政观快递 | American Political Science Review No.1, 2020（上）

期刊简介：《美国政治学评论》（American Political Science Review）是美国政治学会（American Political Science Association）旗下最知名的季刊。自1906年创刊并由剑桥大学出版社出版以来，逐步成为政治学最具权威性的期刊之一。内容涉及政治学理论、美国政治、公共政策、公共管理、比较政治、国际关系等。根据Journal Citation Reports显示，其2018年的影响因子为3.895，在176种政治科学类期刊中位列第7位（7/176）。

编者按：摘要编译主要由各高校在读硕士生和博士生自愿组织进行。受学生学识及翻译水平所限，译文可能有诸多不当之处，还望读者们见宥，也欢迎留言讨论。此外，由于版权所限，需要阅读原文的读者请通过所在学校/机构的图书馆数据库或其他途径访问下载。

期刊目录

1. 代议制民主——可辩护的知识精英制

2. 民主协商的形式理论

3. 有支持民主的情绪吗？民主支持的恒温观点

4. 柏拉图的厄洛斯神话和本性的重构

5. 什么是自生秩序？

6. 殖民时期印度的自治和民族性问题

代议制民主——可辩护的知识精英制

题目：Representative Democracy as Defensible Epistocracy

作者：Dimitri Landa, 纽约大学政治学系副教授；Ryan Pevnick，纽约大学政治学系副教授

摘要：知识精英制的安排之所以被广泛排斥，是因为在哪些公民算是在知识上更加优越，以及知识上优越的公民可能会因其偏见而削弱决策能力的问题上，存在着合理的异议。如此以来，民主政府应是较优良的体系，因为其不允许某些公民凌驾于其他公民之上。本文指出，这一路径更加不尽如人意：尽管代议制民主政府形式无法用“不允许一些公民凌驾于另一些公民之上”来为自己辩护，却可以辩护为一种特殊形式的知识精英制。本文指出，设计良好的代议制民主能够通过特定的手段和选择机制，使最有能力的公民来到台前进行公共决策，即使是陷于对知识精英制的一般性批评时也是如此。这对代议制民主的正当性和制度设计问题具有启示意义。

Epistocratic arrangements are widely rejected because there will be reasonable disagreement about which citizens count as epistemically superior and an epistemically superior subset of citizens may be biased in ways that undermine their ability to generate superior political outcomes. The upshot is supposed to be that systems of democratic government are preferable because they refuse to allow some citizens to rule over others. We show that this approach is doubly unsatisfactory: although representative democracy cannot be defended as a form of government that prevents some citizens from ruling over others, it can be defended as a special form of epistocracy. We demonstrate that well-designed representative democracies can, through treatment and selection mechanisms, bring forth an especially competent set of individuals to make public policy, even while circumventing the standard objections to epistocratic rule. This has implications for the justification of representative democracy and questions of institutional design.

民主协商的形式理论

题目：A Formal Theory of Democratic Deliberation

作者：Hun Chung，早稻田大学政治经济学院副教授；John Duggan，罗切斯特大学政治经济学教授

摘要：受社会选择理论中不可能定理的启发，许多民主理论家认为集体形式的民主无法为达成的集体决定提供充分的民主合法性。因此，民主理论家们已经将他们的注意力转向协商民主。根据协商民主理论，“当且仅当结果成为平等主体之间自由达成的合理协议的对象时，他们才具有民主合法性”（Cohen 1997a, 73）。然而，为民主协商提供一个形式理论的工作相对较少。本文通过提供一个关于三种不同的民主协商模式的形式理论来填补这一空白。这三种模式分别为：短浅的讨论、建设性讨论和辩论。作者发现短浅的讨论会导致长期结果的不确定性，但是建设性讨论和辩论的影响是决定性的。最后，与其他两种协商模式不同，不管最初状况如何，辩论都是一种独立路径，并且会产生一种独特的折中方案。

