Defining "indigeneity" has recently been approached with renewed vigor. While the field can involve quite passionate commitment to advocacy among scholars, theoretical clarity is needed in understanding just who might be thought of as indigenous, and the
Amidst rising trends of "nativism" and "xenophobia" throughout Southeast Asia, a related yet distinct movement framed around altogether different notions of "Indigeneity" is occurring among various long-oppressed ethnic minorities. These groups and their distinct claims of Indigeneity and linkages with the regional and global Indigenous movements are all arising in response to the heightened incorporation of their communities and territories into expanding nation states. The Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP) Foundation based in Chiang Mai, Thailand, is playing a key role in promoting solidarity, networking and capacity-building among Indigenous Peoples in Asia as well as linking local communities with international funders and advocates. As highly marginalized communities residing predominantly in the region's natural-resource-rich areas, Indigenous Peoples are bearing the brunt of the downside of ASEAN's "ambitious investment plan" and "resource-extractive model of development". Regardless of ASEAN's overall stance of non-recognition of Indigenous Peoples as a distinct community, Indigenous Peoples in the region are increasingly identifying in solidarity with a larger, distinctive collectivity of Indigenous Peoples within the framework of ASEAN.
The origin of enduring stereotypes of Native peoples conjured by Christopher Columbus in the late-fifteenth century, the Kalinago people of today live in Dominica, an island with a unique, complicated history of settlement and resistance. Kalinagos dedicated to raising "cultural consciousness" participate in Dominican museum and heritage projects as well as in international indigenous meetings abroad. This article suggests the concept of "the professionalization of indigeneity" to consider how some Native people are experts at representation itself: producers of representations of their communities both on their communities' behalf and for the public abroad, yet always with attention to state relations at home.
Throwing mangoes at tourists -- How to do things with aloha -- F-you aloha, I love you -- Bloodline is all I need and defiant indigeneity on the West Side -- Aloha in drag -- The afterlife of Princess Ka'iulani -- Bound in place: queer indigenous mobilities and "the old paniolo way" -- Aloha as social connection
"In Haunting Biology Emma Kowal recounts the troubled history of Western biological studies of Indigenous Australians and asks how we now might see contemporary genomics, especially that conducted by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scientists. Kowal illustrates how the material persistence of samples over decades and centuries folds together the fates of different scientific methodologies. Blood, bones, hair, comparative anatomy, human biology, physiology, and anthropological genetics all haunt each other across time and space, together with the many racial theories they produced and sustained. The stories Kowal tells feature a variety of ghostly presences: a dead anatomist, a fetishized piece of hair hidden away in a war trunk, and an elusive white Indigenous person. By linking this history to contemporary genomics and twenty-first-century indigeneity, Kowal outlines the fraught complexities, perils, and potentials of studying Indigenous biological difference in the twenty-first century"--
J. Kēhaulani Kauanui is Professor of American Studies and affiliate faculty in Anthropology at Wesleyan University, where she teaches courses on indigenous studies, critical race studies, settler colonial studies, and anarchist studies. She is the author of Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity (Duke University Press 2008) and Paradoxes of Hawaiian Sovereignty: Land, Sex, and the Colonial Politics of State Nationalism (Duke University Press 2018). She is also the editor of Speaking of Indigenous Politics: Conversations with Activists, Scholars, and Tribal Leaders (University of Minnesota Press 2018). Kauanui is one of the six co-founders of the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association (NAISA), established in 2008. She serves on the advisory board for the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel and is currently completing a book provisionally titled "Indigenous Implications: Decolonizing U.S. Palestine Solidarity Activism."
This article critiques the shift towards valorizing indigeneity in western thought and contemporary practice. This shift in approach to indigenous ways of knowing and being, historically derided under conditions of colonialism, is a reflection of the 'ontological turn' in anthropology. Rather than indigenous peoples simply having an inferior or different understanding of the world to a modernist one, the 'ontological turn' suggests their importance is that they constitute different worlds, and that they 'world' in a performatively different way. The radical promise is that a different world already exists in potentia and that access to this alternative world is a question of ontology - of being differently: being in being rather than thinking, acting and 'worlding' as if we were transcendent or 'possessive' subjects. We argue that ontopolitical arguments for the superiority of indigenous ways of being should not be seen as radical or emancipatory resistances to modernist or colonial epistemological and ontological legacies but instead as a new form of neoliberal governmentality, cynically manipulating critical, postcolonial and ecological sensibilities for its own ends. Rather than 'provincialising' dominant western hegemonic practices, discourses of 'indigeneity' are functioning to extend them, instituting new forms of governing through calls for adaptation and resilience.
It is contended that indigenous people in Canada, New Zealand, & Australia face a paradox in attempting to create political relations with the aforementioned states. The respective governments have addressed indigenous people's sovereignty claims by attempting to create multicultural societies. However, these governments have also started to consider eliminating certain aspects of their colonial relations with indigenous groups. It is asserted that indigeneity possesses a discursive function & is used to create novel forms of belonging between sovereign political communities. Nevertheless, the restructuring of colonizer-indigenous relations has proved extremely difficult because state governments are unwilling to abandon their position as colonial authority. Despite the persistence of certain colonizing institutions in the aforementioned nations, it is suggested that indigenous people's novel approaches to establishing belonging possess the potential to improve state-indigenous relations.
