The Google News Desk

How much responsibility is the Indigenous Peoples in the failure of the Approval of 4-9? His proposals were resisted by the conservative world and liberal sectors. There was not enough time to develop a pedagogy of them. The indigenous conventions reached relevant agreements with the majority of the plenary session of the convention, and it is evident that they were sincerely influenced by the echoes of the social explosion and thought that their ideas would have broad support.

The indigenous issue was a “workhorse” of the conservatives to induce fear in citizens about their identity and territory. With the attack on plurinationality, it was accused that the indigenous people intended to divide the country. Common sense indicated that this was part of a campaign to generate rejection of the new Constitution.

The 53 indigenous articles highlighted rights that are already enshrined in Chilean legislation from 1993 to 2016, with the Indigenous Law 19,253 and the ILO Convention 169. The State signed the United Nations Declaration of Indigenous Rights in September 2007 and then the American Declaration of Indigenous Rights of 2016. In 2004, President Lagos delivered to the country the Report of the National Truth and New Treatment Commission. None of this was made explicit enough, neither by the conventionalists, nor by the conservative world (which strategically silenced these documentary sources), nor by the progressive political parties and the media focused their editorials on the questions.

The Conservative campaign is not a single motive. The conventional indigenous bet to innovate in diverse subjects, like the one of the plurinationality. But, the installation of a new concept requires a development and maturation time. The idea of ​​plurinationality required a lot of explanation to understand its meaning and its effects. If this was so in the indigenous world itself, it would be the same in society as a whole, which is only now finding out about plurinationality. The political class was not equally prepared to understand it. A very wide range of political leaders, of all colors, did not even remember the existence of the Report of the State of Chile on Truth and New treatment with the PPII. The right was clear about this diagnosis.

Phrases such as: “The constitution is indigenist”, “with consent they will paralyze the development of Chile and lead us to disaster” and much more, and in the absence of time to verify if this were the case in the future Chile, many people chose to reject the text among many other reasons, but maintaining the mandate to draft a new Constitution.

You have to learn lessons, then. Among others, the triumph of rejection has had the virtue of revealing that intimate quota of racism and discrimination that still survives in a large part of our society. This is a cultural defeat. It helps us understand that the social struggle for recognition and respect for diversity is still in its infancy.

In the medium term, and the mandate of the October 2020 plebiscite being in force, and the text being drafted by a democratically elected Convention, indigenous participation and its proposals must be resolved again.

In the long term, it is evident that the issues that do not have sufficient social, cultural and political maturation will not need to be replaced. Today, the substantive thing is the Constitutional Recognition of the Original Peoplesan issue that does have wide acceptance, from the right to the liberal sectors if we take into account their statements.

In summary: the idea of ​​a social and democratic State of rights and inclusive is still valid, which entails the Constitutional Recognition of the PPII and indigenous rights that correspond to our own legislation since 1993: “Respect, promote, protect and guarantee the exercise of self-determination, the collective and individual rights of which they are holders and incorporating their political representation”, and thus ending with 212 years of exclusion. The historically relevant fact today is that the Original Peoples cannot be excluded from the constitutional text. And neither can they be set aside or treated in an irrelevant way in the constituent body.

Follow us on

  • The content expressed in this opinion column is the sole responsibility of its author, and does not necessarily reflect the editorial line or position of The counter.


Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

J. A. Allen

Author, blogger, freelance writer. Hater of spiders. Drinker of wine. Mother of hellions.

Leave a Reply