is Associate Professor of Politics and Public Administration at the University of Hong Kong (HKU). He obtained his Bachelor of Law (International Politics) and Master of Law (International Politics) degrees from Peking University and an A.M. and Ph.D. in political science from Harvard University. He is a comparative political scientist with special expertise in the politics of China. His research interests evolve around political development, authoritarianism, democratization, local government, contentious politics, comparative historical study of revolution, and the Chinese reforms. In 2012, he received an Early Career Scheme Grant from the Research Grants Council of HKSAR to support his research on local government reforms in the People's Republic of China. He is awarded the 2012 Gordon White Prize by the China Quarterly for his article entitled " 'To Get Rich Is Not Only Glorious': Economic Reform and the New Entrepreneurial Party Secretaries" (The China Quarterly, June 2012, No. 210). Recipient of a Harvard University Certificate of Distinction in Teaching (2007), he is a member of HKU's Common Core Curriculum Committee and an Area of Inquiry (AoI) Leader from 2013 to 2015. He is recipient of HKU's Outstanding Teaching Award (2013)..
What do states gain by sending citizens into the streets? Ruling by Other Means investigates this
question through the lens of State-Mobilized Movements (SMMs), an umbrella concept that includes a
range of (often covertly organized) collective actions intended to advance state interests. The SMMs
research agenda departs significantly from that of classic social movement and contentious politics
theory, focused on threats to the state from seemingly autonomous societal actors. Existing theories
assume that the goal of popular protest is to voice societal grievances, represent oppressed groups,
and challenge state authorities and other powerholders. The chapters in this volume show, however,
that states themselves organize citizens (sometimes surreptitiously and even transnationally) to act
collectively to advance state goals. Drawn from different historical periods and diverse
geographical regions, these case studies expand and improve our understanding of social movements,
civil society and state-society relations under authoritarian regimes.
'This brilliant volume shines penetrating light on a hidden phenomena: state mobilization of popular
action. While social movements are usually thought to only oppose state bureaucracies or contend
with popular counter-movements, this book shows that this is only half the story. States routinely
pursue their goals, seeking to defeat social movements by actively mobilizing pro-state movements.
Combining fresh theoretical insights with coverage of cases from around the world, this is a
must-read volume for anyone studying social movements and state power.'
Jack A. Goldstone - George Mason University
'Ruling by Other Means turns social mobilization on its head. The contributors to this powerful
volume demonstrate how states have taken the very tool most often used against them to shore
themselves up. Instead of focusing on protests in which people cry out against the state, this
stellar collection crafts an innovative approach, analyzing how state leaders mobilize citizens
against both real and imagined enemies.'
Joel S. Migdal - University of Washington, Seattle
'For far too long, scholars in both political science and sociology have conceptualized states and
movements as qualitatively different actors. In an era in which the line between states and
movements is increasingly blurry, Ruling by Other Means serves as a welcome corrective to the
traditional view. Through a range of fascinating cases, the authors remind us that state actors can,
and often do, appropriate the movement form to buttress their rule.'
Douglas McAdam - Stanford University
Asia Center Author Conversation Series [Video]
Speakers/Editors:
Grzegorz Ekiert, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Government
Elizabeth J. Perry, Henry Rosovsky Professor of Government, Harvard University
Xiaojun Yan, Associate Professor, University of Hong Kong
Discussant:
James Robson, James C. Kralik and Yunli Lou Professor of East Asian Languages and Civilizations;
William Fung Director of the Harvard University Asia Center
Produced by:
the Harvard University Asia Center
本書是哈佛大學政治學博士、香港大學政治與公共行政學系副教授閻小駿的最新著作,也是他歷經十餘年在中國基層社會進行田野調查研究所積澱的學術成果。
本書試圖回答這一問題:中國何以能夠在經濟社會大變動的時代保持國家基本政治秩序的穩定?
