The Meaning of Globalization: From Ulrich Beck’s Vision to the Rise of Anti-Globalization (6)

Because of the rise of information technology, another approach to understanding the concept of “no-distance” is emerged, which is related to the rapid development of a new communication form between people. Today, the flowering of many internet services and handy gadgets (e.g. mobile phones) has helped to facilitate the realization of the breaking-down of the space-time distance that hindered people from connecting with friends and relatives living in different countries across the world. This development does not eliminate the existence of distance, but does realize the “no-distance” reality that actually links up all of the people who have the condition to access to the technology around the globe. Obviously, the positive aspect of the development is minimizing the cost and geographical restriction on human communication. However, the “no-distance” connection simultaneously causes the alienation of the natural relationship between individuals: when real-time communication is too easy to be reached, many would tend to downgrade or even ignore the value or significance of it and human solidarity would be more difficult to be carried out, despite the “possibility for change” already at hand. This phenomenon can be evidenced by the universality of the distant, chilly and passive attitude of the developed towards the serious political and social issues in contemporary globalization. The people always think it is not necessary to hastily put an eye on the issues because we can forever click (check) it out and find out the solution online in the “next second”.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

Advertisements

The Meaning of Globalization: From Ulrich Beck’s Vision to the Rise of Anti-Globalization (5)

Nowadays, world governments are so busy with tackling the unwanted side effects of globalization, such as digital crime, imbalanced distribution of wealth, etc. because when border “disappears”, the distance between any nation-states or political entities also become meaningless. Here, it is necessary to indicate that there is a close relationship between border and distance. Generally speaking, distance can cause separation and prevent communication between peoples. As the outcome of the establishment of political border, separation is a very end which helps control the free-floating of population. On the other hand, distance can be a substantial protection for the political. Therefore, if border becomes “dysfunctional”, distance can no longer be existed. The consequence of this is: various politico-social risks like terrorism and human diseases would easily spread from one country to another.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

The Meaning of Globalization: From Ulrich Beck’s Vision to the Rise of Anti-Globalization (3)

It is quite reasonable to say that another angle of analyzing the nature of globalization is needed. For this, Ulrich Beck, similar to some sociologists, argues that globalization is making the border and distance between countries “vanished”[1]. However, he points out that:

[globalization] is changing [people’s] everyday life with considerable force and compelling everyone to adapt and respond in various ways. […] people are thrown into transnational lifestyles that they often neither want nor understand[2].

Clearly, this comment implies the coercive nature of globalization. Perhaps we can use the following metaphor to discuss it further: globalization is like an international train on which many rich men are aboard. These men ask the stationmasters – the heads of world states – to allow the train’s coming, promising that the arrival of them will benefit “everyone” because they have the means to create “economic prosperity”. Once the stationmasters give a green light to their coming, the “border-vanished” becomes a reality. In other words, under the condition of the absence of the opposition to globalization, the existence of border is no longer served any meaningful purpose.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

[1] “Globalization means that borders become markedly less relevant to everyday behaviour in the various dimensions of economics, information, ecology, technology, cross-cultural conflict and civil society […]. Even things, people and ideas that governments would like to keep out (for example, drugs, illegal immigrants or criticisms of human rights abuses) find their way into new territories. So does globalization conjure away distance.” See: Beck, Ulrich. What Is Globalization? Blackwell, 2001, p. 20.

[2] Ibid.

The Meaning of Globalization: From Ulrich Beck’s Vision to the Rise of Anti-Globalization (2)

In fact, the rise of globalization is connected with certain historical factors – at the beginning it started its elementary development in the Age of Discovery in the fifteenth century. After that, the eighteenth-century Industrial Revolution caused the growth of commercialism, facilitating the beginning of Western colonialism. With the dominant capitalism developed, colonialism was then superseded by the upsurge of the wave of national independent movement and democratization across Asia and Africa. Despite the changes, world economy was still controlled by Western powers, especially by the United States – “neoliberalism” brought us a seriously imbalanced distribution of wealth and resources not only in capitalist states but in the former colonies of the West. Although the “developed” states have got huge economic interest from the development, the “global market” is keeping its pace to further evolve, conforming to the principle of the so-called “profit maximization”. Since then, countries in different regions have been set to play different roles in the market: the “developed” are responsible for designing the products and services, and the “developing” in charge of selling their labour and resources for manufacturing. Globalization, as we can see, lets all people play their “appropriate” roles in serving the market. The core question is still here: who makes the whole thing “unavoidable”?

