泰國學生運動發展之研究(1973-1992)

Abstract

中文摘要\n 本文主要的研究目的是要檢視泰國學生運動在1973∼1992年間泰國政治發展過程中所扮演的角色。相較於其它多數相關研究，本文不僅僅只是追溯時間序列上所呈現的事件，更要探究其後所代表的意涵與價值。同時，透過瞭解學生運動的興起、發展與轉型過程，來評估其對泰國民主化及市民社會力量增強所帶來的貢獻。\n 1973∼1992年的二十年間，泰國一共經歷了三次重要的民主轉型階段，同時也發生了三次大規模全國性群眾運動，分別是1973年的10月學運、1976年的第二次學運以及1992年的黑色5月事件。1973年的事件是起因於他儂(Thanom Kittikachon)政權施行威權統治，進而引發大規模政治抗議的結果，而此次由學生所領導的事件，可說是泰國大規模社會運動的濫觴；1976年的二次學運是針對軍方態度的跋扈及對群眾請求漠視的反動；1992年的5月運動則是要要求執政當局制定具有民主本質的憲法，同時也欲推翻未經民選過程卻出任首相的蘇欽達(Suchinda Kraprayoon)。\n 本文立基於這三個轉型階段與三個歷史轉折點，來探討以下議題：在什麼樣的政治機會下，導致了學運的興起、發展與轉型？其後的歷史背景與相關意涵為何？是什麼原因讓學生變成行動主義者，並且號召其它群眾參與政治？文化及思想意識如何影響學運的發展與轉型？學生運動如何影響泰國的政治發展？\n 本研究主要是利用政治發展理論（political development theory）來分析泰國學生運動與政治發展間的關聯性，進而探究其在泰國政治轉型中所扮演的角色為何。同時並觀察外在政治環境的變化，特別是軍方政權的態度與行為模式、學生動員群眾的方式，尤其是與其它組織的結盟策略以及運動帶給一般群眾的認知與文化思想信念等變數，來分析學生運動成功或失敗的原因。\n 透過運用政治發展理論對上述三個歷史轉型階段的分析，本文發現（1）、泰國學生運動扮演了社會力量代言人(agent)的角色，透過學生運動的努力，喚醒了弱勢階層長久以來遭受壓抑的政治意識，並影響中產階級對民主的觀念，最後造成了軍人脫離政治及民主化的落實。(2)、由學生運動所引發的「由下而上」(bottom-up)改革力量以及群眾運動，將是觀察泰國政治發展的重要指標，這種來自民間的政治參與，會是未來影響政府決策及督促政治發展的最重要力量。(3)、泰國學生運動的發展脈絡印證了政治發展理論中由變遷—進步的結果。透過激烈的革命手段來達成演化的目的，最終促成了國家政治體系的進步。\n 最後，本研究認為，在學生運動帶動下的市民社會抗爭獲得成功之後，其信心與力量都更為鞏固，同時人民已認知到集體力量的重要性，日後統治階層若想再藉由武力的方式來鎮壓民眾的聲音，恐將難以成功，而泰國的政治應該會更加朝向民主鞏固的路途邁進。

Abstract\n This thesis examines the role of the Thai student movements in the political development process that took place in Thailand between 1973 and 1992. Most studies of the student movements in Thailand take the presence of a movement as something that can be traced simply through sequential events. Things occur and results materialize. This research has a different purpose: first, to explore not only what happened, but also how it happened. Second, to examine its emergence, development and transformation. Finally, to evaluate the contribution it has made to the expansion of civil society and democratization.\n Here this research attempts to answer such questions as: what internal conditions facilitated the emergence and development of the movements and how? What was the historical context in which the movement emerged and how was the emergence related to this context? How and why were students able to become activists, and then recruit others so as to sustain a voluntary social formation? And how did the elements of culture and ideology affect the development and transformation? The main subjects of this research are three pro-democracy demonstrations: the student movement of 1973, the bloody October of 1976, and the May uprising of 1992.\n The analysis of the Thai student movements is guided by political development theory to better understand the relationship between student movement and political development. Through this study, three conclusions have been drawn: (1) Thai student movement played the role as the agent of social force. Through its efforts, the political awareness of the civil society has thus been waken up, leading to the break down of the military. (2) Student movement brought about the “the bottom-up” reform forceand created the political space for mass participation. This kind of “bottom-up” reform force will be playing the leading role affecting government’s attitude and policies. (3) The Thai student movement verifies the hypothesis of the political development theory. Through drastic mass movements, it leads to a real progress of the political system.\n A comparison of the three cases shows that the development and expansion of civil society led by student movements, and the success of mass struggle make people understand the importance of collective action. It would be a quite difficult thing for the ruling class using violent means to stifle people’s demands in the future, and Thailand will be getting closer to the goal of the consolidation of democracy.