浅析查韦斯政府执政以来的委内瑞拉社会组织

委内瑞拉查韦斯政府在执政期间积极促进各类社会组织的发展.以社区委员会、合作社和社区媒体为代表的委内瑞拉社会组织成为公民参与公共事务的重要渠道,并与政府形成良性互动的趋势.查韦斯政府把社区委员会视为建设参与式民主的主要组织形式.作为一种地方自治机构,社区委员会使公民对公共事务的直接参与走向制度化.查韦斯政府还大力促进合作社的发展,把合作社视为委内瑞拉实现"内生发展"的关键途径.在委内瑞拉,社区媒体是一种具有替代色彩的信息传播渠道,通过深入挖掘和揭示民众对于国家和国际事务的感受,为民众全面了解国家发展进程提供一条替代渠道.     

拉美左翼和参与式民主:以拉美四国为例

拉美是参与式(制)民主实践的先锋。相较于世界其他地区,参与式民主在拉美的确有着更为广泛的存在。拉美第一代参与式民主实践是20世纪八九十年代左翼在地方政府执政的产物,其主要内容是各种管理拉美城市的参与机制。拉美第二代参与式民主实践始于20世纪末至21世纪初拉美"向左转"时期,是该地区参与式民主试验的高峰。在此期间,委内瑞拉、玻利维亚、厄瓜多尔和巴西的左翼政府建立了多种形式的参与式民主。比较而言,委内瑞拉创造了一个激进参与式民主模式,寻求以参与式民主取替代议制民主;巴西提供了一个务实参与式民主模式,主张通过扩大参与实现政府有效治理从而巩固代议制;厄瓜多尔和玻利维亚则是混合模式,兼具两者特征。本文从正式性、代表性、范围—规模三个维度,对上述四国的参与式民主实践进行梳理和比较。本文认为,拉美左翼的参与式民主实践在扩大政治参与、增强民主包容性和提高政府回应性方面取得了显著的成效,为拉美国家民主体制注入了新的活力,体现了拉美国家在独立探索民主体制发展方面的积极意愿,但参与式民主体制的内在复杂性和拉美国家的剧烈政治变动使相关实践的可持续性面临巨大的挑战。     

论委内瑞拉“21世纪社会主义”思想和实践

壹韦斯政府力求对既有的政治一经济发展模式实行根本变革.推动国家走上一条符合本国国情的发展道路.在这一过程中,查韦斯政府逐渐把"21世纪社会主义"作为变革的指导理论."21世纪社会主义"的基本内涵是:保留现行的代议制民主体制和多党竞争,同时鼓励、扩大基层民众的政治参与;加强国家对经济的干预和调控,对资本和市场进行一定限制,建立一种注重实效、私营经济与国有经济并存的混合经济;改善社会福利,倡导社会公正;追求国际关系民主化,反对霸权主义.在"21世纪社会主义"的建设进程中,查韦斯政府修改宪法,颁布一系列新法律,重视扩大非私有制形式的生产资料所有制,促进参与式民主的发展,开展社会主义教育运动,实施一系列"社会使命",倡导建立国际合作新模式,强调第三世界特别是拉美国家的团结合作.壹韦斯政府将面临4个方面的挑战:如何发挥工人阶级的作用?如何加强委内瑞拉左派阵营的团结?如何克服对查韦斯领导作用的过度依赖?如何应对国内反对派的强有力挑战?     

