Leaving Hopkins

离开霍普金斯

Everyone, I am leaving to take a private-sector job in Seattle, starting August 19th. I will still be working with my students and collaborators here remotely. As you’ll see from this letter, I have been fired from Hopkins effective the 31st of August. I had arranged a backup plan beforehand, so will be leaving a bit earlier. Please don’t blame the Whiting School or Andrew Douglas for this; this comes from higher up. You’ll see from the letter that I am not supposed to communicate with (almost) anyone at Hopkins… technically I am just putting this on the web; and if you find it, you find it.

从8月19号开始，我就要离开JHU去西雅图的一家公司工作了。之后我会用远程的方式指导我的学生以及和合作者协作。在这封信里可以看到，我被JHU开除了，且必须在8月31之前离开。因为在被开除前已经有了准备，所以我可以更早些离开。请你们不要责怪Whiting学院或者Andrew Douglas，这是更高层的决定。在通知信里可以看到，我几乎不被允许和JHU的任何人交流，不过从技术角度讲，我可以把我想说的放到网上，如果你不小心看到了，那就和我无关啦。

I don’t expect all this will come as a surprise to most of you, given that three months ago organized a counter-protest against the student occupation of Garland hall, and a number of people were extremely triggered about that; but I thought you might like a little background.

我想对于你们不少人而言，听到这个消息时应该有心里准备，毕竟，很多人对于三个月前我组织的“反占X”（反对示威学生占领Garland行政中心)活动一直都很关心，不过我估计你们可能会想了解更多的相关背景信息。

What was never in dispute is that, being frustrated as the prospect of a long siege at Garland where our computer servers live, I organized a group of what I called “counter-protesters” to try to regain control of the building from the students. This was on the evening of May 8th; there was a scuffle and I was carried out of the building by the protesters. They then made allegations to the Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), saying that I had attacked them. The OIE seems not to have been able to substantiate the allegations that I attacked the protesters, but university leadership still decided that I still needed to be fired. (The attached letter claims that they are still investigating… I think most likely the true story is either they found the protesters were lying or realize that they’ll never know what happened).

我先描述下这件事的基本背景，这个是整件事里最无争议的。一些示威学生长期占领着Garland行政中心，由于我们的服务器集群恰好处于Garland行政大厅下面，而他们的行为严重影响了服务器的正常使用，所以我组织了一群“反示威者”试图从这些学生手中夺回Garland行政大厅的控制权。在5月8号，我在此和这些示威学生发生了争执，最后被他们赶了出来。之后他们向OIE声称我攻击了他们。尽管OIE找不到任何证据证明我攻击过学生，但是学校的领导仍然决定对我进行开除。（通知信中说他们仍在调查，不过估计他们实际上也知道是示威者在撒谎。）

What the administration seems to be saying is that I put the students in danger by bringing outsiders into what could have been a dangerous situation. You’ll see that the letter states that I believed the group I brought with me “could become violent”… the actual conversation with their lawyer went like this: after I stated that everyone was under strict instructions to not retaliate if attacked, I was asked whether I was confident that they would be able to follow those instructions no matter what happened, and I shrugged.

管理层大概的意思是，我带的一些学校外部人员使得学生处在了可能的危险之中。在辞退信中提到，我明知我带来的反示威者“可能会采用暴力”… 实际上，我和律师的对话是这样的：我要求每一个人要严格遵守指令，即使被学生攻击也不要有任何报复行为，在陈述完此段之后，律师问我是否有自信他们可以在任何情况下遵守这些指令，我只能耸了耸肩。

So essentially I am being fired for what might have happened, while the students are getting off scot free for things that actually did happen. They actually made false allegations against me, both in public (on Twitter) and to the university authorities. They actually attacked me and hurt me; many of you saw the big scratches on my back. They also threw a lot of punches at the people with me, who showed admirable restraint, although I understand one punch was thrown by a person in my group. They actually shut down Garland and inconvenienced thousands of people, requiring the fire department to cut open the doors to get them out. But they suffer no consequences. Am I sensing just a liiiitle bit of a double standard? I mean, obviously faculty will be held to higher standards than students, but that’s nowhere near enough to account for the difference in treatment.

