Paper short abstract:

Health, social and cash transfer programmes based largely on a philosophy of ‘asistencialismo’ make up the ‘development’ strategy that aims to improve the lives of Mexico's indigenous communities. In response to this welfareism self belittling attitudes of entitlement and dependency emerge.

Paper long abstract:

Like most indigenous communities, the Mexican Huichol people are classified as 'highly marginalised' and this entitles them to financial and other donations, some conditional, from the ministry of social development as well as specific programmes such as the 'crusade against hunger'. Over the years this as included three generations of toilets, concrete for their floors, corrugated iron sheets for their roof, food and blanket handouts. After more than forty years of 'development' programmes, many communities have become dependent on hand-outs and have repositioned themselves as families in relation to the state as people who, because of their indigenous origins and condition of often extreme marginalization they are entitled to as many forms of economic and social support as possible.

In this paper I will argue that this self-derogatory attitude is a form of symbolic violence that operates against them on an individual and community level and is in turn utilized by the state to stigmatise their poverty. This belittling attitude is one of the many unintended consequences of a approach that does not seek to deal with the long term and structural determinants of poverty and ignores the indigeneity of communities, instead aiming to incorporate indigenous families into the lowest ranks of mestizo society. This then begs the question of whether these symbolic and structural forms of violence are actually 'unintended', or simply form part of a wider concerted effort to undermine indigenous and autonomous lifestyles in order to maintain the existing racial and economic hierarchy.