next »

[fym22]

Another posting on this forum asks about hispanic is an ethnicity or a race. It made me recall a conversation I had with a colleague of mine a couple of weeks ago. She made a statement that got me thinking. So, I'll pose it to the forumites. It has to do with the term "native American". In recent times that phrase has been used to refer to what used to be called "American Indian".

My colleague, whose ancestors were european, said the following:  "Well, I was born and raised in the U.S.  So were my parents, grandparents and greatgrandparents. The only time I've been outside of the U.S. was a one week vacation to Canada last year. If I don't qualify as a "native American", then I must, by definition, be a native of some other country. What country would that be?

You know, I didn't have a good answer for her.

[scientiffikk]

Why would American Indian be more appropriate?  Are you suggesting the aboriginal people of North America are from India?

Do you have a point with this or are you just trying to stir up controversy?

[larryc]

I do American Indian history and sometimes work with people from tribal groups. Most call themselves Indians--Native American is a term that you hear mostly on college campuses and in academic journals, rarely in Indian Country.  However, few American Indians object to the term Native American.  Indian and Native American are equally acceptable. Neither is more accurate than the other--Indian is Columbus's misnomer, and humans are not native to the Americas. Really, in my field this is not an issue anymore.

Best of all, however, is to use a specific tribal designation when one is available.  If you are describing a group of Nez Perces, for example, it is better to write "Nez Perces" instead of "Indians."

[prytania3]

Potawatami.

[doctormommy]

My experience is similar to larryc's. Most American Indians that I've known either refer to themselves by their tribe or call themselves Indian.

I also have several friends who are from India who found the term "American Indian" totally confusing.

[speedwell]

I also teach American Indian history, and LarryC's response is right on.

[scientiffikk]

Guys,

I have afriend who is Navajo, and he refers to himself as Indian.  I knew that when I responded, however, that is not the answer to the question the OP asked.

[helpful]

In Canada they have a better idea. They call themselves First Nations. It is as much a political term as a designation.

[thinkuniversity]

Another posting on this forum asks about hispanic is an ethnicity or a race. It made me recall a conversation I had with a colleague of mine a couple of weeks ago. She made a statement that got me thinking. So, I'll pose it to the forumites. It has to do with the term "native American". In recent times that phrase has been used to refer to what used to be called "American Indian".

My colleague, whose ancestors were european, said the following:  "Well, I was born and raised in the U.S.  So were my parents, grandparents and greatgrandparents. The only time I've been outside of the U.S. was a one week vacation to Canada last year. If I don't qualify as a "native American", then I must, by definition, be a native of some other country. What country would that be?

You know, I didn't have a good answer for her.

Good question.

These are terms often used. I guess one who's native ethnic heritage comes from North and South America might want to answer this one.

Many terms used are

Amerindian
Native American
American Indian
Alaska Native

These two terms are use in some places
Mestizo (Amerindian/white)
Zambo (Amerindian/black)

Many say Mexico is officially mostly Mestizo. But, in fact it is mostly Amerindian.

Many people don't often use the term Zambo.

In the US one is legally an American Indian if they are Mestizo or Zambo. But, one can also be legally white or black. Depending on what the person wants to claim.

Oddly, in the US on the official US Census Bureau's form
one can not ba an American Indian/Native American/Alaska Native unless they maintain a relationship with a tribe (ethnic group).

This is strange because we know that Mexico is mostly populated by Amerindians and Mestizos. Yet, in Mexico people no longer maintain a tribal or ethnic affiliation. Most people from Mexico maintain a national identity of Mexican, over any tribal or ethnic identity. Many other Amerindians from other Latin countries also maintain their national heritage over any relationship to a tribe or ethnic group. Of course European Mexicans and African Mexicans are not Amerindians (with the exception of the Mestizo and Zambo population). The same goes in other Latin American countries (with the exception of the Mestizo and Zambo population).

Mexico can be said to have had five major civilizations: The Olmec, Teotihuacan, the Toltec, the Mexica (Aztecs) and the Maya. These civilizations (with the exception of the politically-fragmented Maya) extended their reach across Mexico, and beyond, like no others. Today 90% of Mexico's population are from these people. 9% of Mexico's population is from European heritage, such as the outgoing president Fox. 1% of Mexico's population is either black, or Asian.

There may actually been more black Mexicans than we know of:
http://www.afromexico.com
Photos of AfroMexicans
http://www.afromexico.com/album/


This is what the US Census Bureau states you have to be to meet this official status in the United States

American Indian or Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment.

Because of this criteria and because there is no Amerindian category on the US Census forms, over 25+ million Amerindians from Latin American are not identified as such. Yet, for the first time since the creation of the United States Amerindians/American Indians/Native Americans/Alaska Natives are the nation's fastest growing population.

Take a look at this
This really shows the relationship with this group of people that has been overlooked due to the terms we are speaking of here in this topic thread.

http://www.mexica-movement.org/timexihcah/video/mmintro.htm

[bibliothecula]

I was always told that "Zambo" was a deragatory term. is it not?

[larryc]

Many say Mexico is officially mostly Mestizo. But, in fact it is mostly Amerindian.

Not really. In Mexico, "Indio" is more of a cultural than a racial classification. People who speak Spanish and wear western dress are rarely called Indians, whatever their racial heritage. 

I was always told that "Zambo" was a derogatory term. is it not?

The Mexican "zambo" for a person of mixed black and Indian heritage is not the same word as the North American "Sambo" which is indeed a derogatory term for blacks.  I am not sure if zambo is derogatory in contemporary Mexico--anyone know?

[thinkuniversity]

I was always told that "Zambo" was a deragatory term. is it not?

Zambo, Mestizo, Mestiço, Métis are all often seen as deragatory by a number of Amerindians.

But, you may be thinking of the term Sambo that is considered a derogatory term for an African Americans/blacks. (As larryc stated)

[helpful]

Metis is a proud title for those Metis in Canada. It is even recognized in the Canadian constitution.

So it just proves that the meaning of a word is contextual and contingent on a particular context's history.

[dr_stones]

Ask a tribal member . . . and they will tell you that they are Arapaho, Sioux, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Shoshone, Navajo, and so on. 

They will also often say that they are Indians. My experience is that most of the people who walk around actually worrying about this are not Indian, Native American or from the Subcontinent. 

[bibliothecula]

Hmm, no, I was thinking of "Zambo," not "sambo." A Chicano friend tells me it's not polite. But interesting on "Metis" being accepted and apparently reclaimed in Canada. A colleague here in the Midwest supports the name "First Nations," also used in Canada. Does anyone know how that term developed? was it proposed by those from those nations, or by outsiders?