人際和諧觀對於政治參與活動的影響：以2003年台灣民意為例

Social Harmony and Its Implication for Political Participation: the Case Study of Public Opinion in Taiwan in 2003

10.6284/NPUSTHSSR.2013.7(1)1

邱師儀(Albert Shih-Yi Chiu)

衝突 ； 和諧 ； 政治參與 ； conflict ； social harmony ； political participation

人文社會科學研究

7卷1期（2013 / 03 / 31）

1 - 26

繁體中文

民主的基石為政治參與，在政治參與的過程當中，多元或者是歧異的政治意見，從公民端傳達到政府決策端。因此，當不同利益、不同意識形態，與不同政黨傾向的選民參與各式各樣的政治活動時，容易導致人際間的衝突；或者因為企圖影響政府施政而與官方代表或者維持秩序的警察發生口角甚至是肢體衝突。換言之，絕大部分的政治參與可能與華人文化中所蘊含的和諧元素不相容。另一方面，政治參與也有可能象徵公民社會齊心協力來決定公眾事務，進而賦予政府統治的正當性，在這種時候政治參與就與和諧觀性質一致。本文的基調是和諧觀者會放棄政治衝突性質的政治參與，如示威、遊行、抗議與向媒體或者在網路上爆料。另一方面，和諧觀者會參與支持政權穩定與民主共識的政治活動，主要是投票行為。本文藉由2003年｢台灣選舉與民主化調查｣民調資料來做假設檢證，分析結果與衍生出來的意涵依序在文中探究。

Political participation serves as foundation for democracy. In the process of political participation, a variety of political opinions are conveyed to decision makers from the electorate. Thus, when different interests, ideologies and party supports compete with each other via political participation, interpersonal confrontation or even conflict will inevitably occur. These conflicts can occur between voters of different interests or between citizen participants and government. I argue that the cultural element of social harmony in Chinese society is hardly compatible with several participation acts. These acts have the nature of conflict, confrontation and cacophony and include political protests and making complaints related to politics via the news media or the Internet. On the other hand, though, social harmony motivates citizens to support the legitimacy of their government in the way that those citizens participate in political activities that are encouraged by the government. Voting belongs to this case. In other words, voting behavior is theoretically compatible with social harmony. I rely on the 2003 TEDS to examine several theoretical hypotheses. Findings are reported and philosophical discussion flowing from it is offered as well.

