Contesting Citizenship: Indigenous Movements and Democracy in Latin America

Yashar, Deborah J.

doi:10.2307/422104

Cited by 226 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Yet the salience of ethnic divisions for party competition remains unexplored. This is not entirely surprising given the widespread consensus on the absence of indigenous politics in contemporary Peru (Yashar, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The politicization of indigenous identities in Peru

Raymond

Arce

2011

Party Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until now, scholars have argued that, unlike other Latin American countries with sizable indigenous populations, indigenous politics are largely unimportant in Peru because indigenous-based parties or national-level movements are absent. Rather than focusing solely on the emergence of indigenous parties or movements, which ignores the larger consequence of individuals' indigenous identifications for electoral politics, we argue that it is more important to examine the emergence of indigenous political divisions and their effects on indigenous representation. Using data from the World Values Survey across the presidential elections of 1995, 2001, and 2006, we show that, as indigenous identity has become more carefully defined, indigenous voting divisions have emerged in Peru, and concomitantly, parties have begun to recognize and respond to these divisions.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The politicization of indigenous identities in Peru

Raymond

Arce

2011

Party Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many scholars attribute the rise of indigenous movements to the widening opportunities offered by state reforms, most notably democratization and decentralization policies (Yashar 1998;Assies 2000;Li 2001). National transitions to democracy and the implementation of liberal economic reforms in the 1980s and 1990s opened the door for 'the politicization of indigenous identity' (Assies 2000, 3).…”

Section: Indigeneity and Changing Notions Of Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forest conflicts and the informal nature of realizing indigenous land rights in Indonesia

Muur

2018

Citizenship Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a widening legal scope for indigenous rights, the invocation of indigeneity to claim land rights rarely empowers marginalized communities. This article develops an explanation for why this formal recognition of community rights actually has little substantive impact on local struggles over land in Indonesia. Employing almost two years of fieldwork on how rural communities employ indigeneity-based land claims in South Sulawesi, it argues that claims for land rights on the basis of indigeneity are settled not simply on the basis of law, but also on that of the relative bargaining positions and the character of informal linkages between communities, their mediators and local authorities. Indigenous status therefore must be understood as a privilege most likely to be obtained by those groups with relatively strong connections to influential state actors. In contrast, communities that are in conflict with local state actors tend be excluded from obtaining the status of indigeneity and hence the state is likely to deny them their land rights claims.

show abstract

“…Postero (2007) Americans are experiencing today (Kymlicka 1995;Postero 2007;Stavenhagen 2002;Yashar 1998), and in sharp contrast to an historical context where being indigenous ipso facto implied a lack of citizenship. María Elena García goes further in her analysis in proposing an indigenous citizenship where 'cultural difference is no longer a criterion for exclusion, but one of inclusion in a multicultural political community ' (2005: 165).…”

Section: Indigenous Citizenshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict, claim and contradiction in the new ‘indigenous’ state of Bolivia

Canessa

2014

Critique of Anthropology

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent conflict between indigenous people and a self-styled indigenous state in Bolivia has brought to the fore some of the paradoxes and contradictions within the concept of indigeneity itself. The contemporary politics of state sponsored indigeneity in Bolivia has as much capacity to create new inequalities as it does to address old ones and there is a conceptual deficit in understanding contemporary indigenous rights claims, in particular, as they relate to the state. I reject Peter Geschiere's (2009) suggestion that one should distinguish between 'autochthony' and 'indigeneity' but am inspired by these arguments to suggest that one needs to make a critical distinction between the kinds of claims different indigenous people make against the state. Of interest here are the consequences of indigeneity being transformed from being a language of resistance to a language of governance. I propose a conceptual distinction between inclusive national indigeneity for the majority which seeks to co-opt the state through accessing the language of governance and a minority concept of indigeneity which needs protection from the state and continues to use indigeneity as a language of resistance. Only by looking at the kinds of claims people make through the rhetoric of indigeneity can we make sense of the current indigenous conflict in Bolivia and elsewhere.

show abstract

Contesting Citizenship: Indigenous Movements and Democracy in Latin America

Cited by 226 publications

References 1 publication

The politicization of indigenous identities in Peru

The politicization of indigenous identities in Peru

Forest conflicts and the informal nature of realizing indigenous land rights in Indonesia

Conflict, claim and contradiction in the new ‘indigenous’ state of Bolivia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About