Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation

Stephen Barnard (
Sun, 18 Aug 1996 15:15:30 -0800 wrote:
> Stephen Barnard <> wrote:
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Stephen Barnard <> wrote:
> >>
> >> snip>
> >>
> >> >I'm not anti-Native-American. I *do* happen to find the hypersensitivity of
> >> >some ethnic groups to nomenclature to be unfortunate....
> >>
> >> Your words shoe that you are anti Native American and very smug
> >> about how some of those, you know, minorities react to white
> >> Americas nomenclature. My question is what kind of an American are
> >> you? And as for the lack of hypersensitivity from the Indian
> >> newsgroup -news flash- people will have more tolorance when they
> >> are addressed or referred to in a fashion that THEY, not you, deem
> >> acceptable.
> >
> >
> >That's exactly what I've been trying to determine. Quite some time ago
> >I was satisfied that Native American will do. In this post I was only
> >answering some factual questions. You chose to pick on a side comment,
> >which is fine with me.
> As I have mentioned before I have only watched this thread
> intermittently and may have missed some points of view. I don't mean
> to pick on a side comment but why should you not still be satisfied
> with Native American?

Didn't I just say that Native American is fine with me? Didn't I say
that quite some time ago? Really.

> The indigenous people here were and still are
> not Indians. Another -news flash- The great "discoverer" of the new
> world, Columbus, was wrong!!! He did not reach India-did not even
> come close to India therefore the people he met were not Indians. I
> think it is time for us to accept this fact and move on. Why should
> one continue to try to convence the horse that it is a zebra? Am I
> talking to the wall???

So you don't think that "Indian" is a particularly good term either?
Good. I'm glad we've cleared that up.

> >> Well the white-bread midwesterners may be on to something. Does
> >> the word Hebrew ring a bell? JU-daism is a religion. Remember, the
> >> one that came before Christianity and Islam, numero uno in the
> >> chronology of the big three!
> >>
> >
> >
> >What's you point?
> My point is simply that the "white-bread midwesterners" you spoke of
> seem to want to be correct or at least polite in how they address
> any group of people and the word Jew has and still is used by
> bigots. May be in light of this the word Jew had lost its flavor to
> these people and they were atempting to soften, on their own, what
> they perceive as an *offensive* reference with an acceptable
> substitue. But what they did not do was create a cutesy yuppy style,
> white wine and cheese *slang* reference such as Amerind! What the
> h--- is an Amerind? Plus you seemed to have been making fun of these
> people. The rest of what I said was simple frustration. So there.
> ;-)

That people would think that "Jew" is an offensive term is ludicrous,
although their reasons for thinking so may be innocent. Certainly
antisemites have used, and still use, the word Jew in an intentionally
insulting way. For an ethnic group to sacrifice their actual name,
which has been used for thousands of years, just because some racists
use it in a despicable way, would be a tragedy.

> >> On the whole, I found the
> >> >attitude of the Asian Indian respondents to be refreshingly tolerant.
> >>
> >> Well mercy be!!
> >>
> >> I do not beleive that the Native American (except may be Ben
> >> Nighthorse Campbell) really cares about how tolorant white America
> >> think they are....
> >I'm not speaking for "white America". I'm speaking only for myself.
> I do not take your remarks as speaking for white America, however, I
> do feel your comments mirror the smug sentiments of most of white
> America. If you did not intend to give an impression of being smug
> or intolorant may be you should try, if you can, divorcing yourself
> from yourself and listen and hear your own words as if they were
> coming from a stranger. You may be surprised at what you learn.
> >> I suppose it is obvious that I am angry at the lack of tolorance
> >> and understanding from some of the participants on this thread but.....
> >Native Americans have plenty to be angry about, but tolerance and
> >understanding are virtues for *all* people.
> No-no-no-no-no. If you are referring to the Native American I don't
> think you quite get it. They have *tolorated* more than their share
> for over 500 years. Tolorance is no longer apart of their
> vocabulary. They are pushing and pushing hard. It is now time for
> all Americans in general and white Americans in particular to begin
> to tolorate and stop whining and stomping their feet like a two year
> old because the Native American took their Amerind away. It's
> sooooooo, ah, unbecoming. ;-)

So you don't think that tolerance and understanding are virtues for all
people? We'll just have to disagree about this one.

Steve Barnard