Votn'#! Sl udla ReVIew I I, no.

2 (1996)
Articles
Anthropology and Indian-Hat ing
Russel Barsh
AnthropologJSIJ have devoted considerably more effort to
st udymg the cultures of the victIms of oppression Ihan Ihe
c ullures of their oppressors. ThIs IS parudoxical and
unfortunate, since unlhropologists lend to identify with and
support the cluims of IlIdlgenous peoples and ot her victims
of raCIsm and dUCl'lmlnatl on Rigorous study of the
organilation, recrUllment and reproduct ian Ofraci!lt groups
and oppressive ",stllutl ons,from "Indian bureaus " to While
supremacIsts, "," auld contribule more to tire liberatI on of
Indigenous peoples thon further sludy of the wounds these
insti tut ions inflicl
Les anthropologues 0111 consacre considerablement plus
d'efforts a I'et ude des cultures des VICllmes d'oppresslon
qu 'a I 'et ude de!l cultures des oppresseurs Valla un paradox
depl orable. cor les onlhropologue!l !Ie monlrent ene/inS a
appuyer et Ii s 'identifier oux revend,cat,ons des populations
aul ochotones O"'SI qu 'uux aulres VICl/mes de racisme et de
dlscnmination Une etude rlgoureuse de I 'organisat ion, du
recrutemenl et de fa reproducti on des groupes rac/Sles,
mstllulions oppreSSlves, "Indian bureaus" ef tenants de 10
supremocie blanche contribuerait plus Ii fa liberal/on des
populations au/ochtones que 10 prolongation d une etude
sur tes maux mfllRees par ces ins/llutions
A wave of anti- Indian' advocacy and violence accompanied American
Indians' court victories over fishing ri ghts in the 1970s, and resumed in the
1980s with the harassment of Indian fishermen in Wisconsi n. and the
marketingof"treaty beer" as a fund-raising devi ce by White hate groups.)
Despite the terrifying impact of these phenomena on Indians, scholars who
make thei r living studying Indian communities have shown relatively I iule
intcrest in the psychology or social organizati on of Indian-haters.
Two explanations may be suggested for this omiss ion. One is that
predominantly non-Nati ve scholars do not see Indian-haters as a threat on
3
Barsh "Anthropology and Indian-Hal ing"
the same order as apart heid or the Ku Klux Klan, both of which have been
given greater allention, The other explanation is a fasci nation with the
exotic. Anthropologists, in particular, have identified wi th the victims of
racism and imperialism, and supported thei r struggles agai nst oppression
and marginalization, Whi le thi s is to be welcomed morally, it ironically may
lead anthropologi sts to limit their study to victi ms, rat her than studying the
victimizers.
A bias towards studying Indi genous peoples as victims exposes the
weaknesses and di visions within Indigenous societies to criticism and
manipUlation, while Indigenous peoples themselves learn nothing about
combatting their oppressors. I f truly "liberated," anthropology would
concentrate on questions considered importan t by the victims of power,
rather than questions that are significant chiefly to anthropologists. The
questions of great est interest to Indians concern anthropologists' own class
and culture.
Anal ytical Myopia
More has been wrinen about the effects of oppression on Indians than
about the causes of their oppression, and more about the cultures of the
victims than about the organizat ion of their vict imizers. Most studi es of
"border towns" have focused on how Native people cope wi th discrimination,
rather than the social constructi on and economic uses of discrimi nation by
nonNative townspeople,} A handful of surveys of contemporary Indian
stereotypes ha ve seen print, but they have gone no further than confirming
a correlation between respondent s' stereotypes and their perception of being
threatened economi cal ly by Indians:"
The main studies of the snuggle for Indian fishing ri ght s in the Pacific
Northwest devote but a few pages to the organization of White opposi tion
groups.j Only one recent paper explores the ways in whi ch White Canadians
have organized to block land claims.
6
The Handbook oj No,th American
Indions devotes two chapters to "Indian hobbyists," but contains nothing on
Indianhaters.
1
Anthropologists continue to study Indi ans' cultures and
"culture confli ct," but not the White groups who believe they are defending
thei, " way of I ife" against Ind ians.
Similarly. there have been few critical studies of the culture of the U.S.
Bureau of Indian Affairs: how it recruit s and socializes its personnel (most
of whom are Indians themselves), lobbies Congress for funds , orrational izes
the perpetuation of its control over Indians' lives.
'
The re is only one study
of social processes withi n Canada's Department ofl ndian A fTairs.
9
However,
the impacts of these institutions in demoralizi ng Indian communities have
NQ/;veSllidres Rev;ew II. no. 2 (1996)
been the subjects of hundreds of publications.
Vastly more has been published about old Indian-hating than about its
contemporary manifestati ons, creating a fal se impression of moral progress.
Attention is diverted from the violent tendencies sti ll embedded in the
culture oflhe victimizer, to the lingering ill-effects of past viole nce on the
cultures and mental hea lth of the victims. The " problem" no longerbelongs
to the oppressor, but to the oppressed.
Table I summarizes all 1995-1996 publicati ons(excludi ngreprintsand
book reviews)on the Sociofiledatabase in the " American Indians" subject
classification. Exactly ha If of thi s current opus is devoted to the descript ion
and treatme nt of Indians' problems, including loss of identity, famil y and
c ultural breakdowns, family violence, suicide, addictions, crime, sc hool
failure and unemployment . Only one-sixth of these recent works address
ei ther the nature of di scriminati on against Indians, or Indians' patterns of
resistance. Indeed, of j ust twe lve works that dealt primarily with the nature
of racism and di scrimination, not one involved primary research on racist
or oppressive organizations.
l o
Anthropol ogists, who wrote one-sixth of the
total output , devoted on Iy ten percent oftheir effort to racism or res istance;
Table 1 Current Publications on " American Indians," 1995-1996
Expressed as Percentage of TOlal
AffiLIATION

anlhropology sociology health others tot. t
Problems of
'.4
7.3
,.,
16.2 J6.3
Treatment of
0.'
0.0 10. 1 34 14.0
Racism against
0.'
3.4 0.0
2.'
6.7
Resistance by 1.1
2.'
0.0 4.'

Policy towards
0.' 0.' 2.' 3.' 7.'
Insti tutions of
2.' 0.'
0.0
'.1 '.5
Symbolism of 3.4 0.0
0.'
1.1
5.'
Olher topics 4.'
L7
0.'
, ..
11.J
Totat 16.8 16.2 23. '
43.6 100.0
Notes: includes social work, psychology. public health and mcdicine.
refers to counselling, helping and healing. refers to
tribat governments, internal laws and courts. "Symbolism- refers to studies of
discourse and symbotism within Native Americall cultures and religions.
Data includes all enuics in Sociofile in aillallguages. except reprints and book
reviews, for publiCltioll years 199' and 1996.
Cotumn .Ild row totals may be affe cted by rounding.
6
Bar:rh "Anthropology and Indian-Hating "
sociologists, who also wrote one-sixth orlhetotal, were proport ionall y four
times more inlcrested in these topics.
