Young Che《切·格瓦拉传记》切·格瓦拉，是阿根廷的马克思主义革命家、医师、作家、游击队队长、军事理论家、国际政治家及古巴革命的核心人物。《时代》杂志将格瓦拉选入二十世纪百大影响力人物！ 下载 pdf 电子版 epub 免费 txt 2025

“I had prepared a life plan that included ten years of

wandering, later years studying medicine. . . . All that's in the

past, the only thing that's clear is that the ten years of

wandering might grow longer . . . but it will now be of an entirely

different type from the one I dreamed of, and when I arrive in a

new country it will not be to go to museums and look at ruins,

because that still interests me, but also to join the struggle of

the people.”

– Che Guevara, in a letter to his mother, 1956

Assembled from two separate books written by Che's father, this is

a vivid and intimate account of the formative years of an icon.

Ernesto Guevara Lynch describes the people and personal events that

shaped the development of his son's revolutionary worldview, from

his childhood in a bourgeois Argentinian home to the moment he

joined Castro to train for the invasion of Cuba in 1956. It also

includes, available for the first time in the United States, Che's

diary of his trip around Northern Argentina in 1950. Young

Che is an indispensible guide to understanding one of the

twentieth century's most famous and enduring revolutionary

figures.

Acknowledgements

Introduction by Lucia/idvarez de Toledo

Preface by Ernesto Guevara Lynch

Map

List of Illustrations

1. Che in Cuba, I956-9

2. Ernesto's ancestry and early years, I85OS-I933

3. Growing up, 1933-52

4. Argentine travel diaries, 1950

5. Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador, 1953

6. Guatemala, 1953-4

7. Mexico, 1954-6

8. Mexico en route to Cuba, 1956

Epilogue: Tita Infante remembers Che a year after his death

Biographical notes

Chronology

Ernesto Guevara Lynch, the father of Che

Guevara, was born in Argentina in 1900 of Irish and Basque

origin.

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

Part One: Che in Cuba, 1956–9

It was early December of 1956 and the world’s major

newspapers were publishing accounts of Fidel Castro’s* failed

attempt to invade the island of Cuba. The ex-Sergeant Batista*,

then self-elevated to the rank of Major General, spread the news,

by means of the international agencies, that Castro and his men had

been killed during an attempt to invade the island. This took place

on 2 December of that year.

Fidel Castro had launched the threat to invade Cuba over a year

earlier by saying: ‘We shall be free or we shall be martyrs.’

Our family in Buenos Aires was not aware of this threat, but began

to understand what was going on when we read in large headlines the

first news of it that the leading newspapers of the world were

publishing. They were devoting space to the disaster that had taken

place when Fidel and his men disembarked near the city of

Manzanillo, in the province of Oriente. It was a bombshell.

We knew that Ernesto was involved in a conspiracy and that he had

been taken into custody in Mexico with Fidel Castro and his

men.

The Guevara family discovers the real destiny of Ernesto

Guevara de la Serna

On 6 July 1956 I received a letter from Ernesto, in reply to one of

mine that I had sent to the jail of the Gobernación of Mexico City,

on Miguel Schultz Street, in which I told him that we had just

learned from the newspapers that he was in jail and asked him to

tell me what the situation was, plainly and without beating about

the bush.

His reply to my letter cleared any doubts that anyone might have

had about Ernesto and his position within Fidel Castro’s

army.

The news, particularly when it came from the United States, gave

details of the extermination of the whole contingent.

When the news reached Buenos Aires, our friends started telephoning

incessantly. They wanted to know what was happening. I was told

over the telephone the dreadful news that my son Ernesto had been

mortally wounded during one of the skirmishes. The reports said

that both Fidel Castro and his brother Raúl* had been killed, as

well as several of their comrades. I remember the names of Juan

Almeida* and Ramiro Valdés*. The news said that the motorboat

Granma, in which the eighty-two had sailed from a small port in

Mexico called Tuxpan, had been captured with all members of the

invasion force on board and that the majority of the crew had died.

The remaining few had been dispersed, according to the newspapers,

and would soon have to give themselves up.

