欧洲十位保守主义知识分子在10月7日以九种语言同时发布一份联署声明《一个我们能够信靠的欧洲》。2017年10月7日，欧洲十位保守主义倾向的学者和知识分子，以九种语言同时发布一份联署声明（https://thetrueeurope.eu/），表达了他们对目前欧洲危机的看法，以及对欧洲未来的原则性构想。这份声明是否能如签署者所愿对欧洲公共讨论产生影响，目前还不得而知。我们翻译这一文本，旨在提供当前欧洲思想界一种相对边缘的立场和观点。这种声音的出现，及其或沉寂或喧哗的后续效应，都会折射欧洲思想与政治的复杂局面与前景，也是对学院派的保守主义思想是否对欧洲政治仍具影响潜力的某种检测。

2017年5月，一群保守派学者和知识分子在巴黎聚谈，他们因为对欧洲政治、文化和社会时局——尤其是对欧洲精神与想象的共同关切而走到一起。在幻相、自欺与意识形态扭曲中，欧洲正在把自身的文明遗产挥霍殆尽。

这场聚谈并非碌碌无为的哀叹，也无意于在汗牛充栋的“西方没落”文献库中增添另一部书卷，与会者们相信以公开方式发表一篇正式声明的意义更为重大。他们表达了对“真正的欧洲”（the true Europe）的拥护，并且认为这一做法可以被所有人予以理性认可。在完成这项行动中，首先要做的是对“真正的欧洲”提供一份解说，它被掩盖在我们时代的各色时髦的抽象中。

聚谈的最后成果就是这篇《一个我们能够信靠的欧洲》。这份《巴黎声明》呼吁人们重新理解并激赏欧洲真正的个性。同时，它也意在邀请欧洲民众积极打捞我们欧洲传统中的最好遗产，共同建构一个充满安宁、朝气和高贵的未来。

请藉由这份宣言与我们握手。

2017年10月7日

巴黎声明《一个我们能够信靠的欧洲》

签署人

Phillipe Bénéton（France）

法国著名政治理论家，生于1946年，供职于雷恩大学和天主教高等研究院，讲授马基雅维利、托马斯·莫尔、伊拉斯谟等经典作家，最新著作《西方道德的败坏》（Le dérèglement moral de l'Occident，2017）。

Rémi Brague（France）

法国哲学史家、随笔作家，生于1947年，精通古希腊哲学和中世纪阿拉伯、犹太与基督教思想史，供职索邦，并曾兼任慕尼黑大学哲学系主任，法兰西学院（Institut de France）院士，著述丰厚，最新作品《人的统治：现代方案的起源与挫败》（Le Règne de l'homme：Genèse et échec du projet moderne, 2015）。

Chantal Delsol（France）

法国哲学家、政治史家、小说家，生于1947年，隶属马克斯·韦伯学脉，供职马恩—拉瓦雷大学，“汉娜·阿伦特研究院”（1993）创办人，著述丰厚，服膺“联邦制”，认为这一制度植根于天主教秩序与日耳曼民族的巴洛克文化母体中，代表作《民粹主义：对不可辩护者的辩护》（Populismos：Una Defensa De Lo Indefendible, 2013）、《不正义的正义：驳国际法的暴政》（Unjust Justice：Against the Tyranny of International Law, 2008）。

Roman Joch（Česko）

捷克著名保守派政治家和政治理论家，布拉格智库“公民研究院”（Občanský institut）执行主任，生于1971年，在政治哲学、国际关系与国家安全领域发表众多著作，曾供职捷克外交部的学术咨询委员会（2006）、副总理Alexandr Vondra的政策助理（2009）、总理Petr Nečas 的人权与外交政策助理（2010-2012）。

Lánczi András（Magyarország）

匈牙利政治哲学家，生于1956年，供职考文纽斯大学（Corvinus University, Budapest），担任该校政治科学与哲学研究所主任，著作论题涉及政治智识、命运-遗产、列奥·施特劳斯思想中的传统与现代性等，在复兴匈牙利与欧洲保守政治思想方面，他贡献甚巨。

Ryszard Legutko（Polska）

波兰哲学家与政治家，生于1949年，杰格隆尼大学（Jagellonian University）古代哲学与政治理论教授，精研柏拉图对话，著述丰厚，最新作品《民主中的恶魔：自由社会中的极权主义诱惑》（The Demon in Democracy：Totalitarian Temptations in Free Societies，2016），波兰政治哲学研究中心创办人，曾入选波兰参议院（2005），出任波兰教育部长（2007），国务卿（Secretary of State，2007-2009），欧洲议会成员，波兰“无形学院”（Collegium Invisibile）院士。

Sir Roger Scruton（United Kingdom）

英国著名政治哲学家、作家，生于1944年，著名保守学刊The Salisbury Review主编，著述等身，代表作《保守主义的意义》（1980），于1998年被哈维尔总统授予捷克共和国最高荣誉勋章，2016年，受封骑士，表彰其在哲学与公共教育领域的杰出贡献，现执教于牛津大学、剑桥大学与圣安德鲁斯大学。

Robert Spaemann（Deutschland）

罗马天主教哲学家，生于1927年，“里特尔学派”（Ritter School）成员，精研基督教伦理，在生物伦理、环保与人权领域建树颇丰，深受教宗本笃十六世肯认，最新作品《卢梭：人与公民，现代人的悖境》（Rousseau – Mensch oder Bürger. Das Dilemma der Moderne，2008）。

Bart Jan Spruyt（Nederland）

荷兰历史学家、记者、作家、保守主义思想领袖，生于1964年，早年研习神学、历史与法学，现供职鹿特丹自由大学，讲授教会史，“埃德蒙·伯克基金会”创始人，反对欧洲宪法，2006年曾撰写“保卫西方：新保守主义与对新丘吉尔的持续需求”。

Matthias Storme（België）

比利时著名律师、学者与保守派哲学家，生于1959年，其家世传承在政治与学术领域拥有显赫记录，现供职鲁汶大学。

声明正文

1. 欧洲是我们的家园。欧洲属于我们，我们也属于欧洲。这片土地是我们的家园；这是我们唯一的家园。我们挚爱欧洲，这无须解释，我们对欧洲的忠诚亦毋庸辩护。它关乎我们共同的历史、希望和爱；关乎我们习惯的生活方式以及那些悲怆和痛苦的时刻；也关乎那些激动人心的和解经验，以及一份对于美好未来的承诺。普通的风景和事件灌注着特殊的意义——它属于我们，与别人无关。无论我们经历过多少的流浪，家是一个让人感到亲切，让我们感到被认可的地方。这就是真实的欧洲，我们的珍宝，无可替代。

2. 一个虚假的欧洲正在威胁着我们。欧洲的丰饶和伟大正在因为它对于自身的误解而受到威胁。这个虚假的欧洲把自己想象成我们文明的完成形态，但实际上将毁掉我们的家园。它企图夸大和扭曲欧洲真实的美德却对自身的恶习视而不见。它沾沾自喜地换取了历史的片面缩影，针对我们的过去展开不可一世的攻击。它的支持者们自愿成为无家可归的弃儿，并且他们以此为高尚之举。通过这种方式，虚假的欧洲把自己歌颂为一个普世共同体的先驱，但事实上，它既谈不上普世，更称不上是一个共同体。

