Jiang Bixin, Wang Hongxia, is related to but not the same as the rule of law and the social rule of law. Building a society governed by law is the foundation of the construction of the rule of law. It is an effective way to break the bottleneck of the rule of law. It is a reflection and reconstruction of the human society and the cultivation and promotion of public reason, which helps to bridge the social consensus of the transitional China. The society ruled by law has two characteristics: the coherence of the rule of law and the common governance of the society. The construction of a society under the rule of law needs to be dominated by public power. It requires the socialization of the rule of law to realize the rule of law.

At present, China's rule of law has entered a new stage and it is necessary to deal with the general defects and special flaws in the process of deepening the rule of law such as the imbalance of the rule of law, the rule of law, the lack of trust in the rule of law, and the weightlessness of the rule of law. The concept of the development of the rule of law, which focuses on the rule of law, focuses on the general growth law of the rule of law and the status quo of the Chinese society.

Lecturer and postdoctoral fellow (Changsha 410083).

Based on the painstaking experience of the “Cultural Revolution” negating the rule of law and the profound reflection on the road to the construction of the People’s Republic of China, since the reform and opening up, China has formed strong hopes for democracy and the rule of law and has continued to explore. Looking back at the ruling party’s dominant search path, one can clearly observe the two contexts of China’s rule of law. The first is from the textual creation of the norm and system system to the vertical improvement of the concept and spirit of the rule of law. The second is the horizontal extension of the rule of law, the rule-of-law government, and the comprehensive legalization of all aspects of society. In the former, after more than a decade of exploration, in the year of 1997, the 15th National Congress of the People's Republic of China proposed the strategy and goal of “ruling the country according to law and building a socialist country under the rule of law”, which was included in the Constitution in 1999. Since the 21st century, the state has vigorously promoted the establishment and improvement of specific institutional texts. On the other hand, it has begun to build the rule of law from the conceptual perspective. Through continuous and unremitting efforts, the constitution is the commander, composed of laws, administrative regulations, local regulations, etc. The organic legal system of multiple legal departments has been formed in 2010; the Party Central Committee has also passed the “establishment of the socialist concept of the rule of law” ( 2005), "Promoting the spirit of the rule of law" (2007), "Taking socialist legal cultures very important" (2009), and simultaneously committing itself to the intangible concept of the rule of law. This is a 2013 National Social Science Fund Major Project (the first batch)" "The construction of the rule of law China study" (13ZD032) of the phased results. Thanks anonymous reviewers for their valuable advice.

Excavation and cultivation. In the latter case, the purpose of ruling the country according to law in 1997 was to "guarantee that all state work is carried out in accordance with the law." "The realization of the legalization of all national work" as required by the 2007 report of the 17th National Congress of the People's Republic of China reflects the goals and tasks of the country's legal construction. Increasingly, at the end of 2012, the proposal of "integrated construction of the rule of law, the rule of law government, and the rule of law society" was essentially an all-round development of the rule of law.

According to the development of the rule of law in the development of the rule of law in China built on these two contexts, it deserves special attention that the “rule of law” is clearly mentioned in the construction agenda. However, what is the connotation of a society under the rule of law and how do we understand its relationship with the relevant areas such as the rule of law, social management, the rule of law, and the rule of law in society? What is the status of the rule of law society? How does it determine its significance in the development of the rule of law, social development, and China's transition? How does the characteristics of the rule of law society, how to describe the basic pattern of the rule of law society, how the construction of the rule of law society, how to achieve the goal ideal of the rule of law society, the above issues, the academic community is still lack of systematic response, this article try to make a Overall analysis.

I. Three Opinions on the Social Connotation of the Rule of Law Domestically, at least in 1959, the term "rule of law society" was used. 1 So far, it has been widely used in a variety of situations. Its meaning is different based on different contexts, but users often make no distinction. In general, the "rule of law" society referred to in the initial stages of reform and opening up was a society with a legal system to distinguish it from the rule of society where the rule of law was absent during the "Cultural Revolution." Later, with the exploration of the rule of law in theory and practice, the term "rule of law" was used in various discussions on the rule of law. 2But at this time, what the “society” of the rule of law society refers to is a social concept that is symmetric with “natural” and is a big social concept that integrates “state-society”. Its meaning is “rule of law” and “rule of law”. There is no difference. With the development of the country’s rule of law, some researchers have raised and discussed the social issues of the rule of law from the social aspects that are relatively independent of the country. 3 Since the end of 2012, General Secretary Xi Jinping has proposed the topic of “integrated construction of the rule of law, the rule of law, and the rule of law society” in commemorating the 30th anniversary of the implementation of the current Constitution and the fourth collective study of the Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. A relatively independent construction content is clearly expressed. We try to make a framework description of the basic content of the rule of law society, which should include three aspects. First, the system. All aspects of social life have a complete, coherent and scientific system of rules formed by the country’s formal laws and rules of social autonomy and habits. At this level, the system of general rules formed by multiple rules has the basic common property requirements, namely, the rules of good or the law. Second, psychological aspects. Social groups and members recognize the concept and spirit of the rule of rule in terms of ideas and concepts, and thus see Chia: "The Delhi Convention on the International Legalists Conference", "Dictionaries of Modern Foreign Philosophy and Social Science," 1959. : "Restate the Formation of the Society of Law and Its Characteristics and Discuss the Possible Formation of the Community of Legal Profession", see Xi Jinping: "Speech at the conference marking the 30th anniversary of the implementation of the current constitution of the capital" (December 4, 2012), "People's Daily" December 5, 2012, 2nd edition.

Conscious obedience and practice in action and life are the identification of law. Third, the order face. The social self-running of the above two as an intrinsic support, the various social organizations, members and the various functional departments of the country form a division of labor between the self-government and the rule, that is, the order of co-governance across the domination and self-government. The expressions of the rule of law society and the rule of law, the rule of law (type) social management, and the social rule of law are similar but not identical in meaning. The ontology of the rule of law can gain a clearer understanding of these categories.