The whole world believed the news because of the disparity between

the regular army of General Batista – formed by selected troops of

the rural guard, the marines and the armed police force – and the

tiny guerrilla group of just eighty-two men under Fidel Castro. It

was impossible to believe that the latter might topple the military

government of Batista, far less defeat its army and air force,

trained by the United States of America and equipped with the most

modern weapons.

When we received the news we were depressed. I went to the offices

of the newspaper La Prensa of Buenos Aires asking for confirmation.

They said, as consolation, that they were unable to tell me if it

was true until official confirmation came and, as such confirmation

had not arrived, there was still hope.

I went home in despair. My wife, Celia, was sitting at a table with

a pack of cards playing a game of patience. My children had learned

from other sources what the wires were announcing, which was by now

in any case in the public domain. When they saw me arrive, they did

not utter a single word. They did not say anything to their mother.

It was up to me to deliver the awful blow. I sat opposite her and

waited for what seemed to me a century until she had finished her

card game. She then lifted her head and, perhaps because she had a

premonition, asked, ‘What is it?’

‘Look,’ I replied, ‘there are some reports that I don’t think are

true.’

She was livid. ‘Ernesto?’ she asked.

‘Yes. But I can assure you that I do not believe it.’

She jumped to her feet, went to the telephone and called the news

agency Associated Press and, with a dry but firm voice, said, ‘I am

the mother of Dr Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, whose death you have

just announced and will be published in the newspapers. I want you

to tell me the truth. Is it true?’

She later told me that they had tried to console her, telling her

what I had already been told: that most of these reports ended up

not being confirmed.

We were used to putting up with all sorts of worries when it came

to Ernesto. I imagine the majority of our family and friends

believed the terrible news, and I imagine that the government of

Batista himself also believed it. But I was not totally

discouraged. There was something that told me it could not be true,

even if the evidence was to the contrary. I had an intuition –

something like a remote hope in this avalanche of unconfirmed news

– and that is why my words could be of some comfort to my

family.

At that time I was in contact with civil servants who worked for

the government of General Aramburu*. I went to the President’s

private secretary and asked to see the President to request him to

intervene with the Cuban government, so that in the hypothetical

event that Ernesto had been taken prisoner, he would not suffer the

fate that Batista was in the habit of meting out to his prisoners:

torture and assassination.

General Aramburu intervened and the Argentine Foreign Ministry

moved with speed. We were continually in touch with the ministry,

but neither denial nor confirmation was forthcoming. We were unable

to find out anything.

My home, normally so noisy and lively, had become a sombre place.

Nobody spoke, everyone foresaw the catastrophe, and around us there

was an air of desolation. As for me, I must confess that I found it

impossible to concentrate on anything that was not related to

Ernesto. I abandoned my job, I didn’t even turn up at the office. I

went from one place to another seeking information. The newspapers

dropped the story. But some newspapers and magazines arrived by air

from Cuba. I remember an issue of the magazine Bohemia that I

forced myself to read. It contained the same news that the first

agency wires had issued, but in great detail: Ernesto, who was

reclining against a tree talking to his mate Dr Pérez, had been

mortally wounded. It had happened at Alegría del Pío. Fidel

Castro’s men had been surprised by the army, and the rural guards

had fallen upon them before they had been able to see them, and the

guards had machine-gunned them from a few metres away. The air

force had rained napalm bombs on the woodlands and sugar-cane

fields. The army had surrounded the area, and it was assumed that

nobody could have escaped the ambush alive. For the government of

Batista, this was the beginning and the end of the much-heralded

invasion by Fidel Castro Ruz.

And then a letter from Ernesto, written in Mexico, arrived. For the

family this was simply dreadful. It was his farewell letter to his

parents. In it he made some philosophical observations. His message

was that for him death was not important; what was important was

the struggle for one’s ideals. He also said that he was leaving

Mexico to enter Cuba as a revolutionary. My wife read the letter in

front of everyone without a tear. I clenched my teeth and did not

understand why Ernesto had to get involved with a revolution that

had nothing to do with his homeland.

How wrong I was. My son Ernesto had to teach me – I who had guided

him through his first steps in life – the duty of men who fight for

humanity. It was not clear to me at the time; I could not separate

the heroic event in which one gives one’s life for an ideal from a

warlike adventure with no precise direction. I would compare

Batista with any of the military men who had at one time or another

been dictators in my country. I had fought against them, but what

eluded me at the time was something that Ernesto had already fully

understood: for the oppressed people of the world, the enemy was

one and the same, and that enemy was not in Argentina, or Cuba, or

Peru, or any other part of Latin America; the enemy was further

away – it was from where the capitalist elite originates, and from

where it sends its forces against those oppressed people via the

heads of governments who serve their interests.

