The Great Debaters EVER
只是刚刚看完 《the great debaters》
因为 Denzel Washington而去看，最后却为电影中一场场的辩陈词所倾倒
无话可说 这无疑是部很棒的电影 让我无法忘记
来来回回地把最后一场和哈佛的辩论听写下来
多么铿锵有力的文字 我真的很崇拜写出这些文字的人 在他们的内心 必定有更加强大 以至于改变世界的力量
Resolved:
Civil disobedience is a moral weapon in the fight for justice. But how can disobedience ever be moral? Well, i guess depends on one's definition of the word. In 1919, in India, 10000 people gathered in Amritsarto protest the tyranny of British rule. ( 有借鉴wiki，历史太差，诶—）General Reginald Dyer (对英文人名的反映度还是迟钝...） trapped them in a count yard and order his troops to fire into the crowed for ten minutes. 379 died. Men, women, children. Shot down in cold blood. Dyer said he had taught them a moral lesson. Gandhi and his followers responded not with violence but with an organized campaign of non-cooperation. Government buildings were occupied. Streets were blocked with people who refused to rise, even when beaten by police. Gandhi was arrested. But the British were soon forced to release him. He called it a moral victory.(电影里，海默父亲解救了Mel，同样的）
The definition of moral:
Dyer's lesson or Gandhi's Victory?
You choose.
Applause:
From 1914 to 1918, for every single minute, the world was at war.
Four men laid down their lives (没有懂这句话什么意思...), Just think of it. 240 brave young men were hurled into eternity, every hour of every day, of every night. (诶，知道他一直说240是在强调伤亡人数的庞大...但是， 你懂得，主角光环，就算对手是哈佛...) XXXX 这段我跳过去了，大概就是在讲人死的很多，在这期间. Here was a slaughter, immeasurable greater than what happened at Amritsar. Can there be anything moral about it? Nothing...Except that it stopped Germany from enslaving all of Europe. Civil disobedience isn't moral because it's non-violent. Fighting for your country with violence, can be deeply moral, demanding the greatest sacrifice of all; life itself. Non-violence is the mask civil disobedience wears to conceal its true face... anarchy.
Gandhi believes one must always act with love and respect for one's opponents. even of they are Harvard debaters. Gandhi also believes that law breakers must accept the legal consequences for their actions. Does that sound like anarchy? Civil disobedience is not something for us to fear. It is ,after all, an American concept. You see, Gandhi draws his inspiration not from a Hindu scripture. But from Henry David Thoreau, who i believe graduated from Harvard and lived by a pond not too far from here.
My opponent is right about one thing. Thoreau was a Harvard grad, and, like many of us, a bit self-righteous. He once said, "any man more right tan his neighbors constitutes a majority of one."(也不太懂，梭罗先生果然有深度...) Thoreau the idealist could never know that Adolf Hitler would agree with his words.
The beauty and the burden of democracy is this: No idea prevails without the support of the majority. The people decide the moral issues of the day, not a majority of one.
Majorities do nit decide what is right or wrong. Your conscience does.So why should a citizen surrender his or her conscience to a legislator? No, we must never, ever kneel down before the tyranny of a majority.
Applause:
We can not decide which laws to obey and which to ignore. If we could i'd never stop for a red light. My father is one of those men that stands between us and chaos: A police officer. I remember the day his partner, his best friend, was gunned down in the line of duty. Most vividly of all, I remember the expression on my dad'a face. Nothing that erodes the rule of law can be moral, no matter what name we give it. （当哈佛辩手说这句话的时候，他的鼻孔都微张了，真的用了真感情，我有被他说服到，特别是最后一句话，不过，前提是，所谓的法律，是公正的。）
亮点来了！！！可爱的=-= 海默二世停顿了小久，小眼睛咕噜咕噜地左右瞧座位上的听着。我等待着他的一语惊人。
In Texas... they lynch Negroes. My teammates and I saw a man strung up by his neck and set on fire. We drove through a lynch mob, pressed our faces against the floorboard. I looked at my teammates, i saw the fear in their eyes...and worse, the shame. What was this Negro's crime that he should be hung, without trial, in a dark forest filled with fog? Was he a thief, was he a killer? Or just a Negro? Was he a sharecropper? A preacher? Were his children waiting up for him? And who are we to just lie there and do nothing? No matter what he did, the mob was the criminal. But the aw did nothing, just left us wondering why. My opponent says, nothing that erodes the rule of law can be moral. But there is no rule of law in the Jim Crow South, （这地方是神马———）not when Negroes are denied housing, turned away from schools, hospitals and not when we are lynched. St. Augustine said, "An unjust law is no law at all," (这句经典！！！足足反驳哈佛辩手的 鼻孔微张时说的那句！！也是他老爹之前说过的话！！—）which means I have a right, even a duty, to resist with violence or civil dis0bedience. You should pray i choose the latter.
BRAVO!!!!
我打的好累...
勿喷！
敬礼~
正片
