Indigenous cultures have long traditions of travel and mobility that empower them to survive, adapt to changing physical and political contexts, and create new futures for themselves. This dissertation, Rootedness and Mobility in International Indigenous Literatures, proposes a critical perspective that recognizes travel and migration neither as elements foreign to Indigenous cultures nor as symptoms of their hybridity or assimilation. Rather, they are central elements of Indigenous tradition, and as such inform contemporary Anglophone Indigenous writing as well as international Indigenous political actions. Understanding the place of travel within Indigenous cultures leads to a deeper understanding of the Indigenous peoples’ rights, which include not only the right to land, but also the right of free movement. Such mobility is not in conflict with but is instead complementary to a powerful sense of place and rootedness. The three chapters examine texts which hinge on cross-cultural contacts among Indigenous groups, and deal with novels by Thomas King, Leslie Marmon Silko, and Witi Ihimaera. Rather than merely seeking the legacies of colonialism in Indigenous texts, this dissertation acknowledges the devastating impact of colonialism on Indigenous peoples but does not give colonialism center stage. Instead, the center belongs to Indigenous traditions and the dialogue that takes place between the stories being written today and the ancient stories and histories that have been passed down through generations. In exploring these novels and the cultural landscapes their authors call home, we see that travel, migrations, and the resulting intercultural contacts are not incidental, but integral to many Indigenous cultures, and contribute to a growing sense of Indigenous internationalism. Mobility and travel are not in conflict with, but instead coexist with a sense of rootedness and place. Thus, as we look at contemporary cross-cultural contacts among Indigenous authors, artists, and activists, it is vital to understand the long Indigenous histories both of rootedness and mobility. / text

On December 15, 1999, the people of Venezuela approved a new Constitution, which is the first Venezuelan constitution to entrench the rights of indigenous peoples. The purpose of this thesis is to analyze the different theoretical issues raised by the problem of rights for indigenous peoples. It is argued that indigenous rights are collective rights based on the value of cultural membership. This implies both an investigation of the value of cultural membership and of the criticisms that the multicultural perspective has offered against that point of view. / Indigenous peoples have the moral right to preserve their cultures and traditions. It is submitted that indigenous peoples have a double moral standing to claim differential treatment based on cultural membership, because they constitute cultural minorities and they were conquered and did not lend their free acceptance to the new regime imposed upon them. Therefore, they constitute a national minority, with moral standing to claim self-government and cultural rights.

My dissertation focuses on the rise and spread of Aboriginal mobilization in Canada between 1951 and 2000. Using social movement and social-political theories, it questions the relationship between contentious actions and formal organizational growth comparing among social movement and political sociological perspectives. In most accounts, contentious action is assumed to be influenced by organization, political opportunity and identity. Few scholars, however, have examined the reverse relationships, namely the effect of contentious action on each of these. Drawing upon time-series data and qualitative interviews with Aboriginal leaders and representatives of organizations, I found that critical events surrounding moments of federal state building prompted contentious action, which then sparked mobilization among Aboriginal communities. I argue that three events: the 1969 White paper, the 1982 patriation of the Constitution, and the 1990 'Indian Summer' led to mass mobilization and the semblance of an emerging PanAboriginal identity. This finding returns to older collective behaviour perspectives, which note that organizations, opportunities, and identities are driven by triggering actions and shared experiences that produce emerging norms. Nevertheless, in the case of Canadian Aboriginal mobilization, unlike that of Indigenous movements in other countries, building a movement on triggering actions led to mass mobilization but was not sustainable because of a saturation of efficacy. As a result, Aboriginal mobilization in Canada has been characterized by divergent interests and unsustained contention.

mnesty International (2009:1) reports that despite some progress over the last decade, indigenous peoples around the world continue to live in hardship and danger. This is due to the failure of states to uphold their fundamental human rights. The persecution of minorities by intolerant majorities is still a major cause of international unrest in various parts of the world (Sohn, 1981: 272). Against this backdrop, this study set out to investigate the extent to which the rights of the Basarwa in Botswana are promoted and protected by the government. Methods of data collection included questionnaire, interviews, books, journal articles and internet publications. The study found out that the government of Botswana does not promote and protect the rights of the Basarwa in Botswana. They are instead being considered as a primitive and backward people and hence, a developmental problem by the government of Botswana. Other violations of their rights include: non-recognition as the indigenous people of Botswana, derogatory names-calling, forced land evictions and other forms of social and economic exclusion. The study recommends the following: The need for the government of Botswana to recognise the Basarwa as a distinct and unique ethnic group in the country; the need for dialogue between the Basarwa, the government of Botswana and NGOs; the need for the government of Botswana to ameliorate the quality and accessibility of social services for the Basarwa, particularly in the areas of health and education; and the need for both the public and private sectors alike to provide the necessary skills for employment of the Basarwa.

