[On a side note, in trying to learn more about #FindYourPark I learned that the National Park Foundation is the "official charity of the National Park Service," as established by an act of Congress in 1967.]
- The #FindYourPark movement as it intersects with preexisting NPS conversations around diversity in the National Parks
- The use of non-governmental organizations, sponsors, and spokespeople (Part II)
With the upcoming centennial of the founding the National Park Service, the NPS and its partners have been engaging in campaigns, studies, and dialogue surrounding the future of the next century of the NPS. At the NPS Narratives symposium in September 2014, issues of Diversity, Relevance, and Inclusion were a hot topic amidst these conversations about the NPS centennial.
The NPS recognizes that is a very white organization, and that it needs to do more work towards creating and managing sites that speak to a diverse American experience. Some moves towards this inclusion of diversity include the Cesar Chavez National Monument in California, an LGBT special resource study announced by Secretary Jewell, and other identity group specific resource studies to identify culturally and historical significant resources. This comes amidst nation wide conversations about the shifting demographics of the United States toward a “majority-minority” country.
While I recognize the good work that the NPS is doing in thinking seriously about the issues it has around the whiteness of its workforce and the low retention levels of its employees of color, merely hiring more people of color or establishing more parks that speak to diverse historical experiences does not erase the fact that the agency’s (and nation’s) existence relies upon the territorial dispossession of native communities. I know that may sound a bit harsh, but conversations about contemporary inclusion can’t ignore historical exclusion.
Scholars in Ethnic Studies and other related fields have used a framework of a “politics of recognition” to explore relations of inclusion and exclusion of oppressed and marginalized communities within the state or other powerful institutions. I want to consider though, what does a politics of recognition foreclose? What are its limits? And how does it reinforce ideas of the nation and/or state?
The thoughts continue in Part II.