本論文從十九世紀末以來亞洲民族國家形成的脈絡，探討反攻意識型態在戰後台灣歷史的歷程中所扮演的角色，目的在探求戰爭塑造與國家建構兩者之間的關係。戰後台灣承繼了日本總力戰、中國抗日戰爭與動員戡亂等多重戰爭體制的影響，在「反攻大陸」的訴求下延續與強化戰時措施，作為在台灣建立國家的憑藉，也強烈形塑統治體制的特徵。在體制建構外，鼓吹人民支持的即為反攻意識型態，透過意識型態各面向的發展，中華民國政府賦予這場戰爭各種不同的意義，並逐漸找尋出不懼時間流逝、為何一直無法反攻的回答。伴隨著意識型態逐步完備的是宣傳手法的漸次純熟，藉由不斷地實驗摸索，反攻意識型態化為日常生活中無所不在的訊息與制度性措施，所依靠的是由軍方大幅介入、以戰時措施宣傳戰爭的方式。統治體制的性質與反攻意識型態的訴求與手法，反映了五○年代以戰爭為中心思考的策略，也代表著戰後台灣國家體制建立的特質。 / This dissertation discusses the role of the ideology of "Reconquering the Mainland" in the 1950s Taiwan from the context of the formation of the nation-state in Asia. The aim of this dissertation is to analysis the relation between war-making and state-making. Postwar Taiwan is conbined with several war systems, including the late Japanese colonization, the anti-Japan war system, and the system of Mobilization for Suppressing the Communist Rebellion. By the reason of "Reconquering the Mainland," Taiwan inherited and increased these war systems to build its state and make the type of rule. What the way to maintain the war system and encourage Taiwanese to support the rule is the propaganda on the ideology of "Reconquering the Mainland", and builing the propaganda institution for the ideology. Through the development of the ideology, the KMT government finded the resolution of time pass-by and the reason why the government can't reconquere the Mainland. And through the development of the propaganda, the ideology permeated in the daily life of the "normal" people. This dissertation also argues the role of the military in the propaganda institution. From the ideology, propaganda institution and the propaganda way, we can find the central role of the thinking of war, and the importance of war-making in the state-making in the 1950s Taiwan.

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.

蔣中正和毛澤東，同為二十世紀中國的重要領導人物，其影響不僅是在政治上，更在軍事上。兩人都是偉大的戰略指導者和軍事理論家，或者至少他們的追隨者如此宣稱。在超越領袖崇拜的今天，這個形容仍是事實嗎？ 蔣、毛第一次在軍事上對決是在江西第三次圍剿。毛澤東已取得前兩次反圍剿的勝利，他發展出一個理論應付國軍的圍剿：集中兵力各個擊破國軍分散的各路。加上共產黨的動員力量，國軍的圍剿相當困難。蔣中正有鑑於此，做出了戰略上的轉向，新的戰略結合碉堡戰術、封鎖、「三分軍事七分政治」等方針。最終對贏得了第五次圍剿。毛澤東在長征中重新取回領導權，他馬上面對的是國軍在貴州的新一波圍剿。由於遠離蘇區戰鬥，因此只有很少的補給和援助。會戰展開也不順利，土城、魯班場之戰戰敗，而僅以慘勝贏得遵義之戰。但毛終究設法逃出蔣的包圍圈，並離開貴州與紅四方面軍會師。由於毛澤東和張國燾的戰略歧見，毛澤東獨自帶領紅軍北上抵達陝北與當地紅軍會合。紅軍東征入晉，宣稱要到華北抗日。但為蔣增援山西的中央軍所擊退。在紅四方面軍北上之後，為了在甘肅、寧夏打通蘇聯援助路線，紅軍渡過黃河。但為蔣中正命令下的國軍所切斷，這個行動最終導致了西路軍的潰滅。 在剿共戰爭當中，蔣中正和毛澤東各自研發出他們的理論與對中國戰爭的認知。他們的共識是中國的戰爭是不同於外國的戰爭的。此階段可以視為他們的軍事思想奠基時期。毛澤東所寫的「中國革命戰爭的戰略問題」成為以後他的軍事著作的先聲。另一方面，蔣中正對此的經驗則比較是方法上的，以軍官訓練團訓練軍官及幹部、親自編撰各式「手本」等戰術教材，這些方法的延續持續到抗戰之後，甚至到臺灣時期。 / Chiang Kai-Shek and Mao Ze-Dong, two great leader of 20th century China, not only politically but also militarily. Both man are, or so claim separately by their followers, are great stretegist and military theorist. Beyond the worship of both man, is that true? Chiang and Mao’s first military encounter was the third encirclement campaign of Jiang-Xi. Mao already won the first two, he develop a theory to counter Nationalists’ encirclement by concentrating strength and attack the enemy detachment separately. Along with the mobilizational power of Communists, Nationalists’ encirclement campaign turns out very difficult. Chiang realize that, and making a dramatic turn of strategy, combine with bunker tactics, blockade, and political mobilization of people. Chiang eventually won the fifth encirclement campaign over the Mao-absence Communists. Mao took back his command during the Long March. He soon faces the Nationalists’ encirclement again in Guizhou. This time he is not fighting on a soviet area, therefore gain little support and reinforcement. The battles are not quite well either, Lost two of them and won one costly. But he still manage to escape from Chiang’s encirclement, and leave Guizhou to rendezvous with other Red Army. Because of strategy difference between Mao and another Communist leader Zhang Guotao, Mao leads his troop go north to Shaanxi, rendezvous with local Red Army. Mao attacks Shanxi by claiming they want to fight Japanese evasion at North, driven back by Chiang’s reinforcement to local warlord Yan Xishan. To fulfill the strategy goal of reaching USSR to get supplies, Communists launch another campaign in Ningxia and Gansu and crossed Yellow River. But the Red Army been cut off by Chiang’s nationalist army, this later leads to the elimination of the west side detached Red Army. During the war, Chiang and Mao both develop their own theory and knowledge of War in China, which they both believe in common is different from foreign wars. The period of first Chinese civil war, can be seen as their military thought’s foundation. Mao wrote “Problems of Strategy in China's Revolutionary War” to conclude this war, became the pioneer of his military works later on. Chiang, on other hand, took the experience most in method way: retrain officers in special facility, write tactic handbooks.These methods cotinuely used by Chiang on later wars against Japan, even in Taiwan in his late years.

There is no abstract available for this thesis.