The Miccosukee Tribe of South Florida is a federally recognized Indian tribe who reside on a reservation that lies within the Florida Everglades. As such, like many Indian tribes, their modern political history is entangled with the history of the creation of nearby national parks that were previously their traditional hunting territories. Since the beginning of the era of Everglades restoration and the rise in public policy designed to save the “River of Grass” from pollution, encroaching development, and eventual extinction, the Miccosukee have been on the front lines of trying to preserve the area they call home. While the Everglades means many different things to many different people, the Everglades to the Miccosukee Indians are the site and stakes of indigenous sovereignty. I argue that the issue of Everglades preservation is not just a matter of environmental conservation, but also a matter of fundamental human rights. Theoretically, I situate the debate surrounding the Florida Everglades within several theoretical paradigms, including the rights of indigenous peoples, the anthropology of development, and political ecology. I use anthropological research methods such as in-depth interviews with tribal officials and local environmental agencies to gain a complete picture of the current political landscape of the Everglades. / Includes bibliography. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2020. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to examine the Indigenous Navigator partnership through its Bésiro project in Bolivia to find out whether the partnership approach can enhance Indigenous participation in global education. In the short term, enhancing the participation of Indigenous peoples in global education may help them maintain their unique identity and culture. In the long term, it may enable Indigenous peoples to actively decide on policy that concerns them. The objective of the research was to help policymakers and those working in the field of international and comparative education to secure Indigenous peoples’ right to determine their own education development. In the 19th and 20th centuries, after the creation of nation-states in Latin America, national education efforts sought to unify populations through assimilationist policies. Those policies used the dominant language as the language of instruction, and the content of curricula responded to the national vision of those in power. Indigenous peoples held on to their culture and language despite the external pressure to assimilate and the lack of recognition and support. In the second half of the 20th century, a global Indigenous movement took place that claimed Indigenous peoples’ collective rights within the nation-state, including the right to self-determine their education. This movement succeeded in garnering international attention, which led to the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This declaration served as a framework upon which states were expected to model their laws. While this helped put the plight of Indigenous peoples in the international spotlight, some countries have implemented the Declaration to a greater extent than others. As a result, many Indigenous peoples remain stripped of the power and legal authority to ultimately decide on the education (and other) issues that concern them. The power asymmetries that have been affecting them in international education politics persist. A global education system that does not count on the continuous participation of Indigenous peoples as collective actors fails to meet the goals of inclusion and equality that it intends to achieve. Against this background, the following questions remained unanswered: Who is entitled to participate in global education and in what capacity? How are Indigenous peoples currently participating in global education? Why and how should the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, which is the international agency tasked with promoting peace through international cooperation in education, science, culture, communication, and information, enhance Indigenous participation in its education politics? Driven by the questions above, I carried out a qualitative case study involving a multistakeholder partnership–the Indigenous Navigator. The Indigenous Navigator partnership includes Indigenous and non-Indigenous nongovernmental organizations, civil society organizations, and other international and national stakeholders. This partnership developed a framework and a set of tools to produce Indigenous data and track progress toward the fulfillment of Indigenous human rights. When applied to education, the Indigenous Navigator partnership translates the data collected into projects designed by Indigenous peoples for their own purposes. The Indigenous Navigator partnership offers an alternative approach for global education to enhance Indigenous participation in education policy. The Indigenous Navigator partnership’s project that became the case study was called Revitalization and Vitalization of the Bésiro Language of the Monkox Nation. This project was designed by the Monkox, a people indigenous to Bolivia. The Monkox utilized the Indigenous Navigator’s framework and set of tools, and focused on revitalizing their Bésiro language. This Bésiro project was implemented between 2019 and 2020 in Lomerío, in Bolivia’s lowlands. The case of the Monkox within Bolivia stands out because even though the Monkox are small in number, they have a long history of defending their language and their education. Bolivia, in turn, has drawn regional and international attention because it adopted Indigenous human rights into its political constitution and has come forth with a unique education model based on intraculturality, interculturality and plurilingualism, and in which Indigenous peoples are seen not only as individuals with a right to education, but also as peoples with collective education rights. To analyze the effectiveness of the Indigenous Navigator partnership and the Bésiro project, I spent 7 months observing the functioning of the Indigenous Navigator partnership prior to fieldwork, then spent another year interviewing 42 key stakeholders, out of whom at least 17 were Indigenous. I also analyzed relevant documents related to Indigenous education in Bolivia, global education, and enhanced participation. The results of the study offer a glimpse into present-day Indigenous education in Bolivia; an analysis of the Indigenous Navigator partnership and the Bésiro project; and a comparison between local, national, and international power dynamics that interacted throughout the project and can further impact education politics in Bolivia and beyond. The results show that the Indigenous Navigator partnership operated through what I call multisphere Indigenous ownership (i.e., the capacity of each partner to contribute from their own area of expertise while reducing the stratification of power) to ensure the Monkox’s self-determination in the Bésiro project. The analysis also shows that interculturality is difficult to reach if intraculturality, or the reaffirmation of a people’s identity, culture, and politics, has not been strengthened. To reaffirm intraculturality, the active participation of Indigenous peoples in their own education policy processes is vital. Only then will Indigenous peoples be able to achieve sustainable education along with national efforts. Lastly, the case study revealed that the Indigenous Navigator partnership worked through tacit interculturality between the European Union and Latin America, that is, the implicit reciprocity of two Indigenous systems in both parts of the world. As an outcome of this analysis of the Indigenous Navigator partnership and the Bésiro project, it is suggested that the global education community, guided by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, implement multistakeholder Indigenous ownership to allow Indigenous peoples, as collective stakeholders, to participate in education policy processes that concern them. This study closes with a policy and research agenda that contributes to achieving sustainable, quality education for Indigenous peoples.

