相互非支配:对佩迪特审议民主理论的批评

Reciprocal Non-domination:A Critique of Pettit's Theory of Democratic Deliberation

民主审议作为理想的集体决策过程,在自治与善治之间存在固有张力。一方面,民主审议通过自发回应政治共同体成员的集体意见,赋予民主政治正当性;另一方面,民主审议又试图超越特定情境下的多数人意见,寻求良好决策和正确行动。当代新罗马共和主义理论家菲利普·佩迪特将非支配自由作为调节性原则,在坚持善治理想的同时引导民主审议的自治。佩迪特的共和主义民主审议理论既没有预设一个社会在先的共性,也没有提出一套不可让渡的个人权利,却成功地证成了在民主审议过程中施加外部前提的可行性,因而值得人们认真考虑。然而,人们仍然批评其在民主审议中强加非支配自由的前提具有反民主倾向,尤其是当公民争论源于那种可能持续产生受他者支配焦虑的相互平等关系,以及源于人们持有关于非支配自由的对立观点。如果将“相互权力”策略作为促进相互平等个人或群体间非支配的手段,“相互非支配”作为附加的调节性原则就能够更好地将民主审议导向非支配自由这一前提。

Democratic deliberation as an ideal process of collective decision-making has an inherent tension between self-government and good government.On the one hand,it grants democratic politics a legitimacy which depends on its spontaneous responsiveness to the collective opinion of the members of a political community.On the other hand,it seeks good decisions the justification of which adheres to an ideal of right action beyond the opinion of the majority in a specific context.In this regard,Philip Pettit,the major contemporary exponent of neo-Roman republicanism,proposes“liberty as non-domination”as a regulative ideal that guides democratic deliberation for self-government without jettisoning the ideal of good government.His republican theory of democratic deliberation is worthy of our consideration in the sense that without endorsing either any pre-existing commonality in a society or a set of inalienable individual rights,it successfully justifies the imposition of external premises in the process of democratic deliberation.However,its imposition of the premises of liberty as non-domination in democratic deliberation still falls prey to charges of having an anti-democratic tendency,particularly when a civil contention is grounded in a reciprocal equality that persistently generates an anxiety of being dominated by the other,and when this kind of contention between individuals or groups is chiefly driven by the contrasting views of liberty as non-domination.Based on this observation,to enhance the strategy of“reciprocal power”as a means to promote non-domination between individuals or groups in a reciprocal equality,I will suggest the principle of“reciprocal non-domination”as an additional regulative principle that helps better steer democratic deliberation toward the premise of liberty as non-domination.