作者認為,中國得以維護政權安全和政治穩定,有賴於政權吸納和預防式管控。前者即是國家的「彈性」,本書剖取的四個截面是:中國共產黨對致富能人(新社會階層)的吸納、人民政協制度、統一戰線制度和基層參與式治理實驗;而後者則可稱之為國家的「剛性」,即大學校園政治秩序安定,以及基層社會面管理和防控體系。正是基於這兩個因素,中國得以在實現經濟奇蹟的同時亦能保持穩定。
中國何以穩定是 中國社會科學出版社2017年十大好書
本書指出,廿一世紀政治科學尤其關注規則問題,即在一個「陌生人社會」中人們如何在政治系統和政治生活中互動,公共事務須按照什麼規則來運行等嚴肅問題。在「政權」和「治理」這兩項根本議題下,政治科學正正研究這些關乎國家與社會管治最根本層面的問題。閻小駿教授在本書就許多當代政治學的關鍵問題,如民主轉型、政權組織、市民社會、社會運動、政治身份等,撰寫了富有啟發性的篇章。對於這些看似龐雜的題目,他既全面地綜述具重要影響的文獻,亦提供了其獨到的觀點。二十世紀至今,政治研究的範疇、深廣度和方法論都得到重大的擴展,作者現在把精彩紛呈的政治科學知識與動態介紹給讀者,亦當能造福學界。——裴宜理(Elizabeth
J.
Perry),哈佛大學政府系亨利.羅索夫斯基政治學講席教授
作者以廣博知識的精心養護,呈現出經濟學、社會學、人類學、文化學、歷史學等眾多學科的智慧之光;汲取東西方文化的精華,在政治學這塊傳統西方學術文化領地裏,耕耘出一片新的沃土。我們從《當代政治學十講》中所感受到的,不僅是作者深厚的學術功底、廣闊的國際視野,更有背後濃烈的人文關懷。——袁明,北京大學國際關係學院教授
撰寫一本導論書籍是一件吃力不討好的事情:既要有學術的深度,又要能夠令初接觸該學科的讀者明白當中要點和產生興趣,兩者兼顧真是談何容易。年青學者閻小駿教授卻輕鬆自在地抓住十個題目,深入淺出地給我們介紹政治科學的主要討論議題和關注點。通過書中的十講,讀者自會對政治與社會產生興趣和有所瞭解。——呂大樂,香港教育大學亞洲及政策研究學系香港研究講座教授
當代政治學十講是 中國社會科學出版社2016年十大好書
本書以2014年「佔領運動」和2015年特首普選制度本地立法失敗為開篇,解析了香港政治之所以走入當前困局的心理、社會、政治和歷史脈絡,這包括:香港社會對於「一國兩制」方針所存在的觀念偏差和在國家政治認同方面所面臨的困難處境,「港人治港」投入實踐之後所面臨的政治隱憂,以及在高度自治原則下,作為中國的特殊政治邊陲,香港在管治上面臨的結構性困難。
當五十年不變的期限來臨之際,2047年的香港何去何從,將直接取決於接下來的二三十年間,中央政府與香港社會之間是否能夠重建政治信任。
作者畢業於北京大學和哈佛大學,現任教於香港大學,兼具政治學者和中國年輕一代知識菁英的雙重身份,以其理性和敏銳的筆觸,為所有關懷香港未來的人打開全新的政治想像空間。
This is an introductory course offered to students with no previous background in political science. It covers the basic concepts, institutions and processes that one would encounter in the study of politics. Emphasis will be placed on the application of concepts to current issues, including (but not restricted to) that of Hong Kong.
From Hong Kong's political demonstration on July 1st to the protest rally organized by your student union, social protest is undoubtedly an important form of politics. Outside of the formal and institutionalized channels, people do take politics onto the streets and use disruptive means to achieve political ends from time to time. This course seeks to provide students with grounding in the basic tools of understanding social protest and social movement. In addition to Hong Kong, cases will be drawn from many different countries—from the American civil rights movement to the 2007 democratic demonstrations in Burma, from Gandhi's satyagraha (non-violent resistance) to the more recent "color revolutions" in Europe and Central Asia etc. Students will also learn about influential social movement leaders past and present, such as Martin Luther King, Gandhi, Mandela, Mao, Lech Walesa, Aung San Suu Kyi and more.
Why and how do people participate in politics? What are the channels through which people make their voices heard and interests represented? Why does political participation take different forms in different countries? Why is participation important for democracy to sustain and non-democracies to change? This course will examine the dynamics and patterns of political participation in both democratic and non-democratic societies. Topics will cover voting & election, political party, representative institution, public opinion, civic organization, mass media, lobbying, interest group and informal politics in democratic societies as well as the modes, scope and impact of political participation under nondemocratic regimes.
