Genes and Burkas: Predicaments of Human Rights and Cultural Property

  • Elazar Barkan

The validation of cultural property as a manifestation of group identity expanded through the 1980s and 1990s, but since then has encountered major challenges. If previously the control of images and cultural property was viewed as empowering, this has begun to change since the mid-1990s. This was largely due to the revolution in communication including the expansion of the internet and the development of the web. The same type of control – which was viewed as empowering marginal groups, anticolonial forces, and weaker states – has come to be viewed also as possible censorship and repression over individual members of the groups. A moral shift and the inclusion of multiple perspectives within all sides in the debate is at the core of these changing standards. Instead of a binary division between the haves and the have-nots, we encounter pluralistic perspectives at every fluid stage from the individual to the global. Not only can the center not hold, neither does the periphery.


Indigenous People Cultural Property Muslim Woman Indigenous Group Islamic Society 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arendt, Hannah, 1951, The Origins of Totalitarianism. Harcourt, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Ayton-Shenker, Diana, 1995, The Challenge of Human Rights and Cultural Diversity, United Nations Department of Public Information DPI/1627/HR - March 1995.
  3. Barkan, Elazar, and Ronald Bush, eds., 2003, Claiming the Stones/Naming the Bones: Cultural Property and the Negotiation of National and Ethnic Identity. Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  4. Borgwardt, Elizabeth, 2005, A New Deal for the World: America’s Vision for Human Rights. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  5. Buruma, Ian, 2006, How Communities Control Language. The Freedom to Offend. The New Republic, September 4.Google Scholar
  6. Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, Resolution to Oppose the Human Genome Diversity Project and Condemning Unethical Genetic Research on Indigenous Peoples. http://www. (adopted 1998).
  7. Der Spiegel, 2006, New Setback in German-Polish Ties, September 4. http://service. cache/international/0,1518,435066,00.html
  8. Dodson, Mick, and R. Williamson, 1999, Indigenous Peoples and the Human Genome Diversity Project. Journal of Medical Ethics 25: 204-208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Harry, Debra, 2001, Biopiracy and Globalization: Indigenous Peoples Face a New Wave of Colonialism (comments for the International Forum on Globalization Teach-in held in New York City), February.
  10. Hirsi, Ali, 2006, Spiegel Online, Spiegel Interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali: Everyone Is Afraid to Criticize Islam, February 6.,1518,399263,00.html (accessed 9 January 2007).
  11. Huntington, Samuel, 1996, The Clash of Civilizations and Remaking of World Order. Simon and Shuster, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Indigenous People, Genes and Genetics, 2000, What Indigenous People Should Know About Biocolonialism: A Primer and Resource Guide, June.
  13. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966; ratified 1976)
  14. IPCB (Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism)
  15. Macaulay, Thomas B., 1835, Minute on Indian Education.
  16. Nafisi, Azar, 2003, Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books. Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  17. The Ethical Framework, National Geographic. (accessed 6 January 2007).
  18. The Genographic Project, National Geographic. (website accessed 6 January 2007).
  19. The Legacy Fund, National Geographic. (accessed 6 January 2007).

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elazar Barkan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of International and Public AffairsColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations