回归政治社会的社区治理——以贵阳市“乌当社区”为例

Community Governance Returning to Political Society——Taking Wudang Community in Guiyang as an Example

2011年以来,贵阳市的街道办事处逐步被撤销并分化,建立起若干社区服务中心,即由社区大党委、社区服务中心和社区居民议事会("一委一会一中心")组成的"新型社区",制度上初步构建了"小政府、大社会、多中介、强自治"的城市基层社会治理模式。然而"新型社区"的治理实践效果并不理想。乌当社区的个案研究考察了社区治理的现状,并从国家与社会互动视角进行分析,发现社区内的"国家"(小政府)只能算是国家的代表者,而真正的国家并没有进入社区场域中来,难以起到培育、动员社会力量的作用。社区社会的发展需要国家的回归,国家应对基层社会进行必要的渗透,支持相关社区的工作,使社区内国家的代表者有资源和能力去培育社会。葛兰西领导权理论的方法论指出社区治理现代化应该是统筹国家与社会的领导权建设,其表现为把社区建设中的基层政权建设(国家对基层社会的渗透)和社区共同体发展(基层社会发育)看成一个辩证的统一体,同时国家与社会在微观社区层面的互动也应该使二者成为辩证统一的整体。

Since 2011,the sub-district offices have been repealed and divided into several "community service centers " in Guiyang. Community Service Center is combined with the Party Committee of Community and Citizen Council of Community,called as the "New Community ",which institutionally builds an urban local governance mode as"small government,big society,multi-agents and strong self-governance. "How ever,from the fact that this community reformation has little external effects,we can see that the design of community system cannot guarantee the realization of its goal.This paper,based on the field research and social intervention method,from the angle of interaction between state and society,aims at exploring the situations of community governance and the obstacle to realizing the goal of community reformation through a case study in Guiyang( called Wudang Community in this paper),and proposing theoretical suggestions.This paper argues that the "state"in the community can only be seen as"the representative of state",while the state at upper level does not come into the community field. The "state"in community is the strategic agent under pressure from the regime-building and society-building;the obstacle to realizing the goal of city governance structure as "small government,big society,multi-agents and strong self-governance "is the limit of "state "in community, which cannot really cultivate society or mobilize society effectively. Under the "pressure-based system ",the basic objectives and tasks of urban governance undoubtedly fall to the most basic level of government,which refers to the community service center( although it is a nominal institution). In this context, the community service center of "Wudang Community "is regarded as a strategic actor under the "stress system "instead of the "state " within the community we usually imagine. As Fedberg’s definition of rigorous actors,"their behavior should not be attributed only to past socialization, but also to their perception of the opportunities and constraints in their field of action,their expectations of the more or less intuitive nature of their opponent’s behavior in the game,their understanding of their respective short-term interests and/or long-term interests. "In addition, on the practical level, some scholars intentionally or unintentionally oppose the "country " and "neighborhood " in community research,focusing on the confrontation between the state and society,such as the reluctant ritual participation of the masses and the struggle for the interests of the community and regard these as the "shouldness of the civil society ".Although these are incomprehensible,they actually unconsciously go to the path of anti-politicization or depoliticization. It is not helpful to improve the present. The status quo of community governance.From the analysis of Wudang community, we can see that society development needs to bring the state back at basic level. The state needs to penetrate into grass-root society,supporting the related work in community and making the "state " in community has more resources and abilities to cultivate society.The theory of national grassroots political development is under the framework of "state and society "analysis. Whether it is divided into "the country strengthens the penetration and the rise of civil society "or the "urban neighborhood of independent space and the neighbors of the party and the country ",we can see the "national central orientation "and "social center orientation"under the framework of "state and society "clearly. These two theoretical orientations have also led to two orientations of understanding of the community.This paper argues that although the development of community autonomy and the strengthening of grassroots social management can have obvious tension in theory,in reality,the modernization of community governance must take care of both,and at the same time develop the new theory of orientation tension that can solve these two theory orientation on the basis of empirical research,and in the Marxist political philosophy tradition,Gramsci’s thought can just provide us with a new understanding orientation. Gramsci was the first thinker to combine the state and society. "In Gramsci’s view,the distinction between political society and civil society is a methodological distinction rather than an organic distinction. In reality,the two are consistent or identical. "By analyzing the essence of methodology of Gramsci’s hegemony theory,this paper argues that community governance should be a hegemony-building,combing the state and the society. To be more specific, this kind of hegemony-building sees the regime-building( state penetrating into grass-root society) and community development( society-cultivating) as a dialectical unity,the micro-interaction between state and society at community level should also make both two a dialectical unity. This kind of dialectical unity may be because the community construction process concerned by the two community research orientations analyzed above is not separated in time and space,but closely related. The key is that the country should play its due role. Specifically,the overall leadership of the state and society is divided into three levels,of which the third level is the core step,and the first two levels are the basis of the third level.The first level: coordinating the building of leadership in the state and society requires the state to promote the establishment of intermediary organizations at the community level,which must play a role in both the state and society. The purpose of the state’s involvement in the establishment of community intermediary organizations is to enable residents to have an overall identity with the intermediary organizations, and it is also the main embodiment and inevitable requirement for the return of community developing countries. The second level of coordinating the leadership of the state and society is based on intermediary organizations to build a structure of interests related to the lives of community residents. Achieving this goal also requires the necessary penetration of the country into the grassroots society.The reality is that we can construct interest structures related to community residents through cultural and sports activities, community services and neighbourhood mutual assistance in the community. In this process,the state will truly be connected to the society,not the "adhesion "state. The third level of coordinating the building of leadership in the country and society is the"national " in the community to carry out civic education and policy propaganda. The work done in the first two levels is integrated into the daily life of the residents,thus building a national identity component. Realize community identity,shape community culture and unite the identity of the party and the country. In addition,the country’s construction of interest structures related to residents’ lives in the community also provides a good platform for civic education because "there is a natural connection between community autonomy and community education. Community autonomy requires community education, and self-government itself is one practice education. "Above conclusions carry on the essence of overall method of Marxism in terms of community building, and this paper believes that this kind of hegemony building can remove the obstacle to achieving the above goal of modernization of community governance. Community governance must base on citizens’ everyday lives,and state must penetrate into society effectively,not as "political tasks " but creating interest structure that connects with citizens’ lives. So it can coordinate with the leading of state,realizing the hegemony of state and civil society.