Kathmandu School of Law Review

P-ISSN : 2091-2110, E-ISSN : 2773-8159, DOI : 10.46985, Publisher : Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal
Annual flagship journal of Kathmandu School of Law, Nepal

Volume 12, Issue 1, April 2023
Articles

Power and Epistemology: How the Western Idea of “Nation” Triumphed Over Its Indigenous Counterparts

PDF
  • Mohammad Moin Uddin
Mohammad Moin Uddin
Associate Professor at University of Chittagong
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46985/kslr.v12i1.2223

Published 2024-07-26

Keywords

  • Indigenous nations, nations-within, nation-states, nation-ness, self-determination, sovereignty.

How to Cite

Uddin, M. M. (2024). Power and Epistemology: How the Western Idea of “Nation” Triumphed Over Its Indigenous Counterparts. Kathmandu School of Law Review, 12(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.46985/kslr.v12i1.2223
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Abstract

The Peace of Westphalia and the French Revolution are two constitutive moments of the modern idea of “nation”. The modern idea of "nation" is linked with the idea of statehood. This idea spread throughout Europe and became dominant worldwide during the heydays of European colonialism. International law, shaped by Western powers, endorsed the idea, and imposed it upon the rest of the world. Nations not claiming statehood existed before the European age of nationalism, while thousands of them still exist today in the form of “nations-within,” but most independent states do not recognize such nations. Independent states call these nations ‘communities,’ ‘societies,’ ‘ethnic groups,’ ‘gens,’ ‘tribes,’ or even ‘confederacies’—anything but nation. This paper argues that the dominance of the western idea of nation happened for two reasons: first, the triumph of European powers who believed in the superiority of western ideas, and second, the resilience and sustainability of European epistemology even after the decolonization. However, it remains a reality that non-state nations demonstrated extraordinary resilience too, surviving perennial threats and assaults from state power. Indigenous nations are prime examples of such resilience. Indigenous peoples of North America are legally recognized as nations, though indigenous peoples of Asia and Africa are denied such recognition. In this article, the author explores different trajectories of indigenous people who encounter with colonizers in settler states and in the Third World and concludes that ‘nations-within’ should be recognized with respect.

