19 掌权者的文化
The idea of unmarked categories originated in feminism. The theory analyzes the culture of the powerful. The powerful comprise those people in society with easy access to resources, those who can exercise power without considering their actions. For the powerful, their culture seems obvious; for the powerless, on the other hand, it remains out of reach, élite and expensive.
The unmarked category can form the identifying mark of the powerful. The unmarked category becomes the standard against which to measure everything else. For most Western readers, it is posited that if a protagonist’s race is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is Caucasian; if a sexual identity is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is heterosexual; if the gender of a body is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that it is male; if a disability is not indicated, it will be assumed by the reader that the protagonist is able bodied, just as a set of examples.
One can often overlook unmarked categories. Whiteness forms an unmarked category not commonly visible to the powerful, as they often fall within this category. The unmarked category becomes the norm, with the other categories relegated to deviant status. Social groups can apply this view of power to race, gender, and disability without modification: the able body is the neutral body; the man is the normal status.

20 国家的自主决定权
The principle of self-determination, often seen as a moral and legal right, is that every nation is entitled to a sovereign territorial state, and that every specifically identifiable population should choose which state it belongs to, often by plebiscite. It is commonly used to justify the aspirations of an ethnic group that self-identifies as a nation toward forming an independent sovereign state, but it equally grants the right to reject sovereignty and join a larger multi-ethnic state.
Although there is a consensus that international law recognizes the principle of self-determination, the principle does not, by itself, define which group is a nation, which groups are entitled to sovereignty, or what territory they should get for that purpose. Its application in international law creates a tension between this principle and the principles of territorial integrity and non-intervention in internal affairs.

21 国家自主决定权是民族主义运动的典型要求
The principle of self-determination formally expresses a central claim of nationalism, namely the entitlement of each nation to its own nation state. It has itself become a typical demand of nationalist movements. However, the formal expression of the principle came later than the nationalist movements and the first nation-states. In the 20th century, the principle was central to the process of decolonization, but its use is not limited to contesting colonialist or imperialist rule.

22 政治个人主义
In political philosophy, the individualist theory of government holds that the state should take a merely defensive role by protecting the liberty of each individual to act as he or she wishes as long as he or she does not infringe on the same liberty of another. This contrasts with collectivist political theories, where, rather than leaving the individual to pursue his or her own ends, the state ensures that the individual serves the interests of society when taken as a whole. The term has also been used to describe “individual initiative” and “freedom of the individual” in general, perhaps best described by the French term “laissez faire,” a verb meaning “to let the people do” (for themselves what they know how to do).

23 政治个人主义者眼中的社会
For some political individualists, who hold a view known as methodological individua-lism, the word “society” can never refer to anything more than a very large collection of individuals. Society does not have an existence above or beyond these individuals, and thus cannot be properly said to carry out actions, since actions require intentionality, which requires an agent, and society as a whole cannot be properly said to possess agency; only individuals can be agents. The same holds for the government. Under this view, a government is composed of individuals; despite that democratic governments are elected by popular vote, the fact remains that all of the activities of government are carried out by means of the intentions and actions of individuals. Strictly speaking,the government itself does not act. For example, the point is sometimes made that “we” havedecided to enact a certain policy, and sometimes this usage is used to imply that the entity knownas “society” supports the policy and thus it is justified.

24 政治个人主义在实践中
In practice, individualists are chiefly concerned with protecting individual autonomy against obligations imposed by social institutions (such as the state). Many individua-lists pay particular attention to protecting the liberties of the minority against the wishes of the majority and see the individual as the smallest minority. For example, individualists oppose democratic systems unless constitutional protections exist that do not allow individual liberty to be diminished by the interests of the majority. These concerns encompass both civil and economic liberties. One typical concern is opposition to any concentration of commercial and industrial enterprise in the hands of the state, and the municipality. The principles upon which this opposition is based are mainly two: that popularly-elected representatives are not likely to have the qualifications, or the sense of responsibility, required for dealing with the multitudinous enterprises, and the large sums of public money involved in civic administration; and that the “health of the state” depends upon the exertions of individuals for their personal benefit(who,“like cells”, are the containers of the life of the body). Individualism may take a radicalism approach, as in individualist anarchism.

