DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation Versus Survival: a Cultural Ecological Study Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conservation Versus Survival: a Cultural Ecological Study Of Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2003 Conservation versus survival: a cultural ecological study of changing settlement patterns, cultures, and land use in the Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve of northeast Honduras Elizabeth Ann Fraser Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Fraser, Elizabeth Ann, "Conservation versus survival: a cultural ecological study of changing settlement patterns, cultures, and land use in the Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve of northeast Honduras" (2003). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 1928. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/1928 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. CONSERVATION VERSUS SURVIVAL: A CULTURAL ECOLOGICAL STUDY OF CHANGING SETTLEMENT PATTERNS, CULTURES, AND LAND USE IN THE RIO PLATANO BIOSPHERE RESERVE OF NORTHEAST HONDURAS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Geography and Anthropology by Elizabeth Ann Fraser B.A., State University of New York at Geneseo, 1995 M.A., The George Washington University, 1998 August 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables......................................................................................................................iv List of Figures ....................................................................................................................vi List of Maps ......................................................................................................................vii Abstract ............................................................................................................................viii Chapter One: Introduction................................................................................................... 1 Research Problem.................................................................................................... 3 The Literature.......................................................................................................... 7 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 17 Organization.......................................................................................................... 24 Chapter Two: The Setting ................................................................................................. 25 The Study Area...................................................................................................... 27 Socio-Economic Portrait ....................................................................................... 32 Land Use ............................................................................................................... 42 The Biosphere: Goals and History ........................................................................ 46 Conclusion............................................................................................................. 48 Chapter Three: Changes in Settlement.............................................................................. 50 Three Types of Settlement .................................................................................... 50 Ladino Frontier Settlement.................................................................................... 53 Coastal Ladino Settlement .................................................................................... 56 Coastal Miskito Resettlement................................................................................ 61 Overall Spatial Implications.................................................................................. 63 Chapter Four: Miskito Subsistence ................................................................................... 65 Agriculture ............................................................................................................ 66 Protein Sources: Hunting, Fishing, and Livestock................................................ 79 Gathering............................................................................................................... 82 Wage Labor ........................................................................................................... 83 Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 86 Chapter Five: Ladino Subsistence..................................................................................... 88 Ladino Settlement Patterns.................................................................................... 89 Agriculture ............................................................................................................ 90 Protein Sources: Hunting, Fishing, and Livestock................................................ 94 Wage Labor ........................................................................................................... 97 Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 98 Chapter Six: Comparative Analysis and Long Term Outlook .......................................... 99 Changes in Miskito Culture and Land Use ......................................................... 102 Spatial Extent of Land Use: Past, Present, and Future........................................ 105 Implications for the Río Plátano Biosphere Reserve .......................................... 109 Implications for Future Research ........................................................................ 111 ii References Cited ............................................................................................................. 