3. 虚假的欧洲是虚幻的和专横的。虚假欧洲的支持者受惑于一种对进步的必然性的迷信。他们相信历史站在他们一边，这种信念使其变得傲慢和轻蔑，也没有能力去承认他们正在建构的所谓“后民族”、“后文化”的世界存在着各种缺陷。更有甚者，对于他们和我们共同珍视的体面人性的根源，他们无从知晓。他们无视甚至攻击欧洲的基督教根基。同时他们花费巨大精力去防止对穆斯林的冒犯。他们妄想穆斯林将会愉快地采纳他们的世俗主义与文化多元图景。这个虚假的欧洲在偏见、迷信和无知中沉陷，被虚荣和自鸣得意的乌托邦幻景刺瞎了双目，并且反过来扼杀对它的任何异议。当然，所有这一切都是以自由和宽容为名。

4. 我们必须捍卫真实的欧洲。我们正在接近一条死胡同。对于欧洲未来的威胁既非俄罗斯的冒进，亦非穆斯林移民。真实的欧洲正处在危险之中，是因为虚假的欧洲正在以令人窒息的权力扼杀我们的想象力。对欧洲是什么以及应该是什么的幻想和自我欺骗，正在掏空欧洲各族及其共同文化。我们誓言抵抗这种危及欧洲未来的威胁。我们将守护、维持并捍卫真实的欧洲，那个我们真正以身相许的欧洲。

5. 团结一致和公民忠诚鼓舞着我们积极参与。真实的欧洲期待和鼓励积极参与共同的政治和文化生活。欧洲的理想是团结一致，它基于对一种法律体系的同意，该体系审慎节制，适用于所有欧洲民族。然而，这种同意并不总是以代议制民主的形式来实现，在更为根本的层面，公民忠诚传统反映着我们对自身政治与文化传统的根深蒂固的同意，不管它采取何种形式。在过去，欧洲人努力使我们的政治体系变得更向普罗大众开放，而且我们也公正地以这段历史为荣。他们在这种行动过程中，甚至在公开的反叛中，依然热情地肯定这块大陆属于我们欧洲人，即使他们的事业染指不义，甚或一败涂地。献身变革使得欧洲成为一块寻求更高正义的地方。这种进步精神产生于我们对家园的热爱和忠诚。

6. 我们不是被动的屈服者。欧洲统一的精神让我们能够在公共广场上信任彼此，即便我们是陌生人。欧洲乡镇和城市中的公园、中央广场以及宽广的林荫大道展现了欧洲政治的精神：我们分享着共同的生活和共同的事务（res publica）。我们自认为有义务承担起对于我们社会未来的责任。我们不是权力统治下的消极服从者，不管它是世俗的还是神圣的。专横的历史暴力也不会令我们屈服。成为欧洲人意味着拥有政治和历史的能动性。我们是自身共同命运的书写者。

7. 民族国家是欧洲的标志。真实的欧洲是欧洲各国族的共同体。我们拥有各自的语言、传统和边界，但我们仍然承认相互间的亲缘关系，即使在我们身陷分歧甚至战争。这种多元一体（unity-in-diversity）看起来像是欧洲的自然格局，但实际上，它既不是自然的，也并非必然的，这一点使得它既非凡特异，又弥足珍贵。“多元一体”最常见的政治形式是帝国，在罗马帝国衰落之后的数个世纪里，这一形态被欧洲的武士君主们不断地重造。帝国形态的诱惑始终存在着，但民族国家取得了最后胜利，这一政治形式致力于把民族性和主权联结在一起。民族国家因此成为了欧洲文明的标志。

8. 我们不为强加于人的强制统一而站台。民族共同以自我统治为荣耀，它常常炫耀自身在艺术和科学领域的民族成就，并与其他国族展开竞争，包括角逐沙场。这些活动伤害了欧洲，有时甚至非常严重，但欧洲文化的统一性从来没有因此受到伤害。事实上，情况正好相反。随着欧洲各民族国家渐趋巩固并凸显其独特性，一个共同的欧洲认同变得更为强大。二十世纪上半叶，在经历两次世界大战的可怕杀戮之后，我们以更强大的决心去光耀我们共同的遗产。这确证了作为一种正当意义上的世界级文明的欧洲的深度和力量。我们并不谋求帝国式的强加于人的大一统。相反，欧洲的世界主义认为，对国家的热爱和公民的忠诚可以扩展到一个更广阔的世界。

9. 基督教促进了文化的统一。真实的欧洲曾经以基督教为标记。基督教会普世的精神帝国在没有援引政治帝国的协助下，为欧洲提供了文化上的统一性。这一点使得一种特殊的公民忠诚得以在共同的欧洲文化中生长壮大。那种被我们称为公民社会的独立自主成为欧洲生活方式的标志性特征。此外，基督教福音书并没有发布一种统一性的神圣律法，因此，多样化的欧洲各国内部的世俗法律得到承认和尊崇的同时，我们欧洲的统一也并没有受到损害。并不意外的是，随着欧洲基督教信仰的衰落伴随而来的是建构政治统一的重新尝试——一个金钱和律法的帝国，其中覆盖着一层伪宗教的普世主义滥情，这就是欧盟正在营建的东西。

10. 基督教根基滋养着欧洲。真正的欧洲肯定每一个个体的平等尊严，无论性别、等级或是种族。这也是从我们基督教的根基中生长出来的。我们的绅士德性是一项明确无误的基督教遗产：公正、怜悯、仁慈、宽容、和解、仁爱。基督教彻底变革了男女间的关系、珍视爱情以及以前所未有的方式保持相互的忠诚。婚姻的纽带让男人和女人都能在交流中共同成长。我们所作的大部分牺牲都是为了我们的伴侣和孩子。这种自我奉献的精神也是另一项由基督教献给我们所钟爱的欧洲的遗产。

11. 古典的根基鼓舞着卓越的德性。真实的欧洲同样也在古典的传统中获得灵感。我们通过古希腊和罗马的文学作品来认识我们自己。作为欧洲人，我们努力成就伟大，这是古典德性中的王冠。在很多时候，这引发了为获取霸权而展开的暴力竞逐，但在其最好的状态下，它启发了欧洲的男女为追求卓越而在音乐和艺术工作中造就无与伦比的美，同时也在科学和技术领域成就了众多非凡突破。在真实的欧洲，节制镇定的罗马人的严肃德性、公民参与的荣耀以及希腊人的哲学探究从没有被遗忘。这些遗产同样也是我们的。

