Irrespective of genre, in writing a book, there is always a need to do research into concepts you either don't understand, or would like to understand better. When I set out to write Tears for the Moon God, one of the concepts I wanted to explore in some depth was how it might be to live in an isolated community and then be thrust out into a world whose ways are foreign and far more modern than anything you knew. I thought it must be like living in a science fiction novel for many members of these cultures, a dystopian in which their way of life must come to an end through violence, because that is what all of the evidence precludes.
In doing the research, what I was met with was mostly obstacles to success in finding information about the communities I wanted insight into. This was not surprising. As a matter of fact, I expected it. The nature of uncontacted tribes inherently means there is little research into them outside of a very few sources. The Brazilian authority, FUNAI, possesses the most in depth research on the subject as a byproduct of coming into regular contact with some branches of these, to varying degrees, uncontacted tribes.
Of the roughly 100 uncontacted tribes around the world, we understand around 85 inhabit the Amazon Rainforest, and so that is where our focus will be today; however, as I read up on these concepts, I found myself needing to broaden the lens, and shift the perspective through which I wrote this article, in order to take a more holistic and integral approach. That said, this article's driving focus remains on uncontacted or formerly uncontacted tribes in the Amazon (such as the Awa and the Korubo), but through the broader lens of agribusiness and deforestation. In framing the argument against both, I asked two questions.
How do these forces impact the lives of indigenous peoples in the Amazon? And, how do the broader effects of deforestation in the Amazon (The Lungs of the World) affect us as global citizens?
A Brief but Alarming History of Agribusiness Related Violence
Chiquita and the Banana Republic
Let me set the scene for you.
A post colonial, largely agriculture driven economy arises in several Central American countries. These countries grow several crops including cocoa, limes, cactuses, and (most important for our purposes) bananas. Pursuant to their own interests in capitalizing on an already established economic system under a number of weak or fledgling democracies, a foreign national company begins to flirt with the leaders of these countries, making promises in support of an agenda to amass arable land, convert it for the purpose of growing a single cash crop, and then develop the infrastructure needed to transport and ship said cash crop overseas. What follows is the erosion of what democratic institutions exist in these nations, ushering in puppet regimes as friendly politicians seek to aid these foreign influences by granting them sweetheart deals to the detriment of their own peoples. A series of coups worsen conditions for the local populations while supporting the interests of the foreign companies capitalizing on this cash crop, who just happen to also be building the railways and modernizing the ports they will come to use, often with no need to pay duties at port, to ship their crops to other countries (most notably, the United States of America).
This is a rough outline of the story of the United Fruit Company (now called Chiquita Brands International) and its strategic and intentional formation of Banana Republics in Central American countries like Honduras. In buying up millions of acres of land, constructing railways and revitalizing ports; and at the same time obfuscating the truth of their involvement in political affairs in the region to the U.S. government, and other relevant bodies, they managed to monopolize the banana industry in the region and use their economic power to influence government officials to work to their benefit, often to the detriment of their own people. This is just one among many episodes of agribusiness related corporations disenfranchising a people of their rights in order to secure economic gains for themselves, enriching themselves by leaning on government to place their interests above the interests of local communities.
Dole and Hawaiian Annexation
Another example of this occurs with the fall of Hawaii's queen. The crops in question which fan the sparks of revolution to life are sugar and pineapples, and the company in question is the Hawaiian Pineapple Company (now known as Dole).
Hawaii, in the nineteenth century, was ruled via monarchy, with the leaders of said monarchy enjoying widespread support from the indigenous Polynesian population who lived there. However, with the arrival of U.S. interests in the region, the political landscape changed to accommodate growing foreign national interests, most notably a growing sugar cane industry, and later, a tactical military position at the base in Pearl Harbor (itself a critical outpost during the Spanish-American War.) Disatisfied with a political shift that occurred with the rise of the then queen, Liliuokalani, and her refusal to recognize a sham constitution which benefitted western influences in favor of a constitution which placed substantial authority under her; one Sanford Dole lead a coup against her, overthrowing her government and establishing himself as the new ruler of Hawaii. He then petitioned for formal annexation by the United States in an effort to serve his own interests. Dole was unsuccessful at first, as the democratic party of the time in the U.S. were opposed to annexing the country, citing that the local population did not want to be annexed; however, seeing the advantage Pearl Harbor provided during the Spanish-American War, the U.S. government under President McKinley formally annexed Hawaii, putting an end to their monarchic system, and installing Dole as a legitimate political force in the then territory.
