本研究涉及之課題是處理1949至1960年間國民黨黨國體制之建構，國民黨臺灣黨務之發展，國民黨與地方派系的互動，國民黨與在野精英的互動等四個面向。 第一章以一九四○年代後期之臺灣政局為主，實為本研究之前置背景，論及臺灣精英從日本殖民統治時期起，至中華民國政府接收後的政治參與活動，以及國民黨在臺灣地區初期的黨務發展。 第二章處理中國國民黨改造與黨國體制建構。首先處理的是中華民國政府遷台前後的政情，將從臺灣外部與內部的政治情勢，討論美國對台政策的轉變，與政府在臺灣實行地方自治政策之決策過程。後以改造中國國民黨為主題，針對遷台的中國國民黨發展進行背景敘述，指出改造是在黨領袖意志下進行，與在改造後黨權成功歸於黨領袖所有，不再旁落；再探討中國國民黨的地方基礎在1950年代之重組，分從黨基層結構的設計、臺灣省黨部的人事遞遷、省縣市黨部的組織編制、地方黨部的經費預算四層面進行探討；再則探討中國國民黨所實施的社會調查，發現國民黨透過社會調查來瞭解臺灣社會，提高國民黨員的政治意識，並進行政策回饋功能。它對黨國體制的建構確實具有正面助益。 第三章處理的是黨國體制下的臺灣地方政治。首先討論的是1950年代地方自治法制變遷，及地方黨政制度的運作。其次處理中國國民黨動員機制的建構。首先注意的是中國國民黨的黨員結構。儘管本省人黨員在區域黨部中佔多數，總體結構與黨幹部仍以外省人為多。國民黨開始紮根臺灣，便需要各種機構以深入地方社會。國民黨便透過既有團體—農會，並組設新的動員組織—民眾服務站對地方社會進行滲透與動員。第三，地方精英既然透過選舉進入體制，其中特別是所謂「半山」與「阿海」兩種不同經歷的臺灣人所進行的政治角力，臺灣地方派系與選舉的關聯等都是探討主題。而後從中國國民黨所建立的黨內提名制度及其運作，與中國國民黨所主控的輔選機制的形成及運作過程，可檢證並修正既往針對國民黨與地方派系的互動之相關解釋論點。 第四章處理的是朝野互動下的地方政治。先分兩方面觀察在野精英的參政問題：青年黨與民社黨的黨務發展，及無黨籍人士。其次在野人士對於公平競爭的訴求，顯示於反對「一人競選現象」，選舉監察問題兩大主題。在野人士由於無法獲取國民黨進一步回應，決定以組黨從事政治競爭。對在野精英而言，組黨是化解社會分歧、從事政治公平競爭的解決方式；國民黨對組黨運動如何動用國家情治機構、媒體與黨機器解決1950年以來的首次內部危機，也在討論之列。 / This study explores four topics: construction of KMT party-state system, developments of KMT in Taiwan, interactions between KMT and local factions, interactions between KMT and opposition elites from 1949 to 1960. It deals with Taiwan politics during the later phase of 1940s in Chapter 1, including Taiwanese elites’ political participations from Japanese colonial rule to ROC takeover, and premiere stage of KMT developments in Taiwan. It explores reconstruction of KMT and building of party-state system in Chapter 2. Changes of US policy to Taiwan, and decision-making process of Taiwan Province autonomy are main courses in political situations after ROC regime’s retreat in 1949. About KMT reconstruction process, this study first deals with reconstruction under tsung-tsai (supreme leader of KMT), and party decision power only belongs to tsung-tsai. Then it explores designs of party base formation, cadres change of Taiwan Province Party Bureau, organizations and fiscal budgets of party bureaus, and how they exercise to reorganize KMT’s local support during 1950s. Then it focuses on “social investigations” which are implemented by KMT. KMT use them to understand Taiwanese society, raise political consciousness of party members, and policies feedback. At last, “Social investigations” are also positive to building of party-state system. It explores Taiwan’s local politics in party-state system in Chapter 3. First, not only changes of autonomy law system, workings of local party and administration system need to be dealt with. Second, when we focus on KMT mobilization system construction, we should notice some facts that Taiwanese party members becomes main sector in local party organizations, mainlanders are still in majority on party cadres and whole party. They can be stated that KMT begins to taking roots in Taiwan. KMT needs more apparatus to mobilize and penetrate Taiwanese society. Using established Farmer Association, organizing brand new system -- “Public Service Stations” meet such needs. Third, because local elections became ladder participating regime for Taiwanese elites, we should notice that political struggles between “ban-shan” and “a-hai”, and connections between local factions and elections. Not only the building of KMT nomination system, but also campaign task system which was controlled by KMT and how they work need to be explored. During such processes, established frameworks about interactions between KMT and local factions can be reconsidered and exemplified. It explores local politics between KMT and its opposition powers in Chapter 4. First, Political participations of opposition elites can be surveyed in developments of CYP and DSP, and independents. Second, Opposition elites call for fair campaigns by against “non-competitive election”, and supervising campaigns. No further response from KMT, which makes opposition elites calling for organizing opposition party. To them, organizing opposition party is best way to ease social divergence, and to solve KMT’s manipulations in local elections. This study also focuses on how KMT uses intelligence apparatus of state, media and party apparatus to solve its first inner crisis since 1950.