12. 欧洲是一项共同的事业。真实的欧洲从来都不是完美的。虚假欧洲的支持者们在寻求发展和改革方面没有错。1945年和1989年以来这两段时间，他们在这方面取得了许多成就，这是我们应该珍视和敬重的。我们共同的生活是一项行进中的事业，而非一项僵化的遗产。欧洲的未来有赖于更新对我们最佳传统的忠诚，而不是在似是而非的普世主义中遗忘历史和自暴自弃。欧洲并非起始于启蒙运动。我们所衷爱的家园并不会以欧洲联盟的形式终结。真实的欧洲是，而且永远将会是一个多个国族组成的共同体，它们曾经老死不相往来，有时候甚至非常剧烈的彼此孤立，但始终被同一种精神遗产所联结，藉此，我们欧洲人才可以在一起争论、进步、分享以及互相关爱。

13. 我们正在失去家园。真实的欧洲到了危险的时刻。人民主权的成就、对帝国的抵制、能够兼容公民爱欲的世界主义、基督教遗产下的人道以及有尊严的生活、古典传承在现实中的参与——这些都渐行渐远。当虚假欧洲的支持者们营建着普世人权的基督教天国赝品的时候，我们正在失去我们的家园。

14. 虚假的自由盛行于世。虚假的欧洲吹嘘着一种史无前例的对于人类自由的承诺。然而，这种自由非常片面。它自我推销，声称要从所有限制中谋求解放：性自由、自我表达的自由、“做自己”的自由。1968年的革命一代把这些自由视为对一种曾经神通广大并包含压迫势力的文化霸权的胜利。他们把自己看成是伟大的解放者，他们的僭越行为被称赞为高尚的道德成就，全世界都应该为此感恩戴德。

15. 个人主义、孤独和虚无被广泛散播。然而，对于欧洲的年轻一代，现实表面的镀金少得可怜。放荡和享乐常常导致人生的倦怠和虚无感的沉陷。婚姻的纽带变得脆弱易断。在性自由的海潮鼓荡下，年轻人对于婚姻和建立家庭的深层渴望常常受到挫败。一种挫败我们内心深处渴望的自由变成了我们的诅咒。我们的社会似乎沦入个人主义、孤独和虚无之中。我们并没有赢得自由，相反，我们落入了消费文化和媒体文化所制造的空洞的盲从与单一中。我们有责任说出其中的真相：1968年的一代只知道摧毁，但毫无建树。他们制造了一个真空，现在被社会媒体、廉价旅游和色情文学所充斥。

16. 我们正在被规制、管控。有人在吹嘘我们获得了前所未有的自由，但与此同时，欧洲人的生活却越来越广泛地被规制。规则统治着我们的工作关系、商业决定、教育资质，以及我们的新闻与娱乐媒体。并且，当今的欧洲更试图收紧针对言论自由的既有规则，要知道，这是一种欧洲专属的自由，一种事关个人信仰的公开表达的自由。这些限制所针对的并非是公共生活中的淫秽话语或其他对体面之辞的攻击。相反，欧洲的统治阶级希望对公开的政治言论进行限制。关于伊斯兰和移民问题，那些想要就“难以启齿的真相”而发声的政治领袖们，在法官面前怯步了。政治正确施加了强有力的禁忌，后者将那些对现状的挑战视为非法越界。虚假的欧洲并不真正鼓励一种自由的文化。它提倡的乃是一种由市场所驱动的同质性文化，以及政治上强制的统一性。

17. 多元文化主义不靠谱。虚假的欧洲同样吹嘘一种对平等的前所未有的承诺。它宣称要消除歧视、包容所有种族、宗教与身份。的确，它有了真正的进展，然而一种脱离现实的乌托邦也在欧洲身体上扎根了。在过去的那一代，欧洲曾经谋求多元文化主义的宏大规划。——以至于连要求甚或是增进穆斯林新进移民归化入我们欧洲的风俗习惯——更不用提我们的基督教了——这一行为都被判为粗暴的不正义。人们告诉我们，鉴于对平等地承诺，我们务必要放弃任何暗示我们的文化更加优越的信仰。矛盾的是，欧洲的多元文化主义事业尽管否认欧洲的基督教根基，却以一种夸张得难以实现的形式冒用了基督教的普世仁爱观念。它要求欧洲人以圣母的标准去牺牲掉自我。欧洲家园的被殖民、欧洲文化的覆灭，这就是我们必须承认的欧洲21世纪的伟大荣耀，——欧洲人的集体牺牲，换来的是某种新颖的和平与繁荣的全球共同体。

18. 败坏的良心在滋长。在这一新思维中掺有大量败坏的良心。毋庸置疑，我们统治阶层当中的大多数都认定了欧洲文化的优越性，但它并不能在公共领域中以可能冒犯到移民们的方式得到认肯。基于那样的优越性，他们认为同化将会自然而然地快速发生。欧洲统治阶层假定，通过自然法则或历史法则，“他们”必然会变得像“我们”一样。——相反的轨迹则被认为是不可想象的。这是对欧洲帝国主义旧思维的富有讽刺意味的回声。与此同时，官方的多元文化主义作为一种治疗手段，被用来对付那些不幸的然而却是“短暂”的文化冲突。

19. 技术专家的暴政在蔓延。还有更糟糕的，一种更黑暗的信念在起作用。过去的那一代，我们统治阶层中越来越庞大的部分认定，其自身利益在于加速的全球化。他们希望建立各种他们能够控制的、免于民众主权麻烦的超国家机构。越来越清楚的是，欧盟内部的“民主赤字”绝不仅仅是一种通过技术手段可以救治的技术问题。毋宁说，这种赤字是一个根本性的承诺，并得到了积极的维护。无论是通过被假定的经济必要性，还是自主发展起来的国际人权法而获得正当性，欧盟机构里的超国家官员们，剥夺了欧洲的政治生活，以一个技术性的答案来回应所有的挑战，这个答案就是：不存在其他选择。这是我们所面临的柔软却日益真实的暴政。

20. 虚假的欧洲是脆弱和无能的。尽管其党派势力竭尽全力在加固种种舒适的幻象，虚假欧洲的傲慢自大如今变得昭然若揭。首先，这个虚假欧洲所暴露的虚弱超过任何人的想象。大众娱乐与物质消费并不能支撑起公民生活。多元文化主义意识形态剥夺了更高的理想，挫伤了对爱国骄傲的表达，我们的社会如今很难召唤保卫自身的意志。其次，公民信任与社会凝聚并没有被包容的修辞或者由巨型国际企业所主宰的非个人经济体系所复苏。另外，我们必须坦言：欧洲的社会正在被严重损耗。只要睁开双眼，我们就会看到政府权力、社会管理和教育灌输日渐增长的使用。不仅仅是伊斯兰的恐怖才让全副武装的士兵遍及我们的街道。防暴警察如今还必须用来镇压暴力性的反建制抗议，甚至还用来管制那些成群醉酒的足球迷。我们足球信徒们的那种狂热是一种绝望迹象，来自对团结的深切人性需求，一种在这个虚假欧洲未能满足的需求。

