Some time ago because I have some feelings, blog writing "about" adhere to the leadership of the party "", the middle is mentioned, to uphold the party's leadership is the "Four Cardinal Principles", and no mention of this principle in the constitution, so stick to the leadership of the party is at best only a party in to himself. Found that consciousness is click into place, but also for our party full of a sense of identity, because no matter from the theoretical logic, or legal terms, to adhere to the leadership of the party in a written constitution, it is not appropriate, even make people laugh - historical. On the contrary, adhere to the leadership of the party only write into party constitution is not written into the constitution, it just embodies the basic principle of "separation of Party and government", with a simple and plain citizen political cognition.

   When I suddenly intermittent, heart also was not, is this tangle of countless people's proposition so solved by me? So I still have the constitutional text, learning a lot.

   "The constitution" in the preface mentions the leadership, "China people will continue in the China under the leadership of the Communist Party, in the guidance of Marx Lenin doctrine, Mao Zedong thought, Deng Xiaoping Theory and the important thought of" Three Represents ", adhere to the people's democratic dictatorship, adhere to the socialist road...", in which, four basic and the expression of the principle ("adhere to the socialist road, adhere to the people's democratic dictatorship, adhere to the leadership of the Communist Party of Chinese, adhere to Marx Lenin's Mao Zedong thought these four basic principles, is the foundation of our") is similar to.

   Although similar, but not identical. Uphold the party's leadership is the basic principle of the constitution, the expression is extremely elegant and valuable, sonorous and forceful, no doubt, irrefutable That's final. But in the "constitution" is that "the people of all ethnic groups in Chinese Chinese will continue under the leadership of the Communist Party", it should be noted that this does not say this is a basic principle! "The constitution" the preface is the role of an explanation for the past history, advocates for future development, set up more than 60 years in the new Chinese to Communist Party (even better, can say color) leading the revolution and construction Chinese; in the foreseeable future dozens of years or even a longer time, I believe that the majority of the people Chinese also willing to choose the party as a ruling party (like no other what optional). Accordingly, do an advocacy stated in the constitution, nor does it seem to have.

   According to Marx's class viewpoint, the constitution is the embodiment of "" all kinds of political forces, the constitution such statement is also from the side that the Communist Party is a political power occupies the absolute superiority in the China. So in reality, which in turn means, the constitution such statements lack get excited over a little thing.

   In addition, the first amendment on constitution expression is "the people's Republic of China is the people's democratic dictatorship led by the working class, and based on the worker peasant alliance of socialist countries", regardless of which is full of class consciousness and the enemy state on the suitability or public recognition, single say literally "the working class" not necessarily Communist Party leadership. Very simple, even communist party insists he is working-class political party, the working class party isn't necessarily equal to the Communist Party?!

   In a word, I think it "statements about the leadership of the constitution" is a grain of truth, but in the explanation and understanding remains to be further in-depth and clear. I always believe that good, if you insist on a party leadership as a "basic principles" in a flagrant way of written into the constitution, the Constitution can't be called a real sense of "constitution" -- he has another name, called the "dictatorship".