Re-understand the U.S. Constitution
Keywords: Ackermann / Revolution / Constitution, political / sovereignty of the people
Abstract: Schools in the U.S. Constitution, Ackerman In "" We Have the people> "series made in democratic theory can be said of binary" Over the past half-century thought the United States Constitution is one of the most important contribution. "Ackerman this article constitutional theory and back to the U.S. Constitution in its context, in this based on the interpretation of the Revolution and the Constitution, constitutional politics and conventional politics, and the expression of popular sovereignty, the laws of democratic theory and practice, the elements of binary . and return to the Chinese context, the paper argues that Ackerman's constitutional theory is our window to a new understanding of the U.S. Constitution, not interpret the Constitution of the tool, not only because Ackerman positioning himself for his theory, comparative constitutional law is Study the logic of its own requirements.
In 1980, Yale Law School Professor Bruce Ackerman published <"Free country's social justice>>. [1] In this text, which amounts to 378 on the works of justice, free dialogue, Ackermann ( liberal dialogue based on the concept of building his political theories. After a decade in power after the completion of the book, Ackerman immediately made a decision: he should not be like his teacher, as John Rawls, A Theory of Justice building system, and then spent a lifetime repair, defend and perfect the system. Since the early eighties of last century, Professor Ackerman began his constitutional theory and practice of the United States of academic exploration. by the Yale Law School in 1983 Stowers talks in the <"Discovering the constitution>>, [2] published in 1984 <<Harvard Law Review>> of the classic paper" "Beyond Carolyn products case">, [3] and then published in 1990 Year <"We Have the people>" series of the first volume <<theory>>, [4] the second volume published in 1998 <<transition>>, [5] was invited to Harvard Law School in 2006 Holmes published Lecture "The Living Constitution" [6] and the History of the Constitution, published the same year <<founding father of the failure: Jefferson, Marshall and the rise of presidential democracy>>, [7], of course, plans to publish in the next few years, the < "We Have the people>" series of III, IV ... ... Thirty years later, Professor Ackerman of the United States Constitution can not be said to establish a bypass of the academic tradition, an insurmountable set of academic monument. This A judge applies not only to the Constitution of the United States scholars, also applies to those who want to understand Chinese scholars United States Constitution.
Chinese scholars have never ignored the Constitution and constitutional theory, Professor Ackerman. For example, Ackerman had visited Beijing in autumn 2005, and at Peking University and Tsinghua University Law School academic lectures were delivered, and <"We Have the people>" series has been have long been published in two volumes translated into Chinese publication. [8] However, we Ackerman theory on Translation and they did not review the theory into the context of the United States Constitution and the theory of Ackerman's own context. Ackerman the theory of constitutional scholars in the country seems lively, but the crisis has always been difficult is that we touch one of the doorways. a simple example, Ackerman In "" We Have the people of>> the first chapter of Volume I of several put forward the concept of - - dualism (dualism, constitutional moment (constitutional moment, and advanced legislation (higher lawmaking and ordinary legislation (normal lawmaking - almost as we understand the whole constitutional theory Ackerman, in many cases even become a universal concept , review to be applied without the Chinese context. Professor Sunstein will <"We Have the people>> of the first volume called" Over the past half-century thought the United States Constitution is one of the most important contributions. "But here, this one "most important contribution" has become a concept of several groups can be "In a word" thing. Ackerman Theory in Chinese language only reflects the situation of the territory of our understanding of when the U.S. Constitution has infantilism, but also from its own constitutional theory some of the attributes, even in the Chinese translation of the reasons for the accident. [9] can be said that Ackermann constitutional misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the theory not only explained that we misunderstood its history the United States Constitution, but also because the concept of tyranny that blind us misunderstood the operation of the Chinese Constitution.
In view of this, the paper will try to restore the original appearance Ackerman constitutional theory: This includes both language in the United States to seize the territory of the dual constitution of Ackerman, will also be necessary to review our office to understand how to apply this theory our own academic and constitutional cause. Therefore, this article of the work done is not complicated, the method is also little tip: the system begins to read the article, Professor Ackerman listed on the main Constitution, then back Rereading <"We Have the people of>> the first volume - especially really constitute the basic sections of the volume, the new understanding of that which we normally talk about it to write the Constitution in the text concept. In this paper, the structure is divided into three parts. The first part of Ackerman's constitutional theory will bring back the original of this academic journey. serious theoretical exploration is not a fall from the sky of the divine book, nor is it imagined drawn fierce racking our brains. as a foreign reader, to truly grasp the Ackerman's constitutional theory, the first thing to do, of course, return to the context of the theory. The second part constitutes the main body of this article, it starts with a point: that Ackermann exactly how to read written by the <"We Have the people>> I, then the specific theories presented in Ackerman three core concepts: Revolution and the Constitution, constitutional politics and normal politics, organized by the Federal Constitution, Article V of the Constitution and the separation of powers and political constitutional model of political organization. in the content, "" We Have the people>> Volume will constitute the main body of this discussion, of course, this will also be necessary to introduce Professor Ackerman of the contents of the other. The third part will examine Ackerman constitutional theory and our relationship, specifically, the dual Ackermann neither universal democratic constitution of principle, is not entirely limited to the U.S. experience in theory construction, therefore, to read the Constitution Ackerman theory can not avoid the question: What use of this theory for us, and how to avoid possible misuse.
First, the regression context
For purposes of constitutional scholars in China, in the understanding and interpretation of the U.S. Constitution when the theory is how to face a challenge into the context of its practice and theory, otherwise it will fall into a non-contextual difficulties. Since 2001, ling After the case, the academic research on the Constitution, "Constitutional Jurisdiction," the great debate, we can often see the United States Constitution and its theoretical scientists figure. However, the U.S. introduction of constitutional theory in China, often not to make us better to understand American constitutional government, often to the use of these imported theories serve the purpose of its own theory. In the past decade, various factions in the United States Constitution theory can be said, "You Changba me play," confusing. but the lack of Fan Si academic introduction allows us to Jingchang can not determine the good and bad theory, and sometimes there is no discerning "picked up Wanli is the food." Lun Wennei Chinese Constitution of the United States Tongpian is what constitutional scholars say, but fundamentally failed to understand whether these scholars say, why say so and say so in what context. Therefore, we should reflect on this "for our own use" attitude.
Even if we hold a purely objective understanding of American constitutional government, we understand most are the lack of a sense of history and a sense of context. Maybe the lack of a sense of context is a cross-cultural communication, understanding of the difficulties can not be avoided, but the problem is that we must consciously aware of the absence of a sense of context, and not fall into a collective unconscious. What a sense of historical context? give a simple example, the Constitution of the United States scholars, they know that graduates published in 1962, Professor Kerr a <<the least dangerous branch>>, [10] 18 years later, the Queen was published in 1980, Professor <"Democracy and do not trust>>, [11] and then after 11 years, Professor Ackerman published << We the people of>> the first volume. in the United States within the Constitution, this Constitution in time and space within the transmission is basically an experience of, without much to say. But constitutional scholars in China, which spans generations of constitutional theory it appears in a compressed history of time and space, and often there will be distortions in time. For example, the Queen is the Chinese translation of works published in 2003, and completed the work will have to wait until Kerr after 4 years there in the translation. What is more, "" We Have the people> "series of the first two volumes of the publication in the Chinese world order is reversed, first published in 2003, the second volume, was published in 2004, vol. This flat knowledge of the compression, if not conscious reflection and review, and ultimately it can only be "know, not the why." In theory and practice of interlocking areas of the United States Constitution, "not the why "often will not really" know. "Of course, this is not to review the domestic constitutional scholars specialized in the study of many symptoms of the U.S. constitution, therefore, specific to this paper, our problem is how to Ackerman In" < We the People>> Volume theoretical exploration within the context of return to the original.
Let Bi from Yale Law School Professor Kerr started. Bi Ackerman Kerr is studying in the sixties at the time of the Yale Law School Tuition teacher. [12] studied under relationship, published in 1962 completed the Kerr year <<the least dangerous branch of>> today is recognized as the origin of contemporary American constitutional theory. but to understand the complete works of Kerr, we will be back to the last century, fifty, sixty years by the turn of Kosovo London Court's Brown v. [13] triggered by a decision on judicial review of the classic dialogue. this big discussion of academic ����º��� judge by the Harvard Law School, 1958 Holmes lecture began, [14] After the middle of the year there (1959, Professor Weikesile famous speech on the same platform, [15] Yale Law School Professor Charles Black, published in 1960 <<People and the Court>>, [16] and then to 1962 completion of work by Kerr to the end of the debate. Half a century later, the debate in the first three non-professionals interested in have few people, but <<the least dangerous branch>> or research has been United States Constitution can not be avoided landmark. This is the completion of one of the many reasons put forward by anti-Kerr most difficult (counter-majoritarian difficulty setting for future generations to learn the U.S. Constitution and the agenda of the domain. [17]
The difficulty lies in our system of judicial review is within the power of an anti-majority. To avoid the unavoidable reality that there are ways. Marshall's approach is his claim to represent "the people" to run their own limited government restrictions created by the system ... ... I will chase Marshall Hamilton, who in the "<The Federalist Papers>> No. 78 refused to believe that judicial review means that the judicial power above legislative power ... ..." it is only set higher than both the power of the people at the same time, if the legislation announced in the legislature will not meet as announced in the Constitution will of the people, the judge should take orders from the latter but not the former. "However, such use of the" people " There is an abstract term. It is not necessarily meaningless or destructive, but often filled with emotion at the same time there is no entity - the abstract concepts obscure the reality that when the Supreme Court declared the legislation Act or the behavior of elected law enforcement officers violate the Constitution, it was opposed to the here and now represent the true will of the people ... ... [18]
The passage can be said against the majority of problems within the U.S. premiere of constitutional theory, it can be described as monumental works of the immortal chapter. Impact As a result, it should be the most important works of the United States Constitution, a passage (note There is no "one." However, as "Over the past two decades the most creative constitutional theorist," [19] Kerr just completed the most difficult to create an anti-concept, and can not be said to be single-handedly created a whole The new Constitutional tradition. Bi Kerr embedded in the Thayer Theory of fact, Holmes to Frankfurter, a great academic tradition of the Constitution. It is a theory we understand the U.S. Constitution, one must be consciously aware of academic context, not only because this line series from the Holmes, Frankfurter, Kerr completed within the halls of American law class people, but also because they represent the academic tradition in fact constitutes a theory of the twentieth century the United States Constitution the main line. this axis in order to complete the main line of Kerr for the academic definition of the U.S. Constitution can be said that theory in the twentieth century, the coordinate system can be determined only in the coordinate system, we can understand, including Ackerman, including Later the relative position of constitutional scholars, and only then can we truly understand the theory that the United States Constitution and Imports, as its object of study of American constitutional practice.
Let's move back from the completion of Kerr. Completed in 1952, Kerr has served as an assistant judge in Frankfurt large. And Frankfurter in office before the Supreme Court is a professor at Harvard Law School, he is the idol of youth who often express their objections in the Supreme Court Justice Holmes, then forward, Thayer is a professor at Harvard Holmes during a brief teaching colleagues. We know that Professor Thayer 1893 <"U.S. constitutional doctrine of the origin and scope of the>> recognized as the opening of the United States for constitutional theory. Thayer presented in this article far-reaching "obvious error" standard: In short, the unconstitutionality of the legislation only "certainty" of the court it shall declare the law unconstitutional, [20] and Holmes Laski in a letter he wrote to the judge so positioning the role in a democratic society, "If my fellow citizens to go to hell, and I will help them . because this is my job, "[21] Frankfurt is more serious because the judges do not agree with Warren Court's constitutional decisions and suffered a stroke. Therefore, Needless to say, this followed by the Thayer to the academic tradition but Sunstein throughout the twentieth century American constitutional theory of judicial restraint doctrine. The completion of Kerr due to his "anti-majority problem" as the spokesperson for the traditional sector in the theory. is generally believed that the cross-examination against the majority of problems point to the Judicial Review and Democracy the tension between. In other words, why no non-elected and therefore accountable to the voters the right to review the judge elected representative branch of the political decision-making?! Kerr made since the completion of this problem, the most difficult problem to solve as the anti-plague generations of scholars, the central task of the United States Constitution. [22] But here, against the majority of problems we may return to the original source of this theoretical paradigm, from against the proposal to review the most difficult century American constitutional theory in the absence of a fundamental.
Back to the cited above, have completed the majority of Kerr anti-problem in the proposed text when. Careful read of this passage is not difficult to see that the majority of problems of anti-establishment requires a basic premise: dispelling the people! More precisely, in the completion of the theoretical system of constitutional Kerr did not should not have "people" concept. Why is he may make a counter Kerr completed the majority of the problem? The reason is that completion of Kerr opened a "people" veil. with the completion of the original Kerr own words, "the abstract idea of a reality obscures." within the language, these words can fill the whole as "an abstract idea is the people covered the challenges of the system against the majority of reality. "As a result, more than 300 words in this discussion, the completion of Kerr repeatedly stressed that the people are kind of" abstract "," No entity "exists. Therefore, he highlighted but" the real here and now representative of the people "rather than those who" often filled with emotion, "and often" meaningless or destructive "of the" people themselves. "Therefore, completion of Kerr's" people "only to add quotation marks to indicate that empty of people. [23] If the most difficult to be against the expression of judicial review with democracy but the tension, then the completion of the democratic tradition Kerr concern but "here and now" and "real people" of the "representative" - the Congress and elected representatives of the political decision-making. from the constitutional design, the Senate is six years was the formation of a democratic election, the House of Representatives is organized by the biennial elections, therefore, they represent "the people" , and the court (or at least be discussed Kerr completed the Federal Supreme Court judges are not elected, so they can not represent "the people", against the majority of the resulting problems.
