Indigeneity and Indigenous Agency in Latin America (original) (raw)
Related papers
This paper, given as a lecture at a postgraduate conference in Copenhagen in May 2014, offers a discussion of recent developments in the politics of indigenous rights and autonomy in Latin America, examining the differences that arise from different national state policies but focusing principally on what is happening in practice as a result of different kinds of social setting, differences in inter-ethnic relations, and what states and state agents are doing rather than simply saying. The paper interrogates the question of territoriality, the issue of autonomy in multi-ethnic regions, the networking possibilities open to indigenous movements, self-defence movements and state recourse to the deniable violence of paramilitarisation, placing indigenous autonomy demands in the broader context of struggles over resource sovereignty, and examining ways in which the politics of indigeneity become relevant to social actors who do not see themselves as indigenous in the contemporary context of crisis in capitalism and democracy. But it also emphasises social and cultural change amongst indigenous people as a constant and continuing expression of their historical agency which can take many forms, some provoking conflict and internal social and political disputation, others not, but always incompatible with constructions of indigenous cultures as pure and timelessness, whether these are made by academics or indigenous political actors themselves.
Peoples of the Earth; Ethnonationalism, Democracy and the Indigenous Challenge in "Latin" America
2010
"Scholars in the field of comparative ethnic nationalism have long been frustrated by the nearly total absence of information concerning the indigenous peoples of Latin America. They have been treated as outside of the sociopolitical realm, slighted by their governments and intellectuals, as well as by writers from outside Latin America. Political mobilization in recent decades among the indigenes of the Andean Cordillera from Mexico to Bolivia has belatedly forced their governments and the outside world to acknowledge them as a consequential force, but insightful, comparative analysis of these movements and their likely outcomes is needed. Martin Edwin Andersen's manuscript is a giant step in meeting that need."-- Walker Connor, author of Ethnonationalism: The Quest for Understanding Peoples of the Earth employs a comparative history of ethno-nationalism to examine Indian activism and its challenges to the political, social and economic status quo in the countries of Central and South America. It explores the intersect between problems of democratic empowerment and security-including the appearance of Islamists among Indians in two important countries-arising from the re-emergence of dormant forms of ethnic militancy and unprecedented internal challenges to nation-states. The institutions and practices of Indian self-government in the United States and Canada are examined as a means of comparison with contemporary phenomena in Central and South America, suggesting frameworks for the successful democratic incorporation of the region's most disenfranchised peoples. European models emerging from "intermestic" dilemmas are considered, as are those involving the Inuit people (or Eskimos) in the Canadian far north, as policymakers there "think outside the box" in ways that include more robust roles for both sub-national and international bodies. Finally, the work challenges policymakers to broaden the debate about how to approach the issues of political and economic empowerment and regional security concerning Native peoples, to include consideration of new ways of protecting both land rights and the environment, thus avoiding a zero-sum solution between the region's 40 million Indians and the rest of its peoples. Peoples of the Earth is a pioneer study addressing ethnic activism, characterized by multiple, small groups pressing for state recognition and democratic participation, while also promoting a defence of the environment and natural resources. Part of its attractiveness is the likelihood that the work will lead to further investigations and will become an authoritative point of departure for the fertile area of ethnonationalism studies in Latin America. Each country chapter provides a succinct but substantial presentation of the basic issues and challenges facing the Native peoples of the country. Overall, the book has an excellent mix of historical and contemporary analysis.
