the un declaration on indigenous rights

[sophiaserpentia]

Not that it's been mentioned in US news anywhere, but yesterday the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on the rights of indigenous people which has been in negotiation for 20 years.

Four nations voted against it: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. What do these nations have in common? Huge tracts of land and vast amounts of natural resources which were stolen from indigenous people.

Critics in Canada, New Zealand, and Australia are vocal about their country's "no" vote. Here in the US? I think the media's still talking about how 'fat' Britney Spears looks now.

The State Department is concerned that this will impact US relations with Indian tribes. Most galling for the empire, i think, is Part V which requires the consent of all indigenous nations before laws can be passed which affect them.

Defenders of the vote in Australia and New Zealand have echoed the old racist refrain that it gives "one group special rights over another." It just sickens me every time i see challenges to one's privilege and efforts to bring about equality interpreted as "reverse -ism."

Comments

[lassiter.livejournal.com]

Four nations voted against it: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. What do these nations have in common? Huge tracts of land and vast amounts of natural resources which were stolen from indigenous people.

I'd have thought that both Russia and China would have issues with this, for the same reason. At any rate, all the landgrabbers will be able to freely ignore the UN anyway. :(

[neitherday.livejournal.com]

Part V is never going to fly in the United States, as it would require amending the constitution to comply. I'm not saying that it wouldn't be a good thing, I'm just saying that the chance of the United States becoming fully compliant with the resolution is about as good as the chance of China leaving Tibet.

That said, the resolution will probably make a positive change to the political playing field and may instigate improvements in the treatment of indigenous peoples even in countries that never fully embrace it.

[sophiaserpentia.livejournal.com]

I think the UN takes the long view on things like this and its declarations on the rights of women. They know that things are not going to change overnight or even in a generation, but it's a way to develop a global ethical infrastructure moving into the future.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

And I agree with you - it is galling, especially the way Australians treat the aborigines currently. And having lived in Canada, there's a lot more racism toward natives than one would think from the 'Nice White People' there.

[goldoyster.livejournal.com]

It depends on the region I've found. A lot in the prairies, not as much in the east and southern Ontario.. . at least in my experience.

[argentla.livejournal.com]

The State Department is concerned that this will impact US relations with Indian tribes.

Well, I guess when you've done more than two centuries of accumulated screwing, you don't want to lose momentum...

[kellcrow7.livejournal.com]

Hee.

[alobar.livejournal.com]

> Defenders of the vote in Australia and New Zealand
> have echoed the old racist refrain that it gives
> "one group special rights over another."

My brain automatically takes that phrase to different ends. I feel that EVERY group (other than corporations and the super rich) should have the right to veto legislation which impacts them. Gays, street entertainers, pagans, poly people, etc.

[neitherday.livejournal.com]

That sounds nice, but it's a good way to make sure nothing ever happens. For instance you would have a difficult time getting food vendors to agree to legislation requiring potentially costly and time consuming health inspections or small-time house painters agree to legislation banning cheaper lead paints. You'll find that whatever law is passed, they'll be some group that opposes it. If each self-defined group had veto power, nothing would ever change. I agree that all groups should be consulted about legislation that effects them, but not veto power.

Indigenous peoples present a special case, and are not analogous to street vendors or poly folk. There is a legitimate question about the right of rule of a culture that has taken land over a culture from whom the land was taken.

[alobar.livejournal.com]

You have some points. However, Christian monotheists have taken over and repress people of other paths. like non-monotheists, non-monogamists, etc.

[kumbunny.livejournal.com]

Claim them equal now, and you have to face "repatriation" payments for slave trades, stolen generations and in Australia's case - admitting that their government considered Aboriginals the same as dogs.

New Zealand, it would be different, they have the Treaty that gives weight to Moari rights. Although, the damage has already been done.

It angers me senseless. And what I dislike most about the arguments, it always comes from people who do not have friends from aboriginal cultures.

That's what I love about New Zealand, it's too difficult for a racist to be vocal, because you cannot easily identify aboriginal culture, like you can here.

bahhhh, now I am shitty. Thanks yanky.

[kellcrow7.livejournal.com]

I assure you, it is no "rain dance", this dance I am now happily dancing all over my house.
It is true, what neitherday said about parts of the Declaration not flying with some interpretations of the Constitution... But Gawd, FINALLY, a place to start! A leg to stand on, next time we have to go protest the wrenching up of Tribal lands to mine for ores that could be found at least fifteen other places; or the unearthing of sacred burial mounds of our elders to pave through a freeway that could just as easily be lain twenty miles to the north or south; or denial of access to a sacred mountain so that some state university can erect enormous, ridiculous-looking telescopes that're supposed to be scanning for evidence of extraterrestrial life... Finally a reference point which we can cite, as we hold the White Government accountable for the more than 400 treaties they have entered into with tribal people.

I might just move back to the rez...
'Course it's like snowing up there by now... ;}

We are all disfranchised natives

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I wonder if the Vatican has a position on this one. After all, Rome was the original land grabbing power. Europe was aboriginal territory before the Roman invasion. Most of us have more in common with the natives than we have with the big money players of those four dissenting republics.