Bernie Sanders's Speech on Super Tuesday BERNIE SANDERS: Thank you! It is good to be home! You know, I have been all over this country, but the truth is, it is great and great to come home and see all my friends. You know, we want to win in every part of the country, that goes without saying. But it does say something and means so much to me that the people who know me best, the people who knew me before I was elected, who knew me as mayor, knew me as congressman, and know me as senator, have voted so strongly to put us in the White House. Thank you so much. This campaign — as I think all of you know, this campaign is not just about electing the president. It is about transforming America. It is about making our great country the nation that we know it has the potential to be. It is about dealing with some unpleasant truths that exist in America today and having the guts to confront those truths. It is about recognizing that in our state, we have town meetings and people come out, they argue about budgets, and then they vote. One person, one vote. In Vermont, billionaires do not buy town meetings, and in America, we are going to end a corrupt campaign finance system. We can disagree in a democracy, and that’s what a democracy is about, but I hope all of us agree that we’re going to not allow billionaires and their super PACs to destroy American democracy. In our state — in our state, you all know that we have many, many thousands of Vermonters who are working not just one job, they’re working two jobs, they’re working three jobs. And you all know that while our people are working so hard, almost all of the new wealth and income generated in America is going to the top 1 percent. Well, together, what we are going to do is create an economy that works for all of us, not just the people on top. And together, we are going to end and reform a broken criminal justice system. This country, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, should not be having more people in jail than any other country on earth. That’s wrong. So we are going to invest for our young people in education, in jobs, not jails or incarceration. Now, I know many of my Republican colleagues think that climate change is a hoax. Well, I believe that you don’t develop real public policy unless you listen to the science, and the science is clear. Together, we are going to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel to energy efficiency and sustainable energy. Now, I know that Secretary Clinton and many of the establishment people think that I am looking and thinking too big. I don’t think so. So let me go on the record and say as you have heard me say for years, health care is a right for all people. And let me also say that in the United States of America, when we talk about public education, it’s not just first grade through 12th that has got to be expanded to make public colleges and universities tuition-free. What I have said from day one in this campaign and I suspect many of you were down on the lake with me when we announced on that beautiful day. What I have said is that this campaign is not just about electing a president. It is about making a political revolution. What that revolution is about is bringing millions of millions of people into the political process. Working people who have been so disillusioned, they no longer vote. Young people who have never been involved. What the political revolution is about is bringing our people together. Black and white, Latino, Asian-American. Gay and straight. People born in America, people who have immigrated to America. When we bring our people together, when we do not allow the Donald Trumps of the world to divide us up. When we bring our people together and when we have the courage to stand up to the billionaire class and tell them they can’t have it all. That our government belongs to all of us, not just super PACs and wealthy campaign contributors. Now, tonight, you’re going to see a lot of election results come in. And let me remind you of what the media often forgets about. These are not — this is not a general election. It is not winner-take-all. If you get 52 percent, you get 48 percent, you roughly end up with the same amount of delegates in a state. By the end of tonight, we are going to win many hundreds of delegates. Ten months ago, as you know better than any other group in America, when we were out on the lake, we were at 3 percent in the polls. We have come a very long way in 10 months. At the end of tonight, 15 states will have voted, 35 states remain. And let me assure you that we are going to take our fight for economic justice, for social justice, for environmental sanity, for a world of peace to every one of those states. Now, Wall Street may be against us and the super PACs may be against us. But you know why we’re going to win? Because our message is resonating and the people when we stand together will be victorious. So on a personal note, I want to thank all of you for the love and the friendship that you have given our family. You have sustained me. And I am so proud to bring Vermont values all across this country. So thank you again for helping us win here in Vermont tonight. And I look forward this evening to just saying hello to so many old friends. So thank you all very much!

El discurso del supermartes de Bernie Sanders BERNIE SANDERS: ¡Gracias! ¡Qué bueno es estar en casa! Como saben ustedes, he viajado por todo este país, pero a decir verdad, es maravilloso, maravilloso, volver a casa y ver a todos mis amigos. Como saben, queremos ganar en todas partes del país, esto ni hay que decirlo, pero sí dice algo, y es muy significativo para mí, que las personas que mejor me conocen, las personas que me conocían antes de que yo fuera elegido, que me conocían como alcalde, que me conocían como congresista y que me conocen como senador, me hayan apoyado tan fuertemente con sus votos para ponernos en la Casa Blanca. Muchísimas gracias. Esta campaña –como seguramente todos ustedes saben– esta campaña no es solo una campaña para elegir un presidente. Es una campaña para transformar a Estados Unidos. Es una campaña para hacer de nuestro gran país la nación que sabemos que tiene la potencial de ser. Es una campaña para liar con unas verdades incómodas que existen en el Estados Unidos de hoy y para tener las agallas para confrontar esas verdades. Es una campaña para reconocer que en nuestro estado tenemos plenos municipales y la gente asiste, discute sobre presupuestos y vota. Una persona, un voto. En el estado de Vermont, los multimillonarios no compran los plenos municipales, y en Estados Unidos vamos a terminar con un sistema de financiación de campañas corrupto. Podemos estar en desacuerdo en una democracia, y de eso se trata la democracia, pero espero que todos podamos estar de acuerdo en no permitir que los multimillonarios y los supercomités de acción política destruyan la democracia estadounidense. En nuestro estado, en nuestro estado, todos ustedes saben que tenemos varios, varios miles de vermonteses que están haciendo no solo un trabajo, sino dos trabajos, tres trabajos. Y todos ustedes saben que mientras nuestra gente trabaja tan duro, casi toda la riqueza y los nuevos ingresos generados en Estados Unidos se acumulan a beneficio del uno por ciento más rico. Bueno, juntos, lo que vamos a hacer es crear una economía que funcione para todos nosotros, no solo para los más ricos. Y juntos, vamos a poner fin y terminar con un sistema de justicia penal roto. En este país, el país más rico en la historia del mundo, no deberíamos tener a más personas encarceladas que cualquier otro país en la tierra. Esto está mal. Por eso vamos a invertir, a favor de nuestros jóvenes, en la educación, en trabajos, no en cárceles ni en la encarcelación. Ahora, sé que muchos de mis colegas republicanos piensan que el cambio climático es un engaño. Bueno, yo estoy de la opinión de que no se puede elaborar una política pública seria sin escuchar antes lo que dice la ciencia, y la ciencia está clara. Juntos, vamos a transformar nuestro sistema energético, de un sistema a base de hidrocarburos a uno caracterizado por la eficacia energética y la energía sostenible. Sé bien que la Secretaria Clinton y muchos de los de la clase dirigente piensan que mi visión y mi programa son demasiado utópicos. No lo veo así. Permítanme, entonces, que yo diga, para que conste, algo que me han oído decir durante años: La asistencia sanitaria es un derecho de toda persona. Y permítanme decir, además, que en los Estados Unidos de América, cuando hablamos de la educación pública, no hablamos solamente de los grados de 1 a 12. Esto tiene que ampliarse, para hacer que la matrícula en las universidades públicas sea gratuita. Lo que he dicho desde el primer día de esta campaña, y seguramente muchos de ustedes estaban ahí en la orilla del lago conmigo cuando anunciamos la campaña en ese día tan bello... Lo que he dicho es que esta campaña no es solo una campaña para elegir un presidente. Es una campaña para efectuar una revolución política. El propósito de esta revolución es el de atraerles a millones y millones de a participar en el proceso político. Trabajadores que han sido tan desilusionados que ya ni votan. Jóvenes que nunca han participado. El objetivo de la revolución política es unir a nuestro pueblo. Negros y blancos, latinos, asiáticoamericanos... Homosexuales y heterosexuales. Personas nacidas en Estados Unidos, personas que se han inmigrado a Estados Unidos. Cuando unimos a nuestro pueblo, cuando no permitimos que los Donald Trump del mundo nos dividan... Cuando unimos a nuestro pueblo y cuando tenemos el valor de hacerle frente a la clase multimillonaria y decirles que ellos no pueden tenerlo todo... Que nuestro gobierno nos pertenece a todos nosotros, no solo a los supercomités de acción política y los acaudalados contribuyentes a las campañas. Esta noche verán entrar muchos resultados electorales. Y déjenme recordarles de lo que los medios muchas veces se olvidan. Estos no son –esta no es una elección general. El ganador o la ganadora no se lo lleva todo. Si recibe el 52 por ciento, o bien si recibe el 48 por ciento, termina recibiendo aproximadamente la misma cantidad de delegados de un estado. Para cuando se termine esta noche nosotros nos habremos ganado varios centenares de delegados. Hace diez meses, como ustedes bien saben mejor que cualquier otro grupo en Estados Unidos, cuando estábamos ahí en la orilla del lago, estábamos al 3 por ciento en los sondeos. Hemos llegado muy lejos en 10 meses. Llegado el final de esta noche, habrán votado 15 estados; quedan otros 35. Y déjenme asegurarles que vamos a llevar nuestra lucha por la justicia económica, por la justicia social, por la cordura medioambiental, por un mundo de paz, a cada uno de esos estados. Puede ser ser que los más ricos del país y los supercomités de acción política estén en contra nuestra, ¿pero saben por qué vamos a ganar? Porque nuestro mensaje está resonando y el pueblo, cuando nos unimos, seremos victoriosos. Bueno, a título personal, quiero agradecerles a todos ustedes por el amor y la amistad que han dado a nuestra familia. Ustedes me han sostenido. Y me llena de orgullo llevar los valores de Vermont a todos los rincones de este país. Así que les agradezco de nuevo por habernos ayudado a ganar aquí en Vermont esta noche. Y espero con ilusión, esta tarde, la oportunidad de pasarla simplemente saludando a tanto viejos amigos. Así que, ¡muchísimas gracias a todos ustedes!

Bernie Sanders bio and proposals in a better Spanish translation

The English is from berniesanders.com.The Spanish is my translation.

