中国：呼唤行动纲领，更呼唤行动

　　经济上的宏观调控已经持续数年，但调控的效果并没有达到所预期的目标。一方面是房地产、农产品价格和股票市场的激荡变化，另一方面是政府没有有效的举措来应付这些变化。

　　尽管中央政府力图调整经济增长方式以达到可持续发展的目标，但各级政府奉行的还是GDP主义，即牺牲一切以达到增长目标。各级政府对地方经济增长的竞争不仅没有得到遏制，反而呈现上升和加剧的趋势。

　　造成这个经济局面的因素有很多，但不管怎样，这个局面表明中央政府还没有发展出能够适应市场经济的经济调控能力，或者说中央政府还没有有效的方式来规范和驾驭市场经济。

利益分化上的思想多元化

　　社会抗争或者群体事件纵深发展。工业化、城市化、全球化和信息化为社会抗争提供了巨大的客观动力，而近年来执政党的“亲民”政策有效地推动着社会各阶层中人权意识的提高。

　　社会层面的权力保护（无论是个人还是群体，无论是自主的还是自卫的）已经形成了一种“气候”。社会公正和正义一方面已经具有了意识形态领域的合法地位，另一方面也是社会各阶层尤其是弱势社会群体所要争取的目标。但是，各级政府并没有有效的方式和方法来控制和减少社会群体事件的进一步发展。

　　尽管大多数社会群体性事件仅仅是为了一些具体的利益，但因为政府官员的处理不当或者不公，很多事件往往转化成为政治事件，就是说由社会对抗转化成为政治对抗。

　　再者，以巨大财富分配不公为标志的社会分化也影响到社会的道德领域。官方的意识形态已经失去了从前的道德引导功能，而社会道德的急剧衰落已经影响到社会整体的凝聚力。

　　社会各阶层互相憎恨，无论是穷人和富人，都似乎没有稳定的幸福感。在各个社会阶层或者阶级之间不存在任何相互信任和关爱的情况下，社会冲突往往表现出其暴力一面。

　　也应当注意的是，因为社会分化已久，并且有固定化的趋势，那么各阶层的意识形态化不可避免。各社会阶层总是会根据自身的利益需要来批判现实，寻找一个符合自身利益的未来社会和制度。

　　最近几年里，社会上各种名目繁多的思潮或者意识形态如“左派”、“右派”和“保守主义”等在很大程度上都反映了现实层面的利益差异。

　　有些思潮甚至和官方所要提倡的意识形态构成竞争之势。或者说，某个社会思潮对一部分社会成员来说可以成为官方意识形态的替代。

　　尽管利益分化状态不可避免地要导致思想多元化，但这种基于利益分化之上的思想多元化必然具有深刻的政治含义。

黑社会与邪教组织

　　更令人担忧的是，在很多地方，基层政府组织要不基本上处于一个无政府状态，要不就是黑社会化，极端地腐败。权力的真空化需要其它一些组织去填补，例如社会自治组织或者非政府组织。但是因为很多政策因素不利于公开的和合法的组织的产生和行动，一些任何社会都不想看到的非法地下组织就应运而生。

　　最不利于社会稳定的就是邪教组织。这些邪教组织在广大的农村尤其是边缘地带的农村产生和发展。近年来各种邪教组织之间不断发生暴力冲突。

　　也有迹象表明，一些邪教组织已经有跨区域发展的能力。从中国历史的经验看，很多重大的社会甚至政治冲突都是由这些本来并不起眼的基层组织开始的。

　　环境方面的压力要远远大于有关部门的估计。今年全国各地发生的河流、湖泊的大面积污染事件只是冰山一角。GDP主义主导中国的发展多年，在环境问题上，已经欠债累累。

　　环境的“报复”现在开始出现，在今后相当长的一段时间里，相信没有人可以阻止得住。环保的问题本来不会恶化到今天这个地步。

　　很多年前，一些地方尤其是经济相当发展的地方，就已经发生了社会组织自主的环保运动。这种环保运动本来就是当地居民对自己生存环境的一种自然的和本能的反应，但往往被地方当局视为是具有政治含义，因此被压制甚至镇压。

