Chapter 38 Six, the last question

Let's start with the Republic. Looking at the history of the world, it is not difficult to find that no matter the classical republic or the modern republic, almost all of them are commercial countries.It was the ancient Republic of Athens, the Roman Republic, medieval city-states such as Venice, Florence, Genoa, and Amsterdam, and modern Britain and the United States.Britain, as a virtual monarchy, and the United States, as a federal republic, are both commercial republics.On the contrary, those "real" empires, such as the Chinese Empire and the Mongol Empire, were mostly established by agricultural or nomadic peoples.Agricultural peoples advocate power, nomadic peoples advocate force, and empire is precisely a system that advocates both power and force, relying on force to obtain and maintain power (please refer to the first chapter of this book).

This is far from the republican spirit of "the world is for the public, peaceful coexistence, and elections".Of course, agricultural peoples also love peace, the Chinese Empire also advocated that the world should be one, and the Qing Dynasty also achieved the republic of five ethnic groups.This is the difference between agricultural peoples and nomadic peoples, agricultural empires and herding empires.Of course, as long as water and grass are plentiful and inviolable, nomads may not start wars, and they also love peace.But in comparison, agricultural peoples prefer stability and stability.Because only when the society is stable, the political situation is stable, there are no natural disasters, and no disasters, farmers can have a harvest, and they can slowly move towards a well-off through hard work and accumulation year by year.However, individual farmers who are unarmed and scattered are unable to maintain stability and stability.They can only hope in centralized politics, that is, relying on a strong regime to maintain order and prevent them from being violated and harassed.You must know that in those eras when there was neither domestic law nor international law, violations and harassment were easy to happen-there were nomadic peoples who were eyeing tigers abroad, and there were hooligans who did evil in the countryside.Only the empire can protect their safety, and only the long-term stability of the empire can give them the hope of running towards a well-off life.This is the reason why they always look forward to the early birth of the "true man" when the world is in chaos.So the thing turned out to be like this: the peaceful coexistence of the empire was actually maintained by the power and the force behind the power. The principle that the world is a common law is just an excuse to maintain the rule.As for the regular elections, the change of term of office is even more exaggerated-the empire does not agree, and the people are not interested.Imperial subjects who hope for stability and stability do not like frequent changes in rulers.

The republican spirit and republican system can only be produced in commercial nations, which does not mean that commercial nations are nobler or better than agricultural or nomadic nations, but only because of the different ways of making profits.The legitimate means of profit is toil, among agricultural, nomadic, and commercial peoples alike.But if it is necessary to seize by chance, then the commercial nation is more inclined to steal than to seize.Everyone knows that success in business mainly depends on careful planning, repeated calculations and bargaining, rather than relying on fighting with open flames and robbing houses.There is also the use of force, but that is mostly to pave the way or create conditions for bargaining.If the plunder is all based on violence, it is not a merchant, but a robber.

Therefore, the commercial nation also advocates negotiation rather than war.The so-called "negotiating business" means that all business is negotiated, not negotiated.Even if there is a "commercial war", when it is the turn to do business, we still have to talk.The difference between commerce and plunder is that any transaction must be negotiated.And vice versa.As long as it can be negotiated, anything can be regarded as a transaction and can be resolved through negotiations, including political issues.This is "and", that is, to resolve disputes through peaceful means.If a deal can be finally reached, its plan must be "mutually beneficial"; if a dispute can be settled peacefully, its plan must be "win-win".Mutual benefit and win-win do not mean that one party overwhelms or consumes the other, so it is not only "harmony", but also "republic".

