Pub Date : 2024-06-12DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-113134
Corey Brettschneider, Aidan G. Calvelli
How much should we fear that a president will break the law to pursue power—then use their office to avoid legal accountability? Political scientists studying the presidency have often overlooked the risk of what we here call a criminal president. Donald Trump's presidency spotlighted that risk and has begun to shift the field's focus toward not just presidential power but presidential constraints. We believe this shift should continue. In this review, we aim to set an agenda that makes the danger of a criminal president central to understanding the presidency more broadly. Situating the criminal presidency within wider questions about legal and constitutional constraints on presidential power, we emphasize the unique risks to democracy that a president unbound by law can pose. We call for a greater focus on the legal rules governing the executive branch—especially unitary executive ideas—and the policies needed to hold criminal presidents accountable.
{"title":"The US Presidency: Power and Constraint","authors":"Corey Brettschneider, Aidan G. Calvelli","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-113134","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-113134","url":null,"abstract":"How much should we fear that a president will break the law to pursue power—then use their office to avoid legal accountability? Political scientists studying the presidency have often overlooked the risk of what we here call a criminal president. Donald Trump's presidency spotlighted that risk and has begun to shift the field's focus toward not just presidential power but presidential constraints. We believe this shift should continue. In this review, we aim to set an agenda that makes the danger of a criminal president central to understanding the presidency more broadly. Situating the criminal presidency within wider questions about legal and constitutional constraints on presidential power, we emphasize the unique risks to democracy that a president unbound by law can pose. We call for a greater focus on the legal rules governing the executive branch—especially unitary executive ideas—and the policies needed to hold criminal presidents accountable.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141351921","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-19DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034241
Desmond Jagmohan
This article argues that conflict rather than consensus defines the history of African American political thought. Its seminal figures have pursued justice along different and diverging lines—including advocating reformist, realist, and nationalist paths. While there is agreement that white supremacy is a form of social, economic, and political domination that should be eradicated, there is disagreement regarding its nature, effects, and resilience. This variance in judgments and inferences regarding the foundations and consequences of white supremacy leads to different accounts of social change, diverging strategic advice for realizing that change, and conflicting political theories. To press this claim, I consider the conflicting political visions of Booker T. Washington (1856–1915), W.E.B. Du Bois (1868–1963), and Marcus Garvey (1887–1940).
{"title":"Three Traditions of African American Political Thought: Realism, Reformism, and Nationalism","authors":"Desmond Jagmohan","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034241","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034241","url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that conflict rather than consensus defines the history of African American political thought. Its seminal figures have pursued justice along different and diverging lines—including advocating reformist, realist, and nationalist paths. While there is agreement that white supremacy is a form of social, economic, and political domination that should be eradicated, there is disagreement regarding its nature, effects, and resilience. This variance in judgments and inferences regarding the foundations and consequences of white supremacy leads to different accounts of social change, diverging strategic advice for realizing that change, and conflicting political theories. To press this claim, I consider the conflicting political visions of Booker T. Washington (1856–1915), W.E.B. Du Bois (1868–1963), and Marcus Garvey (1887–1940).","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140683054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-19DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-095535
Ina Kubbe, C. Baez-Camargo, Cheyanne Scharbatke-Church
One key question driving innovations in corruption studies is how anticorruption reforms can be more impactful and sustainable. This is critical to understand due to the detrimental impact of corrupt practices on equality, human rights, peace, and the rule of law. A significant body of research has shown that many anticorruption initiatives do not produce the expected effect, or they achieve results that fade after the intervention ceases. Seeking to understand how to improve anticorruption outcomes, scholars have turned to causal explanations of the persistence of corruption ranging from institutional settings and individual motives to informal practices and social norms. This article explores the intersection of social norms and corruption as a contribution to improving anticorruption programming. It explains how norms impact our conceptual understanding of corruption and the vicious cycle that exists between corrupt practices and norms. Grounded in the belief that programming and social norm diagnosis need to be contextually driven, we lay out the nascent research on changing social norms that drive corruption and the consequences of ignoring them.
