摘要
1848年欧洲变革是19世纪欧洲现代化进程中最为重要的事件之一,它最重要的特征是国家之间存在远高于前几个世纪的互动与社会共鸣。除了英国和俄国等少数国家,欧洲大部分国家都在短时间内爆发了社会变革,并且基本都以失败告终。本文结合阶级分析方法和现代化理论,采用定性比较分析与案例研究相结合的方法,讨论1848年欧洲各国政治现代化的成败原因。定性比较分析的结果表明,经济危机是政治现代化的必要条件,它作为外部冲击触发了各国内部的变革诉求。在此基础上,1848年的现代化浪潮存在两条路径:第一条路径是具有较高经济水平且不受反革命联盟影响的国家,它们通过资产阶级革命来推动政治现代化;第二条路径是具有强国家能力且利益固化程度较低的国家,它们通过君主立宪制改良来推动现代化进程。此外,通过过程追踪和更长时段的分析可以发现,同时具备上述两条路径所需因素组合的国家,其转型的代价更低且转型后建立的制度也更为稳定。
The institutional change in Europe in 1848 was one of the most significant events in the process of European modernization in the 19 thCentury. Social changes were taking place rapidly in most European countries,but most of them ended up yielding rather limited advances. With the combination of class analysis and modernization theory and with the help of qualitative comparative analysis( QCA) and process tracing,this paper finds out that there are two paths in the wave of modernization in Europe in 1848. The first one is the path taken by the countries with a higher degree of economic development and beyond the control of the counter-revolutionary alliance,who promoted political modernization through bourgeois revolution. The second one is the path taken by the countries with strong national capacity and a low degree of interest solidification,who promoted the process of modernization through constitutional monarchy reform. In addition,through process tracing and longer-term analysis,it can be concluded that countries possessing a combination of the factors included in the above two paths have experienced a more stable and low-cost modernization transition.
出处
《欧洲研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第4期62-88,I0003,I0004,共29页
Chinese Journal of European Studies
基金
复旦大学陈树渠比较政治发展研究中心基金项目“社会科学中的空间理论评析”的资助。
