君主政体的专制与法治

发布时间：2018-04-01 13:00

本文选题：政体　切入点：君主政体　出处：《西南政法大学》2010年硕士论文

【摘要】： 《论法的精神》不是一部容易理解的作品,甚至伏尔泰也觉得它像是一座迷宫。但是孟德斯鸠却宣称,这部作品是有设计的,或者说,隐藏着一个意图。因此寻找一个适当的切入点,对于解读这部复杂的作品显得至关重要。本文尝试以政体学说作为这样一个切入点,并把这一学说置于双重背景下加以考察。首先我简要地回顾孟德斯鸠之前的政体学说传统,从中选取了三位与孟德斯鸠联系最密切的作家的学说加以分析,这三个人依次是亚里士多德、波利比乌斯和马基雅维里。我认为孟德斯鸠的政体理论源头不是亚里士多德,他虽然借鉴了亚里士多德,但并不认同他的学说。对于波利比乌斯,孟德斯鸠则抱着更大的同情。但是三者中马基雅维里对孟德斯鸠的影响至为深远。通过两人文本的对勘,我发现从早期的《思索欧洲普世君主制》《罗马盛衰原因论》到晚期的《论法的精神》,都可以看到孟德斯鸠力图消除马基雅维里主义的影响,而且孟德斯鸠的政体学说恰恰是针对马基雅维里而设计的。我特别比较了两人对波利比乌斯的不同处理手法以及对专制的不同见解,揭示了两人的分歧所在。接下来我试图说明,由于马基雅维里的政体学说与罗马史有不可分割的联系,所以孟德斯鸠清除马基雅维里主义的任务不可避免地与为罗马“除魅”的任务交织在一起。为了达到这一目的,孟德斯鸠复活了东方专制这一古老的概念,他将罗马专制等同于东方专制,鼓吹这种东方蛮族的统治方式将威胁到西方文明世界的生存。接着我着重考察了《论法的精神》中的政体分类的特色,尤其是其中关于君主政体与专制政体的论述。我认为这两个部分实际上是不可分割的,在这两种政体的背后实际上有一个隐蔽的政体,即法国君主政体,那才是孟德斯鸠政体学说关注的焦点。我分析了孟德斯鸠笔下现代君主政体的两种模式,即由日耳曼模式衍生出来英国模式和法国模式。英国式的自由政体并非孟德斯鸠心目中的理想政体,孟德斯鸠并不认为这种政体具有普世适用性,因为各国的法的精神并不相同。因此孟德斯鸠根据法国民族的特性,设计了一种独具特色的君主政体,即法治的宽和政体。孟德斯鸠认为这种政体既可以抵御东方专制主义的威胁,又可以维持法兰西民族的生活方式。通过细读文本,我认为这种政体的原则并非表面上所说的荣宠,因为荣宠也受制于法律,所以法律才是这种政体的真正驱动力。最后,我分析了孟德斯鸠对法律的两个定义,揭示其法律观的本质在于将法律作为驯服人类激情的理性。
[Abstract]:The Spirit of the Dharma is not an easy to understand work, even Voltaire feels like a labyrinth, but Montesquieu claims that it is designed, or rather, Therefore, it is very important to find an appropriate entry point for the interpretation of this complex work. This paper attempts to take the polity theory as such a starting point and examine the theory under the dual background. First of all, I briefly review Montesquieu's tradition of polity, from which I select three writers who are most closely connected with Montesquieu, and these three people are Aristotle in turn. Pollibius and Machiavelli. I don't think Montesquieu's theory of polity came from Aristotle. He borrowed from Aristotle, but he didn't agree with his theory. Montesquieu was more sympathetic. But Machiavelli's influence on Montesquieu was profound. I found that Montesquieu tried to eliminate the influence of Machiavellianism from the early thinking of the European monarchy, the reasons for the rise and fall of Rome, to the late Spirit of the Doctrine. And Montesquieu's theory of polity was designed precisely for Machiavelli. I particularly compared the two men's different approaches to Politbius and their different views of autocracy, revealing their differences. And I'm going to try to explain that because Machiavelli's doctrine of polity is inextricably linked to the history of Rome, So Montesquieu's task of purging Machiavellianism was inevitably intertwined with the task of "disenchantment" for Rome. To that end, Montesquieu revived the ancient concept of Eastern despotism. He equated Roman despotism with oriental despotism, and preaching this form of eastern barbarian rule would threaten the survival of Western civilization. And then I focused on the features of the classification of regimes in the Spirit of Law, and in particular on the discussion of monarchy and autocracy, and I think these two parts are actually inseparable. Behind these two regimes is actually a hidden regime, the French monarchy, which is the focus of Montesquieu's polity theory. I have analyzed the two models of Montesquieu's modern monarchy. That is, the British model and the French model are derived from the Germanic model. The British liberal regime is not the ideal regime in the eyes of Montesquieu, and Montesquieu does not consider it to be universally applicable. Because the spirit of the laws of different countries is not the same, Montesquieu, according to the characteristics of the French nation, designed a unique monarchy. The lenient regime of the rule of law, which Montesquieu believes can resist the threat of Eastern autocracy and maintain the way of life of the French people. I don't think the principle of this form of government is prima facie honour, because it is also subject to the law, so the law is the real driving force of this regime. Finally, I analyzed Montesquieu's two definitions of law. The essence of his view of law lies in taking law as the reason to tame human passion.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2010
【分类号】：D09

【参考文献】