The Problem with 'Parliament': World Parliament of Indigenous Peoples
During 7-10 January I attended the first round table of a proposed 'World Parliament of Indigenous Peoples'. The round table took place at Booshakthi Kendra, the Dalit Ashram, near Tumkur, Karnataka, India. Our hosts were the Dalit people lead by Mrs Jyothi with philosopher husband MC Raj. It was a wonderful privilege to be invited.
Naturally, there was a big question over the use of the word 'parliament'. We are concerned not to adopt concepts from non-indigenous cultures particularly and especially if these concepts arise from and advance colonizing cultures.
In our discussions we alighted upon the following points:
1. There is a 'new wind' blowing in indigenous communities worldwide. We wish to encourage this and believe there is much merit in indigenous peoples continuing to meet regularly.
2. These discussions are preliminary and there is a long way to go to finalise the purpose, design and function of any organization that might emerge.
3. We do not wish the discussion over terminology to inhibit progress. We recognize the problem with the word 'parliament' and will continue to debate this question without halting progress overall.
4. In thinking about the nature of the organization and the terminology that might be utilized, there are a number of 'domains' to consider: the internal domain of each indigenous community, the domain of relationships between indigenous communities and the domain of non-indigenous communities including the United Nations. The philosophy and practice of the organization needs to be meaningful across these domains.
5. Whatever entity does emerge, it needs to make a difference. We have been urged to design an organization that achieves a status somewhat greater than a non-governmental organization (NGO) particularly in the eyes of United Nations.
6. The value of the word 'parliament' is that it is somewhat understood and communicates a seriousness of purpose and a status. There are other merits too. This is why some indigenous communities have used this term including Sami people and Māori in New Zealand.
The problem with the word is the
temptation to make use of procedures, conventions and concepts that ultimately do not belong to indigenous communities and could indeed inhibit the expression of indigenous ways of implementing governance.
Hence the dilemma. This will not be resolved quickly. However, we will continue to discuss this matter without halting progress noting also that we will need to resolve it over the next 2-3 years (?) so that the entity will be established in a timely manner.
Tēnā koutou katoa
PS please note that this post contains my personal views of our discussions and does not represent an official record of our meeting.
Naturally, there was a big question over the use of the word 'parliament'. We are concerned not to adopt concepts from non-indigenous cultures particularly and especially if these concepts arise from and advance colonizing cultures.
In our discussions we alighted upon the following points:
1. There is a 'new wind' blowing in indigenous communities worldwide. We wish to encourage this and believe there is much merit in indigenous peoples continuing to meet regularly.
2. These discussions are preliminary and there is a long way to go to finalise the purpose, design and function of any organization that might emerge.
3. We do not wish the discussion over terminology to inhibit progress. We recognize the problem with the word 'parliament' and will continue to debate this question without halting progress overall.
4. In thinking about the nature of the organization and the terminology that might be utilized, there are a number of 'domains' to consider: the internal domain of each indigenous community, the domain of relationships between indigenous communities and the domain of non-indigenous communities including the United Nations. The philosophy and practice of the organization needs to be meaningful across these domains.
5. Whatever entity does emerge, it needs to make a difference. We have been urged to design an organization that achieves a status somewhat greater than a non-governmental organization (NGO) particularly in the eyes of United Nations.
6. The value of the word 'parliament' is that it is somewhat understood and communicates a seriousness of purpose and a status. There are other merits too. This is why some indigenous communities have used this term including Sami people and Māori in New Zealand.
The problem with the word is the
temptation to make use of procedures, conventions and concepts that ultimately do not belong to indigenous communities and could indeed inhibit the expression of indigenous ways of implementing governance.
Hence the dilemma. This will not be resolved quickly. However, we will continue to discuss this matter without halting progress noting also that we will need to resolve it over the next 2-3 years (?) so that the entity will be established in a timely manner.
Tēnā koutou katoa
PS please note that this post contains my personal views of our discussions and does not represent an official record of our meeting.
Comments
Post a Comment