21. 一种弃绝的文化已然生根。可叹的是，欧洲的知识分子阶层同属于虚假欧洲自负者的首要意识形态党派。毫无疑问，我们的大学是欧洲文明之荣耀的一部分。但是，大学这曾是努力将过去时代的智慧传给每个新一代的地方，如今却大多将批判性思考等同于头脑简单的对过去的弃绝。欧洲精神的指导方针一直是智性诚实与客观性的严格训练。然而经过最近的两代人，这一崇高的理想已被转变。曾经致力于让心灵从主导意见的暴政获得自由的苦修主义，已然变成了一种时常自鸣得意且毫无反思的敌意，这种敌意针对的是属于我们自身的一切。这种文化弃绝的立场所起的作用是可以用一种廉价且容易的方式成为“批判的”，它在过去的这一代中不断地在演讲大厅被排练，变成了一种教义、一种教条。而加入宣讲这一信条则被当作是“启蒙”的标志，是在精神上获选的体现。结果，我们的大学如今成为时下文化毁灭的积极能动者。

22. 精英们傲慢地炫耀他们的德性。我们的统治阶层正在推进人权的发展。他们还在为应对气候变化而努力。他们正在规划一个更加全球性整合的市场经济，并协调税收政策。他们监视着推进性别平等的进步过程。他们正在为我们做这么多的事情！那么，他们用何种机制来占据官职又有什么要紧？如果欧洲民众对他们的行政事工产生更多的怀疑又有什么要紧？

23. 另类选择是存在的。那种逐渐增长的怀疑完全是合理的。如今，欧洲被一种毫无目标的物质主义所支配，这种物质主义似乎无法激励男女们去组建家庭和生养孩子。一种弃绝的文化剥夺了下一代人的身份认同感。在我们各个国家中，有些国家出现了一些地区，在那里穆斯林过着一种非正式的自治生活，不遵循当地的法律，好像他们更像是殖民主义者而不是我们国家的同胞成员。个人主义使我们彼此隔绝。全球化改变了数百万人的生活前景。我们的统治阶层当受到挑战时就会说，他们不过是在努力去调解不可避免的事情，去适应无法阻挡的必然之事。没有其他可能的道路，而抵抗是不理性的。事情只能如此。那些反对者会被说成是在经受怀旧伤感，他们因此就应受道德谴责，被当作种族主义者或是法西斯主义者。随着社会分裂与公民之间的不信任变得愈发显著，欧洲的公共生活变得更加激愤，也更加针锋相对，而无人知晓何处才会是个尽头。我们绝不能再这样继续下去，我们需要摆脱虚假欧洲的这种暴政。

24. 我们必须抵御假造的宗教。这项复兴的事业将以神学的自我认知为开端。普世主义者以及虚假欧洲的普世化自负，暴露了这是一种假造的宗教事业，包含着强烈的教义承诺——以及革出教门。这是一种有效的麻醉剂，使欧洲作为一个政治体陷入麻痹无力。我们必须坚持，宗教渴望适存于宗教的领域，而非政治的领域，更不用说官僚行政领域。为了恢复我们政治和历史的能动性，欧洲公共生活的再世俗化是势在必行的。

25. 我们必须恢复真正的自由主义。这将要求我们宣布放弃那种虚伪的语言，那种逃避责任并助长意识形态操纵的语言。谈论多样性、包容性和多元文化主义是空洞的。这种语言通常被用来将我们的失败描述为成就。社会团结的瓦解“实际上”变成了欢迎、宽容和包容的标志。这是一种营销语言，一种用来遮蔽而不是阐明现实的语言。我们必须恢复对现实持久不变的尊重。语言是一种微妙的工具，当被用作棒喝之器就被贬损。我们应当成为语言之体面的庇护者。援用讨伐是我们目前时刻颓废堕落的标志。我们切不可容忍言语的恫吓，更不能容忍致命的威胁。我们需要保护那些通情达理的言说者，即使我们认为他们的观点是错误的。欧洲的未来必须是自由的（在其最好的意义上），这意味着致力于强健的公共论辩，免受所有暴力和强制的威胁。

26. 我们需要负责任的政治家。打破这个魔咒——这个虚假欧洲及其为一个无疆世界而发动的乌托邦式的伪宗教征战的魔咒，这意味着培养一种新型的政治才能和一种新型的政治家。一位好的政治领袖会看护一个特定民族的公共福祉。一位好的政治家会珍视我们共享的欧洲遗产以及我们各个特定民族的传统，视其为壮丽的并激励生命的却又是脆弱的礼物。他不会拒绝那份遗产，也不会去冒失去这一切风险来追寻乌托邦式的梦想。这样的领袖们渴求由他们的人民所授予的荣誉，但他们不贪求那个“国际社会”——实际上是寡头政治的公共机构——的赞许。

27. 我们应该复兴国家的统一和团结。认识到欧洲各国的特殊品格，以及它们的基督教标志，我们不必在多元文化主义者的虚假主张面前感到迷惘。没有同化的移民就是殖民，而这必须被拒绝。我们有正当的理由期望，那些移居我们土地的人们将自己融入我们的国家并接受我们的方式。这种期望需要由明智的政策来支持。多元文化主义的语言是从美国传入的。但美国的移民大时代出现在20世纪初前后，这是一个经济高速增长的时期，在一个实际上没有福利国家的国度，还有一种移民们被期望同化的很强的国家认同感。在接纳了大量移民之后，美国关闭了大门，对此后的两代人几乎停止移民。欧洲需要借鉴美国的这一经验，而不是接受当代美国的意识形态。那种经验告诉我们，工作场所是同化的强大引擎，慷慨的福利制度会阻碍同化，而谨慎的政治领导人有时会指令减少甚至大幅削减移民。我们绝不能让一种多元文化主义的意识形态扭曲了我们的政治判断——关于如何最好地服务于共善（the common good），这需要民族共同体具有足够统一和团结，从而将他们的善视为共同之善。

28. 只有帝国是多元文化的。在二战之后，西欧培育了有活力的民主国家。上世纪与本世纪之交，中欧国家恢复了它们的公民活力。这些都是欧洲最可贵的成就。但如果不处理我们各国的移民和人口变化问题，这些成就将会丧失。只有帝国才是多元文化的，而这正是欧盟将会变成的样子——倘若我们不能使复兴团结和公民统一成为一个标准，以此来评估移民政策和同化策略。

29. 一种恰当等级制滋养社会福祉。许多人错误地认为，只有围绕移民问题的争议才撼动着欧洲。事实上，这只是一个更普遍的且必须被逆转的社会瓦解的一个维度而已。我们必须恢复社会中特定角色的尊严。父母、老师和教授有义务在他们的关怀下形成这种尊严。我们必须抵制那种对专家知识的崇拜，这种崇拜以牺牲智慧、机智和追求有教养的生活为代价。如果不坚决反对夸张的平等主义以及将智慧化约为技术知识，就不可能有欧洲的复兴。我们赞同现代的政治成就。每个男人和女人都应该享有平等的投票权。基本权利必须得到保护。但是，一个健康的民主需要社会和文化的等级制来鼓励追求卓越、对服务于公益的人们赋予荣誉。我们需要恢复一种精神伟大的感知并赋予其应有的荣誉，从而使我们的文明能够一方面对抗财富不断增长的权力，一方面抵御庸俗的娱乐。

