何种公共,谁的公共?——以黄宗羲和洛克财政公共性思想比较为中心  

What Kind of Public, and Whose Public?——A Focus on the Comparison of Huang Zongxi’s and Locke’s Fiscal Publicity Thoughts

作　　者：刘守刚[1] LIU Shou-gang(School of Public Economics and Administration,Shanghai University of Fiance and Economics,Shanghai 200433,China)

机构地区：[1]上海财经大学公共经济与管理学院,上海200433

出　　处：《广西师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第4期110-123,共14页Journal of Guangxi Normal University(Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“中国特色财政政治学理论体系构建研究”(21BZZ002)。

摘　　要：财政制度是极为重要的国家制度,国家制度中的公共性体现在财政方面,有一个发展的过程。借助于比较黄宗羲和洛克二人财政公共性思想的内容,具体而微地呈现17世纪中西方财政制度公共性各自的展开进程与历史差异,集中反映财政公共性思想内容的以下四个方面:财政权的性质、财产权的来源、财政征收的控制、财政管理的主导者,研究发现:大体来说,黄宗羲主张的财政思想,没有像洛克那样通过两个契约过程区分出政治社会与政府,使其主张的公共性难以落到实处,而只能寄希望于未来“王者”的行动解决一切问题,他也没有坚实的财产权理论,财政征收只是强调用客观的低定额来约束财政权,财政管理虽创造性地提出用知识精英组成的学校来发挥公议作用但却耽于空想;洛克主张的财政思想,基于完善的社会契约理论,区分出政治社会与政府,从而凸显出公共性,并创造性地发展出坚实的财产权理论,强调由经济精英组成的议会来通过公议确定征税额从而约束财政征收权。黄宗羲与洛克的思想差别,相当大程度上并非源于二人思维能力的差别,而是出于所处国家发展阶段的不同。黄宗羲的财政思想主要是总结帝制中国传统的财政思想,对于未来虽有设想但不可能有太多的开拓;洛克的财政思想虽然有西方中世纪的影响,但更多反映出已跨过现代国家门槛的英国的思想家对于现代财政的设计。财政公共性逐步展开的过程,已分别体现在二者所处的中国和英国的历史发展进程中。The fiscal system is an extremely important national system as the fiscal aspect fully reflects the public nature of national system;such nature is shaped in a long process.By comparing Huang Zongxi’s and Locke’s thoughts on public finance,this paper concretely presents the development process and historical differences of the public finance system in China and the West in the 17th century,focusing on the following four aspects:the nature of fiscal power,the source of property rights,the control of tax collection,and the leader of fiscal management.The paper finds,1)as Huang Zongxi’s thought does not distinguish the political society and the government through two contractual processes,Locke’s contribution,the publicity he advocates is difficult to be implemented,and it,expected by Huang,relies on the engagement of future“emperors”to pave the way;2)without a solid property right theory,Huang just emphasizes the constraint of fiscal power with objective low quota;3)the proposition that schools composed of intellectual elites play a deliberative role in fiscal management falls into no results.Instead,Locke’s thought,based on the perfect social contract theory,distinguishes the political society and the government,thus highlighting the publicity and creatively developing a solid property right theory emphasizing that the parliament composed of economic elites determines the tax amount through public deliberation to restrict the collection power.The difference between Huang’s and Locke’s thoughts,to a large extent,does not lies in their thinking ability,but the different stages of national development.As Huang’s thought mainly summarizes the traditional fiscal thought of imperial China,his some ideas for the future could not develop too much.Locke’s thought,thought with some shadow of the Western Middle Ages,more reflects the design of modern finance by then British thinkers who had already crossed the threshold of modern states.The gradual expansion of fiscal openness has been reflected in the

关 键 词：黄宗羲 洛克 财政思想 公共性 

分 类 号：F091.3[经济管理—政治经济学]