本文選題：民主理論協(xié)和式民主國外民族問題南蒂羅爾(South　切入點：Tyrol)　出處：《中共中央黨校》2010年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】： 在多元分化的社會中,如何建構(gòu)國家統(tǒng)一和政治穩(wěn)定,使民主運轉(zhuǎn)起來,保護(hù)不同群體的權(quán)利,維持政治和公共政策決策的質(zhì)量一直是多民族國家面臨的一個重大挑戰(zhàn)。本論文力圖展現(xiàn)一種處理民族關(guān)系的理論和方法工具,即協(xié)和式民主(consociational democracy)的理論和方法。本論文的主要宗旨是展示和述評協(xié)和式民主的內(nèi)涵,并以三個案例為基礎(chǔ)驗證和展示協(xié)和式民主理論的運用,發(fā)現(xiàn)其適用性和局限性,以求能夠?qū)χ袊拿褡尻P(guān)系治理提供一些借鑒和啟示。 圍繞這個核心宗旨,本論文首先在占有較為系統(tǒng)文獻(xiàn)的基礎(chǔ)上,梳理出協(xié)和式民主理論的框架內(nèi)涵和方法意義。 作為對傳統(tǒng)政治發(fā)展理論和政治制度研究的批評和質(zhì)疑,協(xié)和式民主認(rèn)識到,多數(shù)民主理論不能解釋在社會和文化結(jié)構(gòu)高度分化的社會中的較高質(zhì)量的民主和政治穩(wěn)定的現(xiàn)實。在尋求對這些案例的經(jīng)驗和實踐進(jìn)行描述和解釋的過程中,政治學(xué)家們構(gòu)建了協(xié)和式民主的理論,作為對傳統(tǒng)政治發(fā)展和民主政體理論的改進(jìn)和完善。簡而言之,與多數(shù)民主模式的多數(shù)決統(tǒng)治不同,協(xié)和式民主模式側(cè)重于把社會各個群體的政治精英都納入政治和政策決策制度和過程,形成權(quán)力共享,依靠各個社會群體精英之間的協(xié)商和妥協(xié),以達(dá)成更廣泛的共識為目標(biāo),實現(xiàn)更廣大多數(shù)的民主。在協(xié)和式民主理論和制度下,多元分裂的異質(zhì)性社會同樣可以兼得政治穩(wěn)定和運作良好的民主制度。 協(xié)和式民主主要的特征是,第一,大聯(lián)合政府;第二,做決策時,各個群體相互否決或同時多數(shù)的規(guī)則;第三,比例性原則,即根據(jù)每個群體人口數(shù)量的不同比例作為政治代表、公職任命以及公共資源分配的主要依據(jù);第四,群體自治,授予每一個群體高度自治以管理其內(nèi)部事務(wù)。作為對協(xié)和式民主理論的延伸,作為多數(shù)民主的一個平行的替代模式,共識型民主理論以社會各個群體和政治力量之間的共識為目標(biāo),主張把盡量多的群體和政治力量納入政治和政策過程,來推行更溫和、更寬容的民主和政策績效。共識民主理論同樣對多民族國家處理民族關(guān)系提供了規(guī)范性的指導(dǎo)意義。 協(xié)和式民主理論是支撐本論文的理論框架。在該理論框架的指導(dǎo)下,本論文選擇了三個具有典型意義的民族關(guān)系治理的案例研究來進(jìn)一步說明、展示和驗證協(xié)和式民主理論的適用性和局限性。這三個案例是意大利南蒂羅爾的民族關(guān)系治理、英國的北愛爾蘭民族關(guān)系治理和比利時的民族關(guān)系治理。 南蒂羅爾民族關(guān)系治理模式的轉(zhuǎn)變,反映了從多數(shù)民主模式向協(xié)和式民主模式的轉(zhuǎn)型。第一個階段,采取的是一種多數(shù)決的簡單化的大區(qū)自治,用意大利語族的多數(shù)壓制了少數(shù)民族的自治和權(quán)利。第二個階段,以德語族裔和拉丁語族裔的否決權(quán)、比例代表制、聯(lián)合政府和民族事務(wù)自治實現(xiàn)了協(xié)和式民主的模式,從而取得了政治穩(wěn)定、民族關(guān)系和諧和良好的經(jīng)濟(jì)社會政策績效。 北愛爾蘭兩大民族由于宗教差異與對立,進(jìn)而造成了社會、政黨、準(zhǔn)軍事組織的兩元對立局勢。北愛爾蘭民族關(guān)系治理模式也經(jīng)歷了這兩種模式的轉(zhuǎn)變。一是1921年至1972年間的“史鐸蒙體制”,是一種多數(shù)民主的模式。英國在北愛爾蘭實行“新教優(yōu)勢”政策,實行不公平不公正的政治、經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會、教育政策,多數(shù)統(tǒng)治走向多數(shù)暴政。另外一種是1998年貝爾法斯特協(xié)議簽訂實施后的具有協(xié)和式民主特點的模式,建立聯(lián)合政府,實行比例代表制,實現(xiàn)權(quán)力共享。 作為一個“人造國家”,在民族社會結(jié)構(gòu)高度“兩極化”的國情下,比利時政府和各界政治精英采用協(xié)和式民主的思維和方法,依靠精英間的妥協(xié)協(xié)商,保障了各個語言群體和地區(qū)的權(quán)利,實現(xiàn)了穩(wěn)定和民主。比利時的政治生活中,體現(xiàn)出大聯(lián)合、比例制、少數(shù)否決、民族事務(wù)自治等明顯的協(xié)和式民主的特征。 對中國讀者來說,協(xié)和式民主理論的內(nèi)涵和方法值得介紹,其中蘊含了對中國處理民族關(guān)系的理論借鑒意義和政策啟示,因而有著較大的理論和現(xiàn)實意義。 一方面,構(gòu)建全國各民族共同的政治忠誠,維護(hù)國家統(tǒng)一和凝聚力是國家建構(gòu)的核心目標(biāo),應(yīng)該理直氣壯地堅持;另一方面,對于傳統(tǒng)的、地方的、民族的、宗教的、語言等的認(rèn)同和少數(shù)民族權(quán)利保障,由于原初認(rèn)同的穩(wěn)定性和對少數(shù)民族權(quán)利保護(hù)的道德義務(wù)和法律義務(wù),應(yīng)該主動對國家內(nèi)部的民族多樣性和文化多樣性予以積極的尊重和承認(rèn)。 對中國的政治發(fā)展,特別是對中國的民族關(guān)系治理而言,應(yīng)該充分認(rèn)識到主動進(jìn)行政治實踐和制度建設(shè)的引領(lǐng)和塑造作用,以實踐和制度改造文化、改造社會。作為一種政治實踐和制度構(gòu)建,協(xié)和式民主的精髓在于,在民族多樣性和文化多樣性的國家,應(yīng)該采取把各個少數(shù)民族的政治精英納入政府和政策過程的方式,打造廣泛的政治和政策共識,實現(xiàn)政治穩(wěn)定和有效民族關(guān)系治理。以此為目標(biāo),要特別重視少數(shù)民族干部的選拔、培養(yǎng)和使用,提高他們在本民族群眾中的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)動員能力,加強(qiáng)民族自治地方的自主性,大力解決經(jīng)濟(jì)社會發(fā)展不平衡的問題,鼓勵跨越民族界限的認(rèn)同和文化交流,增強(qiáng)各個民族之間的親和力。
[Abstract]:In a pluralistic society, how to construct the national unity and political stability, make democracy work, protection of minority rights and maintaining quality of politics and public policy decision has been a major challenge for the multi-ethnic country. This thesis tries to show the theory and method of tool for handling ethnic relations, namely the union Democracy (Consociational democracy) theory and method. The main purpose of this paper is to demonstrate and review of the Concorde democracy, and in three cases as the basis to validate and demonstrate the use of Consociational democracy theory, the applicability and limitation, in order to ethnic relations governance to provide some reference and Chinese enlightenment.
Around this core purpose, this paper first combs the framework connotation and method meaning of the Concorde democratic theory on the basis of a relatively systematic literature.
