政治領導與民主：一種政治觀念史的闡釋

Political Leadership and Democracy: An Interpretation in the History of Western Political Ideas

蔡英文(Ying-Wen Tsai)

《政治與社會哲學評論》 39期 (2011/12) Pp. 1-57

https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532011120039001

摘要

民主就其古典的意義來說乃意指人民（demo）以自由與平等的身分共同參與政治事務，是一個不分統治者與被治者的平等體制。但是人民作為一個集體如何可能不由政治領導者的統治，而得以自我形成一個治理的政治體制？如果民主需要一個政府，那麼就有了治人與治於人的關係在；在民主制中、政治領導者的地位與角色跟在君主制的中有何不同？對於這些問題，本文嘗試以觀念史的進路，探討西方自1世紀塞尼嘉（Seneca, 4B.C-65 A.D）為古羅馬帝制所立的君主統御的觀念以降，政治領導與治理的觀念如何跟民主自治（所謂人民主權）的理想互動交錯，對立緊張，而有所演變。依此，本文論證下列兩個主題：（1）在君主制中，君主實質性的政治領導統御在霍布斯（Thomas Hobbes, 1588-1679）的「制度性主權」的理論中，轉向體制性的治理權威，職司政治的判斷與仲裁。這種轉向到19世紀初葉在龔斯當（Benjamin Constant, 1767-1830）的政治思想中，發展出鑲嵌於自由憲政中的中立性權力的理論：（2）在君主制論述的政治觀念史脈絡中，反君主專制的共和主義式民主的理想不斷地與之相抗衡，本文所論的16世紀法國思想家La Boetie（1530-1596）與18世紀的盧梭（Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 1712 -1778）所揭示的共和民主的人民自治理念代表這種抗衡的思想趨向。

關鍵字

政治領導 ； 共和民主 ； 君主制 ； 制度性的主權 ； 人民主權 ； 中立性的權力

並列摘要

The term ”democracy” in its original sense does mean the demos is endowed with free and equal status to participate in political affairs and thus can shape an autonomous collective power. How is it possible for the demos considered as ”multitude of men” to from such a collective power without a leader who can coordinate them together? Supposed the demostries to build up a government, how is it possible for democratic apparatus of power to exercise without a distinction between the ruler and ruled? What is the status and quality of political leader (or ruler) in democratic government which is different from other regimes, especially from the monarchical government? With these questions, this article tries to examine the relationship between political leadership (and rulership) and democracy from an interpretation in the history of western political idea. It starts with Seneca's justification of Roman Empire's ”principate”, and then explains two status of Medieval princes, that is the rulership and lordship, and ends by an illustration of Constant's ideal of the ”neutrality of power”. In order to interpret the turning point of the conception of political leadership and its tension with the idea of democracy, this article also deals with Machiavelli's idea of political leadership and La Boétie's principle of ”anti-monarchy”, as well as Hobbes' and Rousseau's theory of sovereignty. There are two argumentative theses as follows: one is to interpret the transformation of the status and quality of political leadership (and rulership) from substantive domination to a seat of umpirage elaborated in Hobbes' idea of ”the sovereignty of institution” and further in Constant's the ideal of the ”neutrality of power”. The second is to illustrate the opposition of democratic ideal of people's self-governing to the idea of political leadership that is represented by La Boétie and Rousseau.

並列關鍵字

political leadership ； republican democracy ； monarchy ； sovereignty of institution ； popular sovereignty ； the power of neutrality

參考文獻

Absensour, Miguel、吳坤墉譯(2010)。倡議一個批判的政治哲學。高雄:UTOPIE無境文化。

Schmitt, Carl、李君韜譯、蘇慧婕譯(2005)。憲法的守護者。台北:左岸文化。

Weber, Max、錢永祥譯(2004)。韋伯作品集（I）。桂林:廣西師範大學出版社。

孔令侃1930《暴君政治》。台北：正中書局。

江宜樺(2001)。自由民主的理路。台北:聯經。