论文部分内容阅读
民主与宪政分别有着各自的内涵与特质,共时性地概念化、形而上地谈论民主与宪政的关系,可能会遮蔽和忽略掉一些历时性问题。文章以英美与法德之间的比较为线索,通过历时态地考察近现代英美法德四国的民主乃至整个政制绩效不同的深层原因,发现问题的关键可能不在于民主而在于是否有宪政:英美两国的民主是继承宪政基础上的宪政民主,法德两国的民主则是在建立全权制基础上的无宪政民主,宪政有无对英美法德四国民主乃至整个政制绩效的不同产生了根本性影响。纵览英美两国从宪政到宪政民主与法德两国由民主到宪政民主的政制形态发展历程,可得出基本认识:优良政制建设的关键是必要的宪政优位,民主只能对宪政给予补充而不能作为其替代,更不能作为其否定。
Democracy and constitutionalism have their own respective connotation and characteristics, conceptualize them in a synchronic way, and discuss the relationship between democracy and constitutional government metaphysically, which may mask and ignore some diachronic issues. By citing the comparison between Britain and the United States and France and Germany, through the diachronic investigation of the deep reasons for the different democratic and even political performance of Britain, the United States, Germany and Germany, the key to finding the problem may lie not in democracy but in constitutionalism: The democracy of both Britain and the United States is the constitutional democracy based on constitutionalism. The democracy of France and Germany is the constitutional democracy based on the establishment of the total power system. Does the constitutional government produce the difference of the democracy of the United Kingdom, the United States, France, Germany and the entire political system? The fundamental impact. An overview of the history of constitutional development in the United Kingdom and the United States from constitutional government to constitutional democracy and between France and Germany can be concluded as follows: It can not be used as a substitute for its supplement, not for its negation.