‘Indian’ or ‘Native American’?  [Reservations, Part 0]
Read Time:8 Second

‘Indian’ or ‘Native American’? [Reservations, Part 0]

0 0



Thank you to my patrons for making this video possible: https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=227816 Special thanks: Amelia Grant, Andrea Di Biagio, Awoo, … .

source

Happy
Happy
0 %
Sad
Sad
0 %
Excited
Excited
0 %
Sleepy
Sleepy
0 %
Angry
Angry
0 %
Surprise
Surprise
0 %

Average Rating

5 Star
0%
4 Star
0%
3 Star
0%
2 Star
0%
1 Star
0%

38 thoughts on “‘Indian’ or ‘Native American’? [Reservations, Part 0]

  1. I love how this is only confusing in english as many other languages have a distinct word for Indian as in the natives of america and Indian as in a person from India.

    Post-edit. Actually thinking about it, shouldn't people from India technically be Indies not Indians? I'm not 100% on that, but I'm fairly sure I've heard that come up somewhere.

  2. You constantly assert that i may be confused or feel uneasy about the word "indian" being used to describe the native inhabitants of america. But the only thing i'm confused about is why you feel i might be confused or feel uneasy about the word "indian" being used to describe the native inhabitants of america.

    To be fair, this might be in part because i'm not an american.

  3. I've been confused for a while and have been saying indigenous people, but I don't know if that's better. There's no way of thinking about any of these words without feeling absolutely awful.

  4. No the word Indian doesn't make me uncomfortable.
    Considering my ancestors founded the country called the United States of America, that makes me Native American.. Not the Indians.

  5. I use native people, since the “American” part wasn’t a choice but thrust upon them. Even then I only refer to Native People as the whole in general. When it comes to reservations and tribes I refer to them more specifically like the Lakota. I don’t call then Native People, I just call them Lakota.

  6. I don't buy the "native American" can span the 2 continents argument. Those other places have their own country names that can be used, or other terms. Not only that, but the whole point of biological classification is to be very generic and group people up closely. You think that Russians are similar to Irish people? No, but they share the same genetic classification as "Europeans". Same thing with Africa, and even Asia. Although due to specific geological (and/or political) formations with Asia, it is still too generic in my opinion and should indeed be broken down more.

  7. Had a friend who was new to town & objected to the word "Indian". So I took her to the local pow-wow a little while later where we heard the announcer welcome "our friends from other corners of Indian Country" while we munched on the "Indian Tacos" we got from a local truck.

  8. this is such a annoying argument because the usa is so big that each tribe is very different so it’s hard to say that indians prefer to be called indians cause some don’t many people from my own tribe prefer native american

    luckily i live near my reservation so if i say that i am oneida almost everyone around me knows what i mean

  9. can anyone explain to a east european why " overinclusivity" is problematic? … i get why indian is overinclusive and why it is a problem but i dont get why that word generated that public's reaction

  10. Still praying there is a follow up once travel is lifted. Love to get more representation out there. And if your into history pre Colombian American history is certainly the hottest place to look right now, new discoveries and timeline shifts every year.

  11. wait, that makes NO SENSE!
    I'm brazillian. we call the "indias" here… indians (índio, in portuguese). NO ONE here use "native american", because that is a american (country) thing. Indians describes the natives of ALL CONTINENTAL AMERICA, not USA america. Native americans describes only the indians of USA.
    Indian was NEVER used to describe the natives of USA, but the continet america. in 1500, when Portugal came to Brazil, they called the natives… índios (indian, but in portuguse). and the same in ALL spanish america too.
    but ONLY USA use "native americans", because this america, we (the rest of the continent america) understand it as the country america.
    people use even "indigenous japoneses" as a thing. do americans really thing that "indian" reffer only to indias that was in the actual USA?
    man, you people (americans) really need to learn that there is a thing called "rest of the world", a intire world that is not USA…

  12. But doesn't the term Indian also refer to all natives of the Americas? There is no difference in who it includes, I saw an old American black and white documentary clip about Peru where the narrator refer to the local Quechuas as Indians, which they are still called by Hispanic Peruvians today in the form of "Indio". I think maybe the only difference is that Eskimos/Inuits aren't considered Indian.

  13. Part of the apprehension about "Native American" is due that like "Indian" it wasn't a label we chose, Americans just started using it. Also some bring up the issue of with the American part of Native American. Because our peoples predate this country, we aren't "Native" to it, we existed before this country was even claimed by European Empires. To call us Native American it seems like its also laying claim to us exclusively.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous post Scientists Finally Explain Why We See Ghosts
Next post A brief history of chess – Alex Gendler