百家争鸣
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[法治的精神]
郭国汀律师专栏
·我为什么为法轮功辩护? 郭国汀
·我为法轮功抗辩的真实心声
·法轮功真相之我见
·中共才是真正的邪教----中共血腥残暴迫害法轮功的根源
·中共镇压法轮功的国际法分析
·中共滥用教制度镇压法轮功的法理解析
·当代中国的盖世太宝[610办公室]研究(英文)
·有感于对法轮功学员的强制教育
·中共当局必须立即无条件释放刘如平律师!郭国汀
·声援支持杨在新律师!
·郭国汀章天亮曾宁谈425和平上访到千万退党的精神延续
·中共专制暴政一直在杀人----悼念讲真相英雄陈光辉
·FALUN GONG PERSECUTION FACTS HEET
·RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND FALUN GONG IN CHINA
·2
·Falun Gong Wins Motion in Historic Torture Lawsuit against Former Head of China
·为法轮功抗辩与自由中国论坛部份网民的论战
·Dr Wang Wenyi will be remembered by history as a great courage hero
·法轮功是比中共有过之无不及的一人专制吗?-答谭嗣同先生
·法轮功讲真相无罪
·郭国汀:对法轮功学员的劳教、判刑是非法行为
·郭国汀介绍为法轮功学员打官司的曲折经历
·质疑张千帆教授对法轮功的评价 郭国汀
·宣誓证词Affidavit
·中共一贯谎言连篇是个地道的骗子党!
·中共下达密文奥运成迫害最大借口
·中国著名人权律师从为法轮功辩护看中共践踏法律(图)
·郭国汀律师批评中共奧運前加劇迫害法輪功
·郭国汀律师呼吁台湾政府予吴亚林政治庇护
·郭国汀律师称中共持续非法迫害法轮功及其辩护律师
·答Gavin0919郭国汀是法轮功走狗之指控
***(3)郭国汀为法轮功辩护的专访
·专访郭国汀律师(上) :为法轮功辩护
·专访郭国汀律师(下) :回首不言悔
·RFA:郭国汀介绍为法轮功学员打官司的曲折经历
·自由亞洲電台专访郭國汀谈為法輪功學員打官司
·希望之声郭国汀专访:对法轮功学员的劳教、判刑是非法行为
***(三)郭国汀律师为郑恩宠抗辩
·我为郑恩宠律师抗辩的前前后后
·为郑恩宠案翟明磊等中国新闻记者六君子的声明
·敬请关注郑恩宠律师所谓"非法获取国家秘密罪"一案
·历史将证明郑恩宠律师无罪/郭国汀
·郑恩宠案二审辩护词及网友评论/郭国汀
·关于会见在押的郑恩宠的第二次申请函
·郑恩宠律师“为境外非法提供国家秘密罪”一审判决书
·上海市高级法院郑恩宠案刑事裁定书
·郑恩宠冤案再审案至全国律协诸位会长之公开函/郭国汀
·中国最需要像郑恩宠这样的律师
·诽谤郑恩宠律师的中共党奴及特务名录
·再谈郑恩宠案 郭国汀倡律师网上辩护
·我为郑恩宠辩护的前前后后 郭国汀
·上海普通市民感受的郑恩宠大律师
·关于郑恩宠案我的声明
·我为郑恩宠律师辩护
·一切源于郑恩宠案,可敬的国安兄弟请自重!
·郑恩宠聘请辩护人的真相
·郑恩宠聘请辩护律师真相之二
·真为这位北京律师脸红!
·张思之大律师冒着酷暑赴看守所会见郑恩宠
·上海监狱当局婉拒郑恩宠的辩护律师会见
·关于会见在押的郑恩宠的第二次申请函
·揭开“时代精英“画皮
·答时代精英,
·再答时代精英教导
·向张思之律师,郑恩宠律师学习,致敬!
·南郭:仗义执言的律师还是没良心的律师
·驳“文律”兄郑案高论/南郭
·中国最需要像郑恩宠这样的律师
·凡跟郭国汀贴者一律入选黑名单
·批驳李洪东之首恶律师说!
·历史岂容任意伪造!
·惊闻郑恩宠律师夫人蒋美丽被拘捕!
·郑恩宠案二审会维持原判,辩护律师难辞其咎。
·求名求利的律师代表
·答L君之三项基本原则
·郑恩宠案网友评论
·网友支持或反对郑恩宠的评论
·支持或反对郑恩宠的网友评论之二
·中国律师声援支持郑恩宠
·吴国策律师:“求名求利的律师代表——某律师的心里”系他人盗名发表的声明
·中国律师声援支持郑恩宠律师
·网警\网友\特务与郑恩宠案
·郑恩宠律师的最后一篇代理词
·关于记者杨金志、陈斌严重侵犯郑恩宠律师名誉权的律师函
·郭国汀律师如果你还是个真正的男人的话,请你勇于承担败诉的责任。
·郑恩宠案上海当局特务什么下流无耻的手段皆用
·谋害郑恩宠的凶手是谁?
·郑恩宠案上海高院驳回上诉后网友们的评论
·请记住一位伟大的律师英雄——郑恩宠/郭国汀
***(四)香港联中公司与厦门国际贸易信托投资公司国际贸易争议再审案
·司法腐败的典型案例
·最高法院无理拖宕九年拒不下判再审案代理词
·反了你!竟敢不尊敬我大法官!
·就十五载官司致最高法院法官的公开函
·中国法官如何让吾尊敬/南郭
·最高法院的院长们为何威胁郭国汀律师?
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
法治的精神

