Private association and public brand: the dualistic conception of political parties in the common law world

This paper examines the legal conception of political parties. It does so by unearthing the history and ontology of the common law relating to political parties in international perspective. The flexibility of the unincorporated association, in which parties are understood through the private law of contract as networks of internal rules or agreements, rather than as legal entities, has proven to be a mask. In the common law’s imagination, the ideal party is a ground-up organization animated by its membership. But the law mandates no such thing, and in its statutory and constitutional conception intra-party democracy may be sublimated as parties need be no more than an electoral persona or brand.     

协商民主的类型和功能

当代西方协商民主的制度难题是如何解决“协商”与“决策”二元分离问题.罗尔斯主张协商民主只适用于“宪法根本”和基本正义等政治问题;而菲什金则将民主协商排除在代议制之外,推崇公民微型协商小组.哈贝马斯针对上述“单轨”协商民主及其二元分离问题,提出了正式公共领域与非正式公共领域的“双轨”理论,并通过公民与政府间的“交往之流”促使二者的融合;博曼的二元民主强调执法与公民的协商以勾连立法、执法与公民之间的协商;科恩则主张通过政党上传下达的桥梁作用,促成二者的合一.罗尔斯的“公共理性”意味着在公共协商过程中只存在着一个主导着整个协商过程及其结果的单一理性;而多元理性论者古特曼等则认为：单一理性论者忽视了社会现实的差异性和不确定性等,因此主张“互惠原则”和“共融政治”.价值预设性协商民主强调价值、规范和程序的先定性,不免有强奸民意之嫌;价值待定性协商民主则力主：宪法只是一个对未来行动的一般承诺,具有持续性、对话性和再磋商性等.当下中国政治体制改革势在必行,建立健全以党的领导为前提、以协商民主为核心、以程序法治为主导、以宪法统治为保障的民主政治体制,当为可取.     

Rancière and revolution

This paper explores what role Rancière's work can play in the struggle for a more democratic world. It highlights the strength of Rancière's conception of democracy, which clearly identifies democracy as a popular disruption of the prevailing police order. This order claims to have assigned a proper role to all parts of society. Democracy for Rancière is when an element emerges that has not been taken account of and demonstrates the police order's claim to be false. Among the many benefits of this way of understanding democracy, it upsets any easy association between hegemony and democracy – as in Laclau & Mouffe – and it refuses utterly the ideological fusing of democracy, capitalism, and the state offered by the liberal-democratic-capitalist consensus. However, Rancière's approach also introduces significant limits on democracy because it denies that democracy can ever do more than disrupt the prevailing order. It does not allow for the possibility that democracy can grow and spread to the point that it becomes pervasive in the polity. This paper uses the case of the Egyptian uprising to show how this limitation closes off important political possibilities. The paper argues that Deleuze & Guattari's theorisation of revolution, when used carefully, is a necessary corrective to Rancière's too-restricted concept of democracy     

公民参与式民主理论的拓展——异体问责的视角

公民参与式民主能够完善异体问责的理论和发展路径,而异体问责作为公民参与式民主的重要体现,能够为公民参与式民主的发展提供新视角。公民参与式民主理论强调公民与政府的双向互动,公民可以通过制度保证对政府管理进行监督问责,政府必须对公民监督问责做出积极回应并改善行政管理。民主模式从古希腊城邦的直接民主发展到近现代的代议制民主,20世纪中后期,随着时代的发展和科技的进步,参与式民主理论在对代议制民主的批判和重构中逐渐发展成熟。在该理论指导下的参与式民主实践逐步深入,从而加强了公民作为政府异体问责主体的地位,在具体实践中体现为宏观领域的行政民主、中观领域的电子民主、微观领域的工业民主。     

Information and direct democracy: What voters learn about ballot measures and how it affects their votes

Limited research has evaluated what voters know about the initiatives and referendums that regularly appear on their ballots. Analyzing survey data covering nine ballot measures in three U.S. states, I explore what voters know about measures that would implement policies ranging from approving same-sex marriage to requiring identification to vote. My results show a great deal of variation across both ballot measures and type of knowledge. Specifically, I find that knowledge of endorsements and status quo policies is similar to their knowledge of civics. Policy specific facts, however, lag far behind. My results also show that voters tend to know more about moral issues. Increased campaign spending also helps voters learn about relevant endorsements, though not facts. When comparing the efficacy of facts versus endorsements, knowledge of an endorsement has a measurable decision-improving impact on voters’ choices while knowing a fact only rarely does.     