Bernie Sanders on the Issues The American people must make a fundamental decision. Do we continue the 40-year decline of our middle class and the growing gap between the very rich and everyone else, or do we fight for a progressive economic agenda that creates jobs, raises wages, protects the environment and provides health care for all? Are we prepared to take on the enormous economic and political power of the billionaire class, or do we continue to slide into economic and political oligarchy? These are the most important questions of our time, and how we answer them will determine the future of our country.	El programa electoral de Bernie Sanders El pueblo estadounidense se ve enfrentado hoy con una decisión de suma importancia. ¿Vamos a seguir en el camino que, durante los últimos 40 años, nos ha llevado al empobrecimiento de la clase media y a una brecha cada vez mayor entre los más ricos y los demás, o vamos a luchar por un programa económico progresista que creará empleos, aumentará los salarios, protegerá el medio ambiente y ofrecerá asistencia sanitaria a todos? ¿Estamos dispuestos a combatir el enorme poder político y económico de la clase multimillonaria o vamos a continuar nuestro descenso hacia una oligarquía tanto económica como política? Estas son las preguntas más importantes de nuestros tiempos y nuestras respuestas determinarán el futuro de nuestro país.
Meet Bernie Bernie Sanders is a Democratic candidate for President of the United States. In 2006, he was elected to the U.S. Senate after 16 years as Vermont’s sole congressman in the House of Representatives. Bernie is now serving his second term in the U.S. Senate after winning re-election in 2012 with 71 percent of the vote. Born in Brooklyn, New York, he attended James Madison High School, Brooklyn College, and the University of Chicago. After graduating, he moved to Vermont where he worked as a carpenter and documentary filmmaker. In 1981, he was elected as mayor of Burlington, the state’s largest city, by a mere 10 votes. As mayor, Bernie’s leadership helped transform Burlington into one of the most exciting and livable small cities in America. Under his administration, the city made major strides in affordable housing, progressive taxation, environmental protection, child care, women’s rights, youth programs and the arts. In Congress, Bernie has fought tirelessly for working families, focusing on the shrinking middle class and growing gap between the rich and everyone else. Bernie has been called a “practical and successful legislator” and he was dubbed the “amendment king” in the House of Representatives for passing more amendments than any other member of Congress. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Bernie worked across the aisle to “bridge Washington’s toxic partisan divide and cut one of the most significant deals in years.” In 2015, Democratic leadership tapped Bernie to serve as the caucus’ ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee. Bernie lives in Burlington, Vermont with his wife Jane. He has four children and seven grandchildren.	Biografía de Bernie Bernie Sanders es precandidato demócrata a la presidencia de Estados Unidos. En 2006 fue elegido al Senado de Estados Unidos después de 16 años como representante único del estado de Vermont en la Cámara de Representantes. Bernie está ahora en su segundo período como senador estadounidense luego de haber sido reelegido en 2012 con el 71 por ciento del voto. Nació en Brooklyn, Nueva York. Asistió a la preparatoria “James Madison”, a la universidad Brooklyn College y a la Universidad de Chicago. Luego de graduarse, se trasladó a Vermont, donde trabajó como carpintero y documentalista. En 1981 fue elegido alcalde de Burlington, la ciudad más grande del estado, ganando la elección con un margen de tan solo 10 votos. Como alcalde, su liderazgo contribuyó a la transformación de Burlington en una de las pequeñas ciudades más animadas y atractivas de Estados Unidos. Durante su mandato, la ciudad hizo grandes progresos en temas de vivienda económica, tributación progresiva, protección ambiental, cuidado de niños, derechos de la mujer, programas para jóvenes y las artes. En el Congreso, Bernie ha luchado incansablemente por las familias trabajadoras, enfocándose en la problemática del empobrecimiento de la clase media y de la brecha cada vez mayor entre los más ricos y los demás. A Bernie lo han calificado como “un legislador práctico y exitoso” y en la Cámara de Representantes lo denominaron “el rey de las enmiendas” por haber logrado la aprobación de más enmiendas que cualquier otro miembro del Congreso. Como presidente del comité de asuntos de veteranos del Senado, Bernie trabajó con senadores republicanos para “superar las tóxicas divisiones partidistas de Washington y llegar a uno de los acuerdos más significativos en años”. En 2015, los líderes de los demócratas en el Senado escogieron a Bernie para ser el líder de los demócratas en el comité del presupuesto del Senado. Bernie vive en Burlington, Vermont, con su esposa, Jane. Tienen cuatro hijos y siete nietos.
A living wage Millions of Americans are working for totally inadequate wages. We must ensure that no full-time worker lives in poverty. The current federal minimum wage is starvation pay and must become a living wage. We must increase it to $15 an hour over the next several years. We must also establish equal pay for women. It’s unconscionable that women earn less than men for performing the same work.	Un salario familiar Millones de estadounidenses trabajan por salarios totalmente inadecuados. Debemos asegurar que ninguno que trabaje a tiempo completo tenga que vivir en la pobreza. El actual salario mínimo federal es un salario de hambre y debe llegar a ser un salario familiar. Debemos aumentar el salario mínimo federal a $15 la hora durante los próximos años. También debemos hacer que los salarios de las mujeres sean iguales a los salarios de los hombres. Es imperdonable que las mujeres ganen menos que los hombres por hacer el mismo trabajo.
Medicare for all “Health care must be recognized as a right, not a privilege. Every man, woman and child in our country should be able to access the health care they need regardless of their income. The only long-term solution to America's health care crisis is a single-payer national health care program.” —Bernie Sanders A family making $50,000 per year currently pays $6,273. Under Bernie's plan they would pay $466. That's a savings of $5,807. “If the goal of health-care reform is to provide comprehensive, universal health care in a cost-effective way, the only honest approach is a single-payer approach.” —Sen. Bernie Sanders Other industrialized nations are making the morally principled and financially responsible decision to provide universal health care to all of their people—and they do so while saving money by keeping people healthier. Those who say this goal is unachievable are selling the American people short. Under Bernie’s plan, Americans will benefit from the freedom and security that comes with finally separating health insurance from employment. That freedom would not only help the American people live happier, healthier and more fulfilling lives, but it would also promote innovation and entrepreneurship in every sector of the economy. People would be able to start new businesses, stay home with their children or leave jobs they don’t like knowing that they would still have health care coverage for themselves and their families. Employers could be free to focus on running their business rather than spending countless hours figuring out how to provide health insurance to their employees. Working Americans wouldn’t have to choose between bargaining for higher wages or better health insurance.	Medicare para todos “La asistencia sanitaria debe ser reconocida como un derecho, no un privilegio. Cada hombre, mujer, niña y niño de nuestro país debe poder acceder a la asistencia sanitaria que necesita, sin importar el nivel de sus ingresos. La única solución a largo plazo, a la crisis en el acceso a la asistencia sanitaria en Estados Unidos, es un programa de asistencia sanitaria nacional con pagador único.” —Bernie Sanders Una familia con ingresos anuales de $50,000 paga ahora $6,273. Bajo el plan de Bernie pagaría $466. Esto representa un ahorro anual de $5,807. “Si la reforma del sistema sanitario tiene como meta ofrecer una asistencia sanitaria integral y universal de una manera económica, entonces la única propuesta honesta es la propuesta de un sistema de pagador único.” —Bernie Sanders Otros países industrializados ya han tomado la decisión honesta y solvente de ofrecer asistencia sanitaria universal a todos—y al hacerlo han ahorrado dinero y mejorado la salud del pueblo. Los que dicen que esta meta no se puede alcanzar subestiman al pueblo estadounidense. Bajo el plan de Bernie, los estadounidenses se beneficiarán de la libertad y seguridad que vendrán cuando, por fin, rompamos el vínculo entre el seguro médico y el trabajo. Con esta libertad, los estadounidenses no solo gozarán de vidas más felices, sanas y plenas, sino que también les será más fácil fomentar la innovación y el espíritu emprendedor en todos los sectores de la economía. Podrán fundar nuevas empresas, quedarse en casa con sus niños o dejar trabajos desagradables sabiendo que seguirán teniendo seguro médico para sí mismos y para sus familias. Los dueños de las empresas podrán enfocarse en cómo mejor llevar sus negocios, en vez de tener que pasar innumerables horas liando con el problema de cómo ofrecer seguro médico a sus empleados. Los trabajadores estadounidenses ya no tendrán que escoger entre negociar por un mejor salario o negociar por un mejor seguro médico.

More improved translations coming soon, si Dios quiere.

Estimated data about (U.S. Spanish) translators and ATA certification, along with a few concluding remarks, advice, and words of warning for aspiring or beginning translators

First the disclaimer. I have no actual knowledge that any of the following data are true.

O.K. Now that that is over with, today I was more curious than usual about what percent of Spanish translators in the United States are ATA Certified Translators in both directions, as I am (English-to-Spanish and Spanish-to-English). Fortunately, I am pretty good at math (780 out of 800 on my math GRE), and I did have access to some data (the ATA membership directories), but there are also some key things I do not know. I do not know how many Spanish translators there are in the United States. And I do not know what percentage of those U.S. Spanish translators are members of the American Translators Association. Also, the number of members listed in the membership directories appears to be a little less than the number often reported. (I am sure there are reasons for that, and probably even very valid ones, but I just don't happen to know what they are.)

So, other than lacking three key pieces of information that would be necessary to arrive at accurate numbers, I think we're ready! (Also, I don't know to what extent ATA membership directory data is meant for non-member consumption, so I am going to be deliberately vague on some points, just to be on the safe side. Be assured, however, that I have been as accurate as I could be with the data I had.)

Not knowing the previously mentioned key pieces of data (number of U.S. Spanish translators, percentage of same who are members of the ATA, and overall precise number of ATA members), I started with some assumptions, applied what I do know to those assumptions, did the corresponding calculations, compared the results with the actual data, calculated the degree to which the computed results differed from the real data, modified my original assumptions so that recalculating would yield computed data as close as possible to the real numbers, and I was able to come to within about +/- 3% of the real numbers. If my assumptions are off, though, I could actually be quite a ways off on certain parts of this, so don't quote me (looking at you; yes, you). : )

My modified assumptions (again, see all caveats above): 1) That there might be approximately 5,486 Spanish translators in the U.S. 2) That perhaps one third of them (33.3%) are current members of the American Translators Association ($190 per year to be a member), and 3) That, therefore, there might be about 1,829 U.S. Spanish translators who are members of the ATA. Any of these assumptions could be off. The third number is knowable, but would require either direct access to the ATA member database or, for example, clicking on each Spanish-to-English translator's name to see the full profile and determine whether s/he also claims to be an English-to-Spanish translator. I just don't have the time.

