本文選題：“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)” + 國(guó)家構(gòu)建�。� 參考：《南開(kāi)大學(xué)》2010年博士論文

【摘要】：“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”(internal improvement,美國(guó)早期時(shí)人稱呼交通建設(shè)的用語(yǔ))是美國(guó)早期政治和經(jīng)濟(jì)生活中一件引人注目的大事。在1801-1833年間,美國(guó)歷屆總統(tǒng)和國(guó)會(huì)圍繞全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系產(chǎn)生了持久而激烈的爭(zhēng)論。本文試圖從國(guó)家構(gòu)建的角度對(duì)有關(guān)爭(zhēng)論以及聯(lián)邦政府的“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”政策進(jìn)行考察和分析。 本文認(rèn)為,圍繞全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系的激烈爭(zhēng)論與美國(guó)早期的國(guó)家構(gòu)建問(wèn)題有著密切的關(guān)聯(lián),在很大程度上反映了當(dāng)時(shí)的政治精英關(guān)于如何構(gòu)建國(guó)家的重大分歧。爭(zhēng)論各方絕大多數(shù)贊成聯(lián)邦政府主持建設(shè)全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系,因?yàn)樗麄冋J(rèn)識(shí)到,這是鞏固美利堅(jiān)聯(lián)盟國(guó)家的重要手段。但是,在憲法沒(méi)有明確授予聯(lián)邦政府進(jìn)行“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”的權(quán)力的情況下,聯(lián)邦政府能否進(jìn)行“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”?這一問(wèn)題成為各方爭(zhēng)論的核心問(wèn)題。不可否認(rèn),在很多情況下,爭(zhēng)論各方會(huì)出于地方主義的考慮而支持或反對(duì)全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系,進(jìn)而對(duì)上述問(wèn)題做出肯定或否定的回答。但是,從各位美國(guó)總統(tǒng)和國(guó)會(huì)議員的言論中,可以看出,他們對(duì)憲法授予聯(lián)邦政府的權(quán)力范圍、對(duì)憲法的解釋和聯(lián)邦制的理解、以及聯(lián)邦政府的權(quán)力能否擴(kuò)大、以什么方式擴(kuò)大等問(wèn)題的關(guān)注是壓倒性的、真誠(chéng)的,這些問(wèn)題是爭(zhēng)論各方產(chǎn)生分歧的焦點(diǎn)。對(duì)這些問(wèn)題的關(guān)注表明爭(zhēng)論各方具有不同的國(guó)家理念和主張,對(duì)于如何構(gòu)建美利堅(jiān)國(guó)家意見(jiàn)紛呈。可以說(shuō),關(guān)于國(guó)家構(gòu)建的重大分歧是引起各方爭(zhēng)論不休、并對(duì)聯(lián)邦政府的“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”政策產(chǎn)生重要影響的關(guān)鍵因素。 本文分別對(duì)1812年戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)前聯(lián)邦政府“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”政策的延滯、戰(zhàn)后麥迪遜總統(tǒng)對(duì)《紅利法案》的否決、門羅總統(tǒng)執(zhí)政期間聯(lián)邦政府關(guān)于“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”的大辯論、以及小亞當(dāng)斯和杰克遜總統(tǒng)執(zhí)政時(shí)期聯(lián)邦政府“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”政策的起伏等進(jìn)行考察和分析,進(jìn)而揭示美國(guó)早期政治精英關(guān)于如何構(gòu)建國(guó)家的重大分歧。綜觀1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系的激烈爭(zhēng)論,可以看出,在這一時(shí)期,面對(duì)聯(lián)邦政府能否在“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”事宜上擴(kuò)大其權(quán)力這一問(wèn)題,總統(tǒng)和國(guó)會(huì)議員意見(jiàn)紛呈。歸納起來(lái),爭(zhēng)論各方大致有三種構(gòu)建國(guó)家的思路：一、主張“寬泛解釋”,認(rèn)為聯(lián)邦政府根據(jù)憲法享有廣泛的管理關(guān)乎“共同防務(wù)和公共福利”事務(wù)的權(quán)力,主張建立一個(gè)權(quán)力相對(duì)集中的聯(lián)邦制國(guó)家；二、主張通過(guò)憲法修正案的方式授予聯(lián)邦政府必要的權(quán)力,有限度地?cái)U(kuò)大聯(lián)邦制國(guó)家的權(quán)力,同時(shí),反對(duì)“寬泛解釋”,以防止聯(lián)邦政府藉此逐漸集中權(quán)力并發(fā)展成為一個(gè)集權(quán)國(guó)家；三、主張“嚴(yán)格解釋”,認(rèn)為聯(lián)邦政府只享有憲法中明確列舉的少數(shù)有限的權(quán)力,反對(duì)聯(lián)邦政府以任何方式擴(kuò)大權(quán)力,主張建立權(quán)力受到嚴(yán)格限制的聯(lián)邦/邦聯(lián)國(guó)家。在1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”的激烈爭(zhēng)論中,三種構(gòu)建國(guó)家的思路相互碰撞、競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和博弈,并對(duì)聯(lián)邦政府的“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”政策產(chǎn)生重要影響。 從1801-1833年間聯(lián)邦政府圍繞全國(guó)“內(nèi)部改進(jìn)”體系的激烈爭(zhēng)論以及相關(guān)政策中,可以管窺美國(guó)早期國(guó)家構(gòu)建的復(fù)雜而曲折的進(jìn)程。
[Abstract]:"Internal improvement" (internal improvement) is an important event in the early political and economic life of the United States. During the 1801-1833 years, the president and Congress of the United States had a long and intense debate around the national "internal improvement" system. This article tried to build from the state. This paper examines and analyzes the debates and the federal government's internal improvement policy.
This paper holds that the fierce debate around the national "internal improvement" system is closely related to the problem of the early state construction in the United States. To a great extent, it reflects the major differences of the political elite at that time on how to build the country. The overwhelming majority of the arguments in the dispute agree with the federal government to host the national "internal improvement" system. For them, it is an important means to consolidate the United States of the United States. But, when the Constitution does not explicitly grant the power of "internal improvement" to the federal government, can the federal government make an "internal improvement"? This issue has become the core of the debate. In many cases, there is no denying that the parties will be out of debate. To support or oppose the national "internal improvement" system in the context of localism, and to make positive or negative answers to the above questions. However, from the comments of the president and the congressman of the United States, they can see that they have the power of the constitution to the federal government, the interpretation of the Constitution and the understanding of the federalism, and the federal administration. The concerns of the enlargement and the expansion of the government are overwhelming and sincere. These issues are the focus of the disagreement between the parties. The big difference is a key factor that has caused controversy and has an important impact on the federal government's "internal improvement" policy.
This paper delaying the "internal improvement" policy of the federal government before the 1812 war, President Madison's rejection of the bonus bill after the war, the federal government's debate on "internal improvement" during President Monroe's administration, and the undulation of the "internal improvement" policy of the United States government during the period of President Adams and Jackson's administration. In this period, the president can see whether the federal government can expand its power in the "internal improvement" on the issue of whether the federal government can expand its power on "internal improvement" in the 1801-1833 years. And the opinions of the members of the national conference are in a large number. It is concluded that there are roughly three kinds of ideas to build the country. First, it advocates "broad interpretation," that the federal government enjoys the power to manage the affairs of "common defense and public welfare" in accordance with the constitution, and advocates the establishment of a relatively centralized federal state; and two. The amendment of the Constitution grants the federal government the power necessary to extend the power of the federal state to a limited extent, while opposing the "broad interpretation" to prevent the federal government from gradually focusing on power and developing into a centralized state; three, advocating a "strict explanation" that the federal government has only a clear list of the constitution. A few limited powers, opposing the federal government in any way to expand power, advocating the establishment of a federal / Confederation of Confederacy with strict power. In the 1801-1833 years of the federal government's fierce debate around "internal improvement", the three ideas of building countries collided, competition and game, and the "internal improvement" of the federal government. The policy has an important impact.
From the intense debate over the federal government 's "internal improvement" system over the past 1801-1833 years and related policies, we can see the complex and tortuous process of the early state of the United States.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：南開(kāi)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：K712