As an American constitutional scholars (and students as a completion of Kerr, Ackerman's constitutional theory in their own natural anti-most difficult problems can not be avoided, but even with Ackerman's own words, he has done is digestion (dissolve the not a solution to (solve the anti-majority problem. [24] What is digestion, but also what is meant to solve, where the subtle change of one word in fact we mapped out the key difference between theory construction. Queen (Professor Kerr also teaches at Yale law school graduates students in the "" Democracy and do not trust>> is in the "address" anti-majority problem. Now that you have completed anti-Kerr said the majority of judicial review, undemocratic, then I will have to prove that the Queen, judicial review - at least Warren Court's constitutional rulings - is precisely to do to clear the channels of democratic change of political bias discrimination and protection of minorities. Therefore, the Queen and the completion of Kerr in fact constitute a neat precise questions and answers. Queen to do The most difficult problem is to provide another kind of anti-answers, from beginning to end, the Queen has never been denied by definition complete Kerr most difficult problems against a fundamental premise: the U.S. Constitution, there is no "people." [25]
Ackerman, of course, give their own answers to problems of anti-majority, but Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> in the complete collapse of the core project is the foundation of Kerr proposition: putting people back to the academic discussion of the U.S. Constitution . Ackerman, "we the people" for its multi-volume history of American constitutionalism has been explaining the number of the named key. "peoples" in Ackermann there is no longer a "meaningless" abstraction exist, is an organization with legal personality and constitution of actors, is no longer a "destructive" rabble, but by the U.S. Constitution set the start time of crisis or critical political and legal organization of political constitution. In Bi Kerr There, even the Founders Outline the founding of Hamilton <<The Federalist Papers>> within the "people" are a blur of rhetoric, and Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> Volume in have to do is from the "distant past" (especially "Publius," where to find "people" in institutional mechanisms in the United States Constitution. When people are no longer equivalent to the "here and now the true representatives of the people" , Congress and the courts in a democratic pyramid in the same order (or the political elites in Congress and the courts of justice in the elite is in a different way "representative" of our people, the most difficult to become a forest without trees, Bi Kerr also lost the original cross-examination of mass destruction. Thus, at least in the United States Constitution, it is the Ackerman and his <"We Have the people>> will be" the people "is the concept of exile has been a long time to re-zone Back to the discussion of constitutional law. On this, the U.S. founding historian Edmund Morgan has been accurate in one sentence: "It gives the intangible (elusive, invisible (invisible, not heard (inaudible sovereignty of the people owned by the government to governance and effectiveness have meaning (pragmatic meaning. "[26]
Second, the sovereignty of the people in the United States Constitution: Ackerman proposition
Ackerman In "" We Have the people> "series conducted in the reconstruction of the history and theory can be said to reproduce the U.S. Constitution in one of a handful of grand theories. And also no stranger to domestic constitutional scholars Ackerman's constitutional theory . constitutional politics, constitutional moment, binary concept of democracy is considered outside of these advanced theories of the Constitution in our own discourse everywhere. but the surface is often obscure a fundamental familiarity with the unfamiliar: the text does not read Ackerman difficult (if you want to read it, but it really does not grasp the simple theory of Ackermann (if you really want to grasp the words. In fact, I would point out that below a "procedural" issues, it is very extent when exposed us to understand the problems Ackerman.
(A procedural question: how to read Ackerman?
Open <"We Have the people of>> the first volume, this 322-page text book is not complicated in structure. Office from the directory can be seen in a brief" thanks ", the book is basically divided into two : The first part is from the first 1-162 of the "discovery Constitution" (Discovering the Constitution is the second part of section 163-322 of the "New Federalist doctrine" (Neo-Federalism. If you are familiar with American academic treatise stereotyped format, readers should have a serious question: Why did not the book "Introduction"?! Although not everyone have the English academic work by the "Introduction" to start, although the true master of the right, without the shackles of rigid norms (if he wishes, but the "Introduction" is not missing here is invented a problem. As shown below, if you do not understand this, then read <"We Have the people>> Volume is prone to bias when "misguided."
Ackerman did not directly in the book does not explain why the book "Introduction." However, if the <"We Have the people>> Volume on the Ackerman to understand the context of the theory, then this problem is not difficult to answer. <"We Have the People: Principles>> is not a stand-alone book, but a three-volume multi-volume or even the opening of the writing program. Therefore, the first part of the book" that the Constitution "the fact is the Ackerman Design "Introduction." This accounts for only half the length of the first volume of the "Introduction" is not the first volume of the preamble, but the entire three volumes of the preamble of the writing program. Recognizing this, we have easily This consists of six chapters will be a big break off the introduction, each of the condemnation. Chapter "dual democratic" (Dualist Democracy but the second part of Volume I, "New Federalist doctrine" of the "Introduction", after the first Chapter II, "two centuries of myth" (The Bicentennial Myth, Chapter III, "a constitution, three regimes" (One Constitution, Three Regimes, Chapter IV, "interim of the Republic" (The Middle Republic, the fifth chapter of "Modern Republic "(The Modern Republic roughly four chapters constitute the second volume <" We Have the People: transition>> "Introduction" and Chapter VI of the final "the possibility of interpretation" (The Possibility of Interpretation of course, is still far Writing in the third volume <"We Have the people: to explain>> the" Introduction. "
From this, "that the Constitution" in Volume I or even the status of all three volumes actually quite special. By the second chapter, "two centuries of myth" began, Ackerman has been in advance of the second or even third volume contents of the volume. of course, to do so has his own reasons. stereotyped format of academic works in fact asked Ackerman explained in the beginning of this multi-volume program for the writing program. But the problem is the "big Introduction" the language of the structure will be pre-diluted in large part on the first volume of our own understanding. from the second chapter, Ackerman has been in the use of his dual democracy throws one after another shocking proposition , such as the 1787 Constitution itself is not legitimate, both beyond the representatives of the Philadelphia Convention to have the power, also broke the constitution of the original provisions of the Articles of Confederation, the legitimacy of the Fourteenth Amendment from the Federal Constitution is neither Five constitutional amendments under the program, nor is blood and fire, the American Civil War, but rather by the Republican Party created by the reconstruction of a new constitutional politics, Roosevelt's New Deal in the 1930s did not see the realization of a constitutional transformation of the text, Therefore, the case of Lochner decision in 1905 is correct, but only three years after the New Deal "constitutional" by the veto. Readers will often time and energy to the absorption and digestion in the first volume within these Ackerman But in the second volume, the third volume dealt with the proposition, therefore, the "big Introduction" front has a distracting negative effect, resulting, the reader in the first chapter of Volume I of the first part of the "dual democracy "kick the tires, you drown one by one in the strong impact of the reconstruction of the history of the U.S. constitutional proposition. But if vol <<theory>> of the real essence of where it is located in the second part of the "new federal party doctrine". "dual democratic" theory is not the conclusion Ackerman racking our brains, but in-depth history of the republic and the Constitution after the refined theory. It is in this second part of the Ackerman will explain binary democracy is coming from, what is what.
Therefore, if you want to really understand <"We Have the people>> I, we need (or at least read the book twice, and two different readings. The first pass is from start to finish in the order of reading, the second time will have to read the first chapter in the "dual democracy" after the jump to the second part, in accordance with the order re-read the second part of the five chapters, namely Chapter VII, "Publius" (Publius, Chapter VIII " The Forgotten Revolution "(The Lost Revolution, Chapter IX," General Politics "(Normal Politics, Chapter X," Senior Legislative "(Higher Lawmaking, Chapter XI," Why is dualism? "(Why Dualism?. Only The first chapter of the book and the second part of the collusion between them, before they can grasp in the end ����Щʲô Ackerman within the first volume, rather than parrot to repeat some of the theory fur Ackerman ..
Related to this is the first volume is subtitled Foundations should be how to translate? Foundations here translated as "the foundation of the Constitution" or "foundation" is not accurate, translated as "nation-building" is confusing two different foundation and the founding of the English words, accurate translation should be <"We Have the People: Principles>>.
(B substantive issues: understanding binary democracy
Ackerman, a constitutional theory on the basic understanding of: Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> within his first volume of the dual democratic theory, that the dualistic theory of democracy (as distinct from a dollar democracy and the rights of selfishness but the key to understanding the history of the United States Constitution. dualistic theory of democracy advocates, "the constitutional dualism in the democratic system to seek distinction may be made within the two different decision-making. The first is the decision made by the American people, followed by their decisions made by the Government. "[27] people in decision-making is the so-called" advanced legislation ", and its dual are given within the framework of democracy and the democratic legitimacy of the High, as opposed to representative government is in the conventional political daily decisions made within, that is, Ackerman called "ordinary legislation." within a democratic framework in binary, "general legislation" has no right to challenge or alter the "Advanced Legislative" and therefore, the High Court as the guardian of law who, after the exit to prevent the people of the name of the people of the political elite to achieve the pretext of self-serving political change.
In many cases, Ackerman In "" We Have the People: Principles>> referred to the first ten pages of their theory of what constitutes our basic knowledge. But as Ackerman says, "such a simple statement of the proposed questions to answer far more than it. "[28] Indeed, what come from binary democracy, its system of organization are, and what the U.S. Constitution reflects the history, to answer these questions, We can only read on.
1. Revolution and Constitution
Discussion of the American Revolution and the constitutional relationship between the work can not bypass one of Beard, published in 1913, <"American Economic Interpretation of the Constitution>>. [29] Of course, both in today's American law schools, or China Law School, Beard's original books have been very few people read. But, as the Lochner become plagued the United States Constitution, judicial review and interpretation of a ghost, Beard proposition in the book became entangled century American constitutional theory a curse. any work has its historical background: after the end of the century if the era of the United States Constitution fundamentalist theory of ancestor worship is full of blind argument, then the progress of the century era political and legal theory is keen on founding Fathers "lifting the black," "broke" and "rake manure." Beard said proposition is very simple: in 1787 the economic elite Constitutional Independence Hall in Philadelphia, a counter-revolutionary secret room instigated a "coup", is of the 1776 revolution, abandoned and rejected.
Do not forget, it was Beard, and papers from the pile of "re-discovery" of the nineteenth century, no one is interested in <<The Federalist Papers>> No. 10, making it in the twentieth century classic chapter in American political theory. [30 ] In support of his proposition, Beard was quoted at 10 Madison at the end of words: "bank notes, debt cancellation, the equitable distribution of property, or any other improper or wicked plan may be one of the federal the spread of certain members of the house, but it is difficult to spread to the entire federation. "[31] Beard opinion, this sentence can be described as a mountain of irrefutable evidence:" Father of the Constitution, "Madison, the" notes "," debt cancellation " "The average distribution of property" as "evil plans" and constitution, the aim is to be besieged these "evil plans." counter-revolutionary Philadelphia constitution can be said is all too clear motive, leap off the paper! Although by today's standards of social science research, Beard did not make "bold assumptions, carefully verify", later scholars had in fact listed by the book and more evidence to refute the proposition Beard. [ 32] But the Beard thesis of the United States Constitution and the Revolution made the relationship did not disappear, and this fact constitutes a binary Ackerman history and theory of democracy as a starting point.
From the seventh chapter, "Publius" in the beginning, Ackerman to put forward its own anti-Beard proposition: "This part of the dualism of the United States dates back to the founding of historical roots. To find the dualism roots, we must learn to stand on the position of the founders of grasping the founders: the success of the revolutionaries as they once again lead their fellow citizens to join in the public's collective action, even so at great personal cost. "[ 33] Therefore, the founding of the United States who are "time and time again," the "successful revolutionaries." Here, if the proposition is split Beard 1776 and 1787, but to do so Ackerman in 1776 to communicate and 1787: 1787 is not 1776, not only the anti-proposition, and the completion of the "Constitution of the American Revolution". "Revolution of the impulse does not destroy the constitutional order of construction: the Constitution, but the natural climax of a successful revolution." [ 34] Therefore, the success of the revolutionaries should neither fantasy so-called "continuous revolution" should not be suffering from "amnesia revolution", the success of the revolution is the revolution in the Constitution. [35] As shown below, "the Constitution "of the Constitution can not be interpreted as the end of the revolution, the revolution should be understood as blending in the constitution. apply a usage in English, it can be said that" revolution is dead, but Long live the revolution "(The Revolution is Dead, Long Live the Revolution!
Ackerman and the consensus is that Beard's interpretation of a limited 1776. Beginning in 1776, the American War of Independence by the thirteen states is a patchwork coalition of "out of" their political parent - the British Empire. To join the a victory "near miracle" to the war, generals and soldiers must have "shed blood" courage and passion. [36] In "" Free the revolution's future>> book, Ackerman to has pointed out: the war can be described as independent of Washington in modern history of the first successful guerrilla wars. [37] but the key question is why the understanding of 1787 will be divided. "We must go beyond our own, sitting in the Founders The position - the modern world the glory of the first winner of the War of Independence - Understanding the Founders. George Washington, but as the leader of a rebel victory in Philadelphia ... ... they come another revolutionary - living in the French Revolution before the last group of revolutionaries. "[38] This does not come from the <" We Have the people> "series, then once again stressed to put yourself in the modern experience of the founders. In other words, it seems, at least in Ackerman, Beard is wrong with being in his Origin of the French Revolution a "revolutionary" concept to determine the United States Constitution.