Just going off the membership directory data (with no need for any assumptions), about one eighth (13%) of ATA Spanish-to-English translators are ATA Certified Translators (CT) for that direction, and about one fourth (26%) of current ATA English-to-Spanish translators are ATA CTs for English-to-Spanish translations. (So 87% and 74%, respectively, are not yet certified in the direction(s) they translate.)

Relying on the assumptions listed above (5,846 U.S. Spanish translators, one third of whom are ATA members), we could calculate that about 5% of all U.S. Spanish translators are ATA CTs for Spanish-to-English and 8% are ATA CTs for English-to-Spanish. Further, the percentage of U.S. Spanish translators who are ATA Certified Translators in both language directions would pencil out to be about 1.3%.

If, however, it turns out that only one fifth (20%) (not one third (33%)) of U.S. Spanish translators are ATA members, then there would be about 9,145 U.S. Spanish translators (5 * 1,829) and the percentages of U.S. Spanish translators who are ATA CTs (Sp-En) would be about 3% (not 5%); En-Sp, 5% (not 8%). The percentage who are ATA CTs in both directions would then calculate to be about 0.75% (1 out of every 133 U.S. Spanish translators, rather than 1 out of every 77). [And should more than one third of U.S. Spanish translators happen to be current members of the ATA, then the numbers would swing the opposite way.]

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics does estimate (2014) that there are 49,460 translators and interpreters in the United States. In addition to Spanish translators, that number would include translators of other languages, interpreters (any language) who are not also translators (not everyone is both) and, I would assume, American Sign Language (ASL) interpreters or other sign interpreters as well. The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf claims 16,000 members (not all of them interpreters, but all of them paying members [$15 to $160, for individuals]). About 24% of ATA translators are Spanish translators, so if there were 5,486 Spanish translators in the U.S., there might be 22,941 U.S. translators total (all spoken languages). Adding 16,000 RID members (I know, I know, but no idea how many are interpreters or how many ASL interpreters are not members, so it works as a guesstimate), we are at 38,941, leaving 10,519 U.S. interpreters (all spoken languages) who are not also translators. (There would actually be more interpreters than this, because so many translators are also interpreters.)

So there you have it. Clear as mud, and about as precise, too. But still interesting.

Again, please don't quote any of these as factual. If you do have factual data for the three assumptions in the "My modified assumptions…" paragraph, I would be interested.

The "takeaways" (English business-speak for lessons or conclusions):

• Many translators are not even members of the American Translators Association, probably the majority ($190 is not cheap, but it is a good investment; it at least signals to clients that you take your profession seriously, which is a benefit for you [greater client confidence] even before you achieve certification).
• Roughly 5% of U.S. Spanish translators are ATA certified in just one direction, for a total of about 10% when you add the translators in each direction together.
• Roughly 1% of U.S. Spanish translators are ATA certified in both directions.

The certification exams are said to have a less than 20% pass rate (even after restricting admission to the exams to experienced translators only). The current (August 2015) cost each time you take one of the exams is $300 (if that doesn't signal commitment to the profession!). As you can see, if the passing rate were an odds (probability) proposition, you would be out over $1500 before you could get certified. Thankfully, that is not at all how it works. In my experience (and that of other translators I know), people tend to take the exam for the first time full of confidence, only to fail it and to think long and hard before daring to attempt it again, by which time those years of translation experience will have increased your chances of passing considerably!

The best way to prepare, in my opinion, would be to practice translating short (250 word) published articles on various topics, and then find a way to get an ATA certified translator to offer you feedback—without getting furious at them, by the way—but instead taking the attitude that you might actually still have something to learn! (I still have things to learn!) Getting to the point where you can abandon the beginner's tendency to do word-for-word translations, and can instead achieve meaning-for-meaning translations that sound natural in your native language (and not like a native-language imitation of the original article's sentence structure and word order) does take practice! Letting go of false cognates (e.g., embarrassed/embarazada [which really means "pregnant," not embarrassed], crime/crímen [="murder"], involve/envolver [="to wrap or surround"]) also is a struggle, and most people do cling to them, tightly. And you have no idea, none, of the amount of research that is involved to translate a term in one language with the proper term having that same meaning in the other language (e.g., "propiedad horizontal" is not "horizontal property" [no such thing in English!], it is "condominium"). Too many people see a two-word term in one language and think it is enough to just translate each of the words in the term separately to make a translated equivalent (see previous example). But I digress.

In short, to be a good translator requires knowing everything there is to know in one language (and culture), knowing everything there is to know in the other, and also knowing how to move meanings (not words!!) smoothly from one universe to the next. Good luck learning how to do that. (It is possible, to a point, but it is not, at all, easy.)

Alternate translation of Uruguayan President José Mujica's comments at the White House

Reading the official English version of Uruguayan President José Mujica's comments at the White House, I noticed they were difficult to understand. The comments, posted on the White House website as "as interpreted," are practially a word-for-word translation from Spanish into English. What English speaker, for example, would ever end a sentence with "yes or yes"? What English speaker would even understand what "yes or yes" means? In the interests of having a clearer translation out there, I offer my translation here:

Nuestro reconocimiento al pueblo norteamericano y a sus instituciones representadas por usted señor presidente Obama. Nosotros vivimos en el sur, tenemos alma del sur. Pertenecemos a un conteniente que habla más o menos el castellano. Vivimos un tiempo en el que tendremos que aprender inglés sí o sí. Y ustedes tendrán que ser un pueblo bilingüe sí o sí. Porque la fortaleza de las mujeres latinas es admirable y van a llenar este país de gente que habla castellano y también portugués. Hemos estado mirando para todos lados. Tenemos que mirarnos más a nosotros. Dentro de la humildad de nuestro Uruguay, mi pueblo está allí en el medio de una zona enormemente fértil, con agua, y venimos a buscar conocimiento e investigación en todos los grupos de las ciencias biológicas, particularmente agrarias que necesitan investigación local. Aquel conteniente (por América del Sur) tiene que producir mucha comida para el mundo. Este es el país más avanzado que hay en el mundo en ciencias biológicas. Pero no podemos seguir mandando estudiantes solo, porque se nos casan y las empresas americanas pagan mejores salarios y perdemos los mejores calificados. Tenemos que llevar profesores americanos, aunque sea para que estén un tiempo. Pero tenemos que arreglar las cosas de seguridad social para que puedan seguir cobrando sus derechos sociales acá. La sabiduría hay que ir a buscarla donde está. Le tengo que contar que esto mismo le pedí a la señora (Ángela) Merkel en Alemania y con esa eficiencia de los alemanes formó un plan de 10 mil jubilados calificados que están a la orden para estar un tiempo y transmitir conocimiento. Pienso que a la larga esto vale más que la plata y todo lo que se pueda pedir. Tenemos que luchar por las capacidades de nuestros hijos y de las nuevas generaciones. Va a ser la mejor manera de afirmar la libertad, la independencia y los derechos. Señor presidente. El que está hablando es un viejo fumador. Pero se nos están muriendo 8 millones de personas por fumar por año. Esto supera toda la segunda guerra mundial y la primera y todo. Es un asesinato en masa. Uruguay está en una pelea muy dura. Durísima. Tenemos que luchar con intereses muy fuertes. Los gobiernos no tienen que participar en pleitos privados. Pero acá hay una batalla por la vida. En esta batalla por la vida nadie tiene que hacerse el distraído. Porque de todos los valores, el más importante es la vida. Gracias de todo corazón. Me estoy poniendo viejo y estar viejo es no querer salir de casa. Quisiera tener unos años menos para recorrer el maíz, conocer la lechería de Los Ángeles y otras cosas. Pero transmita un abrazo a todos los agricultores de su nación. Muchas gracias

Our thanks to the American people and their government, represented by you, President Obama. We live in the South; we are Southerners at heart. We belong to a continent that, generally, speaks Spanish. We live in a time when we will have to learn English, no matter what. And you all will have to be a bilingual people, no matter what. Because the strength of Latin women is remarkable, and they are going to fill this country with people who speak Spanish, and also Portuguese. We have been looking everywhere. We need to look more within ourselves, within the humility of our Uruguay. My people are there, in the middle of an immensely fertile area, with water, and we come seeking knowledge, and research, in all areas of the biological sciences, particularly agricultural sciences, which are in need of local research. That continent [meaning South America] needs to produce lots of food for the world. This is the most advanced country in the world in biological sciences. But we can not continue to just send students, because they end up getting married, and American companies pay better salaries, and we lose the most qualified people. We have to bring in American professors, even if they just stay for a while. But we have to arrange the details of their social security, so they can continue to receive their social benefits here. One must go to seek wisdom where it is found. I must tell you that I made the same request of Mrs. [Angela] Merkel in Germany and, with that German efficiency, she created a plan of 10,000 qualified retirees who are offering their services to stay for a while to transmit their knowledge. I think that in the long term this is worth more than money or whatever else could be requested. We have to fight for the abilities of our children and the abilities of the new generations. This will be the best way to secure freedom, independence, and rights. Mister President, the one who is speaking is an old smoker, but 8 million people are dying from smoking each year. This exceeds all of World War II and World War I and everything. It is mass murder. Uruguay is in a very difficult fight. Extremely difficult. We have to fight against very strong interests. Governments do not need to participate in private litigation. But here we have a battle for life. In this battle for life, no one should pretend to not pay attention. Because of all the values, the most important is life. Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. I am getting old, and to be old is to not want to leave home. I would like to be a few years younger to tour the cornfield, to see the dairy in Los Angeles, and other things. But please send my greetings to all of your nation's farmers. Thank you very much.

For the Spanish text, I relied on the one found at http://www.elobservador.com.uy/noticia/278325/los-discursos-completos-de-mujica-y-obama-en-la-casa-blanca/. I have corrected "la fortalece la de las mujeres latinas" to read "la fortaleza de las mujeres latinas" and "esto supera toda la supera guerra mundial y la primera" to "Esto supera toda la segunda guerra mundial y la primera," as these seemed to be obvious errors with similarly obvious corrections.

The official White House "as interpreted" English version of President Mujica's comments can be found here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/05/12/remarks-president-obama-and-president-mujica-uruguay-bilateral-meeting.

World Press Freedom Day

A classic but little known (in English) essay in defense of the freedom of thought, speech, and the press, by the Mexican intellectual José María Luis Mora:

"If some authority were to be granted the power to regulate [opinions], it would very soon abuse such power. And whom would be put in charge of prohibiting us from erring? Him who is exempt from it? But governments do not find themselves in this category.

