On the two sides of Kant's Political Thought.doc

On the two sides of Kants Political ThoughtAbstract From Kant on the French Revolution, described the state power and the polity, we can appreciate the political thought of their revolutionary and conservative nature of the double feature, which essentially is based on the philosophy of language to obscure the German bourgeoisie The political demands, but also the concentrated expression of the German bourgeoisie two-sided. Keywords: Kant; the French Revolution; constitutional monarchy Kants time in Germany, both politically and economically far behind the United Kingdom and France, which the German bourgeoisie with the United Kingdom and France do not have the two sides of the bourgeoisie, they both aspire to the revolution, but also afraid of the revolution. Kants political thought is a direct reflection of the characteristics of the German bourgeoisie, who on the one hand against the feudal autocracy and relive, national division, criticized the authoritarian, yearning and quest for freedom, equality and independence; the other hand, they dare not clearly put forward its own claims and demands, with a subtle, obscure, abstract language and methods demonstrated the reality of social discontent and the pursuit of a better future for mankind, that the only ideal of the Republic in the real world can not be achieved, it can only exist in this side of the world is the reach of present and future, the afterlife, seeking to censure, and so they just stay in the revolutionary ideology. That exists in reality is not ideal, the ideal is unattainable is Kants revolution and the conservative two-tier political and ideological focus on general, and also reflects the weakness of the German bourgeoisie and compromise. We can see from Kants point of view on the French Revolution, the state power of discussion and the views of the polity between the lines in the deeply felt. Kant has been the enthusiasm of the French revolution, who is concerned about, when many people deviate from the German, the Kantian concept of enlightenment is also committed and loyal, so it is called the last one Jacobins. But in fact Kant is not a radical violent revolution of the Jacobins, but was simply lagging behind the situation in the German reformers for change. This can be from Kant to the ambivalence of the French Revolution seen. On the one hand he was the French revolution, the objectives to be pursued very sympathetic, caring passion for the French Revolution, as it is with his own moral and political beliefs consistent; the other hand, he explicitly ruled out any resistance to their rights. Kant opposed to any violence, non-constitutional approach to political change. While he sympathized with the revolutionaries of the target, but he was not in favor of a revolutionary means. Had to make a distinction between goals and means, which plunged into a dilemma. Kants deep sympathy for the French revolution, dedicated care, they also carried out its moral condemnation, that the French people to overthrow the monarchy is morally improper. Kant as the French Revolution took place in the contemporary of such an event, it is a dramatic demonstration of the moral endowments of human nature to prove that humanity really is moving forward to improve. It only refers only to the observers way of thinking . . that all human beings share certain common features, which prove that one has a moral nature, or at least in its formation. This allows us not only hope that the improvement of mankind, and the impact on its already strong enough that it is itself a form of improvement. Kant emphasized, not the French Revolution itself is evidence of continued progress towards the improvement of the human will, but this revolution in the bystander (Kant himself is such a bystander) caused by reflections in mind that this. Kant is not endorsed by rebellion or revolution itself, but a nation free from the interference of other external forces, to create your own one he thinks is appropriate for citizens of the constitution, endorsed the creation of the French people are looking for the kind of constitution, because it is a Department of republican constitution, only in this constitutional system, in order to prevent wars of aggression, for peace, which is the revolutionary performance of advanced political thought. However, This does not mean that a nation with a constitutional monarchy, so you can call itself the right to change the constitution, even if only just in his heart secretly harbor this desire. Kants eyes should not be used in the way of violent revolution to create republican institutions, but should be a peaceful evolution means the gradual establishment of this system, since the violent revolution undesirable, then the avenues for political change only the top-down reform This is a kind of. Kant believed that political change can not be impatient recklessness must be under the influence of environmental forces step by step, he believed that the monarchy, the republican system, leading to the only legitimate way is through a gradual reform of the sovereign himself. Therefore, we can say in the political outlook, the Kantian a conservative first, followed by the reformers, the conservative side of Kant those prevailing. Kant, the state is defined as: Many people in the law under the rule of the consortium. Any real country, only on its legal rights from a priori principles, is consistent with the national idea. Countries may have no real idea of set up to the national standards, but in any case, the state should be moving in this direction, and individuals have to accept the reality. * Kants emphasis on individual must accept the reality, only the loyalty of the law to be free, but also the performance of his existing law and order, institutional and sovereign obedience. Kant pointed out: All the highest legislative authority against any resort to violence . . The rebellion, in the republican form of government is the largest and most to be a punishable offense, because it undermines its foundation, this prohibition is absolute. People in any case to resist the countrys highest legislative power are not legitimate. This is the only obey the will of the general legislation. To have a legal and orderly state, so there is no right to riot, but there is no rebellion of the right . . Kants view that even if the monarchy undermined the law, indiscriminate of authoritarianism, subjects still no right to resist. People have an obligation to tolerate any abuse of the highest authority, even if they find such abuse is not tolerated. In Kants view, can only be subject to feudal Germany, and can not resist the kind of violent revolution through the establishment of bourgeois state power in France, it is appropriate, and in Germany can only be a mirage of the other side of the world . Can be seen, Kants political vision of reality the aspirations of the revolution just stop at thinking that the only viable way to achieve personal self-perfection through moral self-cultivation, rather than to take revolutionary action. Kant believes that as a rational concept (the concept of law) of the destination should be based on three principles of a priori reason, based on: 1 constitutional freedoms, in this case that every citizen in addition to his consent or approval laws, do not have to obey any other law; 2 the equality of citizens, which refers to a citizen the right not to admit that among the people who are above him . . 