【作者】 马奔；

【导师】 张锡恩；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 科社与国际共运， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 民主理论在不同的社会发展阶段有着不同的主题和形态。从古雅典到现在，民主理论几经变迁，呈现出丰富的多样性。古典民主意味着自由而平等的公民，通过公民大会等形式直接参与城邦的治理。这种参与并不是实现其他目的的手段，参与本身就是目的，公民只有参与政治，个人的道德才能趋于完善，人性才能充分展现。这时，选举被认为是寡头性质的，因为某些人可以凭借其出身或财富，容易在选举中胜出，而话语、言说和讨论被认为是民主的本质。在公民大会等形式上是否享有平等的发言权，决定了一个公民是否真正参与了对公共事务的管理。但是，随着民族国家的建立，以直接参与公共事务讨论为主要特征的古典民主已经被代议民主所取代。随着代议民主的实践，熊彼特等人认为古典民主是规范性的，是从应然的角度把民主理想化，这样的民主理论已不能令人信服地分析现实民主国家是如何运作的，因此，他们试图构建出一种对现实更具有解释力的民主理论。通过对现实国家民主制度运作的考查，熊彼特提出了“竞争性民主理论”的经典定义，即“民主就是那种为作出政治决定而实行的制度安排，在这种安排中，某些人通过争取人民选票取得作决定的权力。”由于熊彼特等人认为公民是懦弱的、冷漠的、堕落的、易受感情控制和外部力量左右的非理性“动物”，因此，公民在竞争式民主中的作用，只是通过投票来选择替他们治理的领导人。民主也仅仅成为择取领导的竞争方法的副产品。实际上，自由竞争式民主自产生以来就遭到了众多的批评。譬如，巴伯认为，竞争式民主就像“一位心脏欠佳的长跑选手，表面上跑的稳健，但内在的力量却迅速消耗”，以至于出现一些“病症”。这种以多党竞争选举为核心的民主由于其本身固有的缺陷，最终沦为“弱势民主”(weak democracy)。到了20世纪90年代，协商民主对竞争式民主的缺陷也进行了批评，并逐渐成为当前民主理论的显学。有些协商民主理论者甚至认为：“民主的本质是协商，而不是投票”，以“投票为中心”的民主理论应该逐渐被以“协商为中心”的民主理论所取代。如果说，19世纪到20世纪初，民主化关心的是扩大选举，落实每个公民投票的权利；今天，民主化重视的是如何扩大公共领域，让每个公民都能发表意见。“发声(voice)而不是选票，成为新的赋权方式。”协商民主就是在反省竞争性民主理论的基础上，重新赋予公民参与公共事务的积极性，认为公民的政治参与不应该局限于定期的投票和不定期的游行示威等活动方式，公民应该在信息公开透明的条件下，依据一定的程序，自由而平等地对影响到自己的公共政策进行公开且充分的讨论，通过公共协商赋予决策的合法性，从而提升民主治理的品质。协商民主在两个方面希望对竞争式民主有所改进。第一，竞争式民主强调公民通过选举授权给代理人，让他们替自己治理国家；而协商民主认为公民的参与不应该局限于选举，应该直接参与公共治理。第二，竞争式民主强调选票和多数决定原则，而协商民主则关注投票之前的公共协商和讨论。协商民主自兴起以来，不仅仅停留在规范的层面，而且在协商民主理念和正式体制的接轨方面，即“民主对话的制度化”方面也有很大进展，创新出许多具体的制度设计，譬如：公民会议、协商式民意调查、公民陪审团、愿景工作坊和协商日等。当前，协商民主不仅在欧美国家得到广泛的运用，而且亚洲的许多国家和地区也开始实践这种新兴的民主形式，譬如日本、韩国和中国台湾地区就多次举办了公民会议等形式。甚至，协商民主的实践已经超越了民族国家的界限，譬如，欧盟已开始把协商民主作为解决其“民主赤字”的重要手段。根据协商民主实践的个案来看，协商民主确实发挥着促进公共决策的合法性、改善民主治理的质量、提升公民参与公共事务的意愿和提高公民的知能等作用。但是，如果把协商民主作为解决竞争式民主所产生的问题的万灵丹，恐怕也显得过于浪漫和乐观，其实同任何理论一样，协商民主也面临着质疑和挑战：公民在公共讨论协商之后，有时候不但不会产生民主的决策，反而会导致公民朝向更加极端的方向前进，产生“群体两极化”的现象；公民现实生活中政治、经济和其他社会条件的不平等，限制了公共协商的效果；参与诱因论和社会分工论的诘难，也使协商民主的运用大打折扣。协商民主是立体式的，是企图为民主的未来筑梦，是民主想象的继续而非对民主现状的描绘。因此，协商民主是可以说是一种规范性的理论，试图恢复古典民主中公民的积极身份和协商的传统，重新肯定了参与和协商在民主理论建构中的重要意义，这样就提供了对现存民主制度一个检验和批判的标准，希望用理想的(规范的)力量改善现实民主运作的弊端，从而提升民主的质量。实际上，在现代民族国家，协商民主不是全盘取代也不可能取代竞争式民主的运作，它只能依附于现有的民主体制的活动或过程而存在。今天，无论是国内还是国外探讨的核心，不再是该不该推进中国民主政治发展的问题，而是如何更加有效地推进中国的民主政治发展。但“民主的基础是民主的双腿，只有在测量了这双腿和它们的跨度之后，理想才能真正显现出风采，才能会给我们的步伐以动力和方向。”当前，一方面，我国经济、社会结构的多元化使公民对竞争性民主的需求越来越强烈；另一方面，我国民主政治发展有着明确的价值取向，不主张搞竞争式民主，回避竞争性的价值偏好和制度设计。这种回避必然大大延缓民主政治发展的进程。因此，我国民主政治发展的难题是：在不得不告别非竞争性民主，而竞争性民主又面临着困境和国家价值偏好遗弃的情况下，怎样推动中国的民主政治发展?这个时候，协商民主在中国的运用可以在一定程度上缓解选举民主的压力。因为，协商民主实际上是一种“治道民主”(治权的民主)，就是不问统治权力来源这个最基本的问题，只关心立法和公共决策等领域是否民主的问题。因此，协商民主是民主政治的“改良”，而非“革命”，也就是不在于变革现行权力结构的安排，通过各种协商民主的形式将社会不同的利益和要求汇聚到公共决策的过程，这样公共治理不再是少数精英的专利，呈现出大众性、开放性和参与性。通过公民的对立法和公共决策等领域的参与和协商，可以激发良好意见的表达，增强公共政策的合法性，改善民主治理质量，这样就可以在一定程度上缓解竞争性选举民主的压力。协商民主在中国的运用也有着局限性。因为，民主政治的根本是“政道民主”(政权的民主)，也就是关注统治权力来源合法性这个最根本问题的民主形式。在现代，政权的民主就是选举民主，通过选举赋予统治者治理国家的权力与合法性。实际上，在政权民主和治权民主的关系上，只有政权民主才能保障治权民主的顺利运行。当前协商民主在中国运用的最大局限就是，由于选举民主的赤字，官员不能真正体会到手中的权力是人民赋予的，不能保证官员会真心实意地与公民进行协商，这样就影响了协商的真实。因此，中国在推行协商民主的同时，也需要对选举民主的需求进行适当的回应。更多还原

【Abstract】 Though democracy has been the universal value pursuit by human beings, theories on democracy takes different themes and forms in different stages of social development. From ancient Greece till now, democratic theories have experienced many changes and unfolded rich diversity. Ancient democracy means citizens with freedom and equality participate in the governance of the polis directly through the form of citizen conference or alike. This kind of participation is not a means to achieve other aims, but rather, the participation itself is the aim. Only by participating politics, the moral and talents of citizens can be improved and human nature be fully presented. At this stage, election is considered as with oligarchic nature, because some people can succeed easily with their origin or wealth, while discourses, speeches, and discussion are considered as with democratic essence. Whether to enjoy equal rights of speeches decides whether a citizen really takes part in the management of public affairs.However, with the establishment of nation-states, the representative democracy has replaced the ancient democracy featured by the direct participation in the discussion on public affairs. With the practice of representative democracy, Schumpeter and others hold that ancient democracy is nominative and idealized. This kind of democratic theory cannot convincingly analyze how democratic country operates in reality, and therefore they try to map out a