英文全文翻译,谁能帮我翻译一下下面这段话谢谢

Question

当然，穷人易受伤害，这在任何一个国家都是如此。如果一个欧洲警察误抓了一个富人，那他就要等着没完没了的投诉、调查，甚至可能因此丢了公职；但如果误抓的是个穷人，有可能请他吃顿饭、给点经济补偿就过去了。但问题就在于——穷人常被伤害，难道单单是穷人自己的责任吗？有谁来保护穷人？

一个政治学者所知道的是，无论在何种时代、何种体制下，国家都应该是弱者的主要保护者，而相比其他阶层，弱势阶层也更加依赖于国家的保护。国家保护本国的弱者的具体行动有许多，如通过税收和财富的再分配，将社会财富转移给穷人，还有其他社会福利、贸易保护主义等——凡是有关平等的举措几乎都是对穷人有利的。而且保护穷人并不单单是民主国家的使命，即使是那些精英统治的国家，维护弱势集团利益也是其必须承担的职责之一。一个不能保护穷人的国家，其政府体制可能存在不容忽视的问题。

对于社会其他阶层来说，坐视弱势群体的利益受损而无动于衷的话，也是相当危险的举动。这最弱势的一群在被剥夺殆尽之后，很容易转化为最无畏、最危险的一群:城市治安的恶化，在很大程度上难道不是与这些当初满怀热望但最终却走投无路的“穷人”直接相关吗？先是被欺压、被抢掠者，后来以同样的法则对待他人和社会——在“穷人”群体上发生这种直接的转变值得警惕。而且谁也不能保证适用于最弱势群体的被压榨法则有一天不会适用于“次弱势”群体、“亚弱势”群体，乃至于社会的每个人身上。事实上，任何一个国家如果不能对国家中最弱势的群体利益加以维护的话，都无助于巩固其统治根基。约翰·肯尼迪在四十多年前说:“如果一个自由社会不能帮助那些处于多数的穷人，也就不能挽救那些处于少数的富人。”

第

Answer 1

Of course, the poor vulnerable, which in the case of any country. If a European police mistakenly arrested a rich, he should make waiting for the endless complaints, investigations, and may even lose the public; But if mistakenly arrested is a poor, it is possible to call on him吃顿饭, to the point of economic compensation passed. But the problem lies - often hurt the poor, is only the poor of their responsibilities? Who is the protection of the poor?

A political scholars know is that no matter what age, what kind of system, the state has to be the main protector of the weak, but compared to other sectors, the disadvantaged sectors more dependent on the protection of the State. State to protect its weak there are many specific actions, such as through taxation and redistribution of wealth, the transfer of wealth to the poor, there are other social welfare, trade protectionism, etc. - all the initiatives relating to equal almost all the poor benefited. But the protection of the poor is not only the mission of democratic countries, even those who rule of the elite of the country, and safeguarding the interests of the disadvantaged groups also must assume its responsibilities one. One can not protect poor countries, the system of government there may be problems not to be neglected.

For other sectors of society, sit back and jeopardize the interests of vulnerable groups and indifferent to the case, is also very dangerous move. The most vulnerable group after being deprived completely, it is easy to translate into the most fearless, a group of the most dangerous: the deterioration of law and order in cities, to a great extent with those originally not a full aspire only to end up in an impasse "poor" directly related? First was bullied by the looting, he later treated the same rules others and society - in the "poor" groups directly on the changes that occurred should be on guard against. But no one can guarantee applies to the most vulnerable groups were oppressed rule that one day will not apply to "the vulnerable" groups, "ADB vulnerable" groups, and even in the community, each on them. In fact, any country if not in the national interests of the most vulnerable groups to safeguard the case, would not consolidate its ruling foundation. In John F. Kennedy more than 40 years ago said: "If a free society can not help those who are in a majority of the poor, it can not save the few who are rich."
当然，穷人易受伤害，这在任何一个国家都是如此。如果一个欧洲警察误抓了一个富人，那他就要等着没完没了的投诉、调查，甚至可能因此丢了公职；但如果误抓的是个穷人，有可能请他吃顿饭、给点经济补偿就过去了。但问题就在于——穷人常被伤害，难道单单是穷人自己的责任吗？有谁来保护穷人？

一个政治学者所知道的是，无论在何种时代、何种体制下，国家都应该是弱者的主要保护者，而相比其他阶层，弱势阶层也更加依赖于国家的保护。国家保护本国的弱者的具体行动有许多，如通过税收和财富的再分配，将社会财富转移给穷人，还有其他社会福利、贸易保护主义等——凡是有关平等的举措几乎都是对穷人有利的。而且保护穷人并不单单是民主国家的使命，即使是那些精英统治的国家，维护弱势集团利益也是其必须承担的职责之一。一个不能保护穷人的国家，其政府体制可能存在不容忽视的问题。

对于社会其他阶层来说，坐视弱势群体的利益受损而无动于衷的话，也是相当危险的举动。这最弱势的一群在被剥夺殆尽之后，很容易转化为最无畏、最危险的一群:城市治安的恶化，在很大程度上难道不是与这些当初满怀热望但最终却走投无路的“穷人”直接相关吗？先是被欺压、被抢掠者，后来以同样的法则对待他人和社会——在“穷人”群体上发生这种直接的转变值得警惕。而且谁也不能保证适用于最弱势群体的被压榨法则有一天不会适用于“次弱势”群体、“亚弱势”群体，乃至于社会的每个人身上。事实上，任何一个国家如果不能对国家中最弱势的群体利益加以维护的话，都无助于巩固其统治根基。约翰·肯尼迪在四十多年前说:“如果一个自由社会不能帮助那些处于多数的穷人，也就不能挽救那些处于少数的富人。”

Answer 2

Of course, the poor vulnerable, which in the case of any country. If a European police mistakenly arrested a rich, he should make waiting for the endless complaints, investigations, and may even lose the public; But if mistakenly arrested is a poor, it is possible to call on him eat food, to the point of economic compensation passed. But the problem lies - often hurt the poor, is only the poor of their responsibilities? Who is the protection of the poor?

A political scholars know is that no matter what age, what kind of system, the state has to be the main protector of the weak, but compared to other sectors, the disadvantaged sectors more dependent on the protection of the State. State to protect its weak there are many specific actions, such as through taxation and redistribution of wealth, the transfer of wealth to the poor, there are other social welfare, trade protectionism, etc. - all the initiatives relating to equal almost all the poor benefited. But the protection of the poor is not only the mission of democratic countries, even those who rule of the elite of the country, and safeguarding the interests of the disadvantaged groups also must assume its responsibilities one. One can not protect poor countries, the system of government there may be problems not to be neglected.

For other sectors of society, sit back and jeopardize the interests of vulnerable groups and indifferent to the case, is also very dangerous move. The most vulnerable group after being deprived completely, it is easy to translate into the most fearless, a group of the most dangerous: the deterioration of law and order in cities, to a great extent with those originally not a full aspire only to end up in an impasse "poor" directly related? First was bullied by the looting, he later treated the same rules others and society - in the "poor" groups directly on the changes that occurred should be on guard against. But no one can guarantee applies to the most vulnerable groups were oppressed rule that one day will not apply to "the vulnerable" groups, "ADB vulnerable" groups, and even in the community, each on them. In fact, any country if not in the national interests of the most vulnerable groups to safeguard the case, would not consolidate its ruling foundation. In John F. Kennedy more than 40 years ago said: "If a free society can not help those who are in a majority of the poor, it can not save the few who are rich."