节点文献
中国少数民族群体性事件及治理机制研究
【作者】 吴亮；
【导师】 荣仕星；
【作者基本信息】 中央民族大学 ， 民族地区公共行政管理， 2011， 博士
【摘要】 在一个有着13亿人口、多民族多宗教并存、经济社会快速发展的国家,维护社会秩序、促进社会和谐具有至关重要的意义。当前,中国既处于发展的重要战略机遇期,又处于社会矛盾凸显期,复杂的社会环境对民族事务管理形成较大挑战。民族工作是社会管理的薄弱环节,这不仅体现在民族地区社会事业发展相对滞后,同时表现为近些年相继发生的对社会稳定和民族团结影响较大的少数民族群体性事件。加强少数民族群体性事件的研究,是事关民族团结和改革发展稳定大局的重大理论和现实问题。然而,中国理论界和实务界的相关研究才刚刚起步,缺乏有深度、有针对性的著作。通过多次深入民族地区和少数民族流动人口较多的沿海城市,本文结合国家民委和地方民族工作部门的有关材料,力争突破传统理解误区,使用科学研究方法探寻少数民族群体性事件的成因和规律,对正确处理此类问题、促进民族团结和社会稳定提出政策建议。当前,中国少数民族群体性事件主要有五种类型：一是经济、民事、刑事等纠纷引起的群体性事件；二是宗教因素引起的群体性事件；三是触犯少数民族感情引发的群体性事件；四是清真问题引发的群体性事件；五是历史问题引发的群体性事件。这些群体性事件主要集中在民族关系、民族风俗、宗教信仰、社会流动等方面。值得关注的是,随着下岗、拆迁、征地、外出务工、拖欠工资等问题逐步影响到少数民族群众,可以预见,类似的少数民族群体性事件有可能会形成新的高发期。一旦这些问题与传统的诱发因素交织在一起,少数民族群体性事件的应对和处理将会更加复杂。少数民族群体性事件,与其它方面的群体性事件相比,虽然发生在同样社会背景下,却有着更为复杂的因果机制。本文核心观点,群体性事件的发生是“意愿的形成”与“能力的获得”互动作用的结果,即Incident=perception*capacity,亦即I=F(P,C)。第一个变量“意愿的形成”,包括社会转型、经济贫困和相对剥夺感等方面。不能简单地认为经济上的贫困是主要原因。事实上,决定人们的反应方面,主观感受可能比客观事实更为重要。少数民族群众心理上的“相对剥夺感”才是引发群体抗争的真正意愿。但是,只有参与抗争的意愿,并不必然导致少数民族群众参与抗争的行为,从而引出对另一个变量的分析。另一个变量“能力的获得”,包括民族文化、组织资源、新兴媒介和环境生态等方面。在社会转型的过程中,少数民族的传统能力和现代能力都出现了改变,从而更多地具备了参与政治、影响社会的能力。由于少数民族群众居住空间上的接近性,民族文化、认同感和宗教信仰等文化力量的动员,手机、互联网、新闻媒体等新兴媒介的推动,参与意愿和参与能力进行互动,从而更有条件转化为参与行动。那么,在缺乏充分、有效的利益诉求渠道的情况下,少数民族群众往往进行聚集、串联、群访、围攻、打砸等,以致最终发生群体性事件。同时,政府有关部门的不当应对,往往会与群体性事件产生互动,乃至造成恶性循环。这种替代选择的缺失,正是中国政治治理结构和国家一社会关系的反映。本文分别从城市民族工作、宗教因素、国际因素等三个方面,对本文研究假说群体性事件为能力和意愿的函数I=F(P,C)进行论证。不能简单地将少数民族群体性事件政治化、刑事化、民族问题化,要在社会历史背景下动态研究和认识少数民族群体性事件,以一种实事求是的态度形成关于群体性事件的新思维,实现群体性事件的规范化预防、引导多数群体性事件的体制化存在、形成极端事件的边缘化格局,形成制度化解决群体性事件的新方式。在西方国家,破坏性的骚乱和旨在颠覆政权的革命同样是执政者所绝不容许的,但像工会等以前处于体制外的政治组织,以及罢工、示威、静坐等以前为体制所不容的政治活动,几乎都已被合法化,被全而或部分地纳入了体制轨道。因此,在中国社会的发展中,提高政府对群体行为体制化的能力,全面做好预防工作,切实做好处置工作,并坚决防范和打击各种分裂破坏活动,是十分必要的。进一步来说,建立一个能在将大多数群体行为体制化的同时将极端行为边缘化的国家—社会关系,才是实现长治久安的真谛所在。
【Abstract】 In a multi-ethnic, multi-religious country with a population of 1.3 billion, it is of great importance to maintain social order and promote harmonious society while national economy and society is developing rapidly. Currently, our country is not only in the important period of strategic opportunities, but also in the period of increasing social contradictions. Complex social environment poses a major challenge to national affairs management. Ethnic work is one of the weak links of social management, for example, the social development in ethnic regions is relatively backward, while minority group incidents that occurred from time to time in recent years made deep influence on social stability and national unity. To enhance the research of minority group incidents is a major issue about national unity and social stability, which is of great theoretical and practical value. However, relevant researches have just started both in theory circle and in practice, lacking of deep and targeted works. In this paper, several in-depth researches are carried out in ethnic minority areas and coastal cities where there is more mobile minority population, combined with relevant information from State Ethnic Affairs Commission and local ethnic departments. The author strives to use the scientific methods to break through the traditional misunderstanding, explore the causes and laws of minority group incidents, and give policy suggestions to correctly handle these problems as well as promote national unity and social stability.At present, China’s minority group incidents can be classified into five types. The first type is caused by economic, civil or criminal elements. The second arises from religious factors. The third one lies in the breach of minority feelings. The fourth type is Muslim-induced events. And the last type is resulted from historical