Anthropologists continue to focus thei r attention on the victims of
raci sm ratherthan racist societies, while other social scientists arc borrowing
"ethnographic" methods from anthropology 10 unravel the world-views and
recruitment processes of racist political parties" and criminal organizations.
'2
Ifanthropo)ogists consider it important to study how Indigenous peoples
organize themselves to resist raci sm and oppression, IJ can it be less
important to understand how other peoples organize to oppress these
Indigenous peoples?
Organized violence against African-Americans has been given much
more thorough attention, " though mainly by hi storians, sociologists and
political scientists. Anthropologists have focused their work on African-
American subcu ltures rather than racist organizations. 's The same pattern
appears in the extensive body ofl iterature on apartheid, which ranges from
the grass-roots organization of White supremacists to the role of South
A frican churches and industry in promoting official racism. '6 South Afri can
anthropologists devoted themselves largely to the dynamics of Black
communit ies and the effects rather than ultimate causes of apartheid,
however.
11
On the whole, then, research on racist organizations has bypassed
Native Americans, and the academic di scipline most closely associated with
Native peoples - anthropology - has shown the least inclination to st udy the
organization of oppressors . Most works about Indian right s and res istance
are published in law journals, which creates an illusion that Indians are
victi ms of government pol icy rather than of popular racism.
Is Anthropology Upside-Down?
A generati on ago, amidst American anthropologists' great cri sis of
conscience over the military abuse of ethnography in Vietnam, Laura Nader
and Kathleen Gough challenged their colleagues to "study up" - to focus
their analytical lenses on the institutions of power in today's global society
rather than on the mi sery of the powerless." Why has their appeal not yet
been fully heeded?
Anthropology is unusual among Western social science di sciplines. in
that it tends to be identified with a class of subjects, rather than its objectives
or its methods,l9 Other disciplines focus on a category of institut ions, a
category of behaviour ,or a way of measuring behaviour. Economists study
markets, psychologists study thinking and perception, and sociologists
study relationships between attitudes and conduct.20 Anthropologi sts
Naln'e Siudies Review II, no 1 (1996)
7
generally study marginalized peoples, Anthropologists originally studied
societies living outside the inOuencesofEuropean civilization ("primitive
people"); today, they study peoples who have been impoveri shed by
European civi lization (" Indigenous peoples," the poor, minorities),Z'
While anthropologists readily acknowledge the adverse effects of other
societies on its "prim itives," they avoid direct observati ons of the caU.ff!S of
oppression and rac ism si nce that would require fieldwork among the
oppressors , Elite classes and dominant cultures may be less amenable to
being st udied than the poor, who have little choice in the maUer,21 In the
golden age of fieldwork, ethnographers were viewed as emi ssaries of the
colonial powers; offending them risked orfending the gods. Perhaps
anthropologists also identify with the poor, because they are marginal
within their own societies.
n
They are refugees from the culture of the
oppressor, seeking redemption through labours among the oppressed.
Herei n lies a contradict ion, however. Anlhropologists may best help the
oppressed by going home and studying their own peers and institutions of
power.
2

Some progress has been made. Feminist anthropologists have drawn
connections between patriarchy and imperiali sm, and shown how colonial
institutions have reproduced patriarchy as a means or dominating other
peoples.
2s
There is a small but growi ng I iterature on the cultures of West em
bureaucracies, chieOy social-welfare agencies.
1
$ However, it is still easy to
find books purportedly devoted to the anthropology of power that eschew
the study of contemporary Western institutions,17
Anthropologists have not, for the most part, turned their lens on the
institutions of power that exist within their home societies. However, they
have experienced rejecti on and marginalization within "primitive" societies,
rather than absolution or sol idarity.lI Reluctant to study up, and more and
more den ied access to studyi ng down, they are turni ng to studying themsel ves.
The past twenty years of anthropological writing have witnessed a trend
towards self-reOection, and efforts to justify anthropol ogy as an art rather
than a not-science.29
Refuge and Responsibility
Anthropologists have long enjoyed a monopoly of interpretation of the
oppressed to the oppressor. The dangers Ihat attach to th is role have not been
overlooked, )O and this may help explain anthropologists' growing tendency
towards self-criticism and self.absorption, The role ofanthropologislS as
purveyors ofinfonnation to the oppressed about the world oflheiroppressors
- the anthropologists' own world - merits equal allention. Anthropologists
Barl'h "Amhropo{ogy and (ndian-Hat;ng "
study down because they prefer the company of "savages," while the
savages try to learn what they can by studying the anthropologists.
J
)
Textbooks offer guidance on choosing a place 10 live, dressi ng
appropriately ("impression management"), avoiding getting involved in
local politics or with local women, and overcomin g informants' reluctance
to discuss their neighbours, but relat ively little about researchers ' role as
sources of strategic knowledge. One textbook from my student days
conceded that field workers were 'constantly asked about our ways of doing
things, " but argued that such exchanges of informat ion helped the subjects
"raise their level of awareness of their own culture," as opposed to the
anthropologists ' culture.
ll
A somewhat more recent text explained how the
researcher could "trade on expertise" as a means of gai ning credibility and
access to local knowledge - albeit warning that scholars should not inflate
their expertise.
ll
Exponents ofnew"dialogical" research methods encourage
reciprocity as an inquisitorial tooV" but overlook the consequences of the
dialogue forthesubjects. At least one recent work on fe mini st methodol ogy
does not ment ion the potential impactoffemale scholars ' gender values on
st udied communities.)J
To be sure, proponents of anthropological "advocacy" have argued
more recently that anthropologists can contribute to the liberation of
oppressed peoples by three means:
the anthropol ogist can translate the situation of oppressed peoples
into terms the dominant society can understand;
the anthropologist can raise peoples' awareness of their own situation
so that they can better advocate their own cause;
the anthropologist can provide oppressed people analyses of the
dominant society so that they can improve their strategy and tactics
ofresistance.
J6
The first goal merely restates a classical goal of anthropology - to give
civi lizat ion an accurate picture of the savages. Undoubtedly, arming
progressive elites such as academics and environmentalists with better
"damage reports" from the field can help innuence decisions in national
capitals. This may win a reprieve for marginalized peoples, but it does not
ensure their security in the long term: the root of oppression is power rather
than ignorance ormisunderstanding. American history is, moreover, replete
with examples of the damage done by the "friends of the Indians" when,
from time totime, they wrested control of In dian policy away from the army
and the developers.Jl
It al so seems presumptuous to suppose that an anthropologist who is
just beginning to learn about an unfamiliar culture can help it to understand
Native StudIes New!!' .... I I. no. Z (1996)
9
itself Even if a community were so isolated as to have no conception of its
differences from others, the superiorsolulion would be 10 help them travel ,
ralher than purport to serve as their eyes and ears. In other words, isolated
peoples need their own anthropologi sts or explorers, who can look for the
differences and ask the questions they consider most important when they
come to st udy us. The fact of the matter is that the "primitives" are already
far ahead with respect to understanding themselves. The eni gma, for them,
is us .