Quite the contrary, when the causes are sought which have done most to spread error and contribute to perpetuating it, they are always found in prohibitive institutions. Moreover, if governments were authorized to prohibit all errors and to punish the stupid, the world would very soon be missing a great number of its men, the rest being reduced to eternal silence. We will be told that not all opinions must fall under the inspection of the authorities, but if one opinion is subjected to it, the rest are not secure; laws cannot make a precise classification, nor an exact enumeration, of all of them. Thus, such a power is necessarily arbitrary, and in most cases will become a reason for persecution. These are not unfounded suspicions; look back to the barbarous centuries and you will see universities, parliaments, chancelleries, and kings and queens determined to banish the wise who were making some discoveries in physics, and who were attacking the doctrines of Aristotle. Petrus Ramus, Johannes Trithemius, Galileo Galilei, and other luminaries, would go on to suffer what would not be believed if we did not possess solid proof of it. And what were the fruits of such proceedings? Did governments achieve what they intended? Not at all. The number of proselytes grew day after day, perhaps because of that very persecution."

"Indeed, if one wishes to lend credence to a doctrine, he need do nothing more than ban it. Men will of course suppose, and in this they are not mistaken, that it cannot be combated by reason when it is being attacked by force."

http://spanishprontotranslationblog.blogspot.com/2013/08/discourse-on-freedom-of-thought-speech.html

Spanish interpreter (Olympia)*

State-certified medical interpreter and American Translator Association (ATA) Certified Translator (certified for Spanish-to-English translations and for English-to-Spanish translations), offering interpreting services in greater Seattle, Tacoma, and Olympia. Over ten years of experience.

Areas of specialization: health care, immigration, education.

Preferred interpretation mode: simultaneous

Rates: $80/hour ($60/hour for schools, governments, or non-profit agencies), including travel time (per mapquest, usually to and from Olympia) and any wait times between scheduled start time and actual end time; no minimum charge (except for no-show of one of the parties, or for cancellations received after travel has begun); charges billed by quarter hour (0-15 min. = 0.25 hr, 16-30 min. = 0.5 hr, etc.)

American Express, MasterCard (Maestro), VISA, Discover, and UnionPay welcome

Call for availability. (If you are still scheduling a meeting with a client, for best results, pick three dates and times that will work for you, and chances are that one of those will also work for your client and for me.)

Thank you.

Chris Marquardt, CT
Spanish Pronto
Olympia

*Time from posting to "flagged and removed" on Craigslist: 92 minutes (10:27 p.m. on a Friday night to 11:59 p.m.) Posted correctly in the Olympia section of Seattle craigslist, and in translation section of "services offered" (there is no "interpreting" section, and virtually everyone calls interpreters "translators"). The rates are my true and customary rates. The service area is the one clients are willing to hire me in at these rates. There is not so much as a link to my website (even though a normal reading of the TOU would have allowed it). Meanwhile, overposters (same ad posted daily, or same ad posted in many cities simultaneously) in the same category remain untouched.

Verdict: Craigslist continues to be plagued with overzealous flaggers who flag for reasons other than violations of the TOU. Craigslist continues to be ineffective against them, unnecessarily driving out legitimate advertisers offering legitimate services in an open and honest way.

It was worth another try. Even restaurant reviewers go back more than once to the restaurant they are reviewing. Unfortunately, nothing has changed since the last review.

Lorem ipsum in English, according to Google Translate

Granted, "Lorem ipsum" is nonsensical garbage to begin with. It is still difficult to see how Google Translate gets what it does out of it. You have to wonder if someone has been systematically feeding the Google Translator false translations of Lorem ipsum text, à la Google bombing, for it to come up with the English translation that it does. However it has happened, it makes for some interesting reading. Enjoy.:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, ligula suspendisse nulla pretium, rhoncus tempor placerat fermentum, enim integer ad vestibulum volutpat. Nisl rhoncus turpis est, vel elit, congue wisi enim nunc ultricies sit, magna tincidunt. Maecenas aliquam maecenas ligula nostra, accumsan taciti. Sociis mauris in integer, a dolor netus non dui aliquet, sagittis felis sodales, dolor sociis mauris, vel eu est libero cras. Interdum at. Eget habitasse elementum est, ipsum purus pede porttitor class, ut lorem adipiscing, aliquet sed auctor, imperdiet arcu per diam dapibus libero duis. Enim eros in vel, volutpat nec pellentesque leo, temporibus scelerisque nec.	Of course, it is pain, there is no impact to suspend the price, a wide range of the moment, a real estate leaven, for integer to the entry of a career. Targeting a range of prices is, or customers, across the country , for now it's just nice , it is a big problem. Learn some tips for our developers around the world , kept secret from the layer . User friendly in an integer , a smart , spanned, can you comment bananas, members of the cat with arrows , to create a user friendly , or football is a free to-morrow. Sometimes , however. Non residential element , the same class of drugs foot shot that hit zero emissions , but competitive , game cards through financial impact of free banking . For the United States on or , loading or the kids a lion, nor the times of pollutants .
Ac dolor ac adipiscing amet bibendum nullam, massa lacus molestie ut libero nec, diam et, pharetra sodales eget, feugiat ullamcorper id tempor eget id vitae. Mauris pretium eget aliquet, lectus tincidunt. Porttitor mollis imperdiet libero senectus pulvinar. Etiam molestie mauris ligula eget laoreet, vehicula eleifend. Repellat orci eget erat et, sem cum, ultricies sollicitudin amet eleifend dolor nullam erat, malesuada est leo ac. Varius natoque turpis elementum est. Duis montes, tellus lobortis lacus amet arcu et. In vitae vel, wisi at, id praesent bibendum libero faucibus porta egestas, quisque praesent ipsum fermentum placerat tempor. Curabitur auctor, erat mollis sed fusce, turpis vivamus a dictumst congue magnis. Aliquam amet ullamcorper dignissim molestie, sed mollis. Tortor vitae tortor eros wisi facilisis. Consectetuer arcu ipsum ornare pellentesque vehicula, in vehicula diam, ornare magna erat felis wisi a risus. Justo fermentum id. Malesuada eleifend, tortor molestie, a fusce a vel et. Mauris at suspendisse, neque aliquam faucibus adipiscing, vivamus in. Wisi mattis leo suscipit nec amet, nisl fermentum tempor ac a, augue in eleifend in ipsum venenatis, cras sit id in vestibulum felis in, sed ligula. In sodales suspendisse mauris quam etiam erat, quia tellus convallis eros rhoncus diam orci, porta lectus esse adipiscing posuere et, nisl arcu vitae laoreet. Morbi integer molestie, amet suspendisse morbi, amet maecenas, a maecenas mauris neque proin nisl mollis. Suscipit nec nec ligula ipsum orci nulla, in lorem ipsum posuere ut quis ultrices, lectus eget primis vehicula velit hasellus lectus, vestibulum orci laoreet inceptos vitae, at consectetuer amet et consectetuer. Congue porta scelerisque praesent at, lacus vestibulum et at dignissim cras urna, ante convallis turpis duis lectus sed aliquet, at tempus et ultricies. Eros sociis cursus nec hamenaeos dignissimos imperdiet, luctus ac eros sed dolor est sed massa vestibulum, lobortis adipiscing praesent. Nec eros eu ridiculus libero felis.	And pain in drink and technology had none, since the mass of the lakes, the employee may be free, nor does , biochemical and graduate members of the production, the development of the notebook that time had been that way of life . Value of the data it needs to thrive, a variety of developers. Free soft loans financing the old China . Even the development of indicators to create a employee bills , cars deductible. , Let them drive the development of the United States was, and , with a lot of , it's just a lot of health care in Japan the company's goodies -scale is the lion and. Various feel ugly element. It's mountains , lakes and the marketing and development teams . In the life , or, look at the nice , that a ready to drink in poverty -free mouth of the harbor , each one with a ready every time the HTML of a real estate . I'm the author , was soft but dark , ugly lives across from the word great . Employee each one to love corporate asset , but soft. American institutions in the United States to link the temperature easy. Diesel vehicles to mail it with the bow on your computer itself , in the carts platform, was a great cat 's why your computer from the work for you. Dozens with that . Vikings Japan, the macro employee, from the How to Choose a or and. The world's largest , however, to suspend , or move any in my throat up comments by email at the end. All you need is a lot of takes on a lion , nor love , The time and the players warm-up to a, the likelihood of in Japan in the dictionary blockage, to-morrow , it is that to the porch of the game here, but around the world. In the members to suspend than it was even a place to start , because the earth to grow strong platform for a wide range of the United States, the United States, the gate of the bed I was the customer , and laid aside , players bow life bills. Timing perfect employee , supplier to suspend the disease, a lot of developers , the developers note that consumption of drugs or soft . No , neither the United States nor takes around the world very , website on the Internet that any man should put up a basketball , you need to first of all a variety of vehicles and wants to hasellus of the bed, and the porch of the United States bills beginner of life , but a lot of innovative and hydrogen . Planning to buy a ready at the gate , but the manufacturing and financial goals tomorrow , before the start, the film then do you forget some, but it's just time . Eros partners hamenaeos course worthy of financing enterprise and the United States , but the company is but a mass manufacturing, commercial storage ready . Nor is the United States a ridiculous football -free cats.
Donec arcu risus diam amet sit. Congue tortor cursus risus vestibulum commodo nisl, luctus augue amet quis aenean maecenas sit, donec velit iusto, morbi felis elit et nibh. Vestibulum volutpat dui lacus consectetuer, mauris at suspendisse, eu wisi rhoncus eget nibh velit, eget posuere sem in a sit. Sociosqu netus semper aenean suspendisse dictum, arcu enim conubia leo nulla ac nibh, purus hendrerit ut mattis nec maecenas, quo ac, vivamus praesent metus eget viverra ante. Mauris at suspendisse, neque aliquam faucibus adipiscing, vivamus in. Wisi mattis leo. Natoque placerat sed sit hendrerit, dapibus velit molestiae leo a, ut lorem sit et lacus aliquam. Sodales nulla ante auctor excepturi wisi, dolor lacinia dignissim eros.	Unfortunately, the laughter of the platform available for a bow . Passport macro players the advantage of the course of the laughter of the porch , the mourning of the likelihood of a personal computer eneus Maecenas is to last until will to be just , the disease trigger competition and options. It's a downtown feel good a lot of the lakes , to the Moors , however, to suspend , football 's why the development of a wide range of travel agencies , you need to put a lot of in the a is . Employment spanned suspended 've always said , and no alcohol for a marriage with Americans planning to travel a lot or camcorders, where the live bathroom Asian school education before . The world's largest , however, to suspend , or move any in my throat up comments by email at the end. All you need is a lot of risk. Bureau of real estate but it should be the celestial host , the protein that wishes for vexations a lion A, as it is the Internet and lakes at some point. Members have no authority to catch a nice , smart visual asset value.

