Many years after colonization period, the contemporary position of the indigenous communities in some of the wealthier and developing nations – Africa, Australia, Canada, the United States, among others – seems to be characterized by social, economic, and political marginalization. The mentality of victimization is said to be an all-time high. The indigenous people are victimized, highly over-represented in the cases related to crime in the criminal justice systems, and racially discriminated. These, according to most researchers, are directly linked to colonialism. The worst is that most of the time the policymakers are aware of what is transpiring, but do not take any action. Most of the criminologist and policymakers fail to act based on the mentality that is rooted within them. The policy makers always provide an explanation for the policies based on assumptions and theories that continually pathologies the indigenous individual. According to them, the culture and beliefs of the indigenous people is the problem. This has resulted in many indigenous people getting incarcerated.
According to some indigenous and non-indigenous researchers, the problem experienced today can be traced back to the colonial era – what they term colonial dispossession, the s0ocsil and historical contexts of what is known as indigenous crimes or behaviors, and the new form of show of might – domination through controls in the administration, economic developments, and legal end. These have created a sense of overdependence by the indigenous persons on the governments. Despite the reduction in crime caused by the indigenous people, there is still dramatic increase in the number of indigenous people incarcerated and in prisons. Some researchers also point out that it is not only in the criminal justice system do we see forms of victimization, but in a wider scope. Many researchers, especially from the western world always express their ideas in form of victimization. This paper, in a well-sequenced manner, tries to explain how the colonial mentality is affecting the lives of the indigenous people across the globe – be it Africa, Europe, Australia, the United States among others.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Two sets of theories come to mind when the effect of colonialism on the indigenous people. Chris Cunneen and Juan Tauri through their book, "Indigenous Criminology" critique the colonial mentality and effects on the minds of the westerners and the policymakers by identifying how this deep-rooted mentality is degrading the indigenous people. Chris Cunneen, a professor of Criminology in the Faculties, and Art and Social Sciences at the University of NSW, Australia, has experience and international reputation on criminology, especially on juvenile justice. He is also known for his experience in restorative justice, prison issues, human rights, policing, and more importantly the indigenous people and law. He, Cunneen, has participated in various Australian Royal Commissions and Inquiries on matters related to Australian human rights. As such his works on social justice are reputable. Juan Tauri is also a well-experienced lecturer from the University of Wollongong, Australia. He is also a member of the Ngati Porou iwi of Aotearoa New Zealand. He is commonly known for his works and research on matters related to indigenous people mainly through critiquing perception of crime in settler-colonial jurisdictions, and how the state has responded to the same on over-representation. The other theorist is Chandra Mohanty. Mohanty is an assistant professor of women’s studies and sociology of education at Oberlin College, Ohio, the United States. Mohanty lectures on issues related to feminism, race, development studies, and education. In her book, "Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses", Mohanty critique how the colonial has influenced the perception of the western people on the women in the developing nations. Mohanty has a theory that the women in "Third World Countries" as described by other writers is untrue and un-researched
Under Western Eyes
Under Western eyes by Chandra Mohanty is a work that tries to demonstrate that many researchers, especially those who are trained and inserted within the Western feminists’ scholarship, have always portrayed a monolithic and universalizing the women in the "Third World Countries". Essentially, Mohanty is trying to critique the hemogenic "western feminisms" brought about by colonialism. According to Mohanty, the assumption that the third world women are a coherent group without considering the social factors is problematic. Under, the Western Eyes tries to critique the western feminist, especially when they attempt to explain third world women. This is because the western feminists feel like they are the subject and the third world women as the object. Mohanty says that the theories that are expressed about the third world women are a way to create power hierarchies and cultural domination – what she refers to as discursive colonialism. Mohanty says that it is paramount and urgent to discuss these issues before they evolve to cultural imperialism.
Under the Western Eyes by Mohanty criticizes texts by most feminists from the west which claims that women around the world are oppressed by male violence. Mohanty tries to explain that without understanding and gaining insight into a particular group of women, especially in the third world countries, it is not right to claim or to universalizing experiences. Most of the western feminists have continually relied on false sisterhood in form of shared experience, which to Mohanty is not true. Some of the universal assumptions that are expressed by most western feminists’ articles portray women as sexual-political objects before they enter any family structure, unitary notion on religion, and economic determinism are dead because of the lack of consideration of the context of the discussion, especially when discussing women from the third world nations. It is impossible to classify and group the experiences of different women from different places in the same manner. For instance, Under Western Eyes gives an example of the use of the veil. The use of veil according to the Western feminists is a form of oppression of the women, especially in the Middle-East nations. Mohanty provides another view wherein Iran, the veil is actually a sign of allegiance to other women. Mohanty, therefore, expressed that the binary reduction that men oppress women in the third world countries and that women are oppressed everywhere is actually not true and not a well-researched sufficient model of power. As quoted by Mohanty in the "Under Western Eyes", "a variety of political contexts that often exists simultaneously and overlaid on top of one another."(p.65) as the true model of power. This is also the Michael Foucault’s theory of power.