法治的精神
   
   南郭点评:“美国革命”其实并非共产党主张的那种所谓革命,而是属于几无破坏性,富有建设性的社会政治经济制度的进化。法国思想家芦棱的著作在美国人几乎无人问津,美国独立战争期间对美国人影响最大的乃是Sidney, Harrington and Locke等人的著作。美国人实质上是在英国社会政治经济体制基础上,坚持法治反对专断与尊重个人权利,强调保障人权,不断进行政治改良进化发展而成为今日自由宪政民主国家。法治精神是对抗专制暴政的最有力的武器之一。
   
   

   
    Rule of law not revolution
   
   By Robert N. Wilkin [1]
   
   
   
   
   
    “ When we proclaim that we are revolutionaries and boast of our revolutionary spirit, the author states, we play into the hands of the communists and add to the confusion of their Marxian dialectic and "upside-down language". There is error and confusion in the word "revolution"; history, semantics, logic and clear thinking suggest the use of some other word to characterize our country's purpose today.”[2]
   
   
   
    THE BOLSHEVIK dictatorship is vigorously conducting a world revolution against all traditional forms of government and standards of politics, morality, religion and culture. When we proclaim that we are revolutionaries and boast of our revolutionary spirit we play into the hands of the Bolsheviks and add to the confusion of their Marxian dialectic and "upside- down language". Their revolution is wholly destructive and offers nothing to replace what they seek to destroy.What we are championing and defending is freedom under law, not dictatorship. The history and spirit of our institutions are constructive, not destructive.
   
   
   
    Newspapers reported that President Kennedy, before he left for his meeting with Soviet Premier Khrushchev, said: "I go to Vienna as the leader of the greatest revolutionary country on earth. Our knees do not tremble at the word 'revolution'. We believe in it." And William 0. Douglas, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, wrote an article entitled. "The U. S. and the Revolutionary Spirit", published in Saturday Review, June 10, 1961, the first sentence of which was, "We Americans were born in revolution." The editorial statement at the beginning of the article said, "The United States has traditionally gloried in its revolutionary heritage."
   
   
   
    At once it must be clearly and emphatically stated that the President, the Justice and the editors were not intentionally favoring or supporting the communist revolution. The purpose of their statements was to convey our traditional sympathy for all oppressed peoples who struggle against tyranny and despotism. Loyal Americans would agree with the substance of their remarks. It is the purpose of this discussion merely to point out the error and confusion in the word "revolution". history, semantics, logic and clear thinking suggest the use of some term other than "revolution" to characterize our purpose today.
   