112 Appendix A: Survey........................................................................................................ 129 Appendix B: Examples of Life History Topics and Questions....................................... 134 Appendix C: Plot Sketch and Measurements.................................................................. 136 Vita…. ............................................................................................................................. 139 iii LIST OF TABLES 1.1 Fieldwork According to Community .................................................................... 20 1.2 Number and Type of Interviewees According to Community.............................. 21 2.1 Values of Top Honduran Exports.......................................................................... 26 2.2 Demographic Profile of the RPBR........................................................................ 32 2.3 Community Profiles .............................................................................................. 35 3.1 Age and Size of Frontier Communities................................................................. 54 3.2 Percent of Current Households Present Over the Past 20 Years........................... 54 3.3 Reasons for Migration Among Frontier Settlers ................................................... 55 3.4 Migration Fields for Households in Ladino Communities.................................... 57 3.5 Size and Age of Miskito Communities ................................................................. 61 3.6 Percent of Miskito Residents who Re-Settled....................................................... 62 3.7 Percent of Current Residents that Previously Resided in Study Area................... 62 3.8 Reasons for Migration Among Miskito ................................................................ 62 3.9 Migration Fields for Coastal Miskito Communities ............................................. 63 4.1 Staple Crops, Fruit Trees, Herbs, and Condiments found in Study Area ............. 70 4.2 Number of Parcels Owned by Limonales Residents............................................. 72 4.3 Percent of Households that Plant Staple Crops, by Community........................... 74 4.4 Average Fallow Periods in Miskito Communities ................................................ 77 4.5 Wage Earning Activities in Limonales ................................................................. 84 4.6 Wage Earning Activities in Banaka ...................................................................... 84 4.7 Time Allocation during Fall 2000......................................................................... 85 4.8 Time Allocation during Spring 2001 .................................................................... 85 5.1 Soalres in Ladino Communities............................................................................ 90 5.2 Crops Planted by Ladino Farmers......................................................................... 91 iv 5.3 Prevalence of Herbicide Use in Ladino Communities .......................................... 92 5.4 Length of Fallows Among the Ladinos................................................................. 92 5.5 Hunting, Fishing, and Meat Consumption in Ladino Communities
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mutual Integration Versus Forced Assimilation
    Mutual Integration Versus Forced Assimilation: The Conflict between Sandinistas and Miskitu Indians, 1979-1987 by Jordan Taylor Towne An honors thesis submitted to the Honors Committee of The University of Colorado at Boulder Spring 2013 Abstract: This study aims to i) disentangle the white man’s overt tendency of denigrating indigenous agency to ethnic identity and, through the narrative of the Miskitu people of Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast, display that this frequent ethnic categorization oversimplifies a complex cultural identity; ii) bring to the fore the heterogeneity inherent to even the most seemingly unanimous ethnic groups; iii) illustrate the influence of contingent events in shaping the course of history; and iv) demonstrate that without individuals, history would be nonexistent—in other words, individuals matter. Through relaying the story of the Miskitu Indians in their violent resistance against the Revolutionary Sandinistas, I respond contrarily to some of the relevant literature’s widely held assumptions regarding Miskitu homogeneity, aspirations, and identity. This is achieved through chronicling the period leading to war, the conflict itself, and the long return to peace and respectively analyzing the Miskitu reasons for collective resistance, their motives in supporting either side of the fragmented leadership, and their ultimate decision to lay down arms. It argues that ethnic identity played a minimal role in escalating the Miskitu resistance, that the broader movement did not always align ideologically with its representative bodies throughout, and that the Miskitu proved more heterogeneous as a group than typically accredited. Accordingly, specific, and often contingent events provided all the necessary ideological premises for the Miskitu call to arms by threatening their culture and autonomy—the indispensible facets of their willingness to comply with the central government—thus prompting a non-revolutionary grassroots movement which aimed at assuring the ability to join the revolution on their own terms.
    [Show full text]
  • Recuerdos De Nicaragua: Remebering the Dress of Indigenous and Afro- Descendants of Nicaragua in German Moravian Photography By
