Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
-
Upload
bruno-goulart -
Category
Documents
-
view
225 -
download
1
Transcript of Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
1/21
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
No.1,2013
AMERINDIANPERSPECTIVISMANDNON-HUMANRIGHTS
IdelberAvelarTulaneUniversity
ThispaperstartsfromDipeshChakrabarty'sargumentthatinthenewlynamederaoftheAnthropocenewhenhumanbeingshavebecomesuchadestructiveforcetotheenvironmentthattheyhaveacquiredthestatusofgeologicalagents,capableofinterferingwiththemostbasicprocessesoftheEarth,thehistoryofculturecannolongerbeseparatedfromthehistoryofthespeciesandofnatureitself.IthendeveloptheinsightthattheAnthropocenerenewstherelevanceofBraziliananthropologistEduardoViveirosdeCastro'sAmeridianperspectivism,atheorybased onthewidespreadAmerindian postulate ofanoriginary stateofindifferentiation betweenhumansandanimals,andthat theoriginal conditioncommon tohumans and animals isnot animality, as inWestern thought, buthumanity itself. The abundance of Amerindian narratives in which animals,
plants,andspiritsseethemselvesashumansisanalyzedasanAnthropomorphicimpulse that paradoxically containsananti-anthropocentricpotential,as inaworldwhereeverythingishuman,beinghumanisnotthatspecial.Thecontrastbetween Amerindian anthropomorphism and Western anthropocentrism isfurther developed in the context of the recent Ecuadorian and Bolivianconstitutions,whichforthe first time conferonanimals,plants, and bodies ofwater the condition of juridical subjects endowed with rights. The conclusionpointstowardthenotionofnon-humanrightsasanecessaryandurgenttask intheeraoftheAnthropocene.
AnthropotechniqueandThanatopolitics
Theconceptofhumanrightshasalwaysbeenhauntedbyitsnecessaryyetimpossible
universality. On the one hand, human rights would mean nothing if the notion did not
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
2/21
2 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
theoreticallyextendtothetotalityofhumanbeings,theentiretyofthehumancommunityon
Earth.Ontheotherhand,itsunmistakablyEuropeanoriginshavesystematicallycastashadow
onhowuniversallyapplicabletheyareorhavebeen,andwhatparticular,specificinterestsare
at stake when they are invoked or defended. The tension between universalism and
particularismhasbeenattheveryheartofthestrugglesaroundhumanrights,andmypurpose
hereisnot tosolvethattension.It is, rather,to recast itindialoguewitha setofreflections
developed inpastdecades byBraziliananthropologist EduardoViveirosdeCastro underthe
rubric of Amerindian perspectivism, aswell asmy observation of Bolivia's and Ecuador's
experiences inwriting constitutionsthat havesignificantly rethought the limits andscope of
human rights. This recasting will acquire its full meaning once I take into account Dipesh
Chakrabarty'srecentcallforarenewedunderstandingoftheblurringoftheborderbetweennature and culture in the lightof the unprecedentedenvironmental crisisbrought aboutby
globalwarming.Mypurposeherewill,then,betoaskwhathappenstohumanrightsoncewe
factorinrecentdevelopmentsinthecritiqueofanthropocentrism,aguidingthreadthatruns
throughtheAndeanconstitutions,Chakrabarty'sessay,andViveirosdeCastro'soeuvre.
Illustrious among contemporary interrogations of human rights is Italianphilosopher
GiorgioAgamben's referralof the notion back to its origins in the French Revolution. Inhis
HomoSacer:SovereignPowerandBareLife,AgambentakeshiscuefromHannahArendttoshowthatintheveryDclarationdes droits de l'hommeetdu citoyen thereisadisjunction
betweenthetwotermsthatdesignatethesubjectsofrights,asmanispresumablyinclusive
of citizen. There is something aporetic, then, about the conjunction and that connects
manandcitizen,asthesecond term issupposedly includedin the first.Agambenshows
howthepresumablynatural,biologicalrightsacquiredbyhumansintheveryactofbeingborn
(asstatedbyArticle1oftheDclaration:Leshommesnaissentetdemeurentlibresetgaux
en droits) are traversed by the paradoxical requirement that those rights be validated inreference toa non-natural, historical construction, namely the nation state. Article 3 of the
sameDclarationestablishesthathumanrightsshouldbereferredtoasovereignpower:Le
principe de toute Souverainet rside essentiellement dans la Nation, the same nation,
Agamben notes, that is etymologically related to naissance, birth. Biology and politics are,
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
3/21
idelberavelar 3
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
therefore,inextricablylinkedwithinhumanrights,andAgambentakesthatlinkasanindexto
thelimitsoftheconcept.
Agambenhypothesizeswithgoodreasonthatifmanisonlyasubjectofhumanrightsto
theextentthatheisalsoacitizen,thenthemassesdeprivedofcitizenshipareaninteresting
cuetoinvestigatethelimitsoftheconcept.ItisnotbychancethatstartingwithWorldWarI,
manyEuropeanstatesbegantopasslawsallowingthedenaturalizationanddenationalization
oftheirown citizens (16-7). France (1915), Belgium (1922), Italy (1926), and Austria (1933)
providesomeoftheprecursorstotheNurembergLawsof1935thatdividedGermancitizens
intocitizenswithfullrightsandcitizenswithoutpoliticalrights(17).Ashasbecomecanonical
in the past two decades, the concept of homo sacerthe bearer of that lifewhich can be
annihilatedwithoutsacrificeormourningemergesinthecontextofAgamben'sreflectionsonthedifficultyindistinguishingtheconditionofrefugefromtheconditionofstatelessness,that
is on the one hand the (presumably) temporary exclusion from the sovereign spacewhere
humanrightsarevalidatedand,ontheotherhand,theconditionofbeingcompletelydeprived
ofallpossiblereferencetoanysuchspace.InBeyondHumanRights,ashortpiecefrom1993
thatpreparesthelongermeditationpublishedtwoyearslaterasHomoSacer,Agambentakes
the 425 Palestinians expelledby the stateof Israel (24) asemblems of the no-man's-land
inhabitedbythehomosacer.Bybindingtheconditionpropertohumanitytothesovereigntyofanationstate,therefore,theconceptofhumanrightscanbebestunderstoodasonethatis
perenniallyhauntedbyitsoutside.ForAgamben,ratherthanemancipatingusfromsovereign
power, human rights have the effect of further inscribing uson the basis of our 'bare
life'withinthemechanismsofthebiopoliticalstate(LechteandNewman523).
