15. 결론
209 Government, in a 잘-컨스티튜트된well-constituted(잘 조직된well-organized) republic, requires no 신념belief(신앙faith) from man beyond what his reason can 줄give(설명할explain). He sees the rationale of the 전일적 체계whole system(모든 조직all oranization), its origin and its operation; and as it is best 지원되다supported(뒤받침되다) when best understood, the human 능력faculties(재능talent) 행동할act(발휘할show off) with boldness, and acquire, under this form of government, a gigantic manliness. As, therefore, each of those forms 행동하고acts(움직이고move) on a different 바탕base(기반), the one moving freely by the aid of reason, the other by ignorance; we have next to consider, what it is that gives 움직임motion(운용되는가) to that species of Government which is called 혼합된 정부통치mixed Government(혼합국가), or, as it is sometimes ludicrously 스타일된styled(양식의mode), a Government of this, that and t' other. The 움직이는 권력moving power(원동력) in this species of Government is, of necessity, Corruption. However imperfect election and representation may be in mixed Governments, they still give 행사exercise(여지) to a greater 조각portion(비중) of reason than is 편의convenient(좌우하기 힘든) to the hereditary Part; and therefore it becomes necessary to 살buy(매수할) the reason up. A mixed Government is an imperfect everything, cementing and soldering the 불협화음의discordant(맞지않는unfitted) parts together by corruption, to act as a 전일체whole(전체total).
213 Sovereignty, as a matter of right, 부속하는appertains(속하는belong) to the Nation only, and not to any individual; and a Nation has at all times an 내재적인inherent(생득적인) 무효화할섮는 올바룸indefeasible right(생득권) to abolish any form of Government it 발견하는finds(생각되는think) 불편하다고inconvenient(적절하지않다고), and to establish such as 협화음되는accords(적합한) with its 이득관계interest(이익gain), 기질disposition(의향) and happiness. The 낭만적인romantic(몽상적인fancy) and barbarous distinction of men into Kings and subjects, though it may suit the condition of courtiers, cannot that of citizens; and is 폭발했다exploded(무너졌다collapse) by the principle upon which Governments are now founded. Every citizen is a member of the 주권Sovereignty(주권자souvereign), and, as such, can acknowledge no 인격personal(개인individual) subjection; and his obedience can be only to the laws.
214 what we now see in the world, from the Revolutions of America and France, are a renovation of the natural order of things, a system of principles as universal as truth and the existence of man, and combining moral with political happiness and national prosperity.
"I. Men are born, and always continue, free and equal in respect of their rights. 시민적Civil(사회적social) 구별들distinctions(차별들discriminations), therefore, can be 근본기초된founded(근거로) only on 공적 효용public utility(공공의 이익).
"II. The end of all political 어쏘시에이션associations(결사) is the 보존preservation(보전) of the natural and imprescriptible rights of man; and these rights are liberty, 프로퍼티property(재산), 안전보장security(안전), and resistance of oppression.
"III. The nation is essentially the 원천source(근원) of all sovereignty; nor can any Individual, or Any Body Of Men, be 자격가질entitled(행사할excise) to any authority which is not 표현적으로expressly(명백히clearly) 갈래쳐지지derived(나오지) from it."
● [사람의 올바룸들] 제 1부, 15장은 [사람의 올바룸들 1부] 결론입니다. 여기서 페인은 이제까지의 모든 주장들을 총괄합니다colligate. 페인의 모든 생각들은 정확하게 (페더럴리스트 페이퍼를 아직 보지 않아서 잘 모르겠습니다만) 나이테가 읽은 고전책들로 보면, 명확하게obviously 로크-몽테스키외의 것입니다.
흥미로운 점은, 페인은 혼합된 정부통치를 부정하고, 공화국을 찬양한다는 것입니다. 이것이 왜 흥미롭냐면, 전통적으로 공화국=혼합정부이기 때문입니다. 공화국은 곧 군주정부monarchy, 귀족정부aristocracy 그리고 인민정부democracy의 혼합된 정부통치이지요.
따라서, 내가 보기에, 페인은 공화국이란 낱말 대신에, 피플스 또는 시빌스 데모크라시 곧 인민/시민 민주주의라고 했어야 할 듯 합니다. 왜 페인이 이런 낱말을 채택하지 않았는지는 모르겠습니다.
그리고 또 페인은 이러한 시민 민주주의의 3가지 원리를 한번 더 단언합니다. 첫째는, 본성적인 올바룸들의 불가침적인 그리고 뺏길섮는 평등함, 둘째는, 공적인것(페인은 전통적인 바디 폴리틱이나 소시에타스 대신에 “폴리스적인 어쏘시에이션들”이란 낱말을 채택했습니다)은 자유, 프로퍼티, 안전보장, 저항이라는 본성적인 올바룸들의 보존을 위한 수단임, 셋째, 주권은 국민에게 있으며, 개인이나 단체는 주권을 가질 자격없음. 우리는 여기서 로크가 다시 나타남을 봅니다.
페인의 [사람의 올바룸들]은 버크의 [성찰]을 비판한 것입니다. 다음번 나이테에서 버크의 [성찰]을 살펴보도록 하겠습니다.