Three Dimensions of the Historical Origins of the Normativity of Intra-Party Regulations

Intra-Party regulations are the fundamental basis for governing the Party according to rules and an organic component of the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics. The study of intra-Party regulations is an important part of philosophy and social sciences with Chinese characteristics, and strengthening research on intra-Party regulations is an inherent requirement for constructing an independent Chinese legal knowledge system. Where the normativity of intra-Party regulations comes from, and how intra-Party regulations form the legitimacy and justice to guide, evaluate, constrain, and even punish Party members, are among the "meta-questions" that research on intra-Party regulations must thoroughly analyze. Existing research focuses on perspectives from legal studies and political party studies, but this is not yet sufficient to constitute the entire discourse on the sources of the normativity of intra-Party regulations. Intra-Party regulations possess a certain historicity; they are the intellectual成果 formed through the emergence and development of Marxist party theory in China, the practical product of the Chinese Communist Party's self-institutionalization and systematization in the process of leading China's revolution, construction, and reform, and the epochal innovation of the Chinese civilization's millennia-old beautiful vision of good governance and good laws in the process of the Chinese Communist Party strengthening its own construction. Approaching from the three dimensions of intellectual history, practical history, and civilizational history allows for a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the sources of the normativity of intra-Party regulations.

党内法规是依规治党的根本依据，是中国特色社会主义法治体系的有机组成部分。党内法规研究是中国特色哲学社会科学的重要组成部分，加强党内法规研究是构建中国自主的法学知识体系的应有之义。党内法规的规范性从何而来，党内法规何以形成指引、评价、约束乃至惩戒党员的正当性与正义性，是党内法规研究必须深入剖析的“元问题”之一。现有研究注重从法学和政党研究的视角切入，但这尚不足以构成党内法规规范性来源的全部论域。党内法规是具有一定历史性的，它是马克思主义政党理论在中国发生发展所形成的思想成果，是中国共产党在领导中国革命、建设和改革过程中进行自身制度化、体系化建设所形成的实践产物，是中华文明千百年来对良法善治的美好设想在中国共产党加强自身建设过程中的时代创新。从思想史、实践史、文明史三个维度切入，可以更加深入全面地理解党内法规规范性的来源。

The Dimension of Intellectual History of the Normativity of Intra-Party Regulations

党内法规规范性的思想史维度

From the dimension of intellectual history of the sources of the normativity of intra-Party regulations, it is necessary to examine the emergence and development of Marxist party theory in China. Intra-Party regulations are a product of Marxist parties developing to a certain historical stage, a product of the world proletarian revolution developing to a certain historical stage. The important expositions of Marx and other classical writers on the mission, organization, and discipline of the proletariat and its party enriched and developed Marxist party theory, constituting the intellectual history dimension of the sources of the normativity of intra-Party regulations. Based on these important expositions, the normativity of intra-Party regulations can achieve unity among theory, history, and reality, and manifest the original aspiration and founding mission [1]1 Original aspiration and founding mission (初心使命): The Party's founding goal of serving the people and realizing communism, as articulated in its continuous self-reform. of the Chinese Communist Party as a revolutionary organization at its founding and existence, as well as the revolutionary ideal and political philosophy created by the Chinese Communist Party.

从党内法规规范性来源的思想史维度看，需要考察马克思主义政党理论在中国的发生和发展。党内法规是马克思主义政党发展到一定历史阶段的产物，是世界无产阶级革命发展到一定历史阶段的产物。马克思等经典作家关于无产阶级及其政党的使命、组织性与纪律性的重要论述，丰富和发展了马克思主义政党理论，构成党内法规规范性来源的思想史维度。基于这些重要论述，党内法规规范性得以在理论、历史与现实三者之间达成统一，并彰显出中国共产党作为一个革命组织其创立和存在的初心使命，以及中国共产党创造的革命理想和政治哲学。

