The radical act of choosing common ground Nisha Anand

Transcriber: Leslie Gauthier
Reviewer: Ivana Korom

In 1994, the Violent Crime Control
and Law Enforcement Act passed.

You probably know it as the crime bill.

It was a terrible law.

It ushered in an era of mass incarceration

that allowed mandatory minimums,

three-strikes laws,

the expansion of the death penalty –

it was terrible.

But it passed with bipartisan support.

GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich,

architect of the Republican Revolution,

led the way –

signed into law by Democratic
President, Bill Clinton.

Also in 1994,

I was a senior in high school
when this bill got passed,

and you were likely to find me

on the streets protesting
any number of causes …

including the crime bill.

So that’s what makes this picture
all the more surprising.

Newt was not on the top of my
“Favorite Person in this Country” list.

But this picture was taken in 2015.

This was the start of a movement

that would pass a bill
called the First Step Act.

The “New York Times”
called it the most significant reform

in criminal justice in a generation.

You know, 1994 Nisha –

on-the-streets activist –

might be disappointed in this photo –

some of you might be too.

But standing here today I’m not.

This is what I’m here
to talk to you about today.

This is radical common ground.

And I’m not talking about the kind
of common ground where –

you know, we can talk
about how much we love springtime

or “puppies are super cute.”

And it’s not, you know,
compromised common ground.

This is common ground that’s hard.

It hurts.

It’s the type of common ground
where you will be ridiculed and judged.

But it’s the type of common ground
that can secure human freedom.

It can save lives.

And it’s the type of common ground
I was born to find.

It’s in my DNA.

My dad was born
during the partition in India.

After the Indian independence movement,
the country was really divided

between people who wanted
to keep the country together

and those who wanted
different independent nations.

And when the British left,

they just decided to draw a line,
the partition and make a new country.

This started the largest forced
mass migration in human history.

Fifteen million people trapped
on the wrong side of these new borders.

Two million people dead
during the partition.

And my dad was the youngest
baby in a Hindu family

on the wrong side of the border.

and like families all around
the border on both sides,

they went into hiding.

And I was told when I was little
about the story of my family in hiding,

and one day when armed men came
into the house that they were hiding in,

searching for families,
my dad started crying.

And my grandma started shaking him.

And my grandfather, in that moment,

he made the choice that he’d sacrifice
his son in order to save the family.

But luckily, in that moment
he stopped crying.

My grandma, she shook him
and he stopped crying

and I’m here today
because he stopped crying.

But I’m also here today

because of that Muslim family
that took us in.

They also were held at gunpoint

and an armed man asked
if they were hiding anyone,

and they swore on the Quran
that nobody was in that house.

They chose in that moment
when the entire country –

everybody in the region,

you could hate people
who had different politics than you,

different religion,

you could kill people.

That was what was happening.

but they swore on their Holy book,

they chose the shared humanity

over politics of that day, and we lived.

And we survived.

And I start with this story
because often people tell me

that my mission for common
ground is the weak position.

But I ask how was that Muslims
family’s actions weak?

Because of that, my dad
did grow up healthy in India

and he emigrated to this country,

and I was born here in the late ’70s,

and like most first-generation kids
I was born to build bridges.

I was a bridge between
the old country and the new.

And just growing up, that’s what I did.

I was a brown girl in the Black
and white South in Atlanta, Georgia.

I was like, on one hand,

the perfect Indian daughter –

straight As,

captain of the debate team –

but on the other hand,

I was also this radical feminist,

punk-rock activist sneaking
out of the house for concerts

and, you know, getting arrested
like, all the time for causes.

I was a mix of a lot things.

But they all live harmoniously in me.

Building bridges was just natural,

and I think all of us represent
a mix of a bunch of things.

I think we have that ability
to find the common ground.

But that’s not how
I was living my life …

at all.

I moved to the Bay Area in 2001,

and this was kind of
a turning point for me;

it was the start of the second Iraq War.

And I was organizing
with a bunch of activists –

of course –

and we were thinking that probably
we needed to expand our circle

a little bit,

that we weren’t going to successfully
stop the war if, you know –

just amongst us.

So we decided we’d build bridges,

expand our circle,

and so the great, anarchist
versus communist soccer tournament

of 2001 was born.

(Laughter)

That’s it.

That’s how large my circle
was allowed to expand.

Building bridges with liberal Democrats?

Oh, no way, that was a bridge too far.

Local electeds?

