I have been cribbing about the fact that the original inhabitants of Continental America are being erroneously referred to as "Indians" leading to lot of confusion and humiliation to us the people who truly have right for this ethnic identity title. Recently for my class project I took up this subject and reviewed three scholarly literature sources. I thought I would share it with the readers of my blog and elicit your opinions on the subject.
Indian, American Indian, Native American, and Alaska Native: Which Is The Right Ethnic Identity For The Indigenous Peoples Of Continental America?
Ever since Christopher Columbus landed in Continental America in 1492 in his search for India and erroneously called the indigenous peoples of this continent as Indians, the racial and ethnic identity label has persisted (Robert F Berkhofer Jr. 4 quoted by Bird 5). Though it has been five centuries since and the world has become aware of Columbus’ erroneous perception of the real identity of indigenous peoples of continental America, the federal and state governments, media, and academia in the US continue to refer to them as Indians. In fact there is a Bureau of Indian Affairs under the US Department of Interior to provide services to the people of indigenous descent. Over time this identity label has evolved to include terms such as American Indian, Native American, Amerindian, Alaska Native, among others, but none of them are correct. This persistent erroneous nomenclature of the indigenous peoples of US by everyone including the government has led to great deal of confusion. In this conundrum of identities the fact that people from India are the rightful owners of the identity title Indian, Indian American and American Indian (the last two refer to Indians who have immigrated to the United States) has been totally ignored.
To learn more about this ethnic identity crises and understand what the indigenous peoples of continental America feel about being referred to as Indians, I have chosen three scholarly journal articles on this subject. These articles attempt to resolve the identity crises of the indigenous populations of continental America and arrive at a suitable acceptable ethnic identity label. In the first paper titled What We Want To Be Called: Indigenous Peoples’ Perspectives on Racial and Ethnic Identity Labels, Michael Yellow Bird attempts to define the right ethnic identity title for the entire population of indigenous peoples. In Renaming Ourselves On Our Own Terms: Race, Tribal Nations, and Representation in Education, Cornel Pewewardy makes a strong case for self determination of identity for indigenous peoples and moving away from titles thrust upon them by colonizing Europeans. Carole L. Seyfrit, Lawrence C. Hamilton, Cynthia M. Duncan and Jody Grimes discuss how ethnic identity influences the aspirations of youth of indigenous populations in Alaska in their journal article Ethnic Identity and Aspirations among Rural Alaska Youth.
What We Want to Be Called: Indigenous Peoples' Perspectives on Racial and Ethnic Identity Labels, focuses on the fact that the terms “First Nations Peoples” or “Indigenous Peoples” should be the new ethnic identity labels of the indigenous populations of United States. The article rues the fact that the terms “Indian” and “American Indian” are the current identity labels simply because they were “uncritically imposed” upon them by colonizing Europeans (Bird 3). Further in the article the author explains why it is difficult to group the entire indigenous population under one identity and makes a serious attempt to arrive at a consensus about the type of nomenclature that would appropriate to refer to the unified mass of indigenous peoples of continental America.
The title of the article suggests that there are several members of the indigenous peoples speaking out in favor of self determination of their ethnic identity. Given that there were more than “560” unique groups of indigenous peoples each with their own ethnic identity label before the colonizing Europeans arrived it is understandable that they do not wish to be placed under a blanket ethnic identity label. Moreover current terminologies in use including “Indian”, “Native American”, and “American Indian” are colonized identities (Bird 6). The authors feels that there is a dire need to move away from these stereotyped identities and define their own unique and empowering ethnic identity label. The title also indicates that the author is quite unhappy with the current terminology used to identify him and his community and wants to change this identity perception.
A clear problem statement with a detailed explanation about the social, economic, and historical context is made right at the beginning. The fact that the First Nations people or indigenous people are not a uniform group but belong to over “560 distinct tribes, including 233 Alaska Native villages” is one of the strong reasons given by the author to prove that they should not be grouped under one ethnic identity label (Bird 4). Popular media has also used the terms “Indian”, “American Indian”, “redskins”, “savages” in demeaning manner (Bird 6). He rues the fact that this kind of labeling creates stereotypes which has led to the people of First Nations being frowned upon as those who are not ready for modern civilization. “Because these labels have an overwhelming negative effect on the identity of all Indigenous Peoples and can institutionalize feelings of racism and discrimination toward these groups, many Indigenous Peoples have spearheaded efforts to call for the end of using these labels” (Bird 5).
One of the popularly accepted ethnic identity label which has become prevalent during the second half of the 20th century is Native American. This identity would include anyone born in continental US and as such not acceptable. Speaking about this identity label, the author successfully argues against it. “While the label ‘Native American’ may not have the baggage of stereotypes associated with the term ‘Indian’ it still reflects a monolithic identity of Indigenous Peoples and gives the impression that these lands were referred to as ‘America’ by its Indigenous Peoples, which, of course, they were not,” (Bird 5).
