美国肯塔基论文代写:不可分割的权力

Keywords:美国肯塔基论文代写:不可分割的权力

第三个，也许是最重要的区别是，对霍布斯来说，主权是一种永久的，不可分割的权力，属于一个特定的个人。事实上，这一分歧正是本文的症结所在。对洛克来说，保护公共利益需要各种各样的权力，就像霍布斯一样，但没有必要把它们统一在一个整体上。在这里洛克提出了法律主权本身的概念:“没有必要，立法应该始终存在，而不是总是有事情要做”(洛克76)。法律“具有持续不断的力量，需要永久的执行”，这是由行政权力提供的(洛克76)。虽然霍布斯同意主权的这些方面的需要，但他拒绝分裂它们。另一方面，洛克证明了“劳动分工”的存在是可行的，特别是因为他提到了一种与其他职责相关的自然权力的概念。联邦权力涉及“战争与和平、联盟与联盟以及所有交易的权力”，可以很容易地投资于完全独立于行政和立法权力之外的机构。那么，最后一个要回答的问题就是权力的分配是否合理。幸运的是,洛克解决这一问题,认为“君主的绝对权力的不便,继承是容易声称“永远不可能与“平衡政府的权力,通过将几个部分在不同的手”,在这一过程中,公民”既不觉得专制统治的压迫,也没有时尚的时代,也不是他们的财产,或livinga方式€¦给他们任何理由逮捕或提供反对”(洛克57)。对洛克来说，主权是从人民借给立法机构的“至高无上的权力”，通过在行政机构和其他政府机构之间划分职责来制定照顾公共利益的法律。权力很容易、有益和安全分成不同的身体:很容易由于洛克的解雇霍布斯的矛盾的反对这样做,有益的,因为劳动分工可以提高效率和更大的生产力,和安全,因为权力充当一组分工制衡保护人民免受任意滥用。
美国肯塔基论文代写:不可分割的权力
The third and, perhaps most important, difference is that for Hobbes, sovereignty is a perpetual, indivisible power belonging to a particular individual. Indeed, this disagreement is the crux of this paper. For Locke, there are a variety of powers necessary for the protection of the public good, just as in Hobbes, but there is no need to unite them all in one body. Here Locke presents idea of the sovereignty of law itself: “there is no need, that the legislative should be always in being, not having always business to do” (Locke 76). The laws “have a constant and lasting force, and need a perpetual execution” that is provided by the executive power (Locke 76). While Hobbes agrees to the need of these aspects of sovereignty, he refuses to divide them. Locke, on the other hand, demonstrates that a ‘division of labor’ can very feasibly exist, especially because he touches upon the idea of a natural power that pertains to other duties. Federative power, which relates to “the power of war and peace, leagues and alliances, and all transactions”, could easily be invested in entirely separate bodies from both the executive and legislative powers.The last question to answer, then, is whether the division of power is good. Luckily, Locke tackles this issue, arguing that “the inconveniences of absolute power, which monarchy in succession was apt to lay claim to” could never compete with “balancing the power of government, by placing several parts of it in different hands” for in doing so, citizens “neither felt the oppression of tyrannical dominion, nor did the fashion of the age, nor their possessions, or way of living…give them any reason to apprehend or provide against it” (Locke 57). For Locke sovereignty is the “supreme power” on loan from the people to the legislative to set laws that look after the public good by dividing duties amongst the executive and other governmental agencies. Power is easily, helpfully, and safely split up into different bodies: easily due to Locke’s dismissal of Hobbes’s contradictory objection to doing so, helpfully because the division of labor allows for increased efficiency and greater productivity, and safely because the division of powers acts as a set of checks and balances to protect the people from arbitrary abuse.