本文主要探討蔣中正於1930～1937年之間如何型範其建構現代國家的模式。此期間在完成北伐後對中共展開軍事圍剿，他試圖融合中國傳統社會控制方法與現代西方觀念，展開一連串政治、社會、經濟等層面的改革，從中體現了現代國家的建構過程。江西省作為對中共軍事圍剿的中心，在熊式輝主政下施行一系列地方政治改革措施，其中包含了許多傳統的中國社會控制方式，而正也體現了蔣中正其有關地方政治改革觀念。同時，江西省的農村與同時期中國其他省份農村，均面臨了嚴重的經濟與社會危機，江西農村在當時更成為毛澤東建立革命根據地並成功動員農民的大本營，並且展現了毛澤東建構現代國家的另一種模式。所以分析江西為何能夠成為中共進行武裝革命的重要根據地，以及其能成功動員農民的主要動力何在，成為理解蔣中正據以提出其著名的「三分軍事，七分政治」策略的重要原因。因此，江西省政府於1930年代進行一連串的地方政治改革，分析其方案內容以理解蔣中正對於地方政治改革與建構現代國家之間的關係。對蔣中正而言，進行地方政治改革的主要目的是為了擴張與強化國家對基層社會之基礎控制能力，借以強化對農村社會的控制。但為使改革成功而必須適應中國之國情，因此蔣中正採借了中國傳統帝國時期有關農村社會控制與動員的手段，例如保甲制度、團練與強調恢復傳統道德精神的新生活運動等。其後，蔣中正以江西省的實際作法與成功經驗作為其掌握國家權力後的具體施政參照，例如1939年對日抗戰期間國民政府毅然決定全面革新進行縣政制度，也反映了相同的政治改革邏輯。在蔣中正的政治改革理念中，不僅反映了傳統與現代性之間的掙扎、反抗與妥協，衝突、轉化與融合，並且有意或無意地採取了中國特有的習慣與制度，從而體現了現代性的多元特性。 / This dissertation focuses on the ideas and mode of how Chiang Kai-shek build the modern state in 1930-1937. In this period, he tried to integrate traditional Chinese social control methods and modern Western concepts, and launched a series of political, social, economic and other aspects of the reform. However, in the period of 1930-1937. Which embodies the construction of the modern state process. Jiangxi Province as the center of the Chinese military siege before 1935, Xiong Shi-hui implement a series of local political reform measures which contains many of the traditional Chinese social control, Chiang Kai-shek is the best embodiment of the concept of local political reform. At the same time, rural areas in Jiangxi Province and other provinces in China in the same period were facing serious economic and social crises. At that time, the rural areas in Jiangxi Province became Mao Zedong's revolutionary base areas and the headquarters where successfully mobilized the peasants, moreover, Mao Zedong to show the construction of a modern state of another model. Therefore, the analysis of why Jiangxi could become an important base for the armed revolution in China, its main motivation to mobilize the peasants, became an important reason for Chiang Kai-shek to put forward his famous "three points military, seven political" strategy. Therefore, the Jiangxi provincial government in the 1930s to carry out a series of local political reform, analysis of its program content to understand the Chiang Kai-shek for local political reform and the construction of the relationship between the modern state. For Chiang Kai-shek, the purpose of local political reform is to expand and strengthen the country's basic control of grass-roots level of social control, but to make the success of the reform must adapt to China's national conditions, so he adopted the traditional society of social control and mobilization means, such as the system of “Bar-jia”, “Tuan-Lian”(militia) and the new life movement which that emphasizes the restoration of the traditional moral spirit. The practices and successful experience of Jiangxi become an important reference after Chiang Kai-shek take the political power of nation, for example, he decided to conduct a comprehensive reform of the county system during the Sino-Japanese war in 1939, which that also reflects the same logic of political reform. In Chiang Kai-shek's ideas of political reform, not only reflects the struggle between tradition and modernity, resistance and compromise, bat also conflict, transformation and integration. At the same time, in his ideas had adopted China's unique habits and institutions intentionally or unintentionally, thus reflecting the characteristics of modernity multivariate.

