论文部分内容阅读
Ⅰ.引言众所周知,“宪政民主”(constitutional democracy)一词包含着一种内在张力。民主(democracy)意味着自治(self-rule),而宪政主义(constitutionalism)则要求限制自治(self-governing)的人民所能作出的选择。~([1])如同弗兰克·米歇尔曼与尤尔根·哈贝马斯以不同的方式已论证的那样,宪政民主的问题在于,什么样的制度性安排对选择所施加的限制能够被适当地看作自治之人民自我施加的限制?~([2])候选方案可以归为两类:第一,可能存在一种根深蒂固的宪法文化,它使得对于全体都同意之限制的违背备受质疑。~([3])第二,可能存在一种机构,
I. Introduction It is a well-known fact that the term “constitutional democracy” embodies an inherent tension. Democracy means self-rule, whereas constitutionalism requires the option of limiting the self-governing people’s choices. As Frank Michelman and Jurgen Habermas have argued in different ways, the question of constitutional democracy lies in what kind of institutional arrangements limit the choice Properly regarded as self-imposed restrictions imposed by self-governing people? [(2)) Candidate programs fall into two categories: first, there may be an entrenched constitutional culture that allows for the unwillingness of all parties to agree Questioned. ~ ([3]) Second, there may be a mechanism,