【作者】 张博；

【导师】 王彩波；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 政治学理论， 2022， 博士

【摘要】 日裔美籍学者弗朗西斯·福山(Francis Fukuyama)在二十一世纪相继推出了《国家构建:21世纪的国家治理与世界秩序》、《政治秩序的起源》和《政治秩序与政治衰败》三本书,基本构建了他的政治秩序理论,以回应多年来学术界对他的“历史终结论”是否还具有现实解释力的质疑。本文通过对福山的政治秩序理论做一项整体性研究,并深入揭示出这一理论的学术价值及其局限性。首先,从形成背景、良好政治秩序三要素的起源和三要素发展逻辑三个方面对福山政治秩序理论展开分析;其次,围绕美国政治衰败问题,检视福山对于政治衰败的理解是否真实反映了自由民主的现实问题;最后,借助历史政治学的研究视角,着重对福山政治秩序理论中的发展逻辑以及与中国相关的论述进行批评。福山政治秩序理论提出的现实背景,即“第三波”民主化浪潮的“回潮”和“失败国家”的出现,让福山看到了自由民主制度既没有成为各国政治发展的必然选择,也没有“终结”各国的历史;同时,美国主导的“华盛顿共识”政策的失效,美国政治经济乱象频出,而作为对照的中国,在各方面的发展都取得了巨大的成就,这些都促使福山开始检视自由民主制度所存在的问题。基于此,福山吸收了多方面的理论资源后提出了政治秩序理论。促使福山进行政治秩序研究的直接理论源泉,是亨廷顿的政治发展理论和文明冲突理论。此外,福山个人的多年学术探索,也为他深入思考各国的政治史和美国现实提供了必要的思想基础。福山政治秩序理论的内在逻辑,从核心概念出发,对政治秩序和国家构建进行了一般性的理论分析,其目的是为此后批判福山的部分学术观点提供理论支撑。政治秩序是政治共同体内各要素(各行为体)的协调发展,可以为政治权力提供合法性论证,也可以通过制度化建设约束政治行为体。国家构建作为国家理论中的重要概念,在适用于中国的时候首先面临的就是对“国家”的定位。国家构建是指现代民族国家构建,不同的发展程度和不同历史文化的国家,其民族国家特征也不同。国家构建受到时间、空间和制度三个方面的约束。三个限定条件规定了不同国家的政治发展进程必然是不同的,简单的、不顾及历史条件的制度移植无法实现国家的良性政治发展。福山分析政治秩序起源和演进的主线是国家构建,具体包括国家能力的提升和官僚机构的公共性;另两个要素,法治和民主负责制,是为了约束在构建有效国家的过程中国家权力的无序扩张,指导国家能力有的放矢。福山认为,国家构建的起源是古代中国,更准确地说是秦汉建立的“非人格化”的官僚体制,福山认为中国过早地显现出现代国家的特征,即“早熟论”;与中国做对比的是古代印度和奥斯曼土耳其帝国的国家建设实践,二者都没有形成中国这样有效的国家统治体系;法国大革命后,欧洲的官僚体制的经历吸收了中国的经验,但在欧美的不同国家又呈现出不同的特征。法治和民主负责制则起源于西欧,法治起源于基督教,世俗国家通过与教会进行权力争夺,最终获得了法律的制定权和审判权;福山认为法治在中国是缺席的,而中东世俗国家与教会的争权过程与西方类似,但最终阿拉伯国家还是缺乏法治的。民主负责制起源于英国的封建制度,即中世纪庄园会议(议会),但在其扩展的过程中遇到了欧美庇护主义和依附主义的破坏,最终在英国,议会和君主势均力敌,以光荣革命为民主负责制的开端;民主负责制对于政治秩序的价值在于保护本国公民个人权利的能力,以及通过赋予反对法合法的参政地位来约束执政者。福山认为,无论是历史事实还是理论的可行性,均表明政治秩序三要素之间存在先后的发展次序。首先进行国家构建,建立有效国家和官僚体制,然后是确立法治的相关制度,最后是民主负责制的确立。福山主要通过历史上特定国家的政治演进过程,来论证缺少有效国家而“过早地”发展民主的弊端。福山提出政治发展次序的思想基础是认为制度是可以被借鉴和复制的,这种借鉴和复制不受历史因素的约束。与政治秩序相对应的概念是政治失序,从秩序到失序之间有一个变化的过程,这个过程就是政治衰败。福山概括为两种表现形式,其一是制度与外部环境在变化频率上脱节,即制度僵化;其二是家族制的复辟,这种复辟就是对“非人格化”制度原则的破坏。福山认为,美国当前出现的政治衰败主要是第二种形式。此外,福山认为美国的另一个政治衰败的表现是身份政治所导致的选民分裂和民粹政治。从历史政治学的研究视角看,福山的政治秩序理论中的部分观点是值得商榷的。第一,福山对于比较历史分析方法的运用,存在“重比较轻历史”的问题,在比较对象的选择上不够科学。第二,福山对于中国存在误读。包括两个方面,一方面福山对于中国的“早熟的现代国家”的定位是带有价值取向的:过早的“成熟”导致了过早的“衰落”,没有认识到中国历史中社会结构的变化;另一方面,福山没有认识到中国的现代化转型是由多重逻辑构成的,不仅仅是马克思主义的革命理论,也包括中国传统文化。第三,从世界政治史的角度看,帝国主义主导的秩序并没有消失,而是变得更加隐蔽。移植和复制发达国家的制度,从表面上看是制度的转移。但是,从“时空-制度”的限定条件来看,制度有其生长和生存的时空条件,而时空条件是无法复制和移植的。从总体看,福山政治秩序理论扩展了国家理论的历史视野,对政治秩序的构成要素的形成和发展进行了梳理,特别是对国家能力的关注,从历史和现实的角度再次强调国家在政治发展中的重要性;福山能够尖锐地指出美国政治制度呈现的政治衰败现象,体现了政治学者的现实关怀和责任担当。但是,福山仍没有跳脱出固有的意识形态偏见,导致其理论可行性低,过于理想化。更多还原

【Abstract】 Francis Fukuyama,the Japanese-American scholar,has successively published three books in the 21 st century,namely,State Building: Governance and World Order in the Twenty-first Century,The Origins of Political Order: from Prehuman Times to the French Revolution,and Political Order and Political Decay: from the Industrial Revolution to the Globalization of Democracy.These three books basically build up his theory of political order in response to the years of doubt in academic circles about whether his theory of "the end of history" still has realistic explanatory power.This thesis makes a comprehensive study of Fukuyama’s political order theory,and deeply reveals the academic value and limitations of this theory.Firstly,this thesis analyzes Fukuyama’s theory of political order from three aspects:the formation background,the origin of the three elements of good political order,and the development logic of the three elements.Secondly,focusing on the problem of political decay in the United States,this thesis examines whether Fukuyama’s understanding of political decay truly reflects the real problems of liberal democracy.Lastly,with the research method of historical politics,focuses on the criticism of the development logic in the theory of political order and the relevant discussion on China.The context of Fukuyama’s theory of political order,namely,the "return" of the "Third Wave " of democratization and the emergence of "failed states",showed Fukuyama that liberal democracy was neither the inevitable choice for the political development of all nations,nor the end of their history.Meanwhile,the failure of the US-led "Washington Consensus",the frequent political and economic chaos in the United States,and as a contrast,the great achievements of China in its overall development,all prompted Fukuyama to review the problems of liberal democracy.Therefore,Fukuyama drew on a wide range of theoretical resources and then put forward his theory of political order.The direct theoretical sources that prompted Fukuyama’s research on political order were the theory of political development and the theory of clash of civilizations proposed by Samuel Huntington.In addition,Fukuyama’s years of academic exploration also provided him with the necessary ideological foundation for his deep thinking about the political history of various countries and the reality of the United States.The internal logic of Fukuyama’s political order theory starts from the core concepts,and conducts a general theoretical analysis of political order and state construction.Political order is the coordinated development of various elements(actors)within a political community,which can not only provide legitimacy for political power,but also constrain political actors through institutionalization.As an important concept in the theory of the state,state building,when applied to China,is first faced with the question of how to position the "state".State construction refers to the construction of modern nation-states.Countries with different levels of development and different histories and cultures have different national-state characteristics.There are three qualifying conditions stipulate that the process of political development must be different in various countries,and that simple institutional transplants that do not take into account historical conditions cannot achieve the sound political development of a country.State building is the main thread of Fukuyama’s analysis of the origin and evolution of political order,including the enhancement of state capacity and the public nature of bureaucracy;the other two elements,the rule of law and democratic accountability,are intended to constrain the disorderly expansion of state power in building an effective state and to guide the objective-oriented state capacity.Fukuyama believes that the origin of state building is in ancient China,more precisely in the "impersonal" bureaucracy established in the Qin and Han dynasties,and he believes that China has prematurely revealed the characteristics of a modern state,i.e.the "premature theory".As a contrast,the practice of state building in ancient India and Ottoman Turkish Empire did not form an effective state ruling system like China.The European bureaucracy,after the French Revolution,absorbed the experience of China,but different countries in Europe and America took on different characteristics.The rule of law and democratic accountability,on the other hand,had their origins in Western Europe,where the rule of law had its roots in Christianity and where the secular state,through a power struggle with the Church,eventually gained the right to make and judge laws.Fukuyama believes that the rule of law is absent in China,and the power struggle between secular countries and churches in the Middle East is similar to that in the West,but ultimately Arab countries still lack the rule of law.Democratic accountability had its origins in the British feudal system,that is,the medieval manor assembly(parliament),but its expansion was undermined by European and American patronage and dependency.Eventually in the UK,the parliament and