Title

她們不是我們?分析台灣的民族主義者反大陸移民之態度

Translated Titles

Aren't They Part of Us? Opposition to Chinese Migrants among Taiwan's Nationalists

Authors

楊婉瑩(Wan-Ying Yang);張雅雯(Ya-Wen Chang)

Key Words

民族主義 ; 族群式國家認同 ; 公民式國家認同 ; 大陸移民 ; nationalism ; ethnic national identity ; civic national identity ; mainland migrants

PublicationName

東吳政治學報

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

34卷2期(2016 / 06 / 01)

Page #

1 - 59

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

一、前言二、民族主義者反移民三、民族主義不一定反移民四、理論建構與研究假設五、資料分析六、結論兩岸互動日趨頻繁,大陸來台人數日增,挑戰著台灣既有族群之間的分野,更衝擊台灣國家成員的界定。過去研究普遍認為台灣民族主義者和大陸移民之間存在著緊張關係,本研究認為,台灣不同的民族主義,牽涉到對台灣和中國的認同方向的差異,更涉及到認定國家成員組成的內涵的不同,這些不同面向都影響台灣民眾對待大陸人民的態度。就認同方向而言,台灣意識越強者,越可能反對大陸移民。然而,即使是具有強烈的台灣意識者,對國家成員界定的基礎不盡相同,其對大陸移民態度便可能有所不同。國家認同的基礎中,越是強調對政治共同體的公民式認同相對於強調歷史文化的族群式認同者,越可能接納大陸移民。探究台灣民族主義和反大陸移民的關係,本文採用「台灣社會變遷基本調查第六期第四次:國家認同組」資料,區分民族主義的方向(台灣/中國)與內涵(族群/公民),並建構四種民族主義的組合,透過模型分析顯示:在不同的民族主義類型之中,族群式台灣民族主義最為排斥大陸移民,公民式中國民族主義最接納大陸移民;然而,更值得關注的是,族群式中國民族主義相較於公民式台灣民族主義,可能更為排斥陸配來台以及懷疑其認同忠誠。簡言之,研究發現台灣民族主義不一定總是排斥大陸移民,而中國民族主義也不一定總是悅納大陸移民。

