收藏 纠错 引文

立国思想家与治体代兴

ISBN:978-7-5203-4422-7

出版日期:2019-05

页数:691

字数:595.0千字

丛书名:《政治理论与中国政治学话语体系丛书》

点击量:7760次

中图法分类:
出版单位:
关键词:
专题:
折扣价:¥100.8 [6折] 原价:¥168.0 立即购买电子书

图书简介

作为社会科学学科基础的中国政治学出现于西方思想登陆而中国思想被妖魔化的“转型世代”(1895—1925),这就意味着中国政治学从一开始就是学习乃至移植的产物。其间,先是学习英国、德国为代表的西方国家,接着是学习苏联,再接着是改革开放以来学习以美国为代表的西方国家,总之一直处于学习之中,各种学说、思潮到今天的量化研究方法,都在学习之列。

中国自己有“国学”而无社会科学,学习是必然之路,否则就没有今天的以政治学、经济学和社会学为基础的中国社会科学。与此相对应,中国的“文明型国家”向现代国家的转型,也是与西方碰撞的产物。在过去100年里,思想引领实践,实践检验思想,也是外来思想与中国实践相互撞击、相互矛盾、相互调试的“长周期”。

客观地说,在过去40年的时间里,作为学科的中国政治学与中国国家建设—政治发展的关系并不那么密切。改革开放以来,我们形成了以民主集中制为核心的“混合型”政治体制、混合型的社会主义市场经济体制和包容性的社会主义核心价值体系,但是政治学学科流行的则是传统与现代、先进与落后、民主与威权等二元对立的否定性思维方式,以及由此而产生的学科体系和理论体系。按照流行的政治学理论分析中国政治、中国实践乃至整个中国的政治发展,似乎总是不符合教科书中的“标准答案”。

常识是,一个关乎13亿多人口的政治绝对不能迎合任何简单化的理论。要知道,没有任何事情比治理大国更为复杂,这是中外历史反复证明了的;同时,基于特定国家、特定历史、特定经验而形成的理论也没有资格去鉴定中国政治发展的对与错,我们只能基于中国经验、在比较研究中形成相应的理论和概念。比较研究的发现是,当西方国家自身陷入困境之中、很多非西方国家也问题重重而导致世界秩序大变革时,中国之路还算顺畅,以至于曾经提出“历史终结论”的福山认为“中国模式”是一种替代性模式。

这意味着,中国道路之上的“中国方案”和“中国智慧”,需要一种新的政治科学去回答。社会科学具有鲜明的时代性,20世纪50年代,刚刚诞生的美国比较政治研究委员会自信地宣布,基于老欧洲经验的国家、权力等政治学概念该让让位置了。美国人确实搞出了新政治科学,在研究主题上是从现代化研究到民主化研究,在研究方法上是从结构功能主义到理性选择主义等的实证主义理论。但是,“实证”(the becoming)的逻辑离“实存的世界”(the world of the being)越来越远,将个人主义本体论弘扬到极致的美国政治学已经陷于危机之中,中国政治学不能把美国政治学的落点当作我们的起点,不能把美国政治学的败相当作我们的榜样。已经学习美国政治学40年的中国政治学,需要有自主性的理论体系和话语体系,中国应该是理论的发源地。

自主性政治学的关键是自主性的政治学理论。应该看到,在过去40年里,作为政治学理论学科资源的政治思想史研究、历史社会学和比较政治学,都不尽如人意:政治思想史研究要给中国政治学理论贡献更直接的新知必须拓展其研究路径;历史社会学则不存在“作者群”;而比较政治学一起步就跟随美国比较政治学的“民主转型”研究。这些学科现状决定了建构自主性政治学话语体系任重而道远。

但是,我们并不是没有自主性理论体系。历史上,毛泽东同志在延安时期提出的“以中国为中心”的研究方法、人民民主国体和民主集中制政体等新政治学概念,标志着中国共产党的政治成熟,也是最有力量的“中国学派”,因而解决了中国问题。今天,中国政治学有着特殊的资源禀赋去建设自主性学科体系:第一,和其他学科一样,中国政治学已经足够了解西方政治学,也有足够的包容力去接纳其有益研究成果;第二,和其他学科不同的是,中国政治思想史和政治制度史极为丰富,这是中国自主性政治学建设的最重要的“大传统”和文化基因;第三,有着中国革命经验所形成的“小传统”;第四,有现行民主集中制政体以及由此而衍生的强大的治理能力和伟大的治理成就;第五,在知识论上,中国政治学直接来源于科学社会主义——一种坚持人民主体性的科学学说,而伴随中国走向世界中心而发展起来的比较政治研究,是中国政治学的规范性学科来源。正是因为拥有这些如此独特而又优异的资源禀赋,即使在“历史终结论”如日中天之时,中国政治学阵地也没有丢掉。中国政治学理应倍加珍惜并发扬光大这些优质资源,最终形成自主性中国政治学科体系和话语体系。

