This article was downloaded by:[Swets Content Distribution] On: 4 March 2008 Access Details: [subscription number 768307933] Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Anthropological Forum A journal of social and comparative sociology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713405137 Australian Anthropologists and Mary Edmunds; Monique Skidmore

Online Publication Date: 01 July 2007 To cite this Article: Edmunds, Mary and Skidmore, Monique (2007) 'Australian Anthropologists and Public Anthropology', Anthropological Forum, 17:2, 107 - 125 To link to this article: DOI: 10.1080/00664670701438373 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00664670701438373

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article maybe used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 fcretcie ohsoia,pltcladlcleet n ocs ou nthis on focus a is forces; and anthropology’ events local ‘public and nature view, political relational profoundly historical, our the to shows that crises In way to current a time. in of of issues application social our of broader political and the insights of urgent characteristics: and key issues three illuminate concerns by to issues, social distinguished order the in broader audiences, bring non-academic to the and academic is both anthropology’ to ‘public anthropology of aim The ; Anthropological Australian Seekers Burma; Asylum Australia; Anthropology; Public Keywords: public a anthropology mandate. of public Society’s development of Anthropology inclusion the deliberate Australian of could the the timeliness for approach the in the and on for anthropology Australia also argue in Drawing public we stream manner. anthropology panellists, effective a fellow an which in our Burma We of in health in work the debate. crisis ways and health and illustrate suffering current the discussion disease, to represent on public Burma research postgraduate in Skidmore’s the in from engagement at system study a particularly accessible case training, forces; short and of a and profoundly active present aspect events the an central local shows a and and that as political level; way approach historical, a this to on in crises focus issues current social of nature political and relational and controversy urgent public Yanomami key to three the distinguish identify ethnography by we of discussion, articulation that aftermath this pursuing its the In characteristics and context. in African Britain the Borofsky and in Werbner USA Robert Richard a the as of in development such anthropology the writers public examined Australian of the session stream at The Anthropology’ specific conference. ‘Public entitled annual session Society’s a Anthropology convened authors the 2004, In Skidmore Monique & Edmunds Mary Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian 107–125 2007, July 2, No. 17, Vol. Forum Anthropological O:10.1080/00664670701438373 [email protected]; DOI: Email: # Australia. online print/1469-2902 0200, 0066-4677 ISSN ACT Acton, Australian The House, Humanities, of Canberra School Research Old [email protected] at both University, Skidmore, Monique National and Edmunds Mary to: Correspondence 07Dsiln fAtrplg n oilg,TeUiest fWsenAustralia Western of University The Sociology, and Anthropology of Discipline 2007 nhoooy h rae plcto of application broader the anthropology: Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 ebe rudtene o ulcatrplg o‘ie nweg fand subsequently, of and knowledge ‘widen lecture, to that anthropology In public the anthropology. a for raised public need it as the Africa’, to argued what constituted Werbner referring in anthropology Australian was anthropology in strands he public various the University, and whether National of Australian question radicals The at ‘Reasonable 2004 in lecture entitled a gave Werbner Richard When Rights Human and Citizenship Anthropology, issues. Public land indigenous has and ethics there title the However, native about fatalities. mining, listserve Internet on no AASNet commentary had the the public other have on of and example, in we for Fergie anthropologists world, debate, the Unlike Deane vigorous public been of worked. of parts had hostile favour dangerous she Court often in Federal more whom qualification, and 2001 with a without intense women and found, Commission Ngarrindjeri to Deane Royal Court bridge decade, 1995 starkly The a Island a most through trial. Hindmarsh media, but nearly the anthropologists, recent for in of scrutiny more subjected, number the were a In Australia, Fergie, Northern occasion. South the in in policy such land Jawoyn conflict on one with mining proposed was medicine over in 1990s Territory early controversy and and Hill 1980s Coronation late health The the reluctantly. very as sometimes willingly, such sometimes in areas example, in for academy. practices, work the industry outside number improve implications to A helping in in mining. people indigenous elsewhere with work and to Australia continue anthropologists Other claims. title native Queensland the the of development ots h eeomn fteNblobuiemn nterland), their on mine bauxite (in Nabalco to case the Land Gove of Arnhem north-east 1971 development of the That the people from imperatives. Yolngu contest the anthropologists, public with other particular worked anthropologists different by of which very followed service their been the in has in all tradition generation, our earlier their on an used draw of (1949), that ways anthropologists Thomson three concern and but public (1964) name Stanner of (1943), to issues Elkin in skills. and involvement knowledge active disciplinary of Australia. has is, in that it developed pology’, as be as above, to it anthropology’ defined still have is ‘public we anthropology, as from engaged anthropology different Public from Britain. distinct is and relationship USA it dynamic the the in theory, emerged continues and and Australia, practice in important arenas between an policy plays and anthropology public engaged pure/ in while the role that, beyond suggest anthropology, We of dimension distinction. third applied a as anthropology’ ‘engaged debate. term and an discussion and level; public postgraduate in the engagement at accessible particularly training, and of active aspect central a as approach 108 nhoooit nAsrlahv nee rbe rw notepbi sphere, public the into drawn been or entered have Australia in Anthropologists hr sasgiiathsoyi utainatrplg f‘nae anthro- ‘engaged of anthropology Australian in history significant a is There the to referred (1996), Guille-Escuret Georges later and (1981), Firth Raymond nhoooia Forum Anthropological brgnlLn c 1991 Act Land Aboriginal brgnlLn ihs(otenTrioy c 1976 Act Territory) (Northern Rights Land Aboriginal n usqetln lis ocurrent to claims, land subsequent and 1 hog the through Ch and (Cth) Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 obe oenet oalct udn o hs ua ihsotncalled often rights human those and for issues funding these on allocate publicly and to speaks of health alleviation He governments the this procedure. make allowing to lobbies expensive in as extremely way role a poverty, an their such of in disease diseases understand structured the be to alleviating to Westerners industry into pharmaceuticals upon put be calls to he effort and public massive for called has netosdsae.Ti saboeia at n ti loasca ateietto evident fact social untreated a to also is due ( it Farmer are countries. and Yanomami World worldwide fact, Third the in to biomedical deaths working right of a anthropologists children’s the many is aftermath and poor This suffering the diseases. of to infectious in relation majority in (2005) The 2005) Borofsky (2001, health. Farmer Robert Paul as and controversy, such area writers the Pacific. by into the in forays and making lawyers here to are both largely rights anthropologists left indigenous been although public through has a is scientists, rights 5). and human 2003, political local … and of Mitchell a and field between sociality, and the move (Wilson agency to Australia, human practice us and In allows is . links moral of relationships these anthropologists level analysing and as the of Establishing exercise at concern rights property embedded Our about and who therefore a persons networks.’ social in social are persons embodied in as rights rights social human ‘human portray Anthropologists between where rights interconnections generally. human more but of Africa, specific in just the the not with is times, dealing analysis our to of relational anthropology, issues public of social of larger kind hence and This related anthropology, as 6). of experienced contribution 2004, necessarily (Werbner nevertheless, multiplicity interrelated are, a that by, and confronted milieux are cultural now cultural and elites, different confront, and Kalanga they of his political which like in of groups, environment most forms an new relational; inhabit these new profoundly sees also as the He pluralism difference. of of of negotiation the forms view of aspects a key as Africa is in pluralism analysis Werbner’s to Central the of analysis his by : and in elites country Kalanga and the town between of opposition, study the his than claim, by dominant rather bold relationship, supports a intellectually is long-term he ‘that This his one agenda’. challenges on Africanist but the Drawing 3) rewriting Africa’. (2004, by in Afro-pessimism, Werbner movement, transition Botswana, historic morality of in political time and research a citizenship, at rights, [Botswana] about debates in public in interest theoretical ulcatrplg a enatcltdi h S rmadfeetperspective different a from USA the in articulated been has anthropology Public anthropology the of terms in point same the make 8) (2003, Mitchell and Wilson teghi onrsd eerh h oelkl ti orahgetrsrnt in strength greater its reach people 7) to on 2004, is the builds (Werbner it than town. anthropology likely too, in less more public so, in research the no more related and research, both day, divide, The countryside divide, in the rural–urban … strength of supposed this research any issues anthropological straddle immediate across great must the to urgently The arises Africa: flow theory. there themselves, in In back in them. and anthropology and lead town fieldwork public study to they for country people from challenge the move letting the in following pride take rightly Anthropologists utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian e.g. 01 263–82) 2001, , 109 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 as,i ugss sh oso osy ta htvri sta tngah so has public’. or the little is by ethnography a that all, be is at it may if whatever judgment poorly, ‘that this understood what say, to is While about on it 308). goes concerned become, he (2005, editors’ as especially study’ suggests, and been we it harsh, reports people not the in and have to find anthropologists competence happens a repeatedly that raised usefulness, I is title message ethnographic headlines whose ‘The contributors, On that, the whom? relevance’—observed of one to Petersen, question—‘Important Pacific. the in of ethnography issue recent A Anthropology Public and Ethnography is Critical available. readily interests that findings whose those just ethnography make analyse witnessing, to to of ethnographer careful and act the served, an ‘public’ challenges being is on it are it while truly and craft; based testimony, society, our of a just professional and not knowledge or is of in Ethnography discipline intimate strength. our concept believe anthropology’s of the The also members among maintaining method. traditional We and debate boundaries of ethnographic disciplinary discipline. our modes beyond move the the as to us retaining requires of issues while of Anthropological anthropology issues, global these integrity American and growth social take broad the the with ongoing engage Institute Both to the capacity Anthropological anthropology. anthropology’s to Royal public Australian Britain’s of fundamental the that and heart for focus and anthropological the Association the region of our at expansion in the mean lies is might It (AAS). it Society what as Anthropological explore viewed to been and instead, Australia, have, image. They public 2001). anthropology’s Borofsky to (see damaging potentially times larger issues the our address of effectively the issues can insights illuminating anthropologists and social or and concerns audiences, anthropology issues, non-academic that the and ways bringing Hindmarsh specific academic of the both terms as to in Finlayson between such anthropology cast and country, of been relationship Smith this not the in example, have anthropology case, of one for Island just context critical for events the Even (see, in 1997). anthropology mainly Australia. ‘applied’ in occurred and addressed has little ‘pure’ been debate has times the our of Here, issues and crises social of and political lives globalised the and upon World. geo-political Third corruption broader the and across in the capitalism local children profoundly the twenty-first-century and it, of of terms nations politics 6) the consequences Western between (2004, links can Werbner ‘liberal’ the and as explicit avowedly ‘engaged’ is, makes is it it advocacy because and social relational, ‘urgent’, This USA. considered as reconfigured the be being in surely is anthropology anthropology ‘public’ how of truly ( example health a an to is right advocacy the social as Farmer’s such rights, human ‘secondary’ 110 ebleei stml odvlpamr xlctnto fpbi nhoooyin anthropology public of notion explicit more a develop to timely is it believe We moral, the to sites ethnographic our linking work relational of kind this date, To nhoooia Forum Anthropological nhoooia Forum Anthropological a eiae otetpco critical of topic the to dedicated was e.g. amr20,xiv–xxviii). 2005, Farmer , Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 sus‘i ttehato nhoooy.Ti swa hyhv osyaotthe about say to have grounded they in what 1–2): (pp. is best policy This public does policy anthropology’. of that anthropology it of case an heart the what of made the relevance upon recently at have draws ‘lie 1) (2005, issues that the Feldman to and anthropology effective relevant Wedel is most ethnography. an that the anthropology is an and between It links public Australia. rejuvenating in of believe, anthropology we public way, a development. of and component policy necessary to relating as life courts public the further of in facets witnesses requiring other expert in as praxis engage as We well such anthropological 2005). providing Feldman and procuring and of of (Wedel risks ethical testimony area the of understanding clear an a and attention into is incorporated are statements frameworks witness and public public testimonies institutional and broader our life which unequivocally a public in to way for are relation The possibilities in policy. practices roles the of ethnographic range of a terms play and Anthropologists in anthropology. ethnography resonate that, Pacific, arguments claim Their the the political. make in cites, he least whom colleagues at his of those and comments, Feinberg’s s suyn hog’ rrltoa nhoooy u qal bu o eut can results how (that is discipline. study about the that we equally beyond way how but impacts about anthropology) a just have relational in not or tackle is results through’, anthropology ‘studying to research public is, So communicate responsibilities public. to it the and to with then, accessible issues carries anthropology, social public but is broader a world centrepiece, related In post-9/11 the and anthropology. globalising to remains a suited in ethnography especially policy public initiative analysing an of thus task the up take To ietetr eggdatrplg’ natrplg fpbi oiyi a is policy public of anthropology an anthropology’, ‘engaged term the Like ntesm su,Fibr 20,27 elce that: reflected 297) (2005, Feinberg issue, same the In te niy rvdsapoiigfaeokfreaiigplc processes. policy or the examining public for general by framework ‘clan’, promising affected network, a social provides those company, entity) community, to other a they programmes—through (be … case and policies process) ‘extended policy prescriptions a the discourses, to (e.g. parties ethnography, object multi- of that the (e.g. theorizes interactions it in and object that contestation) relations ways the that political power in the of and studies analysis), site discourse it fluid [and] global method’ a that of as its grounding ways constructs policy the it faceted (e.g. how examining study in for of contributions of venue distinctive object regimes offers ideal non-localized Anthropology an larger, … offers processes affect thus otherwise not, Policy or or wittingly power. resist relations; policies reproduce, resource public and actors power , these complex contemporary in of actors disparate organization connect the to central Increasingly which in ills complicit’. these be of may forms those itself part. including anthropology a ‘writing injustice, are observes, and we) oppression issue) (and exploitation, (this they Harrington issue which as an of about in encompass, community communities global may the the consideration on on Such and effects work, its in we enterprise, which anthropological presented the of as consideration ethnography, Critical Suyn hog’ h rcs ffloigtesuc fapolicy—its a of source the following of process the through’, ‘Studying crucial opol’ ie’ ssc,i utegg i h nlssof analysis the ‘in engage must it such, As lives’. people’s to utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian hscleto,ivle reflexive a involves collection, this 111 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 n ousfrntokn.I st ehpdta hs on nhoooit will anthropologists young these that hoped be to and alliances is desire of form It the to networking. body of anthropologists for evidence Australian student forums is of and generation 200, postgraduate next to the of close a of now challenge determination (ANSA), membership the Australian a the Anthropologists up with of taking anthropologists creation Student the are Finally, of Boyle country. those the this as Network between in on such anthropology intersections only public students the not a on doctoral creating focusing also worlds, In political but power. other military, worlds of and to social levels sacrificed definable highest often of the public are ethnography at alternative rights interests important human economic an where and ways society provides the a Forum-Asia of an in one that for is discourse suggests campaign lawyer rights Boyle Its with human which Bangkok. an fieldwork Thai a in in year’s of such a based disappearance on NGO the in based into rights investigation is interest human context’, regional an Thai our a ‘Promoting a of already Forum-Asia, in topic, practices one His is NGO students. by rights: there anthropology human undertaken postgraduate that research Australian indicates by PhD approach from Boyle, The anthropology country. Nathan larger public a the about panellists, to around information moved for students be requests to 2004 PhD received the had this at later and session In audience We Anthropology overflowing venue. students. Public an the graduate attracted that conference and noting AAS worth researchers perhaps professional career is to it membership early context, in by surge a bodies for anthropological responsible been has anthropology public n20,w raie eso n‘ulcAtrplg’a h A Annual AAS the at Anthropology’ ‘Public on session a organised Conference. we 2004, In Training Postgraduate and Anthropology Public 112 oan eclsi h ato tyn lo’ n ticue omtett certain to public as: commitment defines the a includes he from it that and themselves ideas aloof’, bounded cocoon staying of or to ‘art philosophical the use it a anthropologists calls creating He further, that domain. gone has techniques (2006) of Eriksen Hylland list Thomas removed and sphere’. increasingly debates, public universitaire’, grown own the have their couture from with anthropologists subfields haute conferences, into and of ‘ramified journals, that catwalk jargons, written has narrow the 22) (1994, step the remarked Starn has to Orin erase 6) an ‘love (1995, we in Benthall anthropologists Jonathan suffering formats, discipline. that mass non-scholarly our in and in prevalent individual so and dichotomies about language write accessible injustice. to and engaging, responsibility inequality social the atrocity, suffering, accepting of In examples concrete its in and lives tngahcwiigcnb oefladmvn nisdsrpino individual of description its in moving and powerful be can writing Ethnographic nhoooia Forum Anthropological n h rvlgn faayi vrnraie HladEisn20,20) 2006, ‘the Eriksen of (Hylland activity; narrative. of loss kind over the subversive analysis a of and as privileging anthropology critiques as the science; postcolonial and as complexity confidence the ethnography’; of loss premise; ‘my native’; from than resulting rather specialisation conclusion myopic a elitism, 2 nNrhAeia h nrdcino naaei temdfndas defined stream academic an of introduction the America, North In Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 ttevr oeti sn ogrpsil ocaatrs hma ihso the of rights the in as seen them also is characterise citizens state to of possible rights the longer about no calculation This is state’. a it unprotected of completely system, moment citizens be nation-state to very 2) prove the man the ‘in of (1994, at rights where, inalienable Agamben paradox man and a sacred between Arendt, so-called identity posing the from ‘the refugee of the as drawn break-up citizen’—with organisations life—the arguments and political humanitarian from Using and life life’. bare governments distinguishes ‘bare by seen of are figures refugees and seekers a contemporary in has realised Anthropology fully it. be against to yet speak, has not that Australia. if potential in than subversive write, us circumstances, and this to those radical places responsibility to truly In sometimes moral suffering. suited discipline a and better our have injustice are that we atrocity, work, witness is we research however, where our believe, in situations do of out we some speak frequently What and and others. us, intellectuals of public become Some all public. we that advocate to panel great policy-making of other problems and Genocide contemporary of organisations urgent aid others. institutions. to subfields international witness than governments, bear Certain to all more relevance rights, informants. violence human endeavour and of anthropologists its war and this peace, anthropologists, of medical to and forensic experiences themselves scholars, life lend the concerning the and anthropology examples in public concrete belief concerns to and a contribution information significant beliefs, on important a based make providing also to by ability is debates its Britain and and anthropology of America relevance North in anthropology Public of Anthropology aim Public the the a Developing tenets beyond basic problems its of global one emerging as or taking by transnational so discipline. social, of do social utility to and outreach. broad able the inequality, addressing and been reinstated public justice has broadly training, social It has emphasise suffering, graduate advocacy. social USA institutions, of to that the regard forms centres, in with new USA anthropology initiative lists innovative anthropology in the and public which interest activities the across outreach website, student such museums Anthropology Project, Through reinvigorating Assessment Public and Outreach for Public the universities vehicle the is on a example understanding hosted for One usefulness USA, world. and less to contemporary the in relevance the become, its head-on in has asserting anthropology by Public decade anthropology, world. the a of parts than other and Britain intellectual USA, broader millennium. the new to the research of field issues their rights relating human of and process the begin together h oko gme 19)sosta nbcmn ttls esn asylum persons stateless becoming in that shows (1998) Agamben of work The our of purpose the it was Nor anthropology. only the not is anthropology Public the in developments with parallel a Australia in see to beginning are we Perhaps utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian 113 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 utainFdrlPlc adoese fteiqiyit II) ikPalmer. Mick DIMIA), into the inquiry of the head of former a overseer from the (and but of Police anthropologist, analysis an Federal this from Australian that not ironic comes perhaps Department is the of It 168). 