宪法之争——美国宪政道路的抉择

发布时间：2018-06-03 00:31

本文选题：美国宪法 + 联邦党人　；参考：《安徽大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 美国宪法制定后并没有立即生效,因为按照1787年9月17日的制宪会议的相关决议,新宪法只有被至少九个州批准后方能生效。但是美国人民并不是非常认同这部新宪法,分歧比较大。支持新宪法的一方被称为联邦党人,他们极力夸大新宪法的各种好处,认为新宪法就是将美国引向强大的灯塔,希望美国人民能尽快批准通过新宪法；反对新宪法的一方被称为反联邦党人,他们极力贬低新宪法,认为新宪法就是衰亡的源头,如果宪法被批准通过,那么美国就将重蹈被压迫、被剥削的覆辙。围绕宪法的批准与否的问题,联邦党人与反联邦党人展开了激烈的争论,各自试图说服美国人民来达到各自的目的。经笔者研究发现,两党论战的焦点主要集中在四个方面,分别是宪法的合法性之争、联邦共和的国体之争、联邦政府的权力建构之争和权利法案之争,这四个方面也依次成为本文的前面四大部分,加之后面一部分笔者自己的一点感受,本论文共有五大部分。第一部分,宪法的合法性之争。争论的焦点主要是新宪法的制定是否符合法律的规定。联邦党人认为新宪法的制定是符合安纳波利斯会议通过的决议精神的,也是符合邦联条款的精神的,也就是说新宪法是合法的；但反联邦党人认为按照安纳波利斯的决议,1787年2月21日的制宪会议的决议,以及《邦联条款》的规定,制宪会议根本就没有权力来制定宪法,他们享有的只是“修改权”而已,所以新宪法完全是违法的。第二部分,联邦共和之争。争论的焦点较多,主要集中在三个方面,分别是：(1)联邦与邦联,(2)联邦与共和,(3)联邦与各州。联邦党人认为邦联制已经过时,应该建立全新的联邦制国家,且认为在美国这样幅员辽阔的国家是可以做到联邦制和共和制的融合,在这个联邦制国家中,联邦权力要处于绝对的主导地位,州权只能处于附属的地位；反联邦党人认为邦联制是世界上最好的政府形式,不应该将其抛弃,况且在美国这样一个地域广大的国家是难以做到联邦制和共和制的兼容,就算真的建立起联邦制的国家,州权力要优于联邦权力。第三部分,联邦政府之争。争论的焦点较多,主要集中在三个方面,分别是：(1)国会之争,(2)总统之争,(3)法院之争。本部分的争论最为复杂,但集中在“三权分立”的具体制度设计上。第四部分,权利法案之争。联邦党人认为再在宪法中加入权利法案是多余的,根本就没有必要,也不应该有这样的规定；反联邦党人坚持认为在宪法中必须要有权利法案,这样可以从宪法的高度上保障个人权利免遭侵犯。第五部分,联邦党人与反联邦党人围绕宪法问题展开了激烈的争论,共同制定、通过及宣传了新宪法。在这基础之上,美国人民建立起饮誉世界的宪政制度,让美国不断地变得强大,终成为一超级大国,傲立于世界的西方。更加难能可贵的是,在这一制度之下,美国真正地做到了国家的强大与人民的幸福的高度统一。可以说,如果没有这样的宪法,没有这样的宪政制度,美国是很难取得这样的丰功伟绩。其可借鉴之处实是太多。但笔者坚信,最值得的借鉴之处不是制度的本身,而是建构制度的方法。围绕宪法,联邦党人与反联邦党人所表现出来的妥协精神和对抗精神最有借鉴的价值,因为只有拥有了这两项基本精神,才有可能建构起发达的宪政制度,然后才有可能和谐发展下去。通过研究,我们比较清楚地了解当时针对宪法的批准所展开的争论,通过对这些争论的分析,我们不难发现无论是联邦党人,还是反联邦党人他们都有爱国之心,也都有利己之心,不是那么伟大,也不是那么渺小。共同的爱国之心可以产生妥协的力量,共同爱国之心的不同的表达方式可以产生对抗的力量。在宪政制度的建立过程中,需要妥协和对抗两种力量,妥协的力量可以保证制度本身得到正面的支持,对抗的力量可以发现制度本身的缺陷,为制度本身的完善提供一重要前提条件。所以说,在妥协与对抗的共同作用之下,美国人民制定并通过了伟大的宪法,建立起伟大的宪政制度,让国家强大,让人民幸福。
[Abstract]:The constitution of the United States did not come into effect immediately, because the new constitution was approved only by at least nine states in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the September 17, 1787 constitutional convention. But the people of the United States did not agree with the new constitution very much. One party supporting the new constitution was called the Federal Party, and they exaggerated the new constitution. The advantages of the law are that the new constitution is to lead the United States to a powerful lighthouse and hope that the American people can ratify the new constitution as soon as possible; one party against the new constitution is called the anti Federal Party. They are trying to degrade the new constitution and think that the new constitution is the source of decay. If the constitution is approved, then the United States will repeat the oppression, The course of being exploited.
On the issue of the approval of the constitution, the Federalists and the anti Federalists have launched a fierce debate, each trying to persuade the American people to achieve their own purposes. The author's research finds that the focus of the two party debate is mainly in four aspects: the legitimacy of the constitution, the Federal Republic's state dispute, and the power of the federal government. The struggle between the force construction and the bill of rights, these four aspects also become the first four parts of this article, and the latter part of the author's own feeling, there are five parts of this paper.
The first part is the debate on the legitimacy of the constitution. The focus of the debate is whether the formulation of the new constitution is in accordance with the legal provisions. The Federalists believe that the formulation of the new constitution is in accordance with the spirit of the resolution adopted by the Annapolis conference and the spirit of the Confederacy clause, that is, the new constitution is legal; but the anti Federalists believe that the new constitution is legal According to Annapolis's resolution, the resolution of the constitutional convention in February 21, 1787, and the provisions of the Confederacy clause, the constituent assembly has no power to make the constitution, and they enjoy only "the right to amend", so the new constitution is completely illegal.