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. James Tully, ‘Strange Multiplicity: Constitution in an Age of Diversity’, Cambridge University Press, 1st edition, 1995.
  2. Will Kymlicka, ‘Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights’, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995; Antony Anghie, ‘Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law’, Cambridge University Press, 1st edition, 2005, pp. 52-65; R. Merino, ‘Reimagining the nation-state: Indigenous peoples and the making of ultranationalism in Latin America’, Leiden Journal of International Law, volume 31:4, 2018, pp. 773-792.
  3. Walker Connor, ‘Nation-Building or Nation-Destroying?’, World Politics, volume 24:3, 1972, pp. 319-355.
  4. Alfred Stepan, Juan J. Linz &YogendraYadav, ‘The Rise of State-Nations’, J. Democracy, volume 21:3, 2010,pp. 50-51.
  5. American indigenous peoples are called ‘Indian.’ ‘Indian’ is also a mis-appellation, which came from Columbus’s original delusion that he was landing in a part of India. Despite being wrong factually, the term ‘Indian’ stuck, and still remains the common appellation for the indigenous peoples of the Americas.
  6. Johnson v. McIntosh, Supreme Court of the United States, 1823, 21 U.S543, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, Supreme Court of the United States, 1831, 30 U.S. 1,; Worcester v. Georgia, Supreme Court of the United States, 1832, 31 U.S. 515.
  7. Max Weber, Essays in Sociology, Routledge and Kegal Paul, London, 1948; Ernest Gellner, Nations and Nationalism, Basil Blackwell, 1983; Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Refelections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, New York, 2006.
  8. This sounds like they are talking about modern states as opposed to tribal governments and empires.
  9. Gellner (n 7), pp. 18, 34, 38.
  10. Gellner (7), p.55.
  11. Lewis Henry Morgan, Ancient Society, University of Arizona Press, 1985.
  12. Robert R. Palmer, ‘The National Idea in France before the Revolution’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 1940, pp. 95 and 97; Brian C. J. Singer, ‘Cultural versus Contractual Nations: Rethinking Their Opposition’, History and Theory, 1996, p. 317.
  13. Ibid, p.318.
  14. Roger Brubaker, ‘Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany’ Harvard University Press, 1992, p. 44, 15 Stepan, Linz &Yadav (n 4).
  15. Brubaker (n 14), p. 5.
  16. AdeedDawisha, ‘Nation and Nationalism: Historical Antecedents to Contemporary Debates’, International Studies Review, 2002.
  17. Leon Thiry, ‘Nation, State, Sovereign and Self-determination’, Peace Research p.15, volume 13:1, 1981, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23685021, Accessed on 17 December 2023.
  18. Brubaker (n 14), p. 48.
  19. Alexis De Tocqueville, John Bonner & Joseph Meredith Toner,The Old Regime and the Revolution,Harper and Brother Publishers, New York, 1856, p. 35.
  20. The pre-revolutionary social and political system of France is known as Ancient Regime.
  21. Tocqueville et.al. (n 20), pp. 35-36.
  22. David G. Ritchie, ‘Contributions to the History of the Social Contract Theory’, Political Science Quarterly p.556, 1891, pp. 556-572.
  23. Singer (n 12), pp. 310-311.
  24. Eugene Kamenka (ed), Nationalism: The Nature and Evolution of an Idea, International Book Services Inc., 1974.
  25. Roland Axtmann, ‘The State of the State: The Model of the Modern State and Its Contemporary Transformation’, International Political Science Review, volume 25:3, 2004, pp. 259-264.
  26. Michael Rogin, Rousseau in Africa, Indiana University Press, 1963, pp. 23-25, available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2934455, accessed on 17 December 2023.
  27. Anghie (n 2), p. 102.
  28. Rudolph C. Ryser, Indigenous Nations and Modern States: The Political Emergence of Challenging State Power, Taylor & Francis, 1st edition, 2012.
  29. Jason Farr, ‘Point: The Westphalia Legacy and the Modern Nation-State’, International Social Science Review, volume 80:3, 2005, p. 156.
  30. Leo Gross, ‘The Peace of Westphalia, 1648-1948’, The American Journal of International Law, volume 42:1, 1948, pp. 20-26.
  31. Ryser (n 29), p. 17.
  32. Ibid, p. 11.
  33. Ibid, p.47.
  34. Ibid, p. 30.
  35. Edward W. Said, Orientalism, New York: Random House Inc., 1979.
  36. Ibid, p. 41.
  37. Ibid, p. 25.
  38. Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth, New York: Grove Press, 2005.
  39. AimeCesaire, Discourse on Colonialism, NYU Press, 2000, pp. 29-78.
  40. Anderson (n 7), p. 48.
  41. FelicitaMedved, ‘Nation and Patria in the Emerging World Order’, GeoJournal, 1997, pp. 5-11.
  42. Subrat K. Nanda, ‘Cultural Nationalism in a Multi-National Context: The Case of India’, Sociological Bulletin, 2006, pp. 24-25.
  43. John Hutchinson & Anthony D. Smith, Nationalism, Oxford University Press, 1994.
  44. Robert A. Williams, The American Indian in Western Legal Though: The Discourses of Conquest, Oxford University Press USA, 1990; Anghie (n 2).