　　尽管中央政府已经三令五申地提倡环境保护，但社会保护环境的权利还是没有有效的表达方式，更不用说来改变政府的行为了。

　　在中国的制度生态中，政治不可避免地处于所有这些内在压力的中心。这不仅是因为这些压力的产生和发展和政治方面的因素有关，而且也是因为本来很多事情和政治没有关系，但因为（如上面所提到的）有关方面处理不当和不公而转化成为政治问题。

　　政治是核心表明政治必然是解决或者控制这些问题的关键所在。如果认识到政治的关键作用，人们对是否能够控制和解决存在着的诸多严重问题，可以消除过分的悲观态度。政治的本质是集体行动，通过集体的政治行动，人类可以改变自身的命运。

只有行动才可能解决问题

　　在中国，人们对政治行动的重要性早已经有深刻的认识和丰富的经验。且不说长达世纪之久的革命和社会运动，近年来，执政党力图通过政治行动来重新确定中国社会的发展方向。面临压力，政治和政策话语在近年来有了很大的变化甚至转型。

　　从这个角度来说，2007年可以说是确定新行动纲领的一年，其标志就是中共十七大所确定的新发展方向，或者如有关当局所说的新的“旗帜”。

　　十七大尽管也强调承上启下，也必须协调诸多的利益，但无论在经济、政治和社会等方面，十七大都具有行动纲领之性质。在经济上，十七大虽然继续强调发展之重要性，但更为强调发展的目标是为了全面小康社会的建设。

　　全面小康意味着财富并不是集中在少数人手里，而是具有邓小平当年所说的“共同富裕”的味道。全面小康要由可持续的发展来推动，而只有全面小康，中国社会才会达到和谐的状态。

　　要实现全面小康和和谐社会，就必须重新规定发展的意义和方向。社会正义和公平因此成为执政党行动纲领的核心部分。必须指出的是，社会正义和公平经常是弱势社会群体所高举的旗帜和呼唤的口号，但现在成为执政党的行动指南，这本身就意味着一个巨大的变化。

　　在政治上，十七大的行动纲领以民主政治为旗帜，并且比以往都具体。十七大报告中所提到的民主可以概括为三种形式，即党内民主、人民民主和宪政民主。其中报告明确提党内民主和人民民主，而宪政民主则表达于报告对法治和法律至高无上性的强调。

　　党内民主对党内来说是一种结合了自上而下和自下而上权力产生和行使方式。人民民主有多种形式，主要强调的是自下而上的政治参与，因此人民民主也可以称为社会民主。而无论是党内民主还是社会民主，或者是党内民主和社会民主之间的互动，都必须在一个法治和法律的构架中，这就是宪政民主的内容。

　　这些民主形式显然要同时达到几个目标，或者同时应对来自各方面的压力。党内民主针对的是党内的参与和遏制党内权力的滥用，从而控制党内不断恶化的腐败状况。

　　社会民主针对的是社会参与压力，无论是新生的中产阶级还是社会弱势群体。没有社会参与，上面所说的社会正义和公正必然表现为空中楼阁。而宪政民主的重要性更不言自明。没有宪政，无论是执政党还是社会，都会滥用权力，走向腐败。

　　从所有这些方面来说，十七大具有“旗帜”意义。旗帜是一个方向，是为了引导行动。行动纲领不能只停留在话语阶段，而必须体现为行动。

　　无论对执政党本身还是对中国社会来说，人们所希望的就是行动。只有通过行动，才能实现十七大这个行动纲领；也只有通过行动，才能直面和解决越来越多的问题。

　　但也就是在行动层面，中共仍然面临着巨大的挑战。十七大以来，执政党正在通过频繁的人事布局来部署具体的行动。行动纲领确定以后，执行力成为主要的问题。而在中国政治体制中，执行力主要表现为人事布局。

　　如何执行十七大的行动纲领，明年的新一届政府首当其冲，为第一个考验。新政府如何行动，人们已经拭目以待。

·作者是英国诺丁汉大学中国研究所教授、研究主任

　　 China's problems are growing but Party congress offers some hope

　　 Economic, political, social and environmental pressures are exerting ever more powerful pressures on the Chinese government, but the policies outlined at the 17th Communist Party congress in October 2007 suggest that these problems are likely to be overcome, said Professor Zheng Yongnian, Head of Research at the China Policy Institute of The University of Nottingham, in his weekly column in the Singapore newspaper Lianhe Zaobao.

