党的十一届三中全会以来,我们党多次提出惩治腐败、转变党风的任务,但迄今为止,腐败势头并没有得到根本遏制。究其原因,并不在于我们的目标过高,而是因为机制失灵。本文试图就不同治腐手段的机制及其必需的社会条件作些理论分析,在此基础上,根据我国的现实国情,提出治腐模式。一、两种治腐手段的不同机制及效应通观现代社会,有效的反腐败手昆总括起来不外乎两种:—是法治手段,它依靠正常的法律防范和制裁机制,将腐败规模控制在社会能够容许的范围。二是政治手段,它依靠上层领导的政治觉悟,通过广泛的社会动员,组织民众对腐败行为实施猛烈围攻。前一种手段是在 Since the Third Plenary Session of the 11th CPC Central Committee, our party has repeatedly put forward the task of punishing corruption and changing the party’s work style. However, so far, the momentum of corruption has not been fundamentally deterred. The reason is not that our goal is too high, but because of the failure of the mechanism. This article tries to make some theoretical analysis on the mechanism of different means of governance and the necessary social conditions. On this basis, according to the reality of our country, we put forward the mode of governance. I. The Different Mechanisms and Effects of the Two Kinds of Offending Measures Looking at the modern society, effective anti-corruption measures can sum up no more than two kinds: - the means of the rule of law, which relies on normal legal guard and sanctions mechanisms to control the scale of corruption at The range that society can tolerate. The second is political means. It relies on the political consciousness of the leaders at the top level and mobilizes the public to organize a violent siege of corrupt behavior through extensive social mobilization. The former method is in