WEKO3
アイテム
{"_buckets": {"deposit": "3a3a3488-587e-459d-87e4-eab7fffbe881"}, "_deposit": {"created_by": 3, "id": "1300", "owners": [3], "pid": {"revision_id": 0, "type": "depid", "value": "1300"}, "status": "published"}, "_oai": {"id": "oai:seisen.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001300", "sets": ["137"]}, "author_link": ["1924", "1925"], "item_7_biblio_info_12": {"attribute_name": "書誌情報", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"bibliographicIssueDates": {"bibliographicIssueDate": "2020-03-31", "bibliographicIssueDateType": "Issued"}, "bibliographicPageEnd": "164", "bibliographicPageStart": "147", "bibliographic_titles": [{"bibliographic_title": "清泉女子大学人文科学研究所紀要"}, {"bibliographic_title": "BULLETIN OF SEISEN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR CULTURAL SCIENCE", "bibliographic_titleLang": "en"}]}]}, "item_7_description_10": {"attribute_name": "抄録(日)", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": " 一般に国際政治学の中で多数派支配を意味する共和政は、平和と結び付けて語られることが多い。そうした語りを行なった人物の代表的事例がカントであるが、しかし『法の精神』の著者として知られるモンテスキューも、実は同様の指摘を行なっている。ただ国際政治学の中では長い間、このモンテスキューの議論はほとんど取り上げられないままに放置されてきた。そこで本稿では、この研究上の空白を埋めることを通じて、共和政の対外的関係というテーマを今後再考するための足掛かりを得ることを目指したい。\n 実はモンテスキューの主張は、カントのように、共和政それ自体を平和的と見なすものではない。この政体と対外的な好戦性とは本来矛盾する、というのが彼の見解であり、その理由として、共和政国家が論理的に小国でなくてはならないことが挙げられている。モンテスキューによれば、共和政が持続するためには、私益よりも公益を優先する「徳」が人びとの間に備わっていなければならない。だが徳の維持は大国であるほど難しく、ゆえに共和政は、領土拡大を旨とする好戦的姿勢と両立させることが困難である。こうして対外的な平和の追求が、共和政の維持にとっての必要条件になる。\n ところが共和政の歴史は、この政体が好戦的になり得ることを示してきた。実際、マキャヴェリを始めとするモンテスキュー以前の共和主義者たちは、主にローマの事例から、共和政を好戦的あるいは膨張主義的な政体と位置付けていたのである。しかしモンテスキューからすれば、ローマの帝国化は「歴史の偶然」に過ぎず、それと共和政との間に必然的な関係は存在しない。ただ共和政が大国化し得ることは否定できない歴史上の事実であり、だからこそそれを防ぐために、幾つかの策を講じる必要がある。その防止策として彼が提示したのが、以下に挙げる3つの方策であった。すなわち、小国である共和国が連合してその防衛力を拡大させる「連合共和国」を結成すること、専制への防波堤としての自由な制限政体を保持すること、そして「商業の精神」の普及によって平等な社会状態を維持すること、の以上3点である。\n 今日、行き詰まりを見せる現代社会への処方箋として、「共和主義」の再興を唱える向きは少なくない。だが、共和政の対外的関係というテーマに関して言えば、この点をめぐる現代の共和主義者たちの関心は相対的に希薄なままに留まっている。本稿が示すモンテスキューの国際政治理論は、この文脈において、重要な示唆や知見を与えるものとなるのではあるまいか。", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_7_description_11": {"attribute_name": "抄録(英)", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": " The republic has often been associated with peace in the study of International Relations (IR). Immanuel Kant’s famous dictum that the republican regime is inherently pacific is a prime example of this association, but his is not at all the only voice that was heard among his contemporaries. Montesquieu, another famous political philosopher in the eighteenth century, also proclaims that “the spirit of republics lies in peace”. IR scholars have, however, paid little attention to this claim, leaving it largely unexamined so far. This paper tries to fill in this gap; it also aims to establish a theoretical basis to re-consider the issue of the republican regime and its external foreign policy.\n Unlike Kant, Montesquieu did not consider the republic per se to be of a peaceful orientation. His claim is rather that the nature of the republican regime is incompatible with a militant foreign policy and, in this light, it needs to be peaceful. This claim of Montesquieu comes from his oft-cited theorem that the republican regime should be small in size. “Virtue” ― the moral quality that prioritizes public interests over individuals’ private interests― is the necessary principle that, he argues, makes the regime smoothly function, but this quality is readily lost among its people when the republican state becomes larger in territory. The republic must refrain from being aggressive in its external relations for this reason. It is required to keep peaceful relations with other states; and, if not, it would not be able to sustain its own republican regime.