30边沁

30. Bentham杰里米·边沁（Jeremy Bentham, 1748-1832），英国哲学家、法学家、政治学家和经济学家，功利主义的最大代表，自由主义政治思想的奠基人。

边沁出身于律师世家，受教于牛津大学，著述广泛，涉猎政治学、经济学和哲学，但主要倾心于政治立法及其理论探索，1789年发表的《道德和立法原理导论》（An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation）一书，历经15年精心构思，系统阐述了“最大多数人的最大幸福”等功利主义哲学的基本原则，从而奠定了他作为功利主义哲学旗手的地位。

在国际政治和国际关系方面，受法国启蒙思想家卢梭的影响，边沁在1786-1789年间撰写了4篇文章，组成《国际法原理》（Principles of International Law）一书。

在4篇文章中，具有重大影响的是《国际法的目标》（Objects of International Law）和《普遍的永久和平计划》（A Plan for an Universal and Perpetual Peace），前者第一次提出了“国际法”（The International Law）的概念，认为国际法的目标在于确保主权国家之间互不侵害、相互促进最大利益、限制并禁止战争；后者提出了一个旨在确保国家间和平的宏伟计划，强调要最大程度地裁减军备、设立国际法庭、公开地通过外交谈判缔结一项普遍的和永久的条约等。

这些论述使得边沁在国际关系方面所作的理论贡献，超过了19世纪英国的其他自由主义思想家，尽管他这方面的著述异常简短——如《普遍的永久和平计划》不过33页，这在11卷之巨的《边沁文集》中是多么微不足道啊！也正是因为如此，边沁的影响是巨大而深远的。

沿着他的足迹，走出了理查德·科布登、诺曼·安吉尔和伍德罗·威尔逊等自由国际主义思想家。

本篇选自《普遍的永久和平计划》，叙述了边沁的和平计划中的第13点方案。

A Plan for a Universal and Perpetual PeaceAn International Code1ought to regulate the conduct of nations in their mutual intercourse. Its objects for any given nation would be: (1) general utility, so far as it consists in doing no injury, and (2) in doing the greatest possible good to other nations, to which two objects, the duties which the given nation ought to recognise may be referred; and (3) general utility, in so far as it consists in not receiving injury, or (4) in receiving the greatest possible benefit from other nations, to which the rights it ought to claim may be referred. But if these rights be violated there is, at present, no mode of seeking compensation but that of War, which is not only an evil, it is the complication of all other evils.The fifth object of an International Code would be to make such arrangement that the least possible evil may be produced by War consistently with the acquisition of the good which is sought for.The laws of Peace would be the substantive laws of the International Code; the laws of War would be the adjective laws of the same Code.A plan for a universal and perpetual Peace grounded upon two fundamental propositions: (1) The reduction and fixation of the forces of the several nations that compose the European system. (2) The emancipation of the colonial dependencies of eachstate.There are fourteen Pacific Propositions, of which the thirteenth includes this scheme: That the maintenance of such a permanent pacification might be considerably facilitated by the establishment of a Common Court of Judicature2for the decision of differences between the several nations, although such Court were not to be armed with any coercive powers.It is an observation of somebody’s, that no nation ought to yield any evident point of justice to another. This must mean, evident in the eyes of the nation that is to judge, evident in the eyes of the nation called upon to yield. What does this amount to? That no nation is to give up anything of what it looks upon as its rights: no nation is to make any concessions. Whatever there is any difference of opinion between the negotiators of the two nations, war is to be the consequence.While there is no common tribunal, something might be said for this. Concession to notorious injustice invites fresh injustice.But, establish a common tribunal, the necessity for war no longer follow from difference of opinion. Just or unjust, the decision of the Arbiters will save the credit, the honour of the contending party.Can the arrangement proposed be justly styled visionary, when it has been proved of it that: (1) It is the interest of the parties concerned. (2) They are already sensible of the interest. (3) The situation it would place them in is no new one, nor any other than the original situation they set out from.Difficult and complicated Conventions have been (already) effectuated: e.g., (1) the Armed Neutrality;3 (2) the American Confederation;4 (3) the German Diet;5 (4) the Swiss League.6Why should not the European fraternity subsist as well as the German Diet or the Swiss League? These latter have no ambitious views. Be it so; but is not this already become the case with the former?How then shall we concentrate the approbation of the people, and obviate their prejudices?One main object of the plan is to effectuate a reduction, and that a mighty one, in the contributions of the people. The amount of the reduction for each nation should be stipulated in the treaty; and even previous to the signature of it, laws for the purpose might be prepared in each nation, and presented to every other, ready to be enacted as soon as the treaty should be ratified in each State.By these means the mass of people—the part most exposed to be led away by prejudice—would not be sooner apprised of the measure than they would feel the relief it brought them. They would see it was for their advantage it was calculated, and that it could not be calculated for any other purpose.Such a Congress of Diet might be constituted by each Power sending two deputies to the place of meeting; one of these to be the principal, the other to act as an occasional substitute.The proceedings of such Congress or Diet should be all public.Its power would consist: (1) In reporting its opinion. (2) In causing that opinion to be circulated in the dominion of each State. Manifestos are in the common use. A manifesto is designed to be read either by the subjects of the State complained of, or by other states, or by both. It is an appeal to them. It calls for their opinion. The difference is, that in that case (of a manifesto) nothing of proof is given; no opinion regularly made known. (3) After a certain time, in putting the refractory State under the ban of Europe.There might, perhaps, be no harm in regulating as a last resource, the contingent to be furnished by the several States for enforcing the decrees of the Court. But the necessity for the employment of this resource would, in all human probability, be superseded for ever by having recourse to the much more simple and less burdensome expedient of introducing into the instrument by which each Court was instituted a clause, guaranteeing the liberty of the Press in each State, in such sort, that the Diet might find no obstacle to its giving, in every State, to its decrees, and to every paper whatever, which it might think proper to sanction with its signature, the most extensive and unlimited circulation.Quoted from M. C. Jacob, ed., Peace Project of the Eighteenth Century (New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1974)1 International Code, 国际法典，通International Law.2 Common Court of Judicature, 国际法院。