That was a bridge too far.

And that was in 2001.

And I think you’ll agree with me now.

In 2020 it’s gotten even worse –

that division, that tribalism.

We won’t sit down at dinner

with people who voted differently than us.

We, like, see a mean tweet
from our best friend –

a tweet that, like,
doesn’t fit with our worldview,

and all of a sudden they’re canceled.

The purity politics of the moment gone.

I sometimes wake up –

I don’t know what we’re going to do.

And people ask me
“how do we do that?”

But I know about common ground.

I feel like we can build those bridges.

But it’s not easy.

I have a concept that I go back to,

and it’s a concept that should
be familiar to everybody

since the beginning of human history.

It’s the idea of the commons.

This shared place
in the center of town –

town square,

the quad –

but it’s the place
where you come together,

your community,

and you can listen to people
on soapboxes with different ideas,

and you can be very different,

but you come together because you know
together we’re stronger than being apart.

And today when I think of the commons,

I extend it to the resources
we all share –

collectively owned,

like the air we breathe.

I think of schools,

parks.

I think of the intelligence we share.

We can share in libraries or the internet.

And I think the internet’s important.

In this digital age,

that shared humanity,

that access to be together in the commons,

is at our fingertips.

But we’re not using it that way.

We’re not coming together.

To choose that path towards the commons
and to be with each other,

you also have to choose love.

That’s a hard thing.

But I know you can’t go to the town square

filled with hate for the town.

You can’t lead a people you don’t love.

You can’t lead a country you don’t love.

And –

I don’t think you can change the world

and say, “I’m only changing it
for the people like me,

my own circle of friends,

not for the people I hate, not for them.”

It doesn’t work.

It’s a terrible strategy, it doesn’t work,

but that’s what we keep doing.

I see it every single day.

These silos are just getting stronger.

And you know,

your corner of the internet,

like Instagram or Twitter,

we’re just in an echo chamber
talking to each other.

So I can be really comfortable in my
Berkeley Democratic Socialist commons

and talk to all of you.

And my dad can be in his bootstrappy
immigrant Republican commons,

and I can watch MSNBC

and he can watch Fox News

and we will not know the same things.

We won’t have the same –

I mean, we won’t live in the same world.

We may never know each other
or be with each other again.

And I don’t want to keep going
down that path.

And I know we can get back
to a better path.

I know we can find our way to the commons,

and I know that because I had a first,
like, front-row, firsthand look

at the ability to do it

and do it on a large scale.

And so I want to get you back
to the First Step Act

and the criminal justice reform.

I interviewed for a job
with Van Jones about seven years ago.

And he’s been a mentor and my boss,

and he’s actually an inspiration
behind a lot of this in the speech.

And he told me that we were going to pass
bipartisan criminal justice reform,

and I laughed because I thought
that was an oxymoron.

I was in the streets –

go figure –

at the Republican
National Convention in 2000

in Philadelphia,

and we were protesting
the criminal justice system.

And there were no Republicans
on the streets with me at that protest.

I remembered the crime bill;

I lived through the tough-on-crime era;

I didn’t see it.

But he saw it and he walked me through it.

He saw me and people like him on the Left,

who it’s always been and issue
of dignity and justice,

that this system has been
racist since the start

and discriminating against poor
people and people of color

and it’s an issue of justice and dignity.

So there we were.

But he also saw something different
from our colleagues on the Right.

The fiscal Conservatives,

they had an economic incentive to do it:

they saw a system that cost
the taxpayers a whole lot of money

and was getting terrible results

and it wasn’t making
the communities any safer.

The Libertarian Right,

who believe in less government,

saw an expansion of government control,

an expansion of the police state,

mass incarceration is like,
antithetical to who they are.

And the religious Right:

second chances –

redemption.

These are values that they hold dear,

and the criminal justice system
can’t see those anywhere.

And so there was common ground to be had.

And that’s what we set out to do.

And under the leadership
of the formerly incarcerated folks

who have been leading this forever,

we built this bipartisan coalition
to pass criminal justice reform.

Eighty-seven senators voted in favor
of the First Step Act,

and yeah, President Trump signed it.

And because we were able to do that,

because we were able
to look at that shared humanity,

get over our distaste
for working across the aisle,

20,000 people have been
impacted in just the last year,

7,000 home who would
not have been home,

17,000 years of human freedom
restored just in the last year.

