Abstract
Abstract The present article analyzes the Inquiry into the Indian Inspectorate in Amazonas and Acre, established in 1931 by order of the Federal Intervenor of the Amazonas. Taking as our approach an analysis of regional contexts, we link the inquiry to land conflicts that occurred in the previous decade, which gravitated around the imposition of a commercial monopoly on a resource historically configured as a “remedy for poverty” - Brazil nut trees. We demonstrate how narratives regarding these conflicts were triggered in the inquiry according to a logic that aimed to criminalize indigenous peoples and Indian Protective Service representatives as a way of accumulating legitimacy for the extralegal exercise of power. Finally, we illuminate the symbolic character of these disputes, which sought to restrict the legal meanings of “Indian” in order to question the legitimacy of the Indian Service in its administration of the so-called “semi-civilized peoples” and to restrict indigenous peoples’ access to State resources.
Highlights
The Inspectorate, according to its procedures, has created “a State within the State”, in which it is the absolute authority, dividing up [at] its discretion the municipalities into lots, which it delivers to the administration of its agents
The paragraph comes from the final report of the Inquiry into the Inspectorate of Indians Protection Service in Amazonas and Acre, produced by a commission established in January 1931 by the Federal Intervenor in the State of Amazonas, Álvaro Maia
By analyzing the inquiry and the struggles that surrounded it in this way, we argue for a better understanding of the lasting effects of the rearrangement of political forces, such as the reorganization of apparatuses and devices for training and controlling the workforce that resulted in the collapse of the Indian Protection Service in the 1930s
Summary
El Servicio de Protección al Indio en el banquillo de los acusados: la lógica de la difamación en la disputa por el control de los territorios y los pueblos indígenas en el Estado de Amazonas, 1931. En la Investigación, se desencadenan las narrativas sobre estos conflictos según la lógica circular de la difamación, apuntando a la criminalización de los representantes indígenas y del SPI, como una forma de acumular legitimidad para el ejercicio extralegal del poder. Ilumina el carácter propiamente simbólico de las disputas, que buscaban restringir los significados jurídicos de la categoría “indígena”, quitando la legitimidad del SPI en la administración de los llamados “semi-civilizados”, y removiendo a los indígenas de los canales de acceso al Estado. Palabras clave: Conflictos territoriales; Servicio de Protección Indígena; Historia de Amazonas; Mura; Munduruku; Poder simbólico
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