How has China's grand transformation to a modern nation-state shaped the country's state-society relationship today? By focusing on the tensions and conflicts between the Chinese state and the country's evolving civil society, this course surveys the major protests, rebellions and revolutions in China in the past 150 years. From a comparative perspective, this course particularly examines the economic, social, political and organizational resources that had facilitated various Chinese resistance movements during the country's long and tedious journey to modernity. It also explores how China's revolutionary past had significantly influenced the social movements of mainland China and Hong Kong today. Weekly topics include but are not limited to: the Chinese revolutionary tradition, the concept of "the mandate of heaven", Chinese secret societies & the Triad, underground religions & cults past and present, the Chinese communist movement, the legacies of the Cultural Revolution, the democratic movement of Tian'anmen in 1989, the latest outburst of nationalism in Mainland China, and vairous new forms of social resistance under the ongoing market reforms. Being part of the common core curriculum, this course is also designed to equip the students with conceptual frameworks to critically analyze the causes, processes and outcomes of social protests, rebellions and revolutions in general and to further their understanding on contentious politics—a crucial aspect of human society.
How Does an Authoritarian Regime Choose its Business Collaborator? Evidence from Public-Private Partnerships in China
Assistant Professor
Hangzhou Normal University 杭州師範大學
Fighting the Many Smokeless Wars: A comparative Study of the Origins, Conceptualisations and Practices of Cultural Security in China and Saudi Arabia
Senior Researcher at Institute for Humanities and Social Sciences, the University of
Hong Kong
Head of the Asian Studies Unit at the King Faisal Center for Research and
Islamic Studies
Golden Youth: State, Market, and China's Second-Generation Private Entrepreneurs
Assistant Professor (Tenure-track Lecturer-ship)
Nanjing University 南京大學
Bootstrapping Public Participation in the Global South: Participatory budgeting Reforms in Brazil, China and South Africa
Assistant Professor (Tenure-track Lecturer-ship)
Renmin University of China 中國人民大學
Contentious Challenges and State Capacity: Why Do Governments Respond Differently to Social Protests in Contemporary China?
Associate Professor, Doctoral Adviser
Shanghai Jiaotong University 上海交通大學
Politicized Academic Capitalism: The Chinese Communist Party's Sociopolitical Control Mechanisms over Intellectuals during the Reform Era
Assistant Professor (Tenure-track Lecturer-ship)
Renmin University of China 中國人民大學
Research Grants Council, HKSAR Government
Central Policy Unit, HKSAR Government
Research Grants Council, HKSAR Government
Today, authoritarian states, such as that of China, strive to cultivate political allegiance
among their diasporic subjects through state-run propaganda operations beyond national
borders. Aiming to construct a stable, exclusive, and institutionalized diasporic network of
influence within host societies, autocratic states use extraterritorial propaganda to amass
integrative capacity by dispersing carefully tailored discourses, penalizing opposing
voices, promoting a unified interpretive framework for conceptualizing socio-political
reality, forming a standard meaning system for diasporic communities, coordinating
collective action, and forging an integrated patriotic identity through the repetition of
codified communication.
The early 21st century has witnessed the rise of pro-regime solidarity among diasporic
Chinese, a global force buttressing China’s communist regime. In this article, we argue that
this unprecedented forging of solidarity is the product of China’s extra-territorial
propaganda. The ruling party-state consistently uses concise, catchy, and carefully tailored
symbolic resources, such as ‘China insult’ (ruhua) incidents, to extend its political
influence beyond national borders. This poses novel challenges to the Westphalian sovereign
state. The state’s tactic overseas propaganda operations have facilitated the emergence of
an extraterritorial Chinese ‘symbolic state’ that relies on shared symbolism and identity,
rather than territorially defined Weberian coercion, to project control over a transnational
socio-political domain.
Cultural security has become a major watchword in the national security discourses of both the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Within this discourse, overseas study has been imagined as a conduit for cultural and ideological subversion threatening the authority of the prevailing regimes. At the same time, overseas study has been actively encouraged by both the Chinese and Saudi states as an important element in their modernization projects. In the past two decades, the Chinese and Saudi overseas student populations have been some of the largest in the world. The article seeks to explore these tensions by examining the conceptualisation and practice of cultural security in the PRC and Saudi Arabia through their management of overseas study.
