馬來西亞跨國勞工政策與國族國家的雙重邏輯： 發展主義與國族主義

Abstract

馬來西亞作爲發展主義後進、強勢國家，身處於全球資本主義體制的跨國分工生產鏈，以及馬來穆斯林主導政治的多元族群社會之中，使發展主義與國族主義(官方民族主義)這兩種意識形態，成爲了檢視跨國勞動遷移的重要指標。本論文從國族國家的雙重邏輯—發展主義與國族主義，檢視如何影響了馬來西亞跨國勞工政策之形成與流變？國族國家的政策合理性或治理邏輯爲何？ 馬來西亞統治精英與政府奉行發展主義意識形態，長期高度干預國家政治經濟發展政策。它們一方面實施種族恩惠政策，重新再分配經濟和社會資源；另一方面，確保穩定且持續引進大量廉價勞動力來源，成爲了國家發展與資本積累的重要機制。跨國勞工佔馬來西亞總勞動力人口的25%，足見廉價勞動力對國家發展的重要性。 本研究分析了1970年代至今，浮現於跨國勞動遷移不同階段的重要經驗謎題，指出發展主義意識形態如何促成廉價勞動力成爲國家經濟發展的重要機制。此外，本研究檢視國家統治精英與官僚代理機構，如何以國家發展之名，建構「勞工短缺」、「長遠策略的短暫措施」等論述，來合理化跨國勞工的引進，同時壓制本地勞工抗議失業發起罷工的抵抗聲音。嚴厲及剝削性客工制度愈趨明確的建立，作爲政府試圖管控和消除非正規遷移的手段，以彰顯其統治正當性。爲了適時地因應地主國在不同階段的需求，移工政策本身呈現出斷斷續續的特質，使跨國勞動淪爲「合法奴工」。

另一方面，國族國家偏好與馬來族群文化特質具親近性的印尼穆斯林移工，使後者在馬來西亞跨國勞動市場佔有顯著地位，約佔總跨國勞工人口其中的六至八成。國家的選擇性與「馬來性」與伊斯蘭教化政策成爲馬來西亞國族主義的關鍵且優越概念相關聯。可是，這種選擇性在單一族裔政體的多元族裔社會中引起爭議，進而使移工政策成為國族政治再重構—「誰以成爲我們」、「我們是誰」—的延伸場域。本研究提出，此一階段的國家傾向於採取一種跨越國家疆域邊界的族群化劃界策略，試圖將與馬來族群文化特質相近的印尼穆斯林移工納入「我們」，建立一個遍佈世界、跨國家邊界的伊斯蘭社群—「烏瑪」的一部分。不過，這種優先選擇性與納入模式，仍然出自於一種地主國整合主義的觀點，印尼穆斯林移工本身多樣性的文化身份並未受到肯認。 後來，印尼穆斯林移工的身份角色也隨著國家經濟產業的發展而有所改變，也使到他們歷經了階層化他者化的過程。地主國不同社會行動者，在各式各樣具體的互動情境脈絡中，採取不同的他者化劃界方式，使印尼移工同時受到了各種權力宰制與支配關係的影響。後期的印尼穆斯林移工，傾向於被建構為一個顯著對立的劣勢他者，凸顯出馬來西亞國族主義内涵之轉變。此外，本研究主張這個關注政府試圖雇用非傳統來源國跨國移工以後所面臨的新興問題，如何引發了發展主義與國族主義之間的矛盾關係。印尼穆斯林移工反被認爲是不符合「新馬來穆斯林典範」，意味著國家邊界不再馬來同一信仰者所開放，其所建構出來的是一個「有邊界的伊斯蘭世界社群」。此邊界不僅具有強烈的階級因素，且也反過來合理化了地主國透過各種方式壓制各國籍跨國勞工，以防止他們透過各種方式向上流動的可能，進而穿透了現代化、先進的伊斯蘭世俗國。 最後，本研究也重新整理發展主義與國族主義這雙重邏輯，如何展現在馬來西亞跨國勞工遷移的不同階段，以及它們彼此之間不同的關係組合。

This thesis mainly focuses on how the dual logic of Malaysia--developmentalism and nationalism-- influences Malaysia labor migration policy in different contexts. The rationality in policy is also analyzed by examining the role of nation-state. Both the ideologies have significantly shaped the political-economy of Malaysia. As a strong developmental state, Malaysia’s nation-state plays its important role in directing the capitalist development by serving the international division of labor. In the mean time, though the state has presented itself as a multiethnic society, it has never abandoned its effort in building a Malay Muslim dominated political entity. Migrant workers have contributed 25% of total labor force in Malaysia and this reflects cheap labor is taken as a crucial mechanism in this developmental state. By addressing its reliance on cheap labor, this thesis traces and describes the few puzzles emerged from the development of and changes in Malaysia transnational labor movement since 1970s. In order to rationalize the recruitment of migrant workers, the author argues that the state has constructed discourses of ‘labor crisis’ and ‘temporary measure’ in the name of national development. Paradoxically, local workers’ strikes and complaints have spread. An exploitative and harsh guest-worker policy, as a mean of controlling irregular migration and of restoring government legitimacy, has been gradually established. The stop-go characteristic of migrant worker policy, best serves host country’s need, has however turned the migrant workers into ‘legal servitude’. From the nationalism perspective, account nearly 60%-80% of Malaysia transnational labor market, the large proportion of Indonesian workers, who share common characteristics of Malay ethnic culture, proves the existence of the state’s selectivity which is related to and consistent with its basic features of nationalism that emphasize on the superiority of ‘Malayness’ and Islamization. I proposed the concept of ‘ethnicization’ to capture the state selectivity where it is prone to integrate Indonesian migrant workers, to some extent, into the construction of ummah—the world wide Islamic community—rather than exclude them. It can be expected that migrant worker policy with preference challenges the multiethnic nation identity and raises question such as ‘Who are we?’ Depending on circumstances, Indonesian migrant workers have been experiencing the process of stratified Otherization in the sense that they have been treated as inferior other when different social actors, includes the state, try to draw boundaries. This is especially true when the Malaysian government adopted ‘Indonesia Hire Last’ policy and immediately determined to diversify its source countries from 4 to 17 in 2002. These changes triggers the contradiction of developmentalism and nationalism. Comparing to the early stage policy, I argue that the recent migrant worker policy shows that the state borderline no longer opens to Indonesian Muslim workers since they failed to fit into the new concept of ‘New Malay Muslim Model’ and thus a newly ‘bounded Islamic community’ is established. To sum up, I reexamine the different combinations of relationships of the dual logic—developmentalism and nationalism, which is reflected on the formation of Malaysia labor migration.