A Discourse On Anthropological Activism

In Dave McBride’s “Our Children Are Not Poverty Porn” he addresses the issues that arise from considering Native children, youth and families as victims. Although this may be the case there are a lot of ideas such as self-determination, “resilience” and the “ecological model” which help address the ways that these Native people can be empowered to become leaders and intellectuals, leaving the stereotypes behind.

The protests were a means to describe people’s condemnation of the Colonizing governments’ abuses of the environment at the expense of Native peoples’ lands. For example, the protests emerge a wave of Native activism on environment and human rights matters, as manifestations condemned the spread of wildfire across Native lands (Laduke, par 5).

Why A Public Anthropology? addresses the issue about why cultural anthropology is not affective by its current stance of “not doing any ethical harm” and into more detail explains why IRB’s should make notions to move towards a more positive stance of "doing good." Throughout the explanation of ethical violations from five given cases, the details will prove why these violations emphasize that the review board’s current stance of "do no harm is an ethically ambiguous position”. Even with anthropologists going in with the intentions of not doing harm result in the exact opposite; including national governments who try to avoid ethical issues end up just over-regulating research studies. These actions limit researcher ability to do well and cause additional problems. IRB’s focus on positive results is based on monetary value and time however this does not show respect and sensitivity. In the reading of this research I conclude it is due to the lack of similarity to the participants of the study leads to lack of care and treatment, thus threatening their wellbeing leads to the ethical issues in research cases and regulation. To solve this problem, Institutional Review Boards and Review Ethics Boards should create a set of common rules, these rules could easily differentiate what between what is what is and what is not ethical behavior and additionally it would facilitate all types of data in research projects that

While many may perceive the problems with slavery and refugees to reside specifically in underdeveloped, Third World Countries, Nazer’s story displays how ethical problems, such as slavery, reside in global powers as well. Alison Jaggar expresses the necessary elimination of the assumptive societal viewpoint of these problems in her work, “‘Saving Amina’: Global Justice for Women and Intercultural Dialogue”. Jaggar stresses that it is necessary to realize that Third World poverty, “… cannot be attributed exclusively to the injustice of… local cultures,” and that many people in these countries, “are oppressed by global forces” (Jaggar 62 & 67). Omer’s utter disbelief once he, “… discovered the full truth about,” Nazer not being paid for her service depicts how many people the ignorance that many people in countries, such a England, have towards problems within their own countries (Nazer 296). Both Nazer and Jaggar speak, through their works, directly to, “… those in the West,” that, as Nazer puts it, “often take their freedom for granted” (311). At the same time, though, both stress the importance of creating an, “… intercultural dialogue about global justice,” and ensuring that those in power understand their own moral and ethical problems just as much as those in Third World countries (Jaggar

The issue of ethical standards has always been relevant in an anthropologists work, no more so than now in this hyper-political media driven society. Starting in 2005 the U.S. government created the Human Terrain System (HTS). The Human Terrain System is a programme which would send anthropologists along with the U.S. Army, in an attempt to provide information on the culture of the ‘adversary’ during their missions in the war against Iraq and Afghanistan. The Human Terrain System was one of their efforts in the Middle East to win the ‘hearts-and minds’ of the citizens to ensure smoother operation and less hostility between the armed forces and the local populations. The Unites States Army employed anthropologists to provide “cultural knowledge” for the purpose of more effective counterinsurgency (González 2008:21). However, this programme has given rise to several ethical issues in the anthropological field. Questions of objectivity and morality arise from the employment of a system like the Human Terrain System.

Reflexive anthropology has pressured scholoars to recognize their own biases and look increasingly inwards when studying “other” cultures. Reflexive anthropology is a break away from the traditional study of a clearly defined “us” and “them,” that seeks to shift towards indentification rather than difference. It attempts to uncover the politics behind ethnography. Reflexivity shows how “we” are effected by “others”, and how “others” are effected by “us.” It holds anthropologists accountable for what they write, and how they represent culture. Anthropologists like Dorinne Kondo and Renato Rosaldo have greatly influenced the devlopment of reflexive anthropology through their enthnographies.

They monitor the most significant changes in the lives of these refugees; that the Nakba, as it meant the loss of the land, turned the peasants into workers. But this didn’t change their culture until the birth of modern organizations, such as student unions and trade unions Feminism, so that values and traditional relationships will be modified.

Activists have a lot in common. They all are inspired, make their voices heard, and accomplish something.

