个人资料
正文

书评 中国模式:政治尚贤制与民主的局限性

(2025-07-19 13:55:39) 下一个

书评 中国模式:政治尚贤制与民主的局限性

丹尼尔·A·贝淡宁(作者,序言) 2016年9月6日

中国政治模式如何成为西方民主的可行替代方案

西方人倾向于将政治世界划分为“好的”民主政体和“坏的”威权政体。但中国政治模式并非完全符合这两类。过去三十年,中国发展出了一种可以被完美地描述为“政治尚贤制”的政治制度。《中国模式》旨在理解这一独特政治制度的理想与现实。政治尚贤制的理想如何设定衡量中国政治进步(和倒退)的标准?中国如何避免政治尚贤制的弊端?以及如何将政治尚贤制与民主制度最佳地结合起来?丹尼尔·贝淡宁将解答这些问题以及其他更多问题。

贝淡宁以对“一人一票”选举高层领导人方式的批判开篇,指出中国式贤能政治有助于弥补选举民主的关键缺陷。他探讨了贤能政治的优势与弊端,区分了贤能政治与民主政治的不同结合方式,并指出中国已经发展出一种道德上可取且政治上稳定的民主贤能政治模式。贝淡宁总结并评估了“中国模式”——上层是贤能政治,中层是实验政治,下层是民主政治——及其对世界其他地区的启示。

《中国模式》是一本适时而新、独具匠心的著作,必将引发人们的兴趣和讨论。它考察的不仅是中国悠久的历史,而且可能成为21世纪最重要的政治发展。

中国模式:贤能政治与民主的局限 | 作者:丹尼尔·A·贝淡宁

保罗·埃文斯,加拿大温哥华不列颠哥伦比亚大学

书评,《中国与内亚》第91卷 - 第1期

普林斯顿;牛津:普林斯顿大学出版社,2015年,第12卷,318页。精装本,售价29.95美元。ISBN 978-0-691-16645-2。

《中国模式》融合了西方与儒家政治哲学,分析了当代和历史上的中国,并比较了不同政治制度,其广受好评,褒贬不一。本书由一位出生于加拿大、游历亚洲和北美的学者撰写,现任清华大学教授和山东大学政治与公共管理学院院长。该书被誉为发人深省、见解深刻、富有启发性,同时也令人愤慨。

贝淡宁堪称“牛虻”,其含义之广令人咋舌:他探究、粉饰和推广贤能政治的概念,其方式无疑触动了国内外自由主义者的神经,他们对选举民主的优越性有着不可动摇的信念。根据对中文译本的评论,本书也触动了中国官方的神经。

本书的核心是对自柏拉图以来西方经验中一些持久而根本的政治问题进行了深入的分析:什么是优秀的领导者?领导者应该如何选拔?不称职的领导者应该如何被取代?

贝淡宁主要关注贤能政治,它既是中国政治体系中的理想,也是现实,无论过去还是现在。他从以下前提出发:(a) 中国之所以在某些方面做得非常正确,很大程度上得益于其领导人的选拔方式; (b) 中国可以而且应该改进其选拔和晋升制度,尽管如此,该制度仍然“明显优于那些让人民随心所欲、不受哲学、历史和社会科学教训约束的选举民主国家”(108)。

尽管他对中国的尚贤哲学和实践既钦佩又感兴趣,但他并不回避中国政治体制中的问题,包括权力滥用、不平等加剧和社会流动性降低、派系内斗以及对中共国内批评者和少数群体的严厉对待。最重要的是,他强调了中共合法性面临的日益严重的威胁,这需要更多的参与、更多的民主、更自由的言论和更多独立的社会组织。如果没有这些,“尚贤政治的捍卫者很难反驳将强制手段置于其政治体制核心的批评”(197)。

他并没有将这些缺陷视为政权存亡的致命因素,也没有建议推行一人一票制,而是主张进行政治改革,在底层推行更多民主,在中层进行试点,并在顶层强化贤能政治。引言:他建议中国共产党改名为“民主贤能联盟”(198),这是中文版删除的概念之一。

