首页> 外文OA文献 >Assessing the New Washington Pluralism from the Perspective of the Malaysian Model
【2h】

Assessing the New Washington Pluralism from the Perspective of the Malaysian Model

机译:从马来西亚模式看新华盛顿的多元主义评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This paper discusses the post-Washington Consensus development paradigm, questioning whether the changes it embodies are sufficient to open up the development debate. We show that the new paradigm, which might be called ‘Washington Pluralism’, harbours three pluralist principles. It maintains that development is 1) contingent on culture; 2) contingent on history; and 3) requiring a multidisciplinary perspective. We assess these principles on the basis of an analogy with the Malaysian Model, which embodied the same three principles. We show that, in Malaysia, the first two evolved into cultural determinism and historicism, respectively, while the third created a discourse in which institutions, politics and culture were reduced to instruments for development. Consequentially the proliferation of the idea of a Malaysian Model has been associated with increasing authoritarianism in Malaysia rather than with increased openness. On the basis of this analogy we conclude that the three pluralist principles are not sufficient to create an open development debate.
机译:本文讨论了《华盛顿共识》之后的发展范式,质疑它所体现的变化是否足以引发发展辩论。我们表明,可能被称为“华盛顿多元论”的新范式包含了三个多元化原则。它坚持认为发展是:1)视文化而定; 2)取决于历史; 3)需要多学科的观点。我们在与马来西亚模式相似的基础上评估这些原则,其中体现了相同的三个原则。我们表明,在马来西亚,前两个分别演变为文化决定论和历史主义,而第三个创造了一种将制度,政治和文化简化为发展手段的论述。因此,马来西亚模式思想的泛滥与马来西亚专制主义的增加而不是开放程度的提高有关。根据这种类比,我们得出结论,三项多元化原则不足以引起公开的发展辩论。

著录项

  • 作者

    Maseland, R.; Peil, J.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2008
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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