November 22,2008
威權其實並不遙遠 I: 政治秩序
杭亭頓之所以重要,是因為他的研究總是引領美國政治學界的主流,1968年他寫了The Political Order in Changing Society,當時美國正面臨了新興國家勃興而間接引發的代理人戰爭問題(proxy war)。杭亭頓告訴美國人,到底這些國家透過民主選舉選出了共產黨和內戰是怎麼回事,對美國利益來說,重要的到底是民主還是穩定?無論是杭亭頓自己或者美國政府,都選擇了穩定,於是阿葉德被推翻、桑定被打倒,而蔣介石、馬可仕和蘇哈托受到美國的支持,以穩定的威權統治鞏固了美國圍堵共產世界的防線。
老頭年輕的時候頭髮就不多
杭亭頓在《變動社會的政治秩序》主張的,是以結構功能論的角度,針對1960年代美國流行的現代化理論作出批駁。現代化理論主張國家如果富有就不會有共產黨,1945年以後美國援助希臘、推動馬歇爾計畫,透過國際開發總署(OECD)針對第三世界國家進行經濟援助就是現代化理論的產物,希望讓大家都變成民主和平的信徒。安士敦(Alice H. Amsden)早期對台灣的研究也站在這個角度出發,認為美援提供了台灣成為發展型國家的有力後盾。但杭亭頓指出,現代性帶來穩定,但現代化卻引發混亂;一個國家會亂,不是因為貧窮,而是因為對富裕的期望還沒達成。因此,貧富和亂不亂的問題,應該是一個U型曲線。谷底是現代化所面臨的轉折,一但通過,就是穩定而富裕(但不一定是民主),只是大多數的新興國家都沒能度過這個谷底,成為穩定的政體。
問題是,什麼樣的國家會通過死亡幽谷,而什麼國家不會?以結構功能論撰寫此書的杭亭頓提出了政治制度的完備與否,才是關鍵問題。他指出,現代化必定帶來更多的政治參與期望,當一國的制度不完備,就可能因為無法吸納政治參與的力量而崩潰。他用praetorian(執政官)來形容這樣的政體,羅馬的執政官是監護當地的外來政權,當他面對本土社會的正當性挑戰,會選擇以暴力鎮壓或者腐敗攏絡的方式,來完成恩庇侍從的「暴力/貪腐政權」統治模式。而這樣的體制也必須面臨暴力的挑戰,很可能遭到推翻,因此是不穩定的。(也有可能勵精圖治去變成制度化完備的體制,比如國民黨在台灣的例子)
反過來說,杭亭頓用公民(civil)去形容一個制度完備的政權,認為他有可能因為制度吸納的能力強,就能夠紓解現代化所帶來的政治參與壓力,無論用民主或者非民主的形式。在Authoritarian Politics in Modern Society: The Dynamics of Established One-Party Systems這本書裡,杭亭頓有更詳盡的關於這種「建制的一黨制」如何吸納政治參與力量的解說。
前幾個星期想的: 台灣會恢復一黨制嗎?
去年讀的:唯發展論作為一種意識形態
引用URL
New York Times
December 27, 2008, 2:25 pm
Samuel P. Huntington of Harvard Dies at 81
By Sarah Wheaton
Samuel P. Huntington, an influential political scientist and longtime Harvard University professor, died at the age of 81 on Wednesday, according to an obituary on Harvard’s Web site. Mr. Huntington’s most famous thesis – that world conflicts stem from the competing cultural identities of seven or eight “civilizations” – became a fundamental, if controversial, premise of post-Cold War foreign policy theory. His emphasis on ancient religious empires, as opposed to states or ethnicities, gained even more cachet after the Sept. 11 attacks.
Michael Ignatieff summarized the thrust of Mr. Huntington’s 1996 book in a Times book review:
In expanding the Foreign Affairs article into ”The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order,” Mr. Huntington has thickened out his argument, but it remains controversial. If there are seven or eight world civilizations, he says, the West had better shed the hubristic notion that its civilization is destined to spread its values across the globe. The West is ”unique” — but its values are not universal. Universalism, Mr. Huntington maintains, is just a leftover from imperialism. Western aid workers have no business telling the Afghan Taliban to allow their women to go to school. Washington has no business tying human rights conditions to its trade with China. It is a significant change of heart for a former architect of American policy in Vietnam to assert that ”Western intervention in the affairs of other civilizations is probably the single most dangerous source of instability and potential global conflict in a multicivilizational world.”
But critics, including Edward W. Said, a Columbia University professor who wrote “Orientalism,” said Mr. Huntington’s theory perpetuates a “West against the rest” mentality.
Mr. Huntington’s most recent book, “Who Are We? The Challenges of American National Identity,” was published in 2004 and tackled immigration. That volume also attracted criticisms of his assertion that low levels of assimilation by Hispanic immigrants could cleave the country in two.
Born Samuel Phillips Huntington in New York City on April 18, 1927, he was an adviser to Hubert H. Humphrey and Jimmy Carter. He stepped down from active teaching at Harvard in 2007, and he died on Dec. 24 in Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.
著名美國政治學家杭亭頓去世
中央社
Published: 2008-12-28 05:37 AM
(中央社紐約27日法新電)哈佛大學網站今天宣布,美國極有影響力的政治學家、「文明的衝突與世界秩序的重建」(The Clash of Civilization and theRemaking of World Order)一書的作者、哈佛大學教授杭亭頓(Samuel Huntington)已於24日去世,享年81歲。
杭亭頓在哈佛大學任教58年後,2007年退休。哈佛大學說,杭亭頓是在本月24日在麻薩諸塞州瑪莎葡萄園(Martha's Vineyard)小島去世。它沒有說明杭亭頓去世的原因。
杭亭頓曾與人共同合寫或編過17本書,大部份是有關美國政府、民主化、軍事政治、軍民關係和政治發展等。
杭亭頓最著名的是他相信,冷戰後的世界暴力衝突將來自於文化和宗教的歧異,而不是國家間的意識型態差異。
1996杭亭頓所出版的書「文明的衝突與世界秩序的重建」充份解釋了他的這項看法。這本書曾被翻譯成39種語言。971228