代写范文

留学资讯

写作技巧

论文代写专题

服务承诺

资金托管
原创保证
实力保障
24小时客服
使命必达

51Due提供Essay,Paper,Report,Assignment等学科作业的代写与辅导,同时涵盖Personal Statement,转学申请等留学文书代写。

51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标
51Due将让你达成学业目标

私人订制你的未来职场 世界名企,高端行业岗位等 在新的起点上实现更高水平的发展

积累工作经验
多元化文化交流
专业实操技能
建立人际资源圈

British constitutional system and constitutional thought

2019-03-04 来源: 51due教员组 类别: Essay范文

下面为大家整理一篇优秀的essay代写范文- British constitutional system and constitutional thought,供大家参考学习,这篇论文讨论了英国宪制和宪制思想。英国1618世纪宪制的演变比较曲折。内战前混合宪制已形成多年,其相应思想长期流行并影响后世。17世纪中期共和国的兴衰和分权制有名无实,给后人留下经验和教训。而贵族寡头权力垄断和内阁制的形成发展,增强了18世纪英国混合制的特色。

constitutional system,英国宪制思想,essay代写,作业代写,代写

The evolution of British constitutional system in the 16th and 18th centuries was rather tortuous. Before the civil war, the mixed constitutional system had been formed for many years. In the mid-17th century, the rise and fall of the republic and the decentralization system were nominal, leaving behind experience and lessons for later generations. The formation and development of the oligarchy power monopoly of the GUI nationality and the cabinet system enhanced the characteristics of the mixed system of Britain in the 18th century.

There are a variety of expressions about the character of the British political system at various times. The Tudor and earlier political systems were known as Mixed Constitution. In the mid-17th century, it was once called commonwealth. Later scholars also concluded that "the theory of separation of powers was born and developed under the special circumstances of the English civil war and the republic". After the glorious revolution, the British political system was not only called "mixed system" and "decentralization system", but also occasionally called "republic system". So many names, often make future generations difficult to understand and misunderstanding. Even a concept is ambiguous. For example, the doctrine of decentralization has been interpreted by John Lawson, John Locke and William blackstone, etc., which means either hierarchical decentralization, or functional decentralization of government, or both.

It can be seen that the single use of "mixed system" or "decentralization system" is not enough to accurately summarize the development context and basic characteristics of Britain's early modern constitutional system. In the meantime, the balance of power mixed and divided is sometimes strong, sometimes weak, or both exist side by side. Since the late 17th century, Britain has been characterized by a mixture of power and checks and balances. Moreover, despite the decentralization of power in Britain, especially the independence of the judiciary and the law, the development trend of "mixed constitutional system" has been consistent and has occupied the mainstream. Relevant interpretations can be found in the works of John bonet, John Elmer, Thomas Smith, Philip hendon, harrington and Locke, as well as in a number of government documents. After the glorious revolution, the continuation of the aristocracy's political power and the formation and development of the cabinet system strengthened the integration of administration and legislation.

In addition to civil rights, constitutional studies mainly focus on the division, exercise and coordination of state power. In view of the mutual influence between the British constitutional system and its thoughts, this paper has repeatedly discussed the practice of constitutional system and the relationship between them.

Why does the British political system always have the characteristics of mixed constitutional system? What are the reasons for the coexistence of mixed and decentralized systems in the 17th and 18th centuries? The author tries to probe into the evolution of British constitutional system from the 16th century to the 18th century in chronological order. The improper place, asks the reader to advise.

In the 18th century, the decentralization system and the theory of decentralization in Britain seemed to be suddenly curbed, leaving little room for further development. There are at least three reasons:

First, in the first half of the 18th century, the theory of mixed government once again came to dominate. Its momentum is stronger than ever.

Among those who defend the hybrid system, Humphrey McVay's views are typical. In his view, for a country blessed with security, a mixed system of government is the key, the sharing of legislative power is the prerequisite, and the division of powers for other government functions should be prudent, reflecting the spirit of balance and mutual restriction. The king must have the power to declare war and make peace, to command the armed forces, to call and dissolve parliament, and to appoint religious, secular, military and other important positions. The house of Commons decides to levy taxes and impeach officials; the upper court has the power of trial.

McWhorse's argument, though lacking the influence of Locke's, is a feasible summary of the facts of the British constitution then and for many years to come. He incorporated the idea of supporting separation into the mixed theory, making the principle of functional differentiation of institutions both indispensable and unable to break through the framework of mixed system. Steyer, a political commentator of the same period, warned in succinct terms that if the various branches of government were completely independent, "unpleasant structures would inevitably be produced, that is, if any discord arose between them and they were determined to remain unmoved, then the political system here would require a right to vote." As a result, power stalemate is likely to occur, and even lead to violence.

Among the most influential politicians of the time, only st. John bolingbroke was prepared to defend a balanced constitution, stressing that the separation of the three branches of power was the essence of the British constitution. If the king has legislative and executive power, he is an absolute monarch: if either house of parliament is too powerful, Britain has a kind of aristocracy and democracy. It is precisely because of this political balance, that these different privileges are respectively attributed to the king, the house of lords and the house of Commons, that a limited monarchy is formed. The main purpose of borlinbruck's decentralization doctrine was to resist the power monopoly and expansion of the whigs, especially the cabinet system created by Walpole. However, due to the great disparity between the two parties and the scattered opposition parties, bo's idea of balanced decentralization could not be smoothly publicized. However, his above thoughts influenced montesquieu's decentralization theory.

