THERE is no better way to begin this discussion than to say I am proud to be an Indian.
I know the term Indian has become controversial; that it is viewed as derogatory by many people, both native and non-native. I don’t pretend to speak for all First Nations’ people on this issue, but I personally love the term Indian and believe we should embrace it.
The word has often been used as a slur, but we shouldn’t abandon the name that describes us just because it has been used by bigots. The disgrace is rooted in their minds, not in our identities.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
We should not scramble to find new terms to describe ourselves just because some hateful people tried to turn the term Indian into one of shame. The best way to win this battle is to call ourselves Indians and say it with great pride.
I understand why some non-natives shy away from a word that has often been used in a derogatory way. They don’t want to offend us, and for that sensitivity, I thank them.
I can also understand why many non-natives are confused about which word they should use when referring to us. On the one hand they’ve heard people – sometimes native people themselves – say that the word Indian is derogatory. Then, on the other hand, they see that the main Indian organization in Saskatchewan calls itself the Saskatchewan Federation of Indian Nations.
Indeed, the term Indian appears to be more widely embraced in Saskatchewan than some areas of the country, but acceptance of the term is far from universal among Indians themselves.
Recently I was attacked in one of our publications by a letter writer in a First Nations publication for my use of the word Indian, claiming the word was a slur on par with some of the derogatory terms that have been used to describe African Americans and Chinese.
He was wrong. In Canada the term Indian has a noble connection; it is who we were identified as when the treaties were signed. And going back further in time, well, we’ve all heard the story about how Columbus got lost at sea and thought he had been to India when he had been to the Americas.
“We should be glad he wasn’t looking for Turkey or we’d have been called Turkeys,” the joke goes.
Well, I was at a function in another part of the world where it was indicated the word could be traced to the Latin term “indios,” which means God’s free-spirited people. That is the definition I prefer. It is who we are.
Another word that I find agreeable is Anishinabe, which is the indigenous word for both my tribe and my language. Other Indians are Dakota, Cree, and so on.
But please don’t call me aboriginal unless that is exactly what you mean.
Aboriginal shouldn’t be used because somebody doesn’t want to use the term Indian and finds First Nations people awkward to say.
Aboriginal is the right term to use when you are referring to all Indian, Metis and Inuit people.
Each of these three groups is distinctly different. Legally the Metis are as different from treaty Indians as they are from non-aboriginal populations.
