全球化之辩:世界主义和共同体主义的观点

发布时间：2018-07-08 12:08

本文选题：全球化 + 意识形态　；参考：《国外理论动态》2017年09期

【摘要】：曾经受限于民族国家边界的经济、文化和政治体系正经历着全球化进程,政治家、社会组织和其他社会行为体积极参与到全球化议题的公共讨论中。冲突是否固化为一个稳定的分裂状态,决定因素之一是这些冲突在多大程度上拥有意识形态支撑。作为这种支撑的基础,我们将全球主义者与国家主义者、普遍主义者与情境主义者之间关于正义的哲学争论视为活跃在公共领域的政治倡导者们可以利用的原始思想材料。基于此,我们确定了可以为这种意识形态支撑提供核心要素的四个主要争论点:边界的渗透性、权力在不同层级间的分配、共同体的规范性尊严、正当性证明的模式。全球主义者与普遍主义者在这四个争论点方面的观点的理想型组合可被称为世界主义,而国家主义者和情境主义者的相关观点的理想型组合可被称为共同体主义。世界主义和共同体主义作为政治意识形态在公共讨论中越是扮演重头戏,关于全球化的争论就越有可能固化形成新的分裂。本文提出的概念框架可以用来支持旨在分析全球化冲突的意识形态基础的实证研究。
[Abstract]:The economic, cultural and political systems that were once limited by the borders of nation-states are undergoing the process of globalization, with politicians, social organizations and other social actors actively participating in public discussions on the issue of globalization. One of the determinants of whether conflicts solidify into a stable state of division is the extent to which they are ideologically supported. As a basis for this support, we regard the philosophical debate on justice between globalists and nationalists, universalists and situationists as the original ideological material available to political advocates active in the public domain. Based on this, we determine the four main issues that can provide the core elements for this kind of ideological support: the permeability of the boundary, the distribution of power among different levels, the normative dignity of the community, and the model of justification. The ideal combination of the views of globalists and universalists in these four issues can be called cosmopolitanism, while the ideal combination of the views of nationalists and situationists can be called communitarianism. The more cosmopolitanism and communitarianism play an important role in public discussion as political ideology, the more likely the debate about globalization will solidify and form a new division. The conceptual framework proposed in this paper can be used to support empirical research aimed at analyzing the ideological basis of globalization conflict.
【作者单位】：德国柏林社会科学研究中心;中国社会科学院欧洲研究所;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金青年项目“中国与一体化组织的外交政策”(16CGJ017)的成果
【分类号】：D815;F091.3

【相似文献】