30. 我们必须恢复道德文化。人类的尊严不只是免受干涉的权利，国际人权的学说并没有穷尽正义的诸种要求，更没有穷尽善的诸种要求。欧洲需要复兴关于道德文化的共识，从而使民众能被导向一种有道德的生活。我们绝不允许错误的自由观阻碍审慎使用法律以威慑制止邪恶。我们必须宽恕人类的弱点，但如果没有恢复对正直行为和人类卓越的共同渴望，欧洲就不可能繁荣。一种尊严的文化源自正派以及履行我们生活中各种职责之义务。我们需要更新社会阶层之间的相互尊重，这是一个重视所有人贡献的社会的特征。

31. 市场需要指向社会目标的秩序。我们承认自由市场经济的许多积极方面，但我们必须抵制那些寻求将市场逻辑总体化的意识形态。我们不能允许所有事物都可出售。运转良好的市场需要法治，而我们的法治目标不应该仅仅是经济效率。市场在强有力的、以社会自身而非市场原则组织起来社会体制中也才能发挥最好的作用。经济增长是有益的，但并不是最高的善。市场需以社会目标为导向。今天，企业巨无霸甚至威胁到政治主权。各国需要通力合作来掌控全球经济力量的傲慢和盲目。我们认同审慎使用政府权力来维持非经济性的社会益品。

32. 教育需要改革。我们相信欧洲拥有值得持续的历史和文化。然而，我们的大学常常背弃我们的文化遗产。我们需要改革教育的课程设置，以促进我们共同文化的传播，而不是给年轻人灌输一种否定弃绝的文化。各个层级的教师和导师都担负着记忆的责任。他们应该为自己担当连接着过去与未来世代之间的桥梁角色而感到自豪。我们还必须将崇高与美作为我们的共同标准，拒绝将艺术退化为一种政治宣传，以此来复兴欧洲的高雅文化。这将需要培育新一代的艺术赞助人。公司和官僚机构已经表明自己是差劲的艺术管理者。

33. 婚姻和家庭是必不可少的。婚姻是公民社会的根本，是男女和谐的基础。它是为了维系家庭和养育孩子而形成的亲密纽带。我们确认，我们在社会中和作为人类最基本的角色就是父亲和母亲。婚姻和孩子内在于任何一种人类繁荣的愿景。孩子需要那些把他们带到世界上的人们的奉献。这种奉献是高尚的，也必须予以敬意。我们赞成以审慎的社会政策来鼓励和加强婚姻、生育和抚养。一个不欢迎孩子的社会是没有未来的。

34. 民粹主义应该被介入。由于所谓的“民粹主义”的兴起，今天的欧洲存在很大的焦虑，尽管民粹主义这个术语的含义似乎从未被界定，而且它主要被用作谩骂。我们对此持保留态度。欧洲需要依赖她传统的深刻智慧，而不是依靠简单化的口号和分裂的情感诉求。尽管如此，我们也承认，在这种新的政治现象中，许多都代表一种对虚假欧洲之暴政的有益反叛，任何对虚假欧洲的道德正当性垄断的威胁都会被它贴上“反民主”的标签。所谓的“民粹主义”挑战了既存现状的独裁，即“中心的狂热”，这是正确的。这是一个迹象，表明即使在我们退化和贫乏的政治文化中，欧洲民族的历史能动性也可能重生。

35. 我们的未来是真正的欧洲。我们拒绝如下错误的主张：在那种——由统一市场、跨国的官僚机构以及油腔滑调的娱乐所构成的——人造的没有灵魂的团结之外，不存在任何负责任的替代选项。面包和马戏团是不够的。负责任的替代选择是真正的欧洲。

36. 我们必须担负责任。在此刻，我们呼吁所有欧洲人加入我们，一起来拒绝那种无国界的多元文化世界的乌托邦幻想。我们有正当的理由热爱我们的家园，我们努力将我们自己曾接受的每一件高贵的事物，作为我们的遗产，传给我们的子孙后代。作为欧洲人，我们也分享着一份共同的遗产，这份遗产要求我们作为一个诸国构成的欧洲一起和平生活。让我们重申民族国家的主权，恢复对欧洲未来的共同政治责任的尊严。

附：英文原文

In May 2017, a group of conservative scholars and intellectuals met in Paris. They were brought together by their common concern about the current state of European politics, culture, society—and above all the state of the European mind and imagination. Through delusion and self-deception and ideological distortion, Europe is dissipating her great civilizational inheritance.

Instead of simply wringing their hands in fruitless anxiety, or adding yet another tome to the ample literature that diagnoses “the decline of the West,” the Paris participants believed it was important to make an affirmation, and to do so publicly. They expressed their attachment to “the true Europe,” and did so with reasons that can be recognized by all. In doing so, it was first necessary to give an account of this true Europe, which lies hidden beneath the fashionable abstractions of our age.

The result is, “A Europe We Can Believe In.” This Paris Statement is a ringing call for a renewed understanding of, and appreciation for, Europe’s true genius. It is an invitation to the peoples of Europe to actively recover what is best in our tradition, and to build a peaceful, hopeful, and noble future together.

Please join us in this affirmation.

7 October 2017

THE PARIS STATEMENT

A EUROPE WE CAN BELIEVE IN

1. Europe is our home. Europe belongs to us, and we belong to Europe. These lands are our home; we have no other. The reasons we hold Europe dear exceed our ability to explain or justify our loyalty. It is a matter of shared histories, hopes and loves. It is a matter of accustomed ways, of moments of pathos and pain. It is a matter of inspiring experiences of reconciliation and the promise of a shared future. Ordinary landscapes and events are charged with special meaning—for us, but not for others. Home is a place where things are familiar, and where we are recognized, however far we have wandered. This is the real Europe, our precious and irreplaceable civilization.

2. A false Europe threatens us. Europe, in all its richness and greatness, is threatened by a false understanding of itself. This false Europe imagines itself as a fulfilment of our civilization, but in truth it will confiscate our home. It appeals to exaggerations and distortions of Europe’s authentic virtues while remaining blind to its own vices. Complacently trading in one-sided caricatures of our history, this false Europe is invincibly prejudiced against the past. Its proponents are orphans by choice, and they presume that to be an orphan—to be homeless—is a noble achievement. In this way, the false Europe praises itself as the forerunner of a universal community that is neither universal nor a community.

