Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
of humanity. As a result, antiracist activist and scholarly projects often become trapped
in ethnographic multiculturalism, what Silva describes as a “neoliberal multicultural”
representation that “includes never-before-heard languages that speak of never-before-
heard things that actualize a never-before-known consciousness” (da Silva 2007, 169).
Thisproject restsonaninherent contradiction because thisstrategy,designed todemon-
strate our worthiness of being universal subjects, actually rests on the logic that Native
peoples are equivalent to nature itself, things to be discovered or to have an essential
truth or essence. In other words, the very quest of full subjecthood that is implicit in the
ethnographic project to tell our “truth” is already premised on a logic that requires us to
be objects of discovery, unable to escape the status of affectable other. Consequently, as
I will discuss later, Native Studies is in a position of ethnographic entrapment because
Nativepeoplesbecomealmostunintelligible withintheacademyoutsideofthisdiscurs-
ive regime.
ReyChow(2002)notesthatwithinthispositionofethnographicentrapment,theonly
rhetorical position offered to the Native is that of the “protesting ethnic.” The posture
to be assumed under the politics of recognition is the posture of complaint. If we com-
plaineloquently,thesystemwillgiveussomething.BuildingonChow'swork,thisessay
will explore how another posture that is created within this economy is the self-reflex-
ive settler/white subject. This self-reflexive subject is frequently on display at various
antiracist venues in which the privileged subject explains how much she or he learned
about her complicity in settler colonialism or white supremacy because of her exposure
to Native peoples. A typical instance of this will involve non-Native peoples who make
presentations based on what they “learned” while doing solidarity work with Native
peoples in their field research/solidarity work. Complete with videos and slide shows,
the presenters will express the privilege with which they struggled. We will learn how
they tried to address the power imbalances between them and the peoples with which
they studied or worked. We will learn how they struggled to gain their trust. Invariably,
the narrative begins with the presenters initially facing the distrust of the Natives be-
cause of their settler/white privilege. But through perseverance and good intentions, the
researchers overcome this distrust and earn the friendship of their ethnographic objects.
Inthesestories,ofcourse,toevokeGayatriSpivak,thesubalterndoesnotspeak(1994).
We do not hear what their theoretical analysis of their relationship is. We do not hear
about how they were organizing on their own before they were saved/studied by these
presenters.
Nativepeoplesarenotpositionedasthosewhocanengageinself-reflection; theycan
only judge the worth of the confession. Consequently, the presenters of these narratives
often present very nervously. Did they speak to all their privileges? Did they properly
confess? Or will someone in the audience notice a mistake and question whether they
