The Last Citizen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: The Editor Ludwik Abramowicz (1879–1939) and the Idea of "Krajowość"

The Last Citizen of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania: The Editor Ludwik Abramowicz (1879–1939) and the Idea of KrajowośćLudwik Abramowicz was one of the main ideologists of the idea of krajowość in its liberal-democratic version. He defended its principles even in the interwar period, when Poland was dominated by the policy of assimilation of national minorities and relations with Lithuania had the character of a cold war. Thanks to Abramowicz, Przegląd Wileński [Vilnius Review] (1921–1938) became the last bastion of the idea of krajowość, actively popularising it in the public life of the Vilnius Region. Abramowicz unwaveringly defended the idea of the political independence of the Belarusian-Lithuanian Lands and the decision of its future by the representatives of all indigenous nations. Abramowicz’s life and work, his publications in Przegląd Wileński prove that against all political and national-cultural realities, the idea of krajowość as an idea of harmonious coexistence of the nations of the historical Lithuania was popular and found new supporters.Ostatni obywatel Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego. Wprowadzenie do biografii redaktora Ludwika Abramowicza (1879–1939)Publicysta i redaktor Ludwik Abramowicz był jednym z głównych ideologów idei krajowej w jej liberalno-demokratycznej wersji. Bronił zasad krajowości nawet w dwudziestoleciu międzywojennym, kiedy w Polsce dominowała polityka asymilacji mniejszości narodowych, a stosunki z Litwą miały charakter zimnej wojny. Dzięki Abramowiczowi „Przegląd Wileński” (1921–1938) stał się ostatnim bastionem idei krajowej, czynnie popularyzując ją w życiu publicznym Wileńszczyzny. Abramowicz konsekwentnie bronił idei politycznej niezależności Kraju Białorusko-Litewskiego i decydowania o jego losie przez przedstawicieli wszystkich rdzennych narodów. Życie i twórczość Abramowicza, publikacje w „Przeglądzie Wileńskim” świadczą, że wbrew wszelkim realiom politycznym i narodowo-kulturowym idea krajowa jako idea harmonijnego współistnienia narodów historycznej Litwy cieszyła się popularnością i znajdowała nowych zwolenników.

Decolonial conservation: establishing Indigenous Protected Areas for future generations in the face of extractive capitalism

Extractive capitalism has long been the driving force of settler colonialism in Canada, and continues to threaten the sovereignty, lands and waters of Indigenous nations across the country. While ostensibly counterposed to extractivism, state-led conservation has similarly served to alienate Indigenous peoples from their territories, often for capitalist gain. Recognizing the inadequacy of the colonial-capitalist conservation paradigm to redress the biodiversity crisis, scholars in political ecology increasingly call for radical, convivial alternatives rooted in equity and justice. Indigenous Protected and Conserved Areas (IPCAs) are one such alternative, representing a paradigm shift from colonial to Indigenous-led conservation that reinvigorates Indigenous knowledge and governance systems. Since the Indigenous Circle of Experts finalized a report in 2018 on how IPCAs could contribute to Canada's conservation targets and reconciliation efforts, an increasing number of Indigenous stewardship initiatives across the country have been declared as IPCAs. These initiatives are assertions of Indigenous sovereignty, inherent rights, and responsibilities to their territories, as well as movements to rejuvenate biocultural conservation. Although Canada is supporting IPCAs through certain initiatives, the country's extractivist development model along with jurisdictional inconsistencies are undermining the establishment and long-term viability of many IPCAs. This paper explores two instances where Indigenous governments have established, or are establishing, IPCAs as novel strategies for land and water protection within long histories of resistance to colonial-capitalist exploitation. We argue that there is a paradoxical tension in Canadian conservation whereby Indigenous-led conservation is promoted in theory, while being undermined in practice. IPCAs offer glimpses of productive, alternative sustainabilities that move away from the colonial-capitalist paradigm, but are being challenged by governments and industries that still fail to respect Indigenous jurisdiction.

