Preface to （American Law in the Twentieth Century）

《20世纪美国法律史》中文版序言 

作者中译本前言 （美国斯坦福大学法学院教授劳伦斯.弗里德曼；翻译：周大伟）

  I am very happy that my book, American Law in the Twentieth Century , will be made available in translation to the Chinese-speaking world.  It is a work about the legal system of a single country, the United States, and a single century, the 20^th century; but I hope that there are lessons in it that go beyond that time and place.

       我的《二十世纪美国法律史》一书将被翻译到讲中文的世界里，我感到十分高兴。这部著作写了一个单个国家——美国的法律体系以及一个单一的世纪——20世纪; 但是，我还是希望其中的经验教训将超越时空的限制。

      In the hundred years between 1900 and 2000, there were enormous, dramatic changes in the United States:  changes in economy, in society, in culture, in political life.  These changes were reflected, as they had to be, in the American legal system. A legal system is a reflection of the society in which it is embedded.  This is the assumption the book is based on, the pillar it stands on. It is of course the basic assumption of the law and society movement.  That assumption—that the legal system is not autonomous, that it is the product of social forces and responds to those forces—has been the cornerstone of all of my work.  Any major change in the social order will be reflected in a change in the legal order as well.  Think, for example, how the great depression of the 1930’s impacted the law; or the effect of the two World Wars; or of the civil rights movement, the womens’ rights movement, and the like. Or think of how new science, technology, and medicine impact the law.  Consider, for example, the influence of the automobile on traffic law; indeed, the automobile, basically, created traffic law. Moreover, no major change in the legal order will arise independently of social forces.  Law does not change on its own—at least in any deeply significant way.   Legal history, I believe, provides rich and abundant evidence to support these general ideas.

 在1900年至2000年的百年间，美国发生了巨大的和戏剧性的变化，这些变化发生在经济、社会、文化和政治生活领域。这些变化一定会在美国的法律制度中反映出来。一个法律制度是它被植入的社会的一种反映。本书所基于的如此假设是立论的基石。当然，这就是所谓法律和社会运动的基本假设。这种假设——即法律制度不是自发的产物，而是社会力量的产物，也是对这种社会力量的反映；这一方面，一直是我所有著作的基点所在。在社会秩序上发生的任何重大变化，也将反映在法律秩序之中。试想一下，例如，20世纪30年代的大萧条对法律产生了何等的影响; 两次世界大战的影响、民权运动的影响、，女权运动的影响，等等。或者，我们想想新的科学、技术和医学对法律的影响。例如，我们还可以想想汽车对交通法的影响 —— 的确在根本上创造了交通法。此外，在法律秩序中，没有什么重大的变化将不依赖社会力量的兴起。至少在任何深刻显著的方式层面。法律并没有对自己加以改变。我相信，法律的历史提供了非常丰富的证据来支持这些总体思路。

       I do not need to mention, in this brief preface, the major ways in which in American law and society changed in the 20^th century.  These changes are the subject of the book.  The century begins with the first hints of the automotive society; and it ends in the computer age.  It is the century of antibiotics, jet airplanes, air conditioning—and also the age of the atomic bomb.  Technology and modern science have revolutionized society in so many ways.  Society is also wealthier, more diverse, more complex.  This was the century, moreover, of the so-called sexual revolution.  A person of 1900 would hardly recognize, or understand, the world of 2000; to that person the world (and the country) would seem complicated, even mysterious, a world which stood many old assumptions on their heads.  A lawyer of 1900 would be baffled by legal issues and legal arrangements that the lawyer and the lawyer’s clients would be facing  in the year 2000: civil rights law, environmental law, and many other fields would be either totally or mainly new.  And even the old familiar fields of law—family law, corporation law, land law— wouold have changed in deeply dramatic ways. 

      在这个简短的前言中，我不需要再次提及导致美国的法律与社会在20世纪变化的主要途径。这些变化是这部书的主题。这个世纪昭始于汽车社会，并且在计算机的时代结束。这是抗生素、喷气式飞机、空调的世纪，也是原子弹时代的世纪。技术与现代科学已在许多方面彻底改变了社会。这个社会变得更为丰富多彩和纷繁复杂。另外，这也是一个所谓的性革命的世纪。一个1900年的人几乎无法辨认和理解一个2000年的世界; 对于一个头脑里还保留着许多旧世界观的人而言，这个世界（和国家）看上去是复杂甚至是神秘莫测的。在2000年的律师以及客户们所遇到的法律问题和解决方案面前，1900年的律师们大致会感到百思不得其解：民权法、环境法等诸多领域几乎完全或者大部分都是新颖的。甚至古老并熟知的法律领域——家庭法、公司法和土地法也以戏剧性的方式发生了深刻变化。

One point about American law in the 20^th century is worth making precisely because it forms so stark a contrast with the Chinese experience.  It is this: despite all the massive changes in the century, changes in both law and society, a certain fundamental continuity in legal structure is also part of the 20^th century story.  The country began and ended the century with the same Constitution, the same arrangement of states and federal government, the same nine-person Supreme Court, the same two-party political system.  Of course, every one of these institutions underwent change during the century, sometimes great change;  but the basic skeleton, the basic framework persisted.  There was a technological revolution, and a cultural revolution, even a sexual revolution:  but no actual political revolution. The American story is a story of stability in the midst of change. New wine is poured into old bottles. Of course, some of the stability is misleading:  the text of the Constitution does not change; but the interpretation does, the Supreme Court, in reality, rewrites the constitution as time goes on; and this is in many ways far more important than the fact that the text remains the same.  Nonetheless, the players still play the game with many of the old and time-honored rules.