2005, (Palmer justification’ ewrso eue upr n ua ihsavcc rus swl sterefugee the as of well the these as new up groups, the made advocacy by of themselves. rights encountered, is communities human result have imposed there and refugees support Then a refugee been and operate. of seekers networks as to have asylum had emerged that have constraints environment they have social what which networks within and context social institutional responses new and what circumstances of external also of approach account combination anthropological An this they takes responses. via how group them and social notes for individual and how and and It cultural circumstances themselves; by involved. what effected found responses; those been they their have of shaped which transformations background place in social the conditions and in cultural the their starting to shape the responded by to and so examine came interpreted that does public therefore, networks it into must, and but back processes stories them, them institutional these and feeds cultural of then social, and account broader lives, anthropological everyday An people’s debate. in operate they how the refugees. by and question seekers into asylum thrown are particular and context, concepts of citizenship, this these rights, experiences In as about 2004), societies. debates (Werbner host public mutuality, morality expand their political to of asylum of help and members can networks refugees and anthropology of them public constitute groups between among will also developed and are others seekers some they effects); as oppressive; cultural reciprocity or produce and support (and disrupted, asylum exploitative reference or of of be destroyed framework of been relations will a have reinscribing form and will to networks purposeful networks continue those the but of social Some at through refugees. looking and citizens’, seekers by ‘stateless citizens to state humanity modern state’. sense, modern of this the in definitions to that, attachment arguing Das subject’s further, in the assertion (quoted of rearranges Asad’s wars’ part nation-state takes colonial becomes 30) and contemporary ‘violence (2007, national the of Das ‘violence that 93). the 2006, argues into who suffering’ of (2003), ‘forms Asad of work 114 ua ihsatvssaddfneswr l xlddfo netkn n such any undertaking from advocates, excluded refugee all defenders—were lawyers, and journalists, activists rights course—and human of anthropologists, However, eea eateto mirto n utclua n nieosAffairs Indigenous and former the the Multicultural of of and officials Australian charge as Immigration (first, well in of as (DIMIA). guards Limited) seekers, Department and Solutions asylum for federal officers Global centres by security detention mandatory followed the Services, of Correctional examination an example, fiil,alo hmhdbe rtce yeteescey aeudrciiimin criticism under came secrecy, extreme by protected been the had whom of all officials, h iutdeso nhoooytksise rmteasrc ee,examines level, abstract the from issues takes anthropology of situatedness The and rights the of understanding this further to position a in are Anthropologists nAsrla oedtie nlsso hs id fise a nld,for include, may issues of kinds these of analysis detailed more a Australia, In amriqiyit h mirto Department Immigration the into inquiry Palmer nhoooia Forum Anthropological 4 ohtedtnincnr euiyognsto n,priual,DIMIA particularly, and, organisation security centre detention the Both 3 o aclueo eiladself- and denial of culture ‘a for 5 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 rwbc,mmnaiy rmhsAD artv,t u i us o uefor cure a for quest he that: his and me put illnesses to Burmese to said of narrative, He frequency AIDS perspective. his and his in range about AIDS from the me that momentarily, of telling knew view back, He was his AIDS. drew man for in cure old interested a was find the to I crucible, from subjects) sparks human the the (on dodging in experimentation down, ongoing salts and up mercuric arts bellows bubbling forbidden, the but levered the 78-year- white, I gaunt, As the wiry, wizardry. in a Burmese apprenticeship for of three-month bellows the a manning during was alchemist, I old 2002, of season monsoon the In Crisis Humanitarian Burma’s Study: Case anthropologists. the public for prolongs a response situations, that ethical such programs in only that, aid the argues is foreign She approach and people. anthropology Burmese witnesses complicity of of the form suffering of a and study, misery In action war case new short the the following Agamben. in of the analysis in evident (2005) argues, and given Farmer’s Skidmore are Like poor, who rights, country. the Arendt and human the on healthcare leave basic international to by afford other passports can many to who so access described few those like but is, process all health to to denied dehumanising right the Burma, the Australian contemporary (2004). Asylum-seekers, of Jenkins life: Fiona form philosopher ‘Bare by example, violence’, in of for begun critique being see, Agamben’s already and fields; is politics work other This experiences in morality’. these a political between Australia to to links and and the rights citizenship, explicit these seek ‘rights, make to the would and access approach including would better an how themselves, Such achieve find rights: life. to issue they better human order which of in in this involved, conditions lack institutions the a public to with experience engage who to approach seek people they to anthropology happens what public demonstrate A examination. o ol xli s cured, absolutely explain be could never I can how that religion.’ his pain or to personality hungry returned individual’s is always an but essence of taxonomy, the regardless disease particular ‘Again, a point: into key length at on went He 07.Bcueo cnmcsntos i rvdsU$.0prcpt e year per capita inadequate per water, and (UNICEF US$2.50 soil years 100,000 air, provides 60 of per aid is pollution industrial today physicians sanctions, Deforestation, born 10 2007). economic 30 children than (UNICEF male more of than for is Because expectancy five less under life 2007). are children the per of and there 1.5 rate cent, is and mortality per Burma The figures), 2007). in (WHO (1998 health population on GDP expenditure of total cent The organisations. aid emergency h eua fasaet ncieisctzn ihbschmnrgt safurther a is rights human basic with citizens its inscribe to state a of refusal The etaa hteeigfo h iteaceyhtbsd i os,wondering house, his beside hut alchemy little the from evening that away went I ooiu I u hycno ecmae ihtegets ies fhunger. of disease the greatest and the cancer with like compared be existence cannot in they diseases but many … are HIV There notorious time. all of disease greatest nteBdh’ icusso ntm,h etoe … mentioned he anatomy, on discourses Buddha’s the In arnar h raetdsaeo l ie odvlpetand development to time, all of disease greatest the , utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian sarnar hnr an the pain, —hungry 115 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 uiiyo adi prahst i,t olwfmle hs hlrnwudhave would children whose families follow to aid, to approaches about bandaid write of To organisations futility development vehicles. urban four-wheel-drive of reach their the and from away miles many live, to population crops grow to forced resources and the recruitment having military from rice. to forced people supplement is labour, Burmese diet of forced prevent adequate proportion stop that an ever-increasing to relocation to an and secret farmers harvest taxing the rice stop that a their to is to regime here secret military saying the public and the is Similar groups pressure one water. food no their main What five boil diet. the pamphlets and balanced people and frequently Burmese videos teach hands drives instead, their education wash create, to programs Burmese health telling example, for also water, of but potable Non-Government little audience approaches. target does bandaid its often only reach Government-Organised, international are programs Not themselves requires health them. programs Burmese the and to these to allocated training institutions, money provide aid the the partner and in parallel (GONGOs) The say of aid. Organisations to final set prioritise the and a has monitor organisations created thus distribute, will regime has who military regime individuals The through the UNICEF. administered of and as recruitment bilateral such mostly agencies is aid UN Development clinics. prices. secondary and discounted hospitals to at medicine susceptible traditional major more the to is present thus nutrition, 40 and are nourishment under of women people rural lack reason a and majority to due than case the also heal Amenorrhea, to the of lowered infections. longer take be with