现代环境主义视野下的“生态的印第安人”

生态的印第安人是伴随现代环境主义运动的兴起而在欧美逐渐流行起来的一种假说。它其实是历史上白人视印第安人为高贵的野蛮人这一传统观念在生态主义时代的新版本。虽然从印第安人的环境伦理和白人到来前他们对当地环境的影响来看,这种形象缺乏足够的历史根据,但却作为当前欧美社会批判西方文化以征服自然为特征的环境伦理的一个对照物而逐渐传播开来。在当前北美土著人争取资源控制权的斗争中,生态的印第安人形象被各方力量当作了实现各自利益的工具,结果使它在广为流传的同时,也饱受诟病。     

试析二战对美国印第安人的负面影响

第二次世界大战对美国印第安人的自治诉求产生了深远的负面影响。在二战的巨大冲击下,印第安人事务局被逐出政治权力中心华盛顿,人员不断流失,战时活动成为印第安人事务的中心,以恢复土著自治权为目标的印第安人新政归于瓦解。与此同时,印第安人在服役于美国军队和参加战时生产等活动的过程中,与主流社会频繁接触,从而加速了自身接受同化的进程。这些接受了白人生活方式的印第安人,在战后初期越来越关注如何维护个人权利而非印第安人自治,结果使美国社会同化印第安人进入主流社会的呼声成为理所当然之势,为结束联邦政府对印第安人部落监管提供了依据。受上述因素影响,美国公众舆论明显转向,取消联邦政府与印第安人的托管关系、同化印第安人进入主流社会成为当时美国社会的共识。     

美国的印第安人新政研究

美国学术界对20世纪30年代印第安人新政的研究可以分为三个阶段。第一个阶段是研究的初期阶段,主要以新政改革参与者和同时代学者为主,多颂扬印第安人新政。第二个阶段是印第安人新政研究的快速发展时期,美国学者开始重新思考和评价这一重大改革举措,对印第安人新政的批评和指责也越来越多。第三个阶段为全面繁荣时期,传统印第安人史学与新兴族裔史学遥相呼应,对印第安人新政的批评与赞扬交织于一起。     

美国印第安人的今昔

美洲大陆的亚洲人种 在美国大部分的影视作品和著作中,印第安人都被描绘为一种固定的模式：住在提皮中,戴着羽毛头饰,穿着饰有念珠的鹿皮衣,开弓射箭,追逐野兽的红种人。而嗜血如命,残杀妇孺,野蛮凶残则是他们的民族特征。     

二十世纪美国印第安人政策之演变与印第安人事务的发展

20世纪,美国联邦政府的印第安人政策发生了几次重大的转变,这给美国印第安人的社会生活带来了很多重大的也是极为复杂的变化。20世纪初联邦政府的印第安人政策是上一个世纪同化政策的继续,其目的是最终将印第安人纳入美国主流社会。颁布于1887年的《道     

《印第安人博彩业管制法》及其对印第安部落地位的影响

1988年通过的《印第安人博彩业管制法》是美国印第安人事务中的一个重要法案,该法是为解决因部落赌博而带来的部落与州之间的纠纷而颁布.它要求部落与州就赌博事宜达成契约,然而订立契约却改变了部落的地位,因为部落早在美国政府和州形成之前就已存在于北美大陆.根据联邦宪法,部落与美国政府维持着特殊的联邦关系,其政治地位要高于州,一直以来部落主要是与联邦政府发生关系.但在该法通过后,部落却必须要与一直被视为印第安人威胁的州进行互动.因此,该法普遍被认为背离了部落自决原则,将州与联邦政府间的权力平衡转向了州,从而削弱了联邦政府和部落的权力.     

试论美国土著民族反对印第安人新政的原因

20世纪30年代的印第安人新政为了维护印第安人的利益、文化和传统,力图实现美国印第安人政策从同化到土著民族自治的转变。然而令人奇怪的是,印第安人新政却遭到美国土著民族的诸多强烈反对。究其原因可以归结为印第安人新政存在三大矛盾(1)印第安人新政的思想基础与被同化印第安人理念之间的矛盾;(2)印第安人新政的政策载体与印第安人传统习俗之间的矛盾;(3)印第安人新政的政策效果与印第安人的期望之间的矛盾。     

安德鲁·杰克逊政府迁移印第安人的动因分析

19世纪20年代末到30年代初,以安德鲁.杰克逊为代表的美国官员和南部诸州认为文明开化政策已经失败,美国印第安人政策迫切需要改弦更张。恰恰就在此时,迁移印第安人到密西西比河以西的政策构想也日趋成型,为杰克逊政府提供了一种新的选择。当时南部要求维护州权和白人利益的压力,则最终推动美国政府决定以迁移作为解决印第安人问题的途径。美国政府不惜以牺牲印第安人为代价,残酷剥夺土著土地。杰克逊高贵的言辞和父权式的论调,并不能掩盖迁移政策现实中的操纵性和强制性。杰克逊时代的民主,实际上只是白人美国的民主,是以牺牲印第安人的权益为代价的。     