長久以來，政治學慣於將企業畫歸為私領域活動，鮮於對企業組織及權力進行系統性分析。然而，正是這樣的忽視，使我們難以掌握後全球化時代，面對企業權力的崛起，國家政經結構將何去何從。 緣此，本研究回歸歷史，將長期遭政治學忽視的「企業」，重新置放於現代國家形成的歷史過程中，分析企業與政府，如何在競逐有限資金的過程中，建立起合作關係與制度，進而形成現代民族資本主義國家。並藉由先進/後發、東方/西方四個案例）尼德蘭聯省共和國、英國、日本、中國）的交互比較，進一步探問：為何有些國家由企業主導，形成「企業國家」，如尼德蘭、英國？又為何有些國家最終形成由政府主導的「國家企業」，如日本、中國？ 經過四個案例分析後，本研究提出了一個新的國家建構過程：先是財務需求促成強制權力及資本權力的法人化，形成「政府」與「企業」組織；而後，由於政府與企業在融資上的競合，促成了政府與企業透過財務機制）持股、債務、董事連結），進一步連結成為「國家法人」。而這個由政府與企業組成的國家法人，因成立動機起始於財務需求，因此首先被建立起來的是金融制度。接著，受國際政治及市場競爭壓力，軍事外交部門開始組織化。再者，為獨佔境內資金，政府與企業聯手建立國內政治/市場的統一/壟斷制度。而後，為消弭因不公平分配所導致的叛亂）抗稅、罷工），出現了公共/公司福利制度。現代國家的政經制度：財政金融、軍事外交、社會福利，於焉建立。且正由於國家法人組建的基礎在於財務，因此導致國家走向「企業國家」或「國家企業」的分殊關鍵，即在於政府與企業兩大法人的相對融資能力（financing capacity）。

隨著世界各國在民主化後對重新審視、扭轉過去壓迫性政權作為的嘗試，近年來以臺灣史料為題材的研究中，以轉型正義為主題的論文也有逐漸增加的趨勢。不過多數研究習慣將視野集中於國民黨來臺後的族群歧視、整個國家退守臺灣後基於反共／防共的白色恐怖對人權的侵害、或是臺灣政治民主化後的補償與歷史正義，相對少有探討臺灣戰後初期對日本統治的反省內容，同時也缺乏比較性地跨越不同政權統治時期，嘗試從外來政權如何統治社會與汲取資源方式的角度，研究國家建構如何影響轉型正義主張與行動的作品。 　　相較先行研究，本論文以從日本殖民時期以至戰後初期的臺灣與朝鮮為研究對象，指出日本對新領土的國家建構工程使兩地在戰後初期都出現了轉型正義的行動與主張，而兩地在遭受殖民前與殖民期間發展出的共同體意識、社會成員處境、和殖民者建構國家的手段與過程均影響了兩地轉型正義的內容與強度；而兩地在戰後分別受到外來政權統治，再次出現國家意圖控制社會的國家建構行為，使兩地原有的轉型正義主張遭到壓抑－在臺灣，新統治者與臺灣社會認定的犯過錯者結合，以自己的轉型正義標準壓制臺灣人的權利和對政權的批判，臺灣人因此重新審視共同體界線；朝鮮／韓國對民族獨立與犯過錯者的究責要求則一直未滅，然而新統治者與其後繼者為了穩定政權，出現了無視社會要求，以新標準區別敵人並阻礙轉型正義的情形，最後，戰後初期統治兩地的新政權皆為其國家建構目的犧牲了社會的轉型正義要求，同時製造了新的不正義。 / With countries of the world tried to review and redress doings oppressive regimes did in the past after democratization, the number of theses topic on transitional justice by studying Taiwan historical resources increases recently. However, most of the researches focus on ethnic discriminations after Kuomintang seized Taiwan, human right violation and persecution in white terror era, and redress or historical justice after political democratization. There come relatively fewer discussions on reflections on Japanese rule in early post war Taiwan, and lack of comparative, cross-regime works try to explain how state-building influenced transitional justice ideas and actions, by applying viewpoint that different alien regimes carry out ruling and extraction resources from society. 　Compared with former researches, I adopt the era Taiwan and Korea under Japanese colonization to early post war period as research subjects. I first point out Japanese state-building crafts brought out transitional justice ideas and actions in early post war Taiwan and Korea, different development degrees of community imagines, situation of society members, means and process colonizers took to build state before and in the colonial period made postwar transitional justice different in the two places. Next I point out new alien regimes befell post war Taiwan and Korea, new state-building process came out once again, and transitional justice was repressed. In Taiwan, new rulers built a patron-client relationship with local wrongdoers, they put Hanjian accusation standard on Taiwanese, suppress their political right and critique, and therefore Taiwanese started to review the boundary of community. In Korea, desires to nation independence and punish wrongdoers never faded, however, post war rulers ignored society requests and used new standard to mark new enemy within, blocked transitional justice for stable regime. At last, regimes ruled Taiwan and Korea in early post war days sacrificed society requests for transitional justice, instead by pursuit of state-building goals, and brought out new injustice.