In Defence of the Secular? Islamisation,Christians and (New) Politics in Urbane Malaysia

Besides the clarion call for a “new politics” by opposition political parties, a significant catalyst that arguably swayed Christian electoral choices in the landmark Malaysian general elections of March 2008 was the counsel by religious leaders to safeguard “the secular state”. This action was prompted by recent high profile controversial legal cases that were perceived to be a serious erosion of the freedom of religion clause guaranteed in the secularist Federal Constitution. In this essay, I not only examine the recent antecedents of this course of action but also delve into the more distant past in order to draw out how the apparently impervious categories of “religion” and “the secular” have been implicated in the structuring of social and political imaginaries in Malaysia.     

Asiatics and Chinamen

This article compares two clusters of polemical language. One is comprised of critical uses of the term “Asiatic” in Russian political discourse from the 1890s to the 1910s. The other is Chinese usage, in the 1920s and 1930s, of the term “Zhina,” a Japanese version of “China” which was perceived as injurious to Chinese national pride. The article traces how, in both cases, political and cultural agents criticized their own country and society by adopting an outsider’s perspective – that of the foreigner, who would classify Russia as an “Asiatic” country and call China “Zhina.” The conclusions are relevant for understanding the sources of nationalist rhetoric in modern Russia and China, with implications reaching beyond these two countries.     

Historians Writing about Historians

This article takes three famous historians writing about historians and history-writing as its subject, considering Fan Ye’s work in light of Liu Zhiji’s understanding of history and Fan Ye’s writing on Ban Gu. It seeks to discover in Liu Zhiji’s work the principles for writing a guoshi 國史 (court history), reading Liu Zhiji’s principles in relation to Liu’s assessment of Fan Ye’s Hou Hanshu (History of the Later Han) in general, and, it provides, more particularly as a case study, a study of Fan Ye’s treatment of the earlier historian Ban Gu, author of the Hanshu (History of Han). The article builds the cases that Liu Zhiji and Fan Ye are model historians, insofar as they were responsible for supplying plausible accounts of the past based on the evidence available to them. Liu Zhiji’s metahistorical rules and Fan Ye’s biography of Ban Gu serve in the article as examples in this regard. The article presumes that the historians’ experiences in their own lifetimes inevitably shaped both the style and content of their works, as no “objective” or “scientific” account of history is possible. The good historian instead holds himself accountable for the judgments rendered. So although modern historians of China today may well prefer the rhetorical style of one of the three early historians to that of the others, moderns would do well to ponder, and in some cases emulate features of the early histories under review here.     

Theoretical reflections

The article starts with a discussion about the frequent statement that culture is a marginal area in politics. It proceeds with an analysis of the phenomenon and concept of “the cultural turn” and its possible consequences for cultural democracy. Then there follows a reflection on the potential power of religion and culture in political developments. After these introductory sections I present and discuss what I call five “democracy dimensions” of cultural policy: norms and ideologies; distribution of economic resources; institutional structures and decision‐making procedures; agents and interests in the policy‐making process; and access to and participation in cultural life. The conclusion is that under certain circumstances culture may mobilise huge masses of people in political actions but this is unlikely to happen in Western European democracies where culture in a long historical process has been privatised and isolated from big politics by the establishment of a specific sphere with its own structures, norms, logics and discourses. It is questionable if cultural policies will be more democratic under the reign of global capitalism and new liberalism. “The cultural turn” is an ambivalent phenomenon which cannot by itself bring about more cultural democracy. The future of cultural democracy cannot be decided for by cultural life or the cultural policy system themselves, it is dependent on what will happen to democracy as a total political system, of which cultural policy is only a small part.     

接收而不接受--铁路知识的供给与刘锡鸿的选择

无论在理论还是实践方面,刘锡鸿都是晚清较早"接收"铁路知识的官员之一,但他却提出25条理由反对中国修筑铁路,从而以"不接受"铁路闻名于时。他的论据在于中国不具备兴办铁路的政治与社会环境,缺乏相应的经济与文化基础。对此,不能以"保守"简单定性,应当看到刘锡鸿对于西学知识的认真思考和理性抉择,进而理解近代国人在接收与接受西方事物方面的复杂性。     

Emancipation or Enclosement? The Spatialization of Difference and Urban Ethnic Contestation in Colombia