Approaching from the dimension of intellectual history allows for a more adequate answer to the deep-seated questions of the normativity of intra-Party regulations. Why do intra-Party regulations exist relatively independently of state law? In the evolutionary logic of Marxist party theory, intra-Party regulations serve the self-construction of a revolutionary organization, and a revolutionary organization is the subject of action carrying out revolutionary activities. Revolution is a critique and transformation of the social system and the mode of state governance under given historical conditions. Under this premise, revolution does not need state "permission" to exist, and the internal regulations of a revolutionary organization likewise do not need state law "permission" to exist. Only after establishing the constitutional status of the people as masters of the country through revolution can intra-Party regulations and state law achieve consistency in value orientation. In the socialist rule-of-law system with Chinese characteristics, although intra-Party regulations are coordinated and connected with state law, this does not deny their own rationality for independent existence as internal regulations of a revolutionary organization. Why are intra-Party regulations stricter than state law? In the conception of Marxist party theory, Party members, as part of the revolution and the revolutionary organization, must bear higher-level responsibilities and obligations not required of ordinary state citizens in the general sense, in order to form and maintain the combat effectiveness of the revolutionary organization in the revolutionary struggle. Under this premise, Party members' fulfillment of responsibilities and obligations must not only come from the conscious demands of their own "Party spirit" [2]2 Party spirit (党性): The principle of loyalty to the Party's political line and organizational discipline, a core concept in Leninist party-building., but also from the binding and compulsory "heteronomy" of the revolutionary organization to which they belong. After the revolutionary organization takes power, it must still use this "heteronomy" to maintain the ability of Party members to continue fulfilling higher-level responsibilities and obligations, rather than merely ensuring that Party members obey the law like ordinary state citizens, in order to prevent the revolutionary organization from becoming a loose political alliance after taking power. Such questions all need to be answered in the specific historical context of the emergence and development of Marxist party theory in China.

从思想史维度切入，党内法规规范性的深层次问题可以得到更充分的回答。党内法规为何相对独立于国家法律而存在？在马克思主义政党理论的演进逻辑中，党内法规服务于革命组织的自身建设，而革命组织是进行革命活动的行动主体。革命是对既定历史条件下社会制度及国家统治方式的批判和改造。在此前提下，革命不需要经国家“许可”才能存在，革命组织的内部规定同样也不需要经国家法律“许可”才能存在。只有在通过革命确立人民当家作主的宪法地位之后，党内法规与国家法律才能在价值取向上达成一致。在中国特色社会主义法治体系中，党内法规虽然与国家法律协调衔接，但并不因此否认其自身作为革命组织的内部规定而具有独立存在的合理性。党内法规为何严于国家法律？在马克思主义政党理论的构想中，党员作为革命及革命组织的一部分，必须要承担一般意义上国家公民所不被要求具备的更高层次的责任和义务，才能在革命斗争中形成并维持革命组织的战斗力。在此前提下，党员履行责任和义务不仅要出于自身“党性”的自觉要求，也来源于所属革命组织带有约束力和强制性的“他律”。革命组织执政之后，仍要以这种“他律”维系党员继续履行更高层次责任和义务的能力，而不是确保党员像普通国家公民一样遵守法律即可，以防止革命组织在执政以后成为一个松散的政治联盟。此类问题，都需在马克思主义政党理论在中国发生和发展这个具体历史语境中作出回答。

The Dimension of Practical History of the Normativity of Intra-Party Regulations

党内法规规范性的实践史维度

From the dimension of practical history of the normativity of intra-Party regulations, it is necessary to examine the Chinese Communist Party's self-construction and practical activities. Intra-Party regulations are a product created by the Chinese Communist Party in the process of leading China's revolution, construction, and reform, a product of combining Marxist party theory with China's specific realities. The important expositions of Mao Zedong and other classical writers on intra-Party regulations were established on the basis of their concrete analysis and in-depth reflection on Party building and the Party's practical activities, possessing a profound practical attribute. As the era background and social environment undergo historical changes, if the original "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations are to continue to function in governing and managing the Party, they must answer a question of the times: why they remain effective under new historical conditions.