Inspired by impossibility theorems of social choice theory, many democratic theorists have argued that aggregative forms of democracy cannot lend full democratic justification for the collective decisions reached. Hence, democratic theorists have turned their attention to deliberative democracy, according to which “outcomes are democratically legitimate if and only if they could be the object of a free and reasoned agreement among equals” (Cohen 1997a, 73). However, relatively little work has been done to offer a formal theory of democratic deliberation. This article helps fill that gap by offering a formal theory of three different modes of democratic deliberation: myopic discussion, constructive discussion, and debate. We show that myopic discussion suffers from indeterminacy of long run outcomes, while constructive discussion and debate are conclusive. Finally, unlike the other two modes of deliberation, debate is path independent and converges to a unique compromise position, irrespective of the initial status quo.

有支持民主的情绪吗？民主支持的恒温观点

题目：In the Mood for Democracy? Democratic Support as Thermostatic Opinion

作者：Christopher Claassen，格拉斯哥大学社会与政治学院高级讲师

摘要：对于民主的存续和活力来说，政治支持一直以来都被认为是十分关键的因素。现有研究认为民主也会创造对其自身的需求：通过早期的社会化和后期的学习，民主体系的存在经过了时间的检验为民主带来了了广泛的公众支持。通过使用测量了超过135个国家长达30年关于民主情绪的新型面板数据，本文发现很少有证据能验证这种对于民主支持的正反馈效用。相反，本文表明了一种负面的恒温效用：更高水平的民主降低了民主情绪，而民主程度的减少激励了这种情绪。此外，民主在自由、反多数决上的提高会激起公民的反感情绪，而民主在多数决、选举层面上的提高并不会有这种效果。这些新颖的结果挑战了现有关于民主支持度的研究，但也使这项研究与有关宏观态度的文献保持一致。

Public support has long been thought crucial for the vitality and survival of democracy. Existing research has argued that democracy also creates its own demand: through early-years socialization and later-life learning, the presence of a democratic system coupled with the passage of time produces widespread public support for democracy. Using new panel measures of democratic mood varying over 135 countries and up to 30 years, this article finds little evidence for such a positive feedback effect of democracy on support. Instead, it demonstrates a negative thermostatic effect: increases in democracy depress democratic mood, while decreases cheer it. Moreover, it is increases in the liberal, counter-majoritarian aspects of democracy, not the majoritarian, electoral aspects that provoke this backlash from citizens. These novel results challenge existing research on support for democracy, but also reconcile this research with the literature on macro-opinion.

柏拉图的厄洛斯神话和本性的重构

题目：Plato’s Myth of Er and the Reconfiguration of Nature

作者：Tae-Yeoun Keum，牛津大学基督教堂学院Christopher Tower青年研究员

摘要：为什么柏拉图要以厄洛斯神话这样一个政治意义不明的模糊神话来收尾他最著名的政治理论著作《理想国》？本文提出了一种对厄洛斯神话的新颖解读，这个神话体现了《理想国》两个较早的插叙中的共同情节。这表明，柏拉图将神话作为对探索的一种解释，这类似于好的城邦教育计划中包含的对潜在哲学王的分类，因为教育的影响已经日积月累地渗透进哲学王的本性之中。这个神话中的本性模型反过来帮助我们将本性的分类作为一个运行中的理念来看待：我们可以认识到这样一种语境，在这种语境下，复杂、易变的个体具有固定、不可磨灭的本性，同时我们对这种本性的理解是可变的。

Why did Plato conclude the Republic, arguably his most celebrated work of political theory, with the Myth of Er, an obscure story of indeterminate political-theoretical significance? This paper advances a novel reading of the Myth of Er that attends to the common plot that it shares with two earlier narrative interludes in the Republic. It suggests that Plato constructed the myth as an account of a search, akin to the sorting of potential philosopher-kings that underwrites the kallipolis’ educational curriculum, for natures that have successfully absorbed the cumulative effects of their philosophical upbringing. The model of nature presented in the myth, in turn, helps us approach the category of nature as a working concept: we can recognize contexts in which it is useful to assume in otherwise complex and fluid individuals a fixed, indelible nature, while granting that our sense of what that consists in is subject to revision.