Abstract: The focus of this article is a paradox inherent in the political effects of spatial claims undertaken by multicultural policies in many nation states: though territory is considered as one of the primary means of achieving autonomy and self‐determination, it is at the same time a mechanism that encloses difference. Through a combination of archival and ethnographic research I study the political effects of binding indigenous people's minority rights with indigenous reservations in Colombia. I focus on analyzing the legal ways in which an “ethnic indigenous type” has been attached to an “ethnic indigenous rural topos” in the jurisprudence of the Colombian Constitutional Court. I also examine how ethnic groups in the capital city of Bogotá have questioned the multicultural ideals of indigeneity and the romantic desires of what an indigenous place should look like. Ultimately, my intention is to draw attention both analytically and politically, to the necessity of more thorough analyses of the consequences of strict forms of spatializing ethnicity.     

“WHAT HAS POSTERITY EVER DONE FOR ME?”: FUTURE GENERATIONS,INTERGENERATIONAL JUSTICE,AND THE CHRONOPOLITICS OF DISTANT FUTURES

“Future generations” play a key role in current political debates. In the context of the climate crisis especially, political controversies are often framed as moral problems of “intergenerational justice.” This article aims to historicize the use of the concept of “future generations” in modern political discourse and to uncover its long—and often ambivalent—history. Its main argument is that talking about “future generations” was part of an attempt to integrate (distant) futures into the political discourse of the time. The first part of the article outlines a theoretical perspective on the relationship between generations and temporalities. The second part focuses on how anticipating “future generations” became an important part of the history of utopian thinking and political planning in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, especially in the realm of demographic and economic discussions. The third part analyzes the emergence of “future ethics” and “intergenerational justice” as important political discourses in the 1970s. This part refers both to the academic debates about “future generations” and to the way political decision-makers used the concept to legitimize their policies. The article argues that the concept of “future generations” should not be taken as an ethical principle that transcended the political debates of the present. Rather, it was itself the result of intense political controversies.     

The Judicial Bookshelf

Almost anyone who can read would describe the Supreme Court of the United States as a legal body–an institution that says what the law is in the context of deciding cases. May the Court also be fairly described as a political institution? Even to pose the question raises eyebrows, because Americans commonly use the word “political” to refer to partisan politics—that persistent struggle between organized groups called political parties to control public offices, public resources, and the nation’s destiny. In this sense of the word, the federal courts are expected today to be “above politics,” meaning that judges are supposed to refrain from publicly taking sides in elections, from otherwise jumping into the arena of electoral combat, 2 or from deciding cases based on the popularity of the litigants.3 While democratic theory anticipates that elected officials will answer to the people, the rule of law envisions something different: an abiding and even‐handed application by the judiciary of the Constitution and statutes shaped by the people and their representatives.     

安纳波利斯会议在美国制宪史上的地位

安纳波利斯会议原是邦联国会为协调北部各邦之间贸易冲突而开,会议报告却发出了召开修改《邦联条例》以应对邦联危机的费城会议的决定;汉密尔顿和麦迪逊是这次会议的主角,协调贸易冲突的失败,更坚定了他们这些“国家主义者”建立强大中央政府的信念,并开始思考建立新国家的若干原则,从而为费城会议上的大辩论奠定了理论基础。因此,安纳波利斯会议在美国制宪史上占有重要的地位,是美国宪政体制由邦联向联邦制转变的一次探索性的会议。     

Revisiting and Revising the Tobacco Rebellion

The major foreign concessions granted in the reign of Nasser al-Din Shah Qajar have received considerable attention, none more so than the Tobacco Rebellion, which is generally viewed as a watershed event in the awakening of political consciousness in Iran. Although mentioned in most of the published material on the precedents of the Constitutional Revolution of 1906, a revised narrative of the tobacco rebellion is overdue. This paper fills the gaps and revises some of the widely held assumptions on the forces that unleashed a nationwide movement that almost brought down the Qajar dynasty. The emphasis is on the incendiary protests in Tabriz and the largely neglected role of Hajj Kazem Malek-al-Tojjar. This article, which is the fifth of a series by the author on the two Malek-al-tojjar-e mamalek-e mahrusa of the Qajar era, questions the authorship of the fatwa (hokm) and re-assesses the motivation for its hasty proclamation and dissemination. In other words, were the “sensation-seekers” the heroes of reform or is there a neglected version to extricate from the truths and half-truths propounded about this watershed event?     