ThetwosubjectsofrightsexplicitlymentionedintheDeclarationoftheRightsofMan
andtheCitizenare,therefore,maninsofarasheisbornandmaninsofarasheissubjectedto
thesovereigntyofanationstate.Thegender-specificpronounisdeliberatehere,anditaddstotheaporeticnatureofthecouplingofmanandcitizen.Whereasexplicitlyexcludedfrom
thelattercategoryatthetime,womenwerepresumablyincludedinthelatteralthoughthat
inclusion itself reinstated the aporia of a gender-specific pronounmade to stand for all of
humankind.1 For Agamben, the theoretical coupling of life as a biological fact and life as a
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
4/21
4 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
politically qualified experience does not have the structure of a simple binary opposition.
AgambenarguedthattheGreeksdistinguishedbetween zoasunqualifiedlife(thelifethatis
sharedbyhumans,animals,gods)andbos,thequalifiedlifepropertohumans.Inthathewas
followingMichelFoucault,whodefinedthemodernageasthatmomentinwhichnaturallife
begantobeincludedinthecalculationsandmechanismsofstatepowerand,therefore,the
realmofpoliticsbecame properlybiopolitical. Beginning in1977,Foucault's seminars in the
CollgedeFrancefocusedonthepassagefromthe'territorialstate'tothe'populationstate'
andtheensuingvertiginousgrowthintheimportanceofbiologicallifeandthehealthofthe
nationasaproblemforsovereignpower(Agamben11).Agambengoesfurther,however,in
claimingthat zo,i.e.barelife,hasthesingularprivilegeofbeingthatuponwhoseexclusion
thecityofmenisfounded(15).Modernityrelies,accordingtoAgamben,onasimultaneouscapturingandexclusionoflife,tothepointwherepoliticsdoesnotknowanyvalueotherthan
lifeitself(17).
Buttherearereasonstobelievethattheseparationbetweenzoandboswasfarless
clear-cut in Greek thought than Agamben would have it. This is the starting point of the
argumentofferedbyArgentineanphilosopherFabinLudueainhisremarkable Lacomunidad
delosespectros.Tobetrue,inhisseminarTheBeastandtheSovereign JacquesDerridahad
noticed that the dichotomy between a general realm of unqualified life (zo) and the lifequalifiedwithhumanattributes(bos)wasunsustainableandinfactnowheretobefound,asa
stable dichotomy, in the Aristotelian text. Luduea further argues that isolating these two
dimensionswasnotpossiblebecausepoliticswasnotasupplementtolifenowdefinedas
bosaddedaposterioritoasubstratumconstitutedbyaprimary zo,asAgambensustained
(Luduea30).2Inotherwords,thereisnopoliticsthattranscendsthebiologicalfactoflifeitself
orremainsuncontaminatedbyit.Politicsisalwaysalreadythemanagingofzo.Accordingto
Derrida's and Luduea's rereadings, then, the very attempt to separate a properly humandimensionoflife(thatis,bos)fromthebruteanimalitythatgoesbynameofzowasitselfa
technique in the production of humanity, a device in the domestication of zo, a political
taming ofanimality. The primary substance ofpolitics, then, should not goby the name of
biopolitics,asinFoucaultorAgamben,butratherzoopolitics(Nodari2).
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
5/21
idelberavelar 5
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
Luduea calls anthropotechniques the set of devices, discursive practices, disciplines,
methods,andtechniquesthroughwhichhumancommunitiesoperateupontheiranimalnature
inordertochange,rewrite,expandtheirbiologicalsubstratumwithaviewtotheproductionof
whatwehavecalledman(15).Lacomunidaddelosespectrosisaremarkabletourdeforce
onhowTheologyandLawhaveprovidedtwopowerfulinstancesofsuchanthropotechnological
operation. In opposition to Agamben's argument, what is at stake in the production of
humanityforLudueaisnotsimplyanexclusionof zoos,oftheanimal.Politicshassetitself,
fromthebeginning,theartofdomesticationofthehumananimal(Luduea 21),inaprocess
wherepolitics is always coextensivewith eugenics. AccompanyingAncient zoopoliticsasthe
selective production of life, Luduea argues, therewas a thanatopolitics that regulated the
discarding of defective offspring that could harm the species' biological patrimony (57).Ludueapresents,then,abundantevidencethattherelationshipbetweenzoandbosisnot
oneofconstitutiveexclusion,asAgambenargued,butratheroneofconjunction,inwhichthe
veryadministrationofanimalitywasatechniqueintheproductionofman.
