论公民不服从

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

作者:

贾琴

导师:

宋玉波

导师单位:

政治与公共管理学院,人权研究院(人权学院)

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

公民不服从;公民资格;公民权利;非暴力;群体性事件

摘要:

在民主的法治社会中,公民的基本权利已被纳入到宪法体系中,并通 过相应的制度安排来保障其不受到国家权力的侵犯。而公民亦通过对法律 的尊重和服从,来保证社会能够有效的运作。但现实中民主社会是采用投 票多数完全否定少数的既定模式,这就使得多数压迫少数的危险很容易发 生,同时作为代议制的民主又很难保证代理人能忠实和正确的反映民意所 向。因此,再精心的制度安排也不能完全避免国家权力的扩张,防止其对 公民的基本权利的侵犯,更不能保证所有法律或政策都是符合正义与自由 的要求。为克服这一困境,西方学者从公民反抗不正义的法律或政策的实 践活动中引申出一套名曰:“公民不服从”的理论,将其作为民主社会矫 正法律缺陷,稳定宪政体制的最终手段。正是基于公民不服从这种对法治 建设的重大理论意义和实践意义,其一直受到西方政治学界和法学界的极 大重视。而我国现在正处于社会转型期,三十年的改革开放取得巨大经济 成就的同时,却因为政治体制和社会体制配套改革的滞后,也带来了严重 的贫富差距,社会公平与正义问题开始凸显。由于对社会不公现象的长期 不满以及缺乏有效的表达途径,暴力化的群体性事件时有发生,严重扰乱 社会秩序。这时若能借鉴,以和平、非暴力为核心理念的公民不服从理论, 并将其作为纠正社会对正义偏离的异议形式,更有利于防止政府与公民冲 突暴力化,维护社会稳定。与此同时,随着我国法治建设的深入,政府依 法行政的理念逐渐加强,公民意识觉醒,并通过诉诸宪法原则和法律精神 的方式来维护自身的权益,公民不服从也开始具备在我国实践的条件并初 现端倪。但在我国关于公民不服从的研究却未受到足够的重视,对其系统 而深入论述很少,将其与我国现实相联系的就更为少见,并且对其概念也 不甚理解,很随意的就将一不满行为如学生对老师不满、教授对学校不满 冠以“公民不服从”之名。故,本文试图通过深入探究公民不服从所蕴含 的深刻涵义,以及西方公民不服从的实践演变和具有代表性的理论,以期 能对其有个较为深刻而全面的认识,减少对其的误解和误用,并以此为基 础对我国近年来的现实案例进行初步探讨。全文共分为三个部分: 第一部分:公民与公民不服从。公民不服从是由“公民的”和“不服 从”两个词组成。“公民的”即公民资格,而“不服从”又蕴含着公民的 法律权利与义务。通过对公民资格的深入探究发现其除了是一种成员身份 外,更是指一种充分的政治参与权利,并包含公民德行、公民素质等深层 1 次的要求。在此基础上,结合西方学者的观点,得出:公民不服从应是一 种体制内的在尊重法律体制整体合法性的前提下,基于共同的正义观为促 使某项不正义的法律或政策或某种弊端得到改变而实施的公开的、政治 的、群体的并甘愿受罚的非暴力的违法行为。然而,当公民为维护正义而 违反法律,可视为对公民德行的实践,但又面临公民守法义务的非议;公 民不服从以违法来表示对法律的忠诚又看似矛盾。为解决这一困境,本文 又进一步对公民服从法律的权利与义务的历史脉络进行了大概梳理,以期 能作出回答。 第二部分:西方公民不服从的实践演变和理论简介。虽然公民不服从 的实践者都是以祛除社会不正义为目标,但在实践中表达异议的方式却各 有不同,也各自从不同方面体现了公民不服从的部分特征。其中苏格拉底、 梭罗和马丁·路德·金,分别标志着“守法”、“良心”、“非暴力”,也代 表着公民不服从实践演变的三个转折点。而西方关于公民不服从的理论讨 论主要集中在20世纪60至70年代,其中以罗尔斯、汉娜·阿伦特、德 沃金的学说最具代表性。虽然他们在对公民不服从的界定、正当性的论证 方式、适用条件等方面有所不同,但都认为公民在面对不正义的法律或政 策时有不服从的权利,公民不服从作为一特殊的违法行为是与一般的违法 或刑事犯罪行为以及暴力革命是有区别的,是具有正当性的,对稳定民主 宪政,防止权力滥用有着重要作用。而拉兹却对在一自由国家公民不服从 具有正当性持反对意见,在他看来只有在一不自由的国家,由于缺乏充分 有效的政治参与途径,公民才有不服从的权利。 第三部分:关于我国公民不服从的思考。由于群体性事件与公民不服 从一样都是群体性的公开违法行为,并且其起因和目的又带有一定的合理 性,使得两者很容易被混淆。而通过对群体性事件的概念和特征的分析, 可以看到两者在实施主体、抗议方式、行为目的以及对待法律惩罚的态度 上是有显著区别的。故切不可将群体性事件等同于公民不服从行为,更不 可鉴于群体性事件对于社会秩序和公共安全的负面影响而得出在我国提 倡公民不服从将危及社会稳定破坏法治的结论。同时,通过对无直接利益 冲突的群体性事件、拆迁维权事件以及厦门PX事件等现实事件的分析, 可以看到公民不服从在我国已有存在的空间更有存在的必要,具备实践的 条件,并已有了实践的可能性,对我国的社会稳定、法治建设、公民意识 和公民素质的培养也具有重大意义。

