普鲁士改革中的乡镇自治与市民社会的培育

"市民社会"概念是从欧洲历史发展中演绎出来的,但市民社会本身并没有一致的共同模式,而只是一种具有特质的社会现象.德国市民社会的发展也有自己的特点.以普鲁士改革中的乡镇自治为重点考察对象,不难探讨出德国市民社会建立的模式:普鲁士国家借助法律手段和对公众舆论的掌控,强行规范公民的政治参与,使农民和城镇市民从家庭、血缘、社团、行会等传统权力的支配下解放出来,卷入国家政治生活,为他们的发展创造新的社会空间.在普鲁士市民社会的形成过程中,国家是积极的参与者和推动者,国家与社会之间存在着某种相辅相成的关系.当然,国家与社会间的特殊关系也带来了负面后果,它导致了西方式的议会民主在近代德国难以建立.     

终身教育立法研究

"终身教育"理念从20世纪引入中国后,经历了从理念到政策,再到立法的漫长发展.现如今,世界各国都出台了相关的法律法规,终身教育法制化是终身教育事业的必然趋势.但我国国家层面的终身教育立法迟迟没有出现,反倒是我国台湾地区和福建省、上海市、太原市、河北省、宁波市先后出台终身教育地方性立法.通过比较分析日本、韩国、美国的终身...     

试论魏玛"福利国家"的早期实践(1918-1920)

一战结束后,德国社会遭遇了政治、经济与社会的多重危机,政府权力亟待合法性认同,社会期稳定。魏玛政府力图把福利国家作为控制与解决危机的一种手段。1918-1920年间,魏玛的福利国家建设曾规范劳动市场、协调劳资关系、改革保险和救济政策、解决住房问题以及调整经济运作模式等方面掀起高潮从短时段看,这些实践活动确立了基本的福利国家原则,维护了政府权威,初步解决了战后德国的社会危机然而从长时段看,这一时期的福利实践存在许多问题,埋下了日后经济危机、社会危机乃至民主危机的隐患。     

现代性与社会政策改革——1890-1933年间德国社会政策探析

1890-1933年间德国社会政策的演进,正是以"制度化"与"民主化"为目标的现代性在"国家/社会"这一权力结构中的又一展演.这一发展实现了现代国家在统治模式上的"理性化",从而成为德国现代化的一次尝试.然而"现代性的病态"却注定了这种尝试以失败告终.德国社会政策改革的这一历史将成为学界反思现代性的又一途径.     

论德意志帝国政府对劳工问题的调节

德意志帝国时期,快速工业化进程使得劳工问题日渐突出,德意志帝国政府采取"立法"与"行政"手段对劳工问题进行了全面调节,形成了比较系统的劳工问题调节机制。德意志帝国对劳工问题的调节,缓解了社会矛盾,对德国经济、政治、社会的整体协调发展产生了持久而深刻的影响。     

华侨华人与《反分裂国家法》的酝酿、立法和颁行

在《反分裂国家法》酝酿、立法、颁行的过程中,华侨华人做出了突出的贡献,如华侨华人早就有以立法遏制"台独"的倡议,并向温家宝总理提议,成为酝酿《反分裂国家法》的重要来源;《反分裂国家法》立法程序启动后,华侨华人统一认识,积极献言献策,力正视听,并见证了此法通过的历史时刻;《反分裂国家法》颁行后,华侨华人广泛拥护,对"台独"等各种分裂分子的行径进行了抨击,对华社①的不同意见进行交流,促进了国际社会和华社对此法的认同。     