25 政治个人主义之方法个人主义
The methodological individualist points out that “we” in fact did not enact or carry out this policy;among those who voted, a certain group of people voted for the policy, individuals all, and anothergroup voted against it. The decision that emerged was not made by the “people”, or by the “government”; it was made by those on the winning side of the vote. This is significant because inany collective there exists individuals who oppose the policy whose wills are being overridden,and the use of “we” tends to obs-cure that fact. The individualist wishes to highlight the importance of the individual and prevent subsumption into a collective. For these reasons, methodological individualists tend to disagree with claims such as “we deserve the government we have, because we are doing it to ourselves,” since perhaps that individual and very possiblymany others disagree with the actions of the individuals who hold government power. That is tosay, many individualists are willing to use “we” in reference to government or society asconvenient shorthand as long as the fact that these entities are composed of individuals is kept in mind.

26 政治集体主义
Some consider an example of collectivist political philosophy to be Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract, which maintains that human society is organized along the lines of an implicit contract between members of society, and that the terms of this contract (e.g. the powers of government, the rights and responsibilities of individual citizens, etc.) are rightfully decided by the “general will”—that is, the will of the people. This idea is part of the philosophical foundation of democracy and inspired the early socialist and communist philosophers such as Hegel and Marx.
According to Moyra Grant, in political philosophy “collectivism” refers to any philoso-phy or system that sees any kind of group (such as a class, nation, race, society, state, etc.) as more important than the individual. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, “collectivism has foundvarying degrees of expression in the 20th century in such movements as socialism, communism, and fascism. The least collectivist of these is social democracy, which seeks to reduce the inequities of unrestrained capitalism by government regulation, redistribution of income, and varying degrees of planning and public ownership. In socialist systems collectivism is carried to its furthest extreme, with a minimum of private ownership and a maximum of planned economy.”

27 政治集体主义观点
However, political collectivism is not necessarily associated with support for states, governments, or other hierarchical institutions. There is also a variant of anarchism which calls itself collectivism. Collectivist anarchists, particularly Mikhail Bakunin, were among the earliest critics of authoritarian communism. They agree with communists that the means of production should be expropriated from private owners and converted to collective property, but they advocate the ownership of this collective property by a loose group of decentralized communes rather than a government. Nevertheless, unlike anarcho-communists, they supported a wage system and markets in non-capital goods. Thus, Bakunin’s “Collectivist Anarchism”, not withstanding the title, is seen as a blend of individualism and collectivism. Anarcho-communism is a more comprehensive form of non-state collectivism which advocates not only the collectivization of the means of production but of the products of labor as well. According to anarcho-communist Peter Kropotkin, “houses, fields, and factories will no longer be private property, and that they will belong to the commune or the nation and money, wages, and trade would be abolished.”

28 代表制的应用
The only truly representative government for a population is the population itself. The logic of government open to all underpins the social forums (such as the World Social Forum) that have developed in contradistinction to the forums of the powerful. These alternative forms are sometimes called counter-power. This view appears in many projects of social change, but its founder Paulo Freire is largely unknown. Freire assumes that people carry archives of knowledge within them. In particular he rejects the idea that people remain ignorant unless they have learned to communicate using the culture of the powerful. The person is seen as part of a culture circle with its own view of reality, based on the circumstances of everyday living.
Dialogue can bring about social change. Such dialogue directly opposes the monologue of the culture of the powerful. Dialogue expands the understanding of the world rather than teaching a correct understanding. The process of social change starts with action, on which the group then reflects. Commonly, more action of some kind then results.

29 代表制与权力对抗
Gilles Deleuze, the twentieth century French philosopher, compared voting for political representation with being taken hostage. A representational government assumes that people can be divided into categories with distinct shared interests. The representative is regarded as embodying the interests of the group. Many social movements have been successful in gaining access to governments: the working class, women, young people and ethnic minorities are part of the government in many nation-states. However, there is no government where the government represents the population along the characteristics of the categories.
The problem of finding suitable representatives relates to an individual’s membership of different categories at the same time. The only truly representative government for a population is the population itself. These ideas have become popular in social movements for global justice. The logic of government open to all underpins the social forums (such as the World Social Forum)

that have developed in contradistinction to the forums of the powerful. These alternative forms are sometimes called counter-power.