In a reviewof Luduea's Lacomunidad de los espectros, BrazilianessayistAlexandre
Nodarinotedthelinkbetweencensusandcensorship,insofarasthecountingofproperties
andpopulation,itsredistributionaccordingtogovernmentalcalculationsinclasses,theregistry
of births and deaths, etc. allowed for a better organization of the republic, facilitating thedetectionandcorrectionofunproductiveelements(thevagabonds)bythecensor(3).3Bothin
theAristotelianresponsetoPlatoniceugenicsandinChristianity,Ludueaidentifieddifferent
attemptsatproducingananthropotechniquethatdemandedthatlifebeseparatedawayfrom
itsintensity,force,andanimality,whichthenhadtobemeasured,confined,calculated,and
framed.Christianitywouldlaterthinkofimmortalityastheessentialattributethatseparates
the human from the animal. The Christian invention of man drew upon a methodical
eliminationoftheprimordialanimal,asforThomasAquinasnon-humananimalshadnoplaceintheKingdomofGod(Nodari4).SocraticGreeceandChristianitysharedanattempttopurge
animality out of man, to abolish the animalitas proper to man. One could argue for the
existenceofacontinuitybetweentheanthropotechniquesofChristianityandthoseofmodern
humanism. From Descartes to Heidegger, animals tend to appear in the philosophical text
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
6/21
6 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
precisely when the essence of humanity is being defined. In Descartes's works, the
anthropotechnicaloperationtakesplaceintheequationofmindandsoulandthedefinitionof
animals as machine-like beings devoid of soul or consciousness. In La comunidad de los
espectros,Ludueaisrightfullyskepticalofsomeofthealternativestoanthropotechniquesthat
havebeenproposed,fromtheprojectofanaffirmativebiopoliticstotheillusoryattemptto
voidChristian patriarchalismbyreturning to its Pauline foundations, suchasexemplified by
AlainBadiouorSlavojiek.Ratherthanescapinganthropotechniquesbycarvingapaththat
presumablybypassesthem,mypurposeherewillbe,rather,toaskwhathappenstothemonce
we take into account a number of recent developments in law, anthropology, and cultural
studiesthathavequestionedouranthropocentricheritage.
OntheimpactoftheAnthropoceneuponCulturalStudies
4
The concept of a new period named Anthropocene, coined by ecologist Eugene
StoermerandlaterwidelyusedbyatmosphericchemistandNobelPrizewinnerPaulCrutzen,
designatesanewgeologicaleratowhichtheEarthiscurrentlytransitioning.Theadventofthe
previousera,theHolocenewhichreplacedthelasticeage,orthePleistocene,about10,000
yearsagocoincidedwiththeemergenceoftheinstitutionsthatwehavecometoassociate
withcivilization,suchastheemergenceofcities,agriculture,writing,andreligionsasweknowthem.ThewarmerHoloceneistheperiodinwhichwesupposedlyareatthemoment,butthe
possibilityofanthropogenicclimatechangehasraisedthequestionofitstermination,suchas
explainedbyIndianhistorianDipeshChakrabartyinanessayentitledTheClimateofHistory:
FourTheses:
Nowthathumansthankstoournumbers,theburningof fossilfuel,andother
relatedactivitieshavebecomeageologicalagentontheplanet,somescientistshaveproposedthatwerecognizethebeginningofanewgeologicalera,onein
whichhumansactasamaindeterminantoftheenvironmentoftheplanet.The
nametheyhavecoinedforthisnewgeologicalageisAnthropocene.(208-9)
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
7/21
idelberavelar 7
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
This essaybyChakrabarty, one of the greatmeditationsofour time, suggests that a
distinction towhichwehad grownaccustomed,namelygeological time versus humantime,
maywell beapproaching a definitive crisis. The temporalityof the Earthasamuch longer,
extendedprocessencompassingahumantimethatpalesandshrinksincomparisonnowneeds
to be understood in the context of a set of human activities that have the power to do
significant,permanentdamagetotheplanet.Ifweoncethoughtthatgeologicalfactswereso
grandthatnothingthathumanscoulddowouldchangethem,wemustnowwrestlewiththe
factthatdeforestation,desertification,theburningoffossilfuel,theacidificationoftheoceans,
andseveralotherhuman-leddestructiveactivitieshavechangedthemostbasicprocessesof
the Earth. Inotherwords, anthropological time has caught upwith geological time inways
hithertounthought. ThemainconclusiondrawnbyChakrabartyfromtheadventoftheAnthropoceneisthat
itisnolongerpossibletowritethehistoriesofglobalization,capital,andculturewithouttaking
intoaccount,atthesametime,thehistoryofthespecies.Therearesomanyofuscuttingdown
somanytreesandburningsomanyfossilsthatthehistoryofourculturecannolongerbe
separatedfromthehistoryofnatureasitoncewas.WhereasduringtheHoloceneonecould
argue for a somewhatclear-cut separationbetweennature and culture,a reasonably stable
distinctionbetweenthetemporalityoftheplanetandthetemporalityofhumanhistory,wehavenowbecomegeologicalagentstosuchadegreethattheverydichotomybetweenecology
andculturemustbecalledintoquestion.Whereasforcenturiesscientiststhoughtthatearth
processesweresolargeandpowerfulthatnothingwecoulddocouldchange them[...] that
human chronologies were insignificant compared with the vastness of geological time
(Oreskesqtd.inChakrabarty206),ourtimeischaracterizedbyanunprecedentedconvergence
betweenecologyandculture,wherebyitisnolongerpossibletoseparatehumanhistoryand
naturalhistory.AsChakrabartystates,itisonlyrecentlythathumanshavebecomegeologicalagentstotheextentthatthedynamicofhumanhistoryhasbeguntoimpactnaturalhistory.
Wemust,therefore,putglobalhistoriesofcapitalinconversationwiththespecieshistoryof
humans(212).
Theseparationbetweenhumanhistoryandnaturalhistoryhadbeenarelativelystable
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
8/21
8 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
oneatleast sinceHobbesandVico.Giventheir trajectory inrecentdecades,thehumanities
findthemselvesinaparticularbindwhenthatdichotomycollapses.Ifwecouldsingleoutthe
majorfeaturethattraversestheminthe20thcentury,itwouldbetheculturalizationthathas
accompaniedtheso-calledlinguisticturnofthehumanisticdisciplinesandthesocialsciences.
