...
首页> 外文期刊>Policy sciences >'Technocracy,' democracy ... and corruption and trust
【24h】

'Technocracy,' democracy ... and corruption and trust

机译:“技术专制”,民主……以及腐败和信任

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AbstractMutual distrust between experts and ordinary citizens—manifest in the wake of the Brexit referendum, the rise of the Tea Party and the election of Donald Trump—is not new. But it takes on particular urgency in an age when ill-informed “populist” policies on issues such as climate change may cause irreparable damage. This article examines the viability of Gilley’s (Policy Sci 50:9–22, 2017) attempt to resolve the conflict between “technocracy” and democracy. Gilley’s solution relies on the objective qualities of a policy to assign it to its appropriate “sphere”: Highly technical problems are best addressed by experts, while those marked by technical uncertainty can be handled by democracy. This article argues that such a solution will not be stable under current political conditions. We must recognize that various forms of corruption of expertise have contributed to today’s populist reaction against experts. The challenge of reforming expertise and mitigating mistrust of experts is a “divergent” problem, which requires ongoing balancing, and does not admit of a once-and-for-all solution.
机译: 摘要 专家与普通公民之间的相互不信任-在英国退欧公投后表现出来,茶党的崛起和唐纳德·特朗普的当选,并不是什么新鲜事。但是,在这个时代,当对气候变化等问题不了解情况的“民粹主义”政策可能造成无法弥补的损害时,它尤为紧迫。本文探讨了吉利(Policy Sci 50:9–22,2017)试图解决“技术官僚主义”与民主之间冲突的可行性。吉利(Gilley)的解决方案依赖于将政策分配给适当的“领域”的客观政策:高度的技术问题最好由专家来解决,而那些具有技术不确定性的问题则可以由民主来解决。本文认为,在当前的政治条件下,这种解决方案将是不稳定的。我们必须认识到,各种形式的专业知识腐败已导致当今民粹主义对专家的反应。改革专业知识和减轻对专家的不信任的挑战是一个“分歧”的问题,它需要持续的平衡,并且不能接受一劳永逸的解决方案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号