亲眼见证着每个政府机构里，那些历经数十年建立的民权体系正被逐步拆解。其速度之快、手段之老练前所未见。

But I was seeing, kind of agency by agency, this entire civil rights infrastructure that had been set up over decades being dismantled. And that was happening at a pace and a rate and a sophistication that we had not seen before.

妮可，我想深入探讨这点：为何对DEI的瓦解会演变成对民权本身的破坏？毕竟美国多数民权源于宪法修正案和《1964年民权法案》这类法律，理论上应该极难被推翻。请解释这个逻辑链条。

Well, Nicole, I just wanna linger on that idea for a moment. How exactly could it be possible that what begins as a dismantling of DEI somehow becomes the dismantling of civil rights itself. Because so many of the civil rights in this country come from constitutional amendments, come from laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that would seem to make them not at all easy to roll back or dismantle in the first place. So just explain that.

法律不会自动执行。就像我们有反谋杀和抢劫的法律，但仍需要警察部门去执法。联邦机构同理——很多人不知道，每个主要联邦机构内部都设有民权执法部门。

Well, laws are not self enforcing. Right? This is why you have laws against murder and robbery, but you still have a police department that has to go out and enforce the law. And so that's the same thing with federal agencies. Most people I have found are actually surprised that every major federal agency actually has a civil rights enforcement division within that agency.

这有其深层原因：联邦政府触及美国人生活的每个角落，因此它才是执行民权法最有力的工具。无论是私营承包商、公共福利还是各类机构都与联邦政府有交集。自《1964年民权法案》后，各部门设立民权办公室就是为了确保联邦接触的每个群体都能获得强有力的民权保障。为何联邦层面如此关键？我们必须明白：当初需要联邦民权法，正是因为某些州政府曾公然歧视黑人公民。

And there's a reason for that. The federal government touches every aspect of American lives, and it is actually the greatest tool, therefore, of enforcing civil rights law because, you know, all types of private contractors engage with the federal government, our public benefits, all of these institutions. And so out of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, we see this growth of civil rights offices within the various divisions to ensure that any community that the federal government was engaging with was going to have robust civil rights enforcement. So why does that matter so much at the federal level? We have to understand, you know, the reason we even needed federal civil rights laws was because in some states, the state was actively discriminating against black Americans.

他们曾实施种族隔离法律和强制措施。因此，在各州层面上，非裔美国人往往无法向地方政府或州政府寻求免受歧视的保护。所以联邦政府必须介入——这一历史可以追溯到奴隶制终结时期——以确保非裔美国人的权利在全国范围内得到落实。社会保障署设有民权部门（至少曾经存在），正是因为非裔美国人在申领社保福利时确实遭遇过歧视。

They had segregation laws and segregation mandates. And so, on a state by state basis, Black Americans often could not go to their government to get relief from discrimination, not their local government, not their state government. So the federal government had to step in, really historically, going all the way back to the end of slavery, to ensure that Black Americans' rights were being enforced across the country. So the Social Security Department has a civil rights division, or at least it did. And that was because Black Americans actually face discrimination in trying to obtain their Social Security benefits.

退伍军人事务部也被证实存在非裔美国人获取退伍福利时遭受歧视的情况。因此该机构也设有民权部门（至少曾经存在）。

The Veterans Administration, it's been shown that Black Americans face discrimination in trying to access their veterans benefits. So there's a civil rights division in that agency, or at least there was.

这个机制的意思是：如果你去当地社保办公室申领支票被拒绝，可以向社保管理局民权部门申诉，由他们来纠正这种不公。

And so the idea is that if you're going to your local Social Security office and saying, I'm here to get my check, and the local office said, no, I'm not giving you your Social Security check, then that could be appealed to the civil rights division of the Social Security Administration who would then redress it.

没错。所有联邦机构都是如此。虽然我常以非裔美国人为例讨论民权，但这些权利保护所有美国人。对于女性、移民、宗教少数群体、残障人士而言，这些机构帮助他们将法律条文上的权利转化为现实权益。若这些机构被彻底废除或瘫痪，就意味着民权执法将名存实亡。

Right. And so this is true across all of these different federal agencies. And we tend to think of, and of course, I talk about civil rights often through the frame of Black Americans, but these rights protect all Americans. And so it's been very critical for women, for people who come from foreign countries, for people who come from a, you know, minority religion, for people who are disabled to be able to have their rights that exist on paper vindicated. And so to have those agencies either fully dismantled or crippled, it sends a signal that there's going to be very little civil rights enforcement.