学科:

政治学理论

提交日期

2026-01-12

引用参考

贾琴. 论公民不服从[D]. 西南政法大学,2008.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 论公民不服从
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20050302011055
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 贾琴
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 政治与公共管理学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法学硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2008
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 宋玉波
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 政治与公共管理学院,人权研究院(人权学院)
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 公民不服从 ;公民资格; 公民权利; 非暴力; 群体性事件
  • dc.subject
  • civil obedience; ;civil qualifications;; civil rights; ;non-violence;; mass disturbance
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 在民主的法治社会中,公民的基本权利已被纳入到宪法体系中,并通 过相应的制度安排来保障其不受到国家权力的侵犯。而公民亦通过对法律 的尊重和服从,来保证社会能够有效的运作。但现实中民主社会是采用投 票多数完全否定少数的既定模式,这就使得多数压迫少数的危险很容易发 生,同时作为代议制的民主又很难保证代理人能忠实和正确的反映民意所 向。因此,再精心的制度安排也不能完全避免国家权力的扩张,防止其对 公民的基本权利的侵犯,更不能保证所有法律或政策都是符合正义与自由 的要求。为克服这一困境,西方学者从公民反抗不正义的法律或政策的实 践活动中引申出一套名曰:“公民不服从”的理论,将其作为民主社会矫 正法律缺陷,稳定宪政体制的最终手段。正是基于公民不服从这种对法治 建设的重大理论意义和实践意义,其一直受到西方政治学界和法学界的极 大重视。而我国现在正处于社会转型期,三十年的改革开放取得巨大经济 成就的同时,却因为政治体制和社会体制配套改革的滞后,也带来了严重 的贫富差距,社会公平与正义问题开始凸显。由于对社会不公现象的长期 不满以及缺乏有效的表达途径,暴力化的群体性事件时有发生,严重扰乱 社会秩序。这时若能借鉴,以和平、非暴力为核心理念的公民不服从理论, 并将其作为纠正社会对正义偏离的异议形式,更有利于防止政府与公民冲 突暴力化,维护社会稳定。与此同时,随着我国法治建设的深入,政府依 法行政的理念逐渐加强,公民意识觉醒,并通过诉诸宪法原则和法律精神 的方式来维护自身的权益,公民不服从也开始具备在我国实践的条件并初 现端倪。但在我国关于公民不服从的研究却未受到足够的重视,对其系统 而深入论述很少,将其与我国现实相联系的就更为少见,并且对其概念也 不甚理解,很随意的就将一不满行为如学生对老师不满、教授对学校不满 冠以“公民不服从”之名。故,本文试图通过深入探究公民不服从所蕴含 的深刻涵义,以及西方公民不服从的实践演变和具有代表性的理论,以期 能对其有个较为深刻而全面的认识,减少对其的误解和误用,并以此为基 础对我国近年来的现实案例进行初步探讨。全文共分为三个部分: 第一部分:公民与公民不服从。公民不服从是由“公民的”和“不服 从”两个词组成。“公民的”即公民资格,而“不服从”又蕴含着公民的 法律权利与义务。通过对公民资格的深入探究发现其除了是一种成员身份 外,更是指一种充分的政治参与权利,并包含公民德行、公民素质等深层 1 次的要求。在此基础上,结合西方学者的观点,得出:公民不服从应是一 种体制内的在尊重法律体制整体合法性的前提下,基于共同的正义观为促 使某项不正义的法律或政策或某种弊端得到改变而实施的公开的、政治 的、群体的并甘愿受罚的非暴力的违法行为。然而,当公民为维护正义而 违反法律,可视为对公民德行的实践,但又面临公民守法义务的非议;公 民不服从以违法来表示对法律的忠诚又看似矛盾。为解决这一困境,本文 又进一步对公民服从法律的权利与义务的历史脉络进行了大概梳理,以期 能作出回答。 第二部分:西方公民不服从的实践演变和理论简介。虽然公民不服从 的实践者都是以祛除社会不正义为目标,但在实践中表达异议的方式却各 有不同,也各自从不同方面体现了公民不服从的部分特征。其中苏格拉底、 梭罗和马丁·路德·金,分别标志着“守法”、“良心”、“非暴力”,也代 表着公民不服从实践演变的三个转折点。而西方关于公民不服从的理论讨 论主要集中在20世纪60至70年代,其中以罗尔斯、汉娜·阿伦特、德 沃金的学说最具代表性。虽然他们在对公民不服从的界定、正当性的论证 方式、适用条件等方面有所不同,但都认为公民在面对不正义的法律或政 策时有不服从的权利,公民不服从作为一特殊的违法行为是与一般的违法 或刑事犯罪行为以及暴力革命是有区别的,是具有正当性的,对稳定民主 宪政,防止权力滥用有着重要作用。而拉兹却对在一自由国家公民不服从 具有正当性持反对意见,在他看来只有在一不自由的国家,由于缺乏充分 有效的政治参与途径,公民才有不服从的权利。 第三部分:关于我国公民不服从的思考。由于群体性事件与公民不服 从一样都是群体性的公开违法行为,并且其起因和目的又带有一定的合理 性,使得两者很容易被混淆。而通过对群体性事件的概念和特征的分析, 可以看到两者在实施主体、抗议方式、行为目的以及对待法律惩罚的态度 上是有显著区别的。故切不可将群体性事件等同于公民不服从行为,更不 可鉴于群体性事件对于社会秩序和公共安全的负面影响而得出在我国提 倡公民不服从将危及社会稳定破坏法治的结论。同时,通过对无直接利益 冲突的群体性事件、拆迁维权事件以及厦门PX事件等现实事件的分析, 可以看到公民不服从在我国已有存在的空间更有存在的必要,具备实践的 条件,并已有了实践的可能性,对我国的社会稳定、法治建设、公民意识 和公民素质的培养也具有重大意义。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • The rule of law in a democratic society, citizens have the fundamental right to be involved in the Constitution, and the adoption of the corresponding institutional arrangements to ensure that its powers are not a violation of state. The citizens also respect and obey the law, which works efficiently to protect operation of the community. But in reality, democracy is a complete established model which denies minority voting rights to majority, it oppressed minority where risk covered by peace would be prone to