新中国土地改革后新富农产生的规模与分布研究

从土地改革结束到农业集体化高潮前夕,新富农的出现从全国范围来看是稀少而缓慢的。在各省之间,农民的富裕程度与新富农比重大小关系不明显,但在同一地区内来看,两者呈现正相关关系。同时,在农业合作化程度较高亦即是较早对新富农采取限制政策的地区,新富农的比重并不一定低于甚至高于其他地区。这说明多种因素对新富农的产生、发展发生作用,单因素的分析不能解释清楚新富农这个复杂的社会经济问题。     

新时期的思想解放与马克思主义中国化的历史发展

新时期以来的思想解放与马克思主义中国化有着清晰的脉络和明确的成果。在新时期中共历史发展的三个阶段、四个重大关头,思想解放形成了三次“大潮”和若干个“次大潮”。随着思想解放的不断深入,马克思主义中国化在实践和理论两个方面取得了丰硕的成果,即在实践中探索出一条建设中国特色社会主义的道路;理论上形成了邓小平理论和“三个代表”重要思想两大成果。     

Accessing global value chains? The role of business state relations in the private clothing industry in Vietnam

This article deals with the access to global markets via inclusionin global value chains for private clothing producers in Vietnam.It argues that ‘chain entry barriers’ are not onlyconstructed by global buyers as it is often suggested, but alsoby political–economic processes in Vietnam. The marketorientations of four segments of private enterprise owners isexamined and shown to correspond to their ethnicity, originand location in northern or southern Vietnam. It is argued thatthis is mostly because these factors influence access to thestate system, where export-related resources are found.     

新时期我国法制建设的历史进程与基本经验

以1982年宪法的公布实施和1997年依法治国基本方略的确立为标志,新时期我国法制建设的历史进程可分为三个阶段:从1978年到1982年为恢复阶段;从1982年到1997年为全面发展阶段;1997年以来为全新发展阶段。新时期我国法制建设的基本经验主要有:必须正确处理党的领导与法制建设的关系;必须正确处理法制建设与经济建设的关系;必须把民主建设与法制建设结合起来;必须把立足中国国情与借鉴外国经验结合起来;必须不断完善法律监督体系。     

20世纪90年代中期以来中国出版业的改革与发展

20世纪90年代中期以来,中国出版业经历着从计划经济向社会主义市场经济转变的历史性进程。从1993年开始到1998年,出版业改革的主线是由“规模数量为主要特征向以优质高效为主要特征”的“阶段性转移”;从1998年开始到2002年,集团化发展成为出版业改革的主题;从2003年开始,企业化转制成为出版业改革与发展的方向和主线。十多年来,出版业的政策走向反映了中共中央、国务院对出版工作的高度重视和大力支持,反映了出版业逐渐加快了产业化、市场化、国际化进程,反映了出版业改革不断深化的脉络。     

试论塞瑟尔的"新君主制"学说

在文艺复兴时期的西欧,法国的宫廷大臣、著名的政治思想家克劳德·得·塞瑟尔根据现实社会的变动,提出了系统的"新君主制"学说.在肯定君主制的价值时,他鼓吹"王权神授",但却着重于从人性的角度来强调君主制的优越性.在对"明君政治"的憧憬中,他界定了一些君主应当遵循的政治行为规范,特别强调君主实施仁政,建立各等级之间的"和谐"秩序,并提出了等级变动的合理性.同时,塞瑟尔主张君主让各等级代表参政议政,建立"君主咨政会议制".他还提出"有限君权"的主张,力图以教会、"正义"与国家法令来遏止君主的暴政.此外,他还要求君主灵活地进行外交,积极进行殖民扩张.塞氏的政治学说充满着"过渡时期"社会所赋予的复杂性与矛盾性,但受时代变迁的感召与人文主义的熏陶,他突破传统的藩篱,提出了适应民族国家发展与新兴资产阶级成长之需要的"新君主制"学说.他的政治理想,反映了西方政治思想从中世纪向近代转型的历史趋势.     

