论文部分内容阅读
代议制当然只是个程度上的问题:汤姆·佩恩所展望的民主共和国与没有投票权的英国臣民在威斯敏斯特享有的所谓“虚拟代议制”之间有天渊之别。然而,一个有产者议会里的虚拟代表总归比绝对君权下没有代表好。但它在实际意义上是否也更好呢?政治理论家们有时认为“代议制体系,而非绝对君权,在收税上更优越”。正如我们所见,这是孟德斯鸠的观点。然而,虽则对18世纪的英、法两国来说此言不谬,但代议制与税收之间的关联并非普遍存在。代表大会若不批准政府开支的优先项目,就能轻而易举地严重削弱国家的征税能力。17世纪时,弗朗西斯·培根爵士宣称,英国人是“欧洲所有国家中对自己的财产最
Probation is, of course, only a matter of degree: there is a world of difference between the so-called ”virtual representation “ enjoyed by Westminster and the democratic republic to which Tom Payne envisions the non-voting British subjects. However, the fictitious representation of a beheaded parliament is always better than that of an absolute monarchy. But is it actually better in the real sense? Political theorists sometimes think that ”the system of representative systems, not the absolute monarchical power, is superior in tax collection.“ As we have seen, this is the view of Montesquieu. However, although it is not absurd to say that the two countries in Britain and France in the 18th century, the relationship between representative and taxation is not ubiquitous. If the Congress fails to approve the priorities of government spending, it will easily and easily severely weaken the taxing power of the country. In the seventeenth century, Sir Francis Bacon declared that the British were ”the most indebted person of all nations in Europe