In essence, Mohanty is against the universalization theories about women that have been brought by the western feminists as a result of colonialism is untrue, especially without consideration of the different experiences or clear-cut research. Universalization that has been brought about colonialism, to Mohanty is problematic because there is no singular identity for the women. As described by Foucault, there are various identities in different places at different times; these include religion, politics, social identities among others. As such, it is vital to understand that the theories of universalization as expressed by the western feminists cannot stand the time, especially on the expression that patriarchy hinders the lives of women globally. This cannot be used as a model of power. It is therefore important to look deeper into the various aspects of the women lives differently rather than using the universal stereotyping.
Indigenous Criminology
Indigenous Criminology by Cunneen and Tauri tries to explore another aspect of colonial perception and victimization. The book explores victimization based on indigenous people contact with the criminal justice system both in the historical and contemporary contexts. Indigenous Criminology essentially is concerned with criticizing various authors who base their arguments about crime among the indigenous individuals to be based on culture and belief rather than looking and doing research deeply. According to Cunneen and Tauri, there is the need for the importance of understanding the Indigenous knowledge and methods to criminology before making policies that are universal that seems to victimize the indigenous people. The book indicates and suggests that colonialism should be at the center of the discussion of criminology in order to understand the incarceration, deaths in custody, police brutality, and a high number of violent cases in the indigenous communities. According to Cunneen and Tauri, listening to the Indigenous people, doing proper research, and understanding their history will be the best approach to decolonizing criminology among them.
As described by Cunneen and Tauri in the introduction, colonialism has a great impact on the criminology in the Indigenous communities. The book indicates, "… provides the basis for a new explanatory model for understanding Indigenous people's contact with criminal justice systems; one that is firmly based on historical and contemporary conditions of colonialism" (Pg.1) The book calls for understanding the indigenous people by setting a vision that avoids universalizing the indigenous people and losing sight of diversity within the indigenous people. It seeks to foster recognition of the indigenous knowledge by the various authors on indigenous criminology through respect and having culturally informed view and writing. It calls for the authors to strive to place the dynamics of settler colonialism at the heart of the analysis.
The book goes further to explain that administrative and authoritarian criminologies, particularly through false claims of objectivity and universality have led to serious harm to the indigenous people. This false objectivity, according to Cunneen and Tauri, has constantly imposed Eurocentric explanatory frameworks which are biased and tend to ignore the violence perpetrated by the colonialists – “epistemic violence of colonialism” (Pg. 9). It is obvious that the critique is based on the fact that the neo-liberal ideology has fueled the perception of criminology in the Indigenous communities through its relentless demands for what various pro-western writer calls ‘policy relevance’. This the authors do without considering the exclusion and marginalization that is obvious and has been perpetrated by colonialism, victimization, and sense of dominance. Cunneen and Tauri argue that even critical analysis of the indigenous criminology, especially those based on race, are wanting enough because they remain blind to the circumstances of dispossession. According to Cunneen and Tauri, colonialism has everything to do with Indigenous criminology. The duo claim that colonial legacy has to be discussed when talking about indigenous criminal acts and therefore there is need to question the common liberal myth that there exist neutrality in law that point to the right of the states to punish criminals. This is because there is already some form of prejudice about the indigenous people and criminology.
Throughout the book, there is a various noticeable element that constitutes indigenous criminology which intersects with feminist methodologies, and post-colonialism. However, the most important aspect is the illustration given by Cunneen and Tauri from various materials and their own research on works that are related to the indigenous people and their shortcomings. For instance, in chapter three of the book, Cunneen and Tauri identify links between the histories of the settler societies and the over-representation of the Indigenous individuals in the criminal justice systems. They argue that the mainstream media, authors, and researchers have ignored this central part in describing criminal justice systems across various nations where Indigenous people are found – New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Australia, among many others. According to Cunneen and Tauri, solving the indigenous criminology lies in understanding the colonial criminogenic effects. Further, in Chapter 4, the authors indicate that the today policing, especially when it comes to Indigenous people, is almost similar to that during the colonial period: “policing is deeply implicated within the wider historical trends of colonization and nation building’ (Pg. 67). Within the same chapter, Cunneen and Tauri say that rethinking possibilities of decolonized relationship is the only promising approach regarding colonial policing style. Further, in chapter 5, the book recognizes the increased number of incarceration of the indigenous women. Cunneen and Tauri describe this as a criminological catastrophe. They indicate that colonial responses to some actions, especially in Australia against the Aboriginal community have led to higher levels of incarceration of the Indigenous people. Finally, in chapter 6, 7 and the subsequent, the authors of “Indigenous Criminology” – Cunneen and Tauri – critique the view that the colonizers have that they are the solution and the indigenous people – the aboriginals – as the problem.