确实。按你的说法，若没有联邦层面的民权执法体系，民权法律在某种意义上就失去了存在的意义。

Right. And from what you're saying, without the federal infrastructure of enforcing civil rights law, those civil rights laws, in a certain sense, cease to do what they're intended to do.

完全正确。我们总是带着滤镜回顾民权运动时期，却忘了在这个国家争取这些权利付出了什么代价——非裔美国人奋斗了八十年，这是场血腥致命的斗争，期间还发生了政治暗杀事件。

Yes. Absolutely. You know, I I think we look back on that period of the civil rights movement in kind of gauzy ways. We forget what it took to actually get those rights in this country, that Black Americans were fighting for eighty years to get those rights, that this was a bloody and deadly fight. There were political assassinations.

存在私刑暴力。这些权利曾被血腥镇压。我们总爱讲述这样的故事：当权利法案签署后，所有认为'黑人应安分守己'的愤怒与仇恨一夜消散。但事实并非如此——这种观念早已深植于我们的社会肌理。

There were lynchings. That these rights had been violently suppressed. And we tend to tell the story that once those rights were achieved, then all of that anger and hatred and belief that Black Americans should stay in their place, that it just dissipated overnight with the signing of these laws. It didn't. That was ingrained in our society.

因此，几乎就在20世纪60年代那些民权法案通过后不久，我们就看到了反弹。

And so, almost immediately, after the passage of those civil rights laws of the 1960s, we see a backlash.

我们正在征求对民权法案的意见。你想发表你的看法吗？我确实不喜欢它。这是肯定的。我不喜欢它。

We're soliciting opinions on the civil rights bill. Would you like to give us yours? I sure don't like it. That's for sure. I don't like it.

我认为你们只是想强加给我们一些我们不想要的东西。我觉得这是有史以来最荒谬的事情。

I think you're just trying to put something on us that we don't want. And I think this is the most ridiculous thing that has ever happened.

几乎立刻，我们就看到一场运动声称这些法律过于苛刻，认为它正在迫害那些被联邦政府干涉事务的白人美国人。

Almost immediately, we see a movement that says these laws are too onerous, that it's victimizing white Americans who have the federal government prying in their business.

为什么联邦政府不能放过我们，把学校还给我们？

Why can't the federal government leave us alone and give us our school?

例如，你开始看到对学校融合努力的限制。

You started to see, for instance, restrictions on efforts to integrate schools.

我们不想惹麻烦。

We want no trouble.

我们并不谴责这些黑人。他们也是人。我们理解这一点，但我们想要霍华德的学校。

We don't condemn these black people. They are human beings too. We understand that, but we want Howard's school.

你看，民权运动几年后，最高法院就受理了一起挑战大学平权法案的案件。

You see, within a few years of the civil rights movement, a Supreme Court case challenging affirmative action programs in college.

今天有人谈论白人和黑人，特别是白人的权利。这在以前是闻所未闻的。

Today, there was talk of white and black, in particular the rights of the white person. This was not heard before.

我作为一个白人，因为所谓的逆向歧视而受到歧视。所以我感觉

I, as a white person, am discriminated against because of, you know, reverse discrimination. So I feel

而且你看，里根政府通过教育部推行这些反白人政策——他们称之为逆向歧视认定。这种势头在乔治·布什接手后愈演愈烈。这种模式由来已久——有些人甚至想推翻1964年的《民权法案》。虽然缺乏政治意愿实现这点，但可以逐步削弱它。

And you see, you know, the Reagan administration bring these anti white or what they would call reverse discrimination findings through the Department of Education. And that just only gains momentum when George Bush took over. So this has long been a pattern. I mean, some folks wanted to overturn the 1964 Civil Rights Act. There wasn't a political will to do that, but you could defang it.

因此我们看到，随着时间的推移，利用民权法积极纠正多年种族歧视的能力正在被持续削弱。而在特朗普任内，这种酝酿六十年的愿景终于迎来了最佳时机。

So we see over time the steady chipping away of the ability to use civil rights law to affirmatively remedy years of racial discrimination. And under Trump, you kinda see this sixty year vision meet its perfect moment.

我们稍后回来。

We'll be right back.

我是黛博拉·卡门，《纽约时报》的调查记者。有一次，我正在调查房地产行业的不良行为，这个案子特别棘手。在和编辑开会时，她问我：‘黛博拉，你的脸色怎么这么苍白？’我就如实告诉了她。

I'm Deborah Kamen. I'm an investigative reporter at The New York Times. This one time, I was working on a particularly difficult investigation of the bad behavior in the real estate industry. I was in a meeting with my editor, and she said, Deborah, why is your face so white? And I just told her the truth.