poverty wounds services, otherwise population abject health the would affordable the of leaves lack with the minerals and Coupled and population systems. vitamins they starving; defence of not s are and immune of paste spectre diet shrimp the little balanced by a stalked a and constantly beans miserable, people rice, that perpetually of true just is day funding are It a of agencies. meals area Nations two priority United a eat other not who and is Program so Food starving, World are the people for which in country a considered pu eiaie en h otcmo nioe os to antidotes young common and and infants most paste especially betelnut the hunger, pains, off being hunger which staving of in quenching derivatives ways water of opium infinite the way seemingly drink are a Burmese There as such children. data fieldwork of cooked portions My cent small is three. per into eat rice meals do 40 adequate that approximately two those their and that stretch day, indicate can a they meals that three so eats rice that of pain. family course, hungry a of meet about is, to talk rare This they 2007). crisis. when (UNICEF humanitarian saying and services are health health people a basic Burmese of most what midst the the exactly of even cent in per clearly by 40 is covered and Burma rates, not disease is high country to contribute the all treatment water and sanitation 116 Sarnar ensure to plants purification water building and tubing down laying than Rather condoms sells it and example, for rates, literacy and vaccination targets aid Foreign ntevlae n eiubnfigso eta um hr ok ti extremely is it work, I where Burma central of fringes peri-urban and villages the In nhoooia Forum Anthropological ugypi,lvsi h onrsd,wee8 e eto h Burmese the of cent per 87 where countryside, the in lives pain, hungry , sarnar ogv xmlso the of examples give to , arnar arnar um snot is Burma . h akof lack The . Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 bu rtr n nelculrsosblt.O htocso esaid: he occasion that seldom On responsibility. but intellectual well-known and stomach. a writers empty about is an even on there and occur social Burma, cannot for In revolution tool that situations. powerful on idiom a such is voiced be in Burma can in change anthropology public everyone political and Almost be, flows. also and governments. aid accountable should s more of and with be to monitoring terms organisations agencies their intimate UN aid upon in call effective to of can used more and be priorities ethnographic rule, had can authoritarian concrete data funding had under to such using life Further, the anthropologists they rural presented of for if challenge be misery ways the can but directly are to data witness measles life—these bear Such of for to matter. examples years UNICEF that five by data first vaccinated collect the in were food they adequate if not lived, aeteracs rvlgsaervkd hysekpbil bu h ftr’of of terms ‘future’ in couched the is about this Often publicly present. the speak of in They brutalities policies grim revoked. the Burmese omit are about but controversial privileges Burma, anything access say their or case and write mobilisation. to association and unwilling speech, opposition become political of the of 1962, freedom forms Since stop all wronged. when repress to justice to acted seek and to has is assembly, way there apparatus a and accountable, or juridical not system is military legal military a The council to dissent. military recourse all authoritarian quell no to centralising forces a armed where the Burma, uses within situation the with between world. of links the tide around and the universities associations by and international along regime for borne the and and be meetings forums, to ASEAN easy conferences, development people at very regional the collaboration is to for it them requests past and reasonable incredibly get repressing, seemingly foreign to ruthlessly is difficult of so regime facilitate is are to minority It Burmese and they academics. a cooperate The and to only themselves eager Burma. between appear for ‘in’) and links gentlemanly said rarely are be minions (but access its can on congenial; my that that work knowing but who power, to revoked, scholars truth be speak to inevitably research would this of beginning the from tendency strong a have they power. that to some and themselves pay history, respected subordinate write are may who who to who people intellectuals those the that a than are believes privileged in greater Chomsky and someone integrity’. obviously and of … honesty responsibilities are for ‘the society cost that open said and also free Chomsky more occasion, same the On tawies ofrnei utai n19,Na hmk a se otalk to asked was Chomsky Noam 1996, in Australia in conference writers’ a At nodrt e noBraadb bet euntee ayfrinacademics foreign many there, return to able be and Burma into get to order In starkly contrasts cooperation for desire and congeniality of display outward This intention my been has it and now, decade a than more for Burma in worked have I oosy2001) Borofsky uine u sacmuiyo omncneni hc n oe to hopes one which in an concern as seen common speaking be be of not not community should should We it a constructively. seek … participate as could furthermore One but vocation. matters—and honourable that audience, particularly audience a not an is out power to truth speak To arnar sfnigaece n rga eeomn officers development program and agencies funding as , utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian to but , with Cosy in (Chomsky, . 117 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 hs epehv lce otecte otyadeeotalvn,adaefrigthe forming are and living, a out eke and under-employed. try or to cities unemployed the chronically to flocked are have Pagan on people and dependent These and jobs become semi-skilled have Mandalay peoples or (Yangon), self-sufficient unskilled previously Rangoon that around meant The livelihoods. has land their (Bagan) zones and arable land their into of lose both people used that either commandeering relocated means previously forcibly persons is areas the displaced into and internally it farmers or of the influx been conflict, Burma, The active have foraging. Unocal’s in of or informants areas agriculture of relocated my for in pathway military of are the the many by people in great administered When a live plaintiffs, to relocated. Unocal enough forcibly the unlucky like of those but, to behalf pipeline, out anti- on meted the consultancies tragedies in paid participants their recent disclosed Unocal. to as as not university such scholars, companies the latest have upon such the conferences change hosting become for sanctions for atmosphere has an University and publicly the and trade Hopkins apologise by ideas of Johns of new up provided force opening Generals. thousands figures to an Burmese of and order wobbly engagement in hundreds on for links, instead of cultural arguments argue harm their prospects and the regime, about base economic military and political the They the statecraft, in exercise, people. of to speak weapon Burmese academic and a creating as conferences are unrelated sanctions convene of sanctions an to futility began the natural seemingly the retired, about from Burma media and was proceeds against active the what sanctions both from profit economic scientists, In to have parties pipeline. to both allow Unocal gas would and this effectively regime as had the lifted, which both order, by and hired law of 1962. system of regime, coup a military military to once the the Burmese Burma was by after there length in Fourteen ceased arm’s that life Burma. at prove about kept Southeast to testimony being in and always expert of laid needed claims NGOs being Unocal’s counter activist was several area pipeline and the gas in people people its Burmese of which enslavement and in rape torture, murder, the in complicit omnayfrueb h litfsi h aeo h epeo um essUnocal versus Burma of corporation). people the energy of major case the US-based in (a plaintiffs and the other debates. by use no these voices for currently in commentary of is voice there a diversity because have Burmese, to a be majority to the provide like for is and way to it of engagement what perspective anthropologists the of concerning from understandings for important, issues especially anthropology, is to the it then, relation public within situation, a in occurs