Search

This paper examines the creation of the Colombian Indigenista Institute, CII (1942), its institutional history, and its closure (1949). The CII, influenced by the Mexican indigenista movement, fought for indigenous peoples’ visibility for eight years. In the end, however, the CII failed due to a combination of internal factors such as ideological disagreements, and internal ones, including violence, scarce resources, and lack of awareness on the part of politicians and elites about the status, challenges, and even existence of Amerindian groups in Colombia. Three Colombian scholars created the CII. They attended the First Inter-American Indigenista Congress (Pátzcuaro 1940) where they got in touch with Manuel Gamio, then director of the Interamerican Indigenista Institute. Gamio´s ideas — that Indians have the right to govern themselves, to have tribal organizations, to elect their community leaders, and to maintain and assert their cultural identity — inspired the Colombians. In this paper, I trace the influences of the Mexican indigenista movement on Colombian indigenismo projects between 1940 and 1950. I draw on a variety of sources including Colombian newspapers and magazines, as well as letters of the indigenistas housed at the Colombian library Luis Ángel Arango in Bogotá and the Nettie Lee Benson Latin American Collection at the University of Texas at Austin. I conclude by explaining why Colombian indigenismo of the decade between 1940 and 1950 ultimately failed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following a case study -- the recent Mapuche movement in Chile -- this paper portrays the figure of the global indigenenous. In order to do that, the Mapuche's case study will be discussed in relation to other indigenous experiences worldwide, in the midst of the current debates within the field of Indigenous Studies. The thesis defended here is that indigenous policies are trapped today in three paradoxes, constitutive of indigeneity itself. These paradoxes are concerned with how indigeneity is constituted in time and space. In this context sovereignty, cultural and physical authenticity are at stake. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]