　　 Prof Zheng said a programme of economic adjustment had been introduced several years ago, but it had had little success, with the government shown to be ineffective in dealing with soaring property and food prices and turbulent stock markets.

　　 The central government may be aiming for sustainable development but officials at all levels were continuing to go for GDP growth at any price. This clearly showed that "the central government does not yet have effective means of planning and guiding the market economy," Zheng said.

　　 He also noted that local violence has increased, spurred by industrialisation, urbanisation, globalisation and information technology, while the Party's "qin min" or propeople policies had had the effect of increasing people's awareness of their human rights.

　　 This had given encouragement to the weakest members of society, but officials had often reacted ineptly, politicising such issues, Zheng said. This had been exacerbated by vast income disparities, so that "there is hatred between social strata, and both rich and poor do not have a stable feeling of prosperity. There is no mutual trust or feeling of concern between various strata and classes, so social clashes often become a manifestation of violence [felt for each other]," he added. Different strata now viewed society solely in the light of their own interests and were interested in shaping society strictly according to these interests, with a proliferation of new schools of thought known as "leftists," "rightists," and "conservatives" that were in competition with factions in the bureaucracy which also had their own views of society, Zheng noted.

　　 Even more worrying, local government in many areas was sinking into anarchy or was being infiltrated by underworld gangs, resulting in extreme levels of corruption, he said, adding that religious cults were a particularly serious problem in many rural areas and rival sects were often involved in violent clashes. On top of this environmental pressures are far more serious than is officially recognised, with the widely reported problem of polluted rivers and lakes just the tip of the iceberg, Zheng said. He said local groups had sprung up to deal with environmental issues, but local officials often viewed them as a political threat and suppressed them.

　　 But there was some hope, with a strong emphasis at the Party congress on an action programme which not only stressed development but even more strongly emphasised that the aim of development is the building of a "xiaokang" or well off society in which wealth is not concentrated in the hands of a minority but which aims for, in Deng Xiaoping's words, "common prosperity." This must come about through sustainability, with the aim of creating social harmony through policies of social justice.

　　 Zheng noted that "socialism and social justice are often the banners raised by the weakest elements of society and the slogans that they shout, but they have now become the Party's action plan, which denotes a huge change."

　　 Zheng said the recent congress emphasised democracy in its programme for action, and was more detailed than previous such declarations, stressing "intraParty democracy, people's democracy and constitutional democracy", the last implied in stress on the rule of law and on nobody being deemed as being above the law.

　　 He said intraParty democracy meant combatting privilege and evergrowing corruption, while "people's democracy", which could also be referred to as "social democracy", meant inclusivity, from the emerging middle class to the weaker members of society. "Without social participation, the social justice and fairness mentioned above are pie in the sky," Zheng said.

　　 The Party had unfurled a banner declaring these principles, he added, but "an action programme must not remain at the stage of mere words, but must be manifested in action."

　　 "No matter whether it is a matter of implementing the Party's policies or of Chinese society [in general], people are hoping for action. Only through action can the 17th Party Congress's programme be implemented, and only through action can the ever multiplying problems [facing China] be addressed and solved. "But at the implementation stage too, the Chinese Communist Party still faces huge challenges...And in the Chinese political system the power to implement [policy] is a matter of personnel," Zheng added, referring to leadership changes at various levels that are still needed. This is an English summary of Professor Zheng Yongnian column's of 25 December, 2007, by Michael Rank for CPI.