【新唐人2013年05月25日讯】中共媒体分别在周二、周三发表一连串文章，围攻宪政的提法。不仅声称宪政理念兜圈子，否定了中国发展之路，还重申所谓的“中国梦”就是中国特色的社会主义梦，是“宇宙真理”，要求信仰党性就如同基督徒信仰上帝。这一反常态度引起外界的强烈反弹和驳斥。
继周二《红旗文稿》刊登署名文章后，周三，官媒《环球时报》紧接着发表社评，攻击“宪政”是兜圈子，是用新说法提出中国接受西方制度的老要求。
《人民日报》也在周三刊发文章，抛出了“党性神性论”，就是﹕党员相信党性如同基督徒相信上帝。同一天，《解放军报》发文宣称，“我们信仰的主义，乃是宇宙的真理”。
中共媒体的这一态度，在中国学术界和社交媒体上引发了激烈辩论。有网友说：中共终于公开承认自己是个宗教了。有不少网友还转发了2001年3月29号，《人民日报》批判法轮功的文章截图，以大笑的微博表情，暗讽中共才是真正的邪教。
中国问题专家、社会观察学者戴晴：“我觉得这帮傻帽都疯了，他们就想讨好习近平。都疯了，说的都什么疯话呀，说出来都不嫌丢人！原来的什么毛泽东思想战略、什么伟大万岁，那都旧词儿，没用了，编新词儿，可是这新词儿出来对今天普通的百姓没有任何意义，就是说梦话！”
“中国政法大学”法学院副院长何兵在网上表示，竟然有人公开喊﹕人治优于法治。
中国宪政学者陈永苗：“130对于普通老百姓、对于西方世界或整个历史来说，这种政体是不是好的，他们不考虑这些问题。256 我觉得它说了什么并不重要，最重要的是你得紧紧的抓住它，它想干什么，它想骗住你，想维护自己的权力，它想搞法西斯主义，它想维护它的统治地位，它想把自己塑造成这个国家的主人。”
“北京大学”法学院教授、中国宪法学会副会长张千帆，22号也在微博上表示：有人要搞二次“文革”。
近代史学者章立凡在微博上留言说﹕读罢“新两报一刊”的四篇烂文，不少朋友惊呼“文革”将卷土重来，我送他们一段马克思的语录：“黑格尔在某个地方说过，一切伟大的世界历史事变和人物，可以说都出现两次，他忘记补充一点：第一次是作为悲剧出现，第二次是作为笑剧出现。”
大陆民主人士马玉忠：“他（习近平）要走这条路下去，他就是亡国之君，这是必然的。目前把宪政掐断了、把这个门关上了，这是极端错误的。正因为这样，他们让这种悲剧重演的可能性，造成了良好的土壤和环境。文革这种悲剧有可能重演。”
不过，中国宪政学者陈永苗则表示了不同看法。
陈永苗：“他们是不会搞文革的。包括薄熙来和习近平，他们不可能像毛泽东那样，动用体制外的力量，动用群众的力量，来打破官僚体制。他不外乎是为官僚体制修修补补，加点润滑油。第二个，现有的政治、经济全球化的条件，他已经没办法再搞文革了。还有一个理由是，毛泽东那个时代是个封闭式的，信息是闭塞的。是可以搞文革的。”
此外，对于“中国人民大学”法学教授杨晓青周三发表的文章，“宪政属于资本主义，而不属于中国式的社会主义”，“中国人民大学”旗下的“中国宪政网”发表了多名中国著名法学学者的文章，反驳了这一说法。
一名网友在网上回应说，“宪政与社会主义制度不符”，这个论断本身是正确的。实践已经证明，所谓的“社会主义”是人类历史的垃圾，说宪政和社会主义制度不符，恰恰反映了现在以及历史上各个社会主义国家的真实面目。
采访/田净 编辑/王子琦 后制/郭敬
A Second Cultural Revolution? Official Media Publish Four Articles Criticizing Constitutionalism.
Chinese Communist Party (CCP) state media published
a series of articles on Tuesday and Wednesday.
The articles claimed criticized
the concept of constitutionalism.
Constitutionalism is said to ‘beat about the bush’,
and negates China’s road to development.
