Challenging the International Order: The Mapuche People and the Construction of Wallmapu

Since the Peace Treaties of Osnabruck and Munster, of May and October 1648 respectively, the Westphalian notion that each State is sovereign over its own territory, with interaction between sovereign states to be determined by law, has been fundamental to the international legal order. Thus, the UN is, as its Charter proclaims, based on the principle of “sovereign equality” of all its Member States (Article 2(1), UN Charter). The concepts of sovereignty, jurisdiction and territoriality are closely linked. One of the key features of the (traditional) concept of sovereignty is that it entails the right of the State to prescribe the laws in force, and to enforce those laws, on its own territory. As Lord Macmillan famously expressed it in the UK House of Lords some 75 years ago, “It is an essential attribute of the sovereignty of this realm, as of all sovereign independent States, that it should possess jurisdiction over all persons and things within its territorial limits and in all causes civil and criminal arising within these limits.” This positive concept of territoriality (power to make laws for one’s territory) has the logical negative corollary as expressed in the excerpt from the Lotus above, i.e., in principle and in the absence of a permissive rule to the contrary, a State ought not to exercise jurisdiction in another State’s territory. Exercise of extra-territorial jurisdiction has, therefore, typically been treated with suspicion under international law doctrine.At the same time, however, States and regions have increasingly been faced with global problems which do not respect traditional State boundaries, and for which effective regulation may require (legal) solutions that transcend the State geographies we have become used to. Daniel Bethlehem has rather provocatively termed this the “end of geography”: denoting the array of trans-border, geography-defying challenges which will, he argues, force us to move beyond our traditional notions of Westphalian States and international law, and with them our traditional concepts of sovereignty, jurisdiction and territoriality. These challenges include the globalisation of the economic system, trade and financial flows; the globalisation of security risks; as well as global warming and other environmental problems of a global scale.Viewed in this light, it is perhaps unsurprising that an increasing number of States and entities that might normally (claim to) respect international law are being criticised for alleged extraterritorial exercise of jurisdiction. Among them is the EU, although it is by no means the only culprit in this regard. This contribution considers the relevance of territoriality as a restricting factor on the legislative jurisdiction of EU Member States, and the EU itself, with particular regard to EU tax law. Section 2 considers jurisdictional bases and conceptions of territoriality in international law. Section 3 switches to an EU law perspective, considering the status of customary international law in EU law. Section 4 considers the CJEU’s approach to territoriality as a justification for Member State action. Section 5 considers the CJEU’s approach to territoriality as a limitation on EU action, focusing on three examples of alleged extraterritorial exercise of jurisdiction by the EU in the past - in the fields of competition law, environmental law, data protection law, and financial markets law - and considers the legal and political responses to such exercise. Section 6 considers the case of the proposed Financial Transaction Tax (FTT), and the objections linked to territoriality concerns. Section 7 concludes with a discussion.

The Internet represents the immaterial dimension of existence, which complements and acts in continuity with the material dimension rather than being an alternative to it. Immaterial relationships are mediated by the on-line platforms that have developed rapidly and with little control largely because the European e-Commerce Directive of 2000 exempted them from liability. On-line platforms are now determining factors in the use of the Internet, and become not only the principal means of interacting with the immaterial dimension, but also the most important interfaces for the material dimension. However, they are not neutral: as a matter of fact, the ways in which on-line platforms are conceived and user experiences are shaped are capable of orienting and modifying user behaviours. And that is not all because the platforms are designed to produce the effects of lock-in (which make it very difficult for users to abandon an adopted service) and the absence of interoperability, as the laws governing intellectual property rights are used to assure their closure in various ways. The widely deregulated and rapid immaterial dimension is often characterised by increasing returns that tend to give rise to global monopolies and oligopolies which, in a few years, have created (and are still creating) positions of dominance in intermediating the services of the material dimension without any of the guarantees or restrictions foreseen for their predecessors. They are replacing local intermediaries operating in the material dimension with multinational intermediaries operating in the immaterial dimension: in other words, allowing the presence of gatekeepers in the immaterial dimension is leading to a loss of governance of a large part of the material dimension. In order to defend the market (and, with it, public rights), the present gatekeepers should be subject to specific pro-competitive regulation and the entry of the new gatekeepers wanted by those (who would like to eliminate the neutrality the Internet) should be prevented. It is therefore to be hoped that ex ante provisions are introduced in order to protect the rights of consumers and economic operators who are currently only protected ex post. Europe, in its dimension as a market of consumers, should decide whether to accept the status quo or intervene in order to ensure a different future.