As for anthropologists' possible role as interpreters of domi nant
societies, thi s presumes that they actually study and have special ized
knowledge of their own cu ltures and political systems. Mayberry- Lewis
contends that real advocacy:
requires an ability to study our own society (or other "modern
industrial societies") with a detachment similar to that we st ri ve for
in studyi ng the exotic. It requires the ability to anal yze nat ional
pol icies. deve lopmenta I ideo logies and the workings ofbu reaucracies
with a detachment that enables us to see beyond thei r familiar
obfuscations and self-deceptions.
lI
Thi s is a severe test, si nce anthropologists 8re products of their own class
and cultures. Mayberry-Lewi s recommends building al liances with urba n
middle-class intellectuals against "sellier societies {whoj are a lways
unsc rupulous"- for example, a mestizo peasant might propose uniting the
poor in a struggle against the rich. In any case, the kind of advocacy
Mayberry-Lewis promotes would begin with fieldwork at the Department of
Indian Affai rs, Ihe head offices of major corporati ons and the conventions
of hate groups. The failure of anthropologists to study up the ir own societies
is incompatible with advocacy. since it depri ves the anthropologists of the
one gift they might deliver to their hosts.
Some anthropologists counter that the goal of their di scipline is "to
increase our self-knowledge."'9 This is a worthy aim if it means an
understanding of anthropol ogi sts' own societ ies, and not j ust the personal
growth of individual anthropologists. The Romant ics of the nineteenth
century went abroad to find them.selves, giving birth to "oriental ism" and
anthropology. Romanticism survives in anthropology, fed by modem forms
of alienat ion. escapism and a search for lost values.
Were There No Raci sts in Plainvill e?
What might st udying up re veal here in North America? A few clues can
be found scattered through the social science li terature. starting with the
"community studies" that were once in vogue among midwestern American
10
Barsh "Anrhr opofogy a'ld I"dian-Haling"
sociologists. Although several " While" North American communities have
been the subject of classic ethnographies, the authors devoted little attention
to racial and ethnic tensions. Middletown had a Black neighbourhood, but
racism was relegated to a fOOlnote.4\) Plainville makes no menti on al all of
race or clhnici ly, while the c)(haustive study of Jonesville, after brieny
nOling the existence ora Polish enclave, made "oeffon to understand why
other groups treated Poles with disdain.41 Even the study of Elmtown,
completed at the height of the American civil-rights movement , devoted only
three pages 10 the role of ethnicity in determining social stalu5.
41
The exception to this pattern was an ethnography conducted in the
South, wit h a specific focus on the socio-economi c bases of the colour bar.'J
The authors concluded that the function of contemporary racism was the
control of local farm land, just as the function of ante-bellum racism had
been the control of slave labour. Thisechoes John Demos' finding that land
di sputes lay behind seventeeth-cenlury Massachusetts witch scares_'" In
both cases. st ruggles for the control of economic resources were waged
indirectly through a discourse about inferiority, deviance and danger.
Thc vict ims of such tactics, whether they be African-Americans or
alleged witches, are presumably not impressed by contentions that theydo
not deserve a decent livelihood. They are oppressed by differences in power,
not by the force of their opponents' logic. If the ultimate result is dictated
by power, why do oppressors bother to devise racist ideologies?The answer
is suggested by the fact that only a small minority of the "dominant" group
( Whiles, godly Christians) ever directly benefits from the redi stribution of
resources. Most Euro-Americans in the Old South did not own slaves: most
ofthc Puritans studied by John Demos were not land speculators. Those who
did stand to profit from bigotry needed the support of the others, however,
and they used pride, status and fear to mobilize that support. Rac ism has the
ability to achieve a level of soli darity that transcends class divi sions.
The Ethnography of Borders
A useful venue for exploring the economics of racism would be the
"border towns" where Nativeand non-Nat ive people compete forthe same
jobs, attend the same public schools and sometimes marry. In a study of
Canada's northern frontier, Jean Morisset argued that the Canadian
psyche" is dominated byexculpatOl)' beliefs in the breakdown of Indian and
Inuit soc iety, and in the liberating power of capitalist expansion,'s A key
element of thi s self-serving logic was "'blami ng the victim" for the adverse
consequences of development , a view reinforced by official st udi es and
government policy. The most deslTuctive aspect of racism, Morisset
NaMe Siudies Review II. no. 1 (J996)
II
concluded, was its power to co-opt Native people into seekingrespectability
with Whites by confirming Whites' racist
Evel yn Plaice's ethnography ofethni city and class boundaries in North
West River, Labrador, al so stressed the role of justifi cation in theconst ruction
of non-Aboriginal identiti es.' The "settl ers" with greatest status based
their coll ective claims, paradoxicall y, on thei r knowledge of Indigenous
tec hnology, and their abilit y to trace some of thei r ancestry to Indigenous
roots. Latin American mest izo societi es have made similar claims to hybrid
superiorit y.'
It should not be startling that the boundaries bet ween groups are
constructed and maintained with the aim (or the effect) of controlling
resources. Somewhat less obvi ous are the effects of oppression on the
internal orderofthe oppressors. Mobil izing violence agai nst ot hers involves
an increase in uses of power and violence within the domi nant society to levy
greater taxes, organi ze industrial and military labour and suppress dissent.
9
Internal differences of class. ethnicity and gender gain salie nce, along with
increased aggress ion, fru strat ion and anxiet y.
Recent research on the Ku Klux Kl an offers some further hints forthe
st udyoflndi an-hat ing. Popular media long characteri zed the Klan as a relic
of the ari stocracy of the Old South,SO but in fact the Kl alJ appears to have
enjoyed its strongest support among the rural poor and urban workers." The
Kl an has been opportunisti c, exploiting whateve r issues could be used to
mobili ze White fear s and frustrati ons, ranging from immigrat ion and
desegregati on to crime and homosexuality. Jl Klan fortunes have waxed and
waned with business cycles and times of social cri sis. n It is a movement
looking for a moment.
This kind of organized hate is not limi ted to "ext remists" but is a
phenomenon of the poor mobil izi ng against the poor. The ethnography of
hate suggests that rac ism is a funct ion of economi c conditions, and not
merely popular ignorance. Other factors may help racism coalesce and grow
stronger, such as a lack of publi c confidence in the abil ity of government to
mai nt ai n order and restore prosperity, as we ll as the level of media attention
give n to the problems (or the gains) of other groups in society.)cO These
factors intensify the perception that "the Other" is responsible for economic
downturns. This perce ption can be manipulated by hate groups to inc rease
thei r support , and by poli tical and economic el ites wishing to divert
allenti on from themsel ves.
lf one thing is clear, however, it is the resurgence of organi zed rac ism
and racial violence in the 1980s, a time of declining optimism and
expectations.HGaps in income and employment between Whites and non-
12
Barsh "Anthropology and ,m/ion-HOling"
Whites grew, whi le public confidence in govcrnmentdeclined inthe fa ce or
colossal errors of judgment by public officials and the antics of junk-bond
and merger kings on Wall Street. Indeed, racism grew in proportion to the
evidence that uncontrollable Whiles were running the country.