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

A New Approach to Understanding the Contemporary China (5)

We are focusing on examining an emerging social power which represents the rise of anti-globalization movement. This kind of social power is always shifting its shape, density and capacity based on different politico-economic climates and social conditions. Of course, it is possible to measure this power by following the quantitative method mentioned above: to produce lots of statistic figures related to the existing of the social power. However, the figures can only indicate the “status quo” of the power sustaining in a very short time. To produce complex quantitative data is, in our research context, not a right approach to constructing a qualitative understanding on the current ongoing development of the social power for common people’s voices.

Here is an alternative approach to discovering the significance of the practices of the independent media activism as an influential social power developing in Hong Kong and Taiwan.

We will get start with revealing and analyzing the unique characteristics of the practices of the independent media movement in the Chinese societies. Comparing the characteristics of the movement practices with the Western counterparts’ and discovering the hidden connection between the contemporary social movement and the Chinese traditional thought – Daoism are the next two important steps. There is no doubt that Chinese society as a whole has been impacted by the domination of globalized capitalist economy and Western scientific civilization. However, the Chinese is still keeping its unique thinking logic and its clear attitude toward the contemporary changing world in a distinctive historical context. This can be evidenced by the fact that a “dialectical adaptive logic” has been embedded, developed and working in Chinese people’s mind, influencing the development of Chinese society from past to now. The form of this special logic for life is made by the long-term feudalism of the ancient China and the Westerns’ “colonization” with the Communist ruling over the modern China that the Chinese have never had the opportunity to develop their socio-political sense “to live their own life”.

Today, the brain of the West has dominated most of the academic studies on contemporary China, seeing the Chinese as the “follower”, ignoring the existence of the distinctive logic for harmonizing the hard social reality with the “to-be-oneself” idealism of the Chinese people. Therefore, how to open up a new approach to consider this “home-grown” logic is a crucial thing. Through our study on the independent media in Hong Kong and Taiwan, we discover that certain Chinese traditional thoughts can play a role in explaining various social phenomena emerging in the contemporary Chinese society, meanwhile the logic is fully considered.

Finally, a completely new theory – “Open Structure” is to be presented not only for embodying the logic’s existentiality but also for interpreting the close relationship between the Chinese society, the characteristics of the media movement practices and Daoism. Through the theory, a bold attempt to examine the significant reflection of today’s Chinese people on the nature of the globalized civilization by reconnecting the ancient thinking with the contemporary reality will be realized. Also, the theory is anticipated to help open up an advanced construction of an open knowledge structure beyond existing East-West epistemological perspectives, on which the next stage of human civilization for all people can be based.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

耶穌言行的無政府性 (3)

耶穌對世人的愛源自上帝的愛,其超脫所謂男女之間的愛情或共同血緣之間的親情。基督信徒如此相信,世人亦應相信,上帝全知全能,知曉眾生困阨,這是一個「真理」。所以「神愛世人」。據傳統猶太教的典籍記載,上帝的愛似乎獨厚猶太族人。不過,基督宗教中耶穌以愛宣揚神的啟示,其關涉世上所有人類,因為上帝愛人係無私的,祂不分族類、不分長幼,不管社會地位的高低或身體的強壯懦弱。作為上帝的使者,耶穌擁有悲天憫人的神格。所以,耶穌在其人生及宗教實踐─例如對基督教義的宣揚上對人「一視同仁」。人人都是平等的,只要全心信仰上帝。比起權貴,耶穌更加親近平民及病弱者。這就是神的大愛的本質:福音並不專屬於一小撮教徒。這種解放的宗教實踐確確實實存在於耶穌的言論和行為中。

