让男人哭泣的绝招漫画:《政治秩序的诸种起源》

《政治秩序的诸种起源》

WHY did the Catholic church’s insistence on priestly celibacy in the late 11th century give Europeans an early advantage over other societies in establishing the rule of law? The answer in Francis Fukuyama’s stimulating new book is that celibacy was one of several important reforms, instituted by Pope Gregory VII, which resulted in the development of canon law and the notion that even kings were subject to it. Gregory won everlasting fame by bending Henry IV, the Holy Roman Emperor, to his will, forcing the most powerful man in Europe to do penance before him at Canossa.

11世纪晚期天主教会所坚持的僧侣独身制度，为什么能够使欧洲在建立法治方面比其他文明社会更具领先优势？福山在他那激动人心的新书中作出了回答：独身制是由教皇格里高利七世制定的一系列重要改革措施之一。这些措施导致了教会法规的发展，以及即使国王也要遵守法律观念的形成。通过迫使神圣罗马帝国的皇帝亨利四世屈从于自己的意志，并进而使这位欧洲最具权势的人受尽屈辱的到卡诺莎觐见自己，教皇格里高利七世得以永垂史册。

Celibacy was vital in the battle against corruption and rent-seeking within the church, both of which were the typical consequences of patrimony. The reforms gave the church the moral stature to evolve into what Mr Fukuyama describes as “a modern, hierarchical, bureaucratic and law-governed institution” that established its authority for spiritual affairs—and by so doing set the ground rules for the subsequent rise of the secular state.

在同教会中的腐败和寻租现象作斗争的过程中，独身制起到了关键性的作用，而上述两种现象都是世袭的典型产物。这些改革措施的实行赋予了教会道德上的优势，并进而演化到福山所描绘的“一个现代的、等级制的、官僚主义的、和法律治理的制度”，从而为宗教性事物建立了权威，也为随后兴起的世俗政权奠定了基础。

Mr Fukuyama (a pupil of Samuel Huntington who wrote a seminal work on political order 40 years ago) begins his own search for the origins of political order with the shift from small hunting bands to tribes. This eventually brought about the “coming of the Leviathan” or the coercive state. It was a development driven partly by the increasing complexity of societies founded on agriculture but much more by the organisational challenges of conducting warfare on an ever-greater scale.

福山（塞缪尔·亨廷顿的学生）在《政治秩序诸种起源》一书中首先研究了人类从小规模狩猎组织向部落群体转换的过程。在这之后，人类最终迎来了“利维坦（镇制性国家）时代”。国家的出现是靠建立在农业基础之上的社会日益增长的复杂性驱动的，更多的则是适应了在更大规模的基础上指挥作战的组织上的需求。4

With impressive erudition, the author travels across China, India, the Islamic world and different regions of Europe looking for the main components of good political order and at how and why these emerged (or failed to) in each place. The three critical ingredients, he argues, are a strong state, the application of the rule of law to all parts of society and a means of holding rulers to account for their actions.

拥有令人称叹的学识，作者来往穿梭于中国、印度、伊斯兰世界和欧洲的不同地区，并努力探求形成良好政治秩序的主要构成元素，以及它们在每个地方出现（或失败）的原因和过程。他认为，形成良好的政治秩序需有三个关键性元素：一个强大的国家政权，社会中普遍施行的法治，拥有一个能够对自身行为负责的统治阶层。

The first unambiguously modern state, Mr Fukuyama believes, was the Qin dynasty in China, founded in 221BC. Many of the control mechanisms perfected by the Qin had developed during the preceding 500 years or so of the Eastern Zhou dynasty when a host of small warring states across China began to coalesce. Such elements included a merit-based (non-aristocratic) military leadership combined with mass conscription, sophisticated taxation systems and a bureaucracy recruited from a permanent administrative cadre selected on the basis of ability rather than family connection. The Qin simply went much further, assaulting every section of society in its remorseless attempt to establish a form of protototalitarian dictatorship.

福山认为，建立于公元前221年的中国的秦王朝是世界上第一个鲜明的现代国家。许多由秦所完善的控制机制，在大约500年前，列国争战合并的东周时期就已经开始得到发展。这些其中包括：一个勋功制的（非贵族的）军事领导体制，以及与其之相结合的大规模的征兵制度，成熟的征税系统，和一个以个人能力而不是家庭关系为标准从固定的行政干部中选拔官僚的制度。秦朝则走得更远，在妄图建立一套近似极权主义的残暴独裁统治的尝试之后，最终侵犯了社会中每个部分的利益。

The Qin’s extremism was also its undoing and it was soon replaced by the more enduring Han dynasty, which sought compromise with aristocratic elites and legitimation through a revived Confucianism. The Han state lasted for more than 400 years. But it was always vulnerable to what Mr Fukuyama calls “the bad emperor problem” as well as to the hardwired human tendency to make ties of kinship the primary criterion for conferring wealth, power and status. As Mr Fukuyama observes: “There is an inverse correlation between the strength of the centralised state and the strength of patrimonial groups. Tribalism…remains a default form of political organisation, even after a modern state has been created.”

