Indigenous Groups

The Dakota Access Pipeline controversy is centered around a crude oil transport pipe that on its 1,200-mile route passes through territory of a Sioux Indian reservation. The American government and engineers is the safest and most cost-efficient means of transportation of crude oil, but indigenous groups and environmentalists protested that it would contaminate drinking water and damage sacred burial grounds. The problem with this situation is that the government did not respect the issues of the indigenous claims to the land and their heritage. This is similar to the Mapuche issue. Indigenous peoples, Mapuche and Sioux, root their lineage and ancestry in the earth and the history of generations past, but the government only acknowledges the laws of land ownership that their created. Indigenous groups rightfully distrust the promises of those in power because it is not possible to get full cooperation from the group that took your land and disbanded your culture in the first place. The Dakota Pipeline has leaked as predicted and the eucalyptus and pine trees in Chile have overtaken the lands that once hosted native trees. The land and indigenous populations are forced to deal with the consequences of decisions made by the colonizer, their protests are not respected unless they follow the rules set forth by the oppressor. This gives more of disadvantage to marginalized groups that lack power, influence, and opportunity. Similar to the indigenous groups in Chile, American indigenous populations struggle with a high illiteracy and unemployment rate and are either cut off from the rest of society or have significant struggles succeeding in the dominant culture. I feel as though Chilean government should take more responsibility for the current state of the native communities and acknowledge the advantages they have economically and socially. Once this is thoroughly acknowledged, a better discussion can be had that benefits both parties equally.