打字猴:1.703232828e+09
1703232828
1703232829 (118)See Ibid.;also Wu,“Order Without International Law,”29-33.
1703232830
1703232831 (119)参见国际证监会组织(IOSCO)首页(cited 23 December 2002.);available from http://www.iosco.org/gen-info.html.
1703232832
1703232833 (120)“The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision,”on Bank for International Settlements homepage(cited 23 December 2002.);available from http://www.bis.org/babs/aboutbabs.htm.
1703232834
1703232835 (121)Aviram,“Regulation by Network”18.
1703232836
1703232837 (122)Ibid.,18 n.63,citing Bernstein,“Opting Out of Legal System,”129.
1703232838
1703232839 (123)Slaughter and Helfer,“Toward a Theory of Effective Supranational Adjudication,”286.
1703232840
1703232841 (124)Foreign Affairs Committee,The Future of the Commonwealth,vol.1,27 March 1996,xlviii.
1703232842
1703232843 (125)Chayes and Chayes,The New Sovereignty,27.
1703232844
1703232845 (126)我将这一见解归功于Kal Raustiala,他结合两位Chayes的作品并将之作为他所写的一篇更大的论文的一部分,这篇论文分析了导致国内官僚机构发生结构性改变的政府网络的力量。Raustiala,“Order Without Law:Disaggregated Sovereignty and Structural Replication in the International System,”(May 1997)(on file with author).
1703232846
1703232847 (127)“Background,”on the G-20 homepage(cited 23 December 2002);available from http://www.g20.org/docs/bkgrnd-e.html.
1703232848
1703232849 (128)“From G7 to G-8,”on G-8 Information Center homepage(cited 23 December 2002);available from http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/g7/what_is_g7.html.
1703232850
1703232851 (129)“Parliamentary Supremacy and Judicial Independence,Latimer House Guidelines(1998),”on Commonwealth Parliamentary Association homepage(cited 2 January 2003);available from http://www.cpahq.org/download/latmrhse.pdf.
1703232852
1703232853 (130)Howell,“The Place of the Commonwealth in the International Order.”
1703232854
1703232855 (131)Justice Richard Goldstone,personal conversation with author,Hamburg,Germany,23 August 2001.
1703232856
1703232857 (132)Fearon,“Deliberation as Discussion,”44.
1703232858
1703232859 (133)在这方面,比较一下Abram Chayes的陈述“选择的基本过程充满了对正当理由的要求。在政府为其行动提供正当理由所需要的知识和政府能够选择的行动类型之间存在持续的反馈”。Chayes,The Cuban Missile Crisis:International Crises and the Role of Law,103.
1703232860
1703232861 (134)Fearon,“Deliberation as Discussion,”62.此处引言来自Fearon,但他只是解释了Manin在 “On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation,”352 的观点。
1703232862
1703232863 (135)Ibid.,45.Fearon 陈述了他支持讨论的理由:泄露私人信息;减轻或者克服有限理性的影响;逼迫或者鼓励为需求或者宣称提供正当理由的特殊模式;帮助产生在公众眼中具有合法性的最后选择,为组织团结做贡献或者改善对判决的可能的执行情况;改善参与者的道德或思想质量;做“正确的事”,不管讨论的结果如何。
1703232864
1703232865 (136)Ibid.,47.
1703232866
1703232867 (137)Ibid.,55.
1703232868
1703232869 (138)Ibid.,58.
1703232870
1703232871 (139)Ibid.,54.
1703232872
1703232873 (140)Risse,“Let’s Argue!”:Communicative Action in World Politics,”1-39.
1703232874
1703232875 (141)承蒙Thomas Risse 的好意,他在这里关于人的行为的陈述可视作对德国伟大哲学家于尔根·哈贝马斯的部分理论的一个基本概括。哈贝马斯花费了几十年的时间来为这个世界寻求理性的空间,因为在这个世界中,人人看起来通常关注的只是以利益为动力的原子式的个人和令人窒息的社会结构。哈贝马斯,Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns(translated as Thoery of Communicative Action),哈贝马斯将个人视为不仅试图说服他人,而且是对他人的说服持开放态度的人。说话的人愿意改变想法是因为受到了他听到的话的影响,而这些想法通常是对他所说的内容的回应。这种改变想法的意愿是“正确推理”的前提,Risse,“Let’s Argue!”9.
1703232876
1703232877 (142)March and Olsen,Rediscovering Institutions:The Organizational Basis of Politics;“The Institutional Dynamics of International Political Orders,”52,no.4(DATE):943-969.
[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.703232828e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]