今日主題：Charlemagne--A democratic nightmare
查理曼大帝--一個民主化的夢魘
康康精選GRE&GMAT會考的主題，堅持每天精讀一定會進步的哦!
MP3音檔 (按右鍵可下載聽)：喜歡的同學，幫忙推或按讚哦~~
http://xia2.kekenet.com/Sound/2015/…/ecob1201_4519572RkA.mp3
只有音檔怎夠，聽不懂地方，不用怕，康康幫你準備好中英文稿了：
中英文稿：
Charlemagne--A democratic nightmare
查理曼大帝--一個民主化的夢魘
Seeking to confront the rise of Eurosceptics and fill the democratic deficit
根治疑歐主義，彌補民主缺陷
TO ITS critics the European Union was born in sin: a project devised by and for the elites, lacking democratic legitimacy.
許多評論家認為歐盟生而有罪：掌權者為掌權者設計的規劃，缺少了民主合法性。
All attempts to make good the “democratic deficit”, a term coined in the 1970s, have failed.
“民主逆差” 一詞是上世紀七十年代發明的一個術語，而如今所有想彌補民主逆差的嘗試均以失敗告終。
Direct elections to the European Parliament (EP)?
歐盟議會（歐議）將直選？
Turnout has fallen ever since they were instituted in 1979.
與會人數比1979年歐盟議會剛成立的時候還少。
Give the assembly real power?
是否應該給這些人實權？
The parliament has never had more clout, yet trust in the EU is at an all-time low.
議會的影響力早已式微，而且歐盟的信任度已降至歷史最低點。
Europe's economic crisis is making this chronic problem acute.
歐洲的經濟危機讓這個“慢性”的問題轉為了“急性”。
One reason is that, particularly in the euro zone, Brusselsis intruding ever deeper into national life, meddling in everything from budgets to pensions and wage-setting.
原因有一，尤其是在歐元區，歐盟正在過多的入侵國民生活，從預算到養老金再到工資設定。
Another reason is the expected backlash from voters in next May's election to the EP.
原因二就是明年五月歐盟議會大選中預期內的選民強烈反對。
There will be big gains for anti-EU and anti-immigrant parties of all colours—from the sharp-tongued nativists of the UK Independence Party to the thuggish neo-Nazis of Golden Dawn in Greece.
這對於各陣營的反歐盟和反移民組織來說都將收穫頗豐，包括英國獨立黨內尖刻的本土主義者，以及希臘金色黎明黨內蠻橫的新納粹分子。
Eurosceptic parties could top the polls in France, Britainand the Netherlands; they will do well in Finland and Italy;
在法國，英國和荷蘭，疑歐政黨可能位居民調榜首；在芬蘭和義大利也會有不俗戰績；
and in milder guise they could win seats for the first time in Germany.
保守估計，他們甚至都能首次在德國贏得席位。
The sense of alarm is palpable.
這樣的警鐘可謂顯而易見。
Franois Hollande, the French president, says the rise of nationalists and Eurosceptics would bring “regression and paralysis”.
法國總統奧朗德表示說，民族主義和疑歐主義的抬頭會帶來“倒退和癱瘓”。
Enrico Letta, Italy's prime minister, reckons Eurosceptics could win up to a third of the seats.
義大利前總理萊塔估計疑歐主義者將贏得高達三分之一的席位。
Radicals and populists are a disparate bunch, preferring to give speeches than influence policy, so centrists should still be able to get parliamentary business done.
激進派和民粹派也是各自心懷鬼胎，相對於影響政治他們還是更喜歡發表演說，所以中立派還有可能把議會的瑣事處理完畢。
Perhaps the bigger influence will be the poisoning of domestic politics, which would hamper decision-making by governments.
而更深遠的影響可能成為國內政治的毒瘤，而這顆毒瘤已牢牢束縛了政府決策。
How to respond?
如何應對？
Mr Letta is among those who want to galvanise pro-European forces by turning the European election into a contest for the next president of the European Commission.
萊塔是想要用歐委會下一任主席一職的選舉刺激擁歐力量的人之一。
The main European political “families”, the broad coalitions of national parties that dominate parliament, say they will each campaign behind a “presidential” candidate.
歐洲政治的主要方面就是“家庭”，主導議會的國家政黨間的廣泛聯盟稱，他們將逐個參加主席的競選。
The Socialists seem likely to choose Martin Schulz, the feisty German president of the EP.
社會黨似乎傾向舒茲，那個在歐盟議會中相當活躍的德國總統。
The greens plan an open primary.
綠黨計畫舉行開放式選舉。
The conservatives, likely to remain the biggest grouping, still seem to be in a quandary.
保守黨可能保留最大的分組，似乎還在左右為難。
Advocates hope to inject excitement, strengthen the commission's democratic mandate, focus the contest on European issues, and raise the stakes to avoid the ballot turning into a protest against unpopular national governments.
支持者希望加強委員會的民主授權，把注意力放在歐洲問題上，為防止投票演變成一場針對不得人心的政府的抗議示威，他們提高了風險等級。
Unless there is some blood-and-guts politics, they say, citizens will turn to populists.
他們說，除非能出臺一些動真格的政策，不然市民就會投靠民粹的陣營。
And yet the EU is not a country, and the commission is not a government.
雖然歐盟不是一個國家，委員會也不是一個政府。
It has the near-exclusive right to propose new legislation, to be approved by both the Council of Ministers (representing governments) and the EP.
