Author: Pierre Monet (France) translator: Cao Haijun
The copyright page: unlike Hobbes, Rock distinguished between the legislative and executive power, but compared with Montesquieu, he did not put forward the theory of separation of powers. On the contrary, Rock insisted that the executive power is fundamentally from belongs to the legislative power. Because as long as the sovereignty in the hands of the king, between the two powers of more or less equal distribution can't get. If the king is a sovereign, he must have these two kinds of power -- or at least the executive power has, but also directly involved in legislation. So the free plan must give up the notion of sovereignty. However, the absolute sovereignty, people can only against another absolute sovereignty: the king's sovereignty, sovereignty of the people. As the absolute, the sovereignty of the people as a matter of principle than the king's sovereignty is more beneficial to the separation of powers. But since the sovereign people unable to direct rule, and the representative organization is also not suitable rule, then the sovereignty of the people's political system based on from the practice is required in addition to a power beyond the sovereign power. At least Rock's England thought: from a practical point of view, Rock the establishment of the people's sovereignty is 1688-1689 years in the glorious revolution, the representative compromise shown between institutions and reform after the monarchy. Once you establish this compromise and function well, we can put the British political description for the interaction between two nearly equal power, regardless of makes compromise to absolute sovereignty may, and the problem of legitimacy. Montesquieu's theory is not established on the basis of analysis or the political legitimacy of the original situation of. The theory relies on the political experience of interpretation, namely the British experience, Montesquieu from a distance on the result of experience. The separation of powers doctrine found the classic expression in Montesquieu there, the reason lies in the neglect of the only legitimate principle of "" (forgetting), the forgotten just reproduce this compromise British actors and promoters of the experience causes, at the same time that the principle of legality future -- people's sovereignty -- the power discrete possible, can be used against this principle. No intrinsic relation between two theories: the legitimacy of democracy, namely free system within the framework of the British monarchy, in other circumstances may become their enemy. So Montesquieu thought that, when the problem of legitimacy has been forgotten, the dramatic changes that liberalism is the one and only, time will be in the active royal sovereignty (termination in the British revolution) and positive people's sovereignty (originated from the French Revolution) remain stagnant. Through the political core issues of the conflict between the power and freedom, Montesquieu defined a clear liberal language. Thus, Montesquieu subverts Rock views and more effectively implement the target. He is not from the establishment of the right of free men, but by the threat of rights as the starting point; he did not consider the origin of power, but the influence of the. There is no doubt that he is the first power as either origin or purpose and its phase separation. The founder. In this way, between the person and the person he makes envisaged in the hearts of our modern, process interaction under the only "power" concept to be terminated. In contrast, the Romans distinguish at least three forms of political power: auctoritas, potestas, imperium. Later, when Hobbes will all the passion and motivation are attributed to the desire for power, the problem is simplified. "Most can cause variation in intelligence passion is mainly different degrees of lust for power, wealth, knowledge and reputation to desire to. These desires can be summarized as the first kind of desire, that desire for power; because of wealth, knowledge and honor is but a different power." At the same time, "my first as the universal tendency out is, the thought of the second, died, endless desire for power."
The original order English edition preface chapter Europe and theological and political problems in chapter second of Machiavelli and the evil creative chapter third of Hobbes and the new political art, the fourth chapter of Rock, labor and property in Chapter fifth, chapter sixth of Rousseau Montesquieu and the separation of powers, the liberal critics seventh chapters after the French revolution liberal eighth chapter Banjarman Constant and the opposition the ninth chapter: Liberalism of Francois Guizo ruling Liberal tenth chapter Tocqueville: liberal democracy in the @##@ translators encounter "The liberal ideology and cultural history" is Pierre Monet's works, the style is concise, straightforward; not many footnotes and a large number of scholarly annotations; between the various parts of the connecting appropriately; and in many complex topics he boldly provides a succinct summary - for example, the relationship between church and state history for centuries old Europe -- a few pens, but plain precise. Behind the simple appearance, Jean Monnet shows a complex, sensitive, full color and full of wit and argument, often filled with all kinds of contradictions in modern political life, the explanation of the nature, we from the shaping and inspired the modern political life basic assumption and foresight to see this point.
"The liberal ideology and cultural history" by the Jilin people's publishing house.
Culture @ 2017