「在地脈絡」和「跨國連結」：日治武裝與左翼抗日運動中的網絡

Abstract

網絡作為「動員群眾」與「傳遞訊息」的關鍵要因，在「台灣政治反對運動」的先行研究中，其重要性仍被顯見低估。本論文擬跨越「國別史」與「殖民地史」的框架，從「東亞區域史」與「跨國連結」的視角出發，探討日治武裝與左翼抗日運動中的網絡，如何影響其對構框、論述以及動員劇碼的選擇。 論文的第一部份以「噍吧哖事件」為例，指出「日本官方」與「日資會社」的強徵土地和利益寡佔，以及「地方社會」和「日治新治理性」的碰撞交逢，挑戰該地庄民對「道德經濟」與「生存倫理」的想像。地方菁英則在地形優勢的掩護下，使其隱身在「國家眼目所不及之地」，得以持續演練「不被治理的技藝」。並透過「鄰里網絡」與「宗族勢力」，以及「神明�神符護體的保庇」、「生計利益的保庇」以及「中國革命軍現代彈藥武器的保庇」的同體一構，使庄民得以跨越「風險最小原則」的限制，進而參與起事。也證明當殖民帝國的「清晰性」治理邏輯，欲全面接收「地方社會」之際，不可能全然無視於該地習之已久的「在地脈絡」和「地方實踐」。 論文的第二部份則以「台灣共產黨」作為分析主軸。主張留學生作為「新興的近代知識份子」，其跨國連結與菁英交往，使其具備「越界與受容的新式身體」，其思想與智識因此擁有混血與雜揉的雙重視角。本研究以擁有莫斯科留學經驗的謝雪紅、上海的翁澤生，以及東京的蘇新和陳逸松，作為左翼具有「跨國經驗」者的三種不同類型，試圖理解不同態貌的網絡連結，帶來什麼不同的路線轉折與行動選擇。留學與跨國流動的菁英，其自身除是一個移動在東亞三國的節點，也可以充作人脈和思想的過渡之橋，橋接東亞各國運動菁英的思想和運動策略。藉閱讀左翼論述與報刊或留學之便，輸入新興思潮並將其反饋給母國。在這類異花授粉的過程中，透過積極串連跨國組織人脈，以及運動策略的移植，社會主義思潮、運動策略與劇碼、組構人群的動員方式，因此可以看到相當類似的襲承性，也得以透過此種閱讀網絡所形塑的隱形社群和共同體，展開對他國菁英或群眾的「認知解放」與「共識動員」，並進一步使其走向「行動動員」之路。

The importance of networks, essential for the mobilization of people and the transmission of information, has been significantly downplayed in the existing literature on the political resistance movements in Taiwan. This dissertation attempts to move beyond the framework of “national history” and “colonial history” by adopting the perspective of “regional history of East Asia” and “transnational linkages,” and thereby explores how the networks among armed uprisings and left-wing movements under Japanese colonial rule bear on the selection of the repertoires of mobilization and framing in discourses. The first part takes the Ta-pa-ni Incident as an example, pointing out how the Japanese administration’s and companies’ expropriation of lands and their monopoly of interests, as well as the confrontation between the local society and the new Japanese governmentality, had challenged local residents’ understanding of moral economy and subsistence ethics. Taking full advantage of the terrain, local elites had managed to hide themselves from the gaze of the state and practice persistently the art of not being governed. Furthermore, the existence of neighborhood social networks and patriarchal clans, as well as the homology of “the blessings of Gods and charms,” “the blessings of expected interests,” and “the blessings of the modern weapons of the Chinese revolutionary army,” had all been decisive in local residents’ overcoming the principle of risk minimization and taking part in the event. This attests to the fact it is impossible for the colonial empire, with its logic of governance centered around “explicitness,” to ignore the local contexts and local practices when it attempts to take over the local society.. The second part of the dissertation centers on the Taiwanese Communist Party. It argues that overseas students, understood as the newly modern intellectuals, had developed a “new transboundary and adaptive body” due to their transnational contacts and linkages with overseas elites. Their thoughts were therefore characterized by hybridity and pluralism. This study takes Hsieh Hsueh-hung (who studied in Moscow), Ueng Ze-sheng (in Shanghai), and Su Hsin and Chen Yi-song (both in Tokyo) as three types of leftists with transnational experiences, with an aim to understand how different networks and connections bring about different political lines and action choices. Elites studying overseas and moving across borders not only are nexuses in the three East Asian countries, but serve as bridges of social relations and ideas that articulate the thoughts and movement strategies of East Asian movement elites. Having the opportunities of exposure to left-wing discourses, they convey new ideas back to their home countries. In these processes of what might be called “cross-pollination,” one can find remarkable similarity among a set of disparate socialist thoughts, movement strategies and repertoires, and the manners in which people are organized and mobilized. Furthermore, invisible communities are formed via these networks, rendering possible the “cognitive liberation” and “consensus mobilization” oriented toward overseas elites or lay people, and eventually the “action mobilization.”