中国德国史研究会“德国历史:宗教与社会”学术研讨会综述

2012年9月13-16日,中国德国史研究会2012年年会暨"德国历史:宗教与社会"学术研讨会在山东大学中心校区举行.来自中国社会科学院、北京大学、中国人民大学、复旦大学、北京师范大学、华东师范大学、华中师范大学、天津师范大学、上海外国语学院、山东大学以及国家海洋信息中心、人民出版社等全国高校和科研机构的七十余位学者会集一堂,围绕"德国历史:宗教与社会"主题进行了深入交流与探讨.会议由中国德国史研究会和山东大学犹太教与跨宗教研究中心联合主办,山东大学哲学与社会发展学院和历史文化学院协办,共收到论文37篇,德国历史新地图2幅.会议期间,与会学者围绕"德国的宗教与政治"、"中德史学与文化研究"、"马丁·路德与宗教改革运动"、"德国经济建设及社会问题"、"现代德国对外关系和社会政策"五大主题进行了探讨,提出了许多前沿性观点.     

近现代以来欧美社会变革与稳定”学术研讨会综述

正2013年9月29日,由中国社会科学院世界历史研究所主办、西欧北美研究室承办的"近现代以来欧美社会变革与稳定"学术研讨会在世界历史研究所召开。来自北京大学、北京师范大学、南开大学、河北师范大学、中国生态文明研究与促进会以及中国社会科学院世界历史研究所、欧洲研究所和俄罗斯东欧中亚研究所等高校和科研院所的专家学者及研究生共计五十余人出席了会议,其中有19人作了会议论文报告。与会者围绕"近现代以来欧美社会变革与稳定"主题展开深入探讨。欧洲研究所裘元伦研究员作了《如何在大变革中保持社会稳定——以德国为例》的报告,论述了第二次世界大战之后德国在政治、经济和社会三个方面的具体改革措施:政治改革将德国从封建军事专制国家和纳粹独裁国家改造为民主国家;经济改革将第三帝国的统制经济     

“三大政策”与独立自主的新中国外交

中国革命胜利前夕,中共中央制定了"另起炉灶"、"打扫干净屋子再请客"和"一边倒"的三大外交政策."三大政策"的基本内容是:废除一切不平等条约,彻底清除帝国主义的残余势力,拒绝承认国民党政府与外国的外交关系;新中国是一个充分享有独立、自由的主权国家,作为国际社会中的平等一员,它与任何国家的关系必须以平等互利和尊重领土主权为基础;中国的独立离不开社会主义国家和国际无产阶级的援助,为确保未来的国家安全和经济建设的顺利开展,新中国将加入以苏联为首的和平民主阵营."三大政策"反映了新民主主义革命的必然要求,表明了即将站立起来的中国人民掌握自己命运的坚强意志.独立自主是"三大政策"的本质和核心."三大政策"有着有机的内在联系,共同构成了新中国外交的坚实基础.     

由西方“人的安全观”引发的对国家与社会关系的重新思考——一种跨国关系—国内政治分析视角

在20世纪90年代以来由全球多国政府和知识精英参与的"新安全观"(亦称"非传统安全观"和"综合安全观"等)探讨中,尤以西方国家提出的"人的安全观"呼声最为强烈。在西方"人的安全观"理念中,传统的国家-社会模式被打破,社会不再被各类国界线划定为一些封闭的空间,人的安全问题也不再仅是国家内部问题,而同时成为全球市民社会的重要议题。尽管西方"人的安全观"暴露出很多不足与缺陷,但其跨国关系—国内政治分析模式促使我们去反思国家与社会关系的近现代理解模式,打破那种在一个封闭的国家内谈论国家与社会的关系或者仅以单一国家为单位谈论世界政治问题的局面,从而能更多地从国家与社会的关系来看待我国对外关系的变化以及在国际社会中的社会化进程,或者从另一方面来说我国对外关系的变化如何影响到我国国内社会改革和政治议程。     

两种主张的较量与战后德国经济发展

战后德国经济是在左和右,即主张国家干预和自由经济,这两股社会和政治势力交互作用下发展起来的。前者主由社民党体现,后者由基民彤社民盟主张。最初这两股势力形成了有效互补,使得德国社会和经济进入高发展期,后来由于这两股势力彼此抗衡过度,失落了有效互补,社会体制失去活力,经济和社会进入发展低迷期。如今,德国经济一直挣扎在这样的发展困境中。     

