年會時間：11/16（六）-17（日）
年會場地：國立台北教育大學
主辦單位：台灣社會研究學會、國立台北教育大學文化創意產業經營學系、國立成功大學
協辦單位：台灣社會研究季刊、新國際
會議手冊：https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1bfDiAndCxt60kiTHh0NWUEuNX6Xszyyc?usp=drive_link
（本次年會獲得國科會全國學術推廣計畫、國立成功大學高教深耕計畫支持）
台灣作為資本主義全球化的一部分，現今夾在中美競爭的縫隙中，英國《經濟學人》與CNN等西方媒體都曾提出憂慮，夾縫中的台灣是危險的。台灣社會如何在危機時代中思索自己在國際的位置並尋求替代的道路？
「Taiwan Can Help」是現今台灣社會最常想到回應國際的連結方式，係源於Covid-19疫情期間一句將台灣與世界聯繫起來的呼喊。它不只是一句口號，也道出了台灣人民的渴望，指出一種從封閉到開放，從斷裂到連結、從個人到集體、化被動為主動、化排除為參與的實踐主體性的「方法」。這樣的渴望，「世界」也以不同的方式回應。
今年4月16日，台灣左翼社運團體響應全球聲援巴勒斯坦A15行動中，在台灣的結婚生子的加薩居民哈澤姆．艾爾馬斯里（Hazem Almassry）（中文名：安海正）也參與其中，他在以哈戰爭中失去了自己的母親，兄弟與親人也正流離失所。他帶領現場抗議群眾喊著Free Free Palestine時，脫稿演出喊出Taiwan Can Help當時，現場群眾的心情接近「驚／異（uncanny）」。佛洛伊德認為uncanny是向來／應該隱藏著的「真實」顯露的瞬間的主體經驗。那麼，此時此刻Taiwan Can Help的真實為何？
台灣社會研究學會也參與了那場行動，決定在今年年會從「Taiwan Can Help」的反思出發，作為探尋替代路徑的起點，並希望以三個面向（但歡迎更多不同面向）來探索這個問題：
一、與「他者」的倫理：「Taiwan Can Help」的主詞是Taiwan，說出這句話、做了「help這個動作」的台灣確立了自己的主體位置，但弔詭的是受援助的對象卻消失在句子中模糊不清。安海正的呼喊攪動了原來「Taiwan Can Help」的政治性，欲受救援的他者現身與發聲的同時，開啟了對「Taiwan」與他者的倫理關係的思考：「對象／他者」與主體的關係是什麼？應該是什麼？而Taiwan Can Help與Taiwan Can’t Help、Taiwan Cannot but Help，甚至Taiwan Needs Help之間的歷史辯證關係又為何？與他者的倫理問題何在？
二、自我與他者之外的跨X種和平：在疫情與地震中，我們看到貓狗不再是災害下可被棄置的物，而甚至是傾力保護的生命夥伴。加薩被轟炸期間，《衛報》連載的「加薩日記」（Diary in Gaza）中也看到這樣的現象。對此，而洪凌以「旁若」或「共在」提出一種有別於主流的多元文化主義下的倫理，被認為可以割捨的動物與受到轟炸而被驅趕的人，雖然有著無法簡化為一體的人獸差異，卻實踐了一種不是訴諸人道的施捨同情，而是在共難之下相互支撐、拒絕被主導世界的政治排除的「共在」並以此作為生存的希望。從前述跨物種共同尋求和平的生存為例，那麼在台灣各種嘗試跳脫自我與他者的對立、乃至各種跨X種連結與共存的論述、實踐與社會運動的經驗為何？又如何提供差異得以「共在」的「和平」想像？
三、「全球南方」的「異托邦」：由第三世界結盟所形成的「全球南方」，以及其與全球北方的進步力量合作，重新定義了國際關係的本質，將種族、種姓、性別、土地、農業和生態問題擺放在核心位置。有別於資本主義下的民族國家競爭，「全球南方」提供了一種「異托邦」（heterotopia）的理想，「異托邦」如法國第八大學哲學系教授Alain Brossat所界定，是多樣性、異質整體的通稱，將時間、空間是留給行為偏差、邊緣的個體。在台灣，各種關於如何展開國際主義串連的想像與討論為何？當中「全球南方」在台灣是什麼具體的樣貌、如何開啟「異托邦」的想像？
歡迎有興趣的師友們，共同組成論壇分享您的思索與實踐，一同探討全球南方與全球北方的邊界，並再思「Taiwan Can Help」！
The boundary between the Global South and the Global North: Rethinking “Taiwan Can Help”
As part of capitalist globalization, Taiwan is besieged by the rivalry between the United States and China. The western mainstream media such as The Economist and CNN have expressed concerns, suggesting that Taiwan is in a dangerous position. How can Taiwanese society contemplate its international position and seek alternative paths in this era of crisis?