Ifthis analysi s is correct, anthropological "advocates" need to address
the underlying poverty and inequality in their own societies. rather than
simpl y challenging stereotypes, ignorance or bad science. They must,
moreover, be sensi tive to economic differentiation among flon.lndigenous
people, and acknowledge that Indians and the worst Indian-haters may be
victims of the same phenomena. The objective should be 10 find the roots of
power, ralher than s imply opposi ng the people who shout racist slogans the
loudest. This mighllead anthropologi sts to beadvocates and interpreters for
poor Whites, not just Indians.
Subcultures of Power
Eric Wolf once observed that "disregarding the problems of power" was
characteristic of American anth ropologists.S. Beingaccustomed to having
power, Americans are less conscious of it. Powerful societies, indeed, are
the ones that invented anthropology. " Nonetheless, North Americans are in
a favourable position to help liberate anthropology, because they have such
rich ground to ploW. They have two departments of " Indian affairs" to
study, as ,""ell as a splendid variety of private hale groups.
Whether the subject of study is a public institution or a private
organization, a common core of issues needs to be addressed:
social base - Who j oins the organ ization, for what reasons and with
what effect on their families and communities?
recruitment - Howare potential members identified and selected by
the organization?
socializalion - What rituals and training are used to construct a
shared vision and solidarity?
elhos - What myths, symbols and "science" (or pseudo-scientifi c
theories) are used to establish group legitimacy and purpose?
aclian - What is the group's strategy for survival , growth and
achieving its goal s, and what tactics does it employ?
mobilization - How does the group mobilize support among ot her
secti ons of society, and deflect opposition, including its use of the
mass media?
The central strat egic issue is the organization's source of power - its power
resources in the terminology of contemporary political science - which may
NOliW! St"dies Review 1 / , no. 1 (/996)
13
come in part from its social base, its utility to a broader range of interest
groups and. in the case ofa state bureaucracy. its legal status. Without this
analys is. it is impossible to know how itcan be most effectively challenged
or mitigated, where its social base can be eroded or how its actions can be
neutralized. Useful model s can be found in studies of the cultures of
business corporations, which have explored mythology," ceremony'9 and
dispute resol ution, 60 usi ng tools borrowed from ethnography.
My own personal contact with organized Indian-hating began when I
was a member of an interfaith speakers' bureau organized to combat the
worst excesses of White reaction to Indian treaty fi shing rights.!>1 I vis ited
scores of churches. fraternal societies, union halls and other local gathering
places, debating opponents of Indian treaty ri ghts, or responding to often-
hostile audiences. One norm was shared by all of the opposition groups I
encountered: equality.61
Why are the most vocal and organized opponents oflnd ian treaties and
Aboriginal rights preoccupied with equality? One hypothesis mi ght be that
they are self-consciously the underdogs of non-Native society. Equality is
not only an attack on the legitimacy of Indian claims, but an implicit demand
for justice vis-a.-vis other Whites. These citizens do not cry "equality! " at
the Rockefellersor Bronfmans, however. The limited context in which the
appeal to equality indicates that it is ademand not for equalization with the
ri ch, but for preserving the exi sting status hi erarchy among different groups
of the poor. Not surpri singly. thi s recall s the argument that imperialism
dist racts the poor within the colonizer's society. Instead of combatt ing
injustices at home, they compete for status with the poor abroad. Hence we
see agai n that the key to understanding the situation of Indians is not to be
found within Indian societ ies, but in the injustices and opposition that exist
among European-Americans.
Future research should also address the parall els between popular
fonns of private Indian-hating, and institutions of govemment charged wit h
the management (or "protection") of Native peoples. Private hate groups
and public agencies recruit personnel and mobilize support from the same
population. To survive, they must forge an ethos of communal solidarity
and legitimacy in the face of resistance by the groups they control or oppose.
Public agencies may enjoy the securityofa legal and financial relati onship
with the state, but can lose this sinecure iftheydisappoint public expectations.
Of course, " Indian bureaus" are supposed to protect Indians from
Indian-haters. They are said to bear a trust, or fiduciary abligation to
Indians under contemporary American and Canadian law. But this may only
be an illusion. What do these state bureaucracies do in reality? They
14
Borsh "Anthropology aNi Il1d"",.Holmg "
mediate between Indians and Indian-haters. Theyc)(ist because of opposition
to Indian rights; it is their raison d 'eire, and they have historically defended
Indians up to the point that their own surviva l, growth and power were
threatened. The history of an Indian bureau is a series of compromises with
the J ndian-haters, at Indians' expense," Moreover, the ability to make stlf-
perpetuating compromi ses depends on adopting some oflhe language. if not
the cthosoflndian-haters. Why do we protect Indian land, onlytoopen their
land to developers later when its value has increased? The bureaucrats
reply: II is good for the Indians, and will make them equal!
We may find that periodic reversalsor"cycles" in Indian policy, lasting
from twenty to thirty years, reflect cycles in the social and economic
momentum behind private Indian-hating. In other words, Indian-policy
cycles may have more to do with periodic disi llusionment and perceived
injustices within White society than anything pertaining specifically to
Indians.
Insufficient attention has been paid to the interplay of internal and
external violence in the history of a powerful , dominant society, such as
White America or Canada. Indeed, a major historical survey of collective
violence in Canadian history mentions Aboriginal peoples in only two
contexts (the 1885 Red River conflict and domestic violence on modern
Indian rcserves) as if the gradual but aggressive removal of people from
their homelands over the intervening 110 years was somehow not a form of
Indian-hating and other forms of col lective violence and hatred,
directed for example against the poor, immigrants or francophones, may
have different targets but the same perpetrators . It is tempting to speculate
that Indian-hating has frequently provided a safety-valve for other personal ,
ethnic and political frus trati ons.
Indian-hating has arguably been the most consistent diversion for the
frustrations of North American immigrant populations for centuries -
except perhaps in the largest American indust ri al cities and the Old South,
where African-Americans have apparently supplied the same need. In Puget
Sound, public officials and the press blamed declining stocks of salmon
vari ously on the Japanese, Russians, Koreans and Canadians; bUlthe only
group consislently blamed for the decline, over a twenty-year period, was
American Indians.66 Aboriginal peoples have likewise long served as a
scapegoat in Quebec
Racial and ethnic conflicts heighten the sa lience of boundaries and
encourage individuals to take sides rather than admit to diversity of
ancestry. Might it be true, as a corollary, that organizations and institutions
preoccupied with racial and ethnic purity tend to attract individuals who are
Sludles RevIew II , no. 2 (/996)
"
experiencing difficulty coming to terms with thei rown complex or ambiguous
identiti es? Arc ethni call y ambIvalent pcople more likely to suppon raCial
and ethni c extremism than people who are candidly self-aware of their own
ethnicity? There do not appear to be any published studies of ethnicity and
ethnic self-consciousness among Indian-affairs bureaucrats or Indian-hate
groups, unfonunately.
