Generally speaking, the constitution is a legal document the highest level of a country. Constitutionalism refers to political practice according to the constitution of a country. The constitution must fully reflect public opinion, otherwise it can not be called constitutional democratic constitution, so often associated with. Because the Constitution itself is legal, so it is usually associated with constitutional law. I understand that constitutionalism, democracy and the rule of law.

In general, a constitutional country basically is the constitutional state (but there are some exceptions, for the socialist countries), why is that? Because the Constitution itself contains the rulers promise to the people, the constitution makes the people's right to free exercise with according to (again how rogue rulers, nor to a flagrant violation of its commitments. Especially in the constitutional monarchy, was popular, is because the king than short-term ruling politicians more trustworthy). People are free, various political forces will rise, thus evolved into a political party, between the party and the party competition first to ensure the politicians on the Constitution and legal compliance (as in the case of competition makes any attempt to violate the constitution of the people will lose their political space). With the coming of party competition, constitutionalism.

In extreme cases, no constitution can also have constitutional. Such as the United Kingdom (Note: some people will free O Xianaki, the petition of right and other documents as a constitutional document, seems to be a misunderstanding. Because the file constitutional this so-called does not have higher than the common law position. There is no concept of the fundamental law of England). No constitutional democracy and the rule of law in Britain, but did not fall behind. What is the reason? Although the UK is not constitutional, but there are many about the Constitutional Convention (Constitutional Convention), the constitutional convention replaces the constitution play a role.

Now we come to think: why China constitution, but no constitutional government?

1908Years, the Qing government promulgated the "imperial constitution outline" "Outline" provisions, legislative, administrative, judicial powers nominally belong to the emperor, at the same time: the law by the Council decision, Emperor life practice, the emperor not to repeal the law Dahir, confirmed the legislative supremacy of parliament; the total prime minister by the parliamentary elections, the emperor the appointment, as the chief administrative officer; the judge by the emperor emperor appointed, instead of the overall judicial power. Although the "Outline" that "separation of two powers", the essence is the separation of the three powers. This is China history first to limit the power of written legal documents, should be regarded as a great progress. Unfortunately, does not it works, Xin Hai revolution broke out. China became even more terrible than the autocratic era. I always think, if there is no Xin Hai revolution, adulthood, will take the "Outline" with what kind of attitude? Is a betrayal of the ancestors of the promise, and let the "separation of the three powers" goes on and improve it? History cannot be assumed, but will give us a wealth.

1912Years, the Nanjing government promulgated the "provisional constitution", began to try the civil rights era constitutionalism. But God and Chinese right, out of Yuan Shikai, when the president also want to be an emperor, and the "provisional constitution" was "Republic of China provisional constitution" replaced, fulfilled its name in the "temporary" two words. Since then, the "provisional constitution" ups and downs, first by Li Yuanhong, was Zhang Xun's restoration abolished, then by Cao Kun, Wu Peifu recovered, and Tsao Kun constitution instead. Until1931Years of political tutelage stage constitution promulgated completely withdraw from the stage of history. Objectively speaking, the "provisional constitution" than the "imperial constitution outline" in addition to the president in place of the emperor, and not what substantive breakthrough. "Provisional constitution" does not consider the relationship between central and local is a federal or centralized system. This fatal neglect almost directly determines the destiny of their own. You don't think about the power of local, armed groups around the how will admit you? It provides the president and vice president, said a future Congress, the executive power completely gives the president, seems to be picking American presidential system, but not modeled American constitution bicameral. This makes people for the future of the regime pattern has a doubt: what is the virtual president of the cabinet system (such as now in Germany), or semi presidential cabinet system (such as half now France), or the presidential system (such as the USA)?

These important issues, it is "negligence" (the quotes, because I can not determine whether the Is it right? Negligence), also no wonder, Shiyao another built stove a Republic of China provisional constitution.

Visible, "failure" in the provisional constitution of the Republic of China, its defects. This defect is due to Chinese politicians too conceited, and ready-made experience refused to learn? Hidden or otherwise? I think, the situation to go at that time, this defect is inevitable. Cover American presidential system also is a federal law, if the presidential system, cannot deny federal system. But in the circumstances adopt federalism is extremely dangerous, easy to cause the local separatism or secession (Youth Mao Zedong even promote the Hunan Republic). Sun Zhongshan advocated a strong central government, this is why. If the recovery of virtual system can avoid the president, although unionist ascendancy, but who needs the president? Everybody would like to centralization of state power, but are reluctant to let others centralization. This is political! Visible, provisional constitution of the Republic of China is a product of politicians have sinister motives, not from the heart of the compromise, this Law who would really go into effect?

Some recourse, that is Liang Qichao's constitutional monarchy, virtual ruler republic. An emperor is bad, but also has the advantage in that situation, solvable president phantom on the one hand, on the other hand can suppress the federal system calls. Now we can understand, Liang Qichao declared that "the Republican ideas win support among the people" of the case, why there are still a lot of literati to Yuan's emperor. Because it is really justified.

Unfortunately, when politicians hate the monarchy, Nothing is right. thought monarchy. With hatred and prejudice, how could a compromise?