耶穌以愛作為一個真確的信念,作為一種超脫世俗藩籬的體現。此信念是以創造的意志和實踐表示出來。這並非意味「上帝」是由耶穌所創造。恰好相反,耶穌富有神人二格。上帝創造萬物的意志和實然係被耶穌的「神力」施展所兌證。耶穌的人生意義是以宣佈神對待每一個人都是平等而得以成全。耶穌沒有創造「上帝」,但其言行確實創造了一種人類關係的越界態勢。這種人與人之間的休戚相關不但超越男女情愛的框架,打破了親屬血緣關係的格局,更瓦解所謂國家民族意識型態對人的精神束縛。最後,全人類因不同地緣和語言所造成的疏離與隔閡被上帝的愛所消弭,使人類不分國族界限的理想:建立一個「神的國度」得以現實。創造作為無政府性之一,其實可從耶穌一生的宗教實踐中獲得兌證。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

耶穌言行的無政府性 (2)

上帝憐憫、體恤萬民苦難,祂要世人知道苦難的原由:世界上每一個人都帶著永遠無法洗脫的原罪。我們無法追究這種罪的成因。人人生來就有罪,這根源於上帝創世之時,亞當與夏娃(Adam and Eve)因偷嚐「禁果」所犯下的。現世人類對這段「真理」陳述無法知道更多,亦無法挽回這個因欲望驅使所犯下的罪業。所以耶穌說:天國近了。在世界末日之時,上帝將審判所有人。凡未抱悔改之心的「罪人」,必下地獄。只有全心信仰基督、相信人子來世的目的是為了洗脫人們的罪,天堂之門是打開的,所有人將獲得永恆的生命。

在基督教教義裡,我們認識到「罪」這個概念的普全性質。沒有人從未犯過錯,所以人身上都帶有不同程度的罪。這並不是法律上的犯罪,而是一種道德的罪、由基督宗教所定義的罪。以規範一個概念的普全特性來進一步發展思想理論或教義的規模,其思考邏輯與斯多噶的基諾講人擁有「理性」相似。如上節所述,基諾認為人是理性的,所以人與人之間的關係是平等、休戚相關、是「自然」的。在此,基督教認為凡人必有罪,所以這個罪係必須被贖:耶穌代替我們贖了這個罪而犧牲生命,這個事體我們必須相信。不然,地獄就是死後唯一存身之場所。

下一個問題是,耶穌─上帝之子、「人子」、「彌賽亞」究竟依據什麼思想、理念、精神基礎去頂替人類面對死亡、為人贖罪?據《新約聖經》記載耶穌一生的言行來推斷,祂是基於「愛」─一種打破不同種族、長幼、社會階級等藩籬的大愛為人去贖這個根本之罪。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

No Relationship with the Cultural Difference between the East and the West (4)

Different from the Oriental’s thinking logic, the West has a long history of positioning and categorizing the “unknown” by constructing a stronghold of absolute knowledge system. For this, the rise of natural science[1] is a good example. The construction of so-called scientific knowledge as a Western civilization tradition has affected people’s spirit, thinking logic and way of life in every aspect of human society. In social sciences, the impact of the development of the scientific spirit embodies in the inclination of trying to present a “fixed picture” of social phenomenon: taking social movement practice as an example, why the people do it; how the people carry out the movement; what the major factors are the causes of the movement; what the approaches to participating in the movement are provided at the specific moment are all needed to be studied in the scientific methodology. Therefore, from this point we can understand the practice form of the independent media movement in the West is impacted by this kind of reasoning: for instance, social movement activists would carry out their action by creating a “systemic tool” for promoting their practice – building up an online website or blog as a public communicative platform for expanding their social influence. By clicking on the platform, people can understand the movement’s idealism and practical goal in an ordered context. After that, they can decide whether they want to support the activism ongoing. Through this approach, people’s social power can be brought together and strengthened further effectively.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

