Merlan Francesca
School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory 0200, Australia.
Curr Anthropol. 2009 Jun;50(3):303-33. doi: 10.1086/597667.
The term indigenous, long used to distinguish between those who are "native" and their "others" in specific locales, has also become a term for a geocultural category, presupposing a world collectivity of "indigenous peoples" in contrast to their various "others." Many observers have noted that the stimuli for internationalization of the indigenous category originated principally from particular nation-states-Anglo-American settler colonies and Scandinavia. All, I argue, are relevantly political cultures of liberal democracy and weighty (in different ways) in international institutional affairs. However, international indigeneity has not been supported in any unqualified way by actions taken in the name of several nation-states that were among its main points of origin. In fact, staunch resistance to the international indigenous project has recently come from four of them. In 2007, the only four voting countries to reject the main product of international indigenist activity over the past 30 years, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, were Australia, the United States, Canada, and New Zealand. In these locations, forms of "indigenous relationship" emerged that launched international indigeneity and that strongly influenced international perceptions of what "indigeneity" is and who "indigenous peoples" may be. Some other countries say the model of indigenous relationship that they see represented by the "establishing" set is inapplicable to themselves (but have nonetheless had to take notice of expanding internationalist indigenism). The apparently paradoxical rejection of the draft declaration by the establishing countries is consistent with the combination of enabling and constraining forces that liberal democratic political cultures offer.
“原住民”一词长期以来用于区分特定地区的“本地人”和“其他人”，如今也已成为一个地缘文化范畴的术语，意味着“原住民”作为一个世界集体，与他们形形色色的“他者”相对。许多观察家指出，原住民范畴国际化的推动力主要源自特定的民族国家——英裔美国人的定居殖民地和斯堪的纳维亚地区。我认为，所有这些都是自由民主的相关政治文化，并且在国际机构事务中具有重要影响力（方式各有不同）。然而，以几个作为其主要起源地的民族国家之名采取的行动，并未以任何无条件的方式支持国际原住民身份认定。事实上，其中有四个国家最近对国际原住民项目进行了坚决抵制。2007年，在过去30年里唯一四个投票反对国际原住民活动主要成果《原住民权利宣言》的国家是澳大利亚、美国、加拿大和新西兰。在这些地方，出现了开启国际原住民身份认定的“原住民关系”形式，并且强烈影响了国际社会对“原住民身份”是什么以及“原住民”可能是谁的认知。其他一些国家表示，它们所看到的由“创始”国家所代表的原住民关系模式不适用于自身（但尽管如此，它们还是不得不留意日益扩张的国际原住民主义）。创始国家对宣言草案明显自相矛盾的拒绝，与自由民主政治文化所提供的促进和限制力量的结合是一致的。