COVID-19 and the Working Class: Harm, Resistance, and Solidarity in the United States

Compared to many other wealthy nations, the United States lacks a strong social safety net, has weak legal protections for workers, has suffered long-term declines in unionization, and has eroded the gains in prosperity achieved by the working class in the post-WWII era. Consequently, despite advancements in science and medicine, the U.S. working class has suffered great harms during the COVID-19 pandemic, from the direct effects of illness and mortality and from indirect familial, social, and economic impacts. The failure of the federal government to protect blue collar, service, and retail sales workers with strong mandatory worksite infection control regulations has further endangered working class communities. The dearth of federal leadership has been countered by solidarity and a diversified set of pandemic monitoring and mitigation efforts on the part of worker organizations (primarily labor unions), social service NGOs, Indigenous nations, and communities of color. Defeating the COVID-19 syndemic will require continued working class solidarity, an ethical framework for envisioning a future which prioritizes social and racial justice, and structural economic and sociopolitical transformations.

Kia Maia ki te Kanga o Ta Koutou Ahi: Keeping the Home Fires Burning

<p>This thesis articulates physical activities of tangata whenua occupation and use as being central to the operations of ahi ka and fundamental to the demonstration of mana whenua and mana moana. The focus on use and occupation of land expresses ahi ka as a practical tool, but more importantly, as a catalyst of Maori tribal identity and cultural permanency. The customary framework of Nga Tatai Ahi Ka is applied to demonstrate intricacies, flexibility and fragility of ahi ka as a holistic tool, symbolic of identity, permanency and well-being. A richer understanding of ahi ka shows that its practical functions exceeds mere occupation and use by contributing to the socio-political, cultural, spiritual and intellectual landscape of Maori tribal peoples. The visioning of ahi ka casts the indigenous net wider by examining the local context of Mer Islands located in the Torres Strait Archipelago. Meriam customs and practices reveal the Malo ra Gelar framework as a holistic law of organisation, akin to ahi ka . Together, the Nga Ta tai Ahi Ka and Malo ra Gelar frameworks illustrate two complex and pragmatic knowledge systems as an assertion of two indigenous peoples' holistic relationships to their surrounding landscape. The usefulness of this research serves to open up new spaces of inquiry into ahi ka and Malo ra Gelar as holistic applications of self-determination, self-identification, and sovereignty of our future landscape, destinies and realities. Furthermore, its application could extend towards other indigenous nations to continuously challenge their colonial landscapes by privileging their holistic approaches as assertions of autonomy over people and place.</p>

Kia Maia ki te Kanga o Ta Koutou Ahi: Keeping the Home Fires Burning

<p>This thesis articulates physical activities of tangata whenua occupation and use as being central to the operations of ahi ka and fundamental to the demonstration of mana whenua and mana moana. The focus on use and occupation of land expresses ahi ka as a practical tool, but more importantly, as a catalyst of Maori tribal identity and cultural permanency. The customary framework of Nga Tatai Ahi Ka is applied to demonstrate intricacies, flexibility and fragility of ahi ka as a holistic tool, symbolic of identity, permanency and well-being. A richer understanding of ahi ka shows that its practical functions exceeds mere occupation and use by contributing to the socio-political, cultural, spiritual and intellectual landscape of Maori tribal peoples. The visioning of ahi ka casts the indigenous net wider by examining the local context of Mer Islands located in the Torres Strait Archipelago. Meriam customs and practices reveal the Malo ra Gelar framework as a holistic law of organisation, akin to ahi ka . Together, the Nga Ta tai Ahi Ka and Malo ra Gelar frameworks illustrate two complex and pragmatic knowledge systems as an assertion of two indigenous peoples' holistic relationships to their surrounding landscape. The usefulness of this research serves to open up new spaces of inquiry into ahi ka and Malo ra Gelar as holistic applications of self-determination, self-identification, and sovereignty of our future landscape, destinies and realities. Furthermore, its application could extend towards other indigenous nations to continuously challenge their colonial landscapes by privileging their holistic approaches as assertions of autonomy over people and place.</p>

