Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
logo_m-Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy

    Jump To中央區塊/Main Content :::
  • About JSSP
    • About JSSP
    • Indexed in
    • Subscription Information
    • Contact Us
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
    • Guidelines for Submitted Manuscripts
    • Publication Ethics Statement
    • Statement Regarding Artificial Intelligence (AI)
    • Review Process
    • Online Submission
  • Volumes and Issues
    • Forthcoming Papers
  • Annual Statistics
    • Submission Trends by Academic Discipline in 2014-2024
    • First Round Processing Time of Submissions in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Viewed Papers in 2024
    • Top 10 Most Downloaded Papers in 2024
  • RCHSS
中文
RCHSS
search
Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy
  • Home
  • Volumes and Issues
  • 《Journal of Social Sciences and Philosophy》 Volume 34, Number 04
  • Facebook
  • line
  • email
  • Twitter
  • Print
2022 / December Volume 34 No.4
Deliberation in Social Movement: A Comparison of the D-Street in the Sunflower Movement and the General Assembly in the Wild Strawberry Movement

Number of Clicks:4874; Number of Abstract Downloads:68; Number of Full Text Downloads:329;

發刊日期/Published Date
2022 / December
中英文篇名/Title
街頭審議行不行:比較太陽花的公民審服貿與野草莓的公民大會
Deliberation in Social Movement: A Comparison of the D-Street in the Sunflower Movement and the General Assembly in the Wild Strawberry Movement
論文屬性/Type
研究論文 Research Article
作者/Author
林祐聖
Yu-sheng Lin
頁碼/Pagination
665-702
摘要/Abstract

審議民主與社會運動對於解決爭議的想像大異其趣,前者認為解決爭議的最好方式是透過討論,達成共識與符合共善的結論,後者則主張以集體行動的形式,去對抗造成不正義的敵人,以爭取自身的利益。本文比較太陽花運動中的公民審服貿與野草莓運動的公民大會,從團體風格的角度說明理論上不相容的邏輯如何在實作中並存。透過兩者的比較,本文認為若能對於矛盾邏輯的兩方,都形成負面參考點,較可能產生包容不同邏輯的團體風格,本文也從團體風格討論社會運動策略的道德性與集體認同的多元意涵。

This article compares the D-Street in the Sunflower movement and the General Assembly in the Wild Strawberry Movement to explore the combination of two incompatible imaginations on problem-solving: deliberative democracy and social movement. To make these two incompatible ideas work together, this article argues that building an appropriate group style is the key. This article indicates that actors have to treat both typical deliberative democracy and social movement as negative references to build a collective identity that can integrate these two contradictory logics. The shared assumptions derived from the collective identity make the coexistence of these two logics possible. In the end, this article reminds use of the importance of bringing the group into analysis and rethinking the formation of collective identity and the moral dimension of strategic repertoires in social movements.

關鍵字/Keyword
團體風格, 街頭審議, 公民審服貿, 太陽花運動, 野草莓運動,
group style, D-Street, deliberative democracy, Sunflower Movement, Wild Strawberry Movement, social movements
學科分類/Subject
社會學
Sociology
主題分類/Theme

DOI
10.53106/1018189X2022123404001
檔案下載/Download
Abstract Full Text
相關文章
  • The Coming of Networked Social Movements? Social Ties and Social Media in the Sunflower Movement
  • China Factor or Civic Disobedience? Explaining Support for the Sunflower Movement with Panel Data
  • Jürgen Habermas on the German Student Movement
  • Does Deliberation Foster Civic Activism? Public Deliberation, Social Capital and Political Engagement
  • Why E-Portfolio Is Controversial: How Deliberation May Avoid a Fantasy Document

  • About JSSP
  • Editorial Board
  • Notes to Contributors
  • Volumes and Issues
  • Annual Statistics

Research Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, Academia Sinica, No. 128, Sec. 2, Academia Rd, Taipei 115, Taiwan

Tel: 886-2-27898156 Fax: 02-27898157 Email: issppub@sinica.edu.tw

© Copyright 2025. RCHSS Sinica All Rights Reserved.Privacy Policy & Security PolicyVersion:V1.1.3