权力政治与文化斗争——韦伯的国家观

韦伯是在现代政治的权力逻辑中审视国家,国家被界定为在特定领土范围内垄断了使用武力的正当权利的政治组织.民族国家是现代国家的主要形态.现代政治的主题即为民族国家间的权力斗争.现代国家担负着在世界上寻求权力以捍卫和张扬民族(文化)的重要使命.     

从《独立评论》时评看胡适的民主宪政主张——兼与《新月》时期比较

胡适关于民主宪政的系列时评构成了《独立评论》最重要的内容之一。胡适批评国民党名不副实的“训政”,从理论和实践层面上阐释宪政在中国实行的重要性、可行性和阶段性,对反对宪政的观点进行了商榷和反驳。与《新月》时期相比,胡适批评的对象有所调整,批评的锋芒有所缓和,但他反专制的精神没变,爱国立场和独立人格依旧,他始终把实行民主政治确定为刊物最重要的内容之一。     

对东亚现代化进程中威权政治的思考

战后东亚国家出现的威权政治体制,是特殊历史条件下的产物,有其深厚的政治、经济基础。经济与政治基础的相对薄弱无疑是东亚选择威权主义政治而不是西方民主制的重要原因。在战后相当长的时间里,“威权 发展”模式反映了东亚国家要求改变落后面貌的愿望,取得的成就是显著的。但是它并不符合现代化发展的总体要求,从长远观点来看,它只是一种过渡形式。     

Targeting the Motivated? Ethnicity and the Pre‐emptive Use of Government Repression

Research on government repression often focuses on the comparison between states over time and provides little insight about the targets of repression within a state. This article unpacks government repression against different ethnic groups. It argues that non‐democratic governments use pre‐emptive and targeted repression against ethnic groups that are discriminated, strong, or have a history of protest or rebellion in order to prevent future ethnic rebellions. For democratic governments, on the other hand, the cost of pre‐emptive repression is too high. The article tests this argument in a quantitative analysis of government‐group dyads. It finds at least partial support for some implications of the argument: Autocratic governments use more repression than democracies against discriminated groups, but only when they are also weak, and against groups with a history of protest. There is little evidence that regimes of either type respond to previous violent mobilization or group strength with repression.     

Explaining subnational parliamentary scrutiny powers: A fuzzy-set analysis of German Landtage

While the European Union’s Lisbon Treaty has important implications for regional parliaments with legislative competences, most studies have focused on cross-country differences or examined the activities of regional parliaments at the EU level. This contribution shows the existence of substantial intra-country differences in the formal scrutiny rights of regional parliaments. We analyse how German regional parliaments (Landtage) have addressed the challenge of controlling their governments in EU affairs. Using fuzzy-set comparative qualitative analysis, we find that institutional and partisan factors (vote share in the second chamber, economic potential, and conservative governments) explain the differences found among German Landtage particularly well. Landtage with otherwise weak parliamentary prerogatives were successful in using the reform momentum to strengthen their rights in the field of EU policy. Combined with the party political salience of EU policy-making, the integration process has thus empowered formally weaker Landtage.     

Politics,exit strategy and political settlement in Sierra Leone: a critical analysis of a laboratory experiment (1991–2015)

Abstract

A glance at key indicators—in terms of growth forecast and stable elections—will project Sierra Leone as a political settlement model for a post-conflict state. Sierra Leone has been an important laboratory for UN and international donors’ interventions and thinking. However, efforts by the international donor community to decentralise power to the margins, both geographically and demographically, have failed. Instead, this focus on the institutions of governance has allowed the same elite to maintain power. Sierra Leone today shares similar socio-economic and political conditions with the Sierra Leone before the outbreak of the civil war. A detailed analysis of the country’s socio-economic trends, its political institutions and the logic and dynamics of violence show a disturbing picture. While the international community considered that an exit strategy was feasible, the political settlement remains an experiment in that it is detached from everyday life and livelihood concerns of Sierra Leoneans and reveals the structural violence behind this process.     

Political enthusiasm for social pensions and its eventual decline in Taiwan: an institutional account of pension dynamics in a new democracy

Over the last two decades, there has been a remarkable transformation of the demography and political economy of East and Southeast Asia, thus raising pensions as an important policy issue. In addressing the pension needs of those outside formal sector employment, Taiwan was the regional forerunner regarding social pension provision. However, the immense political popularity of these schemes waned and from the mid-2000s onwards the government began to substitute them with a contributory system for the socially disadvantaged. This paper analyses the political dynamics of social pensions in Taiwan, from expansion of coverage through to gradual dismantlement. The politics surrounding these benefits has received scant attention in international scholarship, with the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank Institute, in particular, having focused most of their attention on policy design issues. The contention here is that a specific configuration of political factors featured prominently in Taiwan, thus providing an explanation for the evolution of its pension policy. Also, these political dimensions can shed light on how this type of pension could evolve in other East and Southeast Asian countries, which is pertinent given that many have increasingly ageing populations.     

The Personal Sources of Responsiveness. Introduction to a Special Section

Responsiveness is a core value in democratic politics. Individual legislators are important mechanisms for implementing this concern in real‐world settings and thus facilitating responsive government. This introduction to the special section on this topic starts out by highlighting the special relevance of individual legislators in this regard and by sketching important theoretical considerations that emerge from the political science literature on this issue. In its main part, it summarizes the key findings of the contributions in relation to its main theme, namely the personal sources of responsiveness. We end with a short conclusion that reflects on possible tensions between responsiveness and the personalization of representative systems.     

和谐社会的人际伦理

在现代社会中使用"和谐"的说法,需要作与现代政治、社会有关的释义,方能明确它的现代含义.我们可以用现代民主、宪政、法制、权利、权威等概念来解释"和谐"的现代政治含义,也可以用别类现代概念来解释"和谐"其它方面的现代意义.著名伦理哲学家马各利特(A.Margalit)在<记忆的伦理>中提出的一系列有用的伦理哲学概念,为我们解释"和谐"的现代社会人际伦理意义提供了一种可能.