Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/32041
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor張台麟zh_TW
dc.contributor.author王贊焜zh_TW
dc.creator王贊焜zh_TW
dc.date2007en_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-09-14T04:58:08Z-
dc.date.available2009-09-14T04:58:08Z-
dc.date.issued2009-09-14T04:58:08Z-
dc.identifierG0095952006en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/32041-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description歐洲語文學程碩士在職專班(MPES)zh_TW
dc.description95952006zh_TW
dc.description96zh_TW
dc.description.abstract1973年西德聯邦憲法法院作出東、西德基礎條約判決指陳 ”基礎條約的特殊性在於,它雖是一項適用國際法規則、並且具有國際法條約效力的兩國間之雙邊條約,然而這兩個國家卻是一個始終尚存、又保有同一民族的整體德國之兩部份”。西德以「基本法(Das Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, GG)」治國,在政治自由與經濟成長的輝煌成果,對社會主義東德產生催枯拉朽的體系瓦解,並導致兩個德國在1990年10月3日正式復歸「統一」。\r\n國族認同在德國既因為納粹時代的誤用而被視為一種罪惡及禁忌,二次戰後的德國人,既不能像其他國族國家的人民一般以土地作為政治共同體認同的對象,也不能繼續以國族為認同的對象,乃發展出以體制為認同的對象。統一後德國經濟的表現與落差,不如原先之預測與期待,隨之而來的是,認同自己是「德東人」的前東德人卻越來越多。1990年統一之初,有六成一的東德人回答自己是「德國人」,到了2000年時,認同自己是「東德人」的竟高達七成七。以歷史的角度來看,所謂的日耳曼民族「統一」,在漫長的歷史長河裏,是否竟成短暫一瞬?國族認同其實是不斷「轉變」、需要被「建構」? 德東人的國族認同似乎印證此一說法。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThe decision of the Federal Constitutional Court in the Basic Treaty of 1973 stated “ The specialty of the treaty is that it applies to, as well as effects, a bilateral international treaty between two states which are existing for long and keep the same nation in the two divisions of the entire Germany as a whole.” The significant political freedoms and economic prosperity that West Germany established under the Grundgesetz (Basic Law), which across the border many of East Germany’s citizens looked to, eventually led to the collapse of socialist and the consequent official unification of two German states into one again on 3rd October 1990.\r\nDue to the Nazis’ distortion of national identity, as well as the changing border in historical Germany, an ideology of identity in political communities has appeared on “systems” for the postwar German, rather than on “nations” or “lands” as for people in other nation state. Alongside the social unequal and decline derived from the disappointing economic performance after unification, more and more pre East German now declare themselves “East German”. In 1990, 61% of pre East German recognized “German”, while in 2000 77% of those recognized “East German”. From the historical point of view, the so called “Germanic unification” ultimate becomes a short memory in the long history? National identity actually transforms and needs to be continuously constructed? The terms of pre East German seem in support of this indication.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents摘要 ------------------------------------------- 2\r\n第一章 研究背景 -------------------------------- 4\r\n第二章 研究動機與目的 --------------------------- 6\r\n第三章 文獻探討與研究方法 ------------------------ 15\r\n第一節 文獻探討 ---------------------------------- 15\r\n第二節 研究方法 – 比較歷史研究途徑 ---------------- 27\r\n第四章 民族國家的發展模式 ----------------------- 40\r\n第一節 民族主義與民族國家的起源與發展 --------------- 40\r\n第二節 國族主義的形式 ----------------------------- 47\r\n第五章 德國實行國族主義的研究分析 ---------------- 58\r\n第一節 體制的認同 -------------------------------- 58\r\n第二節 東德鄉愁 ---------------------------------- 67\r\n第三節 體制内的反彈 ------------------------------- 81\r\n第四節 體制外的反彈 – 右翼激進主義政黨與組織 -------- 103\r\n第六章 國族主義的限制 – 掙脫經濟衰退的惡性循環 ----- 111\r\n第一節 經濟恐慌下的激進民族主義 --------------------- 111\r\n第二節 民粹主義的反動 – 向左移動的鐘擺 -------------- 116\r\n第三節 小結 – 公民平等地位立於經濟發展之上 ----------- 118\r\n第七章 結論 – 轉變中的國族認同 -------------------- 123\r\n第八章 參考文獻 ---------------------------------- 126zh_TW
dc.language.isoen_US-
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0095952006en_US
dc.subject德東人zh_TW
dc.subject德西人zh_TW
dc.subject國族認同zh_TW
dc.subject政治共同體zh_TW
dc.subjectEast Germanen_US
dc.subjectWest Germanen_US
dc.subjectNational Identityen_US
dc.subjectPolitical Communityen_US
dc.title政治共同體的再建構 - 德東人國族認同的轉變與延續zh_TW
dc.titleRe-construction of Political Community - The Transformation and Continuation of National Identity for the East Germanen_US
dc.typethesisen
dc.relation.reference壹、 專書zh_TW
dc.relation.reference一、 中文zh_TW
