Coined by Princeton Professor and citizen of the Cherokee Nation Eva Marie Garoutte, radical indigenism argues for a rebuilding of knowledge and explores indigenous philosophies capable of generating new dialogues.² The concept of radical indigenism takes its name from the Latin derivation of the word “radical”: radix, meaning “root”. Design by radical indigenism imagines a movement that rebuilds an understanding of indigenous philosophies in relation to design to generate sustainable and climate resilient infrastructures. Lo—TEK orients us towards a different mythology of technology. One that evolves humanism with radical indigenism.

The field of design is at a pivotal moment, expanding to confront complex problems that require robust and adaptive responses. With environmental and societal collapse imminent in the coming decades, design at the intersection of anthropology, ecology and innovation is the most pressing discussion of our time.³ A new mythology that acknowledges Lo–TEK is critical to advancing the coexistence of man with nature.

While scientific knowledge is considered an essential truth, it is in actuality a constantly evolving mythology. In contrast, our society overlooks indigenous spiritual beliefs as myth, despite them encapsulating millennia-old, enduring ecological knowledge. The invalidation of science that integrates culture and spirituality is exemplified in the controversy surrounding the simultaneous discovery of the theory of natural selection by Alfred Russel Wallace and Darwin, the guiding principle for ecological thought since the Enlightenment. Wallace’s relative obscurity can be attributed to both Darwin’s exploitation of their collaborative work and Wallace’s ties to spiritualism. Wallace was eventually ostracized and invalidated by his peers for attributing spiritual meaning into scientific phenomenon.

With beliefs and mythology forming a large dimension of Lo–TEK, the struggle between science and spiritualism overshadows indigenous people, who remain the unrecognized ecological innovators of the planet. Compounding this problem, history also reveals a legacy of indigenous appropriation without attribution. The very origin of the term sustainability can be traced back to The Great Lore of the Iroquois people, and its Seventh Generation Principle, considering actions as they affect the seventh generation after them.⁴ This association remains unacknowledged, perhaps for fear of invalidating its scientific authenticity with spiritual beliefs, just as the relationship of indigenous people to sustainable technology remains unexplored.

In this era of the Anthropocene, humankind will need to redefine the mythology of technology to include indigenous innovation. The indigenous cultures of the world need to be recognized as innovative rather than primitive and have their knowledge embedded in the thinking of our future. Harvard professor Dr. Edward O. Wilson predicts that during this next hundred years the protection of biodiversity will be our highest priority.⁵ However, species’ extinction alone won’t be the twenty-­first century’s greatest loss. The same forces that drive species extinction endanger the indigenous technol­ogies that may hold a key to humanity’s survival. With indigenous communities being one of the groups most impacted by climate change, and many of the activities that, in the name of progress, have precipitated it, their knowledge is in fact an essential part of the solution.

In the age of the Anthropocene, humanity’s impact on the planet is undeniable. By destruction and even by conservation, all ecological systems are impacted by human action. We are now at a crossroads where we can either continue a narrow view of technology, informed by our distance from nature, or we can acknowledge that this is just one way and not the only way for humans to live. Designers today understand the urgency of reducing humanity’s negative environmental impact, yet perpetuate the same mythology that relies on exploiting nature. We cast Nature both as a menacing force now retaliating against us, and as a forlorn figure, surrendering to our ‘saving by way of savvy’ technological innovation.

By building hard infrastructures and favoring hightech homogenous design, we are ignoring millennia-old knowledge of how to live with Nature in symbiosis. Being borne in an era before climate change, the early efforts of the conservation movement to “save nature” predictably perpetuated the same mythology of technology, overlooking indigenous people and their innovations. Conservation lands were conceived of as guarded wilderness, from which human life was removed. Charismatic landscapes and species were protected, rather than the symbiotic relationships between species that support ecosystems. By attempting to preserve nature, the top-down approach to conservation has often eroded it. This movement removed stewards, erased knowledge, and ignored resilient technologies that had been mitigating climate challenges for thousands of years.

The American forefathers of conservation could not have imagined the movement would be adopted globally, displacing millions of indigenous peoples and accelerating the mass extinction of species. In the shadows of the conservation movement is the hidden story of conservation refugees. Millions of indigenous peoples who have been systematically removed from their lands to create conservation areas.⁶ Accompanying this mass displacement is the loss of Lo—TEK innovations that rely on and protect animals, materials, mythologies, and man.

While the conservation movement was conceived with admirable ambitions, it was based on the scientific thinking of the time that elevated nature as pristine wilder­ness that had to be saved, while indigenous peoples and their technologies were completely ignored. By valuing science over tradition, the individual over community, and pristine wilderness over indigenous peoples, the prevailing mythology of technology was reinforced.

We cannot find solutions to the problems we face with the same ideology from which those problems emerged. Exploring alternatives to the dominant mythology and the failure of conservation reveals the existence of the invaluable indigenous knowledge facing extinction. We need to change how we view the Anthropocene. While human impact is ubiquitous, it does not mean all interactions have led to destruction. This mindset distances both us from nature and nature from us. In contrast, the mindset of indigeneity sees humans as part of nature and has evolved technologies that use biodiversity as a building block. A new mythology of technology in the era of the Anthropocene can replace the pending threat that nature will destroy us with the optimism that a collaboration with Nature can save us.

Climate change has shown us that our survival is not dependent upon superiority, but upon symbiosis. In the shift towards designing resilient cities, indigenous technologies are critical in the conversation for designers addressing climate change, as they are living examples that embody resilience thinking. We need to expand our definition of sustainable technology. Acknowledging the mistakes of modernity and the failure of conservation, we can shift our position of authority to one of collaboration with Nature. This will involve incorporating the nuances of indigenous innovation.

Building high-tech, homogenous, hard infrastructures in response to climate change is perpetuating the old mythology of technology. Considering drastic sea level rise, recurrent storm events, and other unpredictable impacts from climate change, static infrastructures are proven limited in response to dynamic change. Without implementing soft systems that use biodiversity as a building block, these infrastructures remain inherently unsustainable. In an era of both utopian high tech and unprecedented climate extremes, we are drowning in information, while starving for wisdom.

We must begin telling an emergent yet ancient mythology of technology, where progress is not only found in our fascination with the future. As designers, our role is to create a new ground for a positive engagement with Nature. Re-establishing this relationship means acknowledging that humans have always lived with natural systems. Indigenous people of the Great Lakes are guided by the Original Instructions.⁷ These are the mythologies that have been passed down through generations in ceremony that contain the wisdom of the past. They are not instructions but, like a compass, they provide an orientation rather than a map for the future.⁸ Innovation can be found in knowledge from the past, and the customs that teach us to “remember to remember.”

Bio

Designer, activist, academic and author, Julia Watson is a leading expert on indigenous nature-based technologies. Her unconventional practice led to research, writing, and design projects inspired by pilgrimages to indigenous sites, while her formal education led to teaching positions at Harvard, Columbia, RISD, and Rensselaer universities. Julia’s work has been widely published in journals such as SPOOL, Topos Journal, and the Indigenous Peoples and Climate Technologies Guidebook. In 2019 she published Lo-TEK. Julia’s studio work involves speaking, writing, landscape architecture and urban design, alongside futures consulting for Fortune 500 companies. She’s held fellowships with Summit REALITY & Pop!tech, received a Christensen Fund grant, an Arnold W. Brunner award for Architectural Research, a New York State Council of the Arts Architecture + Design award, and ws a Disruptive By Design Ambassador for WIRED.