democratic theory. that can explain the reality more effectively. Through the investigation into the democratic system in reality, Schumpeter raises the classical definition of "competitive democratic theory", i.e. democracy is the institutional arrangements implemented for the purpose of political decision. In this arrangement, some people acquire the power for decision by striving for people’s votes. Because Schumpeter thinks citizens are irrational "animal" that are cowardly, listless, degenerated, easily controlled by emotion and exterior forces, the role of citizen in competitive democracy is only to vote and select the leaders who can govern on their behalf, and democracy is only the by-product of competitive method of selecting leaders. Actually, liberal competitive democracy has been criticized by many since its birth. For instance, Barber believe that competitive democracy is like "a long-distance runner that has heart-trouble, strong in appearance, but worn out quickly inside" and therefore having many "malady". This kind of democracy with multi-party competitive election as the core has its inborn limitation and eventually falls into weak democracy. In the 1990’s, deliberative democracy criticized competitive democracy and has by and by become the most prominent democratic theory. Some deliberative democracy theorists reckon, "the nature of democracy is deliberation instead of vote" and "vote-centered" democratic theory should be replaced by "deliberation-centered" democratic theory gradually. If the concern of democratization from the 19^th century to the beginning of the 20^th century was the expansion of election and fulfillment of each citizen’s right to vote, today its focus is how to enlarge the public area and let each citizen express individual opinion. "Voice instead of vote is a new way of endowing power."Deliberative democracy is, on the basis of reflecting competitive democratic theory, regives citizens the enthusiasm to participate in public affairs. It reckons that citizens’ political participation should not be restricted to periodic vote or aperiodic activities such as demonstrations. Citizens should, under the premise of open and transparent information and according to certain procedures, freely and equally carry out in full the discussion on the public policies that affect them, and through the legalization of decision by public deliberation, the quality of democratic governance is enhanced. In this way, we can see that deliberative democracy has made two improvements as compared to competitive democracy. First, competitive democracy emphasizes citizens’ entrusting power to representatives through election and letting representatives governing the country on their behalf; while deliberative democracy considers that citizens’ participation should not be restricted to election but direct public governance. Secondly, competitive democracy emphasizes election; while deliberative democracy focuses on the public deliberation and discussion before the vote.Since deliberative democracy came into being, it has not been resting on the nominative sphere but has made many creative and specific institutional designs on gearing of deliberative democracy concept and formal system, i.e. "the institutionalization of democratic dialogue," such as citizens conference, deliberative opinion poll, citizens jury, scenario workshop, deliberative day and so on. Right now, deliberative democracy is not only widely applied in Europe and America, but many countries and regions in Asia is also starting to adopt this new form of democracy. For instance, Japan, ROK and Taiwan have held many citizens conference etc.. Even more, the practice of deliberative democracy has exceeded the border of nation-state, such as EU, which has started to take deliberative democracy as an important measure of solving its "democracy deficit".According to the case of deliberative democracy practice, deliberative democracy really plays the role of promoting the legalization of public decision, improving the quality of democratic governance, enhancing the wish of citizens to participate public affairs and improving citizens’ awareness. But if deliberative democracy is taken as the elixir to solve the problem caused by competitive democracy, it is too romantic and optimistic. Actually, deliberative democracy, like any other theory, is facing inquiry