Jump to content

      












Photo

Local place names - First Nations vs. later names


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#121 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 08:41 AM

^ Looks like a settler honky tonk girl holding the "Reclaim. Rename. Reoccupy." poster, which has an extremely conforntation tone, btw.

Settler:



Isn't the whole theory about how aboriginals came to North America is they crossed over an ice bridge between Alaska and Russia? Guess they're settlers too.

#122 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,974 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 23 May 2013 - 08:52 AM

I'm all for the First Nations people rebuilding their culture and searching for reparation. I don't like being called "settler people" though. It has a derogatory tone to it. So, we need to come up with a better term for ourselves. I propose Second Nations people....


Anything but the other term being bandied about: guest. I am not a guest in my homeland. My mother was born here, I was born here, my children were born here. We are no more and no less connected to this land than anyone else.

Taking a moment to think about the term "settler" to differentiate from "indigenous" I am moving past the immediate feeling of offense (thanks to modern associations) and wondering if it should not be a source of pride and humility at the same time.

In American mythology the settlers were a breed of brave explorers, battling the elements (and the natives) to survive in a new land. Getting past the racist part I have to say that settlers were a brave bunch. I cannot imagine packing up my family and moving across the continent or to a different one on the hope that I might find work and build a future. Can I not respect their bravery and at the same time acknowledge their flaws and even crimes that might still require some form of resolution?

Why should we be afraid to acknowledge that our ancestors came as settlers in a new world? How does that in any way diminish us?

I think that someone who emigrates is a settler in their new home. How is the recent arrival from India/China/Scotland an immigrant but not a settler? What difference does it make? Would you be offended if we describe those who will be the first colonize Mars as settlers?

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#123 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 23 May 2013 - 08:57 AM

I support renaming areas of the island, but I think it shouldnt be the only focus. We have economic and environmental issues to deal with that affect all of us. First Nations are working on getting back their sense of pride and thats great. As I said before, we all live here now, and we need to work together.

The original occupiers have long since died and the attitude towards first nations people has greatly improved. (well unless you are that moron that wrote those letters to the Nanaimo News)

Learn from the past, dont dwell on it and move forward.

#124 HB

HB
  • Banned
  • 7,975 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 09:01 AM

Yes the evidence suggests that during the last ice age animals and humans congregated in Beringia which was and ice free refugium that extended from Siberia to Yukon
When the ice age started to end and the glacial masses shrunk opening up route to the south people followed the animals populating north and south America

So yes in short the Indians are settlers here too and should be grateful that the British ended up with the land instead of the Spanish if the Spanish settled here there would be no land claims or name changes because there would be no Indians

Everyone should just get along and work together forget about the past and get on with now and the future

#125 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 57,768 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 10:21 AM

Kikadee, thanks for the info!

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#126 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 11:19 AM

Yes the evidence suggests that during the last ice age animals and humans congregated in Beringia which was and ice free refugium that extended from Siberia to Yukon
When the ice age started to end and the glacial masses shrunk opening up route to the south people followed the animals populating north and south America

So yes in short the Indians are settlers here too and should be grateful that the British ended up with the land instead of the Spanish if the Spanish settled here there would be no land claims or name changes because there would be no Indians

Everyone should just get along and work together forget about the past and get on with now and the future


Thanks for the info HB.

Yes, thankfully the English were not genocidal maniacs like the Spanish and even the Portugese were.

I wish as a society we could get past this "us vs them" stuff which is still so pervasive in aboriginal relations in this country.

#127 Kikadee

Kikadee
  • Member
  • 247 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 11:20 AM

Kikadee, thanks for the info!


You're welcome!

I've been an ethnohistorical researcher for a dozen years now, and it's nice to have a forum for sharing this information.

#128 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 5,169 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:10 PM

So are we saying the diseased blanket trick wasn't genocidal but simply an accident? Or that the residential schools weren't cultural genocide? This is why I would rather not be referred to as "settler people". I shouldn't be connected to these actions.

#129 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 12:29 PM

So are we saying the diseased blanket trick wasn't genocidal but simply an accident? Or that the residential schools weren't cultural genocide? This is why I would rather not be referred to as "settler people". I shouldn't be connected to these actions.


^ These things weren't nice, that's for sure. Nobody's defending those actions, I just think we're pointing out that things weren't that horrible for aboriginals here in that we didn't actually wipe them away from existence on this planet, unlike some other colonizers.

#130 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,974 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:11 PM

This is why I would rather not be referred to as "settler people". I shouldn't be connected to these actions.


So, on that logic, we should stop using the word "German" since it connects modern citizens of Bundesrepublik Deutschland to actions of their predecessors?

What term would you suggest to describe the non-aboriginal population of Canada?

