State of the world 2018: democracy facing global challenges*

This article analyses the state of democracy in the world in 2018, and recent developments building on the 2019 release of the V-Dem dataset. First, the trend of autocratization continues and 24 countries are now affected by what is established as a “third wave of autocratization”. Second, despite the global challenge of gradual autocratization, democratic regimes prevail in a majority of countries in the world (99 countries, 55%) in 2018. Thus, the state of the world is unmistakably more democratic compared to any point during the last century. At the same time, the number of electoral authoritarian regimes had increased to 55, or 31% of all countries. Third, the autocratization wave is disproportionally affecting democratic countries in Europe and the Americas, but also India’s large population. Fourth, freedom of expression and the media, and the rule of law are the areas under attack in most countries undergoing autocratization, but toxic polarization of the public sphere is a threat to democracy spreading across regimes. Finally, we present the first model to predict autocratization (“adverse regime transitions”) pointing to the top-10 most at-risk countries in the world.     

Is there difference in democracy promotion? A comparison of German and US democracy assistance in transitional Tunisia

Since the 1990s, comparative scholars and constructivists have recognized the universally liberal character of democracy promotion and yet continued the analysis of difference in this area. Mainly in studies of German and US democracy promotion, constructivists have demonstrated the recurring and difference-generating impact of ideational factors. In this article, I hence assume the likeliness of difference and address the question of how we can analyse and explain those differences through a comparison of German and US democracy assistance in transitional Tunisia. I conceive of Germany and the US as a dissimilar pair and adopt a broad perspective to uncover differences at the diplomatic level and between and within the respective approaches to democracy assistance in Tunisia. Theoretically, I argue that national role conceptions hardly impact democracy assistance in a clear manner, and that roles are renegotiated in the process. I rather focus on liberal and reform liberal conceptions of democracy, which shape perceptions of the local context, and democracy assistance agencies different organizational cultures, which impact civil society support. Finally, I account for transnational dialogue and coordination as a factor mitigating differences in democracy promotion.     

货币权力的宪法规制及其路径选择简

在现代经济社会,不可兑换的信用货币体制和政府财政权的扩张导致了纸币的持续超发,也肇始了愈发严重的金融危机或经济危机接踵而至,进而侵犯人民的财产权利,而需要在宪法位阶上对中央银行的货币权力进行合理的制度规范。货币权力的宪法规制不但要赋予中央银行独立行使职权的法律地位,还应当通过对中央银行的货币权力予以宪法性约束,使其权力运行真正能够受到民主监督的制约,以期实现对人民基本权利之有效保障。     

The Dual Use of an Historical Event: ‘Rwanda 1994’, the Justification and Critique of Liberal Interventionism

This essay places the 1994 genocide in Rwanda in the context of the academic and political rise of liberal interventionism since 1990. It argues that this historical event is important for the debate about ‘humanitarian interventions’ in two different ways: on the one hand, as a signifier, ‘Rwanda 1994’ has been used (or, for that matter, misused) in order to justify an almost unlimited international agenda of liberal interventionism and social engineering; on the other, the genocide that could arguably have been prevented represents the exceptional case where military intervention can indeed be justified—but precisely because it is not in need of a specifically liberal justification. What would have made a military-based prevention of genocide justifiable in this particular case is precisely the aim to prevent something that is universally agreed to be unacceptable (genocide). The liberal twist in the justification narrative, in contrast, tends to emphasize the difference between the (liberal) ‘us’ and the non-liberal ‘them’, consequently claiming the legitimate right for the ‘us’ to decide about the use of force exclusively, that is, without the ‘them’. The continuation of the narrative into answering the post-intervention question ‘what now?’ then leads consequently into the necessity of imposing one's own system of rule as a general norm without due attention to the specifics of the situation ‘on the ground’. The exceptional features of ‘Rwanda 1994’ (the empirical event) thus point in a critical way to all those cases where ‘Rwanda 1994’ (the signifier) has been used to make the case for an ever-expanding agenda of liberal (‘just’) war.     

我国法治实践的若干法律问题

随着我国“建设社会主义法治国家”宏伟目标的明确提出,我国的法治进程得到不断推进。但是,“人治”观念的影响、民主政治的不健全、道德与法律在法治进程中同时并存、法律移植与本土化的矛盾、乡土社会实施法律的艰难以及法的实效的不理想却造成我国法治进程比较缓慢。因此,我国应加强“法治”观念,真正使民主制度法律化,正确处理道德与法律、法律移植与本土化之间的关系,促进国家法在乡土社会的实施,尽量通过提高立法技术等措施保证法功能、目的的实现,进而使我国的法治建设取得更大的成效。     

新农村建设背景下我国乡村治理体制的变革

我国现有的乡村治理体制自形成以来，对于保持乡村社会的稳定秩序，推动乡村经济社会的发展作出了巨大的贡献。然而，随着经济社会的飞速发展，我国现行乡村治理体制的弊端逐渐显露出来。因此，需要对我国现有的乡村治理体制作根本性变革，以确保新农村建设宏伟目标的顺利推进。     

用足人民政协的“民主监督”功能

曾经为筹建新中国作出重大历史贡献的人民政协,具有“民主监督”的重要功能,它是整个“人民监督”的一个重要方面,有其鲜明的特点与优势。为了用足人民政协的“民主监督”功能,本文从多角度提出了应当进一步创置的“条件”。     

Limitation of religious freedom to conform to the standards of an open and democratic society

One has freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. This claim is common, but it rests on a misunderstanding of what real freedom of religion entails. The most important thing to remember is that freedom of religion, if it is going to apply to everyone, also requires freedom from religion. Why is that？ One does not truly have the freedom to practice one＇s religious belief if one is not also required to adhere to any of the religious beliefs or rules of other religious. Freedom from religion does not mean, as some mistakenly seem to claim, being free from seeing religion in society. No one has the right not to see churches, religious expression, and other examples of religious belief in the nation, and those who advocate freedom of religion do not claim otherwise. What freedom from religion does mean, however, is the freedom from rules and dogmas of other people＇s religious beliefs so that people can be free to follow the demands of their own conscience, whether they take a religious form or not. Thus they have both freedom of religion and freedom from religion because they are two sides of the same coin.     

《共同纲领》与国民经济恢复时期的国家经济建设

本文初步解读和简要概述了《共同纲领》中新民主主义经济方针的基本内容和历史针对性。《共同纲领》是中国共产党长期探索新民主主义经济理论的思想结晶。从理论属性说,它不是社会主义的,而是新民主主义的。从实践方面说,它成功引导了国民经济恢复时期的国家经济活动。