著者
安井 宏樹
出版者
JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
雑誌
年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.60, no.1, pp.1_303-1_321, 2009 (Released:2013-02-07)
参考文献数
36

Federal Republic of Germany has been governed by the unified governments only for 17 years of its 59 years history. The upper house of German legislative body (Bundesrat) has no power to dismiss the cabinet, but has a de facto veto power in the legislation process. Such setting of governing system makes it difficult to keep the unified government in Germany.   However, the period of “certain divided government”, in which the opposition parties have a clear majority in the Bundesrat, is shorter: about 13 years. Voting behavior of a “mixed state” that has a coalition government of federal ruling parties and federal opposition parties tends to be dependent on the negotiations among the parties. Therefore, for around half of the period, Germany experienced the “uncertain divided governments”, under which neither the ruling parties nor the opposition parties could have controlled the solid majority in the Bundesrat.   While negotiations and compromises are the basic mode under the “certain divided governments”, federal cabinets in the time of “uncertain divided government” have a room for maneuver to arrange the legislative proceedings in a unilateral manner.
著者
矢田 俊隆
出版者
JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
雑誌
年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.15, pp.61-76,en4, 1964-12-21 (Released:2009-12-21)

The object of this article is to illustrate the particular process of dynamic development which the German liberalist movements showed during the Revolution 1848/49. It is as follows.The intellectual liberals sought to realize their pre-March mission of drawing government and people together as the real agents of their ideals, were progressively isolated from both of these powers and were subsequently themselves torn apart into their three generic divisions as they fell into dependence upon divergent real interests or remained impotently suspended about them. The dissolution of intellectual liberalism under the solvent of conscious self-interest in its agents meant the beginning of the end for the philosophical approach to politics, and introduced the general reorientation toward the frank and direct appreciation of interests and power which the Revolution had shown to be decisive in German society and politics. Such fundamental reorientation led to a political positivism, which meant the intellectual decline of German liberalism, because it undermined the comprehensive appeal of the liberal political ethic and, in consequence, diminished the force of assault upon the prevailing state-system in Germany.
著者
山中 優
出版者
JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
雑誌
年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.59, no.1, pp.1_37-1_60, 2008 (Released:2012-12-28)

One of the thinkers whom Hayek praised very highly is Tocqueville. Hayek regarded Tocqueville as one of the best liberal thinkers of the 19th century who developed most successfully the political philosophy of the Scottish thinkers such as Mandeville, Hume and Smith. And the title of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom (1944) was named after what Tocqueville had called the “new servitude”. Evidently Hayek's argument on tyranny or despotism in the book had many similarities with that of Tocqueville in Democracy in America.   However, there were, in fact, several big differences between them. Tocqueville defined individualism in a negative way: individualism “disposes each citizen to isolate himself from mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of family and friends”. But Hayek defined it in a positive way: the essential features of individualism were, for Hayek, “the respect for the individual man qua man”. While Tocqueville considered political freedom most important as a bulwark against the majority's tyranny or a new democratic despotism, Hayek considered economic freedom most important. Tocqueville endeavored to make the best use of democracy to make people good public citizens. But Hayek had skepticism and disappointment with democracy, which seemed to make Hayek resemble Plato rather than Tocqueville. These differences between them seem to pose a significant problem for state-society relationship in the contemporary world.
著者
建林 正彦
出版者
JAPANESE POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION
雑誌
年報政治学 (ISSN:05494192)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.56, no.1, pp.201-227,353, 2005-11-10 (Released:2010-04-30)
参考文献数
17

This article examines the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats in postwar Japan. The author argues that the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) has manipulated bureaucrats' policy preferences towards the LDP's ideal position by using “ex ante control” such as recruitment and promotion policy. With the framework of the principal-agent model, the author claims that the spurious autonomy of Japanese bureaucrats can be interpreted as the outcome of successful control over bureaucrats' preferences by LDP politicians. The paper provides evidence with a quantitative analysis of surveys conducted in 1976-77 and 2001-2002. For example, the closer the policy preference of the bureaucrat is to the ideal position of the LDP, the wider he tends to find his discretion.