协商民主的类型和功能

当代西方协商民主的制度难题是如何解决“协商”与“决策”二元分离问题.罗尔斯主张协商民主只适用于“宪法根本”和基本正义等政治问题;而菲什金则将民主协商排除在代议制之外,推崇公民微型协商小组.哈贝马斯针对上述“单轨”协商民主及其二元分离问题,提出了正式公共领域与非正式公共领域的“双轨”理论,并通过公民与政府间的“交往之流”促使二者的融合;博曼的二元民主强调执法与公民的协商以勾连立法、执法与公民之间的协商;科恩则主张通过政党上传下达的桥梁作用,促成二者的合一.罗尔斯的“公共理性”意味着在公共协商过程中只存在着一个主导着整个协商过程及其结果的单一理性;而多元理性论者古特曼等则认为：单一理性论者忽视了社会现实的差异性和不确定性等,因此主张“互惠原则”和“共融政治”.价值预设性协商民主强调价值、规范和程序的先定性,不免有强奸民意之嫌;价值待定性协商民主则力主：宪法只是一个对未来行动的一般承诺,具有持续性、对话性和再磋商性等.当下中国政治体制改革势在必行,建立健全以党的领导为前提、以协商民主为核心、以程序法治为主导、以宪法统治为保障的民主政治体制,当为可取.

Different Types and Functions of Deliberative Democracy

The separation of consultation and decision is a key problem of deliberative democracy. The single- track deliberative democracy thinks that consultation can be only used in legislative process or among citizens, but for the double-track both are ok. The single-reason deliberative democracy upholds that only one reason leads to the whole consulting process and its result, but the multi-reason is for the fusion of different reasons. The scheduled-value deliberative democracy stands for guiding values and rules, but the expecting value insists that all the decisions should be made after consultations. Now political reform is going on in China. Led by the Party we can set up the process deliberative democracy under the constitutional ruling.