所以实际上我是因为“可能发生的事情”而被开除了，与此同时示威的学生却没有因“确实已经发生的事情”而受到任何惩罚。想想他们确实对我做了虚假的指控，包括在twitter上公开的以及向学校官方的。他们确实攻击了我，并且伤害了我，你们中很多人也看到了我背部多个明显的抓痕。他们还确实挥拳打了和我一起的好几个人，而这些人都非常克制没有还手，仅仅只有一个人还了一拳而已。这些示威者确实占领关闭了Garland大厅，影响到了上千人，以至于需要消防部门来把门切开赶他们出去。但他们却不用承担任何后果。难道这里面就没有一点点点点的双标吗？我的意思是，作为学校职工的确应该比学生要遵守更高的行为标准，但是学校的这个处理对待双方的差别显然太大了。

Where could this double standard come from? Well, obviously there’s the fact that they were protesting for a left-wing cause, and I was opposing them. I’m not convinced that that’s enough to explain it, though. My feeling is that this mostly has to do with underrepresented minorities, specificially black people (and trans people). There seems to be nothing that Americans, or American institutions, fear more than being accused of racism (or similar ism’s), which leads to ridiculous spectacles like what we’re seeing here, where such a huge organization can be paralyzed by a handful of deluded kids.

这种双重标准的根源在哪？当然，这些人的示威抗议是因为一些左翼原因，而我是反对左翼的，但是我觉得这不是根本原因。 我认为主要原因跟少数族裔有关，尤其是涉及到了黑人和跨性别者。对于美国人或者美国的机构而言，没有什么比被指控为种族主义更可怕的事情了，所以这就导致了我们看到的荒谬情况：一个巨大的组织被一小撮被蛊惑的孩子搞得瘫痪了。

Now if I had known in advance that everyone inside the building was black (that was what I saw; although from media coverage it seems that there may have been a white trans person in the core group)– I wouldn’t have gone ahead with the counterprotest. I’m not an idiot; I know that as a person who demographically ticks all the ‘oppressor boxes’, I would have to be severely punished for opposing such a group. I miscalculated by trusting the coverage in JHNewsletter, which seems to have given a false impression of the demographics of the protest; their photos showed mostly white people. Now many of the people sitting outside the building were white, but that seems to have been window-dressing; they were just bystanders and didn’t do anything except take a bunch of cellphone video. All the people that I saw fighting and screaming were black. If it were simply a matter of difference of opinion I expected that Hopkins would at least pretend to be even-handed; but once race and transgender status enter the picture I don’t think that’s possible any more.

如果我提前知道那个大厅里所有的示威者都是黑人（我看到的是这样，不过从媒体报道上看，核心成员里似乎还有一个白色跨性别者），我就不会组织反示威了。我又不是个傻子，我知道自己的族裔性别肤色无论哪一项在美国都只能属于被压迫的那一类，我也知道如果反抗这样一个群体只有被严厉惩处的下场。可惜我相信了JHNewsletter网站的消息，导致了错误的判断。JHNewsletter在报道里给出的照片中大多都是白人，这使我对示威者人口分布的产生了错误估计。现在仍然有很多白人坐在大厅外面，不过他们似乎都是些看热闹的，只不过是路过拍拍视频。我看到的所有争斗和嚎叫的都是黑人。如果这件事仅仅是冲突双方存在观点上的分歧，我估计JHU至少还会假装公平处理，但是一旦涉及到种族和同性的话题，我知道他们连假装一下都不可能了。

I’m aware that it’s a huge violation of social norms for me to say publicly that I think whites, or males, are being discriminated against. As far as I can tell there are three specific circumstances in which it’s acceptable for a white male in left-of-center America to allude publicy to these types of double standards:

To justify them

To advocate for their adoption

To deny that they exist at all

我明白，公开说出我的想法，即认为白人或着说是白人男性受到歧视，这极大违反了美国的社会规范。据我所知，只有三种情况下可以稍微提及白人男性被双标对待这件事，而不会惹怒美国偏左翼的白人男性。这三个情况是：

为这些人辩护

倡导他们的采纳

否认他们存在

Clearly what I am doing here doesn’t fall into any of those three categories. But the truth is, I left the bounds of left-wing respectability quite some time ago. White males in this environment seem to be expected to constantly atone for their existence by telegraphing their exclusive concern for every demographic group but their own, like a neutered puppy-dog or some Justin Trudeau man-child. It’s pathetic, in my opinion; and I don’t accept it at all. I am not prepared to apologize for being who I am. I don’t think that empathy should preclude critical thinking or basic self-respect. I don’t accept that a person should have carte blanche to disrupt everyone’s lives just because of their minority status; and I don’t feel it’s right that I should be fired just for opposing a group whose victimhood makes them politically unassailable. This might sound very controversial to some people here, but to me it seems like common sense.

