政權轉移之治理性：戰後國民黨政權對日治時代保甲制度的承襲與轉化

Governmentality and the Change of Regime: The Pao-chia System's Transformation after 1945

本文探討1945年政權轉移之後的治理性。討論的對象鎖定在日治時代保甲制度到戰後村里制度的演變過程。長久以來，這是一個被台灣的歷史學、社會學、政治學等相關研究所忽略的領域。本文主要的問題意識有兩個：首先，殖民時期的保甲制度在政權轉移之後跑到哪裡去了？第二、國民黨明明是一個外來政權，為什麼在今日的台灣越到基層其實力越雄厚與鞏固？本文除了導論與文獻回顧之外主要分成幾部分：第一、從治理性的觀點來詳細介紹日治時期的保甲制度。第二、探討政權轉移之後（保正）村里長這一批人的延續性，藉著這部分的討論，試圖論證國民黨政權來台之後並沒有充分意識到村里在統治上的高度戰略位置，連帶地也就缺乏有效的機制來控制這一批人。第三、詳細分析政權轉移之後國民黨政權是如何思考與想像村里制度。本文發現，一直到1953年之前，國民黨政權仍然在抱怨他們在村里這個層級的空虛。藉著一些間接的過程，國民黨政權在政權轉移的數年之後，「終於」重新認識到村里長這一批人對統治台灣的重要性與有效性。漸漸地，在該政權的運作之下，村里制度從日治時代的保甲社會控制機制轉變成今日人們習以為常的選舉動員機制。

This paper investigates the governmentality in the change of regime. It focuses on the continuity and transformation of the Pao-chia system under the KMT regime, which came to Taiwan claiming its power and sovereignty after the end of Japanese colonization in 1945. It is an area that historians, sociologists, and political scientists in Taiwan have neglected. This paper is mainly driven by two puzzles. First, what is the KMT's attitude towards Pao-chia system, which without doubt is one of the most efficient governmental technologies in colonial history? Second, how can it be possible that the KMT as an emigree regime now enjoys such a solid power base in each and every locality in Taiwan? The argument in this paper is mainly divided into three parts. First, I introduce the Pao-chia system from the perspective of governmentality. Second, I deal with the continuity and discontinuity of the 'village/li' leaders between 1945 and 1951. Third, I discuss the effect of the KMT's political rationality on the village/li. This paper concludes that the KMT did not discover the strategic importance and governmental efficiency of the village/li system until 1953. After 1953, the KMT regime gradually transformed village/li from a system of social control, as in the Japanese colonial period, to a system of election mobilization.