The pragmatist view of human rights represents a the-oretical condensation of the Chinese practice in human rights devel-opment.In view of the problem of circular idling between rights and claims caused by the traditi...The pragmatist view of human rights represents a the-oretical condensation of the Chinese practice in human rights devel-opment.In view of the problem of circular idling between rights and claims caused by the traditional view of human rights of focusing on contents and not valuing implementation,social segmentation caused by empty talks on interests and claims while ignoring social develop-ment,and the phenomenon of the issue of human rights completely becoming empty and useless political rhetoric,the pragmatic view of human rights,based on the fact that there is a gap between the claims and realization of human rights,emphasizes that instead of blindly ex-panding the types of rights in term of text,it is better to base on prac-tice and promote the maximum realization of existing rights through development.The pragmatist view of human rights attaches impor-tance to relevant economic,social and cultural basis to promote the realization of human rights,rather than only focusing on the claims themselves;it pays greater attention to enhancing the realization of rights,rather than the distribution of rights under the total limit;it ad-vocates more for cooperativism in the realization of rights,rather than confrontation.The pragmatic concept of human rights takes Marxism as its theoretical basis and the gene of practice and the dimension of development as its theoretical characteristics,and promotes the devel-opment of human rights through the realization of rights.展开更多
Modem enterprise theory defines onterprise＇s ownership through the concepts of residual rights of control and claim to residue. It also believes that when they are in homologous, the ownership of enterprise can be ar...Modem enterprise theory defines onterprise＇s ownership through the concepts of residual rights of control and claim to residue. It also believes that when they are in homologous, the ownership of enterprise can be arranged in the best place. When the enterprise is under normal run, shareholders are its owner, but when it goes into bankruptcy, claimers should take place of shareholders becoming the owner of the enterprise. But in China, the ownership of state-owned enterprise （SEE） goes into double misplaces. Management controls the enterprise under the normal run, which leads salaries to seize the earnings and share equities. The state who acts as the shareholder not only lessens investments but also fixes its earnings as much as possible. It gives up the claim to residue, which leads claimers to bear the enterprise＇s residual risks （when the residual income is negative）. When the enterprise goes into bankruptcy, as the shareholder, the state determines whether it can exist or not in order to maximize its own utility. Rights of claimer are being seriously damaged as they can be manipulated freely in the enterprise. Banks＇ bad debts are also in an extremely high level. In this article, the author will establish a model and use the relative data to do technical analysis.展开更多
As capitalist society develops from a producer society to a consumer society, from the dominance of material production to the rise of non-material production, and from the dominance of labor-intensive industries to t...As capitalist society develops from a producer society to a consumer society, from the dominance of material production to the rise of non-material production, and from the dominance of labor-intensive industries to the rise of knowledge-intensive industries(accompanied by the shift of labor-intensive industries to the Third World countries), the generation and composition of the “Surplus Population” in Western developed countries have demonstrated new historical characteristics. The capitalists not only refuse to solve the problems they have created but even “besiege” these unfortunate victims by moral and legal means. They marginalize and stigmatize the “Surplus Population” with work ethics, to severely damage the moral foundation for them to enjoy human rights. They reach an agreement for the welfare system, criminal practice, and work ethic to reinforce social indifference and hostility towards the “Surplus Population”, pushing them into a more difficult human rights situation, even excluding them from the scope of legal recognition and protection of human rights. However, the “Surplus Population”, which is considered “useless, redundant and dangerous”, is included in the process of capitalist production in a way that is excluded by the above-mentioned morality and law, becoming the “utility of futility.” As a result, the subjectivity of the “Surplus Population” as human beings is deprived.展开更多
基金the National Social Science Fund project“Basic Theoretical Research on Law Science”(22CFX002).
文摘The pragmatist view of human rights represents a the-oretical condensation of the Chinese practice in human rights devel-opment.In view of the problem of circular idling between rights and claims caused by the traditional view of human rights of focusing on contents and not valuing implementation,social segmentation caused by empty talks on interests and claims while ignoring social develop-ment,and the phenomenon of the issue of human rights completely becoming empty and useless political rhetoric,the pragmatic view of human rights,based on the fact that there is a gap between the claims and realization of human rights,emphasizes that instead of blindly ex-panding the types of rights in term of text,it is better to base on prac-tice and promote the maximum realization of existing rights through development.The pragmatist view of human rights attaches impor-tance to relevant economic,social and cultural basis to promote the realization of human rights,rather than only focusing on the claims themselves;it pays greater attention to enhancing the realization of rights,rather than the distribution of rights under the total limit;it ad-vocates more for cooperativism in the realization of rights,rather than confrontation.The pragmatic concept of human rights takes Marxism as its theoretical basis and the gene of practice and the dimension of development as its theoretical characteristics,and promotes the devel-opment of human rights through the realization of rights.
文摘Modem enterprise theory defines onterprise＇s ownership through the concepts of residual rights of control and claim to residue. It also believes that when they are in homologous, the ownership of enterprise can be arranged in the best place. When the enterprise is under normal run, shareholders are its owner, but when it goes into bankruptcy, claimers should take place of shareholders becoming the owner of the enterprise. But in China, the ownership of state-owned enterprise （SEE） goes into double misplaces. Management controls the enterprise under the normal run, which leads salaries to seize the earnings and share equities. The state who acts as the shareholder not only lessens investments but also fixes its earnings as much as possible. It gives up the claim to residue, which leads claimers to bear the enterprise＇s residual risks （when the residual income is negative）. When the enterprise goes into bankruptcy, as the shareholder, the state determines whether it can exist or not in order to maximize its own utility. Rights of claimer are being seriously damaged as they can be manipulated freely in the enterprise. Banks＇ bad debts are also in an extremely high level. In this article, the author will establish a model and use the relative data to do technical analysis.
文摘As capitalist society develops from a producer society to a consumer society, from the dominance of material production to the rise of non-material production, and from the dominance of labor-intensive industries to the rise of knowledge-intensive industries(accompanied by the shift of labor-intensive industries to the Third World countries), the generation and composition of the “Surplus Population” in Western developed countries have demonstrated new historical characteristics. The capitalists not only refuse to solve the problems they have created but even “besiege” these unfortunate victims by moral and legal means. They marginalize and stigmatize the “Surplus Population” with work ethics, to severely damage the moral foundation for them to enjoy human rights. They reach an agreement for the welfare system, criminal practice, and work ethic to reinforce social indifference and hostility towards the “Surplus Population”, pushing them into a more difficult human rights situation, even excluding them from the scope of legal recognition and protection of human rights. However, the “Surplus Population”, which is considered “useless, redundant and dangerous”, is included in the process of capitalist production in a way that is excluded by the above-mentioned morality and law, becoming the “utility of futility.” As a result, the subjectivity of the “Surplus Population” as human beings is deprived.
