Raymond Aron、Friedrich Hayek与“第三世界”:意识形态辩论终结的另类历史

Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins
{"title":"Raymond Aron、Friedrich Hayek与“第三世界”:意识形态辩论终结的另类历史","authors":"Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins","doi":"10.1353/hum.2021.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article explores the differences and similarities between neoliberalism and Cold War liberalism by looking at the decade's long relationship between two of its chief representatives: Friedrich Hayek and Raymond Aron. It argues that the key to understanding their differences concern's Aron's notion of an \"end of ideology\": the perspective that the post-War welfare state had made obsolete the need for something like a revolutionary workers party. Hayek, contra Aron, believed that such welfare states were inherently ideological and thus potentially totalitarian. What kept the differences between Aron and Hayek at bay was the early Cold War, and namely fears over Soviet expansion and Communist Party electoral victories in Western Europe. Their relationship became antagonistic in 1955 when Aron suggested that the North Atlantic Community had achieved an end to ideology. Yet at this time the political fate of the Third World remained undecided—a reality made sober to Aron and his fellow members of Congress for Cultural Freedom in light of the Bandung Conference which took place in April 1955. This larger international context, it is argued, explains the antagonism between Aron and Hayek after 1955, as the latter's thinking came to be seen as detrimental to the Congress's mission of fighting global communism.","PeriodicalId":44775,"journal":{"name":"Humanity-An International Journal of Human Rights Humanitarianism and Development","volume":"12 1","pages":"241 - 264"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Raymond Aron, Friedrich Hayek, and \\\"The Third World\\\": An Alternative History of the End of Ideology Debate\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/hum.2021.0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:This article explores the differences and similarities between neoliberalism and Cold War liberalism by looking at the decade's long relationship between two of its chief representatives: Friedrich Hayek and Raymond Aron. It argues that the key to understanding their differences concern's Aron's notion of an \\\"end of ideology\\\": the perspective that the post-War welfare state had made obsolete the need for something like a revolutionary workers party. Hayek, contra Aron, believed that such welfare states were inherently ideological and thus potentially totalitarian. What kept the differences between Aron and Hayek at bay was the early Cold War, and namely fears over Soviet expansion and Communist Party electoral victories in Western Europe. Their relationship became antagonistic in 1955 when Aron suggested that the North Atlantic Community had achieved an end to ideology. Yet at this time the political fate of the Third World remained undecided—a reality made sober to Aron and his fellow members of Congress for Cultural Freedom in light of the Bandung Conference which took place in April 1955. This larger international context, it is argued, explains the antagonism between Aron and Hayek after 1955, as the latter's thinking came to be seen as detrimental to the Congress's mission of fighting global communism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44775,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Humanity-An International Journal of Human Rights Humanitarianism and Development\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"241 - 264\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Humanity-An International Journal of Human Rights Humanitarianism and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/hum.2021.0016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL ISSUES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Humanity-An International Journal of Human Rights Humanitarianism and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/hum.2021.0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:本文通过考察新自由主义与冷战自由主义的两位主要代表人物哈耶克和阿隆近十年来的关系,探讨新自由主义与冷战自由主义的异同。文章认为,理解他们之间差异的关键在于阿隆关于“意识形态终结”的概念:他认为战后福利国家已经使革命工人政党之类的东西变得过时。与阿隆相反,哈耶克认为这样的福利国家本质上是意识形态的,因此可能是极权主义的。使阿隆和哈耶克之间的分歧保持在海湾的是冷战初期,即对苏联扩张和共产党在西欧选举胜利的担忧。1955年,当阿隆提出北大西洋共同体已经结束了意识形态时,他们的关系变得敌对起来。然而,在这个时候,第三世界的政治命运仍然悬而未决——根据1955年4月举行的万隆会议,这一现实对阿隆和他的文化自由大会的同事们来说是清醒的。作者认为,这种更大的国际背景解释了阿隆和哈耶克在1955年之后的对立,后者的思想被视为不利于国会打击全球共产主义的使命。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Raymond Aron, Friedrich Hayek, and "The Third World": An Alternative History of the End of Ideology Debate
Abstract:This article explores the differences and similarities between neoliberalism and Cold War liberalism by looking at the decade's long relationship between two of its chief representatives: Friedrich Hayek and Raymond Aron. It argues that the key to understanding their differences concern's Aron's notion of an "end of ideology": the perspective that the post-War welfare state had made obsolete the need for something like a revolutionary workers party. Hayek, contra Aron, believed that such welfare states were inherently ideological and thus potentially totalitarian. What kept the differences between Aron and Hayek at bay was the early Cold War, and namely fears over Soviet expansion and Communist Party electoral victories in Western Europe. Their relationship became antagonistic in 1955 when Aron suggested that the North Atlantic Community had achieved an end to ideology. Yet at this time the political fate of the Third World remained undecided—a reality made sober to Aron and his fellow members of Congress for Cultural Freedom in light of the Bandung Conference which took place in April 1955. This larger international context, it is argued, explains the antagonism between Aron and Hayek after 1955, as the latter's thinking came to be seen as detrimental to the Congress's mission of fighting global communism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
The “Unwilling or Unable” Doctrine and the Political Economy of the War on Terror Learning from Dar es Salaam: Harvard’s “Project Tanganyika” and a Nodal Perspective on Decolonization’s Itineraries Human Rights, Revolutionary Humanitarianism, and African Liberation in 1970: Unsettling Discontinuities in Human Rights History The Jurisprudence of Decolonization: The Postcolonial Career of D. N. Pritt and the Labor of Insurgent Lawyering Decolonizing the Sky: Global Air Travel at the End of Empire
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1