conducted such being that In especially is sanctions. censorship Burma country, in the situation the political of current outside the result about a a debate taking the or As country, violence sensationalising approach. not of activist scholarship, one-sided pure or objective for need the 118 eaieyfwo yifrat aesfee h id fdgaain and degradations of kinds the suffered have informants my of few Relatively firms relations public the upon focused effectively media US the in debate The neapeo uhpbi nhoooyocre n20,we rvddexpert provided I when 2003, in occurred anthropology public such of example An nhoooia Forum Anthropological 6 nti ae nclwsacsdo being of accused was Unocal case, this In Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 bu hi eerhrslss htte pelt uine eodtediscipline: the beyond audiences to appeal they that so results research their about concrete of use the includes and an examples. media fact ethnographic non-traditional in and is traditional this both profession, through biomedical the collaboration or even UN of simply or the act anthropology, than as applied such Rather of partners kind disseminated. industry same projects with the are of prioritised, results more is is and this research thinking graduate-training- investigated, anthropological a and which to in formulated America, ways are in the least in at urgent change way, more of driven giving humanities humanities issues slowly the the characterised are in such have and anthropology upon that anthropology and sub-specialisation focus in and future a Fordism the The Yet, of generally. wave justice. the social human is multiple of concern country’s social lack that Burma, against and in speaking interests atrocities of with project rights academics the Australian to junta, of counter Burmese number directly goodly the run a with of engagement actions of the policy and current government’s Australian The Anthropology of Responsibility and Utility The legitimacy moral and denied the economic currently of Burma to examples in ethnographic regime people concrete of of the use millions academic the of of and claims use linkages, the international the be through surely counter would to anthropology survival. public freedom for of example necessities An basic shelter. is the and use having be not they often must or term they informants, life, having The their our either about of as speak lives to themselves people everyday accessible. describe way Burmese the scholarly asks and one a into engaging When in research guarded. is and our jealously publicly the that of speak way into results to a ability the back and in about right feeding research our our freedom, through academic to of Our issues and results living, as the sanctions everyday such domain of and people, necessities public the Burmese engagement in of I current shortfall concerns have, subsequent reframe the we and to land intellectuals, of listen public lack to As this responsibility casualties. moral the a academics among foreign believe, and been rule, have its of universities acceptance and tacit and complicity into to Burma, home outside also are that areas slum pain. cities, hungry World of Third disease to familiar the so areas slum of kind yln rke 20,9 a ugse asi hc nhoooit a write can anthropologists which in ways suggested has 9) (2006, Eriksen Hylland and inside both people, of number enormous an drawn has regime military The aebe fetv.Bti diin hr xs ait fsrtge of strategies of a variety of substance. a efficacy in potential also exist but the to form, there show appear in reader which only addition, read the not world, to engaging anthropology in outside of public (students) the ways But forced these with effective. All nor communication … (colleagues) been writes one paid engaging have that of neither is way one is it just whatever not which is there readership engagement; of a styles possible many are There translation htmksfnig cesbeaditrsigt h eea public general the to interesting and accessible findings makes that sarnaryenar utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian hc rnltsltrlya od ae,clothing water, food, as literally translates which , sarnaryenar . 119 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 ums isoacmuiya hycatdmcai oesadmtosfor methods and models democratic rights the chart of human mobilisation they local collective as communities, the and peace community junta, of diaspora the by formation Burmese controlled the not as zones in well creation initiatives as and atrocities graves might of It mass commitment regime. of the of military analysis documenting to the and an with researching include able include ‘engagement’ case also is this of in policy it might government anthropology Australian which public the continuing A in while impunity. communities, with ways scholarly phased-in act and to problematic slowly political the a international other democracy, the with to with and roadmap ‘engage’ engagement a program regime talks, at substitution the peace allowing creating attempts opium in of useful show ongoing proving a are make The academics to many rule. by realities junta the military military about Burmese to write of disservice to a refusing brutalities do and also regime and academics the Burma with in colluding so by informants feuding, their tribal to due simply as Balkans ainls yh nteaayi ftevoetbeku fYgsai n h ueof rule the and Yugoslavia of break-up majority violent and the of propaganda Milos analysis Serbian article, the of 1999 in acceptance a myths Anthropological uncritical nationalist In American its anthropology. the for of of (AAA) section utility European Association the Eastern of the rebuked rethinking Baskar the Bojan is America North abroad. in and a Australia anthropological by as in including students (such reframed, of and anthropological agendas debated of impact political being generation currently people’s the are new indigenous claims) study, title of native roles context and we the the land the and as people in appropriations, such anthropologists and the issues ownership of the Key for cultural change. with of respect sea issues and a (mis)representations, the our public undergoing in traditionally the of thus have with is anthropology anthropologists nature issues re-engagement which that public in a State ways with way Activist for The engaged diverse call informants. Washington in its the the Masters of at of to communities Corps track responding some Peace Anthropology is graduate just the USA Environmental mention and the to (Austin) in Pennsylvania, University, Texas Program of of University International University the Anthropology at Interest the Public Anthropology in the MA at the University, Oregon, American of Program Transformation the University the at Community at Anthropology social Anthropology for Public Public in Alliance in the and Program University, (Amherst) the service Syracuse (ACT), intellectuals, Massachusetts at public Initiative of the public Movements Social University in the researchers, organisers include These as grassroots advocacy. of and graduates results leaders producing the community broad bring Anthropology, a to Public with used cultural dialogue be into the the can analysis and that anthropological essay defamiliarisation, audience. techniques and the that intervention, fieldwork writing the ethnographic all suggests journey, are personal 9–20) the biography riddle, (2006, the autocritique, Erikson Hylland 120 ehp h ottertclyitrsigapc ftepbi nhoooydebate anthropology public the of aspect interesting theoretically most the Perhaps in degrees Masters as well as subjects of number burgeoning a is there USA, the In ˇ nhoooia Forum Anthropological evic ´ ieteatrplgsswolzl nepee uho h ilnei the in violence the of much interpreted lazily who anthropologists the Like . Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 n e ok n h asi fhnsa n Iraq. and Afghanistan in wars London the in Action bombings and Al-Qaeda in of York, Anthropology wake the New demands in the and accommodating structures and to power appropriating has resisting, fundamentalist ‘fundamentalism’ of richness of what ways a to of show as and in findings them, Muslims area offer among Their an understandings Taliban. in of Marsden the diversity and by of and fundamentalist London infiltrated in of form heavily Tarlo stereotypes Pakistan sphere, a northern public examined the me, have in (2005) prevalent for Muslims Marsden be, Magnus and would (2005) This prosperity. and in. engaging peace worth anthropology to Burma returning te,tebodrsca odtosta hs asegg h ie falhuman all of lives the the engage the about days on thinking these and, of anthropology that of ways conditions focus new social local for rather broader the title Australia hand, the a one in other, America, the term North on descriptive between, and a relationship Britain remained in has as anthropology than, public date, Australia To in Anthropology Public for Possibilities The anthropologists. that: student states to he in lessons when practice these correct into absolutely teach lessons is to these 34) begin put (2000, also and Purcell Norway can Trevor from we learn but the we Australia can can in we only lessons profession many Not academic are as (2006). his There visible in so’. read Eriksen or most Hylland decade be from ‘the last learn the social would least, during 3), media at (2006, issue not mass Eriksen Norway were mainstream the Hylland to in anthropologists on According why is, debate. anthropologists the to anthropology of of as merits for the media silence to say, public the significant arises, The in in concern counsellors involved. occur public religious would getting of putting outcry issue of an an policy Norway schools, if government’s in federal fact, anthropologists Australia, the In in example, capital. situation social the enormous of reversal have direct almost an In uine u hs orasaei h ioiy n etal(95 3 oe htin that notes 23) (1995, Benthall wider and a minority, to the relevant in general: them are make journals and these issues but contemporary audience, address to seek that journals nrcn susof issues recent In mgnto oterdclptnilo h icpie n ems,b u own our by engagement/participation must, that we demonstrate fulfilment. and society, own discipline, in its and the is discipline students’ of the awaken potential in must radical stance we then the reality to recognisable imagination a anthropology public make to that say to university the the not of that domains only journal. is the times, beyond refereed our heard the This of be or most issues to campus … not key the tends the war voice with on anthropological concerned and not debates are fundamentalism public anthropologists including cleansing,’ to times, our of little ‘ethnic discussed—issues widely relatively most therefore contributed controversial—and has anthropology nhoooyToday Anthropology , rtqeo Anthropology of Critique utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian naigatrplg:Tecs o ulcpresence public a for case The anthropology: Engaging nhoooit uha maTarlo Emma as such anthropologists , and nhoooia Forum Anthropological nhoooyToday Anthropology are 121 , Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 olauso tdns oeaetrs notepbi y,smtmswt dramatic with sometimes academic eye, our public consequences. than the to into other drastic thrust audiences contribute and are to and Some speak students. inquiries, and or for government colleagues write and Some courts issues. public policy in the public witnesses in engage expert anthropologists as Australian many domain recognised, have we As groups. 122 otiuino nhoooyt ulcafis.T hsetn,teRoyal the its extent, and research’, this ‘urgent To in scholarship affairs’. the PhD and public a anthropology, journal, to funds of Institute particular anthropology understanding Anthropological a public of ‘has the (2006) contribution This promoting Institute sectors’. Anthropological to human private solve Royal commitment to and the use its Similarly, public and knowledge problems’. the anthropological of in the dissemination ‘represent ‘the internationally, includes to professional and seeks Australian their nationally (2006) groups, in Association discipline human emerging self-conscious Anthropological all and American and of public The relevant concerns lives mandate. more why the social become upon urgent can of impact In anthropologists incorporate and examples 2004). engage to Institution that all focus (Smithsonian conditions anthropology’ analytical are Anthropology ‘urgent the of 1966, and Office shifting as Smithsonian the recent, early what as with relatively termed, hand in all hand goes cleansing are anthropology ethnic genocide, terrorism, about writing and and peace-making, creative studying teams, potnt o ynybsdatrplgsst otxuls h om of forms the Macquarie contextualise at to an Inclusion provided anthropologists Social riots Cronulla on Sydney-based the recent as Research the for such around for inter- debates, opportunity commentary national Centre Australia, media in International the The Within voice University. the of a University. have advocacy include Indiana to public beginning and at Examples are Davis, Ethnography centres voice. California, disciplinary of in powerful University Laboratory at one the Group who individuals with Graduate in of Development students, alliances speak graduate Agricultural and USA, networks to the create in to but, wish together debates, joined and have forums public particular, of number a Australian into of the just affairs. not expand public world of the to also to in explicitly to but and organisations anthropology policy movement companion commits Australia, our America, a of like North of in discussion and that, Britain part one this service anthropology to become on mandate the public to build Society’s Anthropological Australia: to truly in mean in and a we anthropology use humankind’, what create of of re-examine responsible future service to the the its imperative about in an promote use is systematic ‘responsible there to the by that in suggest and grounded We knowledge discipline humankind’. itself professional public confines of a but includes direction, as pursuit it this does that anthropology in and ‘advance glances website scope’ also to: Society in constitution AAS broad Anthropological The is commentary. work Australian ‘anthropological The that recognise anthropology. public and nhoooit neigcnlc iutos onn oescadexhumation and forensic joining situations, conflict entering Anthropologists nteBreecs td bv,teatrplgs csaoet rvd input provide to alone acts anthropologist the above, study case Burmese the In nhoooia Forum Anthropological nhoooyToday Anthropology 7 ossetysest ute h eae rudengaged around debates the further to seeks consistently , Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 hsppra n otiuint htw oewl eavgru n ieydebate. timely and vigorous Notes a offer be will We hope country. we this what in to contribution anthropology one also public also as but a paper We requirements, developing this the sector. of institutional and education possibilities pitfalls, with higher the potential about the the them discussion cost- in the the provide occurring broaden survive to to is departments need that anthropological need see restructuring to we and active are cutting and we to responsibly if issues; analysis support being and anthropological global pathways of of and relevance the social possibilities seeing broad the new of and the anthropology, enough, inspire with public to nearly through need anthropologists not We institutions. but of their this, of generation support doing necessary Numbers already the public. The are without the university- often country. with Australia a communication this in as of in anthropologists lines anthropology clear public of of creates the resilience it with when the project re-engage of based evidence should is and experience not can is Norwegian that Society body Anthropological Australian only The the violence. into erupted that intolerance 7 en ege paigaotteHnmrhIln rdecs,a ato h 04Public 2004 the of part as case, Bridge Island Hindmarsh the about speaking was Fergie, case Deane this [7] of culture title police which The in way [6] as the with department familiar is the himself Palmer leaving that portfolio, likely is this it policeman, from a As removed [5] was Affairs Indigenous ways, 2006, the In of [4] many identified has Victoria in refugees Hazara with research Glazebrook’s [3] Australian The Humanities, of School (Research session this in papers presented both We [2] [1] ri u tdnsi,bodradmr fetv omncto kls(navreyof variety a (in have and skills strategic and communication considered effective to be need to more we needs and anthropology and