This line of inqUi ry might also reveal an imponant difference in
motivational st ructure between Indian-hating and colour racism. Nonh
American and European mass cultures today accord a positI ve status to
Aboriginality. To the extent that Indian-hati ng anracts ethnicall y ambivalent
indi viduals, it may reflect envy as much as material greed.
Liberating Anthropology
Liberation theology has become a significant political factor in Lat m
America by "speaking m the name of the poor" against all forms of eli te
power, including the Church What makes this school of theology
"li berated" is not merely its oppos ition 10 oppressIOn bUI the fact thai it is
a theology informed by experi ence and interpreted/ rom the bottom up. It is
a theology liberated from its priests and returned to parishes. Instead of
telling people what they muSI do, it gives them a language in whi ch they can
express their own
To liberate exploited people, anthropologists must liberat e their own
societies. They need to begin by studying the acquisition and use of power,
and recognize the role of anthropology as the source of data and theones
historically used to justify oppression. They also need to challenge the
"church" directly by li berati ng anthropology itself, as a di sci pline.
L,beral/on anthropology would seek to answer the questi ons posed by
oppressed and marginalized peoples. Ofneeessit y, it will become a study of
power and domination rather than victimization. Anthropology has long
claimed for ilself a more holi sti c and universal perspective than political
science, sociology or economics. Now is the time for anthropologists to
prove it by doing an even better job of analyzing the same organizations and
institutions.
Anthropologists of the early twentieth century tried to preserve some
memories of pre-contact cultures; anthropologists in the 1950s began to
document processes of destruction; smce the early 19705, anthropologists
have taken an interest in the processes of resistance. This shift from
lamenting culture change as decay to recognizing it as a function of
resistance and renewal was the first step in liberating anthropology,10
"Studying up" should be the next
16
Barsh "Anthropology and Indian-Haling"
Notes
r hope 10 be forgiven for mixing the currently preferred American terminologies
("Ameriean Indian" or "Native American") with those t hat enjoy greatest
favour in contemporary Canada ("Aboriginal peoples" or Nations"). My
use oflhc term "Indianhating" is a deliberate auempt to evoke the statc of mind
of those wllo hale. ralher than IlIal of the victims of hatred.
Bruce E. Johansen. "The Klan in a Can," Tht Progressive 52. no. 7 (198B): 13; Craig
Neff. "The Wisconsin Fishing WIU," SpoTls lIIus/rottd70. no. S (1989): 16: Scon Kerr,
' The Ne,",' Indi an Wars: The Trail ofBrokcn Treati es Grows The !'rogress"'"c
54. no. 4 (1m): 20-22: United Stales Congress. "Ami.lndia" Violencc": Heo""'Ks
the JudicIary CommJ//ee of the United Houu of IOlst
Congress, 2nd SelSion (Washington, D.C.: GO"cmmcnt Printing Offiec, 1988).
Evelyn M. The Nat,ve Game. Sellier Puceptions of
RelatIons in Southern Labrador (St.John's: Memorial University of
Newfoundland, 1990), p. 7. Eump1cs indude Jcanne E. Guillemin, Urban
Renegades. The Cul,ural Sirotegy af American Indians (New York : Columbia
University Press, 1978) and Donna Deyhle, "Navajo Youth and Anglo Racism:
Cultural Integrity and Resistancc," Harvard dUCallOn Rev,ew 65, no, 3
(]99S) :403-44.
Jeffery R. Hanson and Linda P. Rousc,"Dimensions of Native American
Stereotyping," American Indian CII/lure and Ruearch Jaurnal ] ] , no. 4 (] 987) :
33- 58: Linda p, RQUSC and Jeffcry R. Hanson, "American Indian Stereo-typing,
Resource Competi ti on, and Slatus-Based Prejudice," American Indian Cui/lire
&- ReuorchJo"rna/15, no. J ( 1991 ): ]-17,
Fay G, Cohen, Trea/,es on Trial. The Continll",g Controvusy over Nor/hWitJ/
IndlOn Fish",g R,gh/s (Seattle: University of Washin8ton Press, ] 986), pp. ] 75,
] 86; Diannc Newell, Tangled Webs of History: Indians and the Low in Canada 's
Pacific Coast Fisheries (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, ] 993), pp. ] 76-
78.
Peter Armitage and John C. Kennedy. "Redbaiting and Racism on Our Front ier:
Military Expansion in Labrador and Quebec," Canad,an Rew,ew of Soc,ology
and Anthropology 26, no. 5 (1989):798-817, Cj. Paul Tennant, Aboriginal
Peoples and PolilICS: The Indian Land QueSfion in BrJ/ish Columbia, 1849-
1989 (Vancouver: Uniwersi ty of British Columbia, 1990), which devotes a score
of pages to Whites' " attitudcs." but no information on
opposition groups of landowners and loggers,
Wilcamb E. Washburn (cd.), HmorYoflnd/On-Whilf Rtlafions. Vol. 4, Handbook
of North American Indians ( Wastlington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution, t 988).
Russel L. Barsh, "The BIA Folli es of 1978: A Lcsson in
Bureaucratic Self- Defense," American /ndion Law 7. no. 1 (1979): 1-
50: Russel L, Barsh, "Progressive-Era Bureaucrats and the Unity of Twentieth-
Century Indian Policy," Amedcan Indian Quarterly IS, no. 1(1991): 1- 14;
Duane Champagne, "Organizational Change and Conflict: A Case Stud), of the
of [ndian Affairs," American Indian CUI' Ure and Research JOllrnol7,
no. 3 (1983 ): 3-28; Stcphcn E. Feraca, "I nsidc the Bureau of Indian Affairs, "
Society 27, no. 4 (1990): 29-39. This last paper is actually a diatribe against
preferential employment of Indians.
NOI/\'e S,wd,u Rev,no.
r
II. /'to 1 (1996)
11
9 S.Uy M Mak,ng ('anadra" IndllJn Pa/'q Til, H,dd." Ag."da 1961/
1970 (TOlonlO ofToronlo 1911) See "'oel "'''a' I, ,,,,
Ind, .. " "P,abl.", .. nd RUisl .. " c. '" Canad,a" I"d'an ArJ""n""'""on
(51 John's, Newfoundland MemOlial Un,verS'I)" 1991) (or a cmu:al h',lor),
of poli cy development
10 Seven deal l wllh nature or demography or nelatlve
h,story of Amencan Indllns IS en example ofracnm In brold lermland t .... o
used historicil case Sl ud.es of mass killings of AmeTlcan Indllns to suppOrt a
of the cause of genocide
11 ror example, Cat tile Lloyd and Haul Wll ers, -Frlnce One Cullure. One
Peopler Roc. &, Clall 32. no. 3 (l991) : 49- 6j ; Bruce Matthe ..... s. -S'nhlll
Culturel and Buddhist Pllriotic OrganiHtions In Contemporary SrI
Pac,/ic A//alr$ 6 1, no. 4 (1989): 620-32 An ucepllonal study by In
anthropologist is R. Barrell. Is God A Rac,,'-' Th. R'g'" 'for"g '"
Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 19117)
12 For Francis A 1. llnni, A Family 8ul"":u Kuullrp a"d SOCial
COII/'OJ .11 Orga",:.d C"m. (New York ' Russell Sase Found,uon, 1972).
