Steven Newcomb: How use of 'indigenous' benefits colonizers

Given that the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues is about to convene in New York for its 14th session, it seems fitting to once again revisit the term “indigenous” in the context of the United Nations. In his amazing book A Poetic for Sociology (1977), Richard H. Brown say that “the ‘thing itself’ is emergent in the process of its being named.” (p. 148). We might say that we became “emergent” as “indigenous” when others began to apply that word to us, and especially when we made the decision to begin applying the word “indigenous” to ourselves.

Interpretative implications followed when we “became emergent” as “indigenous,” for it is not possible to use a word without also using the interpretations that accompany that word in different contexts and for different purposes. In the context of the U.N. the word “indigenous” means “colonized.” And the phrase “indigenous peoples” means, peoples that have been colonized (forced under domination) and never decolonized.

What is typically called decolonization is partly a mental process which involves becoming highly conscious of the way in which dominating colonizers have used their language and their meanings to dominate us. Given that our nations and peoples have been metaphorically “woven” into a deceptive language “web” of domination, there is much to be gained by examining each linguistic strand, along with the metaphor “indigenous” in the context of the United Nations.

Becoming highly conscious requires ending self-deception wherever it exists. We need to become hyper conscious of when and the extent to which we have named ourselves with words that benefit the colonizers, while maintaining the processes and patterns of domination. The word “Indigenous” is an example of how using dominating words to name ourselves can serve to reinforce rather than end the colonization and domination of our nations and our lives.