Racism Part III: Indian or Native American

 

A war exist between the terms "Indian" and "Native American." I hear this argument all the time:

 

"Indians aren't native american, I was born in America, I'm native american too."

 

What the hell? Native American DOES NOT mean that you were born in this country, it means that your ethnicity is one of the indigineous people of the Americas before contact with Europe. To call someone "Indian" would mean that the person you are speaking of is from India. So, calling someone "Indian" is not only a geographic absurdity, but also shows a lack of understanding concerning history.

 

But out of all words, why Native American? It is pretty long and usually we like quick ethnic names like Latino, Italian, Black, White, Asian, Arab, and ect. However, what other options do we have? If we call Native Americans "Natives" it implies that they are an extremely backward people. "Indigineous Americans/Peoples" is fine as well, but it is even longer to say than "Native American." Because there is no better, more efficient, or honest way to describe people of Native American ethnicities, one must always use the term Native American.

 

Why do I care so much about things that are not that important to an 18 year old white male? I cannot stand inconsitency or hypocrisy. If anything is ever inconsitent in my beliefs, I would like to rectify such a problem. When I hear "African American", the absurdity and background to such dishonest and therefore inherently racist terms bothers me. Why? Because racism is a belief that requires hypocritical, inconsistent, and illogical thought patterns. This I can never accept. I can accept what I find out is most likely true and I try to stay consistent to such beliefs. If everyone thought in a consistent illogical matter we would be in many ways better off. So is it too much to care about even small problems in a society? I do not think so. If you see something that is wrong, do not ever be afraid to question it. When we start accepting what we hear and see without question, we become hollow shells of people who cannot think on our own. This is unacceptable.

 

 

 

edit: I wrote an entire argument that is wrong, because the historical background taught to me was a lie. I stand corrected and I am happy that I am corrected. I'm merely a mortal, even I can be wrong some times.

I am gonna have to tell you something that you may not like... You are wrong.

 

The term Hispanic does not refer to someone who comes from "Hispanola". Actually, this term dates back to the Roman Empire. "Hispania" was the name the Romans called Spain during their invasion of the Iberic Peninsula in 19 B.C.

 

Called Hispania by the Romans, Spain was not one political entity but was divided into three separately governed provinces (nine provinces by the fourth century A.D.)

Link

 

We know that all Latin American nations speak Spanish because they were conquered and colonized by the Spaniards... Therefore, the term "Hispanic" or "Hispano" refers to the fact that we speak Spanish and were part of Spain for a long time.

 

That said, I have to say that this term is in no way derogatory. It is actually a way to lump us all Spanish speaking nations into one group; sort of like the term "Anglo-Saxon" refers to English speaking nations.

If that is so I stand corrected. However, that's not what I was taught, I would have to do more research.

 

However, Latin American groups together all those whose parent country was from the Iberian Peninsula, Spain and Portugal.

 

I would have to check up on that.

The only thing that bothers me about the use of the words "Latino" and "Hispanic" is that it has been used to denominate us as a "race".

 

Latino or Hispanic is not a race, just like Anglo-Saxon is not a race. The only races (which only refers to skin color because in reality Human is a race by itself) are Asian, White, Black, Indian, Mulato, etc.

 

Latino and Hispanic refers mainly to culture not skin color. For those who are clueless and inter-culturally challenged, you may want to know that there are people of Hispanic descent who are white, others that are black, others that are Mulato, Indians, etc.

 

Some people have come up to me with the best of intentions but with utter ignorance and tell me "wow, I didn't know you were Latina. You don't look Latina" mainly because I don't fit they're pre-conceived idea of what a "Latina" is supposed to look like. Just remember, Latino or Hispanic does not refer to someone's physical appeareance or race.... It refers to someone's culture and language.

as long as im not called a spick, w*****k or get looked at funny for speaking spanish i dont care

Lcyberlina, I was 100% wrong. I read up on it, you are right, so i apologize. Pardon my ignorance, I hope you can forgive me.

 

I will edit my post.

I agree with Lcybernia I dont like being called Latino, hispanic, or by the color of my skin. I think we should called people by where they are from. People from the USA are Americans, People from Cuba are Cubans, and People from Costa Rica like me are Costa Ricans or ticos.

Native Americans call each other Indians. So Indians.

 

Who cares? Racism is in the eye of the beholder. Words aren't dirty or racist because we percieve them to be, it's only dirty in the mind of the person who hears it, or says it in ignorance. There are times when it's okay to call anyone anything (black guys calling each other the dreaded 'n' word that still sends shivers up the white spine). We can't eliminate these words from our vocbularies, so both sides just need to agree to disagree. End of story.

I'm part Cherokee. Who the hell cares what they're (we're) called?

 

 

Does anyone find it funny that these indigenous groups are called "Native Americans" when actually they aren't native of America. It was named America waaayyy after they got here (of course, it's named after the Italian, Amerigo Vespucci). It's also interesting to note that these indigenous groups are really not native, but can be traced back to present-day Mongolia. If they are native Americans, than anyone born on this continent is a Native American.

 

That being said, if I had written documentation (which is tough to find, because of a series of fires and whatnot on my mama's side), I would be able to get scholarships and whatnot for being "Native American"....and maybe my stance on Affirmitive Action would be totally different...lol

we are all africans originally.

 

 

or maybe asians.

many experts believe that about 75% or more of all blacks (living in America...not Africans) have hispanic in them.

here's the beauty of this whole argument: WHO GIVES A FLYING F*CK! These names are used to describe someone. Hispanic, African-American, black, negroe, Indian, Native American, what have you....whatever you say, make sure people know what the hell youre talking about. I mean, that is the main point of language. If people are gonna get their panties in a bunch about technicalities such as the PC way of calling someone of a certain race or culture, then they need to calmly stand up, and shake the sand out of their vagina.