From 1865 to 1869, legal authority William blackstone published the interpretation of English law. The description of the British national power not only inherits the former view of the trinity of the British parliament, but also borrows the essence of montesquieu's decentralization theory boldly, thus presenting a beautiful political picture of the combination of power mix and balance:

The king is part of the parliament, so that's why he has some legislative power. The constitution gives the king the "right of veto" instead of the "right of decision"... . The sovereign has no power to misbehave, but merely "prevents" it. When a given law is introduced, the sovereign shall not be free to make changes from the outset, but may agree or oppose changes proposed and approved by both houses. Moreover, without the consent of the executive, the legislature shall not deprive the executive of any of the powers currently acquired by law. Since laws must be made permanent, as they were before, they can be changed only if the monarch and both houses of parliament agree. In this way, the British regime is superior in that it keeps all sides at each other's beck and call. In the legislature, the people contain the aristocracy, and the aristocracy contain the people. Both houses guard against administrative overreach... In this way, the parts of our national machinery support each other and are supported by each other. Controlling other aspects and being controlled by other aspects... It's like three different kinds of repairmen, each doing their best in their own way, working together to develop the state machinery.

The accuracy of blackstone's views was questioned by later generations, and he was even criticized for copying montesquieu's views. Western scholars F.T.H.F letcher in his book Montesquierand English quite harsh on brinell criticism in Politics says: "blackstone is not a very principled thinker, in the field, in addition to the common law of he covered by what we get from montesquieu his own contribution to the constitutional theory, even he has long been regarded as a reflection of master meng. He borrowed a lot of ideas. Some say blackstone's plagiarism is' disgusting if not ridiculous'. '" from M. Wiehl. Constitutionalism and decentralization. P. 95. Bentham and others scoffed at his idea. For example, in 1776, bentham published his theory of government film anonymously, which was written to criticize blackstone. The final circumstances of his view also illustrate the fate of the decentralization doctrine. In 1784 Soame Jenyns, a senior member of parliament, warned the world in a pamphlet entitled "reflections on parliamentary reform" :

The independence of the house of Commons is not an essential element of English law. The virtue of the British constitution is that it consists of three powers, each dependent on the other. If one side were independent of the other, it would certainly have all the power, and our system of government would immediately change. In the last century the house of Commons was effectively independent, Kings were killed, nobles were killed, and the world's worst democracy was established. If we are unlucky enough to see another democracy, the same chaos is sure to recur.

Obviously, the British ruling class to the revolution of the alert, is their advocacy of mixed system, against the separation of powers or parliament from the tripartite and independent true meaning.

In the 18th century, the formation and development of the cabinet system strengthened the characteristics of legislation and administration. In particular, Walpole, the first prime minister, could not only replace the king and skillfully lead the cabinet, but also act as the most important spokesman of the ruling party and skillfully control the parliament, effectively controlling the legislative power of the parliament and the highest executive power of the country in the cabinet headed by the prime minister. That allowed him to serve as head of the cabinet for another 21 years. For example, perrin led the cabinet for 11 years, Lord north served as coyett for 12 years, and William Pitt served as prime minister for nearly 20 years twice. Their average term of office was nearly 16 years, significantly higher than that of other noble prime ministers, and both of them took advantage of and promoted the constitutional mixture. In 1784, with the support of George iii, Peter the younger dissolved parliament for a new general election, setting a precedent for the government to dominate parliament by "appealing to the people". Cabinet/parliamentary system became the typical model of British government institutions in modern times, and formed a series of conventions, and the trend of administrative and judicial interaction was obviously strengthened.

After the glorious revolution, a few lords monopolized the state power for a long time and kept the basic characteristics of the aristocratic oligarchy. In other words, the long-term existence of aristocratic oligarchy is an important condition for the existence of Britain's "mixed constitutional system". The lords were not only the makers of the 1688 revolution and the framers of the constitutional monarchy, but also the core of the allied monarchy, the country gentry, and other propertied classes. The long existence of large estates became the basis of aristocratic oligarchy. Aristocracy is also a combination of patriarchy and representative democracy. The existence of the aristocratic system ensures the existence of the monarchy, and their teams of both houses of parliament also help old power mechanism to maintain, delayed the arrival of the era of parliamentary reform, decrease the speed of the British political modernization, the bourgeoisie were long excluded outside power, so as to keep the British constitutional characteristics of the hybrid power. This is a rather big proposition, the author has been involved in other works, here is not redundant.

Naturally, the strengthening of the mixed trend of British political system also requires the maintenance of the political tolerance between the ruling classes, and relies on the recognition of the status and role of the anti-party. Space is limited, so I'll stop here.

Both the mixed system and the decentralization system are designed to effectively prevent the arbitrary use of state power and protect it from the tyranny of one person, few people or the majority. They are also designed to improve the efficiency of the government, safeguard the interests of the ruling class, and maintain the stability and development of the society. For hundreds of years, the British government system has long been characterized by mixed features, and the balanced decentralization of government functions never took root, which is also attributed to the prudence, sophistication and flexibility of the British ruling class in the choice of constitutional system.

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明:原创essay代写范文源自编辑创作,未经官方许可,网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为,未经同意的情况下,51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、作业代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的essay代写服务,亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多essay代写范文 提供代写服务,详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041。

上一篇:Comparative advantage with the 下一篇:The American model of tax acco