2017-01-13 Liu Zhongjing
There are several different sources of the Constitution of the Kingdom of England that we know. But what needs to be emphasized is the origin of its Germanic tribe. Its other two sources are relatively less important. First, for the Kingdom of England itself, it is an external, introduced factor; second, it is introduced in a written way, in the form of a mature civilization. This kind of introduction makes the cultural elements it introduces more or less on the surface, not endogenous things. And if the constitutional government of the Kingdom has any special influence on the world, it means that it represents an endogenous, spontaneous system that grows up on habits and unwritten law.
This system uses what we know, David Hume (1711-1776, Scottish philosopher, historian, the master of British empiricism, the author of the immortal masterpiece British History), that is, it is It grows like a plant, and there are no traces of artificial design. Except for the British and ancient Rome, no other nation can match. If you want to talk about the constitution simply, the broad constitution is available to all ethnic groups. However, in most cases, the constitution is artificially formulated. The main lesson or educational significance that the English constitutional government brought to the world lies in its spontaneous nature. And it is part of the spontaneous nature, mainly from its Germanic tradition. The Constitution of the Kingdom actually has parts from the Roman and Hebrew cultures. However, these parts are superficial on the one hand. On the other hand, understanding these parts is not a big deal for others. It is not surprising that these things should be commonplace for most people in the world because of the introduction of foreign cultures or the constitutionalization of constitutions.
Only through the primitive customs of a nation, spontaneous and continuous constitutionalism, this path has its particularity. The freedom we know in England, in fact, mainly refers to this habit and spontaneity. Although many countries claim to be or are called liberal democratic institutions, these countries, as long as they are not English-speaking countries, have almost no exceptions, they must have a written constitution and powerful bureaucratic machines to enforce their laws. And the system. Just this point makes them different from the freedom of the real Anglo circle.
Where is the freedom of the Anglo Circle? Fundamentally, its source is from the Germanic tribe. The primitive freedom of the Germanic tribe was the fundamental source of all political systems throughout Europe. But only England has preserved this freedom in the long-term historical evolution and carried it forward. Other nations, either originally did not, or in the process of evolution, for more advanced rule, to improve efficiency, or for a variety of reasons, abandoned the original seemingly barbaric and vulgar freedom. The cost of this abandonment is often very alarming.
England's particularity to the world is here. Without England, there is no freedom in the true sense. It can be said that the freedom of the non-English world, although on the surface, can be said to be self-developed, but from the perspective of the world, direct and indirect, can not be separated from the order output provided by the English nation. This order output is due to the original Germanic tribe.
The Germanic norms, or customary laws, seem simple on the surface and are actually quite complex. According to Tocqueville, it is hard to imagine that in such a barbaric era, such a complicated and sophisticated code has been produced. If we assume that the Indo-European people have a certain homology in the laws of the primitive era, then we can go to the ancient Indian version of the Monu Code or to the ancient Persian Avista Code to find similar factors. What are the characteristics of these codes? They do not distinguish between religion and secular, do not distinguish between politics and everyday, everything is a mixed whole, and everything is within the jurisdiction of custom. The habit of sacrificing is part of customary law, and the habit of living is also part of customary law. Customary law relies on the stubbornness and inertia of the broadly conservative people, especially the unhealthy people, and does not require professional institutions. The paradox of the father's oral communication is that it is powerful to maintain strength. If a person violates the custom, it is not any force that is sanctioned by him, but merely not to be allowed by the father and the fellowship, it is enough to make him unable to mix in this tribe and have to escape. In the most primitive and ultimate sense, the aristocratic system and the democratic system are united.
What is the aristocratic system? That is the elite system. In the middle of the original war environment, a person who has no fighting power or is not good at fighting and is not brave can not pretend to be a noble. He must be a true warrior to be the leader of the nobility. On the other hand, it is the democracy in the most primitive sense, because the meaning of democracy is that the people choose their elite. The leader of the samurai was chosen by the samurai with the power of their weapons. And any subsequent elections can't be as real as such elections, because there is absolutely no room for people to impersonate. What is the original democracy of the Germans? It is the samurai assembly. In the middle of the Samurai General Assembly, if someone’s speeches and opinions are approved by everyone, then the person who approves will wave his spear, knocking each other and making a loud noise; and those who oppose him will also take him out. The spears of the spears, then, the two sides are bigger than their voice, the loudest party, that is to win. This is the most primitive democracy.
