In the article “Issues on Land and Sovereignty: The Uneasy Relationship Between Chile and Rapa Nui”, anthropologist Riet Delsing focuses on the Rapa Nui, also named Easter Island (or Isla de Pascua), and the way it has been administrated by Chile for the past 150 years. Delsing gives a general historical overview of the history common to the island and the mainland, and examines the successive laws that had an impact on the population and the landownership of Rapa Nui.
Chile gained independence from Spain in 1818, but was still consolidating its territory in the 1880s: the integration of the Mapuche territory in the south and the annexation of former Bolivian and Peruvian territories in the north were the context in which Chile annexed Easter Island in 1888. Policarpo Toro Hurtado signed the Agreement of Wills with the Rapanui leaders. From this date, Rapanui ancestral customs, specifically regarding landownership, were disrupted. After the annexation of the island, and especially because of the civil war of 1891, the Chilean nation-state lost interest in Rapa Nui. Everything changed in 1917, when the Chilean Republic started to consolidate its hold on the island by sending the navy as a colonial agent applying strict military rules on Rapa Nui.
The history of Rapa Nui is intrinsically linked to landownership. Before Chilean colonization, the kainga as a form of collective landownership was exclusively applied. With the arrival of Chilean settlers and moreover with the passage of the Ley Pascua of 1966, private landownership was introduced. It was reinforced by the Ley Pinochet in 1979. In opposition to those laws, the Ley Indígena of 1993 established norms of protection, promotion, and development of Chile’s indigenous people, and recognized land as the lifeblood of indigenous cultures. Nevertheless, Rapanui people were not spectators in this process of assimilation. They often fought the Chilean government, organizing themselves into a Council of Elders in 1980 and creating a Rapanui Parliament with demands of autonomy. Eventually, in 2007, the island was granted a Special Status, thanks to a constitutional reform.
Delsing’s article highlights the evolution of the relationship between Chile and its Pacific colony through a detailed examination of landownership on Rapa Nui. It identifies the specificities of Rapa Nui, both its peculiar indigenous social organization and the policy of the Chilean government towards it, as opposed to mainland indigenous territories.
Delsing, Riet. “Issues of land and sovereignty: the uneasy relationship between Chile and Rapa Nui (Easter Island)” in Decolonizing Native Histories: Collaboration, Knowledge, and Language in the Americas. Durham: Duke University Press, 2012.
https://muse.jhu.edu/chapter/515052
Tag: Assimilation
Performative Identity: The Effects of Spanish Colonization on Indigenous Women and Society
The theme of performative identity, an exploration of the effects of Spanish colonization on the social hierarchy of indigenous communities, can be seen in the change of family structure, rights of women, and the representation of culture. The pre-colonial indigenous social structure, in terms of family, was heavily reliant on marriage. Marriage was important to the way individuals lived in relation to their community, since the wife and husband functioned as a “unit” where they worked together and were seen as one. A great example of this structure is seen between Titiruku, an Aymara activist, and his wife Rosa Ramos where they helped each other network and find resources. However, with colonization from the Spanish, these structures and practices have shifted greatly and had the most impact on indigenous women. Post-colonialism, the Western Colonial Ideology led to “the denial of the very notion of ‘human rights’ to the female sex” in indigenous communities. As their rights began to decrease and their role grew inferior, women became a focus for reproductive use and childcare, meanwhile the role of men increased in society and in the cities, leaving women in the background.
The representation of culture through language, clothes, and jobs reflect another change in the identity of indigenous communities through the shift in the social hierarchy due to Spanish colonization. The most notable shift was the assimilating behavior by indigenous men who worked in the city since they would change both their appearance and behavior. These indigenous men would trade out their traditional clothing and for more European-styled clothes all the while speaking Spanish throughout their time in La Paz, Bolivia. The fact that some indigenous men did change their clothes and language, or simply the fact that they were able to do that not only reflected their privilege and power in their communities, but also impacted the way indigenous women were viewed in society and their accessibility to certain jobs.
Indigenous women would wear more traditional clothing which included skirts, or polleras, that made them stand out more and, in a sense, stay stagnant in their roles. These clothing pieces were traditional and stood out as a significant factor of their indigeneity and culture, therefore it was hard for them to blend in or assimilate they way the indigenous men did. Notably, the ideas that “To the man, the profession, and to the woman, the hacienda” led indigenous women to more often than not work as artisans, in domestic service, and in commerce. Due to this ideology, indigenous women were pushed towards these jobs with a newbound society setup to keep it that way. The fact that Spanish colonialism impacted so many aspects of the performative identity of indigenous individuals is important to note and must be further discussed in order to achieve a greater understanding and appreciation of indigenous peoples and their work.
These points reflect the direct impact that Spanish colonialism had on the indigenous communities, a drastic change from what it once was. It is important to discuss this topic and bring it to light because the change in their social hierarchy also affects the way indigenous communities interact among themselves and with the rest of the country. This also includes their participation and decisions in other aspects, such as the way they assemble, their involvement in politics, and the leaders they choose or follow. By analyzing their social structure, we are able to further understand indigenous communities but also, we have the opportunity to examine how this structure has evolved within indigenous communities and whether or not it has retained the changes. Also, by gaining this new understanding, we can compare the impact on indigenous social hierarchies in other Latin American countries, not just Bolivia, that were also conquered by the Spanish empire, in order to evaluate how much the impact was and for how long it has remained.