[1] “By the mid-nineteenth century, science was having an ever-greater impact on European life. The Scientific Revolution of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries had fundamentally transformed the Western worldview and led to a modern, rational approach to the study of the natural world….Moreover, the technical advances of the early Industrial Revolution had depended little on pure science and much more on the practical experiments of technologically oriented amateur inventors. Advances in industrial technology, however, fed an interest in basic scientific research, which in the 1830s and afterward resulted in a rash of basic scientific discoveries that were soon converted into technological improvements that affected everybody. …The steadily increasing and often dramatic material gains generated by science and technology led to a growing faith in the benefits of science. The popularity of scientific and technological achievement produced a widespread acceptance of the scientific method, based on observation, experiment, and logical analysis, as the only path to objective truth and objective reality.” See: Spielvogel, Jackson J. (2010). Western Civilization. USA: Cengage Learning. p. 783.

No “Label” (5)

Similar to the alienation of the use of currency, the reasoning method of “induction” – to label social phenomena by linking up known theories, thoughts and principles and by categorizing things as a typical approach to “scientific knowledge production” – is to be impotent and needed to be reflected nowadays. Through labeling, we seem to have deeper understanding on the things studied. However, by following this approach we would unconsciously ignore the importance of the nature and characteristics of the things developing within distinctive historical contexts when enjoying the “academic achievement” brought by the doing, being misled by the “power of human knowledge” based on the so-called “absolute effectiveness of the method endorsed by the name of “science”, blurring our original goal for understanding the existing within the Nature on the Earth. Human beings are not the “creator” of the world, but created by the world. However, human knowledge labeled by “science” makes everyone believe in it without reflection. This is a very obstacle of human civilization progression. Therefore, it is certain to say when we get used to put any social phenomena into a fixed understanding system of human knowledge development through labeling things, we lose a significant opportunity to rediscover the only world without the interference from power.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

No “Label” (3)

Some sociologists are so keen to analyze the historical development of social movement. They categorize and compare known theories and practice cases of social movement in human society in different ages, creating various specialized terms for labeling the “new”, trying to facilitate the structuring of knowledge systematization. For example, the term “Left/Right Wing” is commonly used as ideology which refers to a group of individuals who hold specific positions, ideas or opinions on how people should live in politics, economics, and humanities categorized by academicians on the intellectual scene. Also, the so-called “-ism” is another one for solidifying any theories.

Generally speaking, this labeling behaviour of knowledge makers can be significant: it contributes to the enlightenment of human understanding. However, the behaviour simultaneously produces many negative effects on civilization development, such as ossifying people’s thinking, causing power fetishism under the “scientific umbrella”, etc., that does not conform to the original aim of the doing. Here, “derailing from its original” is a kind of alienation, which is one of the characters of human developing tendency.

(See: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement: Case Studies of the Independent Media in the Chinese Societies – Hong Kong and Taiwan. Bonn: Bonn University. 2014)

The Contents: The Theory and Practice of Anti-Globalization Movement – Case Studies of the Independent Media in Hong Kong and Taiwan