"They are another revolutionary." So who is the first revolutionaries, the sense of the French Revolution, the revolutionaries, the revolutionaries understood Beard? So here there are two concepts of revolution, which is Ackerman in the eighth chapter, "The Forgotten Revolution" discussion. Beard revolution is a social revolution: the revolution that success lies in whether the class structure of society changes, controls the means of production shifted. Since < "The Independents declaration>> is one of the drafters of Jefferson slave owners, the hypocrisy of the American Revolution can be said to be self-evident. However, Ackerman used but" political revolution "concept." The real revolution Spirit has nothing to do with the social consequences, but rather to rediscover the value of civic capacity. "[39] United States Constitution is the political community to achieve the re-definition of the Constitution of 1787 as the zero point on the coordinate system, marking the constitution after constitution before political significance. In Beard opinion, the secret of Philadelphia to discuss constitutional and illegal procedures are clear evidence of counter-revolutionary constitution, but in Ackerman, where the process of both the United States Constitution as an independent cause of those who willingly gave their lives Continental politicians (rather than state politics after independence ambitions of politicians raged, also has a basis in the deliberative citizen of the Republic to make rational judgments (rather than "the streets of Paris mob eager to bread." Therefore, "he (referring to Pub Cornelius was a successful revolutionary, but he is a kind of eighteenth century all (rather than the agenda of the twentieth century. "[40]
2. Constitutional politics (and the general political
<<The Federalist Papers>> The opening is asked: "The world really have the ability to choose to build under the deliberative and good government, or destined never to rely on chance and strength to determine their political constitutional ... ... "This is a revolutionary success is possible only questions. Ackerman himself has asked:" How to Save the principles of the American Revolution? This is the constitutional design of the main issues. "[41] It is through the" Constitution of Binary "Federalists based on" deliberative and select "complete revolution in the Constitution. Therefore, the" dual constitution "is not a good system of government Ackerman a theory about the concept, but designed by the founding Federalists and followed later by a reality and the transformation of constitutional design.
Let us start from a constitutional and political [42]: "Since the founding of the beginning, again and again called for political movements to join their fellow Americans, the actions of citizens, and when successful, the final form to the establishment of our people in the name of the senior law development. "[43] Ackermann definition given in somewhat abstract. Federalists in the constitutional interpretation of behavior, Ackerman was the Constitution of binary democratic political setting within the four dimensions : form of illegal (formal illegality, the masses of energy (mass energy, public spirit of the (public-spiritedness, and the extraordinary reason (extraordinary rationality. [44] Therefore, the behavior of the Federalists to their own constitutional reform for the future generations who set a precedent, which is a civil war with the New Deal constitutional amendment will be followed in transition have also been modified, senior legislative channels. but never expect Constitution Publius can produce a steady stream of citizens of Germany sex (which is the classical theory of the CPC and the political foundation of the continuity of government and thus beyond the Republican political ills - partisan / factional (faction. appears in Ackerman, the Constitution Federalist science but a "virtue����ѧ":���ǿ�Դ,���ǽ���.���,��Ȼ�ɹ����ܷ����ν�����"Ⱥ�ڵ�����"��"�����ľ���",���ܷ�����(�����ڳ�����������һ�ַdz��������.�ղ�����˹��Ԥ�ԡ����������ܷ�����ʷҲ�Ѿ�֤������ֻ����"�����ڼ��鱻ѹ�Ƶ�Σ��֮��",[45]�����˲ſ��ܰ�����ϵ���εij���,������ܷ��ĸ�Ĺ�������.
������Ѿ���1787���ܷ���Ԥ����"�ܷ�����"�ij��ij���:����������ܷ��ĵ�����.��һ�ɽ�������Ƶ����ܳ�������"������"Ϊ��Ԫ�ĸ�����ͨ��:���ɹ�����Ժ֮����֮����������ܷ�������(��ȻҲ����������֮�����������ٿ��ܷ�����,�����ķ�֮�����ݵ��������ܷ����������.����������Ϊ��λ�����ܳ���ȴʹ�ø�����ͨ����ת��������.����,������ķ�֮һ��С���ڵ��������ķ��,һ���ܷ������������鼴̥������.��˹������������"¯��̸��"�о���ָ����һ��:"����35�����ڵ�ȫ��95%���˿ڶ�֧������,��13�����ڵ�5%��ѡ������ֹ����������."[46]Ҳ���Ǵ���˹��������,�����ܷ����������ܷ���Ǩ�����ϻ�������Ϊһ��"ʳ֮��ζ����֮��ϧ"�İ���.���仰˵,����˹��������ĸ������Ѿ������ϲ��������������ܷ��ij��ķ���֮��.[47]
�ܷ���������ʽ�ںܴ�̶�������Ϊ�����ܷ����趨�������屾��ı仯.�����ܷ����ı���ʼ��"��������",���������������"������˭?"[48]��ͳ������Ϊ,����������һ�ξ�������ѱ�,��ζ��һ���µ����ι�ͬ���빫��������ݵ��γ�(����Ϊʲô��������֮Ϊfounding��?���ɽ�����һ�̿�ʼ,����֮������Ҫ��Ϯ�Ž����ܷ�ҵ��ȷ���Ĺ���,��������ҲҪ���������ܷ��й涨���ܷ���֮����.���,��������ֻҪ����ѡ�����μ�"�����ι�".���������������������������Ҫ���ı�������������ԶΪ����.�����йؼ���һ�����ڼ�����������ս����������(�����ǵ�ʮ��������.��ʮ����������ƪ���涨һ���������Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,Ȼ�������/������ס���ݵĹ���.�����ʮ�����������о��߰Ѵ־������������������ƽ�ȱ���������,��ȴ�����˰��ڵ�һλ�Ĺ����ʸ�����.�ں��ڹ�����ʱ,һ���������������ݵĹ���,Ȼ����Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,����ս������ͨ����,���ֶ�Ԫ���������ת��:һ���������Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,Ȼ���������ס�ݵĹ���.���,��ս�����������ڹ�������һ��"������"����ɵ�����(Union,����һ��"��������"����ɵ��������(Nation.����������ڹ�Ҳ��һ����������(United States��Ϊ��������(United States.[49]���,�ܷ��ı��е�"������"�����������Ѿ������ʵ�����ε��ݽ�.����������������˵���,��������(�ѳ����ܱ�����Ϊһ������,�ɴ˷�չ��һ�������������ܷ��������ĸ�����ͨ��.���˵�ܷ������������������Ȩ(division of powers����֯��һ����������֮����ܷ��Ի�,��ô�����������ú����Ȩ(separation of powers�����������ڲ������һ�ַ�֧����ܷ��Ի�.
���ڳ�������,һ���ձ�����ǰѳ������ε�ͬ�ڶ�ս������������Ķ�Ԫ��������.�������۽����ι��̱��������г�,���ξ��ߵĽ����ȡ�������漯�ż�Ľ�����ƽ��.���Ⲣ���Ƕ�Ԫ�ܷ����趨�ij�������.��������������ɣ˹̹�Ķ������������ij�������,"��������Ŀ��Ӧ������������:�����ܵ���Ƴ�һ���ƶ�,��ȿ��Դٽ�'�������μ�'�ĵ�ѡ,Ҳ���Լ������Ǹ���������֪����Ĺ���������ͳ��."[50]���,����˵��ܷ������Դ��Լ���ѡ������֤"�������μ�"�ĵ�ѡ,�������Ȩ����������Լƽ������������Լ����Щ���ڼ�����������ϵ,ģ���һ���Թ�������Ϊ����ij�������.
3.������Ȩ�ķ��ɱ����ʵ��
�ִ����ε�ͳ���ߴ������������Ȩ����Ȩ����.��Ҳ����Ħ������,�ڴ�������۰汾��,"����"��ֻ��һ��"������"��"������"Ҳ"������"�Ķ���.��ʵ��,��������"�ܷ�ʱ��"��������һ�����:���ܷ����λ�������־�ı������һ������ʱ���ڳ��ֵ�,��ν�ĸ����������һ��,̨������Ӧ���Ƽ�.[51]���ڰ���������,�ܷ����δ��������������Ҫ����������ʮ�����ʱ��,���Ҳ�Ҫ����,������ܷ�������Ϊδ��ͨ�������������������õ������ƶȼ���,����Ҳû�гɹ�(����,�������������Ԫ�ܷ���ʱ���������������.���,�������Ĺ���֮һ���������������ܷ�ʷ���ҵ���������Ȩ�ڷ�����ʽ�ϵı����ʵ��.û������ķ�����ʽ,"����"�������������ػ�������,������Ȩ�ںܶ�ʱ�����ɱ�Ϊ����ͳ����"˵����,�����,����Ҳ��"����Ϸ.
����֪��,�ڷѳ��ܷ���������ʱ,������˰���ʩ�еĻ���һ�ֹŵ����ε�"����ܷ�"(mixed constitution.�ڻ���ܷ��Ŀ����,�����Ǿ����Ļ���,����Ժ�ǹ���Ļ���,������Ժ����ƽ��Ļ���.��������˵�1787���ܷ���,��ͳ������Ժ������Ժ����Ժ��������Ĵ���.�����Բ�ͬ�ķ�ʽ����������,�����ǼȲ���"�����Լ�",Ҳ̸��������Ļ���.[52]�����,�ղ�����˹����<<������ļ�>>��63ƪ��ָ��:"����(����ָϣ���Ĵ����������������������������������Լ�����ݶ����ڵ�������ȫ�ų��ں���,������������֮�������ȫ�ų���ǰ�ߵĹ���."����ֿڵĻ����Ǻܺ����,Ҳ����������ܶ����.����,�ղ�����˹ϣ��ָ�����Ǵ��������ڹŵ������о��Ѿ�����,������ϣ���ijǰ�����Ҳ����������֮����,���,�������ƵĶ���֮������������ȫ�ų�������,����֮,������������.�ܶ��˽���仰���Ϊ�����ͨ�����ܴ�����һ�������������������ξ�Ӣ��Ϸ,����仰��ԭ����ʵ��ǡǡ�෴.�ղ�����˹��Ϊ,������������������,��������ѡ֮����Ҳֻ�������"����",�����ǻ���ܷ��е�����"����","�Լ�����ݶ����ڵ�����".[53]����������Ȩ��Ϊһ����ʶ��̬��1776����1787�������,��ʷѧ���������������<<�����Ṳ���Ĵ���>>�й����ʵ�����.[54]
�й�������Ȩ�������ܷ�ת���еķ��ɱ��,��ʵ�����Ѿ������˰�������<<��������>>�ڶ����ڵ�����.����֪��,��������ڹ��Խ�����ֻ����һ���ܷ�,�����Ƿ�������ι���,N���ܷ�.����1800����ͳ��ѡ����ս����������Ȩ�˶����Լ�����������������Ŷ����ܷ�������ת��,"��������"��û������¯��,�����ƶ�һ��ȫ�µ��ܷ�.��Ԫ�ܷ��е�������Ȩ��Ȼ����ͻ���ܷ��������涨�ĸ�����;��(����֮,�ܷ���������δ¢�����ܳ���,������ͻ����Ӧ���ǻ������е��ܷ�Ԫ��,��������һ����ȫ�������ܷ�����־���.�������˵,�ܷ����ο��Գ�Խ�����ܷ�������(�������"Υ����",��������������ȫ�������.��ʵ��,�ӽ�������˵��ؽ�ʱ�ڵĹ��͵�����������ʱ�ڵ�������,�������ܷ��ĸ���һֱ��������������ܷ��е�����Ԫ�ض��������µ����ܻ���.���,��ս���������ܷ�����ʵ�ֵĶ���һ��"�����Ա��"(revolutionary transformation,������"��ȫ����"(total revolution[55]
���ȳ��ֵ�Ԫ���ǰ�������˵����ͳ�쵼Ȩ(presidential leadership.�����ܷ����������趨�����ܳ���Ҫ����ͳ�IJ���,��ֻ�ǹ涨������������������֮��ĶԻ�.��ͳ�������ܷ������Ĺ���,ԭ�����ڽ����ܷ����������ͳ����һ������Ʒ���빦�������μ�(��������������ܷ��ڶ���ʱ��Ȼ֪����ʢ�ٽ����ι����ĵ�һ����ͳ,�������ڰ��ջ�ʢ�������������ͳ��ְλ,������һλ�������,һλ������ϵ���������Ұ�ļ�.��Ȼ,����1800���ѡ�еĽ��ѷ���ǵ�˹֮����,��һԭ�����������֤������ʧ��.[56]���,���������е��ܷ�������,Ψ����ͳ��ȫ������ĺϷ�������.����սʱ���ֿϵ������е���˹��,��ͳ���ڷ����ܷ��ĸ��Ѷ��,����������Ĺ���.�ڰ���������Ƶ���Ȩ������Ϊ���Ƶ��ܷ�������,��ͳ�����֮��Ļ������Ǿ����Ե�:��<<��������>>�ڶ�����,��������������ʷ�������,����ǿ������ֿϵ��ӵ�������,Ҳ���ʮ����������û�б�Ҫд���ܷ�,�������ɱ��˹���Ĵ̿�ǹ���پ�Щ,����ʱ��Ҳ������ı���ʽ��������.[57]
����������ܷ����涨��Ȩ������.������Ҫ�������,��Ȩ���������������������ر����ƶ����.��������Ȩ��������ͳ��,������˰���Ӣ�������������,�е�ֻ��Ȩ���ķֹ�(���Ƿ���.��Ӣ��������,ȡ������Ժ����ϯλ�����������������,�Ӷ���������������(������һԪ�����ĵ�������,��������,һ���������������˶����Ҫ����������������֧,�������ܱ��书��һ��,�����ǿ��ǵ�������߷�Ժ������ְ�Ĵ���.������,������Ҫ���������ܷ��ڵĵڶ����ƶ�,�����һ���ɵ�0��2��4��6�ꡭ������ɵ�ѡ������.һ�������˶����ϣ���ƶ�������,�����������������Ϊ��λ��ѡ���в��Ͻ�������ļ���,Ψ�������������������������ڻ��һ�ν�һ�ε�ѡ��ʤ��,����ֱ�ӻ��ӿ�������������������֧,���ǵ��ܷ�������п�����������������.�����,����������2006��Ļ�ķ˹������ָ��:"������Ȩ����һ�ֵ�һʱ�̵�����,����һ����Ҫͨ��һϵ�нεij�������."[58]
���,�������ڶ�Ԫ�����Ŀ���������ܷ������볣������,�����ԵIJ��������������(���,Ҫ����������ܷ�ѧ������֮��,��������������ػ�(��������������.�ڶ�ʮ���͵�������,�����Ѿ�Ŀ��̫��������֮����������ʩ�еı���.���,��"����"�˳�֮ʱ,������Ȩ���ƶ��ĸ�������Ҫһ���ػ�����:�����������߷�Ժ��˾�����.�Ͽ˶���һ�Ƚ���߷�Ժ��������"��֪",���ĸ���ȷ�,���������Ķ�Ԫ������ȴ���Ŵ���˾�����ʱӦ�����,��������ǰ��."��������"�����ܷ�����ԭ����,�����ǵ��ܷ�������Ҫʵ��һ�ִ����ۺ�(inter-generational synthesis,��������ʷ���ܷ�ʱ���������̵�������־����鵱�µ����ξ���,�Է����μ��ڳ���������������֮�������������α��֮ʵ.[59]
ת���� ��������������� http://www.hi138.com ��������������;������
�ص������ᄈ,������Ҫ���һ������,��Ϊ�й��ܷ�ѧ��,����ΪʲôҪѧϰ�����ܷ�(�Լ�ΪʲôҪ��Ⱒ����?����Ĵ𰸲�������ֿ���:��һ����ʶ�����ܷ�,����Ǹ����й��ܷ�.��Ȼ,�����ִ�֮��Ҳ���ǷǴ˼��˵Ĺ�ϵ.������,������ȫ��������˵:������ʶ�����ܷ�,����Ϊ�˸����й��ܷ�.�й�������"��ɽ֮ʯ�����Թ���"�Ĺ�ѵô?����������,ÿ�����DZ��Ÿ����Լ�����̬��ѧϰ�����ܷ�ʱ,�����ܷ��Ͳ�����һ��Ҫ��ʶ�����Ķ���,����Ϊһ�ֱ������Ĥ�ݵ�����.�ںܴ�̶���,�����ڹ�ȥ�ܳ�һ��ʱ�䶼����"�ӹ�"����̬��ѧϰ�����ܷ�.�����������ʵ�ϼ�δ����������������ܷ�,Ҳδ�ܿ۵���ʶ�����Լ�.
