比较视域下国家能力建设的历史渊源、制度逻辑及中国贡献

Historical Origin, System Logic of National Capacity Development and China’s Contribution under a Comparative Perspective

新冠疫情在全球范围的传播放大了不同社会制度、文明体系之间的差异性,同时也加剧了国家之间的利益冲突和意识形态分歧。各政治行为体对国家和政府责任的价值认知对于其权力组织、制度框架和治理结构产生重大影响。以国家能力作为切入点考察和比较中西抗疫模式差异背后的历史渊源和制度逻辑,它在政治价值基础、动员组织能力、体制吸纳能力、制度韧性等方面分别表现为理性政治与德性政治、紧密型社会与松散型社会、权利本位与家国一体、最小化政府与积极国家等诸多差异。疫情暴露了西方政治理念误区和制度性缺陷,构建有利于全人类发展的治理体系成为核心议题。中国可以为解决人类难题提供有益的思想启示和制度资源:一是强化责任政治逻辑,重新思考和界定国家的角色和功能;二是增强内聚力,重建公共领域与私人领域的连续性和有机性;三是创新上下互通的协同网络,提高基层社会治理效能;四是增强协同应对危机意识,推动构筑全球治理新秩序。

The global spread of COVID-19 has increased difference among different social institutions and civilizations, and intensified the conflict of interest and ideology between countries. Political actors’ value perception of state and government responsibility has great impact on their power organization, institutional framework and governance structure. This thesis elaborates upon national capacity, comparing the historical origin and system logic behind the difference between China and the West in fighting COVID-19. In terms of political value basis, China promotes politics of virtue while the West is dominated by politics of rationality. In terms of organizational mobilization, China is a tight society while the West is a loose society. In terms of institutional absorption capacity, China stresses the unity between family and nation while the West puts right first. In terms of institutional resilience, China is an active state while the West follows minimal statism. The COVID-19 has exposed many long-standing problems in western political ideas and institutions.Building a governance system conducive to the development of mankind has thus become a core issue. China can provide useful ideological inspiration and institutional resources to solve human problems. Firstly, it is necessary to stress the political logic of responsibility, review and redefine the role and function of the state. Secondly, it is necessary to enhance internal cohesion and rebuild organic connection between the public and private spheres. Thirdly, it is necessary to build a coordinated network of communication between different level to improve the grass-root governance. Lastly, it is necessary to raise awareness of coordination in response to crises and push for a new order of global governance.