壟斷性侍從主義：中國國家社科基金項目中的國家社會關係

Monopolistic Clientelism: The Distribution of National Social Science Fund Projects and''State-Society''Relations in China

國家與知識分子的互動向來是觀察威權國家中國家社會關係的重要視角，也一直都是經典的「中國研究」議題，然卻未有系統性的研究解釋國家如何「管理」知識分子。宣傳系統對中國共產黨而言，不僅在「包裝」方面發揮關鍵作用，也是黨國控制社會的重要工具，特別是在意識形態、媒體與思想工作上。而社會科學研究屬於意識形態的一環，自然必須受宣傳系統控制與引導，故在中宣部領導下的「全國哲學社會科學規劃辦公室」所主導的「國家社會科學基金」項目，向來受中國社會科學界所關注和重視。本文將以國家社科基金項目為例，經由大量的資料搜集與資料庫建構，時間從2008至2017年（包含胡錦濤第二任期與習近平第一任期），透過「文字探勘」以及田野訪談等，分析以下議題：（一）中國大陸國家社科基金項目的運作機制；（二）中共黨國體制如何控制或導引社會科學研究；（三）比較胡錦濤與習近平時期的異同。經由前述分析，本文提出「壟斷性侍從主義」以解釋當前中國國家與知識分子關係，及其對國家社會關係的意義。

In Authoritarian governments, dictators not only need to deal with pressure from the internal ruling elites in asking for the sharing of power, but they also face challenges from society, in particular, popular opposition from intellectuals that would topple their rule or trigger political crisis. To understand political change in contemporary China, it is crucial to understand the position of intellectuals in that society and their often troubled relation to the state. The extent of propaganda system's powers has played a pivotal role in repackaging of the CCP and Chinese government. It is also an important instrument in the Party-state's toolbox of thought control. In China, social science research is considered to be ''ideological work,'' which must be ''guided'' by propaganda authorities. These said propaganda authorities are in charge of planning and research direction. Furthermore, the Central Propaganda Department controls the national planning and funding system for social science research, especially the National Social Science Fund (NSSF). This paper will collate a large body of data (more than 40,000 cases from projects of NSSF covering 2008 to 2017) in order to clarify the precise characteristics of the distribution of academic resources. It will carry out both quantitative analysis (text mining) and qualitative research (field studies) to identify the relationship between the state and intellectuals, of which we call ''monopolistic clientelism,'' and the employment of the state capacity for thought work. We are particularly interested in the differences between the Hu Jintao and Xi Jinping era in coping with social control. Our findings suggest that the propaganda and thought management has become one of the key means for guaranteeing the CCP's ongoing legitimacy and hold on power. This type of propaganda epitomizes the broader processes of adaptation and resilience that characterize the CCP's rule today.