覃漩：政治协商与政治发展

栏目：《转型中国的政治发展理论与实践研究》格致出版社/上海人民出版社发布时间：2022-10-24浏览次数：371

（因下文中的图表可能无法正确显示，您可点击下载本文PDF版）

政治协商与政治发展

覃漩*

本章对比了中西语境中协商民主出现的理论动力和历史条件，来说明协商在不同制度中可能承担的不同功能。不同于西方背景下为了解决民主系统内部缺陷而产生的纠偏机制，协商在中国的出现是为了回应政治发展在不同阶段的功能性需求。自全球范围内的殖民统治时期开始，直至中国获得独立并过渡为现代国家，协商在制度安排和政治话语中的内涵不断发生着变化，并呈现为谈判、咨询、治理机制这三种样态。它与民主之间的联系，也并非是一开始就存在的，而是在发展过程中被逐渐建立起来的。

在英语世界中，“协商民主”这一概念由约瑟夫·贝赛特在1980年首次提出^{^[1]}，并由伯纳德·曼宁^{^[2]}和约书亚·科恩^{^[3]}在九十年代末展开的讨论中发展和延伸了它的理论内涵。自那时起，大量与协商民主有关的著述与论文集相继涌现^{^[4]}，它们大多将协商民主视为选举民主的补充，在传统民主理论的框架之下辨析其概念并为其制定标准。在此期间，越来越多的民主理论学者加入了这一思潮，支持协商民主的基本构想并声称自己为协商理论家，这其中包括罗尔斯^{^[5]}和哈贝马斯^{^[6]}。虽然人们对于“什么样的交谈互动才能够称得上协商”这一核心问题尚存在着分歧，但一套相对而言被广泛接受的标准来自于哈贝马斯的交往理论^{^[7]}，它也为后来被称为第一类协商（Type I deliberation）的原则系统奠定了基础^{^[8]}。这一类协商强调话语中包含的理性和展开协商的意图。根据这样一种定义，协商是平等自由的个体在谈话中交换理由。相比基于权力的威胁与恐吓、基于利益的讨价还价、情感煽动或意识形态操控等，“好的理由所携带着的非强制性力量”是一个论断获得改变他人立场的影响力的唯一可接受方式。因此，谈判、修辞（rhetoric）、故事（storytelling）等常见的对话形式，被协商的经典标准排除在外。新世纪以来，在这样一种协商标准的指导之下，各种各样的协商实验在全球范围内展开，从詹姆斯·费什金的民意测验（deliberative poll），到阿雷格里港的参与式预算（participatory budgeting）^{^[9]}。这些创造性实验的出现表明协商民主已经从“理论争辩”的阶段过渡为一种“工作指南”^{^[10]}。然而，在协商实践不断扩张的十年中，经验数据支持下的实证研究重新激活了关于协商标准的理论探讨[11]。这样的背景下，一套被称为“第二类协商”（Type II deliberation）的原则系统逐渐取代“第一类协商”，在理论界形成对于协商概念的广泛共识。根据这种对于协商的定义，曾经被排除在外的交流形式被重新纳入进来，成为符合协商要求的类型之一。这种转变的实质，是协商的理论核心由哈贝马斯式的“理性论证”朝向“相互论证”的转移——即令人信服的、可接受的和有说服力的观点，取代“理性”成为了协商的中心要素^{^[12]}。因此，像“讲故事”一类诉诸于情感的交流形式，尽管不符合经典协商标准对于理性的要求，但由于它在“提供可信度，建立同理心，激发义愤感等方面，直接或间接地有助于观点的证成”^{^[13]},而被肯定为协商的形式之一。

总而言之，协商民主是一个快速发展的理论领域。在过去的三十年里，不同的协商形式通过不同的方式，对协商纯度提出了不同的主张。协商诞生的理论动力来自于选举民主对于自身的纠偏，因此，在很长一段时间内，那些在制度上缺少有效选举程序的威权国家，不被认为是协商可能发生的地点之一。在这样的背景之下，何包钢和马克·沃伦使用“威权协商”这一概念来描述20世纪90年代以来出现在亚洲威权主义国家的大量协商事实^{^[14]}。这一概念将两个常见的元素——威权和协商——合并为一个陌生的术语，并将我们带回了对于理论的反思之中。它打破了民主与协商之间的传统关联，指出它们在制度安排上并不必然以对方为前提。民主作为一种决策方式，意味着对于决策权力的平等分配；而协商作为一种沟通方式，要求对于公共意志形成过程的塑造和参与。虽然民主和协商之间存在着结构和制度性关联，但我们完全可以设想一种包含着协商元素、但最终并未导向共同决策的参与方式，为政府号召公民合作和增加合法性提供功能性的帮助。

在接下来的章节中，本文对比了中西语境中协商民主出现的理论动力和历史条件，来说明协商在不同制度中可能承担的不同功能。不同于西方背景下为了解决民主系统内部缺陷而产生的纠偏机制，协商在中国的出现是为了回应政治发展在不同阶段的功能性需求。自全球范围内的殖民统治时期开始，直至中国获得独立并过渡为现代国家，协商在制度安排和政治话语中的内涵不断发生着变化，并呈现为谈判、咨询、治理机制这三种样态。它与民主之间的联系，也并非是一开始就存在的，而是在发展过程中被逐渐建立起来的。

一、西方语境下的协商民主：对聚合式民主提出的挑战

分歧和冲突是现代政治的本质特征之一。以选举为代表的早期民主理论，为如何在相互冲突的立场中实现集体行动提供了行之有效的解决方案。选举机制保证了公民定义个人立场并参与政治的权利，一人一票的量化手段则赋予这些个人立场以平等的分量。因此，选举民主的支持者认为选票的加和是公共意志的最大体现，而选举也为价值多元时代的公共决策提供了可操作的办法。以投票为代表的，对于个体偏好进行登记、计算与加和的民主模式，被称为聚合式的民主（aggregative democracy）。自阿罗有关偏好聚合的重要工作以来^{^[15]}，投票理论也成为公共决策的基本范式，在理性选择领域被广泛接受。然而，对于民主概念的聚合式理解，以及这种理解为解决分歧提供的方案，在19世纪末引起了激烈的批评。这些批评和对理性选择理论的反思缠绕在一起^{^[16]}，驱动民主理论在20世纪的最后十年发生了朝向协商的转变^{^[17]}。新的民主模式，即协商民主，被认为是对选举民主的有效补充。

对于聚合式民主的批评主要集中在以下两个方面。首先，聚合式民主将个体偏好视为已知的和已确定的，却很少关注它们是如何形成的，也没有为个体重估个人立场提供制度性引导。尽管聚合式民主为制定公共决策提供了有效的程序，但通过单纯的累加、聚合、多数原则，相互冲突的意见被放置在一起仅仅只是为了生成一个结果，互动过程中没有更进一步的讨论或对于立场背后的理由的展示。这样一种缺乏沟通的竞争机制可能会导致观点的固化和极化，使持有某种立场的群体更加固执己见，从而巩固社会中现存的权力分布：“这些分布可能是公平或者不公平的，但聚合式的民主概念不提供任何我们得以判断其是否公平的原则。更重要的是，它们也没有提供任何过程，使公民基于这些权力分布的观点和看法可能得以改变”^{^[18]}。

