对欧亚非大陆自由主义民主格局演变的 批判性分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-9479.2020.06.2019174

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

自由主义民主作为西方谋求世界霸权而肆意输出的意识形态，以批判性话语剖析欧亚非大陆自由主义民主状况，对揭露西方民主输出的真实目的意义重大。探究欧亚非大陆“自由”等级格局演变特征，搭建“自由”等级格局演变影响因子体系，并揭示其演变影响机制。研究发现：①“自由”国家数量总体显著增长，从欧洲南部、西部、北部，亚洲南部、东北部扩散至欧洲东部、中部和非洲南部地区；“部分自由”国家数量总体明显增加，基本分布在亚洲南部、东南部，非洲东部、西部和南部；“不自由”国家数量总体略有减少，从欧洲东部、亚洲和非洲大部分地区压缩至亚非大部分地区。②“自由”等级标准差指数表现出明显上升趋势，而其变异系数表现出波动下降趋势。③总体上，欧亚非大陆具有相似“自由”等级的国家集聚程度在不断增强，其中，高值集聚出现波动增强；局部上，冷点、次冷点区域呈现“联成一片”的态势，热点、次热点区域则有“东进”的趋势。④社会经济、外部扩散、文化宗教、政治制度、西方行为等因素影响显著，且在整体和局部影响机制上呈现明显差异。⑤“自由之家”为突出和强调西方在国际政治领域的标准制定权和话语权，其“自由”等级指数具有极强的意识形态属性和战略意图。

关键词: 批判性分析, 欧亚非大陆, 自由主义民主, “自由”等级, 格局演变

Abstract:

Liberal democracy as the ideology of Western exporting wantonly to seek world hegemony, it is of great importance to analyze profoundly liberal democracy conditions of Afro-Eurasia for revealing the true purpose of the export of Western democracy. On the basis of analyzing the relationship between the essence of liberal democratic logic, we explored the spatial evolution characteristics in Afro-Eurasia. In addition, we also built the factor system to discover the "free" ratings pattern spatial evolution impact mechanism under different scales. Some conclusions can be drawn as follows: (1) The number of "free" country increases markedly, whose spatial distribution diffused from Southern, Western and Northern Europe, Southern and Northeast Asia to Eastern and Central Europe, Southern Africa; The number of "partly free" country increases obviously, whose spatial distribution is Southern and Southeast Asia, Eastern, Western and Southern Africa; The number of "not free" country declines slightly, whose spatial distribution shifts from Eastern Europe, most part of Asia and Africa to most part of Asia and Africa. (2) The Standard Deviation of "free" ratings in Afro-Eurasia increases, but the Coefficient of Variation of "free" ratings in Afro-Eurasia declines fluctuatingly. (3) On the whole, the degree of agglomeration of countries with "free" ratings is becoming stronger in Afro—Eurasia, and the degree of agglomeration with high values shows fluctuation strong; On the local, the cold and sub-cold spots display the continuous distribution; The hot and sub—hot spots appear a "moving to east" tendency. (4) The factors including social—economy, external diffusion, culture-religion, political system and western behavior have remarkable impacts, which lead to different impact mechanism in whole and in local. (5) "Freedom House" emphasizes the Western standards and discourse power in the field of international politics, and its "free" ratings has a strong ideological attribute and strategic intention.

Key words: critical analysis, Afro-Eurasia, liberal democracy, "free" ratings, pattern evolution

麻洪川, 郗笃刚, 刘建忠, 张晶, 丁梓越. 对欧亚非大陆自由主义民主格局演变的批判性分析[J]. 世界地理研究, 2020, 29(6): 1113-1124.

Hongchuan MA, Dugang XI, Jianzhong LIU, Jing ZHANG, Ziyue DING. A critical analysis on spatial evolution of liberal democracy pattern in Afro-Eurasia[J]. World Regional Studies, 2020, 29(6): 1113-1124.