Since the settlement of political disputes is regarded as a transaction, it must of course be carried out in accordance with commercial methods and rules.The first is to talk, that is, "proposal", which is equivalent to promoting products and quotations in commercial activities (including stating the reasons for pricing).This requires professional ability and specialized talents, and thus professional politicians, such as parliamentarians, have emerged.Although members of parliament are elected by the people in name, it is impossible to get unanimous votes in reality. In fact, they are only elected by a group of people with the same or similar political views. They are their political spokespersons, no different from business representatives sent by companies.The task of members of parliament is to "negotiate business" with other representatives, and the corresponding political system is "parliamentary democracy" and "representative system".This kind of system is not difficult to understand among business people, because it is like handing over one's own business to an intermediary company or a professional company, such as finding a special accounting company to help you calculate your accounts, and finding a special investment company to help you manage your finances .Election of members is just looking for those who specialize in politics to represent their own political views.This is commonplace in modern business society, and it is also an efficient practice.Therefore, only in the early days of the commercial republic, they will implement the system of "direct democracy".Because most of them were "self-employed" at that time, and each business was negotiated by themselves.

For a transaction to be successful, not only must it be negotiated (advocated), it must also be conceded.This is "compromise", which is equivalent to bargaining in business activities.Bargaining includes not only the asking price, but more importantly, the price (of course there must be a bottom line).A sale with only bargaining and no bargaining is not a sale, and it cannot be successful.Both parties make concessions before the deal can be concluded.If one side thinks it has power and the other thinks it has the truth, or if both sides are self-centered and neither is willing to give in, then there will only be "mutual struggle" and "one-sided power".In fact, there is no republic without compromise.The 1787 Philadelphia Constitution of the United States was the product of the "Great Compromise" between Federalists and Anti-Federalists.The result is the long-term coexistence of various political forces, peaceful coexistence, mutual supervision, and taking turns to sit on the throne. This is "republican politics".

Finally, there is the "signing".This is "legislation", which is equivalent to signing a contract in business activities.However, this is not an ordinary contract, but rather a "framework agreement".It stipulates principles, not specific affairs.Since it stipulates principles, it even needs a contract on how to sign a contract, which is the "legislative law"; it also needs a general contract that regulates all transaction principles and signing principles, which is the "constitution".Only transactions and contracts concluded within the framework of the Constitution are legally valid and protected by law. This is the "constitutional system".Please see, democracy, republic, constitutional government, or parliamentary democracy, republican politics, and constitutional government, do they all have the shadow of commercial activities behind them?

This is of course a political tradition and way of thinking that our nation cannot have.We are an agricultural nation, and the agricultural nation does not advocate cleverness or usurpation, but practical work.According to the spirit of hard work, talk is going to harm the country.This makes us preconceived disapproval of systems such as parliamentary democracy.Likewise, due to the long-standing contempt and contempt for commerce, merchants, business activities, and commerce, transaction, compromise, and bargaining have always been derogatory terms in our nation.What we stand for is awe-inspiring righteousness, a promise that is worth a thousand dollars, valuing righteousness over profit, "calculating political accounts rather than economic accounts", and "dare to compete with evil spirits and not yield an inch to demons".Therefore, despite the fact that there are tricks and robberies, they cannot be put on the table, let alone called for publicly, but must be decorated with high-sounding reasons (such as "pleading for the people", "the side of the Qing Dynasty").Therefore, in Chinese history, there were only palace coups, but no parliamentary democracy; there was only competition in the Central Plains, and there was no republican politics.Likewise, we cannot have a constitutional system.Because what we value is faith rather than contract, morality rather than law, how can there be rule of law, and how can there be constitutionalism?

But that's not the most important thing.The most important thing is that only commercial activities strongly require the clarification of property rights and the distinction between public and private, because buying and selling is nothing more than the transfer of ownership.This thing originally belonged to me, but after it is sold to you, it becomes yours.This must first be clear whether this thing is mine.If it's someone else's, I have no right to sell it.If it is public, we cannot buy or sell.Therefore, commercial activities require not only clear property rights, but also a distinction between public and private.If the property rights are not clear, the buyer and the seller cannot make a deal.Who dares to buy a commodity with unclear property rights?Similarly, if the public and private are not clear, it is difficult to move towards a republic.Because the concept of republic comes from "public affairs" (res publica), it is relative to the field outside "private affairs" (res priv ata).It is only in this field that there is the question of republic or not. In the field of private affairs, it does not matter whether it is republican or not (it should even be independent).It can be seen that the distinction between the public sphere and the private sphere is a prerequisite for the realization of a republic.