什么是自生秩序？

题目：What Is Spontaneous Order?

作者：Daniel Luban, 牛津大学政治学系初级研究员

摘要：弗里德里希·哈耶克的著作使“自生秩序”成为社会理论中一个颇具影响力的概念。它试图解释人类的实践和制度是如何作为种种个人行为的意外后果而出现的，并指出理性主义和有意识的设计在社会生活中的局限。自生秩序理论的政治含义解释了它所引发的（人们对其的）热情和怀疑，但它的基本机制仍然难以捉摸，也没有得到充分的检验。本文梳理了这一概念的内在逻辑，认为它可以用来表示几种不同的含义。一些是前瞻式的(根据现在的功能来定义它)，而另一些是回顾式的(根据历史起源来定义它)。然而，这些可能性中没有一种被证明是条理清晰或令人满意的，这表明自生秩序无法承受人们赋予它的分析权重。

Due especially to the work of Friedrich Hayek, “spontaneous order” has become an influential concept in social theory. It seeks to explain how human practices and institutions emerge as unintended consequences of myriad individual actions, and points to the limits of rationalism and conscious design in social life. The political implications of spontaneous order theory explain both the enthusiasm and the skepticism it has elicited, but its basic mechanisms remain elusive and underexamined. This article teases out the internal logic of the concept, arguing that it can be taken to mean several different things. Some are forward-looking (defining it in terms of present-day functioning), whereas others are backward-looking (defining it in terms of historical origins). Yet none of these possibilities prove fully coherent or satisfactory, suggesting that spontaneous order cannot bear the analytical weight that has been placed on it.

殖民时期印度的自治和民族性问题

题目：Self-Rule and the Problem of Peoplehood in Colonial India

作者：Nazmul S. Sultan，芝加哥大学政治学系博士候选人

摘要：这篇文章理论化了印度反殖民主义思想家在试图概念化“自治”或“印度自治”时所努力克服的民族性问题。英国殖民统治的合法性来自于认为殖民地人民是落后且分裂的发展主义观念。关于殖民地人民“不发达”的话语使印度人民“不适合”自治，因此无限期地中止他们行使主权。印度自治的概念随着拒绝推迟的殖民地自治而产生。然而，发展主义观念的持续存在造成了一场主权授权的危机。前甘地时代的印度自治理论家们将在否定英国统治的那一刻面对一个尚未清晰的人民形象。恢复关于印度自治概念在前甘地时代未被重视的历史，并重新解释它在甘地时期的含义，这篇文章为甘地的道德自治理论提供了一个新的解读。通过这样做，它展示了自治的历史如何有助于追溯人民主权的殖民经历。

This article theorizes the colonial problem of peoplehood that Indian anticolonial thinkers grappled with in their attempts to conceptualize self-rule, or swaraj. British colonial rule drew its legitimacy from a developmentalist conception of the colonized people as backward and disunited. The discourse of “underdeveloped” colonial peoplehood rendered the Indian people “unfit” for self-government, suspending their sovereignty to an indefinite future. The concept of swaraj would be born with the rejection of deferred colonial self-government. Yet the persistence of the developmentalist figuration of the people generated a crisis of sovereign authorization. The pre-Gandhian swaraj theorists would be faced with the not-yet claimable figure of the people at the very moment of disavowing the British claim to rule. Recovering this underappreciated pre-Gandhian history of the concept of swaraj and reinterpreting its Gandhian moment, this article offers a new reading of Gandhi's theory of moral self-rule. In so doing, it demonstrates how the history of swaraj helps trace the colonial career of popular sovereignty.

编译/校对：施榕、杨端程、康张城、殷昊、赵德昊、吴温泉

编辑：郭静远

【政文观止Poliview】系头条号签约作者

你在看政观么