Francis AJ. lanm, 8/od Mafia Elhnlc S",cuu,all III Orgafu=.d C,.."'. ....
York ; Simon & Shustcr, 1974).
] J Shuichl Nagata. - From Ethnic Bourgeoi sie to Organic SpeculahOnJ
on North. American Native Leadership. " An,hropolog'ca 29, no. ] (1987): 61 -
H; Aluander M. Erv in, "Styles and Strategies of Leadership during the
Alaskan Native Land Claims Movement: 19j9- 197I ,- Anlhropologlca 29, no
1 ( 1987): 2 1-38.
14 Len .... ood G. Davis, Th, KII Klou KIa" A Bibliography (Westport, CT
Green .... ood 1984) and. most recently. M "om.n O/llr.
Klan Roc.sm a"d Gllnd., ,n Ih. 1910s (Bcrkeley. CA Unl\crsity ofC.lifornil
Press, 199 1). See C. Matth.ew Snipp, -Under standIng Race and Eth,."cit)' In
Rural America," RllraJ Saclology61. no. I (1996): 12S-42 for a recent comment
on the need for more work by sociologists on relations - and an IdmiSSion
that Indians have overlooked.
IS E.L. CerroniLong, Anthropology and the Study of Blacks in
the United Stales.- Jo""nol olB/ad S,,,,d,CI 17, no. 4 ( 19117): 438-j9; Andrew
H. -The Anthropology or Poverty In Blick Communities, A CrItique
Ind Altemat,ve,- U, bo" Anlhropalagy 17, nos_ 2 & J ( 1988). 171- 91
16 fo r uampl e. Her ibert Adam, -Variations of Elhnicity: Afrikaner and Black
Nationalism in Sout h Africa.- Jo"""al a/ AS/on and A/rlcan Sl ",dlu. 20. nos. 1
& 4 ( 198j): ]69-80; Jubber, -The Prodigal Church: South Africa's Dutch
Re for med Church and the Apa"htid Policy,- SOCIal Compan 32. nos_ 2 & J
(198j): 273-8j; Timothy Keegan. "Crisis and Catharsis in the Development of
CapitalIsm in South African Agriculture," A/riCO" AflO"J 84, no. ))6 (l9SS):
37 1- 9S: K.C. M. Rogerson. S.O. Beavon and G.H. PlTle. - The Geography or the
In Namlbia.- SOCial Dynam,cJ j. no. 2 (1979); 13- 17
18
Barsh "Anthropology and Indian-Holing "
17 For c:o.amplc, Isal A NIehaus. 1010 Phl,llhaduJhaba and T5Cki : A
Compara''''c Elllnog/aph) of Planned and Unplanned A/rlean
S,,,d,u 48. no. 2 (1989); Andrew 0 Spiegel. MTlu: Aml>lgull1C5 of
ScHnmen,: A Transkci Cue Study," A/riCU" SI"J,U 47. no. 2 ( 1988); 147- 69;
M.G. Whisson, MTswclclswclc: From SenlcmcnllO Community in a Peri-Urban
Arca orlhe eisleti," Urbun Amhropology 13, nos. 2 & 3 (1984): 2J7- S9 BUI
sec Vincent Craplnl.anO. Wailing W!IIIU of Soulh AfrIca (New York'
Random House, 1985)
18 Laur. N.du, "Up Ille Anthropologist - Perspectives Giuncd from Slud)lng
Up, " In R"'''''''''''''gAflllrrop%gy. cd Dcllllymcs(NcYl York. Random I10use,
1972), pp. 284- 3 11 . Kallileen Gougll . "Antllropology and Impenali sm.M
Monthly 19, no. I (1968) : t 2-27 and MNe ... proposals for antllropologi sts. M
Anthropology 9, no. 4 (1968): 403- 7.
19 Here J disagree witll the vic"" of Ernest Gellncr, "The Politics of Antllropology."
and Opposlt.on 23. no. 3 (1988): 290- 303, that anthropology
defines itself by It s ",elhods rather tliin ilS substance Anthropology I nd
sociology share the ume blsic methods of obserVilion and
mttrviewing. More pef$uuive is Gellner ' s Irgument tllat anthropology hn a
" baptist" chlracter - }OU do not really belong until you have been baptI sed III
the field.
20 Of course, the univenallst pretensions of mainstream disciplines such as
economics. and sociology do not meRn thai they arc culture
free . On the contrary, Ihey focus on do",uron' societ ies and institutions - the
exact reVerSe of traditional anthropology - which they model and interpret
accordlllg to Western cultural paradigms.
21 The Anfhropolog.ca l JOllmol on Ellrop,Mn ellllllrts. a self-conscious effort to
promote the study of cultural forces ursldt Western society, "'as launched in
1992 - and is largely devoted to European Hmmorities. "
22 Stanley R. Barrell , An,hropology. A SllIdem's GII.de 10 Theory and Mcthod
(Toronto, Buffalo, London : University of Toronto I'ress. 1996), nicely describes
his own misgivings and difficulties launching a study of Whitc supremaci st s.
2l As I argued in Rusu:1 l. Barsh, HAre Anthropologists Huardous to Indians'
Hcalth?M JOllr",,1 01 Elh".c 5111d.ts 15. no. 4 ( 1988): 1-38. My criti cism is
ai med at the dominant forces within Ihe diSCipline of anthropology in the WeSI,
anthropologists Ihemselvu arc stratified - by colour and gender - ... ,th respect
to status and privilege, and there arc al",ays vOIces of resistance Insi de the
profession.
24 David Mayberryl.e wi s. "A Special Sort of Pleading: Anthropology at the
Service of Ethnic Grollps, " in Advococy and Amh,apology. cd . Rober, I'aine
(St . 10hns. Ne ... foundllnd: Memorial UniverSIty. 1985). pp. 130- 48; he observed
that "anthropologists usually try to help because of their conviction thlt such
societies arc being ... ronged, of un with no clear Idea o(ho ... to set abollt righting
thc wrong
H
(p 130).
NOIll'e Studies RevletI' I I , no 1 (1996)
19
25 I1cnricll a L. Moore. Fcml""m and AnlhMpalogy (Cambridge; Polity, 1988);
Micaela Di Leonardo cd .. CCI1dl" or rhe C,auraad, a/ Knowledge Fem/",,,
Anrhropology i n tire POSfmodl"n E,a (Berkeley. CA: University of California
I' ress. 199 1). It shou ld be lIoted that WesteTIl (emlllists have been criticized for
overlook ing thei r own relatively privileged status in the world: Kimberl y
Christell$Cn, .. ' With Whom Do You Bclie\e Your Lot [s Cast?' White Femilllsts and
Racism:' Signs Jou,nal 0/ Women If! Culfure and SOCltty 22. no. 3 (1997): 611-48
26 For a thoughtful recent survey ofthls rcsearch, sec Susan Wright. H Anthropology:
Still the Uncomfortable Discipline?"' in The Futu,e 0/ A ",h,opolol/Y. lIS
Relevance 10 Ih" COnlemporary Wor/d. cd Akbar Ahmed and Cris Shore,
(London and Atlantic Ilighiands, NJ: Athlone. 1995). pp. 65- 92. For a recent
example of the genre using a discourse approach. sec Josiah McC. Heyman.
