OPERACIONALIZACIÓN DE VARIABLES

Traditionally, indigenous peoples construct political systems that are closely connected to their living circumstances. Through such systems, indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage, values, and world views are bound together to a certain degree. Indigenous traditional political systems are intimately connected with kinship rooted in their culture and history. The concept of class exists in the majority of traditional indigenous societies and carries with it strict rules; the responsibilities of contemporary “traditional” indigenous political systems59 include recognizing and facilitating their rights and leading role in protecting and preserving their culture and traditional system, and in decision-making regarding their future development. But after long periods of colonization, indigenous political

59

The concept of a “traditional” indigenous political system includes within its scope not only their pre- colonization operating paradigm, i.e., before they were affected by the political and management concepts of dominant groups. Within the colonization process of dominant groups, so-called “tradition” will to a greater or lesser degree be influenced, infiltrated or forced to change by different values. As colonized people, indigenous peoples themselves, even if they are strongly motivated to develop schooling, will still face numerous challenges due to differences in ideas and methods as compared to those of the dominant government.

systems develop into different forms. As Porter (2005:93) points out in his discussion of the ideas of different kinds of tribal governments that exist in the United States,

There are three basic types of tribal government. First, there are the traditional governments, which retain an unwritten form that has been in place since before the arrival of the colonists. Second, there are the autonomous constitutional governments, which are written forms of government established by the people themselves through a democratic process. Lastly, there are the dependent constitutional or corporate governments, which are established through the direct influence of the United States […] most native governments today reflect a combination of these different governmental types.

Even though some aspects of indigenous traditional legal systems (such as rituals and political cultural practices) are still widely in use60, it is evident that such systems are facing several serious challenges to their survival. For example, even the traditional political system of the largest indigenous community in Taiwan, the Amis people (approximately 146,000), has been influenced and changed by the Han Taiwanese dominance. In the past, before contact with colonizers, their traditional social organization was based on matrilineal clans. After getting married, the male had to move into the female’s residence. Family affairs including finances were decided upon by the female head of the household. Events such as marriage or the allocation of wealth were decided upon in a power hosted by the uncles of the female head of the household. The public affairs concerning community politics, law, wars, and religion were dealt with by an institution consisting of males of all age grades. But nowadays, intermarriages and the influence of the dominant educational philosophy have led the younger Amis generation to shift their traditions in a “new” direction. The community political system has already changed and evolved into a Taiwanese political system. Another example is formed by the Rukai people in Taiwan. The traditional social structure in Rukai society is that of a hierarchy comprising nobles and commoners. The nobles have the privilege of the legendary blood superiority and of ownership of lands. Common people can raise their social status by attaining leadership functions through increasing harvest storage and marriage. But within the context of the national political structure in Taiwan, land rights can no longer be exercised in a traditional way but rather have to follow the national land-use policy. And as long as a member of noble family cannot succeed in getting a good job in Taiwanese society, his or her noble background would amount to only a title with no significance for her/his future development. (洪英聖 2005) Of course, in those cases where the traditional political structure was not totally destroyed, within the indigenous community itself, most indigenous peoples still treasure, respect, and even abide by the traditional rules.

The above, in conjunction with the effect of globalization, speeds up the pace of change in indigenous culture and values. However, colonization, with its methods of segregation and assimilation that were so devastating to indigenous traditional cultural heritage, influenced the leadership practice and philosophy of indigenous leaders. The aftermath of this wholesale transformation of an entire system was somewhat like old traditional authorities being incorporated into the dominant governance structure. Since the means by which indigenous leaders are selected differ from those of the dominant system, indigenous leaders were treated as people with a vested interest, becoming a powerful channel through which dominant governments could easily secure agreements with

60

indigenous peoples. After all, these leaders, whether part of a traditional political system that has been in existence for a long time or of a “new” political system61, wield considerable influence.

“Indigenous education” and “indigenous schools” are merely symbolic nouns in most countries; development of educational policy and course content are completely dependent on government policy. With regard to this subject, the work that indigenous leaders can do is in fact limited. As stated previously, once indigenous leaders become stakeholders, in some ways, some unwanted challenges may rise to the implementation of indigenous education policy. In addition, the inherent political structures of indigenous peoples exist at the extreme peripheries of the dominant society, and may even be completely neglected. This leads to the inability of indigenous education to attain fair participation opportunities in educational policy-making processes, not to mention traditional indigenous political power becoming a means of support for the enacting of indigenous education, or providing any needed assistance for indigenous schools in school administration or curriculum development.

What is important is that if the conception and attitudes of indigenous leaders cannot break free from the influence, both tangible and intangible, of the dominant political power structure, then it is as if the dominant government’s spokespeople can only follow “standard” procedure and blindly continue implementing inappropriate colonial education.