There are various key terms that are essential to understanding, or at least beginning to understand, the impacts on indigenous communities from Spanish colonialism. The most important term to begin this analysis is discussing what colonialism is and who it has impacted in society. By recognizing the term, we can fully dive into the discussion of its impacts. Also, Indigenous feminism, on the other hand, is crucial for the realization of the roles indigenous women faced in their society through time. Due to Western Ideology, the role of indigenous women changed not only in their society but in also the one of Bolivia as a whole, and therefore it is important to acknowledge the need to support of these women, not necessarily all since other women were relieved of certain jobs that they pressed upon indigenous women instead. The term ayllu remains significant as well because the idea of community has adapted and been modified throughout time, both pre and post colonialism reaching even towards the way it is viewed today.
Theme: "Lettered Society"
[et_pb_section admin_label=”section”]
[et_pb_row admin_label=”row”]
[et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text”]Key Theme: “Lettered Society”
This concept is mentioned in Brooke Larson’s article “Forging the Unlettered Indian”, in Joan Rappaport’s book “Politics of Memory,” and in Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui’s article “The Notion of Rights and the Paradoxes of Postcolonial Modernity.” Through these texts, the written word and literacy are conveyed as powerful tools for colonization, which are used as an exclusionary tool kept away from Indigenous communities and used to control, oppress, and set them apart. Because literacy played such an important role throughout colonization and subsequent law and land reforms, it is important to understand how literacy operated in this historical context and how it was used as a tool to oppress Indigenous communities and later as a tool by Indigenous people to empower themselves and stand up against their colonization.
In Larson’s article, she discusses how “lettered elites” were in control of the government and made Bolivian legal, political, and economic decisions. Because literacy was seen as such a powerful tool in this society, it was kept from many indigenous people. Larson describes an education reform in which a “dissident group of intellectuals hijacked the liberal idea of universal literacy and schooling to push forward a model of Indian schooling that subordinated universal literacy to specialized labor.” This supports that literacy was used as an exclusionary tool to maintain that those in power remain in power. Cusicanqui’s article discusses how it was the literate apoderados in Bolivia who were empowered to voice complaints and demands for their communities. She discusses how it was the literate who were able to contribute to political discourse and decision making and it was through this discourse that a “literate public opinion” and “literate culture” developed. Exclusion from literacy perpetuated indigenous exclusion from these spheres as well. Finally, Rappaport discusses the weight put on literacy in her book Politics of Memory. She uses the term “fetishization of the written word” to emphasize the priority and power placed within the ability to read and write. She also discusses Quintin Lame’s use of the written word to gain a voice in the society and to gain legitimacy for the history he writes down about his people. He is able to find power for himself and his community through his literacy.[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column]
[/et_pb_row]
[/et_pb_section]
History of Assimilation in Bolvia and Columbia
Key Term: Assimilation
Definition: The absorption of the culture and practices of one group of people into the culture and practices of a dominant group with the aim of marginalizing the first group.
Significance: The term assimilation is key to the topic of indigenous rights because of the way in which is has underlined state-community relations for the past few centuries. Hybrids of colonial and pre-colonial power structures were still in place but the new liberal governments in Columbia and Bolivia wanted to get rid of these colonial practices post-independence. One of the manifestations of this change in ideology was several neo-liberal reforms in both countries which targeted at creating a nation and assimilating the indigenous population into the dominant culture. Understanding the history and consequences of these assimilationist policies enacted by the Bolivian and Columbian governments towards the indigenous people informs as to why assimilation is not the answer to current indigenous demands and how the indigenous identity is under threat. The books Revolutionary Horizons and Politics of Memory demonstrate the ways in which on political and economic levels, the indigenous population shifted to being termed as “peasants” and the government attempted to assimilate them into the dominant culture. In Revolutionary Horizons, Hylton and Thomson write, “Bolivian liberalism in the nineteenth century has been described as ethnocidal since it aimed to turn ‘Indians’ into ‘Bolivians,’ without granting them the rights and status of ‘citizens.’” [1] Political movements to incorporate indigenous communities into the nation were seen as progressive in contrast to the colonial system of two separate republics. However, Hylton and Thomson note how for the indigenous people, equality and citizenship were still out of reach. They write, “The document noted the gains of the national revolution as well as its limits – among other points, Aymara-Quechua peasants were ‘foreigners’ in their own country due to the culturally homogenizing policies of the MNR and the military.” [2] By terming the policies of the government at this time as “culturally homogenizing,” Hylton and Thomson convey the extent to which political movements at the time aimed to take the cultural diversity in Bolivia and weld the people into one people who followed one Bolivian culture. The consequences of this were that indigenous people continued to feel excluded from the nation because they didn’t want to sacrifice their indigenous identity. Hylton and Thomson describe this as the concept of mestizaje which, “implied a distillation of Bolivia’s distinct Spanish and Indian racial and civilizational essences into a blended national unity.” [3] While the term national unity and everyone being made citizen seemed progressive and beneficial to everyone, the failure to recognize the separate indigenous identity and history meant that many of the policies in actuality were assimilationist and contributed to the erasure of the indigenous identity. I think that the term assimilation and its history is very important to include in our syllabus so that anyone reading can have a good understanding of how governments have treated indigenous communities in the past and how the consequences of those actions are shaping present day indigenous movements.
[1] Hylton, Forrest, and Sinclair Thomson. Revolutionary Horizons: Past and Present in Bolivian Politics (London: Verso, 2007), 47.
[2] Hylton, Forrest, and Sinclair Thomson. Revolutionary Horizons, 87.
[3] Hylton, Forrest, and Sinclair Thomson. Revolutionary Horizons, 80.
Sources Used:
Hylton, Forrest, and Sinclair Thomson. Revolutionary Horizons: Past and Present in Bolivian Politics. London: Verso, 2007.
Rappaport, Joanne. The Politics of Memory: Native Historical Interpretation in the Colombian Andes. Duke University Press, 1998.