【作者】 陈朋；

【导师】 齐卫平；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 政治学理论， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 民主是人类亘古不变的不懈追求,也是人们极力达致的政治发展目标。协商民主理论自兴起以来,无论被看作是复兴传统的民主范式,还是当作超越传统的理论创新,都客观表达了人们对发展民主理论的热切期盼和积极追求。从其民主价值、构成要素等规范层面的研究,到其实践领域的践行模式和价值功效,都承载着人们巨大的期许。也许将协商民主理论看作是传统民主范式的复兴似乎更加合理。但是,这种复兴(复兴古典民主强调的参与)不是简单的归复,而是在复兴的过程中有超越和修补(修补自由主义民主的缺陷,超越古典民主中的理想成分)。对于协商民主,可以作出这样一个简单朴素的定义：协商民主意味着政治共同体中自由、平等的公民,通过广泛的讨论交流,互相了解各自的主张和观点,据此理性的修正彼此的偏好,并实现偏好转换,尽可能的达成共识、促进决策,而因此达成的共识和促进的决策具有鲜明的合法性。它的核心是公共参与、理性讨论、自由平等、相互协商、促进决策、公共责任。它讲求参与性、公共性、互惠性、平等性、合法性、包容性。民主的核心价值是普适的,但民主的内涵、运行模式则是具体的。作为当代中国民主的一种重要形式,中国协商民主自然有其自身的内涵要义。这种内涵要义是它区分于西方协商民主的核心之所在。也就是说,西方协商民主理论在中国具备有限的适用性。中国的协商民主就是指,在中国的基本制度框架下,所有受到决策影响的行为主体,围绕政治社会生活中的议题,通过咨询、商议、讨论的方式,达成共识的一种民主形式。它既强调协商程序的合理性,也强调结果的共识性。国家、政党和社会层面都有这种协商民主内涵的体现,如中国共产党领导的多党合作政治协商制度,公共论坛,民主恳谈会,听证会,等等。“民主恳谈”是对浙江省温岭市在乡村、城镇社区及市级机关(部门)开展的各种民主沟通会、决策议事会、交流讨论会、重大事项听证会等民主形式的简称。作为一种乡村民主形式,民主恳谈的生长和发展主要源于民众日益增长的民主诉求和代表国家的地方官员推动民主创新的努力。其本质上是中国本土化的协商民主实践在乡村的体现。为此,本文以中国乡村的协商民主实践为研究主题,借用协商民主的理论基础和国家与社会的分析框架,基于对温岭民主恳谈实践的生长机理及发展进程的考察,既向人们全景展示生长在中国改革土壤中的具有首创精神和现实价值的这一重大实践,又阐释和说明中国乡村协商民主实践的动力、机制、价值及趋向,并在此基础上进一步探讨中国乡村发展的新模式。从温岭民主恳谈实践的成长、发展过程可以看出,它是国家与社会共同作用的结果,国家推动与社会发育是对其成长、发展和特色的典型概括。进一步而言,可以用“国家主导下多方回应互动型制度变迁假说”来分析温岭民主恳谈实践的生长机理。这种多方回应互动型制度变迁模式,既不回避国家及其代表——政府的引导作用,也不忽视社会力量的推动作用。它强调的是推动制度创新实践的主体之间是相互合作和动态博弈的,而且这些主体不是单一的,而是多元的。国家主导即是说在这场民主实践中,国家充分发挥着引导和规范作用,离开国家的介入,实践也许会变得更加曲折。多方即是说在这场制度创新实践中,行动主体是多元、开放的,而不是单一、封闭的；回应即是说创新实践萌生以后,各行动主体之间有相互沟通和交流的过程,而不是单向的直流行为；互动即是说在这场制度创新实践中,发挥引导作用的政府和需求推动作用的社会力量之间存在着良性互动,他们围绕着共同利益——推动创新实践成长发展,继而在创新实践中获得各自所追求的利益——展开相互交往。从温岭民主实践在横纵两大方向展开的一般层面的民主恳谈、参与式预算试验、行业工资集体协商等实践型态看,乡村协商民主简而言之,就是在中国乡村政治经济社会生活中,所有可能受到决策影响的行为主体,如乡村民众(包含人大代表、政协委员、私营企业主等乡村精英,以及普通村居民)、党政官员、外来务工者等群体,围绕乡村经济政治社会生活中的重要议题,以吸纳群众参与公共事务为主题,以改善乡村政治社会权力结构为渠道,以达成共识、作出决策为指向,通过直接参与商议、讨论或咨询的方式,展开积极、理性的交流和沟通,相互体谅,彼此让步,从而尽可能就共同关心的议题达成共识的一种民主治理形式。它既强调协商过程的合理性、公开性和参与性,也强调协商结果尽可能的共识性。进一步而言,它本质上是乡村的协商政治型态,是生长在中国乡村的群团合作型民主,是乡村政治生活领域中官民互动的重要平台,是乡村民众信息交流的重要渠道,是乡村民众参与乡村公共事务管理的重要形式。协商主体、协商客体、协商场域、协商过程、协商方式和协商结果这六大核心要素是支撑乡村协商民主实践的重要支柱。公共协商、理性沟通和偏好转换则是推动乡村协商民主实践运行的内在机制。基于民主的视阈,可以发现,温岭的乡村协商民主实践展示出了鲜明的民主价值。这体现在五个方面：开辟乡村民主的新空间、促进乡村民主政治现代化、促进公众的有序参与、夯实乡村民主的社会基础和推动政府与民众之间的良性互动。但是,深入分析也可见其限度,如谁来组织决策执行和监督过程中的恳谈更合适?如何促进票决民主与协商民主的有机融合?政府创新的动力何以持久?民主实践的操作技术何以进一步提升?温岭民主恳谈以其丰富而又生动的内涵向人们展示了生长在中国乡村场域的协商民主实践。在这场民主实践中,国家与社会是在互动中促成了实践的发展,反过来,国家与社会也在这场民主实践中实现了双赢。乡村协商民主实践的发展在一定程度上有力的优化了乡村治理格局,从而也进一步启示人们：构建民主合作式的乡村治理模式是推动乡村发展的理性选择。温岭的乡村协商民主实践不是孤独者,在其引起学者关注的同时,也逐渐被其它诸多地方参考和借鉴。但是,任何“复制”温岭民主实践的行为选择,必须要考虑到：是否具备相应的基础和条件。民主实践的成长和发展是基于一定的基础和条件之上。唯有具备相应的基础和条件,像民主恳谈这样一种乡村协商民主实践才会落地生根、发芽。更多还原

【Abstract】 Democracy is an everlasting pursuit and also a political development goal of humanity. Since its rise, either has been seen as a revival of the traditional paradigm of democracy, or be deemed beyond the traditional theory of innovation, Deliberative Democracy has expressed people’s expect and pursuit for democratic theory. Perhaps, it seems more reasonable to regard the theory of Deliberative Democracy as a revival of the traditional paradigm of democracy. However, this revival (revival of classical democracy emphasis of participation) is not a simple re-normalization, but in the process of surpassment and repair (repair of liberal democracy’s shortcomings, beyond the classical ideal of