Early one morning the phone rang. I was being summoned by the

Ministry of Foreign Affairs to meet the secretary of the Foreign

Minister. He saw me in his office; his demeanour was quiet. What

must I have looked like! I do not know, but I can imagine. He

looked at me with pity and said the following: ‘I have just

received a telegram from the Argentine Embassy in Havana, which

reads: “Dr Ernesto Guevara de la Serna, according to enquiries made

by this embassy, is not among the dead, nor among the wounded, nor

among the prisoners of Batista’s  army.”’

Had I been thrown into the air by an earthquake I would not have

left the premises with greater speed. I ran all the way home with

the news, and that same afternoon everything changed for us. An air

of optimism enveloped us all and my home was once again noisy and

filled with youthful exuberance.

Some days went by. We lived in a state of anxiety awaiting

confirmation or denial, but neither arrived through the official

channels. So we believed the news that had arrived at the Ministry

of Foreign Affairs from our embassy in Cuba.

1956 was coming to an end. On 31 December we were getting ready, as

usual, to celebrate the arrival of the new year, although this time

uncertainty hung over us. It was then that the unforeseen happened.

It must have been around ten o’clock that night when an envelope

was slid u...

在线阅读地址：Young Che《切·格瓦拉传记》切·格瓦拉，是阿根廷的马克思主义革命家、医师、作家、游击队队长、军事理论家、国际政治家及古巴革命的核心人物。《时代》杂志将格瓦拉选入二十世纪百大影响力人物！在线阅读

在线听书地址：Young Che《切·格瓦拉传记》切·格瓦拉，是阿根廷的马克思主义革命家、医师、作家、游击队队长、军事理论家、国际政治家及古巴革命的核心人物。《时代》杂志将格瓦拉选入二十世纪百大影响力人物！在线收听

在线购买地址：Young Che《切·格瓦拉传记》切·格瓦拉，是阿根廷的马克思主义革命家、医师、作家、游击队队长、军事理论家、国际政治家及古巴革命的核心人物。《时代》杂志将格瓦拉选入二十世纪百大影响力人物！在线购买

暂无原文赏析，正在全力查找中！

编辑推荐

"A timely source of vivid insights into [the key influences]

that turned this young man into the world's most recogniseable

revolutionary.”

—The Latin American Review of Books

书籍介绍

“I had prepared a life plan that included ten years of wandering, later years studying medicine. . . . All that's in the past, the only thing that's clear is that the ten years of wandering might grow longer . . . but it will now be of an entirely different type from the one I dreamed of, and when I arrive in a new country it will not be to go to museums and look at ruins, because that still interests me, but also to join the struggle of the people.”

– Che Guevara, in a letter to his mother, 1956

Assembled from two separate books written by Che's father, this is a vivid and intimate account of the formative years of an icon. Ernesto Guevara Lynch describes the people and personal events that shaped the development of his son's revolutionary worldview, from his childhood in a bourgeois Argentinian home to the moment he joined Castro to train for the invasion of Cuba in 1956. It also includes, available for the first time in the United States, Che's diary of his trip around Northern Argentina in 1950. Young Che is an indispensible guide to understanding one of the twentieth century's most famous and enduring revolutionary figures.

