請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/3794
標題: | 中國是否會民主化? 美國學界三派之論爭 Will China Democratize:The Tripartite Debate in the American Academia |
作者: | Hsien-Yu Chung 鍾賢玉 |
指導教授: | 明居正(Chu-Cheng Ming) |
關鍵字: | 美國學界,中國民主化,中共民主化,政治前景,威權韌性,政治衰敗,政治制度化,政治不穩定,現代化理論,過程論,週期理論, THE AMERICAN ACADEMIA,CCP-LED DEMOCRATIZATION,POLITICAL PROSPECT,AUTHORITARIAN RESILIENCE,POLITICAL DECAY,POLITICAL INSTITUTIONALIZATION,POLITICAL INSTABILITY,MODERNIZATION THEORY,TRANSITION THEORY,CYCLE THEORY, |
出版年 : | 2016 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 本研究之重要性在於系統性回顧美國學界對中國民主化前景的文獻,清楚掌握美國學界三大派(中共民主化派、中共威權韌性派、中共威權衰敗派)之立場與主要論點,並實質性架構三派對話,找出論爭焦點。裨益我國與美國學術界交流與中國民主化研究。
本研究採文獻分析法,針對天安門事件後至2016年6月美國29位具代表性學者與專家之62份有關中國政治前景之作品進行分類、比較、評析。分三章詳盡解析三派之主因、方式、結果、時節點。 重要發現是中共民主化派論述以危機壓力下民主化較具說服力,但忽略自下而上民主化的可能性;中共威權韌性派因政治制度化程度削弱與倒退,威權韌性也隨之削弱、疲乏;中共威權衰敗派較能解釋中共近年走向,但對經濟風險之內容須更新。民主化派與衰敗派預測的民主化與政權垮台時間點都落在2010年代與2020年代。三派主要論爭問題為:中共有沒有執政危機? 中共內部到底有沒有改革派?中國社會價值觀有無變遷? 其論爭關鍵在於改革派的權力與其民主化意願、民主的工具性價值、社會對民主之需求。筆者發現美國學界的討論有趨向中共衰敗之走向。 筆者認為中國大陸已進入民主化壓力高峰期,可能在2017年至2022年發生重大政治事件與政權轉型。建議未來可往改革派、經社危機、政經週期理論、政治發展路徑等方向研究。研究限制在於為了梳理出爭執焦點,分散了學者原作品論點,讀者可能就不易了解該作品的先後論述。 The importance of the thesis is that it systemically analyzes the literature about China’s democratic prospects in the American Academia, which helps clearly master the arguments of the tripartite scholar groups (CCP-led democratization group, authoritarian resilient group, and authoritarian decay group). It offers a platform where the tripartite can literally “debate,” finding out the bone of the contention and thus benefits the communications between R.O.C. and the American academia, and studies of China’s democratization. Literature review is the main approach to categorize, compare and analyze 62 China’s-political-prospect-related books or academic journals written by 29 typical American scholars from Tiananmen Square massacre to year 2016, June. Three chapters are dedicated to each group to present their contention of causes, modes, upshots and possible transition time. The crucial results are that the CCP-democratization under pressure or crisis is more persuasive but neglects the possibility of bottom-up democratization; due to the decline of the political institutionalization, the authoritarian resilience of the CCP has thus declined or even reached its limits; political decay best describes the China’s trends but the argument about economic risks should be renewed. Both possible democratization time and regime-collapse time center at the period between 2010s to 2020s. Three critical points of the tripartite debate are “Does the CCP face a regime crisis?”; “Are there reformers in the CCP or not?”; “Has the Chinese social values changed?”. The key factors are the power of the reformers and their democratic will, the instrumental values of democracy, and societal demand for democracy. Moreover, there seems to be a discussion trend toward the political decay of the CCP regime among the American scholars. In my view point, China has entered the “high democratic pressure zone,” and possibly face significant political events or regime transformations between 2017 and 2022. Recommended future research includes the reformers, social-economic crisis, political-economic cycle theory and studies of political development paths. In order to picture the whole debate and comb out the key points, arguments in the literature have been rearranged which might thus limit readers to understand the original arguments of each literature. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/3794 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU201603847 |
全文授權: | 同意授權(全球公開) |
顯示於系所單位: | 政治學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-105-1.pdf | 4.95 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。