How do I get registered as an Indian?

[Fenghuang]

What? I don't really think it's up for debate whether or not the people who inhabited the North and South American continents originally experienced a genocide worse than anything that's ever happened to any other culture in modern times. I'm not sure how stating that would incur a warning.

 

That's coming from someone who's a product of that genocide.

[Kaftan Barlast]

But yours truly making offensive jokes about said ghenocide would almost certainly lead to warnings

[Guard Dog]

Outgroup meet ingroup. Not a matter of political correctedness, however if you're a Cherokee you'll identify yourself as Cherokee before you say "I'm an Indian." To call yourself Indian implies your knowledge of the group comes from a source other than the group itself.

 

Or so I would presume.

 

Kudos Tale, that is one of the most intelligent posts I've read here in quite a while. A few years ago I did a design project for a site in the Micosooke Reservation in west Miami-Dade county. The property manager out there and I got to talking about that very subject. He said something to the effect "I'm not an indian, I was born in Florida, not India. I'm a Micosooke."

 

So I guess the answer to Fengs question is to move to India. At least you can say hello to Ros once you get there!

[Dark_Raven]

But yours truly making offensive jokes about said ghenocide would almost certainly lead to warnings

That it would.

 

@ the original question. Did you try the reservations with your questions?

Edited January 29, 2008 by Dark_Raven

[Gfted1]

Well if we want to keep peeing into a fan, indians from India are referred to East Indians.

[Hurlshort]

Well if we want to keep peeing into a fan, indians from India are referred to East Indians.

 

Where? In Northern California, everyone from India or whose parents are from India refers to themselves as Indian. The term American Indian is used often, but Tale is very correct in pointing out that specific tribe names are much more appropriate.

 

In Feng's case, he's clearly trying to find what his link is to American Indian tribes. He is currently an outsider, but if he does manage to establish a connection, he will probably start referring to himself as Cherokee.

[Gfted1]

Well if we want to keep peeing into a fan, indians from India are referred to East Indians.

 

Where?

 

Upon further review, wiki states that East Indians are a specific sub-group of indians from India.

[Tale]

Well if we want to keep peeing into a fan, indians from India are referred to East Indians.

 

Where?

 

Upon further review, wiki states that East Indians are a specific sub-group of indians from India.

 

You were right on both accounts. East Indian has been used for many things.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indies

The racial designation East Indian was once primarily used to describe people of all of the East Indies, but more recently it is been used widely in the US and Canada as a more precise version of an Indian from India, to avoid the potential confusion from the term American Indian (alternately: Native Americans) who where once simply referred to as Indians (see the Native American name controversy for more information).

[Fenghuang]

Outgroup meet ingroup. Not a matter of political correctedness, however if you're a Cherokee you'll identify yourself as Cherokee before you say "I'm an Indian." To call yourself Indian implies your knowledge of the group comes from a source other than the group itself.

 

Or so I would presume.

 

Kudos Tale, that is one of the most intelligent posts I've read here in quite a while. A few years ago I did a design project for a site in the Micosooke Reservation in west Miami-Dade county. The property manager out there and I got to talking about that very subject. He said something to the effect "I'm not an indian, I was born in Florida, not India. I'm a Micosooke."

 

So I guess the answer to Fengs question is to move to India. At least you can say hello to Ros once you get there!

 

Yes, except Tale's being retarded and I've already said I know the difference but for the purposes of this discussion it's registering as an Indian. CDIB card is different than registering citizenship with the Cherokee Nation.

 

EDIT: I am not sure what is so hard to grasp here, if I am referring to that part of my ancestry in conversation it's "Cherokee" or "Native American/(American) Indian" if I'm trying to be more broad; because I do have some Sioux in me, but not much, which is why I'm "a little more than 1/8 Native American/Indian". Currently I'm trying to get a CDIB card, which is Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood, because it's an old term and nobody's bothered to change it, and it's a catch-all for anyone from any tribe in the US recognized by the Federal Government; so I'm registering as an "Indian". If I was trying to gain citizenship with the Cherokee Nation I would be trying to register as a "Cherokee". Really I just hate political correctness and PC terms so I'm just as likely to say Indian as Native American because people still know what I'm talking about, neither is particularly offensive, and the people who do get offended go on my "That person is kind of a douchebag" list immediately.

 

However it's looking like even for a CDIB card I have to have an ancestor on the Dawes Rolls and that's not likely because my family spent a lot of time trying to deny their heritage to outsiders because things were easier for them that way.

 

EDITx2: Just found This site and it is saying different things but I'm not really sure if I trust it. There is way too much confliciting information this.

Edited January 30, 2008 by Fenghuang

[Tale]

I wasn't arguing with what you call it with that statement. I was more arguing against you claiming it has anything to do with "PC terms."

 

My initial statement was wrong (at least in context), I'll admit that.

Edited January 30, 2008 by Tale

[Walsingham]

I think it's a little harsh to force the use of two long words instead of one short one. We need a new word to replace 'Indian'.

 

As a bizarre sidelong view on this, are you sure you want to be registered 'non-white'? A couple of dud elections,a nd you may have to get used to living in some sort of wire enclosure and regular beatings.

[Hell Kitty]

I think it's a little harsh to force the use of two long words instead of one short one. We need a new word to replace 'Indian'.

 

u want 2 dumb down the english language?

[Humodour]

Come now, HKD, it's not really dumbing down.

 

Just think of it as 'newspeak'.

[Walsingham]

I think it's a little harsh to force the use of two long words instead of one short one. We need a new word to replace 'Indian'.