3 political independence (freedom), this right to make a civic life in the community and continue to live, not because of someone elses arbitrary will, but because of his own rights as well as the powers of the members of this community. In other words, the state founded on freedom, equality, independence based on the principle, every member of society, as citizens of the country is freedom, equality, independence, and this is also the obligation of every citizen to assume the fundamental basis for national politics. These ideas clearly have Kants progressive, reflecting the German bourgeoisie, to freedom, equality, independence aspirations and requirements, as well as the feudal autocratic relive the ethnic separatist discontent, which is based on the fundamental spirit of the French Enlightenment thinkers natural rights doctrine, in particular, to Rousseaus popular sovereignty to based on political ideology, showing the whole thought of Kants anti-feudal aspect of the Enlightenment. Kant argued that the state should follow the civil liberties, equality and independence of the constitutional principle of separation of powers in the government formally adopted the principles, which constitute the power of the rulers of certain restrictions. However, he other hand, make sure that all the existing political authority, thought that the people have no right to put into practice the above principles can be put into practice the above principles, the only existing rulers. However, Kant in a specific chapter dealing with its founding principles, but also with many restrictions, these principles are in contradiction with each other. In Kants view, the so-called freedom is only of thought, freedom of speech and the freedom to vote, rather than action, resistance and violent revolution freedom, freedom of thought, rather than freedom of movement, in fact refers to the freedom of citizens to obey. The so-called equality refers only to the equality of citizens before the law, rather than economic equality, he indicated: The general terms of equality, private property, with the number of people on a great level of inequality coexist. So-called independent , Kant, that not all citizens are independent, he is divided into citizens active citizenship and passive citizenship, the latter mainly including women, workers, apprentices, servants, serfs, and so the teachers and families , as they are not economically independent, to rely on others for survival, and therefore can not enjoy political rights, political rights, belongs only to those who own property, do not rely on others active citizenship. Reposted elsewhere in the paper for free download Kant was also discussed from the experience, the level of the country. Level of experience, Kant recognized that the reality falls far short of the idea from country to country. However, he does not thereby denied the countrys political system of the existing and culture. He affirmed the country and its rulers towards the republican goal of progress on the road, but the reality of the country from the requirements of the national idea was also far from Kant advocated an enlightened ruler of reform in order to gradually close to destination. Can be seen, Kant in his discussion of its destination of the founding principles everywhere embodies the contradictions, trade-offs and compromise the idea, highlighted the political thought of Kants two sides characteristics, it is also the weakness of the German bourgeoisie and shake Sexual expression in Kants body. With regard to the national system of government forms, Kants view that traditional country has three forms, namely the monarchy, aristocracy and democracy, all three forms may become autocratic system. In this, Kant focused study of the countrys governance. He was Montesquieus theory of the impact of decentralization that the countrys sovereignty should be divided into three kinds, namely, legislative, executive and judicial power, legislative power is the countrys highest authority, should belong to the people; executive power rests in accordance with the law should be , and subject to the implementation of legislative power in the hands of state power; judicial power exercised by the officials. In his view, the relationship between the three powers is subordinate, but also coordinated the only way to prevent tyranny. Kant criticized the authoritarian, advocating one-third of sovereignty based on the model of their ideal form of government. He believes that only the Republic is consistent with the requirements of freedom is the common will true embodiment of which is the most ideal state form. Kant advocated the republican representative form of government, but he thinks a republic and monarchy can coexist, as long as an enlightened monarch to achieve republican institutions, reflect the common will, will be separated from the legislative and the executive is very good; a country may very well be right themselves to republican institutions to govern, although it is still in the current monarchs rule. He even made such a statement: The fewer the number of rulers, and their greater representation of the state system is also more close to its republican possibilities. In the aristocracy and the democratic system of government there are a number of people have executive powers, in this case, there will be many opportunities for private interests is the laws enacted by the legislature of the implementation of bias, if only one person in power, it will prevent a private interests affecting the implementation of the legislatures will. In this sense, the monarchy more accessible than the aristocracy that the only sound legal system, namely, republican system. Kant seemed to have the democracy must be tyranny, and does not ensure compliance with the true public will. He also pointed out that the only ideal of Republic in the real world is impossible to achieve, it can only exist in this side of the world, which is a political revolution and the conservative thought dual character of another a vivid expression. As Marx said: Kants view that the countries of the Republic as the only legitimate form of practical reason is the benchmark, is a never achieve but that we should always seek and attempt to achieve the benchmark. Since the ideal of Republic exist in the other side of the world, then, in Kants mind, which is expected to be the ideal form of government, and can only be constitutional monarchy. In his view, such a representative of the constitutional monarchy of the implementation of legislative and administrative decentralization, legislative power belongs to Parliament, the executive power belongs to monarchy, the king be able to comply with the rule of law based on the state management. In accordance with a constitutional monarchy, the bourgeoisie not only took part in the government, but also saved the monarchy, to reconcile the results of the class, but Kant opposed to radical political change, advocates a moderate, top-down change. Kant, of course, want to see the country as close as possible the existing countrys ideals, mature people through participation in the formulation of legal representative, but the experience of the worlds total will not be perfect, the ideal is elusive. He felt that the mass from the bott