我说：‘你知道，这个报道真的很难。’她看着我说：‘这就是我们的工作。’我时常想起这句话。在《纽约时报》，从没人对我说过‘这目标太远大’或‘这报道太难了’，恰恰相反。

I said, you know, this story is really hard. And she looked at me and said, that's what we do. I think about that all the time. At the New York Times, I have never encountered someone who said to me, that's too ambitious, or that story is too hard. It's the contrary.

他们会告诉我：‘你需要更深入挖掘。必须持续追踪，直到我们确认掌握了所有事实、所有层面，去报道那些因为困难而无人讲述的故事。’这正是《纽约时报》的特别之处——让读者不仅知道发生了什么，更理解背后的原因。如果你是订阅用户，或许已经体会过这种深度理解的感受。

I am told you need to dig deeper. You need to keep going until we make sure we have every single fact, every single layer to tell the stories that would not be told because they are hard. And that's what's special about The New York Times. It allows our readers to understand not just what's happening, but why it's happening. If you're a subscriber, you probably have experienced that sense of understanding.

感谢你支持这份事业。若你尚未订阅，可访问nytimes.com/subscribe。

And thank you for supporting this work. If you're not, you can subscribe at nytimes.com/subscribe.

那么妮可，请带我们更深入探讨特朗普政府如何瓦解联邦机构中的民权执法机制，以及我们认为这会如何开始影响民权法律实际履行其初衷的能力。

So, Nicole, take us more deeply inside the Trump administration's dismantling of these civil rights enforcement mechanisms in federal agencies and how it starts to, we think, impact the ability of civil rights laws to actually do their intended job.

以教育部为例——尽管特朗普政府声称，教育部并不制定课程（这由各州和地方决定），也不负责教师聘用。教育部的核心职能其实是作为民权执法部门，其根本使命是维护和保障学生的权利。

So we can look at a place like the Department of Education, which despite what the Trump administration says, the Department of Education does not set curriculum. That's set at the local and state level. It doesn't hire teachers. More than anything else, the Department of Education exists as a civil rights enforcement division. It really exists to enforce and ensure the rights of students.

但在特朗普政府任内，我们看到他们关闭了大部分负责执行这些权利的地区分支机构。这意味着什么？教育部的重要职能之一是保障残疾学生权益——这些学生本应获得特殊服务，但这些服务往往成本高昂，导致学区有时会拒绝提供。

But what you've seen under the Trump administration is they shuttered most of the regional divisions charged with enforcing those rights. So what does that mean? One of the major things that the Department of Education does is it enforce the rights of students who have disabilities. Students with disabilities are supposed to receive special services, but those services are often very expensive. And so sometimes school districts won't provide them.

教育部民权事务司将确保学生若对未获得应得服务提出投诉时，相关学区必须履行义务。同时，该部门也为有权获得适当教育的英语学习者执行法律，根据《教育法修正案第九条》保障体育运动的平等机会，并致力于消除黑人及其他学生在各教育阶段面临的种族差异问题。因此，当看到特朗普政府宣称要解散教育部时，他们实际是在剥夺全美学校执行民权法的能力。

The Department of Education Civil Rights Division will ensure that students, if they have a complaint, if they're not receiving the services that they are entitled to, that those districts comply. And also, they enforce the law for English language learners who have a right to an appropriate education. They enforce equal access to sports under Title IX. And then they also enforce against all of the racial disparities that Black and other students face, really, across every level of education. So when you see these efforts to dismantle the Department of Education, which is what the Trump administration has said, is he really wants to shutter the entire Department of Education, what they're really shuttering is the ability to enforce civil rights law across America's schools.

正如你之前所说，当联邦层面的执法消失后，任何投诉、诉讼或异议都将退回地方学区处理——而基于各种原因，这些学区可能缺乏采取行动的动力。

And as you said earlier, when that federal enforcement goes away, then any complaint, any lawsuit, any objection really falls back to the local school district, which, for a variety of reasons, may not have much of an incentive to do anything.

