关于中国历史上疆域问题的几点认识

文章认为 ,凡是生活在今天中国疆域内的民族以及历史上生活在今天疆域内而今天已经消失了的民族都是中华民族的组成部分 ,他们的历史 (外来民族迁入之前的历史另作别论 )都是中国历史的组成部分 ,他们在历史上活动的地区及其建立政权的疆域也都是中国历史上疆域的组成部分。按照这一原则 ,结合历史上中原政权与边疆民族及其政权的隶属关系 ,以及边疆民族对中华思想文化的心理认同等条件综合考查 ,不难对中国历史上的疆域问题得出比较正确的结论。     

Unsettling Settler Belonging: (Re)naming and Territory Making in the Pacific Northwest

Names can act as daily reminders of a colonial presence. To unsettle Settler origin stories, we strive to reveal the legacy of (dis)possession rooted in naming. As case studies, we consider the attribution of the name Salish Sea, the naming of the Straits of Juan de Fuca and Georgia, and the delineation of national boundaries during the San Juan Water Boundary Dispute. We use these examples to demonstrate the unsettling potential of (re)naming practices. To conclude, we suggest further areas for praxis and research that are situated in a broader context of naming practices.     

THE FUTURE'S PAST: POLITICS OF TIME AND TERRITORY AMONG DAKELH FIRST NATIONS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

ABSTRACT. This article examines contemporary political movements among Dakelh First Nations in British Columbia that have challenged Western modernity's fixation with a future achieved through industrial progress. Aboriginal people have been especially assertive in politicizing the connections between time and place through the display and performance of memory in forms as diverse as life history narratives, the cultural landscape, media and grass-roots development projects. Such constructions suggest that future developments in traditional lands must come through an engagement with the past - its meanings, practices, and significance in the particular places of cultural and economic production. I explore how Dakelh territories serve as sites for imagining and enacting alternative political and development agendas. I argue that these territories have increasingly become spaces forged in the margins of modernity's binary oppositions of self-other, nature-culture and future-past. This finding is not meant to marginalize indigenous territories conceptually or politically, but rather to recognize their centrality to contemporary provincial politics where margins - both geographic and discursive - have become central locations for pursuing sovereignty over land and nation.     

Tribal Sovereignty and the Problem of Difference in Environmental Regulation: Observations on “Measured Separatism” in Indian Country

Abstract: The legal and juridical sovereignty of American Indian nations is supposed to help Native peoples maintain their own distinct political and cultural communities. In the context of environmental issues, this means that tribal governments have both the inherent and statutory right to set their own environmental standards, which have the potential to protect tribal peoples and their natural resources in culturally relevant ways. In the past, the US Supreme Court has sought to curtail this kind of sovereignty when the due process of non‐Indians might be hindered. In this article, we look at why tribal environmental sovereignty can and should address the issues of due process in the context of environmental regulation in tribal borders, and make a call for this to be done in a way that supports American Indian tribal sovereignty. Moreover, we connect these issues to the current legal and juridical struggles of other environmental justice groups and the need for more meaningful participation in environmental regulation within the nation‐state for all cultural minorities.