从党内法规规范性的实践史维度看，需要考察中国共产党的自身建设与实践活动。党内法规是中国共产党在领导中国革命、建设和改革过程中所创造的产物，是马克思主义政党理论同中国具体实际相结合的产物。毛泽东等经典作家关于党内法规的重要论述，建立在他们对党的建设与党的实践活动进行具体分析和深入思考基础之上，具有深刻的实践属性。随着时代背景和社会环境发生历史性变化，原先作为“历史文本”的党内法规若要继续发挥管党治党功能，就必须回答一个时代之问，即为何在新的历史条件下仍然行之有效。

Approaching from the dimension of practical history allows for a clearer elaboration of whether the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations still have validity in reality. In the history of the Party, the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations include both those introduced to China from the Comintern [3]3 Comintern: The Communist International (1919–1943), the international organization of communist parties led by the Soviet Union, which influenced early CCP organizational practices. or other overseas channels, and, more importantly, original regulations born from the local practices of China's revolution, construction, and reform. For the former, it is first necessary to clarify the original meaning of the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations in world modern history, especially the history of the international communist movement, then trace how they were translated into Chinese and introduced to China, and under what circumstances and in what ways the Chinese Communists understood and accepted these extraterritorial regulations and made them our Party's intra-Party regulations. For the normativity of intra-Party regulations, how the Chinese Communist Party understood and accepted these regulations is more valuable for research than the meaning and dissemination of the regulations themselves. For the latter, it is necessary to clarify the era background of the formation of the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations in China, then explain which problems in Party building and the Party's practical activities they were originally used to solve, and how consensus was reached within the Party and effectiveness was formed. Whether introduced from abroad or emerging locally, the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations must undergo a process of canonization, that is, being transformed from policies and measures for solving specific problems into "fine traditions" of institutionalized and standardized construction. Only through this process can these regulations be extracted from their original historical context and become normative content still effective under new historical conditions. Precisely because the original aspiration and founding mission of Chinese Communists has remained consistent, fundamentally speaking, the "historical texts" of intra-Party regulations have validity across time. However, with the development of the Chinese Communist Party's governance practice, in response to the era's problems of governing and managing the Party, intra-Party regulations have never been rigidly bound to "historical texts," changing according to the times and circumstances, and actively making corresponding adjustments. Especially since the 18th National Congress of the CPC [4]4 18th National Congress of the CPC: Held in 2012, marking the beginning of the Xi Jinping era and the launch of the comprehensive and, the Party's self-revolution [5]5 The integration of rites and law (礼法交融): A traditional Chinese concept referring to the complementary use of moral norms (rites) and legal codes (law) in governance. has promoted the systematic construction of intra-Party regulations, fully confirming the profound interactive relationship between "historical texts" and the practice of governing and managing the Party.

从实践史维度切入，可以更清晰地阐述党内法规的“历史文本”在现实中是否依然具有效力。在党史上，党内法规的“历史文本”既有从共产国际或其他海外渠道传入中国本土的，更有诞生于中国革命、建设与改革本土实践的原创性规定。对于前者，首先需要明晰党内法规的“历史文本”在世界现代史特别是国际共运史上的原本意义，进而追溯它如何被译成中文并传入中国，以及中国共产党人是在何种情况下、以何种方式理解并接受了域外的规定并使其成为我党的党内法规。对于党内法规规范性而言，中国共产党如何理解和接受这些规定，比这些规定本身的含义和传播更有研究价值。对于后者，需要明晰党内法规的“历史文本”在中国本土形成的时代背景，进而阐释其原本用于解决党的建设与党的实践活动中的哪些问题，以及怎样在党内达成共识、形成效力。无论是从域外传入，还是在本土萌生，党内法规的“历史文本”都必须经过一个经典化过程，即由解决某个具体问题的方针和举措，被转化为制度化、规范化建设的“优良传统”。唯有经历这一过程，这些规定才能从最初的历史语境中抽离出来，成为在新的历史条件下仍然具有效力的规范性内容。正是因为中国共产党人的初心使命始终如一，从根本上来讲，党内法规的“历史文本”具有跨越时间的效力。但是，随着中国共产党执政实践的发展，针对管党治党的时代问题，党内法规也从不拘泥于“历史文本”，因时而异、因势而变，主动进行相应调整。尤其是党的十八大以来，党的自我革命推动了党内法规的体系化建构，充分印证了“历史文本”与管党治党实践之间的深刻互动关系。

