SAE Theory of Inter-State Cooperation · Paper 2: Mutual Questioning / SAE 国家间协作论 第二篇: 互问

Among states that have no superior overhead, where do questions come from, and who cannot close them; and when the system itself acts, who can question it? This paper takes the Three-Borders Cooperation System as its example and answers both halves. The system's position is that of an external questioner: its determinations are public questions and records; it neither authorizes nor vetoes, and even a member that sends forces cannot close its questions. Making a covenant needs the consent of all parties; questioning existing matters does not; the party questioned recuses itself on the matter directed at it, and the questioning party does not decide alone that the case is closed. Closing one channel cannot cancel the questioning. The system does not enforce, and whether a question lands rests with each member; a member's obligation to answer comes from the covenants it has acknowledged, and "internal affairs" does not block questions. Treaty bodies admitting individual petitions fill the place where individuals cannot reach the procedures between states, and they are checked against the three conditions of a channel. The unified sentence of the Theory of the State is extended here, for the first time, to the system level, and its full text is given in §6: those whom the system's acts reach and who cannot avoid them are, as regards those acts, in the system's interior, whether or not they are within a member's territory; giving them a road by which the system itself can be reached is the system's own fifth ought; the accounts of the system and of the members are each checked by their own source. The system's arrangements can be chiseled; the three conditions are not withdrawn, and the arrangements are checked against the four points of War Treatise §16; decisions can be final, positions cannot. Four matters run through the paper: the system puts questions to the DRP about a decree that deprived people of citizenship; the families of the dead of Junction Town and the farming households of Wheat Plain petition the Petitions Committee against the UCSE; shopkeepers and villagers on the two banks of the Grey River petition over a common measure; people in the Eastfield camp petition against a sharing decision of the Conference of Members itself. The paper interfaces in place twice with Vattel's The Law of Nations: on the liberty and independence of nations, and on no state's having a right to interfere in the government of another; for Kant's publicity, it points to the interface the Theory of the State has already made. The paper has seven propositions (XZ9 to XZ15), each stated at the end of its section and listed together at the end. 一群头上没有上级的国家之间,问从哪里来,谁关不上它;体系自己作出施为时,又有谁能问它。这一篇以三界协作体系(the Three-Borders Cooperation System)为例子,答这两半。体系的位置是外部追问者:它的认定是公开的问与记录,不授权,不否决,出兵的成员也关不上它的问。立约要各方同意,问已有的事不要;被问的一方在指向自己的那一件上回避,问的一方也不独定结案。关上一条通道,取消不了问。体系不强制执行,问落不落地在各成员;成员作答的义务从它已认的约来,"内政"不挡问。许个人申诉的条约机构,补的是个人够不着国与国之间程序的那一处,照通道的三项条件核。国家论的统一句在这里第一次推到体系一级,全文见第六节:体系施为所及、避不开的人,就这些施为而言在体系的内部,不论在不在成员境内;给他们一条到得了体系本身的路,是体系自己的第五条;体系与成员的账各按来源核。体系的安排可被修凿,三项条件不撤,照战争论 §16 的四条核;决定可以终局,位置不能终局。全篇以四件事贯穿:体系就 DRP 一道剥夺籍的法令向它发问;枢镇死者的家属与麦原的农户向申诉委员会申诉 UCSE;灰河两岸的商家与村民就一项共同措施申诉;东坪营地的人就一项分担决定申诉成员会议本身。随文与瓦特尔《万国法》对接两处,各民族的自由与独立,别国无权干预一国的统治;康德的公开性指向国家论已有的对接。全篇七条(XZ9 至 XZ15),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.23269635 DOI Publication / Preprint To Whom the Ought Is Addressed (SAE Institution Theory, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.23271324 DOI Publication / Preprint Open to Questioning (SAE Institution Theory, Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.23413192 DOI Publication / Preprint Levels (SAE Theory of Government, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.23413413 DOI Publication / Preprint Emergency (SAE Theory of Government, Paper 5) References 10.5281/zenodo.23413511 DOI Publication / Preprint Questioning and Bearing (SAE Theory of Government, Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584292 DOI Publication / Preprint What a State Is Not (SAE Theory of the State, Prequel) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584315 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Rule (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 1) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584318 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Instance (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 2) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584325 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Exit (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 3) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584346 DOI Publication / Preprint One Another, with No Superior (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 5) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584352 DOI Publication / Preprint The Last Resort (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 6) References 10.5281/zenodo.23584356 DOI Publication / Preprint Questioning the Last Layer (SAE Theory of the State, Paper 7) References 10.5281/zenodo.22313628 DOI Publication / Preprint SAE Conflict Treatise: How Subjecthood Is Not Swallowed by Conflict Itself References 10.5281/zenodo.19656617 DOI Publication / Preprint SAE War Treatise: How Cultivation Is Not Swallowed by War Itself References 10.5281/zenodo.19549018 DOI Publication / Preprint Interstellar Law and Grand Closure — The Recession of Coercive Law (SAE Law Series, Paper 4) References 10.5281/zenodo.20218248 DOI Publication / Preprint Collective 15DD and the Four-Stage Evolution of Community Form (SAE Moral Law, Paper 8) References 10.5281/zenodo.20480134 DOI Publication / Preprint On the Recognition of Power · Shi (SAE Power Theory, Paper 3)