Analyses & Alternatives (분석과 대안)

Korea Consensus Institute(KCI) (사단법인 코리아컨센서스연구원)
권호 표지

Consultative Democracy in Contemporary China: From a Perspective of Popular Sovereignty

인민주권론의 관점에서 본 중국 협상민주주의(协商民主)

  • Received : 2020.02.02
  • Accepted : 2020.03.20
  • Published : 2020.03.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Chinese Communist Party's 'with-Chinese-characteristics' discourse proclaims its superiority in reflecting people's genuine needs without poisonous partisan politics, as in Western democracies. The Party's Consultative Democracy is key to this superiority. To evaluate Consultative Democracy in Contemporary China from a perspective of popular sovereignty, which is the essential purpose of every kinds of democracy, this research looks into Consultative Democracy from two dimensions: theoretical dimension and institutional dimension. Theoretically, CCP's Consultative Democracy seeks its theoretical sources from their traditional thought as well as from Marxism, and especially emphasizes CCP's leadership to fulfill the consultation results. And through the analysis of various field investigations, we find that there are some prominent problems in grass-roots society's institutional mechanism for Consultative Democracy, such as insufficient connection between institutional innovation and existing legal system, inefficient consultation, insufficient representation of consultative subjects and weak motive force for sustainable development. By legitimizing certain groups or individuals as representatives in their consultative process, CCP can be de-legitimize by containing, dividing or denouncing others so that critics can be co-opted, neutralized or isolated. The CCP's consultative and representational processes are different from taking policy inputs as dialogue or negotiation as in democracies, it is a dynamic, largely one-way process of enforcement and direction with a clear political agenda: maintaining Party hegemony.