What has driven China, a developing country that has only recently saved itself from nationwide poverty, to increase its investment in social welfare so rapidly and extensively in the past decade? Drawing on extensive field research in a prefecture-level district in southwest China between 2014 and 2017, the authors argue in this article that local governments in China provide welfare housing programmes as a veil for developmentalist industrial policies aimed at industrial upgrading and the improvement of dynamic efficiency. The article demonstrates the unique incentive structure behind the local Chinese governments' role as the front-line investor in social welfare benefits, and how the local state has cunningly used the façade of welfare provision to (1) divert the earmarked budget to implement development-oriented industrial policy; and (2) fake a discursive congruence between the heavily interventionist local practice and the overall neoliberal central-level policy discourse that features deregulation, small government and a laissez-faire developmental pathway. Exploring this set of strategic dynamics underlining the manoeuvres of the Chinese welfare operation helps us understand the variability of welfare state forms and trajectories of developmental strategy in the Global South.
Why do local officials across China respond differently to societal challengers? In this article, the authors analysed six recent and influential social protests in China—the Dongyang protest (2005), Xiamen protest (2007), Weng'an protest (2008), Shanghai Anti-MagLev Railway Project protest (2008), Shenzhen protest (2008) and Shishou protest (2009). The article demonstrates that disparities in state capacity noticeably affect the trajectories of contentious collective actions and shape government responses in China. Local states in China respond to social protests by dynamically and vigorously assessing their capacity as the social protest develops, and by weighing the probable effectiveness of control measures designated for the locale.
In the wake of the global economic crisis of 2008, the Chinese state has enhanced its systematic efforts to rebuild Communist Party branches in private enterprises. This article examines such efforts with specific reference to the campaign initiated in 2012 in Anhui province, one of the most recent initiatives undertaken by the party-state to infiltrate the country's huge and still-growing private sector. The article examines the emerging and dynamic institutional links between provincial party-state apparatus and local private businesses in Anhui and highlights the four key methods used by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to extend its control over the increasingly powerful and influential private sector. These mechanisms are establishing new official institutions to coordinate CCP affairs related to the private sector, "sending down" a group of "party-building instructors," rewarding private business elites with appointments to party positions, and reorienting the work of local party organs to better serve the needs of the private sector. Although this business-oriented party building has indeed made the CCP more relevant to private business development and thus increased its organizational presence, it remains unclear whether these efforts have genuinely strengthened the Communist Party's control of the private sector.
Many authoritarian regimes use participatory political reform to maintain control over the societies under their rule and survive global waves of democratization. Recent studies of transitional governance have underscored the importance and intricacy of institutional reform; however, no consensus has been reached on an explanation of the dynamism that shapes institutional reforms under non-democratic systems. Why do authoritarian apparatchiks reform their institutions of governance? How can the varied pathways of these reforms be explained? Post-Deng China provides an ideal laboratory in which to study these issues. Since the 1990s, growing tensions between the Leninist polity and a gradually opened society have compelled local governments in China to test a vast set of participatory reforms. In an examination of three major local participatory budgeting reforms in China, this article maps the main pathways – representation, consultation, and transparency – of these recent sub-national participatory reforms implemented by the incumbent regime, and explores the driving forces that sculpt a reformist model over the alternatives. By introducing an "incentive-contingent framework", this article sketches out the "repertoire" of participatory reforms in the authoritarian governance of China and suggests an explanatory framework for the variation in the strategies and forms of such institutional innovations.
*Also in Debating Regime Legitimacy in Contemporary China: Popular protests and regime performances (ISBN: 9781138289611), edited by Suisheng Zhao, 2017, London, UK: Routledge, pp.228-244.
Today, with social protests a daily phenomenon in China, the Party-state's survival hinges upon its institutional capacity to prevent, monitor, process information on, and overcome real and potential challenges. Over the past decade, the Communist Party has consistently stressed the critical importance of 'stability preservation' (weiwen) as central to ensuring the longevity of the authoritarian regime. Drawing upon intensive interviews and archival research, this article looks into the stability-preservation system in W County in North China. By exploring the institutional configuration, work mechanisms, daily activities and operational principles of the stability-preservation apparatus in the county, the author seeks to gain insight into the PRC regime's mythical operations of 'system maintenance' and the ways in which the Party-state exerts control over society.
