|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 “开明专制” 不是句骂人话 |
 |
| 所跟贴 |
“开明专制” 不是句骂人话 -- 芦笛 - (1586 Byte) 2005-3-19 周六, 下午11:37 (901 reads) |
rimskych
[博客]
[个人文集]
游客
|
|
|
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
[quote=伏尔泰, 芦笛]
“Enlightened monarchs were monarchs who distinguished themselves from traditional monarchs in the way they governed. Specifically, Enlightened Monarchs ruled their subjects using the principles of the Enlightenment. In order to be considered "enlightened", they must allow religious toleration, freedom of speech and press, and the right to hold private property. They must foster the arts, sciences, and educations. Above all, they must not be arbitrary in their rules; they must obey the laws and enforce them fairly for all subjects.”
[/quote]
First of all, even China today do not have enlightened monarchs, the ruiling class's position can not be inherited by their relatives, et cetera.
Of course people would agree that "religious toleration, freedom of speech and press, and the right to hold private property." would be the most important things to be implmented in China.
The argument is mainly on whether it should be enforced by enlightment absolutism (I think that the term enlightment monarch is not suitable), or democracy with universal suffrage. I personally don't prefer enlightened absolutism, as anyone except the ruiling class have no say on politics. And the success of this completely depend on how rational the CCP are, not a wise move I must say.
However I don't support complete democracy either, the problem is how can you implement it? The CCP would not reform by itself to such extent, there are too many "reactionarys" there. But I would think that democracy with limited suffrage is the best solution. Those who are wealthy can vote, or those who are landowners, it is technically more pratical, actually I think the CCP try to achieve the same goal by getting those richs into the party. With a limitied suffrage, it would provide the function for monitoring the progress of government in a limitied extent.
Though it doomed to have problems, as the government would be very likely to be lassez-faire, but it would be the best of all evils.
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
