在資本主義危機的國際背景下，本文採用國家理論的觀點，比較兩種理論對待國際外力涉入因素的態度及其對當前兩岸關係「第三條路」的策略啟示意義。冷戰以後，國際新秩序已有從階級對立逐漸轉向文化交流的趨勢，可是中共的諸多政策主張卻仍然有以全球戰略為範圍的階級對立態勢：在國際問題上，以「暫時退卻的階級攻勢」看待；兩岸關係上的「一國兩制」政策，也仍然具有階級意識基礎的統一戰線意涵；內政上的改革開放政策，雖以「中國國情論」為標誌，稀釋了毛澤東時代「以階級鬥爭為綱」的激烈手段，其實質卻仍然並沒有離開馬克思國家理論的階級鬥爭觀點。相反的，功能論者的國家發展理論卻有較為寬廣的「第三條路」選擇空間。功能觀點的國家理論者主張：兩岸關係的衝突本質是在於生活方式與發展制度主張，而非階級對立，更不是民族衝突之爭。海峽東岸追求「國家自主性」的外交空間，乃是制度上「國家發展」之自然結果，算非階級的合流，更不是民族的聯盟。在「自主性」的國家理論下，援引外交力量，一如引用外資與外國技術一樣，利用之而不受其控制。可是西岸將東岸發展國際空間的主張，解釋為「民族的背叛」，並因此利用民族主義所發動「文攻武嚇」，期能藉以「防獨促統」。實則此舉不僅不能達到民族的統一，反而引發了國際對於「中國威脅論」的疑慮，增強了國際以「文明衝突論」圍堵華人文化的勢力，也造成了海峽兩岸社會民族感情距離的加大。此一馬克思主義國家理論「反資本主義性格」的「第二條路」延續，對於標舉以中國國情為第三修路的中共而言，或有重新檢視國際及兩岸對立情勢的反思空間。
This article examines theoretical perspectives on the issue of how to deal with foreign interference in the process of national development. The purpose is to magnify the contradictions between Marxist state theory adopted by China and the state autonomy theory adopted by Taiwan. This article argues that although China's economic reform has been successful in trying to find a "third way" in national development since 1987, the theoretical core of its national goal is still based on "class conflict," hence falling under the category of the socialist or second way. China's State socialist perspective has implications for international, domestic, and cross-strait issues. In contrast to Marxist state theory, Taiwan's national development has followed the route as layed out in the theory of state autonomy. Also trying to avoid drawbacks of the pure capitalist first way and the socialist second way, Taiwan is skillfully reaching its goal of political, economic, and social development by careful absorbing foreign advantages without antagonism. The article argues that improvement in the cross-strait relationship will depend on the consensus over the third way of and perspectives of State function.
