![Hundie Jo [Dot] Com](http://www.hundiejo.com/wp-content/plugins/ttftitles/cache2/7d6a910bbe08845c0836a517a70936d5.png){kind=small}
Henry Imler March 10th, 2007
The Maverick Philosopher looks at six words that are loaded and stifle debate.
Maverick Philosopher :: Language Matters: A Half-Dozen PC Expressions
The list:
- Homophobia
- Islamophobia
- Native American
- Assault weapon
- Undocumented Worker
- Immigrant
I agree with the missing distinctions in all but #3. It makes for an interesting discussion never-the-less.
- Philosophy
- Comments(7)
I agree with you — they are very good points, but I think he is just
being difficult when it comes to number three. The term “Native
American” may exude political correctness, but the image it summons to
mind, and the context in which it is used, are not tainted like the
other words he mentions.
I don’t know about that one. I am a native American, in that I was born
here. Perhaps capitalizing both words might change the meaning. The
issue still remains, our culture invaded, or sprung up as a virus in
another culture (or another set of distinct cultures) and did not
conquer it, did not colonize it, but eradicated it. It brings up all
sorts of questions of morality and rights.
Native American is a lot more accurate than Indian or American Indian.
I did not say it wasn’t. I’d agree that it is not, but I am still not
sure that I like the term. There has got to be something else that
captures the true meaning.
There are several aspects of the term “Native American” that fall short
of being the ideal way of referring to the indigenous people of North
America. You’re right, technically it applies to everyone born in
America.
However, I still don’t think it belongs in the same category as the
other terms. When those words are used, they imply things that are
inappropriate, extra, unnecessary, inaccurate, etc, even if they are
technically an exactingterm.-
(continued)
Native American, however, is the other way around. Although it might
not be a technically correct term, it brings to mind simply one thing
with no pollutants: Native American.
Albeit it might conjure images of stereotypes, like headdresses or
c@sinos, but at least in my opinion, there are no insinuations of good
or bad, docile or dangerous, or positive or negative.
I think the argument is that if what gives them the right that we
violated is their being native, then that same right would apply to any
other person that is a native. Everyone born here has that right. The
vast amount of American citizens are also native Americans. Therefore,
it is a false distinction.
If the birth in this land gives one a right to the land (the reason
taking the Native American/Indian lands was wrong), then any person
here has that same right.
I am not pronouncing judgement on the issue at all, but it seems overly
PC to use that name when it does not really apply. Even if you want to
say that our ancestors were not native (meaning anyone of
European/African/ect… decent) there was still a time that they
migrated here.
When it comes to a better name, I don’t know what to offer in its
stead. Indian? That was a label put on them by the people that
exploited them and pushed them out. To be really accurate, I guess one
should talk about each individual tribe b/c there was/is no unified
national culture. One is still lumping distinct peoples into one
category that is created from the outside.