(I) Distinguishing between the rule of law and the rule of law Society and the state are the two types of organizations, communities, and actions that humans have created and exist in which are distinct but closely related. "It represents two different ways of collective integration." In the course of world development, the rise of the modern market economy has contributed to the separation of society and the country. Unlike Western countries, the traditional Chinese state and society have almost always been in a state of high unity. Driven by the reform and opening up and the socialist market economy, China’s state and society have gradually become separated, and relatively independent areas of social life continue to emerge. At the same time, with the changes in the social structure, interests have become disintegrated, and interest subjects have become increasingly diversified. As a result, complicated social patterns with multiple contradictions have emerged, and the problem of social benign operation and orderly development has become increasingly prominent. This is the basic background of China’s rule of law society.

For the two concepts of the rule of law and the rule of law, academics and practitioners have not strictly distinguished themselves in the past. 2 In the context of the integrated construction of the rule of law, the study of the rule of law society should focus on analyzing and revealing its independent connotations and characteristics relative to the rule of law. The relationship between the rule of law and the rule of law society is very close. Some scholars have argued that the two are inclusive relations, emphasizing that the rule of law state is a greater concept than the rule of law government and the rule of law. 3 Some scholars also believe that the rule of law and the rule of law are both coexisting. This is the two sides of the body. This article tends to the latter view.

For the rule of law, the most representative definition is the view of the German scholar Maurer. He advocated that the rule of law is a country in which the relations between citizens, between countries and citizens, and within the country's internal fields are adjusted by law. The sign is that all state powers and their exercise are governed by the law. 5 The domestic scholars have also refined the connotations of the country under the rule of law: the rule of law state means “the state of the country’s legalization or the rule of law, is the rule of law in the national realm Zheng Hangsheng, Yang Min: “Social and national relations in contemporary China a new perspective of social construction, "The South can be seen from the definition of the concept of a country under the rule of law in previous studies. For example," a socialist country under the rule of law means relying on the reasonable allocation of rights (power) from the people's interests. The law of obligation and responsibility to restrict state power and regulate the activities of the main body of society to form a sound and stable legal order. (See Sun Guohua, Huang Wenying, Du Xiao: "The Rule of Law, the Rule of Law, the Government, the Rule of Law, Society" Discourse : The authoritative analysis of the three "rule of law" why "integrated construction" (content of Li Lin's interview), "Legal Daily" March 1, 2013, 4th edition.

Zhuo Zeyuan: "On the Theory of the State with Law," Beijing: Legal Press, 2008, No. 54 - Hartmut Maurer: "General Administrative Law", translated by Gao Jiawei, Beijing: Legal Press, 2000, No. In the sense of national reality. In contrast, the differences between the rule of law and the rule of law society are mainly reflected in the following aspects. First, the focus of the construction of the rule of law is different. The narrow sense of the country is a system of public power, and society reflects the self-organization system among members of society. The rule of law countries include the rule of law of the entire state power, 2 emphasizing that the state power (national legislative power, supervision power, decision-making power of major issues, administrative power, judicial power, etc.) is established by law, has laws to follow and operates according to law, and its theme is politics. The rule of law. The rule of law society focuses on the orderly production and living activities of social organizations and members of society. All kinds of social organizations and citizens are able to abide by the law, live rationally, properly exercise their rights and undertake social obligations. Second, the governance concept of the rule of law is different. The governance of the rule of law focuses on unified national governance. The governance of the rule of law recognises the effectiveness of multiple governance forces and governance methods, including public rights, and relies more on social autonomy. Third, the focus of rule governance is different.

In the implication of the rule of law, the country's public rights and its operation are the main targets of the legal norms. The construction of the rule of law focuses on ensuring that public rights actively perform their duties and prevent abuses. Within the dimensions of a society ruled by law, the focus of law adjustment is on the behavior and interaction of social organizations and individual social members. It can be seen that there is a clear difference in the subject of governance between the rule of law and the rule of law.

(II) Social management The rule of law and the rule of law society In the legal norms, the concept of "social management" was used earlier, and it was used to refer to the static meaning of a social order, in the "Criminal Law", "Public Security Administration Punishment Act", etc. The law is widely used. 3 Since the Fourth Plenary Session of the 16th CPC Central Committee in 2004, the Central Government has attached great importance to and repeatedly emphasized the issue of social management and scientification while promoting the construction of various undertakings. In the process of the nation’s overall rule of law, social management and its innovation must follow the rule of law and become the basic consensus of the academic and practical sectors. Although the "rule of law type social management" or "rule of social management" is different in emphasis, it is a general expression of this consensus. The “social management” with its basic pattern of “party leadership, government responsibility, social coordination, and public participation” is actually a function of the government in this context. It is also referred to as macro-control, market supervision, and public service.

In many discussions of social management, although there are many involved in the management of society and citizens, it is still difficult to avoid the problem that the government dominates the main body alone, the operation is regulated in a clear color, and the ideological stability is higher than the rights protection. With the economic and social development and the growing awareness of public rights and participation, the traditional government-monopolized social management and regulatory-oriented social management are difficult to sustain. The social-based concept of autonomy is flourishing. The socialization of the rule of law and more emphasis on social self-management, self-monitoring, self-service, social autonomy for everyone involved Jiang Mingan: “On the Relationship between the Rule of Law, the Government under the Rule of Law, and the Construction of a Society under the Rule of Law”, Law Journal, 6th, 2013 period.

In the existing results, use "rule of social management"

There are many words, but considering that the rule of law is more focused on describing the dynamic construction process, this paper selects the state of “rule of law type social management”. The expression also sees pay pattern. In comparison, the rule of law society contains a subjective imagination that abandons the government's management of social functions, and this function is targeted. That is to say, it is back to the order of the face, and the benign operation of the society is ensured through goal definition and system supply, that is, the rule of law.

In the main body, the rule of law society is not limited to the government. Instead, it first requires non-government social forces to freely play in the rule of law framework and the rule of law. The role of the government in the rule of law society shifts from a managerial perspective to a ready-made one (see later discussion). This undoubtedly escaped the concept of management and returned to the original intention of the rule.

