著者

中島 信吾

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.55, pp.81-98, 2005-01-21 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

藪野 祐三

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.32, pp.97-116, 1982-10-08 (Released:2009-12-21)

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.38, pp.206-220, 1988-03-30 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

山田 真裕

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.62, no.2, pp.2_52-2_69, 2011

---

This paper is a case study of organizational transformation in a prefectural party unit of Japans Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Ibaraki prefecture was one of the bulwarks of LDP dominance and the prefectural organization ("kenren") had been proud of own strength. But, at the defeat in the 2009 gubernatorial election, many conservative local politician and interest organizations were against the "kenren" and supported the incumbent governor, Masaru Hashimoto, and let him win. The defeat broke the previous regime at the "kenren", and the Ibaraki-kenren was forced to rebuild its organization and to try transforming itself from being a prefectural member-centered organization to becoming a more inclusive organization. <br>  The purpose of this article analyzes the process of the gubernatorial defeat and the organizational reformation in the kenren following that defeat, to claim the necessity of further accumulation of analysis about local organizations of political parties, not only from perspective of national level confrontation among parties, but also local conflict among local politicians and interest organizationswith a peculiar dynamism.

著者

今村 都南雄

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.36, pp.117-146, 1986-03-28 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

木山 幸輔

出版者

木鐸社

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2015, no.1, pp.170-190, 2015

著者

松浦 正孝

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, pp.3-29, 1995-12-21 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

蝋山 政道

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.6, pp.138-145, 1955-03-30 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

宮下 豊

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.61, no.1, pp.1_171-1_193, 2010 (Released:2016-02-24)

---

This paper proves that the kernel of Morgenthau's Scientific Man vs. Power Politics is not in defense of the pursuit for power but critique of modernity. In modernity, he thinks, normative ethics disappears under the reign of rationalism which substitutes “laws of causality” for “laws of morality” and as a consequence “the scientific approach” governs both politic sand ethics. Then it becomes clear that to focus only on his critique of liberalism in disregard of his critique of Marxism and Nazism is to misunderstand this normative concern. Lastly, it is argued that Morgenthau has gloomy prospect of man in modernity as “Scientific Man”, which is thought to be similar to Friedrich Nietzsche's “die letzten Menschen” and Max Weber's “Fachmenschen ohne Geist, Genußmenschen ohne Herz”, in that, according to Morgenthau, modern man cannot fail to aggravate the struggle for power by embracing the political religions which promise salvation from suffering of this world.

著者

坂野 潤治

出版者

岩波書店

雑誌

日本政治学会年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

no.1987, pp.p109-128, 1987

著者

日本政治学会文献委員会

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, pp.233-256, 1995-12-21 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

村田 玲

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.61, no.2, pp.2_212-2_232, 2010 (Released:2016-02-24)

---

Today, Machiavellism is generally regarded as a specific rule of political action stemming from the necessity and autonomy of politics. In other words, the problem of Machiavellism is raised as one related to the tragic antinomy between politics and ethics. However, such an interpretation has its roots in 19th-century German Historicism. Here, it should be noted that the term Machiavellism itself was generated and spread in the mid-16th century. The word has its genesis in the old interpretation of Machiavelli's political science, which accused Machiavelli of being a teacher of evil. The purpose of this paper is to rediscover the essence of Machiavellism in terms of its original meaning. First, the fundamental character of the present-day interpretation of Machiavellism must be articulated by analyzing German Historicism. Then, intentionally avoiding ideas that are related to German Historicism, the original meaning of Machiavellism must be grasped by analyzing the interpretation of Machiavelli's political science as raised by his first readers in the 16th century.

