“比较-现代化”视野下的国家建设与财政变革——基于历史社会学和新财政史学  

State-building and Financial Reform under the Vision of"Comparative modernization":Review and Reflection Based on Historical Sociology and New Financial History

作　　者：林光祺[1] 洪利华 LIN Guang-qi;HONG Li-hua(School of Public Finance and Administration,Anhui University of Finance and Economics,Bengbu 233030;School of Sociology and Anthropology,Xiamen University,Xiamen 361005,China)

机构地区：[1]安徽财经大学财政与公共管理学院,安徽蚌埠233030 [2]厦门大学社会与人类学院,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《广东财经大学学报》2020年第4期4-19,共16页Journal of Guangdong University of Finance & Economics

基　　金：国家社会科学基金后期资助项目(19FJB035)。

摘　　要：1980年代以来,欧美历史社会学界与新财政史界首次把"国家"与"财政史"作为独立的社会科学分析变量,纳入"比较-现代化"的研究视野,前者从国家建设映射财政变革,后者从财政体系变迁解释国家转型,两者从相反的方向携手完成了"国家(建设)"与"财政(变革)"的学术联姻。"国家建设"在经验与逻辑上大体分为"国家形成"与"国家转型"两个部分,前者解释国家"从无到有"或至少"从不发达到发达状态"的实现过程,后者研究国家从"不可欲"状态向"可欲"状态的转型经验与教训;前者勾勒了"外部军事竞争"与"内部财政汲取"相互推动,共同厘定国家边界、确定国家-社会关系的图景,后者通过"国家-社会"互动的多元模式,解释财政体系与财政制度如何构成社会变革的动力、如何决定国家的成长方式与发展路径。国家建设与财政变革有"工具理性"与"价值理性"两个维度,由此形成了不同的组合方式,作为工具理性的"国家"与"财政"本身是中性的,在价值理性层面既可能受制于传统国家与财政的那些特色,也可能服务于现代国家与财政的那些规范。应努力摆脱各种通过"国家战胜社会、权力捉弄权利"的方式汲取财政资源、强化国家能力的传统做法。只有把国家建设纳入现代化的价值规范即"民主问责"与"法治限权"的轨道,国家与社会的摩擦成本才可能变得更小,而社会对国家的认同度才可能真正提高;只有在"无代表不纳税"(即税权法定)以及"无公开不支付"(即预算民主)的基础上推动财政变革,政府与纳税人的关系才可能从单向的"支配-服从"走向双向的"契约-合作",而纳税人对税收(及其支出)的遵从与支持度才可能真正提高。Since the 1980 s,historical sociology and new financial history in Europe and the United States for the first time have taken"state"and"financial history"as independent variables of social science analysis and included them into the research field of"comparative modernization".Historical sociology maps the financial reform from the state-building,and new financial history interprets the state transformation from the financial system change.From opposite directions,they have completed the academic marriage of"state"and"finance".Seen from experience and logic,state-building can be divided into state formation and state transformation.State formation interprets the realization process from scratch or from underdeveloped to developed.State transformation focuses on the experience and has lessons from"undesirability"to"desirability".State formation has drawn a picture of"external military competition"and"internal financial absorbency",jointly promoting and determining the state boundary and determining relationship between state and society.Through the interaction between the state and society,state transformation illustrates how the financial system and financial regime constitute the driving force of social change,and how they determine the growth mode and development path of the state.There are two dimensions of"instrumental rationality"and"value rationality"in state-building and financial reform,which forms different ways for combination.In the dimension of instrumental rationality,"state"and"finance"are neutral.Whether its power,ability and autonomy are strong or weak,in the dimension of value rationality,they may be subject to those characteristics of traditional state and finance,and may also serve those norms of modern state and finance.We should try to move away from the traditional practice of extracting financial resources and strengthening state capacity by"state defeats society or power suppresses rights".When state-building is brought into the track of"democratic accountability"and"limitation of power by

关 键 词：“比较-现代化”研究 国家建设 财政汲取 财政变革 历史社会学 新财政史 税权法定 预算民主 财政税收 

分 类 号：F810[经济管理—财政学] D03[政治法律—政治学]