The aim of this research is to reconsider in the historical context of the globalization of new capitalism Tocqueville's contribution and relevance to the political theory of the 20th century, in particular that of liberal democracy. The globalization of the economy has brought about new kind of poverty and disparity all over the world and the hegemony of the American empire has raised skepticism about American democracy. On the other hand, political democratization is inevitably going on in many non-Western countries. Against this changing background of the contemporary world, Tocqueville's theory of democracy requires new reading and has in fact been reinterpreted in various ways. In the process of this two year research, the following three points have been identified as remarkable in this new approach to Tocqueville's political theory.
(1) The end of the Cold War and the collapse of Soviet regime did make clear the victory of liberal democracy over socialism but the subsequent globalization of the economy under the hegemony of the United States has not prevailed the American model of democracy in the world, rather provoking resistance to it everywhere. Recent noteworthy phenomena in America, the growing political influence of religious fundamentalism, the increase of economic inequality and disparity, the poverty of social capital, and the decline of public spirit require the reconsideration of Tocqueville's view of America.
(2) Tocqueville's warning against the danger of military-bureaucratic despotism in post-Napoleonic France, which he declares has nothing to do with America at his time, is highly suggestive for thinking about the military-industrial complex of the United States today.
(3) The Tocquevillian analysis of the historical process of the modernization and democratization of Japan would be useful for considering the task of democratization in non-Western countries in the contemporary world

The aim of this research is to Compare in the light of Tocqueville's political theory two types of modern democracy, the French and the American, and to examine m the historical development of the two Countries the various aspects of the opposition and interaction of the two models. The following issues are particularly addressed : the French view of America since Tocqueville and the rise of anti-Americanism in the 20^<th> Century, the French reaction to American liberalism, the historical transformation of the United States in the 20^<th> Century as a result of its becoming a global power, and Tocqueville moments in contemporary political discourses in both countries.
Principal discoveries and findings acquired through the two years research are :
(1)In spite of the long history of Franco-American friendship since the tame of the American Revolution, the American commitment to Europe and the rise of the United States as a global power caused in the 20^<th> century a negative reaction of the French people and the Cold War in particular nurtured the anti-Americanism of intellectuals.
(2)Tocqueville's theory of democracy invites various new readings in terms of this great transformation of the world. In the United States, the increasing political influence of religious groups, growing economic inequality, the decrease of "social capital", the decline of public sphere, and other recent tendencies of American society forced public philosophers and social scientists to reconsider Tocqueville's description of America and his theory of democracy.
(3)In France, Tocqueville's severe critique of French political culture has, for the first time since his death, been taken seriously and attracted a big audience. It is an aspect of French reception of Anglo-Saxon liberalism. However, Tocqueville is also used by many people as a reference for criticizing America.
(4)In contemporary political philosophy, there is a difference between the American use of Tocqueville and the French reading of his text In the United States, Tocqueville is mainly referred to in the republican or the oommunitarian context, while, in France, he is allotted an important role in the liberal revision of French republicanism.
(5)Some of Tocqueville's warnings about the dangerous tendencies of 19^<th> century French democracy seem to be more relevant in the present world to the United States than to France.

We submitted the following four papers at the International Conference "Reconstructing the Welfare State: Health Care Reform in Italy, Japan, the UK and the USA," The International Jacque Maritain Institute, Treviso, Italy, 16-17 September, 2002.
In their paper "Political Parties, Variety of Capitalism, and Veto Players in Health Care Retrenchment: Japan in Comparative Perspective," Ido and Magara contended that the variety of capitalism and the presence of veto players, rather than types of welfare regimes and the ideology of parties in office, determined the changes in public efforts in the era of welfare retrenchment.
In his "Constitutional Welfare Rights," Kawagishi argued that there was no direct correlation between manners of constitutional response to welfare --- ignorance, declaration of social principles, declaration of social rights, and declaration of both --- and rates of governmental expenditure on welfare in major countries. Thus, execution of welfare rights largely depends upon discretionary policy judgments on the part of the legislative and administrative departments.
Yazawa and Iijima, in their essay "Moral Foundations of Welfare Policies," investigated possible moral foundations of welfare state, while paying attention to concepts of individual's "needs" and "capabilities." They examined a series of liberal theorists including M. Ignatieff, M. Nussbaum, R. Dworkin and R. Goodin, and reached a conclusion that the state should provide a wide range of welfare policies, as long as we commit ourselves to the liberal tradition, a normative outlook to pursue individual liberty as the primary political value.
In his "Rethinking Japanese Bioethics", Tanaka examined how Japanese bioethics has developed, comparing with the history of American bioethics, and revealed the historical conditions that have made Japanese bioethics insufficient as social force to open up the relatively closed system of Japanese modern medicine.