中国自由主义文学的话语建构与理论阐释——兼对 "泛自由主义"倾向的批评

自由主义文学一直是个颇具争议的话题。20世纪80年代始,研究者们就开始了对自由主义文学的理论建构和概念阐释,他们的阐释话语直接影响了中国自由主义文学的概念和内涵。时至当下,学者们对自由主义文学的关注已经显化为一种独立的文学思潮研究,但对于研究中普遍存在的“泛自由主义”倾向,也应引起人们的警惕和批评。     

世界体系理论:预测2025年——读《自由主义的终结》

华勒斯坦预测:2025—2050年,我们将见证现行世界体系(即资本主义世界经济体系)的终结、自由主义的终结以及美国霸权的终结。它们在相近的时间段里占据统治地位,也会在相近的时间段里相继灭亡。其中新世界体系的建设是最值得关注的。华勒斯坦认为取代资本主义世界体系的会是社会主义世界体系,但是并不是先行的社会主义,对此,他做了有限的展望,但要清楚地知道"对岸"的情况却是不可能的,因为2025—2050年会是一个充满危机的混沌期。     

近代中国自由主义思潮研究综述

中国有自己的自由主义传统。学界注意梳理中国近代自由主义这份历史遗产。对有关近代中国自由主义研究的一些基本问题,如近代自由主义的意义、核心价值及特征,近代自由主义的发端与发展阶段,近代自由主义的类型、流派与主流,近代自由主义者,近代自由主义失败的原因等,有必要进行评述。     

个人权利的基础和位置——评麦金泰尔对新自由主义权利理论的批判

个人权利是政治哲学的核心范畴,新自由主义和社群主义是政治哲学的两个流派。以罗尔斯和诺齐克为代表的新自由主义将建立在个人主义基础上的个人权利置于优先位置,个人主义的前提是先验个人。以麦金泰尔(A lasdair MacIntyre)为代表的社群主义试图从根本上摧毁新自由主义的权利基础论,认为个人权利的基础不是先验个人而是社群,置于优先位置的是公共利益而不是个人权利。建设社会主义和谐社会应保持公共利益与个人权利之间的合理张力。     

Agency in advanced liberal services: grounding sociological knowledge in homeless people's accounts

This paper aims to understand how people who are homeless respond to advanced liberal social services that endeavour to promote their autonomy and responsible actions. We prioritize the experiences and positions of people who are homeless, and what agentic action means to them. Sociological literature is selective about what accounts are deemed agentic. Agency is associated with accounts that resist or subvert dominant neoliberal framings of homelessness as failure of individuals. When people experiencing homelessness or poverty themselves foreground autonomy or responsibility, sociologists treat them as cultural dopes who have internalized neoliberal discourse. Our analysis is driven by an ethnographic study in an Australian homelessness shelter. We demonstrate how people who are homeless neither outright reject nor completely embrace advanced liberal practices to influence their actions and promote autonomy. People engaged in relational reasoning. Paternalist and advanced liberal social services were both lauded and rejected for their capacities and limitations to realize a good life. We contribute to the discussion for sociology to value people's accounts and experiences, rather than broader social process explaining their accounts. From the perspectives of people who are homeless, we show that just because something appears neoliberal does not mean it should be automatically rejected.     

Survivor: spectators and gladiators in the US environmental movement, 2000–2010

What motivates people to participate in which forms of environmental activism? To address this question, we revise empirical models examining environmental activism by disaggregating the outcome variable of movement participation and dichotomizing two key motivational factors. Using repeated cross-sectional data from the US General Social Survey of 2000 and 2010, this study conducts logistic regression of four forms of participation on perceived severity and sense of efficacy, while accounting for biographical availability and political engagement. Results from regression analysis show that vocabularies of motive have substantial impacts on an individual’s likelihood of: (1) signing a petition; (2) giving money; (3) joining a group; and (4) joining a protest or demonstration. Their effects are large enough to override the noticeable impacts of liberalism and education. This study also finds that the level of participation in the movement across all forms has decreased between 2000 and 2010. These findings direct our attention to the limited capacity of the public sphere to accommodate the environmental movement during the last decade, as well as to potential changes in environmental activism in the coming decades that may mobilize those previously less likely to participate.     

