新自由主義下的原住民社會與文化

Aboriginal Society and Culture under Neoliberalism in Taiwan

隨著新自由主義在台灣的發展，原住民社會與文化在這世紀以來，有著根本的改變。以東埔社布農人為例，隨著921 災後重建，交通、網際網路及溝通系統等的大幅改善，提供新自由主義有效發展的條件，不僅使得當地社會生活的個個層面得以超越原聚落的範圍，各層面的新範圍間也沒有一致性，使得聚落不再是社會生活的主要單位而不斷地被弱化。更因新資本的不斷投入而產生整個大台中地區的地方社會不斷地再結構。這使得地方社會呈現與以往不同的面貌：依資本及知識密集而來的新產業出現導致新階級的浮現與貧富懸殊的極端化；地方派系幾乎成為外力在地方上的能動性及代言人，相互傾軋的結果，造成當地年輕人的政治冷漠；原為地方社會集體表徵與再現的地方教會沒落，挑戰既有宗教觀念的個人化、心理化、多樣化宗教活動崛起；現代家庭化、個人化、心理化、多樣化的家，成了當地布農人在當代備受挫折與失敗後的最後依賴等新發展趨勢。這也使得「什麼是地方社會？」「誰的的聲音？誰的利益？」「是族群還是階級的問題？」「是宗教的世俗化？還是個人化、心理化、多樣化宗教在挑戰過去既有的宗教觀念？」等等新的課題不斷浮現。若不能意識到新時代已導致原住民社會文化的根本改變，將阻礙我們去面對及解決新問題的可能性。

With the development of neoliberalism in Taiwan, aboriginal society and culture has undergone fundamental changes in the first decade of this century. After the reconstruction project for 921 earthquake disaster, communication systems, such as the Internet, and mass transportation in Central Taiwan were greatly improved, offering neoliberalism better conditions under which to operate. As a result, the Bunun of Taketonpu have found that every aspect of their social life has been extended beyond the boundaries of their original settlement and that these new borderlines are not mutually consistent. In this sense, the original settlement is no longer the unit or center of their social life. Moreover, with continued investment of new capital into Central Taiwan, local society is also incessantly reconstructing itself. This has caused the Bunun in Taketonpu to take on new features in this century: New ways of production with intensive capital and knowledge replacing the former one has induced the emergence of new classes and maximized income differentiation between the rich and the poor. Local partitions have become the agents or proponents of external political forces, and conflicts and boycotts among them have created political apathy among the younger generation. The declining local church, originally the collective representation of local society, is gradually being replaced by various new personal, psychologizing, religious activities which have come to challenge former concepts of religion. In addition, the family has tended to take the form of the “modern family” or another orientation: personalizing, psychologizing, and displaying various types. The family has become the final line of defence for the Bunun when they are frustrated or find themselves failing to adapt to this new era. This leads us to ask some significant questions for new research subjects: What is local society? Whose voices and whose interests are being expressed? Are issues of class or ethnicity involved? Are personalizing, psychologizing types of new religious activities an issue of secularization or a challenge to our past concepts of religion? Without an awareness of the coming of new era and the fundamental changes to aboriginal society and culture in Taiwan, it is impossible to deal with new social problems.