       因为与中国的经验形成了一个鲜明的对比，在这一点上，20世纪美国的法律就值得精耕细作。其情形在于：尽管本世纪在法律和社会方面发生了巨大变化，然而在法律结构中某种特定和根本的连续性也是20世纪故事中的组成部分。从一个世纪开始到另一个世纪结束，这个国家带有同样的宪法，同样的州和联邦政府的安排，同样的九人最高法院，同样的两个党派政治制度。当然，每一个这些机构经历了世纪沧桑之变，甚至有时是巨大的变化; 但是它们的基本骨架、基本框架仍然坚守。技术革命、文化革命甚至是性革命都曾如期而至：但没有发生实际上的政治革命。美国的故事是一个在变化过程中发生的一个稳定性的故事。新酒倒入了旧瓶。当然，有些稳定性是一种误导：宪法的文本并没有更改; 但是，在实际上，宪法解释、最高法院随着时间的推移在重塑宪法; 在很多方面，这些远比宪法文本保持不变的事实更加重要。尽管如此，这些玩游戏的人们，还是在许多旧的和历史悠久的规则中照章办事。

        How different the Chinese experience seems!  The 20^th century  begins with the fading days of imperial China, the China of the Empress Dowager.  The 20^th century for China is a century of war and upheaval; of dramatic political change. A century of continual revolution.  There is huge upheaval in even the most basic political arrangements.  There could hardly be a greater contrast with the experience of the United States—at least in this one important regard.

中国的经验看上去是何等不同！ 西太后的帝制在中国衰亡的日子与二十世纪同时拉开了序幕。 20世纪的中国是一个战争和动荡不安的世纪，一个戏剧性政治变革的世纪，一个不断革命的世纪。即使在最基本的政治安排方面也有着巨大的动荡。至少在这一个重要的方面，中国和美国经验存在着近乎难以想象的巨大反差。

Yet today, when we look at the two countries, there is a sense, to me at least, of enormous convergence   Anyone visiting the United States from China, or China from the United States, is immediately struck with certain obvious, glaring differences.  It is easy, therefore, to overlook the very  important and basic similarities.  In my opinion, China and the United States today are more alike than  was true in the past—certainly more alike than the China of the Empress Dowager and the America of Theodore Roosevelt. 

       然而，今天，当我们看到这两个国家，至少对我而言，有一种巨大的融合之感。无论是从中国来美国访问的人，还是从美国到中国去访问的人，都会很快触及到某些特定和明显的的差异。因此，这很容易忽视了一些非常重要和基本的相似之处。在我看来，中国和美国今天的情形，比过去的情形更为相似了，有一点可以肯定的是——比西太后的中国和西奥多·罗斯福（Theodore Roosevelt）的美国那个年代相似太多了。

This idea of convergence may surprise some people.   Differences usually seem more obvious than similarities.  But if you consider the way people act, think, and behave, it is the convergence, not the divergences that are more striking.  The streets of Beijing, like the streets of Washington, D. C., are clogged with cars.  Jet airplanes land in Beijing airport, guided by air controllers whose work is the same everywhere in the world.  Computers and antibiotics have revolutionized life in both countries—and all other countries.  People dress alike, they have the same sense of time, they face many of the same problems, even when the solutions do vary from society to society.  Both mass culture and popular culture, more and more, have a universal flavor.  Young people in particular form a kind of global cultural mass.  Old traditions of music, art, and literature survive, of course; but they seem to flow into a single common, world-wide stream of consciousness. 

      这种融合的想法可能会让一些人感到惊诧。差异性通常似乎比相似性更明显。但是，如果你考虑到人们的行为、思考和举止之类的方式，这就是一种融合，而不是更引人注目的差异。北京的大街小巷上，和华盛顿特区（Washington, D. C.）的街道上一样，堵塞着汽车。像在世界其他地方一样，由空中导航员们引导着的喷气式飞机降落在北京机场。计算机和抗生素已经彻底改变了这两个国家以及所有其他国家的生活。人们的穿着类似，他们拥有相同的时间感，他们面临着许多相同的问题，即使每个社会解决问题的方案各不相同。美中两国越来越多的大众文化和流行文化带有普适的韵味。尤其是，年轻人形成了一种全球性的文化体。当然，古老的传统音乐，艺术和文学还生存着；但他们似乎融入了一个单一的、公共的、遍及世界范围的意识流（stream of consciousness）之中。

Convergence is in my opinion a simple and brutal fact.  Unfortunately, convergence does not guarantee world peace, or even world harmony.  The world today in fact is a world of turmoil, a world beset with enormous problems.  In part this is because no country stands alone.   Every country is connected with every other country, in many different ways; culturally, too, and not merely in terms of trade and finance.  Modern communication makes time and distance less and less relevant.  The world is a smaller place.  Travel that once took months or even years, now is a matter of hours, as planes fly with enormous speed across time zones, and across the international date line.  And this is physical travel:  messages, ideas, pictures, images, can be sent all over the world in seconds.  Satellites circle the earth and send and receive these messages.

