我覺得台灣有個怪現象，就是某些詞彙概念的使用是有階級的，例如國民黨全名「中國國民黨」，該黨可以大張旗鼓地打著中國民族主義的主張。但反過來，如果台灣人主張台灣民族主義就立刻被打成「種族主義」

本文對於民族同一體的起源就是從個體的自治到民主政府的建立,並且有條件擴張的概念,在現今真的是很精闢的見解,也指出現今對於民族主義不全面了解者的繆誤。如果在民主政治發展進程中,要能保持民主的本質持續發展,樓主這邊所提到的概念因該用引號註記起來.至於俄羅斯,台灣人的認知大概就是在戰鬥民族,與金髮巨乳羅莉間的漫談吧,至於甚麼馬列主義,蘇維埃政權,這種屬於國際權力角逐下的訊息,可能只有5%中著5%才知道或者能清楚解釋.

公民民族主義（Civic nationalism，又稱civil nationalism）為國家由公民主動參與，產生「全民意志」而取得法統（political legitimacy）的民族主義型式。此論一般認為源於盧梭，特別是自其1762年的著作「社會公約」（The Social Contract）而得名的社會公約論（social contract theories）。公民民族主義來自理性主義與自由主義的傳統，在民族主義上與種族民族主義（ethnic nationalism）相矛盾，因其認為公民國家（民族）之成員身份應從自決而來。公民國家（民族）理想化了美法等國之代議政治（representative democracy）在發展中所具有的影響力。

Civic nationalism is a kind of nationalism identified by political philosophers who believe in a non-xenophobic[citation needed] form of nationalism compatible with values of freedom, tolerance, equality, and individual rights.[1] Ernest Renan[2] and John Stuart Mill[3] are often thought to be early Civic nationalists. Civic nationalists often defend the value of national identity by saying that individuals need a national identity in order to lead meaningful, autonomous lives[4] and that democratic polities need national identity in order to function properly.[5]

Civic nationalism is the form of nationalism where the state derives political legitimacy from the active participation of its citizenry (see popular sovereignty), to the degree that it represents the "general will". It is often seen as originating with Jean-Jacques Rousseau and especially the social contract theories which take their name from his 1762 book The Social Contract.

Civic nationalism lies within the traditions of rationalism and liberalism, but as a form of nationalism it is contrasted with ethnic nationalism. Membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary, as in Ernest Renan's classical definition in "Qu'est-ce qu'une nation?" of the nation as a "daily referendum" characterized by the "will to live together".[6] Civic-national ideals influenced the development of representative democracy in countries such as the United States and France (see the United States Declaration of Independence of 1776, and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789).

其實會寫這篇算是試圖釐清我自己內心的一個疑問；那就是在要求台灣獨立出支那與國民黨的殖民時，純粹地借由提倡普世價值的人權是否真得是一種有效的政治主張？

在國民黨面前談人權當然總是不缺正當性，但是這種正當性最終能有效支撐一個要求台灣獨立的政治主張嗎？是在這個疑問下，我才開始試著回到民族主義的哲學引擊上進行討論的。