• 作者：大大泡泡龟 发布时间：2018-06-04 08:14:01

  79分上岸

• 作者：Oo司徒韶光oO 发布时间：2010-01-27 12:33:28

  90%以上是真实的 吧，亲爱的历史小说。

• 作者：Amber 发布时间：2012-02-05 23:28:59

  资料库

• 作者：胖达叔 发布时间：2019-02-27 16:14:27

  主体是名人读书经验谈，但还有人物介绍以及对名人的回忆文字，但是许地山的部分选个落花生我不知是何意。末尾附录几个著名的书目。

• 作者：冥王星初级红参 发布时间：2013-03-13 20:52:11

  大一下

• 作者：是樱樱啊 发布时间：2023-09-09 15:35:45

  画风很棒！内容简明翔实！总算知道感冒为什么会发烧了。科普好书

• 《文明的进程》对读《逃避统治的艺术》

  作者：mh12321 发布时间：2021-07-20 13:00:54

  1，这是处于两个不同时代的著作，《文明的进程》成书于1936年，《逃避统治的艺术》出版于2009/2010年，所以，我们理应对《文明的进程》有更多的宽容。

  2，《文明的进程》中，最引起我怀疑的问题是埃利亚斯关于暴力的想象。这是本书立论的一个重要基础，围绕着“暴力独占”，作者展开了一系列对于暴力独占前后对比的论述：用“战战兢兢的走羊肠小道”和“自我持续调节的走通衢大道”做类比，表达了在暴力独占前，社会处于普遍的暴力环境中：“由国君亦或国王代表的对暴力进行稳定独占的社会职能分工，就得以发展束缚，个人的行动链条也长，个人对他人的职能性的依赖也就大，在这样的社会里，个人的生命在很大程度上得到了保护，使其免遭突然袭击，免遭令人惊吓万分的体力暴力的破门而入。”他还描绘了在暴力独占前的人的心理状态：“人的心灵在这里，请允许我这样表达，要时刻准备着，也总是习惯于从一个极端跳向另一个极端，常常是小小的印象，无法遏制的联想就足以引起不安和情绪的变化。”埃利亚斯描绘的那个武士动辄残杀劫掠，人们情绪容易失控的世界，是个大有疑问的事情，埃利亚斯没有拿出扎实的数据来证明这种普遍性，正像如果未来的人，用拳击比赛来证明我们当今世界对暴力的热衷，会让我们错愕一样。在兰德尔·柯林斯的《暴力》一书中，作者以翔实的材料论述了暴力发生的条件：在生理上，肾上腺素和心律的飙升，会导致人部分失去行为能力、不受控的颤抖、视野变窄、听力减弱、肠道痉挛、甚至大小便失禁等等，能够掌控身体的施暴者需要不断的训练，还要有施暴的天赋，柯林斯列举了大量战争中，受过训练的士兵在战争中表现的数据，结果显示，在二战期间，美军士兵开火的比例在15%—25%；在越战中，为了提高士兵开火率，美军改进了战术，仍然只有不超过25%士兵会积极开火；射击命中率没有因双方距离缩短而得到明显提高，越战中，普通士兵需要射击2.5万发子弹，才能杀死一人；与之相反，狙击手是士兵中的暴力精英，也是在战争中杀人最多的战斗群体，与受害者保持距离和有效隐蔽自己，是使他们有效实施暴力的条件；在美国的中东战争中，美军犯下对平民的暴行多与无人机的使用有关，这在一些人看来，正是因为美军与受害者保持了有效距离，受害现场的悲惨氛围无法感染到施暴者，施暴者才能冷酷无情。就个人在冲突中的表现来说，已成年的人相比处于儿童时期的人，更懂得如何终止冲突，控制暴力的程度。柯林斯的结论是：当人类在面对面时，我们很难实施严重的暴力，即便是强弱悬殊的处境中，比如行刑时，施暴者也会倾向回避受害者的面孔和眼睛。有人认为这是人类基因决定的，我认为这是一种合理的解释，人类首先是社会性动物，协作是使这个种族能繁荣的重要原因。过分暴力的个体虽然在战斗时有用，但在和平的部落内部会破坏人际关系，成为部落稳定的威胁，部落可能在其成长初期就将其抛弃，而暴力对施暴者自身就是充满风险的，尤其在没有抗生素的时期，施暴者一次小的外伤就可能付出生命的代价，由此而难以产下更多的拥有暴力基因的后代。基因说虽然被柯林斯认为是“天马行空”的解释，但显然，在社会中，能够实施暴力的个体是人群中的少数，除了军事记录以外，社会犯罪中，80%以上的暴力犯罪也是由15%的罪犯制造，这都支持了这样一个事实：无论社会是否发生了“暴力独占”，社会是否制定了制裁施暴者的法律，经常施暴的人只是社会中的少数，任何一种社会形式，都会有一系列的律令和文化，使普通人规避与这些暴力精英冲突的风险。在《文明的进程》中，埃利亚斯所举出的，支持尚武的文献，有一部分可以归结为“吹嘘”。而在新的文明叙事形成的过程中，是这种“吹嘘”，而非暴力本身，被边缘化了。“暴力并不原始，文明也并未驯服暴力”，这是柯林斯反对埃利亚斯关于“文明进化”时的观点，柯林斯列举的论据中，让我印象最深的是，在1994/1995年，美国2-3岁的儿童中有85%、4-5岁的儿童中有95%在过去一年里都曾挨过打，平均每周发生2.5次，这与我以前接收到的信息有着完全不同的印象：我听到的都是关于美国邻居如何报警制止惩戒子女的家长的故事。而经历过两次世界大战的埃利亚斯也无法否认，在暴力独占的文明中，制度型暴力在频繁发生。柯林斯在注释中这样解释自己的工作：“相反，我会尝试证明，暴力总是社会建构的。暴力的历史就是用社会技术建构特定种类暴力的历史。相应的，近代历史上的暴力之所以增多，并不是去'文明化'的结果，而恰恰是因为我们建构出了新的社会暴力技巧。”

