【摘要】： 隨著中國政治民主化進(jìn)程的加快,公眾的民主意識、政治參與意識越來越強(qiáng)烈,民主化的時代已經(jīng)來臨,而我國現(xiàn)有的公共決策機(jī)制卻不能適應(yīng)現(xiàn)代民主社會的需求�，F(xiàn)有的公共決策仍然被政治精英們把握和壟斷,公共決策作用的客體——公眾卻因?yàn)闊o專業(yè)知識、無技能和缺乏效率等借口而被排除在外。這種壟斷式的公共決策模式越來越遭到質(zhì)疑,其決策結(jié)果的合法性也越來越脆弱。近年以來,接連發(fā)生的貴州甕安、云南孟連等群體性事件則更加以血的代價(jià)給我們敲響了警鐘：如果再藐視公共決策過程中的公眾參與,如果再把公共決策當(dāng)作政治精英的事,那么公共決策的合法性將越來越脆弱,甚至將動搖當(dāng)權(quán)者的統(tǒng)治基礎(chǔ)。 20世紀(jì)后期興起于西方的商議民主理論則給我們提供了一種新的認(rèn)知視角。商議民主理論被視為傳統(tǒng)民主范式的復(fù)興,其以公共參與和平等商議為基本價(jià)值訴求,強(qiáng)調(diào)參與主體對于公共利益的責(zé)任,促進(jìn)政治話語的相互理解。商議民主理論的“商議”“民主”“平等”“公開”等核心理念正好與公共決策中“公眾必須能夠公開平等地參與決策”、“在公共決策中公眾必須有與政府商議的權(quán)力”、“公眾必須能夠?qū)嵸|(zhì)性地影響公共決策”等價(jià)值取向相吻合,本文正是以此為基點(diǎn),借助商議民主理論的基本理念和觀點(diǎn),以中國基層民主實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)的典型代表——“澤國實(shí)驗(yàn)”為觀照對象,從公共事務(wù)決策參與的角度契入,采用理論闡釋與個案分析相結(jié)合的研究方式,在理論與實(shí)踐的相互參照下,嘗試性地構(gòu)建出一種商議民主式的公共決策機(jī)制,這是本文的寫作重點(diǎn)。 本文的寫作目的就是要構(gòu)建出這樣一種商議民主式的公共決策機(jī)制,并使得這一機(jī)制具有現(xiàn)實(shí)的實(shí)踐價(jià)值,以便能對當(dāng)今中國的公共決策實(shí)踐起到指導(dǎo)作用。在本文最后,筆者又分析了這種商議民主式公共決策機(jī)制可能遭遇的現(xiàn)實(shí)困境,并嘗試性地對商議民主式公共決策機(jī)制提出了優(yōu)化方案。筆者寄希望于這種得到優(yōu)化的完善的商議民主式公共決策機(jī)制在能夠增強(qiáng)基層政府公共決策的民主性和科學(xué)性、削減基層政府公共決策合法性危機(jī)的同時,進(jìn)而能夠促使中國權(quán)威政治結(jié)構(gòu)的變遷,加快中國的政治民主化進(jìn)程,讓人民真正實(shí)現(xiàn)當(dāng)家做主的權(quán)力。
[Abstract]:With the acceleration of the process of political democratization in China, the democratic consciousness of the public and the consciousness of political participation are becoming stronger and stronger. The era of democratization has come, but the existing public decision-making mechanism in China cannot meet the needs of the modern democratic society. The existing public decision-making is still held and monopolized by the political elite, but the public is excluded because of lack of expertise, skills and efficiency. This monopolistic public decision-making model is being questioned more and more, and the legitimacy of its decision-making results is becoming more and more fragile. In recent years, the successive group incidents in Weng'an, Guizhou, and Menglian, Yunnan, have even sounded the alarm at the price of blood: if public participation in the process of public decision-making is again disdained, and public decision-making is again regarded as a matter of political elite, Then the legitimacy of public decision-making will become more and more fragile, and will even shake the ruling basis of those in power. The western theory of deliberative democracy in the late 20 th century provides us with a new cognitive perspective. The theory of deliberative democracy is regarded as the revival of the traditional democratic paradigm, which takes public participation and equal negotiation as the basic value demands, emphasizes the responsibility of the participants to the public interest and promotes the mutual understanding of the political discourse. The core concepts of the theory of deliberative democracy, such as "consultation", "democracy", "equality," openness ", and so on, coincide with the fact that" the public must be able to participate openly and equally in decision-making "and" the public must have the power to negotiate with the government in public decision-making. " The value orientation such as "the public must be able to influence public decision-making substantially" is consistent. This paper is based on the basic ideas and viewpoints of deliberative democratic theory. Taking the typical representative of China's grass-roots democratic practice experience, "the experiment of the State" as the observation object, from the angle of participation in decision-making of public affairs, the author adopts the research method of combining theoretical interpretation with case analysis. Under the cross-reference of theory and practice, this paper tries to construct a kind of deliberative democratic public decision-making mechanism, which is the focus of this paper. The purpose of this paper is to construct such a deliberative democratic public decision-making mechanism, and to make this mechanism have practical value, so as to guide the public decision-making practice in China today. At the end of this paper, the author analyzes the practical dilemma that this kind of deliberative democratic public decision-making mechanism may encounter, and tries to put forward the optimization scheme for the deliberative democratic public decision-making mechanism. The author hopes that this kind of optimized and perfect deliberative democratic public decision-making mechanism can enhance the democracy and scientific nature of the public decision-making of grass-roots government and reduce the crisis of legitimacy of public decision-making of grass-roots government at the same time. Then it can promote the change of Chinese authoritative political structure, speed up the process of political democratization in China, and let the people truly realize the power of being the master of their own country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D630

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李炳爍;;超越古典共和主義與自由主義——協(xié)商性民主與合法性重建[J];江蘇大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2006年05期

2 燕繼榮;;協(xié)商民主的價(jià)值和意義[J];科學(xué)社會主義;2006年06期

3 朱勤軍;中國政治文明建設(shè)中的協(xié)商民主探析[J];政治學(xué)研究;2004年03期

4 陳家剛;協(xié)商民主:概念、要素與價(jià)值[J];中共天津市委黨校學(xué)報(bào);2005年03期

5 王學(xué)軍;;協(xié)商民主與公共決策[J];天府新論;2006年01期

6 王錫鋅;;公共決策中的大眾、專家與政府 以中國價(jià)格決策聽證制度為個案的研究視角[J];中外法學(xué);2006年04期

7 許紀(jì)霖;北大改革與商議性民主[J];學(xué)海;2005年05期

8 郎友興;商議式民主與中國的地方經(jīng)驗(yàn):浙江省溫嶺市的“民主懇談會”[J];浙江社會科學(xué);2005年01期

9 陳剩勇;協(xié)商民主理論與中國[J];浙江社會科學(xué);2005年01期

10 林尚立;協(xié)商政治:對中國民主政治發(fā)展的一種思考[J];學(xué)術(shù)月刊;2003年04期

，

本文編號：2335392