This volume in the Contemporary Anarchist Studies series focuses on anti-statist critiques in ancient and modern China and demonstrates that China does not have an unchallenged authoritarian political culture.
Treating anarchism as a critique of centralized state power, the work first examines radical Daoist thought from the 4th century BCE to the 9th century CE and compares Daoist philosophers and poets to Western anarchist and utopian thinkers. This is followed by a survey of anarchist themes in dissident thought in the People's Republic of China from 1949 to the present. A concluding chapter discusses how Daoist anarchism can be applied to any anarchist-inspired radical critique today.
This work not only challenges the usual ideas of the scope and nature of dissent in China, it also provides a unique comparison of ancient Chinese Daoist anarchism to Western anarchist. Featuring previously untranslated texts, such as the 9th century Buddhist anarchist tract, the Wunengzi, and essays from the PRC press, it will be an essential resource to anyone studying anarchism, Chinese political thought, political dissent, and political history.
John A. Rapp*, (1986), department chair, political science, professor
B.A., American University; M.A., Indiana University; Ph.D., University of Wisconsin-Madison
Phone: 608-363-2335
Email: rappja@beloit.edu
John Rapp joined the faculty at Beloit College in 1986 where he teaches courses in comparative politics. He founded the Asian Studies program in 1987 and served as its chair for ten years. He also served as chair of the Political Science department from 1996-1999 and again starting in 2014. From 2002-2005 he served as Director of Asian Studies Programming under the first installment of Beloit's Freeman Foundation grant. In 1988-89 he was interim director of the Center for Language Studies, Beloit's summer intensive language program.
His primary teaching interests include Chinese politics, Communist and post-Communist systems, comparative democracies and electoral systems, and Chinese and comparative political thought. Besides his regular comparative politics offerings, he teaches courses on comparative revolutions, dissent, anarchism, and political fiction.
In March 2005 he led a faculty-staff study tour to Hong Kong and Guangdong in the People's Republic of China. In May 2006 he participated in a Beloit faculty-staff study tour to Hungary, and in the summer of 2007 he joined a faculty-staff travel group to China to help inaugurate Beloit's two new exchange programs in Kaifeng and Jinan. He also taught a concentrated mini-course on German politics at Beloit’s former exchange program in Hamburg, Germany in 1999. He has been selected to participate in several seminars for college professors over the years, including CIEE Faculty Development Seminars in Berlin (June 1990) and Hong Kong (1992), as well as the American Political Science Association (APSA) seminar on Japanese Politics (August 1990). His awards include the Beloit College Mouat Chair for Younger Faculty in International Studies from 1992-96, a faculty sabbatical grant to the University of Michigan in 1992-93 from the Program on Inter-institutional Collaboration in Area Studies (PICAS); a National Endowment for the Humanities Reading Grant for Private College Faculty (which included travel to Hungary) in May-June 1990; and a Pacific Cultural Foundation (PCF) Faculty Research Grant for the Fall of 2000.
His publications include the books Daoism and Anarchism: Critiques of State Autonomy in Anciewnt and Mdoern China (NY and London: Bloomsbury Press, 2012) and Autocracy and China's Rebel Founding Emperors: Comparing Chairman Mao and Ming Taizu (coauthored with Anita Andrew) (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Press, 2000). His published articles and book chapters include “Anarchism or Nihilism?: The Buddhist-Influenced Thought of Wu Nengzi,” in Alexandre Christoyannopoulos (ed.), Religious Anarchism: New Perspectives(Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2009); “Daoism as Utopian or Accommodationist: Radical Daoism Reexamined in Light of the Guodian Manuscripts,” in Laurence Davis and Ruth Kinna (eds.), Anarchism and Utopianism (University of Manchester Press, 2009); “Clashing Dilemmas: Hong Rengan, Issachar Roberts, and a Taiping ‘Murder’ Mystery,” Journal of Historical Biography 4 (Autumn 2008): 27-58, online at http://www.ufv.ca/jhb/Volume_4/Volume_4_Rapp.pdf; “Utopian, Anti-Utopian, and Dystopian Ideas in Philosophical Daoism,” Comparative Asian Development 2:2 (Fall 2003): 211-231; “Maoism and Anarchism: Mao Zedong's Response to the Anarchist Critique of Marxism,” Anarchist Studies 9 (2001): 3-28; “Daoism and Anarchism Reconsidered,”Anarchist Studies 6: 2 (October1998): 123-152; and “The Fate of Marxist Democrats in Leninist Party-States:China's Debate on the Asiatic Mode of Production,” Theory and Society16 (1987): 709-740. He is currently working on a biography project on Issachar J.Roberts, the 19th century southern Baptist China missionary who served as mentor and advisor to the leaders of China’s Taiping rebellion.