(Applause and cheers)

And Republicans and Democrats
in this election cycle,

almost all of them running,

are running on platforms
of criminal justice reform.

They are trying to bring this bigger,
stronger, bolder and more reforms

everywhere they are.

That was impossible
during the tough-on-crime era.

But I also look at this.

These are the people coming home.

In my office, we get a video
like this almost every day.

Thousands of people coming home.

And when people tell me
that common ground is the weak position

or that my love for the people

or my belief in our shared
humanity is naive,

or that if I work with folks
across the aisle

that I’m somehow getting
taken advantage of,

I just look at this:

I look at the people.

I say, “Say that to this –

to the folks coming home.”

Say that to those 2.2 million people
that are still behind bars.

So now our challenge
is to make this possible

across a whole bunch
of other issues too:

human rights, immigration –

all sorts of things –

health care, mental health.

I think there’s common ground to be had.

But it’s not easy.

If you want change in a large scale,

you need large movements,

and that means
our circles have to be bigger.

And it’s not easy being a Lefty
working across the aisle;

I certainly get
my fair share of hate mail,

but I think that that’s exactly
the radical approach we need right now.

And so this is Jenny Kim.

She is someone who is dead serious
about second-chance hiring.

She wants to make sure

that formerly incarcerated folks
have a pathway to jobs

and that businesses make it
an amazing place for folks to work.

She’s also the deputy
general counsel at Koch Industries.

K-O-C-H, Koch.

She is an amazing organizer,

and I’m proud to work
with her on this issue.

And an issue I care deeply about,

probably a lot of you do too – climate,

which seems divisive,

seems like there’s no common
ground to be had there.

I think there is.

Trump’s own Department of Defense
this year released a report saying

that all future wars were going
to be wars about resources,

wars about climate.

And so yeah, I want to find
partnership with the military.

And I used to be the national director –

the national organizer
for the War Resisters League,

the oldest pacifist
organization in the country.

But if there’s common ground
to be had there,

yeah, I’ll partner with them.

It’s not easy.

The approach means
we need to find love.

We need to get back
to that shared humanity

and that commons.

But I know this love,

it doesn’t just get us through
Thanksgiving dinner.

It’s the kind of love
that secures freedom,

changes the world.

But to do that,

I have to step into my courage,

and I want all of you
to step into your courage.

Just like that Muslim family

stepped into their courage
for my Hindu family all those years ago.

I think we can do it.

But it’s a little bit uncomfortable.

If you are who I know you to be –

you know, someone who cares
about change and progress

and wants to see something
change in the world –

you probably want to know how

but you’re also a little bit uncomfortable
about me standing up here

and celebrating these pictures
with Newt and Koch,

talking about partnerships
with the military.

I want you to feel those feelings.

I feel them too.

I don’t enter into these
partnerships lightly at all.

My entire trajectory of who I am
has made me think

that it’s not even possible,

but I know it is.

That feeling,

that discomfort,

that’s preceded every major
breakthrough in human history ever.

That’s that feeling
that comes before a moonshot.

And so I want to make you
even a little more uncomfortable.

I want you think about an issue
that you care deeply about –

something that you want to see changed
on a national or global scale.

Think big.

What would resolution look like?

On a large scale,

what would it look like
to solve that problem?

Can you get there with just
your circle of friends?

I know you can’t.

The anarchist-communist soccer
tournament isn’t going to help

bring about that change.

So I want to think about how
we can expand our circle a little more.

Where is there common ground to be found?

Can you think of any unlikely allies?

Strange partners?

Further than that,

who’s in your way?

Who’s stopping you
from finding that common ground,

and is there room for them in that circle?

I think there is.

I think we have to be able
to find it at this scale.

And it means that we’re going
to have to step into that courage

and include people,

hold our vision so strong,

know that justice
and freedom is so important

that we’re able to include more people,

love the people who might
not love us back.

And so I want to ask you:

who’s your Newt?

Who’s your Koch?

Who’s the military in your story?

And I want you to find –

choose that common ground.

Thank you.

