| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 政治學研究所 === 101 === This thesis aims at answering the main question “how does hegemony monopolize in Taiwan?” The theoretical framework used to answer the question is built upon Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, Foucault’s theory of governmentality, and different perspectives—Edensor versus Adorno and Horkheimer—on how popular culture provides ways to either strengthen or counter hegemony. Because the theory is western, the thesis also provides an analysis of Taiwan’s complicated multisided and multidimensional postcolonial position, and explains the effects this has on the theory. Especially referred to are Taiwan’s three main colonizers and/or (past) rulers Japan, China, and America.
The thesis points out that in Taiwan even though on the surface there are multiple identities/cultures—with the main ones being the Kuomintang’s one-China policy, and the Democratic Progressive Party’s independent Taiwan proposition--constantly striving for hegemonic domination, but that none of these perspectives has ever been able to gain hegemonic control. The thesis argues, however, from a Gramcian perspective, that Taiwan’s hegemonic culture is built upon capitalist thought, brought to Taiwan through America’s intellectual colonization that started during the Cold War.
China’s opening up policy initiated in 1978 created a global trend of focusing on the Chinese market to increase wealth, in fact making China an access to desire. In its turn, the Chinese government internalized capitalist thought, and used capitalist logic to give other countries the choice to either accept the Chinese government as the true representative of China (and abolishing the Kuomintang), or denying them access to the Chinese market; a choice which proved to be an easy one for the capitalist world. For Taiwan, the prevalence of capitalist hegemonic culture, combined with international ignorance, instilled in people’s mind the idea that making money is more important than national identity, even more strengthening the focus on China as an access to desire.
Finally, the thesis argues that the internalization of capitalist thought in both China and Taiwan has provided a way to surpass national identity, and created the opportunity for the emergence of a post-national-identity.
|
|---|