Screening The Social Face of Denmark to the Nazis

Looking into the state-sponsored creation and presentation of a German-language film on the Danish social state, this article discusses the complexities of Danish–German relations during the German occupation of Denmark, 1940–1945. The film, Das soziale Gesicht Dänemarks, was screened in Berlin to a full house, including a number of Nazi notables, and followed by a presentation by the Danish Minister of Labor and Social Affairs. Based on archival research and film analysis, the article argues that the screening in Berlin informs an understanding of an asymmetrical power relationship between occupiers and occupied, in which the promotion of the Danish social model countered the hegemony of the dominant Nazi state. It did so by seeking to assert Danish sovereignty on social policy in accordance with German intentions to respect Danish sovereignty as stated at the very beginning of the occupation; in other words, for the Danish state, social policy became a means for an intentional but subdued resistance – even a form of counter-power – to the power of the German occupier.     

Global finance and the German model: German corporations, market incentives, and the management of employer-sponsored pension institutions

Where there was a settled political geography of state power and responsibilities, the remarkable growth of global finance has put enormous pressure on national economic, political and social institutions. Furthermore, the looming crisis facing many continental European social security systems has raised many doubts about the long-term viability of the German model compared to its Anglo-American rivals. In this context, large German corporations have sought ways of sustaining their global competitiveness by, in part, restructuring their national and regional commitments. To illustrate, in this paper we concentrate on the nature and organization of German employer-sponsored pension institutions in relation to Anglo-American management practice. Two issues drive the analysis. One has to do with an emerging coalition between corporate management and shareholders with respect to the market value of the firm. The second issue has to do with the allocation of risk and uncertainty between the social partners when negotiating the financing and final value of promised retirement income. The institutional framework of collective decision-making common to many of Germany's largest firms is under pressure; three models of investment decision making relevant to pension assets and liabilities are used to illustrate this point. In doing so, we suggest that the German model is more fragile than commonly realized. We also suggest that Anglo-American management practices have penetrated and affected German corporate (national and regional) institutions and regulations. The social market lauded by advocates of stakeholder capitalism is changing rapidly, at least in the sphere of large firms and global finance.     

The State of Autonomy

In this article it is argued that between 1870 and 1910 the Swedish social liberal state used economic grants as a political tool in order to govern parts of the sector of social movements. State grants given to non-formal education, folk high schools, organizations that held lectures for the working class, and organizations that set up libraries are the point of departure for the analysis. The specific governing measure consisted of making the sector flourish in a ‘state of autonomy’, a state in which their conduct was influenced by the need to fulfil certain demands in order to receive funding. The requirements included, for instance, that the organizations were governed by a specific form, that they were in liaison with the local government, and that they did not wander outside the ideological demarcations set up by the government. In conclusion, the article shows how the state tried to govern the conduct of non-formal education.     

THE MAKING OF THE FINNISH MODEL

Earlier research has underlined the importance of the first incomes policy agreement in 1968, in analysing the qualitative shift to more consensual industrial relations and the stronger influence of labour market organizations in the Finnish welfare state legislation. The main argument is that this qualitative change in Finnish corporatism happened earlier. The compromise between employers and trade unions in the early 1960s was established not because of their strength but because of their simultaneous weakness and vulnerability. The left wing majority in the Eduskunta forced employers to adopt a more conciliatory and even pro‐active view of social reforms. Confederation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), which suffered from a severe split, was more than willing to co‐operate with Confederation of Finnish Employers (STK) in social policy as well as in wage bargaining.     

