A civilised world or a bloodsucker of the earth?Olli Tammilehto |
|
ContentsUlla Lehtinen: "Indigenous peoples and oil" events in Finland 1999Olli Tammilehto: A civilised world or a bloodsucker of the earth?Background information on oilRussia's oil productionFlorian Stammler: Where does our oil come from?Yeremei Aipin: Russia's oil industry and the development of rights of indigenous peopleAgrafena Sopochina: "We Live on what the earth carries on itself"Yuri Vella: Kogalym-Lor - the lake where a man diedBruce Forbes: Industrial development in the Yamal-Nenets AreaLidia Okotetto: I no longer understand the tundra that has loved meGrigorii Anagurichi: A clash of civilisations at the ends of the worldCharity Nenebari Ebeh: The Ogoni experienceMagda Lanuza: Oil production in Central AmericaEcuador and oilArturo Yumbai Iligama: The war against the poorColombia, the U'wa and oilRoberto Afanador Cobaria: Oil is blood of the earthWorkshop 1: The strategies of oil industry and the responses of indigenous peoples' movementsWorkshop 2: Networking of indigenous peoples threatened by oil and gas explorationWorkshop 3: Northern DimensionCommunique of the participants in the seminar "Indigenous Peoples and Oil"Internet links |
Civilised Europeans relate
positively
to indigenous peoples. For sure that is true. These represent the richness
of cultures, don't they? Isn't is clear that millions have to be spent
for their protection just in the same way as for preservation of churches
and rare animal species? There are units in the EU concerned with the protection
of indigenous peoples. In the new Finnish policy document on human rights
a separate mention is made on indigenous peoples, too. But in spite
of the European civilisation's global care, indigenous peoples are disappearing
from the face of the earth all the time. The rate of disappearance is relatively
faster than that of plant and animal species: several dozens of languages
die every year - most of them those spoken by indigenous peoples. An essential
part of the culture of a people disappears along with the last persons
who use the language. After this, one can hardly speak of the existence
of the people.
Perhaps an improvement has to be made on the directives of indigenous peoples and one must invest in their protection another million. Or does even that help? Maybe there is something so brutal in our civilised life that small improvements do not help. A reference to this was made in many speeches during the indigenous peoples and oil events. The lifeblood of our civilisation is oil, and what is left of it is often found underneath the land of the remaining indigenous peoples. These systems of thinking and living are much older than euro-culture, and many of them have known oil but understood that the use of this "blood of the earth" is dangerous. The raw material for atomic energy that engineers thought would be a substitute for oil is also often found on the land of indigenous peoples: uranium, or "the deadly stone" as it was called by primal Americans. It could be that we have to choose between preserving indigenous peoples and preserving our present social system. But if that is the case, then indigenous peoples have no hope, have they? The civilised world is not about to give away the present welfare-producing industrial system. It certainly will not give away so long as it can imagine that it has progressed from a barbarian to a civilised world and is living in a continuously growing welfare. But when doubts gain ascendancy then there will be room for the forces of change. Who would like to live in a society that makes it members bloodsuckers, genocidal killers and rapists? And that, on top of it all, produces material wealth for a small elite, but denies possibilities for a good life to almost all living now and take away possibilities for any life from those who are meant to live in the future. |