In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • The Origins of Indigenism: Human Rights and the Politics of Identity
  • Susan Dicklitch
The Origins of Indigenism: Human Rights and the Politics of Identity. By Ronald Niezen. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Pp. xix, 272. Notes. References. Index. $18.95 paper.

There is a new international movement afoot, a movement that could represent a "new possibility for universalism, based largely upon the actions and aspirations of indigenous peoples" (p. 117). This movement that Niezen scrutinize is indigenism. Some might scream in protest to the introduction of yet another "ism" to the surfeit of "isms" out there, but Niezen makes a compelling case that there is indeed another bonafide "ism" distinct from all the other "isms," one that merits examination and [End Page 146] inclusion in international discourse. Indigenism is different from nationalism and ethno-nationalism; it is a liberation movement, yet not like that of decolonization, anti-apartheid or civil rights movements. Rather, Niezen views indigenism as an "identity, grounded in evidence, testimony and collective memory" (p. 15).

It is a movement, Niezen argues, with an estimated three hundred million people from four thousand distinct societies (pp. 4-5). As such, it is a distinctive global phenomenon. But what unites these three hundred million souls of different ethnicities, religions, continents and cultural traditions? According to Niezen, it is a common identity, based on "what they hope to achieve in international forums...and above all, formal recognition from states and interstate governing bodies of their experience of human rights abuses under existing international law and the need to enshrine their rights to self-determination as 'peoples' in emerging human rights standards" (p. 93). After examining in detail two case studies from very divergent sources, the Cree of Northern Canada and the Tuareg of West Africa, Niezen argues that even though these two peoples come from regions and cultures so different, they share a common identity of "broken promises, intolerance, and efforts to eliminate cultural distinctiveness" (p. 90). The comparison of the two cases helps to illuminate the experiences of marginalization, oppression, and claims of special rights by these indigenous societies. Hence, the principal goal of indigenism becomes the recognition of distinct collective rights.

But there is a problem. International human rights tend to focus on individual rights, whereas indigenism focuses on collective rights and group rights. How can this problem be reconciled, given that individual rights often undermine the very cultural traditions that some indigenous societies wish to perpetuate? In one example, Niezen examines the controversy over female circumcision, also known as female genital mutilation. After a lengthy literature review of anthropological perspectives including "applied anthropology," "ivory tower anthropology" and the basis for cultural relativism, Niezen comes to the conclusion that "activating the self-determination of indigenous peoples without a baseline of individual rights could in some circumstances become an innovative form of oppression within liberation" (p. 221). This is a crucial point. In other words, individual basic human rights cannot be sacrificed for group rights. Individual human rights are not mutually exclusive to the collective rights of indigenous peoples. In fact, there is a need to embrace the universality of human rights in order to preserve self-determination. Since individual rights are insufficient to protect collective treaty rights, and collective rights are sometimes insufficient to protect individual human rights, there is a need for a blend and respect of both.

Niezen is obviously sympathetic to indigenism, but he does not romanticize indigenous cultures or societies. He takes a realistic approach to allying the international human rights movement with indigenism. Ultimately, the indigenous rights of self-determination must be recognized by states, but at the same time individual human rights of people within indigenous societies must also be protected by the leaders of newly, self-determined peoples. This book was not an easy read, but it [End Page 147] certainly offered a refreshing and sophisticated approach to understanding the dilemmas between cultural relativism and the universality of human rights. It is recommended for graduate school students or specialists in the field.

Susan Dicklitch
Franklin & Marshall College
Lancaster, Pennsylvania
...

pdf

Share