本論文的目的，在於透過五○、六○年代臺灣的內外情勢，以及文復會工作的分析，解釋文復運動出現的原因，以及該會所扮演的角色。文復運動之所以展開，是中華民國政府在反攻戰事日益拖延的情勢下，為了解決動員戡亂與民主憲政的扞挌衝突，所必須塑造的一套正當性基礎。文復會的角色，則從原先主動塑造政府正當性的地位，在經歷七○年代的國際變局後，轉變為被動配合政府追求現代化的輔助機構。 自1950年以來，中華民國政府即面臨必須號召反攻，卻又不能反攻的情勢。隨著時間的流逝，反攻無望等疑問逐漸上升，以及動員戡亂長久維持所產生的弊病，皆嚴重威脅中華民國政府正當性的基礎。在此情況下，藉由中共文化大革命的發生，遂以文化復興運動塑造政府正當性。其方式是建構臺灣為中華文化唯一寶庫，為保衛傳統文化而需繼續與中共奮鬥，並以蔣中正作為道統傳人，將全民團結於領袖之下，換言之，「道統-國父-蔣公」、「三民主義=文化復興=反攻大陸」成為文復運動的主要內涵。總統兼文復會會長，意味著國家最高的領袖同時肩負文化復興的重責大任，對蔣中正而言，這種身份是繼承國父與道統而來，別人所無法取代。能領導文復會的，是道統傳人，是總統，是蔣中正，而這三者在當時構成了領袖一辭的實質內涵。該運動的工作不一定全是創新，但其鞏固中華民國政府統治正當性的作用，具有領導性與積極性。 文復運動繼承五○年代以來國民黨推動文化運動的手法，黨政機關隱藏在後，動員各式團體響應，使運動蔚為風潮，並宣稱此運動為民間自發的運動。由此，當回頭思考文化霸權的理論時，便發現葛蘭西的分析並不適用於文復運動。葛蘭西強調的是一個自主的市民社會，統治階級必須在此爭取認同，說服市民社會承認其在哲學、道德與知識上的領導權。然而，從背景的回顧來看，臺灣當時根本缺乏所謂自主性的市民社會，反對中華民國政府、需要被說服的勢力早已被剷除，這一點也是先行研究者所共同承認的。用文化霸權解釋文復運動，等於假定了一個不存在的市民社會。而所謂民間團體的積極響應，一種看似社會被統治者說服的景象，實際上也是黨政機構運作下的結果。因此，以文化霸權的概念分析，容易造成理論與事實的誤差。在這個運動中，我們必須注意領袖擁有崇高地位的這項特性，這將在文復會的實際工作中展露無遺。 在實際工作中可以發現，文復會所復興的「中華文化」，是經過篩選，而且利於中華民國政府統治。透過加強民族精神教育，傳達三民主義、愛國意識與擁戴領袖的信念；以推行國語運動等方式，壓抑地方文化，塑造官方同意的國有標準文化；從儒家經典的率先註譯中，又可了解道統學說才是文復會的重心所在。換言之，該運動所復興的「中華文化」，不僅強化三民主義與道統的重要性與普及性，同時亦意欲成為全中國均應學習與維護的唯一文化，成為判別正統中國與「偽政權」的標準文化。 另一方面，文復會制訂「國民生活須知」與「國民禮儀範例」，期望從日常生活當中體現文化復興的精神。貫穿須知與範例的最重要精神，在於嚴格克己與長幼尊卑的要求，將生活上的具體情境化為一條條的行為準則，建立起社會的秩序氣息。文復會採取由上而下的推行方式，期望黨政軍各級首長以身作則，達成上行下效的效果。這種依恃道德表率的思考，以人而言就是向尊長學習，以物而言就是向標語學習，以全國而言就是向政府學習，以運動整體而言就是向領袖學習。而在海外方面，運動的推行對象以華僑為主，這意味著文復會希望全球華人皆能體認正確的「中華文化」，藉由宣傳保衛民族遺產而支持中華民國政府，目的在彰顯世界華人對蔣總統復興文化的全力支持。從文復會海內外的工作來看，文復運動的重心，最終在於促進人民對領袖的擁戴。 然而，到了一九七○年代，外交上的挫折對中華民國政府的正當性基礎產生實質傷害，在穩定政權為首要考量下，蔣中正於1972年繼續連任總統，並提名其子蔣經國任行政院長。蔣經國透過多項社會與政治風氣的改革措施，宣示政府革新的企圖與決心，並以建立現代化國家為號召，推動九項建設等重要基礎工程。文復會在變局下，工作內容亦轉而強調現代化的面向，「國民生活須知」的實踐，出現大量維護清潔衛生與交通秩序的工作，透過政府機關的配合，修改法令加強取締髒亂與交通違規的情事。更具象徵意義的是，文復會的工作報告中，出現大量與蔣(經國)院長相關的活動，這對只配合蔣中正言論和政策的文復會而言，顯示在工作上已將蔣經國納入擁戴領袖的對象。整體而言，文復運動從原本具有領導性質的精神動員，在變局之後轉為依附政府對現代化的追求。 文復運動原是為了在不改變既有秩序的情況下，解決民主憲政與動員戡亂的衝突難題，然而變局後中華民國政府的諸多改變，則使文復會的重要性降低。第一任會長去逝之日，正式代表一個以文化命脈與領袖功業相結合時代的過去。文復會見證了此項轉變，但不變的是對領袖與中華民國政府的忠誠擁戴。

本文以戰後中國憲政的發展為題，探討1946－1948年間，國民黨、民社黨、青年黨三黨合作對制憲國大的召開、政府改組、國代選舉、立委選舉等重要政治事件的影響，本文側重探究三黨合作行憲的運作實態，探討國家利益的「前台表演」與黨派利益的「後台運作」之間的複雜關係。首先，本文扼要回顧抗戰期間到戰後初期的中國政局，探討朝野黨派關係如何影響憲政運動的推動，瞭解其對戰後中國政治的影響。抗戰勝利後，國、共衝突再起，美國、「第三方面」人士相繼居中斡旋，未能促使國共合作，最後國民黨單方面宣布召開國大制憲，中共和民盟抵制之，而國民黨則成功拉攏民、青兩黨合作。此後，國民黨拋出政府改組的議題，繼續與民、青兩黨談判，本文將分析三黨對行憲的不同想像，此間，國民黨三中全會為何對政府改組有反彈聲浪。在政府改組完成後，民、青兩黨的內部糾紛為何再起，社會輿論的普遍觀感為何，國府在此時宣布「動員戡亂」，又為日後行憲帶來什麼影響。 政府完成改組後，緊接著便是國代和立委選舉，本文將探討政府籌備選舉經過，國民黨如何建立其內部提名機制，剖析其中派系鬥爭、黨團競逐的內情。除此之外，三黨中央亦就選舉名額、地域分配作協商，以達到聯合提名，同額當選的結果，以維持三黨合作的政治格局，並略述在地方上的選舉經過。選舉結果出爐後，不符三黨協議，民、青兩黨以退出政府要挾，迫使國民黨設法遵守三黨協議，國民黨為避免造成一黨行憲的局面，運用黨紀強令當選黨員退讓，引發「黨紀」與「國法」之爭，最後國民黨中央幾經討論，由蔣中正祭出「以黨讓黨」的解決辦法，彌平選舉糾紛。為此，三黨又如何達成協議，繼續合作實施憲政。透過上述研究，本文將從五個角度分析：一、國際因素對中國政治的影響；二、「行憲」與「戡亂」的關係；三、「黨紀」與「國法」之爭的象徵意義 ；四、三黨合作的政治得失；五、戰後中國實施憲政的歷史意義。