正是如此。如果歧视行为实施者就是地方政府本身，民众还能向何处申诉？届时人们唯一的救济途径只能是聘请私人律师或寻找民权组织代理。我们曾经拥有联邦政府的全力支持，如今这些执法部门几乎已被彻底掏空。

Exactly. Because if your local and state government are the actors who are committing the discrimination, where do you go? Now, really, the only avenue for redress that people would have would be to pay a private lawyer or to find a civil rights organization who might represent them. And so, where we once had the full weight and power of the federal government, The federal government has gutted nearly all the offices that will enforce the law.

好的。能否请您带我们深入了解另一个正在经历民权执法体系解体的机构？

Okay. Take us inside, if you could, another agency where we are seeing this dismantling of civil rights enforcement.

司法部的情况或许最能体现这种机构空心化带来的深刻危机。作为美国最基础的法律执行机构，司法部民权司堪称全国民权执法的明珠——它根据《1957年民权法案》设立，初衷正是保护黑人公民投票权，并起诉针对民权工作者的犯罪行为。

There's probably nowhere where this gutting is more profoundly troubling than what's happening at the Department of Justice. So, of course, the Department of Justice is this nation's most foundational law enforcement agency. And in fact, the civil rights division at the Department of Justice is considered kinda the crown jewel of civil rights enforcement in the country. It was created by the Civil Rights Act of 1957 precisely to protect the voting rights of black citizens and to prosecute crimes that were being committed against civil rights workers.

嗯。

Mhmm.

但在特朗普政府领导下，该民权司的实际作为却是：以执行反DEI（多元化、公平与包容）行政令为由，驳回投票权案件和涉及警察部门的民权案件。例如司法部放弃了对路易维尔警局的监督（该监督源于布雷onna·泰勒命案后拜登政府启动的调查），转而将矛头对准国内那些努力实现种族融合、遵守民权法平权法案要求的机构。

But now, under the Trump administration, if you look at what that civil rights division has actually done, it's moved to dismiss voting rights cases and civil rights cases involving police departments under the guise of enforcing Trump's anti DEI mandate. So, for instance, the Justice Department walked away from overseeing the Louisville Police Department, and that oversight had been initiated by the Biden administration following the killing of Breonna Taylor. The Justice Department instead is going to actually target organizations and institutions in this country for trying to integrate and comply with the affirmative action mandates of the civil rights law.

基于什么理由？

On what basis?

嗯，基于这些努力是反白人的，是对美国白人的种族歧视。

Well, on the basis that these efforts are anti white, that they are racially discriminatory against white Americans.

所以除了削弱所有这些机构的执法能力之外，你指出的还是政府为谁而战、将谁视为歧视受害者的立场转变。

So on top of dismantling much of the enforcement capacity across all these agencies, what you're pointing to is a change in who the administration is fighting for, who it sees as the victims of discrimination.

没错。比如当司法部试图驳回这起具有里程碑意义的民权诉讼时就能看到——那家化工企业向路易斯安那州'癌症巷'的贫困黑人社区排放大量污染物，导致该社区面临全美最高的癌症风险。

Exactly. So you see this when, for instance, the Department of Justice moves to dismiss this landmark civil rights lawsuit against this chemical company that was emitting so many pollutants into this poor Black community in Louisiana's Cancer alley, that that community faced the highest cancer risk in the whole country.

哇。

Wow.

但政府试图驳回此案，理由是受害方不是黑人社区，而是遭受歧视的公司。通过他们的言行我们反复看到，他们持续聚焦于所谓的'反白人歧视'。必须指出，这实际上是在试图重新定义白人作为美国种族主义和歧视的主要受害者——这完全不符合我们掌握的任何数据，甚至包括白人自己的调查报告。

But the administration sought to dismiss that case because they said that it wasn't the black community that was being victimized, but that it was the company that was being discriminated against. And we're seeing again and again through their language and their actions, they are constantly focusing on what they consider to be anti white discrimination. And I think it's important to say, trying to actually redefine white people as the primary victims of racism and discrimination in The United States. That's not backed up by any of the data we know, even self reporting amongst white Americans.

那么妮可，如果情况如此，若没有DEI（多元平等包容）运动，我们是否就不会陷入这种局面？特朗普政府能否像现在这样迅速彻底地推行这些政策？如果没有那种更模糊的——在我看来你远不如传统民权法律和制度重视的——多元化、公平与包容的制度化扩张的话？

Well, if that's the case, is it possible that we don't end up in this situation, Nicole, if not for DEI? Would the Trump administration be able to do what it is now doing as quickly and as thoroughly as it's doing it if not for the birth of the expansion of the institutionalization of diversity, equity, and inclusion, this mushier thing that I don't see you assigning anywhere near as much importance to as the traditional civil rights law and infrastructure.