当代西方共和主义政治哲学发展评析

共和主义的复兴是当代西方政治哲学发展中的重大事件.当代西方共和主义的复兴不是简单地回归古典共和主义政治传统,而是对共和主义进行更加系统化与理论化的拓展与阐释.在规范政治理论中,当代西方共和主义政治哲学在公民身份、自由、民主与美德等维度上做出了既不同于自由主义又区别于社群主义的阐释,深化了在相关问题上的理论分析.共和主义政治哲学的兴起既体现了当代西方社会发展的基本要求,同时也是当代西方政治理论发展的必然结果,它在批判与挑战西方自由主义与社群主义思想范式的同时其本身也在反思与辩驳中不断发展与成熟.     

新自由主义与新保守主义的博弈——欧美当今主导政治思潮探讨

自冷战结束,尤其是小布什当政以来,美欧的关系出现了裂痕。表面上看,苏联的突然解体和冷战的结束使美欧失去了共同的敌人似乎是双方渐行渐远的原因,实际上,透过表象我们发现双方主导政治思潮——新自由主义和新保守主义的——对立才是真正的关键。自霍布斯和洛克以来,自由主义一直都是西方主导性的政治思潮。在自由主义发展的同时,另一种政治哲学思潮——保守主义也发展起来。二战后欧洲的主导政治思潮是以福利国家为核心的新自由主义。而在美国,从20世纪60年代开始,一种新型的保守主义开始登上美国政治的舞台并日益强劲,更成为里根和小布什两届政府的主导政治思潮,这就是新保守主义。以不同政治哲学思潮为指导的美欧两方所采取的国内外政策也有很大区别,这造成了它们的分歧和对抗,但从长远看,美欧关系的构架应是竞争、互补和合作并存的一种状态。     

New Trends in Russian Intellectual Anti-Americanism: The Strange Case of Viktor Pelevin’s Novel S.N.U.F.F.

Victor Pelevin’s 2011 novel S.N.U.F.F. is discussed in terms of being a dystopia and a Menippean satire, as well as an anatomy of today’s cultural interactions between Russia and the West. Pelvin’s consistent approach in constructing an elaborate critique of U.S. cultural imperialism is examined in relation to the expansion of popular culture, and also through a Eurocentric epistemological hegemony in the context of which U.S. leftist–liberal academics teach the non-Western ‘rest of the world’ what such things as gender, race, homo- and heterosexuality, femininity, masculinity, sexism, hate speech, etc., should mean in one’s respective culture. The vast, panoramic satirical canvas of intellectual attitudes and cultural beliefs that Pelvin has drawn is described as an attempted worldwide ‘colonization of the mind’, which has today become an avatar of cultural Americanization.     

Liberalism(s) and the Critical Securitization of Development Debate

The securitization of development theme has developed substantially since the late 1990s within the critical global governance literature. To varying degrees, contributors to this debate argue that a liberal global governance complex links the discourses of security and development in what is described as the ‘security–development nexus’, such that the South is conceived as an international security threat. Whilst the security–development nexus itself has been thoroughly explored, the use of the central concept of liberalism has not. This paper addresses this issue through demarcating and critiquing the three readings of liberalism relevant to the securitization of development debate. Identifying and elucidating the three distinct strands of liberalism enable this paper to identify several weaknesses within the debate and propose a number of amendments. This includes proposing that the liberal discourse of global governance reflects complexity rather than consensus and that the centrality of ‘liberalism’ is at the expense of a robust investigation into how the structural power of global capitalism underpins the security–development nexus.