Member-only story

Indigeneity, Property, and the Political Imagination in Neoliberal Chile

E.M. Forster

·12k Followers· Follow

Published in Sentient Lands: Indigeneity Property And Political Imagination In Neoliberal Chile

5 min read

389 View Claps

93 Respond

Save

Listen

The relationship between indigeneity, property, and the political imagination in neoliberal Chile is a complex and contested one. On the one hand, the neoliberal state has recognized indigenous property rights as a way to legitimize its claims to sovereignty over indigenous territories. On the other hand, this recognition has been shaped by a discourse of multiculturalism that constructs indigenous people as authentic and traditional. This discourse has served to both marginalize indigenous political claims that challenge the neoliberal order and to justify the state's continued control over indigenous lands.

Sentient Lands: Indigeneity, Property, and Political Imagination in Neoliberal Chile

by John Gilstrap

5 out of 5

Language	:	English
File size	:	3299 KB
Text-to-Speech	:	Enabled
Screen Reader	:	Supported
Enhanced typesetting	:	Enabled
Print length	:	261 pages

The neoliberal state's recognition of indigenous property rights began in the 1990s, as part of a broader shift towards multiculturalism. This shift was driven in part by the increasing visibility of indigenous peoples on the global stage, as well as by the growing demands of indigenous activists for recognition of their rights. In Chile, the recognition of indigenous property rights was also seen as a way to resolve the long-standing conflict between the state and the Mapuche people, the largest indigenous group in the country.

However, the neoliberal state's recognition of indigenous property rights has been limited and conditional. The state has only recognized indigenous property rights over land that is already occupied by indigenous communities. This means that indigenous people have no right to reclaim land that has been taken from them in the past. In addition, the state has imposed a number of restrictions on indigenous property rights. For example, indigenous communities cannot sell or lease their land without the approval of the government. These restrictions have made it difficult for indigenous people to use their land as they see fit, and have limited their ability to participate in the market economy.

The neoliberal state's discourse of multiculturalism has also served to construct indigenous people as authentic and traditional. This discourse has portrayed indigenous people as being outside of the modern world, and as having a special connection to the land. This construction of indigeneity has served to legitimize the state's claims to sovereignty over indigenous territories. It has also served to marginalize indigenous political claims that challenge the neoliberal order.

For example, the Mapuche people have long argued that they have a right to self-determination, and that they should be able to govern their own territories. However, the neoliberal state has dismissed these claims, arguing that the Mapuche are not a sovereign people, and that they do not have the capacity to govern themselves. This discourse of indigeneity has served to justify the state's continued control over Mapuche territories.

The relationship between indigeneity, property, and the political imagination in neoliberal Chile is a complex and contested one. The neoliberal state's recognition of indigenous property rights has been shaped by a discourse of multiculturalism that constructs indigenous people as authentic and traditional. This discourse has served to both legitimate the neoliberal state's claims to sovereignty over indigenous territories and to marginalize indigenous political claims that challenge the neoliberal order.

This relationship is likely to continue to be contested in the years to come. As indigenous peoples continue to assert their rights and challenge the neoliberal order, the state will be forced to confront the contradictions between its commitment to multiculturalism and its desire to maintain control over indigenous territories.

Sentient Lands: Indigeneity, Property, and Political Imagination in Neoliberal Chile

by John Gilstrap

5 out of 5