著者

田村 哲樹

出版者

木鐸社

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2015, no.1, pp.37-60, 2015

著者

谷 喬夫

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, pp.49-70, 2002-12-20 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

大森 彌

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.30, pp.130-142, 1981-09-30 (Released:2009-12-21)

参考文献数

10

著者

伊藤 洋典

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.46, pp.175-190, 1995-12-21 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

永井 健晴

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, pp.133-162, 2002-12-20 (Released:2009-12-21)

著者

近藤 康史

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.57, no.2, pp.36-59,263, 2006 (Released:2010-04-30)

参考文献数

57

---

In the study of comparative politics, we need a theory that is applicable in analyzing of a ‘political change’ or ‘institutional change’. This article attempts to gain a view of such comparative politics theory, focusing on ‘ideational approaches’. Through the review of existing various ideational approaches in political science, this article argues the potential of ideational approaches for analysis of political change.First, for ideational approaches, it is necessary to highlight not only the existence of ideas per se but also the function of ideas in the political processes. Specifically, we need to focus on the process in which an idea gains wide support from various political actors and thereby coalitions for a political change are built. Second, in case of such coalition building, we need to specify the influences of an idea from the point of view of ‘preference formation’. Third, for more persuasiveness, it is important to take into account the interrelation between ideas and institutions. Finally, this article discusses the possibility of ideational approaches that mediate rationalists, culturalists, and structuralists in comparative politics.

著者

神島 二郎

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.27, pp.7-24,en1, 1977-03-31 (Released:2009-12-21)

---

Until recently in Japan, theories of “domination” (shihai), “conflict” (toso), and “autonomy” (jichi) have been the most utilized conceptual tools in political science research. However, when one applies these theoretical constructs in an attempt to analyze actual political phenomena as they exist in society, there are inevitably things which cannot be adequately explained by these models. In the past, it was often convenient to claim that since we are dealing with a “backward country where cultural standards are lower, one has to expect a certain degree of irrationalism.” I do not believe this explanation is persuasive any longer; rather, the problem is that our conceptual tools are inadequate for understanding Japanese political culture fully.Given this perspective, it is possible to observe from the outset that considerable theoretical confusion persists among these three conceptual tools listed above, and in some instances, extraneous factors have been included. For example, when autonomy is rendered not as self-determination, but as “self-government, ” this is because it has been transformed by the concept of domination. This suggests that it would be valuable not only to distinguish clearly among these three different theoretical constructs, but to abstract from existing reality whatever other tools or theories are necessary for enhancing our understanding. If we were to do this, the following types of theoretical approaches could be developed.Let us list three major concepts: “involution” (kikyo), “assimilation” (doka) and “karma.” These represent three principles which are at the very roots of political culture in Japan, China and India. Since it is a relatively simple matter to identify the basic elements of a particular political culture, one might easily jump to the conclusion that all political cultures can be reduced to a single basic principle. However, this is not the case, and one would be well advised to consider that political cultures are rooted in a series of highly complex principles. Moreover, for each of these principles we can identify seven basic components: ultima ratio (kirifuda), structure, organization, movements, values, change and the social base, and this sheds light on the manner in which these complex elements are intertwined. If we apply these potentially very useful tools to the task of deciphering the reality we perceive around us, the range of our capacity to explain the various existing political and social phenomena which we encounter will be significantly expanded.While political movements are often described as political processes, and political processes are often rendered as developing political conditions, I argue that the overall developmental process of political conditions can be seen as taking a definite form. I call the “place” (ba) in which political conditions develop a fixed “magnetic field” (jiba). We can distinguish three different types of magnetic fields: unipolar, bipolar and multipolar. Moreover, presumably there is some degree of correspondence, between these three types of magnetic fields and the six basic elements that make up society, and with the special characteristics emerging from the way these elements are combined. For example, we can hypothesize that the principles of “karma” and “involution” correspond to the unipolar field; “conflict” and “domination” correspond to the bipolar field; and “assimilation” and “autonomy” correspond to the multipolar field. These elements can be broken down further by distinguishing between the six basic ingredients depending on whether they are diffusive or cohesive, and dividing them into two categories accordingly. It is my hypothesis that if, among the six elements,

著者

永井 陽之助

出版者

日本政治学会

雑誌

年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.11, pp.9-29, 1960-05-25 (Released:2009-12-21)