Analysing legislative performance: a plebeian perspective

Legislative performance can be understood in terms of results (the quality of the laws enacted) or in terms of the literal performativity of legislators (the quality of their appearances on the public stage). This article examines two different ethical frameworks for evaluating legislative performance in this latter, performative sense: a deliberative model, which restricts just political performances to deliberative exchanges among citizens, and a plebeian model, which expands just political performances to include those where political and economic elites endure special burdens as a condition of their elevated status. Given certain drawbacks of the deliberative model and parallel advantages of the plebeian model, I endorse the plebeian approach to political performativity. The article concludes by elaborating one of the key contrasts between the two models with regard to political communication, namely the plebeian model's embrace of a distinct form of legislative disruption. Beyond the way deliberation itself disrupts non-communicative forms of power and beyond the way protests physically disrupt governmental processes, plebeianism invokes a third kind of disruption – non-deliberative speech – intended to rebuke and humble leaders rather than reach mutual understanding about issues.     

西方个人主义价值观研究

个人主义是近代西方社会的主流价值观,它包含两个层面的内容在个人层面上经历了人道主义、利己主义和功利主义、自由主义三个阶段,在国家层面上经历了资本主义、殖民主义、帝国主义和法西斯主义与霸权主义.个人主义具有平民性、自由性、民主性、侵略性等本质特征和非本质特征.     

法律职业话语的解析

职业主义、精英主义和民粹主义构成了现代社会关于法律职业的三种话语系统和意识形态。职业主义是一种描绘和论证法律职业的理想图景的话语,精英主义是一种论证法律职业的正当性和合法性的话语,而民粹主义则是一种批判法律职业之弊害的话语。三种话语系统和意识形态之间的良性互动,是法律职业健康发展的有效保证。