论文部分内容阅读
从比较宪法学的角度看,美国宪法无论是在政治制度、政治过程还是在政治认同方面,与前现代国家的君主都具有很大的同构性与可比性。因而,美国宪法是“后君主制”背景的产物。20世纪初期出现的中国宪法虽然同样享有宪法之名,但是,中国宪法从诞生之时起,就承担了一个现实性、功利性的使命:救亡图存、实现富强。因而,中国宪法是作为实现国家富强的工具来期待的。中国宪法的这种角色,具有深厚的法家背景,是传统中国法家学说的产物,也是新战国时代的产物。从根本上说,法家学说就是对新战国格局的思想回应。将中美宪法的政治角色进行比较与对照,可以凸显中美宪法之间相异的逻辑、语境与背景。
From a comparative constitutional point of view, the United States constitution has a great degree of isomorphism and comparability with the monarchs of the pre-modern countries both in the political system and in the political process as well as in the political identity. Therefore, the U.S. constitution is the product of the background of “post-monarchy.” Although the Chinese constitution appearing in the early 20th century enjoyed the same title of the Constitution, the Chinese constitution has assumed a realistic and utilitarian mission from its birth: saving the nation and becoming prosperous. Therefore, the Chinese constitution is expected as a tool to realize the prosperity of the country. This role of the Chinese constitution has a profound legal background and is a product of the traditional Chinese legalism and a product of the new Warring States Period. Fundamentally speaking, the legalist theory is the ideological response to the pattern of the new warring states. Comparing and contrasting the political roles of the Chinese and American constitutions can highlight the different logic, context and background between the two constitutions.