(3) Distinguishing between the rule of law society and the rule of law in society The legislators with the thinking of the welfare state formulate laws to lead the development of society, regulate and distribute the results of social production, thereby transforming the government from passive regulatory administration to active service administration. Provide people with guiding and service public products. The state not only has the power to issue orders but also fulfills its obligations to meet public needs. By promoting positive social policies, creating a favorable social environment and conditions, ensuring that social actors can exert their potential for survival and welfare, protecting and compensating disadvantaged social groups, and balancing inequitable and disharmonious polarization of the rich and the poor. Social conflicts.

First of all, there is a clear distinction between the rule of law and the rule of law in society. The countries ruled by law in the society focus on "services" and benefits, focusing on the obligation of the state to undertake the "survival care" of the social subject, while the rule of law society focuses on the rule of social operation. Second, the rule of law is different from that of the rule of law in society. Although the obligation of survival care as the cornerstone of the social rule of law originates from the social standard, the social law state formed by it is still essentially state-dominated: the state still maintains the control and control of public power over society in the name of service. It is still national standard. The rule of law society is the governance of social self on the basis of rule governance.

Identifying the differences between the above categories will help further refine the basic issues of the subject, principal, and standard of the rule of law society. From the comparison between a country ruled by law and a society ruled by law, we can find that the theme of the construction of a society ruled by law focuses on the rule of law of social life rather than politics. Legalization of life. The comparison between the rule of law society and the rule of law of social government highlights that the operating subjects of the rule of law society are mainly social organizations and individual social members rather than public power subjects. The comparison between the rule of law society and the rule of law in countries with social rule of law can reflect that the presupposition of the rule of law society lies in the autonomy of the society rather than the position of the country or other rule of law. Comparatively, the rule of law countries are the counterpart of the rule of law society, and the rule of law social management and the social rule of law countries actually correspond to the functional transformation of the state's social management and public services in recent years. Both of them essentially reflect the country's dominant position. On the other hand, the social superiority of the rule of law society has inherited the same strain in both the rule of law and the society, but it has been qualitatively different from the standard presupposition.

Second, building a three-dimensional society of the rule of law society The rule of law society is both an objective requirement for the operation of the rule of law and a subjective choice for the development of China's construction. The profound implications of the construction of a society under the rule of law are prominently reflected in the three dimensions of the operation of the rule of law, the development of a systematic society, and the transformation of China.

In the first two dimensions, the rule of law society is the transfer and deepening of the rule of law from the national level to the social level. It is also the adjustment and transformation of social development concepts and values ​​as well as social operation mechanisms and methods, and this has led to significant changes in social characteristics. The transition dimension is not in parallel with the first two, but runs through the first two. It is an indispensable background for all current issues in China.

(1) The dimension of the rule of law: The rule of law society is the first step in the deepening and upgrading of the rule of law. Building a society governed by law is the foundation of the rule of law. There are different opinions on the logic and historical context of the rule of law and the rule of law. For the logical relationship between the two, there is a view that the rule of law is the basis of the rule of law in the country. 1 There are also views that emphasize the rule of law based on the rule of law. 2 The author believes that the development and evolution of the rule of law is a long process. Different countries have different historical missions and construction priorities in different historical periods. First, in a general sense, the rule of law society has a more fundamental nature than the rule of law. In terms of genetics, society is the country's mother and the original body. Society determines that the state is the main aspect of the relationship between the state and society, and thus is also the fundamental point for understanding and building the modern rule of law.

From a realistic point of view, a country under the rule of law cannot exist alone. It must take the state of the rule of law as its basic support. Otherwise, the state of law may become a legislative country, and the law cannot be trusted, used, and implemented. Second, the road to building the rule of law should be different according to national conditions and social conditions. Judging from the decisive perspective, the core problem of the transitional countries lies in the fact that public power is the core force that dominates the transition, and the transition is essentially the retreat and return of public power.

This paradox can only be solved under the framework of the rule of law. Therefore, in the early stages of the construction of the rule of law, the first step is to establish the rule of law in the country. The first is to use the public power based on the control of the law. Therefore, building a country under the rule of law is bound to be a prerequisite for the rule of law. From an actual perspective, in China, the implementation of “ruling the country by law” has shown a strong momentum of “regulating the country according to regulations” from the very beginning. The ruling party uses the "rule of law state" as the goal of the country's "political civilization" construction and places more emphasis on the transformation of the kind of governance. The state has become the main body and main driving force for the construction of the rule of law. * The practice of over 30 years of construction has proved that the rule of law has made great progress as a whole, and the economy and society have also achieved considerable development under its protection. The preconditional status of the rule of law in China has been verified in practice. However, the particularity of the road and sequence of the rule of law in transition countries cannot deny that the general basis and source of the rule of law is the logical relationship between society and not the state. At present, China is based on the basic establishment of a country with a legal system and shifts the focus of the rule of law to society. On the other hand, the country will continue to maintain its character formed in the national rule of law; on the other hand, the comprehensive legalization of society will become a new task of the times. The essence of this transformation is to fundamentally nurture and consolidate the country under the rule of law. It is also to return to the general law of the development of things, and push the rule of law to the stage of substantial advanced legality.

Second, building a society governed by law is an effective way to break the bottleneck of the rule of law. China's legal construction over the past 30 years has come to Jiang Mingan: “On the Relationship between the Construction of a Country under the Rule of Law, the Government under the Rule of Law, and the Society under the Rule of Law”, Journal of Law, No. 6, 2013.

Lin: "Restate the formation and characteristics of the rule of law society and discuss how the formation of the legal professional community is possible", Jinling Law Review, Fall 2002.

Today, while achieving great achievements, it is also plunged into many limitations and difficulties exposed during the bottleneck period. These dilemmas include at least the following two levels.

One is the lack of control over public power. Despite the rapid development of the rule of law, the abuse of public power has continued unabated. Corruption has been permanently cured. Especially in the age of the Internet, various kinds of information can be rapidly disseminated, resulting in extremely bad social influences and direct elimination of the authority of the rule of law and the trust of the people. There is a natural danger of abuse, and the national law itself is bound to have flaws and loopholes. 1 The construction of a society under the rule of law helps influence the thinking and attitudes of the power exercisers from the perspective of the system and the environment, and forms effective supervision and control forces through the citizens and social organizations and their autonomy. Overcome the Anarchy of Public Power and Construct a Difficult Position of Rule of Law .

