The origin and formation time of China's ancient * * * system is similar to that of ancient Greece and Rome. But why did ancient Greece and Rome form a democratic system road, while China formed an absolute monarchy and lasted for thousands of years? What key objective variables and subjective variables determine the formation and development of these two different institutional paths? Moreover, after the medieval monarchy, why did the western * * * system return to the ancient democratic road in modern times and develop into a modern democratic system? Why is the institutional transformation in modern China so difficult?

1, the origin and formation of the * * * system in ancient China and the west are two different paths, namely, the path of a dominant system (absolutism) and the path of * * * system (democracy). The former has the characteristics of appointment system, tenure system and centralization system, while the latter has the characteristics of election system, tenure system and decentralization system. Based on the latest achievements of history and anthropology, this paper demonstrates and thinks that the two systems of * * in ancient China and the west are.

2. The first characteristic of the national system is to divide residents according to regions. Due to the different openness of natural environment, production tools and living space, the regionality of ancient Greek state system is the result of cutting off blood relationship and breaking through clan barriers, while the regionality of ancient China state system is the result of the extension of blood relationship through patriarchal clan system. In this way, although both ancient Greece and ancient China, as the core of the * * * system, broke through the geographical restrictions, the power structure of ancient China constantly crossed the geographical space along the internal path of the clan, while the power structure of ancient Greece crossed the geographical space on the external path of the clan, that is, first crossed the clan and then crossed the geographical space. It is these two different paths that determine the difference between China and the West in the second feature of the national system: the "public power" of the ancient Greek system gradually developed into civil rights, while the "public power" of the ancient China system was essentially exercised by individuals, and the former evolved into "* * *".

3. In ancient China, due to the inseparability of land and consanguinity, the land enfeoffment system could not be implemented, which promoted the emergence of private ownership of land. In ancient western countries, the separation of land and consanguinity promoted the emergence of contractual relationship, which made the land enfeoffment system develop into private ownership of land. This paper holds that it is this difference that makes the ancient land system in China evolve into a situation that "the king of a big country is not as good as the king of a small country" along the road of competition, forcing the rulers to adopt the way of merger to expand their power. However, the land system in ancient western society has evolved into an institutional situation of "princes don't princes" along the path of contract. However, the origin of China's ancient and western * * * system not only extended from primitive society, but also reflected the choice of social reform scheme. Different social reform programs have greatly promoted the development of the * * * system to meet the needs of governance or society.

4. It is also an important content of this paper to make a comparative study on the subjective path of the evolution of * * * system between China and the West. The cognitive and thinking paths of ancient Chinese and westerners to the * * * system are consistent with the objective paths of their respective * * * systems. Different cognitive and thinking paths, in turn, restrict the evolution of the institutional path between China and the West. (1) The ancients who originated in * * * China thought that * * originated from the establishment of a destiny monarch, and "divine right of monarchy" required "independence of monarchy". The restriction of monarchical power mainly depends on the cultivation of the monarch, supplemented by necessary external constraints. But the ancients in the west believed that * * * originated from people's mutual agreement in order to get rid of the chaotic "natural state", and the premise of the agreement was that everyone had the ability to participate in politics, and everyone had it. The publicity of power determines that the restriction of power must be based on the mutual balance of power. (2) On the cognition of the role of the subject and object of the * * * system, the ancient people in China believed that the monarch was the "son of heaven" and supreme, and the officials were only "ministers who needed to serve the monarch", while the people were only the children of the "monarch and father", and they must rely on the love of the monarch and father to be happy. Officials are "public officials" due to the needs of social division of labor, and the people are citizens who have the right to participate in city-state affairs. (3) In the thinking of * * * system design, the thinking of China ancient system design is to put individuals in the dependent network. I believe that through education and guidance, everyone will find a suitable position in this network and abide by the rules of family relations in the network. All conflicts can be properly resolved in interpersonal relationships. In this network, political power plays a decisive role. The size of political power determines the position and property of individuals in the network. In the west, the design idea of the system is to regard individuals as independent individuals. The position of individuals in the system is determined by their ability and property, and the relationship between individuals must be handled and constrained by contracts and laws. There are always good "angels" in the world, even * * and their officials themselves, so everyone should be bound by the law. The law protects everyone's property while restraining their behavior. Property rights are of decisive significance to everyone, and the premise of gaining political power is to own personal property.

5. Any process of institutional change is realized through reform or revolution. This process is full of old and new disputes. The restriction of the subjective and objective path of the old system on the system transformation is manifested in the restriction of the thinking of the subject of system innovation, the social mobilization of system reform and the social cost of reform and revolution. Through the comparative study of modern institutional changes between China and the West, this paper reveals the characteristics of two different institutional changes between China and the West. (1) The modern institutional reform in the West is marked by the Anglo-French Revolution, but the struggle for institutional reform in the West began in the Middle Ages. The democratic heritage and democratic thoughts of the classical era influenced the whole Middle Ages, but the Renaissance made the ancient political civilization recover more comprehensively. The Anglo-French Revolution was able to establish a constitutional monarchy and a democratic system in the West. It is inseparable from the struggle of the civil class in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Compared with the autocratic system in the Middle Ages, the institutional transformation in modern western countries is the origin of the restoration and development of the ancient system. (2) The institutional transformation in modern China is essentially different from that in modern western countries. It broke the original path of the ancient * * * system, that is, a monopoly system (absolutism). The new system that reformists and revolutionaries tried to establish not only lacked any accumulation and ideological basis in the evolutionary history of China's * * * system, but also had a strong binding force on innovative ideas, system design and revolutionary plans in the process of system transformation. The result of China's system transformation is to transplant the democratic system creatively. It is not the natural extension and development of the ancient democratic system like the West. In this respect, China's institutional transcendence is much more difficult than that of western European countries, which determines that the task of China's institutional transcendence is far from complete, and China's political civilization construction has a long way to go.

You can choose either side to demonstrate.