Jump to content

      













Photo

Local place names - First Nations vs. later names


  • Please log in to reply
186 replies to this topic

#141 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,882 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:57 AM

Why can't the "settler people" decide for themselves what they want to be called? Are we back to square one again where one group determines the terminology used to describe another?

And where did this term "settler people" originate? Is it an attempt by supporters of the re-occupation movement to sound politically correct and to paint all non-aboriginals as "occupiers," or what, exactly? Prior to the Mount Douglas renaming event I never heard of non-aboriginals being referred to as settler people.
  • Nostalgic Victoria likes this

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


#142 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,023 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 10:05 AM

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

I'm merely making the point that the categorizations employed by the establishment in a particular jurisdiction at a particular point in time are not real. Some proofs: the categorizations are not consistent over time even within the same jurisdictions, and the categorizations are also wildly (absurdly) inconsistent between different jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions do not employ any official categorizations at all. And yet in each jurisdiction the categorizations that are in effect at any given moment are nevertheless supposed to be genuine and obvious and incontrovertible, rather than merely political contrivances.

I'd suggest that it's a very good intellectual exercise to peruse the multitude of official racial/ethnic categorizations that are currently employed in various countries and that were used in the past. If the glaring inconsistencies and outright contradictions don't jump out at you then you were probably made for a career in politics.

#143 jonny

jonny
  • Member
  • 9,211 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 10:26 AM

I prefer to refer to my pale self as a honky. Whatever.

Interesting to me that I have been led to believe that I need to call Indians Aboriginals in order to be a non-racist honky, and have in fact been told by friends that they believe the term "Native Americans" to be racist, yet our governments readily refer to this racial group as "Indians".

#144 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 15,023 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 10:48 AM

"First Nations" is the term used in Canada nowadays. The language of categorization differs between Canada and the USA.

From Wikipedia:

Collectively, First Nations,[4] Inuit,[12] and Métis[13] peoples constitute Aboriginal peoples in Canada, Indigenous peoples of the Americas or first peoples.[14][15] "First Nations"' came into common usage in the 1980s to replace the term "Indian band".[16] Elder Sol Sanderson says that he coined the term in the early 1980s.[17] Others state that the term came into common usage in the 1970s to avoid using the word “Indian,” which some people considered offensive. Apparently, no legal definition of the term exists. Some Aboriginal peoples in Canada have also adopted the term “First Nation” to replace the word “band” in the name of their community.[18] A band is a legally recognized "body of Indians for whose collective use and benefit lands have been set apart or money is held by the Canadian Crown, or declared to be a band for the purposes of the Indian Act."[15]

While the word "Indian" is still a legal term, its use is erratic and in decline in Canada.[19][20] Some First Nations people consider the term offensive, while others prefer it to "Aboriginal person/persons/people," despite the fact that the term is a misnomer given to indigenous peoples of North America by European explorers who erroneously thought they had landed on the Indian subcontinent. The use of the term "Native Americans", which the United States government and others have adopted, is not common in Canada.[15] It refers more specifically to the Aboriginal peoples residing within the boundaries of the United States.[21] The parallel term "Native Canadian" is not commonly used, but "Natives"' and autochthones (of Greek roots auto and chthon meaning land) are. Under the Royal Proclamation of 1763, also known as the "Indian Magna Carta",[22] the Crown referred to indigenous peoples in British territory as tribes or nations. The term "First Nations" is capitalized, unlike alternative terms. Bands and nations may have slightly different meanings.

As you would expect, Australia also has its own unique language of categorization:
http://en.wikipedia....nal_Australians

While the term 'indigenous' is being more commonly used by Australian Government and non-Government organisations to describe Aboriginal Australians, Lowitja O'Donoghue, commenting on the prospect of possible amendments to Australia's constitution, was reported as saying:

I really can't tell you of a time when 'indigenous' became current, but I personally have an objection to it, and so do many other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. [...] This has just really crept up on us ... like thieves in the night. [...] We are very happy with our involvement with indigenous people around the world, on the international forum [...] because they're our brothers and sisters. But we do object to it being used here in Australia.[11]



#145 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 12:43 PM

Language is important. Why do you think "First Nations" was created and settled on. It's a fantastic name. I wouldn't be surprised if it cost money. "Settler people" is a horrible name especially when used in the same sentence. I hold no connection to it whatsoever. My parents weren't settlers. I am not a settler, and I don't want to be branded with the atrocious actions that the settlers did to the first nations people. I would like to have a cool nick name. One at least as good as "First Nations". Like all bad nick names, it should be nipped in the bud and not be left to stick.

How about "Neoterics"

#146 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:14 PM

Being somewhat of a seafarer, I can trace my ancestors back to the Vikings when they pillaged Scotland.

I think the Vikings might have landed on our coast at one time and named some of the peaks "dollops", which has a nice ring to it. ;)

#147 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,961 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:39 PM

Why can't the "settler people" decide for themselves what they want to be called?


Uhm... hello... that's what I am trying to do here. My family history is (as far as I know) entirely made up various and sundry nationalities that came to Canada from the British Isles. I have no known first nations ancestors.

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


#148 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 01:51 PM

If you are somehow responsible for "Settler People" then fix it. It's not a good name for "everyone else" and should have been focus group tested with "the others" and not just First Nations.... I might add it will do nothing to aid in First Nations reparations and PR because it has an unequal and derogatory tone to it. They have received bad advice on this one....

