Japan and identity change: why it matters in International Relations

Abstract

Two approaches to identity have been employed to explore issues in Japan's international relations. One views identity as constituted by domestic norms and culture, and as constitutive of interests, which in turn cause behaviour. Proponents view Japan's ‘pacifist’ and ‘antimilitarist’ identity as inherently stable and likely to change only as a result of material factors. In the other approach, ‘Japan’ emerges and changes through processes of differentiation vis-à-vis ‘Others’. Neither ‘domestic’ nor ‘material’ factors can exist outside of such identity constructions. We argue that the second, relational, approach is more theoretically sound, but begs three questions. First, how can different identity constructions in relation to numerous Others be synthesised and understood comprehensively? Second, how can continuity and change be handled in the same relational framework? Third, what is the point of analysing identity in relational terms? This article addresses the first two questions by introducing an analytical framework consisting of three mutually interacting layers of identity construction. Based on the articles in this special issue, we argue that identity entrepreneurs and emotions are particularly likely to contribute to change within this model. We address the third question by stressing common ground with the first approach: identity enables and constrains behaviour. In the case of Japan, changes in identity construction highlighted by the articles in this special issue forebode a political agenda centred on strengthening Japan militarily.     

国家治理现代化视阈下的法律、道德与组织规范关系

国家治理现代化须以系统完备、科学规范、运行有效的规范体系为基础。而法律、道德和"组织规范"共同构成现代社会的规范体系。因而,高度重视"组织规范"并正确处理好它与法律道德的关系,就显得十分重要。"组织规范"具有民间性、自主和自治性,有权制定并实施"组织规范",约束组织本身及其成员的相关行为。这些"组织规范"上承法律下接道德,但又不是照抄照搬,而是依"法无禁止即可为"原则独立存在。在中国继续深化改革和努力实现国家治理现代化的背景下,有必要重新认识三大基础规范的关系,从而有效发挥"组织规范"的作用,构建良好社会秩序。     

Norms,Behavioral Compliance,and Status Attribution in International Politics

Extant work on status attribution has largely focused on major powers or state capabilities as key explanatory factors driving these social processes and suggests that status considerations increase conflicts between states. We argue for a more comprehensive approach to status attribution that considers international norms as another major factor that is weighed in the attribution process. We contend that states (policymakers) evaluate one another not only on the basis of economic and military capabilities but also on the extent to which there is behavioral conformance with normative expectations and reward one another dependent upon whether these expectations are met. However, this attribution of status is dependent upon the level of contestation pertaining to that norm. Using a data set that assesses consistency with six different norms (resource transference, multilateralism, economic liberalism, democratic governance, respect for human rights, and peaceful dispute resolution), we find that status attribution is associated with norm-consistent behavior but only when these norms are uncontested at the global level.     

现代诉讼的本质:全面理性的规范沟通

纠纷的成因是交往失败,而诉讼是重新交往解决纠纷的一种方式。将诉讼置于交往视野下,诉讼的沟通性便得以显现。无论是民事、行政还是刑事诉讼,均渗透着立足言语、实现主体间沟通的理念。诉讼通过外在规范特性保证主体间的沟通顺利进行,没有建制化程序的外在保障,沟通难以成效。诉讼的内在规范性是对诉讼规范性内涵的丰富,是一种内在的交往预设程序。经过对规范价值的内在化,诉讼交往主体形成自我约束,对诉讼规则、交往预设自愿主动承受,促进共识的实现和纠纷的解决。可以说,现代诉讼克服了传统职权主义模式或者当事人主义模式的片面理性,追求客观世界、主观世界和规范世界相融通的全面理性,保障司法公正、令人信服司法,达到司法真正权威。因此,诉讼区别于其他纠纷解决机制的最大不同,在于诉讼的本质是全面理性的规范沟通。     

公司章程自由与公司法强制性规范的协调

公司章程自由是实现公司自治的决定性因素,而公司法中的强制性条款的设定也是必要的。对＂章程不得违反公司法中的强制性规则＂的原则,应根据不同情况进行分析,从而判定行为的效力。     

论爱国主义的时代价值

当代中国,爱国主义的重大主题和根本价值在于推进中国特色社会主义伟大事业。爱国主义是走向国家富强、实现民族复兴的核心精神价值;是坚持中国特色社会主义道路的深厚精神力量;是坚持改革开放、推动科学发展的基本价值准则。     

刑法机能产生的制度基础

刑法的整体机能是由刑法的诸多构成要素共同相互作用的结果,但是,对于刑法的每一种具体机能来说,其产生却分别由刑法不同的构成要素所决定。考察刑法机能产生的制度基础,其实践上的意义在于:我们可以在对刑法机能与刑法构成要素之间的关系进行充分了解的基础上,通过优化刑法的结构而建构刑法机能的良性机制;以技术手段增加刑法的有效性,使刑法真正成为有目的的社会控制手段。     

刑法解释的常识化

条文解释的常识化和学理研究的经验化,是我国刑法学发展过程中出现的一个显著特点。刑法学中的所谓“常识化”大致有两种不同的表述形式:一是刑法解释上的“公众认同”,二是所谓的“社会相当性”。刑法解释常识化是实现法律认识统一性的基础,是实现刑法公正与效率有机结合的重要条件,也是实现刑法目的的重要手段。但是,运用常识化方法解决法律适用问题,必须面对的问题是如何协调该方法中内在的矛盾关系,即常识与专业之间的关系、科学解释与效力解释之间的关系。在我国目前的刑法解释中,需要走出将生活常识等同于专业知识、以感性经验替代科学理论的误区。     

关于网络法基本问题的阐释

网络行为规范主要由技术规范和非技术规范两大类构成。前者属国际性自律规范 ,后者主要包括技术性法律规范和网络社区法律规范。网络法的核心在于技术性法律规范 ,其基本价值应与网络技术规范的特征相一致 ,以求最大限度地促进网络互联和信息共享。在制订与网络相关的法律制度时 ,应考虑如下几项原则 :两类规范间相互协调与促进 ,具有可操作性 ,兼顾全球趋同性 ,他律与自律相结合。     

程序规范的解释:范畴、理念与方法

民事诉讼程序规范存在着解释的必要性。程序法定与程序自由、强行程序规范与任意程序规范、禁止任意诉讼原则与诉讼契约、法官的程序控制权与当事人的程序选择权等范畴是法院解释诉讼程序规范过程中必须斟酌的内容。对程序规范进行解释须以宪法规范和民事诉讼目的为出发点 ,以诉讼基本原则作为解释的基本框架。诉讼程序规范的解释方法有语义解释、体系解释、目的解释、诚信解释等。