events. These group incidents mainly focus on ethnic relations, ethnic customs, religions, social mobility and so on. It is worth noting that, with the laid-off, demolition, land acquisition, migrant workers, and unpaid wages and other issues affecting minority people, similar incidents may enter a peak period. Once these problems are intertwined with traditional factors, it will be much more complicated to cope with minority group incidents.Compared with other group incidents, minority group incidents, although happen in the same social background, have a more complex causal mechanism. The core point of this paper is that the group incident is the result of the interaction of willingness and capacity, namely, Incident= Perception * Capacity, i.e. I= F (P, C). The first variable, the formation of the perception, includes social transformation, economically poverty and relative deprivation and so on. Economically poverty cannot be simply regarded as a major reason. In fact, subjective feelings may be more important than objective facts on deciding people’s reactions. "Relative deprivation "of minority people is the real willingness that triggered group struggle. Moreover, only the willingness to participate in the struggle will not necessarily lead to group incidents. Thus, another variable is brought in, that is, access to ability, including national culture, organizational resources, new media and ecological environment, etc. In the process of social transformation, the traditional and modern skills of minorities have improved. As a consequence, they are able to be involved in politics and social affairs better. Due to their proximal living space, similar cultural forces such as national culture, identity and religious, and the development of new media, the perception is more easily to transform into real action. So, in the absence of adequate and effective interest appeal channel, minority people are inclined to gather, group visit, besiege or smash, etc., which eventually brings about extreme behaviors such as group incidents. Meanwhile, inappropriate responses of government often make it worse, resulting in a vicious cycle. The lack of alternatives is a vivid reflection o f China’s political management structure as well as state-social relations. This paper demonstrates the function I= F (P, C) from three perspectives, respectively urban ethnic management, religion and international factors.Minority group incidents cannot simply be equated as political events, criminal offense or ethnic problems. Instead, we ought to insist on a down-to-earth attitude and study the incidents in the dynamic social and historical background. We should try to find new ways to institutionalize group incidents. For example, we should realize the normalized prevention of group incidents, guide the institutionalization of most incidents, and marginalize extreme events. In Western countries, destructive riots and revolution aimed to overthrow the regime is also not allowed by those in power. But such political organization as trade unions and such political activities as strikes, demonstrations and sit-ins which were used not to be tolerated by the system almost have been legalized, fully or partially integrated into the system. Therefore, with the development of our society, the ability of government to institutionalize group behaviors should be improved, so as to resolutely forestall and fight against all sorts of separatist sabotages. Furthermore, it seems that an effective course of action by the government is to focus on keeping ethnic tensions below a certain acceptable threshold.