Latin America is in a political crisis, yet Bolivia is still widely recognized as a beacon of hope for progressive change. The radical movements at the beginning of the 21st century against neoliberalism that paved the road for the election of Bolivia's first indigenous president, Evo Morales, beckoned a change from colonial rule towards a more just society. Paradoxically, in pursuing progress through economic growth, the Bolivian state led by President Morales has replicated the colonial division of labor through a development model known as neo-extractivism. Deeply rooted tensions have also emerged between indigenous communities and the Bolivian state due to the latter's zealous economic bond with the extractivist sector. Although these paradoxes have received significant attention, one substantial aspect that remains underexplored and undertheorized is how such tensions affect socio-political relations at the intersections of class, race and gender where indigenous women in Bolivia occupy a unique position. To address this research gap, this qualitative study poses the following research questions: 1. How does neo-extractivism affect the lives of indigenous women? 2. How does the state shape relations between neo-extractivism and indigenous women? 3. How do indigenous women organize to challenge the impact of state-led extractivism on their lives and their communities? To answer these questions, I conducted a multi-sited ethnographic study between October 2017 and June 2018 in Oruro, Bolivia, an area that is heavily affected by mining contamination. By analyzing processes of social reproduction, I argue that neo-extractivism leads to water contamination and water scarcity, becoming the epicenter of the deterioration of subsistence agriculture and the dispossession of indigenous ways of life. Because indigenous women are subsistence producers and social reproducers whose activities depend on water, the dispossession of water has a dire effect on them, which demonstrates how capitalism relies on and exacerbates neo-colonial and patriarchal relations. To tame dissent to these contradictions, the Bolivian and self-proclaimed "indigenist state" defines and politicizes ethnicity in order to build a national identity based on indigeneity. This state-led ethnic inclusion, however, simultaneously produces class exclusions of indigenous campesinxs (peasants) who are not fully engaged in market relations. In contrast to the government's inclusive but rigidly-defined indigeneity, indigenous communities embrace a fluid and dual indigeneity: one that is connected to territories, yet also independent from them; a rooted indigeneity based on the praxis of what it means to be indigenous. Indigenous women and their communities embrace this fluid and rooted indigeneity to build alliances across gender, ethnic, and geographic lines to organize against neo-extractivism. Moreover, the daily responsibilities of social reproduction within the context of subsistence agriculture, which are embedded in Andean epistemes of reciprocity, duality, and complementarity, have allowed indigenous women to build solidarity networks that keep the social fabric within, and between, communities alive. These solidarity networks are sites of everyday resistances that represent a threat and an alternative to capitalist, colonial and patriarchal mandates.

Doctorat en Sciences politiques et sociales / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished