一九八○年代展開的台灣原住民族運動，預設著原住民族主義此一意識形態，其內涵包括以民族自決為核心的集體權利體系，其正當性基礎則訴諸於尊重文化差異及歷史主人地位（差異文化論及歷史主權論）。該意識形態係檢驗後續各原住民族政策是否符合族群平等理念的重要依據。本文從當年主要訴求文件，解析前述意識形態內涵，以及國家如何回應與吸納之，並遂步實踐於憲政體制。此外，無論倡議或實踐階段，以民族自決為核心的集體權利訴求，以及差異文化論與歷史主權論這兩項主要理據，亦承受來自於其他人權理念、正義標準或社會價值的挑戰，形成規範層次的可能衝突。本文亦將從近年的某些爭議議題解析其間的可能衝突，以及思想層次上可能得採取的策略。

The Indigenous Movement that emerged in Taiwan in the 1980s presupposed an ideology of Indigenism. Its core consisted of a system of collective rights centered on the principle of self-determination, while the normative justification for these rights was grounded in respect for cultural difference and the status of Indigenous peoples as historical proprietors of the land—that is, arguments based on cultural difference and historical sovereignty. This ideology has served as an important criterion for evaluating whether subsequent Indigenous policies conform to the ideal of ethnic equality. Drawing on major rights-claim documents produced during this period, this article analyzes the substantive content of this ideology, as well as how the state responded to and incorporated it, gradually implementing it within the constitutional framework. Furthermore, both in the stages of advocacy and implementation, collective rights claims centered on self-determination, together with the two principal justificatory frameworks of cultural difference and historical sovereignty, have faced challenges from other human rights doctrines, standards of justice, and social values, giving rise to potential normative conflicts. This article also examines several recent controversial issues to analyze these possible conflicts and the intellectual strategies that may be required to address them.