THE BUSINESS OF WELFARE

A common narrative in welfare state research is that Sweden exemplifies a specific model of welfare, ‘the Swedish model’, or ‘the Social democratic welfare regime’. From this perspective the emerging welfare state left little room for private initiatives – the stage was set for the development of an encompassing welfare state in the 1950s. In this article I argue that this, virtually hegemonic, perspective has hindered an analysis of how private insurance co-existed and thrived within the emerging Swedish welfare state. As an alternative approach to ‘modelling’ – the concept of welfare-formation is developed to analyse mutually sustaining practices of welfare. I show how the insurance business and its protagonists influenced the settings of public pension schemes in a way that underpinned their own interests. A close cooperation with the state apparatus was fundamental for creating a trustworthy insurance market and legitimizing the business claim of fulfilling a social mission. The business adaptability in the shifting landscape of social policy also influenced perceptions of security and welfare in general. Commercial ideals became an essential dimension of the welfare state. By exploring this marginalized history – the business of welfare – the study deepens our understanding of modern welfare societies.     

Critical Geographies with the State: The Problem of Social Vulnerability and the Politics of Engaged Research

Abstract: State interventions to govern social vulnerability highlight the complexity of contemporary states, marked by neoliberal agenda but also by progressive interventions and the desire for effectiveness. This paper draws on collaborative research with government agencies on social vulnerability in the Hunter region to assess the desirability of undertaking critical geographies with the state. We see states as contested terrains invested with the institutional capacity to mobilise diverse political projects. We argue that critical research in partnership with states is possible, as are mobilisations of the agency of state institutions to promote progressive policy development. The paper explores how we might use engaged research to intersect with the production and circulation of texts, technologies and practices within the state apparatus to achieve desirable change. While critical research with the state involves uncertainties and compromise, with no permanent resolutions, we conclude that states must remain centred in our critical conversations and praxis. In this paper we advance the case for the critical possibilities of policy‐oriented research with the state. We reflect on experiences of an engaged research project with state government agencies in the NSW Hunter Region involving the production and use of the texts and technologies as state interventions in social vulnerability. Working through the project's reflexive, collaborative methodologies and our use of critical GIS, we highlight the creation of opportunities to change how the components of social vulnerability were conceptualised, contest policymakers’ view of what was “relevant”, and shift framing rationalities and resultant state practices. As such the paper contributes to our knowledge of strategic research practices for pursuing critical, progressive projects with the state. Such engagement involves uncertainties and contingent compromise. Yet, as terrains of contestation wherein diverse political projects are assembled and propelled, states must remain centred in our critical conversations and in our critical praxis.     

略论19世纪上半期德国社会三大思潮

19世纪上半期,自由主义、民族主义、保守主义等三大思潮影响着德国社会的发展。自由主义在德国表现出温和、保守和依赖国家政权的特点;民族主义首先是资产阶级化的知识分子的运动,呈现浓烈的文化色彩;保守主义则以传统、秩序和稳定为原则,展开了与自由主义、民族主义等要求改变现状者的对抗。三大思潮对日后德国历史的走向产生了重要影响。     

After Geopolitics? From the Geopolitical Social to Geoeconomics

Abstract:  This paper makes two central arguments. First, the popular language of geopolitics needs to be understood as historically emerging from and helping create a "geopolitical social", which both crosses and crafts traditional borders of internal and external to the national state. Second, we suggest that geoeconomic social forms are gradually supplanting this geopolitical social. After establishing the geopolitical social associated with traditional geopolitics, from Ratzel to Bismarck, we examine the erosion of geopolitical calculation and the rise of the geoeconomic. We trace emerging geoeconomic social forms in three domains: the reframing of territorial security to accommodate supranational flows; the recasting of social forms of security through the market; and the reframing of the state as geoeconomic agent. Neither an exercise in "critical geopolitics" nor an endorsement of Luttwakian style geoeconomics, this paper assumes no straightforward historical succession from geopolitical to geoeconomic logics, but argues that geoeconomics is nonetheless crucial to the spatial reconfiguration of contemporary political geography.