frankcunninghamtheoriesofdemocracy畢業(yè)論文外文翻譯

1、文獻翻譯文獻翻譯:【CA】FrankCunningham:m:TheiesofDemocracyChapterIII：LiberaldemocracyAspartofhishighlypublicizedprovocativethesisthatafterthefallofcommunisminEuropewithitthewitheringofgrideologicalcontestshistyhasendedFrancisFukuy

2、amamaintainsthatWesternliberaldemocracyhasbecome‘thefinalfmofhumangovernment’(1992:xi).WhateverthemeritsofFukuyama’s‘endofhisty’theyhisclaimaboutliberaldemocracyhasinitsfavourthatnearlyalldemocraciesaspiringdemocraciesar

3、etypicallydescribedbothintheeticalcirclesinpopulardiscourseasliberaldemocratic.Aswillbeseennotalltheistsbelieveliberaldemocracytobeeitherthebesttheonlyfeasiblefmofdemocracybutsuchtheistsareinaminitypositionsthatevenadeca

4、deagowereadvancedinoppositiontoliberaldemocracyarenowproposedasversionsdeepeningsrealizationsofit.Fthesereasonsthischapterthenextwillbeginthebook’ssurveyofdemocratictheieswithanextendeddiscussionofliberaldemocracy.Insodo

5、ingIshallabstractfromefftstoexplainthepervasivenessofinstitutionspracticescalledliberaldemocratictofocusoncefeaturesofthethey.J.S.Mill’sfmulationInhisessaysOnLibertyConsiderationsonRepresentativeGovernmentJohnStuartMills

6、etoutwhatisoftenconsideredthefirstsystematicexplicationdefenceofliberaldemocracy.AsaprodemocratMillwelcomedtheprogressinequalityaboutwhichTocquevillewasanxiousyetinareviewofDemocracyinAmericahestillenthusiasticallyrecomm

7、endedthewktohisfellowBritonsamongotherreasonsbecausehefoundTocqueville’swarningsaboutthetyrannyofthemajitywelltaken(Mill1976[183540]:213–19).InparticularMillagreedwithTocqueville’sclaimsthatmajitymassculturestiflesfreein

8、fmedthoughtthatanomnipotentmajitycouldoppressaminity.TakentogetherMill’sessaysmayinlargepartbereadasasustainedeffttoconfrontthisproblembythestraightfwardmethodofcombiningdemocracyliberalism.InpreviouserasMillobservedtyra

9、nnywassomethingexperiencedbythemajityofanation’speopleatthehsofaminitysotherewasnodangerofthemajity‘tyrannizingoveritself.’Butwiththeemergenceoflargedemocraticnations(hecitesinparticulartheUS)aneedwascreatedfthepeople‘to

10、limittheirpoweroverthemselves’(Mill1991b[1859]:7).TheaimofOnLibertythenwastoidentifytheprinciplesinaccdwithwhichthepeopleshouldsecurethislimitation.MostoftheessayisdevotedtoexplicationdefenceofMill’sclaimthat‘theonlypurp

11、osefwhichpowercanberightfullyexercisedoveranymemberofacivilizedcommunityagainsthiswillistopreventharmtoothers.Hisowngood...isnotasufficientwarrant.’(14).Infmthisinjunctionprescribesagainstgovernmentpaternalismaswellasaga

12、instoverttyrannyinfavourofwhatisoftennowcalledthe‘pluralist’matethatcitizensthatwhenfeasibleitshouldbecombinedwithdirectparticipation.Becauseameasureofparticipatydemocracyalbeitlimitedisallowedtobepossibledesirablebythei

13、stsevenmecloselyidentifiedwithliberaldemocracythanSchumpetersuchasRobertDahl(1970a:102–31989:338–9)acasecanbemadetoconsiderthisanareaofdisagreementwithinliberaldemocratictheyratherthanasadividinglinebetweenitalternatives

14、.EqualityOtherdifferencesconcernequality.Millisofteninimptantrespectsustlyclassifiedanegalitarian.Hewasamongthefewmalesofhistimefcefullytoadvocateextensionofthefranchisetowomen(Mill1971[1869])hisviewsonthedistributionofw

15、ealthputhimtowardthesocialisticendofaspectrumofstancesonthequestionofhowfarliberaldemocratsshouldinsistonpoliticsfavouringsocialeconomicequality.RonaldDwkin(1983)mayalsobelocatedsomewhereintheegalitarian‘camp’asaccdingto

16、mostinterpretersmayJohnRawlsDahlhasmovedinthisdirectionoverthecourseofhiscareer(contrastDahl19561985).RobertNozick(whodoesnotclassifyhimselfaliberaldemocrat)insiststhatliberalprinciplesdictateantiegalitarianism(1974).The

17、lateIsaiahBerlinwhilenotexplicitlyantiegalitarianwasscepticalaboutsanctioningmethanfmalpoliticalequalityinthenameofliberaldemocracy(1969[1958]).FMill‘thepureideaofdemocracy’is‘governmentofthewholepeoplebythewholepeopleeq

18、uallyrepresented’whichrequiresproptionalrepresentationsoaminityisnotdeniedgovernmentrepresentatives(1991a[1861]:302–3).HoweverthisegalitarianismdoesnotcarryovertothevotewhereMill’sviewdifferswithmostotherliberaldemocrati

19、ctheists.Onthemainstreamviewpoliticalequalityisacentralvalueisinterpretedasequalityinthepollingbooth.Milldidnotagree:‘Idonotlookuponequalvotingasamongthethingsthataregoodinthemselves’heannouncedhewentontoexplainthatbygra

20、ntingtheeducatedtheuneducatedequalvotesademocracyharmfullydeclared‘ignancetobeentitledtoasmuchpoliticalpowerasknowledge’(ibid.:340)翻譯：第3章自由民主自由民主FrancisFukuyama提出了一個曾引起備受關注和爭議的觀點：歷史已經(jīng)在共產(chǎn)主義在歐洲實行失敗的同時以慢慢地意識形態(tài)爭論的停止而終結(jié)。這個理論的

21、部分中闡明，F(xiàn)rancis認為西方的這種自由民主已成為“人類政治的最合理形式”。無論這種論證是否真實可信，但他對于自由民主的論述已經(jīng)成為流行詞，人們在描述民主國家或追求民主的國家時，都將貼上了自由民主的符號，無論是在學術界還是在大眾語言中都是如此?，F(xiàn)在正像人們所看到的一樣，不是所有的學者都認為自由民主是最好的也是唯一切實可行的民主形式，懷有這樣想法的理論家只占很少的一部分。然而，現(xiàn)如今那些十年前曾經(jīng)被認為是反對自由民主的立場的觀點，卻被