不自由，毋宁死，汉语词语，读音是bú zì yóu，wú nìng sǐ。意思是如果失去自由，那么不如去死。源于美国人帕特里克·亨利（1736-1799）1775年3月23日于殖民地弗吉尼亚州议会演讲中的最后一句：“Give me liberty or give me death”。

思想而不自由，毋宁死耳。斯古今仁贤所同殉之精义，其岂庸鄙之敢望。（陈寅恪 《王观堂先生挽词并序》）

哥哥岂不闻欧美人嘴唇皮挂着的话说道：“～”，……（清·梁启超《新中国未来记》第三回） 不自由，毋宁死

在弗吉尼亚州议会上的演讲

（美国）亨利1775年3月23日

议长先生：

没有谁比我更加敬佩这些在议会上发言的先生们的爱国热情和才干了。但是，对待一个问题每个人都会有不同的看法。因此，假如我持有观点与他们恰恰相反，并且无所顾忌毫不保留地表达出来，希望不会被认为对他们有何不敬之意。已经没有时间让我们讲客套了。议会所面临的问题是我们的国家正处于危难之际。我个人认为，最严重的一点就是关系到我们是独立自主还是被奴役的大问题。事关重大，应该准许人们畅所欲言。如此，我们才有望阐明事实，完成上帝和国家托付的重任。此时此刻，如果因为害怕冒犯他人而保持缄默，我会认为自己是在叛国，是对比世上所有君王更令人敬畏的天主的不忠。

议长先生，人类天生就容易沉迷于希望的幻想之中。痛苦的现实来临时，我们往往会紧闭双眼不敢面对；宁可倾听海妖的歌声，直到我们被变成野兽为止。这是聪明人在追求自由的艰苦卓绝的奋斗中所应该做的吗？我们难道愿意做那些对关系着能否获得拯救这样重大的事情视而不见，听而不闻的人吗？就我而言，不管这会带给我多大的精神折磨，我都愿意了解全部的事实和最糟糕的结果，并为此作好准备。

经验是指导我前进的惟一明灯；过去是判断未来的惟一依据。因此，我想知道英国政府在过去十年中有何作为，使得各位有理由信心十足，心甘情愿地来安慰自己也安慰议会？是因为他们最近接受我们的请愿时所露出的狡诈的笑容吗？先生们，别相信这些笑容，事实会证明这只是一个圈套。别被人家的一个吻给出卖了！大家想想：他们如此仁慈地接受我们的请愿，而同时又在我们的水域、我们的土地上大规模地备战，这是多么不协调呀！难道爱护与和解用得着出动他们的战舰和军队吗？难道我们的爱需要用武力才能挽回吗？先生们，别再自欺欺人了！这些只是战争和征服的手段，是国王最后的托辞。请问各位，如果这些军事装备不是用来迫使我们归顺的，那它们是用来干什么的呢？哪位先生能告诉我，这还有什么别的意图吗？难道在这个地方，大不列颠王国还有其他敌人需要用这些庞大的海陆军队来对付吗？不，先生们，没有其他敌人了！这些就是用来对付我们的！它们是英国政府早就造好，用来囚禁我们的锁链。我们能用什么来反抗呢？争辩吗？先生们，我们已经和他们争辩10年了！再还有什么话可说吗?我们所能做的都做过了，然而一切都只是徒劳；难道我们还要卑躬屈膝，摇尾乞怜吗？我们已经用尽了一切办法。所以，先生们，我恳请你们别再自欺欺人了！为了避免这一场即将来临的风暴，我们已经尽力而为了。我们请愿过，我们抗议过，我们也乞求过；我们曾跪倒在国王的御座前，哀求他制止政府和国会的专制暴行。我们的请愿遭到蔑视，我们的抗议带来的是变本加厉的暴力和侮辱，我们的乞求换来的是不屑一顾；我们在天子脚下被轻蔑地一脚踢开！事已至此，我们还能沉迷于和平友好的美好幻想之中吗？已经不再有任何希望了！假如我们渴望自由——假如我们真要维护为之奋斗已久的神圣权利不受侵犯——假如我们不至于卑鄙到想放弃我们抗争已久，发誓不达目的决不罢休的伟大角逐，那么，我们必须战斗！我再重复一遍，先生们，我们必须战斗！除了诉诸武力，求助于战神，我们别无选择！

