英文摘要 |
China’ s grassroots election originated from the developments of Shanghai neighborhood committees and Fuxiang village committees, and therefore, the paper compares these two modes of electoral mobilization. In the study, it discovers that elections’ initiators in NCs are only the committees and activists and forms almost non-competitive or semi-competitive elections. On the other hand, besides the VCs and their activists, the VC candidates are one of initiators who also offer considerable incentives to launch mobilization. Meanwhile, villagers based upon self-interests would like to help pull votes. In this way, the VCs’ elections become semi-competitive or competitive. As a result, the NCs have difficulty activating elections due to the lack of participatory interests and most cities are so called stranger societies, so the NCs and activists can only mobilize residents by interpersonal affection and perceptual factors. Whereas there are many incentives in the VCs’ elections based upon the political and economic developments in China and villagers are mostly acquaintances, so candidates and villagers give much more input into the elections. Besides the mobilization by interpersonal affection, it appears “interest mobilization” which is born to win an election. Although the mobilization bases in the VCs and NCs are not quite the same, the VCs’ mobilization base makes competitive elections in democracy become possible, and the NCs’ base of interpersonal affection tests whether people’ s relationship under Keywords: China, Election, Mobilization, Neighborhood Committee (NC), Village Committee (VC) |