社会转型中的贫富分化与社会的转型

贫富差距的扩大是我国社会转型的过程中凸现出来的、已在对社会产生重要影响的严重社会问题。本文提出了四个问题 ,分析后认为 :我国当前的贫富差距已达到分化的程度 ,但我国的贫富分化并不是两极分化 ,贫富分化在给社会转型造成阻碍的同时 ,也对社会的转型产生着积极的推动作用。贫富分化是社会转型的必然 ,共同富裕主要指财富的量的共同增长 ,达到富裕的程度 ,但也不能最终消除贫富分化。     

如何正确理解收入差距拉大的现象——兼论邓小平防止两极分化的思想

收入差距拉大并不直接等同于两极分化。 最早论述两极分化问题的是马克思和恩格斯，他们在分析资本主义社会两大阶级的对证时提出了两极分化思想。随着资本主义生产方式的确立和不断发展。资本主义国家在社会财富迅速增长的同时，贫富分化日益严重，社会阶级矛盾开始凸显和激化。     

中国贫富分化的价值阐释

目前学术界对贫富分化研究取得了很多进展,但也存在不足,主要是忽略了主体的价值阐释。应当从主体的价值选择、科学社会主义价值观解读贫富分化。在中国社会主义初级阶段,贫富分化是历史合理性与价值非合理性的辩证统一,而在总体上具有不合理性,这是社会主义本质决定的。     

经济全球化与西方民主制度危机

经济全球化实质上是资本主义生产方式向全球扩张的集中表现 ,它导致无约束的资本向劳动者阶级反扑 ,破坏了社会福利国家妥协的历史局面 ,产生资本与劳动、市场与民主的新的紧张关系。大规模的失业、贫富分化和社会分裂对西方民主政治构成严重威胁 ,潜伏着社会地震和政治地震。     

价值观对农民收入影响的实证研究--以四川简阳与新都为例

转型期 ,社会贫富分化加剧 ,不仅中国城乡 ,甚而乡村内部亦出现分化 ,主要从生产目的、科技意识、对土地的态度及农民的交换观几方面反映出来     

2007年度日本马克思主义研究的关注焦点

本文从日本2007年度主要马克思主义著作和杂志的出版情况出发，发现他们的关注焦点为马克思主义的前途、《德意志意识形态》（CD—ROM版）电子版、社会贫富分化、和平主义、社会主义国家等几个方面，本文对此进行分析的同时，对这些关注焦点与日本社会的关系进行了探讨。     

我国贫富分化现状及有效控制探讨

我国贫富分化现象愈演愈烈,不利于经济健康发展以及社会稳定和繁荣。导致我国贫富分化加大的原因众多,有市场化改革因素、不公平的竞争环境因素、政策体制因素有关,社会保障滞后等诸多复杂因素。必须积极寻求有效的治理对策:制定合理可行的分配政策,保持收入适度差距,完善政策支持,规范发展秩序,实现城乡统筹发展,加快农业产业结构调整和技术进步。     

“占领华尔街”运动的回顾与论析

"占领华尔街"运动是美国爆发的一次具有典型意义的当代社会运动。在金融危机的影响下,美国贫富分化的社会矛盾愈加突出,"占领华尔街"运动爆发。由于运动发生在当代最发达的资本主义国家,这次运动涌现出一系列新特点,也在学界引起了巨大争议。"占领华尔街"运动是当代社会运动的典型形式,而通过对这种典型运动的把握,有助于了解当代社会运动的一般性特征,把握其运动本质,正确理解马克思主义社会历史发展规律。     

国外调节收入分配政策简介（一）

美国虽为世界上最富裕的国家。但其贫富差别仍十分巨大．只是贫富阶层对立状况并不明显。社会相对稳定。这是美国重视通过制度化建设来调节社会分配。缩小贫富差距和努力实现社会公正的结果。     

跨越中等收入陷阱的国际参照

中国2012年GDP达51．93万亿元，人均收入6100美元，成为中等偏上收入国家。处在中等收入陷阱的国家有十种特征：经济增长回落或停滞、民主乱象、贫富分化、腐败多发、过度城市化、社会公共服务短缺、就业困难、社会动荡、信仰缺失、金融体系脆弱等。对中国现状观察和研究之后可以知道，中国已经具有上述“中等收入陷阱”的部分症候。参照国际经验，对于中国跨越中等收入陷阱有积极意义。     

The Externalities of Inequality: Fear of Crime and Preferences for Redistribution in Western Europe

Why is the difference in redistribution preferences between the rich and the poor high in some countries and low in others? In this article, we argue that it has a lot to do with the rich and very little to do with the poor. We contend that while there is a general relative income effect on redistribution preferences, the preferences of the rich are highly dependent on the macrolevel of inequality. The reason for this effect is not related to immediate tax and transfer considerations but to a negative externality of inequality: crime. We will show that the rich in more unequal regions in Western Europe are more supportive of redistribution than the rich in more equal regions because of their concern with crime. In making these distinctions between the poor and the rich, the arguments in this article challenge some influential approaches to the politics of inequality.     

Social policy in rich and poor countries: socio-economic trends and political-institutional determinants

Abstract. To what extent can the dramatic differences in social policy efforts in rich and poor countries be accounted for by genuinely political explanations? The hypothesis that is advanced in this article rests upon the combination of two schools of thought in comparative social policy analysis: socioeconomic models which focus attention on levels of economic wealth, need and demand for social security, and models of a comparative-historiographic and political-institution-alist nature. Empirical applications of socio-economic models with lagged dependent variables reveal the existence of two deviant families of nations: overspenders in social policy (such as overspenders of socialdemocratic complexion and of Christian democratic composition) and underspenders (such as the superpowers in East and West as well as Japan and East Germany). The residuals that can be derived from these models are amenable to an explanation which resides in comparative-historiographic political analysis of social policy.     