Dole and Chiquita are two examples of what powerful, corporatized agribusinesses can accomplish when government turns a blind eye to their activities, or endorses them. They also provide a critical framework against which to stage a more acute argument against agricultural encroachments into the Amazon, which is our focus. Though the companies in question do not necessarily have ties to the U.S. government today, and their activities have largely been condemned by our left-leaning politicians, they nonetheless represent a continuation of a long established precedent in which agricultural interests, among other economic giants, prioritize a potential for profits over human lives, and in particular inconvenient, humanitarian causes in the regions they wish to exploit.
World Bank and the Amazon
Much of the burden placed on Amazon tribes is the result of a historical agreement between the governments of Japan and the United States, several European nations and the World Bank regarding access to iron in and around the Amazon Rainforest. These entities came together to create a trade agreement in 1982 which would grant access to 1/3 of the total iron taken from the region to Europe for their use, with the rest split between the other parties to the agreement.
What resulted from this agreement was the initial construction of a railway system that traversed the Amazon, then the predictable and damaging migration of Brazilian peoples into the regions along its path. Logging and ranching operations flourished in the wake of this resettlement, but at the cost of human lives as the new arrivals sought to rid themselves of complications from, as of then uncontacted, indigenous tribes.
This theme is nothing new to the various parties to the agreement, and especially the United States. Each party to the agreement has a dark and complicated history with oppressing, assimilating and annihilating indigenous peoples in the lands they seek to control (be they within the bounds of their fledgling or established nations, or pursuant to lucrative trade deals abroad.) In Europe, the United Kingdoms, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands and Turkiye all have well documented histories of committing human rights abuses throughout Africa, Asia and the Americas. Japan has its history of committing heinous acts of violence against the Chinese population in Manchuria. The United States, its history with both the African Slave Trade and the Trail of Tears, an official policy of relocation that can only be described as genocidal. While we have come a long way overall in terms of preserving human rights to dignity and respect, we nonetheless cannot ignore the echoes of those events where it concerns issues in the Amazon. It should come as no surprise that a Reagan helmed government in the U.S. would cosign on such a deal, nor that the other world powers involved would ignore the interests indigenous peoples in servicing their economic needs.
These patterns continue into the modern day. Not just in Brazil, where the government has, at times, turned a blind eye to what are now illegal deforestation operations in regions declared protected land for the indigenous communities who live there, or their people's tendencies toward genocide against them; but also throughout the global south, where big business seeks to exploit cheap labor by supporting systems that look very like slavery in several countries (most notably, India and China).
When industry comes calling, indigenous peoples die, weak democracies are exploited, and the global south faces human rights abuses while the governments to which these corporations belong turn a blind eye.
Uncontacted Tribes
...the Awa were in the way. So the invaders started to massacre them. Some were particularly inventive in their killings: several Awa died after eating flour laced with ant killer, a "gift" from a local farmer. Others were just shot where they stood – at home, in front of their families. [1]
From logging and ranching operations to illegal and exploitative human safaris, it seems capital rules in the minds of a people seeking ever greater heights, while the lives, traditions and health of uncontacted tribes are treated with contempt. When the prospect of earning more, inviting better conditions into one's life, are predicated on the subjugation or annihilation of whole cultures, we have gone far afield of what is right, and what is sustainable.
The Awa, Kawahiva, Korubo and other tribes are under constant threat from Brazilian loggers, ranchers and gangs, many of whom are operating illegally in regions declared protected for these peoples. Big business has such an outsized impact on government in the region that for nearly a decade, mapping the lands designated for the Kawahiva tribe has stalled, leaving their territory undefined even as it is officially designated a protected zone. This leaves them open to harm as hostile loggers and ranchers seek to kill them on site to make way for their development projects. Business is the driving factor behind a quiet genocide taking place there.
