Читайте также:
|
Выделяют следующие цели политической модернизации:
– создание новых политических институтов для решения постоянно расширяющегося круга социальных и экономических проблем;
– изменение политических ориентаций элиты и лидеров на открытую борьбу;
– формирование рациональной бюрократии.
Основные направления модернизации в современном мире:
– процессы индустриализации и информатизации общества;
– формирование экологического общества, внедрение природосберегающих технологий;
– демократизация общества, расширение участия населения в управлении общественными делами, ответственность власти перед обществом;
– направленность социальной сферы в сторону повышения благосостояния основной массы населения, преодоления социального разрыва между членами общества;
– обеспечение доступности образования и его высокого качества, гарантирующего возможность активной деятельности и успеха в новой, меняющейся системе социальных отношений;
– расширение сферы свободы человека, рост возможности выбора и независимости от давления традиций, среды, места проживания.
2)Для примера, так называемая оригинальной модернизация, характерен для США и стран Западной Европы, которые осуществляли переход к рациональному общественному устройству в результате длительного естественного внутреннего развития. Также вторичная модернизация – был характерен для стран, отставших в своем развитии и пытавшихся догнать передовые ускоренными темпами за счет использования опыта развитых стран. К этой группе относятся развивающиеся страны, освободившиеся от колониальной зависимости (страны Южной Америки, Юго-Восточной Азии), а также страны Восточной Европы, СНГ. Основное внимание современные исследователи политической модернизации сосредоточивают на трудностях политического развития, кризисных явлениях.
40) The theory of Meritocracy
Meritocracy (merit(заслуга), from Latin mereō "earn" and -cracy, from Ancient Greek κράτος kratos "strength(прочность), power") is a political philosophy which holds that power should be vested in individuals almost exclusively according to merit. Advancement in such a system is based on intellectual talent measured through examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the field where it is implemented.
The "most common definition of meritocracy conceptualizes merit in terms of tested competency and ability, and most likely, as measured by IQ or standardized achievement tests." In government or other administration systems, meritocracy, in an administrative sense, is a system of government or other administration (such as business administration) wherein appointments and responsibilities are assigned to individuals based upon their "merits", namely intelligence, credentials, and education, determined through evaluations or examinations.
Supporters of meritocracies do not necessarily agree on the nature of "merit", however, they do tend to agree that "merit" itself should be a primary consideration during evaluation.
In a more general sense, meritocracy can refer to any form of government based on achievement. Like "utilitarian" and "pragmatic", the word "meritocratic" has also developed a broader definition, and may be used to refer to any government run by "a ruling or influential class of educated or able people."
This is in contrast to the term originally coined by Michael Young in 1958, who critically defined it as a system where "merit is equated with intelligence-plus-effort, its possessors are identified at an early age and selected for appropriate intensive education, and there is an obsession with quantification, test-scoring, and qualifications."
Young's fictional narrator explains that, on the one hand, the greatest contributor to society is not the "stolid mass" or majority, but the "creative minority" or members of the "restless elite". On the other hand, he claims that there are casualties of progress whose influence is underestimated and that, from such stolid adherence to natural science and intelligence, arises arrogance and complacency. This problem is encapsulated in the phrase "Every selection of one is a rejection of many".
It was also used by Hannah Arendt in her essay, "Crisis in Education" which was written in 1958 and refers to the use of meritocracy in the English educational system.
Meritocracy in its wider sense, may be any general act of judgment upon the basis of various demonstrated merits; such acts frequently are described in sociology and psychology. Thus, the merits may extend beyond intelligence and education to any mental or physical talent or to work ethic.
In rhetoric, the demonstration of one's merit regarding mastery of a particular subject is an essential task most directly related to the Aristotelian term Ethos. The equivalent Aristotelian conception of meritocracy is based upon aristocratic or oligarchical structures, rather than in the context of the modern state.
History
Ancient times: China and Greece
According to scholarly consensus, the earliest example of an administrative meritocracy, based on civil service examinations, dates back to Ancient China. The concept originates, at least by the sixth century BC, when it was advocated by the Chinese philosopher Confucius, who "invented the notion that those who govern should do so because of merit, not of inherited status. This sets in motion the creation of the imperial examinations and bureaucracies open only to those who passed tests."
As the Qin and Han dynasties developed a meritocratic system in order to maintain power over a large, sprawling empire, it became necessary for the government to maintain a complex network of officials. Prospective officials could come from a rural background and government positions were not restricted to the nobility. Rank was determined by merit, through the civil service examinations, and education became the key for social mobility. After the fall of the Han Dynasty, the nine-rank system was established during the Three Kingdoms period.
According to the Princeton Encyclopedia on American History:
One of the oldest examples of a merit-based civil service system existed in the imperial bureaucracy of China. Tracing back to 200 B.C., the Han Dynasty adopted Confucianism as the basis of its political philosophy and structure, which included the revolutionary idea of replacing nobility of blood with one of virtue and honesty, and thereby calling for administrative appointments to be based solely on merit. This system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer, a position that would bring wealth and honor to the whole family. In part due to Chinese influence, the first European civil service did not originate in Europe, but rather in India by the British-run East India Company... company managers hired and promoted employees based on competitive examinations in order to prevent corruption and favoritism.
