Since their classic volume The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes was published in 1978, Juan J. Linz and Alfred Stepan have increasingly focused on the questions of how, in the modern world, nondemocratic regimes can be eroded and democratic regimes crafted. In Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation, they break new ground in numerous areas. They reconceptualize the major types of modern nondemocratic regimes and point out for each type the available paths to democratic transition and the tasks of democratic consolidation. They argue that, although "nation-state" and "democracy" often have conflicting logics, multiple and complementary political identities are feasible under a common roof of state-guaranteed rights. They also illustrate how, without an effective state, there can be neither effective citizenship nor successful privatization. Further, they provide criteria and evidence for politicians and scholars alike to distinguish between democratic consolidation and pseudo-democratization, and they present conceptually driven survey data for the fourteen countries studied.
Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation contains the first systematic comparative analysis of the process of democratic consolidation in southern Europe and the southern cone of South America, and it is the first book to ground post-Communist Europe within the literature of comparative politics and democratic theory.
Juan José Linz (24 December 1926 – 1 October 2013) was a Spanish sociologist and political scientist. He was Sterling Professor Emeritus of Political Science at Yale University and an honorary member of the Scientific Council at the Juan March Institute. He is best known for his theories on totalitarian and authoritarian systems of government.
Linz was born in Bonn, Germany. In addition to his work on systems of government, he did extensive research on the breakdowns of democracy and the transition back to a democratic regime. He is the author of many works on the subject, including Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996, co-authored with Alfred Stepan), his seminal work Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Rienner, 2000) and his influential essay 'The Perils of Presidentialism'.
Alfred Stepan is Wallace Sayre Professor of Government, the founding Director of the Center for the Study of Democracy, Toleration, and Religion (CDTR), and the Co-Director of the Institute for Religion, Culture, and Public Life (IRCPL). In 2012 he was the recipient of the Karl Deutsch Award of the International Political Science Association. The last three recipients of this award were Juan J. Linz (2003), Charles Tilly (2006), and Giovanni Sartori (2009).
Previously, Stepan was the founding Rector and President of Central European University in Budapest, Prague, and Warsaw, the former Director of the Concilium on International and Area Studies at Yale University, and Dean of the School of International Affairs at Columbia University. Stepan was also Gladstone Professor of Government at the University of Oxford and a Fellow Of All Souls College, Oxford.
Stepan's teaching and research interests include comparative politics, theories of democratic transitions, federalism, and the world's religious systems and democracy. In recent years, Stepan has conducted field research in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Burma, Egypt, Tunisia, India, Brazil, Israel, and Palestine, among other countries. Stepan’s publications in the last three years include Crafting State Nations: India and Other Multinational Democracies, with Juan J. Linz and Yogendra Yadav; “Comparative Perspectives on Inequality and the Quality of Democracy in the United States” with Juan J. Linz in Perspectives on Politics (December 2011); “Tunisia’s Transition and the Twin Tolerations” in Journal of Democracy (April 2012); ““Rituals of Respect: Sufis and Secularists in Senegal in Comparative Perspective” in Comparative Politics (July 2012) “ Democratization Theory and the ‘Arab Spring’”, Journal of Democracy ( April 2013), (with Linz), “Democratic Parliamentary Monarchies, ” Journal of Democracy ( April 2014), ( with Linz and Minoves),and the co-editorship of Democracy& Islam in Indonesia (with Mirjam Künkler), Boundaries of Toleration ( with Charles Taylor), and Democracy, Islam and Secularism: Turkey in Comparative Perspective ( with Ahmet Kuru).
Some of his other books include Arguing Comparative Politics (Oxford 2001);Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: Southern Europe, South America, and Post-Communist Europe, with J. J. Linz (Johns Hopkins 1996);Rethinking Military Politics: Brazil and the Southern Cone (Princeton 1988); The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes, edited with Juan J. Linz (Johns Hopkins 1978); The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective(Princeton 1978); and The Military in Politics: Changing Patterns in Brazil(Princeton 1971).
欧也好,美也罢,都已经是地球上比较成功的区域.这些也都是今天经济相对丰裕、问题不太显著的区域。如果说转型,巩固,似乎是说不成熟到成熟、从不稳定到稳定,这样的民主还不成熟不稳定。知识分子们却要求中国民主进程可以施行,还要求更多的稳定和成熟,谈何容易?不类似与虎谋皮...
评分神人果然在国外,神作自然也是外文。对于国人的翻译水平一直不敢恭维,但这本看起来翻译的尚可。 《民主转型与巩固的问题:南欧、南美和后共产主义欧洲》(Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation:Southern Europe,Southern America, and Post-Com...
评分 评分公民对一个政权社会经济有效性的认识,与对这个政权本身合法性的认识,关系如何?许多非民主政权,特别是统计模型中的威权主义政权,考虑到它所面临的例外异常困难,而被国家精英及其核心社会经济同盟作为一种必要的政权加以辩护、捍卫。这样,长期的经济繁荣,特别是在威权政...