The second is that legislation violates the rule of law. Public power uses legal administration as the basic requirement for the operation of the rule of law. This makes the construction of a country under the rule of law must be preceded by legislation. However, even if public power itself can be used better, legislation may also infringe upon the rule of law. First, in a general sense, the violation of the rule of law by the legislature is rooted in the limited rationality of legislators. This phenomenon will be more prominent under the complex social structure during the transition period. One of the important ways to overcome the limitations of legislation is through the active construction and effective operation of the rule of law in the society, to make up for various inadequacies of the state law, and to form and improve the provision of the national legal system. Second, legislation is overly complicated. Due to the fact that in the last decade or so, the state has focused on the construction of an institutional system, coupled with the passing of rivers, it has led to the existence of a dilemma of excessive legislation and lack of legislation in the process of sound legislation: On the one hand, the legal norms have grown so explosively that they become legally negative. Tired, on the other hand, there are still legal vacancies in the adjustment of many social relations. If the latter is attributed to the lagging and conservative nature of the law, and cannot rapidly respond to rapidly changing social life, the former actually exposes the consequences of the unilateral growth of the rule of law: the members of society have limited knowledge, understanding, and understanding of the law. The ability to digest and use is limited. The complicated multi-layered legal system has become a legal burden on ordinary members of the society. Its complexity makes it difficult for ordinary citizens to grasp, and it is even more difficult for them to act according to law or to defend their rights in accordance with the law. Therefore, the active construction of a society under the rule of law, the promotion of autonomous rules and informal institutions to support the benign operation of the society, will help remedy the above limitations and predicaments of legislation.

(II) Social Dimensions: Building a Society Ruled by Law is the Basic Appeal of the Modern Society Since the reform and opening up, Chinese society has experienced intricate social changes. Judging from the macro system, this is a journey from a traditional society to a modern society. 2 The review of the shift of focus of the rule of law countries towards the construction of a society governed by the rule of law should be observed in the whole system of society and the evolutionary pattern.

First, the construction of a society under the rule of law is a reconsideration of the human society. China has traditionally been a typical human society. The intricate network of human relationships in society, including affection, friendship, fellowship, student relations, colleagues, teacher-student relationships, etc., are intertwined and penetrated into various areas of national governance and social operations. The existence of loopholes in the thousands of laws is indeed the logical starting point for the universal consensus and reasoning of the liberal school of law, the purist school of law, the interest law school, etc. since the end of the 19th century. (See Huang Shupu: "Law of Law in a Changing Society", Taipei: Yuanzhao Publishing Co., Ltd., 2009, pp. 10-17, 23). For the division of traditional society and modern society, see Gao Hongkai: The Way out of Modern Rule of Law. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2003, pp. 245-247.

The Chinese society, which has been immersed in the human experience and social order for more than a decade, has instinctively rejected the law because of its inhuman nature, internal and external factors. The great importance attached to human relations, especially the blood relationship between generations, has profoundly affected all aspects of social operation. At present, finding a relationship and dealing with people in trouble has become a basic action strategy for many people. "Humanity" and "relationship" as the core guidelines or the primary considerations of behavior have acquired a status that is more important than the law. The human-oriented society is still a prominent feature of Chinese society.

The rule of law society is to change the human-centered people rule society, change the main use of power orders, the will to rule society, manage the country and control people; change the "human sentiment", "relationship", power, door, emotion and will and other non-system Factors in the overall control of social life; change the "ruler" does not recognize the system, regardless of the rules of the rule of law, regardless of the rule of authority authority.

It should be specifically stated that this change is not a denial and destruction of social ethics, but a reconstruction of traditional Chinese society after reflection. Traditional ethics has special qualities such as heavy order and heavy self-discipline. It provides important local resources for the extraction of social autonomy rules. The human society has played an important role in the transformation of the economic system from the planned economy to the market economy. The “human sentiment” in a certain sense is conducive to social order and stability. The society ruled by law that we are looking for is to embody emotions and principles in a generalized system of rules and form a system of orderly pursuit of interest, individual development, and the expression of appeals.

Second, the construction of a society under the rule of law is the cultivation and promotion of public reason. The rational spirit is an important feature of a modern society. The rational spirit includes the truthfulness of experimental verification, the spirit of seeking knowledge in the nature of exploration, the enterprising spirit of critical innovation, the collaborative spirit of mutual assistance, and the emphasis on the science of objectification, standardization, precision, quantification, proceduralization, institutionalization, and standardization. spirit. 3 Public reason is about the value guiding and behavioral statute of public life in modern society. It contains a series of value content such as freedom, equality, democracy, rule of law, fairness, and efficiency, as well as communication, coordination, compromise, tolerance, participation, autonomy, and responsibility. Series code of conduct. 4 Public rationality provides a basic and reasonable standard of value and behavior for the main body of political activities and the public sphere. It is an indispensable spiritual element for the healthy operation of modern society.

The relationship between the rule of law society and public reason presents two aspects. First, law itself is a regular, formal, objective public reason. The rule of law as a rule of governance itself includes features such as certainty, clarity, rationality, and stability. These contents are all in line with the core meaning of rationality. The rule of law emphasizes carrying out various economic, social and cultural activities in accordance with the rational spirit and in accordance with the law, and prevents emotions from being used in order to protect individuals against fairness. Second, the rule of law society not only requires the allocation of resources and interest through the establishment of rights (Hanyi), but also uses Han Sheng: “Enlightenment of Modernity in China: Between Traditional Ethics and Modern Civil Society”, “Research on Ethics” In 2007 Chen Guoquan and Cao Wei: “Personality paradox: promotion and restraint of economic transformation by the human society, based on the Wenzhou model Li Xiaoyuan: “Good governance” comes from the construction of a service-oriented government in the perspective of “good governance” and public rationality”, Jiang Hai The trajectory of the operation of the learning process of program planning also requires the pursuit of interests and expression of claims in accordance with the rules. At present, the national rule of law has made remarkable progress in all aspects of legislation, administration, and administration of justice. Public power as a whole has been operating in an orderly manner within the framework of procedures. However, the expression of individual appeals has become more and more irrational, and extreme events and mass incidents have taken over. to.