1. 吳重禮、鄭文智、崔曉倩(2006)。交叉網絡與政治參與：2001年縣市長與立法委員選舉的實證研究。人文及社會科學集刊，18(4)，599-638。
   連結：
2. 林瓊珠(2005)。台灣民眾的政治知識：1992~2000年的變動。選舉研究，12(1)，147-171。
   連結：
3. Merton, Robert K. (1938). Social Strcture and Anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672-82
4. Barabas, Jason(2004).How deliberation affects policy opinions.American Political Science Review,98,687-701.
5. Beck, Paul A.(2002).Encouraging Political Defection: The Role of Personal Discussion Networks in Partisan Desertions to the Opposition Party and Perot Votes in 1992.Political Behavior,24(4),309-37.
6. Belanger, Paul,Eagles, Munroe(2007).Partisan Cross-Pressure and Voter Turnout: The Influence of Micro and Macro Environments.Social Science Quarterly,88(3),850-67.
7. Chareka, Ottilia,Sears, Alan(2006).Civic Duty: Young People's Conceptions of Voting as a Means of Political Participation.Canadian Soceity for the Study of Education,26(2),521-540.
8. Conover, P. J.,Searing, D. D.(2005).Studying 'Everyday Political Talk' in the Deliberative System.Acta Politica,40,269-83.
9. Giddens, Anthony(1994).Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Political Politics.Oxford:Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
10. Goodin, Robert E.(ed.),Klingemann, Hans-Dieter(ed.)(1996).A New Handbook of Political Science.New York:Oxford University Press.
11. Gottfredson, Michael R.,Hirschi, Travis(1990).A General Theory of Crime.Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
12. Hibbing, John R.,Theiss-Morse, Elizabeth(2002).Stealth Democracy: Americans' Beliefs about How Government Should Work.New York:Cambridge University Press.
13. Hofstede, Geert(1991).Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.London:McGraw-Hill.
14. Hood, Steven J.(1998).The Myth of Asian-Style Democracy.Asian Survey,38(9),853-66.
15. Hsu、 F. L. K.(1981).American and Chinese: Passage to differences.Honolulu, Ha:University of Hawaii Press.
16. Huntington, Samuel P.(1991).The Third Wave: Democratization in Late Twentieth Century.Norman:University of Okahoma University.
17. Huntington, Samuel P.(1981).American Politics: The Promise of Disharmony.Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press.
18. Jackman, Simon,Sniderman, Paul M.(2006).The Limits of Deliberative Discussion: A Model of Everyday Political Arguments.The Journal of Politics,68(2),272-83.
19. Jones, Philip,Hudson, John(2003).Civic Duty and Expressive Voting: Is Virtue its own Reward?.Kyklos,53,3-16.
20. Kim, Yung-Myung(1997).Asian-Style Democracy: A Critique from East Asia.Asian Survey,37(12),1119-34.
21. Knack, Stephen(1992).Civic Norms, Social Sanctions, and Voter Turnout.Rationality and Society,4(2),133-156.
22. Lazarsfeld, Paul F.,Berelson, Bernard,Gaudet, Hazel(1968).The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign.New York:Columbia University Press.
23. Lee, Jun-han(2002).Primary Causes of Asian. Democratization: Dispelling Conventional Myths.Asian Survey,42(6),821-37.
24. Leung、 K.(1987).Some Determinants of Reactions to Procedural Models for Conflict Resolution: A Cross-national Study.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53(5),898-908.
25. Leung, Kwok,Allan, Lind E.(1986).Procedural Justice and Culture: Effects of Culture, Gender, & Investigator Status on Procedural Preferences.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,19,125-36.
26. Liu, Frank Cheng-shan(2006).Communication Networks and Changes in Electoral Choices: A Study of Taiwan's 2002 Mayoral Elections.Journal of East Asian Studies,6(1),139-58.
27. Markus, Hazel R.,Kitayama, Shinobu(1991).Culture and Self: Implications for Cognition, Emotion and Motivation.Psychological Review,98,224-253.
28. Markus, Hazel,Shinobu, Kitayama(1994).A Collective Fear of the Collective: Implications for Selves and Theories of Selves.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,20,568-579.
29. McClurg, Sott(2006).Political Disagreement in Context: The Conditional Effect of Neighborhood Context, Discussion, and Disagreement on Electoral Participation.Political Behavior,28(4),349-66.
30. Mendelberg, Tali,Oleske, John(2000).Race and Public Deliberation.Political Communication,17,169-91.
31. Muller, Edward N.(1979).Aggressive Political Participation.Princeton, N.J.:Princeton University Press.
32. Mutz, Diana C.(2002).The Consequences of Cross-Cutting Networks for Political Participation.American Journal of Political Science,46,838-55.
33. Putnam, Robert(1993).Making Democracy Work: Civic Tradition in Modern Italy.NJ:Princeton University Press.
34. Rosenberg, Shawn(Ed.)(2007).Deliberation, Participation and Democracy: Can the People Govern?.Basingstoke. UK:Palgrave Macmillan.
35. Roy, Denny、何振盛譯、杜嘉芬譯(2004)。台灣政治史。台北:商務印書館。
36. Sniderman, Paul M.,Jackman, Simon(2002).Democratic Discussion: The Role of Reasons and Political Sophistication in Political Argument.Democracy Under Strain,Paris:
37. Thompson, Dennis F.(2008).Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science.Annual Review of Political Science,11,497-520.
38. Verba, Sidney,Schlozman, Kay L.,Brady, Henry(1995).Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
39. 江宜樺(1998)。自由主義、民族主義與國家認同。台北:揚智文化。
40. 張德勝(1989)。儒家倫理與秩序情結：中國思想的社會學詮釋。台北:巨流圖書公司。
41. 傅恆德(2003)。政治文化與政治參與。台北:韋伯文化。
42. 傅恆德(1990)。政治參與的類型：誰參與抗議性活動。東海社會科學學報，20，61-83。
43. 楊國樞編(1993)。中國人的價值觀─社會科學觀點。台北:桂冠。
44. 楊國樞編、余安邦編(1993)。中國人的心理與行為─理念及方法篇（一九九二）。台北:桂冠圖書公司。
45. 楊國樞編、黃光國編、楊中芳編(2005)。華人本士心理學。臺北:遠流出版社。
46. 楊國樞編、黃光國編、楊中芳編(2005)。華人本土心理學。臺北:遠流出版社。
47. 齊力(2003)。個人主義、家族主義與集體主義的三角關係格局。市師社教學報，2，115-45。
48. 錢穆(1979)。從中國歷史來看中國民族性及中國文化。台北:聯經。