Indians or Native Americans

[rachmaninoff_forever]

What should we call them?

I used to think that Native American was fair,  but if you think about it, the English came over to America, stole their land, destroyed their culture, killed a couple million people, and then named them after themselves.

But didn't Christopher Colombus call them Indian because when he came to America, he thought he was in India?  But India had a different name back then right?  So did he really name them after India or not?  Hmmm...

So if we call them Native Americas, that's douchebagish, but if we call them Indian, then what do we call people from India?  India Idians?

Ugh, this is confusing.

[Bob]

Native Americans, but good point with the America part.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas#Etymology_and_naming

I heard Indian was offensive because Columbus thought he was in India, so they were Indians.  A whole culture named for a mistake. 

Haha. Oh well.  *Bob oh wells an entire culture.*  I'd say Native American.  Indian will make you sound out dated.

[patrickd]

Native Americans.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

So it turns out that according to the American Indian association, they don't like to be called Native Americans.
 

[maul]

I think "Alcoholic Americans" is the appropriate phrase. I'm a full-blown Alcoholic American myself, or at least I used to be.

[Bob]

You're still stuck having to use Native Americans until society decides to change it. 

Native Peoples sounds a little better to me.  Unless someone takes that as "you people."  Then that would be out.  Native... something.

[lloyd_cdb]

Native Redskins? In all honesty, Without trying to be too disrespectful, there is a point at which being offended is just wanting to be offended. Saying "Natives" makes no real distinction. I'm reasonably confident I'm a "native" as well. I'm not "English" nor am I a spanish conquistador, a pilgrim, an invader, a murderer, or any other distinction between the reason I exist in the US. "People" seems fairly sensical to me. I just really don't see any point to the intentional distinction for anything but scientific studies on genetics.

[pianoplunker]

What should we call them?

I used to think that Native American was fair,  but if you think about it, the English came over to America, stole their land, destroyed their culture, killed a couple million people, and then named them after themselves.

But didn't Christopher Colombus call them Indian because when he came to America, he thought he was in India?  But India had a different name back then right?  So did he really name them after India or not?  Hmmm...

So if we call them Native Americas, that's douchebagish, but if we call them Indian, then what do we call people from India?  India Idians?

Ugh, this is confusing.

Well, according to my heavily anglo-saxon based education from the 1960s and 1970s, Christopher Columbus "discovered"  America, even compared to being the first man on the moon.  So he can call them whatever he wants. And then removing them was all in the name of God so it is all justified. No need to get wrapped up in labels. 

[iansinclair]

Isn't trying to be politically correct fun?  Leads to all sorts of contortions...

The Canadians use the term "First Nations" which has something to be said for it, although the Canadians treat them almost as poorly as the US does, so it doesn't seem to make much difference.  On the other hand, they use the term "Inuit" for the native peoples of the arctic regions, which has a lot to be said for it since it is what they themselves call themselves.

Which suggests that perhaps using individual tribal names (e.g. Cherokee, Iroquois, Arapahoe, etc.) might be more in line with what other groups in North America do, except that might be confusing to those who like to create groups of people...

[Bob]

Pre-Europeans?

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Well, according to my heavily anglo-saxon based education from the 1960s and 1970s, Christopher Columbus "discovered"  America, even compared to being the first man on the moon.  So he can call them whatever he wants. And then removing them was all in the name of God so it is all justified. No need to get wrapped up in labels. 

Well he didn't actually discover America, there were already people there before him.

[lloyd_cdb]

Isn't trying to be politically correct fun?

I wouldn't know. I don't bother trying 

Which suggests that perhaps using individual tribal names (e.g. Cherokee, Iroquois, Arapahoe, etc.) might be more in line with what other groups in North America do, except that might be confusing to those who like to create groups of people...

The American people can't figure out that there is a difference between the words Czech and Chechen. I'm doubting they would bother trying to distinguish tribes by geography, let alone by visual appearance.

In regards to Inuits, it's easier to distinguish them due to the fact that they are so isolated.

Pre-Europeans?

"Homo sapiens existing on the North American continent prior to European 'discovery' and subsequent invasion and genocide"

Well he didn't actually discover America, there were already people there before him.

He was the first civilized person to discover it, duh.