democracy in the composition).For Deliberative Democracy, we can make such a simple and plain definition: Deliberative Democracy means that the free and equal citizens in political community, can achieve preferred conversion, as far as possible reach a consensus, facilitate decision-making, through extensive discussion, mutual understanding, whereby amendment each other’s preference. Thus, the consensus and the decision has a clear legitimacy. At its heart is public participation, rational discussion, freedom, equality, mutual consultation, facilitate decision-making, public responsibility. It emphasizes participation, reciprocity, equality, legality, and tolerance.The core value of democracy is universal, but its meaning and operation pattern is specific. As an important form of modern democracy in China, Deliberative Democracy in China naturally has its own meaning. This implication is the core that should be distinguished from Deliberative Democracy in the West. In other words, the Western Theory of Deliberative Democracy in China, have limited applicability. Deliberative Democracy in China means that in China’s basic institutional framework, all actors affected by the decision-making, around the subject of political and social life, through consultation, negotiation and discussion, to reach consensus. It stressed that the reasonableness of the consultative process, but also the result of consensus. State, political parties and social dimensions are manifestation of the democratic content of these consultations, such as the CPC-led multi-party cooperation and political consultation system, public forums, democracy Symposium hearings and so on."Democracy Discussion" is a short form of democracy in Wenling City of Zhejiang Province, which develops in villages, urban communities, and municipal government agencies in various kinds of democratic communication, decision-making council, communication seminars, hearings and other major events. As a democratic form in villages, "Democracy Discussion" is mainly due to the growing popular demand for democracy and the local officials who on behalf of the state to promote democracy and innovation efforts. It is the essential show of Chinese practice of Deliberative Democracy in the countryside. To this end, the paper shows this important practice, and explains its power, mechanism, value and trend of the Deliberative Democracy in rural China, and on this basis to further explore a new model for rural development in China, through analyzing Deliberative Democracy and analytical framework of state and society, basing on the practice of Wenling practice.From Wenling practice, we can see it is the result of the state and society, country-driving and social developin is typical general to its growth, development and characteristics. Further, we can use the "state-led and interactive institutional change hypothesis" to describe Wenling practice. This hypothesis, not evade the State and its representatives-the government’s guiding role, nor ignore the social role. It emphasizes the mutual cooperation, and these subjects are not single, but multiple. State-led means that the State give full play to the guiding and regulating role. Multi-party means that actors are diverse, open, rather than a