人口規模巨大的中國式現代化與

大家的事商量著(zhù)辦的中國式民主

Chinese Modernization of a Huge Population 

And 

Chinese Democracy that Solves Public Matters Through Consultation 

當代中國與世界研究院特約研究員，復旦大學(xué)中國研究院研究員、副院長(cháng)范勇鵬

By FAN Yongpeng, Special Research Fellow at the Academy of Contemporary China and World Studies, Research Fellow and Deputy Dean of the China Institute, Fudan University

兩會(huì )是中國政治生活中的一件大事，其中一個(gè)重點(diǎn)事項就是審議立法法修正草案，將“堅持和發(fā)展全過(guò)程人民民主”寫(xiě)入立法法。

A key item on the agenda of this year’s Two Sessions as a major political event in China is to deliberate the amendment to the Legislation Law of the People’s Republic of China and thus incorporate “upholding and developing the whole-process people’s democracy” into the Law.

中共二十大提出了“中國式現代化”，中國式現代化四大本質(zhì)特征的第一條就是“人口規模巨大的現代化”。習近平主席講過(guò)，中國式現代化蘊含著(zhù)獨特民主觀(guān)，這個(gè)民主觀(guān)就是全過(guò)程人民民主觀(guān)。那么，巨大的人口規模，自然也是理解全過(guò)程人民民主的一個(gè)重要切入點(diǎn)。

As to “Chinese modernization”, the term was put forward at the 20th CPC National Congress. Among the four fundamental features of Chinese modernization, the first one is that “it is the modernization of a huge population”. As President Xi Jinping once put it, Chinese modernization implies a unique democracy – the whole-process people’s democracy. To fully appreciate this concept, it is important to understand what such a huge population means for China.

民主這個(gè)詞產(chǎn)生于古代希臘。什么樣的國家適合什么樣的制度，是有一定歷史規律的。古典意義上的民主，都是在極小的城邦國家產(chǎn)生的?；咎卣骶褪莾蓷l：一是所有公民都來(lái)直接參政，二是少數服從多數。這種民主不搞代議制，因而主要的制度形式也不是選舉。不管是古希臘的民主城邦，還是中世紀意大利的小型民主共和國，主要采取的都是抽簽制度。當然，所有這些民主國家，都只是極少數公民內部的民主。絕大多數人要么是奴隸，要么是庶民，沒(méi)有政治權利。所以這種民主絕不是普通勞動(dòng)者想要的民主。

The word democracy originated in ancient Greece. There are some historical laws as to what kind of system suits which countries. Democracy in its classic definition always appeared in tiny city-states. It had two basic characteristics: (1) all citizens could participate in state governance directly, and (2) the opinions of the majority shall prevail. There was no representative system back then, so election was not the primary institutional form. Instead, a lottery system was adopted both in the city-states of ancient Greece and Italy’s small republics in the Middle Ages. In all those democratic states, however, democracy was just a privilege reserved for a handful of citizens, whereas the majority of the people were either slaves or plebeians with no political rights. It was by no means the kind of democracy that ordinary laborers would want. 

這種民主小國有個(gè)大問(wèn)題，就是生存能力堪憂(yōu)，所以經(jīng)過(guò)短暫的實(shí)踐之后，這些國家的民主制度都失敗了。從古希臘哲學(xué)家到近代歐洲啟蒙思想家，都認為國家大了搞不了民主，因而大都認為民主不是一種好制度?？陀^(guān)上，歐洲國家從中世紀末期也大都向著(zhù)中央集權的王權制度演進(jìn)，這一點(diǎn)與世界各文明是有共性的。

A major problem with this kind of small democracies is their poor viability, which is why their democratic systems all failed after a short period of practice. From ancient Greek philosophers to modern Enlightenment thinkers in Europe, it was generally believed that democracy was impossible in big states, hence a bad system. In fact, since the end of the Middle Ages, most European states have evolved toward the centralization of power, a phenomenon shared by all civilizations worldwide.  