dc.relation.reference朱紹中,2006,《德國在擴大的歐盟中:Deutschland in der erweiterten EU》,上海:同濟大學出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference李金梅,2001,《民族與民族主義》,台北:麥田出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference辛薔,2005,《融入歐洲 – 二戰後德國社會的轉向》,上海:上海社會科學院出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference吳滄海,1995,《德國的分裂與統一》,台北:志一出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference吳叡人,1999,《想像的共同體:民族主義的起源與散布》,台北:時報文化。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference洪丁福,1994,《德國的分裂與統一 – 從俾斯麥到柯爾》,台北:臺灣商務。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference徐鴻賓、徐京輝、廖立傳,1990,《馬克斯․韋伯與現代政治理論》,台北:久大桂冠聯合出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference郭恆鈺、許琳菲,1991,《德國在那裏?:聯邦德國四十年》,台北:三民書局。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference黃發典,1993,《歐洲百科文庫 – 法西斯主義:Les Fascismes》,台北:遠流出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference曹衛東,2002,《後民族格局:哈伯瑪斯政治論文集》,台北:聯經出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference葉陽明,2005,《德國憲政秩序》,台北:五南書局出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference彭滂沱,1992,《德國問題與歐洲秩序》,台北:三民書局。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference趙全勝,1994,《分裂與統一:中國、韓國、德國、越南經驗之比較研究》,台北:桂冠圖書。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference韓紅,2002,《民族與民族主義:A Typology of Nationalism》,北京:中央編譯出版。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference顧駿,1991,《種族與族類》,台北:桂冠圖書。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference二、 西文zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceAlbrecht, Birgit, et al., 2007, Der Fischer Weltalmanach 2008 Zahlen, Daten, Fakten, Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, Frankfurt am Main.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceBender, Peter, 2007, Deutschlands Wiederkehr – Eine ungeteilte Nachkriegsgeschichte 1945-1990, J. G. Cottasche Buchhandlung Nachfolger GmbH, Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceBrubaker, Rogers, 1996, Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and National Question in the New Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceDirlmeier, Ulf, Andreas Gestrich, Ulrich Herrmann, Ernst Hinrichs, Christoph Kleßmann, Jürgen Reulecke, 2001, Kleine deutsche Geschichte, Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceDirlmeier, Ulf, Andreas Gestrich, Ulrich Herrmann, Ernst Hinrichs, Christoph Kleßmann, Jürgen Reulecke, 2006, Kleine deutsche Geschichte, Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceHistorische Ausstellung im Reichstagsgebäude in Berlin, Fragen an die deutschen Geschichte – Ideen, Kräfte, Entscheidungen von 1800 bis zur Gegenwart, 15. Auflage, Deutscher Bundestag Referat Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Bonn.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceHobsbawm, Eric John Ernest, 1990, Nations and Nationalism since 1780 : programme, myth, reality, Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceHürten, Heinz, 2003, Deutsche Geschichte in Quellen und Darstellung, Band 9, Weimarer Republik und Drittes Reich 1918-1945, Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceKinder, Hermann, und Werner Hilgemann, 2004, dtv-Atlas Weltgeschichte, Band 1, Von der Anfängen bis zur Französischen Revolution, 37. Auflage, Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, München.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceKinder, Hermann, und Werner Hilgemann, 2004, dtv-Atlas Weltgeschichte, Band 2, Von der Französischen Revolution bis zur Gegenwart, 37. Auflage, Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag GmbH & Co. KG, München.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceLehnert, Detlef, 1999, Die Weimarer Republik, Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceMommsen, Wolfgang J., 1998, Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft, Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referencePeters, B. Guy, 1999, Institutional Theory in Political Science: The New Institutionalism, New York: Pinter.