Paper short abstract:

This paper explores the linkage between economic situation, racial affiliation and indigeneity in a Bolivian lowland comunidad which leads back to colonial constructions and reveals why today some people identify with the indigenous movement while many others do not.

Paper long abstract:

Focussing on the Tacana people of Amazonian Bolivia, this presentation looks at the uncomfortable linkage between economic standing and racial affiliation in an indigenous comunidad, a connection which has gone largely ignored in the politics around indigeneity. In the definition of the United Nations and Forum of Indigenous Issues, the term 'indigenous people' indicates a homogenous group. In Bolivia, definitions around race are directly linked to one's economic situation and in this has made some Tacana people more 'indian' than others. Mestizo (racially mixed) Tacana people who are offspring of white authorities a the patron or priest, have traditionally held the leadership positions in the comunidad, and as leadership runs in the family, their offspring now hold the representative positions within the indigenous movement. Ironically this would mean that not 'authentic' Tacana are representing Tacana people, but as in line with colonial history, they are being represented by outsiders. Or are they? Who defines indigenous? It has been argued that 'the indigenous' as has become constructed to fit the neo-liberal model in Latin America, only allows for a prototype Indian subject, the "permitted Indian" (Hale 2004). This paper demonstrates that present Tacana leaders may not be 'authentically' Tacana, in line with how indian-ness has been constructed historically, but due to their past advantageous position, they are the only type of indigenous leaders the indigenous movement, which is part of the neo-liberal model, can allow for.