" I'ulling Power in the Anthropology of Bureaucracy: The Immigrat ion and
Naturalizat ion Se rvicc al thc Mexico- Uni ted States Border," Cu"cnt
Amhropology36, no. 2 ( 1995): 261 -11.
21 For uamp1e. Nicholas B. Dirks, cd . Cololllal,sm and Cullur .. (Ann Arbor:
Universi ty of Michigan I'n:ss. 1992); John S. Henderson and Patri cia J Netherly.
cds, Con/igllrallons 0/ Powl" HoII:fllc Anthropology In Theo,y and Practlel'
(Ithaca & Londoll : CorneLl University Press. 1993).
28 l3arrctt. Anth,opology A Sludent's GUIde, refers to the growing rejection of
anthropology by the primitives BS 3 force tending towards the '" taming of the
anthropologist"' (pp. 236-37).
29 Sec Laura Nader. HPost_lnterpretive Anthropology. Allfhropologlcal Quarterly
61. no. 4 ( 1988): 149- 60
30 Deborah Gewerll and Frederick Errington. '" We Think, Therefore They Are?
On the Occidentalizing of the World.
H
A"th,oPQloglcal Qua,tl"ly 64, no. 2
(1991): 80-91; Marc Manganaro, cd .. Modl"msl Anth,opology: F,om
/0 Ttxl (Princeton, NJ: I'rinceton University Press, 1990).
31 Triloki Nath Pandey. "'Anthropologists atluni,H Procudlf!gs o/ Iht America"
Ph,losoph.cal SoClny 116 ( 1972): 213- 37.
32 Thomas Rhys Williams, F."ld Mnhods '" Iht S,udyo/Cul,u,e (New York: Holt.
Rlllehart &. Winston, 1961). p. 46. Two more reprcsentative ,",orks from that era
arc Pertll 1. Pelto. Anlhropologicol Rcuard, : Tht SlrUCIU,.e o/lnquirY (New
York: Harper &. Row, 1910). and G.N. Appell , EthICal Dilemmas In
Anth,opologlcal Inq ui,y- A Case Book (Waltham. MA: Afri can Studies
Association. 1918).
33 Martyn Hammersley and Paul Atkinson. Ethnography Prtnclples In Pru.ctlce
(London. New York: TaviSlock, 1983). pp. 81 - 84.
34 Dennis Tedlock. '"Questions Concernin8 Dialogical Anthropology. H Journol 0/
Anthropolog.cal Research 43. no. 4 (1987): 325-31.
35 Peggy Golde, cd .. In 'he FIeld. AnthropologIcal upe"enas (Berkeley.
University ofCaliforni. Press, rev. cd., 1986). More seems to have been written
about the psychological st resses experienced by anthropologists in the field
than the stresses their presence imposes on the people they study. John L.
Wengle. Ethnog, aphl"$ ill the Field: Tht Psychology 0/ Research (Tuscaloosa:
University of Alabama Press, 1988); Hammersley and Atkinson. EIIr"og,aphy.
pp. 98- 101.
20
Barsh "Anthropology Qnd Indian-Holmg"
36 Kirsten Hut. up and Peler EISIss. -Anthropological Advocacy: A Contudichon
H'I Terms?" 3 1, no 3 ( 1990); 301-3 I I ; Georg Henriksen,
-Anthropologists as Advocates: Promoters of Plu ralism o r Makers of CI,cnu1-
in AawJ<:ac), and Anthropology. cd. Roher t Paine (51. John'S: Memorial
University of Newfoundland, 1985), PI' . 11 9- 29: Maybe rry- Lewis, -A Special
Sort of Plcading,"
31 Ruud L. Banh ud James Y. Henderson, Thc Rood- Ind,an Tribel "nd
Po/"real trberl)' (Berkeley. CA: University of California Press. 1980), PI' .
63ff.
38 Maybcrry-Lc"'is. "A Special Sort of Pleading.- p. 141. A legitimate question
may be posed about the fusibi l ity of "detachment" In ony study of human

39 Gewertz and ErrIngton, "We Think, Therefore They AreT p. 89 (emphasis
added).
40 Sec Robert S. Lynd and Helen Merrill Lynd, Middle,own A Sl udy {n Amuican
Cullure (Ne'" York ' Halcoul!, Brace. 1929), p. 479
41 W Lloyd Warner , Demouacy {n Jonuv",le A Sludy 'n Qllal"y and Inequal"y
(New York : Harpers, (949); James West, Pla,nv,lIe. U S A (New York : Columbia
University Press, 1945)
42 August de Belmont Hollingshead, Imlown', Youlh and Elm/own RUllw,d
(New York: Wiley, 1975).
43 Allison Davis, Burleigh B. Gardner and Mary R. Gardner, Deep Sou,h A $oc",/
Antltropologlcol Siudy of Creme and ClolJ (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press. 1941).
44 John P. Dcmos, En/erla,rung Salon W"cltcraf, and Ine Cullure of Ear/y New
;ngland (New York : Oll:ford University Press, 1972).
45 lean Morisset. Lu clt,eflS I enlredlvaunt 'nd,ulJ, blancl el mitis dans
Ie grand nard canadIen (MontreaL Optiquc, 1977), pp. 247- 51.
M ori n ci overgcneral izes: h IS subjects" erc a particular group 0 fEuroCanadians
engaged in fronller development.
46 Including posit,ve stereotypes. On the ties between romanticism, ' nouveau
and bl aming the viclim in contemporary Canada, sec Runel
Barsh. James Fenimore Cooper in Canada, " LlIuary Rev,ew of Canada 5, no.
1(1996) : 11 - 13
47 Plaiec, The Nati"e Go"" . Comparc Niels W. Brlroe. Indian and Wlti/e Sclf
'",age and In'U(Ulion In a Canad;an PlalflS Camm"ruly (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, (975), concluding that each side had deployed stercotypes 10
malnt.in borders and defend resourccs.
48 Rodolfo Colonialism, and Aeculturation," in Masses In
La'III AmeTlca. cd , Irving L. Horowitz (Ne w York: Oll:ford University Press,
1970). pp. 235-88; Colin M. MacLachlan and JaIme E. Rodriguez 0 ., Tht
Forging of the Cosmic Race A Rc;nurprcla/lOn ofC%n;al Mu;co ( Berkeley:
University of CalIfornia Press, 1980).
49 Ashi s Nandy, The 'n"malt Enemy: Loss and ofSelfllnder C%nto",m
( Delhi : Oxford Un,vcrsity Press, 1983).