The Death of Craigslist

There are times when you realize that something is over. Like when you notice that there are signs everywhere (literally—actual signs) saying "Disco sucks!" Or the day that you realize that spending 30-60 minutes a day signing back onto the AOL dial-up connection, after repeatedly getting kicked off, is costing you far more (10-20 hours per month, times your hourly rate) than it would cost to just get DSL, even though DSL was $50 a month, and AOL was $20. Or when you see that the only people who take Facebook seriously are the narcissists in your life, who want you to admire their carefully curated virtual "life" and just applaud. "Yay you! : )" No real two-way conversation from you needed, nor even desired.

And now, just like disco, AOL, and Facebook before it, craigslist has earned the boot from my life. In the last few weeks, as I wrote in the previous post, all translation ads were getting flagged off of the Seattle craigslist translation section. Not only that, but all ads in the writing/editing/translation section were being flagged off every day or two, in Seattle—and in Portland, too. There is no other explanation for this other than foul play. There is no evidence to be had that craigslist, despite being alerted to the disappearing translation ads, did anything effective against it.

In theory, community flagging sounds like a great idea. In theory, communism sounds like a great idea. In practice, though, human nature being what it is, neither works well in actual practice for long.

It wouldn't take much for craigslist to hire a few truly customer-service oriented people to curate the ads in each city. Anyone with investigative skills can quickly tell which ads are legit or not, and which ads are overposted or miscategorized. Community flagging, though, should go the way of communism generally; not because it is a bad idea, but because it just...does...not...work.

Until that happens, and it won't, craiglist will just keep alienating legitimate advertisers, leaving only the scammers and the scum. Oh well, it was good while it lasted.

R.I.P., craigslist.

ALL Translation Ads on Seattle Craigslist Being Flagged

I posted this to Craigslist at 7:10 a.m. on Tuesday, November 12, 2013. I also wrote to Craigslist and received their usual, and unhelpful, autoresponse.

-----
Really?? Seattle's translation section on Craigslist used to regularly support 15-20 Spanish translators, and 8-10 translators of other languages, and now suddenly all of us are flagged off for violating the terms of use that we have not been violating? Messages to Craigslist just get an autoresponse suggesting posting in a forum where bullies heap abuse on anyone who asks what happened to their ad. Nowadays, though, it's usually nothing posters did wrong. Posting a single ad in the correct section of Craigslist offering services in one's own geographical area is not a TOU violation; it is legitimate people trying to make a legitimate living. I am thankful my living does not depend entirely on Craigslist, but I am concerned for those who have little other option.

It may be time for us to get together and set up something better.

If you agree with this post, please flag it above for best of craigslist. If enough good people will do that, maybe that will finally get the head office's attention to this problem. Thank you.

And if you are spending all your time being a destructive force in other people's lives to feel good about yourself, then I suggest that when you are old enough (probably next year; I believe you can be working in Washington at 14 or 14 1/2), you try working at an ice cream store instead. You will be doing something productive and positive for yourself and for others, customers are happy when they come in, and they are happy when they leave, and you will feel good about yourself, this time for real.

It does get better. It does.

Chris
Spanish Pronto

PS Please flag for best of craiglist if you agree. Thanks.
-----

Discourse on the freedom of thought, speech, and the press

This essay by José María Luis Mora is a defense of the freedom of speech and of the press that deserves to be much more widely known. One way to accomplish that, in this world of ours, is to translate it into English, which I have finally had time to do. It would have been possible to phrase things differently than how Mora phrased them, perhaps even to simplify the language for the modern English reader (who doesn't really read), but it would have meant losing the flavor and the force of Mora's arguments.

A dictionary of American idioms I looked at once had the entry "Jesus boots" and the example "Hey, man. I really dig your Jesus boots," which was translated for the reader as "Hi, friend. I really like your sandals." Sometimes the original form of expression, even if it requires a bit more effort to understand, is just better.

For the reader in a hurry, here are some quotes from this essay:

"Governments, without excepting any but very few among those who call themselves free, have always been on the alert against anything that might reduce their powers and reveal their excesses. That is why they spare no means to put thought in chains, raising to the status of crimes opinions that are not agreeable, and calling those who profess them delinquents."

"If some authority were to be granted the power to regulate [opinions], it would very soon abuse such power. And whom would be put in charge of prohibiting us from erring? Him who is exempt from it? But governments do not find themselves in this category."

"Moreover, if governments were authorized to prohibit all errors and to punish the stupid, the world would very soon be missing a great number of its men, the rest being reduced to eternal silence. We will be told that not all opinions must fall under the inspection of the authorities, but if one opinion is subjected to it, the rest are not secure..."

"Indeed, if one wishes to lend credence to a doctrine, he need do nothing more than ban it. Men will of course suppose, and in this they are not mistaken, that it cannot be combated by reason if it is being attacked by force."

So that's the gist, but if you are a friend of the First Amendment or a foe of repressive governments anywhere and their attacks on the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press (any government attacking these is, by definition, repressive), you will find much more here to enjoy.