���,���ĵ������dz���:����ѧϰ�����ܷ�,����Ҳ��ҪӦ����Ϊ����ʶ����������ܷ�.����̬�Ȳ�����ζ��ѧϰ�����ܷ�ʧȥ��ʵ�ʵ�����,ֻ������һЩ��ʶ�ϵ���������.������������ʱ��,��������ܷ��Լ�������֯����������������������;����ɷ��ϵ�������ʵ������.����,ֻ��������ʶ�����ܷ�(��Ȼ,��һ��ͬ����Ҫ��ǰ��������������ǵ��ܷ�,�ڱȽϷ������ϵĽ����ѧϰ�ž�������.
(һ��;
"˾����"����˵������ȥʮ���й��ܷ�������ʵ����һ���ؼ���.����"˾����"�����ǽ�Ŀ��ת��������˾�����.���ڳ����߿�ν�Dz����䷳���Ƴ�һ����һ���й�"������߷�Ժʷ"������������.����"��߷�Ժ"�����������ǵó���һ�����ɵؽ�����Ц�Ĺ���:������һ��"��λ��˵����"�Ĺ���,˾���������������뷨�ε�����.���,һ���Է�Ժ��˾��Ϊ������ܷ��о������й��γɲ�����.�ɷ���,��ԺΪ������ܷ��о���������ѧԺ�ڵ�����,������ѧ��ȡ����ʵ������ʵ������Ŀ���.����,������ѧ�����ϵ���һ���ܷ�����,����������һ�����õ�С����:���ʵ��ж���Ү³��ѧԺ��JDѧ���ڱ�ҵ��ĵ�һ��ְ����������߷�Ժ�ٵ�����ʱ,�ҿ������Ͻ���ȫ����JDѧ������������.���й���ѧϰ�����ܷ���Ȼ��Ӧ��Ҳ��������Ҫ�������ķ���������.[60]���,���DZ�����������Է�ԺΪ��������������ܷ���·��.�����������Ƕ���������߷�Ժ�Լ�˾����������һ����˼(�������ɴ�˵����Ĺ���,����μ���ʲ�߸��[61],���һ����������Ƕ��ڷ�Ժ�����������������ʶ.����һ��,���Ƿ����˷dz���Ϥ������߷�Ժ�ٵ����������,��������һ���й���ͳ������:����������ͳ�븱��ͳ��һ�β��ҵ��¹���ͬʱɥ������ɥʧ��������,����ͳӦ����β���?��Ȼ����һ��С�����¼�(����200�������ʷ�ϴ�δ���ֹ��������,�����˿ɷ�������һ�������ش����������.��ʵ��,���ڵ�һ����Ἧ��֮��,�������ѷ����������ƶ���"��ͳ���η�",������������.[62]����˾��Ϊ���ĵ��ܷ�ѧ�����ǶԹ��ڷ�Ժ�������ٸ��ʵ�,����Ժ������ܷ�ȴ��Ϊһ��ä��.
���Ҫ��ⷨԺ����������ܷ�,��ô�ҿ����뵽������������ǰ��������ڵ�<<��������>>ϵ��.���������������������е����Ƿ�ѧԺ��ְҵ�������µķ�Ժ������,�����������ܷ������Ļ�����ԪӦת�Ƶ��ܷ�����(constitutional regime.���,��������<<��������>>����Ҫƪ����������ᡢ��ͳ���ݡ�ѡ������������,��Ȼ����"����",ֻ������δ����ĵ�����Ż�̸����Ժ���ܷ���������.Ү³��ѧԺ�İ����������һƪ�ع�Ү³�ܷ�ѧ���ɵ�������ָ��:"���˵�Ͽ˶����������������ܺõ���������������ѧ������ʷѧ�ҵ�����,��ô�������IJ�֮ͬ���������������һλ�ܳ�������ѧ������ʷѧ��.<<��������>>ϵ���Դ�ǰҮ³������δ�������ķ�ʽ�ڻ��˷��ɡ�����ѧ����ʷ."[63]���,���������ɷ�Ժ��������ܷ����۲����������������������������������,����Ϸ��ɡ���������ʷ���о�·����ʵ��Ҳ������Ŀǰ���о��й��ܷ�ʱ��ȱ����,��ǡǡҲ������Ҫ��.
(������
�����������,���������ܷ����۲Ż��ڹ����ܷ�ѧ�类����������.����������,�ܶ�ʱ��,�������ð����������۲���Ϊ��ȥ������������ܷ�,����ϣ�����ð������ĸ���������й��ܷ�.�����������ᄈת��֮�䰢�������ܷ����۴����ű����õ�Σ��.����˵Ҫ�����ǻص��������ܷ����۵�ԭ��,��Ⱒ����Ϊ��Ҫ�������Ԫ�������ܷ�����.����,����Ĵ𰸲�������,������ϳ�����<<��������>>��һ��Ŀ�ͷ��ҳֽ��.
"������һ��������,�����Ƿ�������������Լ�?ʱ������,���Ƿ��������Լ���Ϊ��ʶ�ϵ�ֳ���,����ŷ�ĸ����������Լ�������ݵ�����?"[64]<<��������>>��ƪ��һ�λ�������Ӧ�ö�����������ʾ����ʾ.�ڰ���������,�����ܷ������Ѿ���Ϊ��ŷ���������ֳ���,��Ҫʵ���ܷ����۵�ȥŷ��,�ܷ�ѧ�ҵ�ע����"Ҫ�����ת���ֿ�,��¬��ת����˹��".���,<<��������>>�������������ڷ�չ��һ����������ɫ���ܷ�����.��Ҫ�������������ص��ܷ���ʷ��ʵ��֮��.������,��Ԫ�������ǽ����������ܷ�����,[65]������Ҫ˵�����������ɹ��İ���,ҲҪ�����������ʧ�ܵĿ�����.���,�����ڽ��ö�Ԫ�������е�һЩ����������Լ���ʱ�����Ҫ����,һ��С��,�Ϳ�������"�ܷ����۵�������"������.
���Dz�Ҫ����,����������һλ�Ƚ��ܷ�ѧ��.����<<��������>>ϵ���еİ�������Ҫȥ��չ��һ�����������ܷ�����,���������۽���Ҳ�����ǽ�������������������֮�ϵ�.��ʵ��,������ͬӢ������(һԪ������¹�����(Ȩ����λ����ıȽ�֮��,����������ʷ�Ķ����Բŵ�����,��Ԫ���������˱ȽϷ������ϵIJ���ϵ.ͬʱ,�������,"�ܷ����۵�������"�����ǰ�������Ϊ�������µ�����,���������Լ������ݽ�ȥ������.2005����,����������ݰ�ٱ���,���ڱ�����ѧ���廪��ѧ�ֱ��ݽ�,���ڱ�����ѧ�ݽ�����Ŀ��<<�·�Ȩ>>,[66]���廪��ѧ�ݽ�����<<�����������������>>,[67]��û�����й��������������������ܷ�ѧ����������,���й�ѧ��Ҳ�в�����ͽ��"��Ԫ������".���������Ϊ����������֪��,�����й���������������Ԫ�����۾ͺñ�������ϵ����һ���µĻ�ѧ����.����й�������,��Ӧ�ó��ֵ������ıȽ��ܷ�����.�������Ƕ���,����������������<<��������>>ϵ���еİ�������������������������������ܷ�,Ψ���������ʶ����һ���,���Dzſ��ܽ�������������۹����뷽�������·����й����ܷ�.
Notes:
[1] Bruce Ackerman, Social Justice in the Liberal State, Yale University Press, 1980.
[2] �μ�Bruce Ackerman, "The Storrs Lectures: Discovering the Constitution", 93 Yale Law Journal 1013 (1983).
[3] Bruce Ackerman, "Beyond Carolene Products", 98 Harvard Law Review 713 (1984).
[4] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, Harvard University Press, 1990.
[5] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Transformations, Harvard University Press, 1998.
[6] �μ�Bruce Ackerman, "2006 Oliver Wendell Holmes Lectures: The Living Constitution", 120 Harvard Law Review 1737 (2006).Living Constitutionͨ����Ϊ"����ܷ�",���������ܷ���������һ������"ԭּ����"(originalism,���������ڻ�ķ˹��������Ҫ���������ܷ���Ǩ,�������ܷ�����,���,ԭ�����㲻���ر����е�"����ܷ�"�ķ����������������,����ڴ˱���ԭ��,��������.
[7] Bruce Ackerman, The Failure of the Founding Fathers: Jefferson, Marshall, and the Rise of Presidential Democracy, Harvard University Press, 2006.
[8] �μ���³˹��������:<<��������:�ܷ��ĸ���>>,�������ų�ϼ��,���ɳ�����2004���,<<��������:�ܷ�����ԭ����>>,��������,���ɳ�����2003���.
[9] <<��������>>ͷ������������뱾�����ų̶Ȳ�ͬ�ķ�������:��һ���ͷ��β����һ������ʧ�ܵĴ�����Ʒ,���ڶ���Ҳ�������൱�ദ�ķ���Ӳ���Լ���ʱ�ɼ�������.���ڰ�����������,һ���Ƚ�ȷ��ȫ�������,�ɲμ����컪:"�ܷ�������:��³˹���������Ķ�Ԫ������������",��<<������̳>>2005���6��.
[10] Alexander Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics, Bobbs-Merrill, 1962.
[11] John Hart Ely, Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review, Harvard University Press, 1980.
[12] ����������������1978��ĵ�һ���ܷ�����<<˽�вƲ����ܷ�>>�������ŵıϿ˶�,�μ�Bruce Ackerman, Private Property and the Constitution, Yale University Press, 1978.
[13] Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954).
[14] ������ν���,�ɲμ�Learned Hand, The Bill of Rights, Harvard University Press, 1958.
[15] ������ν���,�ɲμ�Herbert Wechsler, "Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law", 73 Harvard Law Review 1 (1959).
[16] Charles Black, The Court and the People: Judicial Review in a Democracy, MacMillan, 1960.
[17] �й��ܷ�ѧ��ܶ�����Ϊ�Ͽ˶�����������������֮��Ϊ˾�����ķ�����,��ʵ������һ�ַ��ᄈ�Ľ��.���ⳡ�塢��ʮ����Ĵ������,���˵���·��ٵĿ�ƪ���ڷ�˾�����,����˾��������ܷ���û���ı�����,����˹�յĻ�Ӧ����Ϊ˾�������Ѱ�ı����֮ͬʱ�������ʰ����о�,��ô�Ͽ˶�����˾������̬�����Ϊ����:���Ƿ���������������,����Ҫ����,��Ҳ����������Ϊֹ�������������ɹ��Ĵ�:��������(passive virtues.����,ɣ˹̹���ھ��ھ�ʮ����ӹ��˱Ͽ˶�������,����˾����С����������߷�Ժ���ܷ��þ�Ӧ��"��խ���"��"��dz����",��ܴ�̶��ϳ�Ϊ�Ͽ˶�֮������������ʱ���ڵ�һ��Ӧ��.�μ�Cass Sunstein, One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court, Harvard University Press, 1999.