我是说，迈克尔，这很难下定论。

I mean, you know, Michael, that's hard to say.

嗯。

Mhmm.

我不知道即使没有那些DEI（多元化、公平与包容）的努力，我们是否就不会走到今天这一步，毕竟六十年来我们一直沿着这个轨迹发展。但我确实认为，作为一种宣传工具，DEI及其被利用是有用的。我不认为那些进行这种表演性DEI的组织对民权事业有任何帮助。因为我认为，迈克尔，民调显示某些圈层对DEI产生了厌倦情绪，觉得有些DEI实践做得过火了。但这并不能成为正当理由。

I don't know that even without those DEI efforts, we wouldn't have arrived here anyway because, of course, we have been on this trajectory for sixty years. But I certainly think that in terms of a propaganda tool, DEI, and the co opting of that useful. And I don't think that all of the organizations that kind of engaged in this performative DEI have done civil rights any favors. Because I do think, you know, Michael, and the polling shows that there was a weariness with DEI amongst some circles, that there was a sense that some DEI practices went too far. I don't actually think it's a justification.

我不认为你不得不参加的那些不喜欢的培训，或是网站上某些让你感到冒犯的内容，能成为我们现状的合理借口。但我确实认为这削弱了人们对既定民权法律及其实施被废除的反对声音。

I don't think that some training you had to sit through that you didn't like or some person who put something on a website that you took offense to can justify kind of where we are. But I do think it dampened opposition to settled civil rights law and enforcement being undone.

我很高兴你用了'削弱反对声音'这个词，因为这似乎是我们应该讨论的问题。特朗普的信息不仅在美国共和党人中找到了听众，似乎民主党内部也没有太多反对声音。这可能意味着你所认为的问题并未被两党视为共同问题。

I'm glad you used that word dampen opposition because that seems like something we should talk about. Trump's message is not just finding an audience with Republicans in The United States, it would seem. There's not very much pushback you could contend from Democrats either. And that would perhaps suggest that the problem as you see it is not viewed in a bipartisan way as a problem.

我认为这在某种程度上是事实。民调显示大多数共和党人认为改善种族主义的努力让美国白人的生活更困难，他们倾向于将针对非裔美国人的种族主义视为过去的主要问题，而现在白人比任何其他群体更受种族主义之苦。但更令人惊讶的是，自2024年大选以来，关于种族态度的民调显示，认为白人因社会优势而大大受益（这些优势是非裔美国人所没有的）的民主党人比例在短短两年内暴跌了15个百分点。我不确定能否归咎于DEI，但显然存在某种社会力量让美国白人说：好吧，也许这做得太过分了。我认为有很大一部分群体真的不想再谈论种族问题了。

I think that is true to a degree. Polling shows that the majority of Republicans see efforts to ameliorate racism as making life more difficult for white Americans, that they tend to see racism against Black Americans as a major problem but of the past, and that now white Americans are suffering from racism more than any other group. But more surprising, I would imagine, is the fact that since the time of the twenty twenty four election, polling on racial attitudes showed that the percentage of Democrats who believe that white Americans benefit a great deal from advantages in society that black Americans don't have has plummeted 15 percentage points in just two years. I don't know that we can blame that on DEI, but certainly there was some societal force that was leading white Americans to say, Okay, maybe this has gone too far. And I think that there is a significant constituency who doesn't really want to talk about race anymore.

尽管他们可能不同意特朗普的其他政策，但对这些政策其实并没有太大异议。

And that while they may not agree with other Trump policies, they don't actually disagree with these that much.

我是说，让我们直截了当地问这个问题。考虑到我们讨论的所有原因——制度瓦解、民意调查显示公众似乎并不强烈反对——这是否意味着美国黑人，特别是现代民权时代，现在正式结束了？

I mean, let's just ask this plainly. Is for all the reasons we're talking about, the dismantling of the structures as well as the polling and the public opinion that seems to not be all that opposed to it, does that amount to the modern era of civil rights for Black Americans, specifically, now being over?

不幸的是，感觉确实如此。因为我认为我们正站在一个我们这代人从未经历过的美国时代的边缘。迈克尔，这正是我认为历史至关重要的时刻。

Unfortunately, that's what it feels like. Because I think that we are on the cusp of an America that no one our age, Michael, has ever lived in before. I mean, this is where I think history really matters.

详细说说。

Explain that.