Discourse on the freedom of thought, speech, and the press	Discurso sobre la libertad de pensar, hablar y escribir
by José María Luis Mora	por José María Luis Mora
"An extraordinarily happy age in which one is allowed to think what he wishes, and to say what he thinks." ...rara temporum felicitate, ubi sentire quae velis, et quae sentias dicere, licet. – Tacitus, Histories, Book I, i, 4	"Época extraordinariamente feliz en que es lícito pensar como se quiera, y decir lo que se piensa." Rara temporum felicitate, ubi sentire quae velis, et quae sentias dicere, licet. – TACIT., Hist. Lib. I.
If, in Tacitus’s time, the right to think what one wished and say what one thought was a rare happiness, then in our time it would be an utter disgrace, and hardly a favorable sign for our nation and institutions, if some attempt were made to put limits on the freedom of thought, speech, and the press. That writer and his fellow citizens found themselves, after all, under the rule of a lord, whereas we are under the leadership of a government, which owes its existence to such freedom, which will not be able to survive except because of it, and whose laws and institutions have afforded that freedom as wide a berth and latitude as it is capable of, with no means spared in guaranteeing to the citizen this precious and invaluable right.	Si en los tiempos de Tácito era una felicidad rara la facultad de pensar como se quería y hablar como se pensaba, en los nuestros sería una desgracia suma, y un indicio poco favorable a nuestra nación e instituciones, se tratase de poner límites a la libertad de pensar, hablar y escribir. Aquel escritor y sus conciudadanos se hallaban al fin bajo el régimen de un señor, cuando nosotros estamos bajo la dirección de un gobierno, que debe su existencia a semejante libertad, que no podrá conservarse sino por ella, y cuyas leyes e instituciones la han dado todo el ensanche y latitud de que es susceptible, no perdonando medio para garantir al ciudadano este precioso e inestimable derecho.
To as great a degree as we have managed to be persuasive in our first issue about the importance and necessity of scrupulous, faithful, and prompt compliance with the law, we will attempt in this one to lay the foundation for complete and absolute freedom for opinions; just as laws should be obeyed down to their finest points, opinions should be free of any censorship preceding or following their publication, because one cannot justly demand that laws be faithfully observed if the freedom to point out their disadvantages is not found to be perfectly and totally guaranteed.	Tanto cuanto hemos procurado persuadir en nuestro primer número la importancia y necesidad de la escrupulosa, fiel y puntual observancia de las leyes, nos esforzaremos en este para zanjar la libertad entera y absoluta en las opiniones; así como aquellas deben cumplirse hasta sus últimos ápices, estas deben estar libres de toda censura que preceda o siga a su publicación, pues no se puede exigir con justicia que las leyes sean fielmente observadas, si la libertad de manifestar sus inconvenientes no se halla perfecta y totalmente garantida.
It is not possible to place limits on the ability to think; it is not doable, just, nor advantageous to block the oral or written expression of what is thought.	No es posible poner límites a la facultad de pensar; no es asequible, justo ni conveniente impedir se exprese de palabra o por escrito lo que se piensa.
Precisely because acts of understanding are metaphysically necessary, they should be free from all political assault or coercion. Human understanding is as necessary a power as vision; it does not really have the ability to decide on one doctrine or the other, to refrain from drawing legitimate or erroneous conclusions, or even to adopt true or false principles. It can, at most, be applied to examining objects deliberately and judiciously, or quickly and carelessly, to delving more or less deeply into matters, and to considering them from all or just one of their sides, but the result of all these preliminaries will always be an act as necessary as the act of seeing clearly and confusedly, or with greater or lesser perfection, the object that we have a certain distance before us. Indeed, an analysis of the verb to know [conocer], and of the complex idea it expresses, must lead us to this result.	Precisamente porque los actos del entendimiento son necesarios en el orden metafísico, deben ser libres de toda violencia y coacción en el orden político. El entendimiento humano es una potencia tan necesaria como la vista, no tiene realmente facultad para determinarse por esta o por la otra doctrina, para dejar de deducir consecuencias legítimas o erradas, ni para adoptar principios ciertos o falsos. Podrá enhorabuena aplicarse a examinar los objetos con detención y madurez, o con ligereza y descuido; a profundizar las cuestiones más o menos, y a considerarlas en todos o solamente bajo alguno de sus aspectos; pero el resultado de todos estos preliminares siempre será un acto tan necesario, como lo es el de ver clara y confusamente, o con más o menos perfección el objeto que tenemos a distancia proporcionada. En efecto, el análisis de la palabra conocer, y el de la idea compleja que designa, no puede menos de darnos este resultado.
Knowledge is to the soul what vision is to the body, and just as each individual of the human species has, according to the unique construction of his visual organs, a necessary way of seeing things, and does so without choice, in the same way he has, according to the uniqueness of his intellectual faculties, a necessary way of knowing them. It is true that both of these powers may be perfected and enhanced; it is true that their errors can be corrected or prevented, the sphere in which they operate can be widened, and greater activity or intention can be given to the actions typical of each of them; there is not just one way, but many and infinitely varied ways of achieving this. One, many, or all of them can be put into effect, and they will, in turn, produce perfect results, medium results, or perhaps none at all, but it will always be true that choice will not have played any part in these results, nor should it be counted among the possible ways of obtaining them.	El conocimiento en el alma es lo que la vista en el cuerpo, y así como cada individuo de la especie humana tiene según la diversa construcción de sus órganos visuales, un modo necesario de ver las cosas, y lo hace sin elección; de la misma manera según la diversidad de sus facultades intelectuales lo tiene de conocerlas. Es verdad que ambas potencias son susceptibles de perfección y de aumento; es verdad que se pueden corregir o precaver sus extravíos, ensanchar la esfera dentro de que obran, y dar más actividad o intención a los actos que les son propios; no es uno, sino muchos e infinitamente variados los medios de conseguirlo: uno, muchos o todos se podrán poner en acción, darán a su vez resultados perfectos, medianos, y acaso ningunos, pero siempre será cierto que la elección no ha tenido parte alguna en ellos, ni debe contarse en el orden de los medios de obtenerlos.
Men would be very happy, or at least not so unhappy, if their acts of understanding were part of a free choice; then the bitter and painful memories of the past would not come back to renew sufferings that had ceased to exist, and which do not emerge from the void except to torment us; then the envisioning of future events would not have us foreseeing a thousand sorrows, presenting us ahead of time with people, events, and circumstances that will either not come to pass, or if they should, prematurely causing an indefinite lengthening of our sufferings; then, finally, we would not think of, nor delve into through reflection, the causes and circumstances of our present suffering, nor would we, by so doing, increase its intolerable weight. There is certainly not a single man who would not wish to keep far away from him all those things that could upset him and make him unhappy; and at the same time there is not, has never been, nor will there ever be, anyone who has not suffered greatly because of such things. And what does this prove? That it is not possible for him to place limits on his thoughts, that he is necessarily and irresistibly led to the knowledge of things, whether well or poorly, perfectly or imperfectly apprehended; that one’s own choice, or another’s, plays no role in the actions of one's mental faculties, and that, consequently, our understanding is not, metaphysically speaking, free.	Los hombres serían muy felices, o a lo menos no tan desgraciados, si los actos de su entendimiento fuesen parte de una elección libre; entonces los recuerdos amargos y dolorosos de lo pasado no vendrían a renovar males que dejaron de existir, y no salen de la nada sino para atormentarnos; entonces la previsión de lo futuro no nos anticiparía mil pesares, presentándonos antes de tiempo personas, hechos y circunstancias, que, o no llegarán a existir, o si así fuere, dan anticipadamente una extensión indefinida a nuestros padecimientos; entonces finalmente, no pensaríamos ni profundizaríamos por medio de la reflexión, las causas y circunstancias del mal presente, ni agravaríamos con ella su peso intolerable. No hay ciertamente un solo hombre que no desee alejar de sí todo aquello que pueda causarle disgusto y hacerlo desgraciado; y al mismo tiempo no hay, ha habido ni habrá alguno que no haya padecido mucho por semejantes consideraciones. ¿Y esto qué prueba? Que no le es posible poner límites a sus pensamientos, que necesaria e irresistiblemente es conducido al conocimiento de los objetos, bien o mal, perfecta o defectuosamente aprendidos; que la elección propia o ajena no tiene parte ninguna en los actos de las facultades mentales, y que de consiguiente el entendimiento no es libre considerado en el orden metafísico.
How, then, can one impose rules on a faculty that is not subject to them? How can one try to effect a change, in that which is most independent in man, by availing oneself of violence and coercion? How, finally, can one place in the category of crimes and assign penalties to an activity that, by its nature, is incapable of goodness and of malice? Man can make his actions and speech not conform to his opinions; he can hide his thoughts by his conduct or language, but it will be impossible for him to disregard them or to rid himself of them because of an external assault, a means which is inappropriate and, at the same time, tyrannical and illegal.	¿Cómo, pues, imponer preceptos a una facultad que no es susceptible de ellos? ¿Cómo intentar se cause un cambio en lo más independiente del hombre, valiéndose de la violencia y la coacción? ¿Cómo finalmente colocar en la clase de los crímenes y asignar penas a un acto que por su esencia es incapaz de bondad y de malicia? El hombre podrá no conformar sus acciones y discursos con sus opiniones; podrá desmentir sus pensamientos con su conducta o lenguaje; pero le será imposible prescindir ni deshacerse de ellos por la violencia exterior. Este medio es desproporcionado y al mismo tiempo tiránico e ilegal.
Whenever one tries to achieve some end, no matter what it might be, prudence and natural reason dictate that the means that are employed to accomplish it be naturally appropriate to the task; otherwise, the plan will be frustrated, the nature of things being stronger than the whim of the actor. Such would be the stupidity of him who would try to attack firearms with water, and to prevent the crossing of a moat by filling it with shrapnel. When it comes, then, to changing our ideas and thoughts, or to inspiring new ones in us, and to do this someone makes use of rules, prohibitions, and punishments, the natural effect is that those who suffer such an assault will adhere more tenaciously to their opinion and deny their oppressor the satisfaction that could have been his in victory. Persecution makes opinions take on a doomed aspect without managing to extinguish them, because that is not possible. Human understanding is as noble, in and of itself, as it is wretched for the ease with which it is stirred up by all manner of passions. The first principles that are undeniable for everyone are few in number, but the consequences that are derived from them are as diverse as they are multiplied, because the way in which their interrelationships are learned is infinitely varied. The habits and customs that our education has inspired in us, the lifestyle we have adopted, the objects that surround us and, above all, the people with whom we interact, all contribute, even without our noticing it, to the formation of our judgments, modifying in a thousand ways our perception of objects, and making them appear to take on perhaps a thousand forms, excepting their natural and genuine one. So we see that what is obvious and simple for one person is obscure and complicated for another; that not all men can acquire or dedicate themselves to the same kinds of knowledge, nor excel in them; that some are suited for the sciences, others for erudition, many for the humanities, and some for nothing; that a single person, as he ages, varies his opinion, even considering absurd what he had previously considered proven; and that no one, while he lives, is firm and unvarying in his opinions, nor in the idea he has formed about things. Just as man's intellectual faculty does not have a precise and exact measure of the vigor with which it carries out its operations, neither is there such a measure of the amount of light it needs in order to perform them. To expect, in other words, that the rest will be convinced by the judgment of another, even when it is the judgment of the authorities, is to insist, says the celebrated Spedalieri, on them seeing and hearing through eyes and ears that are not their own; it is to force them to allow themselves to be led blindly and without any other reason than the force they are unable to resist; it is, to put it succinctly, to dry up all the sources of public enlightenment and to destroy, radically and prematurely, the improvements that could have been made in the future.	