第二，聚合式民主丧失了政治生活的公共维度，使公民被简化为偏好的被动承载者，政治被简化为计算。在聚合式民主的安排之下，政治舞台上的每一种观点都被视为权力竞争中固定而孤立的立场，按照市场竞争的模式来完成集体性的决策。在投票的过程中，政客们根据选民的愿望和要求来表达自己的立场和想法，就像生产者为了吸引消费者所做的一样。沟通(如果有的话)和信息交换是为了宣传一个特定的候选人，而不是寻求一个更好的论点。输赢机制决定了人们最关注的永远是投票的结果，而不是辩论的合理性。在这个框架下，个人之间的关系被他们所持有的观点简化为朋友或敌人，政治生活被简化为市场竞争，公民被简化为经济主体。公众意志形成的过程无非是一种聚集和计算:“成功是由被量化为选票的公民对个人或项目的认可来衡量的。选民通过选票表达他们的偏好。他们的投票决策与市场参与者的选择行为具有相同的结构。它们允许不同政党以成功为导向的态度争夺权力职位”^{^[19]}。

除此之外，其他的批评包括聚合式民主没有为公民挑战这个制度本身提供途径^{^[20]}，聚合过程除了公民为达最大利益所动用的计算以为没有包含“必要的理性”^{^[21]},聚合结果由于缺乏深思熟虑而易受社会文化的影响^{^[22]}，等等。出于对聚合式解决方案的不满，民主理论家们认为，最好存在一种民主的概念，使得个体之间能够以理性的方式进行沟通，还原政治生活的公共性内涵，并有效地做出集体性决策。协商民主在这样的背景之下承担了这一期望，成为对于聚合式民主的补充与纠正。

尽管理论界对协商民主的标准尚存在着争议，但一般来说，协商被认为是存在于自由平等的个体之间、就那些影响他们的公共决定进行的沟通和讨论。协商的参与者对不同的观点立场持开放心态，愿意根据新的信息和观点背后的理由修改自己的立场与偏好。解决分歧时，促使观点发生变化的，不应该是权力或利益，而是更好的观点所携带着的影响力——理性的非强制性力量是协商过程中唯一可被接受的“强制力”^{^[23]}。通过这种转变，“以交谈为中心的民主理论取代了以投票为中心的民主理论……问责取代同意成为合法性概念的核心”^{^[24]}。

这样两种民主理念，以不同的方式塑造了个体的公民身份。聚合式民主中的个体关注个人利益；原子化的、一人一票式的赋权方式，使选民获得个体的独立性，并更加倾向于从限制权威的角度上理解个人和政府的关系，警惕以公共利益为名义的对于个人权益的侵害。受这种自由主义观点的影响，个人更可能选择退回私人领域，拒绝外部干涉，对他人的意见保持与己无关的态度等。而协商民主对于公民身份的塑造，至少在以下两个方面不同于洛克式的自由主义理想。首先，协商鼓励个人对集体问题采取具有公共精神的思考角度。“民主进程是以讨论公共利益为导向的，而不是仅仅为了促进每个人的私人利益而发生的竞争”^{^[25]}。在协商的框架中，个人倾向于根据公意来修改个人偏好，而不仅仅从私人效用最大化的角度进行计算^{^[26]}。第二，相比于聚合式民主将个体视为固定偏好的承载者，协商注重培养公民的反思能力，促进不同观点之间的相互沟通。更具体地说，协商民主认为“协商经验有能力影响个体的偏好、意见、伦理视野、理解、信息和对他人立场的欣赏”^{^[27]}。通过讨论、辩护、沟通与回应，公民会更加愿意反思他们接受的规范，修改他们现有的偏好，或至少理解和尊重相反的意见。

从以上的讨论中，我们可以看到，协商民主在西方语境中，是作为一种对于聚合式民主的补充而出现的。争论的焦点是理想的民主概念和相应的制度安排。从这个意义上说，协商在英语世界的讨论中，是内生于民主理论框架中的。然而在中国，协商与民主之间的联系，并非一开始就存在，而是在历史发展的过程中被逐渐建立起来的。协商出现的动力也并非建立更加完善的民主系统，而是为了回应政治发展在不同阶段的不同需求。在下一章节中，文章引入政治发展的概念，来说明协商在近现代话语中不断变化着的政治内涵。

二、中国协商民主与政治发展：协商涵义演变的三个阶段

政治发展的概念与19-20世纪反殖民运动、新兴民族国家的诞生之间有着重要关联。在殖民时期，殖民地是被迫卷入工业资本主义的体系扩张过程中，资本主义国家对资源、贸易和市场的需求推动着殖民地的发展，其所配备的殖民统治机器保证了系统的运行。因此，当殖民体系崩溃之后，获得独立的新兴民族国家需要新的政治体制去填补这一空白^{^[28]}。无论是早期的增长理论，还是后来更为强势的现代性理论，对于这些新兴的民族国家来说，核心问题是怎样谋求政治发展并实现从传统国家到现代国家的过渡。以讨论现代性概念为核心的政治发展理论，大体上是围绕现代化国家与传统国家的对立范式展开的。一种看法认为，传统国家需要逐步采纳现代性的全部标准，清除传统社会的价值规范和历史积累，复制英美国家的政治制度和发展过程以完成现代化。对此的反思与批判认为，传统和现代并不是非此即彼的两组概念。传统所携带的价值对于一些新兴国家来说具备构成性的重要性，这些社会与文化特征无法也不应该被彻底消除，而应将其整合进新的制度以使其获得生命力。在福山看来，争论之中的两种观点都将现代性视为一整套进步而融洽的系统，在这个系统之中好的东西倾向于同时出现，例如经济增长、世俗化、更好的教育和更高的政治参与水平等，而亨廷顿在此基础上挑战了这一预设。亨廷顿认为，现代性中可欲的目标常常是交错出现而非同时发生的，现代化的结果除了政治发展以外也可能是政治衰朽。在此基础上他提出了强大政府论或政治秩序论。他认为政治发展的核心是政府实现有效统治的程度。没有政治秩序，经济和社会的发展便不能够成功进行。发展需要平衡政治参与和制度化之间的关系。在制度化程度不够健全的情况下，过早扩展政治参与，会动摇脆弱的政治体制^{^[29]}。

协商在中国的发生与政治发展理论的演变共轨。区别于来自民主理论内部的自我修正的动力，协商在中国的出现是为了回应政治发展在不同阶段的需求。既往文献已经在理论层面充分说明过协商与民主之间的概念差异，但它们在中国近现代史中怎样建立起联系却鲜少被提及。梳理协商在中国出现的历史背景和它的概念演变，解释了协商与政治发展之间的逻辑，补充了西方背景之外协商的发生机制，对作为整体的协商系统具有理论意义。协商的政治内涵演变在中国近代史上经历了三个不同阶段，来承担政治发展意义上的不同功能：作为谈判的协商，作为咨询的协商以及作为治理机制的协商。

（一）1949年以前：作为政治谈判的协商

虽然早在儒家传统中已经可以找到协商的理念根源，但这一术语在中国语境中获得政治意义需要追溯到解放战争时期对抗日本侵略建立的多党合作统一战线。自中共一大到国共合作期间，共产党在政治联合方面实现了“不同其他党派建立任何关系”到建立统一战线的转变。促成这一转变的两个主要前提，是权力分布意义上势均力敌的多党环境和一个需要对抗的共同的敌人。竞争环境中，当不存在任何一个党派，在权力关系上强大到可以不计代价的将个人意志施加于对方，作为谈判的协商就是不得不出现的。这是受动态利益而非协商意愿的促使走入谈判的典型例子^{^[30]}。

中国共产党于1935年颁布的《八一宣言》中提到，“只要任何部队实行对日抗战，不管他们与红军之间有任何旧仇宿怨，不管他们与红军之间在对内问题上有任何分歧，红军不仅立刻对之停止敌对行为，而且愿意与之亲密携手共同救国。……共产党愿意立刻与中国一切愿意参加抗日救国事业的各党派、各团体（工会、农会、学生会、商会、教育会、新闻记者联合会、教职员联合会、同乡会、致公堂、民族武装自卫会、反日会、救国会等等）、各名流学者、政治家、以及一切地方军政机关，进行谈判共同成立国防政府问题。”^{^[31]}这标志着中国共产党在实现政治联合上态度的转变。除了官方文件中对于“谈判”的使用以外，这种政治联系相比于协商更接近于谈判的另一个原因，在于它是强功能性驱动的。这也反映在毛泽东有关统一战线和关门主义的讲话中：“关门主义‘为渊驱鱼，为丛驱雀’，把‘千千万万’和‘浩浩荡荡’都赶到敌人那一边去，只博得敌人的喝采……关门主义的所谓‘纯粹’和‘笔直’，是马克思列宁主义向之掌嘴，而日本帝国主义则向之嘉奖的东西。我们一定不要关门主义，我们要的是制日本帝国主义和汉奸卖国贼的死命的民族革命统一战线。”^{^[32]}这样一种从功能性视角出发的对于联合的追求，并不符合经典协商的原则标准，而更加接近于谈判。

此外，在这种情况下的协商与作为集体决策方式的民主不存在直接的联系。经由统一战线提出协商架构中，协商主体和协商对象是作为权力上游的党派领袖和具有影响力的社会精英，而非群众或群众代表。这在中共中央政治局于1935年12月25日在瓦窑堡会议上通过的《中共关于目前政治形势与党的任务的决议》中有明确的体现：“共产党要在中国革命中取得领导权，单靠党的宣传鼓动是不够的，必须使他的一切党员在实际行动中，在每日的斗争中，表现出他们是群众的领导者。只知道如何在下层群众中间进行工作(这是主要的)，是不够的，必须知道如何同别党别派和下层群众有关系的上层领袖进行谈判，协商妥协，让步，以期争取其中可能继续合作的分子，以期在群众前面最后的揭穿那些动摇欺骗与叛变分子的面目，而以群众的力量把他们驱逐出去。”统一战线的理论框架中“群众”所扮演的角色，一方面是党派合法性的提供者，是证成战争正义性的理由（“为这些群众的切身利益而斗争，使他们相信共产党不但是工人阶级的利益的代表者，而且也是中国最大多数人民的利益的代表者，是全民族的代表者”）；另一方面，在权力关系中群众受到党派的“领导”，是借以其力量进行斗争的对象（“以群众的力量把他们驱逐出去”）。但群众并非协商的参与者。这并不是说统一战线的架构不包含任何民主的元素，而是说协商在当时的使用场景中与民主并无直接联系。协商在革命语境中的政治内涵，指代与竞争党派发生的谈判，是权力之间的互动，而非自由个体间受理性驱动的、就公共利益展开的交谈。

随着民族解放战争的结束，统一战线之下的政治联合与协商关系也随之终止。这再一次佐证了协商作为谈判的实质与其功能性动因。1945年8月15日，第二次世界大战的亚洲战场在日本帝国宣告投降后结束。经过43天的协商谈判，国共两党就共同建立统一政府达成了《双十协定》。然而，尽管达成了协议并组织了会议，协商的实质仍然是权力集团之间的谈判。1946年6月，国民党退出协议并导致内战的爆发。

简而言之，中国现代史上协商的出现，在中国共产党寻求党派联盟与战略合作中有着特定的政治根源。它是由民族解放和政治发展的功能性需求所驱动的，在这个背景之下，它与民主之间不存在理论或制度性连接，与协商在西方政治中的出现有本质性的差别。

（二）1949年至90年代末:作为政治咨询的协商

协商的含义在内战结束后发生了变化。共产党取得政权之后，政治发展在这一阶段的需求是怎样实现政治结构的分化和功能的专业化，以让政治组织实行高度有效的分工，承担各自比较确定的职能等。为了回应政治发展的需求，作为谈判的协商不再具备存在的必要，取而代之的是作为咨询的协商在建国前后的制度化过程。协商与民主之间的联系，也是在这个时期逐渐建立起来的。

1949年9月21日，第一届中国人民政治协商会议在北平召开，也称为新的政治协商会议。共有662名代表参加了会议，他们来自于中国共产党、国民党革命委员会、中国民主同盟、民主建国会、无党派民主人士、民主促进会、农工民主党、人民救国会等十四个党派以及各区域代表、军队代表、团体代表和特邀人士。会议讨论的话题包括国旗、国歌、首都等。第一届政治协商会议也同时承担民主选举和立法功能，通过了若干提案，并选举出了中央人民政府主席、副主席和政府委员。直到1954年，第一届全国人民代表大会召开，全国人大在此后接管了立法权，政治协商会议被保留为爱国统一战线和多党合作的协商机构。自此之后，两会作为中国民主制度的基本框架被确定下来，分别承担着选举民主和协商民主的功能。在这样一个架构之中，民主所包含着的相互补充的两个理想被期望能够得到实现，即以选举为代表的对于决策权力的平等分配，和以协商为代表的对于集体意志形成过程的有效参与。政治协商会议的核心在于参政议政。通过号召各党派代表和各界别人士加入其中，政协会议主要在决策之前就“重大方针政策、重大举措、法律法规的实施和贯彻执行情况进行民主协商和民主监督，就政治经济、社会文化、民生民情等方方面面的问题进行讨论”，并通过提案等方式传递给国家机关，从而实现对于决策过程的参与。周恩来在《关于人民政协的几个问题》中提到，“新民主主义的议事精神不在于最后的表决,主要是在于事前的协商和反复的讨论”。一个符合民主要求的决策过程，除了在决策的最终环节、即投票过程中确保权力的平等分配外，还需要提供一个公共意志可以持续性的形成和自我纠偏的环境，这一环境为协商所依赖于的交往权力提供了保障。“当制度允许交往权力被转化为国家权力、并允许交往权力对市场的逻辑进行限制时，协商就完成了其制度化”^{^[33]}。当这一制度包含覆盖了所有受到决策影响的个体，赋予他们参政的权利时，“协商就完成了民主的制度化”。因此，在建国后期的这一阶段，为了满足制度化的政治发展的需求，协商作为政治咨询存在于两会制度之中，成为民主参与的表达形式。

（三）20世纪90年代末至今:作为治理机制的协商

20世纪90年代，市场经济改革促使文化环境和政治生活发生了深刻的变化。一个重要的指标是政治参与的提升和社会冲突的增加^{^[34]}。互联网的快速发展，也为公民提供了更加即时和灵活的表达渠道。后传统时代的重要特征之一，是政治单元无法再通过传统资源，如宗族、信仰、共享的伦理价值等，来唤起充分的顺从和对共同体的忠诚。政治发展在这一时期的需求，是如何找到新的方法来提升政权的合法性、解决冲突和维持秩序。在中国，政府通过引进协商实践和鼓励协商创新来尝试解决这一问题。一方面，公共协商中平等自由的个人所交换的具有激发力量的理由是合法性的来源之一。这样一种通过交谈和话语所创造出来的合法性，相比传统的合法性而言，更为稳定可取并符合时代精神^{^[35]}。协商通过具有合法性基础的沟通辩论，有可能使个人的偏好和立场发生改变，生成相互认肯和相互尊重，化解冲突从而提高国家的治理能力。另一方面，后传统时代“包含着一种紧密附属于道德身份的道德多元主义，这些身份反过来内嵌于宗教、世俗道德和生活方式之中”^{^[36]}。道德身份的塑造来自于个体的经验与历史的总和，对一个人来说是构成性的，决定了这个人是谁、相信怎样的价值、进行怎样的行动。人们对于道德身份，无法像对于消费对象那样进行取舍，因此身份意义上的冲突，也无法通过讨价还价来得到解决。基于投票的聚合式民主，能够形成决策结果但无法处理道德冲突，而协商是能够将有关道德立场的理由代入公共空间的唯一资源。通过交换理由，协商可以识别出不可通约的道德立场之间存在着的重叠共识，并导向其所支持的政策结论；在无论如何无法取得共识的情况下，协商也可以通过展现争论背后的道德理由，从而制造理解和尊重。因此，协商具备在道德层面上缓解多元冲突的能力，有助于提高治理功能。

2005年，中共中央颁布了《关于进一步加强中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度建设的意见》。文件提出要进一步完善协商的内容、形式和程序，把政治协商纳入决策程序中，推进政协的制度化、规范化和程序化。同时，文件强调协商“是中国共产党提高执政能力的重要途径”。^{^[37]}一年后，在2006年，中共中央发出了《关于加强人民政协工作的意见》，规定“国家和地方的大政方针以及政治、经济、文化和社会生活中的重要问题；各党派参加人民政协工作的共同性事务，政协内部的重要事务以及有关爱国统一战线的其他重要问题”是政治协商的主要内容。^{^[38]}在这两项决定颁布之后，各种各样的包含协商元素的创新实践在国内出现。其中包括由政府组织的、周期性的、制度化的协商活动，如居民会议，价格听证会等；也有政府协助之下，由社会组织或研究团体安排的协商活动，如民意测试、参与式预算等。这些协商覆盖不同级别的行政区域，包含从交通价格、政府预算到小区绿化等一系列问题。政策性推进是新世纪协商在国内大量出现的主要原因。这个阶段的协商，不同于制度化时期作为政协会议的协商，在组织对象上具备广泛得多的覆盖面，致力于提高合法性并解决冲突，是治理机制中的一个环节。之所以选择20世纪90年代末，而不是2005年作为这一阶段的划分节点，一方面是因为后传统时代的治理压力在90年代的中国已经存在；另一方面，后来被视为典型的一些协商形式，如价格听证会，90年代末期就已经在主要城市试点并展开。

三、总结

以选举为代表的民主理论，涉及平等分配决策权力的民主理想，为如何在相互冲突的立场中实现集体行动提供了行之有效的解决方案。然而，一方面它将个体偏好视为已知的和确定的，没有为观点的修改提供制度性引导；另一方面，聚合式民主丧失了政治生活的公共维度，政治被简化为计算，公民被简化为经济主体，政治生活被简化为市场竞争。基于这些对于选举的批评，民主理论在90年代末期发生了朝向协商的转变。协商要求公民不仅仅以选票的方式决定结果，而且参与到公共意志的行程过程中，通过平等个体的理性交流使不同立场之间发生关联，无论这些立场是为了个人还是集体。由于协商包含着陈述理由、提出挑战和对挑战的回应，它引导个人对自己的立场进行反思，做出更改或进行辩护，因此包含着符合自主性要求的民主理想——即人们拥有做出判断并为之负责的能力。在西方语境中，协商的出现是内生于民主理论内部的、民主系统对于自身的纠偏与完善。

在中国，协商的出现是为了回应政治发展在不同阶段的功能性需求。在殖民统治时期，政治发展的目标是民族独立，作为谈判的协商也首次在近现代政治话语中出现，是共产党寻求整治联合的主要方式。协商的对象是党派代表和社会精英，在使用语境中与民主并无直接的联系。1949年建国之后，政治发展的目标转变为政治结构分化和功能的专业化。协商在这一时期表现为政治咨询，与承担选举立法功能的人大会议并称两会，体现了民主包含着的互相补充的两个理想，即对于决策权力的平等分配，和对于集体意志形成过程的有效参与。协商和民主之间的关联也是在这一时期建立起来的。自1990年代末开始，覆盖面更加广泛的小型协商实验在全国范围内出现，在2005年以后大量展开。这一时期的协商是治理机制中的一环，来回应后传统时代政治发展对于维持秩序和解决冲突的需求。通过梳理协商在中国出现的历史背景和它的概念演变，本文解释了协商与政治发展之间的逻辑，为西方背景之外协商的发生机制做出了说明。

* 覃漩，政治学博士，复旦大学社会科学高等研究院专职研究员、讲师。

[1] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bessette","given":"Joseph M.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"How Democratic is the Constitution?","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Goldwin","given":"Robert A;","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Schambra","given":"William A.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1980"]]},"page":"102-16","publisher":"American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research","publisher-place":"Washington","title":"Deliberative Democracy: the Majority Principle in Republican Government","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=a05e5478-cafe-3b64-917c-015f3a2b7e5d"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Joseph M. Bessette, ‘Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government’, in How Democratic Is the Constitution?, ed. by Robert A; Goldwin and William A. Schambra (Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1980), pp. 102–16.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Joseph M. Bessette, ‘Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government’, in How Democratic Is the Constitution?, ed. by Robert A; Goldwin and William A. Schambra (Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1980), pp. 102–16.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"1"},"properties":{"noteIndex":1},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Joseph M. Bessette, "Deliberative Democracy: The Majority Principle in Republican Government", in Robert A. Goldwin and William A. Schambra eds., How Democratic Is the Constitution?, Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1980, pp. 102–16.

[2] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Manin","given":"B.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Political Theory","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"3","issued":{"date-parts":[["1987"]]},"page":"338-68","title":"On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation","type":"article-journal","volume":"15"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=595a52c7-d468-34ce-9d20-cac7f522e1c4"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"B. Manin, ‘On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation’, Political Theory, 15.3 (1987), 338–68.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"B. Manin, ‘On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation’, Political Theory, 15.3 (1987), 338–68.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"2"},"properties":{"noteIndex":2},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Bernard Manin, "On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation", Political Theory, Vol.15, No.3 (1987), pp.338–368.

[3] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cohen","given":"Joshua","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Good Polity","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Hamlin","given":"Alan","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Pettit","given":"Philip","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1989"]]},"page":"17-35","publisher":"Blackwell","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e7fd5791-a162-494e-9186-7aff989e314e"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Joshua Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’, in The Good Polity, ed. by Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), pp. 17–35.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Joshua Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’, in The Good Polity, ed. by Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), pp. 17–35.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"3"},"properties":{"noteIndex":3},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Joshua Cohen, "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy", in Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit eds., The Good Polity, Oxford: Blackwell, 1989, pp. 17–35.

[4] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Young","given":"Iris Marion","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democracy and Difference","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Benhabib","given":"Seyla","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"page":"120-35","publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=81c68fa0-4896-488e-acc5-5f1db963e9dc"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bohman","given":"James","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Rehg","given":"William","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-2","issued":{"date-parts":[["1997"]]},"publisher":"MIT Press","publisher-place":"London","title":"Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=17781a8e-51fe-3484-8f82-ee686b9ab8f2"]},{"id":"ITEM-3","itemData":{"editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Elster","given":"Jon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-3","issued":{"date-parts":[["1998"]]},"publisher":"Cambridge University Press","publisher-place":"Cambridge","title":"Deliberative Democracy","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=4256feb7-c007-3ad6-84fc-5e1a73306212"]},{"id":"ITEM-4","itemData":{"editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Macedo","given":"Stephen","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-4","issued":{"date-parts":[["1999"]]},"number-of-pages":"289","publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"New York ","title":"Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=9c473a6d-5bc5-323d-a933-2e5f9c06a975"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Iris Marion Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’, in Democracy and Difference, ed. by Seyla Benhabib (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 120–35; Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, ed. by James Bohman and William Rehg (London: MIT Press, 1997); Deliberative Democracy, ed. by Jon Elster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. by Stephen Macedo (New York : Oxford University Press, 1999).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Iris Marion Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’, in Democracy and Difference, ed. by Seyla Benhabib (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 120–35; Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, ed. by James Bohman and William Rehg (London: MIT Press, 1997); Deliberative Democracy, ed. by Jon Elster (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998); Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. by Stephen Macedo (New York : Oxford University Press, 1999).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"4–7"},"properties":{"noteIndex":4},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Iris Marion Young, "Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy", in Seyla Benhabib ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996, pp. 120–135; James Bohman and William Rehg eds., Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, London: MIT Press, 1997; Jon Elster ed., Deliberative Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998; Stephen Macedo ed., Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, New York : Oxford University Press, 1999.

[5] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Rawls","given":"John","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1993"]]},"number-of-pages":"525","publisher":"Columbia University Press","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Political liberalism","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=13aed651-4266-3ac4-85c8-41a7400709d5"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"John Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"John Rawls, Political Liberalism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"8"},"properties":{"noteIndex":5},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}John Rawls, Political Liberalism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.

[6] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Habermas","given":"Jürgen","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"publisher":"Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers","publisher-place":"Cambridge","title":"Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy","translator":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Rehg","given":"William","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d6e6363d-8836-3afa-9551-224bad1a8bd6"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. by William Rehg (Cambridge: Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers, 1996).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. by William Rehg (Cambridge: Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers, 1996).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"9"},"properties":{"noteIndex":6},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, William Rehg trans., Cambridge: Polity Press , Blackwell Publishers, 1996.

[7] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Jürgen Habermas","given":"","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1981"]]},"publisher":"Beacon Press","publisher-place":"Boston","title":"The Theory of Communicative Action","translator":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"McCarthy","given":"Thomas","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=bc909c85-8e5a-34c9-9639-31d10a3eef74"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, trans. by Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1981).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, trans. by Thomas McCarthy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1981).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"10"},"properties":{"noteIndex":7},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action, Thomas McCarthy trans., Boston: Beacon Press, 1981.

[8] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bächtiger","given":"André","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Niemeyer","given":"Simon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Neblo","given":"Michael","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Steenbergen","given":"Marco R","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Steiner","given":"Jürg","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2010"]]},"page":"32-63","title":"Symposium: Toward More Realistic Models of Deliberative Democracy: Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities","type":"article-journal","volume":"18"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e27de09d-c647-3c7d-a567-e3c45a30ccae"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"André Bächtiger and others, ‘Symposium: Toward More Realistic Models of Deliberative Democracy: Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18.1 (2010), 32–63.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"André Bächtiger and others, ‘Symposium: Toward More Realistic Models of Deliberative Democracy: Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 18.1 (2010), 32–63.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"11"},"properties":{"noteIndex":8},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}André Bächtiger et al., "Symposium: Toward More Realistic Models of Deliberative Democracy: Disentangling Diversity in Deliberative Democracy: Competing Theories, Their Blind Spots and Complementarities", The Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.18, No.1 (2010), pp.32–63.

[9] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Fung","given":"Archon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"3","issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]},"page":"338-67","title":"Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences","type":"article-journal","volume":"11"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=007f46bf-03f6-3c49-962d-23359c9c0e5b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Archon Fung, ‘Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11.3 (2003), 338–67.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Archon Fung, ‘Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 11.3 (2003), 338–67.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"12"},"properties":{"noteIndex":9},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Archon Fung, "Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences", The Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.11, No.3 (2003), pp.338–367.

[10] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Chambers","given":"Simone","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Annual Review of Political Science","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]},"page":"307-26","title":"Deliberative Democracy Theory","type":"article-journal","volume":"6"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=33edd41e-b137-3e8c-bb9d-019d04ace59d"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Simone Chambers, ‘Deliberative Democracy Theory’, Annual Review of Political Science, 6.1 (2003), 307–26.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Simone Chambers, ‘Deliberative Democracy Theory’, Annual Review of Political Science, 6.1 (2003), 307–26.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"13"},"properties":{"noteIndex":10},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Simone Chambers, "Deliberative Democracy Theory", Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.6, No.1 (2003), pp.307–326.

[11] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Mansbridge","given":"Jane","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Macedo","given":"Stephen","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1999"]]},"page":"1-211","publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=70be8ac6-6b42-45f0-87dc-06f79834a331"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Dryzek","given":"John S.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-2","issued":{"date-parts":[["2000"]]},"publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberative Democracy and Beyond","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=bd16b6ab-2bd6-3f3e-9525-4e7d7fb4210e"]},{"id":"ITEM-3","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Young","given":"Iris Marion","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-3","issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]},"number-of-pages":"304","publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Inclusion and Democracy","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=ecb4fcc2-2329-30c4-8cdc-5ea7a4ce9eab"]},{"id":"ITEM-4","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Markovits","given":"Elizabeth","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-4","issue":"3","issued":{"date-parts":[["2006"]]},"page":"249-69","title":"The Trouble with Being Earnest: Deliberative Democracy and the Sincerity Norm","type":"article-journal","volume":"14"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=786ad9f5-3401-3554-9753-88a30d5e5972"]},{"id":"ITEM-5","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Mansbridge","given":"Jane","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bohman","given":"James","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Chambers","given":"Simone","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Estlund","given":"David","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"FÃ¸llesdal","given":"Andreas","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Fung","given":"Archon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Lafont","given":"Cristina","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Manin","given":"Bernard","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"MartÃ","given":"JosÃ© luis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-5","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2010"]]},"page":"64-100","title":"The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy","type":"article-journal","volume":"18"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=5e9228f8-893b-37c0-9f87-39129797f62b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Jane Mansbridge, ‘Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System’, in Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. by Stephen Macedo (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 1–211; John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Elizabeth Markovits, ‘The Trouble with Being Earnest: Deliberative Democracy and the Sincerity Norm’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14.3 (2006), 249–69; Jane Mansbridge and others, ‘The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 18.1 (2010), 64–100.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Jane Mansbridge, ‘Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System’, in Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. by Stephen Macedo (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 1–211; John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002); Elizabeth Markovits, ‘The Trouble with Being Earnest: Deliberative Democracy and the Sincerity Norm’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14.3 (2006), 249–69; Jane Mansbridge and others, ‘The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 18.1 (2010), 64–100.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"14–18"},"properties":{"noteIndex":11},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jane Mansbridge, "Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System", in Stephen Macedo ed., Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 1–211; John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; Iris Marion Young, Inclusion and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002; Elizabeth Markovits, "The Trouble with Being Earnest: Deliberative Democracy and the Sincerity Norm", The Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.14, No.3 (2006), pp.249–269; Jane Mansbridge et al., "The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy", Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.18, No.1 (2010), pp.64–100.

[12] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cohen","given":"Joshua","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Good Polity","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Hamlin","given":"Alan","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Pettit","given":"Philip","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1989"]]},"page":"17-35","publisher":"Blackwell","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e7fd5791-a162-494e-9186-7aff989e314e"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cohen","given":"Joshua","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democracy and Difference","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Benhabib","given":"Seyla","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-2","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"page":"95-119","publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton NJ","title":"Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=52bd356b-6966-3f2a-963f-291ab7c53474"]},{"id":"ITEM-3","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bohman","given":"J.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-3","issue":"4","issued":{"date-parts":[["1998"]]},"page":"400-25","title":"Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy","type":"article-journal","volume":"6"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=5b3b34dd-f08f-3f96-8f12-f82dc13404c5"]},{"id":"ITEM-4","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Gutmann","given":"Amy","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Thompson","given":"Dennis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-4","issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]},"publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Why Deliberative Democracy?","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c176ebd7-4271-38f6-8346-3a6f189fe80c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; Joshua Cohen, ‘Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy’, in Democracy and Difference, ed. by Seyla Benhabib (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 95–119; J. Bohman, ‘Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 6.4 (1998), 400–425; Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; Joshua Cohen, ‘Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy’, in Democracy and Difference, ed. by Seyla Benhabib (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 95–119; J. Bohman, ‘Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 6.4 (1998), 400–425; Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"3,19–21"},"properties":{"noteIndex":12},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Joshua Cohen, "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy", in Alan Hamlin and Phillip Petit eds., The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State, New York: Blackwell, 1989; Joshua Cohen, "Procedure and Substance in Deliberative Democracy", in Seyla Benhabib ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996, pp. 95–119; James Bohman, "Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy", Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.6, No.4 (1998), pp.400–425; Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

[13] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Mansbridge","given":"Jane","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bohman","given":"James","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Chambers","given":"Simone","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Estlund","given":"David","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"FÃ¸llesdal","given":"Andreas","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Fung","given":"Archon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Lafont","given":"Cristina","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Manin","given":"Bernard","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"MartÃ","given":"JosÃ© luis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Journal of Political Philosophy","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2010"]]},"page":"64-100","title":"The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy","type":"article-journal","volume":"18"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=5e9228f8-893b-37c0-9f87-39129797f62b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Mansbridge and others.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Mansbridge and others.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"18"},"properties":{"noteIndex":13},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jane Mansbridge et al., "The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy", Journal of Political Philosophy, Vol.18, No.1 (2010).

[14] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"He","given":"Baogang","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Warren","given":"Mark E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Perspectives on Politics","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"2","issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]},"page":"269-89","title":"Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development","type":"article-journal","volume":"9"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=4b3b205a-6e58-398c-971e-8f98205a86a6"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Baogang He and Mark E. Warren, ‘Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development’, Perspectives on Politics, 9.2 (2011), 269–89.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Baogang He and Mark E. Warren, ‘Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development’, Perspectives on Politics, 9.2 (2011), 269–89.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"22"},"properties":{"noteIndex":14},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}He Baogang and Mark E. Warren, "Authoritarian Deliberation: The Deliberative Turn in Chinese Political Development", Perspectives on Politics, Vol.9, No.2 (2011), pp.269–289.

[15] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Arrow","given":"Kenneth","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"edition":"2nd","id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1963"]]},"publisher":"Yale University Press","publisher-place":"New Haven","title":"Social Choice and Individual Values","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d29e7388-db47-45a5-b6f8-1f9428316b75"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Kenneth Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edn (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Kenneth Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, 2nd edn (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"23"},"properties":{"noteIndex":15},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Kenneth Arrow, Social Choice and Individual Values, 2^nd edn., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963.

[16] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Elster","given":"Jon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Foundations of Social Choice Theory","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Elster","given":"Jon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Hylland","given":"Aanund","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1986"]]},"page":"103-32","publisher":"Cambridge University Press","publisher-place":"Cambridge","title":"The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=3818d537-fe44-429d-a2fe-170e45172dd9"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Estlund","given":"David M.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Texas Law Review","id":"ITEM-2","issue":"7","issued":{"date-parts":[["1993"]]},"page":"1437-77","title":"Who's Afraid of Deliberative Democracy? On the Strategic/Deliberative Dichotomy in Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence","type":"article-journal","volume":"71"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d0dd680b-c4e8-4fa0-82bd-ef6b5fda4b04"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Jon Elster, ‘The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory’, in Foundations of Social Choice Theory, ed. by Jon Elster and Aanund Hylland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 103–32; David M. Estlund, ‘Who’s Afraid of Deliberative Democracy? On the Strategic/Deliberative Dichotomy in Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence’, Texas Law Review, 71.7 (1993), 1437–77.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Jon Elster, ‘The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory’, in Foundations of Social Choice Theory, ed. by Jon Elster and Aanund Hylland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 103–32; David M. Estlund, ‘Who’s Afraid of Deliberative Democracy? On the Strategic/Deliberative Dichotomy in Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence’, Texas Law Review, 71.7 (1993), 1437–77.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"24,25"},"properties":{"noteIndex":16},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jon Elster, "The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory", in Jon Elster and Aanund Hylland ed., Foundations of Social Choice Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986, pp. 103–132; David M. Estlund, "Who’s Afraid of Deliberative Democracy? On the Strategic/Deliberative Dichotomy in Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence", Texas Law Review, Vol.71, No.7 (1993), 1437–1477.

[17] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cohen","given":"Joshua","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Good Polity","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Hamlin","given":"Alan","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Pettit","given":"Philip","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1989"]]},"page":"17-35","publisher":"Blackwell","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e7fd5791-a162-494e-9186-7aff989e314e"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Fishkin","given":"James S.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-2","issued":{"date-parts":[["1991"]]},"publisher":"Yale University Press","publisher-place":"New Haven","title":"Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=6361ada6-c13b-3b57-aaa9-34ac5e82c74b"]},{"id":"ITEM-3","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Habermas","given":"Jürgen","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Constellations","id":"ITEM-3","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1994"]]},"page":"1-10","title":"Three Normative Models of Democracy","type":"article-journal","volume":"1"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=21f573f2-cfc1-341a-b276-40bd7e4d1816"]},{"id":"ITEM-4","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Knight","given":"Jack","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Johnson","given":"James","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Political Theory","id":"ITEM-4","issue":"2","issued":{"date-parts":[["1994"]]},"page":"277-96","title":"Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy","type":"article-journal","volume":"22"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=dcd8d2f8-94e0-3bda-84f0-b5a7bf685b30"]},{"id":"ITEM-5","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Young","given":"Iris Marion","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democracy and Difference","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Benhabib","given":"Seyla","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-5","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"page":"120-35","publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=81c68fa0-4896-488e-acc5-5f1db963e9dc"]},{"id":"ITEM-6","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Dryzek","given":"John S.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-6","issued":{"date-parts":[["2000"]]},"publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberative Democracy and Beyond","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=bd16b6ab-2bd6-3f3e-9525-4e7d7fb4210e"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991); Jürgen Habermas, ‘Three Normative Models of Democracy’, Constellations, 1.1 (1994), 1–10; Jack Knight and James Johnson, ‘Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy’, Political Theory, 22.2 (1994), 277–96; Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’; Dryzek.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991); Jürgen Habermas, ‘Three Normative Models of Democracy’, Constellations, 1.1 (1994), 1–10; Jack Knight and James Johnson, ‘Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy’, Political Theory, 22.2 (1994), 277–96; Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’; Dryzek.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"3,4,15,26–28"},"properties":{"noteIndex":17},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Joshua Cohen, "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy" in Alan Hamlin and Phillip Petit eds., The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State, New York: Blackwell, 1989; James S. Fishkin, Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991; Jürgen Habermas, "Three Normative Models of Democracy", Constellations, Vol.1, No.1 (1994), pp.1–10; Jack Knight and James Johnson, "Aggregation and Deliberation: On the Possibility of Democratic Legitimacy", Political Theory, Vol.22, No.2 (1994), pp.277–296; Iris Marion Young, "Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy", in Seyla Benhabib ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996; John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

[18] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Gutmann","given":"Amy","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Thompson","given":"Dennis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]},"publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Why Deliberative Democracy?","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c176ebd7-4271-38f6-8346-3a6f189fe80c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"21"},"properties":{"noteIndex":18},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

[19] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Habermas","given":"Jürgen","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Constellations","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1994"]]},"page":"1-10","title":"Three Normative Models of Democracy","type":"article-journal","volume":"1"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=21f573f2-cfc1-341a-b276-40bd7e4d1816"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Habermas, ‘Three Normative Models of Democracy’.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Habermas, ‘Three Normative Models of Democracy’.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"27"},"properties":{"noteIndex":19},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Jürgen Habermas, "Three Normative Models of Democracy", Constellations, Vol.1, No.1 (1994).

[20] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Gutmann","given":"Amy","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Thompson","given":"Dennis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]},"publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Why Deliberative Democracy?","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c176ebd7-4271-38f6-8346-3a6f189fe80c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"21"},"properties":{"noteIndex":20},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

[21] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Young","given":"Iris Marion","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democracy and Difference","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Benhabib","given":"Seyla","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"page":"120-35","publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=81c68fa0-4896-488e-acc5-5f1db963e9dc"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"4"},"properties":{"noteIndex":21},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Iris Marion Young, "Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy", in Seyla Benhabib ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.

[22] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Sunstein","given":"Cass R.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Yale Law Journal","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"8","issued":{"date-parts":[["1988"]]},"page":"1539-90","title":"Beyond the Republican Revival","type":"article-journal","volume":"97"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=271ffccf-55c3-31fe-95ee-a6e4779b286c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Cass R. Sunstein, ‘Beyond the Republican Revival’, The Yale Law Journal, 97.8 (1988), 1539–90.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Cass R. Sunstein, ‘Beyond the Republican Revival’, The Yale Law Journal, 97.8 (1988), 1539–90.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"29"},"properties":{"noteIndex":22},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Cass R. Sunstein, "Beyond the Republican Revival", The Yale Law Journal, Vol.97, No.8 (1988), pp.1539–1590.

[23] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cohen","given":"Joshua","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"The Good Polity","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Hamlin","given":"Alan","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Pettit","given":"Philip","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1989"]]},"page":"17-35","publisher":"Blackwell","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=e7fd5791-a162-494e-9186-7aff989e314e"]},{"id":"ITEM-2","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Dryzek","given":"John S.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-2","issued":{"date-parts":[["2000"]]},"publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"Oxford","title":"Deliberative Democracy and Beyond","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=bd16b6ab-2bd6-3f3e-9525-4e7d7fb4210e"]},{"id":"ITEM-3","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Chambers","given":"Simone","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Annual Review of Political Science","id":"ITEM-3","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]},"page":"307-26","title":"Deliberative Democracy Theory","type":"article-journal","volume":"6"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=33edd41e-b137-3e8c-bb9d-019d04ace59d"]},{"id":"ITEM-4","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Goodin","given":"Robert E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-4","issued":{"date-parts":[["2008"]]},"publisher":"Oxford University Press","publisher-place":"New York","title":"Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice After the Deliberative Turn","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d4ea46c4-a979-4d35-aacc-08d8f60bfd43"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; Dryzek; Chambers; Robert E. Goodin, Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice After the Deliberative Turn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Cohen, ‘Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy’; Dryzek; Chambers; Robert E. Goodin, Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice After the Deliberative Turn (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"3,13,15,30"},"properties":{"noteIndex":23},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Joshua Cohen, "Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy", in Alan Hamlin and Phillip Petit eds., The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State, New York: Blackwell, 1989; John S. Dryzek, Deliberative Democracy and Beyond, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000; Simone Chambers, "Deliberative Democracy Theory", Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.6, No.1 (2003); Robert E. Goodin, Innovating Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice After the Deliberative Turn, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

[24] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Chambers","given":"Simone","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Annual Review of Political Science","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2003"]]},"page":"307-26","title":"Deliberative Democracy Theory","type":"article-journal","volume":"6"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=33edd41e-b137-3e8c-bb9d-019d04ace59d"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Chambers.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Chambers.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"13"},"properties":{"noteIndex":24},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Simone Chambers, "Deliberative Democracy Theory", Annual Review of Political Science, Vol.6, No.1 (2003).

[25] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Gutmann","given":"Amy","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Thompson","given":"Dennis","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2009"]]},"publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Why Deliberative Democracy?","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=c176ebd7-4271-38f6-8346-3a6f189fe80c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Gutmann and Thompson.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"21"},"properties":{"noteIndex":25},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2009.

[26] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Young","given":"Iris Marion","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democracy and Difference","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Benhabib","given":"Seyla","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"page":"120-35","publisher":"Princeton University Press","publisher-place":"Princeton","title":"Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=81c68fa0-4896-488e-acc5-5f1db963e9dc"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Young, ‘Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy’.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"4"},"properties":{"noteIndex":26},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Iris Marion Young, "Communication and the Other: Beyond Deliberative Democracy", in Seyla Benhabib ed., Democracy and Difference, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996.

[27] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Warren","given":"Mark E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Carter","given":"April","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Stokes","given":"Geoffrey","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]},"page":"173-202","publisher":"Blackwell Publishers","publisher-place":"Malden, MA","title":"Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=56be8f88-2bb8-40ff-b7b3-549ac0d8181b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Mark E. Warren, ‘Deliberative Democracy’, in Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, ed. by April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002), pp. 173–202.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Mark E. Warren, ‘Deliberative Democracy’, in Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, ed. by April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2002), pp. 173–202.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"31"},"properties":{"noteIndex":27},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Mark E. Warren, "Deliberative Democracy", in April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes, ed., Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2002, pp. 173–202.

[28] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Preston","given":"Peter","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1996"]]},"publisher":"Wiley-Blackwell","title":"Development Theory: An Introduction to the Analysis of Complex Change ","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=1743c2b7-d160-363e-afba-895f1463bf28"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Peter Preston, Development Theory: An Introduction to the Analysis of Complex Change (Wiley-Blackwell, 1996).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Peter Preston, Development Theory: An Introduction to the Analysis of Complex Change (Wiley-Blackwell, 1996).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"32"},"properties":{"noteIndex":28},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Peter Preston, Development Theory: An Introduction to the Analysis of Complex Change, Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 1996.

[29] [美]ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"塞缪尔·亨廷顿","given":"","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2021"]]},"publisher":"上海人民出版社","publisher-place":"上海","title":"变化社会中的政治秩序","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=2b4b5e76-45cd-4fcf-aa56-ff23ededf5a7"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"塞缪尔·亨廷顿, 变化社会中的政治秩序 (上海: 上海人民出版社, 2021).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"塞缪尔·亨廷顿, 变化社会中的政治秩序 (上海: 上海人民出版社, 2021).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"33"},"properties":{"noteIndex":29},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}塞缪尔·亨廷顿：《变化社会中的政治秩序》，王冠华等译，上海: 上海人民出版社2021年版。

[30] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Warren","given":"Mark E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Carter","given":"April","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Stokes","given":"Geoffrey","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]},"page":"173-202","publisher":"Blackwell Publishers","publisher-place":"Malden, MA","title":"Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=56be8f88-2bb8-40ff-b7b3-549ac0d8181b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Warren.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Warren.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"31"},"properties":{"noteIndex":30},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Mark E. Warren, "Deliberative Democracy", in April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes, ed., Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2002, pp. 173–202.

[31] 《中国苏维埃政府、中国共产党中央为抗日救国告全体同胞书》，现代语文网：http://xdyw.zjnu.edu.cn/2018/0514/c9517a243975/page.htm。

[32] 《毛泽东：论反对日本帝国主义的策略》，青岛组工网：http://zzb.qingdao.gov.cn/n24179460/n24181359/n27246482/141107172726133085.html。

[33] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Warren","given":"Mark E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Carter","given":"April","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Stokes","given":"Geoffrey","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]},"page":"173-202","publisher":"Blackwell Publishers","publisher-place":"Malden, MA","title":"Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=56be8f88-2bb8-40ff-b7b3-549ac0d8181b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Warren.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Warren.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"31"},"properties":{"noteIndex":33},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Mark E. Warren, "Deliberative Democracy", in April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes, ed., Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2002, pp. 173–202.

[34] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Strand","given":"David","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Problems of Communism","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"3","issued":{"date-parts":[["1990"]]},"page":"1-19","title":"Protest in Beijing: Civil Society and Public Sphere in China","type":"article-journal","volume":"39"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=04a26378-296a-466b-b079-3984c7336e5f"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"David Strand, ‘Protest in Beijing: Civil Society and Public Sphere in China’, Problems of Communism, 39.3 (1990), 1–19.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"David Strand, ‘Protest in Beijing: Civil Society and Public Sphere in China’, Problems of Communism, 39.3 (1990), 1–19.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"34"},"properties":{"noteIndex":34},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}David Strand, “Protest in Beijing: Civil Society and Public Sphere in China”, Problems of Communism, Vol.39, No.3 (1990), pp.1–19.

[35] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Fishkin","given":"James.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["1992"]]},"publisher":"Yale University Press","title":"The Dialogue of Justice: Toward a Self-Reflective Society","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=fd3ab19a-13c3-45a8-a542-4015c771e279"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"James. Fishkin, The Dialogue of Justice: Toward a Self-Reflective Society (Yale University Press, 1992).","plainTextFormattedCitation":"James. Fishkin, The Dialogue of Justice: Toward a Self-Reflective Society (Yale University Press, 1992).","previouslyFormattedCitation":"35"},"properties":{"noteIndex":35},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}James Fishkin, The Dialogue of Justice: Toward a Self-Reflective Society, New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1992.

[36] ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Warren","given":"Mark E.","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century","editor":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Carter","given":"April","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Stokes","given":"Geoffrey","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]},"page":"173-202","publisher":"Blackwell Publishers","publisher-place":"Malden, MA","title":"Deliberative Democracy","type":"chapter"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=56be8f88-2bb8-40ff-b7b3-549ac0d8181b"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"Warren.","plainTextFormattedCitation":"Warren.","previouslyFormattedCitation":"31"},"properties":{"noteIndex":36},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}Mark E. Warren, "Deliberative Democracy", in April Carter and Geoffrey Stokes, ed., Democratic Theory Today: Challenges for the 21st Century, Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers, 2002, pp. 173–202.

[37] 《中共中央关于进一步加强中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度建设的意见》，中国民主同盟会南京市委员会：http://www.njmm.gov.cn/www/njmm/sjhd-mb_a391402177733.htm。

[38] 《中共中央关于加强人民政协工作的意见（摘要）》，中国新闻网：http://www.chinanews.com/news/2006/2006-03-01/8/697236.shtml。