About the Author
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita is the Julius Silver Professor of Politics and director of the Alexander Hamilton Center for Political Economy at New York University. He is the author of 16 books, including The Predictioneer’s Game.Alastair Smith is professor of politics at New York University. The recipient of three grants from the National Science Foundation and author of three books, he was chosen as the 2005 Karl Deutsch Award winner, given biennially to the best international relations scholar under the age of 40.
In this title, two renowned political scientists make the contrarian, research-based case that - regardless of any other factors political scientists or historians may find relevant - the calculations and actions of rulers are the driving force of all politics, and the primary goal of rulers is to maintain power as long as possible. In this clever and accessible book, Bueno de Mesquita and Smith introduce us to their perspective of the political world. They bare the logic of politics, starting from the simple premise that leaders pursue their own ends, and that populations either have, or more often don't have, the power to constrain them to a significant degree. The book is organized by a series interconnected questions, among them: Why do leaders who wreck their countries keep their jobs for so long? Why do autocracies have dismal economic policies? How are there so many suffering people in resource-rich lands? Why do 'natural disasters' disproportionately strike poor nations? Why do 'evil-doers' so often collect loads of foreign aid? Why are democracies so good at war? In answering these questions, the authors look at politics, the choices of public policies, and even decisions about war and peace as lying outside of conventional thinking about culture and history. They set aside ideas of civic virtue and psychopathology. Such notions simply are not central to understanding what leaders do and why they do it. Instead, Bueno de Mesquita and Smith see politicians as self-interested louts, just the sort of people you wouldn't want to have over for dinner, but without whom you might not have dinner at all. And from this perspective, they are able to answer some perplexing mysteries of politics, shed light on what we read in the newspapers every single day, and offer realistic ways of improving human governance.
从9年前郭美美事件到本次武汉疫情再次把红十字推上风口浪尖。到了全网愤怒的地步,我们会好奇为何红十字多年以来死性不改?就在备受质疑后红会仍然没有给出实质性的回复和惩罚。 其实作为普通人,我们要明白当谈论政治和权利时,我们谈论的不是意识形态,国籍或者祖籍或者文化...
评分放诸古今皆准的权力规则 http://www.dfdaily.com/html/1170/2013/3/10/958748.shtml 万维钢 发表于2013-03-10 01:21 十九世纪末的比利时国王利奥波德二世完全有理由成为一些人心中的偶像。 不管你是独裁者还是民主国家领导人,或者公司的CEO,只要能不折不扣地执...
评分本来对某些出版社愿意引进这样的书还是很高兴的,但如果把一本书经过断章取义的处理后再出版,很难讲还算不算做善事,因为有可能给原著抹黑。 翻了没几页,就看到“东北亚某个国家”这样的词了,本能的认为原著不可能这样写,于是找来英文原著做了简单的对照。没想到这一对照,...
评分看到有篇热门书评开始讨论作者的民主观点,实在可笑。作为大学老师,这门课的重点是政治权力的获取和运用,对照的是马基雅维利、霍布斯、麦迪逊、孟德斯鸠的看法。听课的学生生活在民主国家,随时运用民主制度,对民主的理解和实践绝对超过书评作者。那书评就是歪曲。如果说作...
评分给大家个数据,应该叫有影响力集团还是致胜联盟大家自己思考吧。(以下均复制网络http://t.m.youth.cn/transfer/index/url/mip.youth.cn/sz/201710/t20171024_10910065.htm) 关于中央委员会的具体人数,中共党章无硬性规定。相关条款指出:中央委员会委员和候补委员的名额,由...
:无
评分用一种简单模型(interchangeable, influential, essential)去替代另一种简单模型(民主vs独裁),然后生搬硬套。废话太多,车轱辘话来回说,最后我就只看看每章最后的总结。举了不少例子但分析太浅且牵强。最有趣的是,中国和新加坡的成功被作者称为“例外”,然后干脆就不讨论了!
评分选择人理论(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selectorate_theory)有点像用历史结果来决定建模准确性的游戏论的一个特例,优点是这个模型适合解释很多有趣的现象,尤其是近代非洲诸国独立后经历的各种独裁。如果你经常纳闷为何一个独裁者能稳固政权那么久,也许这本书可以提供一些答案,或者至少是思考的源头。
评分很讨厌这种写作风格,感觉不舒服,要不就完全严谨学术写作,要不就写出畅销书应有的水准,这种mixed的真心觉得做作讨厌。\\#多日后为写paper的吐槽# 真是的学术著作吗??敢不敢再不严谨点?
评分脑洞太大,有点儿牵强。不过有些部分(比如援助问题)听起来挺有道理的。 分好高啊。
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
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有