Contemporary Indigenous Social and Political Thought in Latin America (1960-2020)
OXFORD BIBLIOGRAPHIES, 2021
Introduction The contemporary continental emergence of a significant number of indigenous intellectuals who have been trained in the academic fields of social sciences (history, anthropology, sociology, linguistics, law, education, etc.) and have continued to be engaged with the social struggles of their ethnic communities of origin is a major sociocultural phenomenon not so well known in Latin America. Beginning in the 1960s, but with a stronger sociopolitical visibility in the 1980s and 1990s, indigenous intellectuals’ production of knowledge has become the backbone of many indigenous movements and proposals in the continent. Just like the booming appearance of modern indigenous literary writers (see Oxford Bibliographies article in Latin American Studies “Indigenous Voices in Literature”), the contemporary rise of indigenous intellectuals has reconceptualized indigenous communitarian worldviews and contributed to the study of their own social realities from their specific needs, cultural perspectives, and native languages. Indigenous intellectuals and scholars have flourished in the early 21st century, transforming knowledge and academic discourses into tools of indigenous cultural self-recognition; criticism of neocolonial forms of subordination and exploitation; and new conceptual ways of understanding history, democracy, communal life, political participation, cultural representation, and our human relationship with nature (Mother Earth). The purpose of this bibliographical essay is to offer an interdisciplinary and continental comprehensive view about these critical reflections, research studies, reports, interviews, essays, testimonies, manifests, discourses, and other conceptual contributions of Latin American indigenous intellectuals and communitarian leaders from the 1960s to the present. I have limited this vast and complex intellectual production to three fundamental indigenous debates: first, the criticism against neocolonialism, racism, and discrimination; second, self-defense of indigenous human rights and pluricultural laws; and, third, the development of judicial systems to protect the rights of Mother Earth—all of which lead to constructing new societies based on universal principles of ethnic diversity, respect for social equality and reciprocity, and living together in harmony. There are many other areas of indigenous sociopolitical production that are not considered here. That is why this study is a modest and preliminary tribute to a long and much more complex indigenous intellectual production that emerges based on exclusion, discrimination, and other forms of social inequality still suffered by many indigenous peoples in Latin America. This essay, thematically organized, provides an inclusive selection of a very heterogeneous spectrum of contemporary Latin American indigenous intellectuals, academics, activists and communitarian leaders, in conjuction with others who have been inspired or influenced by them. The purpose here then is to visibilize these contemporary indigenous authors, thinkers, and activists, even if their ideas, studies, and social reflections can be related to precolonial or colonial times. The strong presence of social leaders such as Berta Cáceres in Honduras, Isildo Beldenegro in Mexico, or José Tendetza in Ecuador, and many many others—some of whom have been killed, tortured, and criminalized— cannot be separated from the concepts and critical studies produced by indigenous intellectuals. I want to thank Agustín Grijalva and Maria Warren for their invaluable help. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199766581/obo-9780199766581-0245.xml?q=Grijalva%20&fbclid=IwAR02XRk8o66fbQrslTmGUsa1wHJcwXo09D\_sBbht1cw3qOiTVamwQ273ul0#firstMatch
Indigeneity and Indigenous Politics: Ground-breaking Resources
Revista de Estudios Sociales, 2023
The purpose of this article is to relate the very important question of the autonomy of indigenous peoples to freely make decisions about their life with the notion of indigeneity, reconceptualised as a socially constructed and deeply contested resource. Resources are more than mere static assets or quantities of matter waiting to be measured, explored or protected. Something becomes a resource through joint processes of quantification, valuation, and normalisation. Along these lines, indigeneity is not just the ascertainment of something or someone in relation to ‘somewhat else’, but a nexus of indigenous peoples’ self-realisation and political intervention. To be indigenous is to exist politically in space and in relation to antagonist forces and processes that constantly downgrade their ethnic and social condition. Indigeneity is, thus, a resource that presupposes the value and the fight for their rights and for other (so-called) indigenous resources found in their lands. The main contribution here is the claim that indigeneity is a ground-breaking resource and a reaction formulated in the interstices of the old and new machineries of market-oriented coloniality. Indigeneity is reinterpreted as a special, highly politicised resource that directly and indirectly opposes processes of world grabbing and the appropriation of other territorialised resources from indigenous areas. It is concluded that indigeneity, as a resourceful resource, has become a key factor in the process of external and internal recognition, which galvanises political mobilisation and instigates novel forms of interaction. What makes indigenous peoples more and more unique is also what makes them share a socio-political struggle with allied, subaltern social groups. ----- El propósito de este artículo es relacionar la importante cuestión de la autonomía de los pueblos indígenas, en términos de tomar decisiones sobre su vida libremente, con la noción de indigeneidad, reconceptualizada como un recurso socialmente construido y profundamente cuestionado. Los recursos son más que simples activos estáticos o cantidades de materia a la espera de ser medidos, explorados o protegidos. Algo se convierte en recurso a través de procesos conjuntos de cuantificación, valoración y normalización. En este orden de ideas, indigeneidad no es