When the Normans came to England (1066), the customary laws they faced were like this. The Normans did not fundamentally change the original customary law, did not change the manor court and the basic social system, and the township courts and defamation courts left by the Alfred dynasty continued to exist. However, they introduced the standardized military feudal system that worked in Norman and Europe to the Kingdom of England. Due to the conquest of the Normans, the Great Council replaced the Sage Conference. The composition of the two is different: the sage meeting is an irregular meeting organized by the great producers, abbots, or the like of the Saxon kingdom; and the big meeting is assigned by the Normans in the counties. A more formal meeting of the knights. At the end of the big meeting, if it must be said that it is retrogressive, it is closer to Edward I (Edward I, 1239-1307, 1272-1307, who conquered Wales and suppressed the Scottish William Wallace uprising, 1295 Raising the military expenses and convening the "model council", including the archbishop, the bishop, the abbot, the count, the baron, and the representatives of the counties and towns, totaling more than 400 people) the dynasty's upper house. There was no such thing as the House of Commons at the time.
What is customary law? Customary law is not a highway that you officially invest in. It is a path that ordinary hunters and herders step on in the jungle. If all the people think, oh~ this road is the most convenient way to get water from the river. I am going from here. I stepped on the ground and put a few footprints on it. The people behind me stepped on the ground and printed more footprints. Stepping on more footprints... After hundreds of years, the footprints we stepped on have accumulated into a small road that leads to the river, and then everyone will not want to officially repair the road. The statute method is like a national plan. We have to repair a road to the river, invest in a dock, smash it, demolish a large number of places, and repair a straight road. The customary law is like this winding path that has been stepped out by countless unnamed people throughout the ages.
This is a Hume or Hayek-style concept of spontaneous choice: caused by human behavior, but not by human intentions. Caused by human behavior, ruling and eliminating by historical and natural reality, the last remaining part is often the most reasonable, it is like something that has been eliminated by nature. For example, you said that the design of the bee's hive is very reasonable, and the geometricians can't design it. The geometrician has only designed the same reasonable structure in the last few hundred years, and it has not been designed before. Is that because the bees are more intelligent than humans? of course not. It is because of the elimination of nature that it is not so reasonable to continually eliminate it. In the end, only the most reasonable ones remain. The way to eliminate nature is like this, that is, the partial elimination and partial screening that I have just described, and the elimination at the lowest cost, rather than a thorough rebuilding, inventing a basic principle and then re-constructing it completely. With this partial elimination and correction, it can produce results that can completely eliminate your rationalization intentions and, in fact, achieve highly reasonable results, and are more reasonable than the rationalized planning scheme you deliberately design.
Many people think that civilized and moderate justice is a product of modern times, and ancient justice is extremely cruel. This is not the case. Who can be judicially cruel? It is the justice of the ancient absolute monarchy that is cruel, and the judiciality of the church court is also cruel. Because its courts have absolute power over litigants, it can use scientific methods to explore the truth. Extorting a confession by torture is actually one of the scientific methods of exploring the truth, and it itself represents an effort by intelligent intellectuals to explore facts from an unknowable representation. Do not think that extorting a confession by torture is a random attack. No, there is a scientific procedure for extorting a confession by torture. It is hosted by an expert who is proficient in Roman law. It is observed by people who are good at observing and observing all kinds of signs. When people are lying, they have different observations. For those who have different classes, different learning, different sizes of learning, and different clan habits, there are detailed observation procedures. That is not something that is indiscriminate. The common law court does not do this at all. It bears the lawsuit between the free man and the free man. Free men can't fight, even if they are guilty, you can kill him at most, you can't beat him.
Before the eleventh century, we can say that the center of customary law is not in England, but more in German. The Saxon Methodology was produced in German, not in England, and it is very telling. But in the end, Germanic fell completely and became the world of Roman law; and England became the last stronghold of customary law. There are many possible reasons for this. It is due to the combined effect of multiple different factors on the same historical phenomenon. The matter of the autonomous community was the result of the constitutionality of England. Through the colonialism of England, it eventually spread to the whole world and constituted an important part of the current world order. We can make a judgment that is not absolutely correct, including many partial exceptions, but generally correct, that is: the world, if it is a free country, then it is nine out of ten, directly or indirectly, not imitating the Kingdom of England. Is the colonial output from England - the colonial output of England is the borough system that I just talked about; all countries and regions that do not come from this system are all established systems of dictatorship . It can be said that the current system, although the United Kingdom has been replaced by the United States, what is its core system? Still the ancient freedom of England. The American political system better reflects the traditional freedom of England than the United Kingdom, because England was more or less influenced by the European continent after the First World War.
(This article has not been reproduced without the author's authorization. If the original author has any objection, please contact the editor of the Society.)
Author: Liu Zhongjing
This issue is edited: Gao Yuzhen
Text editor: Yang Fan
Network Editor: Yingqi