{"created":"2023-05-15T08:20:24.760547+00:00","id":389,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"b21e0b1f-6a88-4f51-9b26-a8b4548522b4"},"_deposit":{"created_by":3,"id":"389","owners":[3],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"389"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:shobi-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000389","sets":["10:8:69"]},"author_link":["734"],"control_number":"389","item_3_biblio_info_12":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"2015-12-25","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicPageEnd":"179","bibliographicPageStart":"153","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"21","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"尚美学園大学総合政策論集","bibliographic_titleLang":"ja"},{"bibliographic_title":"Shobi journal of policy studies, Shobi University","bibliographic_titleLang":"en"}]}]},"item_3_description_10":{"attribute_name":"抄録(日)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"本稿は、現在アメリカのペンシルバニア大学のエレン・ケネディ教授が約三十年前に西ドイツに在外研究中（1984年～ 6 年）に、あるシンポジウムで発表した研究報告の邦訳である。1980年代中頃、西ドイツの議会制民主政は反核・平和運動の高まりによって不安定化していた。その理由は、手続きの点では正当に選出された政府の実施する政策は合法性を有するが、歪められた選挙制度、政党の変容と代議士の独立性の喪失、政治エリートによるマス・メディアの操作などによって、「民意」は正しく反映されているとは言えず、「街頭」に表出される反対運動の頻出度から見て正統性の点では疑わしい、とハーバーマスによって批判された。彼は、「民意」ができるだけ正しく政治に反映されるように、何年か一度しか行われない選挙と並んで、それを補完する他の回路も必要ではないかという論拠に基づいて人民投票的な要素を導入して、議会制民主政を補完させるべきではないか、という議論を展開した。ケネディは、こうしたハーバーマスの議論には、合法性と正統性という二つの概念を意図的に対抗させて、ワイマール共和国の議会制民主政は合法性を有するが正統性は欠けていると、主張して、その崩壊に理論的に一役買った、「ファシスト法学者」のカール・シュミットの議会制民主政批判論の受容が見られる、と分析した。彼女は、ハーバーマスを含めて、左翼の代名詞のように言われていた「フランクフルト学派」の他の学者にも、政治的目標や価値観の点では正反対の立場にあるが、自由主義的民主政や議会主義を批判する議論やその議論を進める際に用いられた概念や論理の点では類似性がある、と主張した。この主張を簡潔にまとめたのが本論文である。このケネディの論文が刊行されるや、ハーバーマスは言うまでもなく、左翼からの痛烈な批判があり、いわゆる「ケネディ論争が」繰り広げられた。今日、我が国でも政府の安全保障関連法の制定に際して、議会外の反対運動が盛り上がりを見せており、ケネディ論文からは、日本の議会制民主政の在り方に関しても学ぶ点が多いと思い邦訳に踏み切った。この邦訳論稿の前に、ケネディ論争が生まれた背景や、それらに関するドイツや日本での論評や研究の紹介、およびケネディ教授の略歴などについてまとめた「訳者まえがき」を置いた。","subitem_description_language":"ja","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_3_description_11":{"attribute_name":"抄録(英)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"This article is the Japanese translation of Ellen Kennedy, “Carl Schmitt and Frankfurt School” which is originally published in Telos, a Quarterly Journal of Post-Critical Thought, No.71.Spring 1987, New York. In this article Prof. Kennedy addresses both these issues: The recetption of Schmitt’s ideas by Frankfurt School theorists such as Benjamin,Kirchheimer, and Habermas, and Schmitt’ attitude toward liberal institutions. Secondly she attempts to dissolve a paradox about Schmitt’s reception that prevents analysis of its implication. According to this ariticle the core of the Schmitt’ argument about liberal democracy can be summarized as follows:（ 1） Democracy, “the identity of the rulers and the ruled”, challenges the legitimacy of liberal government（majority rule, parliamentary discussion,and the public order）.（ 2 ） Liberal democracy is inseparable from the institutions of the bourgeois constitutional state, the functional and normative guarantor of liberal society. The making of law（parliament）, as well as its interpretation and administration（the courts and state bureaucracy）, further divide the democratic ideal and liberal reality.（ 3） Legality and legitimacy are not identical, as liberal theory maintains, but two distincts and even contradictory concepts. As the consequence of the reception of this Schmitt’s idea of anti-parliamentary democracy by the Frankfurt School theorist in Germany, the often perplexing  similarity of ideological position on the left and the right in late Weimar Republic and West  Germany was formed. It is clear that in spite of the serious differences between Schmitt and particulary Habermas on poltical values and goals, there seems to be a similarity between them in respect of their attitude about parliamentary democracy. Therefore she advices us that a lesson from the constitutional failure of Weimal Republic warns the defender of plural democratic society and parliamentary democracy so as not to posited reality against ideal: legality against legitimacy as Schmitt did it. By the way, strange to say, there seems to be also the similarity between the political arguments of West-Germay in the 1980’era and those arguments against the Security Legislation in the present Japan in respect of whether a policy of the government is legitimite or not. Consequently this ariticle seems to give us a wisdom to get a perspective of illuminating the future of how the parliamentary democracy should be in