solo la constatación de algo o alguien en relación con “algo más”, sino un nexo de autorrealización e intervención política de los pueblos indígenas. Ser indígena es existir políticamente en el espacio y vinculado con fuerzas y procesos antagonistas que degradan constantemente la condición étnica y social. Por lo tanto, la indigeneidad es un recurso que presupone el valor y la lucha por los derechos y por otros recursos (llamados) indígenas que se encuentran en sus tierras. La principal contribución de este artículo es la afirmación de que la indigeneidad es un recurso innovador y una reacción formulada en los intersticios de las viejas y nuevas maquinarias de la colonialidad orientada al mercado. Se reinterpreta como especial y altamente politizado, y opuesto directa e indirectamente a los procesos de acaparamiento del mundo y a la apropiación de otros recursos territorializados de las zonas indígenas. Se concluye que la indigeneidad, como recurso innovador, se ha convertido en un factor clave en el proceso de reconocimiento externo e interno, que galvaniza la movilización política y propicia formas novedosas de interacción. Lo que hace que los pueblos indígenas sean cada vez más únicos es también lo que los hace compartir una lucha sociopolítica con grupos sociales aliados y subalternos. ----- O objetivo deste artigo é relacionar a importante questão da autonomia dos povos indígenas, em termos de tomar livremente decisões sobre sua vida, com a noção de indigeneidade, reconceituada como um recurso socialmente construído e profundamente questionado. Os recursos são mais do que simples ativos estáticos ou quantidades de matéria à espera de ser avaliados, explorados ou protegidos. Algo se converte em recurso por meio de processos conjuntos de quantificação, valorização e normalização. Nessa ordem de ideias, indigeneidade não é somente a constatação de algo ou alguém com relação a “algo mais”, mas também de autorrealização e intervenção política dos povos indígenas. Ser indígena é existir politicamente no espaço e vinculado com forças e processos antagonistas que degradam constantemente a condição ética e social. Portanto, a indigeneidade é um recurso que pressupõe o valor e a luta pelos direitos e por outros recursos (chamados) indígenas que se encontram em suas terras. A principal contribuição deste artigo é a afirmação de que a indigeneidade é um recurso inovador e uma reação formulada nos interstícios das velhas e novas maquinarias da colonialidade orientada ao mercado. É reinterpretado como especial e altamente politizado, e oposto direta e indiretamente aos processos de acumulação do mundo e à apropriação de outros recursos territorializados das áreas indígenas. Conclui-se que a indigeneidade, como recurso inovador, é convertido em um fator-chave no processo de reconhecimento externo e interno, que estimula a mobilização política e propicia novas formas de interação. O que faz com que os povos indígenas sejam cada vez mais únicos é também o que os faz compartilhar uma luta sociopolítica com grupos sociais aliados e subalternos.
108th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, Philadelphia, United States., 2009
In the 1990’s, after years of military dictatorship, most Latin American countries initiated processes of democratization. Along with the passing of new constitutions, countries acknowledged indigenous peoples and recognized their right to property of communal lands. These transformations occurred in a context of neoliberal reforms, which provoked political and economical adjustment. Interesting, the new constitutions promoted the inclusion of traditionally excluded groups as the nation state was experiencing radical transformations that diminished some of its powers. This paper will examine how the Argentine constitutional amendment of 1994 transformed the way indigenous populations relate to the state and to larger supranational bodies such as the World Bank. It focuses on the Kolla Community of Finca Santiago, the first indigenous community in the country to receive the legal titles to communal lands along with the recognition of their ethnic and cultural existence prior to the creation of the nation state. While historically the state had denied ethnic particularities imposing homogenizing policies throughout the territory, after these constitutional revisions a new legal status of citizenship and also the configuration of new subjectivities took place. The paper will explore how the Argentine state has been constructing citizenship and ethnic identities, concentrating not only on the official rule but also on how these practices have been shaped by indigenous peoples. It also examines how a World Bank development project carried out in Finca Santiago has shaped these processes at the local and national levels, producing new environmental subjects.
Manuel Gonzalez Prada and Rigoberta Menchu: Measuring Indigenismo through Indigenous Thought
Hispania, 2012
Much has been written about indianismo and indigenismo and their literary and social meaning, but rarely have these two criollo movements been positioned face to face with actual Indigenous expression. This article attempts a preliminary pass at just such an approach by comparing four indigenous themes established by Manuel González Prada's essay "Nuestros indios" (1904) with analogous approximations in Me llamo Rigoberta Menchú y así me nació la conciencia (1985). Notwithstanding their different national contexts, manner of composition, and periods of composition, there is a surprising conformity between both texts' respective discursive positions on four topics: 1) the problem of the caporal, or overseer, who rises up over his own ethnic group; 2) the negative impact of alcohol among indigenous communities; 3) the conundrum of language and culture with respect to education; and 4) the turn toward violence as a response to internal colonialism. The consonance between González Prada's Peruvian indigenismo and Rigoberta Menchú's Quiché perspective as dictated to anthropologist Elizabeth Burgos could be a coincidence, but it also suggests a common frame of reference for a criollo-indigenous dialogue in the context of persistent internal colonialism in two Latin American countries with large Amerindian populations.