The paths taken by the concept of territory in the field of the history of geography are marked by social, political and theoretical-methodological influences that affected the ways of thinking about geography and the role played by territory in social dynamics. In this sense, authors such as Haesbaert (2019), Saquet (2020), Gottmann (2012), Claval (1999), Andrade (2004), among others, discuss in depth the paths taken by the concept of territory in geography, bringing elements that help us understand the approaches that the concept has obtained throughout the history of geography, which are influenced by more structural conjunctures, such as the epistemological changes and transformations generated in the scope of social reality, as Claval (1999) points out. That said, the objective of the present research is to analyze the approaches to the concept of territory in research that discusses indigenous peoples and quilombola communities in selected texts. In the methodological scope, we highlight that the research is based on the content analysis, according to Bardin (2022), of works published in the annals of the International Symposium on Agrarian Geography (SINGA), between the years 2003 and 2019, totaling nine editions analyzed. In the field of research results, we identified the presence of different approaches to the concept of territory in the research, notably from multidimensional, relational and integrative conceptions of the concept of territory proposed by different geographers, such as Rogério Haesbaert, Claude Raffestin, Marcos Aurélio Saquet, Milton Santos, Ariovaldo Umbelino de Oliveira, Bernardo Mançano Fernandes, Joël Bonnemaison, Maria Geralda de Almeida and Carlos Walter Porto-Gonçalves, among others. Finally, in the framework of the conclusions of the research, we detected that within the research framework adopted, there is a centrality of the concept of territory as an important element in the study of indigenous peoples and quilombola communities, a fact that, in a way, reflects the importance that the concept has been gaining in the field of agrarian studies.

The history of war is also a history of its justification. The contributions to this book argue that the justification of war rarely happens as empty propaganda. While it is directed at mobilizing support and reducing resistance, it is not purely instrumental. Rather, the justification of force is part of an incessant struggle over what is to count as justifiable behaviour in a given historical constellation of power, interests, and norms. This way, the justification of specific wars interacts with international order as a normative frame of reference for dealing with conflict. The justification of war shapes this order and is being shaped by it. As the justification of specific wars entails a critique of war in general, the use of force in international relations has always been accompanied by political and scholarly discourses on its appropriateness. In much of the pertinent literature the dominating focus is on theoretical or conceptual debates as a mirror of how international normative orders evolve. In contrast, the focus of the present volume is on theory and political practice as sources for the re- and de-construction of the way in which the justification of war and international order interact. The book offers a unique collection of papers exploring the continuities and changes in war discourses as they respond to and shape normative orders from early modern times to the present. It comprises contributions from International Law, History and International Relations and from Western and non-Western perspectives.

Territory is one of the central political concepts of the modern world and, indeed, functions as the primary way the world is divided and controlled politically. Yet territory has not received the critical attention afforded to other crucial concepts such as sovereignty, rights, and justice. While territory continues to matter politically, and territorial disputes and arrangements are studied in detail, the concept of territory itself is often neglected today. Where did the idea of exclusive ownership of a portion of the earth's surface come from, and what kinds of complexities are hidden behind that seemingly straightforward definition? The Birth of Territory provides a detailed account of the emergence of territory within Western political thought. Looking at ancient, medieval, Renaissance, and early modern thought, Stuart Elden examines the evolution of the concept of territory from ancient Greece to the seventeenth century to determine how we arrived at our contemporary understanding. Elden addresses a range of historical, political, and literary texts and practices, as well as a number of key players - historians, poets, philosophers, theologians, and secular political theorists - and in doing so sheds new light on the way the world came to be ordered and how the earth's surface is divided, controlled, and administered.