即使不认同他的分析或观点,也能欣赏他对选举民主和中国现行体制缺陷的清晰探讨,欣赏他在中国传统和哲学中寻找持久治国之道的努力,欣赏他对科举制度等制度的实践和哲学的透彻阐述。

正如一些评论家所强调的那样,这本书在政治哲学和历史与政治学之间来回游走。正如安德鲁·内森(Andrew Nathan)等人所指出的,这本书究竟是关于中国体制的神话、愿景和理想——一个想象中的中国——还是一个截然不同的现实,令人费解。

将目光投向中国之外,贝淡宁指出西方政治体制存在治理危机,“这破坏了人们对选举民主的盲目信任,并为政治替代方案开辟了规范空间”(3)。值得注意的是,他甚至在唐纳德·特朗普崛起之前就写下了这篇文章。这种危机在美式总统制下可能比在威斯敏斯特式议会制下更为严重(加拿大参议院和上议院的议员是任命的,而不是选举产生的)。新加坡在他列出的有效替代方案中名列前茅。

无论中国体制独特的活力与具体实践如何持久且强有力,它都很难成为中国周边地区以外的榜样,即使是对欧洲、北美和其他地区那些对本国政权表现感到失望的千禧一代来说也是如此。

相反,贝尔的书是对美式选举民主的绝对主义和必胜主义的一次深刻而真诚的纠正。在特朗普时代,它甚至可能提供一些有益的见解,解释无能的领导者如何以及为何能够

既要提醒人们它们可能造成的损害,又要提醒人们它们可能被取代。我们过去常常问:“如果中国的行为更像美国,世界会变得更美好吗?”至少目前,答案是令人同情的负面情绪。

因此,我将《中国模式》列入我推荐给高年级学生的二十本当代书籍清单,这些书籍对当代中国提供了发人深省的见解,并提出了关于中国内部动态和全球意义的根本性问题。贝淡宁的这本书探讨了从内而外理解中国的可能性和局限性,同时运用了经过持续不断且有理有据的辩论的普世概念和标准。出版社还提供了本书的两个附录,可在出版社网站上免费获取。它们是“2013 年世界的和谐:理想与现实”

http://press.princeton.edu/releases/m10418-1.pdf)和“一个共产主义者和一个儒家之间的对话”(http://press.princeton.edu/releases/m10418-2.pdf)。

The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy 

 Sept. 6 2016  by Daniel A. Bell (Author, Preface)

How China's political model could prove to be a viable alternative to Western democracy

Westerners tend to divide the political world into "good" democracies and “bad” authoritarian regimes. But the Chinese political model does not fit neatly in either category. Over the past three decades, China has evolved a political system that can best be described as “political meritocracy.” The China Model seeks to understand the ideals and the reality of this unique political system. How do the ideals of political meritocracy set the standard for evaluating political progress (and regress) in China? How can China avoid the disadvantages of political meritocracy? And how can political meritocracy best be combined with democracy? Daniel Bell answers these questions and more.

Opening with a critique of “one person, one vote” as a way of choosing top leaders, Bell argues that Chinese-style political meritocracy can help to remedy the key flaws of electoral democracy. He discusses the advantages and pitfalls of political meritocracy, distinguishes between different ways of combining meritocracy and democracy, and argues that China has evolved a model of democratic meritocracy that is morally desirable and politically stable. Bell summarizes and evaluates the “China model”―meritocracy at the top, experimentation in the middle, and democracy at the bottom―and its implications for the rest of the world.

A timely and original book that will stir up interest and debate, The China Model looks at a political system that not only has had a long history in China, but could prove to be the most important political development of the twenty-first century.

THE CHINA MODEL: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy | By Daniel A. Bell

Paul Evans, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada

Book ReviewsChina and Inner Asia   Volume 91 – No. 1

Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2015. xii, 318 pp. US$29.95, cloth. ISBN 978-0-691-16645-2.


A genre-bending combination of Western and Confucian political philosophy, analysis of contemporary and historical China, and comparison across political systems, The China Model has already been widely reviewed in terms both glowing and disparaging. Written by a Canadian-born scholar well-travelled in Asia and North America, now a professor at Tsinghua University and the dean of the School of Political Science and Public Administration at Shandong University, the book has rightly been described as thought provoking, insightful, illuminating, and infuriating.

