Maria John - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Maria John

This dissertation compares and connects the parallel histories of two Indigenous community-contro... more This dissertation compares and connects the parallel histories of two Indigenous community-controlled health services, the Seattle Indian Health Board (SIHB) and The Aboriginal Medical Service (AMS) of Sydney. These were among the first clinics of their kind to be established and run by and for urban Indigenous communities in the U.S. and Australia. Formed in the 1970s within months of each other, I bring their seemingly disconnected histories together to illuminate a larger transnational history about the political ramifications of twentieth-century postwar urbanization (and the associated growth of an Indigenous diaspora) on native people's concepts and practices of political sovereignty. By considering how these clinics provided a key forum for new urban pan-Indigenous forms of political and cultural identity-and claims to Indigenous rights-to be expressed and recognized, my work makes two significant contributions. First, it reveals the importance of health as an arena of Indigenous political action in the twentieth century. Second, it underscores that Indigenous sovereignty, as a political project, must be understood as both adaptive and responsive to change. Drawing on archival research and oral histories conducted over two years across Australia and the United States-including interviews with activists and health workers who were on the front lines of Indigenous politics in the 1950s-1970s-I explain why in their pursuit of self-determination, urban pan-Indigenous communities steadily turned away from a purely western conception of sovereignty as jurisdiction over land. The health struggles of urban Indigenous peoples since the Second World War are a pointed demonstration of how the loss of even limited territorial sovereignty (that is, relocation from reserves and reservations) led to damaging structural invisibility, discrimination, and neglect within the social welfare system. Thus, this dissertation shows how and why the communities in Seattle and Sydney were driven to pursue other forms of practiced, or what I call "deterritorialized" sovereignty centering on their rights to self-governance through the creation and transformation of various social organizations (in this case health clinics) in line with distinctive cultural perspectives. This is the first book-length study to take healthcare reform seriously as an arena in which Indigenous political actors worked to redefine the reach and the meaning of Indigenous sovereignty for communities without recourse to land or nationhood in the assertion of their sovereign rights. Moreover, by bringing a comparative view to this historical inquiry, my work reminds us that trans-Pacific networks of ideas and people formed a shared context for these peoples and histories. I argue that Indigenous health activists in the U.S. and Australia became active at precisely the same moment, because each saw their struggle for recognition and self-determination as part of a global challenge to racism during the Civil Rights era. Moreover, these Indigenous community-controlled clinics should be recognized as part of broader changes taking place in grassroots health advocacy at the time, as reflected in the contemporaneous community and women's health movements, and the movement to form People's Free Clinics by the Black Panthers. In its consideration of the unique problems of recognition faced by urban pan-Indigenous communities, "Sovereign Bodies" also contributes towards an understanding of processes of 'place-making' in a period of great mobility following the Second World War. This dissertation argues that the Indigenous urban health clinics very quickly came to represent the social production of a new kind of political space: not a tribal homeland or even a mosaic of different homelands, but a genuinely pan-Indigenous space in the city that gave physical form to new ideas of a non-territorial, or 'deterritorialized' sovereignty. Moreover, it shows that at work in the efforts of Seattle and Sydney's urban Indigenous health activists, was the idea of a 'portable' or 'mobile' Indigenous status. This was intended, among other things, to allow Indigenous people to live in cities-or wherever they choose for that matter-without having to give up their identity, cultural practices, or their legal status as Indigenous people and ensuing ability to make special claims on the government. At stake in their health activism, this dissertation argues, was a form of place-making that aimed to make Indigenous people at home everywhere within the national spaces of the U.S. and Australia.

