SAE Theory of Inter-State Cooperation · Paper 4: Mutual Checks / SAE 国家间协作论 第四篇: 互制

With no superior overhead, the first thing peers can do is withdraw their own cooperation. This paper asks four things: on what grounds withdrawing cooperation is a check and not force; when multilateral sanctions run as a common procedure, on whom each part of the account falls; where checks part from erosion, and cooperation from collusion; and, toward a member that crosses the line, how far the system can go and where it stops. The paper starts from the economic pressure the Plateau Federation put on the Stonegorge Commonwealth (Stonegorge), and from Common Measure No. 1 of the Three-Borders Cooperation System; it also draws on a commercial agreement between the NUT and the Plateau Federation, on Common Measure No. 2 against the Republic of the Sandbars (the Sandbars), on two proposals Stonegorge made under pressure, and on a member's entry by military force into the Outer Sandbars. What withdrawing cooperation withdraws is the cooperation of the party applying pressure itself, and the other party's room to bear the cost and not comply remains, so it is a check; withholding what was to be given is a check, while taking away what is the other party's own is force; the endpoint of a freeze aimed at an act is that the act has stopped and the account has landed, and whether the account has landed is recognized under a covenant or an award, not decided alone by the freezing party. Checks and reputation count by interests that all parties recognize, and the direction is still that persons are ends. Multilateral sanctions are the act of each participating state plus a common procedure; each state bears its own share, and the common procedure itself bears a share too. The line between checks and erosion, and between cooperation and collusion, is looked for in three places: the interrupt-right; what a measure is aimed at; and whether the part that falls on people has a road by which to ask. At the system level, three shapes of mirror assimilation must be checked. Toward a member that crosses the line, whether by colonizing another state or by crossing the line against its own people, the system can question, record, check and suspend, and can also expel; all these are withdrawing cooperation, and none substitutes for that state's judgment. When a member slides back until the slide has taken hold, whether it has taken hold each member recognizes for itself; the system goes on questioning and recording as before, may suspend, and does not judge for that state who should hold office; that state's seat is taken by the positions that actually take the acts, and the account is booked to them. Along the way the paper takes up Kant, Rawls and Grotius. The paper has six propositions (XZ22 to XZ27), each stated at the end of its section and listed together at the end. 头上没有上级,平级者最先能做的,是收回自己的配合。这一篇问四件事:收回配合凭什么是制约,不是强力;多边制裁作为一项共同程序,账各落在谁那里;牵制与侵蚀、协作与合谋分在哪里;对越线的成员,体系能做到哪里,又在哪里停下。全篇从高原联邦(the Plateau Federation)对石峡邦(the Stonegorge Commonwealth)的经济施压,与三界协作体系(the Three-Borders Cooperation System)的第 1 号共同措施写起;另用 NUT 与高原联邦之间的一份通商协定,对沙洲共和国(the Republic of the Sandbars)的第 2 号共同措施,石峡邦受压之下的两项提议,以及一个成员以军力进入外沙群岛的事。收回配合收回的是施压一方自己的配合,对方承担代价而不从的余地仍在,所以是制约;扣下本要给的是牵制,拿走对方自己的是强力;针对一项施为的冻结,终点是那一施为停止、账落了地,账落没落地照约或裁决认,不由冻结的一方独定。牵制与声誉用各方都认得的利害作数,方向仍是人是目的。多边制裁是各参与国的施为加一项共同程序,各国各担一份,共同程序自己也担一份。牵制与侵蚀、协作与合谋的界线看三处:中断权,针对的是什么,落在人身上的那一部分有没有路可问。体系一级要核镜像同化的三种样子。对越线的成员,殖民别国的,或对本国的人越线的,体系能问、记、制、暂停,也能开除;这些都是收回配合,不替代那一国的判断。一个成员往回滑到走成,走成与否由各成员自己认,体系照旧问、记,可以暂停,不替那一国判谁在位;它的席位由实际作出施为的位置坐,账照它记。随文与康德、罗尔斯、格劳秀斯对接。全篇六条(XZ22 至 XZ27),各节末写出,篇末合列。 Related works Relation Identifier Scheme Resource type Title References 10.5281/zenodo.19328662 DOI Publication / Preprint How Is Institution Possible: From Inter-Ontological Remainder to Co-Constructive Framework (SAE Foundational Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.23270384 DOI Publication / Preprint Not Crossing the Line (SAE Institution Theory, Paper 2) References 10.5281/zenodo.23270766 DOI Publication / Preprint Guarding the Line (SAE Institution Theory, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.23270922 DOI Publication / Preprint Conditions (SAE Institution Theory, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.23411670 DOI Publication / Preprint What a Government Is Not (SAE Theory of Government, Prequel) References 10.5281/zenodo.23413192 DOI Publication / Preprint Levels (SAE Theory of Government, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.23413511 DOI Publication / Preprint Questioning and Bearing (SAE Theory of Government, Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584325 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Exit (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584329 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Force (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584346 DOI Publication / Preprint One Another, with No Superior (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 5) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584356 DOI Publication / Preprint Questioning the Last Layer (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 7) References 10.5281/zenodo.23779070 DOI Publication / Preprint The Reverse Phase Transition (SAE Theory of the State, Companion Study) References 10.5281/zenodo.19656617 DOI Publication / Preprint SAE War Treatise: How Cultivation Is Not Swallowed by War Itself References 10.5281/zenodo.19548237 DOI Publication / Preprint One's Law Meets One's Law: The Structural Origin of Law from 14DD Showdown (SAE Law Series, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.20262737 DOI Publication / Preprint The Institutional Architecture of Mixed Reality: The Phase-Transition Evolution of Cultivation and Colonization (SAE Moral Law, Paper 9) References 10.5281/zenodo.20480134 DOI Publication / Preprint On the Recognition of Power · Shi (SAE Power Theory, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.20582210 DOI Publication / Preprint On the Development of Power · Shi (SAE Power Theory, Paper 5) References 10.5281/zenodo.20647463 DOI Publication / Preprint On the Severing of Power · Shi (SAE Power Theory, Paper 6)