这将是一项值得追求、需要奉献的世代工程。

杨光斌

2018年6月19日

中国人民大学明德国际楼

Chinese political science, which is the foundation of social sciences, emerged from the "transitional generation" (1895-1925) when Western thought landed and Chinese thought was demonized, which means that Chinese political science has been the product of learning and even transplantation from the beginning. In the meantime, first learning from Western countries represented by Britain and Germany, then learning from the Soviet Union, and then learning from Western countries represented by the United States since the reform and opening up, in short, it has been in the process of learning, and various theories, trends of thought to today's quantitative research methods are all being studied. China has its own "sinology" but no social sciences, and learning is the inevitable path, otherwise there would be no Chinese social sciences based on political science, economics and sociology today. Correspondingly, China's transformation from a "civilized country" to a modern country is also the product of collision with the West. In the past 100 years, ideas have led practice and practice has tested ideas, which is also a "long cycle" in which foreign ideas collide, contradict each other, and debug each other with Chinese practice. Objectively speaking, in the past 40 years, Chinese political science as a discipline has not been so closely related to China's national construction and political development. Since the reform and opening up, we have formed a "mixed" political system, a mixed socialist market economic system and an inclusive socialist core value system with democratic centralism as the core, but the discipline of political science is popular with the negative thinking mode of binary opposition such as tradition and modernity, advanced and backward, democracy and authoritarianism, and the resulting disciplinary system and theoretical system. Analyzing Chinese politics, Chinese practice, and even the political development of China as a whole according to popular political science theories always seems to be inconsistent with the "standard answer" in textbooks. Common sense is that a politics of more than 1.3 billion people must not cater to any simplistic theory. You know, nothing is more complicated than governing a big country, which has been repeatedly proven by Chinese and foreign history; At the same time, theories formed based on specific countries, specific histories, and specific experiences are not qualified to judge the right and wrong of China's political development, and we can only form corresponding theories and concepts based on China's experience and comparative research. The comparative study found that when the Western countries themselves were in trouble, and many non-Western countries were also plagued by problems leading to major changes in the world order, China's road was so smooth that Fukuyama, who once proposed the "end of history", believed that the "China model" was an alternative model. This means that the "Chinese solution" and "Chinese wisdom" on the Chinese road need a new political science to answer. In the 50s of the 20th century, the newly born American Council for Comparative Political Studies confidently declared that political science concepts such as the state and power based on the experience of old Europe should give way. The Americans have indeed developed a new political science, which has studied positivist theories from modernization to democratization, and from structural functionalism to rational choiceism in terms of research methods. However, the logic of "the becoming" is getting farther and farther away from "the world of the being", and American political science, which promotes individualistic ontology to the extreme, is in crisis, and Chinese political science cannot take the landing point of American political science as our starting point, and cannot take the failure of American political science as our example. Chinese politics, which has studied American political science for 40 years, needs an independent theoretical system and discourse system, and China should be the birthplace of theory. The key to autonomous politics is the political science theory of autonomy. It should be noted that in the past 40 years, the research on the history of political thought, historical sociology and comparative politics, which are the resources of the discipline of political science theory, have not been satisfactory: in order to contribute more direct new knowledge to Chinese political theory, the study of the history of political thought must expand its research path; There is no "author group" in historical sociology; Comparative politics follows the study of "democratic transition" in American comparative politics. The current situation of these disciplines determines that the construction of an autonomous political science discourse system has a long way to go. However, we are not without a theory of autonomy. Historically, the new political science concepts such as the "China-centered" research method, the people's democratic state system and the democratic centralist system put forward by Comrade Mao Zedong in the Yan'an period marked the political maturity of the Communist Party of China and the most powerful "Chinese school", thus solving the China problem. Today, Chinese political science has a special resource endowment to build an autonomous discipline system: first, like other disciplines, Chinese political science has enough understanding of Western political science and is tolerant enough to accept its useful research results; Second, unlike other disciplines, the history of China's political thought and political system is extremely rich, which is the most important "great tradition" and cultural gene for the construction of China's independent political science. Third, there is a "small tradition" formed by the experience of the Chinese revolution; Fourth, there is the current system of democratic centralism and the strong governance capacity and great governance achievements derived from it; Fifth, in terms of epistemology, Chinese political science is directly derived from scientific socialism, a scientific doctrine that adheres to the subjectivity of the people, and the comparative political research that has developed with China to the center of the world is the normative discipline source of Chinese political science. It is precisely because of these unique and excellent resource endowments that even when the "end of history" is in full swing, China's political science position has not been lost. Chinese political science should cherish and carry forward these high-quality resources, and eventually form an autonomous Chinese political discipline system and discourse system. This will be a generational project worth pursuing and dedicating. Yang Guangbin: June 19, 2018, Mingde International Building, Chinese Minmin University(AI翻译)

展开

作者简介

展开

图书目录

本书视频 参考文献 本书图表

相关词

阅读
请支付
×
提示:您即将购买的内容资源仅支持在线阅读,不支持下载!
您所在的机构:暂无该资源访问权限! 请联系服务电话:010-84083679 开通权限,或者直接付费购买。

当前账户可用余额

余额不足,请先充值或选择其他支付方式

请选择感兴趣的分类
选好了,开始浏览
×
推荐购买
×
手机注册 邮箱注册

已有账号,返回登录

×
账号登录 一键登录

没有账号,快速注册

×
手机找回 邮箱找回

返回登录

引文

×
GB/T 7714-2015 格式引文
任锋.立国思想家与治体代兴[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,2019
复制
MLA 格式引文
任锋.立国思想家与治体代兴.北京,中国社会科学出版社:2019E-book.
复制
APA 格式引文
任锋(2019).立国思想家与治体代兴.北京:中国社会科学出版社
复制
×
错误反馈