The second part, the debate on the Federal Republic is the focus of the debate, mainly in three aspects: (1) federal and Confederation, (2) federal and Republic, (3) federal and state. The Federalists believe that the Confederation system is out of date, a new federal state should be established, and that a vast country such as the United States can be a federal system. In the Union state, in this federal state, the federal power is in an absolute dominant position and the state power can only be attached. The anti Federalists believe that the Confederation is the best form of government in the world, and it should not be abandoned. Moreover, it is difficult to achieve federalism and republics in a vast territory of the United States. Compatibility, even if a federal state is really established, state power is superior to federal power.
The third part, the debate on the federal government has more focus, mainly in three aspects: (1) the controversy of Congress, (2) the presidential contention, (3) the dispute of the court. The argument in this part is the most complicated, but it concentrates on the specific system design of "the separation of the three powers".
The fourth part, the dispute of the bill of rights. The Federal Party thinks it is unnecessary to add the bill of rights to the constitution. It is not necessary, nor should there be such a provision; the anti Federalists insist that there must be a bill of rights in the constitution so that the rights of the individual can be protected from the violation of the constitution.
In the fifth part, the Federalists and the anti Federalists launched a fierce debate around the constitution, and jointly formulated, passed and propagated the new constitution. On this basis, the American people established a constitutional system for the world, making the United States become a superpower, the west of the world. It is, under this system, that the United States has truly achieved the great unity of the state and the happiness of the people. It can be said that, without such a constitution, and without such a constitutional system, it is difficult for the United States to achieve such a great achievement. Body, but the method of constructing the system, the most valuable reference value for the spirit of compromise and the antagonism expressed by the constitution, the Federalists and the anti Federalists, because only with these two basic spirits can it be possible to construct a developed constitutional system and then be able to develop in a harmonious way.
Through the study, we have a clear understanding of the debate on the approval of the constitution at that time. Through the analysis of these arguments, it is not difficult to find that both the Federalists and the anti Federalists all have patriotism, and they all have the heart of self interest, not so great, nor so small. The common patriotism can be produced. The power of compromise and the different expressions of the common patriotism can produce the strength of confrontation. In the process of establishing the constitutional system, we need to compromise and oppose two kinds of forces. The power of compromise can guarantee the positive support of the system itself. The strength of the confrontation can find the defects of the system itself and provide the perfection of the system itself. Important prerequisites. So, under the common effect of compromise and confrontation, the American people have made and passed the great constitution and established a great constitutional system to make the country strong and make the people happy.
【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D971.2;DD911

【参考文献】