Both Plato and Aristotle advocated meritocracy, Plato in his The Republic, arguing that the most wise should rule, and hence the rulers should be philosopher kings.
Criticism
The primary concern with meritocracy is the unclear definition of "merit".[42] Different people often have their own standards of merit, thus raising the question of which "merit" has the best merits—or in other words—which standard is the "best" standard.
Another concern is the reliability of people who measure merit. For example academic grades are given by people who do have opinions, and can be biased or inefficient. If the system is corrupt or non-transparent, decisions on who has merit will be flawed.
Meritocracy also has been criticized by egalitarians as a mere myth, which serves only to justify the status quo, with its proponents only giving lip service to equality. In the words of sociologist Laurie Taylor:
The hideous thing about meritocracy is it tells you that if you’ve given life your all and haven’t got to the top you’re thick or stupid. Previously, at least, you could always just blame the class system.
Another concern regards the principle of incompetence, or the "Peter Principle". As people rise in a meritocratic society through the corporate ladder, they reach, and become stuck, at the first level of what they are unable to do.
Other concerns for the validity of a merit-based system have arisen from studies in psychology, sociology, and neuroscience.[citation needed] Given the proposition that a person's life prospects should not be decided by factors outside of one's control or, for which a person cannot claim personal credit (i.e., social status, inherited wealth, race, and other accidents of birth) a meritocracy proposes a system where people are rewarded based on their efforts, and if everyone can start on equal footing with the same opportunity to advance, then the results are just. However, some studies have shown that even our motivation, work ethic, and conscientious drive is, in fact, outside of our control and can be affected by such arbitrary factors as birth order. Children who are first in birth order tend to aim at goals that reference their own past level of mastery, while secondborns tend to aim at goals based on other-referenced expectations and competence standards. Therefore, a system which rewards effort in this way is not completely just, because effort and hard work is not something we can claim complete credit for.
Khen Lampert has argued that the principle of meritocracy stems from neo-capitalist ideas of aggression and competition.
Degeneration of America's meritocracy
In his book, Twilight of the Elites: America After Meritocracy, Chris Hayes has attributed what he calls the "Fail Decade"—which includes 9/11, the Enron scandal, the invasion of Iraq, Hurricane Katrina, the subprime crisis, and the Great Recession—to the deterioration of America's meritocratic system into one of plutocracy.
41.World Polity Theory
World Polity Theory (also referred to as World society theory, Global Neo-institutionalism, and the "Stanford school" of global analysis) was developed mainly by John W. Meyer as an analytical frame for interpreting global relations, structures, and practices. It was developed partly in response to the application of world systems theory. The theory views the world system as a social system with a cultural framework called world polity, which encompasses and influences the actors, such as nations, international organizations, and individuals under it. In other words, according to John Boli and George M. Thomas, "the world polity is constituted by distinct culture - a set of fundamental principles and models, mainly ontological and cognitive in character, defining the nature and purposes of social actors and action." The World polity theory views the primary component of the world society as “world polity,” which provides a set of cultural norms or directions in which the actors of the world society follow in dealing with problems and general procedures. In contrast to other theories such as neo-realism or liberalism, the theory considers other actors such as the states and institutions to be under the influence of global norms. Although it closely resembles constructivism, world polity theory is to be distinguished from it due to the fact that "world-polity theorists have been far more resolute in taking the “cultural plunge” than their constructivism counterparts". In other words, world polity theory puts more of an emphasis on homogenization than the other. Through globalization, world polity and culture trigger the formation of enactable cultures and organizations while in return cultures and organizations elaborate the world society further.
Beginning in the 1970s with its initiation by John W. Meyer of Stanford University, world polity analysis initially revolved around examining inter-state relations. Simultaneously in the 1970s and also in the 1980s, a significant amount of work was done on international education environment. However, in the 1980s and 1990s due to the noticeable influence of globalization on world culture, the direction of the study shifted towards analyzing the transnational social movement that may amount to a global polity while at the same time attempting to better understand how global polity ideas are implemented through global actors.
Through a series of empirical studies, Meyer and others observed that new states organize themselves in a significantly similar manner despite their differing needs and background, giving strength to their explanation that there is a set norm of forming a new state under the bigger umbrella of world polity.
Other instances that suggest definite presence of world polity are:
Considerable degree of resemblance in national constitutions; They commonly contain the idea of self-determination, state sovereignty, and territorial integrity.
Schooling around the world shows isomorphism.
Nitza Berkovitch stated that the occurrence of the international women's movement reflected the existence of world polity framework and so allows us to view the world as a single global social system.
An empirical study of INGOs (International nongovernmental organizations) shows the existence of universalism, individualism, rational voluntaristic authority, progress, and world citizenship across different INGOS. Sports, human rights, and environmental INGOS especially tend to "reify" world polity. According to John Boli and George M. Thomas who conducted this study, INGOS could instill world-cultural principles of world polity to nations through lobbying, criticizing, and convincing.