Citizen participation in policy making is essential in democracies, but there is much less understanding of the process and substance of it in non-democratic states. Taking local budgetary process as an example, this article compares three pathways of participatory reform undertaken by the communist regime in China, namely the representative pathway, the consultative pathway and the transparency pathway. All three are initiated and administered by the local governments, but differ in a number of crucial aspects from the level of institutionalisation to the form of state–citizenry interaction. These three pathways provide directions the Party-state might consider for nationwide policy reform.
Given their critical influence on society and politics, university students are one of the key target groups for authoritarian political control around the world. To further our understanding of the endurance and resilience of authoritarianism in post-Deng China, it is necessary to examine one of the Party-state's most crucial control frameworks: the institutional mechanism through which it preserves social stability in the nation's 2,358 university campuses, and maintains control over its more than 22 million college students. Drawing upon intensive field research conducted in 2011, this article attempts to map out the structures and measures deployed by the post-Deng regime to nurture political compliance and consolidate its domination of university campuses. By deciphering an essential component of the state's political control apparatus, this article aims to shed new light on the internal operations of the authoritarian system that is running China today.
The Chinese Communist Party persistently stresses the paramount importance of preserving social and political stability in order to maintain its absolute grip on power. Command of loyal, local police forces are integral to this exercise. Relying on intensive interviews, archival research, and on-site observation, the authors examined the daily operations of a city police force operating on the North China Plain between 2008 and 2012. In presenting and interpreting that data, this article details the inner workings of a Chinese municipal police department, exploring its various social functions, and analyzing its political role in mediating social disputes, pacifying tensions, controlling potential contentious challengers and, ultimately, safeguarding the omnipresent Communist regime.
The past two decades have witnessed the unprecedented proliferation of civil-society organizations across China. Yet, contrary to what many political scientists predicted, this proliferation has led neither to the formation of a strong political opposition, nor to any organized anti-systemic social movement. The author of this essay argues that this is due to the unique characteristics of the post-Mao Chinese civil society-including its functional depoliticization, conformity to the ruling regime, supplemental role in service provision, symbiotic relationship with the local authorities, as well as the lack of an engaged intelligentsia who can provide guidance and assume leadership. Combining with the consistent party-state control and the distance between Chinese civil society and the country's burgeoning contentious movements at the grassroots, the inherent weaknesses of contemporary Chinese civil society may have predetermined its limited potential in affecting systematic political change up till today.
*Awarded the 2012 Gordon White Prize for "the most original article or research report published in The China Quarterly in the relevant year".
This article examines the profound transformation market reforms have brought to the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) rural grassroots organizations. Focusing on the political rise of private entrepreneurs and other economically successful individuals who recently obtained village Party secretary appointments in a north China county, the article explores their differing promotion channels, power bases, political resources and motivations to take up the CCP's grassroots leadership position. It demonstrates that the variety among the new entrepreneurial Party secretaries – from large factory owners to de facto farm managers – shaped the network resource, factional affiliation and socio-political capital they rely upon to exercise their newly attained power. It also shows the crucial role played by community-based endogenous forces in transmitting the power of economic liberalization into dynamics for the reshuffling of the Communist Party leadership at the grassroots level.
Why do authoritarian regimes endure? Today, scholars tend to deem political institutions "essential for understanding authoritarian politics". Under communist systems, many of these critical regime-supporting functions are undertaken by a particular kind of political institution—the inclusive regime institution. However, inclusive regime institutions of the People's Republic of China (PRC) have remained remarkably under-explored, leaving us with a significantly inadequate understanding of the Chinese party-state and the reasons for its persistence. Drawing on a rich collection of internal working documents collected from the Z County Archives in Hebei Province in 2009, this article is the first attempt to systematically study the functional and political role of a pivotal inclusive regime institution in China—the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC, 中国人民政治协商会议). By exploring original texts that vividly record the daily operations of the Z County CPPCC over two decades, this article demonstrates that the CPPCC, one of the primary organizational structures of the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) United Front (tongyi zhanxian, 统一战线), plays a far more important political role than previously thought.