The articles referred to the “China Dream”,
consisting of socialism with Chinese characteristics.
This was referred to as the ‘truth of the universe’,
and a request was made to all party members to
treat the party character as a Christian treats God.
These articles caused a strong reaction,
and criticized by the international community.
After “Red Flag Presentation” (Hongqi Wengao)
published an article on Tuesday, official media
“Global Times" immediately published an editorial.
The article claimed “constitutionalism” ‘beat about
the bush’, and is simply using new words to try
to convince China to accept a western system.
“People’s Daily" also published an article on Wednesday.
This discussed the “party character vs divinity”,
which means party members belief in the party
character is like Christians belief in God.
On the same day, “Liberation Army” published an article,
claiming “the doctrine we believe is the truth of the universe”.
This triggered a hot debate in China’s academic
field, as well as on China social media.
Some netizen said that finally, the CCP
admitted publicly that it’s a regime.
Many netizens posted pages from a
March 29, 2001 edition of “People’s Daily",
In this edition, there was an article criticizing
Falun Gong, and claiming it to be a cult.
Netizens forwarded the article, to
indicate that the real cult is the CCP.
Dai Qing, China expert: “I think this gang of people are crazy.
The only thing they want to do is curry favor with Xi Jinping.
All of them are crazy. Their words are crazy,
as they didn’t feel ashamed to say these words.
In that past, Mao Zedong’s strategic thinking
was used, and so these can’t be used any more.
But the new words they created have no
meaning for today’s people. It is nonsense.”
He Bing, the Deputy Dean of the Law School, China
University of Political Science commented online.
There are even people exclaiming that being
ruled by people is better than being ruled by law.
Chen Yongmiao, China constitutional scholar:
“Consider ordinary Chinese people, as well as the
western world, and also taking history into account.
The CCP didn’t consider any of this. They don’t think
about it. I think what has been said isn’t important.
The most important thing is to grasp what it wants
to do. It wants to cheat you to maintain its power.
It wants to engage in military doctrine.
It wants to maintain its ruling regime. It wants
to portray itself as the leader of the country.”
Zhang Qianfan, Vice President of Chinese Constitutional
Association, and professor from the Law School at
Peking University, commented in a microblog on May 22.
There appears to be some who want
to launch a second “Cultural Revolution”.
Zhang Lifan, a modern history scholar
also commented in his microblog.
After reading these four ugly articles of the “new two
newspapers and one magazine”, many friends
proclaimed that there is another “Cultural Revolution”.
I want to give them a sentence of Carl Marx.
“Hegel said that in some place, all great events
and people in the world history appear twice.
He forgot one more thing: the first appearance
was a tragedy, and the second was a farce.”
Ma Yuzhong, a Democrat from Mainland China,
“[Xi Jinping] wants to take this road, and it’s fatal
that he will become the ‘subjugation of the king’.
At present, it’s extremely wrong to kill
a constitution, and to close this door.
It creates good grounds, and a ripe environment
for a tragedy. The Cultural Revolution may repeat.”
However, China constitutional scholar
Chen Yongmiao has a different view.
Chen Yongmiao: “They won’t
begin a new Cultural Revolution.
This includes Bo Xilai and Xi Jinping.
They are unable to behave like Mao Zedong,
and use force from within the system, that is,
the force of the people to break bureaucracy.
The thing they will do is repair bureaucracy, and to oil it.
The second thing, is that in the current global
political and economic conditions, it is unable
to launch a Cultural Revolution any more.
Yet another reason is that in Mao Zedong’s era, the
whole system was closed, and information was blocked.
This is the reason that it can launch the Cultural Revolution.”
In addition, Yang Xiaoqing, a professor from
the Law School of China People’s University,
published an article on Wednesday.
“Constitutionalism is a kind of capitalism, which
isn’t part of socialism with Chinese characteristics”.
But many famous Chinese famous legal scholars
published articles on the “Chinese Constitutional”
website of China People’s University, to refute this claim.
A netizen responded online. “Constitutionalism
is incompatible with a socialist system”.
The comment, itself is correct. In light of history,
it has been proved that “socialism" does not work.
It highlights the real facts from each socialist country,
both during history, and currently in the world.
