Open AccessIdeology, Agency, and the Federal Acknowledgement Process
Author(s) -
Nicholas Barron
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
journal of anthropology at mcmaster
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 0707-3771
DOI - 10.15173/nexus.v22i1.9
Subject(s) - ideology , sociology , state (computer science) , agency (philosophy) , context (archaeology) , conceptualization , indigenous , narrative , hegemony , contest , politics , power (physics) , law , gender studies , political science , social science , history , philosophy , ecology , linguistics , physics , archaeology , algorithm , quantum mechanics , biology , computer science
In June of 2013, the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs, Kevin Washburn, began holding tribal consultations in an attempt to reform the Federal Acknowledgement Process (FAP) with the input of recognized and unrecognized indigenous peoples. Between June and September of 2013, unacknowledged Californian Indian groups, including the Amah Mustun Tribal Band of Ohlone/Costanoan Indians (Amah Mutsun), the Ohlone/Costanoan Esselen Nation (Esselen), and the Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe (Muwekma), submitted separate letters in an attempt to voice their concerns and recommendations. This situation offers a useful case study for anthropologists attempting to study the role of ideology within the context of federal recognition. Using Phil Abrams theorization of the state as a historically determined and processual formation in conjunction with Louis Althusser’s discussion of ideology and Sherry Ortner’s conceptualization of agency, I discursively analyze each comment letter with special attention paid to discourses of history. With this approach, I make three interrelated arguments. First, the FAP is an inherently contradictory ideological project of the state that produces a paradoxical narrative of indigenous history. Second, the historical narratives within these letters reflect an incomplete and contested process of interpellation that seeks to reify state power through the reproduction of hegemonic ideas. Third, these historical discourses reflect the different political strategies of representation that unacknowledged peoples formulate to contest the process of interpellation as they navigate a paradoxical state ideology. Ultimately, these conclusions point towards the incomplete, dialectical, and contested nature of state ideology within the system of federal recognition.