A Comparsion Study of Western Environmentalism and Amazonian Indians

It is not inaccurate to say that historically, first-world individuals have often used third world peoples in order to further propagate their ideals, or to increase their economic gain. The interaction between the “civilized” Westerners and Amazonian Indians is no different. As environmentalism took root in Western society, first-world activists and opportunists utilized misrepresentations and generalizations of Amazonian Indians as vanguards of environmental sustenance to broadcast their causes in both Latin America and back at home.

Until the 1980’s, Environmentalism initially focused on the strict preservation of resources and thus emphasized the presence of people being an obstacle to environmental preservation. However, the change in environmentalists’ focus towards the sustainability of resources rather than their meticulous conservation created the need to find a model of individuals sustainably using rainforest resources. Through ethnobiological research, scientists found that Amazonian Indians were able to use natural resources efficiently while increasing biodiversity, and environmentalists saw the potential that supporting these Indians held in advancing their cause. Conservationists began hailing Amazonian Indians as “guardians of the forest”, and numerous international agencies began promoting new models for sustainable land use that incorporated Indian resource management methods. Soon preserving the local Indian culture and supporting its causes became just as important of an objective aspreserving the sustainability of resources in the rainforest.

This new strategy of environmentalists of supporting the Indians for a humanitarian cause allowed them to not only propose new, efficient models for resource management, but also it legitimized these Westerner’s association with the affairs of the nations these Amazonian Indians represented. Without a valid connection with the local Indian issues, the conservationist crusade against deforestation in the Amazon would have been taken as merely a self-interested first-world interference. Supporting the indigenous causes allowed environmentalists to promulgate their conservationist policies while avoiding being labeled as egocentric imperialists.

Further, Western environmentalists propagated the Amazonian Indians as “Noble Savages”,natural conservationists who use resources non-destructively,creating a cultural tendency of media to stereotypically portray them positively, and as possessing qualities of purity, guilelessness, and “greenness”.This romanticized representation of Native Indians allowed NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization) to communicate and mobilize supporters by distinguishing themselves from other non-profit organizations and raise funds for their cause.By painting this gallant image of Amazonian Indians as defenders of nature, NGO’s were able to raise a feeling of guilt in viewers, making them believe that if they did not support their cause, they were not part of this noble group of individuals defending and attempting to save nature. This positive symbolism also allowed NGO’s dedicated to launching long-term sustainability development in the Amazon to gain backing for their cause through the rush of public receptivity towards rainforest images, further propagating their goal of environmental protection.

This positive symbolic value of Amazonian Indians was not used only by NGOs to gain support for their causes, but many western corporations also used the idealized images of Indians in advertising and marketing. Observing the effectiveness of NGO’s in gaining support by incorporating Amazonian Indians into their publications, firms quickly saw the potential of forest Indians as positive marketing symbols and began to incorporate them into their advertisements. This portrayal of Amazonian Indians as “green” individuals allowed all types of companies that incorporated them into their marketing strategies, from Ben and Jerry’s to Shaman Pharmaceuticals, to market their products as eco-friendly and “Indian-approved”.

Perhaps most important however, was the feeling of planetary community and transcultural identification created by the use of Amazonian symbolism. Observing portrayed alliance between the environmentalists and Amazonian Indians, first world individuals were able to identify with the indigenous Indians’ cultures and break down the traditional barriers of cultural domination and supremacy that alienated the two cultures. Consequently, the environmentalists' calls for environmental sustainability, was now seen as demanded by Amazonian Indians as well and thus gained the influence as a kind of superlegitimacy; associated with purity, time-tested wisdom, and gallantry—all characteristics of a formulaic Indian.

However, benefits from this stereotyping of Indians were not limited to Westerners. Indigenous Indians also reaped the benefits of the positive generalization placed on their culture. Before their rise as a positive marketing tool by the first-world, only two major institutional agents mediated the Indian’s relations to the larger Brazilian society: FUNAI and the Catholic church. As a branch of the Ministry of the Interior, whose primary function was to develop Brazil’s natural resources, FUNAI had many connections with corporations interested in exploiting the Amazon’s resources. Thus, the indigenous Indians’ interests were rarely adequately represented. However, in the mid 1980’s this all changed. As the connection between environmentalists and Amazonian Indians was discovered, environmentalists began to push for Amazonian rights at the international level, and due to pressure from foreign debt, Brazilian policy makers were forced to pay attention to the Amazonian Indian’s complaints. By 1988, this international pressure from conservationists gave native activists independenceFUNAI and a new voice in Brazilian politics. This push for Indian’s rights, and the attention it received following the environmentalist interest in the indigenous group was demonstrated in the extensive media coverage received by the Kayapo, a group of Ge Indians. When the Kayapo, mobilized against illegal gold mining, a proposed radioactive waste dump, and a large hydroelectric project, they appealed to environmentalist interests in order to gain broadcast the issue and gain attention. The Kayapo received so much international consideration, that British rock star Sting visited Kayapo villages to propagate their cause, and in April 1989, hundreds of environmentalists and Indians traveled to Altamira to assemble in support of their cause. In contrast, Mario Juruna, the first Indian elected into the Brazilian Congress in the late 1970’s, had little impact despite his powerful position due to the lack of international support he received. It is clear that environmentalism created an audience that enabled the Kayapo and Indigenous Indians in general to become more widely regarded, almost as international stars.

The Westerners’ typecasting of Amazonian Indians as champions of environmental cause seems to have done no harm. In fact, many would argue that it is benign and has, in fact, aided both sides’ causes. However, what we must always consider is, no matter how positively we may portray a group, if our depiction does not accurately represent the ideals and doctrines of the group, we suppress their power to speak for, and to represent themselves, and when we take away a group’s right to expression, we are violating the very rights that our country was built upon, and which we still fight for today.