 Okay, let's get started. So I'd like to welcome you to this very special science centre of Taiwan Studies seminar. We welcome Professor Scott Simon, who's the research chair in Taiwan Studies at the University of Ottawa. The two of us are two of the very few people around in the world that actually have Taiwan Studies in their job climate. So I think it's a real, I think it's really a kind of a, and Scott's back for the second time, I think. So the last time was back in 2008 in our Culture and State conference. On this occasion Scott's timing is a little bit odd, because essentially Scott's presentation and paper is part of our social movements in Taiwan conference programme that we were running last week. And so long as you came to the public event, the round table on the Sunflower movement. But because of Scott's very complicated travel schedule, he's just back from Uttar. He had to delay his arrival in London. So this has meant that we've got an extra Taiwan Studies event this week. Scott is particularly famous for his work on Indigenous Studies in Taiwan. He's public very extensively. So when we were trying to put together this conference on Taiwanese social movements since 2008, he was the first person we thought of. And the project is particularly focusing on Taiwanese social movements after 2008. And the kind of almost rebirth of social movements. But one of the things that we found in the conference was how there's a lot of variations. Sometimes 2008 is the key kind of turning point. Okay, so without further ado, let's give Scott a warm warm welcome. And hopefully we'll have a lot of time also for Q&A as well. So first of all, thank you, Becky, for inviting me and so generously allowing to make my contribution to the conference well after the conference. And I would have liked to have been here but like you said, and I scheduled, it's been a little bit crazy this year with conferences in Tokyo, in Houtan, Wisconsin and not here. So it's almost difficult to remember where I am at any given time. Thank you all for coming on because this is a really good gathering about Taiwan Studies scholars here. So I'm teaching at the University of Ottawa in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology. But I do manage to do fieldwork in Taiwan and from 2004 to 2007 I had a long fieldwork project. I did 18 months of work in Hualien and Nantou. When I began my project in 2000, when I submitted my proposal to the funding agency, they were called the Aetail tribe. When I arrived there they were called the Taroko tribe. And then by the time I finished my project they were divided into Taroko and Sejec tribes. So that's been a very big part of the project as well. I do have a book about, I think it's a bit inaccessible to most of you, it's in French. It's called Sejec Ballet, Le Toc Toli Formosan, Nantou Sésite, and it's about state and community relations. But if you wait a while I do plan on doing a book in English, so that's just a matter of time. Anyway, I want to give a talk here about indigenous rights movements which was of course written for the conference and I hope that through this and through our discussion in Q&A that we can actually try to make some, get some more information about Taiwan and its indigenous movements. And I'm intentionally using general there because it's definitely more than one movement. But maybe we can even start working towards a better theory about social movements and then move on to something new. So anyway, you're all part of our discussion so I thank you and hope we can have some good discussion. Can you hear me well in the back? Since the very existence of indigenous social movements in Taiwan as a result of successful social movement mobilization since the 1980s I think that the study of indigenous social movements is central to understanding the social context of indigenous peoples in the country. Forwardly known as the Austronesian inhabitants of Taiwan who currently numbers of 2% of Taiwan's population are now fully recognized as indigenous peoples a status which has wide-ranging implications in international and national law. Taiwan's indigenous social movements and processes that seem remarkably raffled to outside observers successfully loving to get indigenous rights included in the Republic of China Constitution in the 1994-1997 revisions to create a cabinet level of consulate of indigenous peoples in 1996 and to pass the basic law on indigenous peoples in the legislative union. And it should be noted that this is a document which precedes by two years the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and contains many of the same basic principles. There are differences but that's not the topic of today's paper. Taiwan's indigenous social activists have been regular participants in the United Nations indigenous events making indigenous peoples an important place and arena for Taiwan to gain voice in the international arena. Some people say that it's the indigenous people only represented in the UN from Taiwan. The relative success of Taiwan's indigenous rights movement to bring about legal change especially if compared to other countries where indigenous activists have lost their lives while pressing for political and legal reform merits solid social scientific analysis. And Canada is one of those countries where activists have lost their lives while protesting for the rights of indigenous peoples. Some sympathetic accounts of the movement in Taiwan, I'm thinking about some of the early articles by for example Fiorella Allio depicted indigenous groups as autonomous political actors that are legitimately pursuing their own group interests in a new democratic context. And so democratization simply permitted a flowering of a movement but it was just waiting to happen. Michael Stanton himself a missionary and pastor as well as an anthropology student analyzed the movement as an outgrowth of liberation and theology. Like Allio he drew attention to the role of the Presbyterian church in the formation of indigenous NGOs which in a church with a majority of indigenous members is an expression of indigenous autonomy. But they're having some dissenting views about the meaning of the indigenous social movements as well. Especially during the sensway beyond presidency, Taiwanese and foreign observers alike often suspected that the state instrumentalized indigeneity to claim a distinct identity from China. In a groundbreaking article on the movement, Tsinghua University anthropologist Gu Kunhui shows how indigenous activists exploited political opportunities to assert their rights at a moment when Taiwan was actively seeking a non-Chinese identity. So with kind of a state centered approach, she concluded her analysis with showing how the state and the DPP manipulated indigenous themes to legitimize a new national identity and most prominently by using indigenous performers at the 2000 inauguration ceremony of President Chen Sui-hye. German Sinologist Mikhail Rudolf took an instrumentalization hypothesis even further even asserting about the indigenous movement and pro-tests and so forth that quote, all these efforts of course had not only the aim to demarcate culturally but also politically from China. So for such authors, indigeneity is a way of showing that Taiwan is not Chinese. Now the former approach which we may call populist approaches tend to view the indigenous social movements as grassroots demands that are intrinsically inherent in liberating finally gaining better traction in a new political context. These approaches can be combined easily with a political economic tradition in anthropology such as that of Arturo Escobar who used development as a discourse that legitimizes external involvement in local communities but which is frequently countered by an indigenous social movement. The latter approach, which we may call an instrumentalist approach sees indigeneity as a political construction accelerated by Taiwan's demands for fuller international acceptance so it's a new identity type of argument. This approach is more in line with the works of Brass or Radha writing Watameori. These people who viewed indigenous and other ethnic mobilizations as forms of elite competition for resources. These divergent approaches tend to reflect debates within the field of anthropology between anthropologists more closely associated with the social movements some of whom have even assisted in the formation of international NGOs and the introduction of indigenous groups into the UN system and I will admit that I have been rather closely attached to the social movement myself and also there are those who have taken a more distant stance contributing more to social theory than to indigenous demands. A six years of a pro-Chinese administration under my job make it possible to evaluate these two approaches by formulating a hypothesis based on the instrumentalist approach. If indigeneity is merely a byproduct of Taiwan's nationalist earnings, one wouldn't have expected a waning of indigenous discourse and a refusal of state organs to entertain indigenous demands as Ma's government de-emphasizes Taiwanization and seeks to legitimize rapprochement with China. I think