| Summary: | 碩士 === 佛光大學 === 政治學系 === 99 === The villager’s self-governance in China was originated from the open of reformation in 1978. On the 5th of February 1980, the villagers of Ho Zhai Village in Yizhou City, Guangxi province’s Zhuang tribe autonomous region, appeared as the first group after the Cultural Revolution. The collapse of the People’s Commune System caused disturbance in the rural areas. For the purpose of maintaining the rural societal order and security, people proposed to set up an organization. The managerial body of it was also selected and named “Villager Committee”. This became the origin of self-governance in China. In this reformation, township people’s government was still part of the government’s body. However, Villager Committee became the “Mass Self-governance”, which did not belong to the government’s body. Thereafter, China announced the “Villager Committee Organic Law (Trial)” in 1987, and further emphasized the autonomy of Villager Committee. This was not a historical contingency. Instead, it is a historical product that created backing and self-help for the desperate Chinese rural society after the Cultural Revolution. This thesis will analyze the development process of the Chinese villager’s self-governance. It will also use the past history of villager’s self-governance and its theoretical basis, characteristics, and status of implementation as the main parts to present its connotation. In addition, this research hopes to uncover the enforceability and prospect of China moving towards democracy.
Villager’s self-governance has been practicing for 30 years and has its pros and cons. In this thesis, the author concluded 4 main points. First, villager’s self-governance allows villagers to participate in democratic elections. Second, villager’s self-governance is merely a mean for legalizing political power. Third, the contradiction between the domination of political party and villager’s self-governance still exists. Forth, villager’s self-governance is a way to show China’s willfulness in authoritarian regimes. To date, China is still a nation with great autocratic power. In addition, China lacks the democratic tradition and education. Nevertheless, due to the influence of its recent economic development and the Western culture, basic level of democracy has been given an opportunity to nurture. Yet with its fragility, driving the Chinese political system towards a higher level of reformation and democracy is extremely difficult and not even close to reaching a consensus.
|
|---|