La tesi si concentra sul Partito Nazionalista Cinese negli anni Venti come punto privilegiato di osservazione del cambiamento politico della Cina dopo la Prima guerra mondiale. Questo decennio rappresentò un momento di definizione identitaria sia per i comunisti sia per i nazionalisti. La storiografia ne ha sottolineato numerosi aspetti, ma si è finora occupata del periodo 1919-1928 come una preistoria degli anni Trenta piuttosto che come un autonomo segmento di storia cinese. Studi recenti hanno superato implicitamente questo approccio criticando due date periodizzanti fondamentali per il Novecento cinese: la nascita della Repubblica nazionalista (1911) e la nascita della Repubblica Popolare (1949). A metà tra queste due date, gli anni Venti sono emersi come snodo decisivo nel passaggio da impero a Stato nazionale, durante cui si definì un nuovo spazio di discussione politica. Questo processo, pur interno, subì l’influsso delle strategie internazionali di sovietici e statunitensi dando vita a una nuova visione non soltanto della rivoluzione ma anche dello Stato post-rivoluzionario. Le classi dirigenti nazionalista e comunista, durante la collaborazione, si rivelarono dinamiche e tale “competizione” si trasferì anche all’interno di ciascun movimento diventando un fattore determinante per il successo o il fallimento del partito inteso come moderna formazione politica. / The thesis focuses on the Chinese Nationalist Party in the 1920s as a special standpoint to analyze the political changes in China after the World War I. That decade was crucial for shaping the identity of nationalists and communists. Many works have already examined some aspects, but they mostly considered the years 1919-1928 as a pre-history of the Thirties rather than an autonomous part of Chinese history. Recent studies have overcome this approach by criticizing two of the main periodization in the Chinese twentieth century: the birth of the nationalist Republic (1911) and the birth of the People’s Republic (1949). Halfway, the 1920s stood out as a critical juncture in the transition from empire to nation-state. A new space of political discussion was defined. The process, albeit internal, was under the influence of the USSR and US international strategies and gave birth not only to a new vision of the revolution, but also to a vision of the post-revolutionary state. Also, the nationalist and communist leaderships turned out to be dynamic. That "competition" may be seen also within the two political movements and became a shaping factor for the success or failure of the party as a modern political formation.