论当代美国的保守主义运动

文章认为当代美国的保守主义运动起源于 2 0世纪 4 0年代中至 50年代中的保守主义思想运动 ,然后经过 2 0世纪 6 0年代以来的保守主义社会运动和政治运动的演进 ,到 80年代末 ,保守主义思潮在美国社会政治中的影响已与自由主义平分秋色 ,90年代中期以来甚至有超强的趋势 ,这一趋势在“91 1事件”后更加明显。文章还认为 ,当代美国的保守主义运动的演进模式是精英驱动—大众响应的模式 ,它对美国社会政治的影响深而且广 ;此外 ,保守主义与自由主义是既对立又统一的两极 ,它们从属于更高一级的意识形态 ,即美国资本主义的意识形态。     

21世纪日本自由主义外交战略思想解读——以"地球贡献国家"论为中心

战后日本战略思想存在两种体系,即保守主义与自由主义.自由主义主要强调文化、影响力等软实力的作用,与强调经济、军事等硬实力的保守主义存在很明显的区别.进入21世纪以来,自由主义派提出日本建设"地球贡献国家"的设想得到了政策与思想上的一定认同,对保守主义色彩浓厚的日本政治生态带来了深远影响.     

论拉兹的至善主义及其得失

正统的自由主义者都是“反至善主义的”。虽然拉兹是一名自由主义者,但他举起至善主义的大旗,试图对自由主义提供一种激进的解释,以探索一种既不同于古典自由主义也不同于新自由主义的第三条道路。拉兹的政治哲学介于自由主义和社群主义之间。     

大俄罗斯主义思想体系及其当代政治表现

主要从彼得大帝时代起 ,在民族自我反省过程中 ,大俄罗斯主义逐渐发展成为世界性征服思想体系 ,其核心要素就是 :( 1 )根深蒂固且极力张扬的民族救世主义及其“帝国转移”理论 ;( 2 )基于地缘安全和意识形态对抗进行地理扩张的帝国思想 ;( 3)国家思想的一元化以及在此基础上追求民族一致性的理想 ;( 4 )帝国的俄罗斯化。作为一种政治文化 ,大俄罗斯主义对俄罗斯国家理想、对外政策、发展道路无不产生了深远影响 ;而作为一种世界性征服思想体系 ,大俄罗斯主义特别强调俄罗斯文明与西方文明之间的对抗性 ,结果造成了俄罗斯与周边国家特别是与欧洲之间严重的安全两难和国家政治与社会结构日趋脆弱。在大俄罗斯主义思想体系中 ,国家思想一元化是俄罗斯民族和国家同一性的根本所在 ,是大俄罗斯主义的重要特征 ,但也是其致命的弱点。前苏联国家意识形态解体后 ,到目前为止俄罗斯还没有一个一元化的国家思想 ,所以当今俄罗斯政坛上 ,意识形态多元化意味着大俄罗斯主义的退潮。     

社团主义:一种新公共伦理学

社团主义：一种新公共伦理学〔美〕Ｍ．戴利在美国的政治思想中，社团主义是一种新哲学。它致力于社团价值观与个人自由价值观的相互协调，其理想是民主的社团。它只能在自由主义的文化传统中形成，也就是说这种文化所促成的社团价值观的衰退似乎已经到了必须加以纠正的地...     

美国宪法的共和主义原旨解读

通过对美国宪法制宪意图的解析,可以看出自由主义、民主政治是美国制宪者所批评的对象,在宪法上并不具有合法性。“共和”是制宪者们为美国人民选择通达自由与幸福的生活方式和宪法框架,这种“共和”的思想与模板来自遥远的古罗马共和国。对罗马的古典共和主义与美国宪法中的共和主义内涵的比较,显示出当代新罗马共和派的理论启示,也可辨别出它的缺陷。     

对“撒切尔主义”的政治学分析

“撒切尔主义”是目前西方社会科学界广泛关注的一个综合性的课题,关于它的政治、经济、国际政治方面的论著很多。其原因是多方面的,其中最主要的是,“撒切尔主义”和各种西方意识形态性社会科学理论,特别是自由主义政治学,保守主义哲学以及     

桑德尔与卢梭之共和主义思想比较

20世纪60年代以来,"共和主义复兴"逐渐成为西方学术界的一道独特景观,其对自由主义的批判意义重大。当代著名美国政治哲学家桑德尔便是借助于共同体主义和共和主义两股力量,对自由主义进行了釜底抽薪式的批判。他的新共和主义思想,同以卢梭为代表的古典共和主义有着一定的"家族相似",却又存在着诸多差异。文章旨在通过比较研究,找出新老共和主义思想的异同,以期揭示当代新共和主义的独特视角和理论贡献以及它自身遇到的挑战。     