the monarch were evenly matched,with the Glorious Revolution as the beginning of democratic accountability.The value of democratic accountability for the political order lies in its ability to protect the individual rights of the citizens and to discipline those in power by giving opposition laws a legitimate place to participate in politics.Fukuyama believes that both historical facts and theoretical feasibility indicate that there is a sequence of development among the three elements of political order.The first step is to build the state,establish the effective state and bureaucratic system,then determine the relevant system of the rule of law,and finally develop the democratic accountability.Fukuyama argues for the disadvantages of developing democracy "prematurely" in the absence of an effective state,mainly through the political evolution of particular countries in history.Fukuyama’s ideological basis for proposing a sequence of political development is the belief that institutions can be borrowed and replicated,and that such borrowing and replication is not bound by historical factors.The opposite concept of political order is political disorder.There is a process of change between order and disorder,and the process is political decay.Fukuyama summarizes its form in two categories: one is the disconnection between the system and the external environment in terms of the frequency of change,that is,the rigidity of the system;the other is the restoration of the family system,which undermines the principle of the "impersonal" system.Fukuyama believes that the current political decay in the US mainly falls in the latter category.In addition,Fukuyama sees another manifestation of political decay in the US as voter division and populist politics resulting from identity politics.By applying the research method of historical politics,this thesis argues that some of the ideas in Fukuyama’s theory of political order are debatable.First,Fukuyama’s application of comparative history analysis methods has the problem of "heavy comparison over history",and the selection of comparison objects is not scientific enough.Second,Fukuyama misreads China.There are two aspects.On the one hand,Fukuyama’s positioning of China’s "premature modern state" is value-oriented: premature "maturity" led to premature "decline",and he did not recognize the social structure in Chinese history.change;on the other hand,Fukuyama failed to realize that China’s modernization transformation is composed of multiple logics,not only the revolutionary theory of Marxism,but also Chinese traditional culture.Third,from the perspective of world political history,the imperialist dominated order has not disappeared,but has become more invisible.Transplanting and replicating the systems of developed countries is,on the surface,the transfer of systems.However,in terms of the qualifying conditions of the "space-time system",systems have their own space-time conditions for growth and survival,and the conditions cannot be replicated or transplanted.The overall assessment of Fukuyama’s theory of political order in this thesis is that it expands the historical perspective of the theory of the state,provides an overview of the formation and development of the constituent elements of political order,with a particular focus on the capacity of the state,and reiterates the importance of the state in political development from a historical and practical perspective.Fukuyama’s sharply pointing out the political decay of the American political system reflects the realistic concern and responsibility of a political scholar.However,Fukuyama still did not break away from the inherent ideological bias,which makes his theory low in feasibility and too idealistic.更多还原