Siempre que se pretenda conseguir un fin, sea de la clase que fuere, la prudencia y la razón natural dictan, que los medios de que se hace uso para obtenerlo le sean naturalmente proporcionados; de lo contrario se frustrará el designio pudiendo más la naturaleza de las cosas que el capricho del agente. Tal sería la insensatez del que pretendiese atacar las armas de fuego con agua, e impedir el paso de un foso llenándolo de metralla. Cuando se trata, pues, de cambiar nuestras ideas y pensamientos, o de inspirarnos otras nuevas, y para esto se hace uso de preceptos, prohibiciones y penas, el efecto natural es, que los que sufren semejante violencia, se adhieran más tenazmente a su opinión, y nieguen a su opresor la satisfacción que pudiera caberle en la victoria. La persecución hace tomar un carácter funesto a las opiniones sin conseguir extinguirlas, porque esto no es posible. El entendimiento humano es tan noble en sí mismo, como miserable por la facilidad con que es ofuscado por toda clase de pasiones. Los primeros principios innegables para todos, son pocos en número, pero las consecuencias que de ellos se derivan, son tan diversas como multiplicadas, porque es infinitamente variado el modo con que se aprenden sus relaciones. Los hábitos y costumbres que nos ha inspirado la educación, el género de vida que hemos adoptado, los objetos que nos rodean, y sobre todo las personas con que tratamos, contribuyen, sin que ni aun podamos percibirlo, a la formación de nuestros juicios, modificando de mil modos la percepción de los objetos, y haciendo aparezcan revestidos tal vez de mil formas, menos de la natural y genuina. Así vemos que para este es evidente y sencillo lo que para otro es oscuro y complicado; que no todos los hombres pueden adquirir o dedicarse a la misma clase de conocimientos, ni sobresalir en ellos; que unos son aptos para las ciencias, otros para la erudición, muchos para las humanidades, y algunos para nada; que una misma persona, con la edad varía de opinión, hasta tener por absurdo lo que antes reputaba demostrado; y que nadie mientras vive es firme e invariable en sus opiniones, ni en el concepto que ha formado de las cosas. Como la facultad intelectual del hombre no tiene una medida precisa y exacta del vigor con que desempeña sus operaciones, tampoco la hay de la cantidad de luz que necesita para ejercerlas. Pretender, pues, que los demás se convenzan por el juicio de otro, aun cuando este sea el de la autoridad, es empeñarse, dice el célebre Spedalieri, en que vean y oigan por ojos y oídos ajenos; es obligarlos a que se dejen llevar a ciegas y sin más razón que la fuerza a que no pueden resistir; es, para decirlo en pocas palabras, secar todas las fuentes de la ilustración pública y destruir anticipada y radicalmente las mejoras que pudieran hacerse en lo sucesivo.
Indeed, what would become of us, and of all of mankind, if someone had granted the wishes of those who have wanted to put understanding in chains and to place limits on the freedom of thought? What advances would we have achieved in the arts and sciences, in improvements to governments, and in the condition of men in the social state? What would become, particularly, of the fate of our nation? Thanks, not to the efforts of the extraordinary geniuses who in every age have known how to shake the chains that were attempted to be imposed on thought, societies, even without having reached the highest degree of perfection, have made considerable advances. Governments, without excepting any but very few among those who call themselves free, have always been on the alert against anything that might reduce their powers and reveal their excesses. That is why they spare no means to put thought in chains, raising to the status of crimes opinions that are not agreeable, and calling those who profess them delinquents. But were they within their rights? Did they proceed legally when they availed themselves of these means? Or, rather, have they run roughshod over the sacred rights of man, arrogating powers which no one wanted to give them and they could not receive? That is the point that we are going to examine.	En efecto; ¿qué sería de nosotros y de todo el género humano, si se hubieran cumplido los votos de los que han querido atar el entendimiento y poner límites a la libertad de pensar? ¿Cuáles habrían sido los adelantos de las artes y ciencias, las mejoras de los gobiernos, y de la condición de los hombres en el estado social? ¿Cuál sería en particular la suerte de nuestra nación? Merced, no a los esfuerzos de los genios extraordinarios que en todo tiempo han sabido sacudir las cadenas que se han querido imponer al pensamiento, las sociedades, aunque sin haber llegado al último grado de perfección, han tenido adelantos considerables. Los gobiernos, sin exceptuar sino muy pocos entre los que se llaman libres, siempre han estado alerta contra todo lo que es disminuir sus facultades y hacer patentes sus excesos. De aquí es que no pierden medio para encadenar el pensamiento, erigiendo en crímenes las opiniones que no acomodan, y llamando delincuentes a los que las profesan. ¿Mas han tenido derecho para tanto? ¿Han procedido con legalidad cuando se han valido de estos medios? O más bien ¿han atropellado los derechos sagrados del hombre arrogándose facultades que nadie les quiso dar ni ellos pudieron recibir? Este es el punto que vamos a examinar.
Governments have been established precisely to maintain public order, guaranteeing each individual the exercise of his rights and the possession of his goods, in the manner and form that has been prescribed to them by the laws, and in no other way. Their powers are necessarily determined in the compacts or agreements that we call constitutional charters, and they are the result of the national will. The ones who created these charters, and those on whose behalf they acted, were not able to write into them provisions which, by the nature of things, were beyond their powers, such as condemning an innocent, or raising to the status of crimes actions which are truly laudable, such as paternal love; nor could they possibly subject to laws actions that are by their nature incapable of morality, such as the circulation of the blood, the movement of the lungs, etc. Hence it is that, for a legislative, executive, or judicial measure to be just, legal and equitable, it is not enough that it be passed by the authority having jurisdiction; it is also necessary that it be inherently possible, and indispensable for maintaining public order. Let us see, then, whether the measures that have been passed, or that they are trying to pass, against the freedom of thought are of this kind.	Los gobiernos han sido establecidos precisamente para conservar el orden público, asegurando a cada uno de los particulares el ejercicio de sus derechos y la posesión de sus bienes, en el modo y forma que les ha sido prescrito por las leyes, y no de otra manera. Sus facultades están necesariamente determinadas en los pactos o convenios que llamamos cartas constitucionales, y son el resultado de la voluntad nacional; los que las formaron y sus comitentes no pudieron consignar en ellas disposiciones, que por la naturaleza de las cosas estaban fuera de sus poderes, tales como la condenación de un inocente, el erigir en crímenes acciones verdaderamente laudables como el amor paternal; ni mucho menos sujetar a las leyes acciones por su naturaleza incapaces de moralidad, como la circulación de la sangre, el movimiento de los pulmones, etc. De aquí es que para que una providencia legislativa, ejecutiva o judicial sea justa, legal y equitativa, no basta que sea dictada por la autoridad competente, sino que es también necesario que ella sea posible en sí misma, e indispensable para conservar el orden público. Veamos, pues, si son de esta clase las que se han dictado o pretendan dictarse contra la libertad del pensamiento.
Up to this point we have demonstrated that opinions are not freely chosen and, therefore, are incapable of morality; all that remains for us is to show that opinions can never disturb the public order, and especially not under the representative system. Indeed, the public order is maintained by the conscientious and faithful observance of the laws, and this observance is very compatible with the absolute and total freedom of opinions. There is nothing more common than seeing men who dislike the laws and whose ideas are contrary to them, but who at the same time not only observe them religiously, but are intimately convinced of the need to do so. To say this law is bad, it has these disadvantages and these others, is not to say it should neither be obeyed nor complied with; the first is an opinion, the second is an action; the opinion is independent of all human power, the action must be subjected to the authority having jurisdiction. Men have the right to make laws or, put another way, to order that things be done this way or that, but not to raise doctrines to the status of dogmas, nor to compel others to believe in them. This absurd right would require either the need for a symbol or comprehensive body of doctrine containing all truths, or the existence of an infallible authority whose decisions should be complied with. There is nothing, however, more baseless than suppositions of this kind.	Que las opiniones no sean libres y de consiguiente incapaces de moralidad, lo hemos demostrado hasta aquí; réstanos solo hacer ver que jamás pueden trastornar el orden público, y mucho menos en el sistema representativo. En efecto, el orden público se mantiene por la puntual y fiel observancia de las leyes, y esta es muy compatible con la libertad total y absoluta de las opiniones. No hay cosa más frecuente que ver hombres a quienes desagradan las leyes y cuyas ideas les son contrarias; pero que al mismo tiempo no solo las observan religiosamente, sino que están íntimamente convencidos de la necesidad de hacerlo. Decir esta ley es mala, tiene estos y los otros inconvenientes, no es decir, no se obedezca ni se cumpla; la primera es una opinión, la segunda es una acción; aquella es independiente de todo poder humano, esta debe sujetarse a la autoridad competente. Los hombres tienen derecho para hacer leyes, o lo que es lo mismo, para mandar que se obre de este o del otro modo; pero no para erigir las doctrinas en dogmas, ni obligar a los demás a su creencia. Este absurdo derecho supondría o la necesidad de un símbolo o cuerpo de doctrina comprensivo de todas las verdades, o la existencia de una autoridad infalible a cuyas decisiones debería estarse. Nada hay, sin embargo, más ajeno de fundamento que semejantes suposiciones.
But how could the former have been created, and who would be so presumptuous and bold as to dare arrogate the latter? "A body of doctrine," says the celebrated Daunou, "supposes that human understanding has made all the progress that is possible, it prohibits all the possible progress that remains, it draws a circle around all the knowledge acquired, it inevitably encloses within it many errors, it opposes the development of the sciences, of the arts, and of all kinds of industry." And who would have been able to create it? Even if, for such an unattainable project, the most celebrated men of the universe had come together, nothing would have been accomplished; if you do not believe it, just look at their writings, and they will be found to be full of errors on the way to a few truths with which they have contributed to the enlightenment of the public. The daily and continuing improvement that can be seen in all human works is conclusive evidence that the perfectibility of their powers has no end, and of how much would have been lost by halting its march, if that had been possible.	Mas ¿cómo podría haberse formado el primero, ni quién sería tan presuntuoso y audaz que se atreviese a arrogarse lo segundo? "Un cuerpo de doctrina", dice el célebre Daunou, "supone que el entendimiento humano ha hecho todos los progresos posibles, le prohíbe todos los que le restan, traza un círculo alrededor de todos los conocimientos adquiridos, encierra inevitablemente muchos errores, se opone al desarrollo de las ciencias, de las artes y de todo género de industria". Ni ¿quién sería capaz de haberlo formado? Aun cuando para tan inasequible proyecto se hubiesen reunido los hombres más célebres del universo, nada se habría conseguido; regístrense si no sus escritos, y se hallarán llenos de errores a vuelta de algunas verdades con que han contribuido a la ilustración pública. La mejora diaria y progresiva que se advierte en todas las obras humanas, es una prueba demostrativa de que la perfectibilidad de sus potencias no tiene término, y de lo mucho que se habría perdido en detener su marcha, si esto hubiera sido posible.
