俄国驻中国喀什噶尔领事彼得罗夫斯基与近代英俄大博弈

尼古拉·费奥多罗维奇·彼得罗夫斯基是俄国驻我国新疆喀什噶尔第一任领事,其任期正值近代英国与俄国的中亚大博弈时期.彼得罗夫斯基利用其在当地的影响力,精心编织情报网络,培训情报人员,收集新疆地区军事政治要情,为俄国推行对华侵略政策提供信息服务,并严密监视英国动向,协助俄国军队占领我国帕米尔地区.在经济方面,彼得罗夫斯基通过扩大俄国商圈、打压英国在新疆的贸易和扰乱金融体系等手段,帮助俄国扩大对新疆的贸易.此外,彼得罗夫斯基利用职务之便在我国新疆喀什噶尔及其周边地区大肆劫掠文物,并与俄国国内积极互动,为俄国考察者提供文物信息和物质支持,在此方面,也将英国视为最大竞争对手.在彼得罗夫斯基的苦心经营下,19世纪末20世纪初俄国在新疆地区的影响力得到极大的扩张,无论在政治、经济还是文物掠夺方面,相对于英国均占据了先机.     

The origins of redistributive policy preferences: political socialisation with and without a welfare state

Research on the impact of the macroeconomy on individual-level preferences for redistribution has produced varying results. This paper presents a new theory on the presence of an expansive welfare state during one’s formative years as a source of heterogeneity in the effect that macroeconomic conditions have on individuals’ preferences for redistributive policy. This theory is tested using cohort analysis via the British Social Attitudes surveys (1983–2010), with generations coming of age between the end of World War I and today. Findings confirm that cohorts that were socialised before and after the introduction of the welfare state react differently to economic crises: the former become less supportive of redistribution, while the latter become more supportive. The research sheds light on the long-term shifts of support for the welfare state due to generational replacement.     

Another look at E. P. Thompson and British Communism, 1937–1955

Examination of E. P. Thompson’s activism in the Communist Party (CPGB) has been limited. Some historians, basing themselves on his memories and interpretations of his 1955 biography of William Morris, have portrayed him as a dissenter, at best a loyal critic of CPGB policy. Others have deduced political conformity from his fourteen years membership of a declining organisation. This article reappraises the literature and reassesses the making and unmaking of a Communist intellectual. It explores Thompson’s contemporary writings – rarely exposed to critical scrutiny – and employs recently released security files to reconstruct the historian’s ideas and activity across the post-war decade. The article concludes that in these years Thompson remained a faithful supporter of the Soviet Union, the party line and ‘high Stalinism’. Khruschev’s ‘Secret Speech’ and the Russian invasion of Hungary did not validate pre-existing dissent. They were the pivotal factors provoking a rupture with the Stalinism Thompson had championed from 1942 to 1955.     

Bolshevism,Stalinism and the Comintern: a historical controversy revisited

ABSTRACT

‘Bolshevization’ and ‘Stalinization’ have been used variously by historians of American and British Communism to designate and date the processes by which the Comintern and national parties were subordinated to Soviet policy. Despite their pervasive influence on the American and British left, this literature reveals little curiosity or consensus about the politics of Bolshevism and Stalinism, their history and relationship, indeed, these labels have sometimes been employed inexactly and interchangeably. In some narratives, Bolshevization dates from 1924 and was completed from 1929. In others, the Comintern and its affiliates were Stalinized from 1924, in still others, from 1929. The historiography of the Soviet Union, in contrast, includes forensic interrogation of Bolshevism and Stalinism, their meaning, periodization and consequences as well as the continuities and disjunctures between them. This work has been overlooked by historians of the American Workers’ Party and the British Communist Party. The present article assesses both literatures. It utilizes insights from Sovietologists to argue that Stalinism constituted a politics and practice connected with but distinct from Bolshevism. Reviewing Comintern and party history, it proposes a specific periodization. State Bolshevism, 1919–1923, saw subjugation of the American and British parties to Russian imperatives. Incipient Stalinism, 1924–1928, witnessed restructuring of the politics of subordination. From 1929, Stalinization accomplished a distinctive subordination. It enthroned a politics and practice foreign to that of Lenin and the Bolsheviks which endured, through different phases, until the 1950s.     

Islamists in the “Rainbow” Coalition

In the 1980s, Britain’s Labour Party promoted a system of race-relations that envisioned Britain as a collection of discrete cultures with equal status. This multicultural model for organizing society conflicted with traditional British notions of a unified national culture, with an assimilationist model of immigrant incorporation. Today, the Labour Party’s relationship with Islamists is sharply dividing Labour’s “rainbow” constituency. Whereas the horrific events of 9/11 and 7/7 have led many Labour leaders to replace its defense of multiculturalism with Tory-sounding calls for immigrant assimilation, other Labour leaders are working harder than ever to accommodate their Muslim constituents.