English Abstract

Mainlander spouses as migrant groups challenge the core ethnic composition and the boundaries of national community in Taiwan. Past studies have observed that Taiwan nationalists were often associated with negative attitudes toward mainland migrants. This study, however, argues that even for the strongest Taiwan identifiers, attitudes toward mainland migrants are deeply affected by perceptions of who are qualified to be nation members and what constitute the substances of their national identities. Those with a strong ethnic, historical and cultural national identity are more likely to oppose mainland migrants compared to those with a civic, political, and institutional national identity. This study explores the relationship between Taiwan nationalism and opposition to mainland migrants using the「Taiwan Social Change Survey: National Identity Module 2013」dataset. We classified respondents into four types of nationalists. Our models showed that ethnic-Taiwanese nationalists were most likely to oppose mainland spouses and civic-Chinese nationalists were least likely to oppose them. More notably, ethnic-Chinese nationalists were more likely to exclude mainland spouses and question their national loyalty -than Taiwanese nationalists. In short, Taiwanese nationalists are not always hostile to mainland migrants, whereas Chinese nationalists are not always accommodating to mainland migrants.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 政治學
Reference
  1. 伊慶春、章英華(2006)。對娶外籍與大陸媳婦的態度:社會接觸的重要性。台灣社會學,12,191-232。
    連結:
  2. 李建良(2007)。人民與國家「身分連結」的法制詮要與法理探索:兼論台灣人國籍的起承斷續問題。臺大法學論叢,36(4),1-60。
    連結:
  3. 杜素豪、廖培珊(2007)。態度量表中的回答模式:以「外來人口影響」與「兩岸統合」兩題組為例。台灣政治學刊,11(2),3-51。
    連結:
  4. 俞振華、林啟耀(2013)。解析台灣民眾統獨偏好:一個兩難又不確定的選擇。台灣政治學刊,17(2),165-230。
    連結:
  5. 張翰璧、張晉芬(2013)。全球化效果的侷限:台灣民眾對接納跨國移民的態度。台灣社會學刊,52,131-167。
    連結:
  6. 陳志柔、于德林(2005)。台灣民眾對外來配偶移民政策的態度。台灣社會學,10,95-148。
    連結:
  7. 陳昭如(2006)。性別與國民身分-台灣女性主義法律史的考察。臺大法學論叢,35(4),1-103。
    連結:
  8. 楊婉瑩、李品蓉(2009)。大陸配偶的公民權困境—國族與父權的共謀。台灣民主季刊,6(3),47-86。
    連結:
  9. 楊婉瑩、張雅雯(2014)。為什麼反對移工∕移民?利益衝突抑或文化排斥。政治科學論叢,60,43-84。
    連結:
  10. 趙彥寧(2005)。社福資源分配的戶籍邏輯與國境管理的限制:由大陸配偶的入出境管控機制談起。台灣社會研究季刊,59,43-90。
    連結:
  11. 鄭夙芬(2013)。2012 年總統選舉中的臺灣認同。問題與研究,52(4),101-132。
    連結:
  12. 國立政治大學選舉研究中心。2015。〈重要政治態度分佈趨勢圖〉。http://esc.nccu. edu.tw/course/news. php?class=203。2015/8/11。(Election Study Center, National Chengchi University. 2015.“Core Political Attitudes Trend Chart.” in http://esc.nccu.edu.tw/course/news.php?class=203. Latest update 11 August 2015.)
  13. 內政部戶政司。2015。〈縣市外裔、外籍與大陸配偶人數〉。內政部戶政司全球資訊網人口資料庫。http://www.ris.gov.tw/346。 2015/12/20。(Department of Household Registration. 2015. “The Population of Foreign and Mainland Spouses.” Population Data of the Department of Household Registration. in http://www.ris.gov.tw/346. Latest update 20 December 2015.)
  14. Allport, Gordon W.(1954).The Nature of Prejudice.Boston, MA:Beacon Press.
  15. Anderson, Benedict(1991).Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism.London:Verso.
  16. Beiner, R.(ed.)(1999).Theorizing Nationalism.Albany:State University of New York Press.
  17. Belsley, David A.(1980).Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity.New York:John Wiley.
  18. Billiet, Jaak(2003).National Identity and Attitude toward Foreigners in a Multinational State: A Replication.Political Psychology,24(2),241-257.
  19. Bourhis, Richard Y.(2001).Acculturation, Language Maintenance and Language Shift.Theories on Maintenance and Loss of Minority Languages,New York:
  20. Brewer, Marilynn B.(2007).The Importance of Being We: Human Nature and Intergroup Relations.American Psychologist,62(8),728-738.
  21. Brewer, Marilynn B.,Campbell, Donald T.(1976).Ethnocentrism and Intergroup Attitudes: East African Evidence.New York:Sage.
  22. Brown, Rupert(2000).Social Identity Theory: Past Achievements, Current Problems and Future Challenges.European Journal of Social Psychology,30,745-778.
  23. Brubaker, Rogers(1992).Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  24. Byrne, Jennifer(2011).National Identity and Attitudes toward Immigrants in a 'Multicreedal' America.Politics and Policy,39(4),485-514.
  25. Ceobanu, A. M.,Escandell, X.(2010).Comparative Analyses of Public Attitudes toward Immigrants and Immigration Using Multinational Survey Data: A Review of Theories and Research.Annual Review of Sociology,36,309-328.
  26. Chow, Peter C.Y.(ed.)(2008).The "One China" Dilemma.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