The Mapuche are South American indigenous people in what is now part of Argentina and Chile. Since colonial independence, the Mapuche have struggled for the right to land. This essay chronicles the rise and evolution of a particular organization within the Mapuche social movement. In the Chilean context, years of frustration from dealing with the Chilean government has led to the creation of more radical Mapuche indigenous social movements such as the Coordinadora de Comunidades Mapuche en Conflicto Arauco (CAM), which adopts a more aggressive approach than previous indigenous movements. The CAM provides a new perspective on the authorized Indian versus insurrectionary Indian dynamic and challenges the concept of neoliberal multiculturalism. It views the Chilean government as trespassers on Mapuche territory. Yet the rise of the CAM has also resulted in the re-introduction of the infamous (Pinochet style) Terrorist Law and the militarization of the southern region by the Chilean government. To research this paper, I gathered extensive data on Mapuche organizations in Argentina and Chile and on Chile’s CAM organization from books on indigenous movements, journal and newspaper articles in English and in Spanish, the CAM organization’s various websites, and news sources pertaining to the CAM and recent events in Chile.

Background: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between the principles of ergonomics in both material and immaterial dimensions and employee productivity in (IOOC). Methods: Immaterial dimension of ergonomics was measured by variables such as freedom of activity at work and job feedback, and the material dimension of ergonomics was measured by factors such as workplace design and body position. The variables of the productivity construct based on the ACHIEVE model include ability, transparency, assistance, incentive, evaluation, credit, and environment. Each of the constructs was measured by an appropriate questionnaire filled out by 170 operational employees of the Company. Descriptive variables were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling based on the PLS method to investigate the research hypotheses. Results: The level of employee productivity and ergonomics of the workplace in the IOOC are not desirable due to difficult working conditions and lack of managers' paying attention. The hypothesis of the effectiveness of ergonomics on productivity was confirmed and the material dimension was more effective on employee productivity than the immaterial dimension of human factors. Conclusion: Due to the difficult conditions of the operational units of oil companies, attention should be directed to the physical conditions of the work environment. To improve employee productivity, certain plans for human resource development and management, revision of the designing of the work environment, and work measurement are proposed

At present, there is no common perception in modern science and international political practice of what the world (international) order (legal order) is. The article analyzes the relevant points of view. It is concluded that by referring to the relevant provisions, generally accepted in the framework of the general theory of law and the theory of international law, it is possible to get close enough to the solution of this problem. The article also examines other problems related to the essence of the concepts of the world (international) order and its types (world public order, world legal order and global world legal order), and also the varieties of social norms of the international regulatory system, the results of the implementation of which shape the corresponding orders. Special attention is paid to the fact that, in contrast to the widespread perceptions, all three types of world order are neither a set of international relations, nor a set of norms regulating such relations. According to the theory of international law, they are the result of the implementation of the requirements of certain norms of the international regulatory system aimed at managing international public relations. In addition, various factors influence the state of a particular type of international order (including a change in the hierarchy of states depending on their role in the international political and/or economic system, the formation of new centers of power, a change in bipolarity, polycentricity or monocentricity of the world, the emergence of multilateral integration formations, the activities of international multilateral institutions, etc.), but they should also not be confused with international orders themselves.

With similar settler-colonial histories having left them occupying the position of marginalized minority groups, indigenous people in Chile and Australia are struggling to assert their rights and retain their cultures. Research in each location suggests that there is widespread prejudice and discrimination against them, even though the mainstream society sees itself as tolerant and harmonious. This paper reports on a study in which thirty Mapuche people in Chile were interviewed about their perceptions of discrimination against them. Their responses were systematically analysed using a taxonomy of racist experiences established in a study of Aborigines in Australia. Like indigenous Australians, the Mapuche people of Chile reported that they experience extensive discrimination in all areas of life. These findings are discussed with respect to the issues related to relationships between settlers and colonized communities.

