現代日本保守主義歷來深受學術界的關注，尤其1990年代以後，日本政治社會往往被視為開始右傾化，因而出現許多從批判性角度分析日本保守主義的著作。然而，過去較少有從政治思想的角度切入之研究，故本文試圖彌補此空缺。保守主義是法國大革命以來構成現代政治思想的重要潮流，故為了理解現代日本的保守主義，政治思想的視角是不可或缺的。鑒於此，本文提出自由保守與國粹保守的分析框架，並從此角度對現代日本保守主義進行分析。自由保守是依據西方保守主義的思維，重視從「保守的」角度進行思..

The literature and academia have paid widespread attention to modern Japanese conservatism. Japan’s political society tends to be considered as leaning towards the right especially after the 1990s, resulting in many studies focusing on modern Japanese conservatism and criticizing its phenomenon. Past studies, however, did not often analyze the issue from the viewpoint of political thought, and therefore, this essay aims to fill such a gap. Conservatism has taken on an important role around the world, constitu..

本文為尋求解釋泰國在柏威夏寺爭議中的動機及柬埔寨的回應，將領土衝突與國族認同及國內政治等面向作出連結，揭示在以絕對控制的邊界觀為基礎的現代國族國家體系中，領土的歷史變遷在國族主義建構過程所扮演的角色，及其為政治人物留下可操作的空間。為達政治目的，政治菁英可選擇製造或操縱國族認同;同時，利用歷史的形塑或詮釋作為策略武器，引導國內觀眾朝向其所欲的結果，來為政權產生並提高政治正當性。不過，從實存的歷史發展過程來看，這種舉動經常會伴隨難以預料的後果。泰、柬柏威夏寺的..

This article explores the linkage among territory, nationalism and domestic politics through a case study of the Preah Vihear Temple dispute between Thailand and Cambodia. In the process of transformation from traditional kingdoms to modern nation-states, territorial changes are very important for nationalism and nation-building. They can provide political elites with chances to manipulate and secure self interest. To fan the flames of nationalism, political leaders or elites often re-construct and re-write national history a..

中日第二次戰爭(即對日抗戰，1937~1945 年)時期，交戰各方為爭奪南洋華僑群眾支持，遂發展政治論述(discourse)。由於「國族」(nation)並非東亞固有觀念，因此華僑國族認同成為當時重要課題。本研究將以戰時各方之調查報告、政策文獻、外交檔案為核心，研究「國共汪日」四方之華僑政治論述基礎、主要政策與華僑群體的應對過程。研究發現:華僑社群原接受中國傳統思想，以各種親屬與文化關係維繫對中國認同，故國民政府在當時以各種團體為中介，實行「抗日救國」的國..

During the Second Sino-Japanese War, a.k.a. War of Resistance (1937~1945), both China and Japan attempted to gain support from overseas Chinese using their different political discourses. The concept of “nation” was not originated in East Asia but highly propagandized during this war period. This article analyzed and compared various discourses on overseas Chinese mobilization submitted by four actors─Chiang(Choung- ching government ), Wang ( Nanking government ), Mao ( Yen-an government), and Empire Japan ─ using..