{"title":"Corruption and Social Norms: A New Arrow in the Quiver","authors":"Ina Kubbe, C. Baez-Camargo, Cheyanne Scharbatke-Church","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-095535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-095535","url":null,"abstract":"One key question driving innovations in corruption studies is how anticorruption reforms can be more impactful and sustainable. This is critical to understand due to the detrimental impact of corrupt practices on equality, human rights, peace, and the rule of law. A significant body of research has shown that many anticorruption initiatives do not produce the expected effect, or they achieve results that fade after the intervention ceases. Seeking to understand how to improve anticorruption outcomes, scholars have turned to causal explanations of the persistence of corruption ranging from institutional settings and individual motives to informal practices and social norms. This article explores the intersection of social norms and corruption as a contribution to improving anticorruption programming. It explains how norms impact our conceptual understanding of corruption and the vicious cycle that exists between corrupt practices and norms. Grounded in the belief that programming and social norm diagnosis need to be contextually driven, we lay out the nascent research on changing social norms that drive corruption and the consequences of ignoring them.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140684664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-18DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-025352
E. Grillo, Zhaotian Luo, Monika Nalepa, Carlo Prato
We review recent contributions to the modeling of democratic backsliding. We organize these theories according to (a) the source of constraints on the executive (vertical or horizontal restrainers) and (b) the target of backsliding (electoral manipulation or executive aggrandizement), and then use these concepts to build a scaffold for a meta-model of democratic backsliding. This meta-model allows us to describe and compare the premises and insights of this scholarship. We further apply our two-dimensional classification to more than 30 empirical papers and show how these theories can guide research design. We conclude by highlighting open issues for future research.
{"title":"Theories of Democratic Backsliding","authors":"E. Grillo, Zhaotian Luo, Monika Nalepa, Carlo Prato","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-025352","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-025352","url":null,"abstract":"We review recent contributions to the modeling of democratic backsliding. We organize these theories according to (a) the source of constraints on the executive (vertical or horizontal restrainers) and (b) the target of backsliding (electoral manipulation or executive aggrandizement), and then use these concepts to build a scaffold for a meta-model of democratic backsliding. This meta-model allows us to describe and compare the premises and insights of this scholarship. We further apply our two-dimensional classification to more than 30 empirical papers and show how these theories can guide research design. We conclude by highlighting open issues for future research.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140686571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-15DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-014707
Prerna Singh
The study of contagion offers important but underexplored opportunities to rethink and advance our understanding of key concepts in political science. These include notably state capacity; social policy; state–society relations, especially the role of trust; nationalism and social solidarity; exclusionary dynamics, such as xenophobia, prejudice, and discrimination; and within political psychology, the role of emotions, including disgust. This article reviews studies on contagion and health within and adjacent to political science. While taking note of the surge of studies around COVID-19, this article focuses on work on infectious disease before and beyond the pandemic. It analyzes the scholarship as it sheds light on the control of infectious diseases, on the one hand, and on the consequences of that control, on the other, while also pointing to connections and feedback loops, especially as they open avenues for future research.
{"title":"The Politics of Contagion: States, Societies, and the Control and Consequences of Infectious Diseases","authors":"Prerna Singh","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-014707","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-014707","url":null,"abstract":"The study of contagion offers important but underexplored opportunities to rethink and advance our understanding of key concepts in political science. These include notably state capacity; social policy; state–society relations, especially the role of trust; nationalism and social solidarity; exclusionary dynamics, such as xenophobia, prejudice, and discrimination; and within political psychology, the role of emotions, including disgust. This article reviews studies on contagion and health within and adjacent to political science. While taking note of the surge of studies around COVID-19, this article focuses on work on infectious disease before and beyond the pandemic. It analyzes the scholarship as it sheds light on the control of infectious diseases, on the one hand, and on the consequences of that control, on the other, while also pointing to connections and feedback loops, especially as they open avenues for future research.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140704013","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-15DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-042247
Allison Stanger, Jakub Kraus, Woojin Lim, Georgia Millman-Perlah, Mitchell Schroeder
While generative AI shares some similarities with previous technological breakthroughs, it also raises unique challenges for containing social and economic harms. State approaches to AI governance vary; some lay a foundation for transnational governance whereas others do not. We consider some technical dimensions of AI safety in both open and closed systems, as well as the ideas that are presently percolating to safeguard their future development. Examining initiatives for the global community and for the coalition of open societies, we argue for building a dual-track interactive strategy for containing AI's potentially nightmarish unintended consequences. We conclude that AI safety is AI governance, which means that pluralist efforts to bridge gaps between theory and practice and the STEM–humanities divide are critical for democratic sustainability.
