美國一九六零年代，黑人鼓吹高等教育裡要有一門學科，開宗明義就是以族裔爲基礎的學術空間，因此，非裔研究(African American Studies)的體制就順勢而生。過去四十年來，非裔研究是美國高等教育不可或缺的一門。雖然人人歡迎此學門的發展，但承認這學門後也引發在論述上激烈的爭議，各種論點相互分歧。不同門派的說法都希望能被認同。另一個較不相關但更艱鉅的考驗就是此學門已有族群分化的現象，而身份政治又孰輕孰重要。此領域越來越著重在種族、族裔和身份的討論也有損此學門的初衷，多數人認爲此種發展是反映美國境內疏離黑人的問題，及共日趨嚴重的結果。因此、非裔研究就是在美國的主流下，發展另一思潮，既雙軌並行，又抗衡主流。而也其有很多評論家所觀察到有族群分化的特色。近幾年來，這種思想上的疏離因爲全球化的關係又與日俱增，全球化的來臨也促使傳統思想模式的修正。非裔研究中因著重身份政治，衍生各種各族的分化，構成教學上嚴重的挑戰，尤其近來人文和社會學科又特別導向跨領域和跨文化的論述。此篇論文討論族裔研究已經在跨領域和跨文化的思潮下，對種族和族裔造成分化的效應。非裔研究在族群類化之下如何因應全球化？在全球化的脈絡下，非裔研究的思潮所強調的身份政治又有什麼可能的影饗？試圖回答這些問題的同時，也會接櫫歷史、社會／文化在非裔研究中可能產生的政治和思想模式。

The demand by Blacks for a distinct, ethnic based intellectual space within American higher education resulted in the institutionaliation of African American Studies (AAS) in the 1960s. In the past four decades American American studies has become integral to American higher education. Although a welcome development, this recognition unleashed heated paradigmatic controversies, resulting in a multiplicity of competing paradigms. Different ideologica schools now compete lot recognilion. An even more critical, though not unrelated, challenge is the prioritization of identity politics and ethnicization of the discipline. The growing emphasis on race, ethricity and identity has compromised the intellectual essence of the discipline. Many perceive this development as both a consequence and reflection of the deepening crisis of black alienation in America, Thus African American Studies has developed along parallel and opposition trajectory to mainstream America, and has assumed what many critics see as an essentially ethnic and separatist character. In recent years, this intellectuall alienation has deepened with giobalization, the advent of which has compelled revision of traditional intellectuall paradigms. The focus on identity politics and growing ethnicizaion and racialization of AAS therefore pose serious pedagogical challenge, especially in the context of a growing recognition for cross-disciplinary and intercultural discourses in the Humanities and Social Sciences. This paper examines the implications of the growing ethnicization and racialization of AAS for interdisciplinary/intercultural discourses. How are advocates of etlmicizing AAS responding to the reality of 1oha1ization? What are the likely consequences of the emphasis on identity politics for African American scholarship in the context of globalization? Attempting to answer these questions would unravel the underlying hisiorical, socio-cultural considerations for the growing characterization of AAS a political and ideoogica1 paradigm.