  45. Morgan (n 11).
  46. Anghie (n 2), p. 195.
  47. Ibid, p.103.
  48. George Manuel & Michael Poslnus, The Fourth World: An Indian Reality, The Free Press, 1974.
  49. Epifanio San Juan Jr., ‘Nation-state, Postcolonial Theory, and Global Violence’, Social Analysis: The International Journal of Anthropology, 2002, pp. 11-12.
  50. Swati Parashar& Michael Schulz, ‘Colonial legacies, post-colonial ‘self-hood’ and the (un)doing of Africa’, Third World Quarterly, volume 42:5, 2021, pp. 867-869.
  51. Sabelo J. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, ‘The Cognitive Empire, Politics of Knowledge and African Intellectual Productions: reflections on Struggles for Epistemic Freedom and Resurgence of Decolonisation in the Twenty-First Century’, Third World Quarterly, volume 42:5, 2021, pp. 882-901.
  52. Erin A. Cech, Anneke Metz, et al., ‘Epistemological Dominance and Social Inequality: Experiences of Native American Science, Engineering, and Health Students’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, volume 42:5, 2017, pp. 743-774.
  53. Ibid, p. 744.
  54. Ibid, p. 747.
  55. Duncan Ivison et al., Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Cambridge University Press, 2000, p. 37.
  56. Lisa Åkesson, ‘European migration to Africa and the coloniality of knowledge: the Portuguese in Maputo’, Third World Quarterly, pp. 922-938, 2021.
  57. Ibid, p. 923.
  58. Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse?, Zed Books Ltd, 1986.
  59. DipeshChakrabarty, ‘Legacies of Bandung: Decolonisation and the Politics of Culture’, Economic and Political Weekly, volume 40:46, 2005, pp. 4812-4818.
  60. Ibid, p. 4812.
  61. Sabelo J. Ndlovu-Gatsheni, ‘The Cognitive Empire, Politics of Knowledge and African Intellectual Productions: reflections on Struggles for Epistemic Freedom and Resurgence of Decolonisation in the Twenty-First Century’, Third World Quarterly, volume 42:5, 2021, pp. 882-901.
  62. Erin A. Cech, Anneke Metz, et al., ‘Epistemological Dominance and Social Inequality: Experiences of Native American Science, Engineering, and Health Students’, Science, Technology, & Human Values, volume 42:5, 2017, pp. 743-774.
  63. Ibid, p. 744.
  64. Ibid, p. 747.
  65. Duncan Ivison et al., Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Cambridge University Press, 2000, p. 37.
  66. Lisa Åkesson, ‘European migration to Africa and the coloniality of knowledge: the Portuguese in Maputo’, Third World Quarterly, pp. 922-938, 2021.
  67. Ibid, p. 923.
  68. Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse?, Zed Books Ltd, 1986.
  69. DipeshChakrabarty, ‘Legacies of Bandung: Decolonisation and the Politics of Culture’, Economic and Political Weekly, volume 40:46, 2005, pp. 4812-4818.
  70. Ibid, p. 4812.
  71. Ibid, p. 36.
  72. Tully (n 1), p. 3.
  73. Kymlicka (n 2).
  74. John A. Armstrong, Nations before Nationalism, The University of North Carolina Press, 1982.
  75. Smith (n 7), p. 196.
  76. Medved (n 42), pp. 7-8.
  77. Subrat K. Nanda (n 43), p. 26.
  78. Shiv Vishvanathan, ‘Interrogating the Nation’, Economic and Political Weekly, volume 28:23, 2003, p. 2295.
  79. Sanjay K. Ray, ‘Conflicting Nations in North-East India’, Economic and Political Weekly, volume 41:48, 2005, p. 2176.
  80. Satish C. Aikant, Rethinking the Nation, Indian Literature, 2006, p.169.
  81. AshisNandy, The Intimate Enemy: Loss and Recovery of Self under Colonialism, Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1983.
  82. Tully (n 1), pp. 54-55.
  83. RashwetShrinkhal, ‘“Indigenous sovereignty” and right to self-determination in international law: a critical appraisal’, Alter Native, 2021, p.71; Peter C. W. Gutkind, ‘The Passing of Tribal Man in Africa’, International Studies in Sociology and Social Anthropology, 1970, p. 45.
  84. Thomas Flanagan, ‘The Sovereignty and Nationhood of Canadian Indians: A Comment on Boldt and Long’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 1985, pp. 367-371; Gidon Gottlieb, ‘Nations without States’, Foreign Affairs, 1994, pp. 100-105.
  85. Tully (n 1), p. 52.
  86. Steven Paul McSloy, ‘Back to the Future: Native American Sovereignty in the 21st Century’, NYU Review of Law & Social Change, 1992-1994, pp. 217-218.
  87. Johnson v. McIntosh, 1823, Supreme Court of the United States, 21 U.S. 543.
  88. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (n 6).
  89. Worcester v. Georgia, 1832, Supreme Court of the United States, 31 U.S.515.
  90. Ibid, p. 559.
  91. Sandra Day O’Connor, ‘Lessons from the Third Sovereign: Indian Tribal Courts’, TULSA L. J., 1997, pp. 1-6.
  92. David H. Getches, Charles F. Wilkinson et al., Cases and Materials on Federal Indian Law, West Publishing Co., 2011.
  93. Ibid, p. 200.
  94. United States v. Lara, 2004, 541 U.S. 193, 219.
  95. Mark Rifkin, ‘Indigenizing Agamben: Rethinking Sovereignty in Light of the "Peculiar" Status of Native Peoples’, Cultural Critique, 2009, pp. 88-124.
  96. Vine Deloria Jr. & Clifford M. Lytle, The Nations Within: The Past and Future of American Indian Sovereignty University of Texas Press, 1998.