we can see in this photo that yes Ma does kind of incorporate indigeneity into his politics as well. So they think that would have been a surprise for some of those authors who equated it with the DPP. Yet I would have shown this paper that events since 2008 have demonstrated that the indigenous rights movement has maintained its movement. This seems to indicate that indigenous people have interests that cannot be reduced to issues of national identity, party politics, or elite competition for resources. Somehow paradise of indigenous people overwhelmingly support the K&T yet indigenous movements are involved in both blue and green political networks in Taiwan. I think it's important as we think through the paper and think through indigeneity that we see an important difference in the English between indigenous people and indigenous peoples with an S and to realize it is legitimate that we can look at both of them as anthropologists. So indigenous people would be individuals who have indigenous identity. So there are 500,000 indigenous people in Taiwan. Whereas peoples would refer to these 14, now 16 groups that have a certain national identity as being indigenous nations. It's been a big issue in the UN. The Declaration of Common Rights of indigenous peoples has that S at the end of it. In fact, there were demonstrations in Geneva where indigenous activists had signs with just the letter S on them. To remind the system that it's important that these indigenous nations and peoples have the same rights as other peoples, especially for self determination. So I think that many social movement leaders in Taiwan hope that they can make progress in indigenous rights in ways that transcend the blue and the green divide that they often perceive as being a conflict between Han Taiwanese political actors that actually has very little to do with indigenous peoples. Now events of the past 6 years suggest that the indigenous movements are here to stay no matter what kind of discourse the government has about Taiwanization or China. Now part of this is because the movements have been institutionalized to a certain extent. And so they already exist as NGOs and there's people who are active in that as their careers and lives and so forth. The movements are also nourished by relations with state institutions that are specific to indigenous peoples. Many of them predate the China administration. I think that this often gets overlooked in studies of the indigenous social movement in Taiwan. That since the Japanese period, if not before that there have been a separate legal frameworks for indigenous peoples that are different than that of the Han people in Taiwan. But since 1945 some of the institutions that are important would be quotas for indigenous legislators and township authorities. There were quotas at the provincial level before. Legal provisions for indigenous peoples in the Constitution and elsewhere in law. The Council of Indigenous Peoples which also had a predecessor in the provincial government and of course the property rights regimes of reserve land that have kept indigenous communities and identities largely intact. So there is this a certain path dependency which maintains the existence of indigenous communities despite whatever changes may happen in the broader political context. So this paper reflects all the diversity of the movements and their mobilization strategies especially since my job is elected in 2008. So I'm going to reflect a bit on the social movement. And my reflections are based, they emerge actually from some observations made in my research project from 2004 to 2007. Three of these which are up here in the Durugul area and the Durugul National Park and up in the Sejek area in Nantou. I was looking at development and resistance to development projects basically in those first few years after the Durugul received recognition as a tribe independent of Vietnam in 2004. Because that project began in Shuling township in Palyan the main conflicts under study were local struggles against the incursions of Asia's cement and the Turugul National Park on indigenous land. The research coincided with local demands to create a Turugul indigenous autonomous region inspired by provisions in the 2005 basic law. But also by Chen Sebyan's promises that state indigenous relations should be based on a new partnership or even quasi state-to-state relations. Turugul demands for self-government in a traditional territory that encompassed three Palyan townships and Nantou were countered by local resistance and by demands in Nantou for state recognition of the Sejek tribe. The Sejek who liked the Turugul claimed that their membership included speakers of Turugul, Teketaya and Toda dialects in Palyan and Nantou were recognized as an independent tribe in the waiting weeks of the China administration in 2008. In fact back then they were quite nervous that the China administration would not recognize them. The executive unit in fact told them this should wait until Maijo comes into office and they insisted that it be done right away and so it was and they were quite relieved they were afraid that they would not get recognition from Maijo. Although just this year they recognized two tribes that split away from the Zou tribe so it's difficult to know. Anyway that's up to 2008 since then in the context of summer visits to Taiwan and an additional six months of field research from 2012 to 2013 I have remained in constant contact with Turugul and Sejek activists. Every time I go to Taiwan I go every year at least once I go on a visit and make a round with the island and I visit people who actually actively dislike one another that are somewhat in competition, some of them who are very much in favor of the Turugul and others from the Sejek and the same communities. In 2009 while working as a visiting scholar at the Graduate Institute of Austronesian Studies in Taidong I was able to observe activities of the Hunter Smoke Action League, the use of open space technology to organize protests as well as rallies against the proposed nuclear waste storage site in a Taiwan village in Taidong. In 2012 I observed discussions around the formation of the Taiwan First Nations Party and attended their inaugural ceremony in Taipei. In fact I think you may recognize that the name of that title sounds very Canadian because they use the word First Nations just like Canada does and they actually consulted me about the name of their party. They wanted to call themselves the Assembly of First Nations Party of Taiwan because Canada has an assembly of First Nations and my advice was that that name is a bit confusing because it's not sure if it's an assembly or a party but there are actually two very different political strategies. An assembly would have all of the chiefs of different villages electing together a general chief and then they would have an alternative government and then ask the government to negotiate with them which is what Canada's done. Whereas a party would have them in competition for those six legislative positions in Taiwan and so that would be more like the Maori Party in New Zealand. So there was a choice that they had to make and they assured me that they wanted to be a party and run for office and so my suggestion was to take away the word assembly to remove the confusion and that's precisely what the Ministry of Interior insisted that they do as well which is why they took away. But anyway, due to increasing use of social media as well I've been able to reign in touch with Indigenous activists and I've been able to continue observation of events even when I'm not physically present in Taiwan. So as the social movements in Taiwan have matured I think that there are well called four new unfoldings which merit our intention and I prefer to think of them as unfoldings rather than as developments in order to avoid any impression of linear development. So we really don't know where these changes are going to go. I want to try to avoid the impression of linear developments or linear thinking or teleological assumptions. Rather, like the unfolding of blossoms on a tree, I think that some of these changes will mature into fruit whereas others will merely wither and fall off the branches. So these four unfoldings are an increased emphasis on lively issues, the rise of non-church actors the broad use of new social media and a radical rethinking of party politics. So this is more of the old social movements where we see here they're making their scoring allegiance to the nation, very in Nantou at the memorial site of Mona Ludao and actually referring to Saideh Kedpo on the native country of Saideh Sijie. So the first unfolding I think is a shifted emphasis from name rectification, which is very important in the first waves of social movements to lively issues. The first generation of the indigenous movement was necessarily focused on a rather confusion dynamic of name rectification. Getting recognition as Yuan Zulin and Yuan Zulin Yuan Zulin. So that's actually translating the whole S discourse into Chinese rather than as together in some way. Arguably the previously used name of mountain compatriots already entitled