This kind of phenomenon exerts a powerful pressure on public power, which leads to a large amount of national resources for the rule of law and weakens the rule of law authority fundamentally. Of course, there are objective reasons such as frequent contradictions in the social transitional period and imperfect system of the rule of law construction period. However, lack of public reason and weak awareness of the rule of law are also problems that cannot be ignored. The rule of law requires social individuals to rationally judge and justify their own interests. The construction of a society governed by law will help infiltrating the values ​​of the law into the hearts of the people, allowing the people to identify with the spirit of law, understand the principles of law, and form a consciousness of the rule of law. This process is precisely the process of nurturing and promoting public reason. The result of this construction will help ensure that society operates on a rational track.

Beyond the two micro-levels of emotions and emotions mentioned above, in the macro-level of the social dimension, the construction of a society under the rule of law has its far-reaching significance: in the tide of globalization, China is simultaneously facing strong Western discourse and deeply ingrained traditional concepts. The pre-modern, modern, and post-modern three trends of thought fluctuate from each other, and it is difficult to accurately position the “society where to go”. The rule of law society has pointed out a direction for social development. This goal is not necessarily the ultimate, nor is it mutually exclusive with the imagination of other societies, but it is undeniable that a society ruled by law is bound to be the necessary foundation for the ideal modern society we pursue.

(III) Transformational Dimensions The rule of law is the core consensus of the transition of China to bridge the social system. Social transformation. It is the social development concept and value change, the dominant force and determinants of social development, the qualitative change of social structure, the fundamental transformation of social operation methods and mechanisms, and social characteristics. Significant changes in the historical process. One hundred years ago, when western countries were confronted with a triple transformation, Simmel issued a classic question of “What is possible in society” in the Journal of American Sociology. 2 Until today, scholars still regard it as the ultimate problem of sociology, and transitional China in fact can not circumvent a similar problem: how can society in transition, possible to throw such problems, first of all based on the following phenomenon Reflections: As the society enters the stage of contemporary development, various countries and regions in the world, including China, have seen increasingly strong mutual exclusion between individuals and society, society, and government. Social life is increasingly diversified and fragmented. Without centralization, individualism has almost become one of the most widely shared beliefs. Since the reform and opening up, China has gradually turned from class struggle as a framework to an overall construction centered on economic construction. The prosperity of the socialist market economy has on the one hand fully released the development of productive forces, and on the other hand, it has brought about the rapid expansion of individual instrumentalism in the context of market economy.

The core or even the content of human value leads to improper squeeze of public life, improper loss of social capital, and frequent social crisis of confidence. Societies that take “organic unity” as their basic requirement suffer from fragmentation between horizontal members. It also faces a fracture between vertical and historical traditions. In a situation where religion and ethics have been reduced and ideology has been weakening, reliance on the national concept of blood and geographical nationality to bridge the social debris is bound to be difficult.

Dworkin claims that the law is not the will imposed by the ruler on the weak, but a guarantee of social coexistence. 1 In a situation where all the authorities are in doubt, fairness and justice are the most common value of the common law. The rule of law, which is the basic content and operation goal, helps reunite the consensus at this level. It is because the rule of law is to promote transformation in China. The important mechanism of social solidarity has become the core task of bridging social fragmentation and recasting trust, and it can take the responsibility of ensuring the path to a harmonious society.

III. Constructing the Rule of Law Society Objectives Description: The characteristics of the rule of law society are refined Since the rule of law society has been widely used in many contexts without distinction, it has become almost an empty category that can refer to any legal field. To regard the rule of law as an important rule of law and rationally plan its construction strategy and implementation path, it is necessary to first refine the basic elements of a society ruled by law, and reveal the characteristics with strong discernibility. Through these characteristics, we can further deepen the understanding and grasp of the noumenon of the rule of law and also help to concretize the goals of the rule of law society and provide guidance for constructing scientific indicators for assessing the progress of the rule of law and integrated construction. Judging from the three poles of integrated construction, the rule of law is a common element of the rule of law, the rule of law, and the rule of law. It is only that the elements of the rule of law will show different priorities among the three. "The rule of law's 'rule of law' emphasizes the control of power, and the 'rule of law' of the rule of law government emphasizes handling affairs according to law and governing according to law. The 'rule of law' of the rule of law society emphasizes more on human rights protection." 2 The differences in the key elements of the rule of law are exacerbated, and the legal society contains The following two qualities are particularly noteworthy.

The “law” of the rule of law society, that is, the rule system of the rule of law society, includes not only formal rules such as laws and regulations promulgated by the state, but also the autonomous norms formulated by social autonomous organizations and groups, as well as the geographical habits of various groups. , Business practices, etc., play an intangible role in regulating the role of social relations. As some scholars have argued: “Social norms such as habits, morals, customs, customs, etc. are always part of a social order and system, and therefore are also part of the rule of law, and they are indispensable parts... The support and cooperation of these informal institutions, the country’s formal system also lacks a solid foundation.” 3 Therefore, Ronald Dworkin, the rule-of-law society’s ruler, “Treat the rights seriously”, translated by Xin Chunying and Wu Yuzhang, Beijing: China. Encyclopedia Press, 1998, p. 15.

Jiang Mingan: “On the Relationship between the Construction of a Country under the Rule of Law, the Government under the Rule of Law, and the Society under the Rule of Law”, Journal of Law, No. 6, 2013.

Suli: “Road to Urban: The Rule of Law in Transition to China”, Beijing: Law Press, 2004, p. 26.