\n To be sure, history is full of examples that show the republic does not always follow this pattern. Ancient Rome is a prominent example of this tendency and, in fact, its subsequent development into the Empire had led many republicans before Montesquieu, such as Machiavelli, to believing that the republic is inherently militant and expansionist. Montesquieu, on the other hand, maintains that the Roman experience was the mere product of historical coincidences and has no correlation with its regime type. He however admits that the republic is not free from the danger of collapsing into despotism and therefore suggests, though only implicitly, that some preventive measures are to be taken to sustain the regime. What he proposes as these measures are the following three: to form a “federal republic” in which small republics unite themselves to enlarge their defensive forces against external aggressors; to keep the free and “moderate” constitution of the republican regime in which powers are divided; and to maintain the equal society through the spread of the “spirit of commerce.”\n Today many scholars, including some IR scholars, argue that “republicanism” is a promising alternative to the dominant liberal ideology and defend it as a means to reinvigorate modern societies. This debate is, however, relatively silent on the issue of external relations of the republican state, which is surely an area to which IR scholars should contribute. Montesquieu’s argument on the republic and its external relations could be a good starting point in this respect; it could give some fruitful insights for further discussions on the issue.", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_7_description_15": {"attribute_name": "表示順", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "14", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_7_description_2": {"attribute_name": "ページ属性", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_description": "P", "subitem_description_type": "Other"}]}, "item_7_identifier_registration": {"attribute_name": "ID登録", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_identifier_reg_text": "10.24743/00001294", "subitem_identifier_reg_type": "JaLC"}]}, "item_7_source_id_1": {"attribute_name": "雑誌書誌ID", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_source_identifier": "AN00128409", "subitem_source_identifier_type": "NCID"}]}, "item_7_source_id_19": {"attribute_name": "ISSN", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_source_identifier": "0910-9234", "subitem_source_identifier_type": "ISSN"}]}, "item_7_text_6": {"attribute_name": "著者所属(日)", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_text_value": "清泉女子大学"}]}, "item_7_text_7": {"attribute_name": "著者所属(英)", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_text_language": "en", "subitem_text_value": "SEISEN UNIVERSITY"}]}, "item_7_title_3": {"attribute_name": "論文名よみ", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_title": "モンテスキューニオケルキョウワセイトヘイワ"}]}, "item_creator": {"attribute_name": "著者", "attribute_type": "creator", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "愛甲, 雄一"}, {"creatorName": "アイコウ, ユウイチ", "creatorNameLang": "ja-Kana"}], "nameIdentifiers": [{"nameIdentifier": "1924", "nameIdentifierScheme": "WEKO"}]}, {"creatorNames": [{"creatorName": "AIKO, Yuichi", "creatorNameLang": "en"}], "nameIdentifiers": [{"nameIdentifier": "1925", "nameIdentifierScheme": "WEKO"}]}]}, "item_files": {"attribute_name": "ファイル情報", "attribute_type": "file", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"accessrole": "open_date", "date": [{"dateType": "Available", "dateValue": "2020-06-09"}], "displaytype": "detail", "download_preview_message": "", "file_order": 0, "filename": "jinbun41aiko.pdf", "filesize": [{"value": "427.7 kB"}], "format": "application/pdf", "future_date_message": "", "is_thumbnail": false, "licensetype": "license_free", "mimetype": "application/pdf", "size": 427700.0, "url": {"label": "jinbun41aiko.pdf", "url": "https://seisen.