Taiwan's Maolin groups to certain political and economic rights as can be seen in the fact that the ROC signed the International Labor Organization 101, which was in 1957 the first international declaration on rights of indigenous peoples. They did that just after the Chinese invasion of Tibet in order to prove that they're better to minorities in Taiwan than they are in China. But nonetheless that was a recognition as was the creation of 30 mountain townships San Dixiang by Zhang Kaixiang. So there were things going on in much earlier time than we often imagine. There were also certain mechanisms in the provincial government for the governance of these communities. And most important was of course the land reserve system, which was something that the Japanese had set up and then under the ROC it was the land was privatized but still kept in indigenous hands. Now most of these institutions like ILO 107 had the intention of modernizing the targeted communities. The goal was assimilation and the idea was to try to somehow assimilate the mountain and plains peoples all into an imagine Chinese community and so forth. But it would take time with these special institutions. Now what often gets ignored is there was a shift in discourse. And the international law was from international people to international peoples. But in Chinese, in Taiwan, there was the whole issue of 中民 and then some of the conservatives such as the 議員 that the academicity wanted to call them 憲徒民 saying that everybody came from somewhere else so we can't say that there are original inhabitants, but we can't say that there are first inhabitants. And then this all came into the language of constitutional revisions and I think it's worth taking a good look at that. The 1994 constitutional amendments endowed 中民 with specific social and political rights. Indigenous activists who lobbied hard for 中民 continued to lobby to change it to 中民 in 1997. And it's kind of interesting, I think probably most of the lawmakers who voted for that in 97 were unaware of what the implications would be. The activists who come through the URM movement at the church were very much aware. But we can take a really brief look at this. It's almost everybody here. It's from Taiwan. Just take a look at 1994 and 97. And we can see there's kind of a sea shift here in discourse. So the first one is looking at the three areas of the ROC. The second one saying it's according to the will of the peoples here. And I think that the big difference that I want to show here is that it's a shift from 中民 to 中民. And it says that they have the 中民 so this is saying that it's protecting the political status and participation of Indigenous peoples. And this is very different from the 1994 one. The 1994 one is basically talking about Indigenous people then would have the right to vote and present themselves in elections. Whereas the second one, and I really don't think that the politicians understood what they were doing here. But they're giving the right to peoples which would mean the Italian people and the Paiwan people and the Pungan people and the Szecek and any other group that was able to give themselves a name and get recognized would therefore have a certain position. And this would be in regard to education and communications and irrigation health and so forth. Economics and land, social welfare. I think that the last sentence of both of these really shows that the legislators didn't understand what they were getting into because it says that the people of Jima and Matsu would also have the same rights. But the 中民 中 set the framework for what happened in 2005 when the basic law on the rights of Indigenous people sets up very clearly that the rights are held by collective groups as recognized in that law. And so that would include all of the different nations that we know as well as new ones to be recognized. So this was a big change. Ironically maybe it was intentional or not. If you ever look at the official English translations it says aborigines in both case. So the English translation does not reflect the sea change that happened in the Chinese documents. So those are quite important. The attention to name rectification in the beginning was very important. It subsequently led to name rectification for specific local groups as successful demands for state recognition led a number of state recognized groups to expand from 9 from the entire period from 1945 to 2000 to 14 by the end of the century and presidency into 16 this year. Observers including Indigenous activists involved in these issues have equipped to know that the timing of these changes has tended to be strategically planned to influence the results of local and legislative elections. These events are not isolated from international developments as groups seek to gain traction or friction in the words of Anat Singh to better push their claims. The emergence of an international Indigenous rights movement in the 1980s led some Taiwanese Indigenous leaders to demand full legal recognition that they had the same inherent rights as Indigenous peoples in America and elsewhere. Born in the urban rural movement, these demands included recognition of the term Yen Tzu Min Tzu in the Constitution, creation of the constitutional Indigenous peoples, and the recognition of such peoples as the Trukku and the Sijek. From a village level, however, the rather abstract and political nature of these changes such as Yen Tzu Min Tzu made them necessarily difficult for local people or what Rudolph calls ordinary people to understand. So often ordinary villagers in Taiwan often perceive the creation of new organizations or these institutional changes including ideas about self-government to be simple ways in which their local leaders try to create new positions for themselves. On the subject of Indigenous self-determination Mikhail Rudolph has quoted one person describing proposals for the creation of autonomous districts which is very fiercely debated recently, as only a means to get aborigines locked up in a cage so that people could look at them like monkeys in a zoo. The problem was that these issues, as pressing as they may seem to urban-based activists and their local allies, were being very remote from the livelihood issues of rural workers and farmers. Even in the communities where I have worked, and where name rectification was a major issue, very few people were actually interested in whether they were called Etayam, Trukku, or Sijek. They were much more interested in such things as what price they could earn for their peanut and corn crops or how they could take legal action against labor contractors who would hire them to work on construction projects and then disappear when it's time to give them paychecks. But now that the institutional framework for Indigenous rights has been created, the movement has been making a shift towards more livelihood issues, issues such as the control of forests and shores, the danger posed by nuclear and the right to hunt. And these may very well gain increased traction in local communities. So a second unfolding has been the rise of non-church actors. As noted by nearly all observers, the Presbyterian Church has played a central role in the creation of the Indigenous rights movement. The first Indigenous rights organization, the Alliance for Taiwanese Aborigines, was essentially a libertarian political alliance relying on Christian concepts of social justice and Marxist influence liberation theology. Beginning in the 1980s and relying largely on international alliances that included Dr. Ed Fial and his Mohawk wife Donna Loft from Canada, the Church trained the generation of Indigenous social activists in training camps known as the Urban World Mission or URM for short. Any of you ever participated in URM by any chance being from Taiwan? Now it's basically a way of training social activists. During this training, promising social activists learned to focus on group identity, define visions for social change, identify the causes of social pain in their communities, as well as obstacles for change, and then create strategies for action. During the training, instructors probably give examples of their direct action, as when they toppled a statue of Wu Feng, a mythical Qing dynasty official who supposedly sacrificed his own life to convince the Zou people to stop hand hunting from its pedestal at Jai Yi, and they noted proudly that the statue was subsequently replaced by the memorial to the 228 incident. Graduates at URM have launched various social movements including a drive to reclaim land from the Asian cement quarry and factory in Banyan, but also various main rectification movements such as the Sijek. So URM graduates have been very active in the social movements. The main weakness of this form of political organization is so closely associated with the Presbyterian Church that it has alienated members of other churches, including the Roman Catholics and the true Jesus Church, who sometimes label these activists as being too political or too green and so forth. The training camps have also been held outside of local communities, meaning that they are available only to those individuals who