透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.147.205.154
  • 期刊
  • OpenAccess

臺灣代議政治的信任門檻

Trust Threshold Towards Taiwan's Representative Politics

摘要


台灣的代議政治,由於受制政治變遷的影響,一直無法進入正常的運作,尤其在兩千年政黨輪替之後,更是演展成黨際之間的惡鬥,行政與立法時常發生對立衝突的僵局,以致代議政治受到主權者的信任度不高,未能達及信任門檻。本文的主要目的之一在於深度鋪陳,這項信任門檻不足的十項徵候,藉以引其擔負政治運轉的政黨及其主要職司的正視,進而運用典範的治理知識加以轉型。本文的第二個重點在於申論:在信任門檻不足的情況下,台灣業已顯露出信任替代的現象,亦即對失去信任門檻的機制、機關或個人,產生消極失望的行為,抑或積極試圖影響信任對象的作為,一來警醒其改弦更張,進行策略性形象管理,用以恢復或取得應有的信任,二來採取反制的行動,試圖削減其政策轄區、權力範圍,或以其他機制突破政治衝突的瓶頸,借用主權者的力量,落實其天賦人權及憲法所賦予的權利,不願再居於外控的地位,而採取主動要求政策的回應力。

並列摘要


Since the 2000 election and the regime change that followed, the proper function of representative politics in Taiwan has been stalled. This stems from the antagonism between ruling and opposition parties, and the stalemate that resulted from the confrontation between administrative and legislative sectors, which in turn caused levels of trust among the electorate to dip below the ”trust threshold.” The article urges major political parties in Taiwan's political arena and their leaders to pay attention to the ten signs that warn of the failure to reach an adequate ”trust threshold”, and to utilize paradigmatic knowledge of governance to correct this failure. This article also provides an in-depth analysis of the electorate's political behavior. When there is a low level of trust among the electorate, the ”trust substitution” phenomenon occurs. That is, the erosion of the electorate's trust in political institutions and their electoral representatives could lead to a sense of disappointment and malaise. But it could also arouse a passionate desire to affect political change: first, by forcing their elected representatives to regain the electorate's trust through strategic image management; second, by constraining the authority and jurisdiction of their representatives or by resorting to other mechanisms to break through the bottleneck caused by political conflicts. Thus, by asserting their natural and constitutional rights, the political activism of the electorate enables them to directly demand policy responsiveness.

參考文獻


6, Perri(1997).Holistic Government.London:Demos.
Amy, D.J.(2003).Real Choices/New Voices.New York:Columbia University Press.
Barber, B.(1984).Strong Democracy.Berkeley:University of California Press.
Barber, K.L.(2003).A Right to Representation.Columbus:Ohio State University Press.
Baumgartner, F.R.,B.D. Jones.(1993).Agenda and Instability in American Politics.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

被引用紀錄


伍慧珣(2017)。民眾為什麼參與公民運動? 紅衫軍運動與太陽花運動的比較分析〔碩士論文,淡江大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2017.00867
楊舒媚(2009)。陳水扁執政與台灣民主化的發展──民主鞏固理論的分析〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.02976
謝智遠(2008)。入聯公投與兩岸關係之研究-泛綠觀點解析〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2008.01809
何溢誠(2006)。公投罅隙與罅隙管制〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2006.01020
郭銘峰、詹富堯、王鼎銘(2013)。規範認知與實然參與的罅隙:臺灣民眾在直接民主治理機制下的分析政治學報(56),27-54。https://doi.org/10.6229/CPSR.2013.56.02

延伸閱讀