网上的翻译基本上都是一样的，但是“双重讽刺”的位置翻译的有些拗口，自己整理一下。

 “听起来是很棒，但实际的情况是怎样呢？后来真的发生革命了吗？”

　　“可以说是的，也可以说不是。今天，除了他关于资本主义危机的分析外，经济学家还可以确证马克思在一些重要问题上犯了错误。另外他没有重视人类对大自然资源的掠夺——我们今天正在面临其严重后果。然而……”

　　“然而什么？”

　　“马克思主义造成了社会上很大的变动。社会主义已经大致改善了社会上不人道的现象。至少在欧洲，我们已经生活在一个比马克思时代更加公平、更加团结的社会中。这很大程度上归功于马克思和整个社会运动。”

　　“发生什么事了？”

　　“马克思之后，社会运动分裂成两股潮流：社会民主主义和列宁主义。社会民主主义代表一条渐进并和平通向社会主义的道路，也正是西欧所选择的道路。我们或者把它称作慢性革命。而列宁主义继承马克思暴力革命是唯一途径的信念，在东欧、亚洲和非洲有广泛的影响力。两股潮流在各自的征途上都困难重重，抵抗镇压。

　　“但是这难道不是形成了一种新型的镇压？比如说在俄国和东欧？”

　　“无庸置疑，在这里我们又一次看到人类所涉及的每一件东西都变成了善恶的两面体。从另一方面来看，没有道理因为那些在马克思死后五十或者一百年里的“所谓的社会主义国家”中的消极成分而指责马克思。但是也许他没有对那些将成为共产主义社会领导的人们给予充分的考虑。很可能从来就没有一块真正的‘乐土’，人类总是为自己制造新的麻烦。”

　　“我相信会有的。”

　　“现在我们结束马克思的内容吧，苏菲。”

　　“嘿，等等！你刚才不是说什么公平只存在于平等之中吗？”

　　“不，那是‘吝啬鬼’（注：本章前面提到的一个文学人物）说的。”

　　“你怎么知道他说了什么？”

　　“好吧，这样看——你和我有同一个作者。事实上我们相互总是紧密联在一块，而不只是相互偶然的旁观者。”

　　“又是你可恶的反讽！”

　　“双重，苏菲，那是双重反讽。”

“Oh well—you and I have the same author. In actualfact we are more closely linked to each other than we would appear to thecasual observer.”

“好吧，你和我有同一个作者。事实上，我们彼此之间的联系比我们在旁观者看来更为紧密。”

“Your wretched irony again!”.

“又是你那可恶的讽刺！”

“Double, Sophie, that was double irony.”

 “双重的，索菲，那是双重的讽刺。”

　　“回到公平的话题。你说马克思认为资本主义是一种不公平的社会形式。那你如何定义一个公平的社会？”

　　“一个叫约翰·罗尔斯的哲学家试图用例子说明它：想想你是一个特别议会的一员，你们的任务是为新的社会制定法律。”

　　“我一点也不介意加入那个议会。”

　　“那个议会的人们必须完全考虑到每个细节，因为一旦他们达成一个共识，他们每个人都签署法律使之生效时，他们就会立刻全部挂掉。”

　　“噢……”

　　“但他们很快会在他们立法所设计的那个社会中复活。而关键一点在于，他们将不知道自己在那个社会中处于一个怎样的位置。”

　　“哈，我明白了。”

　　“那是一个绝对公平的社会。它将会在平等中诞生。”

　　“只有男性和女性的差别！”

　　“不言自明。没有人知道他们以男性还是女性的身份复活。因为各自的机会都是百分之五十，社会对于女性和男性没有差别。”

　　“听起来充满希望呢。”

　　“那么告诉我，卡尔·马克思生活的欧洲是那样的社会吗？”

　　“完全不是！”

　　“但是你今天万一知道了有这么一个社会呢？”

　　“唔……好问题。”

　　“想想吧。不过现在我们不会再谈论马克思了。”

　　“什么？”

　　“下一章！”

“What happened?”

“After Marx, the socialist movement split intotwo main streams, Social Democracy and Leninism. Social Democracy, which hasstood for a gradual and peaceful path in the direction of socialism, wasWestern Europe’s way. We might call this the slow revolution. Leninism, whichretained Marx’s belief that revolution was the only way to combat the old classsociety, had great influence in Eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa. Each in theirown way, both movements have fought against hardship and oppression.”

“But didn’t it create a new form of oppression?For example in Russia and Eastern Europe?”

“No doubt of that, and here again we see thateverything man touches becomes a mixture of good and evil. On the other hand,it would be unreasonable to blame Marx for the negative factors in theso-called socialist countries fifty or a hundred years after his death. Butmaybe he had given too little thought to the people who would be theadministrators of communist society. There will probably never be a ‘promisedland.’ Mankind will always create new problems to fight about.”

“I’m sure it will.”

“And there we bring down the curtain on Marx,Sophie.”

“Hey, wait a minute! Didn’t you say somethingabout justice only existing among equals?”

“No, it was Scrooge who said that.”

“How do you know what he said?”

“Oh well—you and I have the same author. In actualfact we are more closely linked to each other than we would appear to thecasual observer.”

“好吧，你和我有同一个作者。事实上，我们彼此之间的联系比我们在旁观者看来更为紧密。”

“Your wretched irony again!”.

“又是你那可恶的讽刺！”

“Double, Sophie, that was double irony.”

 “双重的，索菲，那是双重的讽刺。”

“But back to justice. You said that Marxthought capitalism was an unjust form of society. How would you define a justsociety?”

“A moral philosopher called John Rawls attemptedto say something about it with the following example: Imagine you were a memberof a distinguished council whose task it was to make all the laws for a futuresociety.”

“I wouldn’t mind at all being on that council.”

“They are obliged to consider absolutely everydetail, because as soon as they reach an agreement—and everybody has signed thelaws—they will all drop dead.”

“Oh . . .”

“But they will immediately come to life again inthe society they have legislated for. The point is that they have no idea whichposition they will have in society.”

“Ah, I see.”

“That society would be a just society. It wouldhave arisen among equals.”

“Men and women!”

“That goes without saying. None of them knewwhether they would wake up as men or women. Since the odds are fifty-fifty,society would be just as attractive for women as for men.”

“It sounds promising.”

“So tell me, was the Europe of Karl Marx asociety like that?”

“Absolutely not!”

“But do you by any chance know of such a societytoday?”

“Hm ... that’s a good question.”

“Think about it. But for now there will be nomore about Marx.”

“Excuse me?”

“Next chapter!”