民主和平论RJ Rummel.docx
- 文档编号:8011642
- 上传时间:2023-01-27
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:15
- 大小:34.29KB
民主和平论RJ Rummel.docx
《民主和平论RJ Rummel.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《民主和平论RJ Rummel.docx(15页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
民主和平论RJRummel
THEDEMOCRATICPEACE:
ANEWIDEA?
1
ByR.J.Rummel
Bytheendoftheeighteenthcenturyacomplete[classical]liberaltheoryofinternationalrelations,ofwarandpeace,had...developed...Peacewas...fundamentallyaquestionoftheestablishmentofdemocraticinstitutionsthroughouttheworld.[2]
SUMMARY
Arepoliticalsystemsrelatedtocollectiveviolenceandwar?
Thisisnowfundamentallyansweredinoneofthreeways:
yes,democraciesareleastviolenceprone;yes,socialistequalitarianismassurespeace;andno,politicalsystemsandviolenceareunrelated.
Recenttheoreticalandempiricalresearchconfirmsthefirstanswer:
thosepoliticalsystemsthatmaximizeandguaranteeindividualfreedom(democracies)areleastviolenceprone;thosethatmaximizethesubordinationofallindividualbehaviortostatecontrol(totalitariansystems)themost,whethersocialistornot;andwarsdonotoccurbetweendemocracies.
Knownforcenturies,atenetofclassicalliberalism,thepacificnatureofdemocracyhasbecamelargelyforgottenorignoredinthelasthalf-century.Thatdemocracyisinherentlypeacefulisnowprobablybelievedbynomorethanafewprominentpeaceresearchers.InpartthishasbeenduetotheintellectualdefectionofWesternintellectualsfromclassicalliberalismtosomevariantofsocialism,withitsemphasisonthecompetitiveviolenceandbellicosityofcapitalistfreedoms.Manyintellectuals,andinparticularlyEuropeanandThirdWorldpeaceresearchers,havecometobelievethatsocialistequalitarianismistheanswertoviolence;others,particularlyAmericanliberals,believethatifthesocialistarewrong,thenatleastdemocraciesarenobetterthanotherpoliticalsystemsinpromotingpeace.
Socialismaside,therealsohasbeenarejectionofWesternvalues,ofwhichindividualfreedomisprominent,andacceptanceofsomeformofvalue-relativism(thus,nopoliticalsystemisbetterthananyother).Insomecasesthisrejectionhasturnedtooutrighthostilityandparticularlyanti-Americanism,andthusoppositiontoAmericanvalues,suchasfreedom.Toaccept,therefore,thatdemocraticfreedomisinherentlymostpeaceful,istothevalue-relativist,tosaytheunacceptable--thatitisbetter.Foranother,toacceptthatthisfreedompromotesnon-violenceseemstotakesidesinwhatisperceivedastheglobalideologicalstruggleorpowergamebetweentheUnitedStatesandSovietUnion.
Independentofdifferentideologicalorphilosophicalperspectives,severalinteractingmethodologicalerrorshaveblindedintellectualsandpeaceresearcherstothepeacefulnessofdemocracies.Oneoftheseisthestrong,generaltendencytoseeonlynationalcharacteristicsandoverallbehavior.Thenanationisrichorpoor,powerfulorweak,belligerentorpacific.Butmostimportantforidentifyingtherelationshipbetweenfreedomandviolenceisratherthesimilaritiesanddifferencesbetweentwostatesandtheirmutualbehavior.Thusshouldbeobservedalackofviolenceandwarbetweendemocracies;andthemostsevereviolenceoccurringbetweenthosenationswiththeleastfreedom.
Anothererrorhasbeentoselectivelyfocusuponthemajorpowers,whichincludeamongthemnotonlyseveraldemocracieshavingmanywars,butalsoGreatBritainhavingthemost.However,asystematiccomparisonamongallthebelligerentsandneutralsinwars,woulduncoverthegreaterpeacefulnessofdemocracies.
Alongwiththisselectiveattentionisthetendencytocountequallyagainstdemocraciesallofitswars,nomatterhowmildorsmall.Thus,theAmericaninvasionofGrenadawouldbeonemarkagainstdemocracy;Hitler'sinvasionofPolandthatinitiatedWorldWarIIwouldbeasimilarmarkagainstnon-democracies.Thisstacksanysuchaccountingagainstdemocracy.
Finally,whileasystematicsurveyoftheliteratureshowssignificantsupportfortheinverserelationshipbetweendemocracyandviolence,researchershavedonelittletheoreticaltestingofthisrelationship,thusresultingintheiroverlookingorignoringitwhenitappearsintheirresults.
DEMOCRACIESPROMOTENONVIOLENCE
Theorganizersofthisconferenceaskedmewriteataxonomicpaperonthequestion:
"Cantherelativebellicosityofstatesbemeasuredandpredictedasafunctionoftheirinternalpoliticalsystem?