很明显我现在的行为不属于这三个范畴的任何一个。事实是，很久以前，我就和左翼划清了界限。当前环境下的白人男性，似乎要不停的向所有族裔的人类（除了他们自己所在的种群即白人男性）表达关怀才得以减轻他们的罪孽，而他们自己只能像一只绝育的小狗或贾斯汀特鲁多似的男孩一样活着。我觉的这真的很可悲。而我自己不接受这一切，我就是我，我不想为我的存在而道歉，我不认为人的理性思维或基本自尊要为同情别人而让路。我无法接受一个人因为自己是少数族裔就可以肆无忌惮的享受打扰其他人生活的权利。我不认为我因为反对一个政治上更优越的团体而被解雇是个合理的事情。尽管对有些人而言我的话听上去有些争议，但对我而言这些都是常识。

After writing the words above, I can hear in my head a chorus of marginalized voices crying: “But.. but.. but.. we’re triggered!” “Hate!” “White supremacy!” “Transphobia!” and demanding special protection. I expect that some people will characterize my plea for equal treatment as an incitement to genocide. Let them. Unlike some people here, I have the mental strength to not be manipulated by these kinds of histrionics. I don’t need the approval of victim groups to bolster my self-esteem; and I’m capable of weathering a little outrage. (The fact that I have career options helps, obviously). There’s a difference between tolerance and cowardice; there’s a difference between broad-mindedness and self-hatred; and no-one should claim they are bravely defending `oppressed classes’ when in reality they are just too timid, self-conscious or mentally feeble to stop themselves from being manipulated by them. Males educated here in America seem to be uniquely supine in this regard. Is it something they put in the cafeteria food?

写完上面的文字后，我听到耳边有股声音在叫喊着，要求被特殊保护：“但是..但是..但是..我们被激怒了！” “这言论令人讨厌！” “你这个白人至上主义者！” “你这个跨性别恐惧症！”。我知道有些人会将我对平等待遇的诉求看成煽动种族灭绝的行为。随他们怎么想吧。和这里的某些人不同，我有种精神力量可以让自己不被现世这种装模作样的风气操纵。我不需要加入受害者团体来增强自尊心;而且我有能力经受住一些对我的不公平侮辱和暴行。 （显然，这多亏了我还有其他的职业道路可选）。请不要把宽容与怯懦混为一谈;宽宏大量并不代表要自我仇恨;如果一个人太怯懦，没有强大的精神力摆脱被风气操控，他就不要宣称自己能够勇敢的捍卫‘被压迫阶级’的权益。然而受过美国教育的男性却似乎尤善此道。难道是他们的食堂里的食物被加了什么特殊东西吗？

Perceptive readers may see the above as an appeal to masculinity. Yes, that’s essentially what it is. The obvious response, for a progressive, would be to put the adjective “toxic” in front of that word “masculinity” and throw it back at me. OK. I’m aware that in the progressive world male is bad and female is good, just as in Orwell’s “Animal Farm” it was “four legs good, two legs bad”. To round it out you can add: “non-white good, white bad”; “diversity good, uniformity bad”; “majority bad, minority good”; “powerful bad, powerless good”, and so on; and you have a nice little moral system, one that may be perfectly self-consistent. Now, I view moral systems as arbitrary and subjective: it’s just a particular assignment of people, actions, thoughts, events, artifacts and so on, to the categories “good” and “bad”– typically reinforced by myths or cherry-picked facts, and held together by some more general principles or concepts. So from a certain abstract point of view, the progressive moral system as on the same footing as any other.

敏锐的读者可能会把上述言论当成我对男性气概的诉求。是的，我基本上就是想表达这个意思。我知道，一些“思想进步”的人会在“男性气概”这个词的前面加上一个形容词：“有毒的”，然后扔回我面前。是的，我知道在“思想进步”的世界中，男性是坏的，女性是好的，就像在奥威尔的“动物农场”中那样，“四条腿好，两条腿坏”。你可以再加一些规矩来进一步完善这个体系，比如：“非白即好，有白即坏”、 “多样即好，单一即坏”、“少数即好，多数即坏”、“无权即好，有权即坏”等等。然后你就拥有了一个非常好的完全自洽的小型道德体系。我认为道德体系是任意和主观的：它只是将人、行为、思想、事件、人造物等在“好”和“坏”的类别进行一种划分而已 – 通常会利用神话或刻意挑选的事实来增强对这种划分的认同，并利用更一般的原则或概念来描述。因此，从某种抽象的角度来看，进步的道德体系与其他任何的道德体系的基础是一样的。

