 |
English
|
正體中文
|
简体中文
|
全文筆數/總筆數 : 18278/19583 (93%)
造訪人次 : 1035876
線上人數 : 480
|
|
|
資料載入中.....
|
請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件:
http://nhuir.nhu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/22315
|
| 題名: | 民主化與經濟發展的政經互動關係：印度尼西亞個案研究 |
| 其他題名: | The Political and Economic Interaction Between Democratization and Economic Development: A Case Study of Indonesia（1945~1998） |
| 作者: | 曾子境
Tzen, Zi-jing |
| 貢獻者: | 亞太研究所
宋鎮照
Jen-jaw Song |
| 關鍵詞: | 民主化;威權體制;經濟發展
Authoritarian regime;Economic Development;Democratization |
| 日期: | 2006 |
| 上傳時間: | 2015-08-04 10:31:33 (UTC+8) |
| 摘要: | 民主化浪潮如同「滾雪球效應」般的襲捲全球，但是在1960~1970年代，東南亞許多因民主化而導致國內嚴重秩序失衡與混亂的發展中國家，急速倒向軍人執政的威權政權，原因是在於東南亞國家的政治與經濟基礎非常薄弱，需要有強勢的政權來穩定政治與經濟的發展，因此造就如印尼蘇哈托(Suharto)、馬來西亞馬哈迪(Mahathir Mohamand)、新加坡李光耀等以威權統治來管理國家的領導人，並走出不同於西方民主化國家的「亞洲式民主」，他們帶領國家走向政治上的權威化與經濟上的自由化，成功形成一種有別於西方民主化的發展模式。 但威權體制的國家發展模式是否一定能使印尼政治與經濟穩定發展，答案是否定的，因為經濟發展與威權主義最終是對立的，短暫的威權主義有助於發展中國家穩定成長，但權威化仍僅是民主化進程的過渡期，唯有民主化與經濟穩定齊步並進才是民主轉型最主要的動力。全球「第三次的民主浪潮」主要就是發生在經濟中高度增長的國家，由此可以看出，經濟穩定也許不是絕對因素，但卻是必要因素。 而印尼從蘇卡諾時期的「指導式民主」被蘇哈托時期的「威權體制」所取代，主要也是起因於缺乏穩定的經濟為基礎就實施民主化而產生的反效果。而蘇哈托「新秩序時期」的整體政治、經濟與社會各方面改變非常迅速，但是相對經濟快速的成長，在政治領域的發展卻非常緩慢。使得蘇哈托政府在獲得經濟成長帶來的成果時，也被迫做出更大的政治及社會開放來滿足民眾對政治民主化的要求。由此可見，經濟因素在印度尼西亞政治發展上扮演極為重要的角色，因此本篇論文試圖分析蘇卡諾、蘇哈托時期的政經體制與改革政策，以及經濟發展所帶動的中產階級崛起與社會結構轉變是否會驅動國內政治變遷，來說明印度尼西亞民主化的發展。
Although the wave of democratization is sweeping across the world with a snowball effect, some nations are suffering from it. In 1960~1970, many developing countries in Southeast Asia lost their social order due to the adoption of democracy, which caused the people of those countries favor the authoritarian ruling and believe that they needed someone with stronger political power to govern the country to stabilize the political and economy downturn when in fact the foundation of politics and economy had been slow to start with. Therefore, Suharto from Indonesia, Mahathir Mohamand from Malaysia, and Lee from Singapore all ruled the countries with that expectations and have created the ＂Asian ways of Democracy ＂, which has successfully led the countries to the future in different ways from those Western countries with experience of democracy for centuries. Does authoritarian regime help Indonesia sustain the growth of economy and stability of political situation? The answer is negative. Economic development and authoritarian is always antithetic. Authoritarian can only help the economy growth of a developing country in a short term. For the long haul development, only democratization can help economic growth substantially. That is to say an economic growth has to co-exist with democratization. Since ＂world's third wave of democratization＂ has happened only in high economic growth countries, it means stable economy might not be the only factor, but a must factor. The bad result of democratization without the stable economic growth makes the ＂Guided democratization＂ in Sukarno period to be replaced by ＂Authoritarian system＂ in Suharto period. In the ＂New order period＂, Suharto brought great economic growth to the country, but it created the interests of democracy from people and forced Suharto to yield some political power to satisfy people. Without a doubt, economy factor plays a big role in Indonesia political structure. The argument of this thesis is to analyze the political and economical system and those of reform policies in Sukarno and Suharto periods; it examines the relations of the arising middle class caused by economic development, change of the social structure due to the development, and the reform of politics. The result will explain the democracy process in Indonesia. |
| 顯示於類別: | [國際事務與企業學系(亞太研究碩士班,公共政策研究碩士班,歐洲研究碩士班)] 博碩士論文-亞太研究碩士班
|
文件中的檔案:
| 檔案 |
描述 |
大小 | 格式 | 瀏覽次數 |
|---|
| 094NHU05664005-001.pdf | | 797Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | 檢視/開啟 | | index.html | | 0Kb | HTML | 258 | 檢視/開啟 |
|
在NHUIR中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.
|
