Conflict, claim and contradiction in the new ‘indigenous’ state of Bolivia

TL;DR: In this article, a conceptual distinction between inclusive national indigeneity for the majority which seeks to co-opt the state and a concept of indigenoity for a minority which needs protection from the state is proposed.

Abstract: Recent conflict between indigenous people and a self-styled indigenous state in Bolivia has brought to the fore some of the paradoxes and contradictions within the concept of indigeneity itself. The contemporary politics of state sponsored indigeneity in Bolivia has as much capacity to create new inequalities as it does to address old ones and there is a conceptual deficit in understanding contemporary indigenous rights claims, in particular as they relate to the state. Anthropologists are understandably reluctant to define indigeneity in any objective way, but as indigeneity discourses proliferate, we need some conceptual tools to distinguish between competing rights claims based on indigeneity. I propose a conceptual distinction between inclusive national indigeneity for the majority which seeks to co-opt the state and a concept of indigeneity for a minority which needs protection from the state. Only by looking at the kinds of claims people make through the rhetoric of indigeneity can we make sense of ...

Full text

desiguALdades.net
Research Network on Interdependent
Inequalities in Latin America
Working Paper Series
Working Paper, No. 22, 2012
Conict, Claim and Contradiction in the
New Indigenous State of Bolivia
Andrew Canessa

Working Paper, No. 22, 2012
Conict, Claim and Contradiction in the
New Indigenous State of Bolivia
Andrew Canessa

desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series
Published by desiguALdades.net Research Network on Interdependent Inequalities in Latin America
The desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series serves to disseminate rst results of ongoing research
projects in order to encourage the exchange of ideas and academic debate. Inclusion of a paper in the
desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series does not constitute publication and should not limit
publication in any other venue. Copyright remains with the authors.
Copyright for this edition: Andrew Canessa
Editing and Production: Sérgio Costa / Barbara Göbel / Laura Kemmer / Simón Ramírez / Paul Talcott
All working papers are available free of charge on our website www.desiguALdades.net.
Canessa, Andrew 2012: “Conict, Claim and Contradiction in the New Indigenous State of Bolivia”,
desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series, No. 22, Berlin: desiguALdades.net Research Network
on Interdependent Inequalities in Latin America.
The paper is a revised version of the keynote speech delivered by Andrew Canessa at the Second
Annual Conference of desiguALdades.net, “New Differences, Persistent Inequalities? Latin American
Experiences“, Berlin, December 8-9, 2011.
desiguALdades.net Research Network on Interdependent Inequalities in Latin America cannot be
held responsible for errors or any consequences arising from the use of information contained in this
Working Paper; the views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author or authors and do not
necessarily reect those of desiguALdades.net.

desiguALdades.net Working Paper Series, No. 21, 2012 | 5
Conict, Claim and Contradiction in the New Indigenous
State of Bolivia
Andrew Canessa
1
Abstract
Recent conict between indigenous people and a self-styled indigenous state in Bolivia
has brought to the fore some of the paradoxes and contradictions within the concept
of indigeneity itself. The contemporary politics of state sponsored indigeneity in Bolivia
has as much capacity to create new inequalities as it does to address old ones and
there is a conceptual decit in understanding contemporary indigenous rights claims,
in particular, as they relate to the state. I reject Peter Geschiere’s (2009) suggestion
that one should distinguish between ‘autochthony’ and ‘indigeneity’ but am inspired
by these arguments to suggest that one needs to make a critical distinction between
the kinds of claims different indigenous people make against the state. Of interest
here are the consequences of indigeneity being transformed from being a language of
resistance to a language of governance. I propose a conceptual distinction between
inclusive national indigeneity for the majority which seeks to co-opt the state through
accessing the language of governance and a minority concept of indigeneity which
needs protection from the state and continues to use indigeneity as a language of
resistance. Only by looking at the kinds of claims people make through the rhetoric
of indigeneity can we make sense of the current indigenous conict in Bolivia and
elsewhere.
Keywords: Indigeneity | The State | Justice
Biographical Notes
Andrew Canessa, Fellow of desiguALdades.net, is a social anthropologist at the
University of Essex and Director of the Centre for Latin American and Caribbean Studies.
He has conducted eldwork in highland Bolivia since 1989 and published widely on
issues of gender, indigenous identities, race, and mobilization. In recent years he has
worked on the use of archaeology in imagining and constructing indigenous futures
(‘Sitios Antiguos y Nuevas Ciudadanías: El uso de la arqueología para crear autonomía
autóctona en Bolivia’, in: Orobitg, Gemma (ed.): Autoctonía, poder local y espacio
global frente a la noción de ciudadanía, Barcelona, 2012 and ‘Globalised Indigeneities:
New Identities for the Twenty First Century’, LACES 2012). Among his most recent
books are Intimate Indigeneities: Exploring Race, Sex and History in the Small Spaces
of Andean Life (Duke 2012) which is the culmination of twenty years’ eldwork in an
Aymara village. Also forthcoming (with Aída Hernández) is Hacia un futuro Indígena
en Mesoamérica y los Andes: Género, Complementariedades y Exclusiones (IWGIA &
Abya Yala 2012), a collaboration with scholars and indigenous activists looking at the
gender issues across indigenous movements.
1
I am grateful to Esther López, Nancy Postero and Maria Sapignoli and for comments on an earlier
draft and for the comments and editorial suggestions from Sérgio Costa and Paul Talcott from
desiguALdades.net. Comments about this version should be sent to canessa@essex.ac.uk.

Frequently asked questions

Q1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Conflict, claim and contradiction in the new indigenous state of bolivia" ?

The contemporary politics of state sponsored indigeneity in Bolivia has as much capacity to create new inequalities as it does to address old ones and there is a conceptual deficit in understanding contemporary indigenous rights claims, in particular, as they relate to the state. I reject Peter Geschiere ’ s ( 2009 ) suggestion that one should distinguish between ‘ autochthony ’ and ‘ indigeneity ’ but am inspired by these arguments to suggest that one needs to make a critical distinction between the kinds of claims different indigenous people make against the state. Only by looking at the kinds of claims people make through the rhetoric of indigeneity can the authors make sense of the current indigenous conflict in Bolivia and elsewhere.