本文關(guān)鍵詞： 毛利 懷唐伊條約 那塔胡 部落經(jīng)濟 共有產(chǎn)權(quán)　出處：《云南大學》2016年博士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：本文致力于撰寫毛利那塔胡部落的經(jīng)濟民族志。那塔胡是新西蘭具有代表性的毛利部落,由遍及南島的18個氏族組成。在不到200年的時間里,毛利部落經(jīng)濟經(jīng)歷了從采集漁獵經(jīng)濟到殖民地經(jīng)濟再到現(xiàn)代資本主義經(jīng)濟的變遷過程。以1840年“懷唐伊條約”的簽訂為起點,英國對新西蘭的殖民開始,西方資本主義制度對新西蘭毛利傳統(tǒng)社會的侵入,也經(jīng)歷了和自然生態(tài)環(huán)境同樣的過程,徹底改變了這塊人類最后定居大陸上的社會生態(tài)環(huán)境。在經(jīng)歷了近150年失去土地和家園、流離失所的不公正待遇后,那塔胡人于1986向王室提出索賠。這是新西蘭的第一個毛利部落索賠。在經(jīng)過漫長和艱苦的談判后,1996年,國會通過“那塔胡部落委員會法案”,標志著那塔胡部落在新西蘭國內(nèi)獲得了合法性地位。隨后,1998年,國會通過“那塔胡部落賠付法案”,由部落委員會代表全體那塔胡人接受王室賠付資產(chǎn)。本文在回顧這個歷史過程后認為,那塔胡部落委員會獲得合法性地位及王室賠付資產(chǎn)有兩個深刻的歷史原因：一個是以毛利主權(quán)為主線的泛毛利種族運動。近200年來,毛利主權(quán)經(jīng)歷了一個從無到有的認知和演變過程,從沒有明確定義的“土地的影子”到土地權(quán)利,從部落(氏族)酋長的個人權(quán)力到部落(氏族)的集體自治權(quán)力。這個運動在1970-80年代達到高潮。另一個是1980年代新西蘭政府推行的“羅杰經(jīng)濟學(Rogernomics)"。這一席卷西方主要國家的政治經(jīng)濟變革源自哈耶克和弗里德曼的新自由主義經(jīng)濟學。部落委員會獲得資產(chǎn)賠付后并未在部落內(nèi)部進行個人私有化,而是以集體共有產(chǎn)權(quán)的形式進行部落資本化。一方面,成立那塔胡控股公司,聘用職業(yè)經(jīng)理團隊管理和經(jīng)營,按照代際資本公司的模式經(jīng)營千年老店。另一方面,引入西方選舉制度和現(xiàn)代官僚體系,實行部落自治和管理部落分配。這一建立在部落文化自覺基礎(chǔ)之上的現(xiàn)代創(chuàng)型,充分利用族人的集體記憶和身份認同,有機地融合了當代主流的政治和經(jīng)濟治理模式,毛利為體、西學為用,開辟了小眾族群有效地參與地區(qū)、國家乃至全球政治經(jīng)濟博弈的創(chuàng)新之路。這一全新的現(xiàn)代部落一體化形式,標志著在新西蘭國內(nèi),那塔胡部落次級法理地位—族權(quán)的形成。如果說,這一創(chuàng)新也是一種回歸—回到古老的親緣關(guān)系—的話,那么,部落共有產(chǎn)權(quán)作為傳統(tǒng)親緣關(guān)系的現(xiàn)代表述,在當代經(jīng)濟過程中能否長期存在下去,就成了那塔胡的部落現(xiàn)代—體化形式能否持續(xù)發(fā)展的關(guān)鍵因素,從而也凸顯為本文必須回答的問題。從西方經(jīng)濟學的視角,那塔胡部落資本主義的實質(zhì)是委托—代理關(guān)系下的福利制度,是毛利傳統(tǒng)社會對資本主義制度的一種現(xiàn)代適應(yīng)。在自由主義經(jīng)濟語境中,個人產(chǎn)權(quán)明晰的主要指向是有助于人們形成交易時的合理預(yù)期。這一預(yù)期在不同的社會通過不同的法律、習俗和道德而得以表達。在那塔胡部落的現(xiàn)代組織形式里,毛利傳統(tǒng)社會中的hau所代表的互惠預(yù)期行使了個人產(chǎn)權(quán)的職能。從馬克思政治經(jīng)濟學的視角,300年來私有制所顛倒的人和土地的關(guān)系,可以說是人和自然的雙重異化—人本身成為商品的同時占有自然。但二者都“不是為了銷售而產(chǎn)生的,而是為了截然不同的理由而存在”。對土地作為私有財產(chǎn)的法理依據(jù)的追問,不僅僅是公平意義上的法理探討,還叩問人類對象性的生存方式本身。從經(jīng)濟人類學的視角,那塔胡部落是初民社會并置于資本主義社會的真實寫照。部落共有產(chǎn)權(quán)集中體現(xiàn)了薩林斯之“物質(zhì)實踐由文化構(gòu)成”的著名論斷。那塔胡人文化自覺的實踐邏輯所質(zhì)疑的,正是西方以個體占有為基點的文化秩序,危害了人類結(jié)群而居的自然屬性。而這一理性,并非放之四海而皆準的自然法則。最終,部落共有產(chǎn)權(quán)這個具有“有限目標理性”的歷時性連續(xù)體能否長期存在,取決于那塔胡人在秉承部落文化的同時,能否持續(xù)地“毛利化”西方社會制度和意識形態(tài),從而不斷邁向未來更高水平的部落一體化形式。
[Abstract]:This paper is devoted to the writing of Maori tribal ethnography Hu tower. The tower is Hu Economic Representative of the New Zealand Maori tribe, composed of 18 clans throughout the south. In less than 200 years, the Maori tribes economy experienced from the collection of fishing and hunting economy to the colonial economy to the evolution of modern capitalist economy. In 1840 the "Treaty of Waitangi" signed as a starting point, on New Zealand's British colonial invasion, the western capitalist system of the New Zealand Maori traditional society, has also experienced the same process and natural ecological environment, changed the human social and ecological environment, and finally settled on the land. After a loss of nearly 150 years and homes, displaced injustice, the tower of Hu people in 1986 claim to the royal family. This is the first New Zealand Maori tribes claim. After a long and hard After the talks, in 1996, Congress passed the "tower Hu tribal council act", marks the tower Hu tribe gained legitimacy status in New Zealand domestic. Then, in 1998, Congress passed the "tower Hu tribe Compensation Act", accept payment by Royal assets on behalf of all the tribal council tower. Based on the review of the hu man history that the tower, Hu tribal council to gain legitimacy and royal payment of assets has two profound historical reasons: one is the pan Maori racial movement to Maori sovereignty as the main line. In the past 200 years, the evolution of cognitive and sovereignty experience a process from scratch, from there is no clear definition of "the shadow" land rights, from the tribe (clan) chief of personal power to the Horde (clan) collective autonomy. The movement culminated in the 1970-80 era. The other is a New Zealand in 1980s The government's "Roger economics" (Rogernomics). The New Liberalism Economics that swept the major western countries political and economic change from Hayek and Freedman. The tribal council did not obtain assets after payment of individual privatization in the tribal interior, but by the collective property in the form of tribal capital. On the one hand, the establishment of the tower Hu holding company, employment occupation manager team management and operation, in accordance with the company's business model of intergenerational capital 1000 years old. On the other hand, the introduction of Western electoral system and modern bureaucratic system, the implementation and management of autonomous tribe. This tribe distribution built on the basis of the modern tribal cultural consciousness of innovation, make full use of their collective memory and identity, the organic integration of political and economic governance pattern of the contemporary mainstream, the gross profit for the body, Western learning for use, opened a small ethnic effective To participate in the regional, national and even global political and economic game innovation. This new modern tribal integration, marking the New Zealand domestic, the formation of secondary legal status - tower Hu tribe clan. If this innovation is a kind of return - return to old relationships - if so, tribal common property as a modern expression of traditional relationship, will continue to exist for a long time in the modern economy, has become a modern form of the tower body - Tribal Hu can be a key factor of sustainable development, which also highlights the questions must be answered. From the perspective of western economics, the essence of capitalism is the principal tower Hu tribe agent relationship under the welfare system, is a modern adaptation of Maori traditional society to the capitalist system. In the context of economic liberalism, individual property rights of the main points It is reasonable to expect people to help form a transaction. This is expected by different laws in different social customs and ethics, and to express. The modern organization form in the tower Hu tribe, mutual expected gross profit in the traditional society of Hau on behalf of the exercise of personal property from the Marx political economy functions. From the perspective of the relationship between the private ownership of the land and the people upside down for 300 years, can be said to be double the alienation of man and nature itself become a commodity and possession of nature. But the two are not to sell and produce, but for different reasons. "As the legal basis of private land the property of questioning, not only is to explore the legal sense of fairness, but also the human existence way of inquiry object itself. From the economic anthropology perspective, the tower Hu tribe is the primitive society in capitalist society A true portrayal of the tribe. The common property embodies the famous theory of "Sizhi SA Lin material practice by culture." questioned the logic of practice that Hu people's cultural consciousness, is the western individual possession for the basis of cultural order, harm to the human nature lived in groups. And this reason the world, is not always correct in natural law. In the end, the tribal common property rights have "limited rational goal of" diachronic continuum can exist for a long time, depending on the tower of Hu people in adhering to the tribal culture at the same time, will continue to "gross profit" of the western social system and ideology, so as to form tribal integration into the future at a higher level.

【學位授予單位】：云南大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：F119;C951
，

本文編號：1451614