[18] Alexander Bickel, The Least Dangerous Branch,ͬǰע10,pp. 16-17.
[19] �μ�John Hart Ely, Democracy and Distrust, ͬǰע11,p. 71.
[20] James Thayer, "The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law", 7 Harvard Law Review 129 (1893).
[21] "Letter to Harold Laski, March 4, 1920", in Mark Howe,ed., Holmes-Laski Letters: The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and Harold Laski 1916-1935, Harvard University Press, p. 249.
[22] ���ڷ����������������ܷ������еĵ�λ,�ɲμ�Barry Friedman, "The Birth of an Academic Obsession: The History of the Countermajoritarian Difficulty, Part Five," 112 Yale Law Journal 153 (2002).
[23] �Ͽ˶������б��ػ���ת��,�������黯��,������Σ�յı���,�μ�Alexander Bickel, The Morality of Consent, Yale University Press, 1977.
[24] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,pp. 6-7.
[25] "����Ϊ���ֻ����ԭ��,ȫ�幫����ʵ�ʳ��ֲ���������������̵�������,�����������ܿ����������Բ�������������."�μ�John Ely,ͬǰע11,p.77.
[26] Edmund Morgan, "The Fiction of 'The People'", in New York Review of Books, April 23, 1992, p.48.
[27] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p.6.
[28] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p.7.
[29] Charles Beard, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States, MacMillan, 1913.
[30] ����<<������ļ�>>��10ƪ��"֪ʶ����ѧ",�μ�Douglass Adair, "The Tenth Federalist Revisited", in Douglass Adair, Fame and the Founding Fathers, Liberty Fund, 1998, pp.106-131.
[31] �μ�The Federalist, Harvard University Press, 2009, p. 69.
[32] ���ڱȶ������⼰�䷴֤��һ���ļ�,�ɲμ�Leonard Levy, ed., Essays on the Making of the Constitution, Oxford University Press, 1969.
[33] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p.165.
[34] Id.,p.206.
[35] ���ڰ���������"���ϸ���"��"��������֢"������,�μ�Id.,pp. 169-71.
[36] John Ferling, Almost a Miracle: The American Victory in the War of Independence, Oxford University Press, 2007.
[37] Bruce Ackerman, The Future of Liberal Revolution, Yale University Press, 1992, p.50.
[38] Bruce Ackerman, The Failure of the Founding Fathers, ͬǰע7,pp. 16-7.
[39] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p. 206. �������ĸ��������ںܴ�̶��������ڰ����ص�<<�۸���>>."���˱��˵���ʵ����,�����Եķ��������������������ʷ,�����ʤ���ɹ�����������ȴ��Ȼ�����ǽ����еط���������¼�."�μ�Hannah Arendt, On Revolution, Viking, 1963, p. 56.
[40] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p.188.
[41] Id., p.181.
[42] �ڶ�Ԫ�ܷ��Ŀ����,�ܷ����κͳ���������һ���෴��ɵĸ���.û���ܷ�����,Ҳ������ν��������,��֮��Ȼ.��һԪ������Ȩ����λ�����ߵ�������,������Ϊû���ܷ�����,����������Ȼ��û�����ֳ���������,�����,��������Ϊ���߶�"�����˶�Ԫ�����߸����ܷ����ε���������".���˵��,������������۵Ĺؼ������������ܷ�����,��Ϊ���ǰ������ڶ�Ԫ�����Ŀ�����ҵ����ܷ����������Ŀռ������.����һԪ������Ȩ����λ�����ߵ�����,�ɲμ�Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,chapter 1.
[43] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p. 7.
[44] Id.,p.177.
[45] Id.,p. 176.
[46] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Transformations, ͬǰע5,p.326.
[47] �����������ʱ���������ܷ���Ǩ����˵�������ܷ������е�һ����Ҫ����.��������<<��������>>�ڶ����������"����Ե����"(transformative opinions,��Ϊ�粼�ʰ�������˾���о��������ܷ���һ����,�μ�Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Transformations, ͬǰע5,Ү³��ѧԺ�İ�˹�������������"��������"(super statutes,��ΪһЩ��̱�ʽ������,����1965���<<��Ȩ����>>,������һ��"���ܷ�",�μ�William Eskridge and John Ferejohn, A Republic of Statutes: The New American Constitution, Yale University Press, 2010.
[48] �μ�Bruce Ackerman, "The Living Constitution", ͬǰע6.
[49] ������һ���̵���ʷ�о�,�ɲμ�James McPherson, Abraham Lincoln and the Second American Revolution, Oxford University Press, 1991.
[50] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,p.198.
[51] �йذ���������ʩ���ص�һ������,�ɲμ�Bruce Ackerman, "The Political Case for Constitutional Courts", in Bernard Yack, Liberalism without Illusions: Essays on Liberal Theory and the Political Vision of Judith Shklar, The University of Chicago Press, 1996, p.209.
[52] Akhil Amar, "Of Sovereignty and Federalism", 96 Yale Law Journal 1425 (1987).
[53] ���ڰ���������λ��Ľ��,���Բμ�Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4,pp. 182-183.
[54] �μ�Gordon Wood, The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787, University of North Carolina Press, 1969.��µĽ�����������˵��ܷ���"���������Ƶ�",����Ȩ����������ʽ�����ƴ�ͳ�Ļ������,��ʵ����ȴ��һ�ֻ��������."����Ȩ����˱�ȥ�˸��ڱ�����ͬ�ʻ�����Ȩ������,������ִָ����������˾���ķ���������Ժ�Ƶķֹ�,��ֻ����������Ȩ���ķ���,��Ԫ����Ԫ�صĴ���,���Ǽȿ���ͬ�������,ͬʱ��Ҫ��������,���������."Id.,p.604,���,�ܷ���������������������֮�䶩������Լ,ͳ���߾����ܷ���ȡ����ͳ��Ȩ��.���ѷ������������Ͳ�����һ��������Ϸ:"������,�ܷ���Ϊ��һ�����������öɵ�Ȩ������,������ŷ����Ȩ�����öɵ���������."Id.,p.601.
[55] ���ڸ����Ա������۲���,�μ�Bruce Ackerman, "Revolution on a Human Scale", 108 Yale Law Journal 2279 (1999).
[56] �μ�Bruce Ackerman, The Failure of the Founding Fathers, ͬǰע7.
[57] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Transformations, ͬǰע5, pp. 255-78.
[58] Bruce Ackerman, "The Living Constitution", ͬǰע6,p.1807.
[59] "�����ۺ�"�ǰ�����������������߷�Ժ�ܷ��þ���һ������,���ڴ˸���ij�������,�ɲμ�Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations,ͬǰע4,chapter 6.
[60] ����,���ĵ�"��Ϊ�������Ժ�ķ���������"��Ӣ�ĵ�"��Ϊ������߷�Ժ�Ĵ�������",��Ȼ����ͬ������,ȴ�ڹ�����������ȫ��ͬ������.�Ƚ�����ѧ���������۵�"��������"(concept travelling�����ڱȽ��ܷ�����Ȼ����,���ڸ������Ƶľ�������,�ɲμ�Giovanni Sartori, "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics", 64 The American Political Science Review 1033 (1970).
[61] Bush v. Gore, 531 US 98 (2000).
[62] ����������ͳ���η�����ʷ�ظ�������Է���,�μ�Akhil Amar & Vikram, "Is the Presidential Succession Law Constitutional", 48 Stanford Law Review, 113 (1995).
[63] Akhil Amar, "America's Constitution and the Yale School of Constitutional Interpretation", 115 Yale Law Journal 1997, 2013 (2006).
[64] Bruce Ackerman, We the People: Foundations, ͬǰע4, p.3.
[65] ����˵������ζ�Ű������Ķ�Ԫ�����۲�����һ�ֹ淶�Ե�Ŀ��.��ʵ��,<<��������>>��һ���д�����̴������ص��������Ͱ�ʮ������������,�������Ķ�Ԫ��������һ���̶�����ҪΪ��˹�������ṩһ���ܷ�����,�Ӷ�Ϊ����Ժ�ĸ������о��ṩ�ܷ�����.��һ��Ҳ������ѧ�߹��ڰ��������۵�һ������,���ܷ�����ֻ��һ���ɰ����������ݵĸ���,����Ļ�,Ϊʲô��˹��������һ���ܷ�����,����˹�ط�Ժ�����������������һ���ܷ�����?������������,���Բμ�Mark Tushnet, "Living in a Constitutional Moment?: Lopez and Constitutional Theory", 46 Case Western Reserve Law Review 845 (1996).��л����<<����������>>�������������а������Ĺ淶��Ŀ�ı���,��������<<���ɹ����е��������>>һ������Ϊ�����������ۼҵİ�������<<��������>>��"ԭּ������"�İ�����:���,������������ֻ��һ���������ɵ�ɫ�µ�ԭּ���塭������һ����,��������������ּ����ֹ����������ǰǴ�𰢿�������Ϊ����˹�ط�Ժ�IJ������ķ������.��¶�����������̵�DZ�ڶ����������ƻ�����������.����,��������ԭּ�����ʾ��������������Ŀɱ���״.��˵������������������߷�Ժ��������������ʵ���ϵ�Ч��,�ִ�����������ǿ�����Ĵ����˲��ò��������ɵ�����.���DZ��뱣���������Ų��������ִ����������������͵��Ų�����������Ϊ������ȷ��,������Ϊ���Ĵ����߸�������Ҫ������.�ڿ���������ѧ���������ֹ��������ǰ����ѧ�߲��ò��ݹ�ȥʱ��Ȩ��,������������.�μ�Suzanna Sherry, "The Ghost of Liberalism Past," 105 Harvard Law Review 918, 933-34 (1992).��Ȼ,��2006��Ļ�ķ˹������,������������������˵�ſ���������Ȩ�ķ��ɱ�,��������֪�������ܷ�ʱ��(���������ؽ��������Ļ���������������ܷ�ʷ��������Ȩ�İ˴�����(��1776����1787����������������ܡ�1800���ѡ�Ľ��ѷ������1830����ܿ�ѷ������1860�������ս�빲�͵��ؽ���ʮ������ĩ��ƽ���˶���1930�������˹��������1960����������·�¡������쵼����Ȩ�������Լ��������������ڵ�һ��������.������һ����,�μ�Bruce Ackerman, "The Living Constitution", ͬǰע6,pp.1757-58.
[66] ������һ�ݽ���Ӣ�ij���,�ɲμ�Bruce Ackerman, "The New Separation of Powers", 113 Harvard Law Review 633 (2000).
[67] ������һ�ݽ���Ӣ�ij���,�ɲμ�Bruce Ackerman, "The Rise of World Constitutionalism", 83 Virginia Law Review 771 (1997).ת���� ��������������� http://www.hi138.com
In 1980, Yale Law School Professor Bruce Ackerman published <"Free country's social justice>>. [1] In this text, which amounts to 378 on the works of justice, free dialogue, Ackermann ( liberal dialogue based on the concept of building his political theories. After a decade in power after the completion of the book, Ackerman immediately made a decision: he should not be like his teacher, as John Rawls, A Theory of Justice building system, and then spent a lifetime repair, defend and perfect the system. Since the early eighties of last century, Professor Ackerman began his constitutional theory and practice of the United States of academic exploration. by the Yale Law School in 1983 Stowers talks in the <"Discovering the constitution>>, [2] published in 1984 <<Harvard Law Review>> of the classic paper" "Beyond Carolyn products case">, [3] and then published in 1990 Year <"We Have the people>" series of the first volume <<theory>>, [4] the second volume published in 1998 <<transition>>, [5] was invited to Harvard Law School in 2006 Holmes published Lecture "The Living Constitution" [6] and the History of the Constitution, published the same year <<founding father of the failure: Jefferson, Marshall and the rise of presidential democracy>>, [7], of course, plans to publish in the next few years, the < "We Have the people>" series of III, IV ... ... Thirty years later, Professor Ackerman of the United States Constitution can not be said to establish a bypass of the academic tradition, an insurmountable set of academic monument. This A judge applies not only to the Constitution of the United States scholars, also applies to those who want to understand Chinese scholars United States Constitution.
Chinese scholars have never ignored the Constitution and constitutional theory, Professor Ackerman. For example, Ackerman had visited Beijing in autumn 2005, and at Peking University and Tsinghua University Law School academic lectures were delivered, and <"We Have the people>" series has been have long been published in two volumes translated into Chinese publication. [8] However, we Ackerman theory on Translation and they did not review the theory into the context of the United States Constitution and the theory of Ackerman's own context. Ackerman the theory of constitutional scholars in the country seems lively, but the crisis has always been difficult is that we touch one of the doorways. a simple example, Ackerman In "" We Have the people of>> the first chapter of Volume I of several put forward the concept of - - dualism (dualism, constitutional moment (constitutional moment, and advanced legislation (higher lawmaking and ordinary legislation (normal lawmaking - almost as we understand the whole constitutional theory Ackerman, in many cases even become a universal concept , review to be applied without the Chinese context. Professor Sunstein will <"We Have the people>> of the first volume called" Over the past half-century thought the United States Constitution is one of the most important contributions. "But here, this one "most important contribution" has become a concept of several groups can be "In a word" thing. Ackerman Theory in Chinese language only reflects the situation of the territory of our understanding of when the U.S. Constitution has infantilism, but also from its own constitutional theory some of the attributes, even in the Chinese translation of the reasons for the accident. [9] can be said that Ackermann constitutional misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the theory not only explained that we misunderstood its history the United States Constitution, but also because the concept of tyranny that blind us misunderstood the operation of the Chinese Constitution.