As the theoretical research and development of the political system of the traditional political criticism and questioning, Consociational democracy recognizes that the Democratic majority democratic and political theory can not explain the higher quality in the social and cultural structure of highly differentiated society stability in reality. The description and explanation in the process of seeking the experience and practice of these cases. Political scientists constructed Consociational democracy theory, as the improvement and development of the traditional political and democratic theory and perfect. In short, the majority and the Democratic majority decision rule of different modes, Consociational democracy mode focusing on the social political elite into political and policy decision-making system and process, the formation of power sharing rely on, negotiation and compromise between various social groups of the elite, to reach a broad consensus as the goal, to achieve greater majority democracy. Democracy in Concord In theory and system, pluralistic and heterogeneous society can also have a democratic system of political stability and good operation.
Consociational democracy the main features is that the first coalition government; second, decision making, each group veto or at the same time most of the rules; third, the principle of proportionality, according to different proportion of each population as political representatives, public appointments and public resources allocation mainly on the basis of fourth autonomous groups; granted, each group a high degree of autonomy to manage their internal affairs. As an extension of Consociational democracy theory, as a parallel substitution pattern of the majority democracy, consensus Consensus Democracy focuses on various social groups and political power as the goal, should take as many groups and political forces into the political and policy to carry out the process, more gentle, more tolerant and democratic policy performance. Consensus Democracy is also of great national ethnic relations provides normative significance.
Consociational democracy theory is the theoretical framework to support this paper. In this framework, this paper chose three case studies of typical ethnic relations governance to further explain, demonstrate and verify the applicability and limitations of Consociational democracy theory. The three cases are ethnic relations governance in southern Italy Tyrol, Northern Ireland ethnic relations governance and Belgium's ethnic relations governance.
Change the South Tyrol ethnic relations governance pattern, reflects the transformation from the model to the most democratic Consociational democracy mode. The first stage is taking a majority of the simplistic regional autonomy, with the majority of Italy. The suppression of the minority autonomy and rights. In second stages, with German minorities and Latin American veto, proportional representation, the coalition government and autonomous ethnic affairs implement Consociational democracy mode, so as to achieve political stability, ethnic harmony and good economic and social policy performance.
Northern Ireland two nation due to religious differences and confrontation, thus resulting in the social, political parties, two tensions paramilitary. Northern Ireland national governance has undergone the transformation of these two modes. One is from 1921 to 1972 "history Duomeng system", is a kind of most British democratic model. To implement the "Protestant ascendancy" policy in Northern Ireland, the implementation of the unfair political, economic, social, educational policy, majority rule to tyranny of the majority. The other one is the implementation of the agreement signed in Belfast in 1998 after having Consociational democracy characteristic model, the establishment of a coalition government, proportional representation system, realize the power sharing.
浣滀負(fù)涓，

本文編號：1648202