Imperial Governance(帝国治理)研究综述
Imperial Governance 帝国治理 - I follow repertoires of contention in four crucial moments characterized by shifting scales of the geopolitical embeddedness of the city: (1) an early Luddite riot of 1861 in the Polish autonomous sub-state within the Russian Empire, (2) the first massive labor protest and the following pogrom of 1892 in the city already fully subsumed under the imperial governance, (3) a failed revolution of 1905 with a sophisticated feedback loop between party politics and street emotions, (4) mobilization practices during the German military occupation during the IWW culminating in the tram workers strike of 1917, (5) developing forms of industrial bargaining in the early Polish state after 1918. [1] The argument presented in this article is novel as it is informed by findings from a new imperial historiography which has revisited the imperial governance and discourse of former European empires—for example the Habsburg, Ottoman and Russian empires. [2] Thus, review of legislation for consistency with higher law helped the Crown to grapple with agency problems in imperial governance, and ultimately achieve more (but still incomplete) centralized control over policy. [3] This article looks at the ways in which the productive and consumptive demands of the camphor industry directly shaped the political, military, and ideological structures of imperial governance in upland Taiwan. [4] Local actors, who appealed to the Qing legal promotion of parental dominance and filial obedience to empower themselves, were recruited into the Qing state's project of moral penetration and social control, with law functioning as a conduit and instrument that gave the design of “ruling the empire through the principle of filial piety” a concrete legal form in imperial governance. [5] Yet concurrently, the formalities and processes of imperial governance had the effect of consolidating their status as a legitimate religious minority, with all the rights and privileges such a position implied. [6]我在四个关键时刻跟踪争论的曲目,其特点是城市的地缘政治嵌入规模不断变化:(1)1861 年在俄罗斯帝国境内的波兰自治次国家发生的早期卢德暴动,(2)第一次大规模的劳工抗议以及随后 1892 年在该市发生的大屠杀已经完全归入帝国统治之下,(3) 1905 年革命失败,政党政治和街头情绪之间存在复杂的反馈循环,(4) IWW 期间德国军事占领期间的动员实践最终导致 1917 年的电车工人罢工,(5)在 1918 年之后的早期波兰国家发展了各种形式的工业谈判。 [1] 本文提出的论点是新颖的,因为它是从新的帝国史学的发现中得出的,该史学重新审视了前欧洲帝国(例如哈布斯堡帝国、奥斯曼帝国和俄罗斯帝国)的帝国治理和话语。 [2] 因此,对立法与更高法律的一致性进行审查有助于王室解决帝国治理中的代理问题,并最终实现更多(但仍不完全)对政策的集中控制。 [3] 本文着眼于樟脑产业的生产和消费需求如何直接塑造台湾高地帝国治理的政治、军事和意识形态结构。 [4] 地方行动者呼吁清朝法律提倡父母统治和孝顺以赋予自己权力,他们被招募到清政府的道德渗透和社会控制项目中,法律作为渠道和工具,设计了“统治天下”。 “以孝为宗”是帝国治理的具体法律形式。 [5] 然而与此同时,帝国治理的形式和过程具有巩固其作为合法宗教少数群体的地位的效果,这种地位隐含着所有的权利和特权。 [6]