The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Paradigm of Domination
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Paradigm of Domination
复制标题
联合国土著人民权利宣言和统治范式
DOI：
10.1080/10383441.2011.10854711
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
S. Newcomb
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Newcomb
本文认为，“原住民”一词被正确地解释为“受统治的人”。有人认为，联合国大会于2007年9月13日通过的《联合国土著人民权利宣言》的必要性是以下因素的直接后果：（1）各国将土著人民定义为“非人”的传统;（2）各国在法律和政策中构建并制度化针对土著人民的统治框架。然而，《联合国土著人民权利宣言》的46条条款中没有一条涉及统治和土著人民的问题，这远远不是解决这些问题的办法。对《联合国宣言》的批判性审查必须考虑到这样一个事实，即参与外交和国际事务的国家行为者决心维持现状，并相当了解现实的社会结构。特别是在美国，构成美国印第安人联邦印第安人法律和政策的统治框架可以追溯到梵蒂冈文件和英国皇家殖民宪章中的论点，即一个发现的“基督教王子或人民”，“基督教国家”或“基督教力量”有权取得“最终的自治领”（统治权）反对原始的非基督教（“异教徒”和“非基督教”）国家和人民。1977年，正是这种基督教欧洲分类体系所产生的土地、资源和自决问题促使美洲印第安长老、精神和礼仪领袖、学者和活动家进入国际竞技场，并最终导致30年后的2007年通过了《联合国宣言》。《联合国宣言》是否提供了一种手段来推翻美国和其他国家两个多世纪以来建立和维持的统治和非人化的双重传统，这仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。就美国而言，基于《联合国宣言》的这种改革似乎不太可能，因为美国政府，包括美国最高法院，不愿意否认或停止使用其针对印第安民族和人民的支配类别制度。
This article argues that the term ‘Indigenous peoples’ is correctly interpreted as ‘dominated peoples’. It is contended that the need for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples – adopted by the UN General Assembly on 13 September 2007 – was a direct consequence of (1) a tradition of states defining Indigenous peoples as ‘less-than-human’ and (2) states constructing and institutionalising in law and policy a framework of domination against Indigenous peoples. However, far from being a remedy to these issues, not one of the 46 Articles of the UN Declaration addresses the issue of domination and Indigenous peoples. A critical examination of the UN Declaration must account for the fact that state actors involved in foreign and international affairs are intent on maintaining the status quo and are quite cognisant of the social construction of reality. In the United States in particular, the framework of domination that constitutes US Indian federal Indian law and policy is traced to arguments found in Vatican documents and Royal colonial charters of England that a discovering ‘Christian prince or people’, ‘Christian state’ or ‘Christian power’ had the right to assume an ‘ultimate dominion’ (right of domination) as against original non-Christian (‘heathen’ and ‘infidel’) nations and peoples. It was the issues of lands, resources and self-determination that arose from this Christian European system of categorisation which drove American Indian elders, spiritual and ceremonial leaders, scholars and activists into the international arena in 1977, and eventually resulted in the UN Declaration being adopted 30 years later in 2007. It remains an open question as to whether the UN Declaration provides a means of overturning the dual tradition of domination and dehumanisation that the United States and other states have built and maintained for more than two centuries. In the case of the United States, such a reform on the basis of the UN Declaration seems highly unlikely, given the unwillingness of the US government, including the US Supreme Court, to disavow or discontinue using its system of dominating categories against Indian nations and peoples.