Chapter One The Introduction
Section 1 The Contemporary World and Anti-Globalization Movement
Section 2 What is Independent Media?
Section 3 The Contemporary Development of the Chinese Societies
Section 4 The Independent Media – “Inmediahk.net” and “Coolloud.org”
Section 5 Globalization and the Media Activism
Section 6 The New Approach to Understanding the Contemporary China
Chapter Two The Theories Inspiring Anti-Globalization Movement – Anti-Capitalism and the Reflection on Democracy
Section 1 The Meaning of Globalization: From Ulrich Beck’s Vision and the Rise of Anti-Globalization
Part 1 The Connotation of the Terms: Anti-/Alter-Globalization
Part 2 Alter-Globalization Movement Promoted by “WSF” & “ATTAC”
Section 2 Anti-Globalization on the Economic Issue: Capitalism and Its Problems
Part 1 The Base of the Economic Inequality: Pierre-Joseph Proudhon Criticizing the “Property”
Part 2 The Quantification of Capitalism Violating the Nature – Murray Bookchin’s Reflection on “Environmentalism”
Section 3 Anti-Globalization on the Political Issue: The Reflection on Representative Democracy
Part 1 From the Beginning of Democracy: K.H.Z. Solneman’s Viewpoints and Weakness of Global Governmental Power
Part 2 Constructing a New Form of Political Power: The Games between Governments
Chapter Three Independent Media as the Anti-Globalization Movement in Hong Kong: “Inmediahk.net”
Section 1 From Globalization to the Development of the Chinese Independent Media
Section 2 The History of Independent Media in Hong Kong
Section 3 The Beginning of “Inmediahk.net”
Section 4 The Funding Issue of the Media
Section 5 The Effects of “Inmediahk.net”
Section 6 The Stance of Anti-Monopoly
Section 7 The Connection between “Inmediahk.net” and the Mainland China
Chapter Four Independent Media as the Anti-Globalization Movement in Taiwan: “Coolloud.org”
Section 1 The Socio-Political Background of Modern Taiwan
Section 2 The Main Works of the Media
Section 3 The Social Background of the Beginning of the Media
Section 4 Anti-Globalization and “Coolloud.org”
Section 5 As a Kind of Diversified Social Movement
Section 6 The Viewpoints on Mainstream Media
Section 7 Reflecting on the Media’s Funding Issue
Section 8 Connected with Social Movement Organizations
Section 9 The Differences between “Inmediahk.net” and “Coolloud.org”
Section 10 The Objection to “Principle”
Section 11 The Difficulties and Challenges
Chapter Five The Characteristics of the Independent Media in Hong Kong and Taiwan
Section 1 The Qualitative Influence of the Independent Media
Section 2 Playing a Role in the Developing History of Independent Media
Section 3 No “Label”
Section 4 No Relationship with the Cultural Difference between the East and the West
Conclusion The Daoist Characters of the Independent Media and Modern China
Section 1 Anti-Globalization Movement as an “Ecology” of Human Society
Section 2 The Daoist logic of “Coolloud.org”: The Abandonment of “Name (名)”
Section 3 The World without Discrimination: From Yu Ying-Shih’s “Introversive Culture” to Ip Iam Chong’s “Political Matter”
Section 4 “Open Structure”: The Contemporary Interpretation of Daoism Inspired by the Media Movement
Reference

目錄:無政府與全球化-論無政府在現今全球政治經濟社會發展的意義

第一章 總論

第一節 前言
第二節 基礎與前提
第三節 研究方法
第四節 文本脈絡
第五節 政府的本質就是統治
第六節 法律的正義─懲罰的困窘
第七節 資本家與政府的掛鉤
第八節 全球化發展下民族國家政府的主權喪失
第九節 無政府的可能性

第二章 無政府主義(Anarchism)的歷史溯源

第一節 道家老子《道德經》中的無政府主義元素
一.道與自然
二.道的性質
三.道與政治的關係
四.合乎道的理想社會
五.老子解放主義政治思想述評
第二節 古希臘哲學尾端的餘韻─斯多噶(Stoa)學派的基諾(Zeno of Citium)
一.基諾的自然
二.順從與和諧
三.休戚相關與理性
四.基諾無政府哲學思想述評
第三節 耶穌基督(Jesus Christ)的無政府性
一.無政府性釋義
(一)創造-人以原初本能表達對權力的異議
(二)反政府-反抗權力宰制的具體立場
(三)無財主支配-以自給自足對抗經濟壟斷
二.耶穌言行的無政府性

