論德國移民政治溝通（2000─2005）

Abstract

當前對德國移民議題的研究甚豐，但往往在深度與廣度上對研究課題設下自我框限，並對「德意志性」存有誤會性的預設。本文將政策制定定義為「政治溝通」之產物，亦即是反應不同社會需求之政策建議間，透過溝通性互動以達成的最終政策產出。藉由比較哈伯瑪斯與傅柯的論述理論，並綜合不同學術領域中討論德意志性的文獻後，本文試圖提出一個研究政策制定過程的框架，以討論政策產出的溝通過程。這個框架一方面處理政策建議的源起，認為政策之建議係反應社會需求，而社會需求起自於受到存在性威脅的社會認同，又不同的社會認同則源自複合的社會論述形構；另一方面，此框架將政治溝通的模式分為「依歸理性的辯論模式」以及「以權力互動的談判模式」。研究者對溝通方式分辨，係以政策建議間是否有相同的論述參考源為判定。透過對「典型德意志」的分析，我們發現德意志社會在處理國家或民族議題時，皆漸漸地在「國家即權力」的論述範疇中找到溝通上的共識。

Despite being abundant in quantity, most recent studies on German immigration issues reveal two blaring restrictions: They are focused too narrowly upon specific policies, and they seem to bear the misassumption of the fixedness of “Deutschtum.” The thesis defines policy-making as an output of phased communicative interactions – political communication – between different policy proposals which reflect social needs. By comparing Habermasian and Foucaultian discourse studies, and by review-ing literatures of various academic fields on Deutschtum, the thesis proposes a framework for studying policy-making with an emphasis on the communicative proc-ess. The framework composes two parts. First, it displays the derivation of policy pro-posals. The policy proposals reflect social needs, which derive from existential threats to different social identities, and these identities stem from the complex of social discursive formations. Secondly, two modes of political communicative action are introduced, including “reason-oriented arguing” and “power-oriented bargaining”. Researchers discriminate between reason-giving and power-manipulating manoeuvres by recognising whether the proposals share the same discursive formation as the ref-erence pool. After analysing “Typish Deutsch”, it is argued that the German society tends to acquire reference from the discursive formation of “State vis-à-vis Power” and gradually reaches a consensus when encountering the issues of state and nation.