但卻擁有近乎全部的權力來提出新法案，同時獲得內閣（代表政府）和歐盟議會的同意。
But it is also a civil service, policeman of the single market and competition watchdog.
但這還是一個行政部門，單一市場的督察，以及一個競爭監管機構。
In a new publication, the Centre for European Reform (CER), a British think-tank, argues that the commission “needs to act as referee in the political game, not as captain of one of the teams”.
一份新發表的發言稱，英國智庫歐洲改革中心（歐改）認為，委員會“需要在政治遊戲中充當裁判，而不是做某一方的指揮。”
National leaders have always appointed the president and the 27 other commissioners, and will not want to be dictated to by the EP, which most regard as a nuisance.
國家領導人總是任命主席和其餘27個專員，而且不願像傻瓜一樣被歐盟議會任意擺佈。
The Lisbon treaty mischievously muddied the process: it says leaders should propose a president “taking into account” the election result; then the candidate “shall be elected” by the EP. The dispute over who chooses, and controls, the commission president may cause more gridlock in Brussels than rowdy Eurosceptics ever could.
里斯本條約反而把進程變得更加模棱兩可：條約中聲明，領導人應該建議總統“考慮到”大選的結果；然後參選人應由歐盟議會“選出”。委員會主席自己選中並控制的這場爭議或將在歐盟引起更大的僵局，甚至大過那些惹是生非的疑歐主義者。
A more partisan commission risks losing credibility in its semi-judicial functions such as ruling on state-aid cases (eg, bank bail-outs) and enforcing antitrust rules.
一個更黨派化的委員會將會冒失去信任的風險履行其半司法化功能，比如掌握國家援助的情況（例如銀行救市方案）以及加強反壟斷法。
The commission has acquired greater powers to scrutinise national budgets and economic policies, and recommend sanctions. It is proposing to be the ultimate authority in winding up banks.
委員會獲得更加強大的權力來審核國家預算案，經濟政策以及推薦制裁。這將會是清算銀行的最後一層管理機構。
Do prime ministers and presidents want to hand loaded guns to an avowedly party-political commission president?
首相和總統會荷槍實彈對準公開的黨派政治化的委員會主席嗎？
The EU needs better commissioners, but an election of the president would narrow the field.
歐盟議會需要更專業的專員，但主席的選舉又會縮小這個範圍。
Sitting prime ministers would not risk their national jobs for a European contest; the choice would come down to jobless politicos or Brussels insiders.
已經坐上首相位置的人不會為一個全歐洲的角逐拿自己工作冒險；這個選擇歸結到失業的政客或歐盟內部人士頭上。
And voters are bound to be disappointed. The commission president does not decide issues they most care about.
而選民們必然要失望了。委員會主席不打算就選民們最關心的問題做出決斷。
Voting against austerity in the EP would not change the fact that creditors set the conditions for bail-outs.
在歐盟議會內投票反對緊縮不會改變債權國為救市方案設定條件的事實。
The unresolvable conundrum
無解的難題
The EU is a hybrid, part international organisation and part federation. There are no neat solutions to the democratic conundrum.
歐盟是一個混合的，不完全的國際化組織和不完全的聯盟。對於民主的難題沒有乾淨俐落的解決方案。
A semi-elected president could offer the worst combination: too partisan to retain the trust of national leaders;
一個半當選總統會提供最糟糕的組合：太黨派化反而不能保持國際領導間的信任；
too powerless to win the loyalty of citizens who may think they are electing the president of Europe but would get only a weak secretary-general.
太過放權又不能贏得公民的忠誠，他們可能會認為他們所選的歐洲主席實際上只是個軟弱的秘書長而已。
A direct election makes sense should the commission ever be granted federal authority, including tax-raising powers.
一次直選可能會讓委員會成功被授予聯邦的權力，包括增稅的權力。
Even so, it may need to give up some of its regulatory and technocratic functions.
即使這樣，這仍然需要放棄部分監管、技術的職能。
For now treasuries remain strictly national. Yet the problem of legitimacy is pressing.
因為現在國債被嚴格管控在本國內。但合法性問題仍然迫切。
One response is for national parliaments to do a better job of holding ministers to account for decisions they make in Brussels.
一種反應是各國議會應該督促部長們為他們在布魯塞爾做的決定負責。
The CER proposes a “forum” of national parliamentarians to scrutinise EU actions where the EP has no say, for instance in devising bail-out packages.
歐洲改革中心提出，當歐盟議會不同意時就舉辦一個“論壇”為各國議員審查歐盟措施，比如說設計紓困計畫。
European politicians can never trump national ones in terms of legitimacy and public interest.
歐洲的政客從未在合法性和公共利益上戰勝國家。
So it is for national leaders to lead the fight against Eurosceptics:
所以這需要國家領導人帶頭與疑歐主義者對抗：
stop blaming the EU for all ills, defend the benefits of integration, fix its flaws and, in the euro zone, explain the reforms needed to stay in the single currency.
不再批評歐盟的弊病，為其一體化的益處而辯護，修復其缺陷，在歐元區內解釋改革需要在單一貨幣體系內。
It would be a great mistake to let Eurosceptics claim the national flags for themselves; the EU's circle of gold stars is no substitute.
這樣疑歐主義者再為自己主張分裂就是個大錯誤；歐盟的藍天金星旗是無可替代的。
留言列表
TOEFL (9)