Through conducting ideological indoctrination, dispensing preferential treatment, facilitating controlled political participation and performing constant surveillance over non-communist elites and other social leaders, the CPPCC provides the party-state with an important platform for co-opting potentially threatening social forces, a forum for policy bargaining, a channel for monitoring various social sectors and a mechanism for offering material benefits to the regime's most loyal and trustful collaborators. The party-state also uses this unique consultative body as an instrument for garnering social feedback and building good governance through soliciting advice from CPPCC members and organizing periodic inspection tours. Overall, as this article will show, the CPPCC helps consolidate the communist regime's social base, improve the quality of public services and ultimately strengthen the regime's control over society.
Liberal economic reforms in the post-Maoist era have deprived the grassroots party-state in rural China of its traditional sources of revenue, thereby gradually transforming it from a socialist rentier state into a postcommunist taxation state. The need for taxation by consent to finance the provision of local public goods necessitates the opening of more institutionalized channels of representation and promotes democratic political change at the local level.
游子歸心之路是漫長而艱辛的旅程;但慶幸的是,香港這座城市正安然回歸祖國的懷抱。過去25年的經驗顯示,堅强的政治領導、高度的治理能力與穩固的政治確定性,對香港保持長期穩定繁榮而言具有至關重要的意義。
國家政治制度的設置不是做擺設,而是要實實在在管用,要能在經濟發展和社會穩定兩個維度上給民衆帶來切實保障。只有以人民爲中心、切實保障人民生命健康和安居樂業的民主制度,才是真正行得通、辦得到、有實效、得民心的民主制度,才是民主精神最真實的體現。
創設The Dialogue論壇,是中國制度研究中心的一項重要舉措。我們的目標是促進社會各界對當前及未來與香港發展特別是制度建設攸關的重要議題進行理性、科學及有益探討。我們希望對話將使得不同文化、文明及觀點在此共融,共同開啟香港良政善治的美好願景。
In my opinion there are three reasons as to why China is being considered the bad guy; the first one is difference, the second is change, and the third is the future.
We must consider not only the text of this law but also the political discourse surrounding it.
This seminar discussed some “big picture” questions surrounding the Hong Kong National Security Law (NSL) and “One Country, Two Systems”(OCTS).
在香港外國記者會午餐會上的演講
在「聚焦灣區 共建帶路」專題午餐會上的發言
在香港專上學生聯會「殖民香港」學術研討會上的發言
中國能保持政治穩定,一個很重要的經驗就是在國家的彈性和剛性間找到了平衡點,而且有效維護了這種平衡。
By South Reviews / Read More
On a Sunday afternoon three years ago, one of China's most-wanted fugitives, dressed in baggy jeans and a striped shirt, walked into the country's pagoda-shaped consulate in Vancouver. Li Dongzhe was ready to take the biggest gamble of his life.