Theculturalistcritiqueofnaturalizationhasbeenoneoftheirdistinctivefeaturesoverthepast
century, if not the structuring, defining one. The unveiling as cultural of traits assumed or
mistakenasnatural has been the breadand butter of our fields for many decades. In that
operation,natureoccupiesthepositionofarecedinghorizon,a limitthatkeepsbeingpushed
backtowardarealmthatisneverreallypresent,neverembodyingapositiveexistence.Inthat
model,wedonotreallyknowwhatnatureis,onlywhatitisnotandwhatthemistakenother
hastakenittobe.Throughoutthe20
th
centurynaturehasbeenaconstantpresenceinthehumanities,butonlynegatively,astheobjectofanoperationofdenaturalization.Therenewed
inseparability of natural history and human history experienced today challenges the
humanities tounderstandnature inwaysotherthansimply through the lensofaculturalist
critique of naturalization. It is no longer enough to unveil the cultural ground of concepts,
notions,andhabitshithertotakentobenatural.Intheurgencyoftheecologicalcrisiswelive
todaywecannolongeraffordnottofacethequestionofanatureaspositivity.
Thechallengeis,then,tothinknatureaspositivity,thatis,toaccountforphysisinourthoughtprocessesandinterventionsintocultureinwaysthatarenotsimplyreducibletothe
well-knownoperationsofdenaturalization.Myhypothesishereisthatsuchthinkingwouldlead
us to a significantly different understanding of human rights, in tune with innovative
experiences brought about by constitutions such as Ecuador's and Bolivia's (promulgated
respectivelyin2008and2009),whichhaveexpandedthenotionofsubjectofrightsbeyondthe
human species. This is a paradox only on the surface, of course: it is precisely in the
Anthropocene,theperiodmarkedbyhumancentralityinclimatechange,thatwemustremovetheanthropos fromitspositionasexclusivesubjectandtargetofourjuridical framework. In
order to accomplish that task anthropologist Eduardo Viveiros de Castro's Amerindian
perspectivismhasprovenanally.
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
9/21
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
10/21
10 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
differentiatesthemistheirbodies,notthepresenceofasoul,theattributeofrationalityorthe
possibilityofimmortality.Awholeanthropocentricedifice,sharedbyseveralbrandsofidealism
andmaterialismalike(Marxismincluded),haddifferentiatedanimalsfromhumansbyascribing
to the latter some attribute lacking in the former. Instead, Amerindianworldviews see the
attributes proper to humanity as aposition that can be occupied by other species as well.
Viveiros de Castro argues that this conception can be found within Amerindian societies
throughouttheAmericas,fromAlaskatoTierradelFuego,anditturnsouroppositionbetween
natureandcultureupsidedowninmanyinterestingways,aswewillsee.
The importance of positionality in Viveiros de Castro's oeuvre harks back to his
ethnographicwork,particularlytheinterpretationofcannibalismamongtheArawet,apeople
of Tupi-Guarani language in theWestern Amazon.Whereas one of the founding fathers ofBraziliansociology,FlorestanFernandes,hadinterpretedTupinambcannibalismassacrifice,
ViveirosdeCastroquestionedtheideathattherewasasupernaturalentityimpliedintheact,
to whom something was presumably being offered, and attempted instead to answer the
question what exactly does one eat in the enemy being cannibalized? by describing the
syntax of the act, rather than the substance ofwhatwas eaten. Testimoniesendowing the
bodies being eaten with some attribute were fairly rare and inconclusive, and Viveiros de
Castroarguedinsteadthatwhatwaseatenwastherelationofenemieswiththeirdevourersor,putdifferently,itsconditionasanenemy.Whatwasassimilatedfromthevictimswerethe
signsoftheiralterity,andwhatwassoughtwasthisalterityasapointofviewupontheself
(Metafsicas).Whatyoucannibalizeisaperspective,aposition,apointofview,notanessence
ora substance. This postulate implied not only a reinterpretation of cannibalismbut also a
rethinking of the premises of the discipline itself, as it was no longer a matter of doing
anthropology to describe life such as it was lived from the indigenous point of view, as
traditionallyenvisionedbyEuropeananthropology.Instead,itwasamatterofdescribingtheassumptionofaposition,thatoftheenemy,inatransmutationofperspectivesinwhichthe
selfisdeterminedasotherbytheactofincorporationofthisother(Metafsicas).Itnolonger
madesensetospeakofadichotomybetweenWesternandAmerindianworldviews,butrather
afundamentaldifferencebetweenthewaysinwhicheachsideperceivedthedichotomyitself.
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
11/21
idelberavelar 11
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
Whereastheformerapprehendeditaccordingtoalogicofcontradiction(thingsareeitherAor
B),thelatterconceivedtheentiredichotomyasalineofflight,anessentiallytransformational
understandingoftheworld.
ApiecebyViveirosdeCastroentitledMyrtleandMarble:On theInconstancyof the
Savage Soulwill helpunravel thesequestions. Themetaphor in the title is taken from the
famous Sermon of the Holy Ghost (1657), by Portuguese Father Antonio Vieira, where he
contrastedmarble statues,which take time andwork tobebuilt, but neednoadjustments
later, tomyrtle statues, far easier tobuildbut inconstantneed tobetrimmed later. Vieira
comparestheindigenouspopulationsmetbythePortugueseinBraziltomyrtlestatues,asthey
receive everything taught to them with great sweetness and easiness, without arguing,
replicating,doubtingorresisting;buttheyaremyrtlestatueswhich,asthegardenerraiseshishand and scissors, soon lose their new figure and revert back to the natural and previous
brutality,tobeingjunglelikebefore(Vieiraqtd.inViveirosAInconstncia184).Evangelization
thus takes the form of a mnemonicmachine, an antidote against the supposedly amnesic
natureofthe Amerindians.NativeAmericans,ofcourse,wereonly amnesicwhen looked at
from the standpoint of a colonialist conception based on an identitarian, Aristotelian logic
according to which one either is or is not. If Amerindians appeared to have learned and
assimilatedalesson,itwasreasonabletoassumethattheywouldactaccordinglythefollowingday.Butthatdidnothappen.