第三章 無政府主義─無政府(Anarchy)概念及理論

第一節 無政府的定義及其概念
第二節 無政府的反證
第三節 人性論的檢討
第四節 俯視觀點的缺陷
第五節 自由作為無政府主義的最終基礎
第六節 無政府主義的經濟面向─
蒲魯東(P. J. Proudhon)對所有權(Property)的論證
一.什麼是所有權?
二.資本家以所有權名義對工人剝削
三.平等的詭論
四.對所有權的反證
五.所有權作為政府存有的根本基礎
六.舉出現實例證並作結論
第七節 無政府主義的政治社會面向─
克魯泡特金(P. Kropotkin)的自由契約與互助
一.契約概念與自由契約
二.罪惡與懲罰
三.公共譴責及其作用
四.互助─隱性支撐社會構成的基礎
五.互助使進化得以實現
六.互助與人性的關係

第四章 全球化與無政府 

第一節 全球化(Globalization)及其意涵
第二節 經濟全球化的本質、影響及其問題
一.經濟全球化造成貧富懸殊
二.「美國標準」的操控
三.資本主義經濟全球化對文化價值的侵害
四.經濟全球化的「解政治」性質及其問題
第三節 全球化的哲學反省及其無政府特徵─從貝克(U. Beck)談起
一.全球主義(Globalismus)、全球性(Globalität)及全球化(Globalisierung)
二.有關全球文化聚合的論點
三.全球化的質性研究
四.世界社會的無政府面貌

第五章 無政府與現今全球形勢之間的關聯

第一節 人的存有條件中有關無政府的分析
第二節 無政府力量的作用─以嚴重急性呼吸道症候群(SARS)為例證
一.政府的指揮抑或民眾的配合
二.醫護人員無私作戰
三.民間志願團體參與協力
第三節 全球各國政府的聯合作用
一.政經強權聯合的目的和意義
二.歷史上國家政府聯合的具體事實
三.國家成為經濟體
第四節 反全球化運動(Anti-Globalization Movement)與無政府
一.反全球化的由來、議題及與全球化之間的關係
(一)反全球化來自對於全球化作用的顛覆
(二)對美國帝國主義與戰爭的反抗
(三)反對生活資源的侵略和片面瓜分
(四)地球環境問題的關注
(五)反全球化是全球化的一部份
二.無政府作為反全球化的基礎
(一)自發行動
(二)多元包容
(三)顛覆權力

結論 權力、資本與人本─一種對人類社會的未來憧憬

第一節 作為一個出發點的思考
第二節 去中心與地方化
第三節 資本主義價值觀與人本生活之間

參考文獻

耶穌言行的無政府性

據《新約聖經》(Bible: New Testament)〈馬太福音〉(Gospel According to Matthew)所載,耶穌不但擁有猶太民族(the Jews)祖先亞伯拉罕(Abraham)、大衛(David)的血統,祂的出生、接受聖約翰(John the Baptist)施洗、及至成年並開始傳佈福音,這整個過程實為一連串神話式的人生發展歷程。

猶太民族的歷史充滿被壓迫、遷徙、動盪戰亂等記載。此民族先後被波斯、希臘及羅馬等不同帝國統治過,而這些帝國的統治者不乏對其族人加以迫害。所以,這不幸的猶太族人的經歷自然形塑出一種民族意識:極其渴望有一位來自「天上」的使者打救其屢屢陷於水深火熱中的猶太人。耶穌就在這樣的歷史背景下被安排降世。

據《新約聖經》所述,耶穌的誕生首先被當時統治猶太土地的希律王(Herod the Great)所忌諱。因為有通曉星象的博士為敬拜將要出世的耶穌從遠方而來。希律王從這些博士的口中得知,耶穌會是「猶太人的王」。在政教合一的現實下,這正意味著既有王權將被挑戰的事實。羅馬帝國統治者希律為阻止這個未來的「王」對自身統治的威脅,不惜下令屠殺大衛城伯利恆(Bethlehem)中所有兩歲以下的嬰兒。結果是徒然的:耶穌的誕生是神的旨意,上帝不會使「人子」降生後就結束生命。耶穌的父母約瑟(Joseph)及瑪利亞(Mary)在夢中得到上帝的明示,先一步逃往埃及避難。及後,這位「猶太人的王」在加利利(Galilee)的拿撤勒(Nazareth)成長,成為一生志願帶領猶太人乃至全人類脫離困阨苦難的「基督」、「救世主」。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (7)

