

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Fighting back against the notion, put forth by American academics, that isolated tribes must be forced into contact with the modern world, Amazonian Indians are warning of another potential Indigenous" genocide" if such ideas come to pass.
U.S. anthropologists Kim Hill, a professor at Arizona State University, and University of Missouri associate professor Robert Walker, have argued that in order to ensure the survival of the most remote tribal people they must be "contacted in a controlled way."
However, the people of the Amazon disagree.
Survival International, an international nonprofit that champions the rights of tribal people, said in a press statement Tuesday that at least one local tribe, the Guajajara, "have acted to protect nearby uncontacted Awa people in the absence of greater government support."
Olimpio Guajajara, the leader of the "Guajajara Guardians," as they call themselves, said in a video uploaded by the organization: "We are here...monitoring the land and defending the uncontacted Indians and the Guajajara who live here. Why? Because there are some people, some anthropologists in other countries who want, once again, to violate the rights of the uncontacted Indians in the country."
"We are aware that some anthropologists have been calling for 'controlled contact' with the uncontacted Indians," Olimpio continued. "We will not allow this to happen because it will be another genocide of a people...of an Indigenous group which doesn't want contact."
According to Survival International's campaign director Fiona Watson, Indigenous peoples are increasingly "speaking out in defense of uncontacted tribes, which has never been the case before."
The crux of Hill and Walker's proposal, summarized by The Independent, is to "instigate contact, educate, and inoculate the tribes before they have a chance to clash with illegal intruders."
Last fall, a coalition of Indigenous organizations across South America penned an open letter to Hill and Walker denouncing the plan as "both dangerous and illegal," saying that it "undermines the rights that Indigenous peoples have fought long and hard for."
The letter continues:
[T]oday indigenous people across the globe are subjected to slavery, violence, and eviction while the destruction of their lands and livelihoods is increasing. They have the right to decide themselves whether to make contact.
International law guarantees tribal peoples' right to collective ownership of their lands. If this right is upheld, and the boundaries of their territories are protected from the invasion of outsiders - including missionaries, illegal loggers, gold-miners, poachers, and researchers - there is no reason why uncontacted tribes cannot continue to thrive today and far into the future.
"It goes down to the question of rights," Watson told The Independent. "There's lots of evidence to show that the uncontacted tribes are rejecting contact, and with tribes like the Awa who were first contacted in the seventies, plenty have said to me that they think it would have been better if they stayed in the forest."
"They are not some prehistoric throwback," she added. "They are contemporary people who have decided they want to live their way, and that is their choice."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Fighting back against the notion, put forth by American academics, that isolated tribes must be forced into contact with the modern world, Amazonian Indians are warning of another potential Indigenous" genocide" if such ideas come to pass.
U.S. anthropologists Kim Hill, a professor at Arizona State University, and University of Missouri associate professor Robert Walker, have argued that in order to ensure the survival of the most remote tribal people they must be "contacted in a controlled way."
However, the people of the Amazon disagree.
Survival International, an international nonprofit that champions the rights of tribal people, said in a press statement Tuesday that at least one local tribe, the Guajajara, "have acted to protect nearby uncontacted Awa people in the absence of greater government support."
Olimpio Guajajara, the leader of the "Guajajara Guardians," as they call themselves, said in a video uploaded by the organization: "We are here...monitoring the land and defending the uncontacted Indians and the Guajajara who live here. Why? Because there are some people, some anthropologists in other countries who want, once again, to violate the rights of the uncontacted Indians in the country."
"We are aware that some anthropologists have been calling for 'controlled contact' with the uncontacted Indians," Olimpio continued. "We will not allow this to happen because it will be another genocide of a people...of an Indigenous group which doesn't want contact."
According to Survival International's campaign director Fiona Watson, Indigenous peoples are increasingly "speaking out in defense of uncontacted tribes, which has never been the case before."
The crux of Hill and Walker's proposal, summarized by The Independent, is to "instigate contact, educate, and inoculate the tribes before they have a chance to clash with illegal intruders."
Last fall, a coalition of Indigenous organizations across South America penned an open letter to Hill and Walker denouncing the plan as "both dangerous and illegal," saying that it "undermines the rights that Indigenous peoples have fought long and hard for."
The letter continues:
[T]oday indigenous people across the globe are subjected to slavery, violence, and eviction while the destruction of their lands and livelihoods is increasing. They have the right to decide themselves whether to make contact.
International law guarantees tribal peoples' right to collective ownership of their lands. If this right is upheld, and the boundaries of their territories are protected from the invasion of outsiders - including missionaries, illegal loggers, gold-miners, poachers, and researchers - there is no reason why uncontacted tribes cannot continue to thrive today and far into the future.
"It goes down to the question of rights," Watson told The Independent. "There's lots of evidence to show that the uncontacted tribes are rejecting contact, and with tribes like the Awa who were first contacted in the seventies, plenty have said to me that they think it would have been better if they stayed in the forest."
"They are not some prehistoric throwback," she added. "They are contemporary people who have decided they want to live their way, and that is their choice."
Fighting back against the notion, put forth by American academics, that isolated tribes must be forced into contact with the modern world, Amazonian Indians are warning of another potential Indigenous" genocide" if such ideas come to pass.
U.S. anthropologists Kim Hill, a professor at Arizona State University, and University of Missouri associate professor Robert Walker, have argued that in order to ensure the survival of the most remote tribal people they must be "contacted in a controlled way."
However, the people of the Amazon disagree.
Survival International, an international nonprofit that champions the rights of tribal people, said in a press statement Tuesday that at least one local tribe, the Guajajara, "have acted to protect nearby uncontacted Awa people in the absence of greater government support."
Olimpio Guajajara, the leader of the "Guajajara Guardians," as they call themselves, said in a video uploaded by the organization: "We are here...monitoring the land and defending the uncontacted Indians and the Guajajara who live here. Why? Because there are some people, some anthropologists in other countries who want, once again, to violate the rights of the uncontacted Indians in the country."
"We are aware that some anthropologists have been calling for 'controlled contact' with the uncontacted Indians," Olimpio continued. "We will not allow this to happen because it will be another genocide of a people...of an Indigenous group which doesn't want contact."
According to Survival International's campaign director Fiona Watson, Indigenous peoples are increasingly "speaking out in defense of uncontacted tribes, which has never been the case before."
The crux of Hill and Walker's proposal, summarized by The Independent, is to "instigate contact, educate, and inoculate the tribes before they have a chance to clash with illegal intruders."
Last fall, a coalition of Indigenous organizations across South America penned an open letter to Hill and Walker denouncing the plan as "both dangerous and illegal," saying that it "undermines the rights that Indigenous peoples have fought long and hard for."
The letter continues:
[T]oday indigenous people across the globe are subjected to slavery, violence, and eviction while the destruction of their lands and livelihoods is increasing. They have the right to decide themselves whether to make contact.
International law guarantees tribal peoples' right to collective ownership of their lands. If this right is upheld, and the boundaries of their territories are protected from the invasion of outsiders - including missionaries, illegal loggers, gold-miners, poachers, and researchers - there is no reason why uncontacted tribes cannot continue to thrive today and far into the future.
"It goes down to the question of rights," Watson told The Independent. "There's lots of evidence to show that the uncontacted tribes are rejecting contact, and with tribes like the Awa who were first contacted in the seventies, plenty have said to me that they think it would have been better if they stayed in the forest."
"They are not some prehistoric throwback," she added. "They are contemporary people who have decided they want to live their way, and that is their choice."