数据安全法颁布时间（媒库文选国家安全）

In the United States， “national security”is the preoccupation that never has to explain itself. In some quarters， refugees fleeing violence and destitution are a “national security threat.” So too are imported automobiles， as President Donald Trump's administration declared last year.，我来为大家科普一下关于数据安全法颁布时间?下面希望有你要的答案，我们一起来看看吧!

数据安全法颁布时间

In the United States， “national security”is the preoccupation that never has to explain itself. In some quarters， refugees fleeing violence and destitution are a “national security threat.” So too are imported automobiles， as President Donald Trump's administration declared last year.

One might think that states have always been obsessed with national security. But Americans didn't begin using the phrase with any frequency until the 1940s， when Edward Mead Earle， a historian based at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton， New Jersey， from the 1930s to the '50s， helped popularize the concept among policy elites and ordinary Americans alike.

Before then， many military planners and civilian leaders spoke of “national defense.” Speaking in 1940 before a New York auditorium crowded with academics， military men， and journalists， Earle claimed the term “defense” to be “misleading.” The term implied a passive and reactive position—one of “waiting until the enemy is at one's gates.” But this amounted to suicide in an age of totalitarianism and air power， which gave the advantage to the aggressor. “Perhaps，”Earle said to the audience， “a better word is security.” In making this case， Earle had introduced something new： a “national security imagination.”

“National security” caught on， quickly becoming a watchword of the war effort. A month after Earle's speech in that New York auditorium，Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave his first radio address centered on the idea： “My friends，” the president told the nation， “This is not a fireside chat on war. It is a talk on national security.” By 1945， one Washington insider said it had become impossible to “go to a dinner party” without hearing talk of the “future security of the United States.” After the war， interest in security was institutionalized through the National Security Act of 1947， which established the National Security Resources Board， the Central Intelligence Agency，and the National Security Council. The National Security Agency arrived five years later.

The imaginative dimensions of national security were on full display during the early Cold War. An ocean away from the U.S. mainland， the countries of Asia were imagined as a set of wobbly dominoes; if one tipped over to communism， it would lead to the obliteration of American security. The Red Scare imagined a communist fifth column infiltrating America.

More recently， the war on terror expanded the national security imagination. The 9/11 Commission named “failure of imagination” as one of the critical errors leading up to the attack on September 11， 2001. Simply put， experts had failed to imagine a civilian aircraft being converted into a ballistic missile.

So totalizing is the conception of national security today that it has even recast commercial disagreements with America's closest allies as existential threats. Last year the Trump administration labeled Canada a “national security threat” because of its steel exports.

Now， “national security” threatens to swallow everything. It's hard to challenge it， because there are threats worth guarding against. But we might reasonably ask if the concept has nevertheless been pushed too far. There was a time in the not-so-distant past when Americans didn't subsume every area of policymaking under “security，” when peace advocacy and the import of foreign car parts weren't treated as existential threats. Defense was a wartime concept， not an all-purpose excuse for officials to conceal or destroy information. Remembering this， we might seek something similar today—to put national security back in its box， and，perhaps， in so doing， to breathe more easily.

在美国，凡事都联系到“国家安全”是无需解释的先入之见。在有些人看来，为躲避暴力、摆脱贫穷而外逃的难民“威胁国家安全”。进口汽车同样“威胁国家安全”，唐纳德·特朗普总统的政府去年就这样说过。

人们大概以为合众国一向受“国家安全”问题困扰。但美国人直到上世纪40年代才开始频频使用这个词，当时，上世纪30年代到50年代在新泽西州普林斯顿高等研究院执教的历史学家爱德华·米德·厄尔推动这个概念在政策精英中间普及开来，并为普罗大众所熟知。

在此之前，文官武将大多谈论的是“国家防御”。1940年，纽约某礼堂内，学者、军人、记者济济一堂，厄尔当众演说，声称“防御”一词“有误导之嫌”。它暗示一种消极被动的姿态——“坐等敌人打上家门”。在极权主义盛行、空中力量制胜的时代，奉行这种思维无异于自杀，把优势拱手让给进犯一方。厄尔对在场的人说：“‘安全’这个词或许更为妥当。”这番话也变相提出了某种前所未有的理念，那就是“国家安全想象力”。

就这样，“国家安全”风靡起来，很快成为鼓吹战争的口号。一个月后，富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福头一次在广播讲话中重点谈论这一理念。“朋友们，”这位总统对全国民众说，“这回炉边谈话不谈战争，我们来谈谈国家安全。”到了1945年，华盛顿某位权威人士说，只要“参加晚宴”就不可能听不到有人谈论“美国未来的安全”。二战结束后，1947年《国家安全法》签署生效，对“安全”的热衷制度化，国家安全资源委员会、中央情报局、国家安全委员会根据该法陆续成立。5年后，国家安全局成立。

国家安全的想象色彩在冷战初期彰显得淋漓尽致。与美国本土远隔重洋的亚洲诸国被想象为岌岌可危的多米诺骨牌；只要有一枚骨牌倒向共产主义，美国的安全就会化为乌有。“红色恐慌”想象有一支共产主义第五纵队向美国渗透破坏。

前些年，反恐战争进一步扩充了国家安全想象力。“9·11”事件调查委员会认为，导致美国在2001年9月11日遭受攻击的重大失误之一是“想象力匮乏”。说白了，众多专家未曾想象有人把民航飞机改装成弹道导弹。

到了今天，“国家安全”这个概念包罗万象，就连最亲密盟友与美国的商业分歧也被说成能威胁我们的生死存亡。去年，因为加拿大向美国输入钢材，特朗普政府把这个国家列为“国家安全威胁”。

现在的“国家安全”大有无所不包之势。我们很难反对，因为有些威胁确需提防。但是，我们仍然大可一问：这个概念是否过于泛化。曾经，在不太久远的过去，我们没有把所有决策领域统统归到“安全”名下，也不认为倡导和平与输入汽车零部件构成攸关生死的威胁。那时“防御”是战时概念，不能成为官员隐匿信息、毁灭信息的万能借口。记住这一点，我们今天也许就会谋求某种类似的东西——收起“国家安全”说法，并且或许因此而可以松口气。（于晓华译自美国《大西洋》月刊网站9月29日文章）