The same goes for constitutionalism.What constitutional government wants to restrict is the use of public power, not the enjoyment of private rights.Rather, it requires that no legislation violate the fundamental rights of individual citizens.The principle of constitutionalism and the rule of law is: for the government, anything that is not explicitly authorized by the law cannot be done; for individuals, anything that is not expressly prohibited by the law is allowed.It can be seen that the distinction between public and private is clear!It is self-evident that democracy must distinguish between public and private.If the public is private, and the private is public, it does not matter whether the sovereignty lies with the king or the people.In fact, democracy, republic, and constitutionalism all aim to solve problems in the public sphere, rather than interfering with freedom in the private sphere.But if there is no private domain, there is no public domain; and if there is no private property, it is difficult to have a private domain.Therefore, only by clarifying property rights and distinguishing between public and private, can there be democracy, constitutionalism, and a republic.

However, as mentioned in Chapter 5 of this book, the economic foundation of the small peasant economy and the superstructure of the family-state integration have led to unclear property rights and no distinction between public and private in traditional China.This makes us not know what democracy is, what is republic, what is constitutionalism, and what is communism.For example, communism was first interpreted as "communism and wife sharing", and then "communism" was interpreted as "equalization of the rich and the poor", "equal partnership", and "eating from the same pot".This is really absurd.In fact, the Japanese translate Communism as "Communism", which means "common collective production".It can be seen that the "production" in the Japanese translation of "communism" is the "production" of production, not the "production" of property.According to Chinese language habits, it should actually be called "communism".Of course, the accurate term is still "communism" or "communism".Because the etymology of Communism, Community, originally had meanings such as community, group, community, public, and community.In fact, Marx and Engels also called the communist society a "community".They said: "In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, there will be a union in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." (Marx, Engels, Communist Manifesto 》) Excuse me, is this equalization of the rich and the poor, equal partnership, and eating a big pot of rice? In fact, communism never means "share other people's property".On the contrary, "Communism does not deprive anyone of the right to possess social products" (Marx and Engels "Communist Manifesto").Just as "the world is public" as the premise of a republic means only the public sharing of the public domain, it does not mean the "confiscation" of private property and private rights; "It's far from it, and it's not like "drinking in a big bowl, eating a big piece of meat, and dividing gold and silver in a big scale" after "fighting a house". On the contrary, it has many similarities with republicanism.In the classic document "Critique of the Gotha Program", Marx proposed three conditions for communism: 1. The source of social wealth is fully flowing; 2. People no longer obey the social division of labor like slaves; 3. Labor is not only about making a living means, and is the first need of life (please refer to "Selected Works of Marx and Engels", Volume 3, p. 12).Here, we don't see the meaning of "communists and wives".On the contrary, people no longer obey the social division of labor like slaves. Everyone works according to their own interests and abilities, each contributes to his ability, and each takes what he needs, thus forming a society where diversity coexists. Isn’t it harmony and republic? Obviously, tradition is a lingering ghost, always controlling our thinking and determining the success or failure of every change we make.Therefore, a theory that ignores tradition is deceptive, a system that ignores tradition is a tree without roots, and reforms that ignore tradition will inevitably suffer repeated setbacks.Mr. Qian Mu said: "I think that the political system must be rooted and self-sustaining. Even if some can be transferred from abroad, it must first be integrated with the traditions of the country before it can really play a role. Otherwise, lifeless politics Without a cooperating system, it will definitely not be able to grow." (Qian Mu's "Political Gains and Losses in the Past Dynasties of China") Mr. Qian Mu's views on ancient Chinese politics are generally debatable, but this statement is not unreasonable.It seems that the best thing is this: We already have a tradition of democracy, republic, and constitutional government, and we just need to dig them out. But the question is, do we have it? This determines that building a republic, democracy, and constitutional government that suits China's national conditions must be a long process, a process of continuous exploration, exploration, practice, and error correction. It can also be said to be "crossing the river by feeling the stones"!It's just that we don't know how wide the river is or how many stones there are. The road is long and long, I will search up and down!