[indianajo]

I'll accept Native American or American Indian.  If you believe the fairy tales of my ancestors I'm 7/8 European anyway.  Ha! Europeans don't have measles five times, or Pneumonia 25 times, or a respiratory infection everytime I ride an airplane or an air-conditioned train or eat at church "family style" where kids use their personal utensils to serve themselves a second helping.  Europeans mostly don't have 28" legs or 30 " arms, tiny hand and foot bones, an extra long back bone, morton's feet, don't weigh 122 lb in their prime, don't have their bones mature at age 25. European males have hair on their face and back and *******, I don't. Male Europeans frequently have male pattern baldness and wrinkles by 40, I don't at 62.  Cher's face is not all plastic surgery.  The books say type B blood is East African or north Asian.  I'm type B and my 55" 72 lb black haired Grandmother was probably too. Figure like a stick, if she was East African like her blood type or Irish like she said she was, I'm the Wizard of Oz.    Not many East Africans in Tyler County West Virginia in 1900.  On my mother's side, Mother met Great Granny Roy at her Grandmother's house about 1933 when her miner husband died and she was thrown out of the company house.  She spoke something strange, had long black hair and the round face, tan skin, thewhole stereotype,  and said she was Cherokee, which is not likely in Boone County WV.  But the Tug Fork natives allegedly spoke something related to Cherokee, Wikipedia says.  The point is, there was a market for short people in low coal from the turn of the century on, some natives survived.  The whole "what enrolled tribe" thing on the federal surveys annoys me.  If I was as resistant to disease or built like a European, I'd put up with the label, but having to fight all the repiratory infections people pass around from carelessness makes me short tempered.  Not being called a stupid label.  Another thing that made me short tempered is becoming invisible to healthy women when I hit puberty.  I'm not a dwarf, I'm too much native, however white my skin is.  It would have been nice to pass on my skills at school, math, engineering, and music and extreme longevity to my children, but there won't be any of those now.  Those of my ancestors that survived were carefully selected by life for intelligence, agility, endurance, and an easygoing personality.  No great warriors in my background, but probably a lot of people that hid in the mountains  of WV until they found a place in modern society about 1870.  Watch for my "Eastern" novel of how my ancestors survived, I bet it sells three or four copies.  
Odd question for Pianostreet.  Indianajo.  

[lloyd_cdb]

I'll accept Native American or American Indian.  If you believe the fairy tales of my ancestors I'm 7/8 European anyway.  Ha! Europeans don't have measles five times, or Pneumonia 25 times, or a respiratory infection everytime I ride an airplane or an air-conditioned train or eat at church "family style" where kids use their personal utensils to serve themselves a second helping.

With all due respect, this isn't exactly how the human immune system works. Your historical ancestry has nothing to do with you being fragile. It due to a lack of immuno-diversity which is caused by the choice of your parents to mate while having similar immune systems. It could also be due to the age of your parents at the time of your birth or due to premature birth (or any other birth issue for that matter). In regards to measles, it's EXTREMELY rare for people to have it twice let alone 5 times which is, again, because of how your immune system works. I'm sorry, but it's almost physiologically impossible for someone to have measles 5 times.

 Europeans mostly don't have 28" legs or 30 " arms, tiny hand and foot bones, an extra long back bone, morton's feet, don't weigh 122 lb in their prime, don't have their bones mature at age 25.

My mother is an immigrant from Belgium. Her parents are Belgian and Polish. My father is a 3rd generation American with ancestry in Lithuania. My brother is 105 lbs at age 24 and has mortons toe. Again, the things you describe are significant outliers and tend to be associated with birth defects, not ethnicity. My brother has Asthma and used to get bronchitis every year without fail.

European males have hair on their face and back and *******, I don't. Male Europeans frequently have male pattern baldness and wrinkles by 40, I don't at 62. 

I have no hair on my back and shave once a week. I have no male pattern baldness that exists anywhere in my family tree. Beyond that:

"The assertion that Native Americans cannot grow facial hair is a common misconception and stereotype.[4][5][6][7][8]" While this is from wikipedia, 5 citations tend not to be a lie. Beyond that, every other source I found on google said it is a stereotype exclusive of yahoo answers. One of which was from a "native american" author of "A Cultural History of the Native People of Southern New England".

I really think you are wrongly associating your health issues with ethnicity.

[chopin2015]

I think indian is deviating from the word indigenous, because the syllable -in- exists in many languages...indian and hINdu are two words that are in my russian vocabulary. But, I would say, "native americans" or whatever THEY want to be called(they probably do not worry about that)...all they really care is that it reflects their spirituality and culture and freedom. If they cannot claim they are white, they can either say they do not choose to identify, or identify with a group of people or gene pool...or whatever.

