離散者的中國民族主義—華裔學者趙穗生，鄭永年面對中國的身分策略

Abstract

現今大多數的中國研究文獻，將中國知識視為科學主義所假定的普遍知識之一環，忽視研究者在知識生產過程中所可能起的作用。本文從離散理論的視角，藉由深入的分析比較兩位華裔政治學者趙穗生、鄭永年對於中國民族主義的論述與其它身份的研究者文獻，觀察到華裔政治學者身處歐美知識界，但其論述中有特殊的為中國辯護之情，使其有別於西方學者或中國本土學者，唯表現的方式會因為個人決斷與所處情境來選擇回應的方式。顯現出不同身份的研究者看待中國的視野有所不同，身份的差異的確影響著研究者對於中國知識的詮釋。尤其是在跨界社群不斷增加的全球化時代，已逐漸彰顯出主客二元對立知識論的不足。身為研究者應隨時反省自己與研究對象間的關係，避免拘泥於特定的知識論，進而有助於理解政治知識的深刻意義。

The current literature on China studies usually includes knowledge of China as part of universalism. The relationship between the researcher and the researched is rarely discussed. This article then tries to use diaspora theory to explore the relations between the researcher’s identity and his production of knowledge. By examining Zheng Yongnian and Zhao Suisheng’s discourse about Chinese Nationalism, I found the Chinese American political scientists tend to defend China from the West attacks on Chinese authorities which native Chinese and western intellectuals seldom do. Moreover, researchers with different identity have their own picture of China image and accordingly construct their own interpretations about Chinese nationalism. The inadequacies of the subject-object opposition approach had become apparent. We need to reconsider researchers’ participation, albeit unintentionally or unwillingly, in the making of knowledge.