{"title":"Terra Incognita: The Governance of Artificial Intelligence in Global Perspective","authors":"Allison Stanger, Jakub Kraus, Woojin Lim, Georgia Millman-Perlah, Mitchell Schroeder","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-042247","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-042247","url":null,"abstract":"While generative AI shares some similarities with previous technological breakthroughs, it also raises unique challenges for containing social and economic harms. State approaches to AI governance vary; some lay a foundation for transnational governance whereas others do not. We consider some technical dimensions of AI safety in both open and closed systems, as well as the ideas that are presently percolating to safeguard their future development. Examining initiatives for the global community and for the coalition of open societies, we argue for building a dual-track interactive strategy for containing AI's potentially nightmarish unintended consequences. We conclude that AI safety is AI governance, which means that pluralist efforts to bridge gaps between theory and practice and the STEM–humanities divide are critical for democratic sustainability.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140700700","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-11DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102335
Keith E. Schnakenberg, Ian R. Turner
The impact of money on politics—whether through campaign finance, lobbying, or independent expenditure—raises key normative questions about democratic representation and accountability. In recent years there has been a deluge of new data allowing researchers to study money in politics from new and exciting perspectives. As a complement to this trend, there has also been a resurgence of interest in developing formal models to provide new theoretical insights that can help us understand how, why, and when money influences politics and policy. We review several major themes in this literature, focusing specifically on exchange-based models, informational models, and subsidy-based models. We compare and contrast the key contributions, and limitations, of each approach in understanding the role of lobbying and campaign finance in politics. We also discuss future avenues for research that incorporate aspects of each approach, which, we believe, will introduce new theoretical insights for understanding special interest influence.
{"title":"Formal Theories of Special Interest Influence","authors":"Keith E. Schnakenberg, Ian R. Turner","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102335","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051921-102335","url":null,"abstract":"The impact of money on politics—whether through campaign finance, lobbying, or independent expenditure—raises key normative questions about democratic representation and accountability. In recent years there has been a deluge of new data allowing researchers to study money in politics from new and exciting perspectives. As a complement to this trend, there has also been a resurgence of interest in developing formal models to provide new theoretical insights that can help us understand how, why, and when money influences politics and policy. We review several major themes in this literature, focusing specifically on exchange-based models, informational models, and subsidy-based models. We compare and contrast the key contributions, and limitations, of each approach in understanding the role of lobbying and campaign finance in politics. We also discuss future avenues for research that incorporate aspects of each approach, which, we believe, will introduce new theoretical insights for understanding special interest influence.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140713670","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-10DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-045000
A. Stilz
This article focuses on discussions of territorial rights and self-determination in the last 15–20 years. Theories of territorial jurisdiction typically combine two elements. First, they offer an account of foundational title: What gives a particular set of people a claim to be located in an area, including the right to form political institutions to govern that space? Second, they offer an account of legitimate jurisdiction: What is the moral basis of a state's right to govern the area and its population? This article begins by reconstructing prominent accounts of foundational title and legitimate jurisdiction. After canvassing these views, I highlight three areas where further work is needed, particularly as the territorial states system begins to be challenged by climate change: the appropriate balance of sovereignty and international authority in a world of global interdependence, how to rectify imperial and colonial legacies in the states system, and the just distribution of territory.