Well, my grandpa was one, and the term he always used was Indian, so that's what I stuck with.

I agree with Lcybernia I dont like being called Latino, hispanic, or by the color of my skin. I think we should called people by where they are from. People from the USA are Americans, People from Cuba are Cubans, and People from Costa Rica like me are Costa Ricans or ticos.

The problem with this is that doing so would be impractible. Blacks come from different parts of Africa, whites come from different parts of Europe, asians come from different parts of Asia, arabs come from different parts of the middle east, and ect. Saying "Latino" isn't lumping together people in the sense that all Domincans, Costa Ricans, and Venezuelans are the same. It pretty much says one is from the parts of America that had Iberian influence.

Native Americans call each other Indians. So Indians.

 

Who cares? Racism is in the eye of the beholder. Words aren't dirty or racist because we percieve them to be, it's only dirty in the mind of the person who hears it, or says it in ignorance. There are times when it's okay to call anyone anything (black guys calling each other the dreaded 'n' word that still sends shivers up the white spine). We can't eliminate these words from our vocbularies, so both sides just need to agree to disagree. End of story.

Not the native americans I spoke to in Arizona. they say either their tribe or just "native americans" when speaking of all of them.

 

Yes, a word is just a word, its really not a big deal. However, it can be dishonest amd inconsistent to call one someone one word over another.

The problem with this is that doing so would be impractible. Blacks come from different parts of Africa, whites come from different parts of Europe, asians come from different parts of Asia, arabs come from different parts of the middle east, and ect.

I think he meant calling people by the country in which they (or their parents for that matter) were born.

 

If I was to call myself by where my ancestors came from, I would be in deep trouble... I have no idea if my ancestors were only indians (South American Tribes), Spaniards or other Europeans, Africans... Etc. I think that today, no one can say that they are absolutely pure race.... (that is another topic). Anyway, I just don't want to drive myself crazy with this... I just call myself Colombian, because that's where I was born and my parents were born.

 

And the word Latino it's even less accurate than Hispanic. No country in "Latin America" speaks Latin. Latin is a dead language and it only survives in bits and pieces in the Romance Languages (Spanish, Italian). Therefore, if you should want to lump us all Spanish Speaking people into one group, you may call us "Hispanics". This term is not racist.

 

Now, calling someone a "spick" or a "wet back", that is racist and derogatory.

Latino put those that speak a latin based language, are catholic, and from Iberian influence into one category.

 

However, just from looking at you, how do I know you are columbian? When someone is Anglo-Saxon white, you can tell. At times, biethnic (black and white), Italians, Greeks, Latinos all look very similar, but other times you can just tell if there's some Native American blood in someone. Of course it does not always work, I by no means look Italian, but at least you know I look European. Its impossible to lable everyone from country, because it cannot be assumed so easily. However, socioeconomic simularities do make categorizing different people in broad groups beyond size of countries necessary.

However, just from looking at you, how do I know you are columbian? When someone is Anglo-Saxon white, you can tell.

Don't call me anything just by my appeareance. If you see me on the streets you would not know where I'm from just by looking at me. Only when I speak, people know that I'm not American. Some people have confused me for a Rumanian, a Hungarian, A Portuguese.... They never guess I'm a Colombian, unless they know how Colombians talk. This is just to tell you, that you should not call people by what they look like.

 

My father and brother are whiter than you. My father has blue eyes. Yet he is not Anglo-Saxon. Anglo-Saxon does not refer to skin color, it refers to your culture and language.

I agree to all those points, myself is a perfect example:

I by no means look Italian

 

Latinos could have a lot of spanish blood and look European, a lot of African blood and look African, and a cross between the two or even Native American blood.

 

Though I doubt your father is whiter than I (because I never met someone who got sunburned through T-shirts, I have come to the conclusion only Michael Jackson is whiter than me), I agree that you really cannot tell 100% someone is from. But to say that it is impossible is ridiculous. When I play pool in the only billiards(sp) place in my country, there are mostly Mexicans (judging from the Mexican flag and high Mexican population in the area.) It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that they happen to appear different than me and I appear different from them. Not that it matters, but yes, there are physical differences between different ethnicites on the whole (not individual basis.) On average, Africans have longer limbs than any other ethnicity. Does that mean all do? No, but on average yes. What I am saying is on average people can look different.

 

I have seen your picture when you had it up, I wouldn't say you looked one thing or the other. My Dad is the same way, especially when he gets sun, because he's a dark italian. He has been mistaken as everything, even Arab (he scaringly looks close to Usama bin LAden in my opinion.) Does this mean that on average Europeans look different from Arabs? No.

Though I doubt your father is whiter than I (because I never met someone who got sunburned through T-shirts, I have come to the conclusion only Michael Jackson is whiter than me),

:rofl

Well, anyone has a tropical tan next to MJ... However, my dad is very white and in the Colombian sun he has to use a hat to avoid looking like a tomato... Which doesn't work anyway, he still looks like a tomato with blue eyes.

 

My brother is blessed on the other hand. He has my moms sun resistant skin, but has light green (hazelnut) eyes and blond hair. This my bro at 6: Andres

Looks kind of like me at that age, but I had blonder hair (it was "platinum" or whatever fancy word you want to call it.) Come to think of it, we look eerily similar. How old is he now?

My brother is 28.

What's he look like now? The blonde totally leave? I'm a dirty blonde now.

What's he look like now? The blonde totally leave? I'm a dirty blonde now.

yeah my brother's hair is now ash blond. My Family 2002

Yeah, his hair is a little darker than mine, but his hair looks the same too (short.) Put a yankee cap on him and he's me 10 years from now.