委内瑞拉私有经济利益集团的共容性与协约民主时期的经济政策

私有经济利益集团(也可简称"私有集团")是委内瑞拉社会的重要组成部分,是该国最重要的经济利益集团之一。在委内瑞拉协约民主时期的近40年中,私有集团在经济和政治上都发挥了较大的影响力,这种影响力在各时期经济政策的制定中均有体现。随着私有集团自身的结构演变以及参与决策的机制变迁,私有集团对经济政策的影响在不同时期体现了不同特征。本文从制度经济学公共选择理论的"共容性组织"相关理论出发,探讨委内瑞拉私有集团组织的共容性演变过程,分析私有集团在国家经济政策制定中角色的演变,揭示其在协约民主体系瓦解过程中的作用。研究发现,在整个协约民主时期,私有集团的共容性逐步降低,其政策诉求日益多样化,决策参与的主导机制由正式逐步转向非正式。以上过程相互强化,导致扭曲的经济政策出台且难以被纠正,进而导致自由化改革失败。经济政策失误导致的危机引发并加剧了政治的不稳定并最终导致协约民主体系的崩溃。从委内瑞拉的经历得出的重要启示是,国家必须谨慎设计将私有经济利益集团纳入决策参与的制度机制。     

公民社会与拉美国家政治转型研究

公民社会在拉美国家的政治转型过程中发挥了重要作用:圣保罗论坛和世界社会论坛已成为拉美政治左转的思想高地;天主教会仍是最能影响和控制人的思想和行为的公民社会组织,其在历次政治转型中发挥的作用不可低估,尤其在"还政于民"过程中的推动作用不可忽视;土著人组织通过其政治参与使国家政权更具包容性,民主参与机制更为广泛,是拉美政治转型的直接推动力之一;社会运动、妇女、学生等其他弱势群体也是拉美政治改革和转型的积极推动者。此外,公民社会还包括个人和家庭等社会细胞,其经济和教育水平的提高为拉美国家的政治转型提供了社会基础。     

委内瑞拉总统卢辛奇及其内外政策

1984年2月2日,委内瑞拉民主行动党领导人海梅·卢辛奇就任委内瑞拉自1958年以来的第六任民选总统。执政4年来,他奉行较积极的内外政策,使委内瑞拉较稳定的民主政权不断得到巩固,社会秩序比较安定。这对于推动和发展拉丁美洲民主化进程具有重要意义,对于正在为本国实现民主化而斗争的其他拉美国家人民也是很大的鼓舞。可以预料,卢辛奇总统在其最后一年的任期中,将继续作出努力,不断克服前进中的困难,取得新的成就。     

对委内瑞拉可治理性危机的分析

委内瑞拉在1958年建立民主体制之后保持了较长时间的政治稳定和可治理性,但自20世纪80年代末实行经济模式转型以来,委内瑞拉面对着一场可治理性危机,其表现为民选政府愈来愈难以有效地维持社会秩序,大规模、长时间的罢工、示威和严重的暴力冲突频频发生;社会各阶层、各群体之间的政治分歧加剧;国家机器内部出现分裂乃至对立,严重限制了政府的执政能力;猖獗的腐败现象损害了民主体制的合法性,多起未遂军事政变的发生对民主体制构成严重威胁.从政治体制的角度看,这场危机发生的原因在于委内瑞拉政治制度化的水平落后于政治参与的发展水平;民选政府的执政能力不足,政策措施缺乏连续性和稳定性;两大传统政党的衰落和政党体制的破碎化削弱了民主体制的社会基础和功能作用.为了应对可治理性危机,委内瑞拉政党和政治体制都需要进行自我改革,提高民众的政治参与度,并建立一套强有力的反腐机制.     

拉丁美洲的民粹主义:理论与实证探讨

学术界对于拉丁美洲的民粹主义这一概念的理解大体上可分为两大类。一类是将其看作一种与进口替代工业化和凯恩斯主义直接相关的经济模式或经济政策,以推动工业化、政府干预、扩张性的财政政策、注重收入分配等为特征;另一类是从政治角度出发,将其理解为一种意识形态、政治策略、政治话语、政治逻辑、政治风格等,各有侧重。拉丁美洲的民粹主义起源于对19世纪晚期大都市革命的威权本质的反抗,同时在文化传统上受到克劳泽主义的影响。政党体系和公民社会不发达的政治体制、极度的收入分配不均和频繁发生的经济危机为拉美民粹主义培育了土壤,使民粹主义在拉美历史上几度兴衰,呈现出强大的历史韧性。民粹主义既包含有利于民主的因素,如揭露现代西方代议制民主制度的弊端,以人民主权的名义扩大政治包容和参与,也包含不利于民主的因素,如权力过度集中于领袖,忽视民主程序和社会多元化,具有一定的政治排斥性等。这种矛盾体现了自由主义的民主传统与民粹主义的民主传统之间的内在紧张性。     