In view of this, the paper will try to restore the original appearance Ackerman constitutional theory: This includes both language in the United States to seize the territory of the dual constitution of Ackerman, will also be necessary to review our office to understand how to apply this theory our own academic and constitutional cause. Therefore, this article of the work done is not complicated, the method is also little tip: the system begins to read the article, Professor Ackerman listed on the main Constitution, then back Rereading <"We Have the people of>> the first volume - especially really constitute the basic sections of the volume, the new understanding of that which we normally talk about it to write the Constitution in the text concept. In this paper, the structure is divided into three parts. The first part of Ackerman's constitutional theory will bring back the original of this academic journey. serious theoretical exploration is not a fall from the sky of the divine book, nor is it imagined drawn fierce racking our brains. as a foreign reader, to truly grasp the Ackerman's constitutional theory, the first thing to do, of course, return to the context of the theory. The second part constitutes the main body of this article, it starts with a point: that Ackermann exactly how to read written by the <"We Have the people>> I, then the specific theories presented in Ackerman three core concepts: Revolution and the Constitution, constitutional politics and normal politics, organized by the Federal Constitution, Article V of the Constitution and the separation of powers and political constitutional model of political organization. in the content, "" We Have the people>> Volume will constitute the main body of this discussion, of course, this will also be necessary to introduce Professor Ackerman of the contents of the other. The third part will examine Ackerman constitutional theory and our relationship, specifically, the dual Ackermann neither universal democratic constitution of principle, is not entirely limited to the U.S. experience in theory construction, therefore, to read the Constitution Ackerman theory can not avoid the question: What use of this theory for us, and how to avoid possible misuse.
First, the regression context
For purposes of constitutional scholars in China, in the understanding and interpretation of the U.S. Constitution when the theory is how to face a challenge into the context of its practice and theory, otherwise it will fall into a non-contextual difficulties. Since 2001, ling After the case, the academic research on the Constitution, "Constitutional Jurisdiction," the great debate, we can often see the United States Constitution and its theoretical scientists figure. However, the U.S. introduction of constitutional theory in China, often not to make us better to understand American constitutional government, often to the use of these imported theories serve the purpose of its own theory. In the past decade, various factions in the United States Constitution theory can be said, "You Changba me play," confusing. but the lack of Fan Si academic introduction allows us to Jingchang can not determine the good and bad theory, and sometimes there is no discerning "picked up Wanli is the food." Lun Wennei Chinese Constitution of the United States Tongpian is what constitutional scholars say, but fundamentally failed to understand whether these scholars say, why say so and say so in what context. Therefore, we should reflect on this "for our own use" attitude.
Even if we hold a purely objective understanding of American constitutional government, we understand most are the lack of a sense of history and a sense of context. Maybe the lack of a sense of context is a cross-cultural communication, understanding of the difficulties can not be avoided, but the problem is that we must consciously aware of the absence of a sense of context, and not fall into a collective unconscious. What a sense of historical context? give a simple example, the Constitution of the United States scholars, they know that graduates published in 1962, Professor Kerr a <<the least dangerous branch>>, [10] 18 years later, the Queen was published in 1980, Professor <"Democracy and do not trust>>, [11] and then after 11 years, Professor Ackerman published << We the people of>> the first volume. in the United States within the Constitution, this Constitution in time and space within the transmission is basically an experience of, without much to say. But constitutional scholars in China, which spans generations of constitutional theory it appears in a compressed history of time and space, and often there will be distortions in time. For example, the Queen is the Chinese translation of works published in 2003, and completed the work will have to wait until Kerr after 4 years there in the translation. What is more, "" We Have the people> "series of the first two volumes of the publication in the Chinese world order is reversed, first published in 2003, the second volume, was published in 2004, vol. This flat knowledge of the compression, if not conscious reflection and review, and ultimately it can only be "know, not the why." In theory and practice of interlocking areas of the United States Constitution, "not the why "often will not really" know. "Of course, this is not to review the domestic constitutional scholars specialized in the study of many symptoms of the U.S. constitution, therefore, specific to this paper, our problem is how to Ackerman In" < We the People>> Volume theoretical exploration within the context of return to the original.
Let Bi from Yale Law School Professor Kerr started. Bi Ackerman Kerr is studying in the sixties at the time of the Yale Law School Tuition teacher. [12] studied under relationship, published in 1962 completed the Kerr year <<the least dangerous branch of>> today is recognized as the origin of contemporary American constitutional theory. but to understand the complete works of Kerr, we will be back to the last century, fifty, sixty years by the turn of Kosovo London Court's Brown v. [13] triggered by a decision on judicial review of the classic dialogue. this big discussion of academic ����º��� judge by the Harvard Law School, 1958 Holmes lecture began, [14] After the middle of the year there (1959, Professor Weikesile famous speech on the same platform, [15] Yale Law School Professor Charles Black, published in 1960 <<People and the Court>>, [16] and then to 1962 completion of work by Kerr to the end of the debate. Half a century later, the debate in the first three non-professionals interested in have few people, but <<the least dangerous branch>> or research has been United States Constitution can not be avoided landmark. This is the completion of one of the many reasons put forward by anti-Kerr most difficult (counter-majoritarian difficulty setting for future generations to learn the U.S. Constitution and the agenda of the domain. [17]
The difficulty lies in our system of judicial review is within the power of an anti-majority. To avoid the unavoidable reality that there are ways. Marshall's approach is his claim to represent "the people" to run their own limited government restrictions created by the system ... ... I will chase Marshall Hamilton, who in the "<The Federalist Papers>> No. 78 refused to believe that judicial review means that the judicial power above legislative power ... ..." it is only set higher than both the power of the people at the same time, if the legislation announced in the legislature will not meet as announced in the Constitution will of the people, the judge should take orders from the latter but not the former. "However, such use of the" people " There is an abstract term. It is not necessarily meaningless or destructive, but often filled with emotion at the same time there is no entity - the abstract concepts obscure the reality that when the Supreme Court declared the legislation Act or the behavior of elected law enforcement officers violate the Constitution, it was opposed to the here and now represent the true will of the people ... ... [18]
The passage can be said against the majority of problems within the U.S. premiere of constitutional theory, it can be described as monumental works of the immortal chapter. Impact As a result, it should be the most important works of the United States Constitution, a passage (note There is no "one." However, as "Over the past two decades the most creative constitutional theorist," [19] Kerr just completed the most difficult to create an anti-concept, and can not be said to be single-handedly created a whole The new Constitutional tradition. Bi Kerr embedded in the Thayer Theory of fact, Holmes to Frankfurter, a great academic tradition of the Constitution. It is a theory we understand the U.S. Constitution, one must be consciously aware of academic context, not only because this line series from the Holmes, Frankfurter, Kerr completed within the halls of American law class people, but also because they represent the academic tradition in fact constitutes a theory of the twentieth century the United States Constitution the main line. this axis in order to complete the main line of Kerr for the academic definition of the U.S. Constitution can be said that theory in the twentieth century, the coordinate system can be determined only in the coordinate system, we can understand, including Ackerman, including Later the relative position of constitutional scholars, and only then can we truly understand the theory that the United States Constitution and Imports, as its object of study of American constitutional practice.
Let's move back from the completion of Kerr. Completed in 1952, Kerr has served as an assistant judge in Frankfurt large. And Frankfurter in office before the Supreme Court is a professor at Harvard Law School, he is the idol of youth who often express their objections in the Supreme Court Justice Holmes, then forward, Thayer is a professor at Harvard Holmes during a brief teaching colleagues. We know that Professor Thayer 1893 <"U.S. constitutional doctrine of the origin and scope of the>> recognized as the opening of the United States for constitutional theory. Thayer presented in this article far-reaching "obvious error" standard: In short, the unconstitutionality of the legislation only "certainty" of the court it shall declare the law unconstitutional, [20] and Holmes Laski in a letter he wrote to the judge so positioning the role in a democratic society, "If my fellow citizens to go to hell, and I will help them . because this is my job, "[21] Frankfurt is more serious because the judges do not agree with Warren Court's constitutional decisions and suffered a stroke. Therefore, Needless to say, this followed by the Thayer to the academic tradition but Sunstein throughout the twentieth century American constitutional theory of judicial restraint doctrine. The completion of Kerr due to his "anti-majority problem" as the spokesperson for the traditional sector in the theory. is generally believed that the cross-examination against the majority of problems point to the Judicial Review and Democracy the tension between. In other words, why no non-elected and therefore accountable to the voters the right to review the judge elected representative branch of the political decision-making?! Kerr made since the completion of this problem, the most difficult problem to solve as the anti-plague generations of scholars, the central task of the United States Constitution. [22] But here, against the majority of problems we may return to the original source of this theoretical paradigm, from against the proposal to review the most difficult century American constitutional theory in the absence of a fundamental.
Back to the cited above, have completed the majority of Kerr anti-problem in the proposed text when. Careful read of this passage is not difficult to see that the majority of problems of anti-establishment requires a basic premise: dispelling the people! More precisely, in the completion of the theoretical system of constitutional Kerr did not should not have "people" concept. Why is he may make a counter Kerr completed the majority of the problem? The reason is that completion of Kerr opened a "people" veil. with the completion of the original Kerr own words, "the abstract idea of a reality obscures." within the language, these words can fill the whole as "an abstract idea is the people covered the challenges of the system against the majority of reality. "As a result, more than 300 words in this discussion, the completion of Kerr repeatedly stressed that the people are kind of" abstract "," No entity "exists. Therefore, he highlighted but" the real here and now representative of the people "rather than those who" often filled with emotion, "and often" meaningless or destructive "of the" people themselves. "Therefore, completion of Kerr's" people "only to add quotation marks to indicate that empty of people. [23] If the most difficult to be against the expression of judicial review with democracy but the tension, then the completion of the democratic tradition Kerr concern but "here and now" and "real people" of the "representative" - the Congress and elected representatives of the political decision-making. from the constitutional design, the Senate is six years was the formation of a democratic election, the House of Representatives is organized by the biennial elections, therefore, they represent "the people" , and the court (or at least be discussed Kerr completed the Federal Supreme Court judges are not elected, so they can not represent "the people", against the majority of the resulting problems.
As an American constitutional scholars (and students as a completion of Kerr, Ackerman's constitutional theory in their own natural anti-most difficult problems can not be avoided, but even with Ackerman's own words, he has done is digestion (dissolve the not a solution to (solve the anti-majority problem. [24] What is digestion, but also what is meant to solve, where the subtle change of one word in fact we mapped out the key difference between theory construction. Queen (Professor Kerr also teaches at Yale law school graduates students in the "" Democracy and do not trust>> is in the "address" anti-majority problem. Now that you have completed anti-Kerr said the majority of judicial review, undemocratic, then I will have to prove that the Queen, judicial review - at least Warren Court's constitutional rulings - is precisely to do to clear the channels of democratic change of political bias discrimination and protection of minorities. Therefore, the Queen and the completion of Kerr in fact constitute a neat precise questions and answers. Queen to do The most difficult problem is to provide another kind of anti-answers, from beginning to end, the Queen has never been denied by definition complete Kerr most difficult problems against a fundamental premise: the U.S. Constitution, there is no "people." [25]
Ackerman, of course, give their own answers to problems of anti-majority, but Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> in the complete collapse of the core project is the foundation of Kerr proposition: putting people back to the academic discussion of the U.S. Constitution . Ackerman, "we the people" for its multi-volume history of American constitutionalism has been explaining the number of the named key. "peoples" in Ackermann there is no longer a "meaningless" abstraction exist, is an organization with legal personality and constitution of actors, is no longer a "destructive" rabble, but by the U.S. Constitution set the start time of crisis or critical political and legal organization of political constitution. In Bi Kerr There, even the Founders Outline the founding of Hamilton <<The Federalist Papers>> within the "people" are a blur of rhetoric, and Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> Volume in have to do is from the "distant past" (especially "Publius," where to find "people" in institutional mechanisms in the United States Constitution. When people are no longer equivalent to the "here and now the true representatives of the people" , Congress and the courts in a democratic pyramid in the same order (or the political elites in Congress and the courts of justice in the elite is in a different way "representative" of our people, the most difficult to become a forest without trees, Bi Kerr also lost the original cross-examination of mass destruction. Thus, at least in the United States Constitution, it is the Ackerman and his <"We Have the people>> will be" the people "is the concept of exile has been a long time to re-zone Back to the discussion of constitutional law. On this, the U.S. founding historian Edmund Morgan has been accurate in one sentence: "It gives the intangible (elusive, invisible (invisible, not heard (inaudible sovereignty of the people owned by the government to governance and effectiveness have meaning (pragmatic meaning. "[26]
Second, the sovereignty of the people in the United States Constitution: Ackerman proposition
Ackerman In "" We Have the people> "series conducted in the reconstruction of the history and theory can be said to reproduce the U.S. Constitution in one of a handful of grand theories. And also no stranger to domestic constitutional scholars Ackerman's constitutional theory . constitutional politics, constitutional moment, binary concept of democracy is considered outside of these advanced theories of the Constitution in our own discourse everywhere. but the surface is often obscure a fundamental familiarity with the unfamiliar: the text does not read Ackerman difficult (if you want to read it, but it really does not grasp the simple theory of Ackermann (if you really want to grasp the words. In fact, I would point out that below a "procedural" issues, it is very extent when exposed us to understand the problems Ackerman.