Japan.","subitem_description_language":"en","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_3_description_15":{"attribute_name":"表示順","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"10","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_16":{"attribute_name":"アクセション番号","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"KJ00010134879","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_8":{"attribute_name":"記事種別(日)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"翻訳","subitem_description_language":"ja","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_description_9":{"attribute_name":"記事種別(英)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"Translation","subitem_description_language":"en","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_3_publisher_22":{"attribute_name":"出版社","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_publisher":"尚美学園大学総合政策学部総合政策学会","subitem_publisher_language":"ja"}]},"item_3_source_id_1":{"attribute_name":"雑誌書誌ID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AA12006349","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_3_source_id_19":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"13497049","subitem_source_identifier_type":"PISSN"}]},"item_3_text_6":{"attribute_name":"著者所属(日)","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_text_language":"ja","subitem_text_value":"尚美学園大学総合政策学部"}]},"item_3_title_3":{"attribute_name":"論文名よみ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"ホンヤク エレン ケネディ カール シュミット ト フランクフルト ガクハ 1","subitem_title_language":"ja-Kana"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"安, 章浩","creatorNameLang":"ja"},{"creatorName":"ヤス, アキヒロ","creatorNameLang":"ja-Kana"},{"creatorName":"YASU, Akihiro","creatorNameLang":"en"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2023-07-21"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"KJ00010134879.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"621 KB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_11","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"KJ00010134879.pdf","url":"https://shobi-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/389/files/KJ00010134879.pdf"},"version_id":"1a7a2c11-1d4f-4a0d-9e6e-40f0ad9f1309"}]},"item_keyword":{"attribute_name":"キーワード","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_subject":"ワイマール共和国","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"自由主義的民主政","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"議会主義","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"多数決原理","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"直接民主政","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"合法性","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"正統性","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"決定(決断)主義","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"公共圏","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"市民的不服従","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"社会国家","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"法治国家","subitem_subject_language":"ja","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Weimar Republic","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"liberal democracy","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"parliamentarism","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"rule of majority","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"direct democracy","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"legality","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"legitimacy","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"decisionism","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"public sphere","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"civil disobedience","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Sozialstaat","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"},{"subitem_subject":"Rechtsstaat","subitem_subject_language":"en","subitem_subject_scheme":"Other"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"翻訳 エレン・ケネディ「カール・シュミットとフランクフルト学派」(1)","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"翻訳 エレン・ケネディ「カール・シュミットとフランクフルト学派」(1)","subitem_title_language":"ja"},{"subitem_title":"Ellen Kennedy, \"Carl Schmitt and Frankfurt School\"(1)","subitem_title_language":"en"}]},"item_type_id":"3","owner":"3","path":["69"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"PubDate","attribute_value":"2017-04-21"},"publish_date":"2017-04-21","publish_status":"0","recid":"389","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["翻訳 エレン・ケネディ「カール・シュミットとフランクフルト学派」(1)"],"weko_creator_id":"3","weko_shared_id":-1},"updated":"2023-09-21T02:52:36.976142+00:00"}