Factor 4: Native collective agency

private sector. As Cameron (2011, p. 3) puts it, “the Progressive Conservative Party professed a sort of business liberalism that was inimical to social liberalism.”

Eventually, Mulroney was unable to accomplish the majority of his fiscal austerity agenda and performed poorly in almost every economic indicator (UNIFOR, 2015).

However, it is important to consider that in the era of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, Mulroney was more prone to maintaining the overall viability of the Canadian welfare state by making “cuts in the margin” of the budget and not trying to push a hardline neoliberal agenda similar to that of his British and North American counterparts⁵⁰ (PATERSON, 1996).

It can be affirmed that while the Mulroney government was committed to

“economic renewal in which economic growth and expansion were clearly favored over the traditional goals of equitable redistribution of wealth and income”

(PATERSON, 1996, p. 19), the Workers Party governments relied strongly on the capacity of the state to boost economy and, at the same time, carry out distributive policies designed to reduce poverty and increase the consumption. The key drivers of economic growth are distinct in both cases, as are the rhetoric and goals of economic activity. However, both paths are strongly tied to market-driven demands and exploitation of natural resources, often harming the environment and communities that may stand in the way of projects and “development.” For the purposes of the current investigation, it is considered that both strategies exclude Indigenous peoples from the design of sustainable economic activities and are likely to predispose governments and economic actors against Indigenous rights.

as social movements since the 1960s and 1970s, increasing each group’s number of associations and spreading the group’s activities nationally. This thesis argues that the democratic effects of associational life (WARREN, 2000) can also be observed in the case of Native groups that have been able to effectively influence the processes of designing policies related to land claims.

Sub-variable 7: Acts of protest

Acts of protest – understood here as the set of actions with varied degrees of contentiousness carried out by a social movement against a defined target and clear political goals (TARROW, 2009) - either increased or decreased in intensity over the period considered for each case; therefore, this variable can be considered as dichotomous.

Indigenous peoples in both countries have been able to present themselves as

“credible threats” (SCHOLTZ, 2006) to the political system, carrying out protests and actively pursuing their interests in the public sphere. As Oxhorn (2014, p. 82) has affirmed, the state and society have been engaged in an ongoing “process in which civil society plays a decisive role in determining the extent and nature of democratic inclusion”; though this process has not always been smooth and peaceful. The participation of Indigenous groups in political processes that affect them was not merely due to a concession by federal governments but fundamentally by the results of long-term mobilization that qualified the organizations as equal partners in the policymaking process. As Chase (2002, p. 2) has affirmed, “the last two decades […]

have been also a time of remarkable activism by groups that have used a global stage to organize their demands for autonomous control over territory” as well as public policies.

In their discussion of Native mobilization in Latin America, Warren and Jackson (2002, p. 9) have claimed that it “would be a mistake to freeze groups in formulaic sorts of essentialism or activism.” Soares (2016) has demonstrated that in Brazil, the Indigenous movement has carried out various actions, including road blockages, the occupation of public agencies’ headquarters, the occupation of private lands, and the intense mobilization of national and international media.

First, it is important to understand that modern ethnic mobilization in Brazil began during the 1970s with the first Indigenous assemblies organized by several Indigenous groups with the aid of the Conselho Indigenista Missionário, the pastoral body of the Catholic church dedicated to working with Native groups⁵¹ (RAMOS, 2002). Since then, the growing mobilization has suffered some setbacks but has generally evolved into its contemporary structure lead by the powerful Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil (APIB)⁵². The Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil functions as a “peak organization” that gathers together several Indigenous regional organizations all over the country. The majority of Brazilian Indigenous groups and the government acknowledge it as an organization that represents the interests of such groups nationally (BRAATHEN; INGLEZ DE SOUZA, 2015).

The organization’s structure is not centralized, and it cannot be assumed that the APIB organizes all actions of protest carried out by Indigenous groups in Brazil.

However, it is fair to consider that this group has an important impact on the ground.

For this reason, the actions presented on the organization’s websites can be considered as a fairly accurate description of the ethnic mobilization activities in the country. After visiting the two organizations’ websites,⁵³ it was possible to collect data regarding the repertory of action of the Brazilian Indigenous Movement organized under the APIB. The categories of action found are as follows:

1. Walks/marches/demonstrations: all activities involving the displacement of protestors in roads, streets, and avenues displaying charts, chanting, performing hymns, and engaging in similar actions;

51 Oliveira (2016) notes that such assemblies began in 1974 in Mato Grosso and counts 15 events that occurred form 1974 to 1979. More than 42 Indigenous assemblies were held between 1980 and 1984. Such events worked as political forums for emergent Indigenous leadership to articulate political views and make claims to Brazilian authorities.

