In Brazil, the rights and needs of the indigenous Indian
population are coming up against the needs to have land for
agriculture and for other purposes for the rest of the large
Brazilian population. The
conflict is already violent, and one judge said it might
de-evolve into general civil war if the two sets of needs
aren't settled diplomatically soon.
The court's decision could help determine the future of
the Amazon, whose remaining jungles provide a critical cushion
against global warming. It could also redefine Brazil's
policy toward its Indians at a time of frequent confrontations,
as the country spends billions of dollars opening roads, building
dams and promoting agribusiness across the world's largest
remaining tropical wilderness. ed.z.: rock and hard place.
You can't go back in time and not invade and have all sorts
of big planetary repopulation and repatriation moves, so what to
do if it hasn't been "settled" yet? And can you
realistically have a nation just stop doing business and
agriculture when they need that to survive?
This is pure sensationalism, here in Brazil is not going to have
a civil war about this issue - indians versus population.
Brazil is trying do develop the nation without take de path that
the "first" world had. And it's not an easy one.
The problem with de Indian population is with the right party
(neo-cons) on one state (Roraima).
Don't believe on this smoke news, it's not true.
Inside here, we are talking about it, but nothing ahead that.
There were a conflit (about 3 or 4 mounths ago), but was a
political theatre from neo-cons.
The neo-cons is trying to prove on STF (Supreme Court on Brazil)
about the indians right - which are protected in Brazilian's
Constitution. They won't get something.
We, Brazilians, think we can develop our country, without exploit
the land and the indigenous population. We are trying - despite
of the neo-cons and some others parties - to make a sustanable
development, both environmental and social.
I've been to Sao Paolo and Foz do Iguacu, to the Itaipu
Binacional, and to Ciudad del Este on the Paraguay side of the
border. Brazil seems to be like much of South America. Ghettos of
shacks where the indigenous people live in the poorest conditions
are next door to mansions with high fences. If the indigenous
people aren't being exploited - and it's hard to believe
they aren't - they sure aren't enfranchised.
I am not saying that the U.S. is better, we have our own
problems, before all else an unwillingness to provide the basics
of food, shelter, and health care for our own people.
Yeah Bruce, I'm not denying the problem (and others) that we
have here, but this headline it's too much sensationalism
that don't represent the reality.
I know that you've been here, me and my fiancée were
with you until the Iguaçu Falls Entrancer =D
Brazil got a lot of problems, all them about been a very
(exaggerated) flexible on all things.
But lately, the people became more concerned about the commitment
with the nation and with the others.
The Brazilian people are very hospitable and generous, and very
ingenuous.
Indigenous Rights Versus Population Pressures for Resources
In Brazil, the rights and needs of the indigenous Indian population are coming up against the needs to have land for agriculture and for other purposes for the rest of the large Brazilian population. The conflict is already violent, and one judge said it might de-evolve into general civil war if the two sets of needs aren't settled diplomatically soon.
The court's decision could help determine the future of the Amazon, whose remaining jungles provide a critical cushion against global warming. It could also redefine Brazil's policy toward its Indians at a time of frequent confrontations, as the country spends billions of dollars opening roads, building dams and promoting agribusiness across the world's largest remaining tropical wilderness. ed.z.: rock and hard place. You can't go back in time and not invade and have all sorts of big planetary repopulation and repatriation moves, so what to do if it hasn't been "settled" yet? And can you realistically have a nation just stop doing business and agriculture when they need that to survive?