Jump to content

They are NOT Native Americans. They are INDIANS


Recommended Posts

The term Native American is a LIE in so many ways. Let's run down the list.

1. When the tribes first arrived at this hunk of rock on the opposite side of the civilized world, Amerigo Vespucci had not been born. So there was NO America. So there can't be a Native American.

2. The Columbus lie (about his thinking the people he saw in the Caribbean were Indians since he was sailing to India) is a stupid lie. Back then, there was no India. It was Hindustan.

3. The word INDIAN comes from Columbus's lack of Spanish language expertise.

https://massinitiative.org/why-did-columbus-refer-to-the-natives-he-encountered-as-los-indios/

Quote

Abbey writes that “Columbus knew he was nowhere near India” and that he was so charmed by the people he found in the Caribbean–so sweet, happy, blessed –he called them Los Gentes en (or in ) Dios , meaning “the people in God.” This is what Columbus wrote to Ferdinand and Isabella, Abbey reports, and the name Indios …

4. Why is it called Bureau of Indian Affairs? Why isn't it called Bureau of Native American affairs?

https://www.bia.gov/bia

 

5. If you really want to point to ignorance and racism, perhaps you should start with the Federal Government.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/29/2021-01606/indian-entities-recognized-by-and-eligible-to-receive-services-from-the-united-states-bureau-of

There are 574 American Indian tribes. Whether they are called Indian (which is correct) or Native American (which is a lie) why are they ALL lumped in one entity?

They are from different parts of the country. They have different customs. They don't even speak the same language.

What about THESE Indians? They speak Spanish. They're from South America. How do they AT ALL resemble Indians in the United States?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

The term Native American is a LIE in so many ways. Let's run down the list.

1. When the tribes first arrived at this hunk of rock on the opposite side of the civilized world, Amerigo Vespucci had not been born. So there was NO America. So there can't be a Native American.

2. The Columbus lie (about his thinking the people he saw in the Caribbean were Indians since he was sailing to India) is a stupid lie. Back then, there was no India. It was Hindustan.

3. The word INDIAN comes from Columbus's lack of Spanish language expertise.

https://massinitiative.org/why-did-columbus-refer-to-the-natives-he-encountered-as-los-indios/

4. Why is it called Bureau of Indian Affairs? Why isn't it called Bureau of Native American affairs?

https://www.bia.gov/bia

 

5. If you really want to point to ignorance and racism, perhaps you should start with the Federal Government.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/29/2021-01606/indian-entities-recognized-by-and-eligible-to-receive-services-from-the-united-states-bureau-of

There are 574 American Indian tribes. Whether they are called Indian (which is correct) or Native American (which is a lie) why are they ALL lumped in one entity?

They are from different parts of the country. They have different customs. They don't even speak the same language.

What about THESE Indians? They speak Spanish. They're from South America. How do they AT ALL resemble Indians in the United States?

 

What rot. They were named Indians because Columbus was looking for a quicker route to Asia and didn't know there was another continent in the way.

How does a bunch of Europeans naming a continent after a Spaniard have anything to do with the people who were already living there?

The Indies were a region, not a country which among others included modern India, Pakistan and Indonesia (Dutch East Indies)

Europeans have a bunch of different cultures and languages. What's your point?

Edited by Aristides
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another insane thread.

Calling them Native Americans has nothing to do with the timing of the arrival of Amerigo Vespucci. They are called so because we renamed the land America and because we are a thoroughly ethnocentric society we renamed the peoples of that place accordingly. Exactly as we would call beings from Mars "martians" even though those beings would have no relationship to the name or notion what Mars is. That's what ethnocentricity is--we view all the world from our own perspective with little regard for the perspectives of other cultures.

Abandoning the term Native American is totally reasonable, but thinking that Indian is somehow more correct is lunacy. It's not better. It's worse. It too is a name imposed upon them by ethnocentric outsiders with zero concern for their perspective--and compounded by the fact that there are actual Indians on the Indian subcontinent who seem to have embraced that designation. 

We could correctly call the people who were here before us indigenous people or some variation. Canada has a very considerate and respectful designation (IMO) with First Nations. Or we could get totally wild and ask the collective peoples what they prefer instead of imposing, once again, some purely external name. I mean, after a conquest of land, a raft of broken promises and a little light genocide, we could probably afford to be a bit more considerate going forward.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, reason10 said:

So there was NO America. So there can't be a Native American.

By that logic, this means that since there was no America when the first white settlers came to what is now America, their descendants can’t be called Americans either.  
 

The logic there is…..   questionable, to say the least.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

By that logic, this means that since there was no America when the first white settlers came to what is now America, their descendants can’t be called Americans either.  
 

The logic there is…..   questionable, to say the least.  

NOT just questionable, but lacking, as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Aristides said:

What rot. They were named Indians because Columbus was looking for a quicker route to Asia and didn't know there was another continent in the way.