这个国家曾经历过另一个时期，那时美国黑人获得了所有这些权利。这些权利在纸面上得以保留，但他们实际上失去了行使这些权利的能力。那个时期被称为'最低点'，是由历史学家雷福德·洛根命名的。他称之为最低点，因为'Nadir'意味着最低谷。

This country has experienced another period where black Americans gained all of these rights. And those rights would remain on paper, but they would lose any ability to actually access them. And that period was called the nadir. It was named so by a historian by the name of Rayford Logan. He named it the nadir because nadir means the low point.

这是重建时期之后的阶段。重建时期的核心是确保曾被奴役的人们能够获得完整的公民权利。因此我们通过了第十三修正案废除奴隶制，第十四修正案首次将平等保护写入宪法——无论种族，法律必须平等对待。这也是赋予我们出生公民权的依据。

This was the period after Reconstruction. Reconstruction was really about ensuring that people who had been enslaved will now be able to access full citizenship in this country. So we passed the thirteenth amendment, which ends slavery, the fourteenth amendment, which for the first time puts equal protection in the constitution. No matter your race, the law has to treat you the same. It's also what gives us birthright citizenship.

接着是第十五修正案，确保投票权不因种族被剥夺。这是美国通过第一部民权法（1866年民权法案）的时期，随后又出台了1875年民权法案。这是个非凡的阶段——刚从奴隶制解放出来几年，曾经被奴役的黑人男性就开始进入国会，担任参议员和众议员。

And We get the fifteenth Amendment, which ensures that you cannot be denied the right to vote based on your race. This is a period of time where the nation passes its first civil rights law, the 1866 Civil Rights Act, and that's followed by the 1875 Civil Rights Act. It's this remarkable period because literally, just a few years out of slavery, you have black men who had been enslaved, are now serving in congress. They're in the senate. They're in the house of representatives.

南卡罗来纳州出现了种族融合的大学，路易斯安那州有了融合公立学校。黑人权利得到广泛扩展，当时进步似乎已成必然趋势。嗯。

We have an integrated university in South Carolina. There's integrated public schools in Louisiana. And you see this broad expansion of black rights. And it probably seemed at that moment that progress was inevitable. Mhmm.

但事实并非如此。当时出现了强烈的反弹。你开始看到各种努力使非裔美国人更难投票。于是我们有了祖父条款、人头税和识字测试。很快，国会里就没有黑人了。

But it wasn't. There was a tremendous backlash. You start to see efforts to make it harder for black Americans to vote. So that's where we get the grandfather clauses and the poll taxes and the literacy tests. Pretty soon, there are no black people left in congress.

然后你会看到南方各州开始通过种族隔离法，规定黑人可以在哪里吃饭、去哪里上学、在火车上必须坐在哪里——尽管这些地方之前已有融合的交通和社区。最高法院还支持这些法律。所以我们曾拥有广阔的权利，然后这些权利又一个个迅速被剥夺。这说明这个国家有能力这样做。我们通常把民权运动当作一项值得骄傲的成就来教授，却不去追问为什么民权运动在1960年代还需要重新争取。

Then you see things like Southern states that had integrated transportation and integrated neighborhoods start to pass laws of segregation to tell black people where they could eat, where they could go to school, where they had to sit on a train, and the Supreme Court upholds that. That. So we have this great expanse of rights, and then just as quickly, those rights, one by one by one, are removed. So we know that this country is capable of doing that. I mean, we are commonly taught about the civil rights movement as this achievement, a time that we should be proud of, without really questioning why civil rights movement had to be fought in the nineteen sixties in the first place.

民权运动不是非裔美国人争取权利的努力，而是恢复权利的努力——要重新获得他们一个世纪前已经取得、却被'低谷时期'抹去的那些权利。所以当我目睹当前发生的一切时，不禁感到我们可能正处在第二次低谷的边缘。

The civil rights movement was not an effort for black Americans to attain their rights, but to reinstate them. To get those rights back that they had achieved a century earlier and that the Nadir had erased. And so as I'm watching everything that's unfolding, I just couldn't help feeling like we may be at the cusp of a second Nadir.

你已经开始探讨这个问题，但我想知道你是否能描述一下：如果第二次低谷真的来临，考虑到过去几十年这个国家取得的进步，它会是什么样子？从定义上说——如果我错了请纠正——第二次低谷的底部与第一次低谷的底部会有天壤之别。

You're you're beginning to do this, but I wonder if you can describe. If a second nadir comes to pass, what does it look like given the progress that has been made in this country over the last many decades. Almost by definition, correct me if I'm wrong, the bottom of a second nadir looks tremendously different than the bottom of the first.