但是歐洲有兩點(diǎn)極特殊的情況，一是近代之前長(cháng)期停滯于封建制度階段，也就是有點(diǎn)類(lèi)似于中國西周的制度，而且還達不到中國西周的制度水平。封建貴族制度里產(chǎn)生出了議會(huì )制和選舉制的雛形。章太炎就曾經(jīng)指出，議會(huì )政體是封建的變體。其實(shí)中國上古時(shí)期也都有類(lèi)似的制度，但是在中國人追求大一統和天下為公的歷史進(jìn)程中，這些制度在秦漢之后被淘汰了。二是歐洲開(kāi)啟了資本主義的現代化。資本主義以私有制為基礎，是一種私權體系。封建制度也是一種私權體系。兩種私權體系的制度很容易相通。所以新興的資產(chǎn)階級要掌握國家政權，就可以非常方便地繼承發(fā)展封建制度遺產(chǎn)，創(chuàng )造出現代的代議制。這就是今天西方所謂代議制民主的淵源。

But two special situations in Europe must be noted. One is that the continent stagnated in the stage of feudal system for a long time before entering the modern times, during which it was somewhat similar to the Western Zhou Dynasty in Chinese history, but of a less developed institutional level. It was from the feudal aristocracy that the parliamentary system and the election system stemmed. Chang Tai-yen, a democratic revolutionary and thinker in the late Qing Dynasty, called the parliamentary system a variation of feudalism. Similar systems existed in China in ancient times, but they were abandoned after the Qin and Han Dynasties as the Chinese pursued national unity in the belief that the world belonged to all. The other is that Europe is where capitalist modernization began. Capitalism is a system of private rights based on private ownership. Feudalism is a system of private rights too. The two systems therefore have much in common. As a result, when the emerging capitalist class tried to control state power, they could easily inherit and develop the feudal legacy and create the modern representative system, which has later evolved into the so-called representative democracy that we see in the West today. 

代議制解決了小規模民主的困境。國家變大了，新興貴族和資本家可以通過(guò)選出代表組成議會(huì )，隱藏在代議制幕后間接掌握國家權力。馬克思說(shuō)資產(chǎn)階級的所謂民主制就是每隔幾年決定一次“由統治階級中什么人在議會(huì )里當人民的假代表”。王紹光教授將這種民主稱(chēng)為“選主”，也就是人民形式上可以參加選舉，選出一些人來(lái)當自己的主人，然后政權和人民就沒(méi)有關(guān)系了。

The representative system has solved the dilemma of small-scale democracy. When a state grows bigger, emerging aristocrats and capitalists can elect their representatives to form a parliament, while they themselves can be the true power holders behind the scenes. According to Marx, the so-called democracy of the capitalist class was “to decide once in three or six years which member of the ruling class was to misrepresent the people in Parliament”. This is called “master choosing” by Professor Wang Shaoguang. In other words, the people could nominally vote to elect some people to be their masters, and then they would have nothing to do with the regime anymore. 

中國能不能采取這種制度呢？肯定是不行，我認為有兩方面原因。

Is it possible to transplant this kind of system to China? The answer is negative for two reasons. 

首先，中國文化崇尚民本。不同于各種以神為本和以資為本的文明，中華文明從上古時(shí)期就產(chǎn)生了以民為本的觀(guān)念。從堯舜到周公，從孔孟到孫中山，中國人都是在追求公天下、民為本。當然，只有中國真正做到了這一點(diǎn)，真正踐行了立黨為公，執政為民。

First of all, the Chinese culture puts the people first. Unlike civilizations that put God or capital first, the Chinese civilization has always put the people first since time immemorial. From legendary rulers Yao and Shun to Zhou Gong, the founding father of Western Zhou, from philosophers Confucius and Mencius to the revolutionary pioneer and leader Sun Yat-sen, Chinese people have never ceased their pursuit for a people-centric world for all. In fact, China is the only country in the world that has truly achieved this goal – the Party is committed to serving public good and exercising power for the people. 

其次，中國規模巨大，廣土眾民。

Second, China has too vast a territory and too huge a population. 

