The End of the Oppression of Indigenous Peoples under Capitalism? Bolivia under the Morales Government

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 58-75
Author(s):  
Soraia de Carvalho

Examination of the indigenous issue under the Evo Morales government in the framework of class struggle points to the weakening of the labor movement with the implantation of neoliberal measures in the late 1980s and the rise of the indigenous movement. The constituent assembly restored the democratic illusions weakened by the upheavals of 2000 and 2003. Its predominantly indigenous and peasant composition brought the agrarian question and the recognition of indigenous nationalities to the center of the debate. This experience did not and could not change the class nature of the state. The maintenance and defense of large private capitalist property is incompatible with a practice of national sovereignty and self-determination of indigenous nationalities. Um exame a questão indígena sob o governo Evo Morales nos marcos da luta de classes aponta o enfraquecimento do movimento operário com a implantação de medidas neoliberais nos fins dos anos 1980 e a ascensão o movimento indígena. A constituinte recompôs as ilusões democráticas enfraquecidas com os levantes de 2000 e 2003. A composição predominantemente indígena e camponesa da assembleia constituinte e a presença das suas organizações no processo traziam para o centro do debate a solução da questão agrária e do reconhecimento das nacionalidades indígenas. Esta experiência não modificou e nem poderia modificar a natureza de classe do Estado. A manutenção e defesa da grande propriedade privada capitalista são incompatíveis com uma prática de soberania nacional e autodeterminação das nacionalidades indígenas.

Author(s):  
Ana Catarina Zema de Resende

Nos últimos 30 anos, a autonomia se tornou um novo paradigma na luta dos povos indígenas por descolonização. Organizações indígenas de todo o continente americano assumiram a autonomia como demanda central. No entanto, o debate em torno das demandas indígenas por autonomia tem gerado muitas polêmicas decorrentes da incompreensão sobre o que querem os movimentos indígenas quando reivindicam seu direito à autodeterminação e autonomia. Para melhor entendimento dessa questão, interessa-nos, aqui, trazer alguns elementos e conceitos que possibilitem apreciar as contribuições de três intelectuais indígenas a esse debate: Taiaiake Alfred, mohawk do Canada; Floriberto Díaz, mixe de Tlahuitoltepec eGersem Baniwa, do povo Baniwa do Alto Rio Negro e das propostas do Exército Zapatista de Libertação Nacional (EZLN). Veremos que a maneira como esses intelectuais e o EZLN vêm construindo suas ideias sobre autonomia funciona como veículo para suas críticas à imposição de controle por parte do Estado, levando esse último a perceber as inconsistências de seus próprios princípios e do tratamento que dá aos povos indígenas.Palavras-Chave: Autonomia Indígena, Pensamento Político, Autodeterminação, Movimento Indígena.Autonomía indígena en el pensamiento político de Taiaiake Alfred, Floriberto Díaz, Gersem Baniwa y en las propuestas del EZLNResumen: En los últimos 30 años, la autonomía se ha convertido en un nuevo paradigma en la lucha de los pueblos indígenas por descolonización. Organizaciones indígenas de todo el continente americano asumieron la autonomía como demanda central. Sin embargo, el debate en torno a las demandas indígenas por autonomía ha generado muchas polémicas derivadas de la incomprensión sobre lo que quieren los movimientos indígenas cuando reivindican su derecho a la autodeterminación y a la autonomía. Para entender mejor esta cuestión, nos interesa, aquí, traer algunos elementos y conceptos que posibiliten apreciar los aportes de tres intelectuales indígenas a ese debate: Taiaiake Alfred, mohawk de Canada; Floriberto Díaz, mixe de Tlahuitoltepec y Gersem Baniwa, del pueblo Baniwa del Alto Río Negro y de las propuestas del Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional (EZLN). Veremos que la manera como estos intelectuales y el EZLN vienen construyendo sus ideas sobre autonomía funciona como vehículo para sus críticas a la imposición de control por parte del Estado, llevando ese último a percibir las inconsistencias de sus propios principios y del trato que da a los pueblos indígenas.Palabras-clave: Autonomía Indígena, Pensamiento Político, Autodeterminación, Movimiento Indígena.Indigenous autonomy in the political thought of Taiaiake Alfred, Floriberto Díaz, Gersem Baniwa and in the EZLN proposalsAbstract: Over the last 30 years, autonomy has become a new paradigm in the struggle of indigenous peoples for decolonization. Indigenous organizations throughout the Americas assumed autonomy as a central demand. However, the debate over indigenous demands for autonomy has generated many controversies which were derived from the misunderstanding of what indigenous movements want when they claim their right to self-determination and autonomy. To better understand this question, we are interested here in bringing up some elements and concepts that make it possible to appreciate the contributions of three indigenous intellectuals to that debate: Taiaiake Alfred, mohawk from Canada; Floriberto Diaz, mixe of Tlahuitoltepec and Gersem Baniwa, from the Baniwa people of the Alto Rio Negro and of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) proposals. We will see that the way these intellectuals and the EZLN construct their ideas about autonomy functions as a vehicle for their criticism of the imposition of control by the State, leading the latter to perceive the inconsistencies of its own principles and the treatment it gives to indigenous peoples.Keywords: Indigenous Autonomy, Political Thought, Self-Determination, Indigenous Movement.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova

AbstractEven though self-determination of peoples has an esteemed place in international law, it seems fairly clear that peoples divided by international borders have difficulty in exercising their right to self-determination. It is thus interesting to examine whether general international law places constraints on trans-national peoples’ right to self-determination. Of particular interest in this article is to examine whether indigenous peoples divided by international borders have a right to self-determination, given the recent adoption of the 2007 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The article will also take up cases where transnational indigenous peoples of Sami and Inuit have tried to exercise their joint self-determination and whether we can, in fact, argue that indigenous peoples divided by international borders have a right to exercise their united self-determination.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-381
Author(s):  
Natalija Shikova

Non-territorial autonomy (NTA) incorporates a mixture of different arrangements such as consociationalism and national-cultural autonomy (NCA), and forms of representation that de-territorialize self-determination. The paper analyses NTA possibilities in reaching indigenous self-governance and reveals the dilemmas in the applicability of NTA for securing the right to self-determination of indigenous peoples. Although the practice points towards some positive examples and successes of NTA institutions related to ingenious peoples (e.g. S?mi Parliaments), the question remains whether NTA holds sufficient potential for addressing indigenous needs upheld by the international principle ?right to land, territories and traditionally owned resources.?


Author(s):  
Anthony Pagden

This chapter argues that, contrary to ‘postcolonial’ claims, the Spanish ‘School of Salamanca’ was not overwhelmingly concerned with the need to justify the Spanish occupation of the Americas, but with creating an understanding of the ‘law of nations’ based upon the concept of a worldwide legal order. In terms of this, the Spanish Crown could only legitimate its presence in America if that could be shown to have brought benefits to the indigenous peoples in terms of protection from tyrannical rulers. None of this, however, could justify occupation or confer sovereignty and property rights on the conquering powers, although it would permit those powers to bring about a form of ‘regime change’. It also argues that all the ‘moral’ arguments for occupation employed by the European colonizing powers led logically and inexorably, if also unintentionally, to the ultimate ‘self-determination’ of the colonized.


2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohaida Nordin ◽  
Matthew Albert Witbrodt

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
pp. 39-48
Author(s):  
Hashimah Abdul Halim ◽  
Rohaida Nordin

For many years, the indigenous peoples had been experiencing various acts of marginalisation and discrimination. However, to this day, the definitions and rights of the indigenous peoples in certain jurisdictions are still left ambiguous. These rights includes the right to self-determination which, on the surface, is linked to freedom to choose political status and cultural or economical development and can be considered as one of the vital rights for indigenous peoples as it allows the community to decide on various aspects of their lives. Looking beyond that, this concept can be further classified into external and internal self-determination and each country may adopt a different approach to this right. As Greenland has a relatively higher population of indigenous peoples, the laws and regulations on indigenous peoples can be distinct. Therefore, this study examines the availability of self-determination policies and possible issues on it’s implementation in Greenland in comparison to the rights of the Orang Asli in Peninsular Malaysia. By using critical legal analysis, this study provides an insight to the exercise of self-determination rights of the indigenous peoples in other jurisdiction and the relevancy of the same right in Malaysia which can help to identify certain aspects to be improved on in the existing national indigenous peoples’ rights laws.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document