Indigenous Traditions Among the Awa, Kawahiva and Korubo
While there are many tribes throughout the Amazon who are yet uncontacted, we will today focus on three. Each enjoys a different way of life, with different customs. Each is also under threat from Brazilian industry. Important to note is that the Brazilian government has taken measures to halt deforestation in the Amazon due to climate change concerns. These efforts aim to eliminate deforestation activities completely in the coming years, with actionable steps built into the policy to crack down on illegal industrial activities in order to preserve what remains of the Amazon. A side effect of these policies is the preservation of indigenous lands for the tribes that inhabit them.
Cultures and Traditions
The Awa inhabit an area in the state of Maranhoa, in northwestern Brazil, where they live in nomadic, hunter gatherer societies. They live in symbiosis with the forest, hunting game with six foot bows they make with wood from irapa trees, and keeping orphaned animals as pets. They share their hammocks with coatis, and share mangos with parakeets, and sometimes breastfeed baby howler monkeys, kapuchins and pigs. In the Awa culture, it is taboo to eat vultures, bats and three-toed sloths. They also have well realized spiritual traditions, including one involving ritual trance and the full moon.
...when the moon is full, the men – hair speckled white with king vulture down – in a chant-induced trance – commune with forest spirits, during a sacred ritual lasting till dawn. Their existence is one of intimate connection with the forest, which provides food, shelter and spiritual solace. [1]
Similarly, the Korubo (who live in the Javari Valley region of Brazil and have intermittent contact with FUNAI), keep pets like baby sloths. However, the Korubo are semi nomadic, following a circuit between several fields as their crops come into season. The Korubo are also known as Clubbers by Brazilians who know of them, as they make use of kind of war club, in addition to blow guns with poison tipped darts. The clubs are housed in holes inside communal shelters called malocas, where support posts identify where he hammocks of each family are arranged. Though they do wear tucum palm bracelets, the Korubo live much of their lives absent clothing, a departure from western norms. They possess funerary rights involving erecting shelters at the site where a loved one died, and grieving for prolonged periods of time.
The Korubo are a complex society, at least one band of which enjoys a matriarchal leadership structure with a woman having final say in decisions for her community. But this speaks to the broader issue when characterizing these tribes. Many may be tempted to think of them as primitive because they do not embrace our modern way of life. I would classify this as a mischaracterization. Though they may not have cellphones and cars, AI technology and GPS, these cultures are nonetheless sophisticated and nuanced in ways we ought to respect, and seek greater understanding of, when the opportunity is presented. Due to these tribes choosing isolation, we may never have an accurate picture the traditions and ways of some.
Which brings us to the Kawahiva, whom we know almost nothing about. The Kawahiva are not in contact with the outside world, and in fact may have adapted to a new way of life in trying to keep it that way. They do not want contact, and we may never learn enough about them to comprehend who they are in truth, but they have left behind some evidence for us to speculate over.
What we know of the Kawahiva resides in what they leave behind. They have been recorded at least once while on the move. They have also left behind clues pertaining to their way of life and the way they lived before first contact was made (alluding to life as an agrarian society before contact, and an increasingly nomadic way as their lands have been encroached on by outsiders.) We know them for the camps they leave behind every weaek or so in trying to stay away from outsiders, but few sightings have been made of them, and for a while it was unclear whether any still survived in the region now defined as their territory.
A Sustainable Way of Life
These cultures are complex societies with nuance and traditions that differentiate them from each other, and are identified with ways of life which are predicated on conservationism by necessity. The people who live in the Amazon are sometimes seen as its guardians, because their understanding of the forest (in growing corn, and manioc and other food crops; taking care of the forest's animals and sustaining themselves while sustaining the natural world around them) allows them to thrive within their domains. We may never have come into contact with them if not for industrial activities in the regions of Peru and Brazil, and to a lesser extent Bolivia and other nations that touch the Amazon, but they are nonetheless an integral part of an ecosystem and a way of life that is far more sustainable than anything we enjoy as individuals in our well developed nations.
