Who are "indigenous peoples"?

An attempt at concept definition and its consequences

According to different definitions and estimates, indigenous peoples

comprise between 300 and 500 million persons worldwide. Some 190
million of these live in Asia, including some 75 million in India. There is no
clarity as to which ethnical groups are referred to as "indigenous peoples".
The following seven aspects should help to define the concept.

1. Indigenous peoples were here "first"

If indigenous peoples are considered "aborigines", this means that they were the first
to settle in the country. However, a "national primogeniture" can only be defined
with respect to later immigrants (settlers) but not as an absolute state. The term
thus refers to a chronological relation. For the indigenous peoples in America this
concept is rather appropriate as the year 1492 can be determined with sufficient
precision as the beginning of foreign rule by Europeans in America. Pre-Columbian
imperialism, for instance by Aztecs or Inkas, is only relevant for American early
history and not for current questions related to development policy. The "Working
Group on Indigenous Peoples" of the United Nations refers to "pre-existence" as the
characteristic of indigenous people.

2. Indigenous peoples are culturally different

The situation in Africa and Asia is different as processes of conquests and colonial
structures reaching back to periods prior to European expansion, have clearly left
their mark on the present reality of life of indigenous peoples. In these areas,
indigenous peoples are not those that were there before the Europeans but they
belong to peoples that clearly distinguish themselves in a socio-cultural context from
the surrounding population. Indigenous peoples are in the first place characterized
by a common culture and language, common spiritual ideas, an identifiable territory
and a certain economic structure. Normally, they form clearly distinguishable groups.
In United Nations terminology the term "cultural difference" is used.

3. Indigenous peoples are marginalized

Indigenous peoples normally do not feel represented by the decision-making elite in
their respective national state. In addition, indigenous communities are increasingly
marginalized by the population surrounding them, causing the concept of
"indigenous peoples" to become a political term. Indigenous peoples are those who
are not in power in modern national states. The "Working Group on Indigenous
Peoples" of the United Nations refers to this characteristic as "non-dominance" of
indigenous peoples.

4. Indigenous peoples consider themselves as independent

ethnical group
In spite of their "non-dominance", indigenous peoples are aware of their original
sovereignty. Through the „We-feeling" that is firmly established in their
consciousness they know of their mutual relationship. The "Working Group on
Indigenous Peoples" of the United Nations speaks of "self-identification" in this
context. On the basis of this "self-identification" they point out that they had become
victims of invasions, conquests and robbery and they claim back their lost rights.
Nothing seems more natural to indigenous peoples than to go their own self-
determined way, independent of the context of the national state surrounding them.
They want to be referred to as independent peoples in order to obtain the right to
self-determination. As many of these peoples strive for an at least partial autonomy,
some NGOs speak about a "Fourth World". This term is not related to the concept of
"Third World", which considers it as subordinate from socio-economic and political
viewpoints but to a political "Third World" concept; the "Fourth World" comprises
those peoples that strive for autonomy and international recognition.

5. Indigenous peoples are subject to a threefold threat

Their state of being underprivileged and marginalized is linked to the expropriation of
land, to their expulsion and destruction of natural resources. The forms of possible
threat reach from direct physical genocide (genocide) to cultural extinction
(ethnocide) and to the destruction of the natural basis of existence of a culture
(ecocide). Genocide is horrifying and at least occasionally provokes public protest as
it represents a clearly visible phenomenon. Ethnocide, on the other hand, happens
gradually and unnoticed by the public: it reaches from forced assimilation of an
ethnic group over prohibition of mother tongue, religion and cultural ways of
expression, to denial of the existence of whole peoples in the public life of a state.
Ecocide in Asia is characterized, above all, by the ruthless exploitation of the rain
forests and mineral resources.

6. Indigenous peoples live outside the "modern world"

Usually, indigenous peoples live in a cosmology of their own. Often they know that
the only way to maintain the balance of the universe is to correctly perform their
rituals. This is no superstition but social knowledge that attemps to understand the
world in a magical way. In addition to the visible physical environment, indigenous
peoples know an invisible reality that is in a constant fruitful relation of interchange
with the visible reality. The modern Western world considers its rationality as it is
expressed by the specific form of the scientific-technological concept of the world as
the only legitimate one and fails to see the existence of alternative forms of
rationality. Reason in the comprehension of a world that also allows room for
indigenous peoples cannot be monological but it must recognize the plurality of
forms of being. While the modern spirit as such is characterized by universalism and
must gradually penetrate the entire universe, those peoples that live outside its
sphere of activity succeed in limiting themselves to their particularity - which does
not mean that indigenous peoples are not familiar with ethnocentrism. To live
outside the modern world does in no way mean to do without modern technology or
media such as the internet. In the same way, the borderline towards the modern
world must not be seen as completely sealed and dialogue as well as mutual learning
processes are in no way impossible.

7. The term "indigenous peoples" is a social construct

Indigenous people consider themselves as such only when they are considered as
being different by the surrounding hegemonic society. They see themselves as
human beings in the first place, which is expressed in numerous names for peopl es
(e.g. the name of the Arctic Inuit or the Japanese Ainu means nothing but „human
being"). On the one hand, peoples are identified as being "indigenous" from the
outside, for instance by ethnologists, missionaries, development aid officials, etc. On
the other hand, peoples learn that those national states where they live ignore them
and intend to iron out their cultural difference, and development programmes then
often aim at assimilation leading to the extinction of the people concerned. In such a
case, referring to the term and status of "indigenous peoples" may serve a people as
a protection against their disappearing in a national melting-pot and, on the
contrary, allows them to maintain their uniqueness.

Indigenousness is a discoursive artefact created by the difficulty to deal with

considerable cultural difference. In a discourse analytical context it seems
meaningless to search for absolute criteria to characterize indigenous peoples.
Indigenousness is created by social processes and changes along with the social
context. This is of course also true for the present attempt at concept definition. At
the same time, the concept of indigenousness can also be used to discuss the
distribution of power and to illustrate dominance versus resistance. It is especially
our conception as the „ones" of indigenous peoples as foreign „others" which
constitutes the discursive concept of indigenousness.
The consequence: to show the distribution of power in a
polylogue
In the framework of the discursive paradigm, we can no longer conceive ourselves as
objective observers and indigenous peoples as the ones being observed but we must
pay attention to the dialogic production of the discourse. Instead of creating a
complete concept of the other, we want to exercise an attitude of self-reflection,
openness of encounter and respect towards the other. As „Margareta Weisser
Foundation for Indigenous People in Asia" we cannot claim any self-defined power of
representation, but we strive for the polylogue, we want to hear the plurality of
voices and make them known to others. At the same time, it is important to clearly
show the distribution of power, to document injustice and to fight against
exploitation and oppression.

Here you can find 2 maps, completing the text (300kb).