台灣創傷記憶與認同政治： 解嚴後迄今的分析

Abstract

在二二八與白色恐怖事件過去幾十年之後，記憶這些創傷歷史意味著什麼？為什麼環繞如何看待這些議題的討論，仍能激起那麼多的情緒與困惑？本研究分析解嚴後台灣的社會與國家如何記憶威權創傷，探討過去與現在的相互塑造，如何影響台灣人認同的形成與變化，其中制度發揮的影響甚鉅。 我提出「時境記憶論」（Chrono-situated Mnemonology）作為分析集體記憶的架構，捕捉記憶的動態性與複雜性。它結合Donna Haraway的處境知識（situated knowledge）與Jeffrey Olick對時間性的強調，凸顯集體記憶受社會、文化、歷史背景影響，也隨時間變化。本論文主張透過記憶間的對話批判與連結，逼近對社會記憶更完整的理解。研究方法主要採用公開流通文本的論述分析，輔以深度訪談，並觀察不同層次的制度發展軌跡，包括民主體制、相關政策法案，及機關日常行政作為等。 這本論文分成兩部，分別以集體記憶與制度的變化為分析前景，凸顯兩者的交互影響。首先將台灣社會主要的記憶方式分為三種，討論它們的形成、變化，以及相互競爭正當性與說服力。「受害者記憶」曾是台灣民族主義的重要起源，也是轉型正義政策的主軸，隨台灣認同結構變化而改變，族群性與對抗性日漸淡化。「破壞者記憶」因鎮壓體制的制度韌性而持續，本文指出部分第一代外省人與鎮壓體制成員，是透過重構歷史來應對受到衝擊的認同，並試圖重建職業尊嚴。另外，我描繪不同意識形態群體，不滿於主流論述中對當事人主體的弱化，而打造各自的「抗爭者記憶」，重構歷史來織就群體認同。 論文第二部聚焦制度，以解嚴以來政府透過最多法制與手段推行的兩個政策，補賠償政策與清除威權象徵的作對照，運用Migdal的國家社會關係視角觀察轉型正義政策場域，為何賠償卓然有成，而威權象徵進展有限。研究發現政策場域生態改變對國家行為的影響，指出缺乏清晰價值與能力的民進黨政府，難以應對內部分歧，在與誤識國家本質的民間團體互動過程中，使轉型正義政策陷入困境。蔣介石紀念物處理的案例顯示，不分藍綠的學術研究和政府政策可能無意中遮蔽了歷史責任的檢討。 整體而言，本研究重建了台灣創傷記憶的發展脈絡，將文化分析視角引入戰後政治史研究，提出不均質的民主化觀點，促使人們重新思考台灣民主化敘事。 時境記憶論的提出與操演克服了現有分析工具的不足，其對制度的重視彌補了既有文獻的缺口，為集體記憶研究開闢新的研究途徑。

What does it mean to remember these traumatic histories decades after the February 28 Incident and White Terror? Why do discussions about how to view these issues still provoke so much emotion and confusion? This study analyzes how Taiwan's society and state have remembered authoritarian trauma since martial law was lifted, exploring how the mutual shaping of past and present has influenced the formation and transformation of Taiwanese identity, with institutions playing a crucial role. I propose "Chrono-situated Mnemonology" as an analytical framework for collective memory that captures its dynamic and complex nature. Combining Donna Haraway's concept of situated knowledge with Jeffrey Olick's emphasis on temporality, this framework highlights how collective memory is influenced by social, cultural, and historical contexts while changing over time. This dissertation argues for approaching a more complete understanding of social memory through critical dialogue and connections between different memories. The research methods primarily employ discourse analysis of publicly circulated texts, supplemented by in-depth interviews and observation of institutional development trajectories at different levels, including democratic institutions, relevant policies and legislation, and daily administrative practices of government agencies. This dissertation is divided into two parts, with collective memory and institutional change as analytical foregrounds respectively, highlighting their mutual influence. First, I categorize Taiwan's main modes of memory into three types, discussing their formation, transformation, and mutual competition for legitimacy and persuasiveness. "Victim memory" was once an important origin of Taiwanese nationalism and the main axis of transitional justice policies. It has changed with shifts in Taiwan's identity structure, with ethnic and confrontational elements gradually diminishing. "Disruptor memory" persists due to the institutional resilience of the repressive system. This study shows that some first-generation Mainlanders and members of the repressive apparatus respond to their challenged identities by reconstructing history and attempting to rebuild professional dignity. Additionally, I describe how different ideological groups, dissatisfied with the weakening of agency in mainstream discourse, have created their respective "resistance memories," reconstructing history to weave group identities. The second part of the dissertation focuses on institutions, contrasting two policies that the government has pursued with the most legislation and means since democratization: compensation policies and the removal of authoritarian symbols. Using Migdal's state-society relations perspective to observe the transitional justice policy field, I examine why compensation has been remarkably successful while progress on authoritarian symbols has been limited. The research reveals how changes in policy field ecology affect state behavior, pointing out that DPP governments lacking clear values and capabilities struggle to address internal divisions. In their interactions with civil society groups that misrecognize the nature of the state, transitional justice policies become mired in difficulties. The case of handling Chiang Kai-shek monuments shows how academic research and government policies across party lines may inadvertently obscure the examination of historical responsibility. Overall, this study reconstructs the developmental context of Taiwan's traumatic memory, introduces cultural analytical perspectives into postwar political history research, and proposes an uneven view of democratization that prompts people to rethink Taiwan's democratization narrative. The proposal and performance of Chrono-situated Mnemonology overcomes the inadequacies of existing analytical tools. Its emphasis on institutions fills gaps in existing literature and opens new research avenues for collective memory studies.

Keywords: collective memory, traumatic memory, transitional justice, state-society relations, 228 Incident, white terror, institutional analysis