图/表 8

参考文献 23

1	张树华.民主化悖论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2017:1.
	Zhang S. Democratization in the Post—Cold War World: Dilemma and Paradox. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2017:1.
2	曾毅,杨光斌.西方如何建构民主话语权.国际政治研究,2016(2):64-81.
	Zeng Y, Yang G. How in the West construct democratic discourse power. The Journals of International Studies, 2016(2):64-81.
3	Wejnert Barbara. Diffusion, development, and democracy, 1800—1999. American Sociological Review, 2005,70(1):53-81.
4	Richard E. Niemeyer, Stephen K. Sanderson, Kristopher Proctor. Endogenous and exogenous factors in the growth of democracy,1900-2005.[2018-11-20]..
5	Pérez-Liñán Aníbal, mainwaring Scott. hegemony or contagion? International factors and democratization in Latin America, 1945-2005.[2018-11-19]. —ISA%20BuenosAires%202014/Archive/ee42fe8a—9417—44e1—9534—8a0c9afee50b.pdf.
6	Lupu Noam, Murali Kanta. Development, Democratization, and Democratic Deepening.[2018-11-20]. .
7	Diskin Abraham, Diskin Hanna, Y.Hazan Reuven. Why Democracies Collapse: The Reasons for Democratic Failure and Success. International Political Science Review,2005,26(3):291-309.
8	O'Loughlin John, D.Ward Michael, Corey L.Lofdahl. The Diffusion of Democacy, 1946-1994. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,1998,88(4):545-574.
9	Houle Christian, Mark Andreas Kayser, Jun Xiang. Diffusion or confusion?.[2018-11-19].
	—kayser.com/papers/DiffusionDemoc.pdf.
10	Strand Havard, Hegre Havard, Gates Scott, et al. Why waves? global patterns of democratization, 1820-2008.[2018-11-19]. .
11	Mohrenberg Steffen. Analyzing Democratization with a Social Network Approach.[2018-11-16]. .
12	傅伯杰.地理学综合研究的途径与方法:格局与过程耦合.地理学报,2014,69(8):1052-1059.
	Fu B. The integrated studies of geography: Coupling of patterns and processes. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014,69(8):1052-1059.
13	陈嘉,韦素琼,陈松林.1991年来台商在大陆直接投资区位选择及驱动机制.地理学报,2014,69(6):838-849.
	Chen J, Wei S, Chen S. The locational choice and driving forces mechanism of TDI in the Chinese Mainland for recent 20 years. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2014,69(6):838-849.
14	梁辰,王诺.基于Logistic回归的沿海经济区建设用地演变驱动因素研究——以大连市新市区为例.地理科学,2014,34(5):556-562.
	Liang C, Wang N. Driving Factor Analysis of Construction Land Changes in Coastal Economic Zone Based on Logistic Regression: A Case Study of Dalian New Urban. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 2014,34(5):556-562.
15	李洪,宫兆宁,赵文吉等.基于Logistic回归模型的北京市水库湿地演变驱动力分析.地理学报,2012,67(3):357-367.
	Li H, Gong Z, Zhao W, Gong H. Driving forces analysis of reservoir wetland evolution in Beijing based on logistic regression model. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2012,67(3):357-367.
16	陈向阳.美国自由之家.国际资料信息,2005(7):38-41.
	Chen X. Freedom House of the U.S.A. International Data Information, 2005(7):38-41.
17	杜欢.自由的指数与不自由的偏误.国外理论动态,2018(7):31-41.
	The index of freedom and the illiberal bias. Foreign Theoretical Trends, 2018(7):31-41.
18	孙玉,程叶青,张平宇.东北地区乡村性评价及时空分异.地理研究,2015(10):1864-1874.
	Sun Y, Cheng Y, Zhang P. Spatio—temporal dynamics of rurality in Northeast China. Geographical Reaserch, 2015,34(10):1864-1874.
19	罗尔斯.作为公平的正义:正义新论.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2011:167.
	John Bordley Rawls. Justice as fairness: A restatement. Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2011:167.
20	塞缪尔·亨廷顿.文明的冲突.北京:新华出版社,2013:170-186.
	Huntington Samuel. The clash of civilizations and the remarking of world order. Beijing: Xinhua Press, 2013:170-186.
21	王莺莺.对非洲民主化的再思考.国际问题研究,2002(6):28-33.
	Wang Y. Africa's democratization in retrospect. International Studies, 2002(6):28-33.
22	曾毅,杨光斌.西方民主话语权构建及实践困境.社会科学文摘,2016(6):42-43.
	Zeng Y, Yang G. The Construction and Practice dilemma of western democratic discourse power. Social Sciences Digest, 2016(6):42-43.
23	张维为.西方的制度反思与中国的道理自信.求是,2014(9):47-50.
	Zhang W. Western system reflection and China's road confidence. Qiu Shi, 2014(9):47-50.

一级指标	二级指标	类型
社会经济	人均GDP	连续型
	15岁以上识字率	连续型
	城市化率	连续型
	非农业产值占比	连续型
外部扩散	邻接扩散指数	连续型
	贸易扩散指数	连续型
	区域扩散指数	连续型
文化宗教	宗教类型	多分类
政治制度	政治制度类型	多分类
西方行为	经济制裁或武装干预	多分类

一级指标	二级指标	类型
社会经济	人均GDP	连续型
	15岁以上识字率	连续型
	城市化率	连续型
	非农业产值占比	连续型
外部扩散	邻接扩散指数	连续型
	贸易扩散指数	连续型
	区域扩散指数	连续型
文化宗教	宗教类型	多分类
政治制度	政治制度类型	多分类
西方行为	经济制裁或武装干预	多分类

年份	标准差指数	变异系数
1974	1.9648	0.5935
1980	1.9701	0.6010
1986	1.9924	0.6380
1992	1.9739	0.4957
1998	2.0238	0.4980
2004	2.0169	0.4665

年份	标准差指数	变异系数
1974	1.9648	0.5935
1980	1.9701	0.6010
1986	1.9924	0.6380
1992	1.9739	0.4957
1998	2.0238	0.4980
2004	2.0169	0.4665

参数	1974	1980	1986	1992	1998	2004
全局Moran’I	0.4613	0.4870	0.5583	0.5324	0.5473	0.5795
Z(I)	7.3689^***	7.7400^***	8.8572^***	9.1219^***	9.4211^***	9.9822^***
全局G	0.0292	0.03081	0.0317	0.0294	0.0289	0.02815
Z(G)	1.0865^*	1.4403^*	1.7006^*	1.9359^*	1.7428^*	1.7776^*