Although Latin America plays a minimal role in debates on the ‘liberal international order’, scholars recognise the region’s influence on international law, norms, and institutions. We contend that these Latin American contributions to international order spring from a tradition of ‘republican internationalism’, rooted in the region’s domestic political traditions and practices. Republican principles such as the separation of power, association, and the rule of law had important corollaries in Latin American international relations, including sovereign equality, confederation and regional cooperation, and international law and arbitration. These republican internationalist ideas shaped Latin America’s diplomatic traditions and its contributions to international order in the nineteenth century and beyond. Attention to republican internationalism and Latin American contributions demonstrates how actors beyond the North Atlantic shaped the origins of international order. This study also advances debates on the sources of the liberal international order by demonstrating the distinctive influence of republican ideas and practices.

While digital platforms have reconfigured the institutions and practices of cultural production around the globe, current research is dominated by studies that take as their reference point the Anglo-American world--and, to a lesser extent--China (Cunningham & Craig 2019; Kaye et al. 2021; Poell et al. 2021; Zhao 2019). Aside from totalizing theories of platform imperialism (Jin, 2013), the “rest of the world” has thus received relatively scant attention. Consequently, central concepts in the study of platform-based cultural production bear a strong imprint of Western institutions, infrastructures, industries, discourses, and cultural practices. US-based research, in particular, has informed how we understand and subsequently theorize notions of precarity, labor, governance, authenticity, gender, creativity, diversity, and autonomy in a platform environment. We can’t simply apply these concepts to local cultures of production in other parts of the world. There is bound to be friction, as this panel will demonstrate, between how labor, precarity, and governance are understood in the Anglo-American world and the lived experiences of platform-dependent cultural labor in Latin America, Southern and Eastern Europe, and East Asia. Concerns about Western-dominated research and theory are, of course, by no means novel. Post-colonial and decolonial theorists have long criticized the dominance and universalism of Western theory, pointing to the continuation of colonial knowledge-power relations (Chakrabarty 2009; Chen 2010; Escobar 2018; Mignolo 2012). Moreover, there have been numerous calls to decolonize (Glück 2018; Willems & Mano 2016) and de-westernize (Curran & Park 2000; Khiabany 2003) media studies and, more recently, production and platform studies (Bouquillion 2023; Bulut 2022; Zhang & Chen 2022). That being said, in practice, the US and Western Europe continue to function as the primary and often sole frame of reference in research on platforms and cultural production. In the light of these concerns, this panel aims to contribute to efforts to: 1) challenge universalism, 2) “provincialize” the US, and 3) multiply our frames of reference in the study of platforms and cultural production. Such a conceptual undertaking is especially vital as the cultural industries are at the heart of societal processes of meaning making (Hesmondhalgh 2018) and market activity. Let us unpack how the papers in this panel pursue this objective. The first paper develops a conceptual framework to expand our frames of reference for studying platforms and cultural production. Departing from epistemological universalism, it argues that “platforms”, “cultural production”, and the “local” need to be studied as dynamic configurations, characterized by crucial variations and correspondences across the globe. That is, in contemporary instances of creating cultural content, transnational platform markets, infrastructures, governance frameworks, and cultural practices become entangled with local political economies and cultural practices. Examining how such configurations take shape around the world, the next four papers in this panel focus on specific regions and modes of production, interrogating how local and transnational political economic relations and practices articulate each other. In this discussion, we pay specific attention to the notions of precarity, governance, and imaginaries. The second paper reframes influencer precarity in a semi-peripheral context in the Balkans and emphasizes the relational basis of influencer agency, as influencers rely on family members and oft-mocked “Instagram husbands” to alleviate precarity. It thus offers insights into the local characteristics of algorithmic encounters with platforms by proposing the concept of platform lethargy. This concept speaks to an emotional response and deliberate refusal on the part of influencers to adapt to platform mandates. This refusal is rooted in algorithmic knowledge from the semi-periphery, where creators are cognizant of their position in a devalued platform market. The third paper critically examines the intricate dynamics of creator culture, challenging the assumption of globally detached markets. Focusing on Latin American content creators in the United States, it explores how their aspirations intersect with the construction of the "Latin American" content creator dream. The study also scrutinizes the role of Content Service Organizations (CSOs) executives in shaping creator culture. Despite global portrayals, tensions emerge, revealing national market characteristics rooted in socio-cultural, linguistic, and regional norms. The fourth paper examines how drama creatives, who work for streaming platforms, are globally connected and yet remain nationally restrained in terms of how they imagine work. Through the notion of platform ambiguity, the paper shows how streaming platforms negotiate with cultural producers by both enabling and restraining their work. Thus, it thus de-westernizes scholarship on platforms and cultural production by highlighting how drama makers are not only creative but also geopolitical subjects dependent on the state. The last paper offers an alternative epistemological and ontological perspective on the state-platform-user configuration, where each actor works in alignment with others under the logic of governance. It uses a Chinese social media platform, Douyin, as a case to reveal how platforms rely on anthropomorphization to communicate with cultural producers and develop playful governance of China’s political and cultural environment.

Reviewed by: Democracy and Music Education: Liberalism, Ethics, and the Politics of Practice Heidi Westerlund Paul G. Woodford , Democracy and Music Education: Liberalism, Ethics, and the Politics of Practice ( Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2005) Paul G. Woodford's Democracy and Music Education needs to be warmly welcomed in the field of philosophy of music education. It contributes to the discussion centering on ethics and music education—a discussion that after multiculturalism, pluralism, praxialism, and other recent "isms" still awaits its appearance in a stronger sense. Woodford writes that the aim of the book is to enhance democratic ends by inviting music educators to contribute "to wider intellectual and political conversations about the nature and significance of music in our lives and those of our children."1 Woodford borrows ideas from many thinkers creating an interesting synthesis and lines of thought throughout the book. His main resource in developing a liberalist music education is, however, along the ideas of the American pragmatist and educational philosopher, John Dewey. Woodford's choice is well thought out. Dewey deserves to be redeemed and recognized in music education, not the least because of various distorted interpretations of his views that have commonly been accepted in the profession in the past. Woodford argues that the music appreciation movement, which aimed at developing good musical taste equally in all children, has not in any particular way been a Deweyan democratic movement. Music educators have not acknowledged their role as agents in the [End Page 235] transformation of school and society. Instead, he states, they have continued to subscribe to the older aesthetic and utilitarian rationales and yet neither approach prepares students "to question and challenge authority and thereby to transform musical society."2 It is noteworthy that Woodford does not elaborate on Dewey's central concept, experience, but unexpectedly draws upon concepts such as abstract reason or the autonomous individual to reconstruct music education. Critical conversation becomes celebrated against performance-oriented music education. The book leaves open the discussion between utilitarian and aesthetic rationales and carefully avoids Dewey's notion of the aesthetic and experimentation, which could have brought new angles in understanding his notion of democracy and its relation to the social and musical.3 Woodford tries to maintain a middle ground in the North American philosophical battlefield of music education stating that music educators "should listen more closely to one another while avoiding extremes."4 His critique targets critical theorists, radical feminist writers, and modernist as well as postmodernist ideas, while Woodford himself seeks a middle way between laissez-faire and elitist or autocratic concepts of music education. As a whole, Woodford's conceptual toolkit for promoting ethical aspects in music education are less akin to Dewey's thoughts and more to the Greek philosophers and their notions of virtues. Woodford writes, "democracy depends on the existence of good faith and generosity of spirit, of character and love for one's fellow men and women."5 These virtues are "the glue that can bind us together as society."6 How is this achieved in music education? Teaching love becomes a practical problem: explaining love requires it to be modelled and experienced, Woodford writes. However, he leaves this cornerstone of his conceptual scheme to rest on the notion of intellectual conversation. Allow me to explain briefly in what way Dewey's philosophical project differs from the Greek philosophical ethos and why abstract reason and intellectual conversation are not central concepts in Dewey's pragmatism (this does not mean that they cannot be celebrated as Woodford has done). For Dewey, the virtue of love signifies devotion, interest, and courage since genuine interest challenges us to overcome the obstacles that stand in the way.7 Interest and devotion are not just attitudes or intellectual modes in the sense of mental states, but linked to doings and active transactions with and in the environment. Interest is co-extensive with action and devotion with dedication to shared projects. This devotion to shared doings and their significance is the socially inclusive ethical side that Dewey brought to the individualistic humanistic theory of self-realization and to the theory of experience. The vision of humanistic self-realization, as has been presented in...

This book is a tale of two towers,two wars and two visions. The two towers are those of the World Trade Center in New York, destroyed by a terrorist attack on 11 September 2001. The two wars are the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq. The two visions are of the international legal and political order for the twenty-first century. The issues involved in the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq are of fundamental importance because they may define the shape of international order for the twenty-first century. The book has a number of themes. First, it considers the principal international law and international order issues involved in the War Against Terrorism and in the War on Iraq in 2003. Specific attention is given to the application of international humanitarian and international human rights law in the wars. Secondly it asks how the international debate on the Iraq War was conducted and why? Finally it questions whether the post-1945 system of international laws and organizations is capable of surviving, and in what form? Chapter one outlines how the relationship between war and the international legal order has evolved and introduces the idea of ‘complexity theory’ as a framework for understanding the events and issues considered in this book. Chapter two considers the pattern of events from the attacks on the US on 9-11 to the Iraq War 2003. Chapter three addresses the issues of law and morality involved in the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq. Chapter four focuses on the moral and legal debate around the War on Iraq and chapter five considers the systemic consequences for international law doctrine and practice, giving particular weight to US policy and approaches and how other states have responded to them. Chapter six appraises the post-war situation in Iraq in terms of political and economic organisation and human rights. It also assesses the consequences of the status of post-war Iraq for the wider region. Chapter seven concludes the book by examining the possible implications of the War Against Terrorism and the War on Iraq for world order in the twenty-first century.

The article examines the distinctive character of the interconnected world of the twenty-first century. The analysis explores the influence of technology on the international system in the modern age, leading up to the unique challenges of the contemporary world. Historically, advances in transportation, scientific breakthroughs, and their military applications have profoundly influenced the ability of states to project power and have had an impact on political structures and configurations. There appears to be little consensus on how these changes influence the debates on power, deterrence, diplomacy, and other instruments of international relations. Traditionally, scholars of the international system have focused on the possession of knowledge and weapons that provided a military advantage in the interpretation of power configurations. Our argument is that the twenty-first century world has a different technological emphasis, that of communications and its supportive satellite and internet infrastructure that forms the basis of the information revolution. The new technologies have succeeded in creating an alternative universe presenting a governance challenge to traditional institutions, laws, and concepts of territoriality.

This article explores the complex interplay between territory, culture, politics, and livelihoods through the ancestral land claims of the Indigenous Aymara community of Chumiza in northern Chile. The Aymara community's struggle for meaning, life, and identity is deeply rooted in a historical context in which the question of territory is inherently cultural, political, and economic. For the Aymara people, the concepts of territory and environment are not just abstract notions but deeply intertwined with their historical awareness, cultural traditions, and their profound relationship with the land. Understanding how land and territory are defined, planned, and regulated is therefore crucial to comprehending their production through state policies and institutional frameworks. These diverse interpretations and definitions, shaped by the state, international law, and Indigenous communities, often clash. The Aymara community's territorial reclamation reconfigures these legal, political, and symbolic dimensions to re-establish territory as a distinct entity, underpinned by a specific historical connection between a people and their land, encapsulated in the notion of ancestrality.