是，大臣第二季

In that, while it has been government policy to regard policy as a responsibility of Ministers and administration as a responsibility of Officials, the questions of administrative policy can cause confusion between the policy of administration and the administration of policy, especially when responsibility for the administration of the policy of administration conflicts, or overlaps with, responsibility for the policy of the administration of policy.

Jim: Five standard excuses?

Sir Humphrey: Yes. First there's the excuse we used for instance in the Anthony Blunt case.

Jim: Which was?

Sir Humphrey: That there is a perfectly satisfactory explanation for everything, but security forbids its disclosure. Second, there is the excuse we used for comprehensive schools, that it has only gone wrong because of heavy cuts in staff and budget which have stretched supervisory resources beyond the limits.

Jim: But that's not true is it?

Sir Humphrey: No, but it's a good excuse. Then there's the excuse we used for Concorde, it was a worthwhile experiment, now abandoned, but not before it had provided much valuable data and considerable employmenpt.

Jim: But that is true isn't it? Oh no, of course it isn't.

Sir Humphrey: The fourth, there's the excuse we used for the Munich agreement. It occurred before certain important facts were known, and couldn't happen again.

Jim: What important facts?

Sir Humphrey: Well, that Hitler wanted to conquer Europe.

Jim: I thought everybody knew that.

Sir Humphrey: Not the Foreign Office.

Jim: Five?

Sir Humphrey: Five, there's the Charge of the Light Brigade excuse. It was an unfortunate lapse by an individual which has now been dealt with under internal disciplinary procedures."

再看依然觉得有意思。 Referring to misuse of taxpayers' money, Humphery makes analogy about health service budget functioning as placebo that neither parliament nor taxpayers cares about how it is budgeted and spent from the beginning, to which Hacker comments dreadful claptrap and being a cynical smokescreen. It is one of the very well played episodes. H's comment: That is to wrongly and contemptuously represent public's opinion for one, moreover, is that it concealed governmental abuses on appropriation.

S02E06 Life Quality The banker is one among the most mocked characters. money-chasing, vulgar, uncivilized nor have appearance of having received any cultural education or possessing humane sympathy, sensitivity in any kind. To secure future retirement plan, as the quid-pro-quo he has to ensure banker's purpose being met, thus through manipulation without breaking any law even processwise, Humphery rushes the minister to sign the focused administrative order arguing it being essentially an AO, not a statutory instrument requires the minister's signature only to become valid, that no premise that it ought to pass the House table by a majority vote is needed. Whatsmore, H quotes even the AO were to be revoked now, it can not invalidate actions taken while it was in force.法不追溯既往。

Episode Five: The Devil You Know

Hacker: Europe is a community of nations, dedicated towards one goal.

Sir Humphrey: Oh, ha ha ha.

Hacker: May we share the joke, Humphrey?

Sir Humphrey: Oh Minister, let's look at this objectively. It is a game played for national interests, and always was. Why do you suppose we went into it?

Hacker: To strengthen the brotherhood of free Western nations.

Sir Humphrey: Oh really. We went in to screw the French by splitting them off from the Germans.

Hacker: So why did the French go into it, then?

Sir Humphrey: Well, to protect their inefficient farmers from commercial competition.

Hacker: That certainly doesn't apply to the Germans.

Sir Humphrey: No, no. They went in to cleanse themselves of genocide and apply for readmission to the human race.

Hacker: I never heard such appalling cynicism! At least the small nations didn't go into it for selfish reasons.

Sir Humphrey: Oh really? Luxembourg is in it for the perks; the capital of the EEC, all that foreign money pouring in.

Hacker: Very sensible central location.

Sir Humphrey: With the administration in Brussels and the Parliament in Strasbourg? Minister, it's like having the House of Commons in Swindon and the Civil Service in Kettering!

...

Hacker: Brussels is a shambles. You know what they say about the average Common Market official? He has the organizing ability of the Italians, the flexibility of the Germans and the modesty of the French. And that’s topped up by the imagination of the Belgians, the generosity of the Dutch and the intelligence of the Irish.

对汉皮这老油子而言，不好糊弄还老想减预算的大臣被调任是重大利好，但若换一个真正腹黑口碑极差的人来接班，他还是不得不阵前倒戈，赶紧把哈克捞回来。

对哈克来说，化工厂建与不建，就是在选民和工业部中间做选择，谁给选票谁就是他娘，他只能想方设法暗中作梗地对选民负责。

官场嘛，不都是屁股决定脑袋吗？还有，在官场上，话术可太重要了，同一件事的不同表达，语境之差犹如天上地下，汉皮的语录简直可以出书了。

最后，这是一部深刻揭露和嘲讽官场的喜剧，光顾笑可是不够的。

E03：死亡名单：隐私权、安全权和“人民的权利”

本集围绕“是否应取消广泛的监听设备”这一议题展开。Hacker起初坚决反对政府对公民电子设备的广泛监听，认为这侵犯了公民的自由和隐私权；而当Hacker本人置身于某反对组织的暗杀名单时，他又支持监听以保卫自己的生命安全；最后，Hacker因为not important enough而被移出暗杀名单，他又重新支持反对监听议案以完成其政治作秀。