秦朝的极端主义做法导致了它的灭亡，取代它的是更为稳固的汉王朝。汉朝政权和贵族精英之间实现了合作，并通过复兴儒家思想建立了统治的合法性。汉代延续了400多年。由于人性中存在难以克服的弱点，在分配财富、权力和身份地位的时候，人们常常优先考虑和自己有亲属关系的人，因此汉朝也一直都被福山所说的“坏皇帝问题”所困扰。正如福山所观察到的：“集权国家的力量和世袭集团的力量之间存在着相反的关联。部落主义……即使在现代国家形成以后，仍然是政治组织中的缺陷形式。”

Much of the book is concerned with the struggle between rulers in different parts of the world trying to forge powerful states (usually with the aim of military domination in times when conquest rather than technological progress was the main route to enrichment) while battling the astonishing ability of patrimonialism to undermine their efforts no matter what measures were used to break its grip. Chinese emperors favoured employing eunuchs in senior positions. Muslim rulers, from the Abbasids in the eighth century to the Mamluk sultanate in Egypt and the Ottomans, developed the institution of military slavery to lessen nepotism and the internal conflicts created by tribal loyalties.

书的大部分内容关注的是世界上不同地区的统治阶层之间的争斗，他们试图塑造强大的国家政权（常常利用武力手段进行征服，而不是把技术进步作为积累财富的主要途径），同时也采取各种措施防止具有惊人能力的世袭主义毁坏他们的这种努力。中国的皇帝喜欢利用太监担任高级职务。从8世纪的阿巴斯王朝到埃及的马穆鲁克阶层再到奥斯曼土耳其帝国，穆斯林的统治者们都发展了一套旨在减少任人唯亲和由部落效忠而导致的内部冲突的军事奴隶制度。

The Mamluks were meant to be a kind of one-generation nobility owing loyalty only to the sultan. Similarly, the Janissaries, the elite slave troops of the Ottoman emperors, were not allowed to marry. But in the end both systems decayed as first the Mamluks and then the Janissaries became interest groups powerful enough to subvert the centralised states they had been created to defend. Once again, patrimonialism reasserted itself.

马穆鲁克是指效忠于苏丹（译者注：伊斯兰国家的统治者）一人而只享有一代贵族身份的特殊社会阶层。与之相似的是，土耳其皇帝们的上层奴隶武装——禁卫军，也不被允许结婚生子。但是，到最后，这些体制都衰败了，最初是马穆鲁克，后来是禁卫军，成为了一个既得利益集团，他们的实力强大到足以推翻起初创造并利用他们进行防卫的集权国家。世袭主义又一次发挥了作用。

Mr Fukuyama makes an interesting comparison between 17th-century France, where royal absolutism was rather less absolute than it appeared and England, which, after the upheavals of the civil war and the 1688 revolution, became the first place (Denmark was probably next) to combine all three of the ingredients for a virtuous political order: a strong state, the rule of law and accountability. The problem in France was that the king did not feel strong enough to challenge the legal rights of the aristocracy, but both were happy to deny the rule of law to the peasantry and the rising commercial classes who bore the full brunt of meeting the king’s need for money to fight wars, through taxation. England at the time could in no sense be described as a democracy, but the idea of accountability was entrenched at all levels of society by centuries of the common law, creating the political conditions for a constitutional monarchy and a dynamic economy.

在17世纪的法国和1688年革命后的英国之间，福山做了一个有趣的对比。法国的王权专制并不如它表面上看上去的那么强大，而英国在经历了内战的动乱和1688年革命之后，成为了世界上第一个（丹麦很可能是第二个）能够将形成良性政治秩序的所有三种元素结合到一块的国家。这三种元素是：一个强大的国家政权、法治和责任意识。法国的问题在于国王没有足够的实力挑战贵族的法定权利，农民和新崛起的商人阶级希望实现法治的请求也被拒绝，通过征税，这两个阶层担负了国王对外作战的全部开销。英国在当时，无论如何也不可能是一个民主国家，但是几个世纪以来形成的习惯法使英国社会的各个方面都存在着根深蒂固的责任意识，这就为君主立宪制和充满活力的经济的形成创造了有利的政治条件。

Though this first volume concludes with the French revolution (a second, charting developments up to the present day, is in the works) its insights are relevant to our understanding of modern states and how they became what they are. For example, there is China with its incredibly smart centralised bureaucracy, weak rule of law and absence of accountability (Mao, argues Mr Fukuyama, shows that China has not yet escaped the “bad emperor” problem). Or there is India with its weak state, but much greater accountability and almost pedantic attachment to the law.

尽管本书的第一卷结束于法国大革命（第二卷将会延续到当下社会，仍在写作之中），但它深刻的洞察力仍和我们对于现代国家及其是如何形成的理解密切相连。例如，中国和她那令人难以置信的灵活的中央集权官僚体制，缺乏法治和责任意识（福山认为，毛的出现显示出中国仍未摆脱“坏皇帝问题”的困扰）。还有，印度和它虚弱的国家政权，但却有更强的责任意识和几近迂腐的遵循法律行事。

He also provides us with a yardstick for measuring the chances that the Arab awakening this spring will meet his three tests of political order (not high, at least not yet). Mr Fukuyama is still the big-picture man who gave us “The End of History”, but he has an unerring eye for illuminating detail. Books on political theory are not often page-turners; this one is.

今年春天爆发革命的阿拉伯国家将会面临他关于政治秩序的三条原则的检验，同时他也为我们提供了衡量这种机遇（不是很高，甚至未曾发生）的尺度。福山先生仍然是带我们进入“历史的终结”大画面的人物，但他同时也具有一双精确展示细节的眼睛。能够引人入胜的政治理论书籍并不多见，这本肯定不会让你失望。