无大损失地安抚工人:专制与进步的劳工立法

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Comparative Politics Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5129/001041523x16869185707673
Hsu Yumin Wang
{"title":"无大损失地安抚工人:专制与进步的劳工立法","authors":"Hsu Yumin Wang","doi":"10.5129/001041523x16869185707673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under what conditions do dictators enact pro-worker legislation? Conventional wisdom suggests that heightened mass discontent motivates dictators to make policy concessions to defuse revolutionary threats. However, a more protective labor law may decrease elites’ economic benefits—and thus loyalty to the regime. I argue that limited judicial independence helps dictators control the distributional outcomes of the law and therefore better respond to the twin challenges magnified by labor reforms. To test this argument, I conduct a cross-national analysis of sixty-eight autocracies from 1970 to 2008. I then examine an illustrative case—China’s 2008 Labor Contract Law—to illuminate how a non-independent judiciary gives autocrats more leeway to balance the interests of elites and the masses. This article contributes to our understanding of authoritarian survival strategies amid distributive tensions.","PeriodicalId":47960,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Politics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Appeasing Workers without Great Loss: Autocracy and Progressive Labor Legislation\",\"authors\":\"Hsu Yumin Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.5129/001041523x16869185707673\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Under what conditions do dictators enact pro-worker legislation? Conventional wisdom suggests that heightened mass discontent motivates dictators to make policy concessions to defuse revolutionary threats. However, a more protective labor law may decrease elites’ economic benefits—and thus loyalty to the regime. I argue that limited judicial independence helps dictators control the distributional outcomes of the law and therefore better respond to the twin challenges magnified by labor reforms. To test this argument, I conduct a cross-national analysis of sixty-eight autocracies from 1970 to 2008. I then examine an illustrative case—China’s 2008 Labor Contract Law—to illuminate how a non-independent judiciary gives autocrats more leeway to balance the interests of elites and the masses. This article contributes to our understanding of authoritarian survival strategies amid distributive tensions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47960,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Comparative Politics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Comparative Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5129/001041523x16869185707673\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5129/001041523x16869185707673","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

独裁者在什么条件下颁布有利于工人的立法?传统观点认为,民众不满情绪的加剧会促使独裁者在政策上做出让步,以化解革命威胁。然而,更具保护性的劳动法可能会降低精英们的经济利益,从而降低他们对政权的忠诚度。我认为,有限的司法独立有助于独裁者控制法律的分配结果,从而更好地应对劳动改革放大的双重挑战。为了验证这一观点,我对1970年至2008年间68个独裁国家进行了跨国分析。然后,我考察了一个说教性的案例——中国2008年的《劳动合同法》,以阐明非独立的司法如何给独裁者更多的余地来平衡精英和群众的利益。这篇文章有助于我们理解分配紧张中的专制生存策略。
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
Appeasing Workers without Great Loss: Autocracy and Progressive Labor Legislation
Under what conditions do dictators enact pro-worker legislation? Conventional wisdom suggests that heightened mass discontent motivates dictators to make policy concessions to defuse revolutionary threats. However, a more protective labor law may decrease elites’ economic benefits—and thus loyalty to the regime. I argue that limited judicial independence helps dictators control the distributional outcomes of the law and therefore better respond to the twin challenges magnified by labor reforms. To test this argument, I conduct a cross-national analysis of sixty-eight autocracies from 1970 to 2008. I then examine an illustrative case—China’s 2008 Labor Contract Law—to illuminate how a non-independent judiciary gives autocrats more leeway to balance the interests of elites and the masses. This article contributes to our understanding of authoritarian survival strategies amid distributive tensions.
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
Comparative Politics
Comparative Politics POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.30%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Comparative Politics, an international journal presenting scholarly articles devoted to the comparative analysis of political institutions and processes,communicates new ideas and research findings to social scientists, scholars, students, and public and NGO officials. The journal is indispensable to experts in universities, research organizations, foundations, embassies, and policymaking agencies throughout the world.
期刊最新文献
The Nature of Ideology in Urban China International Competitive Involvement during Democratic Transitions and State Repression The “Weight” of Territorial Issues: Evidence from Catalonia, Scotland, and Northern Ireland The Political Economy of “Green” Regulation: Evidence from Fuel Price Markets Will the Revolution Be Televised? Party Organization, Media Activism, and the Communication Strategies of Left-Wing Governments in Latin America
×
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