评分
评分
评分
评分
我通常对这类探讨宏大主题的作品抱持一种审慎的态度,因为它们很容易流于空泛的口号。但《Daoism and Anarchism》的强大之处在于其脚踏实地的论证。作者并非空中楼阁式的空想家,他始终将理论的探讨锚定在具体的历史案例和人类行为模式上。他花了大量篇幅分析在特定社会压力下,个体如何自发形成抵抗性网络,这些分析细致入微,充满了对人性的洞察力。这种对“微观抵抗”的关注,极大地增强了理论的可操作性和说服力。读完之后,我没有感到一种“无所不能”的顿悟,相反,我感受到了一种更为深刻的责任感——理解了复杂性,意味着需要更谨慎地参与到日常的实践中去。这本书与其说是一本指南,不如说是一面镜子,映照出我们自身在权力光谱中的位置和潜力。
评分我花了整整一个多月才读完这本令人深思的书,它完全颠覆了我过去对传统政治哲学的一些既有认知。作者在探讨社会秩序构建的章节里,引用了大量的跨文化案例,从古代东方哲学的典籍到近现代西方社会运动的文献,跨越了惊人的时间与地理界限。这种博采众长的论证方式,使得他的观点既有坚实的理论基础,又不失现实的批判锋芒。尤其在描述个体自由与集体责任之间的张力时,作者展现出一种令人赞叹的平衡感——他既没有滑向虚无主义的泥潭,也没有陷入僵化的教条主义。每一次翻页,都感觉像是跟随一位经验丰富的登山向导,攀登着知识的高峰,每到达一个小平台,都能俯瞰到更广阔的思维景观。这本书的文字密度极高,我发现自己不得不频繁地使用荧光笔标记那些“一语道破天机”的句子,这些标记最终汇集成了一条条属于我个人的阅读脉络。
评分这本厚重的著作,其封面设计就带着一种古朴而深邃的气息,初次捧读时,我的手指不自觉地摩挲着那些泛黄的纸张,仿佛能从中感受到历史的重量。作者的叙述视角极其独特,他似乎并不满足于简单的历史梳理或哲学概念的阐述,而是将整个人类文明的演进视为一个巨大的、不断自我修正的文本。阅读过程中,我常常需要停下来,合上书本,仰望天花板,试图消化那些穿插其中的、关于“无为”与“自治”的辩证论述。最让我印象深刻的是他对古代社会结构瓦解与重构的精妙分析,那不仅仅是对权力转移的记录,更像是一种对人类集体无意识的深刻挖掘。作者仿佛一位隐居多年的智者,用极其凝练的语言,揭示了那些隐藏在宏大叙事之下的细微纹理。他的行文节奏时而如山泉般清澈流畅,时而又如同古老的钟声,沉稳而悠远,让人在阅读的同时,也进行着一场深刻的自我审视。
评分这本书的学术深度毋庸置疑,但最让我感到惊喜的是其叙事上的活力。很多严肃的学术著作往往给人一种冷峻、疏离之感,但这位作者却成功地将严谨的思辨与一种近乎诗意的、对生命本真的关怀融合在一起。他探讨的终极议题,是如何在人类社会这个巨大的机器中,最大限度地保持个体生命的“自然流淌”——一种不被过度规划和干预的状态。这种对“自然状态”的执着探求,贯穿始终,使得整本书读起来充满了内在的激情。我尤其欣赏作者在不同章节之间设置的那些精巧的过渡,它们像是一座座桥梁,将看似不相干的历史事件和哲学思潮巧妙地连接起来,展现出一种惊人的整体性。对于那些厌倦了平面化思考的读者来说,这本书无疑提供了一个多维度的探索空间。
评分坦白说,这本书的开篇略显晦涩,初读时我差点因为那些深奥的术语和复杂的句式而感到气馁。然而,一旦度过了最初的适应期,后续的阅读体验简直如同进入了一片充满奇遇的迷宫。作者擅长运用类比和隐喻,将那些抽象的治理原则具体化为生动的画面。例如,他对“去中心化权力”的阐释,不是干巴巴的理论说教,而是描绘了一幅古代部落在没有明确领袖的情况下,如何通过共识达成行动的场景,那种画面感极强,仿佛我能听到当时的低语和决策声。这本书的价值不仅在于其理论体系的构建,更在于它激发读者去质疑日常生活中那些被视为“理所当然”的权威结构。读完后,我发现自己看待新闻报道、社会新闻,甚至家庭决策的方式都微妙地发生了变化,多了一层审视的维度,这是任何一本纯粹的政治学教科书都无法给予的馈赠。
评分时间关系泛读,有趣,但过分借题发挥。从道教思想追溯中国无政府主义和反国家主义的起源(貌似一些自由意志主义者也喜这手?),非暴力非革命乌托邦(及反乌托邦)思维。近现代不论精粗引入西方政治思想导致中国无政府主义思潮兴起,五四前后无政府与马克思主义竞合,在毛泽东身上体现得尤为明显,持续革命论与阶级专政论、暴力革命论与人民权力论的张力,最终在文革中内爆,鼓动造反派清除限制个人能动性的党国机构,但又最终扼杀各种比自己更激进更要求共党下台的青年组织,而文革中部分青年和组织(如湖南省无联,杨小凯)实际已几乎走上早期无政府主义者道路。1981年前后西单冥猪墙则是最后一波无政府思潮的短暂开放。此数点均可结合吴一庆书细读。最后在儒家加中国特色马克思复兴的当代中国,道教与西方无政府思想能否合流进击?
