Hat tip to Tessa. K


via Indian Country Today

President Barack Obama made major news during the second annual White House Tribal Nations Conference, announcing United States’ support for the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

“[A]s you know, in April, we announced that we were reviewing our position on the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” the president said in a speech before tribal leaders Dec. 16 at the Department of the Interior. “And today I can announce that the United States is lending its support to this declaration.

“The aspirations it affirms – including the respect for the institutions and rich cultures of Native peoples – are one we must always seek to fulfill.”

Obama said the administration will release a more detailed statement about U.S. support for the Declaration.

While not legally binding under international law, the U.N. describes the declaration as setting “an important standard for the treatment of indigenous peoples that will undoubtedly be a significant tool towards eliminating human rights violations against the planet’s 370 million indigenous people and assisting them in combating discrimination and marginalization.”

Big news. Hat tip to David G.


Tamari Kitossa and Katerina Deliovsky, ‘Interracial Unions with White Partners and Racial Profiling: Experiences and perspectives’, International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory 3, 2 (2010).

Abstract

Over the past decade racial profiling has received much scholarly and public attention. Our study explores the awareness, perspectives and experiences of the individuals in interracial unions with White partners. We found most White partners’ awareness and objection to racial profiling arose from vicarious experiences with racialized partners who are subjected to everyday racism including racial profiling. White women, in general, exhibited a fairly high degree of anxiety about their partners being racially profiled. Women ‘of colour’ exhibited varied levels of awareness and experience with racial profiling. Most men ‘of colour’ in our study experienced racial profiling, but two provisionally accommodated themselves to the practice. Our study indicates few couples felt they were racially profiled because of their mixed union though couples with young Black men and White women were the exception. All couples experienced overt and covert forms of discrimination and some felt their hypervisibility as interracial couples opened them to consistent regulatory surveillance. We describe the latter as a process of ‘repressive tolerance’ and offer thoughts on future study. This research suggests racial profiling and repressive tolerance have points of convergence in how interracial couples make sense of law enforcement and their place in Canadian society.


Nicholas T. Luetzow, ‘Colonialism, Conflict, and the Religious Response’ (MSc Thesis: South Dakota State University, 2010)

Abstract (Summary)

Nearly every country has participated in colonization or has been threatened by colonization. Modeling the processes used by colonizers and the native reaction to colonization will further understanding of current international relationships and past conflicts. This study was conducted to analyze the reactions of three indigenous cultures as they confronted European colonialism in search of a universal independent reaction to territorial encroachment. This is presented in three case studies focused on the Zulu of South Africa, the Moro of the southern Philippines, and the Sioux of the American Great Plains. The analysis model consists of examining settlements, taxation, land redistribution, and disarmament as reactions to changes in economic practices, cultural hegemony, and native religions. The study concludes that the reactions of all three focus cultures fit the same model, and that settlement, taxation, land redistribution, and disarmament are causes for conflict within the focus groups. The conclusion is that native cultures often alter traditional religious practices as a way of resisting colonization in their attempts to regain control of territory.


which I found via this fantastic South-Asian-poco-blog, Chapati Mystery.


easter island

06Dec10

At least 25 people have been injured during clashes between Chilean police and local people on Easter Island.

Witnesses say police fired pellets as they tried to evict several indigenous inhabitants from buildings they occupied earlier this year.

The Rapa Nui group say the buildings were illegally taken from their ancestors several generations ago.

Easter Island, which was annexed by Chile in 1888, is a Unesco World Heritage Site.

via BBC


Robert K. Hitchcock and Samuel Totten, ed., Genocide of Indigenous Peoples (Transaction: New Brunswick, 2011).

An estimated 350 to 600 million indigenous people reside across the globe. Numerous governments fail to recognize its indigenous peoples living within their borders. It was not until the latter part of the twentieth century that the genocide of indigenous peoples became a major focus of human rights activists, non-governmental organizations, international development and finance institutions such as the United Nations and the World Bank, and indigenous and other community-based organizations.

Scholars and activists began paying greater attention to the struggles between Fourth World peoples and First, Second, and Third World states because of illegal actions of nation-states against indigenous peoples, indigenous groups’ passive and active resistance to top-down development, and concerns about the impacts of transnational forces including what is now known as globalization.

This volume offers a clear message for genocide scholars and others concerned with crimes against humanity and genocide: much greater attention must be paid to the plight of all peoples, indigenous and otherwise, no matter how small in scale, how little-known, how “invisible” or hidden from view.

Table of Contents available on Google books



accommodation

02Dec10

Stay at the Wigwam Hotel, Arizona

hat tip to Mat A.


Thomas V. McClendon, White Chiefs, Black Lords: Shepstone & the Colonial State in Natal, South Africa, 1845-1878 (University of Rochester Press, 2010).

White Chief, Black Lords explores the tensions and contradictions between the British colonial civilizing mission and the practice of indirect rule. While the colonial imperative was to transform colonized societies and bring them within “civilized” norms, fiscal limitations frequently resulted in ruling through indigenous authorities and customs. In this book, Thomas McClendon analyzes this deep contradiction by looking at several crises and key turning points in the early decades of colonial rule in the British colony of Natal, later part of South Africa. He focuses a keen eye on the tenure of Theophilus Shepstone as that colony’s Secretary for Native affairs, examining his interactions with subject African communities.

In a series of case studies, including high drama over rebellions by African “chiefs” and their followers and intense debates over the control of witchcraft, White Chief, Black Lords shows that these colonial imperatives led to a self-defeating conundrum. In the process of attempting to rule through African leaders and norms yet to discipline and transform African subjects, the colonial state inevitably was itself transformed and became, in part, an African state. McClendon concludes by spotlighting the continuing importance of these unresolved contradictions in post-apartheid South Africa.