本文選題：民族區(qū)域自治制度 + 天下帝國�。� 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：2008年與2009年,西藏自治區(qū)首府拉薩與新疆維吾爾自治區(qū)首府烏魯木齊相繼爆發(fā)了少數(shù)民族的大規(guī)模騷亂,即西藏“3·14”事件與新疆“7·5”事件。這兩起惡性民族騷亂事件的爆發(fā),使得改革開放30年來逐漸淡出國家核心政治話題的民族問題,再次成為了學(xué)界關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn),而中國處理民族問題、協(xié)調(diào)民族關(guān)系的基本政治制度即“民族區(qū)域自治制度”,以及以此為核心的各項(xiàng)民族政策,也由此成為了學(xué)界反思的一大重點(diǎn)。20世紀(jì)80年代,在“撥亂反正”的時(shí)代背景下,民族區(qū)域自治制度正式以1982年《憲法》和1984年《民族區(qū)域自治法》的形式得到了國家的肯定。然而與此同時(shí),西藏和新疆的民族分離主義勢力卻也在逐漸抬頭,隨之而來的是1987年和1989年西藏拉薩騷亂、1990年新疆巴仁暴亂、1997年新疆伊犁暴亂等一系列社會(huì)惡性事件。從性質(zhì)上看,這些事件與2008年西藏“3·14”事件與2009年新疆“7·5”事件并無不同�？梢哉f,長久以來,民族區(qū)域自治制度的確立并沒能有效防治民族問題的一再發(fā)生。這似乎表明了,民族區(qū)域自治制度在處理民族問題上存在著一定的局限和不足。時(shí)至今日,中國的民族問題已經(jīng)成為了中央政府和全體國民必須正視和關(guān)注的重大議題,這不僅關(guān)涉到中國的內(nèi)部穩(wěn)定與長治久安,更影響到中國的對(duì)外交往與國際形象。而要徹底鏟除民族問題得以滋生的土壤,我們不能把目光焦點(diǎn)僅僅局限在批判“境內(nèi)外分裂勢力”的陰謀煽動(dòng),更要面對(duì)內(nèi)部建構(gòu)族群關(guān)系的制度性因素。為此,在當(dāng)下,我們有必要認(rèn)真反思“民族區(qū)域自治制度”,這有助于我們在當(dāng)前紛繁復(fù)雜的民族問題中梳理出一個(gè)頭緒,進(jìn)而探尋問題的癥結(jié)并找到問題的出路。本文的主體結(jié)構(gòu)分為四個(gè)部分:第一部分為“民族區(qū)域自治制度的歷史形成”。從歷史譜系考察的角度來看,從傳統(tǒng)到現(xiàn)代,中國的國家體制歷經(jīng)了一個(gè)從“天下帝國”到“民族國家”再到“多民族國家”的轉(zhuǎn)型。以1884年清政府在新疆設(shè)立行省為標(biāo)志,中國開啟了由“天下帝國”到“民族國家”的轉(zhuǎn)型歷程,而1949年民族區(qū)域自治制度的確立,標(biāo)志著“多民族國家”取代了“民族國家”成為了新中國的建國方案。而在這一轉(zhuǎn)型過程中,中國的民族結(jié)構(gòu)與地區(qū)制度也歷經(jīng)了一個(gè)由“二元”到“一體”再到“二元”的轉(zhuǎn)變,從民族結(jié)構(gòu)上看,是從“華-夷”到“中華民族”再到“漢族-55個(gè)少數(shù)民族”的轉(zhuǎn)型,從地區(qū)制度上看,是從“行省制-傳統(tǒng)民族自治”到一體化的“行省制”再到“行省制-民族區(qū)域自治制度”的轉(zhuǎn)型。第二部分為“民族區(qū)域自治制度的歷史基礎(chǔ)”。1949年新中國成立之時(shí),為何會(huì)放棄了中國自1884年以來追求以“中華民族”為“民族單元”的“民族國家”建國方案,而是以民族區(qū)域自治制度再次凸顯了中國政治版圖中的民族多元性?事實(shí)上,這一方面是由于,近代的“民族國家”建設(shè)方案在少數(shù)民族地區(qū),特別是在蒙古、西藏、新疆遭遇了強(qiáng)烈的抵抗,少數(shù)民族“民族自治”(甚至是“民族自決”)思潮的普遍彌漫迫使中國共產(chǎn)黨在建國方案上重新作出慎重考慮,而向少數(shù)民族作出一定的政治妥協(xié)。另一方面是由于,中國共產(chǎn)黨在革命過程中,在不斷成熟和進(jìn)步的過程中對(duì)“蘇聯(lián)經(jīng)驗(yàn)”和“蘇聯(lián)模式”一定程度的學(xué)習(xí),也是對(duì)蘇聯(lián)“民族聯(lián)邦制”的揚(yáng)棄。第三部分為“民族區(qū)域自治制度的現(xiàn)實(shí)困局”。本文認(rèn)為民族區(qū)域自治制度在當(dāng)下的制度困局有二:其一,民族區(qū)域自治制度以“制度”的形式將近代中國所追求的“中華民族”的概念,分解成了“漢族-少數(shù)民族”的二元概念,亦是“56個(gè)民族”的多元概念,也將中國的政治地理分割成為了不同的“民族板塊”,這種“政治化”導(dǎo)向的民族政策極易為“民族主義”的動(dòng)員提供合法的政治空間與社會(huì)空間,不利于國家的整體建構(gòu)。其二,民族區(qū)域自治制度事實(shí)上處在了“工具理性”與“價(jià)值理性”考量的兩難之間。從“工具理性”的角度來說,“板塊式”的民族區(qū)域自治制度不免帶有一定的負(fù)面效果。但是從“價(jià)值理性”的層面考量,少數(shù)民族要求在其“世居地域”上實(shí)行“自治”,實(shí)踐本民族的“社會(huì)性文化”,在現(xiàn)代文明的視角下應(yīng)是一項(xiàng)可被證成的正當(dāng)性訴求,“區(qū)域自治”亦應(yīng)為“世居性少數(shù)民族”的一項(xiàng)固有政治權(quán)利。因此,對(duì)于中國而言,民族區(qū)域自治制度也是一項(xiàng)必要性的制度安排。在這一點(diǎn)上,美國針對(duì)“移民”制定的“文化化”導(dǎo)向的民族政策并不能為中國的民族問題提供有意義的參考。因此,對(duì)于這種犯有“工具理性”錯(cuò)誤的民族區(qū)域自治制度,基于“價(jià)值理性”的考量,我們卻必須予以堅(jiān)持。因此,民族區(qū)域自治制度事實(shí)上處在了“工具理性”與“價(jià)值理性”考量的兩難之間。第四部分為“民族區(qū)域自治制度的未來出路”。本文認(rèn)為,正因?yàn)槊褡鍏^(qū)域自治制度處在“工具理性”與“價(jià)值理性”的兩難之間,由此也決定了中國民族問題的化解無法從動(dòng)搖民族區(qū)域自治制度本身來入手,中國只有在繼續(xù)堅(jiān)持民族區(qū)域自治制度的基礎(chǔ)上,做出政策上的完善與創(chuàng)新,以應(yīng)對(duì)“民族主義”的挑戰(zhàn)。首先,從國家建構(gòu)的政治與法律的層面來看,中國應(yīng)以“公民政治”逐步淡化“族群政治”。一方面,中國需要盡力弱化“族群政治”(即民族區(qū)域自治制度)的制度影響,例如取消居民身份證上的“民族成分”一欄。另一方面,國家需要盡可能的從“公民平等”的角度來處理民族關(guān)系,例如,將“民族性優(yōu)惠政策”調(diào)整為“地區(qū)性優(yōu)惠政策”,弱化少數(shù)民族成員的“民族意識(shí)”,從而強(qiáng)化其“國家公民意識(shí)”。其次,從國家建構(gòu)的文化心理層面來看,政府應(yīng)積極促進(jìn)各民族之間的“交往交流交融”,通過各種政策的引導(dǎo)和鼓勵(lì),促進(jìn)各民族成員在平等、自愿前提下的自然融合,在潛移默化之中,形成能為各民族成員所共享的“共性文化”,并形成統(tǒng)一的“中華民族”意識(shí)。
[Abstract]:In 2008 and 2009, the large-scale riots of ethnic minorities broke out in Lhasa, capital of Tibet autonomous region and Urumqi, capital of the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, namely, the incident of "3. 14" in Tibet and the "7 5" incident in Xinjiang. The outbreak of the two malignant ethnic riots has made the reform and opening up for 30 years gradually fade out of the country's core political topics. The problem of ethnic groups has become the focus of the academic circles again, and the basic political system of China to deal with ethnic problems and to coordinate ethnic relations, namely, the national regional autonomy system, and the national policy on which it is the core, has become a major focus of the academic reflection in the.20 century in the 80s, in the context of the era of "turning the chaos to the right". The system of regional autonomy of ethnic groups was formally recognized by the state in the form of the constitution of 1982 and the law of national regional autonomy in 1984. However, at the same time, the ethnic separatist forces in Tibet and Xinjiang were also rising, followed by the riots of Lhasa in 1987 and 1989, the riots of Xinjiang barren in 1990 and Xinjiang Yili in 1997. In nature, these events are not different from the events of "3. 14" in Tibet in 2008 and the event of "7 5" in Xinjiang in 2009. It can be said that the establishment of the national regional autonomy system has not been able to effectively prevent and control national problems. It seems to show that the system of national regional autonomy is being dealt with. There are certain limitations and shortcomings in the national problem. Today, the national problem of China has become a major issue that the central government and all the citizens must face and pay attention to. This not only concerns the internal stability and long-term stability of China, but also affects China's diplomatic and international image. In the soil of breeding, we can not focus only on the conspiracy and incitement to criticize the "separatist forces inside and outside China", and we should also face the institutional factors of the internal construction of ethnic groups. For this reason, it is necessary for us to reflect on the "national regional autonomy system" in the present time, which will help us in the current and complex ethnic problems. The main structure of this article is divided into four parts: the first part is "the historical formation of the national regional autonomy system". From the perspective of historical genealogy, from the traditional to the modern, China's national system has gone through the "empire of the world" to "the people". The transformation of ethnic state to multi-ethnic country, marked by the establishment of the provincial government in Xinjiang in 1884 as a symbol, China opened the transition course from "the Empire of the world" to the "national state", and the establishment of the national regional autonomy system in 1949 symbolized that the "multi-ethnic state" was replaced by the "national state" as the construction of the new China. In the process of this transformation, China's national structure and regional system have also undergone a transformation from "two yuan" to "one" to "two yuan". From the national structure, it is from "Hua Yi" to "Chinese nation" to "Han -55 minority nationality". From the regional system, it is from "the province system" The second part is "the historical basis of the system of national regional autonomy" in the second part, when the founding of new China in the year of.1949, why China has given up the "ethnic group" of "the national unit" of China since 1884. In fact, this is due to the strong resistance of the modern "national state" construction program in ethnic minority areas, especially in Mongolia, Tibet and Xinjiang, and the ethnic minority "national autonomy" (even the national autonomy ") The prevailing trend of "national self-determination" forced the Communist Party to reconsider the plan of the founding of the nation and make certain political compromises to the minority nationalities. On the other hand, the Communist Party of China has made a certain degree of "Soviet experience" and "Soviet model" in the process of the revolution in the process of the revolution. The third part is "the realistic predicament of the national regional autonomy system". This article holds that the system of ethnic regional autonomy in the present system is two: first, the national regional autonomy system, in the form of "system", divides the concept of "Chinese nation" in modern China. The two yuan concept of "Han ethnic minority" is solved, and it is also the multi concept of "56 nationalities". It also divides China's political geography into a different "national plate". This "politicized" national policy is very easy to provide legal political space and social space for the mobilization of "Nationalism", which is not conducive to the state. Secondly, the system of national regional autonomy is in fact between the dilemma of "instrumental rationality" and "value rationality". From the perspective of "instrumental rationality", the national regional autonomy system of "plate type" is unavoidable with certain negative effects. However, from the level of "value rationality", the requirements of ethnic minorities are considered. The practice of "autonomy" in its "living region" and the practice of the "social culture" of the nation should be a justifiable appeal in the perspective of modern civilization, and "regional autonomy" should also be an inherent political right of the "living minority nationality". Therefore, for China, the system of national regional autonomy is also one. At this point, the "culturalism" oriented national policy made by the United States on "immigration" does not provide a meaningful reference for China's national problems. Therefore, based on the "value rationality" of this system of national regional autonomy for the "instrumental rationality", we must Therefore, the system of national regional autonomy is in fact between the dilemma between "instrumental rationality" and "value rationality". The fourth part is "the future way out of the system of national regional autonomy". This article holds that it is because the national regional autonomy system is between the dilemma of "instrumental rationality" and "value rationality". It is also determined that the solution of the problem of ethnic minorities in China can not start with the system itself. On the basis of continuing to adhere to the system of national regional autonomy, China should make policy improvement and innovation in order to meet the challenge of "nationalism". "Citizen politics" gradually desalination of "ethnic politics". On the one hand, China needs to try to weaken the institutional influence of "ethnic group politics" (i.e., national regional autonomy system), such as the abolition of the "ethnic composition" column on resident identity cards. On the other hand, the state needs to deal with ethnic relations from the perspective of "equality of citizens" as far as possible, for example, for example. The "national preferential policy" is adjusted to "regional preferential policy" to weaken the national consciousness of ethnic minority members and strengthen its "national awareness". Secondly, from the cultural psychological level of the national construction, the government should actively promote the "communication and exchange" among all ethnic groups, through the guidance of various policies and the guidance of various policies. Encourage, promote the natural integration of all ethnic members on the premise of equality and voluntariness, in a subtle way, to form a "common culture" shared by all ethnic groups and form a unified consciousness of the "Chinese nation".

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：D633.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王奇昌;;促進(jìn)各民族交融的必要性與路徑[J];原道;2015年02期

2 楊強(qiáng);;20世紀(jì)早期內(nèi)蒙古自治運(yùn)動(dòng)與中華民族認(rèn)同[J];原道;2015年02期

3 馬戎;關(guān)凱;;國家建設(shè)視角下的中國民族問題——馬戎教授訪談[J];學(xué)術(shù)月刊;2015年08期

4 馬戎;;民國時(shí)期的社會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)型、政權(quán)建設(shè)與族群關(guān)系[J];西北民族研究;2015年02期

5 李珍剛;;民族地區(qū)公共事務(wù)治理現(xiàn)代化問題分析[J];廣西民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年03期

6 馬戎;;旗幟不變,穩(wěn)住陣腳,調(diào)整思路,務(wù)實(shí)改革——對(duì)中央民族工作會(huì)議的解讀[J];青海民族研究;2015年02期

7 馬戎;;中國城鎮(zhèn)化進(jìn)程中的民族關(guān)系演變[J];西北民族研究;2015年01期

8 關(guān)凱;;內(nèi)與外:民族區(qū)域自治實(shí)踐的中國語境[J];清華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年01期

9 馬戎;;1940年的盛世才與他治理下的新疆——讀《盛世才上莫斯科斯大林報(bào)告書(1940)》[J];青海民族研究;2015年01期

10 孫堅(jiān);;蘇格蘭獨(dú)立問題的由來與發(fā)展[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)與政治論壇;2015年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1887205