|
Looking backward, from autocracy the legality has grown up to the rule law, and the rule of law continues growing. If the ideal direct democracy can be reached, the self-running of legality, will imply not only the perfect compatibility between legality and democracy, but also the consistence between the name and the meaning of the rule of law in its end as well as it’s beginning. In fact, if we take democracy as it is possessed by people, legality and democracy are always compatible; if we take it as an ideal, the degree of their compatibility is subject to the degree of the procedural quality of legality. Thus the fourth paradox is naturally solved, and what decided that legality becomes the rule of law (it’s difficult to find a turn-point in theory or in history ) and keeps the letter continuing developing, is the procedural quality of legality, which is the essence of the rule of law.
⒊ Application of local resources
The essence of the rule of law, despite whether it is correct, is an issue unavoidable during we learn from other’s culture. On the other side, id we recognize the rule of law as a natural outcome of the western culture, the rule of law in our country has to be cultivated in our own culture. That necessitates the application of local resources to our construction of the rule of law.
How to use the local resources? Tradition is to be gained by striving for, not by inheriting, 18 and to the local resources there is no exception. To strive for, we must borrow strength and be cognizant of the object. That urges scholars to divide labor and collaborate, studying deep into the western culture and our own culture at the same time, and comparing their sameness and difference. Perhaps the important thing is theory invention to solve the conceptual conflicts between the two cultures. If these conflicts fail to solve, our any use of other culture for reference might be a failure or at least a formal imitation. Taking an example, Chinese legal culture, of which there was no distinction between civil and public law, was characteristic of being moral and legal simultaneously, among which there are no the concepts such as right, obligation, etc. but a mechanism to repress them.19 On the contrary, those concepts in the west had their power first from metaphysics, then from the fact after the legal ideals had come into real. Here the two kinds of cultures conflicts. The fact that modern Chinese men are disposed to be morally reluctant as defying their rights, may be a result of the conflicts unresolved.
Surely, we can’t afford to practice only after the theory invention solves all conflicts, as the ultimate solution comes from the consolidation of theory and practice. From what we have stated, there is two important conclusion: ⑴the rule of law is the best legal system, which is able to reach the efficient disposition of resources and help reach the ethical aim of men; ⑵the rule of law is compatible with democracy, and its essence lies in the procedural system. In fact, the procedural system is democracy too, for the systematic cogency of procedural rule simultaneously marks the degree of the rule of law and democracy in completion. What connect the two aspects of the rule of law, are people, who improve the systematic cogency of procedural rules withi9n the system and will be improved as moral and able agents by the improved cogency. This mutual reaction determines not only the evolution of the rule of law, also the development of people. As a jurisprudent, he has to make analyses for the systematical cogency of the procedural rule, and the systematical cogency of the procedural rules, and modify them in the process that brings about new factors which influence the cogence during the mutual reaction between the rule of law and people (including jurisprudents themselves). Among those factors the most important is tradition culture, because it could affect any other factor. A sign of measure for the systematical cogency of the procedural rules is therefore the application of the local resources.
|
