西方协商民主理论中的程序与实质

西方主流民主模式是选举民主，其核心是“一人一票”的公平程序。20世纪后期兴起的协商民主理论则强调民主过程中的辩论、反思、公共利益等实质要求，将民主合法性的讨论集中在了民主协商的程序要求和实质要求当中。在这一问题上，哈贝马斯将民主协商的合法性完全置于理想的协商程序当中；罗尔斯则认为，理想的协商程序所确立的原则构成了协商民主合法性的主要来源，但协商过程中的实质要求和协商结果同样构成民主合法性的检验标准。新近的某些协商民主论者则结合现实的制度和经验进一步丰富了协商民主合法性的讨论。理清不同主张之间的异同，有利于理解西方协商民主理论的逻辑演进、核心观念和最新进展，进而有助于理解西方协商民主同我国协商民主的差异和存在的缺陷。

The Procedure and Substance of Western Theory of Deliberative Democracy

The mainstream mode of democracy in the West is electoral democracy, and its core is the fair procedure of "one person, one vote". The theory of deliberative democracy, which emerged in the late twentieth century, emphasizes the substantive requirements of debate, reflection and public interest in the process of democracy, and focuses the discussion of democratic legitimacy on the procedural and substantive requirements of democratic deliberation. On this issue, Habermas believes that the legitimacy of deliberative democracy depends entirely on the ideal deliberation procedures, while John Rawls believes that ideal deliberation procedures constitute the main source of deliberative democracy''s legitimacy, but the substance of deliberative democracy and deliberation results also constitute the criteria of democratic legitimacy. Recently, some deliberative democrats have enriched the discussion on the legitimacy of deliberative democracy by combining the actual system and experience. Sorting out the similarities and differences between different propositions is conducive to understanding the logic evolution, core concepts and the latest progress of deliberative democracy, which is helpful for us to understand the differences between deliberative democracy in the West and that in China, and to understand its defects.