民族政策是中国民族史研究的重点——以民族政策的制定为例

中国民族史主要研究中国历史上各民族的历史和民族关系史,涉及的内容非常广泛。从各民族来看,它既包括在历史上产生,并已经在历史上消亡的民族,如：匈奴、鲜卑、突厥、柔然、契丹等;同时,也包括在历史上产生,并延续到现在的民族,这就是我们现在的55个少数民族。从民族关系来看,它既包括汉族与少数民族之间的相互关系,也包括少数民族与少数民族之间的关系,如藏族与蒙古族的关系、满族与蒙古族的关系、维吾尔族与回族的关系等等。在这众多内容中,各民族政权实行的民族政策是其基本的内容。民族政策的制定与实施涉及到以上相关部分的很多内容,要将民族政策弄清楚,首先就要去研究相关内容。民族政策本身又涉及到很多方面,如民族政策的制定、民族政策的执行、民族政策的评估和民族政策的调整与终结等。民族政策的制定主要包括：民族政策的决策者与决策对象、民族政策的决策信息、民族政策的决策理论和方法,和民族政策的决策结果等四个部分。本文主要运用民族政策理论,从这四个方面对历代中央王朝民族政策的制定进行介绍,进而从一个侧面说明各民族政权实行的民族政策是中国民族史研究的重点。     

格勒博士藏学人类学研究历程口述史(下)

正访谈人:梁艳(以下简称梁)被访人:格勒(以下简称格)访谈时间:2014年5月16日地点:成都武侯区西南民族大学格勒博士的书房梁:中根千枝之前在1993年,评价您的《藏北牧民》的时候说到,您这本是当前用人类学方法、角度,研究藏族社会最出色的一本书。我看到您的硕士论文,还有您后来也有一系列跟牧区相关的研究。再者牧区又是人类学研究的一个宝地,所以我想请您谈一谈在牧区研究当中的田野经历。格:我的藏族牧区研究第一次是从为硕士论文进行考察开始的,前面已经讲过了。第二次是我到了     

四川经济融入“一带一路”战略建设的发展前景与对策

四川应该抓住国家实施"一带一路"战略建设给四川经济发展带来的四大新机遇,正确认识四川经济融入"一带一路"战略建设具有的三大优势和五大挑战,并采取六大方面的对策来促进四川经济融入"一带一路"战略建设,促进四川经济的快速发展,提升四川的经济实力。     

