Jessica Yee at Racialicious: Racist Names, Racist Places

I love Jessica Yee with all my heart.

One step at a time.

http://www.thestar.com/article/622980

It wouldn't be a big deal to me if someone asked me to very easily change the presentation of my candy and still have the exact same product? Don't read the comments. I know the world's not ready for this stuff but why do they get so darn defensive about their privilege?  What's wrong with accomodations that do no harm, whatsoever?

It's a great, personal attempt to resolve the problems terminology poses to anti-racist and anti-colonialist struggles. It resonates with similar struggles across the globe, from false state boundaries that remain as sediment from colonial times like Malaysia, Iraq and Nigeria--as well as the story of South American Bolivarian nationalism and indigenous revival. In some ways, it is really encouraging because conscious, whip-smart writers like Yee and those she writes about can indentify the problem and see a way out--but on the other hand, as RP's story points out, it is absolutely outrageous that Eskimo Pies are still available to buy and that the Cleveland Indians are still a national sport franchise.

I hate being called and Indian and I hate being called Chief.  people often suggest that I run for Chief of my reserve but why would I want to be an Indian Chief.  There are many youth who don't like the designation Indian, but we are ignored or chastized by leaders and elders.  they say that youth are important and our opinions matter, but in reality we only matter is we use the same tired old rhetoric of treaty rights, fudiciary responsibility, resource revenue sharing, blah, blah, blah....  Identity is the most important thing but the old Indians have been so thoroughly brainwashed that they will get angry if you even suggest that the names of our ancestors are more important than the name imposed by a lost Italian. 

To "Revolution Please'-  You want a revolution, well here it is: http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/10/8/2134977/UWASA%20constitution%20preamble%20name%20and%20purpose.doc

Let's try that link again.

What are the thoughts on 'non-offensive' name usage?  For example, Calgary has a large number of it's streets with names of Blackfoot Trail, or Crowchild, Crowfoot, Sarcee, Metis trail...the list goes on.  Not just roads, there are communities and awards with these names as well.

I think it best to be careful about what one perceives as ‘non-offensive’. But I think that naming ‘artificial’ landmarks like roads, buildings, bridges, etc after tribal names is fine. It offers at least some recognition that we are a part of this society. I know that from a cultural perspective it isn’t the best thing to name things after people though. This has partly to do with helping the family and community properly release a person’s spirit into the spirit world (letting go, if you will). And another has to do with ‘not’ naming things in the environment after individuals. We are only human after all and the environment is its own self determining entity.

I think that the larger society is quite fixated with their own immorality though. And it irks me a little to see lakes and rivers and mountains named after individuals. It may sound over the top, but I suppose I find this just another one of the hurtful things we do to our environment.

The community I live in has cottage developments around a local lake called Crooked Lake. Named so because it’s... not straight. One of the long time cottage owners had the audacity to ask that a cottage subdivision be named after him because “they were the first ones there”. This without even a hint of thoughtfulness that my community had been living here much, much longer than they. I think that before naming anything, one should always do diligent research and investigation.

I seem to recall commenting on Ms. Yee's article a while back. It's a very good article and agreed entirely with it.

Thanks Sknguy...I wasn't sure if it's viewed as patronizing and is why I quoted the term 'non-offensive'

I find the term "First Nation" objectionable. Especially since I was told by a former in house counsel of DIAND that it was terminology specifically formulated to evade certain international law definitions of nations. Wherever it came from, they sure have lots of people using the term.

Here's an example of both 'First Nations' and 'Indian" as in Union of BC Indian Chiefs.

http://www.vancouversun.com/First+Nations+leader+Grand+Chief+Stewart+Phi...

Speaking of which, I thought this guy was a sovereigntist. Way back in the day UBCIC used to say that "to talk to the Province is treason". Obviously things have changed a lot.

Just to comment on your first paragraph. So I guess rather than trying to “evade” international law I guess we should all just be good little indians and be grateful for the continued benevolence of the international rule of law. Unfortunately, the principles of international law may not necessarily be “universally” representative for all peoples. International law is there to enforce the principles and beliefs of a specific worldview. The development of which has been dominated by Eurocentric thought and practices. As in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

However, I wouldn’t dispute the good intents and positive outcomes of modern international law, for the purposes of the established nation states. But to imply that the principles of what’s called international law as being “universal” in nature oppresses the possibilities that Indigenous peoples may have different, legitimate, and viable legal systems, as based upon very differing worldviews.

My point was not that international law is benevolent but that the the bureaucracies of DIAND and Justice evidently felt it offered possibilities unacceptable to the Canadian colonizers' designs . So "Nation" has certain parameters and possibilities in international law, "First Nation" considerably and deliberately less so perhaps. Both are cages but you will know that the pursuit of international law remedies are nonetheless pursued abroad when domestic remedies are foreclosed. Mostly nothing is achieved and both international and domestic legal systems harmonize to frustrate any possibility of gains.

Point taken, and I appologise NDP. I get a little frosty on the topic of international law. I'd never heard your explanation of the origin of the term "First Nation" before. Interesting. But it's still about on par with being called the so-and-so "Band of Indians". I abhor both terms.

To: Anishnabe Nation (at least I think that's your name as it seems my browser is cutting off your name) We do have a looong, looong way to travel down the 'ol decolonization path.