委内瑞拉的“21世纪社会主义”：理论内涵、实践与现实意义CSSCI

"21世纪社会主义"是委内瑞拉政治经济社会矛盾发展的产物,它的提出和实践与查韦斯总统有着直接联系。作为一种整体性发展战略,"21世纪社会主义"将会发挥三重功效:进一步消除殖民主义留下的印记;引入一条"后资本主义"的发展道路,克服资本主义带来的危机和困境;形成一种替代性的现代化,为委内瑞拉注入一种非欧洲中心主义的现代性。"21世纪社会主义"主张以和平方式进行社会主义革命,以社会发展作为执政党施政的起点。在实践过程中,查韦斯政府大力促进财富的再分配、推动"内生发展"和深化人民权力。委内瑞拉的"21世纪社会主义"实践没有既定的程序,不是以一揽子的方式迈向社会主义,而是谋求通过"试错"的方式迈向社会主义。这一进程受到短期利益与长期利益、社会公平与经济效率这两大矛盾的制约。目前,复杂的政治经济形势使委内瑞拉的社会主义建设面临巨大考验,这一新生社会主义模式的有效性有待实践检验。     

委内瑞拉的“21世纪社会主义”:理论内涵、实践与现实意义

"21世纪社会主义"是委内瑞拉政治经济社会矛盾发展的产物,它的提出和实践与查韦斯总统有着直接联系。作为一种整体性发展战略,"21世纪社会主义"将会发挥三重功效:进一步消除殖民主义留下的印记;引入一条"后资本主义"的发展道路,克服资本主义带来的危机和困境;形成一种替代性的现代化,为委内瑞拉注入一种非欧洲中心主义的现代性。"21世纪社会主义"主张以和平方式进行社会主义革命,以社会发展作为执政党施政的起点。在实践过程中,查韦斯政府大力促进财富的再分配、推动"内生发展"和深化人民权力。委内瑞拉的"21世纪社会主义"实践没有既定的程序,不是以一揽子的方式迈向社会主义,而是谋求通过"试错"的方式迈向社会主义。这一进程受到短期利益与长期利益、社会公平与经济效率这两大矛盾的制约。目前,复杂的政治经济形势使委内瑞拉的社会主义建设面临巨大考验,这一新生社会主义模式的有效性有待实践检验。     

Local democracy and popular participation: Chile and Brazil in comparative perspective

This article examines the factors that facilitate or impede the strengthening of popular participation in local democracy in Latin America through a comparative analysis of the Chilean and Brazilian cases. This comparative analysis illustrates the importance of structural reforms, the institutional configuration of local government and the role of political parties vis-à-vis civil society in either enhancing or impeding popular participation in local democracy. In short, it argues that popular participation will be strong and effective where structural reforms expand the resource base and policymaking authority of local leaders, local institutions strengthen accountability and facilitate citizen input in decision-making, and political parties attempt to organize and mobilize groups and constituents at the grass-roots. Where these conditions do not hold, the reverse will be true. These conclusions are drawn from analysis of the development of popular participation and local democracy in Porto Alegre, Brazil (a positive example) and Santiago, Chile (a negative example).     

Mauritania: Political Parties,Neo-patrimonialism and Democracy

This article takes issue with those analyses of ‘developmental democracy’ which treat popular participation as a clamorous inconvenience to be managed in the interests of economic efficiency. Instead it asks what follows from prioritizing participation both as a defining feature of democracy, and as an integral part of what is meant by development.

