In postcolonial South Asia, Bangladesh continues to define its national identity in ways that reproduce colonial exclusions. Despite the presence of more than fifty-four Adibashi groups, state authorities continue to contest their Indigenous status and deny them constitutional recognition as Indigenous peoples. This article examines how naming practices employed by Bengali political elites contribute to the marginalisation of Indigenous communities in Bangladesh. The state adopts a homogenising model of nationalism centred on a majority identity, which denies Indigeneity and undermines Adibashi claims to land, rights, and recognition. The article argues that nationalist politics shapes naming practices and uses them as mechanisms of assimilation and exclusion. It first situates Indigeneity within international and national debates and then demonstrates that, although marginalisation is not the sole defining feature of Indigeneity, it remains a central dimension of Indigenous experience in Bangladesh and reflects the persistence of colonial forms of domination within nationalist projects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tanzina Tahereen (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: