Westerners tend to divide the political world into "good" democracies and "bad" authoritarian regimes. But the Chinese political model does not fit neatly in either category. Over the past three decades, China has evolved a political system that can best be described as "political meritocracy." The China Model seeks to understand the ideals and the reality of this unique political system. How do the ideals of political meritocracy set the standard for evaluating political progress (and regress) in China? How can China avoid the disadvantages of political meritocracy? And how can political meritocracy best be combined with democracy? Daniel Bell answers these questions and more.
Opening with a critique of "one person, one vote" as a way of choosing top leaders, Bell argues that Chinese-style political meritocracy can help to remedy the key flaws of electoral democracy. He discusses the advantages and pitfalls of political meritocracy, distinguishes between different ways of combining meritocracy and democracy, and argues that China has evolved a model of democratic meritocracy that is morally desirable and politically stable. Bell summarizes and evaluates the "China model"—meritocracy at the top, experimentation in the middle, and democracy at the bottom—and its implications for the rest of the world.
A timely and original book that will stir up interest and debate, The China Model looks at a political system that not only has had a long history in China, but could prove to be the most important political development of the twenty-first century.
Daniel A. Bell is Chair Professor of the Schwarzman Scholars program at Tsinghua University in Beijing and director of the Berggruen Institute of Philosophy and Culture. His books include Spirit of Cities, China's New Confucianism, Beyond Liberal Democracy, and East Meets West (all Princeton), and he is the editor of the Princeton-China Series.
“尚贤使能”的理念是春秋时期贵族等级解体的产物。孔子说:贤能政治始于有教无类的说话,然而,在此过程中并不说人人都能同等的能力做出知情的、道德上站的住脚的政治判断。因此,政治体制的重点在于选拔出超水平的领导者做出,正确的,道德的政治决断,基于此,前者认为这样...
评分转载自爱思想网http://www.aisixiang.com/data/106267.html 作者按:原载《文史哲》2017年第5期,第5-19页。原题为《通往极权之路——贝淡宁“贤能政治”批判》,刊发时编辑部改为此题。正文中某些地方的原文“极权”亦改为了“前现代”(这不符合本文的原意,笔者已经多次指出...
评分 评分牛津大学的斯坦•林根教授认为作者贝淡宁是在“贬低民主”,他认为“贝淡宁是中国体制的崇拜者”,并暗指贝淡宁希望中国的敌人是失败的。撇开这位林根教授暗示中国是不民主的这一点,让我们从客观角度来看待这本书,从政治学角度理性分析民主选举与尚贤制度各自的优缺点。 ...
Self-contradictory
评分???
评分corruption, ossification, legitimacy 按照老赵的说法就是典型文科生思维,这三个轴不正交啊……
评分围城啊围城!
评分舔狗
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美书屋 版权所有