30 国际政治
Other scholars have proposed the concept of noopolitik, which refers to a dimension ofinternational relations that is related to the formation of a “noosphere” or a global informationenvironment. Noopolitik is projected as an alternative to realpolitik, the latter being the traditional approach to fostering the power of the state in the international arena, by negotiation, force, or the potential use of force. In a world characterized by globalization and shaped by information and communication, the ability to act on information flows, and on media messages, becomes an essential tool for fostering a political agenda.
With noopolitik, diplomacy will now include not only governments but also the societies they represent. This new diplomacy may prevent confrontation, increase the opportunity for alliances, and foster cultural and political hegemony. Embedded in this new diplomacy is the capacity to intervene in the process of mental representation underlying public opinion and collective political behavior at the national level.

31 信息时代与国际政治
Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, Jr. reject the view that the information age will radically transform relations between nations. Their position is based on their belief that countries arealready embedded in patterns of complex interdependence where “security and force matter lessand countries are connected by multiple social and political relationships.” However, they judgethat the information revolution alters patterns of complex interdependence by exponentially increasing the number of channels of communications in world politics—between individuals in networks, not just individuals within bureaucracies. But it exists in the context of an existing political structure, and its effects on the flows of different types of information vary vastly.
They also agree that in the 21st century, “information technology, broadly defined, is likely to be the most important power resource.”

32 引语: 权力
“One needs to be nominalistic, no doubt: power is not an institution, and not a structure; neither is it a certain strength we are endowed with; it is the name that one attributes to a complex strategic situation in a particular society.” (History of Sexuality, p.93)
“Domination” is not “that solid and global kind of domination that one person exercises over others, or one group over another, but the manifold forms of domination that can be exercised within society.” (ibid, p.96)
“One should try to locate power at the extreme of its exercise, where it is always less legal in character.” (ibid, p.97)
“The analysis (of power) should not attempt to consider power from its internal point of view and...should refrain from posing the labyrinthine and unanswerable question: ‘Who then has power and what has he in mind? What is the aim of someone who possesses power?’Instead, it is a case of studying power at the point where its intention, if it has one, is completely invested in its real and effective practices.” (ibid, p.97)
“Let us ask...how things work at the level of on-going subjugation, at the level of those continuous and uninterrupted processes which subject our bodies, govern our gestures, dictate our behaviors, etc. we should try to discover how it is that subjects are gradually, progressively, really and materially constituted through a multiplicity of organisms, forces, energies, materials, desires, thoughts, etc. We should try to grasp subjection in its material instance as a constitution of subjects.” (ibid, p.97)

33 政府与民众的斗争
Political bands between citizens and their governments generally need to be dissolved when the government becomes too oppressive. Oppressiveness is usually expressed through heavy taxation and the silencing of critics. In this situation, citizens usually form small militias and communities of support in order to withstand resistance from their governments once the government becomes aware that they no longer support it. The unwillingness to continue supporting one’s government is often called treason, sedition, or simply tax evasion. Unfortunately, these expressions of unwillingness are usually illegal, and so it is illegal for citizens to terminate a government, regardless of whether or not that government is worth anything to anyone.

34 直接民主的概念
Direct democracy, classically termed pure democracy, comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein sovereignty is lodged in the assembly of all citizens who choose to participate. Depending on the particular system, this assembly might pass executive motions(decrees), make law, elect and dismiss officials and conduct trials. Where the assembly elected officials, these were executive agents or direct representatives (bound to the will of the people).
Direct democracy stands in contrast to representative democracy, where sovereignty is exercised by a subset of the people, elected periodically, but otherwise free to advance their own agendas. These two forms of democracy can be combined into representative direct democracy, where elected representatives vote on the behalf of citizens, as long as they do not choose to vote themselves.
Direct democracy also deals with how citizens are “directly” involved with voting for various laws,instead of voting for representative to decide for them.

35 政策的概念
A policy is a deliberate plan of action to guide decisions and achieve rational outcome(s). The term may apply to government, private sector organizations and groups, and individuals. Presidential executive orders, corporate privacy policies, and parliamentary rules of order are all examples of policy. Policy differs from rules or law. While law can compel or prohibit behaviors(e.g. a law requiring the payment of taxes on income) policy merely guides actions toward those that are most likely to achieve a desired outcome.
Policy or policy study may also refer to the process of making important organizational decisions, including the identification of different alternatives such as programs or spending priorities, and choosing among them on the basis of the impact they will have. Policies can be understood as political, management, financial, and administrative mechanisms arranged to reach explicit goals.