能源轉型與政黨意識形態：解構2024年總統選舉缺電爭議的論述

Abstract

本研究以臺灣2024年總統選舉期間的「缺電」爭議為核心，探討能源轉型如何在政治競爭中被「意識形態化」，並成為政黨論述與社群再生產的主要場域。研究關注核心問題：一、主要政黨候選人如何透過論述策略建構「缺電」的意義與政策正當性；二、社群媒體如何再生產、轉化或挑戰菁英論述；三、數位人文技術如何輔助批判論述分析進行大規模文本的系統性詮釋。 在研究方法上，本研究採取「量化指引、質性解構」的整合策略，運用文本探勘技術建立宏觀實證基礎與分析路徑指引。量化分析主要透過語料前處理、語義擴展、主題建模等方法，建構宏觀語境地景；其次，依據關鍵字索引篩選出具代表性語境片段，再結合批判論述分析的詮釋框架，解構各政黨及社群媒體語料中論述的意識形態運作。 研究結果揭示核心的兩大論述軸線與五種具代表性的意識形態立場。一、危機建構軸線（缺電與不缺電）：民進黨建構「技術性不缺電」的事實框架維繫政策正當性；國民黨以「短缺鏈結」製造生存焦慮，形塑以「秩序優先論」為核心的政治論述；民眾黨採行「技術民粹主義」，將缺電定位為「系統性治理失靈」。二、轉型路徑軸線（綠能與核電）：民進黨運用「經濟構連」策略推動「綠色發展型國家」意識形態；國民黨主張「重啟核能」強化「穩定與安全」價值；民眾黨訴諸「科學優位論」以開拓第三條路。三、社群互動與權力效應：社群論述實踐體現為「情感政治」與「符號鬥爭」。政黑板透過「政治部落主義」進行人格化攻防與道德歸責，鞏固陣營認同；八卦板則採取「民粹式反建制」立場，透過語言遊戲解構客觀性。社群論述實踐強化既有意識形態分歧，並將「缺電」形塑成檢驗政黨合法性、動員政治選擇的「核心符號」。 綜上所述，本研究指出能源轉型爭議是臺灣選舉脈絡下政黨意識形態衝突的「核心戰場」。方法論上，本研究展示的整合架構，有效克服傳統批判論述分析面臨的樣本偏狹與主觀性限制，為相關領域的文本探勘研究提供具備「量化規模」與「質性深度」的可行範式。政策上，研究建議政府應提升資訊透明度，避免能源議題在選舉語境中被過度片段化與操作。

This study examines the "power shortage" controversy during the 2024 Presidential Election in Taiwan, analyzing how the Energy Transition is ideologized within political competition and becomes a primary site for the reproduction of party and social media discourses. The core research questions address: 1) How major party candidates utilize discursive strategies to construct the meaning of "power shortage" and policy legitimacy; 2) How social media reproduce, transform, or challenge elite discourse; and 3) How Digital Humanities techniques assist Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in the systematic interpretation of large-scale texts. Methodologically, this study employs an integrated strategy of "quantitatively guided, qualitatively deconstructed," utilizing text mining to establish a macro-empirical foundation and analytical pathway. Quantitative methods, including corpus preprocessing, semantic expansion, and topic modeling, are used to construct the "macro-contextual landscape." Subsequently, representative contextual segments are filtered via keyword indexing, and integrated with the interpretive framework of CDA, the ideological operations within the discourse of political parties and social media are deconstructed. The findings reveal two core discursive axes and five distinct ideological stances: I. Crisis Construction Axis (Shortage vs. No Shortage): The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) maintains policy legitimacy by constructing a "technical no-shortage" factual framework. The Kuomintang (KMT) utilizes a "shortage linkage" to induce existential anxiety, shaping a political discourse centered on "Primacy of Order." The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) adopts "Technocratic Populism," framing the power shortage as a manifestation of "systemic governance failure." II. Transition Pathway Axis (Green Energy vs. Nuclear Power): The DPP employs an "economic articulation" strategy to promote the "Green Developmental State" ideology. The KMT proposes "nuclear reactivation" to reinforce the values of "stability and security." The TPP invokes "Scientific Prioritization" to forge a "Third Path." III. Social Interaction and Power Effects: Discursive practices on social media manifest as "affective politics" and "symbolic struggle." The PTT HatePolitics sub-board utilizes "Political Tribalism" to conduct personalized attacks and moral accountability, thereby consolidating camp identity. Conversely, the PTT Gossiping sub-board adopts a "Populist Anti-establishment" stance, deconstructing objectivity through language games. These social discursive practices reinforce existing ideological cleavages and transform the "power shortage" into a "core symbol" for testing party legitimacy and mobilizing political choices. In conclusion, this study confirms that the energy transition controversy is a "core battlefield" for ideological conflict within Taiwan's electoral context. Methodologically, the integrated framework presented here effectively overcomes the limitations of sample narrowness and subjectivity traditionally faced by CDA, offering a feasible paradigm with "quantitative scale" and "qualitative depth" for text mining research in related fields. Policy-wise, the study recommends that the government enhance information transparency to prevent the energy issue from being overly fragmented and manipulated during election cycles.