从民族志物品收集到东南海洋系文化构建——林惠祥先生收藏与展示实践（1929-1958）

Since the 1980s, critical museum studies have interpreted the‘collecting and exhibi-ting activities’ of a museum as both practical activ-ities as well as a persistent scientific and socio-cul-tural process, and have explored the natures of museum, including the logic and strategy behind these practices. Through reviewing Lin Huixiang ’s collecting and exhibiting practices ( 1929 to 1958 ) , this article aims to explore internal rela-tionships between ( i ) museum practices and ( ii ) the practitioner, all under a particular episteme. This article moreover presents the genealogy of Lin Huixiang ’s academic ideas, museum practices, and‘Southeastern-oceanic-cultural ’ research pro-jects;it covers his earlier activities of ethnographic object collecting and exhibiting practices all the way to the construction of the‘Southeastern-ocean-ic-culture-system ’ within the framework of the‘New Theory of Evolution’ . Seen from a critical perspective, a museum is not a neutral and objective institution but a space full of power and discussion. In addition, in our modern times Museums have become a controver-sial place: the museum’s nature has changed from a‘palace of knowledge’ to a representation-system composed of objects. Eilean Hooper-Greenhill uses the terms“effective history” and“episteme” to ex-amine the history of a museum, and divides it into three stages: ( i ) the irrational cabinet, ( ii ) a classical episteme, and ( iii) a modern episteme. Different epistemes directly influence the collecting and exhibiting practices. Susan Pearce points out that collecting activities express and shape the rela-tionship between the human and material worlds. She distinguishes between “gathering”, “hoard-ing”, and “collecting” and she emphasizes that the term “collecting” points to products of imagi-nation. This imagination metaphorically creates meanings by arrangement and it displays the known world. Therefore, the activity of collecting and ex-hibiting is always practiced under a particular epis-teme;in addition political standpoints, value judg-ments, and academic interests are involved when interpreting the meanings of the objects and the constructing the knowledge order. This article moreover conducts a systematic exploration of Lin Huixiang’s collecting and exhibi-ting practices as well as the genealogy of his aca-demic ideas. All is examined from three aspects:( i) ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object col-lecting practices; ( ii ) the intellectual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology; ( iii ) the New Theory of Evolution and the establishment of the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system. The first section of “ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object collecting practices”focuses on Lin Huixiang’s collecting practices from 1929 until the end of the Second World War. He started to collect aboriginal human objects in Taiwan since 1929 and ethnographical objects in the South Sea since 1937 . As most anthropologists from that area and period, Lin Huixiang’s collecting activities were influenced by patriotism, the establishment of a Chinese anthropology, and by personal academic interests. Chinese anthropologists during the 1920s to 1940s, including Lin Huixiang, believed that nationalism and the ‘Great Harmony ’ would lead to Chinese independence and civilization. And his practices had real significance for China in war-time. On the one hand, these aboriginal objects from Taiwan and the South Sea were regarded as material evidence of an extant“barbarian” culture;this was helpful in understanding that the‘barbari-an’ culture was basically same as that of ours, which then would reduce our ethnic prejudice a-gainst the ‘barbarian’ . On the other hand, these objects also became a means for the public to un-derstand Taiwan, the colony of Japan; in fact, these aboriginal objects even became a symbol of anti-colonialism and aroused the people’s patriot-ism. The second part of “the intelluctual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology” turns to Lin Huixiang’s ideas about the enlightment through a museum and its exhibitions. Lin Huixiang indeed emphasized the educational function of exhibitions and the museum. He displayed his collections to the public, held several exhibitions starting in 1929 , donated all his collections to Xiamen Uni-versity in 1951 , and advocated the establishment of the Museum of Anthropology. Lin Huixiang pointed out that museums were educational institu-tions meant to spread knowledge, and he used specimens, charts, and models to educate the pub-lic. As an anthropologist, Lin Huixiang understood the meaning of an ethnographical museum as an in-strument for teaching, research, and social educa-tion. By reviewing Lin Huixiang’s ‘collecting and exhibiting practices ’ during the period 1929 -1958 , we can clearly come to understand his aca-demic ideas about the discipline of anthropology and about the Southeastern-regional culture. The exhibitions in the Museum of Anthropology of Xia-men University represent his endeavor to construct the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system within the framework of the New Theory of Evolution. He showed archaeological specimens from the prehis-toric period to the historical period, as well as eth-nographical objects of China’s Southeastern region and Taiwan region, Indonesia, Singapore, India, and of Burma. All objects displayed in exhibitions were used to illustrate the rule of evolution, espe-cially the ethnographic objects that evidenced the primitiveness of human culture; this is helpful to us when exploring the origins of cultures. At the same time, Lin Huixiang compared the cultures of Northern China and Southeastern China, and iden-tified cultural traits specific to the Southeastern ar-ea, aiming to show cultural similarities among China’s Southeastern region and the Taiwan region, and Southeast Asia, which he called the“South-eastern-oceanic-culture-system”.     

西部民族地区旅游社会冲突疏解研究——基于对四川旅游业发展的考察

社会转型时期,旅游社会冲突已经成为四川、云南、贵州等西部民族地区一种不容忽视的特殊社会矛盾。本文基于对四川旅游业发展的长期考察,重点选择了桃坪羌寨为案例点,旨在获取描述性研究成果的基础上探寻旅游社会冲突的有效疏解路径,以期规避恶性突发性群体事件,维护西部民族地区社会和谐稳定发展。     

基诺族民族文化传承的现状调查与分析

基诺族是我国目前最晚确认的一个单一的少数民族,主要聚居在云南省的基诺族乡.基诺族形成了包括民族语言、民族服饰、民俗习惯、手工技艺、民族文学与艺术、民族宗教、民族体育、民族医药等在内的丰富多彩的民族传统文化,成为了基诺族民族特性的象征.但是,基诺族在跨越式的高速发展过程中,民族传统文化正在逐渐消失.我们的调查分析希望能为相关部门就民族传统文化传承问题进行决策时提供参考依据.     

孟加拉国的宪法修正及其特点

1972年11月,孟加拉国制定的宪法规定了孟加拉国的政治、经济、公民权、外交等一系列基本原则,成为了孟加拉国民主政治的起点.从1973～2004年间,孟加拉国议会对宪法中关于国家政权、领土、公民权、妇女参政等内容先后形成了14条宪法修正案.孟加拉国宪法的制定和修正,显示了孟加拉国宪法的特点.     

中韩民族文化遗产保护与利用的措施比较

通过对中韩民族文化遗产保护与利用工作在法制建设、实施理念、管理体制、民众参与性、成果发掘等方面的比较,认为中韩两国在民族文化遗产保护与利用的法制建设方面,中国比韩国做得更加具体化,更适合中国国情.但是,中国在民族文化遗产保护与利用的实施理念、管理体制、民众参与性、成果发掘等方面的成效显然不如韩国.因此,我们要注重借鉴与学习韩国的先进经验,提高我国民族文化遗产保护与利用的水平.