20世纪50年代美国对拉美的经济援助外交

第二次世界大战后,美国为同苏联争夺第三世界国家实施了第四点计划。通过对20世纪50年代美国在拉美开展经济援助外交进行历史的纵深考察后可以看出,美国从自身国家安全、繁荣等国家利益出发,将拉美视为其"战略资源库"和"传统盟友",加以严密掌控。但是,这一时期美国对拉美经济援助的重视程度与美苏两国对抗和争夺的激烈程度相关联,服从于美苏争霸的总体战略需要。而援助双方基于国家利益的深刻矛盾,是导致此期美国对拉美经济援助外交失败的根本原因。     

熊出没的美国自驾游

怀描着这样那样的梦想,飞越太平洋,来到了昼与夜的对面。电影中的大都会,教科书中的车轮上的国家,明信片上的国家公园,一一展现在我们的面前,旅行即将开始。     

The United States and Latin American Revolution in the 1960s

Book reviewed:
Michael D. Gambone. Capturing the Revolution: The United States, Central America, and Nicaragua.     

Race and Gender in the United States of America

Books reviewed in this article: Nell Irvin Painter, Sojourner Truth: A Life, a Symbol Ann D. Gordon (ed.), The Selected Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, vol. 1, In the School of Anti‐Slavery 1840‐1866 Ann D. Gordon with Bettye Collier‐Thomas, John H. Bracey, ArleneVoski Avakian and Joyce Avrech Berkman (eds), African AmericanWomen and the Vote 1837‐1965     

拉丁美洲军人干政国家的军人与民主

拉丁美洲军人干政国家中的军人是影响国家民主和民主化的重要因素之一。短期来看,拉丁美洲军人干政国家中军人对民主化的作用是不确定的：军人有时安邦定国为民主化奠定基础,有时践踏宪政成为民主化的障碍。军人干政不代表堵死民主化之路;军人返回军营也不代表通向民主化坦途。长远来看,军人干政不具备终极合法性,民主巩固的结果将是文人领军和宪政。在民主转型中的拉丁美洲军人干政国家,一方面民主转型是大势所趋,另一方面军人干政并未销声匿迹。民主的推行需要合理利用军人的积极作用,以形成独特的民主模式。     

The anthropology of Latin America

Dwight B. Heath, ed. Contemporary Cultures and Societies of Latin America: A Reader in the Social Anthropology of Middle and South America [Second ed.]. New York: Random House, 1974. xvii + 572 pp. Charts, tables, figures, and bibliography. $11.95 (cloth).     

Security in Latin America

This article provides an overview of recent trends in Latin American security and examines three common assumptions that underpin both academic analysis and policy debate—assumptions about the links between political democracy, economic integration and regional stability, and about the need to broaden the agenda of regional security. In contrast to the liberal orthodoxy, there is little reason to believe that the promotion of political democracy and economic liberalization and integration will automatically tend towards regional stability, especially given the weakness of regional institutions, the fragility of many states, the inequality of power among states, and the lack of consensus over the meaning and implications of the 'new security agenda'.