臺灣作為一個新興民主國家， 20多年的民主化受到舉世的稱許，但也產生了如 Shelley Rigger所言的諸多重大難解問題。面對這些持續惡化卻又束手無策的難題，國人對民主還有信心嗎？還相信臺灣適合實施民主政治嗎？臺灣會不會像近世紀幾波民主化國家，出現威權統治回潮的現象？這是本論文所最為關心的主題，從而透過政黨不忠誠概念導引出本論文的研究議題。 在研究操作上，本論文透過專家學者焦點座談，篩選出這 20多年來國民兩黨所主導與論文主題有關的 33件重大事件。然 後選擇菁英作為詢問的對象，立意選樣 40位藍綠陣營各半的知名意見領袖，徵詢他們的看法。 研究結果顯示，情況並沒有那麼悲觀，這些意見領袖對臺灣的民主仍具有信心，僅有 41.9%評估次數認為有嚴重程度不一的忠誠問題， 58.1%認為沒有不忠誠問題或與忠誠無關。若進一步進行政黨比較，國民黨所主導的事件在正當性上負面評價略高於民進黨，其餘的合憲性、共利性及安全性差異則未達顯著水準。 如果分層次來看，在政治共同體層次及政府體制層次，民進 黨所主導的事件受到較大的批評；國民黨則在統治權威角色上， 受到較大的非議。在政策層次的對外政策上，國民黨在安全性上 受到較大的質疑，民進黨則在合憲性上較國民黨為低，在共利性 上國民兩黨都受到相當大的責難。在政策層次的大陸政策上，受 訪菁英對國民兩黨的作為都給予高度的肯定，不過民進黨比國民 黨受到更大的好評。

Taiwan’s transition to democracy 20 years ago was universally heralded. But as scholars like Shelley Rigger have pointed out, democratization brought with it a host of formidable problems. As some of these problems have worsened and appear intractable, it is worthwhile to ask if Taiwanese still believe in democracy. Do they still have faith that democratic politics are suitable for Taiwan? Could Taiwan experience backslide toward authoritarianism like some other third wave democracies? This paper tries to shed light on these questions by examining elite views of the level of disloyalty to democracy exemplified by Taiwan’s major political parties in the 20 plus years since democratization. This research first assembled focus groups of scholars and relevant experts to identify major actions directed by the two major political parties, the Kuomintang (KMT) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), in the post-democratization era. 33 party-led actions were selected for analysis. A sample of 40 well-known opinion leaders was then taken. Among the 40 elites comprising the sample, 20 identified with the KMT-led pan-blue political camp and 20 identified with the DPP-led pan-green camp. These opinion leaders answered survey questions designed to measure their opinions regarding the 33 party-led actions and whether they viewed these actions as evidence of disloyalty to democracy. The results of this research suggest there is reason for optimism regarding democratic consolidation in Taiwan. The elites surveyed demonstrated a continued faith in democracy. Only 41.9% of survey responses showed major variations in perceptions of whether party-led actions had demonstrated disloyalty to democracy while 58.1% indicated that disloyalty was not a problem or was not relevant. If we compare the two parties, KMT-led actions rated slightly higher overall for disloyalty than DPP-led actions. This difference resulted from KMT-led actions being viewed more negatively in terms of legitimacy. The results showed little difference in perceptions of the constitutionality, common interests and security of the two parties’ respective actions. If examined at the levels of political community and political system, DPP-led actions were viewed more negatively; KMT-led actions scored lower at the level of governing authority. At the foreign policy level, KMT-led actions rated lower in terms of security while both parties received low marks with respect to common interests. Respondents expressed positive opinions of both parties’ actions toward China but DPP-led China policies received higher approval overall.