How does a bunch of Europeans naming a continent after a Spaniard have anything to do with the people who were already living there?

The Indies were a region, not a country which among others included modern India, Pakistan and Indonesia (Dutch East Indies)

Europeans have a bunch of different cultures and languages. What's your point?

Nope. Get someone with an education to read the first post and explain it to you. The Spanish phrase is In Dios, which is the origin of the Indian name. Had nothing to do with Indies on the other side of the world.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

The people who named them “Indians” thought they made it to the Indian Ocean.   
 

They should be called whatever they wish to be called.  Why is it up to you?

That is a lie. Get someone with an education to read the first post to you.

The phrase is the badly spoken Spanish In Dios, which is where the term INDIANS comes from.

The American government STILL has an Indian Affairs Bureau, not a Native American Bureau.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

By that logic, this means that since there was no America when the first white settlers came to what is now America, their descendants can’t be called Americans either.  
 

The logic there is…..   questionable, to say the least.  

LIke I've said many times, there are Floridian third graders smarter than you.

The white settlers NAMED this country. The white settlers FOUGHT A GODDAM REVOLUTIONARY WAR to name and create the United States of America.

Indians were here before there was an America. So there's NOTHING "Native' American about them.

They are American Indians. North American Indians, to be exact. That's what they call themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, reason10 said:

Nope. Get someone with an education to read the first post and explain it to you. The Spanish phrase is In Dios, which is the origin of the Indian name. Had nothing to do with Indies on the other side of the world.

 

A: Indigenous  people were not Christian

B: They didn't speak Spanish.

? If I call you mo-ron, that doesn't make it your name, even if it is accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, reason10 said:

LIke I've said many times, there are Floridian third graders smarter than you.

The white settlers NAMED this country. The white settlers FOUGHT A GODDAM REVOLUTIONARY WAR to name and create the United States of America.

Indians were here before there was an America. So there's NOTHING "Native' American about them.

They are American Indians. North American Indians, to be exact. That's what they call themselves.

Why does this matter at all? And what makes you think they give a damn about what you think they should be called? Are you going to decide what Catholics and Jews should be called? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rebound said:

Just answer the question

Asked and answered. There is no such thing as a Native American. That is a bullschit left wing term that oozed into the national consciousness a few years ago and has ZERO basis in fact. They are called INDIANS.

They call themselves INDIANS. History calls them INDIANS. The government agency that deals with them is the Bureau of INDIAN affairs.

If you want to change the subject and drag RELIGION into this, you only look childish and stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, reason10 said:

No I'm not. I'm just pointing out the stupidity of woke goose steppers.

Yes you are. En Dios is all about religion, a foreign religion in a foreign language. Want to find a goose stepper, just look in your mirror. You probably still call Inuit, Eskimos another name dreamed up by the white man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Yes you are. En Dios is all about religion, a foreign religion in a foreign language. Want to find a goose stepper, just look in your mirror. You probably still call Inuit, Eskimos another name dreamed up by the white man.

It is impossible for me to be a goose stepper. I'm a conservative Republican. And apparently I have a better grasp of history than you DemoNazis. You're constantly trying to change history to fit whatever RACIST narrative you want to spew on people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, reason10 said:

I'm a conservative Republican.

That is an oxymoron. A Conservative is loyal to the Crown. A Republican is against the Crown. The tens of thousands of American Conservatives who fought for the King in the revolutionary war were called Tories. Tory is the name we call Conservatives. 

And the people who first settled in the western hemisphere are the First Nations, not "Indians."

Edited by Queenmandy85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That is an oxymoron. A Conservative is loyal to the Crown. A Republican is against the Crown. The tens of thousands of American Conservatives who fought for the King in the revolutionary war were called Tories. Tory is the name we call Conservatives. 

And the people who first settled in the western hemisphere are the First Nations, not "Indians."

 

41 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

That is an oxymoron. A Conservative is loyal to the Crown. A Republican is against the Crown. The tens of thousands of American Conservatives who fought for the King in the revolutionary war were called Tories. Tory is the name we call Conservatives. 

And the people who first settled in the western hemisphere are the First Nations, not "Indians."

What you need to know is that in America the concept of "Conservative" and "Liberal" have undergone drastic changes in definition. It has been 200 years since the Tory. At one time, Liberal used to mean Laissez-Faire free market capitalism with very little government intervention. That changed in the Early Sixties during what was called the Port Huron Statement, which turned liberalism into radical socialism, anti Americanism, and neo Nazism.

It took the philosophies and policies of William F. Buckley, Ronald Reagan and Rush Limbaugh to completely reinvent the term conservatism, which today means free market capitalism, the rule of law, liberty, secure borders and efficient low cost government, which most of America agrees with.

I've heard the term "First Nations" before.

Interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...