所謂臺獨就是主張以臺灣（包括臺、澎，或臺澎金馬）為範圍，建立一個主權獨立的國家。主權國家是來自近代西方的觀念，而臺灣在二戰以後才有比較清楚的、延續的、近代的獨立建國主張，乃有其時代背景。不過，運動者為增加說服力，所援引的「前近代」臺獨事例能否成立？乃至自由化、民主化以後，「中 華民國在臺灣」或「臺灣中華民國」是否為一種臺獨的實現？各方仍有不同的看法。 本文認為，二二八事件是二十世紀臺獨運動最重要的起源，而1949 年之後的戒嚴時代形格勢禁，臺獨主張可謂兵分兩路，一是流亡日本、美國的知識分子如廖文毅、史明、王育德、黃昭堂、盧主義、張燦鍙、蔡同榮等，在組織上、理論上有較為明顯的貢獻；另一方面是島內發生了此起彼落的臺獨政治案件，其中除了1964 年彭明敏師生的〈臺灣自救運動宣言〉較富有理論的意義，餘者因為環境不允許他們提出具體的臺獨主張，他們存在的意義比較是為那個時代受難，彰顯國民黨政府是「不自由中國」、是「外來政權」的性質。 1987 年的解除戒嚴、開放黨禁，以及李登輝時代的來臨，頗有人認為臺灣實際上已演化為一個主權獨立的國家。九○年代國民黨與民進黨相繼「轉型」以後，各種類型的「已經獨立說」、「尚未獨立說」可謂百花齊放、琳琅滿目，大體反映出臺灣經驗作為國際法和政治發展研究上所代表的特殊案例，以及兩岸關 係、臺美中三角關係的複雜現狀。不過，中華民族主義與臺灣民族主義的對壘，仍是當前藍綠政治的基調，只是為了選票雙方都必須往中間挪移，明瞭此一背景才能看清上述的「琳琅滿目」。本文根據政治學和國際法的研究，按著歷史發展的脈絡，一方面整理前賢的看法，一方面分析現在的爭議，並試圖予以釐清和評 價。

The so-called “Independent State of Taiwan” or “Independent Taiwan” for short refers to the establishment of Taiwan (including Taiwan and Penghu Islands or Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Machu Islands) as an independent sovereign state. The concept of sovereignty originated in modern Europe, it is thus natural that Taiwan began to have a relatively clear, persistent and modern advocacy for an independent state only after the Second World War. However, are the pre-modern instances of an Independent Taiwan cited by the activists well justified? Furthermore, can one regard the liberalization and democratization of “the Republic of China on Taiwan” as a realization of an Independent Taiwan? Opinions on these two issues vary widely. This article holds the view that the 228 Incident has always been the most important origin of the twentieth-century Taiwan Independence Movement. Under the strict and harsh conditions after the imposition of Martial Law in 1949, the Movement split into two different paths of development. One was shaped by intellectual exiles in Japan and America, such as Liao Bun-gei, Wang yu-de, Huang chao-tang, Jay Loo, Tsai Tung-zong, who made significant contributions to the organization and theory of the Movement; while the other geared toward staging continuous political events for that cause within Taiwan. With the exception of the “Proclamation of Self-Salvation” put forward by Peng Min-ming and his students, which bore theoretical significance, other advocates did not have the opportunity to promote concretely independence for Taiwan. The meaning of their existence lay more in shouldering the hardship of the time, manifesting that the KMT government represented an “unfree China” and a “foreign regime”. The uplifting of the Martial Law, the abolishment of restriction on party formation, and the era of Li Teng-hui all contributed to the evolvement of Taiwan as what many people considered an already independent sovereign state. After their respective transformation in the 1990s, both the KMT and the DDP put forward a plethora of ideas such as “the already Independent State theory”, “the not-yet Independent State theory”, “the American dominion theory” and “the Independent State of the R.O.C theory”. These many schools of thoughts reflected mainly the contemporary complicated and confusing situation across the Straits as well as the intricate relationship between Taiwan, America and China. Nevertheless, the basic political tone of the KMT and the DDP is Chinese nationalism vs. Taiwanese nationalism, though for the sake of winning votes, they have to take a more neutral rather than extreme stance. In the light of historical context and with reference to political science and international law, this article explores previous perspectives and analyzes the present controversy, attempting both to clarify and evaluate the origins and development of the Taiwan Independence Movement.