在近代中國學界，將中國傳統政治視為專制制度，無疑是主流意見，即使在文化保守主義者中也不例外。錢穆（1895~1990）反對此種看法，並且對政治制度研究的範圍、方法和意義提出獨特見解。
1939年，錢穆以《國史大綱》整體描繪了政治演進，提出了非專制論的見解。在抗戰後期他寫作了多篇論文，評議現實政治，規劃未來前景，並嘗試對傳統政治特質從事理論化的界定。1950年以後，他提出「職分論」、「制度」等傳統觀念說明中國政治思維的特質，強調從文化的觀點理解政治的意義，要點包括：
一、依據《通典》以來的觀點，重視經濟、兵役、教育等建立政治與社會合理關係的範疇，比僅僅著眼於權力運作的制度史研究遠為寬廣。此外，也強調所謂「制度」須有「公」的價值，對規範性制度研究有獨特的關注。
二、優先從當時人的「歷史意見」來理解和評價制度，並提出「職分論」來說明中國特有思維。尊重傳統思維，是要避免因倚賴西方觀點而造成盲點，與採用西方概念、吸收其歷史經驗，兩者正相互補。
三、中國傳統政治建立在國家形態和現實需求上，各派思想家則提供了不同的改革理想，傳統政治的特質是由兩方互動而成的，政治史的經驗不能化約為思想，其得失更不能僅僅歸因於「儒家」或「法家」等因素。中國特殊的國家形態依然存在，現實問題的解決仍須借鏡於歷史經驗。
四、雖然近代民主制度有助於解決中國的政治困境，但制度運作也須有社會基礎與文化價值與之配合。要打倒傳統來移植新制度，有如緣木求魚；唯有銜接傳統文化，才能協助新制度的運作及新價值的孕生。

Chinese scholars in modern times have almost uniformly come to the conclusion that the traditional politics in Imperial China was autocratic, and thus irrelevant to the ideas of modernity. Qian Mu (錢穆,1895~1990) stands out as an important dissenting voice on this argument. His researches are distinguished also by his unique opinions about the study of political institutions, the scope of this field, its methodologies, and its significance.
I summarize Qian Mu’s ideas as follows.
1. Unlike the narrow model of describing political systems solely in terms of transitions of power, Qian Mu adopted the traditional approach set forth by the Tang historian Du Yo (杜佑,735~812) in Tong Dian (《通典》, The Comprehensive Manual ), of researching political institutions from the perspectives of the government and the ruled. Thus, he paid attention to economy, military service, and education.
2. To understand and evaluate traditional political systems, Qian Mu gave priority to what he called “historical opinions” (the ideas of the people of the time). He also described a “doctrine of political responsibility” (職分論) as a unique mode of Chinese politicians’ thought. Although he intended to respect cultural subjectivity, he never opposed the use of either modern or western approaches. The problem he warned against rather was: to have a slavish reliance on western theories at the expense of an accurate understanding Chinese historical truth.
3. Qian Mu stressed the political interaction between philosophical ideals, such as Confucian, Legalist and Daoist, and the practical necessities of the real politics. In his view, therefore, it was usually various combinations of ideals and realities that caused changes of political institutions. Since these political necessities and issues continue to exist in modern China, modern officials and people would be wise to look upon the historical experience of their ancestors as a reference when facing and dealing with current practical problems.
4. Although modern democracy might help to solve China’s current political crises, Qian Mu believed that any successful political system must be based upon social realities and cultural values. It is wildly misguided to believe that the pursuit and successful development of a new political system requires the complete abandonment of tradition, Qian argued, because new institutions and values invariably must be established on the basis of traditional culture.