这本书最让我感到震撼的是其对“社会动员与民主质量”之间关系的重新界定。长久以来,我们习惯于将高水平的公民参与视为民主的黄金标准,但作者却提出了一个更具批判性的视角。他们指出,在特定的转型阶段,过度激进或极端化的社会动员,反而可能成为民主巩固的巨大阻力,因为它容易导致政治极化,使得中间温和的政治力量难以协商合作。书中详细分析了那些成功实现民主巩固的国家,其关键往往在于建立了一种“受约束的参与”模式,即公民有权利发声,但政治精英有能力将这些诉求引导至制度化的框架内解决。这种对参与的“剂量”的精准把握,是极其高明的政治智慧的体现。此外,书中对“去意识形态化”过程的分析也极其到位:一个成功的民主过渡,往往需要新的政治共识建立在实用主义的基础上,而非建立在对旧体制彻底的、零和博弈式的清算之上。这本书对于理解当代许多社会运动如何从积极力量异化为制度性障碍,提供了极具启发性的理论框架。
评分初读这本书时,我并未完全预料到它在方法论上的严谨程度。很多关于民主理论的书籍,要么过于抽象,陷入哲学思辨的泥潭,要么过于偏重个案,缺乏普遍解释力。然而,这本书成功地搭建了一座桥梁。作者似乎深谙如何从宏大的理论框架中提炼出可操作性的分析工具,同时又避免陷入实证主义的窠臼。我特别关注了他们关于“民主巩固的路径依赖”这一章节,作者构建了一个精妙的模型,用以衡量初始转型路径对长期政治稳定性的影响。他们认为,那些通过“精英妥协”而非“彻底清算”建立起来的制度,虽然在短期内可能牺牲了一些问责制,却在长期内通过降低政治冲突烈度,反而增加了制度的韧性。这种反直觉的结论,无疑是建立在大量跨国比较研究之上的。阅读过程中,我感觉自己仿佛被邀请进入了一个高水平的学术研讨会,作者不断地抛出新的概念,比如“软性否决点”和“制度溢出效应”,并用精准的语言将它们定义清楚。对于任何希望从历史经验中学习,并预测未来政治走向的研究者而言,这本书提供了一个无与伦比的分析工具箱。
评分这本书简直是为我这种对政治理论有着深深好奇心的人量身定做的。我一直对国家如何在动荡中寻求稳定,以及民主制度如何才能真正扎根于社会结构这一宏大命题感到着迷。作者在开篇就提出了一个极具挑战性的问题:转型期的脆弱性究竟源于哪些结构性障碍?他们并没有满足于表面化的描述,而是深入挖掘了历史遗产、社会阶层分化以及外部环境干预这三大核心要素。我特别欣赏他对“制度惯性”的分析,指出即便是最完美的宪法文本,也可能因为旧有权力网络的阻挠而形同虚设。书中引用的案例——从东欧的剧变到拉丁美洲的渐进式改革——提供了丰富的对比视野,让人清晰地看到,成功的民主化绝非简单的投票箱选举,而是一场涉及精英博弈、民众动员和法律框架重塑的复杂工程。尤其让我眼前一亮的是关于“合法性危机”的论述,作者细致地剖析了新政权如何在缺乏历史合法性和绩效证明的双重压力下,艰难地建立起民众对其规则的信任。这本书的论证逻辑严密,数据支撑详实,读起来酣畅淋漓,让人不得不停下来反复思考,我们今天所习以为常的民主规范,其基础究竟有多么坚实。
评分这本书的文字风格有一种冷峻的、近乎临床诊断的客观性,这对于探讨高度敏感的政治转型议题而言,是极其必要的品质。它没有采用煽情的语言来描绘民众对自由的渴望,也没有对任何特定政治人物进行道德审判。相反,它将焦点完全置于“机制”和“结构”之上,仿佛在解剖一台复杂的政治机器。我发现自己越来越被书中对权力制衡的设计艺术所吸引。例如,作者对“司法独立性”的探讨,不是简单地赞美它,而是深入分析了在转型国家中,司法系统如何从前政权的附庸,一步步通过任命机制、预算控制乃至社会舆论压力,逐步获得真正的独立性。这个过程中的每一步权衡、每一点妥协,都被描绘得淋漓尽致。读完之后,我对理解一个看似稳定运行的民主体制背后的“脆弱平衡”有了更深刻的认识。它让我意识到,我们所享受的政治稳定,可能仅仅是无数相互制约的力量暂时达成一致的结果,而非历史的必然终点。这种深刻的洞察力,让这本书远远超出了教科书的范畴。
评分这本书的篇幅厚重,内容密度极高,读起来绝非易事,但其提供的知识回报是巨大的。我特别赞赏作者对“制度演化”这一动态过程的细致刻画。他们反对将民主转型视为一个终点明确的线性过程,而是将其视为一个充满偶然性、反馈循环和路径依赖的复杂系统。书中用大量的篇幅探讨了“非正式制度”在正式法律失效时的作用,这在许多只关注宪法条文的著作中是看不到的。例如,精英之间的私人关系网络、不成文的政治默契,如何在关键时刻充当了“软性安全阀”,防止了制度的彻底崩盘。这种对“幕后操作”的深入挖掘,揭示了政治运作的真实面貌。这本书让我开始用一种更具历史纵深感的眼光去看待当下的政治事件——每一个看似突发的新闻,其实都根植于数十年来权力结构调整的深层逻辑之中。总而言之,这是一本需要反复咀嚼,并且每一次重读都会带来新发现的重量级著作。
评分行文之费解读得欲仙欲死
评分linz爱用长句子,我慢!
评分行文之费解读得欲仙欲死
评分linz爱用长句子,我慢!
评分linz爱用长句子,我慢!
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有