评分时间关系泛读,有趣,但过分借题发挥。从道教思想追溯中国无政府主义和反国家主义的起源(貌似一些自由意志主义者也喜这手?),非暴力非革命乌托邦(及反乌托邦)思维。近现代不论精粗引入西方政治思想导致中国无政府主义思潮兴起,五四前后无政府与马克思主义竞合,在毛泽东身上体现得尤为明显,持续革命论与阶级专政论、暴力革命论与人民权力论的张力,最终在文革中内爆,鼓动造反派清除限制个人能动性的党国机构,但又最终扼杀各种比自己更激进更要求共党下台的青年组织,而文革中部分青年和组织(如湖南省无联,杨小凯)实际已几乎走上早期无政府主义者道路。1981年前后西单冥猪墙则是最后一波无政府思潮的短暂开放。此数点均可结合吴一庆书细读。最后在儒家加中国特色马克思复兴的当代中国,道教与西方无政府思想能否合流进击?
评分时间关系泛读,有趣,但过分借题发挥。从道教思想追溯中国无政府主义和反国家主义的起源(貌似一些自由意志主义者也喜这手?),非暴力非革命乌托邦(及反乌托邦)思维。近现代不论精粗引入西方政治思想导致中国无政府主义思潮兴起,五四前后无政府与马克思主义竞合,在毛泽东身上体现得尤为明显,持续革命论与阶级专政论、暴力革命论与人民权力论的张力,最终在文革中内爆,鼓动造反派清除限制个人能动性的党国机构,但又最终扼杀各种比自己更激进更要求共党下台的青年组织,而文革中部分青年和组织(如湖南省无联,杨小凯)实际已几乎走上早期无政府主义者道路。1981年前后西单冥猪墙则是最后一波无政府思潮的短暂开放。此数点均可结合吴一庆书细读。最后在儒家加中国特色马克思复兴的当代中国,道教与西方无政府思想能否合流进击?
评分时间关系泛读,有趣,但过分借题发挥。从道教思想追溯中国无政府主义和反国家主义的起源(貌似一些自由意志主义者也喜这手?),非暴力非革命乌托邦(及反乌托邦)思维。近现代不论精粗引入西方政治思想导致中国无政府主义思潮兴起,五四前后无政府与马克思主义竞合,在毛泽东身上体现得尤为明显,持续革命论与阶级专政论、暴力革命论与人民权力论的张力,最终在文革中内爆,鼓动造反派清除限制个人能动性的党国机构,但又最终扼杀各种比自己更激进更要求共党下台的青年组织,而文革中部分青年和组织(如湖南省无联,杨小凯)实际已几乎走上早期无政府主义者道路。1981年前后西单冥猪墙则是最后一波无政府思潮的短暂开放。此数点均可结合吴一庆书细读。最后在儒家加中国特色马克思复兴的当代中国,道教与西方无政府思想能否合流进击?
评分时间关系泛读,有趣,但过分借题发挥。从道教思想追溯中国无政府主义和反国家主义的起源(貌似一些自由意志主义者也喜这手?),非暴力非革命乌托邦(及反乌托邦)思维。近现代不论精粗引入西方政治思想导致中国无政府主义思潮兴起,五四前后无政府与马克思主义竞合,在毛泽东身上体现得尤为明显,持续革命论与阶级专政论、暴力革命论与人民权力论的张力,最终在文革中内爆,鼓动造反派清除限制个人能动性的党国机构,但又最终扼杀各种比自己更激进更要求共党下台的青年组织,而文革中部分青年和组织(如湖南省无联,杨小凯)实际已几乎走上早期无政府主义者道路。1981年前后西单冥猪墙则是最后一波无政府思潮的短暂开放。此数点均可结合吴一庆书细读。最后在儒家加中国特色马克思复兴的当代中国,道教与西方无政府思想能否合流进击?
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有