3. The false Europe is utopian and tyrannical. The patrons of the false Europe are bewitched by superstitions of inevitable progress. They believe that History is on their side, and this faith makes them haughty and disdainful, unable to acknowledge the defects in the post-national, post-cultural world they are constructing. Moreover, they are ignorant of the true sources of the humane decencies they themselves hold dear—as do we. They ignore, even repudiate the Christian roots of Europe. At the same time they take great care not to offend Muslims, who they imagine will cheerfully adopt their secular, multicultural outlook. Sunk in prejudice, superstition and ignorance, and blinded by vain, self-congratulating visions of a utopian future, the false Europe reflexively stifles dissent. This is done, of course, in the name of freedom and tolerance.

4. We must defend the real Europe. We are reaching a dead-end. The greatest threat to the future of Europe is neither Russian adventurism nor Muslim immigration. The true Europe is at risk because of the suffocating grip that the false Europe has over our imaginations. Our nations and shared culture are being hollowed out by illusions and self-deceptions about what Europe is and should be. We pledge to resist this threat to our future. We will defend, sustain and champion the real Europe, the Europe to which we all in truth belong.

5. Solidarity and civic loyalty encourage active participation. The true Europe expects and encourages active participation in the common project of political and cultural life. The European ideal is one of solidarity based on assent to a body of law that applies to all, but is limited in its demands. This assent has not always taken the form of representative democracy. But our traditions of civic loyalty reflect a fundamental assent to our political and cultural traditions, whatever their forms. In the past, Europeans fought to make our political systems more open to popular participation, and we are justly proud of this history. Even as they did so, sometimes in open rebellion, they warmly affirmed that, despite their injustices and failures, the traditions of the peoples of this continent are ours. Such dedication to reform makes Europe a place that seeks ever-greater justice. This spirit of progress is born out of our love for and loyalty to our homelands.

6. We are not passive subjects. A European spirit of unity allows us to trust others in the public square, even when we are strangers. The public parks, central squares and broad boulevards of European towns and cities express the European political spirit：We share our common life and the res publica. We assume that it is our duty to take responsibility for the futures of our societies. We are not passive subjects under the domination of despotic powers, whether sacred or secular. And we are not prostrate before implacable historical forces. To be European is to possess political and historical agency. We are the authors of our shared destiny.

7. The nation-state is a hallmark of Europe. The true Europe is a community of nations. We have our own languages, traditions and borders. Yet we have always recognized a kinship with one another, even when we have been at odds—or at war. This unity-in-diversity seems natural to us. Yet this is remarkable and precious, for it is neither natural nor inevitable. The most common political form of unity-in-diversity is empire, which European warrior kings tried to recreate in the centuries after the fall of the Roman Empire. The allure of the imperial form endured, but the nation-state prevailed, the political form that joins peoplehood with sovereignty. The nation-state thereby became the hallmark of European civilization.

8. We do not back an imposed, enforced unity. A national community takes pride in governing itself in its own way, often boasts of its great national achievements in the arts and sciences, and competes with other nations, sometimes on the battlefield. This has wounded Europe, sometimes gravely, but it has never compromised our cultural unity. In fact, the contrary has been the case. As the nation states of Europe became more established and distinct, a shared European identity became stronger. In the aftermath of the terrible bloodshed of the world wars in the first half of the twentieth century, we emerged with an even greater resolve to honor our shared heritage. This testifies to the depth and power of Europe as a civilization that is cosmopolitan in a proper sense. We do not seek the imposed, enforced unity of empire. Instead, European cosmopolitanism recognizes that patriotic love and civic loyalty open out to a wider world.

9. Christianity encouraged cultural unity. The true Europe has been marked by Christianity. The universal spiritual empire of the Church brought cultural unity to Europe, but did so without political empire. This has allowed for particular civic loyalties to flourish within a shared European culture. The autonomy of what we call civil society became a characteristic feature of European life. Moreover, the Christian Gospel does not deliver a comprehensive divine law, and thus the diversity of the secular laws of the nations may be affirmed and honoured without threat to our European unity. It is no accident that the decline of Christian faith in Europe has been accompanied by renewed efforts to establish political unity—an empire of money and regulations, covered with sentiments of pseudo-religious universalism, that is being constructed by the European Union.

10. Christian roots nourish Europe. The true Europe affirms the equal dignity of every individual, regardless of sex, rank or race. This also arises from our Christian roots. Our gentle virtues are of an unmistakably Christian heritage：fairness, compassion, mercy, forgiveness, peace-making, charity. Christianity revolutionized the relationship between men and women, valuing love and mutual fidelity in an unprecedented way. The bond of marriage allows both men and women to flourish in communion. Most of the sacrifices we make are for the sake of our spouses and children. This spirit of self-giving is yet another Christian contribution to the Europe we love.

11. Classical roots encourage excellence. The true Europe also draws inspiration from the Classical tradition. We recognize ourselves in the literature of ancient Greece and Rome. As Europeans, we strive for greatness, the crown of the Classical virtues. At times, this has led to violent competition for supremacy. But at its best, an aspiration toward excellence inspires the men and women of Europe to craft musical and artistic works of unsurpassed beauty and to make extraordinary breakthroughs in science and technology. The grave virtues of the self-possessed Romans and the pride in civic participation and spirit of philosophical inquiry of the Greeks have never been forgotten in the real Europe. These inheritances, too, are ours.

12. Europe is a shared project. The true Europe has never been perfect. The proponents of the false Europe are not wrong to seek development and reform, and there is much that has been accomplished since 1945 and 1989 that we should cherish and honor. Our shared life is an ongoing project, not an ossified inheritance. But the future of Europe rests in renewed loyalty to our best traditions, not a spurious universalism demanding forgetfulness and self-repudiation. Europe did not begin with the Enlightenment. Our beloved home will not be fulfilled with the European Union. The real Europe is, and always will be, a community of nations at once insular, sometimes fiercely so, and yet united by a spiritual legacy that, together, we debate, develop, share—and love.

13. We are losing our home. The true Europe is in jeopardy. The achievements of popular sovereignty, resistance to empire, cosmopolitanism capable of civic love, the Christian legacy of humane and dignified life, a living engagement with our Classical inheritance—all this is slipping away. As the patrons of the false Europe construct their faux Christendom of universal human rights, we are losing our home.

14. A false freedom prevails. The false Europe boasts of an unprecedented commitment to human liberty. This liberty, however, is very one-sided. It sells itself as liberation from all restraints：sexual freedom, freedom of self-expression, freedom to “be oneself.” The Generation of ’68 regards these freedoms as precious victories over a once almighty and oppressive cultural regime. They see themselves as great liberators, and their transgressions are acclaimed as noble moral achievements, for which the whole world should be grateful.

15. Individualism, isolation, and aimlessness are widespread. For Europe’s younger generations, however, reality is far less gilt with gold. Libertine hedonism often leads to boredom and a profound sense of purposelessness. The bond of marriage has weakened. In the roiling sea of sexual liberty, the deep desires of our young people to marry and form families are often frustrated. A liberty that frustrates our heart’s deepest longings becomes a curse. Our societies seem to be falling into individualism, isolation and aimlessness. Instead of freedom, we are condemned to the empty conformity of consumer- and media-driven culture. It is our duty to speak the truth：The Generation of ’68 destroyed but did not build. They created a vacuum now filled by social media, cheap tourism and pornography.

