行政伦理视角下的公共权力异化治理

公共权力异化是当前社会中存在的腐败现象之一,其产生的原因在于公共权力自身的异化倾向、权力行使主体的因素及行政组织对权力异化的规约作用不足等。在现实中,公共权力异化往往是与具体的行政组织或行政人员联系在一起的,因此,加强行政组织伦理建设,提高行政人员的伦理自主性,将自律与他律双管齐下,能够促使行政组织及其人员合理、合法地行使公共权力。     

A genealogy of hostility: parental alienation in England and Wales

ABSTRACT

This article explores the emergence and development of parental alienation (PA) in England and Wales. It considers the background into which PA first appeared in private law proceedings concerning children in England and Wales, and examines how it progressed in the case law through the changing political and discursive context of private family law from 2000 to the end of March 2019. A clear pattern emerged of, initially, parental alienation syndrome and subsequently PA being raised in family proceedings and in political and popular arenas in response to concerns about and measures to address domestic abuse. The case law revealed a high incidence of domestic abuse perpetrated by parents (principally fathers) who were claiming that the resident parents (principally mothers) had alienated the children against them, which raises questions about the purpose of PA. More recently, a PA ‘industry’ appears to have amassed comprising experts, therapists and lawyers, advocating transfers of children’s care from ‘alienating’ mothers to non-resident fathers, as well as PA therapy for children and parents. While PA has had a chequered history and is not without its critics, it has become part of the discursive repertoire of current family law, with increasingly harsh consequences for women and children.     

‘It’s Not OK’, but ‘It’ never happened: parental alienation accusations undermine children’s safety in the New Zealand Family Court

ABSTRACT

While the public campaign slogan in New Zealand when referring to family violence, is ‘It’s Not OK’, many women in New Zealand report that the Family Court prefers the catchphrase ‘It never happened’. When women and children escaping violence and abuse reach out to the New Zealand Family Court for protection believing the justice system will help them, they often enter an alternative reality where they are not believed and are subsequently made less safe. This is particularly so for those women whose well-founded fears for their children’s safety get reinterpreted as evidence of a deliberate attempt to alienate the children from their fathers. The Backbone Collective, an independent organisation, surveyed New Zealand women about their experiences in the Family Court, finding that many women reported being accused of parental alienation. This paper investigates the sources of these allegations of parental alienation and how they impact mothers and their children. We argue that the use of parental alienation in the New Zealand Family Court is undermining the international rights of children.     

Nonalienation among peoples: Symposium on Catherine Lu’s Justice and Reconciliation in World Politics

ABSTRACT

This contribution gives an appreciation of Catherine Lu’s book Justice and Reconciliation in World Politics and introduces some concepts and motifs, themes and arguments that play a role in the discussion by the three commentators Reinhard Wolf, Alasia Nuti, and Kimberly Hutchings in this book symposium. The discussion adds to the development of the categories of structural injustice, alienation, and reconciliation, and especially of the systematic relations among them. I conclude that the notion of nonalienation as reconciliation in world order will be worth investigating even independently of questions of historical injustice.     

Structural injustice and alienation: a reply to my critics

ABSTRACT

This author’s reply addresses critiques by Reinhard Wolf, Alasia Nuti, and Kimberly Hutchings of my 2017 book, Justice and Reconciliation in World Politics. First, I restate the normative and practical significance of focusing on challenges of structural injustice for resolving many serious and pressing problems in world politics, including climate change. Second, I begin to resolve some puzzles about the concept of alienation and its relationship to justice and reconciliation, by outlining two concepts of alienation, and distinguishing them from alienation as a cognitive-affective experience. Third, I clarify the limits and potential of decolonial political theory.     

Structural injustice and the legitimacy of the state-centric system

ABSTRACT

Catherine Lu’s seminal Justice and Reconciliation in World Politics is right to stress the enduring nature of some colonialist structural indignities. It is less clear, however, if structural injustices justify Lu’s demand for revolutionary changes of the global order. Before transforming the pluralist state-centric system, we need transparent criteria that help us agree on the severity of structural injustices. Considering Lu’s strong focus on the colonialist origins of contemporary injustices, one would also like to know if and how their historical background affects their present moral status. The essay concludes that, in a multicultural global society with diverse moral values, we should focus on tackling the most glaring injustices and on rectifying those where accountabilities are least controversial.     

制度变迁中地方核心行动者的行动空间拓展与行为异化

脱胎于西方高度结构化制度环境中的新制度主义与我国低制度化的现实环境存在明显的错配,导致与常识性经验体认不符。而以地方核心行动者为视角来解析制度变迁中地方行动空间的拓展与行为异化则可以破解这一难题。我国制度变迁的波动性、制度非耦合性及实施机制不健全都给地方核心行动者扩大了行动空间。这种空间的拓展也带来了追求短期政绩、职能错位及类苏丹化现象,需要我们不断加强制度供给。     

认真对待我国现阶段的社会风险——关于特定社会风险的法社会学忧思与展开

社会风险是指特定国度于特殊时期基于较大的潜在或现实的社会性或政治性因素可能引发社会冲突,危及社会稳定和执政安全的一种可逆性中间状态。当前我国社会总体形势稳定,正处于经济社会少有的战略发展机遇期,同时经济社会急剧转型期间也存在着诸多显性和隐性的社会风险。这样的历史阶段促使敢于担当的人们理性思考社会风险的本源问题,期待国家不失时机地付之以睿智的政治智慧和刚性的良法善治,以有效化解那些可能超出社会承受力的风险,谋求最大化地积极消减社会风险的累积和叠加。诚如是,必将有利于我们最大程度的落实民生福祉,夯实执政基础,实现国家真实牢固的长治久安。     

卢卡奇的物化理论与马克思的异化理论的差异

卢卡奇的物化理论与马克思的异化理论在概念内涵、产生根源、表现形式和扬弃途径上都有差异。马克思将异化的产生归结为社会分工和私有制的出现;而卢卡奇则认为是由于资本主义商品经济的发展导致的。卢卡奇的物化理论在表现形式上涉及了许多马克思没有论述的方面。马克思认为通过暴力革命来克服异化,卢卡奇则依赖于无产阶级的阶级意识。     

法律异化研究

法律异化是指法律这种人类创造出来的本用于服务人类的社会规范,因为一些原因反而成了走向人类对立面的一种异己力量的法律变化。其表现为依＂法＂迫害、合法伤害、非法侵害、人们对法律的异己感和积极寻求法律的替代品等多种形式。法律异化的人为因素是人的异化,客观因素是法律本身的悬空与不切实际、法律规范限制性的僵化、司法的＂证据中心主义＂和法律运行的程序主义等。克服法律异化的路径有以人为本,确保良法的产生;加强民主法制建设,防范主体的自我异化;运用宏观、全面的社会治理手段防范法律的异化等。