浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)
 
   2025年5月17日 星期六   首页 |  期刊介绍 |  编委会 |  投稿指南 |  信息服务 |  期刊订阅 |  联系我们 |  预印本过刊 |  浙江省高校学报研究会栏目 |  留言板 |  English Version
浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)  2005, Vol. 35 Issue (3): 32-    DOI:
栏目 最新目录| 下期目录| 过刊浏览| 高级检索 |
不同领域的协商民主
Deliberative Democracy in Different Places

全文: PDF (127 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 

代议制民主一般采用选举的方法来聚合民众的偏好,它强调公民享有平等的民主权利,强调聚合之后所达成的最终结果,但很少去关注聚合的具体过程.相反,协商民主理论关注的正是聚合的具体过程,强调公民在作出选择过程中的深思熟虑与审慎.协商民主可能发生在三个层面的不同领域:国家制度、特设论坛、公共领域.这三个领域内的协商民主都有其不同的特点与运作方式.而且,对协商民主的追求本身就是一个不断协商的过程,并不存在一个普遍模式.因此,各个国家与地区应当因地制宜地创建协商民主,中国的民主实践也是如此.

服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入我的书架
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
关键词 协商民主国家制度特设论坛公共领域    
Abstract

According to standard and long-established ways of political thinking in the West, democracy was first and foremost an attribute of the state, because the state claims final political authority over the citizens of a particular territory. The legitimacy of the democratic state then rests on popular control combined with political equality across citizens. Popular control was normally conceptualized in aggregative terms: the preferences of citizens for leaders, parties, or policies must somehow be aggregated in order to produce collective decisions about who should lead and what they should do. Aggregation generally takes the form of the counting of votes in elections, when this conception of democracy becomes representative democracy. Political equality then means that the votes of citizens are counted equally. This conception of democracy becomes liberal democracy when it is linked to a set of rights possessed by each citizen. These rights concern most importantly freedom of opinion, expression and association, and protection against the arbitrary power of government.The theory of deliberative democracy does not necessarily reject these features, but it does lead to a difference in emphasis, beginning with a contrast between aggregation and deliberation. The traditional focus on aggregation meant that little attention was paid to how preferences are shaped; for preferences were simply taken as given, and the focus was on aggregation mechanisms. In contrast, deliberative democrats believe preferences ought to be shaped reflectively by thoughtful and competent citizens (or their representatives), and that such reflection is central to deliberation. Preferences can be transformed in deliberation. In addition, for deliberative democrats, the legitimacy of a political decision rests on the right and capacity of those affected by a decision to deliberate in participation about its content. Those affected do not merely vote, or have their preferences registered (though deliberative democracy does not have to dispense with preference aggregation and voting). This does of course raise some questions about how the deliberation of citizens is to be organized into the political system, especially when the number of those affected by a decision is large. Different answers to these questions point to different locations for deliberation. In this paper I will examine three different locations for deliberation: the institutions of the state, designed forums for deliberation by ordinary citizens and/or political advocates, and the public sphere. A deliberative democracy can be built upon practices in each of these locations. There is no precise or universally-applicable recipe for exactly what kinds of institutions and practices are best in each location. The pursuit of deliberative democracy should itself be a deliberative process to which political theorists may contribute, while allowing that any suggestions they might make require validation by a broader public, who also might have creative ideas of their own. Many lessons can be drawn from the Chinese development of participatory and deliberative institutions in recent years. Of course they may not be perfect. But deliberation is in large part a matter of learning.

Key wordsdeliberative democracy    the institutions of the state    designed forums for deliberation    the public sphere   
    
引用本文:   
John S.Dryzek  王大林. 不同领域的协商民主[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2005, 35(3): 32-.
链接本文:  
https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/     或     https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/CN/Y2005/V35/I3/32
发表一流的成果,传播一流的发现,提供一流的新知

浙ICP备14002560号-5
版权所有 © 2009 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)    浙ICP备05074421号
地址:杭州市天目山路148号 邮编:310028 电话:0571-88273210 88925616 E-mail:zdxb_w@zju.edu.cn
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn