【摘要】： 達(dá)爾的民主理論在西方民主理論史上占有重要地位。但是,由于種種原因,國(guó)內(nèi)學(xué)者對(duì)其理論理解并不系統(tǒng)和充分,他們沒(méi)有給它一個(gè)合理的定位。這篇文章從達(dá)爾多元民主的產(chǎn)生、發(fā)展和變化入手,對(duì)達(dá)爾的理論進(jìn)行分析,試圖從中找出它的內(nèi)在含義及其演變過(guò)程。從而也折射出西方民主理論的轉(zhuǎn)變。 達(dá)爾對(duì)民主理論的研究主要集中在20世紀(jì)30年代至80年代,這段時(shí)期是西方社會(huì)重大變革時(shí)期。政治理論家對(duì)法西斯、第二次世界大戰(zhàn)、冷戰(zhàn)和美國(guó)政府信任危機(jī)進(jìn)行了反思,這種反思是在現(xiàn)有的政治體制下進(jìn)行的,并試圖找到解決的辦法。以熊彼特為代表的精英民主理論家認(rèn)為,古典民主理論中的“公共福利”、“人民的意志”等概念,現(xiàn)實(shí)中是不存在的。在現(xiàn)代社會(huì)中,一般選民是消極被動(dòng)的。民主只是一種通過(guò)投票來(lái)選擇領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的方法。精英民主理論注意到了被動(dòng)的選民,但他們卻忽視了選民和領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人之間還存在著大量的組織這一事實(shí)。達(dá)爾通過(guò)對(duì)現(xiàn)行民主政治體制考察后,得出這樣的結(jié)論：民主不僅局限在選民和領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人的相互選擇之中,還通過(guò)組織之間相互作用表現(xiàn)出來(lái)。此外,多元主義政治理論家拉斯韋爾也認(rèn)為,政府和政治組織在權(quán)力上本質(zhì)是一樣的。國(guó)家權(quán)力多元化的基本特征將成為重要因素。 達(dá)爾開始證明多元民主理論。達(dá)爾首先批評(píng)兩個(gè)典型的民主理論。他認(rèn)為,“多數(shù)人的暴政”并不存在,此外,分權(quán)制度和對(duì)政黨的限制不能防止暴政。民主試圖實(shí)現(xiàn)人民主權(quán)和政治平等,這是不現(xiàn)實(shí)的,并具有潛在的危險(xiǎn)。達(dá)爾認(rèn)為,權(quán)力被有效地分散在無(wú)數(shù)的組織手中,使得多數(shù)人專制變得不可能。因此,這兩種民主都不能被稱為民主。達(dá)爾認(rèn)為,民主不是多數(shù)人的統(tǒng)治,而是多重少數(shù)人的統(tǒng)治,多頭政體的標(biāo)志是：投票權(quán),建議權(quán),多數(shù)原則等。 達(dá)爾認(rèn)為,為了實(shí)現(xiàn)多頭政體,社會(huì)和制度都是必要的。在社會(huì)因素方面,多元的社會(huì)組織,自由的市場(chǎng),社會(huì)共識(shí)是其必要條件。民主需要多種相應(yīng)的制度保障,它需要制度條件,可以保證“廣泛參與”和“合法反對(duì)”。 達(dá)爾討論了有關(guān)民主制度框架的問(wèn)題,然后把目光轉(zhuǎn)向微觀領(lǐng)域：組織。達(dá)爾認(rèn)為,目前多元民主的缺陷主要是由組織特點(diǎn)的雙重性引起的,組織之間的不平等,使得組織對(duì)政策影響也不平等。為了解決組織的平等問(wèn)題,我們要解決經(jīng)濟(jì)企業(yè)的所有權(quán)問(wèn)題。第一,改革公司的管理模式,實(shí)現(xiàn)企業(yè)的自主權(quán)。這主要是基于自治權(quán)利的優(yōu)先性。民主保障了個(gè)人基本權(quán)利和自由。但是基本的權(quán)利(包括政治權(quán)力),在一定程度上,比民主制度更好,自治權(quán)利是最重要的基本權(quán)利。經(jīng)濟(jì)民主是大多數(shù)想要實(shí)現(xiàn)自由的人的最有效途徑。如果工人完全參與政策的制定,企業(yè)員工充分參與的權(quán)利得到實(shí)現(xiàn),自由將得到保障。 因此,達(dá)爾認(rèn)為,企業(yè)成員應(yīng)享有企業(yè)的自治權(quán),在公司和企業(yè)中實(shí)行民主,它可以消除不平等問(wèn)題,實(shí)現(xiàn)政治平等和推進(jìn)民主。 達(dá)爾的民主理論對(duì)當(dāng)代民主理論做出了重要貢獻(xiàn)。他批評(píng)了傳統(tǒng)的古典民主理論,打破了傳統(tǒng)民主的完美形象,并指出了它們的不足(麥迪遜原則及其多數(shù)原則的缺陷),還揭示了民主的社會(huì)基礎(chǔ)。以社會(huì)制約權(quán)力的觀念被人們忽視,這給人們帶來(lái)了巨大的提示。理論上,達(dá)爾連接了近代和現(xiàn)代民主。他通過(guò)不懈的研究準(zhǔn)確地把握了民主理論的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)。他通過(guò)借鑒新的研究成果發(fā)展和改進(jìn)了他的多元民主理論。經(jīng)濟(jì)民主理論也是對(duì)傳統(tǒng)民主理論的一大突破。達(dá)爾的民主理論也存在一些缺陷。在現(xiàn)有的資本主義私有財(cái)產(chǎn)和憲政體制下,很難實(shí)現(xiàn)達(dá)爾提出的經(jīng)濟(jì)民主思想。他的設(shè)想,解決不了組織之間的經(jīng)濟(jì)和政治不平等。在現(xiàn)有的制度框架下,他堅(jiān)持在微觀領(lǐng)域?qū)嵭忻裰?但他沒(méi)有給出具體的措施。 本文分為四個(gè)部分的論述 一、主要闡述達(dá)爾民主理論的思想背景。主要是時(shí)代背景和思想淵源。達(dá)爾的理論堅(jiān)持行為主義的研究方法上,理論上受其他民主理論家的影響,如林德布洛姆等。 二,多元民主與多頭政體。達(dá)爾以理論為基礎(chǔ)進(jìn)行研究。他已經(jīng)接受了精英民主理論有關(guān)選民的假設(shè)和研究方法,認(rèn)為麥迪遜多數(shù)原則存在缺陷,真正的民主不是多數(shù)或少數(shù)的統(tǒng)治,而是多頭政體。達(dá)爾關(guān)于以組織為中介的多元主義民主模式。達(dá)爾在扭轉(zhuǎn)以前政治哲學(xué)家關(guān)于組織作用的觀點(diǎn)的基礎(chǔ)上,采取以組織為中介的分析框架,提出了社會(huì)制衡這一實(shí)質(zhì)思想,凸顯了其多元主義民主為實(shí)現(xiàn)自由平等的價(jià)值訴求。 三、多元民主的困境及其解決辦法。經(jīng)濟(jì)民主。達(dá)爾認(rèn)為多元民主的問(wèn)題,主要是由組織特點(diǎn)的雙重性造成的,即組織之間存在不平等的問(wèn)題。為了解決該組織的不平等,我們應(yīng)改變企業(yè)的所有權(quán),這種改變可以通過(guò)經(jīng)濟(jì)民主模式得以實(shí)現(xiàn)。 最后,達(dá)爾的多元民主理論為當(dāng)代西方民主理論做出了重大貢獻(xiàn)：他批判了精英民主理論,在民主理論由現(xiàn)代向近代轉(zhuǎn)變過(guò)程中起了承上啟下的作用,順應(yīng)了時(shí)代發(fā)展。同時(shí),他的理論也有缺陷,他的理論本身有自相矛盾的地方,許多地方都與現(xiàn)實(shí)相關(guān),卻無(wú)法在現(xiàn)實(shí)中實(shí)現(xiàn)。
[Abstract]:Dahl's democratic theory occupies an important position in the history of Western democratic theory. However, for various reasons, the domestic scholars are not systematic and sufficient in their theoretical understanding. They have not given it a reasonable position. This article from the emergence of democracy in the dahduo, the development and change of the hand, the analysis of Dahl's theory, try to find out from it. Its inner meaning and evolution process also reflect the change of Western democratic theory.
Dahl's research on democratic theory mainly concentrated in the period from 1930s to 80s. This period was a period of great transformation in western society. The political theorists reconsidered the fascist, the Second World War, the cold war and the trust crisis of the American government. This reflection was carried out under the existing political system and tried to find a solution. Law. The elite democratic theorists, represented by bear Pete, believe that the concept of "public welfare" and "the will of the people" in the classical democratic theory is not existent. In modern society, the general voters are passive and passive. Democracy is only a way to choose the leader through voting. The elite democracy theory has noticed the passivity. Voters, but they ignore the fact that there is a lot of organization between the voters and the leaders. By examining the current democratic political system, Dahl concluded that democracy is not only confined to the choice of the voters and leaders, but also through the interaction of organizations. In addition, pluralist politics. Lasswell, a governance theorist, also believes that the essence of government and political organizations is the same in power. The basic characteristics of the pluralism of state power will become an important factor.
Dahl began to prove the theory of pluralism. Dahl first criticized two typical democratic theories. He believed that "tyranny of the majority" did not exist. In addition, the separation of powers and restrictions on political parties could not prevent tyranny. Democracy tried to achieve people's sovereignty and political equality, which was not true and potential danger. Dahl thought power. Being effectively dispersed in the hands of numerous organizations makes it impossible for most people to autocracy. Therefore, neither of these two democracies can be called democracy. Dahl believes that democracy is not the rule of the majority, but the rule of multiple minorities, and the symbol of the multiregime is the right to vote, the right to proposal, the majority principle, and so on.
In the view of Dahl, in order to realize a multi headed regime, society and system are necessary. In terms of social factors, multiple social organizations, free markets, and social consensus are the necessary conditions. Democracy requires a variety of corresponding institutional safeguards. It requires institutional conditions to ensure "extensive participation" and "legal opposition".
Dahl discussed the issue of the framework of democratic institutions and then turned to the microsphere: organization. Dahl believed that the shortcomings of the current pluralism were mainly caused by the dual nature of the organizational characteristics, the inequality between organizations, and the unequal impact of the organization on policy. In order to understand the problem of the equality of the organization, we have to solve the economy. First, reform the management model of the company and realize the autonomy of the enterprise. This is mainly based on the priority of the right of autonomy. Democracy guarantees the basic rights and freedoms of the individual. But the basic rights (including political power), to a certain extent, are better than the democratic system, and the right of autonomy is the most important basic right. Economic democracy is the most effective way for most people who want to be free. If the workers are fully involved in the formulation of the policy, the rights of the employees to be fully involved are realized, and freedom will be guaranteed.
Therefore, Dahl believes that enterprise members should enjoy the autonomy of the enterprise and carry out democracy in companies and enterprises. It can eliminate inequality, achieve political equality and promote democracy.
Dahl's democratic theory made an important contribution to the contemporary theory of democracy. He criticized the traditional classical democratic theory, broke the perfect image of the traditional democracy, and pointed out their shortcomings (the shortcomings of the Madison principles and most principles), and revealed the social foundation of democracy. People have brought great hints. In theory, Dahl connected modern and modern democracy. He accurately grasped the development trend of democratic theory through unremitting research. He developed and improved his pluralistic democratic theory by drawing on the new research results. The theory of economic democracy is also a breakthrough in the traditional democratic theory. Dahl's people There are also some defects in the main theory. Under the existing capitalist private property and constitutional system, it is difficult to realize the economic and democratic ideas proposed by Dahl. His idea can not solve the economic and political inequality between organizations. Under the existing institutional framework, he insisted on democracy in the micro field, but he did not give specific measures.
This article is divided into four parts
First, it mainly expounds the ideological background of Dahl's democratic theory. It is mainly the background of the times and the origin of thought. Dahl's theory adheres to the methodology of behaviorism and is theoretically influenced by other democratic theorists, such as Lindblom and so on.
Two, pluralistic democracy and pluralism. Dahl is based on the theory of theory. He has accepted the hypothesis and research method of the electorate in the elite democratic theory. He believes that most of Madison's principles are defective, and that real democracy is not a majority or a minority of rule, but a multi regime. Dahl's pluralist democracy with organization as a mediator. Mode. On the basis of reversing the views of the former political philosophers on the role of the organization, Dahl adopted an analytical framework of organization as an intermediary, put forward the essence of social balance, and highlighted the value appeal of pluralist democracy for the realization of freedom and equality.
Three, the plight of pluralistic democracy and its solution. Economic democracy. Dahl believes that the problem of pluralism is mainly caused by the dual nature of organizational characteristics, that is, the problem of inequality between organizations. In order to solve the inequality of the organization, we should change the ownership of the enterprise. This kind of change can be achieved through the model of economic democracy.
Finally, Dahl's pluralistic democratic theory made a great contribution to the contemporary western democratic theory: he criticized the elite democracy theory, played an important role in the process of the transition from modern to modern, and adapted to the development of the times. At the same time, his theory was also defective, and his theory itself had contradictions in many places. Everything is related to reality, but it can't be realized in reality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號(hào)】：D082