have time and resources to attend. They thus create the impression that any of the subsequent political demands are the strategies of certain elites to gain power. Even the organizers of the movement against Asian cement, for example, were greeted with local skepticism and rumors that their protests were attempts to gain a seat on the township council, or rather mysteriously to extort financial gain from Asian cement, as if companies ever paid people to organize protests against them. Although the Presbyterian Church was an important incubator of social movements, it is noteworthy that activism has moved beyond church networks. Although these groups are largely organized by well-educated urban-based activists, they have managed to create secular groups that attempt to transcend ethnic or tribal identification. So certain new groups would include the Indigenous Youth Front Yuen Zu Ming Zi Qin Yan Zhen Xian, the Taiwan Indigenous People Society, Taiwan itself, which is related more to independence movements. The Association of Taiwan Indigenous People Development, the Taiwan Yuen Zu Ming Xue Yuan, Zhu Jin Hui, the Indigenous People Action Coalition of Taiwan, Taiwan Yuen Zu Ming Huluo Xing Dao Nian Meng, the Association of Taiwan's Indigenous People's Policy, Taiwan Yuen Zu Ming Zu Zheng Ce Xie Hui, and the Hunter Smoke Action League, which is the translation they've chosen for Lam Yan Xing Dao Nian Meng. There's also the NGO Millet Foundation, which has strong involvement of certain anthropologists in Taiwan, which funds research and advocacy. Most of these associations are still urban-based, with their meetings and public events being held mostly in Taipei. The members tend to be educated Indigenous people, with some support from sympathetic non-Indigenous academics. And at the universities, there also are many Indigenous student associations. The Hunter Smoke Action League is actually a photo of them here. It's quite interesting because it's more rural-based, and it's active in communities up and down the East Coast. And they light these bonfires at their protest, which has become kind of a trademark. It's why they're called the Hunter Smoke Action League. And generally, they have an annual protest, which they use simultaneously around Taiwan on the 28th of February every year. They have been a bit more successful than the earlier groups at reaching out to villagers. And not least because they have been able to offer legal aid to people involved in land disputes with non-Indigenous people. So they're actually getting very much involved in livelihood issues of ordinary people. Even so, the people are very active in the Hunter Smoke Action League to say that the people in the village are mostly too busy with farming and with work and raising children and getting old and taking care of parents and so forth, that they don't have that much time to pay attention to Indigenous rights issues or get involved in social movement activities. Now, a third unfolding, and this has happened everywhere, and like the other two, has little to do with my Joe, is that there's been a dramatic blossoming in the use of new social media. All of the aforementioned groups have their own websites. And as you surely all know, almost everybody in Taiwan has a smart phone. In fact, last summer when I was doing research, people observed noted to me that whereas I use a very antiquated cell phone, all of the old people in the village have smart phones and all of the children have iPads. So it's become very common to use social media. And the social movements have been very successful in creating platforms for themselves on Facebook and YouTube to spread information about their ideals, but also information about protests and activities that are going to happen. So anybody who's interested in Indigenous rights can be better informed than ever before about what's happening in Taiwan. Images and information about land disputes are easily available. I think, however, this deserves further research on how people are actually using these different kinds of social media. It's quite possible that most people are still not looking at social movement sites. My own experience in sharing with my Indigenous friends on Facebook is that they tend to push like in very large numbers if I have a picture of a deer in my front yard or my dog. But when I share information about Indigenous politics, they tend not to get that many likes. I think research more needs to be done on that. In fact, the most, the one that I really saw on social media of Indigenous people in Taiwan active at a demonstration had little to do with Indigenous rights. They were opposing same-sex marriage and had that on their website. I think it still needs to be researched what social media means. I wanted to show a clip from the Hunter smoke actually. Let's take a break from this and just see what they've done. I think this is quite a big video here. It was on YouTube. Finally, a fourth unfolding is a new challenge for traditional political parties. The Indigenous groups seem adequate to be represented in the legislative union. Especially as a quota of six Indigenous legislators means that the Indigenous people who constitute 2% of Taiwan's population have 5% of the seats in the legislation. Yet Indigenous activists have long been frustrated with the fact that Indigenous people go overwhelmingly for the KMT and that Indigenous legislators often but not always tend to follow the party line rather than represent Indigenous interests. At any rate, Indigenous legislators are often isolated within the party caucuses and most compromised with non-Indigenous interests. In 2012, veteran activists from all over Taiwan met in Taipei to formally establish the Taiwan First Nations Party, which is a photo of their establishment event. They've established local offices and cities and townships across Taiwan. If they can successfully elect one or two legislators, they may, like New Zealand's Mayoral Party, increase Indigenous voice in the legislature. Indigenous activists and other individuals, however, retain bitter memories of an attempt to establish a Taiwan Indigenous Party in the 1990s. Although that party never succeeded in electing a legislator, people recall that the organizers raised funds from across Taiwan and supposedly pocketed many of the proceeds for their personal enrichment. It is unclear at this moment if these various new forms of social movements will succeed in changing the political landscape for Indigenous people or gaining more substantial implementation of the basic law. What is clear, however, is that they're turning more to livelihood issues. So before concluding, I'll just look at that very briefly. The list of Indigenous issues brought up during the Ma administration is quite long. Non-liberal issues that probably seem less pressing to ordinary villagers included protests against the conversion of mountain townships into city districts, and Taiwan revised its municipal structure to convert several counties into municipalities. The issue of laws for Indigenous autonomy since the Shuiya attracted the attention of Indigenous activists and intellectuals but gained very little traction among ordinary people. During the Sunflower Movement, several Indigenous rights groups took public action and supported the movement against ECFA and the Services Agreement, and Indigenous students claimed their own public space and demonstrations. But in the villages, people tended to show disapproval of such actions, saying that the students had broken laws and were manipulated by larger political forces. To ordinary villagers, there was far more sympathy to livelihood issues, such as those surrounding reconstruction after Taifun Marakot, and they especially disliked the housing that was built by Tsichi, and they didn't like the attitude of Buddhist NGOs in the villages. Protests against the Maeniwan Resort, which we just saw in the photo and the video, protests against hot springs in the Haohia and the Galtai Dam, as well as against road construction that involved displacement of graves in Khaidipur. These issues gained more support, and especially due to social media, I think there was greater awareness of non-local issues and the relationship between actions in different localities. Maenjo deserves a little bit of credit for creating indigenous courts, which began only this year, but the influence of those remains to be seen. I'll just briefly show a few pictures here, some from the internet, but in Tomban, in Hualien, last December, there was a road black blockade, and a lot of people that actually went to support them, they tried to prevent the forestry division from removing trees from their traditional land. And then just this month, they blocked the roads of tourists, especially Chinese tourists, and so they've required them to park the buses down below, and then they have to walk through the village rather than driving through. So they were able to block the roads and get what they want. These are pictures I took myself. This has to do with a village called Nan Tian Bu Luo, which has been consulted about whether or not they would like to store their waste there. So we took