   
   
    War of Independence Was Not a Revolution
   
   
   
    Historians and political scientists of highest authority have explained repeatedly that our War for Independence was not a revolution but a continuance of the evolution of human rights that had been progressing for centuries in England. Historians have referred to England as a nation "marked by a sturdy sense of right". That sense of right and respect for law have marked the Anglo-Saxon race generally. It was owing to their inherited devotion to such principles that the American colonies separated themselves from the British Empire. The establishment of an independent nation in America was not a revolution in the Marxist sense, but a continued assertion of the convictions that had asserted themselves successfully in England. It is that same devotion to law against arbitrary will that continues to unite English-speaking people in the defense of human rights against the forms of absolutism which threaten them today.
   
   
   
    John Fiske, in The Critical Period of American History, in discussing the reforms of Colonial governments prior to the War of Independence, said, "except for expulsion of the royal and proprietary governors, the work had in no instance been revolutionary in its character". He said further:
   
   
   
    It was not so much that the American people gained an increase of freedom by their separation from England, as that they kept the freedom they had always enjoyed, that freedom which was the inalienable birthright of Englishmen, but which George III had foolishly sought to impair. The American Revolution was therefore in no respect destructive. It was the most conservative revolution known to history, thoroughly English in conception from beginning to end. It had no likeness whatever to the terrible popular convulsion which soon after took place in France. The mischievous doctrines of Rousseau had found few readers and fewer admirers among the Americans. The principles upon which their revolution was conducted were those of Sidney, Harrington and Locke. In remodelling the state governments, as in planning the union of the states, the precedents followed and the principles applied were almost purely English.
   
   
   
    The colonies, having been founded largely by men opposed to the imperious will of the King, continued their struggle for rights of Englishmen. The opposition in England to taxes imposed by the King became in America opposition to "taxation without representation". The sentiment in England against the despotic orders of the Star Chainher and High Commission was reasserted in the colonial Resolves "that all trials for any crime whatsoever should be within the Colony by known course of law". The arbitrary orders of the King in the colonies became an issue on both sides of the ocean. That the colonists were continuing the struggle for the supremacy of law is shown by the fact that they were championed on both sides of the Atlantic by the ablest lawyers. The rights of the colonists were defended in England by Sir Robert Walpole, Edmund Burke, William Pitt, Charles James Fox and others. In America the opposition was led by men who personified the spirit of the common law. They based their claims and arguments on the teachings of Coke, who had based his arguments against arbitrary usurpation of power on the teachings of Bracton. They insisted that the arbitrary acts of the Crown were against the Constitution of England and therefore void.
   
   
   
    Word "Revolution" Is Harmful to Us
   
   
   
    When the King sent his soldiers to enforce his orders, the colonists took up arms against them. Those who bear arms in defense of lawful order are not revolutionaries. It is true that the efforts of the colonies for independence became known generally as the American Revolution. Justice Douglas regrets that after World War II "we lost our pride in 'revolution' as an American concept". We should regret, however, that that word was ever accepted as an American concept. It was not so harmful formerly, but today it puts us in a class with the Marxists.
   
   
   
    The President, in connection with his statements quoted above, said, "We believe in the progress of mankind-we believe in freedom." That belief is sustained by "government not of men, but of law". Justice Douglas stated that Australia, New Zealand and North America, during this century, have not been interested in revolution for themselves, "because their institutions usually had built-in procedures for change". A felicitous phrase to distinguish rule of law from despotic rule!
   
   
   
    He stated also that under Gandhi "India experienced an awakening that generated more power than tanks and artillery". India gained its independence without a revolution, and India retained Anglo-American jurisprudence as the law of the land. Its courts cite the decisions of English and American courts as authority for their decisions.
   
   
   
    Justice Douglas concedes that "We, as democrats, cannot become subversive in the communist style and form undergrounds within each nation, undergrounds bent on overthrow by force and violence." We therefore should not identify and degrade our cause by use of the word "revolution". We should not glamorize a word which Marxism has distorted in world opinion.

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场