(A procedural question: how to read Ackerman?
Open <"We Have the people of>> the first volume, this 322-page text book is not complicated in structure. Office from the directory can be seen in a brief" thanks ", the book is basically divided into two : The first part is from the first 1-162 of the "discovery Constitution" (Discovering the Constitution is the second part of section 163-322 of the "New Federalist doctrine" (Neo-Federalism. If you are familiar with American academic treatise stereotyped format, readers should have a serious question: Why did not the book "Introduction"?! Although not everyone have the English academic work by the "Introduction" to start, although the true master of the right, without the shackles of rigid norms (if he wishes, but the "Introduction" is not missing here is invented a problem. As shown below, if you do not understand this, then read <"We Have the people>> Volume is prone to bias when "misguided."
Ackerman did not directly in the book does not explain why the book "Introduction." However, if the <"We Have the people>> Volume on the Ackerman to understand the context of the theory, then this problem is not difficult to answer. <"We Have the People: Principles>> is not a stand-alone book, but a three-volume multi-volume or even the opening of the writing program. Therefore, the first part of the book" that the Constitution "the fact is the Ackerman Design "Introduction." This accounts for only half the length of the first volume of the "Introduction" is not the first volume of the preamble, but the entire three volumes of the preamble of the writing program. Recognizing this, we have easily This consists of six chapters will be a big break off the introduction, each of the condemnation. Chapter "dual democratic" (Dualist Democracy but the second part of Volume I, "New Federalist doctrine" of the "Introduction", after the first Chapter II, "two centuries of myth" (The Bicentennial Myth, Chapter III, "a constitution, three regimes" (One Constitution, Three Regimes, Chapter IV, "interim of the Republic" (The Middle Republic, the fifth chapter of "Modern Republic "(The Modern Republic roughly four chapters constitute the second volume <" We Have the People: transition>> "Introduction" and Chapter VI of the final "the possibility of interpretation" (The Possibility of Interpretation of course, is still far Writing in the third volume <"We Have the people: to explain>> the" Introduction. "
From this, "that the Constitution" in Volume I or even the status of all three volumes actually quite special. By the second chapter, "two centuries of myth" began, Ackerman has been in advance of the second or even third volume contents of the volume. of course, to do so has his own reasons. stereotyped format of academic works in fact asked Ackerman explained in the beginning of this multi-volume program for the writing program. But the problem is the "big Introduction" the language of the structure will be pre-diluted in large part on the first volume of our own understanding. from the second chapter, Ackerman has been in the use of his dual democracy throws one after another shocking proposition , such as the 1787 Constitution itself is not legitimate, both beyond the representatives of the Philadelphia Convention to have the power, also broke the constitution of the original provisions of the Articles of Confederation, the legitimacy of the Fourteenth Amendment from the Federal Constitution is neither Five constitutional amendments under the program, nor is blood and fire, the American Civil War, but rather by the Republican Party created by the reconstruction of a new constitutional politics, Roosevelt's New Deal in the 1930s did not see the realization of a constitutional transformation of the text, Therefore, the case of Lochner decision in 1905 is correct, but only three years after the New Deal "constitutional" by the veto. Readers will often time and energy to the absorption and digestion in the first volume within these Ackerman But in the second volume, the third volume dealt with the proposition, therefore, the "big Introduction" front has a distracting negative effect, resulting, the reader in the first chapter of Volume I of the first part of the "dual democracy "kick the tires, you drown one by one in the strong impact of the reconstruction of the history of the U.S. constitutional proposition. But if vol <<theory>> of the real essence of where it is located in the second part of the "new federal party doctrine". "dual democratic" theory is not the conclusion Ackerman racking our brains, but in-depth history of the republic and the Constitution after the refined theory. It is in this second part of the Ackerman will explain binary democracy is coming from, what is what.
Therefore, if you want to really understand <"We Have the people>> I, we need (or at least read the book twice, and two different readings. The first pass is from start to finish in the order of reading, the second time will have to read the first chapter in the "dual democracy" after the jump to the second part, in accordance with the order re-read the second part of the five chapters, namely Chapter VII, "Publius" (Publius, Chapter VIII " The Forgotten Revolution "(The Lost Revolution, Chapter IX," General Politics "(Normal Politics, Chapter X," Senior Legislative "(Higher Lawmaking, Chapter XI," Why is dualism? "(Why Dualism?. Only The first chapter of the book and the second part of the collusion between them, before they can grasp in the end ����Щʲô Ackerman within the first volume, rather than parrot to repeat some of the theory fur Ackerman ..
Related to this is the first volume is subtitled Foundations should be how to translate? Foundations here translated as "the foundation of the Constitution" or "foundation" is not accurate, translated as "nation-building" is confusing two different foundation and the founding of the English words, accurate translation should be <"We Have the People: Principles>>.
(B substantive issues: understanding binary democracy
Ackerman, a constitutional theory on the basic understanding of: Ackerman In "" We Have the people>> within his first volume of the dual democratic theory, that the dualistic theory of democracy (as distinct from a dollar democracy and the rights of selfishness but the key to understanding the history of the United States Constitution. dualistic theory of democracy advocates, "the constitutional dualism in the democratic system to seek distinction may be made within the two different decision-making. The first is the decision made by the American people, followed by their decisions made by the Government. "[27] people in decision-making is the so-called" advanced legislation ", and its dual are given within the framework of democracy and the democratic legitimacy of the High, as opposed to representative government is in the conventional political daily decisions made within, that is, Ackerman called "ordinary legislation." within a democratic framework in binary, "general legislation" has no right to challenge or alter the "Advanced Legislative" and therefore, the High Court as the guardian of law who, after the exit to prevent the people of the name of the people of the political elite to achieve the pretext of self-serving political change.
In many cases, Ackerman In "" We Have the People: Principles>> referred to the first ten pages of their theory of what constitutes our basic knowledge. But as Ackerman says, "such a simple statement of the proposed questions to answer far more than it. "[28] Indeed, what come from binary democracy, its system of organization are, and what the U.S. Constitution reflects the history, to answer these questions, We can only read on.
1. Revolution and Constitution
Discussion of the American Revolution and the constitutional relationship between the work can not bypass one of Beard, published in 1913, <"American Economic Interpretation of the Constitution>>. [29] Of course, both in today's American law schools, or China Law School, Beard's original books have been very few people read. But, as the Lochner become plagued the United States Constitution, judicial review and interpretation of a ghost, Beard proposition in the book became entangled century American constitutional theory a curse. any work has its historical background: after the end of the century if the era of the United States Constitution fundamentalist theory of ancestor worship is full of blind argument, then the progress of the century era political and legal theory is keen on founding Fathers "lifting the black," "broke" and "rake manure." Beard said proposition is very simple: in 1787 the economic elite Constitutional Independence Hall in Philadelphia, a counter-revolutionary secret room instigated a "coup", is of the 1776 revolution, abandoned and rejected.
Do not forget, it was Beard, and papers from the pile of "re-discovery" of the nineteenth century, no one is interested in <<The Federalist Papers>> No. 10, making it in the twentieth century classic chapter in American political theory. [30 ] In support of his proposition, Beard was quoted at 10 Madison at the end of words: "bank notes, debt cancellation, the equitable distribution of property, or any other improper or wicked plan may be one of the federal the spread of certain members of the house, but it is difficult to spread to the entire federation. "[31] Beard opinion, this sentence can be described as a mountain of irrefutable evidence:" Father of the Constitution, "Madison, the" notes "," debt cancellation " "The average distribution of property" as "evil plans" and constitution, the aim is to be besieged these "evil plans." counter-revolutionary Philadelphia constitution can be said is all too clear motive, leap off the paper! Although by today's standards of social science research, Beard did not make "bold assumptions, carefully verify", later scholars had in fact listed by the book and more evidence to refute the proposition Beard. [ 32] But the Beard thesis of the United States Constitution and the Revolution made the relationship did not disappear, and this fact constitutes a binary Ackerman history and theory of democracy as a starting point.
From the seventh chapter, "Publius" in the beginning, Ackerman to put forward its own anti-Beard proposition: "This part of the dualism of the United States dates back to the founding of historical roots. To find the dualism roots, we must learn to stand on the position of the founders of grasping the founders: the success of the revolutionaries as they once again lead their fellow citizens to join in the public's collective action, even so at great personal cost. "[ 33] Therefore, the founding of the United States who are "time and time again," the "successful revolutionaries." Here, if the proposition is split Beard 1776 and 1787, but to do so Ackerman in 1776 to communicate and 1787: 1787 is not 1776, not only the anti-proposition, and the completion of the "Constitution of the American Revolution". "Revolution of the impulse does not destroy the constitutional order of construction: the Constitution, but the natural climax of a successful revolution." [ 34] Therefore, the success of the revolutionaries should neither fantasy so-called "continuous revolution" should not be suffering from "amnesia revolution", the success of the revolution is the revolution in the Constitution. [35] As shown below, "the Constitution "of the Constitution can not be interpreted as the end of the revolution, the revolution should be understood as blending in the constitution. apply a usage in English, it can be said that" revolution is dead, but Long live the revolution "(The Revolution is Dead, Long Live the Revolution!
Ackerman and the consensus is that Beard's interpretation of a limited 1776. Beginning in 1776, the American War of Independence by the thirteen states is a patchwork coalition of "out of" their political parent - the British Empire. To join the a victory "near miracle" to the war, generals and soldiers must have "shed blood" courage and passion. [36] In "" Free the revolution's future>> book, Ackerman to has pointed out: the war can be described as independent of Washington in modern history of the first successful guerrilla wars. [37] but the key question is why the understanding of 1787 will be divided. "We must go beyond our own, sitting in the Founders The position - the modern world the glory of the first winner of the War of Independence - Understanding the Founders. George Washington, but as the leader of a rebel victory in Philadelphia ... ... they come another revolutionary - living in the French Revolution before the last group of revolutionaries. "[38] This does not come from the <" We Have the people> "series, then once again stressed to put yourself in the modern experience of the founders. In other words, it seems, at least in Ackerman, Beard is wrong with being in his Origin of the French Revolution a "revolutionary" concept to determine the United States Constitution.
"They are another revolutionary." So who is the first revolutionaries, the sense of the French Revolution, the revolutionaries, the revolutionaries understood Beard? So here there are two concepts of revolution, which is Ackerman in the eighth chapter, "The Forgotten Revolution" discussion. Beard revolution is a social revolution: the revolution that success lies in whether the class structure of society changes, controls the means of production shifted. Since < "The Independents declaration>> is one of the drafters of Jefferson slave owners, the hypocrisy of the American Revolution can be said to be self-evident. However, Ackerman used but" political revolution "concept." The real revolution Spirit has nothing to do with the social consequences, but rather to rediscover the value of civic capacity. "[39] United States Constitution is the political community to achieve the re-definition of the Constitution of 1787 as the zero point on the coordinate system, marking the constitution after constitution before political significance. In Beard opinion, the secret of Philadelphia to discuss constitutional and illegal procedures are clear evidence of counter-revolutionary constitution, but in Ackerman, where the process of both the United States Constitution as an independent cause of those who willingly gave their lives Continental politicians (rather than state politics after independence ambitions of politicians raged, also has a basis in the deliberative citizen of the Republic to make rational judgments (rather than "the streets of Paris mob eager to bread." Therefore, "he (referring to Pub Cornelius was a successful revolutionary, but he is a kind of eighteenth century all (rather than the agenda of the twentieth century. "[40]
2. Constitutional politics (and the general political
<<The Federalist Papers>> The opening is asked: "The world really have the ability to choose to build under the deliberative and good government, or destined never to rely on chance and strength to determine their political constitutional ... ... "This is a revolutionary success is possible only questions. Ackerman himself has asked:" How to Save the principles of the American Revolution? This is the constitutional design of the main issues. "[41] It is through the" Constitution of Binary "Federalists based on" deliberative and select "complete revolution in the Constitution. Therefore, the" dual constitution "is not a good system of government Ackerman a theory about the concept, but designed by the founding Federalists and followed later by a reality and the transformation of constitutional design.
Let us start from a constitutional and political [42]: "Since the founding of the beginning, again and again called for political movements to join their fellow Americans, the actions of citizens, and when successful, the final form to the establishment of our people in the name of the senior law development. "[43] Ackermann definition given in somewhat abstract. Federalists in the constitutional interpretation of behavior, Ackerman was the Constitution of binary democratic political setting within the four dimensions : form of illegal (formal illegality, the masses of energy (mass energy, public spirit of the (public-spiritedness, and the extraordinary reason (extraordinary rationality. [44] Therefore, the behavior of the Federalists to their own constitutional reform for the future generations who set a precedent, which is a civil war with the New Deal constitutional amendment will be followed in transition have also been modified, senior legislative channels. but never expect Constitution Publius can produce a steady stream of citizens of Germany sex (which is the classical theory of the CPC and the political foundation of the continuity of government and thus beyond the Republican political ills - partisan / factional (faction. appears in Ackerman, the Constitution Federalist science but a "virtue����ѧ":���ǿ�Դ,���ǽ���.���,��Ȼ�ɹ����ܷ����ν�����"Ⱥ�ڵ�����"��"�����ľ���",���ܷ�����(�����ڳ�����������һ�ַdz��������.�ղ�����˹��Ԥ�ԡ����������ܷ�����ʷҲ�Ѿ�֤������ֻ����"�����ڼ��鱻ѹ�Ƶ�Σ��֮��",[45]�����˲ſ��ܰ�����ϵ���εij���,������ܷ��ĸ�Ĺ�������.