浅析西班牙殖民统治下印第安人境遇的嬗变

西班牙对美洲三百多年的殖民征服与统治给当地印第安人带来了无尽的屈辱与苦难。期间,印第安人的境遇虽然在多种因素的综合作用下经历了一个微妙的嬗变历程,但其表面上的"改善",并未从根本上改变印第安民族长期遭受剥削、压迫的历史命运。因而也就解释了印第安人作为早期拉美独立运动主力之一的深刻根源。     

处女地假说与北美印第安人的命运

在白人殖民者到来前,北美印第安人已经在美洲大陆上生活了数万年,并对周围的环境产生了重要的影响。白人殖民者来到美洲后,一方面出于欧洲种族主义的文化偏见,一方面出于剥夺印第安人土地的现实利益需要,建构出处女地假说,并根据自身需要将北美大陆上的原住民简单形容为高贵的印第安人和嗜血的野蛮人两种非此即彼的刻板形象。处女地假说成为白人殖民者向西部边疆扩张、驱逐和剥削印第安人的理论工具。对于美洲白人来说,该假说意味着机会和希望,而对于北美印第安人来说,该假说则代表了种族主义偏见和殖民主义的罪恶。随着现代环境主义的兴起,处女地假说和印第安人的传统生态智慧受到热捧,印第安人也试图利用这一工具为其当前争取资源控制权的斗争服务,但收效不大。     

Artefacts,archaeologists and American Indians

Abstract

Archaeologists traditionally have observed the style and technology of artefacts and used this to classify archaeological assemblages, describing the repeated association of artefact groups as a ‘Culture’. We continue to place overwhelming reliance on our ability to derive meaningful information about past culture from artefacts, yet the importance these objects had for the members of the cultural group (past and present) is not adequately considered. The typological approach sidelines the creative role of the artisans, we find out a little about their economy, gain momentary glimpses of their religion, but learn almost nothing about their humanity. Archaeologists tend to focus on the physical, technological or esoteric attributes of an artefact, while indigenous populations tend to focus on the object's ritual or social importance. This is most apparent in the treatment of funerary artefacts. Until recently, many American Indian tribal groups have seen no distinction between ‘grave robbing’ and ‘archaeological excavation’ it made no difference to them whether the dead were disturbed by looters or by qualified archaeologists. By involving indigenous populations in the design, practice and dissemination of archaeological research, we can add humanity to our study of the human past, and take a step toward a truly worldwide archaeology.     

Pedigree and productivity in the British and North American cattle kingdoms before 1930

The origin of the concepts of breed and pedigree in cattle in late eighteenth-century Britain, and the circumstances of their translation to north America are examined. Pedigree had a particular value to north American importers and was more widely adopted in both Britain and America for that reason. However, from the outset, competitive pressures developed which owed little to performance as measured in beef or milk. The descendants of early importations of improved but unpedigreed Shorthorn cattle were stigmatized as «unfashionable» while other bloodlines, particularly those descended from the stock of British breeder Thomas Bates, gained the attention and the premiums associated with fashion. The «fancy» thus attracted both north American and British enthusiasts, but with different results. As in Britain, fashionable pedigrees were acquired as positional, non-material goods within a general environment of speculative excess, though with less serious consequences for the overall performance of north American livestock agriculture. There appear to have been two reasons for this. First, north America had no equivalent to the British landlord–tenant system, which encouraged the wider dissemination to the productive sector of costly cattle with indifferent productivity credentials. Second, and more important, in north America the «fancy» and those who promoted it acted as a stimulus to a different kind of boosterism, which promoted competing breeds of cattle on the basis of productivity. Though breed boosters had less success in the dairy than in the beef sector, the net outcome was the more constructive application of pedigree to productivity in north America than in Britain.     

The diversity of North American projectile-point types,before and after the bow and arrow

Mimicking paleobiological studies of biodiversity, changes in the diversity of temporal types of North American projectile points are modeled to reveal evolutionary patterns of origination and extinction. Origination is modeled as rapid innovation of multiple point types (high diversity), and extinction is modeled as gradual winnowing of less-efficient types. Introduction of the bow and arrow as a new weapon-delivery system is modeled as an increase in point diversity. Six sequences of points (dart + arrow), six sequences of dart points, and six sequences of arrow points from western North America best match the model when the number of time periods ?5 and the number of types is >3.