台灣白色恐怖創傷記憶的體制化過程：歷史制度論觀點

Institutionalizing White-Terror Traumatic Memories in Taiwan: An Historical Institutionalism Perspective

近來的研究指出，涉中共地下黨組織者占戒嚴政治案件統計的絕對多數；但在民進黨執政時發軔的「國家人權博物館」，至今仍維持白色恐怖多屬「冤假錯案」的敘事主軸。為何承載社群想像的公立博物館，未成為政黨意識型態鬥爭之角力場域，在國民黨治下產生有利其詮釋戒嚴統治正當性的論述？本文認為，歷史制度論的視角有助解開此一謎題。本文探討台灣「白色恐怖創傷記憶體制化」的歷史過程，是針對國家人權博物館的前沿性探索，考察博物館的組織邏輯與敘事生產如何鑲嵌在當代台灣的政治生活中，反映了國家與社會互動關係發展。我追溯制度起源時期建立的「國家經營、事權分散、服務委外」組織體制，如何制約後續的政策選擇與發展軌跡，即使經歷行政院組織改造與政黨輪替亦然。在此營運模式下形成的政策網絡，使位居民間主流的歷史知識生產者，透過長期參與政府採購形塑「關係性契約」，他們持有的冤假錯案觀點，持續壟斷博物館的敘事主軸，同質化其他類型記憶的異質想像。

According to declassified archives and recent research, most of the political persecution during the decades of Martial Law accounts for cases related to clandestine organization of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), rather than the “ones involving unjust, false and wrong charges.” This has been challenging a common belief among critics of the KMT government to weaken the legitimacy of the authoritarian regime for a long time. Why had not the National Human Rights Museum (NHRM) under the KMTruling government become the field of struggle of ideology and national identity? In this study, the perspective of historical institutionalism, particularly the concept of path dependence, is used to explain the institutionalization of the white-terror traumatic memory in Taiwan to answer the above questions. This article not only provides a pilot study of NHRM, but also helps to fill the gap of previous traumatic memory studies, which have largely relied on narrative or text analysis. I suggest that the organizational logic and production of the narrative of the museum are embedded within modern political circumstances. Any attempt to explain the narrative variations of the NHRM must take into account the issue of institution and bureaucracy. While tracing back to how the DPP-ruling government created the Human Rights Park (the predecessor of the NHRM) under the wave of privatization, I show how the policy choice in the 2000s restricted the subsequent process of the NHRM's establishment. The policy network shaped within the institution enables the private sector to participate in the narrative construction of NHRM. As a result, the mainstream view of their assertion of “unjust cases” assimilates the various types of memory.