  3，在《逃避统治的艺术》中，“文明的”是一个先验的、一般性的，有普遍共识的概念，詹姆士·斯科特并没有特别指出这个“文明的”包含哪些内容，而是将一个我们原以为“野蛮的”、“原始的”、“无政府的”他者——赞米亚，重新介绍给读者。我震惊于山地社会与谷地社会千丝万缕的关系，同时，作为一个“谷地人”，也不得不重新审视“文明”的叙事。这种“文明”叙事，不仅塑造了谷地居民对世界的想象，同时也被统治阶层利用，限制了我们观察世界的方式。在《文明的进程》中，埃利亚斯只考察了谷地社会中，文明的发生和扩散，虽然他论述过核心政权的扩张与分裂，但这都是发生在谷地社会内部的事情，仿佛，人类出生和死亡、顺从和斗争、堕落和爬升都是只能发生在谷地社会的内部，我们只有被纳入文明的进程，才能被看到。然而，我们看到的又是什么呢？在前现代社会中，识字被限定在一小部分人群中，一般少于1%，我们在一个教育普及的年代，了解的历史正是这不到1%的人书写的历史。文字对于客观世界的概述，更多的时候，只是根据有限观察的情绪迷雾，悲叹逝去的美好时代的文字从来都是经典中的主流，到了近现代，进步主义思潮泛滥，也同样使人盲目。

  4，但无论是埃利亚斯，还是斯科特，都反对机械发展进步论。机械发展进步论表达的是，无论发生了怎样的变化，我们的世界都要经历由落后到先进，由不幸到幸福，最终趋于完美的状态。它看起来暗含着革命乐观主义，也是二十世纪新式集权的叙事、解释灾难性事件的借口。埃利亚斯引用卡尔迈特的话：“封建制度不管它与先行的封建制度有多么大的不同，都是直接来自先行的制度。无论是革命还是个人的意志，都无法将其制造出来。”卡尔迈特将这种制度的发生称为自然事件。在20世纪全球兴起的反殖民浪潮中，新型的民族国家纷纷独立 ，大量涌现的政治强人按照某些政治主张塑造出大量的国家，这似乎不像是自然发生的事件，但也可以这样理解：这正是人与人关系结构和与之适应的建制改变的重要表现。只是，我们要避免落入政治宣传的陷阱：一个社会中，人与人之间的结构关系和其建制，不是某些权威在书写和演讲中决定的，我们只有靠认真的观察和梳理以及独立的思考才能接近社会建制的真实情况。

  5，埃利亚斯对文明有高下之分的倾向是显而易见的（虽然在他后续的研究中极力修正这一倾向，而且我也很能理解，受过教育的人很难不去想象，在某种文明中，人类有着更和谐的生活）。前文已经说过，他的重要论点，暴力独占是站不住脚的。就人类的寿命、生产效率、休闲时间这些可量化的指标来说，从一种文明形式发展出另一种文明形式，也不能给人类带来普遍的提升，相反的，我今天所处于的社会，这里的人，休闲时间大大缩短了，睡眠也急剧减少。斯科特在《逃避统治的艺术》中，多次强调，游耕的生产方式有着更高的个人生产力，也由于少与其他族群接触，而不容易感染上传染病。这是近年来，学界流行的看法：游耕、游猎社会的人，比农耕社会中的人有更好的生存条件。《人类简史》中，赫拉利甚至提出了是稻米驯服了人类的观点。