this trip to the creek where they planned storing it and you can see the ocean behind us there, and then the communities on just the opposite side of the creek were not even consulted at all. And so there's concern about the threat there. After what's happened in Fukushima, I think we're on the wrong way of the threat nuclear power post. So here's the demonstration they had in front of Tai Pao, Tai Dong. That's been an issue. Hunting issues are really big issues. Hunting has been somewhat decriminalized, but hunters would still have to apply a month in advance to the township authorities. And then they're only permitted to hunt when they said they would hunt and the animal, they said that they would catch. But of course it's impossible to know what kind of animal you mean in the forest and when your ancestors will give you a dream telling you to hunt yourself for it. So people still do get arrested. So we see here Kawinchi defending Aboriginal hunters at the Taroko National Park. And then the policemen giving their apologies for their actions towards hunters. Just some pictures there. In conclusion, what does all this mean? In my book here, Sejeh Paolai I demonstrated that all of the political and social measures taken for and by the Assephalist communities and societies of Taiwan from township elections to name rectification have contributed to a bureaucratization of indigeneity. The charismatic leadership of formerly egalitarian societies has been scrutinized into forms of state leadership albeit not without resistance from ordinary people's perspectives, like those of the international indigenous movement, are still infused with ideals and equality between men and spiritual notions of love. This calls for a radical rethinking of the meaning of the indigenous social movements in a way that explains its resilience to the face of wider political change. James Scott in his book The Art of Not Being Covered was quite skeptical of indigenism which he framed as yet another millenarian movement after centuries of Southeast Asian religious prophets based on Buddhism or Christianity. In his words the destination remains the same but the means of transportation has changed. All of these imagined communities have been charged with poking expectations unquote. So I think we need to think seriously about what that means and think about indigenity as being a cosmology as well. And I think we need to be serious about the idea that culture in anthropology also has certain teleological assumptions that cultures exist to perpetuate themselves. But I think what we need to do is think about not just the indigenous peoples that are involved even though we've been learning that that's the way we should think but also indigenous people. I think we can better understand various social movements and the resilience of indigenous peoples in the face of political change. If we think of them as composed of individual actors who continue to pursue their own lively goods and strategies among changing circumstances. We can let's better perceive continuity in terms of the indigenous legislators, township authorities and public servants who have maintained even in transgender positions in Taiwan as the KMT returns to the presidency in the executive union. We can also see the importance of livelihood issues as thousands of people outside of these privileged positions see to maintain their own lifestyles based on farming, productive labor, fishing and hunting. Taiwan's indigenous movements seem to gain best traction and they can relate to livelihood issues as those lifestyles are threatened by coastal development, nuclear waste storage, the criminalization of hunting, etc. To see the social movements' only elite competition misses most of the picture. Because these supposed elites whether they are legislators, pastors, musicians or unemployed youth with university degrees are also members of their community, sons and daughters brothers and sisters of ordinary people. And these elites are not the only people involved in social movements which rely on their success on thousands of students, workers, small entrepreneurs, farmers and unemployed people who devote their time and resources. These people are very capable of judging others in their situation. They may be critical when they talk about the social movement to outside observers, but their intellects are just keen when they decide to join a demonstration or to vote for a candidate and yes they do vote for the KMT, but I think they do so because they've intelligently thought through what that means. The actions and strategies of social movement entrepreneurs and their somewhat fickle supporters are neither those of isolated rational actors nor beings over determined by culture, but they are human beings embedded in social networks who are motivated not just by power and money, but also by emotion and faith. It is thus not surprising that the indigenous social movements continue to unfold in changing circumstances, but we need better tools to understand it. So I found this quite interesting from a photo from a conference that was held last year by none other than the executive union in Mindjail, self-determination and sustainable development. This is a conference on national policies for indigenous peoples in the 21st century and we can see the state, just like the social movement is talking about indigenous self-administration. They mean different things ahead, but then they're talking more about more neoliberal things like boosting development of indigenous industries and promoting ethno-cultural pluralism. What's interesting is looking through the faces in here, we see that many of them are the same people who show up at demonstrations and even lead demonstrations who are indigenous professors at universities and so forth. The same people tend to show up in the social movement and at state organized events and I think the people in the villages are quite aware of that and so that says quite a bit about the social movement as well. So thank you. Thanks for that Scott. I'm really glad that we managed to get you here and cover a very, very different angle. When we think about how many social movements, we have a stereotype that it's a very green thing and I've seen that a lot but one of the things that came up both in your talk and in a number of the papers in the conference last week was this kind of stereotype doesn't really work anymore. One of the things that struck me for my work with the Green Party is how much many of these activists really hate the DP as well. They hate the KNT but they hate the DP as well. Similarly if we think about social movement supporting immigrant spouses, they tend to be actually very, very pro KNT particularly those with supporting Chinese. So there's a lot more diversity when we look at Taiwanese social movements. And again I think your presentation also reflected the problems of the periodization. Again this is something that came up a lot. I mean originally I thought that 2008 would be a perfect cut-off point but I think in a lot of the movements we looked at actually it didn't really work with a lot more continuity. Another thing I found really interesting that came up a lot in our discussions last week and I think you've touched upon this as well is the relationship between political parties. And this kind of elite mass gap which again I think was really interesting in this case that you looked at and of course this idea about an Aboriginal political party. I mean I wasn't actually aware of this case in the 1990s. And again this is something that came up last week when we were looking at the green part. Whether or not it could actually act as a voice for some of these social movements and particularly the environmental movement. And even within the environmental movement there's a lot of doubt whether it can actually fulfill this role. I mean for you do you see any, do you see it having any real prospects this first nation party? Because I know my students but maybe you've had some correspondence with Luanzi who's one of her projects is looking at indigenous voting and why they tend how to explain this, what this kind of continuation though many of the Aboriginal social movements are quite anti-KMT but when it comes to voting it's still pretty consistent. There's a number of things there. What do you think about this first nation party? Do you see how it had any prospects? I think that in terms of prospects I tend to agree with Emile Durkhan. I'm studying the futures of your so-called beta. But that being said I think that I can wish them well and hope that maybe they can gain more than two seats. The prospects of that I think are quite wrong. Because the KMT is so firmly entrenched there within the villages. And Gao Jingzumi is very firmly entrenched in her position as well. So I think it's rather difficult to beat the developments at the game that they've been playing so long for so long. Another fascinating trend that you highlighted was this development of social media. Which I think for us that people that are observing Taiwanese development it's an amazing tool. I wonder whether it's better actually more useful for us researchers than it is actually for social movement incidents. I think that's why more research has to be done before we can say anything about it. Because as much as I enjoy looking at their websites and their Facebook pages and even though I friend them and make them so far on their pages I don't know how people really are using social media. And I have very little evidence to say ordinary people in the villages are using that. One of the things that came out in some of my Green Party interviews was we asked this question about what made you vote Green for the Green Party and a large proportion of the people we interviewed it was getting information from our social media so it will be interesting to see once people look at this in some detail Firstly, where is this coming from? Where is this coming from? But also does it actually lead to any changes in voting in it? Again I think it's a bit unknown. I'm sure you have a lot of questions who would like to kind of get started? Well it seems to me although I did point out there are two major issues from what you're saying. First is the land secondly is the hunting issue. And these two have a change. I mean have this issue of concern changed over the years and has become more prominent or less so because the people are concerning about voting but your body seems to suggest that lively or day to day issues are more prominent for ordinary people. If that's the case the change of regime and their concerns changed accordingly because of the change of regime. I would say that these two issues are the two key issues for indigenous people and they had exactly the same problem no matter who was the president on this. Was it because never resolved? It was never resolved because the main issue is that there are two types of land that the movements are concerned with. There's the reserve land which is called Balno T. And that was the case with Asia Cement. And that was also the case with part of the Terralco National Park is that the township office is in charge of regulating the reserve land. And what happened in the case of Asia Cement is there was actual fraud whereas somebody forged the names and used to borrow the jobs for some other purpose and then used them on these documents saying that they had renounced their rights to land to the township office which then turned the run and leased the land to Asia Cement. So there was fraud there. So there are issues regarding the use of reserve land and usually it's not fraudulent but even more often township authorities who are themselves aboriginal who have prior knowledge of which land is dedicated to be leased to the creation of an industrial park or something. And so they hurry up and register that land in their names. And even though somebody else is far from there but never bothered to register their land and then when it comes time to transfer the land they get the money. And so there's been those issues. So reserve land. But then the traditional territory is often where issues happen because governments whether it's DDP or KMT have never recognized any legitimacy of indigenous claimants to traditional territories. They just claim it's oil deep so it belongs to the forestry division or does the Ministry of Defense or somebody and the Indian industry has no right to that. So that's what maybe one is about most of these issues. Hunting. And I forget who it was but somebody said hunting is the only issue that brings indigenous people out because it is really the only issue that will get everybody in the village upset and will get everybody to turn out to the demonstration. So hunting is a really hot issue. And that one is one in which change has happened. And basically the big changes are that have permitted indigenous men to register up to two homemade rifles with the local police office. Now the problem is that they have no way to legally acquire ammunition or gunfire. And so it's still relatively illegal for them to hunt. One man just a few weeks ago told me that he was so angry with all of this that he took his two rifles and he legally registered the police station and just gave them to them and said I don't want to have any legally registered rifles which is identifying me as a hunter and then I still can't hunt anyway as I would like. And so that's been an issue. There have been regulations created that permit them to apply in advance for hunting for cultural reasons. And I actually have a document which is very interesting. They have a list of all of the cultural reasons for hunting according to tribal community. Because they actually asked each community to provide a list of what cultural reasons they would have for hunting. And in some of them they said it's because of a certain festival which of course excludes people who want to hunt for other reasons. And then Siman was very good at coming up with a list of cultural reasons saying maybe for marriages and so forth that we need to hunt. To give gifts to our in-laws and all of that. Other communities didn't think about those parts of culture that are just everything like. So the list can be applied to every tribe. So Siman Housa says we hunt because we have to give me to our in-laws but then somebody else their tribe doesn't say that. They have to go according to their list that they may. So this way of legalizing hunting is still constraining hunting at the same time. And probably the biggest issues are that it's completely illegal to hunt in national parts. And many of them have their hunting territories in national parts. And probably most the most obvious case of all is that trapping is entirely illegal. And nobody seems to be bringing up this issue. You know it's all about hunting rifles. But most people who hunt are elderly people who are using traps. And nobody seems to be talking about on behalf of these elderly trappers. And they took it arrested. So this issue has gone throughout the sense of being in the mind of administration. Nobody seems to care. And in fact the non-indigenous population in Taiwan seems to stigmatize hunting. Which they see as backwards. Or they see it as killing animals and being somehow immoral and so forth. Thank you for your talk. It's very interesting when you do the comparison between the indigenous Taiwanese in Taiwan and the state of the first nations in Canada. And what's interesting is because just like Taiwan, yeah Taiwan and Quebec want to go on independence half of them. And then go back to the 90's you have the Okra crisis in Quebec as well. And it was a similar circumstance compared to Taiwan, the whole land grab issue. And then you have the Mohawks taking out arms and confronting Canadian forces having this crisis going on. So I was just wondering if we could continue this comparison. To what extent does there exist a capacity within Taiwan, within the people, to resort to similar measures. If they keep getting pushed such as the issue of the nuclear waste being put out there land. Whether if you have another choice to resort to having armed confrontation from the central government I think. Well obviously we don't have arms. Yeah, they've got rifles but they don't have arms to weapon. But you know there is like in Taiwan they block the roads. So I guess that shows that they can learn from that. And I'm pretty sure that in Taiwan in line they actually decided to block roads because they know the Canadian first nations block roads. At the beginning of the discussion about using referendums for self-determination no tool. Which is surprising. It seems to be logical to me that back when the Taroko were having all of these meetings about creating a Taroko Autonomous Region that one of the first steps they should take if you have a referendum on Taroko people asking if they want to have that. And then they can take the results of their own referendum to the government and say our people want this. But the organizers of that said well the only thing we really need to do is talk to the Shinsan yet. So they wanted to talk to Yoshin Kud and they didn't want to talk to the Taroko people. So do you think that's back down to this kind of elite crossroads gang? Yeah, that's it. And it certainly makes it look as if self-determination or autonomous districts is only an affair. We have done a poor job of reaching out to our people. Ah, okay. Yes. You talked about the UN information, Hormera information. Now in Taiwan it's all part state member of UN. They voted in Taiwan. They are the review about the ICACPR and the SISCOM review. If any review about the check of the International Convention on International All-Fong Racial Discrimination Review If someone's been reviewing their because they are not part of the UN but they follow this schedule and follow this model just uses, for example they use the SISCOM review and the ICACPR review, International Vehicle Covenants, vehicle and civil rights. And if any review about the for example for the technical rights review is according to UN Hormera information. Basically, Taiwan tries to evaluate itself in accordance with UN instruments like the Human Development Report, it creates its own. And the issue here is not the UN Rights Convention but the UN Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Yundri. And