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/1300/files/jinbun41aiko.pdf"}, "version_id": "1d1c883a-30e8-4ab9-90d3-4d1a0a2eb20d"}]}, "item_keyword": {"attribute_name": "キーワード", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_subject": "モンテスキュー", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}, {"subitem_subject": "共和政", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}, {"subitem_subject": "平和", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}, {"subitem_subject": "Montesquieu", "subitem_subject_language": "en", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}, {"subitem_subject": "the republic", "subitem_subject_language": "en", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}, {"subitem_subject": "peace", "subitem_subject_language": "en", "subitem_subject_scheme": "Other"}]}, "item_language": {"attribute_name": "言語", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_language": "jpn"}]}, "item_resource_type": {"attribute_name": "資源タイプ", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"resourcetype": "departmental bulletin paper", "resourceuri": "http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]}, "item_title": "モンテスキューにおける共和政と平和", "item_titles": {"attribute_name": "タイトル", "attribute_value_mlt": [{"subitem_title": "モンテスキューにおける共和政と平和"}, {"subitem_title": "The Republican Regime and Peace in Montesquieu", "subitem_title_language": "en"}]}, "item_type_id": "7", "owner": "3", "path": ["137"], "permalink_uri": "https://doi.org/10.24743/00001294", "pubdate": {"attribute_name": "公開日", "attribute_value": "2020-06-09"}, "publish_date": "2020-06-09", "publish_status": "0", "recid": "1300", "relation": {}, "relation_version_is_last": true, "title": ["モンテスキューにおける共和政と平和"], "weko_shared_id": 3}
モンテスキューにおける共和政と平和
https://doi.org/10.24743/00001294
https://doi.org/10.24743/00001294716e434b-ef8d-40de-a39b-6572c5cc30c0
名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
---|---|---|
jinbun41aiko.pdf (427.7 kB)
|
|
Item type | [ELS]紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper_03(1) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
公開日 | 2020-06-09 | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
タイトル | モンテスキューにおける共和政と平和 | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
タイトル | The Republican Regime and Peace in Montesquieu | |||||
言語 | ||||||
言語 | jpn | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | モンテスキュー | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | 共和政 | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | 平和 | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | Montesquieu | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | the republic | |||||
キーワード | ||||||
言語 | en | |||||
主題Scheme | Other | |||||
主題 | peace | |||||
資源タイプ | ||||||
資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
ID登録 | ||||||
ID登録 | 10.24743/00001294 | |||||
ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
雑誌書誌ID | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||
収録物識別子 | AN00128409 | |||||
ページ属性 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | P | |||||
論文名よみ | ||||||
タイトル | モンテスキューニオケルキョウワセイトヘイワ | |||||
著者 |
愛甲, 雄一
× 愛甲, 雄一× AIKO, Yuichi |
|||||
著者所属(日) | ||||||
清泉女子大学 | ||||||
著者所属(英) | ||||||
en | ||||||
SEISEN UNIVERSITY | ||||||
抄録(日) | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | 一般に国際政治学の中で多数派支配を意味する共和政は、平和と結び付けて語られることが多い。そうした語りを行なった人物の代表的事例がカントであるが、しかし『法の精神』の著者として知られるモンテスキューも、実は同様の指摘を行なっている。ただ国際政治学の中では長い間、このモンテスキューの議論はほとんど取り上げられないままに放置されてきた。そこで本稿では、この研究上の空白を埋めることを通じて、共和政の対外的関係というテーマを今後再考するための足掛かりを得ることを目指したい。 実はモンテスキューの主張は、カントのように、共和政それ自体を平和的と見なすものではない。この政体と対外的な好戦性とは本来矛盾する、というのが彼の見解であり、その理由として、共和政国家が論理的に小国でなくてはならないことが挙げられている。モンテスキューによれば、共和政が持続するためには、私益よりも公益を優先する「徳」が人びとの間に備わっていなければならない。だが徳の維持は大国であるほど難しく、ゆえに共和政は、領土拡大を旨とする好戦的姿勢と両立させることが困難である。こうして対外的な平和の追求が、共和政の維持にとっての必要条件になる。 ところが共和政の歴史は、この政体が好戦的になり得ることを示してきた。実際、マキャヴェリを始めとするモンテスキュー以前の共和主義者たちは、主にローマの事例から、共和政を好戦的あるいは膨張主義的な政体と位置付けていたのである。しかしモンテスキューからすれば、ローマの帝国化は「歴史の偶然」に過ぎず、それと共和政との間に必然的な関係は存在しない。ただ共和政が大国化し得ることは否定できない歴史上の事実であり、だからこそそれを防ぐために、幾つかの策を講じる必要がある。その防止策として彼が提示したのが、以下に挙げる3つの方策であった。すなわち、小国である共和国が連合してその防衛力を拡大させる「連合共和国」を結成すること、専制への防波堤としての自由な制限政体を保持すること、そして「商業の精神」の普及によって平等な社会状態を維持すること、の以上3点である。 今日、行き詰まりを見せる現代社会への処方箋として、「共和主義」の再興を唱える向きは少なくない。だが、共和政の対外的関係というテーマに関して言えば、この点をめぐる現代の共和主義者たちの関心は相対的に希薄なままに留まっている。本稿が示すモンテスキューの国際政治理論は、この文脈において、重要な示唆や知見を与えるものとなるのではあるまいか。 |