16. We are regulated and managed. At the same time that we hear boasts of unprecedented liberty, European life is more and more comprehensively regulated. Rules—often confected by faceless technocrats in league with powerful interests—govern our work relationships, our business decisions, our educational qualifications, our news and entertainment media. And Europe now seeks to tighten existing regulations on freedom of speech, an aboriginal European freedom—freedom of conscience made manifest. The targets of these restrictions are not obscenity or other assaults on decency in public life. Instead, Europe’s governing classes wish to restrict manifestly political speech. Political leaders who give voice to inconvenient truths about Islam and immigration are hauled before judges. Political correctness enforces strong taboos that deem challenges to the status quo beyond the pale. The false Europe does not really encourage a culture of freedom. It promotes a culture of market-driven homogeneity and politically enforced conformity.

17. Multiculturalism is unworkable. The false Europe also boasts of an unprecedented commitment to equality. It claims to promote non-discrimination and the inclusion of all races, religions and identities. Here, genuine progress has been made, but a utopian detachment from reality has taken hold. Over the past generation, Europe has pursued a grand project of multiculturalism. To demand or even promote the assimilation of Muslim newcomers to our manners and mores, much less to our religion, has been thought a gross injustice. A commitment to equality, we have been told, demands that we abjure any hint that we believe our culture superior. Paradoxically, Europe’s multicultural enterprise, which denies the Christian roots of Europe, trades on the Christian ideal of universal charity in an exaggerated and unsustainable form. It requires from the European peoples a saintly degree of self-abnegation. We are to affirm the very colonization of our homelands and the demise of our culture as Europe’s great twenty-first century glory—a collective act of self-sacrifice for the sake of some new global community of peace and prosperity that is being born.

18. Bad faith grows. There is a great deal of bad faith in this thinking. Most in our governing classes doubtless presume the superiority of European culture—which must not be affirmed in public in ways that might offend immigrants. Given that superiority, they think that assimilation will happen naturally, and quickly. In an ironic echo of the imperialist thinking of old, Europe’s governing classes presume that, somehow, by the laws of nature or of history, ‘they’ will necessarily become like ‘us’—and it is inconceivable that the reverse might be true. In the meantime, official multiculturalism has been deployed as a therapeutic tool for managing the unfortunate but ‘temporary’ cultural tensions.

19. Technocratic tyranny increases. There is more bad faith at work, of a darker kind. Over the last generation, a larger and larger segment of our governing class has decided that its own self-interest lies in accelerated globalization. They wish to build supranational institutions that they are able to control without the inconveniences of popular sovereignty. It is increasingly clear that the ‘democratic deficit’ in the European Union is not a mere technical problem to be remedied by technical means. Rather, this deficit is a fundamental commitment, and it is zealously defended. Whether legitimated by supposed economic necessities or autonomously developing international human rights law, the supra-national mandarins of the EU institutions confiscate the political life of Europe, answering all challenges with a technocratic answer：There is no alternative. This is the soft but increasingly real tyranny we face.

20. The false Europe is fragile and impotent. The hubris of the false Europe is now becoming evident, despite the best efforts of its partisans to shore up comfortable illusions. Above all, the false Europe is revealed to be weaker than anyone imagined. Popular entertainment and material consumption do not sustain civic life. Shorn of higher ideals and discouraged from expressing patriotic pride by multiculturalist ideology, our societies now have difficulty summoning the will to defend themselves. Moreover, civic trust and social cohesion are not renewed by inclusive rhetoric or an impersonal economic system dominated by gigantic international corporations. Again, we must be frank：European societies are fraying badly. If we but open our eyes, we see an ever-greater use of government power, social management and educational indoctrination. It is not just Islamic terror that brings heavily armed soldiers into our streets. Riot police are now necessary to quell violent anti-establishment protests and even to manage drunken crowds of football fans. The fanaticism of our football loyalties is a desperate sign of the deeply human need for solidarity, a need that otherwise goes unfulfilled in the false Europe.

21. A culture of repudiation has taken hold. Europe’s intellectual classes are, alas, among the chief ideological partisans of the conceits of the false Europe. Without doubt, our universities are one of the glories of European civilization. But where once they sought to transmit to each new generation the wisdom of past ages, today most within the universities equate critical thinking with a simpleminded repudiation of the past. A lodestar of the European spirit has been the rigorous discipline of intellectual honesty and objectivity. But over the past two generations, this noble ideal has been transformed. The asceticism that once sought to free the mind of the tyranny of dominant opinion has become an often complacent and unreflective animus against everything that is our own. This stance of cultural repudiation functions as a cheap and easy way of being ‘critical.’ Over the last generation, it has been rehearsed in the lecture halls, becoming a doctrine, a dogma. And to join in professing this creed is taken to be the mark of ‘enlightenment,’ and of spiritual election. As a consequence, our universities are now active agents of ongoing cultural destruction.

22. Elites arrogantly parade their virtue. Our governing classes are advancing human rights. They are at work fighting climate change. They are engineering a more globally integrated market economy and harmonizing tax policies. They are monitoring progress toward gender equality. They are doing so much for us! What does it matter by what mechanisms they inhabit their offices? What does it matter if the European peoples grow more sceptical of their ministrations?

23. There is an alternative. That growing scepticism is fully justified. Today, Europe is dominated by an aimless materialism that seems unable to motivate men and women to have children and form families. A culture of repudiation deprives the next generation of a sense of identity. Some of our countries have regions in which Muslims live with an informal autonomy from local laws, as if they were colonialists rather than fellow members of our nations. Individualism isolates us one from another. Globalization transforms the life prospects of millions. When challenged, our governing classes say that they are merely working to accommodate the inevitable, adjusting to implacable necessities. No other course is possible, and it is irrational to resist. Things cannot be otherwise. Those who object are said to suffer nostalgia—for which they deserve moral condemnation as racists or fascists. As social divisions and civic distrust become more apparent, European public life grows angrier, more rancourous, and no one can say where it will end. We must not continue down this path. We need to throw off the tyranny of the false Europe.

24. We must turn back ersatz religion. The work of renewal begins with theological self-knowledge. The universalist and universalizing pretensions of the false Europe reveal it to be an ersatz religious enterprise, complete with strong creedal commitments—and anathemas. This is the potent opiate that paralyzes Europe as a political body. We must insist that religious aspirations are properly the province of religion, not politics, much less bureaucratic administration. In order to recover our political and historical agency, it is imperative that we re-secularize European public life.

25. We must restore a true liberalism. This will require us to renounce the mendacious language that evades responsibility and fosters ideological manipulation. Talk of diversity, inclusion and multiculturalism is empty. Often, such language is deployed as a way to characterize our failures as accomplishments：The unravelling of social solidarity is ‘actually’ a sign of welcome, tolerance, and inclusion. This is marketing language, a language meant to obscure reality rather than illuminate. We must recover an abiding respect for reality. Language is a delicate instrument, and it is debased when used as a bludgeon. We should be patrons of linguistic decency. Recourse to denunciation is a sign of the decadence of our present moment. We must not tolerate verbal intimidation, much less mortal threats. We need to protect those who speak reasonably, even if we think their views mistaken. The future of Europe must be liberal in the best sense, which means committed to robust public debate free from all threats of violence and coercion.