我认为你提出了一个重要观点：即使在第一次低谷时期，他们也没有恢复奴隶制。所以并非所有进步都被抹去，但大量进步确实消失了。当我们审视当前正在形成的局面时，不仅企业失去了推动融合的动力，而且如果它们这样做反而会受到惩罚。特朗普威胁要调查那些实施融合计划、试图使法律行业多元化的律所。目前所有律所中只有4%的律师是黑人。

I I do think you're making an important point that, obviously, even with the first nadir, they didn't reinstate slavery. So all progress was not erased, but a significant amount of progress was erased. And I I think when we look at the landscape that is being created, not only are companies losing an incentive to try to integrate, but they will actually be penalized if they do. So Trump has threatened to investigate law firms that have integration programs where they're trying to diversify the profession. I think only 4% of lawyers at all law firms are black.

考虑到非裔美国人约占美国人口的14%，这个数字应该被提及。

Compared to the fact, we should probably say that black Americans make up about 14% of the population.

没错。所以如果你声称要调查那些试图促进融合的律所，就可能导致几乎没有黑人律师的局面。看看医学院的情况：由特朗普得力助手斯蒂芬·米勒创立的'美国优先'律所正在向医学院发信和投诉，称其种族意识招生计划构成歧视。看看特朗普与哥伦比亚大学达成的和解协议，或对哈佛、布朗等学校的要求——他们甚至说'我们必须审查你们的账目'。

Exactly. So if you are going to actually say that you will investigate law firms if they're trying to integrate, that could lead to a scenario where there are almost no Black lawyers. We look at medical schools. The America First law firm, which was founded by Stephen Miller, Trump's right hand man, is sending letters and filing complaints against medical schools, saying that they are discriminating because they have race conscious admissions programs. If you look at the settlements that Trump is making with Columbia, for instance, or the demands of a place like Harvard or Brown, they're also saying, We have to look at your books.

我们需要查看你们录取的每个人的考试成绩和录取率，以及所有聘用人员的雇佣信息。如果我是大学校长，我会非常谨慎地聘用过多黑人或录取过多黑人学生，因为我可能会面临联邦政府的愤怒，他们可能会指控我违反了民权法。所以，如果你看到他声称DEI（多元化、公平与包容）是非法的，并且认为实施DEI的企业违法并可能面临刑事起诉，你很快就能想象到一个对美国黑人来说极其艰难的世界。因此，我想到了阅读艾达·B·威尔斯的日记。

We need to see the test scores and rates of every person you admit, as well as all of the hiring information on everyone you hire. Well, if I am a university, I'm going to be very reticent to hire too many Black people or admit too many Black students because I may meet the wrath of the federal government that is going to say that I violated the civil rights law. So if you look at the fact that he's saying DEI is illegal, and that companies that they believe are engaging in DEI are violating the law and could face criminal prosecution, you can very quickly imagine a world where it is exceedingly difficult for Black Americans. And so, I think about, you know, reading Ida B. Wells' diary.

艾达·B·威尔斯，这位伟大的记者和民权活动家，恰好在解放时期出生。她亲身经历了黑人获得所有这些权利和可能性的大幅扩展，然后慢慢看着这些权利被逐一剥夺。如果我们回顾那段历史，美国黑人将在一个世纪内无法重新获得完整的投票权。我们将近一个世纪都没有另一位黑人参议员。

Ida B. Wells, of course, the great journalist and civil rights activist who was born right at the period of emancipation. And she she is witnessing having experienced all of these rights and this vast expansion of possibility for black Americans, and then slowly watches as those rights are being taken away one by one by one. And if we look at that timeline, black Americans would not regain full access to the ballot for nearly a century. We wouldn't have another black senator for nearly a century.

南卡罗来纳大学，当时南方唯一一所种族融合的公立大学，近一个世纪后才重新实现融合。所以我不确定具体会发生什么，但我要说的是，所有因素都可能导致美国黑人再次从精英机构、显赫职位和行业，甚至国会中消失。此刻，这是可能的。我不知道是否会真的发生，但所有条件都已具备，这让我非常恐惧。因为，迈克尔，你和我从未生活在那样的美国。但我们知道，我们可能会再次经历那样的美国。

The University of South Carolina, which was the only integrated public university in the South at that time, wouldn't reintegrate for nearly another century. So I don't know exactly what's going to happen, but what I'm saying is all of the ingredients to once again see a disappearing of black Americans from elite institutions, from prominent jobs and professions, and even from the halls of congress, it is possible in this moment. I don't know if it will happen, but all the ingredients are there, and that is very frightening to me. Because, again, I and you, Michael, have never lived in that America. But what we do know is that we can live in that America again.