近代西欧绝对主义思想论纲

"绝对主义(absolutism)"是指16-18世纪西欧君主制国家中,关于绝对王权、主权和国家理由的学说.这一时期在西方文明的演进史中处于特殊地位--它是中世纪到近代的桥梁,西方政治思想的某些方面正是在这一时期发生了根本性的转变.作为当时官方的意识形态,绝对主义具有温和折衷的特征,使王权进一步抽象为政治共同体的权力和意志.资产阶级革命胜利以后,绝对主义思想退出历史舞台,但是它的理论成果奠定了现代国家理论的基础.     

论平等的自由主义与社群主义之争

以罗尔斯为代表的平等的自由主义理论致力于探讨公平问题,试图建立一种脱离任何形而上学立场的"程序正义"。这一理论由于其所体现的普遍主义、个人主义等特征,成为社群主义的主要批判对象。罗尔斯的政治自由主义某种程度上是对社群主义的批评的一种回应,但并不能消除社群主义的质疑。另一方面,社群主义也不能根本否定或取代自由主义,充其量只是这一理论的补充。     

Gender,work, and childcare in Kazakhstan,Mongolia, and Russia

The current study seeks to understand the nature of gender relations within a post‐Soviet welfare model in Kazakhstan, Mongolia, and Russia. On the basis of the analysis of key labour market indicators, parental leave, and childcare policies, it finds that the welfare models in the three countries are hybrid, and neither authoritarianism in Kazakhstan and Russia nor democracy in Mongolia lead to substantive gender equality outcomes. Persistent gender inequality in these countries is underpinned by the neo‐liberal approach to welfare provision, conservative social norms, and limited agency of civil society to influence the policy agenda. Nonetheless, these states have distributed to the population with an emphasis on working mothers, and this policy choice has been driven by economic, demographic, and political considerations, which ultimately serve to support, rather than transform, the patriarchal power structure in these societies.     

Race,Color, Ethnicity,and Class

The issues of race, color, ethnicity, and class present many challenges for goup workers leading adolescent counseling groups in culturally muted urban areas. These issues are examined in detail in the context of a school-based group work program for middle school teenagers. The role of the group leader in working with this population is discussed, and guidelines are offered for developing biculturalism in group members and for addressing race, color, ethnicity, and class as they arise in bicultural group processes.     

Civilization,Culture, Technology,and the Market

The largest, the cruelest empire in the history of mankind is rapidly disintegrating. But we must not be deluded. The ruins of great empires do not yet mean the emergence of a new, happier, and wiser society. The empire has not yet disintegrated entirely. But even when it does, this will not mean that the people inhabiting one-sixth of the earth's surface will live better, that life will become happy, and that our countrymen will be freer, richer, healthier, better educated, and more humane. Even the cessation of the activity of the CPSU does not mean that the destructive force of lawlessness, militarism, the suppression of human dignity, stagnation, conservatism, the terrible discomfort of everyday life, unprecedented exploitation, general incompetence, parasitism, and technological backwardness is a museum relic forever consigned to the past.     

Religion, Meaning, and Prejudice

Links between religion and prejudice have been interpreted to suggest that religion can both reduce and exacerbate prejudice. Here, the analysis of religion as a meaning system illuminates how religion can affect intergroup attitudes. Traditional psychological perspectives on religion and prejudice are summarized, followed by a discussion of religion and prejudice in cross-cultural and cross-religious contexts, involving varying target groups. Next, we explore possible explanatory mechanisms by proposing how four levels of meaning associated with religion—cognitive, motivational, societal, and intergroup—may both promote and attenuate prejudice. Finally, additional factors that might facilitate the paradoxical coexistence of religious egalitarian intentions with prejudiced attitudes are considered, and we speculate about the potential for religious groups to reduce prejudice within their adherents.     

Gender, Ethnicity, and Power

Group-based power is generally associated with three types of group distinctions: adult-child, gender, and ethnicity. We argue that gender-based power is not comparable to ethnic-based power, in part because the forms and degree of institutional discrimination experienced by men and women of subordinate ethnic groups are not similar to one another, and in part because stereotypes and categorization processes pertaining to gender are not comparable across ethnic groups. Finally, in experiments using college students as participants, we show that whether applicants are placed into occupations that would enhance or attenuate group-based inequality depends jointly on job applicants' ethnicity and gender. Implications for theories of inequality based on gender and ethnicity and the relationship of gendered power to other group-based forms of power are discussed.