政治主體的誕生：戰後台灣政治論述及民主概念1970s-1980s

Abstract

本論文的研究對象為台灣1970年代至1980年代期間的政治論述及其民主概念。在理論上，本論文關注政治論述及民主概念對集體行動和民主轉型所產生的作用；在經驗上，本論文試圖解釋下列兩組問題：壹、1970年代至1980年代期間台灣民主轉型過程中，「自由主義現代化」、「選舉」、「台灣民族主義」及「社會運動」這四類主要的政治論述是在什麼樣的歷史過程中形成？為何知識分子或政治菁英會積極製造這四類政治論述，其行動意圖為何？這些政治論述又對集體行動及台灣民主轉型的路徑產生了什麼樣的作用？貳、為何這些政治論述都十分強調「民主」這個詞彙，其概念內涵為何、作用為何？ 本論文發現自由主義現代化、選舉、台灣民族主義等論述在戰後1950年代至1960年代便已出現，並成為日後集體行動的可能性條件。1970年代一系列的外交事件衝擊了國民黨體制，從而促成自由主義現代化、選舉、台灣民族主義等論述再次興起。自由主義現代化論述首先於1971至1973年期間被運用來重建國民黨體制，並於1975年後成為黨外運動的反抗論述之一。選舉論述於1977年後被運用來為黨外運動、群眾及反對黨塑造集體認同，1980年代期間選舉論述內部則出現分化。台灣民族主義論述在1970年代先是以台灣政治民族主義的形式出現，並與自由主義現代化論述及選舉論述產生接合，共同成為黨外運動的反抗論述，而後在1980年代與中國文化民族主義的爭論中，開始形成台灣文化民族主義，台灣獨立的論述也在1987年後於國內公開形成。1970年代末、1980年代初各式社會運動已透過政治論述建立集體認同，使其得以克服威權體制下的集體行動困境，自願承受行動可能被鎮壓的成本，從而讓集體行動得以延續。上述政治論述為台灣民主轉型路徑提供了「國家認同分裂」及「選舉導向」的可能性條件。 本論文亦發現在台灣民主化的過程中，「民主」這個詞彙中沉積了多種概念，並會在不同的歷史過程中發生概念變遷。本論文進一步主張：「民主」這個詞彙能接合各式概念的條件在於其匯聚了各種邏輯，以及對集體認同產生激勵效果的認知機制出現，才使得「民主」如同滾雪球般在各項議題中的逐步擴散，成為台灣各類政治論述中皆出現的詞彙。

This is a study of political discourses and concepts of democracy during the 1970s-1980s in post-war Taiwan. Theoretically, it asks what effects political discourses and concepts of democracy have on collective action and the paths of democratic transition. Empirically, it describes the historical processes through which the four political discourses of “Liberal modernization”,”election”, “Taiwan nationalism”, and “social movement” were formed. Then, it proceeds to explain why intellectuals and political elites used these political discourses, as well as why all actors ultimately added the term “Democracy” into their political discourses, regardless of their relative differences. The argument of this paper can be summarized as follows: The political discourses of “Liberal modernization”,”election”, and “Taiwan nationalism” had already appeared on the scene in the 1950s-1960s. These discourses produced the condition of the possibility of collective action, and they reappeared when the KMT regime experienced diplomatic crisis. The discourse of Liberal modernization was applied to rebuild the KMT regime in 1971-1973, and similarly applied in the struggle against the KMT regime by the Tangwai movement after 1975. The discourse of election was applied to construct the identities of the Tangwai movement, the collective masses, and the opposition party after 1977, whilst different voices inside the Tangwai movement emerged during the 1980s. The discourse of Taiwan nationalism was developed as political nationalism and it was articulated with the discourses of Liberal modernization and election by the Tangwai movement. In the 1980s, cultural nationalism developed out of contention with Chinese cultural nationalism, and thus the discourse of Taiwan independence emerged publicly in Taiwan after 1987. The actors of social movements already constructed collective identities through political discourses in the late 1970s and in the pre-1980s. These identities helped them overcome the dilemma of collective action. The four kinds of political discourses produced the condition of possibility which directed the divided national identity and election-driven character towards the path of Taiwan’s democratization. In the process of Taiwan’s democratization, the term “Democracy” included many concepts that were to be changed in different processes. The term “Democracy” appeared in all kinds of political discourses not only because it could be articulated with political logic or social logic, but also because it could harness a cognitive mechanism which would empower collective identities.