循环式国家：转型中国的符号式劳动治理机制探析

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 抗争政治与国家建设之间的关系是社会运动研究中的一个经典问题。本文通过对一组国有企业退休工人为维护退休金权益所展开的十年抗争进行过程事件分析，来勾勒国家在劳动治理过程中逐步形成的官僚场域。这个官僚场域由三个相互交叉的圈子所构成：信访办圈子、信访办与法院之间的圈子、中央与地方之间的圈子。这些交叉的圈子所构成的国家场域一方面通过对抗争的制度化循环而拉长了工人的斗争时间，分散了抗争的空间，从而有效遏止了抗争的激进化，另一方面则通过抗争工人与国家代理人之间的叙事化互动促进了国家资本的激活与流通，从而实现了对抗争者的象征性支配。

关键词: 场域 , 循环象征性支配, 国家资本 , 官僚

Abstract: The relationship between contentious politics and the state building is a classic topic in the study of social movements.Through detailed analysis of a tenyear struggle of a group of state workers to defend their pensions by active engagement with state agents，this paper attempts to explore the circular feature of the state and how this circular state functions to absorb the labor contentions.From August 1998 to October 2008，a group of retired state workers in H Steel Factory carried out radical street protests，persistent legal litigations and peaceful collective petitions to fight against their factory’s retention and reduction of their pensions.The trajectory of the workers’ struggles delineates a gradually formed state bureaucratic field of labor governance.This state is composed of three intersecting circles—a circle between different petition offices，a circle between petition offices and courts，and a circle between the local and the center. This system full of tensions within and between different circles produces the negotiation and bargaining relation between different levels and sectors in the state，which in turn leads to the circulation mechanism of social conflicts rather than a resolution structure. The institutional configuration of this circular state includes the double bind between decentralization and marketization and the mutual reference between the petition system and the legal system.The circulation of the workers’ case in this circular bureaucratic field，on one side elongates the struggles of the workers and prevents the radicalization of their resistance; on the other side，promotes the circulation and inculcation of the statist capitals among the workers.

Key words: bureaucratic field , the statist capital , symbolic domination, circulation

程秀英. 循环式国家：转型中国的符号式劳动治理机制探析[J]. 社会杂志, 2015, 35(2): 192-217.

CHENG Xiuying. The Circular State：A Case Study of the Symbolic Labor Governance System in Transitional China[J]. Chinese Journal of Sociology, 2015, 35(2): 192-217.

参考文献

蔡禾、李超海、冯建华. 2009. 利益受损农民工的利益抗争行为研究——基于珠江三角企业的调查［J］. 社会学研究(1):139-161.
程秀英. 2012. 从政治呼号到法律逻辑：对中国工人抗争政治的话语分析［J］. 开放时代(4):73-89.
冯仕政. 2012. 国家政权建设与新中国信访制度的形成及演变［J］.社会学研究（4）：25-47.
黄岩. 2005. 国有企业改制中的工人集体行动的解释框架——以西北某省X市纺织公司的一场抗争为例［J］. 公共管理学报（4）：57-63.
黄振辉. 2011. 表演式抗争：景观、挑战与发生机理［J］. 开放时代（2）：71-84.
林磊. 2007. 权益受损与抗争行为：农民工的维权行动研究［D］. 华中师范大学硕士学位论文.
刘爱玉. 2005. 选择：国企变革与工人生存行动［M］. 北京：社会科学文献出版社.
任焰、潘毅. 2006a. 跨国劳动过程的空间政治：全球化时代的宿舍劳动体制［J］. 社会学研究（4）：21-33.
任焰、潘毅. 2006b. 宿舍劳动体制：劳动控制与抗争的另类空间［J］. 开放时代(3):124-134.
孙立平. 2000. “过程—事件分析”与中国农村中国家—农民关系的实践形态［G］//清华社会学评论（特辑）. 厦门: 鹭江出版社:1-18.
孙立平. 2012. “中等收入陷阱”还是“转型陷阱”［R］. 清华大学社会学系社会发展研究课题组.
佟新. 2006. 延续的社会主义文化传统［J］. 社会学研究(1):59-76.
唐军. 2006. 生存资源剥夺与传统体制的依赖：当代中国工人集体行动的逻辑［J］. 江苏社会科学(5):174-183.
汪建华. 2011. 互联网动员与代工厂工人集体抗争［J］. 开放时代(11):114-128.
王星. 2012. 阶级化与商品化：劳工抗争政治的两种模型［J］. 中国工人(2):24-28.
于建嵘. 2005. 中国信访制度批判［J］. 中国改革(2):26-28.
于建嵘. 2009. 利益博弈与抗争性政治［J］. 中国农业大学学报(1):16-21.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1994. “Rethinking the State: On the Genesis and Function of the Bureaucratic Field.” Social Theory(12): 1-19.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1999. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000. Pascalian Meditations. Stanford:Stanford University Press.
Bright, Charles and Susan Harding. 1984. State Making and Social Movements: Essays in Theory and History. Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press.
Chen, Feng. 2000. “Subsistence Crisis, Managerial Corruption and Labor Protests in China.” The China Journal 44: 41-63.
Chen, Feng. 2003. “Between the State and Labor: The Conflict of Chinese Trade Unions’ Double Identity in Market Reform.” China Quarterly 176: 1006-1028.
Chen, Xi. 2008. “Collective Petitioning and Institutional Conversion.” In Popular Protest in China, edited by Kelvin J. O’Brien. Cambridge：Harvard University Press:54-70.
Cheng, Xiuying. 2013. “Dispersive Containment：A Comparative Case Study of Labor Politics in Central China.” Journal of Contemporary China 22: 79, 131-147.
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish. New York:Random House Press.
Hurst, William. 2005. The Unmaking of Chinese Proletariat: The Politics of Xiagang. Berkeley: University of California Press.
O’Brien, Kevin. 1996. “Rightful Resistance.” World Politics 49(1): 31-35.
O’Brien,Kevin.2004. “Neither Contained nor Transgressive: BoundarySpanning Contention in China.” In State and Society in 21st Century China, edited by Cries and Stanley Rosen. Routledge:105-122.
O’Brien, Kevin and Lianjiang Li. 2006. Rightful Resistance in Rural China. New York:Cambridge University Press.
Lee, Ching Kwan. 1998.“The Labor Politics of Market Socialism: Collective Inaction and Class Experiences among State Workers in Guangzhou.” Modern China 24(1):3-33.
Lee, Ching Kwan. 1999. “From Organized Dependence to Disorganized Despotism: Changing Labor Regimes in Chinese Factories.” China Quarterly 157(March):44-71.
Lee, Ching Kwan. 2007. Against the Law: Labor Protests in China’s Rustbelt and Sunbelt. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Li, Lianjiang. 2010. “Rights Consciousness and Rules Consciousness in Contemporary China.” The China Journal 64: 47-68.
Lieberthal, Kenneth L. and David Lampton. 1992. Bureaucracy, Politics, and Decision Making in PostMao China. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Minzner, Carl. 2006. “Xinfang: An Alternative to Formal Chinese Legal Institutions.” Stanford Journal of International Law 103: 103-179.
Perry, Elizabeth. 2007. “Studying Chinese Politics: Farewell to Revolution.” The China Journal 27(January):1-22.
Perry, Elizabeth. 2009. “A New Rights Consciousness?” Journal of Democracy 20(3):17-20.
Shue, Vivienne. 2000. “Legitimacy Crisis in China.” In State and Society in 21st-Century China, edited by Peter Hays Gries and Stanley Rosen. New York: Routledge:24-49.
Solinger, Dorothy. 2000. “The Potential for Urban Unrest: Will the Fencers Stay on the Piste?” In Is China Unstable? edited by David Shambaugh. New York: Sharp Inc.:79-94.
Tanner, Murray Scot. 2005. “Rethinking Law Enforcement and Society: Changing Police Analyses of Social Unrest.” In Engaging the Law in China: State, Society, and Possibilities for Justice, edited by Neil J. Diamant, Stanley B. Lubman and Kevin J. O’Brien. Stanford:Stanford University Press:162-193.
Tarrow, Sidney. 1994. Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Actions and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tilly, Charles. 1993. “Contentious Repertoires in Great Britain, 1758 -1834.” Social Science History 17（2）: 253-280.

