【作者】 李丹；

【导师】 高永久；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 政治学理论， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 本文旨在按时序解释中国族际政治整合的制度变迁。研究集中于两个问题：尝试建立有关族际政治整合的制度理论；解释族际政治整合制度的稳定与变迁,指出其现状及面临的挑战,为之寻找对策。族际政治整合制度不是某一项具体制度的名称,而是国家将民族和民族地区纳入国家政治体系的规则体系(包括正式制度和非正式制度)的总称,其基本要素包括意识形态(提供制度目标)、政治组织机构和具体的制度安排(提供制度手段),如民族政策等。因国家发展的不同阶段中合法性基础及维持手段不同导致制度供给不同,族际政治整合的制度化程度及制度效果亦不同。制度形成之后的“路径依赖”(path dependence)特点,使得族际政治整合制度具有稳定性。而人类知识存量的增加、意识形态的发展及外力对“锁定”(lock-in)状态的解除,则使族际政治整合制度的变迁和创新成可能。现代民族国家中,族际政治整合制度型塑着各族体的发展,各族体的自我发展又对国家族际政治整合制度提出新要求,这既体现了民族与国家互动的辩证关系,也反映着多民族国家的政治能力。行文的基本过程是：通过历史的视角,采用定性的研究方法,依据新制度主义路径,追溯国家发展的不同阶段中族际政治整合制度的形成、发展、重构、完善与创新的变迁过程。文章以王朝国家的族际政治整合制度变迁研究为起点。王朝国家没有划定明晰的政治疆界,在君权神授的合法性基础上、中央集权的行政框架内、不平等的民族关系的前提下,族际政治整合中形成了朝贡体制下的羁縻制度。随着王朝国家管理制度的逐渐完善,羁縻制度发展至其最高形式土司、土官制度,直至清朝“改土归流”而淡出历史舞台。尽管羁縻制度对统一的多民族国家的维护起到了重要作用,但它终究没有实现各民族全面而彻底的整合。随着清末民初中国被拖入世界体系,中国固有的知识和制度体系开始受到冲击。此时开始的现代民族国家体系的理论与实践中,国家的合法性基础已是社会全体成员的政治认同。多民族国家的民族性开始凸现,民族开始被视为统一体并成为可能的关键的结构性变迁力量。民国时期的族际政治整合制度有所进步并有过新的尝试,但没有得到全面的贯彻,这也是国民党政权失败的原因之一。在中国共产党的革命实践中,随着处理民族问题的理论与实践的逐渐成熟,新型的族际政治整合制度逐渐萌芽。各民族人民在中国共产党的领导下共同建立了社会主义新中国。此后的计划经济时代,在国家掌控着几乎全部的社会资源的情况下,国家通过以民族区域自治为中轴的族际政治整合制度对少数民族与民族地区的进行了一元化的深刻整合,确立了全新的社会秩序,取得了良好的整合效果。但在文革期间,族际政治整合制度的许多方面遭到破坏。进入社会主义市场经济阶段后,中国开始了多元社会变迁历程。各民族不同程度利益诉求的苏醒,民族国家构建与民族自我发展之间的矛盾不断凸显,使得族际政治整合的对象、中心等要素都发生了变化,加之国际因素的复杂影响,对族际政治整合的方式、效度以及相应的制度建设提出了更高的要求。党和政府已经做了许多创新性的工作。但如何应对新挑战,满足制度需要,进而构建族际政治整合制度的创新体系,仍是当前族际政治整合制度建设中的重要议题。研究的结论是中国的族际政治整合制度绵延至今,发展而成的民族区域自治制度为中轴的现代族际政治整合制度,是中国传统政治文明与马克思主义理论相结合的适应我国政治生活的有效制度。但在现代化进程中,它又面临着复杂的国内外环境的影响下的新考验。国家制度供给主体必须要适应多元社会发展的要求,从族际政治整合制度理念、族际政治整合制度安排到制度环境的培育方面做到全面创新,并保障其实施,才能实现民族平等、团结和共同繁荣发展的族际政治整合目标。在此过程中制度规则及制度安排起着重要作用,正是制度的有效运营才使得族际政治整合力加强,国家的政治能力提高。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation tries to explain the institutional evolution of interethnic political integration of China. The research focuses on two issues—one is to establish the theories about institution of interethnic political integration (IIPI), the other is to explain the steady and evolution of the institution, figure out its results and challenges it faced in modern time, then to find countermeasures for it.IIPI is not a single institution but a rule system that brings the ethnic groups and the ethnic regions into the political system of the nation-state. The basic factors of the IIPI include ideology (which supplies the aim of the institution), organizations and concrete institutional arrangements (which supplies the ways of the institution). It claims that the degrees of institutionalization of interethnic political integration and its effects are different when the state’s legitimacy base and means to maintain it are different. The reasons of stabilization (one of the characteristics of the institution) of IIPI is path dependence, it makes the institution go steadily. The increasing stock of human knowledge, the development of ideology and the impact of outside force can unchain the situation of lock-in. It makes the evolution and innovation of institution become possible. In multi-ethnic state, the different supplies of IIPI shape the development of ethnic groups. The ethnic groups’ developments put forward new requests to the developments of the IIPI. The process represents the dialectic relations among the nation state and ethnic groups. It also shows the abilities of the nation-state.Through the historical aspect, adopting the qualitative research method, according to the path of new institutionalism, the paper retrospects to the formation, development, and innovation of the IIPI among different developmental periods of state in China. The paper begins with the IIPI of the dynastic state. It didn’t have a clear boundary, based on the legitimacy of god-given regality, in the frame of centralization of state power, on the preconditions of the inequality of ethnic relations, "Bridle" institution was formed under the "Pay Tribute" system. Though the "Bridle" institution played an important role to maintain the unification of the state, it didn’t integrate the ethnic groups completely after all. Along with china’s being dragged into the world system and began its modernization in late Qing Dynasty, the inherent knowledge and institution systems were impacted intensively. The ethnicities of multi-ethnic state emerged. Ethnic groups became a key structural power of the nation-state. One of the reasons of Kuomintang’s failure is that it couldn’t resolve the ethnic problems.It proved that only under the leading of CCP that could all the ethnic groups establish the new China, then could the new IIPI be set. In the period of planned economic system, the state controlled almost all the resources, it could realize the unitary integration of the ethnic groups and the regions of ethnic groups by institution system based on Ethnic Reginoal Autonomy System (ERAS). But ERAS was once destroyed during "Cultural Revolution".Along with the market economic system’s practice in China, the change to pluralistic societies appeared in China. The ethnic consciousness revivals and its requests are put forward. Together with the international factors’effects, there is a need to improve the efficiency, methods and institutional building of IIPI. How to transfer the unitary integration model to pluralistic integration, develop ERAS, realize the innovation of IIPI, then to improve the efficiency of the IIPI, these are the important issues in the building of IIPI nowadays.The conclusion is that IIPI of China has experienced a continuous process. The modern IIPI is the combination of China’s traditional political civiliazition and Marxism. It is proved to be a suitable form for China. During the process of modernization, if the multi-ethnic state wants to fulfill the aim of IIPI, it needs to achieve the innovations of the IIPI, institutional arrengments and the implement mechanism. The institution still plays important role in this course. It is the efficiency running of the institution that makes the power of interethnic political integration enhanced. The abilities of the state get improved at the same time.更多还原