There are around 85 uncontacted tribes in the Amazon Rainforest, and those tribes need to be protected. To leave them to the whims of big business interests would be to expose them to an ongoing genocide campaign that will see their traditions lost to time along with the last of their peoples. Some tribes have already been entirely exterminated, a loss we should all feel as their cultures went with the last men and women among them.
Why You Should Care
While the preservation of tribal populations in the Amazon and throughout the world is a noble pursuit in itself, and their exploitation should be met with alarm and disgust, the argument for why you should care goes beyond just the preservation of tradition, and reducing the human toll faced by these peoples as agribusiness, mining operations, and sometimes other industries encroach on their lands, destroy their forests and seek to eliminate them via hostile and often murderous means, or even exploit them for financial gain.
As the Lungs of the World, the Amazon has a critical role in regulating global temperatures. It's capacity as a carbon sink allows it to absorb and store between 15 and 20 years worth of global carbon emissions. Were this capacity reduced to the point that the forest became a net carbon emitter, it is possible the emissions given off by it would equal the total annual emissions of Japan, who is the fifth largest polluter in the world. One study also shows that were the entire Amazon Rainforest to be cut down, it's impact on rainfall across South America would be severe, as the rain belt currently looming over the rainforest would likely shift northward into the Carribean, leaving South America to deal with widespread droughts.
There is also the matter of global pandemics to consider. The swiss cheese method of clearing forests so often used in areas where logging operations are conducted has led to some of the worst global pandemics we have seen in modern history. This includes Covid, Sars, Ebola, HIV and Malaria. The way in which this transpires is in forcing animal communities into closer proximity with each other, giving the bacteria and viruses they carry more opportunity to jump from animal to animal and thus more opportunity to mutate, become more efficient, and more deadly. It only takes a leap from animal to human to invite pandemic level catastrophe into our lives, as we saw in 2019 with Covid, the worst epidemic the U.S., at least, has experienced since the Spanish Flu.
Preserving indigenous lands has both a locally beneficial effect in allowing the people who inhabit them to live the way of life they choose (without fear of being murdered to make way for industries they do not benefit from); and also a global benefit in helping to slow the effects of climate change and prevent future pandemics that may wipe out millions globally. We all have a stake in protecting these people, and so it is imperative that we seek to by whatever means we can.
A Last Word Before I Go
I did not intend to post this on Thanksgiving Day; however, the holiday is relevant to both aspects of what is being discussed here. We celebrate this holiday as a remembrance of cooperation between indigenous peoples and European settlers in North America; however, the version we so often teach obfuscates the dark realities involved in that meeting.
We have all heard the story of the starving settlers being fed and then taught to grow crops by the indigenous people of those lands. What is less commonly told is what happened in the aftermath, when those settlers, themselves religious extremists fleeing a land in which they could no longer practice their religion freely, turned on the indigenous people who helped them and ushered in a centuries long period of immense violence against them, and other peoples like them. As indigenous peoples were relegated to reservations which amount to a fraction of a fraction of their lands, we are met with the brutal reality that their nightmare never ended. Each time a new pipeline is deemed necessary by a fossil fuel tycoon, or some other infrastructural need is furnished, our government is pushed into a subservient position, most often allowing the developments to go through and thus violating the terms of the treaties laid out which grant sovereignty to the indigenous communities who inhabit those, protected lands.
In looking to the Amazon, we are met with a mirror reflecting the ugly truth of our society back at us. We are met with a vision of our own hypocrisy, as we cannot in good faith criticize another nation for engaging in practices we ourselves never ceased to. In moving into the future, and becoming the change we seek as a global leader, it is our task to ensure our actions reflect our vision for the future. That we do not just criticize the actions of those abroad, but confront our own acts and move forward from a place of compassion, understanding, and with the objective of creating the greatest benefit for the largest population possible.
With that said, Happy Thanksgiving. May your turkey be moist, and no one use that word to describe it.
Comments