(Applause and cheers)

抄写员:Leslie Gauthier
审稿人:Ivana Korom

1994 年,《暴力犯罪控制
和执法法》通过。

你可能知道它是犯罪法案。

这是一个可怕的法律。

它开创了一个大规模监禁的时代

,允许强制最低限度、

三击法、

死刑的扩大——

这太可怕了。

但它在两党的支持下通过了。

共和党革命的缔造者、共和党众议院议长纽特·金里奇

带路——

由民主党
总统比尔·克林顿签署成为法律。

同样在 1994 年,

当这项法案获得通过时,我还在读高中

,你很可能会

在街上发现我抗议
各种原因……

包括犯罪法案。

所以这就是让这张
照片更加令人惊讶的原因。

纽特不在我的
“这个国家最喜欢的人”名单上。

但这张照片是在 2015 年拍摄的。

这是一场运动的开始,该运动

将通过一项
名为“第一步法案”的法案。

《纽约时报》
称其

为一代人以来刑事司法最重大的改革。

你知道,1994 年的 Nisha——

街头活动家——

可能对这张照片感到失望——

你们中的一些人可能也是。

但今天站在这里我不是。

这就是我今天在这里
与您讨论的内容。

这是激进的共同点。

我不是在谈论
那种共同点——

你知道,我们可以
谈论我们有多爱春天

或“小狗超级可爱”。

你知道,这不是
妥协的共同点。

这是很难的共同点。

好痛。

这是一种共同点
,你会被嘲笑和评判。

但这
是可以确保人类自由的共同基础。

它可以挽救生命。

这是我生来就有的共同点

它在我的 DNA 中。

我爸爸是
在印度分裂时期出生的。

在印度独立运动之后,
这个国家真正分裂


想要保持国家团结的

人和想要
不同独立国家的人。

而当英国人离开时,

他们只是决定划清界限
,划分并建立一个新国家。

这开始了人类历史上最大规模的被迫
大规模迁移。

一千五百万人被困
在这些新边界的错误一侧。

两百万人
在分区期间死亡。

而我父亲是边界错误一侧
的印度教家庭中最小的婴儿

就像
两边边境的家人一样,

他们躲藏起来。

小时候有人告诉我
我的家人躲藏起来的故事,

有一天,当武装人员
进入他们躲藏的房子

寻找家人时,
我父亲开始哭泣。

我奶奶开始摇晃他。

而我的祖父,在那一刻

,他做出了牺牲
儿子来拯救家庭的选择。

但幸运的是,在那一刻,
他停止了哭泣。

我的奶奶,她摇了摇他
,他停止了哭泣

,我今天在这里,
因为他停止了哭泣。

但我今天也在这里,

因为那个穆斯林
家庭收留了我们。

他们也被枪指着

,一个武装人员
问他们是否藏有任何人

,他们在古兰经
上发誓那所房子里没有人。

他们选择
在整个国家——

该地区的每个人,

你可以恨
那些与你不同政治、

不同宗教的人,

你可以杀人的那一刻。

这就是正在发生的事情。

但他们在他们的圣书中发誓,

他们选择了共享的人性而

不是当时的政治,我们活了下来。

我们活了下来。

我从这个故事开始,
因为人们经常告诉我

,我的
共同点是弱势地位。

但我问那个穆斯林
家庭的行动怎么软弱?

正因为如此,我父亲
确实在印度健康成长

,他移民到这个国家

,我在 70 年代后期出生在这里,

和大多数第一代孩子一样,
我生来就是为了搭桥。

我是
新旧国家之间的桥梁。

只是长大了,这就是我所做的。

我是
乔治亚州亚特兰大黑人和白人南部的一个棕色女孩。

一方面,我就像一个

完美的印度女儿——

直男,

辩论队队长——

但另一方面,

我也是一个激进的女权主义者,

朋克摇滚活动家,偷偷
溜出房子参加音乐会

, 你知道,总是
因为原因被捕。

我是很多东西的混合体。

但他们都和谐地生活在我身上。

建造桥梁是很自然的

,我认为我们所有人都代表
了一堆东西。

我认为我们有
能力找到共同点。

但这不是
我的生活方式……

根本不是这样。

2001 年我搬到湾区

,这
对我来说是一个转折点。

这是第二次伊拉克战争的开始。


和一群激进分子一起组织

——当然

——我们在想我们可能
需要稍微扩大我们的圈子

如果你知道的话,我们不会成功地停止战争——

就在其中 我们。

所以我们决定建立桥梁,

扩大我们的圈子,

于是 2001 年伟大的无政府主义
与共产主义足球

锦标赛诞生了。

(笑声)

就是这样。

这就是我的圈子
被允许扩大的程度。

与自由民主党建立桥梁?

哦,不可能,那是一座太远的桥。

地方选举?