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#131 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:23 PM

conqueror

#132 Kikadee

Kikadee
  • Member
  • 247 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 02:45 PM

What term would you suggest to describe the non-aboriginal population of Canada?


Over time, there have been shifts in the term used to describe the non-aboriginal population of Canada: "Whites" or "Europeans," then "Euro-Americans," then (because not every immigrant was white, European, or American) it was "pioneers" or "settlers," and soon afterwards "non-natives." The current popular term in texts relating to this topic is "newcomers."

I don't mind "newcomers." There's nothing pejorative about it.

#133 Jason-L

Jason-L
  • Member
  • 1,257 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 04:33 PM

I'm partial to calling myself a Canadian .
  • Nostalgic Victoria likes this

#134 vandervalk

vandervalk
  • Member
  • 263 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 04:53 PM

What term would you suggest to describe the non-aboriginal population of Canada?


How about Canadian?

Why do we need to name people specifically? Why can't we all just be humans on this planet and stop trying to identify each other by races. You can't end racism and ask for everyone to be treated the same if we are all trying to claim to be different or demand to be treated differently.

"White people" are made up of many different cultures, we're a mixed breed and I suspect there are more half natives, or quarter natives or even less with mixed heritage with "white man" in their bloodline living in this country under the assumption that they are pure 100% native with no fault in their bloodline.

My parents were born in Holland and I'm the first generation Canadian, however, while I identify with my heritage, I do not say I'm Dutch. I am a Canadian and proud of it. Just like the half Latino and half Caucasian person living down the street from me, or the black person who lives across the street. They are all Canadians if you ask me. Sure their "heritage" falls elsewhere, but that is the past. We need to look forward.

And why doesn't Chief "Eric Pelkey" have such a non-aboriginal, or settler, name anyway? Why not go back to naming himself a true First Nation name and identify himself only by that? After all, isn't this what they want to be known as?
Real Estate, Landscape and Family Photographer
http://www.vandervalk.ca

#135 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 5,169 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 06:15 PM

I like Canadian. It's similar to calling Germans Germans....

#136 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,762 posts

Posted 23 May 2013 - 07:30 PM


That carved Pkols sign is gorgeous and they put a lot of work into it. .



Unfortunately after a few years of no maintenance it will look like crap.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#137 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,974 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 24 May 2013 - 08:24 AM

I don't mind "newcomers." There's nothing pejorative about it.


Actually it is pejorative as well as bring inaccurate. Someone born here cannot be called a "newcomer" under any reasonable interpretation. Using the word to describe non-aboriginals implies that the person has less rights and connection to the land.

BTW nothing pejorative about settlers in my book unless we decide to let it be made into a term of hate as has been done in connection to West Bank settlements in Israel.


How about Canadian?


We are seeking a word to describe Canadians of non-aboriginal descent. Your comment is inherently racist and offensive. We are all Canadians.

Are you going to insist we stop identifying ANY sub-groups of Canadians in any form? Heck, I guess we will have to stop using nationality and gender as well since we are all "human".

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#138 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,262 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:07 AM

Are you going to insist we stop identifying ANY sub-groups of Canadians in any form?

Official categorizations and sub-categorizations are typically used to enable racism and the various other -isms, not to diminish them. It's especially glaring when two different jurisdictions officially subscribe to different categorizations, each claiming (if not actually believing) that their categorizations are perfectly legitimate and reasonable.

A quick example of how inherently racist and offensive (and outright ridiculous) it can get:

Many feel the Census also needs to fine-tune its idea of what is and isn't Hispanic. It tends to define Latin America as just the Spanish-speaking countries of the western hemisphere, when the term also encompasses Portuguese-speaking Brazil. It also includes Spaniards in the "Hispanic Origins" box, when in fact a Spaniard is a European, not a Hispanic.

All of this should prod the Census Bureau to simplify things for future counts. The Hispanic-origins and race sections should be combined into one, less confusing section that asks folks what ethnic and/or racial group they belong to: white, black, Native American, Asian, Pacific Islander or Hispanic.


Read more: http://www.time.com/...l#ixzz2UEIZD900



#139 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,974 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:38 AM

^ Riiiiight, so we should not identify any living human on this planet as anything other than human since that might facilitate discrimination of some sort.

Yeah, that's gonna work.

Back in the real world, I would be glad to hear a better suggestion than "settler peoples/first nations".

Lake Side Buoy - LEGO Nut - History Nerd - James Bay resident


#140 Fairbanks

Fairbanks
  • Member
  • 508 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:57 AM

If Germany had won the Second World war or even the First World War, I don't think we would even be having this discussion at all. Well, we might but it would be in Deutch.

I think we should leave things as they are.

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users