By The Wall Street Journal / Read More
研究者認為,穩定是任何希望健康發展的社會夢寐以求的。在機制和意識形態教育的督導下,擁有超過2000萬學生的中國高校不可謂不穩定。然而,穩定依賴的根本不是學生對現行意識形態發自內心的認同,而是他們對自身利益的考量。研究者由此認為,高校的狀態或許是中國社會中諸多機構的縮影。
By 青年參考 / Read More
在國際力量重新分化組合的高度動盪時期,一國兩制在香港的實踐之所以枝榮葉茂、取得豐碩成果,其中最關鍵的歷史經驗,就是始終堅持守正創新的思想方法和穩中求進的工作方法。
在「一國兩制」條件下進行政府管治效能建設,並無前例可供遵循,宜有完整清晰、具針對性的目標體系。筆者試將其歸納為6個「可」字,即議程可行、執行可見、服務可達、形象可親、應急可靠、效果可測。
在「一國兩制」框架下實現良政善治,更要求在政府管治中運用高度智慧和創造力,結合香港社會狀况、經濟特點、民意民情和制度實際,統籌好「全局」的意志與「一域」的需求,平衡好原則的抽象與實踐的具體,把普遍原則與地方的實際情境很好結合起來,以富有創新性的勇氣、辦法和想像力,組織和落實好中央政令在港的貫徹實施,努力「把好事辦好」。
如何通過有效的溝通工作和有說服力的良政善治成效,來團結在理念、信仰甚至價值觀層面,對國家主體政治秩序及國家治理香港基本方略存在懷疑、牴觸甚或「軟抵抗」情緒的人士,是我們時代對治港者隊伍提出的、一項需用實踐來回答的新的艱巨課題。
早前中共十九大在北京舉行,宣示具有中國特色社會主義進入新時代,改革開放和現代化建設開始新征程。習近平的報告也完整交代了未來治國方略和理論思想,規劃了未來30年發展藍圖。其中提出「兩個100年」奮鬥目標,與一國兩制「50年不變」的運行時間表及2022年、2047年兩個標誌性時間節點高度契合。由此香港各界高度關注,這是勢所必然。
「三方面都能接受」這一論述是一個統一的整體,它既強調國家在港主權和治權的完整,又着眼於香港的現實情况和港人的特殊心理狀態,還兼顧國際社會的反應和接受程度,為一國兩制在香港的落實、中央對港工作和特區政府管治工作都提供了最有效和最平衡的指引,是處理香港問題的中道和正道。
若香港政治要走出困局,泛民主派就必須要作出一個艱難的抉擇:究竟是要成為治理型的反對黨還是革命型的反對黨?治理型的反對黨,就是要承認北京的管治權威、在國家的主體政治秩序內參加本地政策辯論,開展選舉活動,其目的是改善本地治理、監督特區施政。若泛民能完成這樣的轉型,香港政局走向良性互動就有了保證。而革命性的反對黨則是以挑戰現有政治秩序、推翻國家政權為己任。
「本書帶有裴宜理明顯的個人風格:優雅而清晰的文筆、充足又前所未聞的原始資料、對於基層政治參與者人性細節的充分描述等。這些特點不僅使本書的敘事引人入勝,而且也對主題提供了清晰有效的分析。裴宜理對安源的觀點原創而新穎,就這一地區對革命所作的持續貢獻進行分析,使之成為一個令人信服的案例分析。」
──周錫瑞(Joseph W. Esherick), 加州大學聖地亞哥分校教授
「裴宜理從中國共產主義革命的源頭,探討安源工人運動的歷史,揭示1920年代毛澤東、李立三和劉少奇三位共產黨員如何利用文化資源在安源煤礦發動一次影響深遠的工人運動,並詳述1949年革命勝利以後,當權者如何扭曲和操弄安源工人運動的歷史,藉以築造和淨化革命傳統,更討論改革開放以後,官方和民間如何透過各種文化媒介如美術、電影、小說、學術和紅色旅遊等來回憶、重現或挪用安源的革命過往。作者相信中國的未來將取決於如何發掘、認識和掌握中國共產主義革命的傳統,她在安源革命傳統的溯源和發掘上開創了一個學習典範。」
──陳永發,中央研究院院士
By HKU Press / Read More
「此書第一版問世之初至今一直是我首選的教學必讀書目,書中彙集多個領域的一流學者,對於中國社會的研究切中時弊要害又極具學理深度。更難能可貴的是,這本文集在理論深度上毫不遜色於學術專著,卻更加明暢簡潔,平易好讀。」
──白瑞琪教授(Marc Blecher), 美國歐柏林大學政治系教授
與自然科學比,社會科學有兩大弱點:一是沒有堪比牛頓力學的基本理論,二是罕見公認的研究前沿。中國社會與政治的研究尤其如此。本書理論範式清晰,前沿問題明確,是學術著作中極為可貴的例外。中文讀者讀這本書,固然可以獲悉事實,更值得期待的是就三個問題得到出乎意料而言之成理的答案。第一,中國社會是不是健康正常﹖第二,如果不是或不完全是,那麼它發生了哪些病變﹖第三,發生病變的原因是什麼﹖書中對這三個問題的深入理解、提出問題的恰當方式、探索答案的可靠路徑,是本書英文版多次重印的原因,也是中文版面世的價值。」
──李連江, 香港中文大學政治與公共行政系教授
By The Chinese University Press / Read More
2009 HKU, Seed Funding for Basic Research for New Staff (HKD120, 000)
2011 HKU, Seed Funding for Basic Research (HKD43,000)
2010 HKU, Small Project Funding (HKD80,000)
2013-14 Research Grants Council, Early Career Scheme (HKD733,240)
2013 HKU, Small Project Funding (HKD80,000)
2014 HKU, Seed Funding for Basic Research (HKD83, 800)
2012 HKU, Small Project Funding (HKD73,600)