outbreak. As a representative democracy can be difficult to ensure that agents act loyally and correctly and reflect public opinion. Therefore, any deliberately designed system is not able to completely avoid the expansion of state power and prevent violations of its citizen's basic rights, and not guarantee that all laws or policies are in line with the requirements of justice and freedom. To overcome this dilemma, Western scholars invent a set of civil disobedience theory from citizens against unjust laws or policies in the practice, taken it as a tool to correct legal flaws democratic society, and ensure the ultimate stability of the constitutional system. It is based on civil disobedience; the rule of law in the construction of such major theoretical and practical significance of society has been in processing developed by Western political scholars and had the great importance in the academia. As of today, Western scholars still study on civil disobedience since there is a large interest on this field. And our society is now in a transitional period, with 30 years of reform and opening up and tremendous economic achievements, but because the political system and social system supporting reform lags behind, there is a serious gap between rich and poor, social equity and justice issues had been highlighted. Because of the long-term social inequities, as well as dissatisfaction with the lack of an effective means of expression, violence of the mass incidents occur from time to time, and seriously disturb social order. Then if the reference to peace, non-violence as the core concept of civil disobedience theory, and as a remedy for social justice from the dissidents, the more conducive measure should be taken to prevent violence and civil conflict, and safeguard social stability. At 1 the same time, with the deepening implement of China's rule of law, the concept of the government is gradually strengthened by the civic awareness. By resorting to constitutional principles and spirit of the law, the way of protecting their own rights and interests of civil disobedience began arising with practice conditions in China. But in our study on civil disobedience failed to be heard, for its profound connotation, and even more rare in-depth exposition of its concepts are not got understood. Acts as dissatisfactions render by students to the teacher; professors dissatisfied with the schools called are easily named as" civil disobedience". This paper attempts to explore the profound meaning of civil disobedience, and states with a view to them have a more comprehensive understanding on the Western representative of civil disobedience theory, in the aim of clearing the misunderstanding and reducing its misuse. For the emerging the phenomenon of civil disobedience in China in recent years, author discusses some preliminary study on this subject. The full text is divided into three parts: Part 1: citizen and the civil disobedience. Civil disobedience is consisted by two words" civil" and" disobedience". " Civil" means citizenship and " disobedience" contains a citizen's legal rights and obligations. Through Inquiry, author found that the citizenship is not only an identity, but also refers to full political participation rights, and also includes civic virtue, civility, and other deep-seated demands. Finally, on this basis, with Western scholars view that: civil disobedience should be a system in respect of the overall legitimacy of the legal system as the premise, and based on a common conception of justice, it is non-violent offences implementing of public, political, groups willing against an unjust law or policy or some drawbacks. When citizens uphold justice and violation of the law, it could be regarded as the practice of civic virtue, but faced criticism on obligations of the law-abiding citizens. Therefore, this paper further states the law of citizenship with rights and obligations in history which was probably combing. Part 2: Brief introduction about practice development and theories of civil disobedience in western land. Although the practitioners of civil 2 disobedience are all aimed at dispelling social injustice, in the practice, the dissent expressing methods are all different and show some features of civil disobedience from different aspects. In which, Socrates, Thoreau and Martin Luther King separately marked "obeying the law", "conscience", "nonviolence" and standed for the 3 turning points in the practice-developing process of civil disobedience. And western civil disobedience on the theoretical discussion mainly concentrated in the 1960s and 1970s, especially represented by John Rawls, Hannah Arendt, and Ronald Dworkin. Although their definition are different from each other in aspects of civil disobedience, argue method used on legitimacy, apply conditions, but they all agree that citizens in the face of unjust laws or policies are not violations to the legislative right. Civil disobedience as a special violation of the law is definitely distinguished from general criminal behavior and violent revolutions. It plays an important role in aspects of the stability of constitutional democracy, and prevention from the abuse of power. Joseph Raz has opposite idea on the legitimacy of civil disobedience in a free country. In his view since in a free country where lacks of full and effective participation in political ways, citizens have the right to not obey. Part 3: the consideration on civil disobedience in our country. Because the mass disturbances and the civil disobedience are both a kind of mass congregate open injuria, and there' re some rationalities in it's cause and target which make the two are easily promiscuous. Through the analysis of the concept and feature of the mass disturbances we could got the obvious differences between the two in implementing subject, protesting style, behavior target and the attitude to the legal punishment. So, we couldn't confuse the mass disturbance and the civil disobedience, neither to make the conclusion that advocating the civil disturbance will endanger our social stability or destroy the law and order just because the negative effect brought by the mass disturbance to our social order and public safety. At the same time, by means of analyzing those practical incidents such as"mass disturbance of non-direct benefit conflict", the incidents about removal and right-safeguarding and the PX incidents in Xiamen, we could know the civil 3 disobedience is essential and there's a space for it. Then the conditions for practice have exited and surfaced and this will play an important role in social stability, the legal construction, the civic awareness and diathesis cultivation.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-01-12
回到顶部