开创新世界的旧立宪者?——评约翰·亚当斯的《为宪法辩护》
|
摘要
亚当斯在《为宪法辩护》中严词批判了法国思想家杜戈特提出的"将所有权力集中到一个中心"的直接民主思想。他通过回顾历史上欧洲各国政体的构建实践和总结知名思想家的著述,声称杜戈特的主张不仅无法在现实中发挥效用,而且还有将国家导向专制和分裂的危险。亚当斯认为只有混合政府才是完善的政体形式,而两院制是维持权力平衡的关键。在美国立宪过程中,杜戈特的主张未成为主流的意见。美国几乎所有州的宪法和联邦宪法都纳入了权力分立和两院制的制度设计,这表明亚当斯辩护的目的已基本实现。但是《辩护》所倡导的强力行政长官和对参议院的贵族式解读却遭到猛烈的批判,这本书成为政敌们攻击亚当斯的主要书面证据。对《辩护》的批判和亚当斯争取连任总统的失败使得我们认识到,18世纪末以来的美国主流政治和知识精英已决意同起源于欧洲的西方古典政治理念和实践划清界限。任何人,哪怕是开国元勋和现任总统,他们将西方古典政治理论和实践同美国立宪活动联系起来的努力也无法获得成功。
In his Defense of the Constitutions,Adams severely criticized the thoughts of direct democracy provided by Turgot,one of the most prominent theorists in France in the late 18 th century. By drawing on the historical development of government and the works of prominent theorists,Adams asserted that the Turgot model is useless in practice at best and dangerous for the unification of the country at worst. In the eyes of Adams,the only perfect form of government is mixed government and the key to maintain the power balance is bilateral bicameralism. During the constitutional drafting process,the Turgot's model was not accepted by the mainstream drafters. The federal constitution and virtually all of the state constitutions incorporated the principles of power division and bicameralism. This signals the success of Adams' s defense. However,Adams' propositions of strong executive head and the support for aristocracy in the senate had received severely criticism. The Defense had become a major written source of evidence for criticizing Adams. Such constant criticism combined with the failure of Adams' seeking presidential re-election indicate that the American political and scholarly elites in the late 18 th century had decided to abandon the traditional political principles and practice,which originated from the Western Europe. Even if the efforts to link the construction of American constitution to these traditional principles are supported by some founder fathers and current president,such efforts would be proved to be a failure.
In his Defense of the Constitutions,Adams severely criticized the thoughts of direct democracy provided by Turgot,one of the most prominent theorists in France in the late 18 th century. By drawing on the historical development of government and the works of prominent theorists,Adams asserted that the Turgot model is useless in practice at best and dangerous for the unification of the country at worst. In the eyes of Adams,the only perfect form of government is mixed government and the key to maintain the power balance is bilateral bicameralism. During the constitutional drafting process,the Turgot's model was not accepted by the mainstream drafters. The federal constitution and virtually all of the state constitutions incorporated the principles of power division and bicameralism. This signals the success of Adams' s defense. However,Adams' propositions of strong executive head and the support for aristocracy in the senate had received severely criticism. The Defense had become a major written source of evidence for criticizing Adams. Such constant criticism combined with the failure of Adams' seeking presidential re-election indicate that the American political and scholarly elites in the late 18 th century had decided to abandon the traditional political principles and practice,which originated from the Western Europe. Even if the efforts to link the construction of American constitution to these traditional principles are supported by some founder fathers and current president,such efforts would be proved to be a failure.
引文
[1][美]汉密尔顿、杰伊、麦迪逊:《联邦党人文集》,程逢如等译,商务印书馆1980年版。
[2][美]赫伯特·斯托林:《反联邦党人赞成什么---宪法反对者的政治思想》,汪庆华译,北京大学出版社2006年版。
[3]姜峰、毕竟悦编译:《联邦党人与反联邦党人---在宪法批准中的辩论(1787-1788)》,中国政法大学出版社2012年版。
[4][美]约翰·亚当斯,《为美国宪法辩护》,冯洋译,商务印书馆2020年待出版。
(1)与《联邦党人文集》的经久不衰形成鲜明对比的是,当时与联邦党人激烈论战的反联邦党人的思想却缺乏足够的关注。直到1963年美国才有学者提议集结出版《反联邦党人文集》,该文集最终于1981年问世,见Herbert J.Storing,Dry,Murray,eds,The Complete Anti-Federalist.1-7(Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1981).