在小國里，大家七嘴八舌，一起商量決定事情，問(wèn)題不大。一是政治事務(wù)沒(méi)那么復雜，七嘴八舌不會(huì )帶來(lái)大禍；二是利益、意見(jiàn)、文化沒(méi)那么復雜，社會(huì )分裂的風(fēng)險不大，國家政治不容易被某種特殊利益團體所綁架。

It would be perfectly practical in a small country to decide something through the consultation of all people because, for one thing, political matters in such a country are not so complicated as to have trouble from such extensive consultation. For another, the interests, opinions and cultures in such a country are not so complicated as to contain the risk of social splits, and state politics are not likely to be kidnapped by a certain vested interest group. 

今天的西方國家比歷史上的民主小國大多了。它們用代議制、聯(lián)邦制等制度，把小國給拼接成大國，這樣的好處是保留了一些小國民主的要素，壞處是也放大了小國民主的弊端。比如，民選代表只為選區利益代言，地方性成為痼疾。立法、決策過(guò)程中各種利益集團游說(shuō)博弈，讓政治權力變成分贓游戲。資本和精英群體擅長(cháng)組成政黨或NGO，也慣于利用法律為自己謀利，而沒(méi)有能力參與博弈的人，他們的利益就得不到關(guān)注。黨爭更是造成了無(wú)原則的反對、互潑臟水?？傊鞣降拿裰饔^(guān)念是“只見(jiàn)其小，不見(jiàn)其大”。整體性成為最大的軟肋。

Western countries today are much larger than the democratic city-states of the past. They have bound the small democracies together through representative system, federal system and the like, an expansion that has both pros – maintaining the democratic elements – and cons – magnifying the drawbacks of small democracies. For instance, the elected representatives only represent the interests of their respective electoral districts, leading to the chronic social ill of provincialism. The lobbying and gaming among various interest groups during legislation and decision making have turned the exercise of political power into a dirty game of spoils. Capitalists and elites can always form a political party or NGO and are adept at taking advantage of the law in their favor, whereas those unable to join the game never receive any attention. Different parties are engaged in mutual opposition and mud-slinging without good reason. In sum, with the Western concept of democracy, political parties are too narrow-minded and self-interested to heed public good or the big picture. 

中國自古就是大國，有豐富的制度經(jīng)驗。在大國中，維持統一、穩定的秩序是極其艱巨的挑戰，要求以維護整體性和共同利益?！渡袝?shū)》有一篇叫《洪范》，洪范就是天地之大法，講的是周武王滅商之后，向紂王的叔叔箕子請教治國理政的道理。其中有一句就是講，治理天下要平正，不能基于私心而作威作福，特別要反對任何人結黨營(yíng)私，“無(wú)偏無(wú)黨，王道蕩蕩”。

China is a large country since ancient times with rich experience in institution. It is extremely challenging for a large country to maintain unity and stability and safeguard integrity and common interests. In the Book of History, there is a chapter called “Hong Fan”, which means the law of governance. It tells the story of Emperor Wu of the Zhou Dynasty, after vanquishing the Shang Dynasty, asking the vanquished emperor’s uncle Ji Zi for advice on how to run a country. The article says, one must be impartial and just in governance, should not act like a tyrant out of selfish motives, and should object to anyone forming a clique to pursue selfish interests. As the old saying goes, “a state will be well governed when there is no partiality or clique”.

但是客觀(guān)而言，大國的體量導致實(shí)現真正的人民當家作主難度很大，因而古代中國雖然最早提出“民惟邦本”的理念，強調“民貴君輕”，但始終未發(fā)展到“民惟邦主”。原因就是，民本與民主之間，隔著(zhù)一個(gè)規模因素的阻礙。

Yet it is difficult to see the people truly become the masters of a large country. Despite its initiation of the idea that “the people are the foundation of a state” and the emphasis that “the people are more valuable than the emperor”, China never really achieved that until modern times. This is because the huge population presents a major hurdle on the way from “people first” to “democracy”.

