政治共识与民主生存——利普哈特共识民主与罗尔斯协商民主比较及对中国的启示  

Political Consensus and Democratic Existence—— A Comparison Between Lijphart's Consensus Democracy and Rawls' Deliberative Democracy and Their Enlightenment to China

作　　者：王可园[1] 齐卫平[1] 

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学,上海200241

出　　处：《南京政治学院学报》2014年第2期62-69,共8页Journal of PLA Nanjing Institute of Politics

基　　金：2010年度教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目"提高党的建设科学化水平研究"(10JZD0001);2013年度浙江省社科联课题"浙江基层服务型党组织建设研究:基于政党-社会的视角"(2013N002)

摘　　要：多元社会民主生存需要政治共识。在西方政治民主语境下,利普哈特共识民主因其政治权力的共享性、良好的宏观经济管理和暴力控制以及实现人民权力而有利于促进政治共识;罗尔斯的协商民主虽有从道德领域到政治领域的转变,但它所强调的制度正义、分配正义和平等论辩仍有利于政治共识的创造。两种民主思想目标一致,实现目标的方案虽层次不同,但仍相互联系和促进。转型时期的中国需要政治共识,研究利普哈特共识民主和罗尔斯协商民主,对我们有一定的借鉴意义。Democracy in a plural society calls for political consensus. Lijphart＇ s consensus democracy emphasizes on sharing political power, good macro-economy governance, violence control and realizing people＇ s power, which helps to improve political consensus. Undergoing a transition from moral sphere to political field, Rawls＇ s deliberative democracy stresses the system justice, distributive justice and equal debates, which also helps to cre- ate political consensus. The two democratic ideas with the same goal are intertwined though they are different in achieving their objectives. It is necessary to create political consensus in China in its transformation period. Thus, the study of Lijphart＇ s consensus democracy and Rawls＇ deliberative democracy is enlightening to us.

关 键 词：政治冲突 政治共识 共识民主 协商民主 

分 类 号：D621[政治法律—政治学]