| 英文摘要 |
The Indigenous Movement that emerged in Taiwan in the 1980s presupposed an ideology of Indigenism. Its core consisted of a system of collective rights centered on the principle of self-determination, while the normative justification for these rights was grounded in respect for cultural difference and the status of Indigenous peoples as historical proprietors of the land—that is, arguments based on cultural difference and historical sovereignty. This ideology has served as an important criterion for evaluating whether subsequent Indigenous policies conform to the ideal of ethnic equality. Drawing on major rights-claim documents produced during this period, this article analyzes the substantive content of this ideology, as well as how the state responded to and incorporated it, gradually implementing it within the constitutional framework. Furthermore, both in the stages of advocacy and implementation, collective rights claims centered on self-determination, together with the two principal justificatory frameworks of cultural difference and historical sovereignty, have faced challenges from other human rights doctrines, standards of justice, and social values, giving rise to potential normative conflicts. This article also examines several recent controversial issues to analyze these possible conflicts and the intellectual strategies that may be required to address them. |