Portuguesechroniclesinthe16thand17thcenturiesarefilledwiththeperplexitycaused
by the Tupinamb's response to evangelization: they did not seem to oppose Portuguese
religiousbeliefswithastructuredsetofbeliefsoftheirown.Theydidnotreactbyinsistingona
contradictoryaccountoftheworld,analternativecosmogonytocompetewiththeChristian
one. They appearedmalleable, accepting, and mimetic of the Portuguese values only, in a
secondmoment,tolookliketheyhadforgotteneverythingandmovedontosomethingelse.Inother words, what stunned the Portuguese was not the fact that there was a completely
differentsetofbeliefsinplay.Itwasnotthepresenceofacosmogonycontradictorywiththe
Christianone.Itwas,rather,thattheTupinambseemedtooperateoutsidetheAristotelian
logicofidentityandnon-contradictionaltogether.AsViveirosnotes,forAmerindiansitwasnot
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
12/21
12 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
amatterofimposingtheiridentityupontheotherorrefuseitinthenameofone'sownethnic
excellence,butrathertransformingone'sidentitybyactualizingarelationshipwiththeother.
Theinconstancyofthesavagesoul,initsmomentofopening,istheexpressionofamodeof
beingwhereexchange,notidentity,isthefundamentalvaluetobeaffirmed(AInconstncia
206).Much like Pierre Clastres invited us to think the paradox of a non-coercive power, a
positionofauthoritybasedondeprivation, 5itisthepuzzlingimagesofareligionwithoutaset
ofclosedbeliefsandaculturalordernotpredicatedupontheexclusionofothersthatmustbe
grasped here. The Portuguese facedasanenemynot another dogma, but indifferenceand
inconstancyvis--visdogmaassuch.Theabsenceofaproperlyevangelical,dogmaticstance
toward belief is linked with anessentially transformational conception of the world, where
humanityandanimalityareunderstoodintermsverydifferentfromourown. ViveirosdeCastronotesthat if thereisavirtuallyuniversalnotionwithinAmerindian
thought,itisthatofanoriginarystateofindifferentiationbetweenhumansandanimals.But
theoriginalconditioncommontohumansandanimalsisnotanimality,buthumanity (Os
Pronomes119;myemphasis),asAmerindianmythsoftentellthestoryofhowanimalslook
the way they do because they have lost attributes proper to humans. Whereas we have
traditionally assumed that we are, in a way, former animals (as the narratives of Western
anthropocentrisminvariablytellthestoryofapassagefromananimalitythatwesharewithnon-humananimalstothespecificityofthehumanessencethatonlywepossess),Amerindian
thoughtinvitesustothinkofanimalsasformerhumans.InalectureentitledDeathasAlmost
anEvent,ViveirosdeCastrorelatessomeoftheseveralAmerindianmythsthattellthestoryof
howjaguarsakeyanimalhere,asthepredatorparexcellenceintheAmazonianbiomeshed
theirskinsandrevealthemselvesaspersonswhentheyareawayfromhumans.Itisimportant
nottoreducethisdynamictoourwell-knownoppositionbetweenappearanceandessence.It
isnotthatthebodyisunderstoodasmereclothinghidingthetrueessence,buttheopposite:clothingitself istakenas abody.Rememberthat inAmerindiansocieties animalmasksare
endowedwiththepowerofmetaphysicallytransformingtheidentityoftheirbearers(Viveiros
OsPronomes133).Clothingandmasksareunderstoodlessascloaksthathideanessence
thanasassemblagescapableofmobilizinganotherbody.Humanityremainswithinanimalsasa
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
13/21
idelberavelar 13
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
forcevisibleonlytotheeyesofthatspeciesitselfortothetrans-specificfigureoftheShaman.
Amerindianontologiesoftenresorttoclothingasacomponentofmetamorphosesthathave
alwaysbeenpartofahighlytransformationalworld(Rivireqtd.inViveirosOsPronomes
117).The result is, then, that althoughwesee ourselves aspersons, thatperceptiondiffers
fromthewayotherspeciesperceiveusandthemselves.Jaguarstooseethemselvesaspersons.
Intheireyes,wearenothingbutprey,wildpigs.
Viveiros locates in Amazonian ethnography countless references to an Amerindian
theory according towhich theway humans see animals (as well asother subjectivities that
populate the universe: gods, spirits, the dead,meteorological phenomena, sometimes even
objectsandartifacts)isprofoundlydifferentfromthewaythesebeingsseehumansandsee
themselves.Typically, humans see themselves ashumans, animals asanimals, and spirits (ifthey see them) as spirits; but predator animals and spirits, according to Amerindian
cosmologies,seehumansasanimals(asprey).Ontheotherhand,preysseehumansasspirits
or animal predators, while predator animals and spirits see themselves as humans. They
apprehendthemselves(orbecome)anthropomorphizedandexperiencetheirownhabitsunder
thesignofculture,notnature.Theyseetheirfoodashumanfood(jaguarsseebloodascauim,
forexample)andtheircorporealattributes(beaks,claws,etc.)asculturalinstruments.Their
socialsystemisorganizedmuchlikehumaninstitutions,withshamans,chiefs,feasts,rites,etc.Whenthejaguarseesyou,heistheonewhoisaperson.Heistheoneendowedwithattributes
of personhood. You are a prey. In other words, whereas the Western debate between
relativismandobjectivismaddressestheprimacyofasubjectpositionvis--vistheobject(or
theotherwayaround),inAmerindianperspectivismwehaveawholesystemaltogether,where
thesubjectpositionitselfisvariableandcanbeoccupiedbyhumans,animals,plants,theEarth,
andsoforth.
