[MPWG] Ethnobotanical Research

[wendy.applequist at mobot.org]

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Duncan [mailto:pduncan at uga.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:12 AM
To: mpwg at lists.plantconservation.org
Subject: [MPWG] Ethnobotanical Research



The ISE recognises that culture and language are intrinsically connected to
land and territory, and cultural and linguistic diversity are inextricably
linked to biological diversity. Therefore, the right of Indigenous Peoples
to the preservation and continued development of their cultures and
languages and to the control of their lands, territories and traditional
resources are key to the perpetuation of all forms of diversity on Earth. 


Like many similar statements of principle these days, half of this seems to
me to be obvious -- matters of basic decency, although since such have been
ignored in the past there may be a need to prescribe them -- and half to be
a sort of political correctness that, by defining indigenous peoples as
fundamentally "other" from ourselves and having different fundamental
interests, almost dehumanizes them.  Before everyone jumps on me, let me
clarify.  In the quote above, the ISE claims that "cultural and linguistic
diversity are inextricably linked to biological diversity."  It is true that
biological hotspots are frequently, though not always, areas with numerous
cultural and language groups (e.g. New Guinea), but both of these are
probably dependent upon factors such as geography and climate:  in a
mountainous, rain-forest area, where travel is difficult and thus many
different human groups will develop in isolation, you also have great
biological diversity.  It is ridiculous to imply that, if all those tribes
suddenly began speaking the same language or allowed their cultures to be
polluted with outside ways, biodiversity would plummet as a result. 

Now, of course the absolute rights of indigenous people to control their own
land and speak their own language should never be violated; but there may be
very good reasons why those people might not want to go on living quite as
their ancestors have done.  For example, the ability to speak a language
that is known outside one's own village conveys real benefits.  We, who are
for the most part comparatively wealthy Westerners, should not wallow in
those benefits while pressuring others to reject them because we believe
that their sacrifice might provide indirect gains to us.  I am reminded of
an article in which an ethnobiologist pondered how far she could ethically
go to prevent the building of a road to a certain village (whose residents
appeared to welcome it).  How many white middle-class Americans would permit
their own children to live in a roadless village where there was no means of
reaching a hospital in case of medical emergency, much less a school?  The
Western extension of even basic creature comforts to the masses is not a
unique tradition of our cultures, but a recent innovation.  Most people do
not realize that just a century or two ago, many Europeans still lived in
what we would now call barbarous squalor, as deprived as any Third World
peasant of today.  Do any of you wish that your ancestors had rejected those
creature comforts, or trade or literacy or dentistry or universal suffrage
or women's rights, because they were not "traditional?"  If not, then in
justice you should do nothing to discourage other peoples from striving to
obtain the same goods if that should be their choice.  To suggest that they
should live, perpetually, in conditions of isolation, poverty and oppression
that you would never tolerate for yourself or your descendants, just because
you think that your culture may somehow benefit from the traditional
knowledge thereby preserved, is to make those people into museum dioramas or
zoo exhibits, not individuals who are your moral equals.

 

Just my $.02 worth....let the throwing of organic, non-GMO tomatoes begin.

 

Wendy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20040121/563a12a4/attachment.html>