"Our 3rd edition of Racism, Colonialism, and Indigeneity in Canada follows on the heels of several significant developments and events in Canada. Following from the publication of our second edition in 2018, we provide a brief overview of some of these developments in Chapter Fifteen of this volume, including the resurgent and historic Land Back initiative aimed at recuperating economic control and territory across Turtle Island ; the Wet'suwet'en defending their land from the Coastal GasLink pipeline project ; the insistence by Mi'kmaq lobster fishers of their sovereign right to fish without interferences by non-Indigenous peoples and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (CBC News, 12 July 2022a); Red Dress Day, and the Every Child Matters movements marked by the now yearly Orange Shirt Day and other initiatives aimed at creating and rejuvenating "meaningful reconciliation in Canada" (National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation)"--
This dissertation studies indigenous peoples in international politics, particularly in the United Nations (UN). Indigenous peoples gained access to the organisation on a permanent basis with the establishment of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (PF). In addition, their rights are increasingly recognised by the UN member states, the most notable advance in this regard being the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This progress has taken place in a state-based system, many of whose members have colonised indigenous peoples and at least previously been hostile to their demands. Indeed, it is this paradox, and my interest in how the change has come about that provided the impetus for the research project. Despite these advances in indigenous participation and rights, I argue that there is no less power exercised over the peoples than previously. I approach the agency of indigenous peoples from two perspectives, that of norm socialisation and that of Foucault-inspired approaches to power and governmentality. The first perspective views indigenous peoples as norm entrepreneurs. It identifies frames through which the peoples draw attention to their concerns and suggest solutions; that is, the peoples promote the acceptance of new norms by states. The latter perspective informed three analyses. In the first, I investigated the ways in which the subjectification and resistance of indigenous peoples takes place in the small-scale power relations of the PF. The second consisted of a critical examination of the constant entanglement of indigeneity and the environment in international politics and its consequences for indigenous agency. The third examined the ways in which the prevailing and accepted discourse on indigenous rights has neoliberal power effects that go beyond the proclaimed emancipatory aims of the rights. The research material comprises observations made in four PF annual sessions; statements by representatives of indigenous peoples, states and UN agencies; reports on the establishment of the PF; and reports of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The study embraces the methodological guideline of problematisation: text analysis was applied to first identify recurrent and familiar perceptions of indigenous peoples and their agency; this then provided the basis for a critical examination of the power effects associated with the perceptions. The ultimate aim of the analysis was to recover the political in what often seems de-politicised, established and accepted in the context of indigenous peoples and international politics. This research breaks from the more conventional approaches to indigenous peoples and politics that conceive of the international institutional, political and legal advances in indigenous issues as self-evidently desirable and 'good'. Such approaches fail to recognise the 'darker' side of the seemingly benign processes involved: they overlook the many ways in which more hierarchical power relations persist. There is no denying that the ways in which indigenous peoples and indigeneity are dealt with in the UN foster indigeneity and its alleged qualities and recognise the freedoms and rights of the peoples. However, as my critical study illustrates, the growing recognition of indigenous rights and the enhanced participation of indigenous peoples signals a change in the ways in which indigenous peoples are best managed internationally, a development geared to ensuring the efficient functioning of neoliberal governance. Indeed, rather than the peoples being governed any less in international politics today, governance at work has taken on more subtle forms.
This volume draws its inspiration from perspectives that have developed over the last few decades in media anthropology. These include seminal works such as Bourdieu's (1993 ) analysis of cultural production, Larkin's (2008 ) study of the impact of media technologies on cultural form and Ginsburg's (1995a , 2002 ) work on indigenous media. Methodologically, the volume relies heavily on ethnography; each of the contributions is grounded in qualitative research. Most of the chapters are based upon data that their authors collected while doing long-term research. Typically, such research involves building up lasting relationships with one's interlocutors, learning about their ideas, attitudes and practices by accompanying them in everyday life. Taken together, the various contributions explore how media that is made for audiences deemed indigenous is produced, shared, and viewed or 'consumed'. The chapters explore the social and political impact of old and new media technologies and media content in relation to the (re)formulation, contestation and (re)defi nition of mediatised representations of indigeneity, and how this bears upon perceptions and conceptualisations of nation in South Asia.
In: Owen , S 2019 , ' Is Druidry indigenous? the politics of pagan indigeneity discourse ' , International journal for the study of new religions , vol. 9 , no. 2 , pp. 235-247 . https://doi.org/10.1558/ijsnr.37622
This article asks if "indigenous," associated as it is with "colonized peoples," is being employed strategically by Druids in Britain to support cultural or political aims. Prominent Druids make various claims to indigeneity, presenting Druidry as the pre-Christian religion of the British Isles and emphasizing that it originated there. By "religion" it also assumes Druidry was a culture equal to if not superior to Christianity—similar to views of antiquarians in earlier centuries who idealized a pre-Christian British culture as equal to that of ancient Greece. Although British Druids refute the nationalist tag, and make efforts to root out those tendencies, it can be argued that it is a love of the land rather than the country per se that drives indigeneity discourses in British Druidry.