论文部分内容阅读
本文以代表制度的三大基本问题“代表谁”“谁代表”和“如何代表”为线索,介绍和分析其基础性理论,并以英国历史与现实中的代表制度实践为例,揭示代表制基础理论内在的变迁与张力。对代表制的理论阐释和典型案例研究,不仅可以揭示代表制在历史演化过程中所表现的内在张力,凝聚现代民主代表制度所应持守的重叠性共识,也有利于厘清代表、选举与民主这三个重要议题间复杂且颇受争议的关系。本文的基本观点是:代表制与民主并不同源,但在现代社会已成为民主制度可行且可欲的落实方式。代表制并不必然与选举相连,但选举是现代社会中被代表者表达对代表同意的最重要途径。由于代表概念本身存在的二重性,以及在根本性政治社会想象上的分歧,代表制对于代表本身特点及其行为方式的要求存在内在紧张。这种紧张难以彻底调和,但应当纾解,其底线在于防止代表制对民主的潜在威胁。
This paper introduces and analyzes its basic theory on the basis of the three basic questions on behalf of the system, such as “who represents”, “who represents” and “how to represent”, and takes practice in the system of representativeness in British history and reality As an example, to reveal the inherent changes and tensions in the basic theory of representation. The theoretical explanation and typical case study of the representative system can not only reveal the inherent tension manifested in the historical evolution of the representative system but also unite the overlapping consensus that the modern democratic representative system should hold, and also help to clarify the differences between representatives, elections and democracy The complex and controversial relationship between the three major issues. The basic idea of this paper is that representation and democracy are not the same origin, but in modern society the way of implementing a democratic system is feasible and desirable. Representation is not necessarily linked to elections, but elections are the most important way for delegates to express their consent to representatives in modern society. Due to the duality of the concept of representation itself and the fundamental political and social imagination, the representative system has inherent tensions with regard to the characteristics of the representative and the requirements of his mode of conduct. Such tensions can not be completely reconciled, but it should be relieved that the bottom line lies in preventing potential threats to the democracy by the representation system.