single, closed; interaction means that innovative practice play a guiding role in promoting the role of government and social forcesFrom Wenling democratic practice, we can get a short definition for rural deliberative democracy, it is in China’s rural political, economic and social life, all actors affected by the decision-making, such as the rural population (with NPC deputies, CPPCC members, private entrepreneurs and other rural elites, and ordinary villagers), party and government officials, emigrants, so as far as possible on issues of common interest to reach consensus on a democratic forms of governance, by the mass participation in public affairs, through direct participation in deliberations, discussions or consultations way to start a positive, rational communication and communication, mutual understanding and mutual concession. To elaborate further, it is essentially a political consultation in rural pattern, is the growing cooperative democracy in China rural areas, an important platform for the exchange of information between officials and the public, an important channel for rural popular, an important form of management of public affairs for rural people.The deliberate subject, deliberate object, deliberate field, t deliberate process, deliberate methods and results of the deliberation is the six core element of rural deliberative democracy practice. Public consultation, rational communication and preferences is the inner system of rural deliberative democracy practice.Based on the perspective of democracy, we find that the deliberative democracy practice in Wenling shows a clear-cut democratic value. This is reflected in five areas:opening up new space for democracy in rural areas, promote the modernization of rural democracy, promote the orderly public participation in village democracy, consolidating the social foundation of rural democracy, and promote positive interaction between the government and citizens. However, the in-depth analysis, we can also find its limits, such as who will implement and monitor the process of organizational decision-making in earnest talk is more appropriate? How to promote democracy and deliberative democracy voting organic integration? How can make the Government’s impetus for innovation lasting? How to further improve the operation of technology?In this rich and lively democratic practice, the state and society in the interaction contributed to the development of the practice, in turn, the state and society achieve a win-win democratic practice. To a certain extent, the deliberative democracy practice in Wenling strongly optimizes the village governance structure, and thus further reevaluates that to build democracy and cooperative governance model in rural is a rational choice to promote rural development.The rural deliberative democracy practice in Wenling is not a solitary practice. It has been paid attention to scholars and gradually been referred by others. However, any "copy" the democratic practice, we must take into account:whether they have the appropriate foundation and conditions. The growth and development of democratic practices is based on a certain basis and conditions. Only with the corresponding basis and conditions, the deliberative democracy practice can take root and sprout.更多还原