查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 反對運動中的路線分歧:從「國家性」視角比較香港(2006~2019)與臺灣(1975~1986)的啟發=Political Cleavages in Opposition Movements: A Comparative Study of Hong Kong (2006~2019) and Taiwan (1975~1986) from the Perspective of Stateness |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 鄭祖邦; | 書刊名 | 臺灣社會學 |
| 卷 期 | 46 2023.12[民112.12] |
| 頁 次 | 頁1-46 |
| 分類號 | 571.6 |
| 關鍵詞 | 反對運動; 民主化; 國家性; 一國兩制; 中華民國臺灣化; Opposition movement; Democratization; Stateness; One country, two systems; Taiwanizing ROC; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 當前在面對中國因素的作用力上,台港兩地的民主運動有著高 度的共鳴,但是,兩地似乎處於不同的民主化階段。本文嘗試從「反 對運動」的角度來進行台港兩地民主化發展的比較,特別是以台灣 1975 至 1986 年期間的反對運動經驗,與香港 2006 至 2019 年所面對 的民主運動困境,兩者進行相互的對照。文中主要的研究對象就是在 反對運動中所出現的內部分歧,在當時台灣黨外的主要分歧形式是 「議會路線/群眾路線」、「體制內改革/改革體制」、「雞兔同籠 問題」,香港則是在「泛民/本土」的對立架構下出現了「民主回歸 /香港獨立」、「和理非非/勇武抗爭」這些運動內部的對立。然 而,同樣面對運動內部理念或路線的分歧問題,為什麼台灣在 1986 年得以創立「民主進步黨」這個本土政黨,開啟了台灣政黨政治競爭 的時代?反觀香港在 2019 年反送中運動期間,卻需要以「無大台」 這種特殊的形式來團結民主運動中不同陣營的力量?為了解釋上述問 題,本文以「國家性」此一理論概念作為台港比較的基礎,進一步去 探討「中華民國台灣化」與「一國兩制」所形塑的不同國家性狀態 (一致型/對峙型)對兩地民主化路徑所產生的影響,並觀察兩地在 「激進化程度」和「組織化程度」這些運動型態上所呈現出的差異。 |
| 英文摘要 | Despite facing similar challenges regarding the influences of the China factor, Taiwan and Hong Kong are experiencing different stages of democratic development. This article aims to compare the opposition movements of Hong Kong and Taiwan. By drawing on the experiences of Taiwan’s opposition movement from 1975 to 1986, we can gain insights into the recent challenges faced by the opposition movement in Hong Kong from 2006 to 2019. The central focus of this study is the emergence of political divisions within the opposition movements. In Taiwan, the major political cleavages within the Tang- Wai movement (“outside the KMT party”) were centered around the concepts of “parliamentary/mass line,” “reform inside/outside the system,” and “chickens and rabbits in the same cage.” In contrast, in Hong Kong, the main political divisions existed between the pan-democratic party and the localist camp, encompassing issues such as “democratic reunification/Hong Kong independence” and “peaceful, rational, non-violent, no foul language/brave fight.” The question that arises is why these political cleavages led to different outcomes. In Taiwan, the formation of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in 1986 marked the beginning of party competition. Conversely, in Hong Kong, the Anti-ELAB movement relied on a leaderless approach to unite diverse factions. To address this question, we attempt to employ the theoretical concept of “stateness” as the basis for comparing Taiwan and Hong Kong. This further explores the impact of the different types of stateness (convergent/antagonist) shaped by the approaches of “Taiwanizing ROC” and “One Country, Two Systems” as the two regions advanced on their respective democratic paths. Additionally, we observe the differences in the degree of radicalization and organization presented in the movement patterns. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。