The analysis is developed in two parts. The first contrasts the narratives of popular and of liberal democracy, showing how they come to different conclusions about participation and its role in development. But it also argues there are potential complementarities. These were obscured when socialist ‘people's democracies’ were (misleadingly) seen as popular alternatives to liberal democracy. Since the end of the cold war, however, the focus has been on democratizing liberal democracy, to ensure it is responsive to the needs of citizens, as active participants in development and not just targets of state policy, rather than on whole system alternatives.

The second part reviews the experience of popular democratic experiments in Tanzania and Nicaragua, which sought to extend participation beyond the confines of representative democracy, and to link it to participatory development. It might be read as a requiem for their apparent failure. But their vicissitudes also raise broader questions: about the contradictions between popular participation and ‘people's democracy'as a system of rule; concerning the structures and procedures (elections, political parties, civil society bodies, mass organizations and so on) through which participation is organised; and about the problems of harmonizing participatory development with the management of complex national economies.     

Civil Society and Peace Negotiations: Beyond the Inclusion–Exclusion Dichotomy

Civil society is generally seen as an important actor in peace processes. But when it comes to reaching an agreement during peace negotiations, much of the current debate is centered on the question of including or excluding civil society. Although most researchers argue that civil society participation makes the process more sustainable and democratic, most practitioners emphasize that enhanced civil society participation makes it more difficult to reach a peace agreement. I argue that practitioners and theorists must both move beyond this dichotomy and, instead, focus on the variety of ways in which civil society actors can be included in a given negotiation process. To this end, I present in this article a comprehensive overview of nine models of inclusion, from most to least direct involvement of civil society, supported by illustrative case studies. Analysis of these models suggests that it will be possible to broaden the participation of civil society in peace negotiations without decreasing the negotiations' effectiveness.     

Fighting for the rule of law: civil resistance and the lawyers' movement in Pakistan

Pakistan, sometimes referred to as ‘the most dangerous place on earth’, is not typically thought of as a place where popular nonviolent resistance could take root, much less succeed. Citizen apathy, poor governance, and fear of regime repression and terrorist violence are barriers to effective civic activism inside Pakistan. Yet, over the past two years, Pakistan's authoritarian ruler was ousted and its independent judiciary restored following a massive grassroots campaign led by lawyers. The ‘men in black’, whose insistence on the rule of law and embrace of nonviolent struggle captured the hearts and minds of millions of Pakistanis, helped transform the country's political landscape in unexpected ways. The successes tallied by this nonviolent movement, this article will argue, can be attributed to the large-scale non-cooperation and civil disobedience that pressured two successive Pakistani regimes – one authoritarian and one democratic – to yield to its demands. Unity and mass participation, nonviolent discipline, and the creative use of nonviolent tactics were three key ingredients of success. While instability and Islamist extremism continue to plague Pakistan, the lawyers' movement highlights the steadily growing strength of Pakistani civil society have a potential to influence democratic change in the country.     

Accountability or “Good Decisions”? The Competing Goals of Civil Society Participation in International Governance

Civil society participation in international and European governance is often promoted as a remedy to its much-lamented democratic deficit. We argue in this paper that this claim needs refinement because civil society participation may serve two quite different purposes: it may either enhance the democratic accountability of intergovernmental organisations and regimes, or the epistemic quality of rules and decisions made within them. In comparing the European Union and World Trade Organization (WTO) in the field of biotechnology regulation we find that many participatory procedures officially are geared towards the epistemic quality of regulatory decisions. In practice, however, these procedures provide little space for epistemic deliberation. Nevertheless, they often lead to enhanced transparency and hence improve the accountability of governance. We also find evidence confirming findings from the literature that the different roles assigned to civil society organisations as “watchdogs” and “deliberators” are at times difficult to reconcile. Our conclusion is that we need to acknowledge potential trade-offs between the two democratising functions of civil society participation and should be careful not to exaggerate our demands on civil society organisations.     

EU assistance for civil society in Kosovo: a step too far for democracy promotion?

EU assistance for Kosovo is the most ambitious external relations venture embarked upon by the Commission to date. Not surprisingly, much of the aid is framed in terms of ‘civil society’ and channelled through a handful of local non-governmental organizations (NGOs). But attempts by foreign donors to promote civil society exogenously across post-socialist Eurasia are deemed to have achieved little in terms of stimulating individual participation and civic engagement. In response the EU appears to have refined its approach by combining the usual support for larger NGOs with more basic assistance for grassroots networks and community-based initiatives. Whilst such a twin-track strategy is arguably appropriate in the context of Kosovo where civil society participation is particularly low, in terms of maximizing the critical development of transactional capacity the approach may fail to target resources most effectively. It is argued here that there is a danger that normative concerns about liberal pluralism, enriching civil society and ensuring that assistance is widely dispersed may ultimately detract from the imperative of deploying limited resources first and foremost to secure a core of sustainable NGOs with developed capacity to engage government, the international community and other non-state actors in the process of policy reform. Indeed, drawing on the experience of civil society assistance in new member states of Central and Eastern Europe, it would seem that although NGOs are often criticized for their detachment from community organizations and campaigns, they perform a critical ‘behind the scenes’ role in policy change and state transformation. They can, if donor funding is appropriately targeted, facilitate the emergence of civil society networks through which small community organizations are then linked with larger, established and capacity-endowed organizations.     

Democracy and civil war: A note on the democratic peace proposition

Democracies may not fight each other, but do they fight themselves? Despite the need to better understand internal wars, empirical investigations of the democratic peace have focused on international war between democracies. We test the effect of regime type on civil wars, a class of events that is widely overlooked in the study of conflict. We find that regime type strongly affects civil war participation.     

NGOs: A ‘New Class’ in International Relations

Nongovernmental organizations have attempted to take control of civil society, displacing traditional governing institutions. This serves the interests of the terrorists, warlords, and mafia dons, who benefit from weak central government, and hinders the West's ability to mobilize allies to participate in the war on terror. NGO leaders who are hostile to the nation-state itself seek to transform a voluntary system of participation in international organizations by sovereign member-states via a “power shift” to an unholy alliance of multinational corporations and NGOs. Since they do not possess the traditional sources of legitimacy enjoyed by nation-states, they seek to impose their will by financial or forceful means—for example, “sanctions” or “humanitarian intervention.” A new class of NGOs has thus emerged that is essentially opposed to the diplomatic, legal, and military measures required for dealing with civilizational conflict.     

On the relationship between democratic institutionalization and civil society involvement: new evidence from Turkey

This study uses a nation-wide representative survey from 2004 to explore the link between civil society involvement and civic attitudes in Turkey. The article argues that, besides civic attitudes, political attitudes are also significant in explaining membership in ‘Olson type’ institutions, while membership in ‘Putnam type’ institutions does not depend on attitudinal variables. The article concludes that low civil society participation with a gender gap and intolerance of rural participants raises significant questions about the democratic potential of civil society in Turkey.     

Voting for peace,mobilizing for war: post-conflict voter turnout and civil war recurrence

In democratic elections around the world, high levels of voter turnout are frequently praised as a sign of democratic legitimacy and consolidation. However, while popular participation should be lauded in many circumstances, under certain conditions it can also have nefarious side effects. In post-conflict countries, high levels of voter turnout may make it easier for militants to return to arms because everyday people are invested in the political process and the electoral outcome. Through the use of survival modelling, this study finds that voter turnout is positively correlated with civil war recidivism in post-conflict first elections. Even when elections are not particularly contentious or when structural factors (such as level of development) are auspicious, voter turnout continues to have a positive and statistically significant relationship with recidivism.