Abstract: The historical significance of selfreform as an institutional practice is indisputable, yet its general theoretical value remains to be fully explored. Different historical attributes give rise to distinct modes of institutional evolution, thereby generating political systems and theories of varying natures. As an institutional form, “selfreform” originates from a tradition of political history and represents a novel power constraint mechanism distinct from the coordination and balance of power rooted in the tradition of social history. In the process of institutional evolution, the “selfreform” system addresses the inherent demand of ethical politics to constrain power within the historical context of “unified power order” and moral imperatives. The institutional innovation of MarxistLeninist parties and the legacy of traditional Chinese political civilization serve as historical resources for the development of the “selfreform” system. Compared to the coordination and balance of power, “selfreform” provides an institutional logic grounded in local practices across four dimensions: the agents of power exercise, power structures, institutional arrangements for power constraint, and operational mechanisms. It thus enriches the power constraint theory and offers a new paradigm for power constraint.

Key words: self-reform, coordination and balance of power, power constraint, leadership, political security

摘要： 作为制度的自我革命的历史意义毋庸置疑，但其一般性理论价值有待挖掘。不同属性的历史诱发不同的制度变迁方式并由此诞生不同性质的政治制度和政治理论。作为制度形态的“自我革命”源自政治史传统，是一种不同于源自社会史传统的分权制衡的新型权力制约制度。在制度变迁过程中，“自我革命”制度解决的是在“一元化权力秩序”和德性要求的历史传统中，伦理政治对约束权力的内在需求。马克思列宁主义政党的制度创设和中国传统政治文明则是自我革命制度建设的历史资源。通过与分权制衡制度相比较，“自我革命”分别从权力行使主体、权力结构、权力约束的制度安排和运行逻辑四个方面，提供基于本土实践的制度逻辑，发展了权力制约理论并提供了一种新的权力制约范式。

关键词: 自我革命, 分权制衡, 权力制约, 领导权, 政治安全