Critics point to the fact that world polity theory assumes a rather flawless and smooth transfer of norms of world polity to the global actors while in reality that might not always be plausible. Also its tendency to focus on the homogenizing effect brings criticisms. World culture theory differs in this aspect from world polity theory because it recognizes that actors find their own identities in relation to the greater global cultural norm instead of simply following what is suggested by the world polity.
Also, an instance of glocalization cannot fully be explained by world polity theory. It is a phenomenon in which local values and global cultures converge to create something new.
42.Definition of TOTALITARIANISM
- centralized control by an autocratic authority
- the political concept that the citizen should be totally subject to an absolute state authority
-Form of government that subordinates all aspects of its citizens' lives to the authority of the state, with a single charismatic leader as the ultimate authority. The term was coined in the early 1920s by Benito Mussolini, but totalitarianism has existed throughout history throughout the world (e.g., Qin dynasty China)
-Domination by a government of all political, social, and economic activities in a nation. Totalitarianism is a phenomenon of the twentieth century: earlier forms of despotism and autocracy lacked the technical capacity to control every aspect of life. The term is applied both to fascist governments (see fascism) and to many forms of communism.
Within totalitarian regimes, the leadership controls nearly all aspects of the state from economical to political to social and cultural. Totalitarian regimes control science, education, art and private lives of residents to the degree of dictation proper morality. The reach of the government is limitless.
Examples of totalitarian regime strategies to gain control of the nation include:
Having a dictatorship
Employing only one ruling party
Rule through fear
Censorship of media
Propaganda in media, government speeches and through education
Criticism of the state is prohibited
Mandatory military sign up
Secret police forces
Controlling reproduction of the population (either in hopes to increase or to decrease)
Targeting of specific religious or political populations
Development of a nationalist party
43.
In Totalitarianism, published in 1954, Carl Friedrich itemized five elements, which, in a subsequent collaboration with Zbigniew Brzezinski, he increased to six.
• A revolutionary, exclusive, and apocalyptical ideology that announces the destruction of the old order—corrupt and compromised—and the birth of a radically new, purified, and muscular age. Antiliberal, anticonservative, and antipluralist, totalitarian ideology creates myths, catechisms, cults, festivities, and rituals designed to commemorate the destiny of the elect.
• A cellular, fluid, and hydralike political party structure that, particularly before the conquest of state power, devolves authority to local militants. As it gains recruits and fellow believers, the party takes on a mass character with a charismatic leader at its head claiming omniscience and infallibility, and demanding the unconditional personal devotion of the people.
• A regime in which offices are deliberately duplicated and personnel are continually shuffled, so as to ensure chronic collegial rivalry and dependence on the adjudication of the one true leader. To the extent that legal instruments function at all, they do so as a legitimizing sham rather than a real brake on the untrammeled use of executive power. Indeed, the very notion of "the executive" is redundant since it presupposes a separation of powers anathema to a totalitarian regime.
• Economic-bureaucratic collectivism (capitalist or state socialist) intended to orchestrate productive forces to the regime's predatory, autarchic, and militaristic goals.
• Monopolistic control of the mass media, "professional" organizations, and public art, and with it the formulation of a cliché-ridden language whose formulaic utterances are designed to impede ambivalence, nuance, and complexity.
• A culture of martial solidarity in which violence and danger (of the trenches, the street fight, etc.) are ritually celebrated in party uniforms, metaphors ("storm troopers," "labor brigades"), and modes of address ("comrade"). Youth are a special audience for such a culture, but are expected to admire and emulate the "old fighters" of the revolution.
-Arendt concludes that while Italian Fascism was a nationalist authoritarian movement, Nazism and Stalinism were totalitarian movements that sought to eliminate all restraints upon the power of the State
The rise and growth of totalitarian movements depends on several inextricably linked key factors. The first and most important of these factors is the presence of what noted political theorist Hannah Arendt calls a "classless society," in which social groups within a society break down and individuals become unmoored and isolated from other members of society as the result of a kind of necessary self-centeredness. Historically, classless society is most oftentimes the result of terrible economic hardship in which hyperinflation and other harmful forces are at play, leading to a disillusioned populace that is tired of the status quo and seeking change. The focus on the poorly-performing economy draws the focus of the average citizen away from the political game and they begin to search for an alternative that will provide them with a new identity, purpose, and vision for the future
44. This situation leads to the second important factor in bringing about totalitarianism: a new, totalitarian ideology. Oftentimes introduced by a persuasive, engaging, and charismatic leader around whom the public can rally, totalitarian ideology seeks to unify and mobilize the totality of the classless masses against some outside, antagonistic enemy. The charismatic leader offers the population a new nationalist identity; citizens no longer belong to a certain class, or other subgroup, and focus on defining themselves against the evils of the external world. This policy necessarily also distinguishes "the other"-- either a foreign, antagonistic force or a part of society within the nation presented as somehow inferior and antagonistic-- as the scapegoat for all internal problems. The leader has one main task: to rally support from the citizens by exalting nationalist views and offering a vision of the future in which the citizens are better off than in the current situation because of the elimination or expulsion of 'the other'.
Дата добавления: 2015-02-16; просмотров: 83 | Поможем написать вашу работу | Нарушение авторских прав |