the UN sends a special report around the World to gather information about Canada and so forth. And of course they don't put in Taiwan. But Taiwan is made its own reports and I think it's quite disappointing to say that Taiwan is a tendency to just say, oh yes, we have already achieved 80% of the goals of the declaration. And I think that they're a little bit, I think it's a little bit of government propaganda that they really have not achieved the goals of Yundri but they have not understood or achieved any spirit of it, which is assuming that it's the Indigenous Peoples themselves who have certain rights that the government should respect. Even if you look at the basic law and you look at Yundri when you compare them, Yundri basically says Indigenous Peoples have such and such a right, whereas if you look at the Taiwan Basic Law it says the state shall solve the subject of the document. Aboriginal language education, because actually I think it was in this room a few months ago Anita just showed her film about protection of Indigenous languages in Taiwan and Hawaii and I was wondering to what extent have Aboriginal social movements actually stressed preservation of local languages? I think it was something about education. How important is this? And the other question that had been crossing my mind listening to your presentation was how many Aboriginal social movement groups are there? We're talking about elitist groups so they've got to be very, very small and I can imagine do they work well together or are they very, very conflictual? They have a very conflictual image and very much unrelated to one another and there's no question how many but they need to find who is a social movement who's not because there are also all of these NGOs that are there to promote Indigenous language education and I intended not to think about those as social movements because they tend to be created by teachers as a vehicle for applying for funding to create textbooks and so I intended to see that it's related to but apart from political activism in the story. The disappointing part of this is that Indigenous education for language training tends to be one to two hours a week and I've actually gone and sat in on classes and it tends to be mostly memorizing lists of words and I'm not making it a living language they teach it as if it were a dead language. I think that came out in Anita's film there was a real contrast between Hawaii and Taiwan I think the overall conclusion when we watched that film was quite pessimistic about the preservation at least among younger generation I've seen immersion schools in Canada where the entire curriculum from first grade until the end of sixth grade is entirely in their language no matter what they study and then I see them do one or two hours a week in Taiwan and it saddens me to see that they're not taking it seriously and furthermore I've even seen that those teachers and principals who are promoting these native language education programs one or two hours a week are sending their own children to other schools because they want their own children to be more able to compete in a bigger society and so I see that and it's rather distressing as well and also I've seen one person told me that they actually had been shown when they had a more proactive cultural and language education a lot of the parents took their children to school and so I've seen that there was Nikki and also Jack as well just to kind of slide step away from that discussion there I'm going to go back into the beginning of your presentation where you shaped the picture of my dress to impress one of the questions that you raised was the kind of the idea that this was predominantly a deep thing and then why is it something that was continuing and I was just wondering whether or not that you think this could be a case of almost like neutralizing the discourse where by doing so you're kind of removing the fact that he's not doing it so there is not an argument towards him saying this is something that you're not doing providing these scenes to kind of being there whether or not it could be a case of just taking away fire from the DPP in the sense it's not really I don't think there's an intention of taking away the fire from the DPP I don't think there's that I think that there's enough of a path dependence even in the KMT that it has its own dynamic that has nothing to do with the DPP you know, John Kaishak used to start events with dances and indigenous people and he was not trying to prove that Taiwan's not a part of China he was saying he was China but he still did that as I think a way of reaching out to local people and you know the legislators are there and they're mostly KMT but I think it really has its own internal dynamic and so I don't think it has anything to do with it to me it's a nice part that you mentioned that there was a la bian shun dong the smoking, the hunter smoke and that happened in the 228 and to me it was it's intriguing because to me 228 sounds like Taiwan's identity but the indigenous people they have their own identity issues less than because about 1 year ago I had a drink with an indigenous white and he was a leader in the Taiwan community and I asked him a question about your identity issues do you identify yourself with Dao, Hanang or do you agree with the Taiwanese ethnicities on these issues or even to identify with your previous and he gave me the question that is your Taiwanese people's business, it's not their business so I want to ask you how did you observe the la bian shun dong 228 and more of your identity how did they see themselves involved in this or did they understand at 35 with the Taiwanese I think that's the whole reason why we have to talk about social movements and plural because there really is a great diversity of possibilities here now obviously the hunter smoke actually has chosen to identify with Taiwan and that's why they picked 228 is the day they have their big demonstrations because they want to say that we indigenous people have suffered and they draw attention to how indigenous people were active in 228 the Tiltrache was the one that was very active in that gaui sun that he was executed afterwards so basically from Orchid Island that's something that's happening on the mainland and has nothing to do with Orchid Island with the Dao people thank you for that one point about the social media indigenous people use the social media for different issues or different things for me there are functions of social media the first one is marketing which help people identify themselves the second is information outlet as you mentioned how the village people whether they use it in their daily lives or not probably don't use it that often but when there are certain big issues or big events they use it as an information outlet to connect people among themselves it's like a bridge between the locals and international communities you can observe something similar in the subplot movement or in other movements also the third part of it is very crucial in my opinion it's the platform for user generated content because it's not just the webmaster or the media posting it's not just for the official people giving out information but also a platform for people in their community to post whatever events or other content on it it's usually triggered by major events for instance you see the subplot movement there are actually many students or many social experts posting photos videos or reports in the square so I'm wondering the use of social media with the strength and identity of indigenous peoples how significant do you see it in the future because apparently it's still kind of new like Facebook for the younger generations to carry on using it how significant do you see this contribution to the recognition of the identity of indigenous peoples I think that like I said we really need to do some research on this specifically to know for sure I think one of the big changes is that he thought that people were saying this back then that they didn't even like the release of me and now I think everybody identifies very clearly as being in Zoom but then the problem is the social media I can say that from my observations which are not systematically collecting is that I see very few people using Twitter but what I have seen is that people love Facebook and recently in fact my invitations to be friends on Facebook coming from Taiwan are coming from elderly people as well which is quite interesting so people in their 60s and 70s are now using Facebook as well because they have it on their smartphones using a computer it's not an intimidating tool inside it's their smart phones it's something that has actually been taken to the number for going there and asking questions and following people around watching how they're using it my impression and this is only based on maybe the 200 people in indigenous communities who have friended me on Facebook seeing what they post my impression is that they're posting life events meals and almost nothing to do with the indigenous social movement you can apply to the various social movement groups the social movement groups