文献一覧: 永井陽之助 (著者)

30 0 0 0 なぜアメリカに社会主義はあるか

著者: 永井陽之助
出版者: 木鐸社
雑誌: 年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日: no.1966, pp.89-131, 1966-09

2018-07-22 12:19:17
30 + 41 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40002967236

10 0 0 0 OA なぜアメリカに社会主義はあるか

著者: 永井陽之助
出版者: JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
雑誌: 年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.17, pp.89-131,en6, 1966-09-26 (Released:2009-12-21)
参考文献数: 3

I Introduction II The Russian Revolution and the American Intellectuals III The New Deal Coalition and the Left-Intellectuals IV The End of Ideology and the American IdeologyIn contrast with the question posed by Werner Sombart at the turn of the century in the title of a book, “Why Is there No Socialism in the United States?”, this article examines the ideological adaptability of American Liberalism, as a surrogate for socialism, to the contemporary crisis home and abroad.The impact of Russian Revolution on American liberals who shared the optimistic expectation of the inevitable spread of democracy throughout the world, had failed to impress them as a challenge on the basic value-system of American regime, because of the misunderstanding about the nature of the Bolshevik regime by the narcissistic projection of American creed. That moralistic idealism, often indicated by the reformist prejudice for the machine politics, had prevented from the. understanding about the nature of “Revolution of rising expectation” in the developing areas.In addition to the creed, the unique character of New Deal coalition in terms of the ethnic, cultural heterogenity, the nationalization of socialism during the happy day of “popular front”, had contributed to the postponement of radical reapprasement of American creed. After the war, the democratic coalition had become so furiously disintegrated by 1952. The domestic crisis in the tortuous period of political indecision and pluralistic stagnation at a decisive turning point in America and world history, is largely a refection of the fact that the nation no longer has an effective majority and never has an stable organized opposition.Although the American Liberalism, saved by the twenty-five years' war, hot and cold, survived under the optimistic atomosphere of “The end of Ideology”, we cannot neglect the fact that “The end of Ideology” did not mean “The end of American Ideology”, particulary for the hard-boild, tough-minded realists.On the other hand, the reaction to “hard-boild” radicalism, with its exaggerated faith in the efficiency of direct political involvement during the day of “popular front”, often took form of the exaggerated skeptism about politics. However, it is no accident that “brilliant realists” of the Kennedy Administration has been so little concerned with the non-European world that the underdeveloped areas home and abroad was the blind spot of the Kennedy foreign policy as well as the negro problems.

2020-04-07 16:01:56
10 + 14 Twitter

4 0 0 0 モラトリアム国家の防衛論

著者: 永井陽之助
出版者: 中央公論新社
雑誌: 中央公論 (ISSN:05296838)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.96, no.1, pp.p74-108, 1981-01

2016-11-07 22:50:47
4 + 5 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40002394867

3 0 0 0 OA 宇宙のノモス

著者: 永井陽之助
出版者: JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
雑誌: 国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.1986, no.Special, pp.2-31,L5, 1986-10-18 (Released:2010-09-01)
参考文献数: 28

I. Uniqueness of the Postwar Peace. II. The Nomos of the earth-Geopolitics of MAD (i) Bipolar System (ii) Geostrategic Approach to MAD (iii) Informal Rules of Game and Norms of Behavior. III. The Nomos of the Outer Space (i) Sanctuarization of the Space (ii) Ambiguity of the Space Weapons (iii) Issues of ABM Treaty in the Legal Context of SDI.This essay aims to examine the impact of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) on the Nomos of the outer space through revealing the secret of durability of the postwar peace. In calling for a defense that would render nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete, ” President Reagan's goal of a perfect area defense stirred the interest of the public who have long sought a moral alternative to deterrence based on the mutual assured destruction (MAD). Yet MAD is not a strategy capable of being changed by political will or strategic considerations; it is rather “existential” condition, not unlike the condition of the market mechanism, resulted by the inevitable consequence of the super-powers having the assured capabilities of mutual destruction, closely connected with the asymmetric geopolitical positon.This condition has created the mutual vulnerability of civilized urban centers, because of the strategic reality resulted from the development of the ICBM and the so-called “reconnaissance revolution.” The detonation of even as few as five or ten Soviet warheads on U. S. cities would cause unparalleld destruction. It might be called the law of “impossibility of area defense”. This unique combination of the bipolar system and the condition of the MAD has successfully drawed a clear distinction between a zone of sanctuarity (a zone of predictability on which mutual interest in common rules based on reciprocal sanction) and a zone of danger (a zone of unpredictabily) in the periphery of the world. They have no choice, in this condition, but to play the game of influence by means of “nuclear cheque” on the security of the nuclear arsenals.Whereas we live in “neither war nor peace, ” we are afraid of a radical discontinuity by turning a zone of predictablity into a zone of danger. The concept of a zone of danger-currently highlighted by the issue of the SDI in outer space-also signals the arrival of an era of opportunity on the formation of the Nomos of the space.Any consideration of a militarization of outer space should not neglect the distinction of two different directions: the sanctuarization of the space (turning into a zone of predictability) through the passive uses such as reconnaissance and communications, in sharp contrast with the militarization of the space by turning into a zone of danger through the development of the ABM and ASAT technology, despite of the ambiguity of space weapons.In all probablity, super-power rivalry in strategic defense will lead to an increased Soviet-American arms race by the exchange of the offensive and defensive in a vicious circle. This is the reason why the development of SDI might be quite different from the Manhattan and the Apollo projects, which involves no less than unlocking nature's secrets; a struggle of man against nature. In contrast, the success of the stratigic defense depends on the reactions or the counter-measureas taken by the Soviet side, as the Fletcher panel project has suggested.Moreover, the SDI poses a real threat to the Outer Space Treaty, not to mention to the ABM treaty which is most significant arms-control agreement of the postwar period. Both treaties should provide us the legal framework (the Nomos), as a fundamental constitution, of the outer space. Such “passive” military uses as the satellites for reconnaissance, surveillance, early warning, and communications are compatible with a doctrine of peaceful purposes and deterrence. Yet the ballistic missile defence (BMD)