Nat Ive Stlfdie,s Review II. 1'/0 2 (1996)
21
50 0 W. Oriffith's controversial film. BIrth 0/0 Naft On, endorsed a romanll e yicw
of the Klan, fashioning imagery that has been a.s hard to shake from
iconology as the " yieious" Indians in the formula West erns of the 1930, and
19405.
S I Leonard J . Moore, " Historical Interpretations of the 1920', Klan : The Trad itional
View and the Populist Jo,.rnal oj SOCi al Hi$tory 24, no. 2 (1 990):
341- S1; Kenneth T. The K,. KI,.; Klan In City. 19/5-/930 (New
York: OKford Uni versity Press, 1967); Rick Selt ;r;cr and Orace M, Lopes, Mlhe
Ku K IUK K Ian: Reasons for SUppOri or Opposit ion among White
Journal 0/ Blad Sludiu 17, no. I ( 1986): 9 1- 109; Kenneth D. Waid, MThe
Vis ible Empire: The Ku Klux Klan as an Electoral Journal 0/
/nterducipltnary HlSl ory II , no, 2 ( 1980): 211-34.
S2 TIle Ku Klux Klan ,n the City; Blee, Women o/ lhe Klan; Thomas J
Keil , " Capital , Labor, and the Klan : A Case Study," l'hylon 46. no. 4 ( 198S):
341 - 52.
S3 James L. Massey and Martha A, Meyers. " Pall cms of Repressive Social Control
in Oeorgia. 1882- 1935," SOCI al Forcu 68, no. 2 (1989):
U8- 88; Robert Alan Ooldberg, Hooded The Ku KI,.x Klon In Colorado
(Urbana: University of Ill inois Press, 1981 ).
54 Martha and Richard R, Valencia, Ideologies in the
1920s- 1930s: Thei r Impact on the Desegregation of Mexican Students in
Cal ifornia. " Anthropology and Educat ion Quarluly 21 . no. 3 ( 1990): 222- 49,
Lawrence Bobo and L. Hutchings, of Racial Group
Competition: Extending Blumer 's Theory of Group Posi t ion to a Multiracial
Soci al ConteKt ," American Sociolog;cal ReView 61 , no. 6 (1 996): 951 - 12
SS Mary H. Cooper, - The Orowing Danger of lIate Groups," Editorial Research
RepOrl$ I ( 1989): 261 -15; James E. Blackwell . " Persistence and Change In
Inter group Relations: The Crisis upon US,H Social Problem$ 29, no. 4 ( 1982):
325-46.
56 Eri c Wolf, HAmeriean Anthropologi sts and American Society,H in Reinvent"'g
Anthropology. ed , Dell Hymes (New York: Random House, 1972), pp. 251 - 63.
Gellner, Politics of Anthropology," p, 300, argued that Americans arc an
extreme group among anthropologi sts, not because they assume power. but
they arc fleeing from a soci ety pervaded by its sense of superiority.
Cuhural relativi sm con sequentl y has " a Ye ry special potency for them"; -it will
be addi ctive and con stitute a reve lati on."
S7 Including Imperial Rome : GermalUa described the CU$loms of each
German tribe in detail; Seneca 's Problems In Nal ,.ral compiled
ethnographic material on Persia and India; Virgil's Georgies attempted a theory
of cultural evolution.
58 For ell.llmple, Barry A. Turner. Aspects of Organiutional
Organization Sludiu " no, 2 ( 1986): 101- 11 5: Nancy DiTomaso,
- Symbolic Media and Social Solidarity: The Foundat ions of Corporate Culture,
Ruearch an the Sociology o/Organizall an$ S ( 1987): IOS-1 34; Stephen R,
Barley, and the Study of Occupat ional and Organiuti onal Cultures,"
Adm"';strallve Science Q,.arterly 28, no. 3 (1983 ): 393-413.
22
Ba,.sh "A",JvopolQgy and Il1dion.Hat""8 "
S9 Sec. for cnmplc. Gladys 1.. . Symons. ",til Ihe Corporale Tnbe. How
Women In Different Culturu E)tpcricncc the Managerial of
Manage,"en' 12. no J (19116): Hamson M Trice. "Rites and Ceremonies
in Organi:tational Cultures," Reuoreh on SOCIology of 4
(1985): 221-10.
60 Clark Molstad. "Control S,"'lcgics Used by Industrial Brc",cry Workers: Work
AVOidance. Imprcssiol'l Management and H .. mon Organ,za(wn 47.
no 4 (1988); 354-60: David A Scllricr and F Dayid Mulcahy. "Middle
Management and Union Realities: Coercion and Ant,-Stru<';lurc in a Public
Corporal lon," Hllmon 0,.gO",10110" 4 7. no. 2 (1988): 146-51 .
61 This was tile same program Ihal sponsored Fay Cohen's study on the politics of
the fishing-rights strugg le, T"(Jliu on TrlOl,
62 Morinet. Ln ch' ens s 'e nlre-deyorenl. p. 2S I. found the same 10 be true in the
Canadian North.
63 S.mlr Amin. " Demoer.cy and Nahonai Stralegy in the Periphery:' Third World
QU"rTuly 9. no. 4 (1987) : 1129- S6.
64 Russel L. Barsh, " ProgressI\'e-Era Bureaucrats and the Unity of T"enl;eth-
CenlUry Ind,an Policy," A,uTlc"" l"dum Qu"rleriy 15, no_ I (1991): 1-14:
Russel L. Barsh, "The BIA Reorganization Follies of 1978: A Lesson in
Bureaucratic Self-Defense," AmUIC(Jn /ndi(Jn Lo ... ReVle ... 7, no. I ( 1979): I -
SO.
6S Judy M. Torrance, Public Vlo/enct in C(Jnodo, 1867- /981 ( Kingston & MontreaL
McGill-Queen's UniverSity Press, 1986).
66 Russel L. Barsh, Tht WQsh'ngfon Fishing Rights An Economic
CrUJqut (Seallle: University of Washington BAFP Monographs, 2nd cd. 1979).
p. 30
67 Carmen Michaud. "Dc I' exolisme au reel: Ie raci sme. Rechcrchts (Jmulnd,e"nu
(Ju Qutbu 21, nos. I & 2 (1991): 111 - 17 (1991),
68 Jeffrey L. Klaibef , " Prophet s and Populists : Liberalion Theology, 1968- 1988,"
Tire Amuic(JS 46, no. I (1989) : I- IS.
69 Lois M Wilson, "The Imperalive orJuslice: The R, se ofConlCKlUal Theologies,"
Ee<Jmenre(J1 Rev,c ... 40. nos. J & 4 (1988): 407- 411 ,
70 Richard O. Clemmer. "Resistance and the Revitalization of Anthropologi sts: A
Nc" Perspeclive on Cultural Change and Rul slance, in Rflnvul,ng
A"tlrropology, cd. Oell Hymcs (Nc'" York: Random House, 1972). pp. 213-47.