誰來做組織：青年樂生聯盟的組織歷程（2004-2014）

Abstract

這是一個探討組織者如何經營社運組織的研究。這項研究始於一個簡單的提問：「誰來做組織？」，更精確來說是「社運組織如何召募、培訓與輪替組織者？」。研究對象是樂生療養院保留運動中在院民及其自救會之外，最重要的社運組織－－「青年樂生聯盟」（2004∼2014），本研究認為青年樂生聯盟（以下簡稱樂青）在長達十年的運動歷程中，成功發展出另類組織典範，成為過去十年來在臺灣社運部門中最重要的新生社運組織之一。 本研究將研究問題拆解成三部分回答。首先，樂青如何持續召募新人？樂青透過與大學社團Z社建立獨特而穩定的聯繫管道得以持續召慕新人，經歷組織運作方式不同的衝突與磨合後，樂青逐漸發展出相對明確而穩定的召募程序：「實習階段、現役樂青推薦、例會通過、正式加入」。 再者，樂青如何培訓新人？樂青透過「集體決策，輪流實作」落實內部民主原則，在日常運作中即嚴格採取輪流分工培訓新進成員，確保新人得以有機會接觸不同分工位置、培養相關技能，當然不是所有組織工作都能迅速上手，有些工作難以培訓，需要長期的互動與磨練才能夠掌握。 最後，樂青如何因應組織者的去留問題？組織者「持續參與」同一個社運組織，往往並非常態，而是可能離開組織或轉換到不同社運組織。具體來說，樂青成員可能會因為「路線差異」、「意見分歧」、「人際互動」、「運動傷害」、「生涯規劃」和「找不到戰鬥位置」等六類因素離開組織，並且不同因素的離開會影響是否可能重回組織，據此發展出「離開」、「曾經離開」、「轉換」等不同的參與軌跡。 本研究的結論，嘗試將樂青個案放置到臺灣整體的社會社運部門歷史脈絡中檢視。延伸Verta Taylor的論點，指出社運組織不僅對其所屬運動本身有長期延續的支持作用，甚至對於整體社運部門也有延續作用，據此，我們可以說樂青是臺灣社運部門沉潛期的重要承載者，在既有社運組織因民進黨首次執政陷入「空洞化」危機時，橫空出世的樂青沒有經驗也沒有歷史包袱，反而開創出另類組織運作與行動方式，成為接下來十年青年學生積極參與社運的重要先行典範。

This research aimed to get a better knowledge of how organizers run a social movement organization. To be more specific, how do they recruiting, training, and replacing organizers? This research focused on the case of “Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” (2004-2014), which was one of the most successful newborn social movement organizations in past ten years in Taiwan. Main research discoveries summoned up to four points below. Firstly, “Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” successfully got connected to an student activist club called“Z Club”(pseudonym) in a university, so they can constantly recruit people from it. Secondly, “Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” trained beginners to be versatile rather than specialized. All the beginners had to learn to be an organizer by doing different kinds of the organizational work, and they divided the work by taking turns. So, all the beginners would have chances to do master different skills an organizer need to have. Though there were some kind of the organizational work which need a very long time to master, which could not be mastered only through a few time exercise. Thirdly, members of “Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” mainly withdrew from the organization for six kinds of reasons, which included “burn out”, “career plan”, “divergent doctrines”, “divergent opinions”, “quarrels”, and“felt no place in the organization”, and sometimes they went back after a while, sometimes they never went back, which constituted different trajectories of participation, such as “transfer”, “individual abeyance”, and “disengagement”. Finally, this research tried to argue that “Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” is the importer carrier of the social movement sector when other established social movement organizations goes quiet when the Democratic Progress Party first time won the presidency. Though the newborn“Youth for Lo-Sheng Sanatorium” lacking experiences, they had successfully developing a new model of running a social movement organization which influenced lots of forthcoming young activists.