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡霄漢;;淺說(shuō)多元民主[J];水利天地;2011年04期

2 黃軍柱;;托克維爾民主的式微[J];學(xué)習(xí)月刊;2010年08期

3 喬國(guó)香;;對(duì)羅伯特·達(dá)爾《論民主》的解讀[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年29期

4 黃梅;民主:在理想與現(xiàn)實(shí)之間——淺談達(dá)爾的民主理論[J];蘭州學(xué)刊;2004年01期

5 侯衛(wèi)偉;多元民主社會(huì)統(tǒng)一和穩(wěn)定的基礎(chǔ)——羅爾斯的重疊共識(shí)理念述評(píng)[J];理論視野;2002年06期

6 程峗,錢捷;從人民統(tǒng)治到人民選擇統(tǒng)治者——西方精英民主理論的發(fā)展與困境[J];南京林業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年01期

7 樊凡;;民主的兩種批評(píng)者[J];唐都學(xué)刊;2011年03期

8 常征;新加坡:權(quán)威主義,還是精英民主?[J];東南亞研究;2005年04期

9 趙自勇;;菲律賓非暴力群眾運(yùn)動(dòng)的根源和后果[J];當(dāng)代亞太;2006年08期

10 金東瑞;;多元民主及其困境——達(dá)爾的多元民主觀述評(píng)[J];成功(教育);2009年08期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前5條

1 熊光清;;自由主義民主與社會(huì)主義民主之比較分析[A];科學(xué)發(fā)展：文化軟實(shí)力與民族復(fù)興——紀(jì)念中華人民共和國(guó)成立60周年論文集（下卷）[C];2009年

2 謝銳君;李海峰;;治理語(yǔ)境下公民社會(huì)的民主發(fā)展探究[A];“構(gòu)建和諧社會(huì)與深化行政管理體制改革”研討會(huì)暨中國(guó)行政管理學(xué)會(huì)2007年年會(huì)論文集[C];2007年

3 何海兵;;后馬克思主義理論評(píng)介[A];馬克思主義 中國(guó)探索與當(dāng)代價(jià)值：上海市社會(huì)科學(xué)界第七屆學(xué)術(shù)年會(huì)文集（2009年度）馬克思主義研究學(xué)科卷[C];2009年

4 李路曲;;關(guān)于東亞的政黨體制與政治轉(zhuǎn)型的思考[A];“政黨制度與中國(guó)特色——21世紀(jì)初政黨發(fā)展與變革”全國(guó)學(xué)術(shù)研討會(huì)論文集[C];2011年

5 李成仁;郭金燦;;突尼斯、埃及兩國(guó)執(zhí)政黨垮臺(tái)的原因及教訓(xùn)[A];紀(jì)念中國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨成立90周年黨建研討會(huì)論文選編（下冊(cè)）[C];2011年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 劉啟云;精英民主與多元民主[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2008年

2 ;精英民主與大眾民主[N];人民代表報(bào);2011年

3 郭忠華 中山大學(xué)政治與公共事務(wù)管理學(xué)院;監(jiān)督式民主:約翰·基恩的民主新論[N];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2011年

4 本報(bào)記者 張立偉;社會(huì)公正與精英民主：一位中央黨校教授的理解[N];財(cái)經(jīng)時(shí)報(bào);2003年

5 劉兆鑫 鄭州大學(xué)公共管理學(xué)院;西方國(guó)家福利政策失敗的二重批判[N];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2010年

6 李鵬程;現(xiàn)代民主形式及其悖論[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2007年

7 ;民主從維護(hù)憲法做起[N];人民代表報(bào);2011年

8 劉學(xué)軍;民主新釋[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2004年

9 黃小勇;民主是法治的基礎(chǔ)[N];學(xué)習(xí)時(shí)報(bào);2001年

10 特約記者 郭忠華 中山大學(xué);監(jiān)督式民主:民主在當(dāng)代的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)[N];社會(huì)科學(xué)報(bào);2011年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 夏軍;多元民主的構(gòu)成[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

2 林毅;批判與超越——精英民主理論評(píng)析[D];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院;2011年

3 聶露;論英國(guó)選舉制度[D];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院;2002年

4 肖克;當(dāng)代西方保守主義民主政治理念研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2008年

5 周圣平;羅伯特·達(dá)爾多元主義民主觀研究[D];中共中央黨校;2010年

6 李兆豐;英美傳統(tǒng)下的表達(dá)自由發(fā)展路徑研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2004年

7 邱曉里;民主實(shí)現(xiàn)的法治機(jī)制[D];中共中央黨校;2012年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 高耕耘;達(dá)爾多元民主理論述評(píng)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2010年

2 孟廣瑞;傳統(tǒng)民主的超越[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2010年

3 金東瑞;達(dá)爾的多元民主理論研究[D];天津師范大學(xué);2010年

4 高之慧;在對(duì)抗與競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中探尋民主真諦[D];華東師范大學(xué);2010年

5 張小勇;精英與大眾[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

6 吳文;達(dá)爾多元主義民主理論述評(píng)[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

7 李春梅;羅伯特·達(dá)爾的“社會(huì)制約權(quán)力”思想研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

8 郭兆祥;達(dá)爾多元主義民主理論述評(píng)[D];吉林大學(xué);2007年

9 王瑞華;多元民主視角下社會(huì)制約權(quán)力的實(shí)現(xiàn)[D];吉林大學(xué);2008年

10 馬超;可控民主理論的源起探析[D];上海師范大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：2149841