and challenges. Citizens, after public deliberation, might not reach democratic decision, but extremes, causing "group polarization" phenomenon. The political, economic and other inequality of citizens in reality has restricted the effect public deliberation. The question on participation inducement theory and social division also abates the application of deliberative democracy.Deliberative democracy is three-dimensional, hoping to improve the reality and enhance the quality of democracy through the power of ideal. It is a dream created for the future of democracy and a delineation of the ideal democracy rather than the status quo. Therefore, deliberative democracy is a normative theory intending to restore the ancient active role of citizens and the deliberation tradition. It affirms the great significance of participation and deliberation in the construction of democratic theory, and provides a criterion for testing and criticizing the existing democratic system. This is conducive to the enhancement of the quality of democracy. In modern nation-states, deliberative democracy cannot fully or possibly replace the operation of competitive democracy. It only finds its existence in attachment to the activities and procedures of present democratic system.Today the focus of discussion at home and abroad is no longer whether to promote China’s democratic political development, but how to push forward it in a more effective way. But "the basis of democracy is the two legs of democracy. Only by measuring the two legs and their span, can ideal show its real demeanor, and can we be guided in power and director." At present, on the one hand, the pluralization of economy and social structure makes citizens’ demand for competitive democracy more great, and one the other, the democratic political development in China has clear value orientation, not advocating competitive democracy and avoiding competitive value preference and institutional design. This kind of avoidance is sure to delay the course of democratic political development. Therefore, the problem of our country’s democratic political development is: under the situation of having to farewell to non-competitive democracy but competitive democracy facing dilemma, how to push forward the democratic political development in China? In this case, the application of deliberative democracy can moderate the pressure of electoral democracy.This is because deliberative democracy is a kind of "democracy of governing power", which does not pay attention to the basic question of ruling power, but only the question whether the lawmaking and public decision sector are democratic. Therefore, deliberative democracy is "amendment" to democratic politics, rather than "revolution", i.e. the process that does not change the present power structure and converge the various social interests and requirements into public decision through deliberative democracy. In this way public governance is no longer the patent of the small group of elites, but is popular, open and widely participated in. Through citizens’ participation and deliberation on lawmaking and public decision sectors, the expression of sound opinions is encouraged, the legalization of public policy enhanced, the quality of democratic governance improved and thus the pressure on competitive election moderated.The application of deliberative democracy in China is also limited, because the foundation of democratic politics is "the democracy of regime", i.e. the democracy that focuses on the legalization of ruling power origin and on who enjoy the legal power to govern the country. At present, the democracy of regime is electoral democracy, the rulers being endowed the power to govern the country through election. In fact, in the relationship between the democracy of regime and that of governing, only the democracy of regime can secure the smooth operation of democracy of governing. In China, the biggest restriction in applying deliberative democracy lies in that, due to the deficit of electoral democracy, officials cannot really feel the power in hand is endowed by people. Officials cannot be secured to carry our deliberation with citizens whole-heartedly. This affects the truthfulness of deliberation. Therefore, China, while promoting deliberative democracy, needs to respond to some extend to the requirement for electoral democracy.更多还原