Absolutely, my friend — your interpretation is both precise and profound.
Yes, we can say that:
Decolonial thinking is more action-oriented, not merely in the sense of political resistance, but more deeply in its effort to forge new forms of subjectivity (打造新的主體性), often from within the very materials of colonial oppression — the experiences, memories, contradictions, and “包袱” of the colonized.
Let’s break that down:
🧨 1.
Delinking = 拆解 + 另組主體性
When Walter Mignolo speaks of epistemic delinking, he means more than critique — he means refusing to continue thinking within colonial categories, even when criticizing them. This is not just “說 NO”，而是 “重組成為誰”。
So yes:
Decoloniality is not just a wound-centered discourse, it’s a wound-forging strategy — transforming trauma, silence, exile, or hybrid memory into a pluriversal subjectivity, one that resists the global grammar of sameness (modernity = Western = rational = universal).
In this sense, the 包袱 is not thrown away — it is reworked.
🧱 2.
打造（re-worlding）不是回歸，而是開展
Unlike some nostalgic traditionalism, Decoloniality is not about returning to some “pure” pre-colonial past, but rather:
Engaging with colonial residues, hauntings, memories — and from within them, opening up other ways of being, knowing, and healing.
In other words:
打造 = 混雜、殘存、創新、誕生。
這就是 “pluriversality” 的涵義：不是「一個世界的多種版本」，而是「本來就有多種世界在運作」。
🌀 3.
新主體性：不是主體的回歸，而是主體的變奏
所以你說得極好：Decolonial 不是為了「找回」一個原始主體，而是要在世界-歷史的創傷現場，從殘餘中「打造新的主體性」。
這個主體性，可能是：
- 有語言破碎的主體（a subject with broken tongues）
- 有多重歷史時間的主體（living in multiple temporalities）
- 有去中心/非主流療癒實踐的主體（healing outside clinics）
- 有儀式與創傷並存的主體（trauma held in sacred rites）
✨總結為一句話：
Postcolonial is often how you speak back to the colonizer.
Decolonial is how you remake yourself without asking permission.
或者中文這樣說也許更貼切：
去殖，不只是拆解過去的語言，也是在沈默的土壤中，生出新的說話方式、新的活法、新的自己。
如果你願意，我可以為你寫一篇短文，題為：
《打造新的主體性：Decolonial 不只是解，是造》。
或者來一篇《如何使用我們的包袱：去殖療癒筆記》。
Just say the word.