The Dimension of Civilizational History of the Normativity of Intra-Party Regulations

党内法规规范性的文明史维度

From the dimension of civilizational history of the normativity of intra-Party regulations, it is necessary to examine how the Chinese Communist Party, in the process of governing and managing the Party, has creatively transformed and innovatively developed fine traditional Chinese culture. For thousands of years, the Chinese nation has formed rich governance experience and unique political wisdom in the historical practice of governing the country and ensuring stability, shaping the civilizational gene of the Chinese nation's pursuit of good governance and good laws. In the New Era [6]6 Manifesting virtue and being cautious in punishment (明德慎罚): A principle from ancient Chinese political thought, emphasizing the priority of moral cultivation over punitive measures., the Chinese Communist Party draws experience and wisdom from fine traditional Chinese culture, allowing its ideological essence to radiate new vitality under new historical conditions, and connecting the Party's institutionalized and standardized construction with the roots of ancient Chinese political civilization. To this end, in examining the normativity of intra-Party regulations, in addition to the dimensions of intellectual history and practical history, it is also necessary to pay attention to the dimension of civilizational history of the Chinese nation's political civilization, promoting the integration of Marxist party theory with the civilizational gene of good governance and good laws in Chinese civilization.

从党内法规规范性的文明史维度看，需要考察中国共产党如何在管党治党过程中，对中华优秀传统文化进行创造性转化和创新性发展。千百年来，中华民族在治国安邦的历史实践中形成了丰富的治理经验与独特的政治智慧，塑造了中华民族追求良法善治的文明基因。新时代，中国共产党从中华优秀传统文化中汲取经验和智慧，使其思想精髓在新的历史条件下焕发新的生机，为党的制度化、规范化建设接续中国古代政治文明的根脉。为此，考察党内法规规范性，除了思想史、实践史维度之外，还需要关注中华民族政治文明的文明史维度，推动马克思主义政党理论同中华文明中良法善治的文明基因相结合。

