Re: Amerind an offensive term (was: Early Amerind assimilation
Mark K. Bilbo (102217.121@compuserve.com)
Fri, 09 Aug 1996 13:15:46 -0600
In article <smryan-3007962146280001@10.0.2.15>,
smryan@netcom.com (!@?*$%) wrote:
>While much of the Goidelic Tribe has only been on this continent for a
>century, many of their members were born here. So how many generations
>does it take to become a native?
You know, it never ceases to amaze me how the current crop of USers
continually scramble the idea of "native." Being "native" in the sense of
being born on a particular piece of land only takes a certain reproductive
act for which one isn't responsible anyway. I'm unclear on the exact
significance that the end of gestation of a particular female has in the
scheme of things. But I do note that the US nation-state attaches
signficance to the event. And USers continually go about the Net screaming
about the significance of their nation-states' customs with regard to
political rights while at the same time going on and on about their genetic
lineage as if these two are related somehow.
In other words, which one do you claim? This Goidelic tribe or US citizen
status? Or are you asserting both? And which sense of "native" is being
discussed here?
Interesting twist is that most all Indian nations have lineage *as
citizenship requirement while the US does not. So your mention of a "tribe"
makes me wonder which side of the fence you're on or if you're trying to
conveniently straddle it.
Mark
|