52 Founded in 2009, the APIB brings together the following regional organizations: Articulação dos Povos Indígenas da Região Sul (ARPINSUL); Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Pantanal e Região (ARPIPAN);

Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira (COIAB); Articulação dos Povos Indígenas da Região Sudeste (ARPINSUDESTE); Aty Guassu (Grande Assembleia Guarani); and Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Nordeste, Minas Gerais e Espírito Santo (APOINME). This group is the contemporary face of the Indigenous movement that was previously organized under the label of União das Nações Indígenas in the 1980s and early 1990s. Furthermore, the APIB’s main activity is the annual gathering Acampamento Terra Livre (Free Land Camp) that brings together hundreds of Indigenous leaders in Brasília to discuss Indigenous issues, make claims to authorities, and demonstrate (BRAATHEN; INGLEZ DE SOUZA, 2015).

53 The two websites of the APIB were visited; these sites are called “Indigenous National Mobilization” and cover the period of political mobilization between 2009 and July 2013 (the website is no longer available) and between August 2013 and August 2017 (https://mobilizacaonacionalindigena.wordpress.com/ Access in:

26/12/17). Both websites can be considered information hubs featuring a substantial number of Indigenous actions across the country. The APIB institutional website is http://apib.info/ (accessed on: 26/12/17).

2. Occupation of public property/public spaces: all pacifistic or violent occupations of federal, state, or municipal government buildings as well as open air spaces such as squares;

3. Occupation of private property: pacifistic or violent occupation of farms or private buildings;

4. Digital/media activism: Twitter activism, social media calls for protests, video circulation, posting of open letters, and manifestos and participation in media briefings;

5. Blockades: blocking the free flow of individuals and vehicles on federal, state, and municipal roads;

6. Symbolic acts: camps, chants, displays of political placards, participating in public audiences, attending international events, publicly denouncing the Brazilian government to national and international courts, and meeting with public authorities;

Figure 11 illustrates that the Brazilian Indigenous Movement carried out 286 actions between 2009 and 2016. An increase in activism began in 2010 that reached its peak in 2011 and fell dramatically after 2012. Forty-four actions took place in 2009, 43 took place in 2010, and 82 took place in 2011 the highest number of the period. Thirty-four actions took place in 2012, 35 took place in 2013, 2014 included 19 actions, 2015 included 26, and as of March only 3 actions of protest had taken place in 2016.

Figure 11: Number of protests by the Brazilian Indigenous Movement between 2009 and 2016 Source: http://blogapib.blogspot.com.br/ and https://mobilizacaonacionalindigena.wordpress.com/. Elaborated by the author.

While goals of this dissertation do not include explaining why this dramatic shift took place after 2011, it is important to reiterate that this was the year when then President Dilma Rousseff was sworn into office for her first term. Even though her government pushed a vigorous anti-Indigenous political agenda – which arguably could spark a greater number of protests – a declining capacity in the APIB to carry out protests in sheer numbers nationwide can be observed.

It is also important to understand the actions of protest carried out by the Indigenous Movement in Brazil in terms of geographic scope. In a country with continental dimensions and with an Indigenous population scattered across the territory, it is understandable that most actions happened in the largest Amazon states with the largest Indigenous populations (Pará and Amazonas states). In the state of Mato Grosso do Sul, a conflagrated situation of violent attacks against the Native population in the region is also a major source of many protests. Additionally, most Indigenous acts of protest in Brazil between 2009 and 2016 happened in Brasília, the country’s capital. Moreover, beyond the Federal District, a few occurred actions in 20 Brazilian states.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Figure 12: Distribution of acts of Brazilian Indigenous Movement by state Source: http://blogapib.blogspot.com.br/ and https://mobilizacaonacionalindigena.wordpress.com/. Elaborated by the author.

Finally, the data revealed that most actions carried out by the Brazilian Indigenous Movement during the period considered were related to media and digital activism and symbolic acts. This finding means that even though contentious acts attract more media attention, they are only a tiny fraction of the Movement’s actions.