26. We need responsible statesmen. Breaking the spell of the false Europe and its utopian, pseudo-religious crusade for a borderless world means fostering a new kind of statesmanship and a new kind of statesman. A good political leader stewards the commonweal of a particular people. A good statesman views our shared European inheritance and our particular national traditions as magnificent and life-giving, but also fragile gifts. He does not reject that inheritance, nor does he chance losing it all for utopian dreams. Such leaders covet the honors bestowed upon them by their people; they do not lust for the approbation of the ‘international community,’ which is in fact the public relations apparatus of an oligarchy.

27. We should renew national unity and solidarity. Recognizing the particular character of the European nations, and their Christian mark, we need not be perplexed before the spurious claims of the multiculturalists. Immigration without assimilation is colonization, and this must be rejected. We rightly expect that those who migrate to our lands will incorporate themselves into our nations and adopt our ways. This expectation needs to be supported by sound policy. The language of multiculturalism has been imported from America. But America’s great age of immigration came at the turn of the twentieth century, a period of remarkably rapid economic growth, in a country with virtually no welfare state, and with a very strong sense of national identity to which immigrants were expected to assimilate. After admitting large numbers of immigrants, America closed its doors very nearly shut for two generations. Europe needs to learn from this American experience rather than adopt contemporary American ideologies. That experience tells us that the workplace is a powerful engine of assimilation, that a generous welfare system can impede assimilation and that prudent political leadership sometimes dictates reductions in immigration—even drastic reductions. We must not allow a multicultural ideology to deform our political judgments about how best to serve the common good, which requires national communities with sufficient unity and solidarity to see their good as common.

28. Only empires are multicultural. After World War II, Western Europe cultivated vital democracies. After the collapse of the Soviet Empire, Central European nations restored their civic vitality. These are among Europe’s most precious achievements. But they will be lost if we do not address immigration and demographic change in our nations. Only empires can be multicultural, which is what the European Union will become if we fail to make renewed solidarity and civic unity the criteria by which to assess immigration policies and strategies for assimilation.

29. A proper hierarchy nourishes social well-being. Many wrongly think Europe is being convulsed only by controversies over immigration. In truth, this is but one dimension of a more general social unraveling that must be reversed. We must recover the dignity of particular roles in society. Parents, teachers and professors have a duty to form those under their care. We must resist the cult of expertise that comes at the expense of wisdom, tact and the quest for a cultured life. There can be no renewal of Europe without a determined rejection of an exaggerated egalitarianism and the reduction of wisdom to technical knowledge. We endorse the political achievements of the modern era. Each man and woman should have an equal vote. Basic rights must be protected. But a healthy democracy requires social and cultural hierarchies that encourage the pursuit of excellence and give honor to those who serve the common good. We need to restore a sense of spiritual greatness and give it due honour so that our civilization can counter the growing power of mere wealth on the one hand and vulgar entertainment on the other.

30. We must restore moral culture. Human dignity is more than the right to be left alone, and doctrines of international human rights do not exhaust the claims of justice, much less of the good. Europe needs to renew a consensus about moral culture so that the populace can be guided toward a virtuous life. We must not allow a false view of freedom to impede the prudent use of the law to deter vice. We must be forgiving of human weakness, but Europe cannot flourish without a restoration of a communal aspiration toward upright conduct and human excellence. A culture of dignity flows from decency and the discharge of the duties of our stations in life. We need to renew the exchange of respect between social classes that characterizes a society that values the contributions of all.

31. Markets need to be ordered toward social ends. While we recognize the positive aspects of free-market economics, we must resist ideologies that seek to totalize the logic of the market. We cannot allow everything to be for sale. Well functioning markets require the rule of law, and our rule of law should aim at more than mere economic efficiency. Markets also function best when they are nested within strong social institutions organized on their own, non-market principles. Economic growth, while beneficial, is not the highest good. Markets need to be oriented toward social ends. Today, corporate giganticism threatens even political sovereignty. The nations need to cooperate to master the arrogance and mindlessness of global economic forces. We affirm the prudent use of government power to sustain non-economic social goods.

32. Education needs to be reformed. We believe Europe has a history and culture worth sustaining. Our universities, however, too often betray our cultural heritage. We need to reform educational curricula to foster the transmission of our common culture rather than indoctrinating young people into a culture of repudiation. Teachers and mentors at every level have a duty of memory. They should take pride in their role as a bridge between generations past and generations to come. We must also renew the high culture of Europe by setting the sublime and the beautiful as our common standard and rejecting the degradation of the arts into a kind of political propaganda. This will require the cultivation of a new generation of patrons. Corporations and bureaucracies have shown themselves to be poor stewards of the arts.

33. Marriage and family are essential. Marriage is the foundation of civil society and the basis for harmony between men and women. It is the intimate bond organized around sustaining a household and raising children. We affirm that our most fundamental roles in society and as human beings are as fathers and mothers. Marriage and children are integral to any vision of human flourishing. Children require sacrifice from those who bring them into the world. This sacrifice is noble and must be honoured. We endorse prudent social policies to encourage and strengthen marriage, childbearing, and childrearing. A society that fails to welcome children has no future.

34. Populism should be engaged. There is great anxiety in Europe today because of the rise of what is called ‘populism’—though the meaning of the term seems never to be defined, and it is used mostly as invective. We have our reservations. Europe needs to draw upon the deep wisdom of her traditions rather than relying on simplistic slogans and divisive emotional appeals. Still, we acknowledge that much in this new political phenomenon can represent a healthy rebellion against the tyranny of the false Europe, which labels as ‘anti-democratic’ any threat to its monopoly on moral legitimacy. The so-called “populism” challenges the dictatorship of the status quo, the ‘fanaticism of the centre,’ and rightly so. It is a sign that even in the midst of our degraded and impoverished political culture, the historical agency of the European peoples can be reborn.

35. Our future is the true Europe. We reject as false the claim that there is no responsible alternative to the artificial, soulless solidarity of a unified market, a transnational bureaucracy, and glib entertainment. Bread and circuses are not enough. The responsible alternative is the true Europe.

36. We must take responsibility. In this moment, we ask all Europeans to join us in rejecting the utopian fantasy of a multicultural world without borders. We rightly love our homelands, and we seek to hand on to our children every noble thing that we have ourselves received as our patrimony. As Europeans, we also share a common heritage, and this heritage asks us to live together in peace as a Europe of nations. Let us renew national sovereignty, and recover the dignity of a shared political responsibility for Europe’s future.

华东师范大学世界政治研究中心 译

翻译：廖凌敏、王灿、孙嘉琪（波士顿学院政治学系陈凯硕博士对译文亦有贡献）