谁是执行权的主体:霍布斯与卢梭论主权与政府的分离

主权与政府的关系构成了早期现代主权理论的内在困难:二者是否必然区分彼此,二者间又有怎样的界限?现有的主要研究(尤以理查德·塔克的作品为代表)将主权与政府各自简单化地理解为卢梭式的立法权与执行权,并以此来解读霍布斯的文本。本文通过考察霍布斯与卢梭对主权与政府关系的讨论,努力澄清这一误解。事实上,霍布斯理论中并不存在卢梭意义上的主权与政府的分离,这一问题也并非霍布斯的核心关怀;卢梭对主权与政府的区分只能在其独特的公意与人民主权理论框架中得以理解,而这一区分同时为卢梭理论带来了本质性困难。文章最后阐述了这些理论讨论所蕴含的现实意义,反思了人民民主在当下的意涵与可能。

The relationship between sovereignty and government constitutes an internal difficulty of the early modern sovereignty theory:is the government necessarily distinct from the sovereignty?What is the boundary between them?The main current researches,especially that of Richard Tuck,reduce the difference between sovereignty and government to Rousseau's distinction between legislative power and executive power,and interpret Hobbes's theory in the same way.Focusing on this topic in Hobbes's and Rousseau's works,this article aims to clarify this crucial misinterpretation.Actually,it does not exist in Hobbes's theory the separation between sovereignty and government in Rousseau's sense,which is even not Hobbes's major concern;besides,Rousseau's separation is due to his special concepts of general will and popular sovereignty,and this theory of separation brings great troubles to Rousseau's political theory.Finally,the article shows the actual significance of this theoretical exploration by reflecting on the present sense and possibility of democracy.