What should we call "American Indians"?

Post Reply New Topic

To be honest, most people pretty much get which kind of Indian you mean by the context of what you say.

"There is an Indian burial ground at Moundville" or "Tannehill has this big Indian arts and crafts sale this weekend" is going to cause the person you are saying this to to immediately think American Indian.

"There seems to be a good bit of Indian culture near UAB" or "There is an Indian restaurant that just opened up" also gives you a good clue as to what kind of Indian.

I once had a good friend who was Indian (from India) and he invited me to a bunch of his family things because I was so interested in it. People would know what I meant when I would say something like "I got to go to an Indian dinner party the other day! The food was fabulous!" People knew I didn't mean Cherokee.

Also, most people I know say "Indian" when they mean American Indian or say "Indian guy" or "Indian lady" when they mean somebody from India. It's just a subtle difference, but it's one that most people around here pick up on. Also, because it's so rare to run into an actual for real Indian (Native American Indian that is) that most people will assume you mean somebody is from India if you say they are Indian. It's not really something that somebody goes around bringing up, that somebody is Indian from India. When somebody they know is a for real Indian (as in a whole lot of some particular tribe blood) they pretty much point that out right away, because it's interesting.

One of our friends was a for real Cherokee. Had lived on a reservation some place or other with his dad when he was a kid and had moved to Alabama to get surgery at UAB when he was a teenager to have some part of his ear reattached because it got cut off in a car wreck and he had to have a couple of surgeries on it. Whenever I would fix him up with a friend of mine I would always make it a point to tell the girl beforehand "He's a for real Indian. A full blooded Cherokee, lived on a reservation once and everything" and they were always interested because those of us in Alabama are interested in everything Indian. He always got all the girls because he was just so good looking anyway but he was also so nice, which is a very rare thing to find with that degree of good looking. He's married now with kids. I talk to him on FB sometimes.

So, it's pretty obvious what you mean around here.

Savages?

(O yeah, I'm terrible.)

I've always thought that "American Indians" was a good name.

Its a great name for immigrants from Bangalore, or from Mumbai.

But not for indigenous peoples of the Americas.

Has anybody thought of maybe sending out a survey to all of them asking them what they want to be called or if they even care, rather than have it debated by people who are, most of the time, not of that ethnicity or at least not very much of it?

Why does everything have to be so complicated?

Exactly my point. Why perpetuate the current needless compexity of having to say phrases like "he is a red dot Indian, and not a feather Indian (or vis versa)" when something like "indigenous American" is simple accurate and to the point?

Columbus made it complicated. Im proposing simplicity. But if you're THAT invested in the existing compexity then thats fine.

1) My assumption is:NOT that folks of Choctaw (or whatever) ancestry are offended by being called "Indian". but that they dont give a damn one way or the other. If they dont give a damn- then why not make life easier by righting the mistake columbus made and make up a new word for them?

If we did your survey and my assumption turned out to be wrong, and they are not only not offended by "indian" but actually are emotioinally invested in KEEPING the label then fine- lets all just keep on beating our heads against the wall and keep calling them after the country that has the Taj Mahal even though that never made any sense.

2) Am into anthropology, and am also an aspie, with an interest in both Asian and in American "Indians". So since I actually think about both groups often- its irritating to my aspie sensibilities that they both perversly have the same damned name. Thats mainly where Im coming from.

3) Here around the nations capital we have many folks of south asian background in every strata of society. AND we have both locals and Hispanics with varying degrees of American Indian ancestry. So even in private converstaion it gets confusing. Nobody gets offended. But why complicate life by perpetuating a 15th centurey mistake in the 21st centurey? The world is getting smaller, and both the nation of India, and americans of indigenous background are going to assert themselves more and more.Its gonna simplify discourse to have more lexical precision - not complicate it. Even had atleast one HS classmate with both kinds of Indian ancestry- and that was back in the seventies.

4) Im more concerned with the word usage in published discourse than with private conversation. Im happy to concede the point that "Indian" is fine for yakking with your nieghbors about their indigenous ancestry if you live in non cosmopolitan corner of the nation where you dont yet have many folks of asian Indian background. And dont have aspie grown up 'little professors' like me to nit pick about it.