中国马克思主义史学发展道路的思考

从五四运动到新中国成立前,自李大钊开始传播唯物史观,此后经郭沫若、吕振羽、范文澜、翦伯赞、侯外庐等的努力,马克思主义史学家坚持革命性与科学性结合,显示出自己建构研究中国历史体系的规模和力量,因而20世纪把中国史学推向了新阶段。建国后17年,马克思主义史学虽然经历过严重的曲折,但成绩仍是主要的,主要表现在:以唯物史观原理与中国实际相结合的方向得到坚持,形成百家争鸣的局面,在通史、断代史和专史领域以及大规模整理历史文献等方面都有重要成果;1958年以后教条化严重泛滥时,郭沫若、范文澜、翦伯赞等挺身而出进行抵制,一批熟悉历史考证的学者在唯物史观指导下,使史学达到新的境界。在改革开放的新时期,经过批判和反思极“左”路线危害,解放思想,史学出现了开拓进取、欣欣向荣的新局面。     

TOWARD A MULTIDIRECTIONAL FUTURE OF HISTORIOGRAPHY: GLOBALITY,INTERDISCIPLINARITY, AND POSTHUMANITY

Compared with the survey offered in the New Perspectives on Historical Writing nearly three decades earlier, historical practices around the world today have witnessed a remarkable change on several fronts. First, marked expansions occurred in such fields as gender history, history of memory, history of knowledge, and visual history, resulting in their noticeable transformation (for example, “gender history” to “history of sexuality” and “visual history” to “history of things”). Second, by exploring and presenting the “other(s)” in modern historiography, new areas are opened up in postcolonial history, global history, emotions history, and so on, which have prompted historians to reconceptualize their notions of time and space. Third, menacing global climate change and notable breakthroughs in various areas of modern technology have exerted an unprecedented impact on historical writing, exemplified by the new developments in environmental history, neurohistory, digital history, and animal history. Science and technology help historians to rejuvenate their research methodology and teaching pedagogy, but they have also demanded that historians acquire a better understanding of the interaction and co-evolution of humans and nonhumans in history, or to take the nonanthropocentric and nonanthropomorphic approach. In sum, what lies ahead for historians and history students today is a multidirectional future, which is at once an opportunity and a challenge.     

MIGRATION AND NARRATION: HOW EUROPEAN HISTORIANS IN THE NINETEENTH AND EARLY TWENTIETH CENTURIES TOLD THE HISTORY OF HUMAN MASS MIGRATIONS OR VÖLKERWANDERUNGEN

Historians’ interest in the history of human migrations is not limited to recent years. Migrations had already figured as explanatory factors in connection with cultural and historical change in the work of classical and ancient studies scholars of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In the writings of these scholars, migrations acted as historical landmarks or epochal thresholds and played a key role in the construction of geo-historical areas. This model has been called “migrationism” and cannot be explained simply on the basis of the history of individual disciplines, but must be seen in its complex interaction with scientific and historical contexts. However, “migrationism” does not relate to fixed political and scientific positions or movements. For this reason, it cannot be explained adequately by using a historically or ideologically based approach. Relying on narratological approaches, this article examines migration narratives that historians of this period used to explain the rise and fall of ancient civilizations. Referring to contemporary historiographical representations of the ancient Near East, it distinguishes three main narratives that are still common today: narratives of foundation, narratives of destruction, and narratives of mixtures. In this sense, analyzing older migration narratives helps us to sharpen the critical view on the genealogy of our own views on the history—and present—of human migrations.     

Rethinking historiography and ethnography: Surrealism’s intellectual legacy

ABSTRACT

Taking up Maurice Blanchot’s perceptive claim that “Surrealism remains always of our time”, the essay traces the importance of Surrealism for rethinking the methods of historiography (for Walter Benjamin) and ethnography (for James Clifford) in ways that allow us to appreciate the significance of Surrealism’s intellectual legacy. In his early essays on Surrealism and the monumental, unfinished work, The Arcades Project, Benjamin developed a new historical methodology, what I term surrealist historiography, that sought to uncover the latent dimensions of culture, obscured by the dazzling sheen of progress embedded within conventional historical narrative. If Benjamin found in Surrealism a way to overcome the limitations of a Rankean historicism, the point of departure for Clifford’s essay, “On Ethnographic Surrealism” is the crisis of ethnographic authority precipitated by a postcolonial critique of the discipline of anthropology. Clifford’s aim in this essay is thus to provide a provocative reassessment of Surrealism’s self-reflexive ethnographic spirit and what it might contribute to a refashioning of ethnographic practice as a polyvocal assemblage that holds in tension disparate material realities and aesthetic principles. Surrealism’s intellectual legacy thus lies, as Michel Foucault has claimed, in its path-breaking interdisciplinarity, which is why it continues to be, for Blancot and others, “a brilliant obsession”.