Afewmoreconclusionsshouldbedrawnfromthepostulatesofaprimordialstateofindifferentiationbetweenhumansandanimals,andanoriginalconditioncommontohumans
and animalswhich is not, asweusually think in theWest,animality, but rather, humanity.
Whereas we see nature as a common ground from which different cultures took off and
differentiated among themselves (the narratives of our humanization being, by and large,
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
14/21
14 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
storiesofamoveaway fromacondition ofnature),Amerindianmythstell the storyof how
animals lost the attributes inherited or maintained by humans. Animals can be, then, for
Amerindianthought,formerhumans.Forus,naturally,thingsarepreciselytheopposite:we
are, in a way, former animals who have acquired, or been endowed with, attributes of
humanity,betheyimmortality,awarenessof temporality,rationalityor theabilitytoproduce
andreproduceourownmeansofexistence.TheSpaniardsneverdoubtedthattheIndianshad
bodies(animalsalsohadthem);theIndiansneverdoubtedthattheSpaniardshadsouls(also
animalsandspectersofthedeadhadthem)(ViveirosAInconstncia431).Inotherwords,in
Amerindian cosmogonies, there is no primacy of human consciousness as such, insofar as
consciousnessorsoularethoughtofasattributesofpersonhoodwithwhichmembersof
anyspeciesmayhappentobeendowed,dependingpurelyonwhatlocusofenunciationandperspectivetheyoccupy.Personhoodisaphenomenologicalunitythatispurelypronominalin
kindapplied toa real radical diversity (Viveiros PerspectivalAnthropology6). There isno
humanessenceinsofarashumanitybecomesapurelypositionalconcept.
ViveirosdeCastro'sconceptofequivocationmayhelpusunderstandhowirreducibleto
simple relativismAmerindian perspectivism really is. TheBrazilian anthropologist elaborates
theconceptfromtheinsightthatLvi-Strauss'anecdoteisnotsimplyaboutperspectivism
butis,rather,itselfperspectivist,instantiatingthesameframeworkorstructuremanifestinthe innumerable Amerindian myths thematizing interspecific perspectivism (Viveiros
PerspectivalAnthropology9).Oneexample,recallsViveiros,isthemyththatrelateshowa
humanprotagonistgetslostintheforestandarrivesatavillagewhosedwellersinvitehimtoa
gourdofmaniocbeer,onlytoseehimhorrifiedwhentheyservehimagourdbrimmingwith
humanblood.The pointhere isnotonly thatmisunderstanding isacommon component of
howtheanthropologistperceivesthenative,ascountlessanthropologistshavepointedout.In
the Amerindian case, the reality that the anthropologist attempts to describe is itselfstructured and constituted through a multiple ensemble of misunderstandings and
conceptualizationsof them,a factwhichascribes tothe notion ameaningentirelydifferent
fromwhatAristotelian logicusually does.AsViveirosdeCastro notes, equivocation isnot a
simpleerror,illusionormisreadingintheusualsense.Incontrasttothese,equivocationisa
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
15/21
idelberavelar 15
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
properlytranscendentalcategoryofanthropology,aconstitutivedimensionofthedisciplines
project of cultural translation. It expresses a de jure structure, a figure immanent to
anthropology. It is not merely a negative facticity, but a condition of possibility of
anthropological discourse (Perspectival Anthropology 10). Whereas errors or deceptions
presupposeafailurewithinagivenlanguagegame,equivocationiswhatunfoldsintheinterval
between different language games (Perspectival Anthropology 11). The Amerindian
perspectivismdescribedaboveis,then,itselfa theoryofequivocation,notsimplyacaseofit.
Mereconstructivism,thatis, thewell-knownargumentthatthereisnonaturalorpriorreality
andtherealisitselfconstructedbydiscourse,isclearlynotenoughtoaccountforwhattakes
place here. There is a world of difference between a world where the primordial is
experiencedasnakedtranscendence,pureantianthropicalterity(thatistosay,theworldofempiricist naturalism that constructivism dismantles) and, on the other hand, a world of
immanent humanity, where the primordial takes on human form (which does not make it
necessarilytranquilizing),forthere,whereeverythingishuman,thehumanissomethingelse
entirely (Perspectival Anthropology 16). In other words, one cannot denaturalize the
primordialgroundbybringingintothepicturethevolitionandintentionalityofdiscourseina
worldwherethe fundamentalattributes of theprimordial groundare,precisely,human-like
volitionandintentionality. Howcan,then,aworldwhere,inaway,everythingishumanserveusasanantidote
toanthropocentrism?Is thatnotacontradictioninterms?ViveirosdeCastro'sanalysisofthe
pronominalstructureunderlyingtheAmerindianexperiencecanbe instructivehere.Whereas
thefirstpersonpronounIistheproperinstanceendowedwithasouloraspirit,andthethird
person he/she is the impersonal domain of nature, the second person you covers
supernature inthe formoftheOtheras asubject (ViveirosOsPronomes 135). Viveiros
hererelatesanarchetypicalencounteroftennarratedinAmerindiansocieties:aman,alwaysaloneintheforest,seesabeingwhich,initiallythoughttobeananimal,turnsouttobeaspirit
oradeadpersonwhothenspeakstothatman.ThatinterpellationtoevoketheAlthusserian
scenewithwhichthisonehassomeparallelsmay result deadly tothe protagonist,who is
objectifiedbytheotherentity,turnsovertotheotherside,andceasestobehuman,becoming
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
16/21
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
17/21
idelberavelar 17
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
alsonatureitself(Pachamama,intheAndes;Gaia,inJamesLovelock'sformulation)toacquire
thestatusofasubjectendowedwithrights.BoththeEcuadorianConstitutionof2008andthe
BolivianConstitution of 2009 are imbued withwisdom learned fromAmerindian peoples in
order to grant rivers, animals, and other non-human components of nature the status of
subjectsendowedwithrights.Article255oftheBolivianConstitutionestablishestheprinciples
ofharmonywithnature,defenseofbiodiversityandtheprohibitionofprivateappropriation
foruseandexclusiveexploitationofplants,animals,microorganisms,andanylivingmatter
(59).Goingbeyondthemeregrantingofthoserightstonon-humansubjects,otherscholars
havearguedthatitisnotenoughtomakeofnatureajuridicalsubjectifwedonotquestion
howmuchofithasenteredintoourownconceptofproperty(Figueroa16-7).Thatis,thevery
understandingofthenaturalworldasanobjectinarelationofownershipinwhichhumansarealwayssubjectsmustberethoughtas,inFigueroa'sfelicitousformulation,thereistoomuch
natureinthenotionofproperty(16).