    1 RECUERDOS DE NICARAGUA: REMEBERING THE DRESS OF INDIGENOUS AND AFRO- DESCENDANTS OF NICARAGUA IN GERMAN MORAVIAN PHOTOGRAPHY BY JASMINE HELM In 1849, the German Moravian Church began a protestant Christian mission in Nicaragua. They built churches along the Mosquito Coast extending from southern Honduras throughthe eastern coastline of Nicaragua (fig. 1). The area is home to several indigenous groups including the Miskito, Mayangna (Sumo), Rama and Afro-descendant Creole and Garifuna (black-Caribe) communities. ―Unlike other Europeans of that era, they [Moravians] did not come to the Caribbean Coast of Central America in search of riches,‖1 notes scholar Benjamin Tillman. Rather, the missionaries‘ goal was to convert the native populations to Protestant Christianity and colonize the region. One of the methods to spread the news of their work, was photography. At the turn of the twentieth century, the Moravian missionaries and German immigrants in Nicaragua took ethnographic-style pictures of Moravian occupied Afro-descendant and indigenous communities (fig. 2,3). Many of the photographs were published and circulated as postcards for tourists entitled ―Recuerdos de Nicaragua.‖ They, were also used to internally to document Moravian conversion and were reproduced for publications or possibly for presentation (fig. 4,5). In these images, indigenous people are shown in both indigenous dress and in European-style garments. In contrast, Afro-descendant Creoles were photographed solely wearing European-style ensembles. The Moravian missionaries established infrastructure and civic support that was welcomed by the many Miskito, indigenous and Creole groups, the missionary presence altered the material culture endemic to the communities in the coast including dress.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara the Dynamic
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara The Dynamic Interrelationships between Ethnicity and Agrobiodiversity in the Pearl Lagoon Basin, Atlantic Nicaragua A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Anthropology by Nicholas Enyart Williams Committee in charge: Professor Susan C. Stonich, Chair Professor David López-Carr Professor Casey Walsh Dr. Andrea M. Allen, Michigan State University September 2015 The dissertation of Nicholas E. Williams is approved. ____________________________________________ Andrea M. Allen ____________________________________________ David López-Carr ____________________________________________ Casey Walsh ____________________________________________ Susan C. Stonich, Committee Chair June 2015 The Dynamic Interrelationships between Ethnicity and Agrobiodiversity in the Pearl Lagoon Basin, Atlantic Nicaragua Copyright © 2015 by Nicholas Enyart Williams iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My research would have not been possible without the help and support of many generous people. I wish to thank Drs. Susan Stonich, Casey Walsh, David López-Carr, and Andrea Allen for their time and commitment throughout the development of my research project and their invaluable feedback during the writing process. I also extend my appreciation to the Fulbright Program and John Fer at the U.S. Embassy in Managua for supporting me during my fieldwork in Nicaragua. I attribute so many of my achievements to the unwavering support of my family. In particular, thank you to my wife, Seeta,
    [Show full text]
  • Miskitu Identity in the Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras
    Miskitu Identity in the Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve, Honduras Laura Hobson Herlihy "We are sambos, mestizos, and mulattos, we are mixed. We are Miskitu because we speak Miskitu" (EnemeciaFerrera,Kuri). Abstract This article examines how Miskito individuals construct their ethnic identity in the inter-ethnic relations of the Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve, an internationally designated protected area in Honduras. The field research focuses on the ethnic terms of reference and stereotypes that Miskito speakers use to distinguish between themselves and Others. The presented data illustrate the situations in which Miskito individuals manipulate cultural markers to define themselves as "Sambos" (stressing their Black ancestry) or "Indians" (stressing their Amerindian ancestry). Conclusions suggest that the Miskito people's ability to construct situational ethnic identities during social interactions, while remaining essentially Miskito, may be a key factor in the success of their population group within and beyond the reserve. The bi-national Miskitu peoples reside along the Miskito Coast (Moskitia). Their historic homeland extends from Black River, Honduras, to just south of Bluefields, Nicaragua. While other Latin American Native Peoples have 3 4 Laura Hobson Herlihy disappeared or experienced culture and language loss as a result of the colonial encounter,1 the Miskitu have expanded their territory and population and have developed a strong ethnic identity.2 Presently, approximately 175,000 people culturally identify themselves as Miskitu with two-thirds of the population residing in Nicaragua, where they gained international attention during the 1980s as rebel soldiers in the Contra-Sandinista wars. The smaller and lesser-known Honduran Miskitu population (about 35,000) have worked peacefully with the nation-state to create several environmentally protected regions, such as the pluri-ethnic Rio Platano Biosphere Reserve (RPBR), a bounded region administered by COHDEFOR, the Honduran forestry agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Women and the International Labour Organization (ILO)