can have their dedicated page so if you go to the Hunter smoke page and they have the social movement I heard from my Taiwanese friends that it's not really common it's not very popular in the Taiwanese when at the start of Sunflower movement I was slightly involved in it my Taiwanese friends was encouraging the participants to use Twitter to use hashtag in spreading the information to the outside world to the international community so that's what I'm saying this is like a platform like a personal Facebook account is too much like live events, views but for the indigenous people for their page there are some major events that everyone can contribute to the official page if there's anything put on the official page everyone's account is not spreading the information that's my problem we've got 3 questions, Theo, Susan let's take these through the original self autonomy after so many years of campaigning for the original self governments we can see for the end of this year we start to have the original district chief my question is what major changes have there been before and after what is the most important change I want to know do you see any clear collaboration between tribes participating in social movement because I've been looking historically at the existence of our origins but they don't seem to they share this in some ways like hunting they all have headhunted hunting in the way for them to express their resistance but they don't seem to work with each other historically because they don't speak the same language they have different identity and they are often in the title of war there but where the criminal clients they try to work together to push a bit more forward their identity for their hunting and even having guns as well sorry for that because I'm suffering from the hay fever I have one question my question is about what I mean during your research experience how do these things induce people in the territory area they are using some public resources such as the because I know like originally when the telephone national public plan those they call it like community center tourist demonstration they want to induce people to use it as well as they want the tourists to come over and then maybe like find something in the park not purely tourist but also for the inflow cost however because of the inner dynamic between different indigenous people I was wondering like how those different groups of people are using this pre-exist facility or they were just majorly controlled and managed by the outsiders who got the fits my feedback about social media is so we do do some research article about the fall of Facebook actually made the stock price of Facebook drop by 3.8% after that block article was rebuilt by newspaper journalists usually the Facebook post that is under 15 words will have better response for most of the Facebook posts if that exists 200 words usually you will get people feel bored and they don't really bother to read it so what happens is most people will give like the experience of Facebook page manager or editors they will use like a photo with like last 150 words to describe a whole incident and then a message so the truth is people will receive a message instead of the whole picture like Facebook the other finding is that more elder people are using Facebook right now actually the young user of Facebook is dramatically dropped one reason is your parents is using Facebook it's not cool anymore but the second thing is because like Twitter and Instagram can share like more instant and condensed information that young people are more easier to absorb but for Tani's people all draw like a large amount of elder over 50 population are using Facebook they are administering right now however a lot of people they are still using a platform called PTT that is like the BBS platform although that is old but it somehow is similar like Twitter it's text based, instant and then like a lot of interact function with it so there might be a possible reason why what you observe in Taiwan and why your Tani's friend responds to your cute animals rather than the minofone article you post my name is Vim and I'm putting to the harm transfer but I'm the one of the the people who are using Facebook and what do you think about when you're looking at the 100 small things that is very useful to demonstrate to our government because in 2009 our government always forces to abandon our community I don't believe in our government so we are going to have one more demonstration to protect our government because indigenous community is very complicated because our leadway is most of indigenous leadway is KMT and the people lead in the village we are going to put a lot of efforts to present our rights and so I also don't believe that so what do you think that this kind of demonstration is very useful and how can we improve to protect our government in the future okay so you have caught a lot of stuff maybe you should just be a little bit selective and then perhaps we can also continue some discussion over a drink if you still have the energy all four of those rather easy so I've got to test my memory here so the first one is about autonomy and what changes have come about I've been talking about indigenous autonomy in Taiwan ever since 1945 Gao Yi Sun was actually the first one to say we should have an indigenous autonomous district in Taiwan his image, because he was the leader of the Japanese period and his idea was that they would all come together and have one autonomous district that never happened and what's happening is they're encouraging local chiefs to be elected who have no real political power at all but all the way through this no indigenous autonomous region has ever been created yet and so there are debates about that KMT has said that we can create autonomous regions as long as we don't interfere with pre-existing administrative boundaries as long as non-indigenous people have the same rights as before it's a very modest proposal and then I think that most of the indigenous activists hope that each nation will have its own autonomous district and so nothing's happened so far probably the most realistic one would be for each village to have its own each island in Seje to have its own because those are people who already identify with one another because that gets to your question about whether the movement has moved beyond the big identities and they're trying really hard and I think that the church has tried to do that, the URM movement and all of these movements like the Hunters Smoke are attempting to create a new pan-indigenous identity but there are still frictions there you know when I was in the Deku Daya village of Palupa I was sitting and drinking beer with some people and then Wada Jiro, one of the big activists of the Sejec, named rectification came looking for me and they said to me, you can't leave with him he stalled up during the Japanese period they killed our people and that was in the films, I did film Pada and that's within the group that calls themselves Sejec I mentioned that hostilities still exist between the drug and the Amis and the bono but there are really deep-seated hostilities in Sejec they're still there, but they're trying as hard as they can your question on tonight really quickly about the Taroko National Park they have visitors center and they're full of water and it's just basically the park administration controls that completely, it has nothing to do with the local people the local people are very upset that they're not allowed to go and set up sell sausages it's still a home of contention the big issue now is the people who live in the park want the what's it called, the building the cable car has broken down that's their big issue and your question is very good, I think it's really important and I hope that you can take it back in Taiwan, but I think that demonstrations are important, they're an important part of the organization but in the village a lot of people are confused about it in fact when I was going around asking people if they've ever been to a public park one very common response was run away or not they didn't even know I was a man, so I had to explain to them they tend to be created with Gao Jing Su Mei demonstrating and making people angry, they really don't like that so I don't think that the use of demonstrations in Taipei or wherever is going to be helpful within the community itself but it's important for branding it's important for media attention and I think that the success of the indigenous social movements everywhere depends on reaching out to non-indigenous people and I would encourage you to take a look on the internet and I don't know more I bet you can Google it because it's been very successful in Canada and getting non-indigenous people to support the indigenous rights movement and it's really getting traction and might influence the next elections and that might be a model for Taiwan so I don't know more okay, on that point I think we should continue our discussions over some beer or wine so let's give Scott one more so if any of you still have some energy we'll relocate to the Institute of Education I have to go first