责任编辑：田青

[1]	刘畅. 打破铁笼：以“关系”和“变通”为线索的美国新韦伯主义官僚制研究[J]. 社会杂志, 2026, 46(1): 31-70.
[2]	翟学伟. 何谓“名分”？——一项基于“关系性”的本土研究[J]. 社会杂志, 2024, 44(6): 1-30.
[3]	潘桐. 流动的责任边界：基层政府的业务与政治[J]. 社会杂志, 2023, 43(3): 135-161.
[4]	路畅, 蒙克. 虔敬主义伦理与普鲁士官僚制精神[J]. 社会杂志, 2022, 42(2): 1-28.
[5]	谢崇赟. 商品世界的物质装置与价值斗争：法国经济社会学的“再市场化”：从布迪厄的经济场域谈起[J]. 社会杂志, 2021, 41(6): 166-202.
[6]	宋淑敏. 传统士人与现代艺术场域的相遇：黄宾虹的三次“被”发现[J]. 社会杂志, 2021, 41(3): 63-102.
[7]	陈涛. 法治国、警察国家与领袖民主制：西欧现代国家构建的三条线索[J]. 社会杂志, 2020, 40(6): 31-70.
[8]	李荣山. 权力与伦理:韦伯支配社会学中的国家理由问题[J]. 社会杂志, 2020, 40(3): 1-31.
[9]	刘建军, 马彦银. 从“官吏分途”到“群体三分”:中国地方治理的人事结构转换及其政治效应——对周雪光《从“官吏分途”到“层级分流”:帝国逻辑下的中国官僚人事制度》一文的一个补充[J]. 社会杂志, 2016, 36(1): 76-98.
[10]	邵颖萍. 全球化与场域精神：麦当劳在东亚城市的“文化定制”逻辑[J]. 社会杂志, 2013, 33(3): 184-203.
[11]	朱伟珏. 权力与时尚再生产——布迪厄文化消费理论再考察[J]. 社会杂志, 2012, 32(1): 88-103.
[12]	谢宇, 董慕达. 天地之间：东汉官员的双重责任[J]. 社会杂志, 2011, 31(4): 1-28.
[13]	欧阳静. “维控型”政权——多重结构中的乡镇政权特性[J]. 社会杂志, 2011, 31(3): 42-67.
[14]	何菊. 再造传统——以云南省镇沅县苦聪人为例[J]. 社会杂志, 2010, 30(4): 179-199.
[15]	王天夫;李博柏. 平等主义国家理想与区隔主义官僚体系：一个社会分层结构的新模型[J]. 社会杂志, 2008, 28(5): 58-73 .