    4 Indigenous women and the International Labour Organization (ILO) Latin America Education for Work, Employment and Rights of Indigenous Peoples (ETEDPI): Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala Project title Education for Work, Employment and Rights of Indigenous Peoples (ETEDPI) Thematic area/programme Indigenous education Project duration 16 June 2004–28 February 2006 Location Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala Beneficiaries A number of indigenous peoples in Honduras, Nicaragua and Guatemala Executing agency/agencies International Labour Organization (ILO) Implementing agency/ ILO agencies Source of funds Netherlands The ETEDPI project places the greatest importance on the mainstream­ ing of gender equality, giving priority to the participation of indigenous women in educational projects and addressing their specific needs in all of the processes and activities that have been developed. Nicaragua Literacy and basic education for the Chorotega indigenous people in Nicaragua The ETEDPI project, through the Programme of Continuous Education for Youth and Adults of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports in Nicaragua, is now undertaking a pilot project in the indigenous com­ munities of San José de Cuzmapa, el Carrizal, San Lucas, Santa Barbara, Litlelpaneca, Totogalpa and San Antonio de Padua in the Department of Madriz, and Mozonte in the Department of Nueva Segovia. Two hun­ 58 Indigenous Women and the United Nations System dred and twelve Chorotega indigenous persons — 91 women and 121 men — are participating in the project. Rescue of the historic memory and living abilities of the Chorotega population The beneficiaries of this project are 779 students (330 women and 449 men), 22 teachers, 400 families, the youths clan (made up of 70 indig­ enous persons: 55 women and 15 men) and the Monimbó artisans group.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua's Failed Revolution
    NICARAGUA’S FAILED REVOLUTION THE INDIGENOUS STRUGGLE FOR SANEAMIENTO NICARAGUA’S FAILED REVOLUTION THE INDIGENOUS STRUGGLE FOR SANEAMIENTO Acknowledgements This report is dedicated to the courageous struggle of the Indigenous and Afro-descendent communities for Saneamiento in Nicaragua. The report was authored by Anuradha Mittal with contribution from Josh Mayer, research assistance by Elizabeth Fraser, Elena Teare, Naomi Maisel, Andy Currier, and Janhavi Mittal, and editorial assistance from Frederic Mousseau. Forests of the World provided the map on Current Land Use, Indigenous/Afro-descendent Territories and Protected Areas. Field research was conducted by Anuradha Mittal, with assistance from several individuals, who are not named so their long- term commitment to this work is not threatened. We are deeply grateful for their support. Names and details that could reveal the identity of those interviewed have been withheld to ensure their safety. The fear of invasions, killings, and kidnappings, that is silencing the Indigenous communities in Nicaragua, makes this report all the more urgent. We are deeply grateful to the many individual and foundation donors who make our work possible. Thank you. Views and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the Oakland Institute alone and do not reflect opinions of the individuals and organizations that have sponsored and supported the work. Design: Amymade Graphic Design, amymade.com Cover Photo: Miskitu villagers on the banks of Rio Coco. November 2018 All photos © The Oakland Institute Publisher: The Oakland Institute is an independent policy think tank bringing fresh ideas and bold action to the most pressing social, economic, and environmental issues. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
    [Show full text]
  • The New Colonization of Nicaragua's Caribbean Coast
    The New Colonization of Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast 5/20/17, 9:47 AM Published on NACLA (http://nacla.org) Home > The New Colonization of Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast The New Colonization of Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast [1] Farmers, cattle-ranchers, and extractive industries threaten the livelihood of Nicaragua’s Miskitu people while the government of Daniel Ortega looks the other way. Tweet [2] Laura Hobson Herlihy 09/06/2016 http://nacla.org/print/11190 Page 1 of 11 The New Colonization of Nicaragua’s Caribbean Coast 5/20/17, 9:47 AM A Miskitu dwelling in Bilwi, Nicaragua, ridden with bullet holes (Photo by Courtney Parker) The Miskitu—an indigenous group of around 180,000 people who inhabit the Muskitia, a rainforest that expands from Black River, Honduras to Bluefields, Nicaragua—are perhaps most famous for the role they played as a counterrevolutionary force against the Sandinista (FSLN) revolution in the U.S.-backed Contra War of the 1980s. Despite the Miskitu’s allegiance to the Contras, in 1987, the FSLN state passed a law to appease the Miskitu’s demands. Under the terms of Nicaragua’s so-called “autonomy law” (Law 28), two pluriethnic, autonomous regions were established on the country’s Caribbean coast, a region that is home not only to the Miskitu but also the indigenous Sumu-Mayangna and Rama people, the Afro-descendant ‘Kriols, and the Afro-indigenous Garífuna, among others. What’s more, Law 28 awarded indigenous and Afro- descendant peoples the right to the preservation of their cultures and languages, self- governance, and resource control and declared that communal lands were inalienable, meaning they “could not be donated, sold, leased or taxed [3].’ At the time, the Law 28 represented one of the most novel and progressive advances in state-indigenous relations anywhere in Central America.