Anthropology is a broad study of multiple areas of human relationships, artifacts, development, cultures, and so on with making reference to both past and present

Schultz, E.A., Lavenda, R.H., Dods, R.R. (2012). Cultural anthropology: a perspective on the human condition (2nd ed.). Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford University

activist-minded anthropology as witnessing to be very compelling. (Just as compelling, although not as well-examined, was the later slippage of calling research ‘policing’.) As she highlighted, listening will carried different meanings - and therefore result in different actions - for both. For the former it entails processing the data through a lens of supposed scientific objectivity (which often benefits the university and its supporters); for the latter it is a moral obligation to act upon it in such a way that both acts as a testimony and overtly returns something to its source. For Ajani, in simply laying out her participant’s biography without needing to document the fact-finding of it (as a colleague implied she should have), what was returned was a level of belief and trust which in turn (may have) empowered the woman as a victim. I found it was in this moment that she moves away from the idea of being a theoretical authority and becomes a participant in “ethical engagement”

A grassroots movement is one in which a given group of people get behind said movement to influence political or economic change at either the local, state, regional, national, or even international level. The movements involve bottom-up rather than top-down decision making, hence the term “grassroots”. The functionalism of grassroots activism allows the ideas and feelings of the majority of participants to flow into natural decisions that represent the group as a whole. Astroturfing, on the other hand, is when a specific sponsor or advocate of a message disguises it to appear as though it has originated and is supported by grassroots participants. These messages can be political, economic, advertising, etc., and are displayed as if there is

In Nancy Scheper-Hughes article she draws on her fieldwork in South Africa, Cuba and Brazil where she encountered a challenge to sociocultural anthropology as she saw a transition from her using an objective model to a moral model. She has calls for an ethically grounded, militant anthropology because she sees the importance of being fully involved in one’s own research rather than just simply being an observer. According to Hughes, acting primarily as a witness does not allow you to fully understand what you’re studying and reduces the “subject” to “objects”. Her approach changed when a fight broke out between her research assistant and the women of shantytown in Northeast Brazil. “Why had she refused to work with them when they had been so willing to work with her? Didn’t she care about them or their lives, their suffering, their struggle?” (P. 410) Just standing by watching the suffering was what she felt that she was doing. She states that her companherias pulled her away from the comfortable position in which she was in previous which allowed her to be active in their public world as result, this led to get a better understanding of the community in which she was studying. Evidently, she takes a very active approach in anthropology and is concerned with human rights. She seeks to promote anthropology as an active and politically committed engaged study. Marvin Harris agrees with her method as this is an effective way to learn and analyze human experience rather than

Throughout history, civil disobedience has been used to bring about change across a wide variety of civil rights issues. In India, Mahatma Gandhi used civil disobedience to nonviolently protest against the British Raj and, after a thirty-year struggle, earn independence both for himself and his people. In the United States, Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. employed civil disobedience to overcome both the Jim Crow laws that had oppressed the African-American minority and the systemic racism that was once prevalent in the Southern United States. In South Africa, Nelson Mandela utilized civil disobedience to lead an anti-apartheid revolution to combat the apartheid system that systemically discriminated against the black inhabitants of South Africa. All three of these exemplary men have earned a Nobel Peace Prize for their efforts (the prize was not awarded in 1948 because “there was no suitable living candidate”, a tribute to Gandhi who was recently assassinated). Although violence could have been used to combat these civil rights violations, all three of these individuals chose not to resort to violence, in favor of a more amicable alternative: civil disobedience. Furthermore, all three of these cases help to demonstrate that in democratic societies, civil disobedience is both a necessary and effective tool that brings about deliberated change in both governmental and/or social systems without inciting violence.

Survival International is an INGO, involved in a global movement fighting for the rights of over 150 million indigenous peoples all around the world. (Anya 2001) Their plan of action is to defend the tribes and protect their land from foreign invaders that are looking to “civilize” and “modernize” the peoples. Most of the tribes have been subjected to violence, slavery, and racism. Outsiders, such as tourists, are not welcome among these tribes. They want to be left alone and not involved in the rest of society. Survival International is willing to work with these tribes in order to make sure the tribes’ wishes are met without violence. Survival International also wants all tribes to flourish around the world in hopes that their unique lifestyle will one day been seen as something beautiful and intriguing in the eyes of the rest of humanity. It is Survival International’s goal to help the tribes live in peace. It has been in charge of multiple medical and self help projects, protests, and lobbies associated with the tribes. (Survival International Website) In this report, I show how Survival International has globalized over the years in order to defend the rights and prevent the annihilation of tribal people around the world through fundraisers, campaigns, and volunteer work.