  6，将文明的类型与人类的福祉放在一起讨论是缺乏意义的。因为没有一种文明，是按照人类幸福感来划分的。虽然无论是《文明的进程》还是《逃避统治的艺术》都没有谈论幸福的问题，但就我的经验来说，当我们谈论文明时，我们是在谈论着人类的福祉。

  7，埃利亚斯将理性理解为“人们在思维中与自身保持距离的能力”，“抑制自发的感觉，即他们自己所经历的一切，特别是与人本身有关的一切都是以他们自身为目的的”。事实是，两种思想：“自然现象是没有企图，没有目的也没有规律性的，只是纯粹机械的发生或者有一定因果关系而引起”，和，“自然是人的意志的体现”，这两句话都会激发人的情感。就像在量子理论中，“人的观察导致坍缩”一样，也不可避免的会激发人的情感——激情。另一方面，在社会动物中，压抑一时的自然欲望，是常见的现象，比如在特定的区域不得排便、狩猎时抑制兴奋、保持安静等等，这是动物的适应性行为，并非人类特有，反而是人类在进化中继承下来的。人类文明的发展是进化还是演化，有方向性还是无方向性的，是可以讨论的问题，因为它不仅在于人们的习惯之中，还要因应环境的变化，没有适应性，习惯会让人陷入险境。趋利避害是生物的天性。但对于我们生活的地球来说，适宜人类生存的环境在数量上是有限的，气候的变化对于人类的历史是缓慢的，所以，即便演化是无方向或者描绘成多元的，也不是无限多元的。

  8，文明类型的划分总是伴随着争议。这里，可以对照《逃避统治的艺术》中，摒弃文字的文明类型，暂时命名这样的文明类型：以文字符号为主要载体的文明是积累型文明。积累型文明有一个缺陷，它倾向于繁文缛节，规则并不总是新的替代旧的，而常常是新旧同时存在，人们会在一个时空中受到多种文明形式的规训：11世纪的希腊公主在威尼斯使用叉子被当成丑闻；上海地铁站里蹲在地上休息的姑娘被年长的女性当成恶习；公园里光着上身的晨跑者被拿手机拍摄的人拦下，要求其穿上上衣等等。积累型文明似乎对应着更复杂的社会结构，但这不意味着，在积累型文明中的群体过着比其他文明类型群体更复杂的生活。在《文明的进程》中，我们看到各种场景、各色人等以及与其相应的文明规范，仿佛感觉文明的发展是为了适应越来越复杂的社会环境，但在另一边，户籍制度、阶级制度、性别制度、种族制度将人群区隔开，甚至固定在狭小的空间中，没有了地理和阶层的流动性。可以想象，即使我们知道了某种文明中的礼节，也无从实践。文明规范随阶层固化而固定下来，随阶层崩溃而崩溃。

  9，被规训的人可以为自己建造监牢，但那毕竟不是监牢。强制劳动或徭役、强制征兵是逃脱统治的重要原因。抵制高税负和抵制强制劳动，通常，人们都会采用消极抵抗的形式，但产生的效果却有不同，高税负打击了劳动者的积极性，会使劳动者疏于生产，但不会逃跑，除非遇到对土地的强制征收，劳动者，尤其是农民，不会轻易离开他们所拥有的土地——这是他们的生存资料；强制劳动则会迫使劳动者出逃。不过，逃避税负和身体强制、监禁是有因果关系的。在《逃避统治的艺术》中，斯科特论述人类逃避统治的原因、和为避免被统治形成的文化，在我看来，是围绕生存、行动自由、思想自由展开的，它们依次对应着逃避战争、饥荒和传染病，逃避徭役、奴役、罪责和抑制领导阶层的出现，保持信仰这三方面。这也是我做为谷地的读者所能理解的，但这也给我带来困惑：在我的认知里，思想与行为自由的确立，是要依靠个人自觉的。我能说赞米亚的居民是更为自觉的人吗？这是否还是我做为谷地人的文化想象？我总结出的解释是：山地与谷地互为他者，在这种对照下，我们既有相互排斥，又有相互模仿。但这是个不能满足我的解释。