一、关于是否监听的讨论

本集中最有趣之处在于Hacker和Humpy就“是否应当监听”的论辩。

第一幕：为什么监听？

Hacker-反对论点1：政府监听侵犯公民隐私权。（从他后来和妻子的床头对话来看，他颇为在意床笫之事为人所知？）

Humpy-支持论点1：监听能有效防止有组织的犯罪（和无组织的犯罪）。

这一幕，Hacker没有被说服，说明他认为“隐私权”被侵害的确定的危害高于未可知的“犯罪”的危害。

第二幕：如果不监听，大臣被暗杀怎么办？

Hacker-反对论点2：被暗杀的风险是大臣（等公共人士）应当承担的。大臣被暗杀可以换个大臣，代价有限，但监听造成的隐私权侵犯是无价的。Freedom is ??, Minister is expendible.（英语不好忘词了）

而当Hacker得知自己是那个要被暗杀的大臣，他的结论改变，理由也改变了……

Hacker-支持论点1：大臣是民选出来的→大臣代表着人民的权利→大臣被暗杀意味着人民的权利受到损害。为了让人民的权利不受损害，牺牲一些人民的隐私权也是没办法的……

二、一些疑问

1. 隐私权是何种权利？为什么要保护隐私权？

隐私的可能内容：个人身体相关的信息（如裸照）；个人身份相关的信息（如身份证）；个人经历相关的信息（如浏览过的网页，生平经历、性经历）；个人情感相关的信息（如私人信件）

隐私被侵犯的形式：（1）除自己之外的第三方知晓，但该第三方不行动。该第三方是个人、非政府机构、政府机关有何区别？（例如个人档案是可以被国家机构随时调取的）（2）除自己之外的第三方知晓，且该第三方有所行动（该行动一般会损害主体利益）。例如：国产N号房事件中女生照片被发在群里供人yy；男明星/女明星私生活被曝光社死；学校/公司调取个人档案，了解黑历史后拒不接受。

哪些隐私权应被保护？谁的隐私权应被保护？

2. 在“民主”体制下，政府（政治人物）的稳定（安全）是符合“人民”的利益的吗？如果是，“人民”应为此付费多少？

Humpy的支持论点1没有打动Hacker。他的天平两端放的是人民的“安全权”（对应打击犯罪）和人民的隐私权；然后他替人民做了选择：为了安全权放弃隐私权。这一套本质上和利维坦的逻辑类似，一则略显老套，二则既然把人民的权利看得这么高，那干脆让人民自己选一个更看重的权利就好，政府似乎不应该替“人民”选择。

Hacker的支持论点1在绑架人民选择这一点上是类似的，但他天平两端放的砝码更有趣些：一侧是人民的隐私权，另一侧则是政府首脑的安全权。他把政府首脑的人身安全等同于民主制度本身（当然这一步很有问题），使该侧重量骤升：牺牲隐私降低一点点自身的安全好像没有必要（这听起来更像是政府的把戏），但牺牲隐私降低民主制度被推翻的危险听起来似乎高尚多了。

虽然Hacker的支持论点1只是为自己小命找借口，但这条理由有更多值得深思的地方，例如：1）民选出的政府/首脑多大程度上代表人民的利益？传声筒坏了一个直接换就可以吗？2）自由和民主的脆弱结合：要是保护民选的政府首脑，似乎就得损害一些自由；选择自由，则民选的政府首脑/民主制度难以自我保存。

哈克真的好呆萌哈哈哈哈哈哈哈 感情你们医院啥都干就是不接诊www 日常鸡同鸭讲哈哈哈哈哈哈哈 创造性懒惰，啧啧啧 感觉一个常识人在这种庞杂的体系下势必会生出无力感 留学生学费cover教育支出，有被冒犯到 humpy和哈克互相阴阳怪气哈哈哈 哈克真是委屈巴巴，如果他当法官就要把humpy抓住关起来，awwww 听到隔壁桌开香槟就钻桌子，哈克也太可爱了吧 这个黄色大衣，不就很日系 哈克被humpy调教成功了哈哈哈 看到哈克要被调去比利时humpy开始舍不得了www Bernard是怎么做到这么傻白甜的啊！可可爱爱的叛逆civil servant，吉祥物就是你啦！ 哈克真好哄，是个大宝宝了 哈克和司机的定番情报攀比（。） humpy秒变担心丈夫出轨到Brussel的小娇妻，急到打直球 Bernard每天前排看戏23333 这一集简直就是humpy和哈克的金牌调解，pm和阿诺德负责煽风点火 这是什么高能表白啦！斯德哥尔摩情人，互相调教 这三剑客真的都可可爱爱，彼此互动好甜 Bernard——俏皮话大王 Bernard去农场戴的这顶帽子还挺可爱的 套模板被发现了哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈哈 这个棒棒糖太鬼畜叻 我猜是不是要银行用三期地给农场交换盖楼许可 行吧humpy也真够狠的，把农场地给别人了，餐桌谈话那段还有点渣苏感 哦哦是不是银行国税局和农场三方交换利益 其实每次哈克摆出一副委屈脸就让人很想欺负的样子诶！ 哈克给一点甜头就很好哄 最后一集有点us against the world的既视感