This is either a political or a scientific question. We don't have to get into the whole white/african american/hispanic/native american identity debate. If you currently live in a native american community, then you can either say you are not white/native or choose not to identify because you were born in America and you have all the rights!

[birba]

Most definitely by their tribal name, as iansinclair pointed out.

[Bob]

That's not going to work for the whole continent.

How about... Continental natives?  Or... People who are continently native?  That way it emphasizes that they're people.  And then the same term could be applied to any continent.  ...People with (North American, South Am, Euro, etc. ) continentally native backgrounds?  That sounds accurate and non-offensive. 

Although everyone immigrated at some point, except for those who "evolved" into being in Africa, the first actual homo sapiens.  I guess everyone's kind of stuck with a label of where ever their ancestors originally travelled to. 

[birba]

Do you call someone from rome a european?  Someone from lieges a european?  A japanese, an asian?  Heaven forbid if you call a georgian a russian.  Each tribe is very very different from the next and they're very proud of their own particular heritage.

[lloyd_cdb]

I'm ok with you calling me a person. Human is acceptable as well.

[chopin2015]

Do you call someone from rome a european?  Someone from lieges a european?  A japanese, an asian?  Heaven forbid if you call a georgian a russian.  Each tribe is very very different from the next and they're very proud of their own particular heritage.

In America, Georgian, Russian, Polish, French...all white. Cherokee, Comanche, Chickasaw, Seneca...all are Native American. No one cares if I am an immigrant, even thought I am treated poorly for it, I am still called white and I can identify as that if I want and have some kind of advantage or disadvantage until they SEE me and hear me speak LOL. If you identify as Native American, you are not white. If you identify to a Tribe, that is pretty territorial...Either way, be it a tribe name or a heritage tag, it is to underline a difference in gene pool. Besides, "Romans" are most likely to be called white than European, anyways. That is not offensive because it is obvious. It is also usually not racial to say European to a person who is a white... and it helps that it is generally considered politically correct to say Native American or indigenous, a norm in America.  

You know, tribes used to fight too...so it's not like it unifies people to identify in a specific way. That applies to identifying as a Republican or Democrat, too...if you're a Democrat, that is. MUAHAHA
I think it is a American culture norm, though. To identify as a race or maybe just a political party is important, so you know where you have advantage and disadvantage in this country. Elsewhere...it's more about culture than race. Here, I think race identifies different types of genetic background, allowing different groups to pursue freedom of culture that is inspired by ancient cultures from all over the world. This gives gives people economic and political opportunities, as well! .

Regardless, fact is that 1/3 of people in the world have Ghengis Khan's genes anyways...

[rachmaninoff_forever]

I'm switching to Indian.

Back then India was called Hindustan, so Christopher Colombus probably didn't name the Indians after India. 

So it turns out Indian means people of god.  No shame in that I guess.

Ditching that Native American bs.

[outin]

I'm switching to Indian.

Back then India was called Hindustan, so Christopher Colombus probably didn't name the Indians after India. 

So it turns out Indian means people of god.  No shame in that I guess.

Ditching that Native American bs.

So what do you call yourself these days? Lisitšian?

[rachmaninoff_forever]

As much as I would love for there to be a country called Lisitsastan, there isn't.

So I'll just stick with black.

[outin]

As much as I would love for there to be a country called Lisitsastan, there isn't.

I'm sure if you can do all the things down there, you can form your own country as well 

[Bob]

Society decides, similar to deciding what's good in classical music. If you don't follow it, you're off.  If you do follow it, you cut down the chance of being criticized. I don't even think an individual person can decide it, even if that's their culture. 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Society decides, similar to deciding what's good in classical music. If you don't follow it, you're off.  If you do follow it, you cut down the chance of being criticized. I don't even think an individual person can decide it, even if that's their culture. 

Whoever criticizes me will be the first to be replaced by nobler beings when I end the world!

Simple.

[birba]

Watch out, bob.  He means business.

[cuberdrift]

Shouldn't they be called Americans, while US people should be called Foreigner Americans, because they came later from far-off countries? 

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Shouldn't they be called Americans, while US people should be called Foreigner Americans, because they came later from far-off countries? 

They came from England and named the new world America. 

The name 'American' didn't come from the Indians.

[chopin2015]

They came from England and named the new world America. 

The name 'American' didn't come from the Indians.

You mean New England?