  27. De Figueiredo, Rui J. P., Jr.,Elkins, Zachary(2003).Are Patriots Bigots? An Inquiry into the Vices of In-group Pride.American Journal of Political Science,47(1),171-188.
  28. Delanty, Gerard(ed.),Kumar, Krishan(ed.)(2006).The Sage Handbook of Nations and Nationalism.London:Sage Publications.
  29. Dupré, Jean-François(2012).Intercultural Citizenship, Civic Nationalism, and Nation Building in Québec: From Common Public Language to Laïcité.Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism,12(2),227-248.
  30. Gellner, Ernest(1983).Nations and Nationalism.Ithaca:Cornell University Press.
  31. Hair, Joseph F., Jr.(2010).Multivariate data analysis.Upper Saddle River, N.J.:Prentice Hall.
  32. Heath, Anthony,Tilley, James R.(2005).British National Identity and Attitudes towards Immigration.International Journal on Multicultural Societies,7(2),119-132.
  33. Hobsbawm, Eric J.(1990).Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  34. Levrau, Francois,Loobuyck, Patrick(2013).Is Multiculturalism Bad for Social Cohesion and Redistribution?.The Political Quarterly,84(1),101-109.
  35. Meinecke, Friedrich(1970).Cosmopolitanism and the National State.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
  36. Pehrson, Samuel(2009).National Identification and Anti-Immigrant Prejudice: Individual and Contextual Effects of National Definitions.Social Psychology Quarterly,72(1),24-38.
  37. Pettigrew, Thomas F.(2007).Who Opposes Immigration? Comparing German with North American Findings.Du Bois Review,4(1),19-39.
  38. Pettigrew, Thomas F.,Tropp, Linda R.(2006).A Meta -analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90,751-783.
  39. Quillian, Lincoln(1995).Prejudice as a Response to Perceived Group Threat: Population Composition and Anti -immigrant and Racial Prejudice in Europe.American Sociological Review,60,586-611.
  40. Reeskens, Tim,Hooghe, Marc(2010).Beyond the Civic -Ethnic Dichotomy: Investigating the Structure of Citizenship Concepts across Thirty-three Countries.Nations and Nationalism,16(4),579-597.
  41. Savelkoul, M. P.(2010).Anti-Muslim Attitudes in the Netherlands: Tests of Contradictory Hypotheses Derived from Ethnic Competition Theory and Intergroup Contact Theory.European Sociological Review,27(6),741-758.
  42. Scheepers, P. M.(2002).Ethnic Exclusionism in European Countries: Public Opposition to Civil Rights for Legal Migrants as a Response to Perceived Ethnic Threat.European Sociological Review,18(1),17-34.
  43. Schneider, S. L.(2008).Anti-Immigrant Attitudes in Europe: Outgroup Size and Perceived Ethnic Threat.European Sociological Review,24(1),53-67.
  44. Shulman, Stephen(2002).Challenging the Civic/Ethnic and West/East Dichotomies in the Study of Nationalism.Comparative Political Studies,35(5),554-585.
  45. Sides, John,Citrin, Jack(2007).European Opinion about Immigration: The Role of Identities, Interests and Information.British Journal of Political Science,37(3),477-504.
  46. Smith, Anthony D.(1991).National Identity.Reno:University of Nevada Press.
  47. Smith, Anthony D.(1986).The Ethnic Origins of Nations.Oxford, UK:B. Blackwell.
  48. Sniderman, Paul(2004).Predisposing Factors and Situational Triggers: Exclusionary Reactions to Immigrant Minorities.American Political Science Review,98(1),35-49.
  49. Wagner, Ulrich(2006).Prejudice and Minority Proportion: Contact Instead of Threat Effects.Social Psychology Quarterly,69(4),380-390.
  50. Wong, Timothy Ka-ying(2001).From Ethnic to Civic Nationalism: the Formation and Changing Nature of Taiwanese Identity.Asian Perspective,25(3),175-206.
  51. Young, Iris M.(1990).Justice and the Politics of Difference.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
  52. 王甫昌(1998)。族群意識、民族主義與政黨支持:1990年代台灣的族群政治。台灣社會學研究,2,1-45。
  53. 王保進(2006)。Spss與行為科學研究。台北=Taipei:心理出版社=Psychological Publishing Co.。
  54. 米勒、莊文忠譯(2006)。Spss 在社會科學的應用。台北=Taipei:五南=Wu-Nan。
  55. 吳乃德(1996)。自由主義和族群認同:搜尋台灣民族主義的意識形態基礎。台灣政治學刊,1,5-39。
  56. 吳乃德(1993)。國家認同和政黨支持:台灣政黨競爭的社會基礎。中央研究院民族學研究所集刊,74,33-61。
  57. 張茂桂編(1993)。族群關係與國家認同。台北=Taipei:業強=Ye-qiang。
  58. 陳雪慧(2007)。世新大學社會發展研究所=Institute for Social Transformation Studies, Shih Hsin University。
  59. 傅仰止(2014)。科技部研究計畫報告科技部研究計畫報告,台北=Taipei:科技部=Ministry of Science and Technology。
  60. 游盈隆編(1997)。民主鞏固或崩潰。台北=Taipei:月旦=Yua-dan。
  61. 蔡明璋(2011)。從接觸到接受?婚姻移民支持的態度在檢視。研究台灣,7,1-23。
  62. 蕭高彥(1997)。國家認同、民族主義與憲政民主:當代政治哲學的發展與反思。台灣社會研究季刊,26,1-27。
  63. 薛天棟編(2002)。台灣的未來。台北=Taipei:華泰文化事業公司=Hua-tai。
  64. 簡康妮、蔡明璋(2012)。歡迎光臨?族群政治、原生傾向與接受跨國移入人口的態度。社會科學論叢,6(2),101-138。
Times Cited
  1. 楊婉瑩、張雅雯(2018)。參與之後?大陸配偶之政治行動與認同。臺灣民主季刊,15(2),1-50。
  2. (2017)。從《CEDAW》公約與歐洲人權法院之判決檢視文化中對女性之歧視。軍法專刊,63(6),103-140。