The daily work of the Indigenous organizations is based on information sharing and network building through the Internet. Lastly, various symbolic acts are also an important part of the Indigenous movement repertory of action. Figure 13 presents the numbers related to each type of action between 2009 and 2016.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

AL PB GO CE MA PE RJ MG TO MT RR BA SP PR RS INT SC PA NI AM MS DF

Figure 13: Frequency of actions of the Brazilian Indigenous Movement by category between 2009 and 2016 Source: http://blogapib.blogspot.com.br/ and https://mobilizacaonacionalindigena.wordpress.com/. Elaborated by the author.

The Canadian history of ethnic mobilization has some similarities with and distinctions from the Brazilian case. Most recently remembered with the spark of the

“Idle no More!” movement in 2012 (COATES, 2015), Indigenous mobilization in Canada can be traced back to the 1920s, when the Iroquois Confederacy appealed to the League of Nations against the Canadian government. This is the first record of an Indigenous group making claims to an international organization (RAMOS, 2002).

After World War II, Indigenous service members began to actively question their treatment as “second-class citizens” by mainstream Canadian society and began to organize. However, it was only after 1969 that the Indigenous movement regained momentum after the Trudeau government’s disastrous attempt to repeal the Indian Act without consulting First Nations⁵⁴ (RAMOS, 2008).

Howard Ramos (2008) was able to collect data about contentious actions⁵⁵ of Canadian Indigenous organizations from 1950 and 2000; Ramos coded 948 actions and divided them into several categories. Overall, 166 (18%) actions were carried out by non-affiliated Indigenous peoples (with no formal link to an organization).

Traditionalist or warrior Indigenous groups acting “regardless of political environment”

54 The details of these events are discussed in chapters 4 and 5.

55 Ramos (2008, p.802) broadly defines “contentious actions” as “any act outside the dominant political process with a clear target, actor, place, action and goal”. However, unlike the dataset in the Brazilian case, Ramos included the use of “legal actions” in his sample. This term refers to the use of courts to pursue Indigenous political agendas.

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 WALK/MARCH/DEMONSTRATIONS

OCCUPATION OF PRIVATE PROPERTIES BLOCKADES OCCUPATION OF PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS/PUBLIC SPACES

SYMBOLIC ACTS MEDIA AND DIGITAL ACTIVISM

to preserve lands and traditions, often through violent actions, carried out 46 actions (5%). Specific Indigenous bands, groups, or reserves were responsible for 283 actions (30%), followed by Pan Nativel organizations that carried out 352 actions (37%); these groups are the most important actor for Indigenous mobilization in the period considered. Finally, coalitions between Native and non-Native groups organized only 50 actions (5%), almost the same number of actions carried out by non-Native groups alone (51 actions or 5%). The Figure 14 displays the number of actions per year between 1951 and 2000.

Figure 14: Acts of protest by Indigenous groups in Canada between 1951 and 2000 Source: RAMOS, 2008.

Figure 14 illustrates three critical moments for Canadian Indigenous mobilization in the period. The first moment is the years following the Canadian government’s previously mentioned attempt to repeal the Indian Act after 1969.

During the 1980s, the patriation of the Canadian Constitution and the following Aboriginal Constitutional Conferences⁵⁶ maintained the movement’s energy. Finally,

56 With the goal of clarifying some of the terms regarding Aboriginal rights enshrined in the new constitution, Native leaders and Prime-Ministers agreed to hold a series of constitutional conferences on Aboriginal constitutional issues in 1983, 1984, 1985 and 1987, concluded with disappointing results for both parties involved in the process (MILLER, 2000)

the failed process of ratification of the Charlottetown Accord in 1992⁵⁷ set the stage for the peak of Native organization of acts of protest during the period considered.

It is also worth comparing the numbers and patterns of collective action presented in this section. Regarding the differences in periods, Brazil and Canada are similar in terms of magnitude of actions of protest by Indigenous groups.

Considering that 286 actions were found for a period of only seven years, it is possible to estimate that the number of acts would be far greater if comparable data were available for the same period of the Canadian case.⁵⁸ Additionally, it is important to consider that both cases present a general growing tendency of increasing the number of actions with a clear moment of intense activity.

So far, the current dissertation has stressed the importance of participation, with particular attention paid to the argumentative aspect emphasized by deliberative democrats, as not only a political activity connected to policy deliveries but also as a conversation with political consequences that can occur in many institutional and social settings. This argument suggests that Indigenous groups will be better able to use PIs to pursue their goals if the groups are collectively well organized. In other words, political organization in associative terms is of immense importance for the model in this thesis. The complex interaction between Native groups and PIs is mediated by the political nature of these organizations. Moreover, scholars have recently begun to discuss political participation in PIs as part of a broader repertory of actions of a number of political actors (AVRITZER, 2017; ABERS et al., 2014).