2022-02-24 17:05:19
3 + 0 Twitter

3 0 0 0 宇宙のノモス:戦後平和と戦略防御

著者: 永井陽之助
出版者: JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
雑誌: 国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
巻号頁・発行日: pp.2-31,L5, 1986

I. Uniqueness of the Postwar Peace. II. The Nomos of the earth-Geopolitics of MAD (i) Bipolar System (ii) Geostrategic Approach to MAD (iii) Informal Rules of Game and Norms of Behavior. III. The Nomos of the Outer Space (i) Sanctuarization of the Space (ii) Ambiguity of the Space Weapons (iii) Issues of ABM Treaty in the Legal Context of SDI. This essay aims to examine the impact of the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) on the Nomos of the outer space through revealing the secret of durability of the postwar peace. In calling for a defense that would render nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete, " President Reagan's goal of a perfect area defense stirred the interest of the public who have long sought a moral alternative to deterrence based on the mutual assured destruction (MAD). Yet MAD is not a strategy capable of being changed by political will or strategic considerations; it is rather "existential" condition, not unlike the condition of the market mechanism, resulted by the inevitable consequence of the super-powers having the assured capabilities of mutual destruction, closely connected with the asymmetric geopolitical positon. This condition has created the mutual vulnerability of civilized urban centers, because of the strategic reality resulted from the development of the ICBM and the so-called "reconnaissance revolution." The detonation of even as few as five or ten Soviet warheads on U. S. cities would cause unparalleld destruction. It might be called the law of "impossibility of area defense". This unique combination of the bipolar system and the condition of the MAD has successfully drawed a clear distinction between a zone of sanctuarity (a zone of predictability on which mutual interest in common rules based on reciprocal sanction) and a zone of danger (a zone of unpredictabily) in the periphery of the world. They have no choice, in this condition, but to play the game of influence by means of "nuclear cheque" on the security of the nuclear arsenals. Whereas we live in "neither war nor peace, " we are afraid of a radical discontinuity by turning a zone of predictablity into a zone of danger. The concept of a zone of danger-currently highlighted by the issue of the SDI in outer space-also signals the arrival of an era of opportunity on the formation of the Nomos of the space. Any consideration of a militarization of outer space should not neglect the distinction of two different directions: the sanctuarization of the space (turning into a zone of predictability) through the passive uses such as reconnaissance and communications, in sharp contrast with the militarization of the space by turning into a zone of danger through the development of the ABM and ASAT technology, despite of the ambiguity of space weapons. In all probablity, super-power rivalry in strategic defense will lead to an increased Soviet-American arms race by the exchange of the offensive and defensive in a vicious circle. This is the reason why the development of SDI might be quite different from the Manhattan and the Apollo projects, which involves no less than unlocking nature's secrets; a struggle of man against nature. In contrast, the success of the stratigic defense depends on the reactions or the counter-measureas taken by the Soviet side, as the Fletcher panel project has suggested. Moreover, the SDI poses a real threat to the Outer Space Treaty, not to mention to the ABM treaty which is most significant arms-control agreement of the postwar period. Both treaties should provide us the legal framework (the Nomos), as a fundamental constitution, of the outer space. Such "passive" military uses as the satellites for reconnaissance, surveillance, early warning, and communications are compatible with a doctrine of peaceful purposes and deterrence. Yet the ballistic missile defence (BMD)