Approaching from the dimension of the history of civilization, the normativity of intra-Party regulations originates from the Chinese Communist Party’s epochal innovation of traditional experience in good laws and good governance. The governance logic of “the integration of rites and law” [5]5 The integration of rites and law (礼法交融): A traditional Chinese concept referring to the complementary use of moral norms (rites) and legal codes (law) in governance. suggests to us that governing the Party and running the state requires not only the rigid constraint of “law” but also the educative guidance of “rites,” so that the two complement each other. The governance logic of “manifesting virtue and being cautious in punishment” [6]6 Manifesting virtue and being cautious in punishment (明德慎罚): A principle from ancient Chinese political thought, emphasizing the priority of moral cultivation over punitive measures. suggests to us that while governing the Party and running the state certainly requires the serious implementation of sanctions in accordance with regulations, on the premise of clarifying the authority of intra-Party regulations, it is even more necessary to give full play to the role of intra-Party regulations in raising the moral level of Party members and promoting self-discipline in their conduct. The governance logic of “inner sagehood and outer kingliness” [7]7 Inner sagehood and outer kingliness (内圣外王): A Confucian ideal whereby a ruler cultivates inner moral perfection (sagehood) to effectively govern the outer realm (kingliness). suggests to us that governing the Party and running the state must be based on strengthening the ideals and convictions of Party members and enhancing their Party spirit, using thought to guide action, moving from knowledge to practice, so that Party members sincerely identify with the high standards and strict requirements of intra-Party regulations and correctly understand the significance of rule-based governance of the Party for governing the country, rather than merely complying with intra-Party regulations out of “fear and awe.” The governance logic of “the people are the foundation of the state” [8]8 The people are the foundation of the state (民惟邦本): A classical Chinese maxim from the *Book of Documents*, asserting that the people are the root of the state. suggests to us that governing the Party and running the state must ultimately benefit the people, and that the promulgation, revision, and abolition of intra-Party regulations must ultimately be judged by whether they benefit the broad masses of the people. Good laws and good governance were a common aspiration of ancient Chinese thinkers, rulers, and the common people, but constrained by multiple factors such as autocratic monarchy, ancient China was ultimately unable to institutionally enable rulers to achieve a self-conscious state of “governing by virtue” and “selecting the worthy and appointing the capable.” Under new historical conditions, the Chinese Communist Party, taking history as a mirror of the rise and fall of ancient Chinese dynasties, transforms the experience and wisdom of good laws and good governance into norms, making them an institutional force driving the Party’s self-revolution. Therefore, the normativity of intra-Party regulations should seek its foundation within the grand vision of the transformation of Chinese political civilization from tradition to modernity.

从文明史维度切入，党内法规规范性来源于中国共产党对传统良法善治经验进行的时代创新。“礼法交融”的治理逻辑启示我们，管党治党不仅需要“法”的刚性约束，也需要“礼”的教化引导，要使二者相辅相成。“明德慎罚”的治理逻辑启示我们，管党治党固然需要依规严肃实施惩戒，但在明确党内法规权威性的前提下，更要充分发挥党内法规提升党员道德水平、促进党员行为自律的作用。“内圣外王”的治理逻辑启示我们，管党治党要以强化党员理想信念、加强党员党性修养为基础，以思想引领行动、由知致行，要使党员衷心认同党内法规的高标准、严要求，正确理解依规治党对于治国理政的意义所在，而非仅是出于“戒惧”才去遵守党内法规。“民惟邦本”的治理逻辑启示我们，管党治党最终要造福于民，党内法规的颁布、修改和废止，最终要以是否有利于广大人民作为评判依据。良法善治是中国古代思想家、为政者与黎民苍生的共同愿景，但受限于皇权专制等多重因素，中国古代终究无法从制度上使为政者达到“为政以德”“选贤任能”的自觉状态。在新的历史条件下，中国共产党以中国古代治乱兴衰的历史为鉴，将良法善治的经验和智慧转化为规范，使之成为推动党的自我革命的制度性力量。因此，党内法规规范性应在中华民族政治文明从传统向现代转型的宏大视野中找寻根基。

In summary, while the normativity of intra-Party regulations requires a scientific answer from the historical dimension, it is also necessary to explore how intra-Party regulations are generated and standardized in the Party’s own construction and practical activities. The Party’s self-revolution in the New Era is a great struggle, and it should actively adapt to the complex changes in the situation of comprehensive and strict governance of the Party in the New Era, deeply understanding the need for the construction of the normativity of intra-Party regulations.

总之，党内法规的规范性需要在历史维度下给出科学回答的同时，探寻党内法规如何在党的自身建设与实践活动中生成并被规范化的。新时代党的自我革命是一场伟大的斗争，应主动适应新时代全面从严治党形势所发生的复杂变化，深刻理解党内法规规范性的建构需要。

(The author is a lecturer at the School of Marxism, Peking Union Medical College)

（作者系北京协和医学院马克思主义学院讲师）

Online editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