Whenitcomestothisrenewedimbricationbetweenculturalandecologicalquestions,
LatinAmericaisnotaterrainamongothers.Inacontextofunprecedenteddevastationtothe
environment,theAmazon,astheworld'sgreatestreservoirofbiologicaldiversity,concentrates
someofthemostdecisivepoliticalandecologicalconflictsofourtime.ThisisvisibleinBolivia's
intra-indigenousstruggleregardingthehighwaytobebuiltacrosstheTipnispark,inviolationofindigenous land; in the Peruvian nationalist government's embrace of a developmentalist
agenda,withsevere damage to itsAmazonian ecosystem; or inthe (presumablycenter-left)
Brazilian administration's inheritanceofthemilitarydictatorship'shydroelectric-basedmodel
of development for the region. In Brazil, particularly the construction of the Belo Monte
hydroelectricdamontheXinguRiverhasmeantanunprecedentedattackonindigenousrights,
withdamagestotheriverofnationaldiversitythatcouldproveirreparable.TheBeloMonte
controversywas also an opportunity for the country's first serious discussion, in courts, ofnature as a subject of rights, as the Public Prosecutor explicitly called anthropocentric
jurisprudenceoutdatedand,throughananalogywith the19thcenturyexpansionofjuridical
statustoslaves,arguedthatnature'srightswerebeingviolated.7
The unprecedented ecological crisis of which we are both agents and, along with
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
18/21
18 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
animals,plants,andPachamamaasawhole,victims,isaclearcaseofwhatTimothyMorton
has called hyperobjects, i.e. those objects that defy our perception of time and space,
because they are distributed around the globe in such a way that we cannot directly
apprehendthem,astheyproduceeffectsthedurationofwhichfaroutlaststhescaleofhuman
lifeasweknowit (Danowski2).Theecologicalcrisisis,then,atthesame timeobviousand
invisible,urgentandlong-lasting,specificallycontemporaryandradicallyuntimely.Ascanbe
deducedfromalloftheabove,theveryurgencyofaconceptofnon-humanrightsisaproduct
of anthropocentric reason as well as a reminder of its limits and shortcomings. The final
paradoxmay verywell be that themost powerful critique ofanthropocentric reason today
comes fromAmerindiannarratives structured around the anthropomorphization of animals,
spirits,plants,andbodiesofwater.Whatremainstobeseeniswhetherornotitistoolatetolearnfromthemthatinaworldwhereeverythingishuman,beinghumanisnotthatspecial.
WorksCited
Agamben,Giorgio.HomoSacer:SovereignPowerandBareLife. Trans. Daniel Heller-Roazen.
Stanford:StanfordUP,1999.
Avelar, Idelber. Cinquenta leituras sobre o ecocdio de Belo Monte. Primeira Parte.
http://revistaforum.com.br/idelberavelar/2011/11/24/bibliografia-comentada-50-leituras-sobre-o-ecocidio-de-belo-monte-1%C2%AA-parte/
-----. Cinquenta leituras sobre o ecocdio de Belo Monte. Segunda Parte.
http://revistaforum.com.br/idelberavelar/2012/01/31/bibliografia-comentada-50-
leituras-sobre-o-ecocidio-de-belo-monte-2%C2%AA-parte/
Badiou, Alain. Saint Paul: The Foundation of Universalism. Trans. Ray Brassier. Stanford:
StanfordUP,2003.
Bevilaqua, CimaBarbato. Chimpanzs em Juzo: Pessoas, Coisas e Diferenas.HorizontesAntropolgicos17.35(2011):65-102.
Chakrabarty,Dipesh.TheClimateofHistory:FourTheses.CriticalInquiry35(2009):197-222.
Clastres,Pierre.SocietyAgainsttheState .Trans.RobertHurley.NewYork:ZoneBooks,
1987.
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
19/21
idelberavelar 19
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
Constitucin de la Repblica del Ecuador . 2008.
http://www.asambleanacional.gov.ec/documentos/constitucion_de_bolsillo.pdf
Constitucin del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia. 2009.
http://www.justicia.gob.bo/index.php/normas/doc_download/35-nueva-constitucion-
politica-del-estado
Danowski, Dborah. O hiperrealismo das mudanas climticas e as vrias faces do
negacionismo.Sopro70(2012):2-11.
Dclaration des droits de lhomme et du citoyen de 1789. http://www.assemblee-
nationale.fr/histoire/dudh/1789.asp
Figueroa,Isabela.Povosindgenasversuspetrolferas:controleconstitucionalnaresistncia.