非常感谢您的来电。我们非常感激。

On the call, thank you very much. We appreciate it.

谢谢。

Thank you.

一项新分析揭示了在特朗普总统第二任期内，黑人官员已开始从联邦政府最高层消失的程度。在特朗普第二任期前200天内获得参议院确认的98项任命中，仅有2%是黑人。相比之下，同期拜登总统任内参议院确认的提名人选中黑人占21%，奥巴马总统任内为13%，乔治·W·布什总统任内为8%。与此同时，国会中的黑人代表比例可能很快也会下降。

A new analysis shows just how much Black officials have begun to disappear from the most senior ranks of the federal government in president Trump's second term. Of Trump's 98 senate confirmed appointments during the first two hundred days of the second term, just 2% were Black. By contrast, during the same period, Black officials accounted for 21% of the Senate confirmed nominees under president Biden, 13% under president Obama, and eight percent under president George W. Bush. At the same time, Black representation in Congress could soon decline as well.

上周的辩论中，最高法院似乎准备撤销1965年《投票权法案》的一项关键条款，这一具有里程碑意义的民权法律允许将种族作为划分选举地图的考虑因素。如果该条款被撤销，预计共和党人将采取行动，取消南方大多数以黑人为主的众议院选区。我们稍后回来。以下是今天你还需要知道的其他消息。一家联邦上诉法院裁定，特朗普总统可以继续执行其向俄勒冈州波特兰市部署国民警卫队的计划，尽管地方和州政府官员表示这既无必要也不合法。

During arguments last week, the Supreme Court appeared poised to roll back a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a landmark civil rights law that allowed race to be used as a factor in drawing election maps. If that provision is rolled back, Republicans are expected to respond by eliminating most of the majority Black house districts across the South. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. A federal appeals court has ruled that president Trump can proceed with his plan to deploy the National Guard to Portland, Oregon over the objections of local and state officials who say it's both unnecessary and illegal.

一位下级法院法官先前曾阻止了此次部署，认为特朗普关于波特兰正经历暴力内乱的指控被夸大了。但周一的裁决更倾向于特朗普的说法，认定波特兰的抗议活动确实对联邦官员及当地联邦建筑构成真实威胁。此外，POLITICO获取的一系列短信显示，特朗普总统提名的某联邦机构负责人选在信息中使用种族歧视性词汇形容纪念黑人的节日，宣称来自中国和印度的人不可信任，并承认自己时不时会表现出他所谓的'纳粹倾向'。这位被提名人保罗·英格拉西亚是特朗普选定的特别检察官办公室负责人，该机构负责调查联邦举报投诉和歧视指控。但截至周一晚间，包括参议院多数党领袖约翰·图恩在内的多名共和党参议员已对英格拉西亚的提名表示质疑。

A lower court judge had previously blocked the deployment, finding that Trump's claims that Portland was experiencing violent civil unrest was overblown. But Monday's ruling put greater stock in Trump's claims, finding that protests in Portland represent a genuine threat to federal officials and to a federal building there. And in a series of text messages obtained by POLITICO, president Trump's nominee to lead a federal agency used a racist slur to describe holidays that honor Black Americans, declared that people from China and India cannot be trusted and confessed to having what he called a, quote, Nazi streak in me from time to time. The nominee, Paul Ingracia, is Trump's choice to run the office of special counsel, which investigates federal whistleblower complaints and claims of discrimination. But by Monday night, several Republican senators expressed doubts about Ingracia's nomination, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune.

本期节目由Sydney Harper、Stella Tan和Lindsey Garrison在Asta Chaturvedi协助下制作，由Patricia Willens和Michael Benoit编辑，Susan Lee负责事实核查，音乐由Dan Powell、Diane Wong和Pat McCusker创作，Chris Wood担任音频工程师。以上就是本期《每日新闻》的全部内容，我是Michael Bilbaro，明天见。

Today's episode was produced by Sydney Harper, Stella Tan, and Lindsey Garrison with help from Asta Chaturvedi. It was edited by Patricia Willens and Michael Benoit, fact check by Susan Lee, contains music by Dan Powell, Diane Wong, and Pat McCusker, and was engineered by Chris Wood. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Bilbaro. See you tomorrow.