|||||
抄録(英) | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | The republic has often been associated with peace in the study of International Relations (IR). Immanuel Kant’s famous dictum that the republican regime is inherently pacific is a prime example of this association, but his is not at all the only voice that was heard among his contemporaries. Montesquieu, another famous political philosopher in the eighteenth century, also proclaims that “the spirit of republics lies in peace”. IR scholars have, however, paid little attention to this claim, leaving it largely unexamined so far. This paper tries to fill in this gap; it also aims to establish a theoretical basis to re-consider the issue of the republican regime and its external foreign policy. Unlike Kant, Montesquieu did not consider the republic per se to be of a peaceful orientation. His claim is rather that the nature of the republican regime is incompatible with a militant foreign policy and, in this light, it needs to be peaceful. This claim of Montesquieu comes from his oft-cited theorem that the republican regime should be small in size. “Virtue” ― the moral quality that prioritizes public interests over individuals’ private interests― is the necessary principle that, he argues, makes the regime smoothly function, but this quality is readily lost among its people when the republican state becomes larger in territory. The republic must refrain from being aggressive in its external relations for this reason. It is required to keep peaceful relations with other states; and, if not, it would not be able to sustain its own republican regime. To be sure, history is full of examples that show the republic does not always follow this pattern. Ancient Rome is a prominent example of this tendency and, in fact, its subsequent development into the Empire had led many republicans before Montesquieu, such as Machiavelli, to believing that the republic is inherently militant and expansionist. Montesquieu, on the other hand, maintains that the Roman experience was the mere product of historical coincidences and has no correlation with its regime type. He however admits that the republic is not free from the danger of collapsing into despotism and therefore suggests, though only implicitly, that some preventive measures are to be taken to sustain the regime. What he proposes as these measures are the following three: to form a “federal republic” in which small republics unite themselves to enlarge their defensive forces against external aggressors; to keep the free and “moderate” constitution of the republican regime in which powers are divided; and to maintain the equal society through the spread of the “spirit of commerce.” Today many scholars, including some IR scholars, argue that “republicanism” is a promising alternative to the dominant liberal ideology and defend it as a means to reinvigorate modern societies. This debate is, however, relatively silent on the issue of external relations of the republican state, which is surely an area to which IR scholars should contribute. Montesquieu’s argument on the republic and its external relations could be a good starting point in this respect; it could give some fruitful insights for further discussions on the issue. |
|||||
書誌情報 |
清泉女子大学人文科学研究所紀要 en : BULLETIN OF SEISEN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR CULTURAL SCIENCE p. 147-164, 発行日 2020-03-31 |
|||||
表示順 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | 14 | |||||
ISSN | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||
収録物識別子 | 0910-9234 |