East of East, 2020

Аннотация. Первая часть статьи посвящена роли первого поколения специальных инвестиционных контра... more Аннотация. Первая часть статьи посвящена роли первого поколения специальных инвестиционных контрактов (СПИК) в российско-германской хозяйственной кооперации. Во многом благодаря опыту, полученному в 2015-2018 гг. при реализации немецких проектовмаяков, к середине 2019 г. был подготовлен закон, получивший неофициальное название "СПИК 2.0" и вступивший в силу 13 августа 2019 г. Во второй части статьи автор анализирует преимущества и недостатки нового поколения СПИК, насколько они могут мотивировать стратегических игроков к внедрению на их российских предприятиях новейших технологий и процессов и как могут влиять на поведение немецких инвесторов в среднесрочной перспективе. Особое внимание уделено немецкому концерну "Сименс", желающему заключить с Минпромторгом РФ контракт на производство газовых турбин большой мощности, и связанному с этим конфликту с партнёром по совместному предприятию российской компанией "Силовые машины". Автор анализирует потенциальные сферы взаимодействия немецкого бизнеса и российского государства в рамках СПИК 2.0. Среди прочего сделан вывод о том, что высокие шансы есть только у тех инвесторов из Германии, кто заинтересован прийти в РФ с современными прорывными технологиями в обмен на среднесрочные государственные гарантии и поддержку. В ближайшие годы количество претендентов из Германии на заключение специнвестконтрактов нового поколения, по оценке автора, в отличие от прошлых лет будет минимально. Ключевые слова: Россия, Германия, российско-германское экономическое сотрудничество, специальный инвестиционный контракт, СПИК 2.0, прорывные технологии. После вступления в силу в начале 2015 г. Закона "О промышленной политике в Российской Федерации" немецкое бизнес-сообщество проявило большой интерес к новому механизму специальных инвестиционных контрактов, позволяющих благо-1 Первую часть статьи см.: Белов В.Б. Специальные инвестиционные контракты и российско-германское экономическое сотрудничество. Часть первая.

Indigenous Self-Determination in Australia, 2020

Interdisciplinary Approaches to Human Rights, 2018

Journal of American Studies, 2020

The idea that disease was a handmaiden of European colonization is by now a familiar trope. Thank... more The idea that disease was a handmaiden of European colonization is by now a familiar trope. Thanks in part to widely successful (and critiqued) pop-histories such as Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, and Steel, but also much-respected academic works by historians like Alfred Crosby, Paul Kelton, J. R. McNeil, and David S. Jones, one often hears the charge that human pathogens were the “shock-troops” of colonial conquest. Yet in his important new book, Sharks upon the Land: Colonialism, Indigenous Health, and Culture in Hawai’i, –, historian Seth Archer pushes beyond such epidemiological and demographic discussions that have long dominated historiographical engagements with health in indigenous history. Instead, Archer examines the broader (and perhaps less obvious) impacts of colonial diseases on indigenous communities. That is, once we move beyond the immediacies of death tolls, how did the decimation wrought by disease impact indigenous religious beliefs and practices? How did the history of disease impact gender and class relations within indigenous societies? Or indigenous trade and labor practices? On two counts, Archer’s focus on health and disease thus feels new and urgent within the subfield of indigenous health history. First, he writes about disease not for the purposes of cataloguing death, but to understand how that death had broader social and political ramifications. Second, he wants to understand how indigenous experiences of colonial disease generated internal changes within their cultures and societies. Archer’s project might, then, be described as an attempt to uncover an indigenous people’s social and cultural history of disease in colonial Hawaii. Framed slightly differently, Archer’s interest is in foregrounding how experiences of colonial disease drove Native Hawaiians to instigate, and sometimes less decisively embark on, courses of action that would bring significant changes within their own cultures, institutions, and societies. He has therefore written a book as committed to centering indigenous historical agency as it is dedicated to bringing health issues from the margins into the very center of significant moments in Hawaiian history. One can look forward to reading this book for understandings of how health matters influenced iconic episodes in Hawaiian history, from the successful political conquests of Kamehameha I to the death of Captain Cook. Moreover, what emerges from Archer’s attention to indigenous historical agency is a reframing of the bleak history of indigenous health in colonial Hawaii, as, ultimately, a story of indigenous survival, strategic cultural adaptation, and political maneuvering in the face of colonialism’s challenges – most especially, its diseases. Notably, Archer’s book intervenes in an ongoing debate that historians of indigenous health are having about the role of disease itself as an agent of historical change. Since at least the early s, scholars have placed emphasis on aspects of colonialism that created conditions which allowed diseases to flourish. Archer, however, seeks to