中国的群体与政治Groups and Politics in the People's Republic of Chin

dengxi6489

中国的群体与政治
    戴维·S·G.·古德曼 主编
    1984
     
    这本文集所收录的文章将通常用于研究多元社会的群体理论应用于中国，此举前所未有。彼得·费迪南德认为，中国政治体系并非铁板一块，可以应用群体理论进行研究，如果将“利益集团”的概念在中国语境下重新定义，会更合适。
     
    书中收录的大部分文章探究了中国政治体系中不同群体的影响，特别是在政策制定领域。文章提到了以下群体的问题：精英的派别之争；支持不同发展路径的经济学家之争；作为政治中间人的省委书记；军队力量；富有凝聚力的利益集团——教师群体；农民们表达他们客观感受和“主观”认知的渠道等。

    于尔根·道姆斯在“中国精英内部群体的形成和冲突”一文中探讨了精英的派别之争，区别了两种不同类型群体的形成过程，一种是短期内拥有相同观点的群体，另一种是长期的派别。

    芭芭拉·克鲁格的文章“中国政治中的经济学家”，讨论了经济领域三种不同的发展路径。

    在“国家政治中的省委书记：一个类别群体还是一个政治群体？”一文中，古德曼认为题目中提到的这些官员是政治中间人，不太可能成为强有力的政治群体。然而，他又认为这些官员的确非正式地参与了决策过程。

    杰拉德·西格尔对解放军的观点是：他们虽被认定是一个群体，但由于缺乏共同的利益，他们不会和其他群体发生冲突（见“中国政治中作为群体的军队”）。

    另一方面，教师作为基层职业中较重要的一个群体，以整体的力量在过去二十年中或积极或消极地影响着教育政策（戈登·怀特《分配的政治和教育的发展：作为政治利益集团的教师》）。

    约翰·P·伯恩斯重点考察的是农民表达他们客观或“主观”关注点的渠道，他发现在国家政策制定方面对部分农民有个累积的效果，但是他注意到这经常发生在官方渠道之外因此也就造成了制度化的失败（见“中国农民的利益表达”）。

    在“工人国家中的工人：中国的城市工人”一文中，托尼·塞齐也论述了城市工人的合理的参与度，但是他也强调，他们的组织仍然被党所控制。

    根据詹姆斯·科顿的文章“中国政治过程中的知识分子群体”，知识分子作为一个群体，纵观共产党的历史，其地位有明显改善，尽管其中科技工作者享受了不成比例的巨大特权。
     
    主编戴维·S·G.·古德曼，是悉尼理工大学国际关系研究所主任，其代表作为《革命中国的社会与政治变迁》和《走向复兴的亚太地区》，上述著作均出版于2000年。
     
     
Groups and Politics in the People's Republic of China
ed. David S.G. Goodman
1984
     
This volume of collected articles applies group theories of politics, usually used in the study of pluralistic societies, to China in an unprecedented way.  However, argues Peter Ferdinand, the Chinese political system is not completely unified, which justifies the use of group theories, especially if "interest group" is redefined in a manner more appropriate to the Chinese context.  
     
The bulk of the work explores the impact of different groups on the Chinese political system and specifically policymaking.  The articles address such group issues as elite factionalism; economists who support different approaches; provincial party first secretaries as political middlemen; the PLA; different substrata of the teaching profession as coherent and effective interest groups; the channels by which peasants express their perceived or "subjective" concerns; Jürgen Domes examines elite factionalism in "Intra-Elite Group Formation and Conflict in the PRC," distinguishing between types of group formation processes which lead to short-term opinion groups or long-term factions.  Barbara Krug's article, "The Economists in Chinese Politics," discusses three conceptually different approaches to the new purely economic concerns.  In "Provincial Party First Secretaries in National Politics: A Categoric or a Politic Group?," Goodman concludes that the officials in the title are political middlemen and therefore unlikely to act as a coherent political group.  Nevertheless, he continues, they do informally participate in the decision-making process.  Gerald Segal's view of the PLA is that it qualifies as a group but because it lacks common interests, it does not come into conflict with other groups ("The Military as a Group in Chinese Politics").  Teachers, on the other hand, exhibit significant group coherence within substrata of the profession, and as a whole have influenced educational policies both positively and negatively in the past two decades.  (Gordon White, "Distributive Politics and Educational Development: Teachers as a Political Interest Group").  John P. Burns concentrates on the channels through which peasants articulate their perceived or "subjective" concerns; he sees a cumulative impact on the part of peasants on national policymaking, but notes that this occurs mostly outside of official channels and thus constitutes a failure of institutionalization ("Chinese Peasant Interest Articulation").  In "Workers in the Workers' State: Urban Workers in the PRC," Tony Saich observes a reasonable degree of participation by urban workers as well, but maintains that their organization continues to be dominated by the Party.  Intellectuals, according to James Cotton ("Intellectuals as a Group in the Chinese Political Process"), have seen their position as a group improve throughout the history of the CCP regime, although the scientific/technological substratum has enjoyed disproportionately greater privileges.  

   
The editor, David S.G. Goodman, is the Director of the Institute for International Studies, at University of Technology, Sydney.  He is the author of Social and Political Change in Revolutionary China and Towards Recovery in Pacific Asia, both published in 2000.

疯丫头

哈哈、、、

疯丫头

呵呵

疯丫头

灌水。。。。