 

u want 2 dumb down the english language?

 

What if they could coopt something shorter and snappier. Like 'Nat' or something from their own languages. It's hardy dumbing down. It's just making politically correct speech more practically correct.

[Hell Kitty]

I think it's a little harsh to force the use of two long words instead of one short one. We need a new word to replace 'Indian'.

 

u want 2 dumb down the english language?

 

What if they could coopt something shorter and snappier. Like 'Nat' or something from their own languages. It's hardy dumbing down. It's just making politically correct speech more practically correct.

 

Indian, American Indian or Native American. They're all accepted terms. If you honestly think anything longer than 6 letters (indian) is too much to "force" on people, then you must have a problem with most of the english language. Removing the ive American from Native American is the definition of dumbing down. Changing words so they are shorter and snappier can only lead to this.

 

Being anti-politically correct is as obnoxious as being politically correct.

[Walsingham]

I respectfully disagree on both counts. Firstly and most importantly I am not against political correctness. Indeed it is precisely because I support it that I am trying to suggest it could be made more palatable. For comparison in the UK many consider it political correct to refer to gypsies ONLY as "members of the traveller community", while the derogatory term is simply "gyppo" (pronounced "jippoh"). The politically correct term has as much hope of replacing the short snappy version as a snowman effectively replacing Satan.

 

I agree that dumbing down is a threat. But I fail to see why refusing to accept new terms which are needlessly extruse is dumbing down. I call that being anti waffling up.

[Gorth]

I respectfully disagree on both counts. Firstly and most importantly I am not against political correctness. Indeed it is precisely because I support it that I am trying to suggest it could be made more palatable. For comparison in the UK many consider it political correct to refer to gypsies ONLY as "members of the traveller community", while the derogatory term is simply "gyppo" (pronounced "jippoh"). The politically correct term has as much hope of replacing the short snappy version as a snowman effectively replacing Satan.

 

I agree that dumbing down is a threat. But I fail to see why refusing to accept new terms which are needlessly extruse is dumbing down. I call that being anti waffling up.

Wouldn't the pc term for "gypsies" be the Roma/Romani? Similarly for "Indians" addressing them by their "nation", e.g Cherokee, Oglala etc.

 

Apologies if I got any of them wrong. Not really my specialty.

[><FISH'>]

I'm confused. How is it that people called Native Americans are also called Indians? And why in the hell are they entitled to all this free stuff? I don't see the relevance of someone being part-native-nationality and part-something-else. It's stupid, and people only use it to inflate their own sense of self-importance, IMO. Surely place of birth, culture and nationality are the only things that matter?

Edited February 4, 2008 by ><FISH'>

[Gfted1]

[quote name=>' post='829095' date='Feb 4 2008, 07:49 AM]And why in the hell are they entitled to all this free stuff.

 

 

Its called a guilty conscience. After our fore fathers were done plundering their land and greatly reducing the population they got to feeling bad about it and gave each tribe a reservation to live on. Within said reservation they are technically their own country and therefore outside U.S. federal laws.

[Baley]

Wouldn't the pc term for "gypsies" be the Roma/Romani? Similarly for "Indians" addressing them by their "nation", e.g Cherokee, Oglala etc.

 

Apologies if I got any of them wrong. Not really my specialty.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=DE1d0G0t_G8

[Walsingham]

I respectfully disagree on both counts. Firstly and most importantly I am not against political correctness. Indeed it is precisely because I support it that I am trying to suggest it could be made more palatable. For comparison in the UK many consider it political correct to refer to gypsies ONLY as "members of the traveller community", while the derogatory term is simply "gyppo" (pronounced "jippoh"). The politically correct term has as much hope of replacing the short snappy version as a snowman effectively replacing Satan.

 

I agree that dumbing down is a threat. But I fail to see why refusing to accept new terms which are needlessly extruse is dumbing down. I call that being anti waffling up.

Wouldn't the pc term for "gypsies" be the Roma/Romani? Similarly for "Indians" addressing them by their "nation", e.g Cherokee, Oglala etc.

 

Apologies if I got any of them wrong. Not really my specialty.

 

A better point in many ways. What _is_ a Native American, after all? My understanding is pretty limited but still good enough to know the tribes were very very different.

[Lare Kikkeli]

Wouldn't the pc term for "gypsies" be the Roma/Romani? Similarly for "Indians" addressing them by their "nation", e.g Cherokee, Oglala etc.

 

Apologies if I got any of them wrong. Not really my specialty.

 

Well kind of, Romanis are an ethnic group, and gypsies in the UK aren't necessarily Romani at all. At least they don't dress/speak/live like Romani people do. I think Sweden, Finland and Romania are the only countries with Romani communities who keep to the traditions. (My great-grandmother was half Romani )

[Kaftan Barlast]

The problem with politically correct euphemisms is that the new word will also become "offensive" with time and without fail.

 

 

In Sweden, we change the word for Immigrant like every 5th year because the old word has gone into PI territory.

[thepixiesrock]

Yeah, Hungarians can be gypsie's too.

[samm]

The problem with politically correct euphemisms is that the new word will also become "offensive" with time and without fail.

As is the case with any euphemisms (and dysphemisms as well). It makes sense however, if one word becomes an insult, because it was used and then percieved as such by too many people, to replace it with something neutral. It should be something natural, used out of respect, and not something forced upon and disliked by the public, like the words described with 'political correctness' seem to be connoted with nowadays.

 

[edit]

I hope this was intellegible... And sorry for OT.

Edited February 6, 2008 by samm