Introduction: Pluralism, Contestation, and the Rule of Law

Around the world, the current political conjuncture is one of profound challenges for constitutionalism and the rule of law. In the United States, the executive has willfully engaged in a prolonged attempt to weaponize the machinery of the state and radicalize public opinion in order to undermine a democratic election. In the European Union, the increasingly authoritarian relationship between the executive and the judiciary in Poland and Hungary is posing the most profound threat to European constitutionalism in decades. In Hong Kong, the Chinese state is actively seeking to undermine legislative and judicial independence in the face of unprecedented pro-democracy mobilizations. In India, Lebanon, Bolivia, and elsewhere mass mobilizations are challenging, and being suppressed in the name of, the rule of law. Here in Canada, the Wet’suwet’en and their supporters, as well as the Tsleil Waututh, Haudenosaunee, L’nu (Mi’kmaq), Inuit, and members of countless other Indigenous nations are contesting the very nature of the rule of law, as they assert Indigenous laws against the law enforcement of the colonial state. Around the world, the use of emergency powers in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is also raising profound constitutional concerns.

STORYTELLING AND THE HIGH COUNTRY: READING LYNG V. NORTHWEST INDIAN CEMETERY PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION (1988)

In Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 485 U.S. 439 (1988), the Supreme Court declared constitutional the Forest Service's development plan in an area of the Six Rivers National Forest (known as the High Country) that is central to the religious practice of the Yurok, Karuk, and Tolowa Nations. The Court admitted that “[i]t is undisputed that the Indian respondents’ beliefs are sincere and that the Government's proposed actions will have severe adverse effects on the practice of their religion” (447). Nevertheless, because the disputed area was on public land, the Court thought that the government should be allowed to manage its property in any way it saw fit, regardless of the severe adverse effects on the religious practice of the local Indigenous nations. In this article, I read materials from the trial that led to the Lyng decision, focusing on the Indigenous witnesses and their testimony that has been largely ignored in the Lyng decision. The U.S. legal framework of free exercise does not allow the courts to fully consider the stories told by the Indigenous witnesses in trial. A law-and-literature approach allows me, though, to tell a different story about the High Country, one that centers Indigenous knowledge and sovereignty.

Environmental Justice and Indigeneity

Indigenous environmental justice (IEJ) is distinct from the broader EJ field, which has been found to exhibit certain limitations when applied to Indigenous contexts. Indigenous scholars have observed, for example, that EJ scholarship generally does not consider Indigenous sovereignty, laws, and governance. Attempts to ensure the relevance and applicability of EJ to Indigenous contexts and realities have resulted in what can be thought of as an “Indigenizing” of the EJ scholarship. Recent scholarship thus recognizes that Indigenous peoples occupy a unique position in terms of historical, political, and legal context, and that this requires specific recognition of their goals and aspirations, such as those outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN General Assembly [UNGA] 2007). Achieving IEJ will require more than simply incorporating Indigenous perspectives into existing EJ theoretical and methodological frameworks, as valuable as these are for diagnosing injustice. IEJ offers a theoretical and analytical framework that goes beyond “Indigenizing” and “decolonizing” existing EJ scholarship and extends to frameworks informed by Indigenous intellectual traditions, knowledge systems, and laws. Indigenous nations and societies are diverse and no single IEJ framework will serve all contexts and situations. There are, however, commonalities among suggested frameworks as evidenced through various international environmental declarations prepared by Indigenous peoples over the past three decades that convey key concepts relating to IEJ. First, Indigenous knowledge systems should be utilized as a theoretical framework for analysis. In this frame, justice applies to all “relatives” in Creation, not just people. EJ is not just about rights to a safe environment, but it includes the duties and responsibilities of people to all beings and, conversely, their responsibilities to people. IEJ is regarded as a question of balance and harmony, of reciprocity and respect, among all beings in Creation; not just between humans, but among all “relatives,” as LaDuke 1999 and Kanngieser and Todd 2020 show. Second, Indigenous legal traditions should form the basis for achieving justice. Scholars have noted how Western legal systems continue to fail Indigenous peoples and the environment. In this sense, grounding conceptions of justice and injustice in Indigenous intellectual and legal traditions opens up possibilities for achieving justice. Finally, IEJ must acknowledge the historical and ongoing role colonialism has played in perpetuating injustices.