������Ѿ���1787���ܷ���Ԥ����"�ܷ�����"�ij��ij���:����������ܷ��ĵ�����.��һ�ɽ�������Ƶ����ܳ�������"������"Ϊ��Ԫ�ĸ�����ͨ��:���ɹ�����Ժ֮����֮����������ܷ�������(��ȻҲ����������֮�����������ٿ��ܷ�����,�����ķ�֮�����ݵ��������ܷ����������.����������Ϊ��λ�����ܳ���ȴʹ�ø�����ͨ����ת��������.����,������ķ�֮һ��С���ڵ��������ķ��,һ���ܷ������������鼴̥������.��˹������������"¯��̸��"�о���ָ����һ��:"����35�����ڵ�ȫ��95%���˿ڶ�֧������,��13�����ڵ�5%��ѡ������ֹ����������."[46]Ҳ���Ǵ���˹��������,�����ܷ����������ܷ���Ǩ�����ϻ�������Ϊһ��"ʳ֮��ζ����֮��ϧ"�İ���.���仰˵,����˹��������ĸ������Ѿ������ϲ��������������ܷ��ij��ķ���֮��.[47]
�ܷ���������ʽ�ںܴ�̶�������Ϊ�����ܷ����趨�������屾��ı仯.�����ܷ����ı���ʼ��"��������",���������������"������˭?"[48]��ͳ������Ϊ,����������һ�ξ�������ѱ�,��ζ��һ���µ����ι�ͬ���빫��������ݵ��γ�(����Ϊʲô��������֮Ϊfounding��?���ɽ�����һ�̿�ʼ,����֮������Ҫ��Ϯ�Ž����ܷ�ҵ��ȷ���Ĺ���,��������ҲҪ���������ܷ��й涨���ܷ���֮����.���,��������ֻҪ����ѡ�����μ�"�����ι�".���������������������������Ҫ���ı�������������ԶΪ����.�����йؼ���һ�����ڼ�����������ս����������(�����ǵ�ʮ��������.��ʮ����������ƪ���涨һ���������Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,Ȼ�������/������ס���ݵĹ���.�����ʮ�����������о��߰Ѵ־������������������ƽ�ȱ���������,��ȴ�����˰��ڵ�һλ�Ĺ����ʸ�����.�ں��ڹ�����ʱ,һ���������������ݵĹ���,Ȼ����Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,����ս������ͨ����,���ֶ�Ԫ���������ת��:һ���������Ǻ��ڹ��Ĺ���,Ȼ���������ס�ݵĹ���.���,��ս�����������ڹ�������һ��"������"����ɵ�����(Union,����һ��"��������"����ɵ��������(Nation.����������ڹ�Ҳ��һ����������(United States��Ϊ��������(United States.[49]���,�ܷ��ı��е�"������"�����������Ѿ������ʵ�����ε��ݽ�.����������������˵���,��������(�ѳ����ܱ�����Ϊһ������,�ɴ˷�չ��һ�������������ܷ��������ĸ�����ͨ��.���˵�ܷ������������������Ȩ(division of powers����֯��һ����������֮����ܷ��Ի�,��ô�����������ú����Ȩ(separation of powers�����������ڲ������һ�ַ�֧����ܷ��Ի�.
���ڳ�������,һ���ձ�����ǰѳ������ε�ͬ�ڶ�ս������������Ķ�Ԫ��������.�������۽����ι��̱��������г�,���ξ��ߵĽ����ȡ�������漯�ż�Ľ�����ƽ��.���Ⲣ���Ƕ�Ԫ�ܷ����趨�ij�������.��������������ɣ˹̹�Ķ������������ij�������,"��������Ŀ��Ӧ������������:�����ܵ���Ƴ�һ���ƶ�,��ȿ��Դٽ�'�������μ�'�ĵ�ѡ,Ҳ���Լ������Ǹ���������֪����Ĺ���������ͳ��."[50]���,����˵��ܷ������Դ��Լ���ѡ������֤"�������μ�"�ĵ�ѡ,�������Ȩ����������Լƽ������������Լ����Щ���ڼ�����������ϵ,ģ���һ���Թ�������Ϊ����ij�������.
3.������Ȩ�ķ��ɱ����ʵ��
�ִ����ε�ͳ���ߴ������������Ȩ����Ȩ����.��Ҳ����Ħ������,�ڴ�������۰汾��,"����"��ֻ��һ��"������"��"������"Ҳ"������"�Ķ���.��ʵ��,��������"�ܷ�ʱ��"��������һ�����:���ܷ����λ�������־�ı������һ������ʱ���ڳ��ֵ�,��ν�ĸ����������һ��,̨������Ӧ���Ƽ�.[51]���ڰ���������,�ܷ����δ��������������Ҫ����������ʮ�����ʱ��,���Ҳ�Ҫ����,������ܷ�������Ϊδ��ͨ�������������������õ������ƶȼ���,����Ҳû�гɹ�(����,�������������Ԫ�ܷ���ʱ���������������.���,�������Ĺ���֮һ���������������ܷ�ʷ���ҵ���������Ȩ�ڷ�����ʽ�ϵı����ʵ��.û������ķ�����ʽ,"����"�������������ػ�������,������Ȩ�ںܶ�ʱ�����ɱ�Ϊ����ͳ����"˵����,�����,����Ҳ��"����Ϸ.
����֪��,�ڷѳ��ܷ���������ʱ,������˰���ʩ�еĻ���һ�ֹŵ����ε�"����ܷ�"(mixed constitution.�ڻ���ܷ��Ŀ����,�����Ǿ����Ļ���,����Ժ�ǹ���Ļ���,������Ժ����ƽ��Ļ���.��������˵�1787���ܷ���,��ͳ������Ժ������Ժ����Ժ��������Ĵ���.�����Բ�ͬ�ķ�ʽ����������,�����ǼȲ���"�����Լ�",Ҳ̸��������Ļ���.[52]�����,�ղ�����˹����<<������ļ�>>��63ƪ��ָ��:"����(����ָϣ���Ĵ����������������������������������Լ�����ݶ����ڵ�������ȫ�ų��ں���,������������֮�������ȫ�ų���ǰ�ߵĹ���."����ֿڵĻ����Ǻܺ����,Ҳ����������ܶ����.����,�ղ�����˹ϣ��ָ�����Ǵ��������ڹŵ������о��Ѿ�����,������ϣ���ijǰ�����Ҳ����������֮����,���,�������ƵĶ���֮������������ȫ�ų�������,����֮,������������.�ܶ��˽���仰���Ϊ�����ͨ�����ܴ�����һ�������������������ξ�Ӣ��Ϸ,����仰��ԭ����ʵ��ǡǡ�෴.�ղ�����˹��Ϊ,������������������,��������ѡ֮����Ҳֻ�������"����",�����ǻ���ܷ��е�����"����","�Լ�����ݶ����ڵ�����".[53]����������Ȩ��Ϊһ����ʶ��̬��1776����1787�������,��ʷѧ���������������<<�����Ṳ���Ĵ���>>�й����ʵ�����.[54]
�й�������Ȩ�������ܷ�ת���еķ��ɱ��,��ʵ�����Ѿ������˰�������<<��������>>�ڶ����ڵ�����.����֪��,��������ڹ��Խ�����ֻ����һ���ܷ�,�����Ƿ�������ι���,N���ܷ�.����1800����ͳ��ѡ����ս����������Ȩ�˶����Լ�����������������Ŷ����ܷ�������ת��,"��������"��û������¯��,�����ƶ�һ��ȫ�µ��ܷ�.��Ԫ�ܷ��е�������Ȩ��Ȼ����ͻ���ܷ��������涨�ĸ�����;��(����֮,�ܷ���������δ¢�����ܳ���,������ͻ����Ӧ���ǻ������е��ܷ�Ԫ��,��������һ����ȫ�������ܷ�����־���.�������˵,�ܷ����ο��Գ�Խ�����ܷ�������(�������"Υ����",��������������ȫ�������.��ʵ��,�ӽ�������˵��ؽ�ʱ�ڵĹ��͵�����������ʱ�ڵ�������,�������ܷ��ĸ���һֱ��������������ܷ��е�����Ԫ�ض��������µ����ܻ���.���,��ս���������ܷ�����ʵ�ֵĶ���һ��"�����Ա��"(revolutionary transformation,������"��ȫ����"(total revolution[55]
���ȳ��ֵ�Ԫ���ǰ�������˵����ͳ�쵼Ȩ(presidential leadership.�����ܷ����������趨�����ܳ���Ҫ����ͳ�IJ���,��ֻ�ǹ涨������������������֮��ĶԻ�.��ͳ�������ܷ������Ĺ���,ԭ�����ڽ����ܷ����������ͳ����һ������Ʒ���빦�������μ�(��������������ܷ��ڶ���ʱ��Ȼ֪����ʢ�ٽ����ι����ĵ�һ����ͳ,�������ڰ��ջ�ʢ�������������ͳ��ְλ,������һλ�������,һλ������ϵ���������Ұ�ļ�.��Ȼ,����1800���ѡ�еĽ��ѷ���ǵ�˹֮����,��һԭ�����������֤������ʧ��.[56]���,���������е��ܷ�������,Ψ����ͳ��ȫ������ĺϷ�������.����սʱ���ֿϵ������е���˹��,��ͳ���ڷ����ܷ��ĸ��Ѷ��,����������Ĺ���.�ڰ���������Ƶ���Ȩ������Ϊ���Ƶ��ܷ�������,��ͳ�����֮��Ļ������Ǿ����Ե�:��<<��������>>�ڶ�����,��������������ʷ�������,����ǿ������ֿϵ��ӵ�������,Ҳ���ʮ����������û�б�Ҫд���ܷ�,�������ɱ��˹���Ĵ̿�ǹ���پ�Щ,����ʱ��Ҳ������ı���ʽ��������.[57]
����������ܷ����涨��Ȩ������.������Ҫ�������,��Ȩ���������������������ر����ƶ����.��������Ȩ��������ͳ��,������˰���Ӣ�������������,�е�ֻ��Ȩ���ķֹ�(���Ƿ���.��Ӣ��������,ȡ������Ժ����ϯλ�����������������,�Ӷ���������������(������һԪ�����ĵ�������,��������,һ���������������˶����Ҫ����������������֧,�������ܱ��书��һ��,�����ǿ��ǵ�������߷�Ժ������ְ�Ĵ���.������,������Ҫ���������ܷ��ڵĵڶ����ƶ�,�����һ���ɵ�0��2��4��6�ꡭ������ɵ�ѡ������.һ�������˶����ϣ���ƶ�������,�����������������Ϊ��λ��ѡ���в��Ͻ�������ļ���,Ψ�������������������������ڻ��һ�ν�һ�ε�ѡ��ʤ��,����ֱ�ӻ��ӿ�������������������֧,���ǵ��ܷ�������п�����������������.�����,����������2006��Ļ�ķ˹������ָ��:"������Ȩ����һ�ֵ�һʱ�̵�����,����һ����Ҫͨ��һϵ�нεij�������."[58]
���,�������ڶ�Ԫ�����Ŀ���������ܷ������볣������,�����ԵIJ��������������(���,Ҫ����������ܷ�ѧ������֮��,��������������ػ�(��������������.�ڶ�ʮ���͵�������,�����Ѿ�Ŀ��̫��������֮����������ʩ�еı���.���,��"����"�˳�֮ʱ,������Ȩ���ƶ��ĸ�������Ҫһ���ػ�����:�����������߷�Ժ��˾�����.�Ͽ˶���һ�Ƚ���߷�Ժ��������"��֪",���ĸ���ȷ�,���������Ķ�Ԫ������ȴ���Ŵ���˾�����ʱӦ�����,��������ǰ��."��������"�����ܷ�����ԭ����,�����ǵ��ܷ�������Ҫʵ��һ�ִ����ۺ�(inter-generational synthesis,��������ʷ���ܷ�ʱ���������̵�������־����鵱�µ����ξ���,�Է����μ��ڳ���������������֮�������������α��֮ʵ.[59]
Newest Research Papers
- Newest
- State\Constitution law Papers
- The rise of the Internet era to create a large network of integrated marketing value
- Chinese students in English language writing negative transfer network to write papers analyzing _ _ net _ to write thesis papers Network
- Chinese students' English pronunciation problems On
- On the "Wuthering Heights"
- On building a culture of three sources of English and American Literature Literature Teaching Corpus improve
- Anglo-American literature on the characteristics of the strange language
- American Literature on the College English curriculum
- On the teaching of English and American Literature on film and literature interaction
- On the Anglo-American literature class on the social and cultural background knowledge in the import
- On the Anglo-American literature in the vague language of the translation strategies
- Anglo-American literature on the reform of teaching in the multimedia
- On the Multimedia in the Teaching of English and American Literature
- Carried out on university English classroom teaching of English and American Literature and challenges the status quo
- Analysis of critical discourse on the Teaching of English and American Literature courses
- On teaching English and American Literature in English in an important position papers to write network _
MOST POPULAR State\Constitution law Papers
- 24Hours
- 7Days
- 30Days
- Stressors on ICU nurses and Countermeasures
- About Vocational School of Health to develop education and training
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- About bracket theory in vocational English Listening Teaching
- Hangzhou guide the work on the practice patterns of family education
- On the new curriculum of high school language teaching
- On the secondary school mathematics teaching poor students into thinking about the problem
- Stressors on ICU nurses and Countermeasures
- Students on full play the main role in the teaching of English
- About Vocational School of Health to develop education and training
- How mathematics teaching in primary schools to implement quality education
- Psychological Contract Perspective counselor burnout causes and Countermeasures
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network
- Amy Tan novel about mother-daughter relationship between culture _ paper to write network