本文選題：霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定 + 霸權(quán)體系　； 參考：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：國際社會(huì)的無政府性是國際政治的本質(zhì),在這種無政府的環(huán)境與壓力之下各民族國家為了生存與安全、權(quán)力與利益而展開了競爭、對抗、沖突以致戰(zhàn)爭等各種形式的自助行為。歷史上的數(shù)次世界性戰(zhàn)爭使脆弱的人類再也經(jīng)受不起大規(guī)模的動(dòng)蕩,國際經(jīng)濟(jì)金融危機(jī)的爆發(fā)可使幾代人積累的財(cái)富瞬間蒸發(fā),人類的生存與發(fā)展迫切需要和平與穩(wěn)定的國際環(huán)境。國際政治學(xué)者們雖然門派不一,但都認(rèn)為國際政治的無政府性并不代表著國際政治一定沒有秩序,為了國際社會(huì)的穩(wěn)定各學(xué)派均提出了自己的思考:其中主流現(xiàn)實(shí)主義主張以權(quán)力的均衡制約國家間的戰(zhàn)爭和對抗的行為;自由主義希望通過經(jīng)濟(jì)交往、民主制度、國際機(jī)制等和平方式協(xié)調(diào)各國利益矛盾,增進(jìn)國際合作意愿;而帶有哲學(xué)和社會(huì)學(xué)底蘊(yùn)的建構(gòu)主義則希望重新建構(gòu)人們的觀念來實(shí)現(xiàn)一種我為人人,人人為我的康德世界。本文介紹的霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定論屬于現(xiàn)實(shí)主義的分支,它主張采取極端不平等的權(quán)力分配形式在國際體系中形成一個(gè)霸權(quán)國家,霸權(quán)國在軍事實(shí)力、政治影響、經(jīng)濟(jì)總量、科技創(chuàng)新等各方面居于世界領(lǐng)先位置,是唯一能夠?yàn)閲H社會(huì)提供安全與穩(wěn)定等公共物品的國家。霸權(quán)國為國際社會(huì)提供正常運(yùn)行所需的國際公共物品的同時(shí)得到體系內(nèi)其他國家對其霸權(quán)地位與統(tǒng)治管理的認(rèn)可,從而形成一種正常運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)的霸權(quán)體系。霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定論是一種周期理論,它將國際關(guān)系的發(fā)展看成一個(gè)個(gè)不同的霸權(quán)周期循環(huán)史,一個(gè)霸權(quán)體系的衰落與消亡預(yù)示著新的霸權(quán)體系的建立和形成。而每一個(gè)霸權(quán)體系自身也遵循著從形成到運(yùn)行以至最終消亡的周期。霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定論自形成以來一直在不斷的發(fā)展和完善,從最初提出要為國際經(jīng)濟(jì)的穩(wěn)定提供一個(gè)平衡者,到吉爾平將其拓展至國際安全和政治領(lǐng)域,再到新自由制度主義者將國際機(jī)制增添其中以彌補(bǔ)前人研究的不足,以至冷戰(zhàn)結(jié)束后發(fā)展為赤裸裸的美國單極穩(wěn)定論。霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定理論的形成與發(fā)展有著深刻的美國色彩,霸權(quán)體系的運(yùn)行、國際公共品的提供都是以霸權(quán)護(hù)持為目的的,霸權(quán)通過強(qiáng)制權(quán)力的方式并沒有給國際社會(huì)帶來真正的穩(wěn)定,相反霸權(quán)國為了自身利益往往帶頭違反國際規(guī)則,任意破壞國際社會(huì)共同遵守的價(jià)值準(zhǔn)則。霸權(quán)穩(wěn)定的方式并不能帶來一個(gè)人們期望的國際秩序,國際政治理論在追尋公平合理新秩序的道路上還有很長路要走。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D815

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊原;;崛起國如何與霸權(quán)國爭奪小國?——基于古代東亞歷史的案例研究[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)與政治;2012年12期

2 葉自成;王日華;;中國和平發(fā)展與國際環(huán)境的理論總結(jié):崛起國與霸權(quán)國關(guān)系的新模式[J];國際觀察;2008年01期

3 邁克爾·瓦爾特 ,彭海紅;帝國還是霸權(quán)國[J];國外理論動(dòng)態(tài);2004年07期

4 王波;;霸權(quán)國內(nèi)部民主與對外霸權(quán)的互動(dòng)[J];江南社會(huì)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2006年02期

5 朱云漢;劉康;黃e，

本文編號(hào)：2080459