  97. Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (n 6), p. 17.
  98. Morgan (n 11), pp. 66-67.
  99. Ibid, p. 101.
  100. Ibid, p. 103.
  101. Duncan Ivison et al., Political Theory and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Cambridge University Press, 2000.
  102. Bradford W. Morse, ‘Common Roots but Modern Divergences: Aboriginal Policies in Canada and the United States’, St. Thomas L. Rev., 1997-98, p. 115.
  103. The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763, U.K. 3 GEo. 3, reprinted in R.S.C., App. I,1985, 4-5.
  104. Calder v. Attorney-General of British Columbia, 1973, S.C.R. (Can.) 313, 328.
  105. Kymlicka (n 2), p. 221.
  106. R. v. Sioui, 1990,S.C.R. (Can.) 1025, 1053.
  107. Morse (n 98), p. 118.
  108. Ibid, p. 119.
  109. Erich Steinman, ‘Indigenous Nationhood Claims and Contemporary Federalism in Canada and the United States’, Pol’y and Society, pp. 98-115.
  110. Rebecca Anita Tsosie, ‘What Does It Mean To “Build A Nation”? Reimagining Indigenous Political Identity in an Era of Self-determination’, Asia-Pacific Law & Policy Journal, 2006, p. 38; Erich Steinman, ‘The Contemporary Revival and Diffusion of Indigenous Sovereignty Discourse’, Indigenous Studies Today, Issue 1, Fall 2005/Spring 2006, p. 89; Ward Churchill, ‘A Travesty of a Mockery of a Sham: Colonialism as ‘Self-Determination’ in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples’, Griffith L. Rev., 2011, p. 526.
  111. Mark Bennett, ‘Indigenous Autonomy and Justice in North America’, New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law, 2004; Hurst Hannum, ‘Sovereignty and Its Relevance to Native Americans in the Twenty-First Century’ American Indian Law Review, pp. 487-495; Menno Boldt& J. Anthony Long, ‘Tribal Traditions and European-Western Political Ideologies: The Dilemma of Canada'sNative Indians’, Canadian Journal of Political Science, 1984, pp. 537-53.
  112. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, 13 September 2007, available at https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp/content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf , accessed on 29 January 2022.
  113. Getches et al. (n 88)
  114. Patrick Macklem, ‘Distributing Sovereignty: Indian Nations and Equality of Peoples’ ,Stan. L. Rev. , 1992-93, p. 1311.
  115. Steinman (n 107), p. 96.
  116. Ibid, p. 108.
  117. B. Denis Marantz, People or Peoples; Equality, Autonomy and Self-Determination: The Issue at Stake of the International Decade of the World’s Indigenous Peoples, International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development, Montreal, 1996.
  118. Amanda Barratt &AshimizoAfadameh-Adeyemi, ‘Indigenous peoples and the right to culture: The potential significance for African indigenous communities of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights' General Comment 21’ AFR. HUM. RTS. L.J., 2011, pp.560-565.
  119. CaitlainDevereaux Lewis, ‘Policies of Inequality—A World Apart: A Comparison of the Policies toward Indigenous Peoples of a Post-colonial Developing Nation to Those of A Post-Industrial Developed Nation’, American Indian Law Review, 2012-13, pp.423-432.
  120. Alan Cairns, ‘Afterword: International Dimension of the Citizen Issue for Indigenous Peoples/Nations’, Citizenship Studies, 2015, pp. 497-498.
  121. Martin Danton & Rick Halpern, Empire and Others: British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600-1850, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.
  122. CaitlainDevereaux Lewis, ‘Policies of Inequality—A World Apart: A Comparison of the Policies toward Indigenous Peoples of a Post-colonial Developing Nation to Those of A Post-Industrial Developed Nation’, American Indian Law Review, 2012-13, pp.423-432.
  123. Alan Cairns, ‘Afterword: International Dimension of the Citizen Issue for Indigenous Peoples/Nations’, Citizenship Studies, 2015, pp. 497-498.
  124. Martin Danton & Rick Halpern, Empire and Others: British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, 1600-1850, University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.
  125. Ibid, p. 30.
  126. Ibid, p. 33.
  127. Stephen Cornell, ‘Processes of Native Nationhood: The Indigenous Politics of Self-government’, Int. Ind. Pol’y J. 1, 2015.
  128. Bengt G. Karlsson, ‘Anthropology and the ‘Indigenous Slot’: Claims to and Debates about Indigenous Peoples’ Status in India’, Critique of Anthropology, 2003, volume 23:4.
  129. Dorothy L. Hodgson, ‘Becoming Indigenous in Africa’, African Studies Review, volume 52:3, 2009, pp.1-18.
  130. SekharBandyopadhyay, AbhijitDasgupta& Willem van Schendel, Bengal Communities, Development andStates, New Delhi, 1994.
  131. Hodgson (n 131), p. 24.
  132. Jim Egoe, ‘Becoming Indigenous Peoples: Difference, Inequality, and the Globalisation of East African Identity Politics’, African Affairs, volume 105:420, 2006, pp. 399 and 414-415.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.