王室宝宝引发英国君主制存废之争

来源：21st Century

Media outlets in the UK went berserk over the arrival of the royal baby. Reporters camped for days outside the hospital where the Duchess of Cambridge stayed; TV presenters spent prime time slots speculating on the baby’s name or when it would ascend the throne; tabloid newspaper The Sun ¬even changed its masthead to “The Son” on the day the royal birth was announced.

不久前，英国各大媒体为王室宝宝的到来而狂热不已。记者们在凯特王妃入住的医院外驻扎多日，电视主持人们则占用黄金时段来推测宝宝的名字和继承王位的时间。英国小报《太阳报》（The Sun）甚至在王室宝宝诞生当天将其报头改成了《太子报》（The Son）。

But many were irritated by the intense media coverage. Satirical news magazine Private Eye printed one simple sentence in bold letters on its cover: “Woman Has Baby”, to ridicule other media outlets’ frenzy over an event the editors considered to be non-news. The Guardian’s website featured a “republican” button to make all talk of the royal baby disappear for non-Royalist readers.

然而，媒体铺天盖地的报道令许多人大为光火。批判性新闻杂志《侦探》仅在其封面印上寥寥几个粗体字：“王妃生了”，以调侃其他媒体对此次非新闻性事件的狂热。《卫报》则在其网站上添加了“共和党人”的按钮，为“非保皇派”用户自动屏蔽关于王室宝宝诞生的话题。

Following the initial excitement, many wonder if it isn’t a bit silly to pay so much attention to one privileged family. But the UK’s republicans are taking it a step further — they argue that the British monarchy should be abolished altogether.

最初的狂喜过后，许多人开始思考对一个特权家族投入过多的关注是否有些可笑。而更有甚者，英国共和党人士声称应该废除君主制。

This is not a new argument and to many it makes a lot of sense: The UK is a democracy, therefore the role of the royals is largely ceremonial. The royal family is also dependent on tax-payers’ money and no longer represents this highly diversified country.

这一争论由来已久，很多人也认为这样做合情合理：英国是民主国家，因此王室更多扮演的是礼仪性的角色。同时，王室的开销还要靠纳税人来买单，它也不再能够代表一个如此多元化的国家。

But the British people love their royals, and that’s a fact. According to a poll by Ipsos Mori last month, 77 percent of Britons want their country to remain a monarchy. For one thing, the royal family brings in heaps of tourism revenues.

但不可否认的是，英国王室深受英国人爱戴。据益普索•莫里调查机构于上月进行的一项民意调查显示，77%的英国人希望保留君主制。理由之一是王室能为旅游业带来巨大创收。

Tourism is the third biggest industry in the UK. An article on The Atlantic website cites statistics from the UK’s tourism agency, according to which the royal family generates close to 500 million pounds (4.8 billion yuan) every year in tourism revenues, drawing visitors to historic royal sites like the Tower of London, Windsor Castle and Buckingham Palace.

旅游业是英国的第三大产业。《大西洋月刊》网站上的一篇文章援引英国旅游局的数据指出，英国王室每年为旅游业创收近5亿英镑（约合48亿元人民币），诸如伦敦塔、温莎城堡和白金汉宫这些王室景点吸引了众多游客。

According to Buckingham Palace, sustaining the royal family costs each Briton 53 pence, per year. The total came to 33.3 million pounds in 2012-2013. So keeping the royal family is a good investment.

白金汉宫方面则表示，英国每人每年要花费53便士来支持王室开销。2012-2013年的总花费达3330万英镑。因此，保留王室是笔十分划算的投资。

Of course, many royalists also want to maintain the monarchy for non-economic reasons. Daniel Hannan, a conservative Member of the European Parliament, says in an article for The Telegraph that the British monarchy, as well as the parliamentary democracy, is a unifying national institution.

当然，除去经济因素，许多“保皇派”人士也依然维护君主制。身为英国保守党的欧洲议会议员丹尼尔•汉纳在为《每日电讯报》撰写的一篇发表文章中称，英国的君主制和议会民主制是一种联合一统的国家机构。

He points out that the UK was the only European country to have fought in World War II and not lost. As a result, the British people didn’t have to start anew in 1945 because their political system hadn’t failed them. The British political system may seem old, but Hannan says that’s because it works.

他指出英国是二战中唯一没有战败的欧洲国家。因此，1945年二战结束后，英国人不需要战后重建，因为英国政体并未辜负他们。汉纳说英国政体看似老旧，实则有效。

Hannan also says the monarchy is part of the British national identity. But a counter-argument in a Guardian editorial cites German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who argued that an enlightened culture is one that doesn’t rely on inherited traditions, authorities and social structures.

汉纳还表示君主制是英国国民身份的一部分。对此，《卫报》社论则援引了德国哲学家伊曼努尔•康德的观点反驳道，开明的文化并不依赖于继承下来的传统、权力以及社会结构。

As people in the Middle East and Africa shed their blood to fight for democratic rights, The Guardian editorial says it’s pathetic that the British people have no written constitution, no right to call themselves citizens (they are the Queen’s subjects) and still accept a “hierarchical, secretive, non-accountable” royal family.

《卫报》社论评论道，当中东和非洲人民正为争取民主权利而流血抗争时，英国人民却没有一部文字宪法，也没有资格自称为公民（因为他们是女王的子民），他们仍在拥护一个“等级制的、神秘的、毫无责任感的”王室，这着实可悲。