【作者】 王健；

【导师】 陈刚；

【作者基本信息】 武汉大学 ， 中外政治制度， 2018， 硕士

【摘要】 在西方民主话语中,印度是世界上最大的、发展中的巩固民主国家,但是印度教徒和穆斯林的暴力活动却是这个巩固民主政体的一个伤疤。为什么印穆群体之间会发生暴力?为什么相对其他地方,有些地方发生暴力的烈度强,持续时间长?为什么印穆暴力在20世纪80年代中期骤然兴起且在90年代不断激化?近年来印度印穆暴力仍有抬头,但是对此的既有研究都存在这样或那样的局限:精英主义研究视角不能解释底层民众的认同极化,普通民众视角则容易忽略国家权力对社会的渗透,试图将两者结合的国家—社会互动视角则聚焦于庇护网络的微观运作,不能将政治精英与民众的互动纳入到宏观的政治发展进程中,以全景式、动态化地说明印穆暴力发生和激化的机理及其在不同时期程度和范围的变化。与之相对照,跨时地考察印度庇护网络的结构变迁,可以更好地说明选举庇护、身份动员和印穆暴力之间的互动关系,从而提供一个囊括印穆暴力宏观变迁和微观机制的整体性解释。本文认为,庇护网络是维持印度庇护式民主有效运转的非正式制度,是传输选票和公共物品分配的“权力性”纽带。庇护网络的结构影响着政党选举动员的庇护策略,而族群身份是选举庇护的重要诉诸对象。暴力则是族群身份的最直接区分手段。所以,庇护网络的结构通过族群身份的动员直接影响着族群暴力。具体而言,独立初期形成的一元化庇护网络抑制了族群身份的政治化,印度教主义政党可以融入主流政治并获得物质恩惠,并不需要发动暴力、进行身份动员。而且即便是发起暴力,一方面不能够获得足够的群众基础,另一方面也会被政府强力镇压。尼赫鲁去世之后,英迪拉母子重造一元化庇护网络的努力弱化了国大党的组织基础,选战策略的宗教转向导致了宗教身份的政治化。恩惠网络的松动和印度教身份动员导致了印穆暴力的兴起,权力极端弱化的国大党邦政府并不能及时制止暴力。到联合政府的多元化庇护网络时期,联邦政治的地方化导致各政党选举竞争的白热化,族群身份动员成为主要的政党动员策略,于是印穆暴力不断加剧。更多还原

【Abstract】 India is the largest developing and consolidated democracy in the world in the western democracy discourse,but the violence of Hindu—Muslim is a scar on the consolidated democracy.Why violence occurs between Hindu group and Muslim group?Why is the intensity of violence stronger and long duration longer in some places relative to other places?Why did Hindu—Muslim violence rise suddenly in the mid-1980s and continued to intensify in the 1990s?Hindu—Muslim violence in India has risen in recent years.However,there are some or all limitations in the existing research on this:the perspective of elitist research cannot explain the polarization of the lower people.From the perspective of the common people,it is easy to overlook the penetration of state power into society,and the perspective of the country-society interaction trying to combine the above two just focus on hte microcosmic operation of the patronage network,which cannot incorporate the interaction between the political elite and the common people into the process of macroscopic political development,and provide a panoramic and dynamic explanation mechanism of the occurrence and intensification of violence in India and its change in the degree and scope of different periods.By contrast,a cross-temporal examination of the structural change of the Indian patronage network can better illustrate the interactive relationship between electoral clientelism,identity mobilization,and Hindu—Muslim violence,thereby provides a comprehensive explanation combining Macroeconomic change and micro-mechanism of Hindu-Muslim violence in India.This paper thinks that patronage network is an informal system to maintain the effective operation of India’s patronage democracy,and is a "power"link for the exchange of votes and public goods.The structure of the patronage network affects the clientelism strategy of party in electoral campaign,and ethnic identity is an important object of electoral clientelism.Violence is the most direct means of distinguishing ethnic identity.Therefore,the structure of the patronage network directly affects ethnic violence through the mobilization of ethnic identity.Specifically,the monolithic patronage network formed in the early days of independence inhibited the politicization of ethnic identity.Hinduism parties can integrate into mainstream politics and receive material favors.They do not need incite violence for identity mobilization.And even if violence is incited,on the one hand,it will not be able to obtain a sufficient mass base,and on the other hand it will be strongly suppressed by the government.After Nehru’s death,Indira and her son’s efforts to recreate a monolithic patronage network weakened the organizational foundation of the National Congress Party.The religious turn in the election campaign strategy has led to the politicization of religious identity.The loosening of the patronage network and the mobilization of Hindu identities led to the rise of Hindu-Muslim violence.The INC’s state government with the extreme weakened power did not stop violence in a timely manner.During the period of the diversified patronage network of the coalition government,the localization of federal politics led to the fierce competition in the election of various political parties,and the mobilization of ethnic identities became the main political party mobilization strategy.Hindu-Muslim violence in India has continued to increase.更多还原