Why Progressives Should be Pro‐Family

For egalitarians, families are part of the problem. By bringing together advantages and passing on to their children, families redouble and (literally) reproduce inequalities. And, by cordoning off a private sphere into which government cannot roam, the family marks the limits of any progressive agenda. But defending families should be part of any answer to social injustice. Family relationships should be seen as a primary good: we need close, caring committed relationships no matter what else we want in life. Families are also increasingly important to one's chances in life. The gulf is widening between those rich and those poor in family life. This should worry egalitarians because lacking good, stable family relationships is a major disadvantage, and one that holds back progress towards other aspects of social justice.     

Productive work and subjected labor: Children's pursuits and child rights in northern Sierra Leone

The implementation of child rights legislation in the African nation of Sierra Leone has revealed children articulating novel values for education and labor. Corporal punishment was used to reinforce for children the importance of schooling and uncompensated household labor to their development as people. With its legal banning, children are forming values that conflict with those held by elders and with rights doctrine itself. They differentiate between productive “work,” useful because it is remunerated and skilled or improves their social connections, and the drudgery of uncompensated “labor,” which reinforces their low social position. Toil such as road works and mining can be “work” if it is valued and remunerated, while the desultory job market, equally desultory classroom experience, low social status, and poor pay of teachers renders formal education subjected “labor.” This highlights children as strategic users of rights and as agents in determining what comprises their own best interests.     

关于我国土地征收制度的特点与完善

土地征收是国家为实现公共利益而强制调整人民土地权益的行为,属于一种不得已而对合法私权科以的特别负担。由于我国现行土地管理和财政管理体制存在缺陷,一些地方政府的土地征收行为存在向＂赢利性经济人＂蜕变的趋势,严重影响了社会和谐。对此,需要科学界定＂公共利益＂,完善相关法律制度,并进一步明确人民的土地权益,以便形成必要的制衡机制。     

Class and social policy in the knowledge economy

Recent studies of welfare state attitudes in the knowledge economy find very high generalized support for generous welfare state policies, both among the working and the middle classes. Has class become irrelevant as a predictor of social policy preferences? Or do we simply mis-conceptualise today's class conflict over social policy? To what extent has it changed from a divide over the level of social policy generosity to a divide over the kind of social policy and – more specifically – over the relative importance that should be given to different social policies? Answering these questions is not only relevant to understand welfare politics in the twenty-first century, but electoral politics as well: only when we understand what working- and middle-class voters care about, can we evaluate the role distributive policies play in electoral processes. We use original survey data from eight West European countries to show that middle- and working-class respondents indeed differ in the relative importance they attribute to social investment and social consumption policies. Middle-class respondents consistently attribute higher absolute and relative importance to social investment. We also show that this emphasis on investive policies relates to the middle class expecting better future economic and social opportunities than the working class. This divide in anticipated opportunities underlies a new kind of working- versus middle-class divide, which contributes to transforming the class divide from a conflict over the level of social policy to a conflict over the priorities of social policy.     

Globalization, Europeanization, Complexity, and the Future of Scandinavian Exceptionalism

Throughout much of the twentieth century, the Scandinavian countries have been a problem for leftist and rightist visions of global order because, with various adaptations, they have continued to successfully develop on their exceptional path of market openness and social inclusiveness. How can this be explained? From a traditional social‐science perspective, it cannot. However, from a complexity perspective, where there are no rigid hegemonic fundamental human orders such as globalization and Europeanization, nation‐states evolve through complex adaptation with their global surroundings. From this perspective, diversity and exceptionalism—not order—are the norm.     

An Analysis of Political Ambition in Britain

Representative democracies require sufficient numbers of citizens to put themselves forward as candidates for political office. Existing studies have shown that political institutions are not representative of the population as a whole, suggesting that political ambition is not evenly distributed across all potential candidates. We discuss evidence from the first systematic study of political ambition in Britain, examining the question of who is interested in putting themselves forward for political office. We find patterns in the distribution of political ambition that help to explain why British political institutions do not look like the British people as a whole and include a gender gap, a social class gap, an education gap, a north–south divide, and a personality gap. We discuss the implications of our findings for political parties, arguing that they need to adjust practices of candidate recruitment in such a way that minimises the effects of these biases.     

Social policy in rich and poor countries

European Journal of Political Research - To what extent can the dramatic differences in social policy efforts in rich and poor countries be accounted for by genuinely political explanations? The...     

Divided by the Market,Divided by the State: Distribution,Redistribution and Welfare Attitudes in 47 Countries

This article examines the impact of income inequality and welfare state context on the extent to which the rich and poor share similar attitudes towards redistribution. It asks whether and how differences in attitudes, particularly those between income groups, are shaped by inequality and redistributive efforts. Based on a multi‐level analysis of individual survey data across 47 countries at three points in time, the article shows that such an interaction of individual characteristics and the macro‐context indeed matters considerably. While material self‐interest, unsurprisingly, explains part of the individual differences, the analysis also shows, for the first time, that both high inequality and strongly redistributive policies divide public opinion along the lines of socioeconomic position. Put differently, while market inequality may be associated with less cohesive attitudes, a highly redistributive welfare state does not seem to foster agreement among the public, either. These findings have important policy implications for advanced welfare states, including a renewed emphasis on ‘predistribution’ (i.e., policies that influence the primary distribution of income) in order to avoid the scenario of intensified redistributive conflicts.