“Taiwan Can Help” is currently the most common way for Taiwanese society to respond to international connections, originating from a call to link Taiwan with the world during the Covid-19 pandemic. As a slogan, it articulates the aspirations of the Taiwanese people, pointing to a method of moving from isolation to openness, from fragmentation to connection, from individual to collective, transforming passivity into initiative, and exclusion into participation. The “world” has also responded to these aspirations in various ways.
On April 16 this year, Taiwanese leftist social movement groups responded to the global A15 action in support of Palestine. Hazem Almassry, a Gaza resident living in Taiwan (Chinese name: An Haizheng), who lost his mother in the Israel-Palestine war and whose brothers and relatives are currently displaced, participated in the action. When he led the crowd to shout “Free Free Palestine” and spontaneously shouted “Taiwan Can Help,” the crowd felt a sense of the “uncanny.” Freud believed that the uncanny is a subjective experience of a moment when the “truth,” which should have always been hidden, is revealed. So, what is the truth of “Taiwan Can Help” at this moment?
The Association for Taiwan Social Studies also participated in that action and decided to reflect on “Taiwan Can Help” as the starting point for exploring alternative paths in this year’s annual meeting. We aim to explore this issue from three perspectives (but welcome more different perspectives):
- Ethics with the “Other”:
The enunciating subject of “Taiwan Can Help” is Taiwan, and by saying this phrase and performing the act of “help,” Taiwan constitutes its subject position. However, the recipient of the aid is obscure and unclear in the sentence. An Haizheng’s call stirred the original political nature of “Taiwan Can Help,” and the appearance and voice of the recipient opened up thoughts on the ethical relationship between “Taiwan” and the other. What is the relationship between the “object/other” and the subject? What should it be? What is the historical dialectical relationship between “Taiwan Can Help” and “Taiwan Can’t Help,” “Taiwan Cannot but Help,” and even “Taiwan Needs Help”? What are the ethical issues with the other?
- Cross-Species Peace Beyond Self and Other:
During the pandemic and earthquakes, we saw that cats and dogs were no longer disposable items in disasters but even life partners worth protecting. This phenomenon was also seen in the “Gaza Diary” serialized by The Guardian during the Gaza bombings. In response, Hong Ling proposed an ethics of “being beside” or “co-existence,” different from mainstream multiculturalism, where the discarded animals and people driven away by bombings, although having irreducible human-animal differences, practice a kind of “co-existence” not based on charitable sympathy but mutual support under common adversity, as a hope for survival rejecting political exclusion imposed by the dominant political power. Taking the aforementioned cross-species pursuit of peaceful survival as an example, what are the various attempts in Taiwan to break away from the dichotomy of self and other, and what are the experiences and social movements of various cross-species connections and coexistence? How can they provide an alternative imagination of “peace” that allows for differences to “co-exist”?
- The “Heterotopia” of the “Global South”:
The alliance of the Third World forming the “Global South,” and its cooperation with progressive forces in the Global North, redefines the essence of international relations, placing issues of race, caste, gender, land, agriculture, and ecology at the core. Different from the nationalist conflicts under capitalism, the “Global South” depicts an ideal of “heterotopia,” a term referring to diversity and heterogeneity for deviance and marginality, as suggested by Alain Brossat, professor of philosophy at the University of Paris VIII. In Taiwan, what are the various pictures on how to unfold internationalist connections? What are the specific trajectories of the “Global South” in Taiwan, and how can it open up the imagination of “heterotopia”?
We welcome interested friends to form forums to share thoughts and practices and to explore the boundaries between the Global South and the Global North. Let’s rethink “Taiwan Can Help”!