Sur,RevistaInternacionaldeDireitosHumanos3.4(2006):49-79.Foucault,Michel.TheBirthofBiopolitics:LecturesattheCollgedeFrance,1978-1979.Trans.
GrahamBucknell.NewYork:Palgrave,2008.
Lechte,JohnandSaulNewman.Agamben,ArendtandHumanRights:BearingWitnesstothe
Human.EuropeanJournalofSocialTheory15.4(2012):522-536.
Lvi-Strauss,Claude.Tristestropiques.Paris:Plon,1955.
-----.Raceethistoire.Paris:Gallimard,1987.
Luduea,Fabin.Lacomunidaddelosespectros.I.Antropotecnia .BuenosAires:MinoyD'vila,2010.
Morton,Timothy.TheEcologicalThought.Boston:HarvardUP,2010.
Nash, Roderick. The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics. Madison: U of
WisconsinP,1989.
Nodari, Alexandre. Censura: Ensaio sobre a 'servido imaginria.' Ph.D. Dissertation.
Florianpolis:FederalUniversityofSantaCatarina,2012.
-----. Fabricar o Humano: Resenha deLa comunidad de los espectros, de Fabin Luduea.Sopro50(2011):2-10.
Pateman,Carole.TheDisorderofWomen:Democracy,Feminism,andPoliticalTheory.Stanford:
StanfordUP,1989.
Rodrigues, Danielle Tetu. Direito & Os Animais, O - Uma Abordagem tica, Filosfica e
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
20/21
20 idelberavelar
http://alternativas.osu.edu 1,2013 ISSN2168-8451
Normativa.Curitiba:Juru,2008.
ViveirosdeCastro,Eduardo.Arawet:osdeusescanibais.RiodeJaneiro:JorgeZahar,1986.
-----.OsPronomesCosmolgicoseoPerspectivismoAmerndio.Man2.2(1996):115-144.
-----.PerspectivalAnthropologyandtheMethodofControlledEquivocation. Tipit2.1(2004):
3-22.
-----.Metafsicas canbales: Lneas de antropologa posestructural. Trans. StellaMastrangelo.
BuenosAiresandMadrid:Katz,2010.(Kindle,nopagination)
-----.AInconstnciadaAlmaSelvagemeOutrosEnsaiosdeAntropologia.2ndEdition.SoPaulo:
CosacNaify,2011.
-----. A Morte como Quase Acontecimento. Public Lecture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdz8U9_8YVUiek,Slavoj.ThePuppetandtheDwarf:ThePerverseCoreofChristianity.Cambridge,Mass.:
MITPress,2003.
Notes
1 InTheDisorderofWomen:Democracy,Feminism,andPoliticalTheory,CarolePatemanmakesthe
veryinterestingobservationthatoutofthethreemajortenetsoftheFrenchRevolutionequality,liberty,fraternity,thelatterwasalwaystheleaststudiedandinterrogated,afactnotunrelatedto
theaporiadescribedabove,wherebyanexplicitlygendered term ispresumablymadeto standforhumanityassuch.
2 Alltranslationsaremine.3 One of the great insights of Alexandre Nodari's dissertation, Censura: Ensaio sobre a 'servido
imaginria,'istheargumentthatourtimeshavelosttheunderstandingthatcensorshipalsoimpliesthecreationofaregimeofcontrolandmeasurementofthevisible(10),thatistosay,wehavecometomisstheetymologicallinkbetweencensorshipand census.MichelFoucault'sbiopolitics,ofcourse,offersaframeworktolinkcensusandpower,buttheconnectionswithcensorshippreciselybecause Foucault's model emphasizes so strongly the concept of power as production of thesayableremaintobeunraveled.Nodari'sdissertationisaremarkablecontributiontothisagenda.
4 ThefollowingsectionincludesandrewritespassagesfromanarticleofmineentitledContemporary
Intersections of Ecology and Culture: On Amerindian Perspectivism and theCritique ofAnthropocentrism, forthcoming in Revista de Estudios Hispnicos. Some passages have beenmodifiedandexpanded,othersappearinthesameformasinthepreviousarticle.
5 In SocietyAgainst theState, Clastres solves theseemingly paradoxicalquestionof a non-coerciveformofpowerbypointingtoAmerindiansocietieswherethechiefisrequiredtobegeneroustotheextremeanddeprivehimselfofmaterialgoods.Thesystemisbasedonthepostulatethatthechiefconveysnothingbuthisdependenceonthegroup(45).
6 TheintersectionbetweenLegalStudiesandEnvironmentalStudiesisavastfieldinwhichIcanclaim
-
7/29/2019 Idelber Avelar - Ameridian Perspectivism and Non-Human Rights
21/21
idelberavelar 21
noexpertise.Tothosewhoare,likeme,approachingitrecently,thefirstchapterofRoderickNash'sclassicTheRightsofNature ,whichbeginswithJohnLocke,offersaveryusefulaccountoftheclashbetween theanthropocentrism of natural rights theory andaweaker yetpersistent notion thatleadsdirectlytotheconceptofexpandedcommunityonwhichenvironmentalethicsrests(19-20).Bevilaqua'sarticleChimpanzs emjuzo reviewstwo legal cases, one inBrazil and the otherinSierra Leone, in which chimpanzees were recognized as subjects of rights, thereby highlighting,according to Bevilaqua's astute conclusion, the need conceptually to manufacture anotherdifference[],astheattemptstodissolvethedifferencesbetweenhumansandnon-humansseemdoomedtofailure(99).
7 A vast bibliography documents the illegality and ecocidal impact of the Belo Monte dam. For acompilation of fifty items that spell out the history of this attack on the rights of nature andindigenouspeoplesoftheAmazon,seeAvelar.