Coherence is the core paradigm of Dworkin’s legal philosophy. According to this theory, the entire legal system should present the principles of principle. Dworkin divided coherence into two parts based on different aspects of the rule of law: as a legislative principle, lawmakers must be required to attempt to make the laws they ethically coherent; as a refereeing principle, the judge is required to The law is regarded as a whole consisting of a coherent set of principles. 1 Some researchers have subdivided coherence into three aspects: facts, norms, and subject understanding. That is, beliefs about facts are logically consistent; judgments about values ​​have normative coherence and consistency in principle. People understand that things should achieve the coherence of the inner world and the outer world, and that they should be the subject's moral and rational needs. 2 Coherence in the context of the construction of a society under the rule of law refers to the internality of the social system of rules, as well as the consistency between the rules system and the practice of the rule of law. There is consistency in the value orientation and basic principles.具体包括两个方面：一是规则之间的融贯，即法治社会的自治规则和非正式规则与作为正式规则的国家法在价值取向和基本原则上具有一致性；二是规则与行动的融贯，即上述规则系统所承载的法价值和法原则获得各类社会主体的认可与服从，深植于主体的决策和行动中。这里所讨论的融贯，并不排斥或回避德沃金所倡导的法与道德的一致关系，而是将“国家法应当反映自然法的要求，承载公平、正义等良善价值”作为法治的一般性原则和法治社会建设的前提性立场。因此，在揭示法治社会的独有特性时，应当着力强调规则之间的融贯和规则与行动的融贯两个层面。

在此前提假定下，有两个具体问题值得特别关注。其一，在我国法治社会的建设过程中，规则之间的融贯主要应表现为一种自上而下的贯彻。正式的国家法在法治社会的规则体系中具有圆点规则的性质。这是因为，我国的法治发展道路不是一个自生自发的过程，而是一个由政府主导的建构型进路。经过长时间的努力现已构建了完整的中国特色社会主义法律体系。虽然在具体制度和规范上仍有缺失和失灵，但社会主义法治的整体价值立场、基本原则以及各法域的核心理念已经成为全社会的基本共识并在正式制度间具有内部自洽性。国家的法律规则与社会的既有自治规则、习惯等并非没有冲突。在建设法治社会的进程中，应当着力使上述国家法的价值和原则等的实质性内核融入到社会自治规则之中，使自治规则获得与国家法相一致的内在品质，并与其共同构成具有整体性的规则体系。其二，法治社会的核心特性在于规则与行动的融贯。近年来，众多研究者在对不同发展中国家的法治进行研究时，几乎都发现文本制度与实践的鸿沟是法治所面临的最大问题，因此特别强调内化于心、外化于行必然也是我国法治社会建设的攻坚问题。

改革开放以来，国家与社会元化的格局逐渐解体，全能国家不断重新自我定位，市场经济体制快速发展加快了社会与国家的分离，社会相对于国家的独立性曰益增强。在以往的研究中，国家与社会二元论往往得出国家与社会的对立关系，并多将自治性作为社会运行的当然状态，这种观点并不完全正确。

首先，应当指出，国家与社会的适当分离和相对独立并不等同于对立，二者关系并非只有零和博弈一种状态，“强社会”并不一定意味着“弱国家”。扩大社会的权利、提升其自治空间，本质上是国家与社会的相互赋权。这种相互赋权在实际运作中会形成“相互增权”：1方面，公民获得参与社会治理的更多权利，另1方面，国家治理的能力因公民参与获得增强，治理合法性和认同感也因之提升。在现实层面，有学者通过实证研究揭示出中国国家与社会关系呈现为“行政吸纳社会”的结构性特征。在此结构中，国家与社会实际上是相互融洽的，并且此结构在实践运作中是有效的。②其次，法治社会是共治社会而非孤立自治社会。一方面，国家公权力运行的有效性取决于国家与社会的关联程度：“没有嵌入社会的'强'国家事实上是脆弱的，不能经受社会变迁的考验。”③另一方面，正是通过国家与社会的共治，法治的潜在因素才能被激活，规则权威的衰弱重新得以强化，有关法治的态度碎片得以重组为一种共识。最终，法治国家与法治社会的融洽关系得以持续地再生产。法治社会的基本理念不是社会的单一自治，而是国家与社会相对独立前提下的互动互构，并由国外学者从社会发展的实践经验考察中也总结出了类似的结论：在经济转型国家中，最成功的往往是社会嵌入最紧密的国家。①在范围更大的西方国家里，国家与社会、公与私之间已没有明确的分界，公民参与有助于加强国家力量，国家制度可建立个促进公民参与的环境，二者互为条件。因此，最重要的是通过定的制度安排将国家嵌入社会，使公众参与公共事务，实现国家与社会的共治。

在当前中国，“国家在社会中”十分必要。因为没有国家的有为、有限参与，社会无法自动实现合规则的秩序建构，缺乏公平正义性质的潜规则会占据社会治理阵地，使社会同时存在着两类相去甚远乃至截然相反的规则体系，并陷入两者所造成的混乱无序当中，导致社会基本结构与行为规范体系处于分裂状态，并造就普遍的虚伪人格，②社会运行走向法治的反面。但是，应当特别指出，在共治结构中，为确保国家的有限参与和社会的自治优位，公权力应当处于备位的地位。

首先，共治本身是对国家干预的一种认可。国家对社会的干预是必要的，但过多依赖国家的公权力去构筑社会秩序，尽管可能呈现出有序，但这种秩序是国家强制力保证的，与社会缺乏内在的亲和性，往往无法调动社会成员运用自身的能力采取有效行动、寻求相互合作，进而形成、发展更为人们所喜欢的、更契合日常生活的、充满生机和活力的社会秩序。

其次，站在社会立场，公权力的备位性表现为两个方面：其，法治国家向法治社会提供基本的法治公共产品：一套正式制度体系，一套立法、执法、司法的公权力机构以及运作机制，乃至有关法治的知识或一般认知（法治精神、法治理念、法治文化等）；其二，正式规则和公权力透过对社会关系的直接调整和方向引领获得社会成员的认同和信任，自觉运用并据此积极建构自治规则和处理自治事务。由此，共治意味着公权力释放更多的空间，社会组织透过自治规范进行治理，而公权力仅处于补充性地位，时刻处于备位状态。

四、法治社会建设的战略择定法治社会建设一方面需要在法治国家建设方面进行深耕：既往建设法治国家的各种路径、方式应当持续坚持运作；③另一方面，法治社会的实质或者说关键举措对此的详细讨论，参见江必新：《关于社会主义法治国家建设若干问题的理论思考》，在于法治建设的重心下移。笔者主张，法治社会建设的基本方略就是透过法治社会化实现社会法治化的育化过程，具体包括法制的社会化以及司法社会化两个主要层面。