The Judicial Bookshelf

A persistent reality of constitutional government in the United States from practically the beginning of the Republic has been the close link between the Constitution itself and the Supreme Court. Oddly, this link derives more from the Constitution's impact on the American political system than from what the Constitution itself actually says or contains. True, Article III included cases “arising under this Constitution” in describing the proper reach of the federal judicial power, and Article VI specified that “[t]his Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land … ” ¹ But the document not only provided scant means for enforcing that supremacy, but also failed even to specify how this “supreme Law” should be interpreted. It soon became clear, however that the task of interpretation would fall upon the Supreme Court, as illustrated by Chisholm v. Georgia. ² In the face of assurances made by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Marshall, and others during the ratification debates in 1787–1788 that a state could not, without its consent, be made a defendant in the federal courts by a citizen of another state, ³ the Justices in 1793 construed the language in Article III conferring the federal judicial power in suits “Between a State and Citizens of another State” to encompass a suit brought by a South Carolinian against the State of Georgia. The uproar that ensued prompted swift ratification of the Eleventh Amendment, which reversed the Court's first excursion into the realm of constitutional interpretation. Despite this rebuke, it was only a short time before Chief Justice Marshall insisted that the judicial power encompassed the authority “to say what the law is.” ⁴ Thus, from the assumed role of expounding of the Constitution evolved the companion duty of guarding it as well.     

National League of Cities and the Ephemeral Nature of Significant Supreme Court Cases

For many years, I taught third‐year law students at the Dickinson School of Law (Penn State's law school now, a private institution then) a seminar entitled “The Constitution.” For a semester we would seek to get to know the document through a careful reading of it, along with some of the works that those who wrote the Constitution would have read and some that they wrote, various essays by legal scholars and political scientists, and various Supreme Court cases. The goal was to get these budding young attorneys to try to determine what, if any, relationship there might be between what the Constitution says and what we now say it says.     

The Judicial Bookshelf

Two decades ago, in the summer of 1987, celebrations of the bicentennial of the United States Constitution were in high gear under the watchful eye of then recently retired Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who chaired the Commission on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution between 1985 and 1991. ¹ Numerous lectures, seminars, and conferences across the land made clear not only the role and value of what Chief Justice William Howard Taft once called “the ark of our covenant” ² in the life of the nation but also the central place the judiciary had long occupied in the political system, as state and national courts confronted vital questions of public policy perplexing and dividing the people. As that astute French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville first noted in 1835, the “American judge is dragged in spite of himself onto the political field . … There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one.” ³ With the “right to declare laws unconstitutional,” he explained, the judge “cannot compel the people to make laws, but at least he can constrain them to be faithful to their own laws and to remain in harmony with themselves.” ⁴     

Anti-ism thinkers: The post-May Fourth schism in political thought

Abstract

This article is a continuation of “Advent of the Age of Isms,” which primarily discusses a period teeming with various “isms” (主義 zhuyi). During this time, there were in fact a number of figures who held overtly or covertly opposing attitudes, in both cases giving rise to a phenomenon of fragmentation and asystematicness. Whether consisting of negative responses to the new political theory of “isms,” this “remedy for all ills,” or of piecemeal, asystematic criticism, the phenomenon itself served as a foil to the colossal intellectual forces of the Age of “Ismization.” This article offers a preliminary discussion of this phenomenon.     

Rethinking the Concept of Membership in Nature Advocacy Organizations

The political science literature on interest groups, particularly since Olson (1965), normally focuses on individual motivations to join groups or the incentives offered by groups to entice prospective members to join and, more important, to stay on as members over time. But what happens to our understanding about “members”—a term freighted with overtones of democratic participation—when these individuals are more likely to be passive “supporters” or “donors”? Is there a conceptual and practical distinction between the two? This article ponders this question by examining the advocacy organizations that comprise the national environmental community.     

Russia,China, and the universalism of modernity: the “Account of the Reforms of Peter the Great” by Kang Youwei

ABSTRACT

This paper analyzes a short essay by Kang Youwei (1858–1927) – one of the intellectual and political protagonists of late imperial and early Republican China. In it, he interpreted the historical experience of Russian modernization under Peter the Great (1672–1725) and used it as a “success story” for the renewal of Chinese monarchical institutions. It was written in 1898 and presented to the Manchu throne under the title “Account of the Reforms of Peter the Great”, and for our purposes will be the departing point for a “global intellectual circuit” through which the following questions will be addressed: Why was seventeenth and eighteenth century Russia considered as a model for China by the author? How did he manage to adapt the historical experience of Russia into a social and political conceptual framework for China? What was Kang’s historiographical method, and what kind of philosophy of history framed his reflections? What does this short essay tell us about Kang’s view on “Westernization”, on the concept of “modernity” itself, and on its use for historiographical purposes?     

