【摘要】 卢梭对代表制的态度一直是学界关注的焦点。诸多研究者依据《社会契约论》认为卢梭政治理论中代表制与人民主权是不可调和的对立关系。通过解读卢梭经典文本可以发现,卢梭对代表制的态度经历了消极接受、明确拒绝、再次采纳三个动态变化阶段。卢梭通过区分主权代表与治权代表,主张在理想共同体中,人民直接行使主权而拒绝主权代表,同时接受政府作为治权代表存在。但是,面对民主理想与现实的张力,以及现实政治立法的科学性,卢梭试图以命令形式的主权代表制保障人民主权原则的实现。卢梭代表概念的复杂性提示我们,当代人民主权与代表制的争论并不是民主的危机,它们之间存在的张力推动现代民主理论与实践的不断发展。更多还原

【Abstract】 Rousseau’s attitude towards representation has always been the focus of academic attention. According to the theory of social contract,many researchers believe that the representation and popular sovereignty in Rousseau’s political theory is an irreconcilable antagonistic relationship. Based on the interpretation of Rousseau’s classic text,this paper attempts to make a deep analysis of Rousseau’s representative theory,and holds that there is conflict and harmony between representation and popular sovereignty. The study found that Rousseau’s attitude to the representation had experienced three dynamic changes,including negative acceptance,explicit rejection and the adoption. By distinguishing between the sovereign representatives and executive representatives,Rousseau supported the people directly exercise sovereignty in an ideal community and rejected the sovereign representatives,while accepted the government as the executive representatives.However,facing the tension between the democratic ideals and the reality,as well as the scientific nature of practical political legislation,Rousseau tried to guarantee the realization of the principle of popular sovereignty through the system of sovereign representation in the form of command. The complexity of the concept of representation of Rousseau suggest that the argument between people’s sovereignty and representation is not the crisis of democracy,the tension between them can promote the continuous development of modern democratic theory and practice.更多还原