雄心勃勃:英国新海事战略评析

英国是传统海洋大国,靠海而生、向海而兴。2019年初,为继承海洋发展的历史传统,更好地应对计划“脱欧”以及世界海洋形势发展的新变化,英国政府出台了《海事2050:引领未来》。该战略可以发现,英国在海事领域的重点关切主要包括:发展海洋贸易、关注海事安全、重视海洋环境保护与气候变化、提升在国际海事行业的话语权。对此,英国设立了雄心勃勃的目标并推出一系列推进措施,如注重整合国内力量、完善基础设施与技术支持、发展与其他国家和国际组织的伙伴关系等。中国应注意到英国海事战略中预见的挑战,加强顶层设计,支持海洋技术发展,保护海洋环境,加强海事合作,为中国建设“海洋强国”和“21世纪海上丝绸之路”赢得先机。     

女性解放视野下的离婚动因考察——以19～20世纪的英国为例

自20世纪以来,在英国急剧社会变迁中,广大女性为改变传统男权主导下的屈从地位,进行了持久不懈的努力,最终在婚姻家庭和社会领域获得了男女平等的话语权.女性的解放不仅颠覆了传统男权社会对女性的束缚,意味着男女平等地位时代的到来,更重要的是引发了人们对传统男权主导下婚姻理念的重塑.由此使得在男权社会构架下的传统婚姻在20世纪后半叶遭遇严峻挑战,离婚率急剧增长,两性不平等下的婚姻和家庭大量解体.探讨英国女性解放引发的离婚革命悖论,或许对当代同样离婚率居高不下的中国来说,具有重要借鉴意义.     

The reception of Bryant’s Unfinished Victory: insights into British public opinion in early 1940

Griffiths describes how, after its publication in January 1940, Unfinished Victory, a clearly pro-Nazi and antisemitic book by the historian Arthur Bryant, could arouse little adverse comment from the majority of its reviewers, and positive en­thusiasm from a good number of them. This examination will cause us to revise some of the usual presumptions about public opinion in relation to Nazi Germany in the period of the ‘phoney war’, and to reinforce others about the British public’s basic unconcern in relation to manifestations of antisemitism. Moreover, the belief, widely held until now, that the British public reacted violently against Bryant’s book, and that he himself immediately realized his mistake, is shown to be untrue. Bryant’s reactions to some of the few critical reviews of his book, and his correspondence with his publisher, show him to have been confident of the rightness of his attitude, as does his decision, some time after the book’s appearance, to send complimentary copies to the royal family and the prime minister. It was only after the fall of Chamberlain and the advent of ­Churchill, and the arrests of ‘fellow travellers’ in May 1940, that Bryant appears to have realized his mistake; he then bought up copies of the book, and started to write those patriotic works for which he is far more famous. An interesting aspect of the subject is Bryant’s relationship with his publisher Harold Macmillan. Surprisingly, given his anti-appeasement attitudes, Macmillan positively encouraged Bryant to produce the book, and seems to have been little affected at that time by its attitudes to Nazi Germany or by its antisemitic flavour. Given the reactions of some of his anti-­appeasement colleagues, however, he soon swung against it after its publication. His correspondence thereafter with Bryant, as he tried under various pretexts to remove him from the Macmillan list, is very revealing, as are Bryant’s knowing reactions.     

'Shovelling out your paupers': The British State and Irish Famine Migration 1846-50

Gray considers the determinants of British policy towards emigration (and particularly towards state-assisted 'colonization') from Ireland during the Great Famine of 184-50. He surveys the idea of 'colonization' as advocated by Charles Buller in 1843, and its varying appeal (changing over time) in Ireland, Britain and the settlement colonies of the British empire. He also considers the issue in the light of pro- and anti-Malthusian interpretations of Irish population pressure, and the emergence of the alternative idea of 'internal colonization'. Gray argues that the failure of the state to adopt an emigration policy in 1846-50 as part of its response to the Famine was the consequence of a combination of anti-Irish prejudice in Britain and the colonies (which was sharpened by the arrival of large numbers of economic refugees in 1847 and the political conspiracies of 1848), and the prevalence of an economic doctrine that prioritized the need for Irish self-help and moral transformation over state assistance. He traces the debate over colonization within the Whig government headed by Lord John Russell, and concludes that some form of assisted emigration was a feasible policy measure, and that its rejection had adverse consequences in terms of additional famine mortality.     

The Commonwealth,Apartheid, and the Role of Micro-states

In the 1980s, the debate surrounding South Africa apartheid consumed the Commonwealth. While superficially this discussion might appear to have had little relevance to the interests of micro and small state members of the Commonwealth, the behemothic nature of apartheid presented significant challenges to such states. This article attempts to assess the varied ways in which South African apartheid affected the diplomatic strategies of micro-states within the political landscape of the Commonwealth, and how it could be perceived as both a hindrance to their agendas, as well a potential tool in the fight to amplify their voices. Micro-states used the egalitarian structure of the Commonwealth and combined it with the prominence of apartheid in international debate to both elevate their status and even to garner support for their own personal concerns. Apartheid’s reframing of the international conversation had broad reverberations which affected Commonwealth responses to a variety of seemingly disparate issues. This culminated in the ejection of Fiji from the Commonwealth in the aftermath of the 1987 coup due to concerns over racial discrimination, emblematising the all-pervasive nature of the apartheid debate within the Commonwealth.