以情感的角度剖析在敵人陰影底下的民主

Abstract

本文旨在探討在面對敵人威脅的時刻民主政治可能的發展傾向，討論的策略則在於以情感操作的因素進行。當人們意識到敵人的威脅時，由於集體不安全感的升高，往往是政治參與和政治動員最高的時刻。依據施密特的分析，區分敵友不僅是政治領域的特徵，也是不可避免的現象。而關於誰是敵人，則必須依照現實的對抗態勢來決定。由於民族國家體系是當前最具普遍性與支配性的國際政治架構，因此敵人的為威脅則往往來自異族與他者。而只要敵人的意象能夠被清晰的只認出來時，整個政治議題的焦點就集中到應和如何與之對抗上，從而有可能產生對人權與公民權不當侵犯。但由於民主是在建立在多數統治的原則之上，支配的合法性必須要多數民意為後盾，因此，如何面對敵人在民主中不僅是統治者的責任，也是全民必須面對的抉擇。在這種態勢中，誰能夠控制輿論並由此操控社會的集體心態與情感，就成為政治鬥爭的勝負關鍵。 儘管本文的切入角度是情感因素，但本文並不打算以特定的情感或情緒作為討論的對象。這是因為情感因素是多重顯現的，在任何一個政治議題中，人們都可以發現有多種的情緒涉入其中。為了能清楚說明當前民主政治中圍繞著情感性因素構成的權力角力場，特別是多數統治與人權議題之間的矛盾，亦即同時在人民主權中既實踐公民權但又可能侵犯人權的情況，我特別選擇三個概念進行闡釋，這三者分別是：（1）愛國主義（patriotism）；（2）博愛／同胞愛（fraternity）；（3）群眾煽動家（demagogue）。這三個概念與現象各自作為一個分析側面，呈現了在面對敵人威脅時的民主的不同面貌，其各自顯示多數統治原則對人權與公民權的侵犯如何有可能在情感操作的情況中達成。民主時代的權力與支配關係並不是單純的二元對立模式，在同一性的原則中，在民族化的人我區隔標準下，在政治操作的支持與反叛中，自以為站在正義的一方，因為這樣而流露出的各種情感，其實反而顯示既定支配模式的反覆延續。透過上述的分析與視角，本文嘗試揭露了民主在敵人陰影底下的可能遭遇的兩難與困境，在其中個人的情感並不像平常人們所想像的那麼私密與自主，儘管情感的表達也被看成是權利行使的一部分，而且能夠代表自己的想法、意志、意願與願望，但在政治有需要它的時候，通常發生的則是自發性的被徵召與被動員。這說明了在民主體制之中，真正的敵人往往不是別人，就是我們自己。

Abstract

This paper aims to explore the moment in the face of enemy threats possible development of democratic political tendencies, discussed the strategy lies in the emotional factors were operating. When people realize that the enemy threat, due to the rise of collective insecurity, often times the highest political participation and political mobilization. According to Carl Schmidt's analysis, the distinction between friend and enemy is not only the characteristics of political field, but also an inevitable phenomenon. And about who is the enemy, people must confront the reality of the situation in accordance to decide. Due to the nation-state system is currently the most universal and dominant international political architecture, so the enemy threat is often from alien and the others. When the image of the enemy can be recognized clearly, the entire political agenda would be focus on how to fight with them. In this moment, it will make it possible to generate improper violations of human rights and citizenship. But democracy is founded on the principle of majority rule, govern legitimacy must be backed by the majority of public opinion, therefore, how to deal with the enemy is not only in a democratic rulers must face, but also all the people must face the choice. In such a situation, and who is able to control public opinion and thus manipulate the collective mentality and emotions of society, has become the key to the outcome of the political struggle. Despite the cut angle of this article is the emotional factor, but this article is not intended to be a particular emotion or mood as the object of discussion. This is because the emotional factors are multiple appearing in any one political agenda, people can find a variety of emotions involved in it. In order to clearly democratic politics around the current field of power struggles constitute emotional factors, especially the contradiction between majority rule and human rights issues, that is the people's sovereignty while the practice of citizenship in both possible cases of human rights violations, I select three concepts to explain, these three are: (1) patriotism; (2) fraternity; (3) demagogue. These three concepts and phenomena as an analysis of each side presents a different face of democracy in the face of the enemy threat, the principle of majority rule in their respective displays of human rights and civil rights violations in the case of how it is possible to reach the emotional operation. Relations of power and domination era of democracy is not a simple dualistic model, the identity of the principles in the nationalization of the people I segment standard, with the support of the rebel political operation, since that stand in the side of justice because it reveals the variety of emotions and, in fact, the contrary is displayed repeatedly established dominant mode of continuity. Through the above analysis and perspective, this paper attempts to expose the dilemma and difficulties that may be encountered in a democracy under the shadow of the enemy, in which personal feelings are not like ordinary people imagined it to privacy and autonomy, although the expression of emotion is also seen is part of the right to exercise, and to represent their ideas, will, wishes and desires, but in politics need it usually happens is the spontaneity of being recruited and mobilized. This shows that in a democracy real enemy is often not the others but our own.

Key words: democracy, emotion, enemy, patriotism, fraternity, demagogue, nationalism