霸权稳定论的理解、评判及反思

发布时间：2018-06-29 02:37

本文选题：霸权稳定 + 霸权体系　；参考：《郑州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：国际社会的无政府性是国际政治的本质,在这种无政府的环境与压力之下各民族国家为了生存与安全、权力与利益而展开了竞争、对抗、冲突以致战争等各种形式的自助行为。历史上的数次世界性战争使脆弱的人类再也经受不起大规模的动荡,国际经济金融危机的爆发可使几代人积累的财富瞬间蒸发,人类的生存与发展迫切需要和平与稳定的国际环境。国际政治学者们虽然门派不一,但都认为国际政治的无政府性并不代表着国际政治一定没有秩序,为了国际社会的稳定各学派均提出了自己的思考:其中主流现实主义主张以权力的均衡制约国家间的战争和对抗的行为;自由主义希望通过经济交往、民主制度、国际机制等和平方式协调各国利益矛盾,增进国际合作意愿;而带有哲学和社会学底蕴的建构主义则希望重新建构人们的观念来实现一种我为人人,人人为我的康德世界。本文介绍的霸权稳定论属于现实主义的分支,它主张采取极端不平等的权力分配形式在国际体系中形成一个霸权国家,霸权国在军事实力、政治影响、经济总量、科技创新等各方面居于世界领先位置,是唯一能够为国际社会提供安全与稳定等公共物品的国家。霸权国为国际社会提供正常运行所需的国际公共物品的同时得到体系内其他国家对其霸权地位与统治管理的认可,从而形成一种正常运转的霸权体系。霸权稳定论是一种周期理论,它将国际关系的发展看成一个个不同的霸权周期循环史,一个霸权体系的衰落与消亡预示着新的霸权体系的建立和形成。而每一个霸权体系自身也遵循着从形成到运行以至最终消亡的周期。霸权稳定论自形成以来一直在不断的发展和完善,从最初提出要为国际经济的稳定提供一个平衡者,到吉尔平将其拓展至国际安全和政治领域,再到新自由制度主义者将国际机制增添其中以弥补前人研究的不足,以至冷战结束后发展为赤裸裸的美国单极稳定论。霸权稳定理论的形成与发展有着深刻的美国色彩,霸权体系的运行、国际公共品的提供都是以霸权护持为目的的,霸权通过强制权力的方式并没有给国际社会带来真正的稳定,相反霸权国为了自身利益往往带头违反国际规则,任意破坏国际社会共同遵守的价值准则。霸权稳定的方式并不能带来一个人们期望的国际秩序,国际政治理论在追寻公平合理新秩序的道路上还有很长路要走。
[Abstract]:The non-government of the international community is the essence of international politics. Under this anarchic environment and pressure, various national countries compete for survival and security, power and interests, confrontation, conflicts and even wars and other forms of self-help behavior. The world wars in history have made the vulnerable human being unable to withstand large-scale turbulence any longer, and the outbreak of the international economic and financial crisis can instantly evaporate the wealth accumulated by generations. The survival and development of mankind urgently need a peaceful and stable international environment. Although international political scholars have different schools of thought, they all believe that the lack of government in international politics does not necessarily mean that there must be no order in international politics. For the sake of the stability of the international community, each school of thought has put forward its own thinking: in which the mainstream realism advocates the balanced restriction of power on the conduct of war and confrontation between nations, and liberalism wishes to see a democratic system through economic interaction, International mechanisms and other peaceful ways to coordinate the interests of countries and enhance the will for international cooperation, while constructivism with philosophical and sociological connotations hopes to re-construct people's ideas to realize a Kant world in which we are all and all are our own. The hegemonic stability theory introduced in this paper belongs to the branch of realism. It advocates the formation of a hegemonic state in the international system in the form of extremely unequal distribution of power, the hegemonic power in military strength, political influence, and economic aggregate. Science, technology and innovation are the leading countries in the world. They are the only countries that can provide the international community with public goods such as security and stability. Hegemonic countries provide the international public goods needed for the normal operation of the international community at the same time they are recognized by other countries in the system for their hegemonic status and governance, thus forming a normally functioning hegemonic system. The theory of hegemonic stability is a kind of periodic theory, which regards the development of international relations as a history of different hegemonic cycles. The decline and demise of a hegemonic system foreshadow the establishment and formation of a new hegemonic system. Each hegemonic system itself follows a cycle from formation to operation to eventual extinction. The theory of hegemonic stability has been continuously developed and perfected since its formation. From the initial proposal to provide a balance for the stability of the international economy, Gilpin expanded it to the field of international security and politics. Then the neo-liberal institutionalists added the international mechanism to make up for the shortcomings of previous studies, so that after the end of the Cold War, it developed into a naked unipolar stability theory of the United States. The formation and development of hegemonic stability theory has a profound American color. The operation of hegemonic system and the provision of international public goods are all aimed at maintaining hegemony. Hegemony does not bring real stability to the international community through the way of coercive power. On the contrary, hegemonic powers often take the lead in violating international rules for their own benefit, and arbitrarily undermine the values that the international community jointly adheres to. The way of hegemonic stability can not bring about a desired international order. International political theory still has a long way to go in pursuit of a fair and reasonable new order.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D815

【相似文献】