英文摘要 |
Adorno, a scholar of the Frankfurt School of Germany, has written a paper arguing that ''culture'' and ''administration'' are inherently different and contradictory that depicts an entangled relationship. While culture is a normative object as its concept demonstrates openness, polysemy, and intricacy, it does not encompass a unified concept of norms. The purpose of this article is to explore how the Constitution regulates activities of a nation in the cultural field. On the one hand, this article discusses the cultural task of a nation which involves the power of a nation and the division of power between the central and local authorities in the cultural field. On the other hand, this article examines the interaction between a nation and its people in the cultural field that mainly involves how a nation influences the formation of culture through laws as well as the relevance to people's basic rights of culture. This article first explores the normative meaning of the cultural concept from the Constitution. Secondly, it discusses the constitutional obligations for the preservation and maintenance of culture and review relevant and specific legal system. The multiculturalism established by the Constitution is a valued order; however the content of a nation's obligation to preserve and maintain culture is not the same. From the exercising entities to specific measures, numerous possibilities are presented through public-private partnerships plus specific measures ranging from indirect grants to direct protection. A nation is a main body undertaking the cultural responsibility which also includes the central and local authorities. Moreover, through ''Cultural Heritage Preservation Act'', this article reflects on the current division of cultural authority between the central and local governments. It sheds light on how local groups act as part of national administration and as main bodies of local culture formation may claim the autonomy of regional culture from the central government. |