Sub variable 8: Associative density

57 The Charlottetown Accord was a political compromise made by Provincial Prime-Ministers and Native leaders in 1992 with the goal of deeply changing constitutional provisions, which failed a referendum at the same year (PELLETIER; TREMBLAY, 2005).

58 One possible reason for the differences in numbers could be related to the media used to code the activities of interest. Ramos (2008) used the digital version of the newspaper The Globe and Mail, while the current study used the APIB’s websites. We tend to think that the use of Indigenous websites provides more reliable data regarding the repertory of actions used by Indigenous movements because big media outlets are not always interested in minor events or are not able to cover the whole country’s territory. This claim, however, lacks empirical confirmation.

Finally, as well as the number of actions of protest, the number of Indigenous associations either increased or decreased over time. It means that our final sub variable is also dichotomic.

Putnam’s (2000, p.103) classic study about the cultural conditions for good institutional governance in Italy has highlighted the importance of associations for the efficacy and stability of democratic governance due to democratic governance’s

“internal effects” on individuals and “external effects” on society. While the former concerns the already-mentioned civic learning process, the latter stresses the incorporation and articulation of different interests in a cooperative process to achieve societal goals; the same applies to Native groups. Moreover, as Sabl (2002, p.9) has argued, “organizing is particularly useful to, and needed by, those furthest removed from the well-functioning institutions of middle-class civil society.” Thus, Indigenous groups have not only been figuratively removed from political institutions but have also been geographically distant.

Furthermore, the kind of archetypal image of Native groups as primitive and passive that might come to mind when discussing Native associations must be avoided. Almond and Verba (1963, p.16-17), for instance, have used the example of

“African tribal societies and autonomous local communities” to illustrate what they call the “parochial culture,” where members “expect nothing from the political system” and the typical political roles of the communities have been dismissed as “diffuse political- economic-religious roles.” Consequently, the individuals in such circumstances have been “input objects” of the political system rather than active citizens. However, it is arguable that this point of view has been poorly informed by anthropological evidence and ignorant of the contemporary political articulation of Native groups.

The nature and purpose of Native associations

It is important to discuss the character of this type of political association.

Leaving behind the fears of factionalism, it can be contended that these organizations have been prone to cooperatively working with institutional actors for achieving their stated goals, without excluding contentious actions that may have been carried out in some contexts. Following Warren (2000), it can be argued that

associations may have “democratic effects,” whether on individuals, the public sphere, political institutions or, as has been argued so far, the concrete policy processes.

Regardless of the variation of Indigenous groups’ internal organization, their forms of electing representation and how they pursue political goals, Indigenous peoples organized as political groups can be considered a secondary association.

They are, as Cohen and Rogers (1995, p.7) have explained, among “the wide range of nonfamilial organizations intermediate between individuals or firms and the institutions of the state and the formal electoral system,” which play a fundamental role in any modern polity. Indigenous groups are either formal or informal associations formed by Native leaders to facilitate negotiations with governmental agents related to a variety of issues affecting Native communities.

From a theoretical point of view, Native associations can be described as collective voluntary organizations, though familial affiliations might play a role in the involvement of certain members, which aim to affect public policies that concern Indigenous peoples. Besides, as Sabl (2002), has suggested, these groups are organizations that empower grassroots movements; furthermore, these groups are fundamentally rooted in their communities and are “face-to-face societies”, meaning decision-making processes are direct and intimate. Well-organized groups can reinforce trust and reciprocity among the members, foster group cohesion around leadership that is perceived as legitimate and influence issues concerning Indigenous communities. In contrast, poorly organized groups will have more difficulties with negotiating their claims and mobilizing collective resources when direct action is needed (ALCANTARA, 2013).

The nature of Indigenous organizations is relevant to comprehend their role in Native land claims policy reviews, and the common goals that unify ethnic groups around a political agenda should be analyzed to better understand their agency capacity. Warren (2000) has argued that an association’s purpose makes a difference to the type of action it may or may not encourage. Scholtz (2006, p.27), in a more explicit statement, has affirmed that “in the politics of minority rights, the most important resource for minorities to mobilize in the struggle for policy change is their own collective energies.” As has been argued so far, it is likely that the main goal of all Indigenous organizations in the Americas is the state recognizing a land as traditionally occupied, and the chance of influencing the policies designed to