Our need, genres). We broader and subjects. media ethnographic in, relationship taken-for-granted different their the students of were and or ‘unsettling’ and our voice are the issues who about train those contexts, of thinking to clearer broader object, scholar urges much the primary Fergie of to a debate. contexts as public described local in taking, be from assumptions accurately the the length’ more is are could ‘analytic of There which we our she or problems. terms in what field’, which of shift shift, in of ‘depth a conceptual our features as Australia fundamental in main a change in a identifies the as She characterises anthropology covers anthropology. an public agenda engaged suggested as Her She describing publicly required. debate’. a public practices of developing anthropological matters decades on of for bear number to a agenda over insights commitment anthropological her bringing and experience ‘to that on drew panel, Anthropology Royal the by and (1987–91). (1987) Custody Queensland in in Inquiry Deaths Fitzgerald Aboriginal the into by Australian factor Commission key general a as identified the was into moved (DIMA). Affairs have and Multicultural with, and they Immigration contact active after maintain another to progress). use one in people (work insightful to, community that and phones, support mobile generous provide of their use the for Anthropology, Australian including members The (Social Centre, panel Werbner Relations our ( Richard thank of Boyle contributions. We University were Nathan Anthropology, University). papers and of National Manchester) the (Department of Fergie to University Deane Respondents did Adelaide). as University), Australia of National Commonwealth the and Ltd Pty Nabalco v Milirrpum o o ta.vUnocol v al. et Doe Joe utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian . 911 L 141. FLR 17 1971 123 Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 ase,M 05 ulmvlaeitletas h ieo h idi otenPakistan. Northern in mind the of life The intellectuals: village Muslim 2005. M. Marsden, 2006. T. Eriksen, Hylland ekn,F 04 aelf:Ayu-ekr,Asrla oiisadAabnsciiu fviolence. of critique Agamben’s and politics Australian Asylum-seekers, life: Bare 2004. F. Jenkins, detachment. 1996. G. and Guille-Escuret, Engagement 1981. R. Firth, 2005. P. presented Farmer, report poverty—A of burden microbial The inequalities: and Infections 2001. P. Farmer, eneg .20.Rfetoso h au fethnography. of value the on Reflections 2005. R. Feinberg, eesn .20.Ipratt hm nehorpi sfles optneadrelevance. and competence usefulness, ethnographic On whom? to Important 2005. G. Petersen, amr .2005. M. Palmer, li,A 1943. A. Elkin, In reproduction. and violence Women, sexed: as citizen The 2007. V. Das, In nature. from argument the and Secularism 2006. V. Das, Noam with interview 2005. An life: R. public Borofsky, of responsibilities the and Intellectuals 2001. In R. self-confidence. Borofsky, to self-criticism through self-applause From 1995. J. Benthall, 2006. Society. Anthropological Australian akr .19.Atrplgssfcn h olpeo Yugoslavia. of collapse the facing Anthropologists 1999. B. Baskar, ucl,T .20.Pbi nhoooy nie erhn o reality. a for searching idea An anthropology: Public 2000. W. T. Purcell, oa nhoooia nttt.2006. Institute. Anthropological Royal sd .2003. T. Asad, mrcnAtrplgclAscain 2006. Association. Anthropological American gme,G 1998. G. Agamben, http://www.egs.edu/faculty/agamben/agamben-we- from Available refugees. We 1994. G. Agamben, References 124 fsil ifrn rmtoecretyepaie nAsrla universities. development Australian the in and emphasised training better currently in those based be from to different needs skills It involved. of risks the for regard great nhoooia Forum Anthropological nhoooyToday Anthropology journals/AJHR/2004/18.html. L’Harmattan. Paris: utainJunlo ua Rights Human of Journal Australian 26 on Congress, States United Research, Biomedical on http://www.publicanthropology.org/TimesPast/Farmer.htm. from Subcommittee Available 2001. House September the to nvriyo aionaPress. California of University nhoooia Forum Anthropological Australia. of arne 94.NteDm:Uiest fNteDm Press. Dame Notre of University Asia Dame: Southeast Notre and South 29–49. in Lawrence, agency and violence Religion, state: Press. University Stanford interlocutors his and Press. California of University http://www.publicanthropology.org/Journals/Engaging-Ideas/ from chomsky.htm. Available Chomsky. Press. world Athlone contemporary London: the to relevance Its anthropology: 51–63. 188: no. Studies), Humanistic and Philosophy for Press. University s.u acse 0Fbur 2006). February 20 (accessed asn.au/ acse 0Fbur 2006). February 20 (accessed Anthropology w.antog acse 0Fbur 2006). February 20 (accessed www.aaanet.org/ Press. eueshm acse 0Fbur 2006). February 20 (accessed refugees.html h utainAoiie:Hwt nesadthem understand to How Aborigines: Australian The omtoso h eua:Crsint,Ilm modernity Islam, Christianity, secular: the of Formations ahlge fpwr elh ua ihsadtenwwro h poor the on war new the and rights human Health, power: of Pathologies h amriqiyit h mirto Department Immigration the into inquiry Palmer The 2:30–34. (2): 9 aoai h irecnrvryadwa ecnlanfo it from learn can we what and controversy fierce The Yanomami: ooscr oeeg oe n aelife bare and power Sovereign sacer: Homo ’nhoooi,a L’anthropologie, dtdb ai ct n hre ishid 312 tnod CA: Stanford, 93–112. Hirschkind, Charles and Scott David by edited , naigatrplg:Tecs o ulcpresence public a for case The anthropology: Engaging 1() 10–15. (1): 21 5() 307–17. (3): 15 est fteRAI. the of Website ` uibn hrhus ehiin,itletese militants et intellectuels techniciens, Chercheurs, bon? quoi est fteAAS. the of Website 8 ..Aalbefo http://www.austlii.org/au/ from Available n.p. 18, , ua Organization Human est fteAAA. the of Website vial rmhttp://www.therai.org.uk/ from Available dtdb .S he n .N Shore. N. C. and Ahmed S. A. by edited , oeso h eua oen aa Asad Talal modern: secular the of Powers nhoooia Forum Anthropological tnod A tnodUniversity Stanford CA: Stanford, . vial rmhttp://www.aas. from Available Diogenes yny nu Robertson. & Angus Sydney: . dtdb .Simr n P. and Skidmore M. by edited , 0() 193–201. (3): 40 abra Commonwealth Canberra: . tnod A Stanford CA: Stanford, . oe n h contested the and Women vial rmhttp:// from Available ItrainlCouncil (International xod Berg. Oxford: . 5() 297–306. (3): 15 h uueof future The Transforming Berkeley: . Berkeley: . . Downloaded By: [Swets Content Distribution] At: 04:29 4 March 2008 mtsna nttto.20.Ntoa nhoooia rhvs vial rmhttp:// from Available Archives. 1964. Anthropological H. W. National Stanner, 2004. Institution. Smithsonian tr,O 94 ehnigtepltc fatrplg:Tecs fteAndes. the of case The anthropology: of politics the Rethinking 1994. O. Starn, mt,D,adJ ilyo.1997. Finlayson. J. and D., Smith, al,E 05 eosdrn troye:Atrplgclrfetoso the on reflections Anthropological stereotypes: Reconsidering 2005. E. Tarlo, isn .A n .P icel d.20.Itouto:Tesca ieo hns In things. of life social The Introduction: 2003. eds. Mitchell, P. J. and A. R. Wilson, http://www.searo.who.int/EN/Section313/Section1522_ 2007. Organization). Health (World WHO policy? public of anthropology 2004. R. an Werbner, Why 2005. Feldman. G. http://www.unicef.org/myanmar/. and 2007. J., Fund). Wedel, Children’s Nations (United UNICEF hmo,D 1949. D. Thomson, oorp o 2 abra etefrAoiia cnmcPlc eerh The Research, 2007). Policy February 27 Economic (accessed www.nmnh.si.edu/naa/guide/_d1.htm Aboriginal for Centre University. National Canberra: Australian 12. no. Monograph Anthropology nhoooyToday Anthropology ngoa esetv:Atrplgclsuiso ihs lisadentitlements, and claims Routledge. rights, York: of New studies and Anthropological perspective: global in 6855.htm. Press. University Indiana 1–2. (1): Macmillan. esnberdcl n iiesi nBotswana in citizenship and radicals Reasonable cnmc,srcueadtecrmna xhneccei rhmLand Arnhem in cycle exchange ceremonial the and structure Economics, 5() 13–38. (1): 35 nAoiia religion. Aboriginal On 1() 13–17. (6): 21 utainAtrplgssadPbi Anthropology Public and Anthropologists Australian ihigoe onr:Atrplgclperspectives. Anthropological country: over Fighting cai oorp.Sde:Uiest fSydney. of University Sydney: Monograph. Oceania loigo n Indianapolis: and Bloomington . nhoooyToday Anthropology jibab –5 London 1–15. ua rights Human controversy. London: . Research Current 125 21