No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
HEAL THE PEOPLE, HEAL THE LAND:: AN INTERVIEW WITH FREDA HUSON
... In a speech to the British Columbian (a province in Western Canada) legislature, Nisga'a leader, Joseph Gosnell, stated, "From time immemorial, our oral literature, passed down from generation to generation, records the story of the way the Nisga'a people were placed on Earth, entrusted with the care and protection of our land" [2] (p. 6). According to the Nisga'a, "Ours is a world of teeming inlets, dense forests, and sleeping volcanoes. ...
... Freda Huson, a spokesperson for the Unist'ot'en, explains the Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) protocol that they use whenever someone new tries to enter their territory: "Who are you, where are you from, how long do you plan to stay if we let you in, do you work for industry or government that is destroying our lands, how will your visit benefit Unist'ot'en, and what kind of skills do you bring. These are the basic questions we ask" [6] (p. 217). ...
Respectful and reciprocal relationships with land are at the heart of many Indigenous cultures and societies. Land is also at the core of settler colonialism. Indigenous peoples have not only been dispossessed of land for settler occupation and resource extraction, but the transformation of land into property has created myriad challenges to ongoing struggles of land repatriation and renewal. We introduce several perspectives on land rooted in diverse Indigenous worldviews and contrast them with settler colonial perspectives rooted in Eurocentric worldviews. We then examine several examples in Canada where Indigenous nations attempt to reconnect with their homelands, protect them, and/or engage with them for economic development. We look at land relationships rooted in historical treaties, contemporary comprehensive claims/self-government agreements, the Indian Act, and the defence of unceded territories. The Indigenous communities we look at include the Six Nations of the Grand River, the Nisga’a Lisims Government, the Westbank First Nation, and the Wet’suwet’en. We contend that a complex configuration of settler colonial institutions challenges long-term efforts for Indigenous land reclamation, protection, and sustainable development, however, Indigenous nations remain steadfast in asserting their self-determination in diverse relational ways inside and outside of settler state systems.
... So it is largely empty and begging for exploration drill holes" (News Net Ledger 2024). As the prevailing orientations of both state and industry actors demonstrate, the energy transition is sold, as Anne Spice says in relation to extractive projects more generally, "by hailing settler publics through possessive investment in Indigenous territories as a pathway to prosperous settler futures" (Spice 2019). A "corridor to prosperity," you might say. ...
After Ferguson, Standing Rock, the Black Lives Matter protests, and the crisis of refugees at the US southern border, there have been renewed calls for a racial reckoning in US anthropology. Dissatisfaction on the domestic front runs parallel to an unease over US anthropology's failure to adequately address militarism, imperialism, and predatory capitalism abroad. Finally, there is the fraught question of US anthropology's oversized influence within world anthropologies. We propose that a reassessment of US anthropology might fruitfully begin with some counterfactual history. How would US anthropology been different had the founding generations conceptualized the discipline as a decolonizing project? What topics or themes might have become central to US anthropology? How might our methods have been different? To make anthropology departments more diverse, inclusive, and equitable, we need to do more than add faculty and students of color. Despite being a field whose central concept is “culture,” we have paid far too little attention to the culture of anthropology departments. Do unexamined practices of “white‐norming” that shape the everyday lives of faculty and students in anthropology departments persistently “Other”—marginalize and alienate—people of color?
Solidarity with Indigenous land-based struggles, such as the #NoDAPL movement, reminds us that political affiliations cross racial lines, transcending aspects of tribal and national identity and community attachment. But does solidarity operate according to the politics of sameness, as in unwavering support for the political terrain demarcated by social justice struggles, or is there room among its many manifestations for opposition and challenge? The three books that comprise this review essay explore the tensions associated with enacting solidarity as they reflect on the social and cultural possibilities represented by Indigenous justice struggles. Their investments in examining the political stakes of solidarity—in the Oceti Sakowin’s resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline Project, in Afrofuturist and Indigenous speculative fiction that traces the boundary between Black and Indigenous political formations, and in the tensions that exist among American Indian writing from the interwar and pre-civil rights era—help us to understand how Indigenous solidarity is connected to complex histories, settler-colonial relations, and systemic inequalities, as well as the political promise that social justice movements create.
This first half of the paper outlines the formation of racial surveillance capitalism across the longue durée of settler colonialism, with special attention to the formation of artificial vision. This artificial vision is deployed in the erased territory, creating a white space in which to see from platforms, ranging from the ship, to the train and today’s drones. The second section examines the Eurodac digital fingerprint database created by the European Union to monitor and control asylum seekers and refugees as an “artificial life system,” to use a phrase coined by its administrators. In this automated form, artificial vision is distributed rather than centralized.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.