实事求是与制度建设

当前,制度性缺陷是影响坚持实事求是思想路线的突出问题.因而,要编织严密的制度之网,将制度保障机制建设与提高干部队伍自身素质相结合,将外在的硬性约束与内在的软性约束相结合,确保实事求是思想路线得到贯彻落实.     

Inventing truth and building power in Russia

Next year marks a quarter century since the end of the Soviet Union. How has power evolved in the region? What might the future hold? What are the implications for the West? Three important works illuminate these questions from different angles. Henry Hale argues that (except for the Baltic states) post‐Soviet regimes are fundamentally similar to one another in being constituted by informal networks that dominate resources and institutions. They converge around, and compete for, influence with a powerful presidency that imposes selective rewards and punishments. Succession is the key weakness, and an unpopular lame duck leader invariably leads to upheaval. Karen Dawisha charts the rise of Vladimir Putin's network of friends and colleagues, and documents allegations of corruption and illegality. She shows how quickly this network, on gaining presidential power, revived state strength and undermined other networks. Peter Pomerantsev vividly portrays a society of simulations ruled by a deft and disorienting ‘post‐modern authoritarianism’. But as systemic popularity has declined this has given way to a harder, shriller anti‐western course, and ultimately to the annexation of Crimea. The future may see the international context play a greater role in regime evolution than before. The compelling anatomy of power laid bare in these three works points to growing tensions and flaws in patronal rule across the post‐Soviet space.     

Post‐truth anthropology

Countless commentators have announced the advent of the post‐truth era, but while everyone seems to be talking about it, there is little agreement about what it really means. This article argues that anthropology can make an important and distinctive contribution to understanding post‐truth by treating it ethnographically. Commonly proposed explanations for post‐truth include changes in political culture, in the structure of information in the digital age and universal cognitive weaknesses that limit people's capacity for critical thought. While all these are likely important factors, they do not account for the role of culture in creating and sustaining post‐truth. In fact, it is likely that culture, especially in the form of metacognition, or thought about thought, plays an important role by providing knowledge practices, techniques for allocating attention, and especially competing theories of truth. Ethnographic methods provide anthropologists with a distinctive window on post‐truth cultures of metacognition.     

Trends in political science

Ithiel de Sola Pool, ed.: Contemporary Political Science: Toward Empirical Theory, McGraw‐Hill, New York, 1967, pp. 276, $7.90.     

Myths in political anthropology

Lewellen, Ted C. Political Anthropology, An Introduction. South Hadley, Mass.: Bergin & Garvey Publishers Inc., 1983. 192 pp. Bibliography, Index, Illustrations. $22.95 cloth, $10.95 paper.     

关于真理的几个问题新议

在实践唯物主义精神的指引下,遵循实践哲学的方法原则,正确对待真理的主观特征和主体本性,挖掘深藏其中的主观意蕴,是关乎真理论研究和发展方向的重大问题,是唯物主义反映论的基本要求。真理作为主体对客体的正确反映,即科学的理论,它包含认识和正确的认识两个规定性,简而言之,真理是特殊的认识。     

Delaying truth recovery for missing persons*

ABSTRACT. The fate of missing persons is a central issue in post‐conflict societies facing truth recovery and human rights dilemmas. Despite widespread public sympathy towards relatives, societies emerging from conflict often defer the recovery of missing for decades. More paradoxically, in post‐1974 Cyprus, the official authorities delayed unilateral exhumations of victims buried within cemeteries in their own jurisdiction. Analysis of official post‐1974 discourses reveals a Greek‐Cypriot consensus to emphasise the issue as one of Turkish aggression, thus downplaying in‐group responsibilities and the legacy of intra‐communal violence. We compare the experience of Cyprus with other post‐conflict societies such as Spain, Northern Ireland, and Mozambique and explore the linkages between institutions and beliefs about transitional justice. We argue that elite consensus initiates and facilitates the transition to democracy but often leads to the institutionalisation of groups opposing truth recovery even for in‐group members.