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 林廣;交通運(yùn)輸與紐約城市發(fā)展(1820～1870)[J];城市問(wèn)題;1997年04期

2 王續(xù)添;;地方主義、聯(lián)邦主義與新國(guó)家構(gòu)建中的制度選擇——考察1910年代中國(guó)政治的一個(gè)視角[J];教學(xué)與研究;2007年04期

3 張玲蓉;試論19世紀(jì)美國(guó)交通革命[J];江西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2003年05期

4 劉祚昌;杰斐遜與美國(guó)現(xiàn)代化[J];歷史研究;1994年02期

5 李劍鳴;;“人民”的定義與美國(guó)早期的國(guó)家構(gòu)建[J];歷史研究;2009年01期

6 任東來(lái);美國(guó)早期憲政史上的聯(lián)邦法令廢止權(quán)[J];美國(guó)研究;2001年02期

7 王希;美國(guó)歷史上的“國(guó)家利益”問(wèn)題[J];美國(guó)研究;2003年02期

8 姜德琪;略論美國(guó)西部開(kāi)發(fā)中交通運(yùn)輸條件之改善[J];青海師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2001年01期

9 李劍鳴;;歷史語(yǔ)境、史學(xué)語(yǔ)境與史料的解讀——以弗吉尼亞州批準(zhǔn)美國(guó)憲法大會(huì)中一條材料的解讀為例[J];史學(xué)集刊;2007年05期

10 李劍鳴;;“共和”與“民主”的趨同——美國(guó)革命時(shí)期對(duì)“共和政體”的重新界定[J];史學(xué)集刊;2009年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：1797427