Indigeneity: global and local.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Merlan F;Merlan F
  • Source:
    Current anthropology [Curr Anthropol] 2009 Jun; Vol. 50 (3), pp. 303-33.
  • Publication Type:
    Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: University Of Chicago Press Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 0421035 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 0011-3204 (Print) Linking ISSN: 00113204 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Curr Anthropol
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Chicago Il : University Of Chicago Press
      Original Publication: Chicago.
    • Subject Terms:
      Culture* ; Human Rights* ; Population Groups*; Australia ; Canada ; Humans ; Internationality ; New Zealand ; Politics ; United Nations ; United States
    • Abstract:
      The term indigenous, long used to distinguish between those who are "native" and their "others" in specific locales, has also become a term for a geocultural category, presupposing a world collectivity of "indigenous peoples" in contrast to their various "others." Many observers have noted that the stimuli for internationalization of the indigenous category originated principally from particular nation-states-Anglo-American settler colonies and Scandinavia. All, I argue, are relevantly political cultures of liberal democracy and weighty (in different ways) in international institutional affairs. However, international indigeneity has not been supported in any unqualified way by actions taken in the name of several nation-states that were among its main points of origin. In fact, staunch resistance to the international indigenous project has recently come from four of them. In 2007, the only four voting countries to reject the main product of international indigenist activity over the past 30 years, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, were Australia, the United States, Canada, and New Zealand. In these locations, forms of "indigenous relationship" emerged that launched international indigeneity and that strongly influenced international perceptions of what "indigeneity" is and who "indigenous peoples" may be. Some other countries say the model of indigenous relationship that they see represented by the "establishing" set is inapplicable to themselves (but have nonetheless had to take notice of expanding internationalist indigenism). The apparently paradoxical rejection of the draft declaration by the establishing countries is consistent with the combination of enabling and constraining forces that liberal democratic political cultures offer.
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20091016 Date Completed: 20091117 Latest Revision: 20191111
    • Publication Date:
      20240628
    • Accession Number:
      10.1086/597667
    • Accession Number:
      19827331