（一）增强法制社会化：良善性与科学性之提升首先，透过提升回应性与增强收缩性建设良善法制。法治社会建设的前提条件在于法治社会的规则系统须为良法，即要求务必是良法为治。但这里的良善性或正当性，最重要的是对国家法的要求。着眼于法治社会建设，正式的国家法应在回应性和收缩性等方面进行改进提升。

其，法由社会建构。这意味着，在形式上，法律是国家制定或认可，并由国家创制出来的。但实质上，其应代表且回应社会的需要，可概称为法的回应性。本文所称法的回应性是指，以国家法为首的各类规则的建构均应积极和理性地回应社会成员和社会整体的需求。当前，迫切需要法作出回应的社会问题，是长久以来直存在且在转型社会表现更为突出的，对于社会各类利益配置和利益矛盾调处问题；二是产生于现代社会并表现出日益严峻和迫切态势的风险社会中各种突发事件应对问题。从此两者可以看出，规则回应性本身是种实质社会本位的立场。其二，如前所述，追溯至社会需求深层，法治包含了法制简化的要求。国家法的适度收缩本身亦具有良善之意。此外，法治社会之法的另一个重要渊源是社会自治规则，其对建构法治社会具有至关重要的意义。国家法应当合理收缩，为社会自治性规则的建构预留空间并创造条件。

其次，妥用法治评估提升法制科学性。法治社会之法亦必须增强科学性以确保其实效。失灵之法在社会层面会造成规范真空并延宕问题的解决，使社会关系处于不确定状态。近年来，世界范围内兴起的法治定量评估运动①带动了国内关于法治评估的更广泛的探索实践和系统的理论总结。这场运动以对各国的整体经济评估为背景，有助于提升法治的一般共识和评判的科学水准。中国应积极回应此一浪潮，藉此契机加快法治建设步伐。但如联合国开发计划署、经合组织和世界银行等国际组织及其他西方评估机构往往旨在建立套普遍适用于不同国家间的评估尺度，此通用性标准在面对各国历史文化、政治制度和经济发展水平以及由此决定的法治建设任务时，其客观性和有效性存在严重问题：其对法治共性的揭示固然重要，但其对法治差异性的忽略则无疑是更为关键的。目前国内先行法治化地区探索的法治评①其中最具代表性的是世界银行全球治理指数中的法治指数和世界正义工程的法治指数估在指标设计上也存在这类问题。①对于后发国家来说，建构型法治的推进更需要一个客观和量化的分析评价标准来衡量法治发展水平，校准法治建设的局部目标定位。当前，我国特别需要根据法治社会的本体内涵和前述特质，充分发掘和妥善设计反映法治社会的辨识度较高的指标，结合中国法治现状创新法治评估模式，真正提升法治科学性。

（二）迈向司法社会化：通俗化与透明性之加强当前，中国的司法走到一个尴尬的境地，背负“不可承受之重”，已为各界所共知共识。以法律纠纷表现出来的冲突往往蕴含着更深层的政治经济社会矛盾。司法审判务必向着真正意义上的公正与独立迈进，已广受认同，但达至彼岸的道路以及潜藏的问题远非这些抽象价值所能概括。从社会契约的角度，司法是向公民供给公平纠纷解决机制这一公共产品的“厂商”，由此，司法必须既保障品质又能让作为消费者的公民所理解和认同。②各国法治求索的实践经验表明，随着立法的繁复和社会矛盾的复杂多元，司法在加强专业化的同时必然导致其与社会的日益疏离。如果说在法治国家层面，司法公正和审判独立是其建设的重要方向，那么在法治社会建设中，应更着力构建为公民所能理解和认同、具有内在权威的司法，否则，法治将沦为知法者的工具。司法的社会化就是因应上述思考，要求司法在追求专业化的同时，有意识地承担教育功能，弥合专业与社会、法律人与民众之间的理解鸿沟。具体说，一是针对个案当事人，司法应努力提升裁判的可接受性；二是面向普通民众，司法应力争赢得理解、尊重与认同。前者应从司法的直接目标、任务与原则进行研析，后者则可透过司法对整个社会系统的功能进行观察。

首先，维护法律的权威和弥合法律与社会现实之间的鸿沟，是司法实践的当然使命和永恒主题。个案审裁方面透过技术性司法，秉持守法主义保障司法的客观性；另一方面则通过自由裁量，秉承裁量正义，增进司法的可接受性。③循此，司法通过对个案的公正处置，把法治精神、法治意识、法治观念深深植入人心。

其次，司法需要透过教育避免专业因素加深所致的人民对法的排斥。“法治问题根本上还是法律文化的问题，法律制度的移植不难，制度下面的价值观要和被移植参见余杭评估体系课题组：《法治量化评估的创新实践余杭法治报告》，中国社会科学院法学研究所编，李林主编：《中国法治发展报告No.6（2008）》，北京：社会科学出版社，2008年，第366页。

凌斌的“法民关系”理论对此问题作出另种叙事。（参见凌斌：《当代中国法治实践社会的价值观契合，则需要施以相当大量的教育。①但直接说教和强制灌输往往走到教育目的反面。真正的观念养成是一个育化过程，身教胜于言教。司法本身就是育化法治的有效途径。包括法官、检察官和律师在内的法律职业群体的职业活动（法庭内外）都是法治教育的重要平台。透过法庭的开放，裁判书的通俗化，人民陪审制等各种途径，将司法目前大量耗散在信访处置方面的资源转而来开展公民事前和事中的沟通和教育，利用各种机会去改变人民对司法的刻板印象。在最近的司法实践中，司法机关通过各种形式对公众普遍关注、社会影响重大的案件的裁判过程进行实时、公开报道。②此种透明的司法方式，为判决结果的社会可接受性奠定基础，有助于调和法律理性与民众观察之间的价值判断差异。同时，司法资源是公共资源，司法个案产生的指引性与每个公民都息息相关，能够引领乃至塑造特定的公共生活规范。③在坚持法治精神的基础上，透明司法为社会建构出更加理性、开放与平等的公共议论空间，是多元社会聚合价值共识、化解社会争议、体现司法公正的有益举措。

五、法治中国与法治社会建设如果以法治为中心梳理新中国发展的历史脉络，前30年国家“以阶级斗争为纲”，在很大程度上否定法治；1978年以后，国家“以经济建设为中心”，展开反思并探索法治建设的道路。这30余年，以中国特色社会主义法律体系全面建成为标志，是形式法治初具规模的阶段。展望未来，中国法治还有漫长道路要走。如果依然截取30年为一阶段，那么今后的30年无疑是法治向着实质化迈进的阶段。

实质化阶段的法治建设所要着重面对的是法治发展中存在的缺陷。围绕深化建设的任务，运用类型化研究法④对各国法治进程中呈现的缺陷进行划分，本文主张法治缺陷应分为四个类型：失衡型、失调型、失信型及失重型。⑤所谓法治失衡，苏永钦：《飘移在两种司法理念间的司法改革台湾司法改革的社经背景与法制基近期通过实时公开报道或微博直播庭审的案件，包括丁书苗案、龚爱爱案、南京“饿死女童案”、北京大兴摔童案、李某某等涉嫌强奸案等。

王旭：《“回应型司法”更能粘合民心》，《人民日报》2013年9月27日，第5版。

关于法治的类型划分，多从发展的正面进行阐述。如塔玛纳哈的形式与实质法治学说即是从单薄趋向厚实的类型划分：形式法治从单薄到厚实分别是以法而治（rulebylaw）、形式合法性和民主合法性，实质法治从单薄到厚实分别强调的是个人权利、尊严国外研究者通过对美国、德国和英国的考察，提出了四种缺陷法治和三类成因，其思即由于种种原因，部分领域/问题的立法健全周密而其他领域/问题的立法则存在缺漏乃至空白，部分领域/环节的法得到有效实施，部分领域/环节的法则停留在纸面难以贯彻落实。所谓法治失调，即法律之间及其内部呈现冲突矛盾缺乏调和。所谓法治失信，即法律制定和实施中的某些武断恣意导致民众对已发布的法，以及透过立法治理社会新问题缺乏信赖。所谓法治失重，是指国家层面的法治系统建设先于社会成长并与社会日益疏离，导致法治深化难以为继，仿佛物体失去重力场的作用而呈现的漂浮状态。基于上述划分，应当特别注意如下三点。

第一，一体建设是迈向法治中国的必然选择。法治失衡、法治失调、法治失信，直至法治失重，是当前我国法治建设中应直接面对的问题，需要从法治国家、法治政府和法治社会三方面统筹规划、系统推进。如前所述，法治国家和法治社会是相对独立又密切互构的两个部分，而法治政府则是法治国家建设的关键环节和建设法治社会的核心力量。“法治国家、法治政府、法治社会体建设”的法治发展观，是对以往法治建设成果的合理自信和对当前中国法治发展瓶颈的准确判断。一体建设符合法治的般成长规律和中国社会的现状，法治国家、法治政府、法治社会体事实上构成了“法治中国”的基本内容。

第二，法治社会是一体建设的重心所在。在上述四种类型中，前三种是较为普遍的缺陷形态，在各国的法治进程中部分或全部地存在。第四种类型的缺陷更容易出现在包括中国在内的转型国家中。毕竟，西方国家市民社会的长期发展和浸润为法治及其现代化准备了丰厚的土壤和坚实的基础条件。由此，其法治建设聚焦于国家的依法而治，法治国家的成也意味着法治社会的成。中国法治建设缺少此背景条件，在发展到一段时间后，呈现出国家法与社会的关系紧张，法治对更坚实的社会基础的诉求愈发强烈，法治呈现出缺少补给和根基，难以落地的“失重”状态。这是当前中国法治建设的主要矛盾，由其决定，法治社会建设是一体建设中的重心所在。法治社会的生成在一定意义上将标志着社会转型的完成和法治现代化的实现。①第三，以法治社会为重心的一体建设，不是法治的转型而是建设的升级。一种主张认为，中国正处于法治转型之中。②对此应当明确，转型国家的法治建设道路与法治转型并不能等同。既往中国法治求索的道路难以用“追仿”西方制度理论来概括，以适应国情、解决实际问题为目标的“自主”法治道路也绝非中国法治的改弦更张。改革开放以来，中国的法治建设吸收借鉴并实践人类社会法治的一般规律，是一个从无到有的建构阶段，它必须以法律体系的建立、法治基本结构与要素的完备为第1要务。但由于独特的社会转型背景和由此决定的整体格局与具体矛盾，西方法治道路至多只是这一阶段中国法治建设的参照系和样本库的一个组成部分。随着制度框架的逐步确立和法治要素的建立健全，中国法治建设进入反思与完善的问题回应阶段。这阶段的法治建设，重在对本国法治的细化、优化和实质化。中国法治向实质化演进，是因为所面临的问题和所肩负的任务而使其本国特色更加明显。

但从法治国家到法治政府直至法治社会一体建设，中国法治的建设道路在不同时期的目标、原则和重点是相互衔接、互为因果的。法治国家、法治政府、法治社会三者所构成的法治中国，首先是人类法治文明的“继承版”，但与其说是中国法治的转型路，毋宁说是法治建设的“中国版”和中国法治的“升级版”

当前，中国迈向法治社会的时机业已成熟。其一，中国特色社会主义法律体系的建立标志着正式制度的完备，法治在国家层面初步形成，并具有了深入社会的基本势能。其二，依法治国的经年实践积累了法治建设的经验和理论成果，也凸显了问题的症结所在，并形成了初步共识，这使得法治社会建设集结了强大动能。加之由于改革深入和互联网时代导致的整体意义上的社会兴起势不可挡，正反两方面社会实践的潜移默化作用，公民、社会组织的权利意识、法治意识日渐强化，社会软实力发育勃兴，上述均对法治社会提出了迫切要求，准备了充分条件。法治社会建设的目标理想是社会依法自治运行。但在转型中国的格局下，法治社会无法自发实现。因此，国家（

Decorative Lines

Wood grating,Technical wood,Mirror frame lines,Window line,Stone plastic sheath board

Heilongjiang Junhe Building Materials Technology Co., Ltd , https://www.junhejiancai.com