那是一座太远的桥。

那是在 2001 年

。我想你现在会同意我的看法。

到了 2020 年,情况变得更糟——

那种分裂,那种部落主义。

我们不会

与投票与我们不同的人共进晚餐。

我们,喜欢,看到
我们最好的朋友发来的一条刻薄的推文——

一条
不符合我们世界观的推文

,突然间就被取消了。

一时的纯洁政治一去不复返了。

我有时会醒来——

我不知道我们要做什么。

人们问我
“我们如何做到这一点?”

但我知道共同点。

我觉得我们可以建造那些桥梁。

但这并不容易。

我有一个概念,我要回溯

,这是一个

自人类历史开始以来每个人都应该熟悉的概念。

这是公地的想法。

这个
位于市中心的共享场所——

城镇广场

,广场——

但它是
你聚集在一起的地方,

你的社区

,你可以
在肥皂盒上倾听人们的不同想法

,你可以非常不同,

但你 走到一起,因为你知道
我们在一起比分开更强大。

今天,当我想到公地时,

我将其扩展到
我们所有人共享的资源——

集体拥有,

就像我们呼吸的空气一样。

我想到学校、

公园。

我想到了我们共享的情报。

我们可以在图书馆或互联网上分享。

我认为互联网很重要。

在这个数字时代

,共享人性

,共享公共空间

,触手可及。

但我们没有那样使用它。

我们不在一起。

要选择通往公地的道路
并彼此相处,

您还必须选择爱。

这是一件很难的事情。

但我知道你不能去

充满仇恨的城镇广场。

你不能领导一个你不爱的人。

你不能领导一个你不爱的国家。

而且——

我不认为你可以改变世界

然后说,“我只是
为了像我这样的人,

我自己的朋友圈,

而不是为了我讨厌的人,而不是为了他们。”

它不起作用。

这是一个糟糕的策略,它不起作用,

但这就是我们一直在做的事情。

我每天都看到它。

这些筒仓正在变得越来越强大。

你知道,

你在互联网的角落,

比如 Instagram 或 Twitter,

我们只是在回音室里
互相交谈。

所以我可以在我的
伯克利民主社会主义公地里很自在地

和你们所有人交谈。

我父亲可以在他的自举
移民共和党公地上

,我可以看 MSNBC

,他可以看福克斯新闻

,我们不会知道同样的事情。

我们不会有相同的——

我的意思是,我们不会生活在同一个世界。

我们可能永远不会互相认识,也可能永远不会
再在一起。

我不想继续
走这条路。

我知道我们可以
回到更好的道路上。

我知道我们可以找到通向公地的方式,

而且我知道因为我有第一个,
比如,前排,第一手看到

这样做的能力,

并大规模地这样做。

所以我想让你们
回到第一步法案

和刑事司法改革。 大约七年前,

我面试了范琼斯的一份工作

他一直是我的导师和老板

,他实际上
是演讲中很多内容背后的灵感来源。

他告诉我,我们将通过
两党刑事司法改革

,我笑了,因为我认为
这是矛盾的。

2000 年在费城举行的共和党全国代表大会上,我在街头——去

想一想

,我们当时正在
抗议刑事司法系统。

在那次抗议活动中,没有共和党人和我一起走上街头。

我记得犯罪法案;

我经历了严厉打击犯罪的时代;

我没看到。

但他看到了,他带我走过。

他在左翼看到了我和像

他这样的人,一直以来
都是尊严和正义的问题

,这个制度
从一开始就是种族主义

,歧视
穷人和有色人种

,这是一个正义和尊严的问题。

所以我们在那里。

但他也看到了
与我们右翼同事不同的东西。

财政保守党,

他们有这样做的经济动机:

他们看到了一个
让纳税人付出了很多钱

并且得到了可怕结果的系统

,它并没有
让社区变得更安全。

相信更少政府的自由主义者右翼

看到了政府控制

的扩张,警察国家的扩张,

大规模监禁就像,
与他们的身份对立。

还有宗教权利:

第二次机会——

救赎。

这些是他们所珍视的价值观

,刑事司法系统
在任何地方都看不到这些。

所以有共同点。

这就是我们打算做的。

在永远领导这一切
的以前被监禁的人的领导下

我们建立了这个两党联盟
来通过刑事司法改革。

87 名参议员投票支持
“第一步法案”,

是的,特朗普总统签署了该法案。

因为我们能够做到这一点,

因为我们
能够看到共同的人性,

克服我们对
跨过道工作的厌恶,仅在去年

就有 20,000 人受到
影响,

7,000 个原本
不在家的家庭,

仅在去年就恢复了 17,000 年的人类自由。

(掌声和欢呼)