在現今資本主義高張的人類社會,任何事體的成就都無法脫離經濟-由金錢所產生出來的各種問題(這就是權力所建構的「遊戲規則」)。任何政治社會運動都需要一定額度的資金才能付諸實踐。那麼,資金從哪來?沒有資金,何來運動?又何來所謂民眾團體組織?又何來社會力量的凝聚?

無財主支配的重要意義在於鼓吹任何反對權力的主張甚至實踐,其得以成立和存在的憑藉並非依賴權力本身─如政府建制、企業集團、資本家願意提供資金支持來成就其基本立場的具體化。不論是個人或團體組織,抱有其阻抗權力擴張和發展的存有價值的前提應建基於自身的經濟獨立─如透過勞動、民眾自願捐助等方式作為支撐其反對宰制信念的基礎條件,而不是靠攏政府或財團。

若某反政府的個人或組織團體必須依附政府或企業作為其既定運作或生存模式,可以預見,其對整體社會的發展而言並無任何顛覆和創進的性質。換句話說,它只是所謂「多元社會」中被權力所允許的裝飾品而已。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (6)

(3) 無財主支配-以自給自足對抗經濟壟斷

權力的擴張在於經濟資源的略奪和壟斷。只要控制人賴以為生的各種物資,統治的施展將順遂且不受挑戰,古今皆然。所以,體現創造和反政府這兩種無政府性的根本基礎在於由個體反對權力宰制之信念出發,在實踐具體顛覆行為的過程中,從頭到尾以個人所成就的經濟條件作為立足點,其無政府性才能完整兌現。為此,我們可對現代政治社會運動的發展加以考察並釐清問題所在。

在現代社會,公開批判政府的施政甚至倡言無政府主義似乎並不困難。不過,我們應著眼於作出如是批判的運動份子或團體是在何種社會脈絡及經濟條件底下去論述其主張。例如,有不少運動團體及非政府組織是以立案的形式成立。所有參與人士都是雇員,以薪資作為生活條件,而這些團體組織的資金卻是來自政府或企業的補助贊助。當它們質疑政府的施政利於企業壟斷經濟卻影響民眾的生計時,其陷入一種理論實踐融貫邏輯的矛盾:一方面站在民眾的立場試圖左右在上位者的施政;另一方面依賴在上位者或既得利益者從民眾剝削而來的資源存活。這種矛盾的真實性可從政府或企業有權透過停止其經濟支持來消弭社會反對聲音而獲得證實。所以,這些社會運動團體及組織如何將自身的運作係由權力所支撐卻抱持著反對權力的立場這個事實正當化或合理化?

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (5)

(2) 反政府-反抗權力宰制的具體立場

無政府性反映一種反政府的具體立場、思維和行動。「政府」的存在代表著絕對權力的在場,作為主宰人的政治生活的建制機構。起初,反政府所針對的並不是某個特定統治機關的存在事實,其實係針對宰制本身:反政府反對任何權力對人的宰制、反對所有在上位者為了延續其統治和利益所施行的各種不合公義和倫理的作為,並批判其無視民眾百姓的霸權態度。

反政府的實踐可以是以群眾集會、抗議、示威遊行、甚至政治革命的形式出現。另一方面,反政府亦可以其他方式進行,例如文學、音樂等藝術創作來反映其精神本質。反政府從反對政府的施政出發,以至反對政府的建制架構及其存有的理論基礎,進而發展成為一種無政府的具體主張或思想。無政府性藉此體現。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (4)

當人受到外在環境的刺激而進入某種特定的精神狀態,創造的本能亦可被激發。例如,創造可以從接觸前人的創造或得知某突發事件的發生而來,這些誘發元素使人產生一種希望將思緒和情感表達出來的原欲。這個創造意念的形構過程往往是創造的一部份。創造的結果通常被稱為「作品」。不僅如此,創造應包含創新的事實。如果只是複製前人的概念,只換上不同的名堂加以充數,此乃係抄襲,其具體行為不能被視為創造。

一種具社會性的創造企圖,其實踐過程必然獲得眾人的迴響、尊重及承認。歷史中,我們發現不少人從己身的政治立場、思想和理念出發從事創造實踐。不過,他們未必得到他人的認同和支持。當然,我們不能以無人認同或少數人認可等判斷作為基礎試圖否定其創造的價值及社會意義。若跳脫「純抽象」的角度去追問創造作為探尋全人類福祉和理想生活的原始動機,對他者的關懷則必須被包含在創造的實踐中。只有真誠地將個體與群體連接起來,創造的完整化才能實現。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (3)

創造可以被下列幾項條件滿足:一,創造必須依據人己身堅定不移之信念藉以實踐;二,創造容納不同思想產物或物質元素的集成、整理和再生;三,創造的成果需具獨立新穎的特性,並能取得他人的同理和共感。

因人具備創造的本能,能運用並開發其精神及意志─其來自個體生活經驗歷史所累積習得的信念形構,確信不疑地將原本並不「存在」的事或物,以一己之力以不同的行為形式表現在外。換句話說,創造本能的呈現就是所謂的「藝術」,包括音樂、文學、戲劇、繪畫、雕塑、建築等都是例子。當然,創造本能乃是一種潛能。雖然每一個人都具備,但並非每一個人都有意願加以運用。這是一個根本問題的陳述:在於人「做不做」,它與人「有沒有能力去做」無關。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義 (2)

無政府性就是一種具備阻抗任何宰制企圖的精神性質或反映,其可體現在任何以存有呈現其自身的人、事、物。無政府性包含以下數種反對權力的特質或理念的實踐:

(1) 創造-人以原初本能表達對權力的異議

不論生活在世界上任何地方,人,無論其性別、種族、語言文化、或以各種方式開展其存有的可能條件,都具備創造─一種將不同的物質轉化提升以對應其精神狀態或意欲的品賦和能力。這個過程係從無到有將「作品」催生的勞作。創造本能的存在是一項根本基礎去證成人,作為一個獨立個體,其生命和生活形成歷程應被無條件尊重和正視的憑藉。無論我們將這個命題放在假定或真理的推理脈絡來理解,都能有效。基本上,所謂「文明」實是以肯定人具有創造本能來賦予人之所以為人的基礎價值,它的內涵是這樣被構成論述的。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)

無政府性釋義

歷史上,耶穌是否真有其人幾無爭議。不過,在新約聖經中有關耶穌對平民百姓所施展之「神力」等記載一直招惹教徒與非教徒之間的爭議。這種爭議其實沒有意義。因為基督教作為世界宗教,其特性、理論基礎和具體目標在於教義能夠在人心中產生一種堅定的信念本身,而不在於「故事內容」的真實性。如果我們就耶穌的「神力」作自然科學式的數式量化研究實驗,或以歷史學的原理原則去驗證,乃屬搞錯方向。所以,我們應著重於探究耶穌的言談和行為、其所宣揚的教義對於人類精神文明層面的催化、提升和陶成產生什麼樣的作用及影響。這種思考進路應適用於各種人文領域的研究,以彌補折衷現代科學主義對人類社會發展的異化及工具化影響。

終其一生,耶穌基督不僅以人類大愛─如「神愛世人」理論來論證和體現人與人之間確實存在一種休戚相關的人倫關係,祂的生命本質和言行更具有濃厚的「無政府性」。如何理解耶穌的言行促成無政府思想及解放主義理論的成熟發展?耶穌的無政府性為何?在回應這些問題前,我們必須定義何謂無政府性。

(摘自: 無政府與全球化. 台北: 國立政治大學. 2003)