    [Show full text]
  • Background- Nicaragua1 Nicaragua Is a Small Central American
    Background- Nicaragua1 Nicaragua is a small Central American country (pop. 6 million, 2017 est.) that has experienced repeated U.S. military intervention and the decades-long dictatorship of the Somoza family. In 1980, leftist Sandinista guerillas overthrew the Somozas and the U.S. responded by funding the violent Contra guerilla counter-insurgency. Despite the violence, Nicaragua successfully transitioned to democracy but continues to struggle with sporadic government violence, lack of respect for indigenous political and land rights, and authoritarianism. Its current president, Sandinista Daniel Ortega, has retained power for over a decade through increasingly dubious elections. Nicaragua’s early years were marked by internal conflict and external intervention. Before the arrival of the Spanish, Nicaragua was inhabited by diverse communities of farmers and hunter- gatherers, whose total population may have been as much as a million. After the arrival of the Spanish in the 1500s, European diseases and enslavement decimated the population, reducing it to tens of thousands. Nicaragua became a neglected backwater of the Spanish empire and the British allied with the Miskito people to gain control of much of Nicaragua’s Caribbean coast. In the early 1800s, Nicaragua joined other Central American countries in achieving independence. However, independence inflamed centuries-old rivalries between Nicaragua’s two principal cities: the middle class and Liberal León and the aristocratic and Conservative Granada. The two sides sought foreign backing in their fight for control, with the Conservatives generally obtaining support from Britain and the Liberals generally obtaining support from the United States. In 1855, the Liberals invited American adventurer William Walker to assist them in defeating the Conservatives.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua: Educational Policy for Ethnic Minorities. PUB DATE 88 NOTE 22P
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 329 446 SO 020 476 AUTHOR Rippberger, Susan TITLE Nicaragua: Educational Policy for Ethnic Minorities. PUB DATE 88 NOTE 22p. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Bilingual Education; Educational Needs; *Educational Policy; *Ethnic Groups; Foreign Countries; Government Role; *Government School Relationship; *Indigenous Populations; Literacy Education; Minority Groups; Subcultures IDENTIFIERS *Nicaragua ABSTRACT Since taking power, the Sandinista government has made a commitment to educating all Nicaraguans. Under itsdirection, literacy increased from approximately 50 to 88 percent. Thousandsof new teachers were hired, and the number of elementary schools doubled. The official language is Spanish, and the dominantculture, Mestizo (mixed Spanish and Indian). In Nicaragua's coastalCaribbean Region there are several ethnic Indiangroups, among which are the Miskito and Sumo, who maintain their own language andun:ique way of life. The indigenolis population has resisted immersioninto the national culture, and the use of Spanish as the languageof instruction. As a result, the government has madean effort to accommodate their specific educational needs. Native Miskitosand Sumos are trained as instructors to teach in theirown area in the native language. Materials have been specially preparedto reflect the Indian language and culture in an effort tomake education more relevant. A 14-item bibliography and two mapsare included. (Author/JB) ***********************************************************************
    [Show full text]
  • Forced Relocation: Catalyst for Indigenous Resistance on Nicaragua’S Atlantic Coast, 1980–1990
    STUDIA HISTORICA GEDANENSIA TOM V (2014) John‑Paul Wilson (St. John’s University, New York, USA) Forced Relocation: Catalyst for Indigenous Resistance on Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast, 1980–1990 Since colonial times, the people of Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast have developed a distinctive cultural and ethnic heritage that has evolved separately and often contrary to that of the Hispanic civilization to the west. Within a region comprising nearly two‑thirds of Nicaragua’s national territory, a diverse population of approximately 120,000 Indians and Creoles has successfully resisted repeated attempts by the state to assimilate them into the cultural mainstream. As a result of their geographic isolation from the Spanish conquest and their proximity to the Caribbean, the aboriginal population of the Atlantic Coast came into extensive contact with British traders as well as a small number