试论民国时期云南边疆的殖边督办

“殖边督办”作为一级行政机构,是中国近代政治制度史上一个不大却又不能缺少的组成部分,也是研究近代云南地方史、云南民族政治制度史不可忽视的一个问题。本文从民国初年云南地方行政制度的变化及边政建设的推行、殖边督办公署的建立、组织机构、治边措施及其历史作用等四个方面对这一问题进行了论述。认为该行政机构在捍卫国家主权、保卫国土、巩固和开发边疆等方面发挥了积极的作用。并为云南边疆“改土归流”的最终完成奠定了物质和文化基础,推动了边疆与内地政治体制一体化的进程。     

No and after: options for Europe

The French and Dutch ‘no’ votes in referendums on the European Union Constitutional Treaty have thrown the EU into turmoil. The messages from both referendums are that public dissatisfaction with European integration is widespread and there is a disjuncture between the views of citizens and those of elites. The original purpose of the process that produced the Constitutional Treaty was to bring the EU closer to its citizens. However, the text that was negotiated was an unwieldy document intended to satisfy diverse requirements but difficult to explain concisely. After the completion of negotiations some governments, for reasons of political expediency, took decisions to hold referendums on the treaty, but the future of The Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe that took three years to complete is now uncertain. Furthermore, member states are divided about whether to press ahead with ratification after the two recent ‘no’ votes. What is the range of alternatives to member states if they wish to salvage the treaty or component parts? Finding a way through this current situation is the task the British government faces as it takes on the EU presidency from 1 July 2005.     

Explaining "Auschwitz" after the End of History: The Case of Italy

Everywhere the 1990s have been characterized by an odd mixture of ideological triumphalism—Fukuyama's “end of history” being only the crassest example—and of ideological uncertainty—can there be, should there be, a “third way”? For all its pretensions to universality, the “New World Order” has never lost a fragility in appearance. Students of historiography can scarcely be surprised to learn that an uneasiness over the present and future has in turn frequently entailed uncertainty about the past and particularly about those parts of the past which had seemed most able to give clear and significant “lessons.” One evident example is the history of what in my Explaining Auschwitz and Hiroshima (1993) I called the “long” Second World War, that is, that crisis in confidence in the relationship between political and economic liberalism and the nation-state which, by the end of 1938, had left only Britain, France, the Low Countries, and Scandinavia as in any sense preserving those “liberal” freedoms which had spread across Europe since 1789. In this article, I briefly review the most recent difficulties World War II combatant societies have had in locating a usable past in the history of those times. However, my major focus is on the specific case of Italy, very much a border state in the Cold War system, and today the political home of an “Olive Tree” and a “Liberty Pole” whose historical antecedents and whose philosophical base for the future are less than limpid. 1990s Italian historians thus give very mixed messages about the Fascist past; these are the messages I describe and decode.     

神和乃礭：利玛窦世界地图的在华传播及其本土化

在西学东渐史上,利玛窦是一个标志性的人物。他不仅在中国用汉语编写《天主实义》和《交友论》,阐释基督教神学和伦理思想,提出对儒佛的独到分析;与徐光启合译《几何原本》前六卷;并多次译绘汉文世界地图,为中国乃至东亚世界首次完整地展示了世界的面貌。该图见之于明确文字记载的自刻、他人翻刻和摹绘版本多达十余种。笔者根据利玛窦世界地图刊刻和传播的实况,将其版本分为《大瀛全图》与《山海舆地图》、《坤舆万国全图》、《两仪玄览图》三个系列和木刻本、彩绘绢本两种形式;并就“地圆说”与地球知识、“五大州”与“万国”的概念、西方人文地理知识点的介绍及其与中国文化的对话等诸多方面,讨论了利氏世界地图中所传送的新知识、新方法和新词汇,指出该图是明清士人理解整个世界的一个重要的窗口。论文还通过熊明遇的《格致草》、熊人霖的《地纬》、王在晋的《海防纂要》以及晚清的《海国图志》和《瀛寰志略》等,分析了利氏世界地图在晚明至晚清二度本土化的过程,指出该地图在晚清西学知识重建过程中所产生的意义。