【作者】 姚华平；

【导师】 陈伟东；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 马克思主义中国化研究， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 20世纪80年代以后,世界各国进入了“全球结社革命”时代。改革开放以来,随着市场经济体制逐步完善和全球化进程不断加快,我国社会结构也发生了深刻变革,计划经济体制下的国家与社会同构模式逐步解体,社会组织开始兴起和蓬勃发展。党和政府越来越重视社会组织建设与管理问题,党的十七大报告明确提出,要加快推进以改善民生为重点的社会建设,重视和加强社会组织建设与管理。然而,从我国社会组织及其管理体制变迁的过程来看,由于法律制度不健全、管理理念比较落后、管理机制不完善等问题,我国社会组织发展的总体水平较低,不仅存在体制性障碍和合法性障碍,还存在功能性困境和自律性困境。针对这些问题,中央和地方各级政府推进社会体制改革,提出了一系列加强社会组织建设与管理的政策措施。很多地方从经济社会发展的实际出发,探索了各具特色的社会组织管理模式,主要表现出两种不同的改革取向：一是业务主管单位行政化取向,二是业务主管单位民间化取向。民间化是社会组织管理体制改革的基本方向,但是,民间管理机构也存在行政化问题,没有从根本上突破现行的双重管理体制。马克思主义认为,国家与市民社会的分离,是社会进步的体现,市民社会决定国家,国家权力终将回归社会。当今学术界在继承马克思主义国家与社会理论的基础上,将国家与市民社会二分法发展为政府、市场和公民社会的三分法,指出作为非政府非营利性组织,社会组织是现代社会最重要的细胞,它对于弥补“政府失灵”、“市场失灵”具有不可替代的重要作用。论文以国家与社会的关系为分析视角,以马克思主义基本理论为指导,借鉴当今相关前沿理论,结合建国以来我国社会组织建设与管理的具体实践,试图探索一条植根中国特色的社会组织建设与管理的基本路径。从国家与社会关系的视角看,我国社会组织以生成模式分类,大体上可以分为内卷模式、合作模式、草根模式三种类型。内卷模式是社会组织被政府吸纳进行政系统,政府烙印极为明显,自治性弱而行政化强。草根模式是社会组织由民间自下而上发起,不与政府存在依赖关系,其资金完全自筹,处于社会的边缘。而合作模式是社会组织由政府与社会在某种需求共识上良性互动合力推建,既借助了政府的力量,又兼顾了社会的需求,是国家与社会实现双赢的一种有效模式。当前我国社会处于高速发展和急剧变革的转型时期,社会主义现代化建设才起步短短几十年,还处于经济、政治、文化和社会建设共同推进的时期。国家与社会的分离与政府、市场、社会三分的过程是交叉进行的,甚至在一些领域很难分清公共领域、私人领域和第三领域的明确界限。而中国共产党是代表最广大人民根本利益的执政党,中国政府是由人民当家做主的政府,国家与社会组织在为人民服务和谋福利这一出发点和落脚点上是根本一致的。国家吞噬社会、限制社会组织发展的做法已被实践证明不可取。西方社会独立于国家、社会组织是国家的对立和限制力量的预设,也显然不符合社会主义初级阶段的基本国情。因而,推进国家与社会的良性互动,构建党领导、政府规制、组织自律、公众监督的多元互动网络,是当前中国特色社会组织建设和管理的必然路径选择。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the 80s of the 20th century, countries all over the world entered the era of "Global Revolution of Association Forming".Since the reform and opening-up policy, with the continuing promotion of the market economy system reform, deep changes have taken place in the social structure of our country. The isomorphism mode between country and society under planned economic system disintegrate progressively, and social organizations began to emerge and thrive. The Chinese Communist Party and the government are paying more and more attention to the construction and management of social organizations. As the report of the 17th National Congress of CPC points out clearly, we should accelerate advancing the social construction which takes improving the people’s livelihood as the focal point, and pay special attention to strengthening the construction and management of social organizations.However, in the process of system changes of our social organizations and their management, because the legal system is imperfect, the management philosophy is relatively backward, and the management mechanisms are inadequate etc., the overall level of development of social organizations in our country is relatively low, so there are not only institutional and legitimacy barriers, but also functional and self-disciplining predicaments.To solve these problems, a lot of local governments proceed from the reality of regional socioeconomic development and have explored the management mode of social organizations with characteristics. These modes mainly demonstrate two kinds of different reform orientations. First is the administration orientation of responsible institutions, and second is the folk orientation of responsible institutions. The Folk orientation is the basic orientation of management system reform of social organizations, but organizations of folk management also tangle with the administration orientation, which has not broken through the twofold management pattern fundamentally.Marxism holds that the separation of state and civil society is a manifestation of social progress. Civil society decides the state, and state power will eventually return to society. The current academia inherits the Marxism state and social theory, and develops the dichotomy between the state and civil society into the trichotomy among the government, markets and civil society, pointing out that as non-governmental non-profit organizations, social organizations are the most important cells of modern society, and have an irreplaceable important role to make up for "government failure" and "market failure".The thesis regards the relationship between the state and society as the analysis perspective and basic theories of Marxism as guidelines, borrows ideas from contemporary cutting-edge theories, and attempts to explore the basic route with distinct Chinese characteristics of the construction and management of social organizations based on the concrete practices of the construction and management of social organizations of our country since reform and opening-up.From the perspective of the relationship between state and society, social organizations can be divided into three kinds of generating patterns, that is, involution mode, cooperation mode and grassroots mode in general. By involution mode, social organization has been absorbed by the Government into the political system, so it has extremely obvious government branding with weak autonomy and strong administration.The grassroots mode is initiated folkly by society organizations from bottom to top and has non-dependent relationship with the government. It is funded entirely independently and is at the margins of society. And the cooperative mode is built on the consensus of a certain demand by the government and the society benignly and interdynamically, having not only drawn support from government but also taken into account the demand of the society, and thus it is a kind of win-win effective mode between the country and the society.At present our society is in the transition period of rapid development and drastic changes. The socialist modernization has started just for a few decades, and is still in the period of joint pushing forward of economic, political, cultural and social construction. The separation between state and society and the trisection among the government, the market and the society are carried out alternately, and even in some areas it is difficult to distinguish clear demarcation lines between the public sphere, private sphere and the third area. The Chinese Communist Party is the party in power which represents the fundamental interests of the overwhelming majority of the people, and the Chinese government is a sovereignty government by the people. The starting and ending points of the country and social organizations are identical thoroughly in serving and working for the welfare of the people.That the state engulfs the society and sets restrictions on the development of social organizations has already been proved undesirable by practice. Those social organizations are independent from the State, like that in western countries, and that social organizations are the country’s opposition and limitative power, do not accord with the fundamental realities of our primary stage of socialism obviously, either. To promote benign interdynamic between government and society and to construct the polybasic interdynamic network with the leadership of the Party, the institution of the government, self-containment of organizations and mass supervision network is an inevitable route for the construction and management of social organizations with distinct Chinese characteristics at present.更多还原