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceRudzio, Wolfgang, 2006, Das Politische System der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 7., aktualisierte und erweiterte Auflage, VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceSchroeder, Klaus, 2006, Die veränderte Republik – Deutschland nach der Wiedervereinigung, 1. Auflage, Verlag Ernst Vögel, Stamsried.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceSmith, Anthony D., 1997, Nationalism and Modernism: A Critical Survey of Recent Theories of Nations and Nationalism, London: Routledge.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceSontheimer, Kurt, und Wilhelm Bleek, 1999, Grundzüge des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Piper Verlag GmbH, München.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceSontheimer, Kurt, Wilhelm Bleek und Andrea Gawrich, 2007, Grundzüge des politischen Systems der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Piper Verlag GmbH, München.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceSteinmo, Sven, et al., 1992, Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, New York.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceVom Bruch, Rüdiger, und Björn Hofmeister, 2002, Deutsche Geschichte in Quellen und Darstellung, Band 8, Kaiserreich und Erster Weltkrieg 1871-1918, 2., durchges. Auflage, Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co., Stuttgart.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceWeidenfeld, Werner, 1999, Handbuch zur deutschen Einheit 1949-1989-1999, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt/Main.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference貳、 期刊zh_TW
dc.relation.reference一、 中文zh_TW
dc.relation.reference葉陽明,2006,〈專論 西德因應德國分裂時期(1949-1990)之憲政安排〉,《國際關係學報》,22:11-43。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference葉陽明,2007,〈戰後德國極右主義、極右政黨對憲政民主之挑戰〉,《社會科學論叢》,1(1):33-94。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference蔡英文,2002,〈民族主義、人民主權與西方現代性〉,《政治與社會哲學評論 – 民族主義專輯》,3:1-46。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference二、 西文zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceAlmond, Gabriel, 1956, “Comparative Political Systems”, Journal of Politics, 18, pp.391-409.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceAnderson, Benedict, 2001, “Western Nationalism and Eastern Nationalism – Is there A Difference That Matters?”, New Left Review, pp.31-42.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceGellner, Ernst, 1981, “Nationalism”, Theory and Society, 10:753-775.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceGreenfeld, Liah, 1995, “The Worth of Nations: Some Economic Implications of Nationalism”, Critical Review, 9(4):555-584.,zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceHall, Peter A. And Rosemary C. R. Taylor, 1996, “Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms”, Political Studies, 44(5):936-957.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceMann, Michael, 1995, “A Political Theory of Nationalism and Its Excess”, in Suknmar Perieal ed., Nations of Nationalism, Budapest: Central European University Press, pp.44-65.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceMarcussen, Martin, and Klaus Roscher, 2001, “Europe and the Other and Europe as the Other”, International Affairs, 77 (4):1004-1005.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceMüller, Jan, 1997, “Carl Schmitt – An Occasional Nationalist?”, History of European Ideas, 23(1):19-34.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceOffer, Claus, 1998, “Homogeneity and Constitutional Democracy: Coping with Identity Conflicts through Group Rights”, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(2):113-141.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceO’Leary, Brenda, 1997, “On the Nature of Nationalism: An Appraisal of Ernest Gellner’s Writings on Nationalism”, British Journal of Political Science, 27:191-202.zh_TW
dc.relation.referenceYark, Bernard, 2001, “Popular Sovereignty and Nationalism”, Political Theory, 29(4):517-536.zh_TW
item.openairetypethesis-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.languageiso639-1en_US-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
index.html115 BHTML2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.