Walking a tightrope: democracy versus sovereignty in ASEAN's illiberal peace

Abstract

Since 1967, ASEAN has established intramural relations that forsake war as a means for resolving conflict. While this is a remarkable achievement for the region, it must be balanced against a concomitant hindrance of democratic reform. I argue in this paper that ASEAN's nascent security community must be seen as an ‘illiberal peace’. Underlying ASEAN's peaceful community are the same principles that support illiberalism in the region, namely sovereignty and non-interference. While sovereignty has historically been a cherished norm for developing countries, ASEAN lags behind other regions, particularly Latin America, in attempting to reconcile tensions between democratic norms and the respect for sovereignty. This tension is most evident in ASEAN's relations with Myanmar. Recent events indicate that ASEAN's non-interference norm may no longer be sacrosanct, but the association is a long way from shunning illiberal politics for the sake of democratic values.     

Introduction: negotiating the promotion of democracy

ABSTRACT

This article makes the case for why we should turn to studying democracy promotion negotiation, outlines the research questions guiding this special issue, identifies overarching findings and summarizes the individual contributions. After outlining the rationale for more attention to the issue of negotiation, which we understand as a specific form of interaction between external and local actors in democracy promotion, we outline three basic assumptions informing our research: (1) Democracy promotion is an international practice that is necessarily accompanied by processes of negotiation. (2) These negotiation processes, in turn, have an impact upon the practice and outcome of democracy promotion. (3) For external democracy promotion to be mutually owned and effective, genuine negotiations between ‘promoters’ and ‘local actors’ are indispensable; the term ‘genuine’ here being understood as including a substantial exchange on diverging values and interests. The article, then, introduces the three research questions for this agenda, concerning the issues on the negotiation table, the parameters shaping negotiation processes, and the results of democracy promotion negotiation. We conclude by presenting an overview of the overarching findings of the special issue as well as with brief summaries of the individual contributions.     

How Many Europes? Fragmentation in the European Space since the Great Recession

ABSTRACT

Since the Great Recession started in the late 2000s, the European Union (EU) has experienced an acute crisis that has triggered internal divisions among EU members. Three factors can help shed light on this tendency towards political fragmentation: economics and finance, culture, and territory. Each of these reveals a specific ‘geography’, in terms of policies and narratives, of the current malaise regarding the EU project and the limits of the Union in addressing issues important for the domestic debates of its members. Such discontent, as well as anti-EU sentiment, fuels strong political reactions including populism and anti-elitism that could further fragment the EU in the future.     

关于我国网络民主缘起与逻辑的问题探究——一项基于个体、舆论和政体的解读性分析框架

作为一种框架性的研究思路，我国网络民主的兴起可以从网络主体的形成动力、网络舆论场域的重新构建以及现实政治稳定结构下的参与激活三个层面进行解读。同时，在其发展过程中亦遵循着自身特有的逻辑线索，表现为主体的形成具有阶段性特征和不同的演绎形态；网络舆论的兴盛和传统舆论构建模式的式微以及它本身强大的俘获能力相关、网络参与的激活是现代化过程中社会利益分化、聚合的必然结果等等。对于网络民主的发展需和现实政治有效对接，避免对社会稳定造成冲击。     

Sustaining Peace One Day at a Time: Inclusion,Transition Crises,and the Resilience of Social Contracts

ABSTRACT

This article argues that inclusion is a key driver of resilient social contracts and a foundation for sustaining peace. Drawing on case studies conducted under the Forging Resilient Social Contracts project and building on the literature on transitions from war to peace and authoritarianism to democracy, the theoretical framework links inclusion to peace sustainability. Interrogating how and why processes of inclusion matter, we argue that resilient social contracting is driven by elite inclusion, societal inclusion and their interactions. Four case-studies illustrate the arguments. Resilient social contracting, findings suggest, allows countries to weather crises and survive to ‘transition another day’.