We are persuaded that none of the current governments will boast of its inability to err. They and the peoples entrusted to their leadership are too enlightened for them to be able to aspire to or grant themselves any such prerogatives. But if governments are composed of men who are just as fallible as the others, by which principle of justice, or on what legal basis, do they rush to prescribe or prohibit doctrines? How do they dare to point out the opinions we should follow, and the ones that we are not allowed to profess? Is this not an act of aggression, without attainable effect, which nothing can justify? Without a doubt. This, however, is common, and it almost always serves as a pretext for classifying citizens and persecuting them straightaway. They are held responsible for the opinions that they have, or that they are believed to have, and those become a reason for hatred and loathing. This is how factions are perpetuated, for the winning dogma is one day overthrown, and then it becomes a crime to profess it. This is how nations are demoralized, and a forced trade in lies is established which forces the weak to hide their thoughts, and makes those who have a strong soul the target of the bullets of persecution.	Estamos persuadidos que ninguno de los gobiernos actuales hará alarde de su incapacidad de errar. Ellos y los pueblos confiados a su dirección están demasiado ilustrados para que puedan pretenderse y acordarse semejantes prerrogativas. Mas si los gobiernos están compuestos de hombres tan falibles como los otros, ¿por qué principio de justicia, o con qué título legal se adelantan a prescribir o prohibir doctrinas? ¿Cómo se atreven a señalarnos las opiniones que debemos seguir, y las que no nos es permitido profesar? ¿No es este un acto de agresión de efecto inasequible y que nada puede justificarlo? Sin duda. Él sin embargo es común, y casi siempre sirve de pretexto para clasificar los ciudadanos y perseguirlos en seguida. Se les hace cargo de las opiniones que tienen o se les suponen; y estas se convierten en un motivo de odio y detestación. De este modo se perpetúan las facciones, puesto que el dogma triunfante algún día llega a ser derrocado, y entonces pasa a ser crimen el profesarlo. Así es como se desmoralizan las naciones, y se establece un comercio forzado de mentiras que obliga a los débiles a disimular su conceptos, y a los que tienen alma fuerte los hace el blanco de los tiros de la persecución.
What! Will it be allowable to express all opinions? Do the authorities not have the right to prohibit the expression of some of them? Many of them which necessarily must be in error, will they not be harmful? Yes, we say it resolutely: Opinions about doctrines should be absolutely free. No one doubts that the surest way, or rather the only way, to arrive at knowledge of the truth is the examination produced by free discussion; then one has in front of him not just one's own reflections, but also those of others, and it has happened thousands of times that from the correction and perhaps from the error or impertinent observation of some person has hung the fate of a nation. There is no understanding, however vast and universal it might be considered to be, that can take in everything, nor exhaust any subject; that is why everyone, and in all subjects, especially those that have to do with government, needs help from others, which he will certainly not obtain if freedom of speech and the press is not guaranteed, shielding opinions and their authors from all attacks which might be attempted against them by those who do not profess those views. The government, in other words, should not ban, nor grant protection to, any doctrine. That is foreign to its purpose; it is in place only to observe, and to make its subjects observe, the law.	Pues qué ¿será lícito manifestar todas las opiniones? ¿No tiene la autoridad derecho para prohibir la enunciación de algunas? ¿Muchas de ellas que necesariamente deben ser erradas no serán perjudiciales? Sí, lo decimos resueltamente, las opiniones sobre doctrinas deben ser del todo libres. Nadie duda que el medio más seguro, o por mejor decir el único, para llegar al conocimiento de la verdad, es el examen que produce una discusión libre; entonces se tienen presentes no solo las propias reflexiones sino también las ajenas, y mil veces ha sucedido que del reparo y tal vez del error u observación impertinente de alguno, ha pendido la suerte de una nación. No hay entendimiento por vasto y universal que se suponga, que pueda abrazarlo todo ni agotar materia alguna; de aquí es que todos y en todas materias, especialmente las que versan sobre gobierno, necesitan del auxilio de los demás, que no obtendrán ciertamente, si no se asegura la libertad de hablar y escribir, poniendo las opiniones y sus autores a cubierto de toda agresión que pueda intentarse contra ellos por los que no las profesan. El gobierno pues no debe proscribir ni dispensar protección a ninguna doctrina; esto es ajeno de su instituto, él está solamente puesto para observar y hacer que sus súbditos observen las leyes.
It is true that among opinions there are, and there must be, many erroneous ones; it is equally true that every error, in any line, and under any aspect that it might be considered, is pernicious in the extreme, but it is no less true that prohibitions are not the means for remedying this; the free circulation of ideas, and the contrast that results from opposition, is the only thing that can rectify opinions. If some authority were to be granted the power to regulate them, it would very soon abuse such power. And whom would be put in charge of prohibiting us from erring? Him who is exempt from it? But governments do not find themselves in this category. Quite the contrary, when the causes are sought which have done most to spread error and contribute to perpetuating it, they are always found in prohibitive institutions. Moreover, if governments were authorized to prohibit all errors and to punish the stupid, the world would very soon be missing a great number of its men, the rest being reduced to eternal silence. We will be told that not all opinions must fall under the inspection of the authorities, but if one opinion is subjected to it, the rest are not secure; laws cannot make a precise classification, nor an exact enumeration, of all of them. Thus, such a power is necessarily arbitrary, and in most cases will become a reason for persecution. These are not unfounded suspicions; look back to the barbarous centuries and you will see universities, parliaments, chancelleries, and kings and queens determined to banish the wise who were making some discoveries in physics, and who were attacking the doctrines of Aristotle. Petrus Ramus, Johannes Trithemius, Galileo Galilei, and other luminaries, would go on to suffer what would not be believed if we did not possess solid proof of it. And what were the fruits of such proceedings? Did governments achieve what they intended? Not at all. The number of proselytes grew day after day, perhaps because of that very persecution.	Es verdad que entre las opiniones hay y debe haber muchas erróneas, lo es igualmente que todo error en cualquiera línea y bajo cualquier aspecto que se le considere es perniciosísimo; pero no lo es menos que las prohibiciones no son medios de remediarlo; la libre circulación de ideas, y el contraste que resulta de la oposición, es lo único que puede rectificar las opiniones. Si a alguna autoridad se concediese la facultad de reglarlas, esta abusaría bien pronto de semejante poder; ¿Y a quién se encargaría el prohibirnos el error? ¿Al que está exento de él? mas los gobiernos no se hallan en esta categoría; muy al contrario; cuando se buscan las causas que más lo han propagado y contribuido a perpetuarlo, se encuentran siempre en las instituciones prohibitivas. Por otra parte, si los gobiernos estuviesen autorizados para prohibir todos los errores y castigar a los necios, bien pronto faltaría del mundo una gran parte de los hombres, quedando reducidos los demás a eterno silencio. Se nos dirá que no todas las opiniones deben estar bajo la inspección de la autoridad; pero si una se sujeta, las demás no están seguras; las leyes no pueden hacer clasificación precisa ni enumeración exacta de todas ellas. Así es que semejante poder es necesariamente arbitrario y se convertirá las más veces en un motivo de persecución. Estas no son sospechas infundadas; vuélvanse los ojos a los siglos bárbaros, y se verá a las universidades, a los parlamentos, a las cancillerías y a los reyes empeñados en proscribir a los sabios que hacían algunos descubrimientos físicos, y atacaban las doctrinas de Aristóteles. Pedro Ramos Tritemío, Galilei y otros infinitos, padecieren lo que no sería creíble a no constarnos de un modo indudable. ¿Y cuál fue el fruto de semejantes procedimientos? ¿Consiguieron los gobiernos lo que intentaban? nada menos. Los prosélitos se aumentaban de día en día, acaso por la misma persecución.
Indeed, if one wishes to lend credence to a doctrine, he need do nothing more than ban it. Men will of course suppose, and in this they are not mistaken, that it cannot be combated by reason if it is being attacked by force. As the spirit of novelty, and of making a public spectacle of oneself, attracting the attention of everyone, is such a strong desire, great geniuses and even-tempered souls adhere to banned doctrines more out of vanity than out of conviction, and the final result is that a piece of nonsense, which might have remained buried in the corner of a house, because of the importance given to it by persecution, devolves into a sect that may even make the columns of the social edifice wobble.	En efecto, si se quiere dar crédito a una doctrina, no se necesita otra cosa que proscribirla. Los hombres desde luego suponen, y en esto no se engañan, que no se puede combatirla por el raciocinio, cuando es atacada por la fuerza. Como el espíritu de novedad, y el hacerse objeto de la expectación pública, llamando la atención de todos, es una pasión tan viva, los genios fuertes y las almas de buen temple, se adhieren a las doctrinas proscritas más por vanidad que por convicción, y en último resultado un despropósito, que tal vez habría quedado sumido en el rincón de una casa, por la importancia que le da la persecución, declina en secta que hace tal vez vacilar las columnas del edificio social.
But does discrediting laws not make them contemptible, and encourage men to break them, depriving the laws of their prestige? And is this not the result of the free criticism that is made of them? When laws have been passed calmly and deliberately, when they are the product of free discussion, and when the spirit of partisanship and the fears that it instills in legislators have not contributed to their creation, causing the general interest to be subordinated to private interests for reasons that are extraneous to it, the fear of such results is very remote, but to guard against it governments must be very alert and not lose sight of public opinion, seconding it in everything. Public opinion is not formed except through free discussion, which cannot be had when the government or some faction takes control of the press and condemns, without any kind of shame, everyone who challenges the dogmas of the sect, or who sheds light on its excesses and offenses. On the other hand, when we proceed without prejudice and in good faith, when we listen attentively and impartially to everything that is said or written in favor of or against the laws, we must certainly be on the road to getting it right. We will never tire of repeating it: The freedom of opinions about doctrine has never been fatal to any people, but all the events of modern history substantiate, down to the last piece of evidence, the dangers and risks that nations have run when some faction has succeeded in taking control of the press, has dominated the government, and by taking advantage of this, has silenced through terror those who could have enlightened it.	¿Pero el descrédito de las leyes no las hace despreciables, y anima a los hombres a infringirlas privándolas de su prestigio? ¿Y no es este el resultado de la crítica libre que se hace de ellas? Cuando las leyes se han dictado con calma y detención; cuando son el efecto de una discusión libre, y cuando el espíritu de partido y los temores que él infunde en los legisladores no han contribuido a su confección, haciendo se pospongan los intereses generales a los privados por motivos que les son extrínsecos; es muy remoto el temor de semejantes resultados; mas para precaverlo los gobiernos deben estar muy alerta, y no perder de vista la opinión pública, secundándola en todo. Esta no se forma sino por una discusión libre, que no puede sostenerse cuando el gobierno o alguna facción se apoderan de la imprenta, y condenan sin ningún género de pudor a todos los que impugnan los dogmas de la secta, o ponen en claro sus excesos y atentados. Por el contrario cuando se procede sin prevención y de buena fe, cuando se escucha con atención e imparcialidad, todo lo que se dice o escribe a favor o en contra de las leyes, se está ciertamente en el camino de acertar. Jamás nos cansaremos de repetirlo, la libertad de opiniones sobre la doctrina nunca ha sido funesta a ningún pueblo; pero todos los sucesos de la historia moderna acreditan hasta la última evidencia los peligros y riesgos que han corrido las naciones, cuando alguna facción ha llegado a apoderarse de la imprenta, ha dominado el gobierno, y valiéndose de él, ha hecho callar por el terror a los que podían ilustrarlo.
But governments never learn, in spite of so many repeated examples. Always stuck in the present moment, they neglect the future. Their main error consists in believing they can do it all, and that it is enough for them to hint at their will for it to be quickly and faithfully obeyed. Perhaps they will reconsider when there is no longer anything that can be done, when they have discredited themselves and thrown the nation into a pit of misfortune.	Pero los gobiernos no escarmientan a pesar de tan repetidos ejemplos. Siempre fijos en el momento presente descuidan del porvenir. Su principal error consiste en creer que todo lo pueden, y que basta insinuar su voluntad para que sea pronta y fielmente obedecida. Tal vez vuelvan sobre sí cuando no hay remedio, cuando se han desconceptuado y precipitado a la nación en un abismo de males.
We conclude our reflections then, recommending to those entrusted with power that they be persuaded that, when they raise opinions to the status of crimes, they open themselves to punishing talents and virtues, to losing their way, and to making illustrious the memory of their victims.	Concluimos pues nuestras reflexiones recomendando a los depositarios del poder se persuadan, que cuando erigen las opiniones en crímenes, se exponen a castigar los talentos y virtudes, a perder el concepto, y a hacer ilustre la memoria de sus víctimas.
El Observador. Mexico City. June 13, 1827. Obras sueltas. [Collected works.] Paris. 1837. English translation copyright 2013 by Chris Marquardt, CT.	El Observador. México. 13 de junio de 1827. Obras sueltas. París. 1837.