誰(shuí)打破了這個(gè)阻礙呢？中國共產(chǎn)黨。張維為教授認為中國共產(chǎn)黨是一個(gè)“整體利益黨”。中國共產(chǎn)黨不同于西方的“部分利益黨”。中國共產(chǎn)黨是人民的先鋒隊，直接代表著(zhù)最廣大人民的意志來(lái)領(lǐng)導國家。就像習近平主席所說(shuō)，中國共產(chǎn)黨“不代表任何利益集團、任何權勢團體、任何特權階層的利益”。這其實(shí)是對中國三千年政道的繼承發(fā)展。

It is the CPC that has finally removed this hurdle. Professor Zhang Weiwei called the CPC “a party representing the common interests of all”, which is different from the Western parties that represent partial or local interests. The CPC is the vanguard of the Chinese people. It leads the country on behalf of the greatest possible majority of the Chinese people. As President Xi Jinping said, the CPC doesn’t “represent any interest group, establishment group, or privileged social group”. This description is a continuation of the principle of governance that has been upheld for 3,000 years in the country. 

放在這個(gè)背景下，我們就很容易理解全過(guò)程人民民主的含義。中國十四億人口的民主，顯然不能靠西方那種基于間歇性選舉和特殊利益博弈的代議制的民主，而要靠貫穿于政治生活所有領(lǐng)域、所有環(huán)節、所有層次的全過(guò)程民主。小到鄉村里的砍柴擔水、鄰里間的家長(cháng)里短，大到國家立法行政、發(fā)展戰略，都是用大家事大家商量的辦法來(lái)解決。

It is easy, against such a background, to understand what whole-process people’s democracy means. With a population of 1.4 billion, China obviously cannot adopt the Western representative democracy featuring intermittent elections and the game of special interests. What it needs is a whole-process democracy that covers all areas, all links and all levels of political life. Be it the daily routines in villages or neighborly trivialities, or state legislation, administration and development strategies, everything concerning the people is done through the consultation of all people. 

中國更強調共識的達成，反對輕易票決，小到基層黨組織，大到全國人大立法，投票之前都要進(jìn)行充分的醞釀協(xié)商，讓不同意見(jiàn)相向而行，聚少數成多數，而不是簡(jiǎn)單地讓多數壓倒少數。像美國那種在國會(huì )里用一票的優(yōu)勢來(lái)立法，大選里以一票之差來(lái)選總統，絕對不是中國要的民主。

Compared with rushing anything to a vote, China places more stress on reaching a consensus. Whether within primary-level Party organizations or for legislation at the NPC, there would be full and extensive consultation before members vote for a decision, so that those of different opinions could find more common ground and meet each other halfway, and an overwhelming consensus could be reached rather than simply overriding the minority. The American type of democracy – to pass a bill at the Congress or to elect a president by having one more vote – is not what China wants. 

最最重要的一點(diǎn)，中國民主須臾不能離開(kāi)中國共產(chǎn)黨的領(lǐng)導。在文化極其多元、利益無(wú)比復雜、發(fā)展仍不均衡的中國，只有中國共產(chǎn)黨可以讓各地各界產(chǎn)生出來(lái)的人大代表成為全國人大代表，只有中國共產(chǎn)黨可以讓各地區、各行業(yè)、各民族的利益匯聚成中華民族的整體利益，只有中國共產(chǎn)黨可以實(shí)現統一性與多樣性的統一。這是全過(guò)程人民民主最本質(zhì)的優(yōu)越性，也是中國民主之所以當得起這個(gè)“全”字的根本原因。

Most important of all, the Chinese democracy should always be under the leadership of the CPC. In China, a country of extremely diversified cultures, extremely complicated interests, and highly uneven development, the CPC is the only Party that can make sure the people’s representatives elected in each place can serve as NPC deputies, can converge the interests of various regions, industries and ethnic groups into the overall interests of the Chinese nation, and can harmonize unity with diversity. That is the essential superiority of the whole-process people’s democracy. That is the fundamental reason why Chinese democracy is for the whole process and the whole people.