真知与偏见：亨廷顿眼中的台湾民主

在《第三波——20世纪后期民主化浪潮》一书中,亨廷顿论及台湾的民主化进程,提出了民主化的基本含义、诱因、过程、特征和前景。亨廷顿对台湾民主的分析充满着真知灼见,其预测也为后来的台湾政治民主实践所证实。但是,必须指出的是,亨廷顿从西方的价值体系出发来对全球的民主化进程进行分析,不可避免地带有一定的偏见性。     

The Four Horsemen of Terrorism: It's Not Waves,It's Strains

David Rapoport's concept of Four Waves of terrorism, from Anarchist terrorism in the 1880s, through Nationalist and Marxist waves in the early and mid-twentieth century, to the present Religious Wave, is one of the most influential concepts in terrorism studies. However, this article argues that thinking about different types of terrorism as strains rather than waves better reflects both the empirical reality and the idea that terrorists learn from and emulate each other. Whereas the notion of waves suggests distinct iterations of terrorist violence driven by successive broad historical trends, the concept of strains and contagion emphasizes how terrorist groups draw on both contemporary and historical lessons in the development of their tactics, strategies, and goals. The authors identify four distinct strains in total—Socialist, Nationalist, Religious, and Exclusionist—and contend that it is possible to trace each strain back to a “patient zero” active in the 1850s.     

Guns,roses and democratization: Huntington's secret admirer in the Caucasus

Georgia is the most democratic country in the Caucasus, but arguably its democratization has also been riddled by Huntingtonian developmental crises, resulting in ethnic conflicts and civil wars. We argue that variation in the type of political instability is best understood by focusing on the interaction between nationalism and political institutionalization rather than on their independent effects. We show that Gamsakhurdia's “state-breaking nationalism”, coupled with political deinstitutionalization, produced separatist and centrist civil wars. When Saakashvili's “state-making nationalism” enhanced state capacity, it marginalized the opposition and rekindled frozen separatist conflicts, but stronger administrative institutions enabled the government to avert another revolutionary regime change.     

传统与非传统:十年国际关系的两种解读--兼评亨廷顿《文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建》

近十年来,传统的安全威胁与非传统的安全威胁相互交织,非传统威胁的影响日益上升;相应地,传统的国际关系理论与非传统的国际关系理论难决高下,非传统理论似将占据上风.根据近十年来的国际大事进行检测,也许可以较客观地评判以"文明冲突论"为代表的非传统理论的现实有效程度,也许还可以评判传统理论在目前"非传统环境"中的生存能力.     

论亨廷顿“民主扩展”理论与美国“新霸权主义”的内在关联性

在美国历史上 ,尽管深信美国负有传播其价值观以“改变”其他国家的使命的人从来就未曾少过 ,而到 19世纪中叶 ,一些信奉“盎格鲁 -撒克逊种族优越论”的人又打出了“天定命运论”(ManifestDestiny)的旗号来推行侵略政策和扩张主义 ,但主张以赤裸裸的武力和强权来扩展所谓“民主”和“自由”并为此提供“理论依据”的始作俑者则非塞缪尔·亨廷顿这位哈佛大学的理论家莫属。本文着重对亨廷顿在 1981至 1991年期间所撰写的两部影响甚巨的著作进行了理论上的剖析 ,驳斥了他所提出的美国在国外输出“自由”、扩展“民主”需要以强权和武力来作后盾的理论依据 ,并揭示了美国“新霸权主义”的实质性内涵。     

Civilization as a political disposition

Abstract

This paper outlines a number of changes in social and political thought following the momentous events of 1989: the rise of postmodernism, identitarian politics and the transformation of notions of race into culture. It indicates origins for this drift in ideas to be found in the heritage of anti-Enlightenment polemics associated with political romanticism, in Europe as well as globally, in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. It then concentrates on the theme of civilization, and of the use of this term in international relations.     

传统与超越：现代新儒家的后西方时代文化特征

亨廷顿提出了“文明冲突论”,而现代新儒家则倡导文明的对话与交流。文章通过分析现代新儒家的中西文化观,指出,现代新儒家在倡导中西文化会通、交流,表达希望儒学复兴的期望时,带有一种“后西方时代”文化特征。     

多元文化或同化：亨廷顿的族群文化观与东南亚华族

亨廷顿的文明冲突论是其族群文化观对国际政冶格局的解读。其族群文化观源于美国的族群理论中的盎格鲁一萨克逊优越论。在美国国内,亨廷顿断言多元文化将使美国分裂而反对多元文化,主张用以盎格鲁一萨克逊文化代表的美国核心文化同化其他移民族群。在国际上,亨廷顿强调不同宗教文化的难以调和性,似乎由主流文化同化其他族群才是解决“国家间和国家内部的文明冲突”的出路。正如同化理论在美国日益没落而多元文化广被认可一样,在东南亚,一个各族群可以和睦相处的多元社会的构建不但是一种理念,也能成为现实。     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

"文明冲突论"与跨文明比较文学研究

亨廷顿的"文明冲突论"备受研究讨论的现象,典型地体现出全球化背景下知识分子追求自身文化身份认同和生存利益的"忧患意识",也从侧面深刻反映了跨文明比较研究的必要性和深刻性.为避免陷入到由全球化所引发的文化身份认同危机而导致的"虚拟对抗"的"文明冲突"陷阱中,在文化思想界有必要进行跨文明研究与对话,而中国的比较文学界有能力、更有责任参与其中.