Bell is a gadfly in the best sense of the word: here probing, preening, and promoting the concept of meritocracy in a way that certainly hits a nerve with liberals inside and outside China who have an unshakeable faith in the superiority of electoral democracy. Based on reviews of the Chinese translation, it has also hit a nerve in official China.

At the heart of the book is a sophisticated analysis of some enduring and fundamental political questions central to the Western experience since Plato: what makes for good leadership, how should leaders be selected, and how should inept ones be replaced?

Bell’s main focus is meritocracy as both an ideal and a reality in the Chinese political system, past and present. He starts from the premise (a) that China is doing some things very right in large part because of how it selects its leaders; and (b) that China can and should improve its system of selection and promotion that nevertheless has “a clear advantage over electoral democracies that leave the whole thing up to the whims of the people unconstrained by lessons of philosophy, history, and social science” (108).

While both admiring and intrigued by the Chinese philosophy and practices of merit, he does not shy away from problems in the Chinese political system including abuse of power, rising inequality and reduced social mobility, factional in-fighting, and harsh treatment of the CCP’s domestic critics and minority groups. Most importantly, he underlines the growing threat to its legitimacy that will require more participation, more democracy, freer speech, and more independent social organizations. Without this, it is “difficult for defenders of political meritocracy to counter the criticism that coercion lies at the heart of its political system” (197).

Rather than seeing these flaws as fatal to regime survival or prescribing a one-person, one-vote system, he makes the case for political reform involving more democracy at the bottom, experimentation in the middle, and strengthened meritocracy at the top. Teaser: he recommends that the Chinese Communist Party rename itself “The Union of Democratic Meritocrats,” (Minzhu xianneng lianmeng) (198), one of the ideas removed from the Chinese-language edition.

It is not necessary to agree with his analysis or sensibilities to appreciate a lucid discussion of the defects of both electoral democracy and the current Chinese system, his effort to find in Chinese traditions and philosophy a durable playbook for domestic rule, and an informed account of the practice and philosophy of such devices as the examination system.

As several critics have emphasized, the book moves back and forth between political philosophy and history, on the one hand, and political science on the other. As Andrew Nathan and others have pointed out, it is perplexing whether the book is about the myth, aspiration, and ideal of the Chinese system—an imaginary China—or its very different reality.

Looking beyond China, Bell identifies a crisis of governance in Western political systems “that has undermined blind faith in electoral democracy and opened the normative space for political alternatives” (3). It is worth noting that he wrote this even before the political rise of Donald Trump. This crisis may be worse in American-style presidential systems than Westminster-style parliamentary systems (the Canadian Senate and House of Lords are appointed, not elected). Singapore is high on his list of effective alternatives.

Whatever the durability and strengths of the distinctive blend of animating forces and specific practices of the Chinese system, it is very unlikely to serve as a model outside of China’s immediate neighbourhood even for a generation of millennials in Europe, North America, and elsewhere disillusioned by the performance of their own regimes.

Rather, Bell’s book is a sophisticated and sincerely empathetic corrective to the absolutism and triumphalism of an unquestioned faith in American-style electoral democracy. And in the Trump era it may even suggest some useful insights on how and why inept leaders can be replaced as well as a reminder of the damage they can do. We used to ask, “Would the world be a better place if China acted more like the United States?” For at least the moment, the answer is empathetically more negative.

I’ve thus placed The China Model on the list of twenty contemporary books that I recommend to senior students for provocative insights into contemporary China, books that raise fundamental questions about its internal dynamics and global significance. Bell’s book speaks to the possibilities and limits of understanding China from the inside out while using universal concepts and standards subject to incessant and informed debate. Also provided by the publisher are two appendices to the book, available free of charge at the publisher’s website. These are “Harmony in the World 2013: The Ideal and the Reality” (http://press.princeton.edu/releases/m10418-1.pdf) and “A Conversation between a Communist and a Confucian” (http://press.princeton.edu/releases/m10418-2.pdf).

 

[ 打印 ]
评论
目前还没有任何评论
登录后才可评论.