{"title":"Territory and Self-Determination","authors":"A. Stilz","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-045000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-045000","url":null,"abstract":"This article focuses on discussions of territorial rights and self-determination in the last 15–20 years. Theories of territorial jurisdiction typically combine two elements. First, they offer an account of foundational title: What gives a particular set of people a claim to be located in an area, including the right to form political institutions to govern that space? Second, they offer an account of legitimate jurisdiction: What is the moral basis of a state's right to govern the area and its population? This article begins by reconstructing prominent accounts of foundational title and legitimate jurisdiction. After canvassing these views, I highlight three areas where further work is needed, particularly as the territorial states system begins to be challenged by climate change: the appropriate balance of sovereignty and international authority in a world of global interdependence, how to rectify imperial and colonial legacies in the states system, and the just distribution of territory.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140717691","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-09DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034446
Jonathan Collins, S. Reckhow
During the COVID-19 pandemic, school district politics rose to prominence on the nation's political agenda, as school boards grappled with controversial decisions about reopening schools and implementing mask mandates. A growing number of political scientists are using newly available data and innovative research strategies to examine policy responsiveness, elections, segregation and inequality, state takeovers, interest groups, democratic deliberation, and public opinion—all while focusing on the unique context of education politics. We illuminate the distinctive institutional and policy context of US education politics and review new research in the field, including growing evidence of partisan polarization and the continuing significance of race for influencing power and decision making about schools in the United States. The field has made great strides in the last decade; we highlight the emerging themes from that already rapidly growing literature, while pointing out areas for future research.
{"title":"The New Education Politics in the United States","authors":"Jonathan Collins, S. Reckhow","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034446","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-034446","url":null,"abstract":"During the COVID-19 pandemic, school district politics rose to prominence on the nation's political agenda, as school boards grappled with controversial decisions about reopening schools and implementing mask mandates. A growing number of political scientists are using newly available data and innovative research strategies to examine policy responsiveness, elections, segregation and inequality, state takeovers, interest groups, democratic deliberation, and public opinion—all while focusing on the unique context of education politics. We illuminate the distinctive institutional and policy context of US education politics and review new research in the field, including growing evidence of partisan polarization and the continuing significance of race for influencing power and decision making about schools in the United States. The field has made great strides in the last decade; we highlight the emerging themes from that already rapidly growing literature, while pointing out areas for future research.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140720679","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-02-29DOI: 10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-052144
Ann K. Heffernan
Despite increasing interest in recent years, disability remains a neglected area of study within mainstream political science. Beginning with a brief overview of the ways that disability studies scholars have defined disability, I address the issues that have arisen in trying to measure disability as well as the limits and possibilities that follow from thinking of people with disabilities as a minority group with defined political beliefs and interests. To the extent that much of the work on disability in political science looks to the research on gender, race, ethnicity, and class as a touchstone, I consider the lessons that might be drawn from this work both as it relates to disability as a social category and regarding efforts to conceive of disability and ability in more structural and ideological terms. Turning to the literature on disability in political theory, I examine the ways that disability has been deployed to reveal the ableist assumptions that pervade canonical and more contemporary texts. I conclude by highlighting avenues for future research, including whether it is possible—or, indeed, desirable—to move beyond the civil rights and identity-based frameworks that have so defined disability politics and organizing. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 27 is June 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
{"title":"Disability in Political Science","authors":"Ann K. Heffernan","doi":"10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-052144","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-041322-052144","url":null,"abstract":"Despite increasing interest in recent years, disability remains a neglected area of study within mainstream political science. Beginning with a brief overview of the ways that disability studies scholars have defined disability, I address the issues that have arisen in trying to measure disability as well as the limits and possibilities that follow from thinking of people with disabilities as a minority group with defined political beliefs and interests. To the extent that much of the work on disability in political science looks to the research on gender, race, ethnicity, and class as a touchstone, I consider the lessons that might be drawn from this work both as it relates to disability as a social category and regarding efforts to conceive of disability and ability in more structural and ideological terms. Turning to the literature on disability in political theory, I examine the ways that disability has been deployed to reveal the ableist assumptions that pervade canonical and more contemporary texts. I conclude by highlighting avenues for future research, including whether it is possible—or, indeed, desirable—to move beyond the civil rights and identity-based frameworks that have so defined disability politics and organizing. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Political Science, Volume 27 is June 2024. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":48264,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Political Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":10.8,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140414598","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：