What I do find very odd, though, is that any straight white male would buy into it. It’s the same as if a gay Jew were to join the Nazi party and begin endlessly apologizing for his ancestors having lent money to Aryans at too-high rates of interest; and agreeing that he needs to recognize his “problematic Jewishness” and “toxic homosexuality”, stop talking, and make space for Aryan voices to be heard. He might even take pride in having acknowledged the uniquely cancerous and exploitative nature of the Jewish people, despite being one himself. So is this person virtuous, or is he just too-easily manipulated? You decide. I know we’re approaching cerebral-haemorrhage territory here, for left-of-center readers, but it’s true: there are many things said by American progressives where if you replace “white patriarchy” and “women of color” with “Jewish capital” and “Aryan youth”, and add a picture of a blond boy and a swastika or two, you’d have a very serviceable Nazi propaganda poster. Think about it.

然而我发现很奇怪的一点是，任何白直男（男性异性恋白种人）都在赞同这个道德体系。这就像一个同性恋犹太人加入了纳粹后，不停地为他的祖先以过高的利率借给雅利安人钱而道歉一样。然后他坦诚自省了自身的“错误的犹太性”和“有害的同性恋倾向”，并停止说话，敬候雅利安人的声音。他甚至可能为意识到了犹太人的不可救药的劣根性和剥削他人的天性而感到自豪，尽管他自己就是犹太人。所以到底是这个人太善良，还是他太容易被操纵呢？你可以想想。我知道我现在说的话可能会刺激到偏左翼的读者，但事实确实如此：想想美国的“思想进步“人士说的话，如果你把其中的“白人父权”和“有色女人”用“犹太资本”和”雅利安青年“替换下，并加上一个金发男孩和一两个纳粹标志，你会得到一个可以直接使用的纳粹宣传海报。想一想是不是这样。

You might counter that my analogy is inappropriate because women of color actually are good and white men bad, and history and science prove it. But that’s a subjective judgement, because facts alone can never tell you what’s good or bad unless interptreted within a moral framework. And if you use a moral framework that was constructed with the specific goal of proving that women and non-whites are good and white men are bad (because it originated in women’s-studies and black-studies departments at universities), then that’s the conclusion you will reach.

你可能会反驳说我的比喻是不恰当的，因为历史和科学证明了女性有色人种确实是善良的，而白人男性确实是坏的。但这其实是一种主观判断，因为事实本身并不能告诉你什么是好的或是坏的，好坏都是在道德框架内判定的。如果你使用的道德框架其构建目的就是为了证明女性和非白种人是好的，而白人是坏的（因为它起源于大学中的女性研究和的黑人研究部门），那么你当然会得到这个结论。

I want to be clear: I’m not in favor of any political or cultural movements that are animated by resentment. The choice isn’t, and shouldn’t be, between demonizing one demographic group or demonizing the other. But to join a movement that’s specifically against one’s own group? That’s retarded. Man up, America! You’re better than that. Leave that garbage to the man-haters and racial agitators that generated it, stop apologizing, and start living your lives!

我想声明一点：我不赞成任何因为怨恨而看起来充满生气的政治或文化运动。我们能做的选择不是，也不应该是非得妖魔化一个群体或另一个群体。但是去加入一场反对自己所在群体的运动实在太愚蠢了。站起来吧男人，美国男人！你们远不该如此卑贱，请把那些愤世嫉俗者和种族主义鼓动者生产的垃圾还给他们，不必再向谁道歉，开始自己的人生！

Anywho: as for me, I may not have my job, but at least I still have my dignity and my independence of thought. I’ll leave you with some words of Bob Dylan:

至于我，虽然可能没有了工作，但至少我还有着尊严和独立思想，这里送给大家一段Bob Dylan的话:

I ain’t sorry for nothing I’ve done

I’m glad I fought, I only wish we’d won

对做过之事 我从未后悔

我为之奋斗 一直骄傲如此

我只是希望 假如我们赢了

Please send my regards to the OIE, and say that, thanks to them, my career prospects have greatly improved.

请替我向OIE表示祝福，感谢他们，让我从此前程似锦。

Sayonara!

再见(原文为日文“再见”的英文写法Sayonara)