Keywords

References

  1. 곽준혁. (2005). 심의민주주의와 비지배적 상호성. 국가전략, 11(2): 141-168.
  2. 김희강. (2010). 공공성, 사회집단, 그리고 심의민주주의. 한국정치학회보, 44(2): 5-27. https://doi.org/10.18854/KPSR.2010.44.2.001001
  3. 박상혁. (2013). 절차적 민주주의와 실질적 민주주의의 지양: R. Dahl과 J. Cohen의 민주주의론을 중심으로. 철학사상, 49: 265-287.
  4. 이정진. (2014). 시민의 선거참여와 민주주의의 질. 한국과 국제정치, 30(4): 1-31.
  5. 이희옥. (2014). 중국식 민주주의의 진화: 협상민주주의 도입의 의미와 한계. 국제정치논총, 54(2): 207-241.
  6. 임혁백. (1999). 밀레니엄시대의 민주주의 대안: 심의민주주의. 계간 사상, 143: 159-184.
  7. 정원규. (2005). 민주주의의 두 얼굴: 참여 민주주의와 숙의 민주주의. 사회와 철학, 10: 281-329.
  8. 최형익. (2015). 민주공화정의 정치이론: 인민주권론을 중심으로. 민주사회와 정책연구, 25: 142-170.
  9. Balla, S. J. (2017). Is Consultation the New Normal? : Online Policymaking and Governance Reform in China. Journal of Chinese Political Science, 22: 375-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-017-9484-9
  10. Cho, Hee-Yeon. (2014). Is democracy with Chinese characteristics possible? A theoretical and practical reflection of crisis in the Chinese partystate regime and post-revolutionary socialist hegemonic politics. Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 15(1): 128-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649373.2014.875979
  11. Gutmann, Amy and Dennis Thompson. (1996). Democracy and Disagreement. Cambride. Mass.: Harvard University Press.
  12. He, baogang. (2013). Working with China to Promote Democracy. The Washingyon Quarterly, 36(10): 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2013.751649
  13. Chen, Minglu. (2015). From Economic Elites to Political Elites: private entrepreneurs in the People's Political Consultative Conference. Journal of Contemporary China, 24(94): 613-627. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2014.975952
  14. Knight, Jack and James Johnson. (1994). Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy. Political Theory, 22(2): 277-296. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591794022002004
  15. Reitz, J. C. (2018). The Chinese Model of Democracy as Liberal Democracy's Major Competitor. Drake Law Review, 66: 863-915.
  16. Schubert, Gunter. (2014). Political legitimacy in contemporary China revisited: theoretical refinement and empirical operatonalization. Journal of Contemporary China, 23(88): 593-611. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2013.861139
  17. Wang, R. and Groot, G. (2018). Who Represents? Xi Jinping's Grand United Front Work, Legitimation, Participation and Consultative Democracy. Journal of Contemporary China, 27(112): 569-583. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2018.1433573
  18. Wolkenstein, Fabio. (2019). Agents of Popular Sovereignty. Political Theory, 47(3): 338-362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591718786232
  19. Young, Iris Marion. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  20. 陈家刚. (2004a). 当代西方协商民主理论的主要内容. 资料通讯, 2.
  21. 陈家刚. (2004b). 协商民主引论. 马克思主义与现实, 3(27).
  22. 陈家刚. (2005). 协商民主: 概念,要素与价值. 中共天津市委党校学报, 3(22): 54-60.
  23. 陈家刚. (2014). 中国协商民主的比较优势. 新视野, 1.
  24. 陈梦琳. (2018). 党领导社会主义协商民主的政治逻辑. 福建省社会主义学院学报, 6: 28-34.
  25. 陈尧. (2013). 从参与到协商: 协商民主对参与式民主的批判与深化. 社会科学, 12: 25-36.
  26. 崔应美.梁月群. (2015). 中国选举民主与协商民主比较研究. 社会主义研究, 3: 57-62.
  27. 戴激涛. (2013). 作为宪政民主新范式的协商民主: 概念, 价值与特质. 中共天津市委党校学报, 3.
  28. 潘禹斌.王功田. (2019). 基層協商民主建設的思考: 以台州黃岩區爲例. 統戰理論與實踐, 1: 26-30.
  29. 郭小聪.代凯. (2012). 试论中西方协商民主的区别与联系. 学习与实践, 6.
  30. 韩福国.张开平. (2015). 社会治理的"协商"领域与"民主"机制-当下中国基层协商民主的制度特征,实践结构和理论批判. 浙江社会科学, 10: 48-61.
  31. 韩志明. (2019). 选举民主与协商民主的比较-以民意信息处理为中心的 技术分析. 社会科学文摘, 2.
  32. 梁珊. (2014). 我國基層協商民主的現狀和發展趨勢. 瀋陽工程學院學報(社會科學版), 2.
  33. 林尚立. (2003). 协商政治:对中国民主政治发展的一种思考. 学术月刊, 4.
  34. 马奔. (2014). 协商民主与选举民主: 渊源, 关系与未来发展. 中国政协理论研究, 3(4): 146-152.
  35. 宋连胜.李建. (2013). 社会主义协商民主理论源头探析. 理论学刊, 3: 4-8.
  36. 王雪春. (2019). 新中国成立70年以来浙江乡村治理创新的实践历程和重要启示-基于若干典型样本的考察. 哈尔滨市委党校学报, 5(4).
  37. 习近平. (2014). 在庆祝中国人民政治协商会议成立65周年大会上的讲话. 人民日报. (2014年9月21日).
  38. 肖光荣. (2017). 习近平协商民主思想的理论基础, 主要内容和现实价值. 湖湘论坛, 6: 5-12.
  39. 俞可平. (2003). 当代西方政治理论的热点问题. 理论参考, 1: 29-31.
  40. 張等文.陳佳(2015). 中國基層協商民主的實踐困境與化解策略. 理論與現代化, 4.
  41. 張隆康. (2014). 推進協商民主實現貧困地區農村村民有序政治參與的思考: 以廣西河池市爲例. 廣西社會主義學院學報, 25(4): 49-52.
  42. 鄭普建. (2018). 鄕賢參與基層協商民主的實踐與探索: 以浙江臨海'鄕賢+治理'模式爲例. 廣西社會主義學院學報, 4.
  43. 中共中央宣傳部. (2018). 習近平新時代中國特色社會主義思想三十講. 北京: 學習出版社.
  44. 周少來. (2014). 發展導向參與民主: 中國民主建設的路徑分析. 政治學硏究, 2.