it's one thing to give a marginalized group a voice, and then completely ignore them. that is the typically "enlightened" liberal perspective - let them speak, they add "diversity" and "culture", and then just walk away and completely ignore them.

this is the status quo on the pseudo-left. but, this is deeply patronizing and deeply racist.

it is another thing to listen to the voices of the marginalized with goodwill, and make a good faith effort to take them into consideration. this ought to be the preferable approach, at face value. but, anybody who has actually done this has learned how impossible it is to stay consistent with an ideologically left approach and listen to these group at the same time - which is why they're so often ignored in the first place.

so, we're left with a pointless choice between ignoring them altogether and infantilizing them into something that isn't worth taking seriously, because you can't take a group seriously when they show up at a science conference and start taking about great spirits - you have to approach them with some patronizing concept of fiduciary obligation and patiently wait to ignore them, or you have to continue to marginalize them.

what you want is for these groups to be able to come to the table and be able to represent their interests using modern language, with an understanding of modern science and modern law. but, you probably realize they wouldn't be marginalized any more if they could stand up and speak for themselves, right?

i don't think that the liberals of past eras were wrong in pointing to education as a way out. today, we point to mary wollstonecraft as the originator of feminism for pointing out the idea that what women need is equal access to education, but we attack people who made similar arguments about indigenous groups as racists and colonialist wasters. it's not an inconsistency, it's an inversion; it's repressed racism for us to continue to cast them away as the other, and then justify that as an "embrace of diversity". if we saw therm as equals, we would insist on educating them so they can stand up for themselves, not let them languish aimlessly in their own ignorance, and then steal their resources when they can't present a defence of them.

it's not what we did that was wrong, it was how we did it. and, it is the how that we should be adjusting, not the what. because, the endpoint of education and modernization is the correct one, and the correct way for these groups to save themselves - and help the rest of us save the planet.