帝國之眼：“次”帝國與國族－國家的文化想像

The Imperialist Eye: The Cultural Imaginary of a Sub-Empire and a Nation-State

陳光興(Kuan-Hsing Chen)

《台灣社會研究季刊》 17期 (1994/07) Pp. 149-222

https://doi.org/10.29816/TARQSS.199407.0005

摘要

帝國的建立往往得靠著文化論述的支撐與呼應。論述的作用在於介入國族文化空間，徵召國族主義主體進入接合作用所建構的召喚位置，臣服於國家機器／資本／男性／種族／族群沙文主義的霸權方案。反霸權的論述性介入，由第三世界文化研究問題意識出發，企圖解讀、拆穿〈人間副刊〉南向論述中以日帝文化想像的翻版與台灣次帝國主義形成之間的共謀關係。處理的問題是南進論述的意識形態構造是什麼？作為一種文化想像，它的來源是什麼？它與帝國主義、殖民主義、國族主義、以及國家機器主義在意識形態結構層次上如何聯結？
我的解釋核心論點是，南進的文化性論述是權力集團所主導國族營造、國家機器再打造與帝國形造三位一體霸權方案中的一個環結。這個霸權方案以台灣國族主義為基地的統合性原則，企圖收編集權制瓦解後的社會力，將「中共」建構成假想敵，來掩蓋階級、性別、種族矛盾，「統一」台灣，鑲入以美帝為霸主的新殖民全球資本主義結構。
台灣是否可能成為帝國不是本文所要處理的問題，關注焦點在於南進論述所建構的文化想像投射出來的帝國慾望，層次是放在文化想像的意識形態的建構，及如何將國族－國家與次帝國接合起來。
最後，我點出台灣國族主義已經無棋可走，必需重新思考國族主義的問題，「向下」走回社會中已經浮現的敵意與矛盾，放棄自戀的種族中心主義，認清台灣所處的第三世界位置，與國際上被壓抑的社會主體群相互聯結，對抗以資本／國家機器為核心的新帝國主義。

關鍵字

殖民主義 ； 帝國主義 ； 國族主義 ； 第三世界 ； 國族 ； 國家 ； 文化研究

並列摘要

The formation of an empire always requires the active support of cultural discourses. The effects of such discourses lie in cutting into the space of national culture, recruiting the nationalist subjects into the interpellated subject-position constructed by the articulating agent, and hence subjecting popular consent to the hegemonic project of a state apparatus/capital/male/ racial/ethnic chauvinism. The counter-hegemonic discursive intervention begins with the problematic of a Third World cultural studies, attempting to de-poison or expose the complicity between the formation of a Taiwanese subimperialism and direct copy from Japanese imperialist cultural imaginary of the colonialist past as is revealed, in my analysis, in the ”marching southward” discourse represented in the special issue of the ”Human World” supplement, of the China Times. The key questions to be tackled are: what are the ideological structures of the ”marching southward” discourse? As a culturul imaginary, where are its resources coming from? How, in its discursive practices, are imperialism, colonialism, nationalism, and statism articulated on an ideological level?
At the heart of my argument is: the cultural discourse of ”marching southward” has to be explained and situated within the nodal point of power bloc's hegemonic project of a trinity complex: nation-building, state-(re) making and empire-forming. This hegemonic project works on the ground of a Taiwanese nationalism, as its unifying principle, attempting to suck in the social forces emitted after the collapse of an authoritarian regime, constructing China (Chinese Communism) as his imaginary and real other, covering up the contradictions of gender/sexuality, class, and race and ethnicity, internally unifying ”Taiwan” and externally inserting it into the neocolonial structure of global capitalism led by the American Empire.
Finally, I point out that there is no way out for the Taiwanese nationalism, which has been incorporated and coopted by the state machine, and hence has to rethink its political and theoretical problems. The alternative strategy is to move ”downward” into the social field of forces in which antagonism and contradiction have already been on the move. It has to give up its narcissistic ethnocentrism, understand Taiwan's position ”within” the Third World, and has to connect itself to the oppressed subject groups across borders so as to counter the neo-imperialist domination, mainly composed of the multinational capital and the super state apparatus.

並列關鍵字

Colonialism ； Imperialism ； Nationalism ； Third World ； Nation-State ； Cultural Studies