(2)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),p.91.
(3)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 4,pp.189-202.
(1)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 4,p.279.
(2)Will Slauter,Constructive Misreadings:Adams,Turgot,and the American State Constitutions,Bibliographical Society of America 105(2011),pp.36-37.
(3)id.
(4)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),pp.105-106.
(5)Will Slauter,Constructive Misreadings:Adams,Turgot,and the American State Constitutions”,Bibliographical Society of America 105(2011),pp.39-40.
(1)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),pp.98-99.
(2)id.
(3)John Adams,Papers of John Adams(Cambridge,Harvard University Press,1977),p.400.
(4)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),Volume 4,p.117.
(5)Zoltan Haraszti,John Adams and the Prophets of Progress(Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2014),p.155.
(1)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York:Simon&Schuster,2001),p.293.
(1)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),p.91.
(2)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.407.
(3)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),pp.289-290.
(1)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),chapter 9.
(2)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),p.290.
(3)id.,p.294
(4)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.407
(5)id.,p.408
(6)1814年以后,亚当斯同泰勒频繁通信,交换对《辩护》主要主张的意见,见Joseph J.Ellis,Passionate Sage,the Character and Legacy of John Adams(New York:W.W.Norton&Company,2001),pp.146-149.
(7)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.397-399.
(8)William J.Watkins,Reclaiming the American Revolution:the Kentucky and Virgina Resolutions and Their Legacy(New York,Springer,2016)p.28.
(1)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.404-409.
(2)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 10,p.94.
(3)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.412.
(4)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.67-68.
(5)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),pp.289-290.
[2][美]赫伯特·斯托林:《反联邦党人赞成什么---宪法反对者的政治思想》,汪庆华译,北京大学出版社2006年版。
[3]姜峰、毕竟悦编译:《联邦党人与反联邦党人---在宪法批准中的辩论(1787-1788)》,中国政法大学出版社2012年版。
[4][美]约翰·亚当斯,《为美国宪法辩护》,冯洋译,商务印书馆2020年待出版。
(1)与《联邦党人文集》的经久不衰形成鲜明对比的是,当时与联邦党人激烈论战的反联邦党人的思想却缺乏足够的关注。直到1963年美国才有学者提议集结出版《反联邦党人文集》,该文集最终于1981年问世,见Herbert J.Storing,Dry,Murray,eds,The Complete Anti-Federalist.1-7(Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1981).
(2)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),p.91.
(3)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 4,pp.189-202.
(1)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 4,p.279.
(2)Will Slauter,Constructive Misreadings:Adams,Turgot,and the American State Constitutions,Bibliographical Society of America 105(2011),pp.36-37.
(3)id.
(4)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),pp.105-106.
(5)Will Slauter,Constructive Misreadings:Adams,Turgot,and the American State Constitutions”,Bibliographical Society of America 105(2011),pp.39-40.
(1)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),pp.98-99.
(2)id.
(3)John Adams,Papers of John Adams(Cambridge,Harvard University Press,1977),p.400.
(4)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),Volume 4,p.117.
(5)Zoltan Haraszti,John Adams and the Prophets of Progress(Cambridge:Harvard University Press,2014),p.155.
(1)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York:Simon&Schuster,2001),p.293.
(1)Bradley Thompson,John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty(Kansas:University Press of Kansas,1998),p.91.
(2)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.407.
(3)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),pp.289-290.
(1)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),chapter 9.
(2)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),p.290.
(3)id.,p.294
(4)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.407
(5)id.,p.408
(6)1814年以后,亚当斯同泰勒频繁通信,交换对《辩护》主要主张的意见,见Joseph J.Ellis,Passionate Sage,the Character and Legacy of John Adams(New York:W.W.Norton&Company,2001),pp.146-149.
(7)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.397-399.
(8)William J.Watkins,Reclaiming the American Revolution:the Kentucky and Virgina Resolutions and Their Legacy(New York,Springer,2016)p.28.
(1)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.404-409.
(2)John Adams,The Works of John Adams(New York:Books for Libraries Press,1969),volume 10,p.94.
(3)Gordon S.Wood,The Creation of the American Republic,1776-1787(Chapel Hill:The University of North Carolina Press,1998),p.412.
(4)John Ferling,John Adams,A Life(Knoxville:The University of Tennessee Press,2010),pp.67-68.
(5)David McC ullough,John Adams(New York,Simon&Schuster,2001),pp.289-290.