Both the books – Under Western Eyes and Indigenous Criminology – act as a critique of the colonial system. While the Under the Western Eyes is based on the western feminist universalism of the women plight, the Indigenous Criminology is about the plight of the indigenous in relation to a criminal justice system. Both the authors of the books share the common idea that colonialism has led to the victimization of the indigenous people. Cunneen and Tauri and Mohanty indicate that victimization by the pro-western authors has created a perception and kind of myth about the indigenous people and third world women. Women in the third world are portrayed to be suffering under the leadership of men; women are oppressed. Yet this is not true. Most of the mainstream authors do not do appropriate research about the women. This idea is equally shared by Cunneen and Tauri who claims that the mainstream authors have do not do enough research to realize that colonialism has an effect on the indigenous criminology. Most of the mainstream authors ignore the colonial effect on the indigenous communities.
Additionally, both Cunneen and Tauri and Mohanty indicate that colonialism has created a common assumption that the colonialists were the solution or the subjects, while the indigenous people and women in third world countries were the problem or the objects. For instance, Mohanty says;
“ Universal images of "'the third-world woman"' (the veiled woman, chaste virgin, etc.), images constructed from adding the "'third-world difference"' to "'sexual difference"', are predicated on (and hence obviously bring into sharper focus) assumptions about western women as secular, liberated and having control over their own lives”
She adds:
“Without the overdetermined discourse that creates the third world, there would be no (singular and privileged) first world. Without the "'third-world woman"', the particular self-presentation of western women mentioned above would be problematical.”
According to Mohanty, the images that have been created about the women in the third world countries is because of the western (colonialists) assumptions about “third world women”. This, according to Mohanty, are points that the feminists in the western world want to help view themselves as better – otherwise the subjects or the solution. The colonialists create an image of the indigenous people and women as poor, unenlightened, unliberated so that they view themselves higher. A similar case is what is represented by Cunneen and Tauri, just differently. that help the west. Cunneen and Tauri says;
“…administrative and authoritarian criminologies, in particular, through false claims of objectivity and universality and sometimes explicit alignment with the colonizing project, have perpetuated harms against Indigenous people by imposing Eurocentric explanatory frameworks and ignoring the ‘epistemic violence of colonialism’ (Pg. 9)
According to Cunneen and Tauri, the criminal perception of the Indigenous people is something that has been created over time since the colonial era. Policies are made based on liberal myths and not actual research (Dei, 2000).
Indigenous criminology exposes the relations of power that structure struggles over justice by creating a justice system that is neither decolonized nor colonial (Pg. 161) This equally echoed by Under Western Eyes which indicate that solving the feminists' problem basically relies on proper research without universalism and victimization. Both the books call for partnership and encouragement in the field of women and indigenous people research studies. They rally the call for authors to help in salvaging the situation through true writing.
In conclusion, Under Western Eyes and Indigenous Criminology are both critique books about colonialism and its effects. As expressed in the two books, the indigenous people and third-world women still undergo prejudices about their lives because of the colonial effects. The colonialist views themselves as the solution while the indigenous people and third world women as the problem. This happens despite the lack of accurate research. According to Cunneen and Tauri colonialism has the effect on the criminal activities by the Indigenous people. The colonial effects and the today contemporary practices have influenced the violent nature of the Indigenous people. Yet, this has been ignored. Same is expressed by Mohanty, who say that third-world women are perceived to be oppressed by the Western feminists without a clear understanding of their historical contexts. All these are due to colonial mentalities.
References
Cunneen C. & Tauri J. (2016). Indigenous Criminology. 1-206
Dei, G. J. S. (2000). Rethinking the role of indigenous knowledges in the academy. International Journal of Inclusive Education , 4 (2), 111-132.
Mohanty, C. T. (1988). Under Western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. Feminist review , (30), 61-88.