  10，资本全球化，是新的、试图将像赞米亚这样的地区纳入统治的尝试。货币体系在埃利亚斯看来，是人们臣服于文明的重要原因，对于这一点，詹姆斯并不反对，他列举了大量赞米亚地区人们和谷底国家交易往来的实例，货币交易在边境市场中是平常事件，山地人的聪明才智足以使他们在市场中获利。现代谷地政府作为主体，向山地推行了替代经济作物种植，这种努力已经有超过半个世纪的时间，此种政策在开始时，是以打击毒品犯罪为其合法性的。但近几年，赞米亚金三角地区，传统的罂粟种植区面积由收缩转为扩张，使我们看到，政府对这一地区的控制力正在减少。政府控制边境地区的成本仍然是巨大的，即使到了现代，谷地的经济一旦出现衰退，政府对边境的掌握还会力不从心。不过看起来，全球资本仍然保持着对赞米亚地区的兴趣，它永远可以是新的投资机会：旅游业、咖啡豆种植、清洁能源等产业，在基础设施不断发展的过程中，不断深入这一地区，丰富了当地的经济生产。谷地社会与山地社会如何互动，斯科特所描述的逃避统治的文化如何在全球化和互联网时代中变幻形态，是值得观察的。

  11，总结：在经典政治哲学中，霍布斯认为，最糟糕的政府也比无政府好。埃利亚斯无疑是这种观点的拥护者。但这一结论，都是这两位作者基于对有政府的社会得出的观察结论，他们观察到的无政府状态，都是谷地政权更迭的过程中，权力真空导致的一时混乱，而非一个长时间处于无政府的世界。这正是斯科特要纠正的错误。但是，当公路飞机高铁、电话线、互联网基站、卫星把世界彻底联系起来，直属于中央政权的政治组织深入进山区的角落时，那种逃避统治的可能性还存在吗？有资本的进入，阶层分化还能抵抗吗？一个现代的谷地人，是否也能通过自由选择，创设自己的身份？个人能否自主选择？还是换了一种服膺于自然、社会规律的形式？个人自觉是否只是幻觉？帝国扩张——无论是军事的、还是资本的——仍然是有社会内部推动力的，政治系统侵入每个人的私人领域，是利维坦式国家自动机械的运动方式，在有了现代通讯技术后，更加如虎添翼。同时，在当今世界的重要议题中，环境破坏和全球变暖的阴影下，赞米亚地区虽然不像一些太平洋小国那样，成为海平面上升的首要受害者，但也因为生活条件的简陋，生态系统脆弱等原因，处于极端气候的威胁之下，而谷地国家，虽然是环境的主要破坏者，却可能（在一段时间内）更有能力抵御环境恶化。如果像赞米亚居民一样的人，不能有效组织起来，以谷地人所理解的方式发出自己的声音，他们就会像以往那样，被排除在这个关乎他们存亡的议题之外，桃花源的美景也将不堪一击。在积累型文明中，我们也可以存在另外的，不是关于个人幸福的目的，阅读浩如烟海的文献，探索记录未知的领域，求得对个人认知的拓展，这不能不说是一种个人自由的进步，正像斯科特引用霍布斯邦的一句话：“在一个世纪之前，欧内斯特·雷楠就正确的指出：'遗忘，我甚至还会说历史的错误，是民族产生的基本因素，因此，历史研究的进步对民族性来说经常是个威胁。'我认为历史学家的重要工作任务，就是对民族的神话形成威胁。”

• 我们是什么时候丢了这颗糖球的？

  作者：就是小C 发布时间：2020-04-03 00:11:12

  今天是国际儿童读书日，女儿小极给我推荐了她近期最爱的《糖球》。趁孩子们都睡着了我翻看了一下，真是感动到飙泪。具体内容我不想透露，只能告诉你这是颗奇妙的糖球。孩子心中已经有了对好的初步标准，站在制高点的说教、牵强附会的大道理都不会成为她心中的好，她脑袋里需要天马行空的有趣，和生活中可以遇到的真实，这样结合起来的故事才会被她选中！欣慰！