在这个选举周期中的共和党人和民主党人,

几乎都在竞选,

都在
刑事司法改革的平台上运行。

他们正试图将这种更大、
更强大、更大胆和更多的改革带到

任何地方。

在严厉打击犯罪的时代,这是不可能的。

但我也看这个。

这些是回家的人。

在我的办公室里,我们
几乎每天都会收到这样的视频。

成千上万的人回家。

当人们告诉我
,共同点是弱点,

或者我对人民的爱

或我对我们共同
人性的信念是幼稚的,

或者如果我与过道的人一起工作

,我不知何故
被利用了,

我 看看这个:

我看看人。

我说,“对这个——

对回家的人说吧。”


那些仍然身陷囹圄的 220 万人这么说。

所以现在我们的挑战


一大堆其他问题上也实现这一点:

人权、移民——

各种各样的事情——

医疗保健、心理健康。

我认为有共同点。

但这并不容易。

如果你想要大范围的改变,

你需要大动作

,这意味着
我们的圈子必须更大。

作为一个左撇子
在过道上工作并不容易。

我当然收到
了相当多的仇恨邮件,

但我认为这正是
我们现在需要的激进方法。

这就是珍妮·金。

她是一个对二次招聘非常认真的人

她想

确保以前被监禁的人
有一条通往工作的道路,

并确保企业使其
成为人们工作的好地方。

她还是
科赫工业公司的副总法律顾问。

K-O-C-H,科赫。

她是一位了不起的组织者

,我很自豪能
在这个问题上与她合作。

还有一个我非常关心的问题,

可能你们很多人也关心——气候,

这似乎是分裂的,

似乎在那里没有
共同点。

我认为有。

特朗普自己的国防部
今年发布了一份报告,

称未来所有的战争都
将是关于资源的

战争,关于气候的战争。

所以,是的,我想
与军方建立伙伴关系。

我曾经是全国总监

——全国

最古老的和平主义
组织反抗者联盟的全国组织者。

但是,如果那里有共同点

是的,我会与他们合作。

这并不容易。

这种方法意味着
我们需要找到爱。

我们需要
回到共同的人性

和公地。

但我知道这种爱,

它不只是让我们度过
感恩节晚餐。

正是这种爱
保证了自由,

改变了世界。

但要做到这一点,

我必须鼓起勇气

,我希望你们所有人都
鼓起勇气。

就像多年前那个穆斯林家庭

为我的印度教家庭鼓起勇气一样。

我认为我们可以做到。

但这有点不舒服。

如果你是我认识的你——

你知道,一个
关心变化和进步

并希望看到
世界发生变化的人——

你可能想知道如何,

但你也
对我的立场有点不舒服 在这里


与纽特和科赫一起庆祝这些照片,

谈论
与军方的伙伴关系。

我想让你感受这些感觉。

我也感觉到它们。

我根本不会轻易加入这些
伙伴关系。

我的整个轨迹让我

认为这甚至是不可能的,

但我知道它是。

这种感觉,

那种不适,

是人类历史上每一次重大突破之前的事情

这就是登月之前的感觉。

所以我想让你
更不舒服。

我希望你考虑一个
你非常关心的问题——

你希望看到
在国家或全球范围内发生变化的事情。

想大点。

分辨率会是什么样子?

在大范围内,

解决这个问题会是什么样子?

你能和
你的朋友圈一起到达那里吗?

我知道你不能。

无政府主义-共产主义足球
锦标赛无助于

带来这种变化。

所以我想想想我们如何
才能扩大我们的圈子。

哪里有共同点?

你能想到任何不太可能的盟友吗?

奇怪的伙伴?

更进一步,

谁在阻碍你?

谁阻止
你找到共同点,

在那个圈子里有没有他们的空间?

我认为有。

我认为我们必须能够
以这种规模找到它。

这意味着
我们必须鼓起勇气

,包容人们,

坚定我们的愿景,

知道正义
和自由是如此重要

,以至于我们能够包容更多的人,

爱那些可能
不爱的人 我们回来。

所以我想问你:

你的纽特是谁?

你的科赫是谁?

你故事里的军人是谁?

我希望你找到——

选择那个共同点。

谢谢你。

(掌声和欢呼)