Critics And Rebuilding To The State Autonomy Theories

In the late 1970s, there was a "new tide" in the Western academics. An unprecedented number of scholars in different fields bent their eyes on the State and its important role, in social transformation, economic development and political change. Since then, various ideas and continuously interwoven, collision had led to the formation of a new academic school in the 1980s, which was named as the School of Returning to the State. The main representatives of the school are Theda Skocpol, Stephen Krasner, and Peter Evans etc. Though the scholars did not reach a final agreement in some specific cognitive problems, their views had one thing in common, that is, they all saw the state as an independent actor and emphasized state ownership and state capacity. The theories of state autonomy discussed in this paper are mainly based on relevant discussion of the School of Returning to the State.The rise of the theories of state autonomy was due to the worse response to social difficulties of the social center theory. In the 1950s and 1960s, the Western mainstream academic theory of factions was the pluralism and structural functionalism. The former regarded the state as an arena where various interest groups competed for self-interest. The latter saw the political system (state) as a "black box", which accepted input from the environment, such as demands, support etc, as well as released output to the environment. Given to different views, they were common in one point that was the society and its interests rather than national was seen as the center of research. After World Warâ…¡, with the economic and social changes and the Modern State Development, the "visible hand" in the Western developed countries were being frequently used, coupled with the oil crisis in 1970s, the social center theory was facing the interpretation difficulty. Subsequently, in order to correct the shortcomings of the social center theory, Ralph Miliband and Nicos Poulantzas, the representative scholars of the neo-Marxist issued the concept of "state relative autonomy", but they also did not shake off the constraints of the social center theory. Based on the criticism to the social center theory and neo-Marxist theory, the School of Returning to the State re-interpreted and developed the "state relative autonomy" theory. According to this theory, state autonomy meant that, as a specific territory and population control of the mandatory implementation of organization, the state could pursue its aims which were not merely the reflection to the interest of some strong interest groups.The theories of state autonomy once again raised attentions to the state as an institutions form, and the "East Asian model" just provided the evidence for this theory. In 1980s, the economic liberalism was still popular, so in this context to emphasize national ownership was also a theory of courage. At the same time, we note that state autonomy theory gave indeed different views in the concept of state autonomy, state autonomy and morphological generation, national independence and national capacity, state autonomy and other issues with the modern state However, the theory has its quite obvious flaws. Though they repeatedly stressed neither they simply denied the social center of the view nor return to complete the "state-centrism", from the theoretical explanation and logic interpretation we can see obviously there is strong "state-centrism" color in it. Theory of state autonomy was hesitated between value rationality and instrumental rationality, which lead to some problems in the concept definition and theoretical deductions. In addition, the unity of research methods made the theoretical explanation be not thorough enough. With the outbreak of the Asian financial crisis, the economic development in East Asian countries was impeded, which made the state autonomy theory being questioned.In the 1990s many scholars in China began to follow up study on the theories of state autonomy, which was undoubtedly commendable. However, many studies were still remaining on the surface. Even worse, some of them were too mechanical to regard our conditions, which have had a negative impact on the theory and practice. This paper argues that, on one hand the theories of state autonomy had its applicability in China. On the other hand, it also had limits in the application. The limit of application was mainly due to the different environment, which including incomplete bureaucracy, the over-expansion of the despotic power and the weakness of state capacities. The public policy cases in local government of China shows that, the conflicts between public interest and personal interest is becoming a difficult problem for state autonomy to response, and the complex interactions of multiple subjects in public administration are having important impact on the formation of state autonomy. An indisputable fact is that, the situation of over-expansion of the despotic power combining with the weakness of state capacities has given China's political development and nation-building much negative impact.Considering the reality, we have to revisit state autonomy theory. This paper argues that, the State should abandon the one-way thinking which was either state-centrism or society-centrism, mode the introduction of the theories of inter-subjectivity. Under the context of inter-subjectivity, state autonomy shows its fundamental nature in two sides, which are the limit of despotic power and the effectiveness of infrastructural power.In order to make state autonomy theories apply to Chinese reality much better, it necessary to expand its structure under the framework of modern state theory. The theoretical development of the point is the institutionalization of state autonomy, which including two levels, the limit of despotic power and the effectiveness of infrastructural power. The former aims can be gained through the constitutional system, public finance and accountability system of ethics designed and the latter through state capacity building, active citizens shaping and civil society building.