重新思考「運動軌跡」：台灣、南韓的勞工與環境運動

Rethinking Movement Trajectories: Labor and Environmental Movements in Taiwan and South Korea

過去三十年來，台灣與南韓的勞工運動有類似的發展路徑，都致力於擴充運動能量並實現勞動階級的集體利益；而兩國的環境運動也有極為類似的運動軌跡，但非常不同於勞工運動所經歷的路徑。為了解釋在不同的社會脈絡中，竟能如此一致地觀察到勞工與環境運動的軌跡差異，本文將運動軌跡視為「開展特有的運動實力」與「克服伴隨運動擴張而來的內外阻礙」的雙重過程，以「運動實力」這個概念為出發點，主張運動實力由「制衡力」與「理念力」構成，勞工與環境運動的不同運動軌跡，主要原於兩種運動企圖極大化的運動實力類型不同。勞工運動在經濟領域追求制衡的力量，而環境運動將火力集中在散播新環境價值與意識形態。但是這個「實力極大化」的策略，一方面改變了勞工與環境運動的內部生態，再者引起運動敵手不同型態的反撲，進而導致勞工與環境運動個別力量的流失，工運的制衡力與環運的理念力不斷弱化。勞工運動是在制衡力被削弱的危機之下，才轉向進行意識形態鬥爭，企圖打破孤立與污名化的困境，證明自己不是一個只顧私利的運動，更代表了廣泛的普世利益。環境運動在說服所有人環境、生態保護的重要性，並促成各種環境行政體制的設立之後，卻面對越來越多環境論述上的競爭者，包括來自國家與企業界，於是在環境議題主導權流失的脈絡下，轉向鞏固草根力量，並企圖解決引含於環境議題中的種種經濟與利益衝突。

The struggles of labor movements in Taiwan and South Korea to increase their power and realize their constituents' interests have followed a similar path over the last 30 years. Environmental movements in the two countries have also followed a similar path, but a very different one from that of labor movements. To explain why these two different national settings produce consistent differences between the trajectories and strategies of labor and environmental movements, this article develops an analytical framework that conceptualizes 'movement power' as being composed of a combination of 'leverage' and 'ideological power.' Examining the historical sequences of movement strategies in the two countries, the analysis indicates that labor initially seeks to maximize its economic leverage and the environmental movements focus first on ideological power. After initial successes, both labor and environmental movements confront new obstacles that undermine the power they previously gained. The state and capital defame and organizationally undermine the labor movements' support bases. At the same time, they learn to compete with the environmental movements for discursive control over ecological values. Labor strives in turn to increase its ideological power by shedding the bad name of 'sectional interest' and winning the support of less-privileged workers and the general public. The environmental movements struggle to increase their leverage by building a united front with disprivileged victims of corporate environmental practices. Thus, in each case, the sequence of strategies converges around efforts to combine leverage and ideological power.