先生们，他们说我们势单力薄，无力抵抗如此强劲的对手。但是，我们什么时候能变得更加强大呢？下周？还是明年？难道非要等到我们被彻底解除武装，家家户户都被英军占领的时候吗？难道优柔寡断，毫无作为能为我们积聚力量吗？难道我们能高枕而卧，要等到束手就擒之时，才能找到退敌的良策吗？先生们，只要我们懂得如何利用造物主赐予我们的力量，我们就绝不弱小。我们拥有三百万为神圣的自由而武装起来的人民，我们拥有这样一方国土，这就是敌人任何武力都不可战胜的力量！况且，先生们，我们并非孤军作战。公正之神与我们同在，并主宰着一切国家的命运，并会唤起朋友们为我们进行战斗。先生们，战斗需要的不只是强大的力量，还需要机警，积极和勇敢；何况我们已经别无选择了。即使我们卑怯懦弱，想抽身而出，也已经太晚了。我们无路可退，回首只是屈从和被奴役！囚禁我们的枷锁早已铸成，镣铐的叮当声回荡在波士顿平原的上空！战争已经在所难免——那就让它来吧！先生们，我再说一遍，让它来吧！

先生们，不用再徒劳地试图缓和事态。各位可以高喊和平——但和平并不存在。事实上战争已经打响！很快，从北方席卷而来的风暴就将带来隆隆的炮声！我们的弟兄们已经奔赴战场！为何我们还在此袖手旁观？各位先生究竟想要什么？又能得到什么？莫非生命如此珍贵，和平如此美好，竟值得我们以镣铐和奴役为代价来获得？全能的主啊，快阻止他们吧！我不知道别人将选择怎样的道路，但对我来说，不自由，毋宁死！

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death

Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.

Mr. President: No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

帕特里克·亨利(Patrick Henry,1736～1799),苏格兰裔美国人。他生于弗吉尼亚，是弗吉尼亚殖民地最成功的律师之一，以机敏和演说技巧而著称。他是独立战争时期的自由主义者，美国革命时期杰出的政治家、演说家，被称为“美国革命之舌”。他是著名的《独立宣言》的主要执笔者之一，曾任弗吉尼亚州州长，深受爱戴，被誉为“弗吉尼亚之父”。在反英斗争中发表过许多著名演说。被普遍传诵的警句“不自由，毋宁死”就出自他的演说。

18世纪中叶，北美要求独立的呼声越来越高，面对这种情况，英国政府软硬兼施，采用各种手段，力图维持它与北美殖民地的宗主国第一届大陆会议只字未提独立问题，进入70年代，莱克星敦已经打响了独立的第一枪，独立已摆到了议事日程上，成为人们谈论的热点问题，然而各种意见仍然争执不休，不能统一。

60年代，亨利就在弗吉尼亚州议会上提出了一系列决议，坚决反对英国向殖民地人民征收印花税。在独立问题上，亨利更是个激进派。他主张北美殖民地不惜以自己的生命和鲜血来换取独立，摆脱对英国的依附关系。1775年3月23日，他在弗吉尼亚州议会上发表了这篇演讲。

亨利的主张明确，态度坚决，立场十分鲜明，这已为社会所知。然而这篇演讲是在议会上发表的，议会是宣传自己主张的讲坛，也是政治斗争的场所。要使自己的主张能为众人接受，争取各方面的理解和支持，就要讲究策略。所以演讲一开始，亨利并未用激烈的语调，义正辞严的态度，令其演讲的内容充满剑拔弩张的火药味。而是采用委婉的态度，舒缓的语调，首先肯定了在他之前发言的几位议员的良善用心。然后婉转地道出自己的主张与上面几位议员有所不同，避免惊人之举。演说开始这种求同存异的做法，表现了亨利的政治智慧，也为下面的发言争取众多的拥护者打下了基础。

在议员中，主张效忠英国的人虽有，但只是少数。对这极少数人，要靠言词来打动他们，使他们转变立场，几乎是不可能的。相比之下，主张与英国妥协、避免武力冲突的议员较多，这部分议员是争取的对象。他们主张和解，反对战争的理由主要有两点：一是对英国抱有各种各样的幻想；二是认为英国武力强大，自己势单力薄，万一战争爆发，后果不堪设想。对此，亨利看得很清楚，他的演讲就是针对着保守派政治策略，也说明了一篇演说的结构，要受到演讲者追求的政治目的的制约。

这篇演讲开始时语调舒缓，但随着演讲的进行，调子越来越坚决，言辞越来越峻急，态度越来越激烈。从修辞角度看，这与大量使用排比、反问、感叹、长短句交错等表达手法有密切关系，同时也与使用精练而富有鼓动性的名言警句