#149 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 02:51 PM

Unfortunately after a few years of no maintenance it will look like crap.


As no governing body issued a permit for anyone to put a sign up on public property in the first place I would not only expect that this "band of brothers" will have moved on to their next cause de jour very soon but I would also expect that whomever is repsonsible for the maintenance of that area will move in and take it down. If they don't I wonder if I too can name and put up signage declaring my pet name for Fort Rodd Hill? I have always loved that peice of property and my relatives used to camp and picnic there years and years ago.

Further to this, does anyone know if our elected official Ben Issett was in attendance and by way of his attendance sanctioned/condoned the installation of this sign.

Interesting perpective if he was there. Civil dissobedience in one municiplaity supported by an elected offical of another neighbouring municiplaity.

#150 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 50,882 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 03:41 PM

Further to this, does anyone know if our elected official Ben Issett was in attendance and by way of his attendance sanctioned/condoned the installation of this sign.


Isitt is the individual in the backpack to the right of the chief.


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


#151 vandervalk

vandervalk
  • Member
  • 263 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 04:37 PM

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".


Ha, racist, nice try. What is so racist about believing that everyone who lives in Canada being called Canadian.

Or would it be more proper that my "description" should be "Once removed Dutch heritage first settler of Canada". Give me an f'n break.

We cannot close the gap on racism if we are constantly try to divide people into races which separate each other. Think about it.

We are ALL Canadians with different lineage. But we are all Canadians.

So my term "Canadian" is the most appropriate. Sorry, but it's not "racist".
Real Estate, Landscape and Family Photographer
http://www.vandervalk.ca

#152 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 06:38 PM

The sign should have read ...ongoing Efforts of indigenous and all people of British Columbia to restore balanced relationships to the lands they call home. That simple difference would have won a lot more support as it sends a message of unification no reoccupation....

#153 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,176 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 06:52 PM

As the Indians also came from elsewhere they could try to call themselves "first settlers" but even that would be incorrect as Kennewick man predates them and is of Asian descent.

http://seattletimes....7_bones10m.html
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#154 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,917 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:00 PM

There are many theories on how the North American continent was populated. Some suggest that coastal and Island first Nations were a separate migration from mainland ones and also earlier.

http://www.newswise....540470/?sc=rssn

Visit my blog at: https://www.sidewalkingvictoria.com 

 

It has a whole new look!

 


#155 Bingo

Bingo
  • Member
  • 16,666 posts

Posted 24 May 2013 - 09:04 PM

Including a reference to "PKOLS" in the original charter would have helped to soothe the current debate.

Mount Douglas Park Charter

"The lands known as Mount Douglas Park are hereby reserved in perpetuity for the protection and preservation of the natural environment for the inspiration, use and enjoyment of the public.

This land has been transferred by the Province of British Columbia to the Corporation of the District of Saanich on the condition that it be maintained and preserved as a public park.

With is charter, the spirit and intent of the original crown grant of 1889 is maintained while its scope is expanded to include within Mount Douglas Park all adjacent municipal parklands, present and future, so the whole will continue as a wilderness preserve for generations to come.

Proclaimed this 22nd day of November, 1992, by the Council of the Corporation of the District of Saanich on behalf of the citizens of Saanich.
Last modified: December 12, 2012"

http://www.saanich.c...ug/history.html

#156 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 25 May 2013 - 08:42 AM

There are many theories on how the North American continent was populated. Some suggest that coastal and Island first Nations were a separate migration from mainland ones and also earlier.

http://www.newswise....540470/?sc=rssn


The biggest problem is that those darned Indians didn't write anything down anywhere. 5,000 years ago, the Egyptians started writing stuff out. You'd think that when Indians were over there on vacation, touring the pyramids and stuff, they would have picked up on that.
<p><span style="font-size:12px;"><em><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">"I don’t need a middle person in my pizza slice transaction" <strong>- zoomer, April 17, 2018</strong></span></em></span>

#157 Kikadee

Kikadee
  • Member
  • 239 posts

Posted 26 May 2013 - 08:11 AM

Well, this addresses my concerns about whether Pkols was being applied to the right mountain. I'm pleased to have this clarification:

Mount Newton, known as Lau,Welnew to First Nations, next on name-change list

Judith Lavoie, Times Colonist, 26 May 2013

. . . .Different families used different names for features, which is why some Lekwungen (Songhees) people refer to Mount Tolmie as Pkols, which means white head or white rock, Keddie said. There are also references to Mount Douglas as Chu-utchin — heavenly mountain — and Pepkiyos, the name given to snowberry plants.
A further complication is that many of the names were not documented until most of the fluent Sencoten speakers had died, Keddie said.



#158 tedward

tedward
  • Member
  • 1,961 posts
  • LocationJames Bay

Posted 27 May 2013 - 10:04 AM

Ha, racist, nice try. What is so racist about believing that everyone who lives in Canada being called Canadian.


Nothing at all except that you have entirely missed the point of the discussion.

Canadian=Everyone who lives in Canada

What you have suggested however is:

Canadian=Everyone of non-aboriginal ancestry who lives in Canada

We are discussing a term to describe Canadians of non-aboriginal ancestry.

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


#159 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 27 May 2013 - 11:28 AM

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


Late comers

#160 dasmo

dasmo
  • Member
  • 4,894 posts

Posted 27 May 2013 - 12:00 PM

Easy.... "Non-aboriginal Canadians".

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.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users