西方协商民主理论的内在演进

On the Internal Development of Deliberative Democracy

作为民主的一种具体形式,协商民主既涉及伦理规范,内在包含并与正义、自由、平等、自主等价值相交叠,又涉及伦理规范的外在化,也就是要求将价值和规范具体落实到现实的政治实践和制度设计之中。因而,只有在规范伦理与制度实践的张力中才能把握协商民主的实质,对西方协商民主的内在演进做出一种合理性说明,并在此基础上揭示其核心问题的演进逻辑,进而剖析西方协商民主理论的内在局限。由罗尔斯、哈贝马斯和吉登斯深入探讨的政治合法性的根据问题可归结为民主的规范性问题,这些研究使得西方协商民主理论获得了奠基性的规范框架。进一步的核心问题就是如何实现协商民主的规范性与社会复杂现实的对接,这既是协商民主理想"下放"社会实践的过程,同时也是社会实践"提升"的过程。这一问题含纳了博曼、古德曼和汤普森、德雷泽克以及埃尔斯特等人的工作。立足于当代大规模社会的复杂现实,深入推进协商民主的制度化,是西方协商民主规范性与社会现实"对接"基础上的深度开掘,展现了多层面、多维度的综合性协商民主制度建构的可能。这包括约翰·帕金森、艾温·欧弗林以及瓦尔特·巴伯和罗伯特·巴特利特等人的研究。

As a specific form of democracy, deliberative democracy involves not only ethicalnorms but also refers to their externalization, that is, it inherently contains and interweaves with val-ues such as justice, freedom, equality, and autonomy etc., and meanwhile it requires to put thenorms and values into practice to promote the actual political institution. Therefore, only in the ten-sion of ethical norm and institutional practice, the essence of deliberative democracy could begrasped, and a reasonable explanation of the internal development of Western deliberative democracycould be, got; and then based on that explanation we could further reveal the evolution of their coreproblemsand analyze the limits of the Western deliberative democracy itself. John Rawls, JürgenHabermas and Anthony Giddens explore the foundation of political legitimacy, which are regarded asthe normative problem of democracy, and establishes the normative scheme for Western deliberativedemocracy. The following core problem is how to joint the normativity of deliberative democracy withsocial complicated reality, which is both a process that the deliberative democracy ideal descends tothe social practice and a process that the social practice elevates to ideal level. James Bohman, AmyGutmann and Dennis Thompson, John S. Dryzek, and Jon Elster try to solve this level of problem.Based on contemporary society on a large scale, that promoting the deep institutionalization of deliber-ative democracy unfolds the possibility of multi-level and multi-dimensional institutional construction,such as the studies of John Parkinson, Ian O'Flynn, Walter F. Baber and Robert V. Bartlett.