论文部分内容阅读
施米特的政治法学将对主权者的辨识置于关键地位,但创造处境、保护处境、解释根本问题和判决重要争端的主体不尽一致,给主权者的辨识带来了重要的理论困难。对这一问题的深入追溯揭示出施米特学说中存在的重要断裂:四种主体的分化归根结底是处境创造者和保护者的矛盾,二者处于统一体中却可能发生冲突。施米特通过骚乱学来处理这一矛盾,将希望寄托于处境的守护者。在当代社会,政治精英集团的复合型人格可能充当这个守护者的角色,但其动态复合结构比施米特学说中预设的单一位格对政治法学提出了更深刻的理论挑战。
Schmitter’s political jurisprudence will place the identification of the sovereign at a crucial position. However, the subjects that create the situation, protect the situation, explain the fundamental issues and adjudicate important disputes are not uniform, posing important theoretical difficulties for the identification of the sovereign. In-depth retrospection of this issue reveals the important break in Schmitt’s theory: the differentiation of the four kinds of subjects is the contradiction between creator and protector of the situation in the final analysis, and the two may conflict in the unity. Schmidt handled this contradiction through chaos and placed his hopes on the guardians of the situation. In contemporary society, the complex personality of the political elite group may play this guardian’s role, but its dynamic compound structure poses a more profound theoretical challenge to political jurisprudence than Schmidt’s presumably single personality.