of African slaves whose English language, social customs, and ethnic stock both contributed to the rise of the Miskito1, Sumu, Rama, and Creole peoples. This emergence of new local identities also coincided with the establishment of independent cultural and political structures. Likewise, the regional adaptation of Moravian religiosity and North American capitalist tendencies served to further differentiate the Costeños from Mestizo society.2 Consequently, the inhabitants of the Atlantic Coast came to regard the Nicaraguan state as an intrusive foreign entity that at times sought to impose its authority and Hispanic culture over the region. For the most part, the indigenous communities of the Atlantic Coast enjoyed a sense of political and cultural autonomy not experienced by other ethnic 1 Over the centuries, there has been a number of different spellings for the term Miskito (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Land Rights in Honduras
    Indigenous Land Rights in Honduras South -South Facility Development Outcome Story Boosting shared prosperity through land titling THE CHALLENGE: Up until 2011, land rights of the Miskito people, a large indigenous community, were not protected in Honduras. This needed to be addressed as secure land rights matter deeply for social inclusion and are fundamental for stimulating investment and growth. Despite numerous efforts to reach consensus about the demarcation of indigenous territories, lack of trust had hindered an effective dialogue among Honduran government AT-A-GLANCE officials and Miskito people. Additionally, there were several CHALLENGE government agencies with Land rights of the Miskito people, competencies over land, which complicated harmonization and the introduction a large indigenous community, of new legal concepts, such as inter-communal land agreements. “We want to were not protected in Honduras. receive recognition for our land rights” said Norvin Goff Salinas, President of MASTA, the umbrella organization of Miskito federations. SSF GRANT THE EXCHANGE: $141,500 To overcome the barriers that had prevented the Miskito people from obtaining land rights, the World Bank connected the Hondurans with their international KNOWLEDGE RECIPIENT peers. Experiences from Colombia and Nicaragua showed them that consensus Honduras can be reached on complex social issues. A carefully designed knowledge exchange was executed, which included a planning workshop, two study tours, KNOWLEDGE PROVIDERS three policy dialogues, action planning, expert visits, and a final workshop for validating plans at the local level. Roman Alvarez, National Coordinator of the Nicaragua and Colombia second Land Administration Project reflects: “The South-South exchange was enormously helpful as it brought the position of the government and of the SDGS SUPPORTED indigenous organizations closer together, because we participated together […] [it] helped very much in establishing a clear path, in establishing clear procedures that were going to be followed in land titling”.
    [Show full text]
  • The Miskito Nation and the Geopolitics of Self-Determination
    Journal of Political Science Volume 19 Number 1 Article 3 November 1991 The Miskito Nation and the Geopolitics of Self-Determination Bernard Nietschmann Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Nietschmann, Bernard (1991) "The Miskito Nation and the Geopolitics of Self-Determination," Journal of Political Science: Vol. 19 : No. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/jops/vol19/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Politics at CCU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Political Science by an authorized editor of CCU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE MISKITO NATION AND THE GEOPOLITICS OF SELF-DETERMINATION Bernard Nietschmann University of California , Berkeley Nations and States Two dramatically different geopolitical assertions ofter­ ritorial organization exist. The first portrays the world as being partitioned into 171 First, Second and Third World states which claim sovereignty over all the lands, 40 percent of the oceans, and the lower reaches of space, and the planet's 5000 distinct peoples. Almost all academic analysis and state and international policies are based on this world-of-states geopolitical assertion. The sec­ ond geopolitical assertion depicts that world as having some 5000 Fourth World nations, each the territory of a distinct people who claim exclusive control of land (and sometimes sea) areas and resources, and most of whom never agreed to being part of a state which is usually considered to be an invading and occupying force.
    [Show full text]