"Theanswerofmostcurrentempiricalresearchisdecidedlyyes.[3]
Indeed,theempiricalrelationshipisevenmoreprofoundandcomprehensivethanthequestionimplies.Intheoryandfact,themoredemocraticthepoliticalsystemsoftwostates,thelessviolencebetweenthem;andiftheyarebothdemocraticviolenceisprecludedaltogether.[4]Thatis,democraticstatesdonotmakewaroneachother.Moreover,themoredemocraticapoliticalsystem,thelessforeignanddomesticcollectiveviolence;themoretotalitarian,themorelikelysuchviolence.[5]
Perhapsthemostsurprisingfindingisthatthelessdemocraticagovernment,themorelikelyitwillkillitsowncitizensincoldblood,independentofanyforeignordomesticwar.Now,warisnotthemostdeadlyformofviolence.Indeed,while36millionpeoplehavebeenkilledinbattleinallforeignanddomesticwarsinourcentury,atleast119millionmorehavebeenkilledbygovernmentgenocide,massacres,andothermasskilling.Andabout115millionofthesewerekilledbytotalitariangovernments(asmanyas95millionbycommunistones).Thereisnocaseofdemocracieskillingenmassetheirowncitizens.[6]
Theinverserelationshipbetweendemocracyandforeignviolence,collectivedomesticviolence,orgovernmentgenocideisnotsimplyacorrelation,butacauseandeffect.Inanutshell,democraticfreedompromotesnonviolence.Theseresultsareworthyofthegreatestattentionandanalysis,foriftrue,whichIamnowconvincedtheyare,thenpeaceresearchhasinfactdefinedapolicyforminimizingcollectiveviolenceandeliminatingwar:
enhanceandfoster[7]democraticinstitutions--civillibertiesandpoliticalrights--hereandabroad.[8]
THECLASSICALLIBERALS
Thefundamentalinverserelationshipbetweenfreedomandviolenceistrulyamatterofinsightandknowledgegainedandlostamongpoliticalphilosopherstoberediscoveredthroughrigoroustheoreticalandempiricalresearchbypeaceresearchers.Infact,solongagoas1795,inhisvirtuallynowforgottenPerpetualPeace,ImmanuelKantsystematicallyarticulatedthepositiveroleofpoliticalfreedomineliminatingwar;andproposedthereforethatconstitutionalrepublicsbeestablishedtoassureuniversalpeace.Thisproposalhasvariousnuances,suchasthoseinvolvingthedifferencebetweenrepublicsanddemocracies,andbetweenpoliticalandeconomicfreedom,buttheessentialideawasthis:
themorefreedompeoplehavetogoverntheirownlives,themoregovernmentpowerislimitedconstitutionally,themoreleadersareresponsiblethroughfreeelectionstotheirpeople,thenthemorerestrainedtheleaderswillbeinmakingwar.InKant'swords:
[9]
Therepublicanconstitution...givesafavorableprospectforthedesiredconsequence,i.e.,perpetualpeace.Thereasonisthis:
iftheconsentofthecitizensisrequiredinordertodecidethatwarshouldbedeclared(andinthisconstitutionitcannotbutbethecase),nothingismorenaturalthanthattheywouldbeverycautiousincommencingsuchapoorgame,decreeingforthemselvesallthecalamitiesofwar.Amongthelatterwouldbe:
havingtofight,havingtopaythecostsofwarsfromtheirownresources,havingpainfullytorepairthedevastationwarleavesbehind,and,tofillupthemeasureofevils,loadthemselveswithaheavynationaldebtthatwouldembitterpeaceitselfandthatcanneverbeliquidatedonaccountofconstantwarsinthefuture.But,ontheotherhand,inaconstitutionwhichisnotrepublican,andunderwhichthesubjectsarenotcitizens,adeclarationofwaristheeasiestthingintheworldtodecideupon,becausewardoesnotrequireoftheruler,whoistheproprietorandnotamemberofthestate,theleastsacrificeofthepleasuresofhistable,thechase,hiscountryhouses,hiscourtfunctions,andthelike.Hemay,therefore,resolveonwarasonapleasurepartyforthemosttrivialreasons,andwithperfectindifferenceleavethejustificationwhichdecencyrequirestothediplomaticcorpswhoareeverreadytoprovideit.
ThroughthewritingsofKant,deMontesquieu,ThomasPaine,JeremyBentham,andJohnStuartMill,amongothers,itbecameanarticleofclassicalliberalfaithinthe18thand19thcenturiesthat"Governmentontheoldsystem,"asPainewrote,"isanassumptionofpower,fortheaggrandizementofitself;onthenew[RepublicanformofgovernmentasjustestablishedintheUnitedStates],adelegationofpowerforthecommonbenefitofsociety.Theformersupportsitselfbykeepingupasystemofwar;thelatterpromotesasystemofpeace,asthetruemeansofenrichinganation."[10]
Theseliberalsbelievedthattherewasanaturalharmonyofinterestsamongnations,andthatfreetradewouldfacilitatethisharmonyandpromotepeace.Mostimportant,theywereconvincedthatmonarchicalaristocracieshadavestedinterestinwar.Itwas,incontemporaryterms,agametheyplayedwiththelivesofthecommonfolk.Empowerthecommonpeopletomakesuchdecisionsthroughtheirrepresentatives,andtheywouldalwaysopposewar.
Inanhistoricalperspectivethattheydidnothave,itisclearthattheclassicalliberalshadtoomuchfaithinthemasses.Theydidnotanticipatetheriseofnationalism,althoughtheFrenchRevolutionandtheNapoleonicWarspresagedwhatourcenturywouldbeholdinfullglory:
thetotalnationatarms,totalmobilizationandtotalwar.Theydidnotappreciatehowth
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 民主和平论RJ Rummel 民主 和平 RJ
![提示](https://static.bdocx.com/images/bang_tan.gif)