  以我之见，融合是一个简单而残酷的事实。不幸的是，融合并不能保证世界的和平乃至世界的和谐。当今世界，其实还是一个混乱的世界，一个被大量问题所困扰着的世界。在某种程度上，这是因为没有任何一个国家可以孤悬于一隅。在诸多不同的方式上，每个国家与所有其他国家相互连接; 在文化上也是如此，而不仅仅在贸易和金融方面。现代通信使得时间和距离变得关联性越来越少。世界正在变得越来越小。当飞机高速飞跨时区和整个国际日期变更线时，曾经需要花费数月甚至数年的旅行，现在只是几个小时内的事情。这指的是身体的旅行：信息、思想、图片、影像可以以秒为单位发送到世界各地。卫星一边围绕着地球运转，一边在发送和接收这些信息。

      And what one country does is more and more significant to its neighbors, and, indeed, to other countries as well, even those that might be thousands of miles away.  Air pollution has no respect for national borders.  Climate change is a global issue.  The fate of the Brazilian jungle is not merely an issue for Brazil. In our times, millions of people travel every year, for pleasure or on business; or, alas, as refugees asking for help and asylum.  And, too, as people travel, so do diseases, plagues, invasive plants, fish, animals, and insects.  Economies are linked; the Chinese buy American treasury bills; Americans buy Chinese products.  The collapse of banks in country A brings crisis to countries B, C, and D.  If the Chinese economy slows down, people in Chile and Uganda are affected.  Long ago, the English poet, John Donne, wrote that no man is an island; that no one exists in isolation.  Perhaps it was true even then.  Now it is most assuredly true.  It is a central fact of the contemporary world.

      的确，对它的邻国以及其他国家，甚至是那些远在千里以外的国度，一个国家究竟做什么才更富有意义。空气污染在国境线上是得不到赞赏的。气候变化是一个全球性的问题。巴西丛林的命运不仅是一个巴西的问题。在我们这个时代，每年有数以百万计的人在进行休闲和商务旅行; 还有，呜呼哀哉，难民们还在寻求帮助和庇护。而且，疾病、瘟疫、入侵植物、鱼类、动物和昆虫也在陪伴着人们旅行。经济上在环环相扣; 中国在购买美国国债; 美国人购买中国产品。在A国的银行崩溃带来了的B、C和D国家的危机。如果中国经济放缓，在智利和乌干达的人们就会受到影响。很久以前，英国诗人约翰·多恩（John Donne）写道，没有人是一座孤岛; 没有人能与世隔绝。即使你不情愿，也许这就是真的。如今，这简直就是毫无悬念的真实。它是当今世界的一个总体事实。

      What this means, of course, is that we have a greater duty than ever before to learn about each other, and to learn from each other.  And not only to learn, but to understand.  And this is the reason why I am so pleased that my work, whatever its virtues and its faults, will be available to a Chinese audience.  Are there lessons to be learned from the American experience?  To be sure, each country has a unique history, has its own special dialect of modernity.  But we face common problems, even if we  do not come up with identical solutions.  And the precise interplay of law and society, in any one country, can teach us a lot about the role of the legal system in society in general; what it can and cannot do, and why and how.       

      当然，这意味着我们必须比以往任何时候都负有更大的责任来相互了解和互相学习。而且不仅要学习，而且要理解。这就是为什么我很高兴看到我的作品——无论它的优点和缺点，将提供给中国读者的原因。从美国的经验教训中能学到什么？当然，每个国家都有独特的历史，拥有自己特殊的现代方言。但是，即使我们不拿出相同的解决方案，我们也在面临着共同的问题。在任何一个国家，法律与社会之间精确的相互作用，在一般意义上，可以教给我们很多关于法律体系在社会中的作用; 以及什么可以做，什么不能做，为什么做和如何去做。

By the same token, China’s complex and tumultuous history, its culture and experiences, are matters that should be of interest to my fellow-citizens; and indeed, to the people in many other countries.  I am confident that in the future, a strong socio-legal literature will develop—there are signs of this already--  and I for one am eager to benefit from it.

    同样的道理，中国的复杂和动荡的历史，它的文化和经验，应该是我的美国公民同胞们感兴趣的事项; 事实上，许多其他国家的人们也情同此心。我相信，在未来，强有力的法社会学文献将会得到发展—— 这一迹象已经显露头角 —— 而且我个人很渴望从中受益。

Lawrence M. Friedman

Stanford University

劳伦斯•弗里德曼 于斯坦福大学

2015年9月

注：此书将于年内由北京大学出版社出版，周大伟等译，周大伟审校。

（