Reading this article I get the impression that there have been several attempts by educated people of indigenous heritage to get rid of the racially discriminating and demeaning ethnic identity label imposed by colonizing Europeans and Americans. One of them has been spearheaded by the author himself. He cites his experiences of using different identities in order to resist the designs of colonial powers to impose an oppressive identity upon all the indigenous peoples. He feels that the terms “First Nations Peoples” and “Indigenous Peoples” can be used to replace the racially demeaning identity labels (Bird 7).
The primary sources of information for this article are members of the members of Association of American Indian and Alaska Natives Professors (AAIANP), who are professors, graduate students or faculty members of various universities in the US. I think this makes the article unique because all respondents are of indigenous heritage. The respondents were asked four discussion questions by electronic mail and their responses analyzed to arrive at the conclusion. According to the author though the questions were sent to 107 members out of a total of 345, only 19 responded (Bird 8).
In matters such as this it is important that a large number of people are interviewed to find out the collective opinion. This particular research paper’s main weakness is that there are too few respondents and as such it is difficult to establish credibility to the findings. Since the number of respondents is so low, this research runs the risk of not being taken seriously. A point the author also concedes: “The opinions reported in this paper have several limitations and cannot be generalized to the general population of Indigenous Peoples or members of the AAIAN” (Bird 8).
At the very end of the article the author comes to the conclusion that the identity label “Indian” rightfully belongs to the people of India as corroborated by a large majority of the respondents. Though many of his primary sources accept being called Indians or American Indians just because it is a term used since several hundred years and has become an accepted norm, the author concludes the article by saying that the “what is most important in the struggle to define racial and ethnic labels are representative of Indigenous Peoples is that these groups do not lose their identities as the First Nations of these lands.” (Bird 19)
I feel that this article is a significant work in the realm of ethnic identity of the indigenous peoples of continental America. The author has successfully defined who is a member of the First Nations and who is a Native American and why these people should not be called Indians or American Indians. This is a pioneering attempt to involve indigenous peoples to define their ethnic identity and will serve as a reference to academics, researchers, minority groups of first nations and true Indians living in the United States.
In the article titled Renaming Ourselves On Our Own Terms: Race, Tribal Nations, and Representation in Education, Cornel Pewewardy uses quotations from several eminent people of indigenous heritage to drive home the point that self determination of identity and moving away from racially demeaning stereotypical titles thrust upon them by colonizing Europeans is the only way forward. This treatise is written more like a personal memoir interspersed with serious facts and quotations. The author starts the article by stating that Columbus not only started the process of colonization of continental America but also represents the legacy of suffering inflicted upon indigenous populations and destruction of their cultures (Smith cited by Pewewardy par. 1).
The mechanics of European colonization of continental America lead to imposition of racially demeaning identities to cover the entire mass of indigenous peoples of the continent. In a bid to completely subjugate the indigenous populations the colonizers resorted to dilution and sometimes destruction of their heritage and culture by imposing foreign identities and ways of life. Within the first few paragraphs the author makes it clear that this article has been written to discuss the themes of linguistic imperialism, race, tribal nations and their representation in education, and tribal identity (Pewewardy par. 3).
Like Bird in the previously cited article, Pewewardy also toys with the several different identity labels used in popular media to define the indigenous peoples of America and comes to the same conclusion that none of the ascribed terms, Indian, American Indian, Native American and Amerindian were right and gave the impression “as if we had no power to define other choices” (Pewewardy par. 4). He successfully argues that these identities denote nothing but negativism. As if on retrospective thought the author seems to praise the fact that some academics have evolved identity labels which such as “First Nations People” and “Indigenous peoples” which denote positive meanings and respectable identity. The author expresses happiness that “some tribal nations have started to tribal nations have started to take back their original names for themselves: Diné (formerly Navajo); Ho-Chunk (formerly Winnebago);” (Pewewardy par. 5).
The next section of the article starts off with a number of quotes on the subject from academics of indigenous heritage. I feel that Pewewardy is using these quotes to try and make his case stronger. If the author had have limited himself to quote only the most significant ones, it would have a made a better impact. Further on the author rues the fact that most indigenous peoples seem to have forgotten that they had distinct names, based on history, heritage, cultural bonds and thousands of years of tribal learning. All of them destroyed by influx of colonizing Europeans who with their implicit and explicit superiority complex subjugated and oppressed the indigenous populations. “many tribes forgot the origin of their names and also how, as Indigenous Peoples, we came to be given alien English names by people outside our tribes” (Pewewardy par. 16).
There seems to be some kind of a discrepancy between the title of the article and the subjects covered within. When I read the title I expected the article to deliberate about ways and means of how indigenous peoples of the United States can arrive at an acceptable identity labels for their race, nation and how the same can be represented in education. While the bulk of the article deals with the subject of defining racial and tribal identities, there are large sections which discuss things such as linguistic imperialism, cultural hegemony and racism. I feel the article should have been titled better to reflect these subjects too. Discussing the difference between race and ethnicity the author emphasizes that “Ethnicity implies history, culture, location, creativity” (Obinga quoted by Pewewardy par. 48). On the other hand the author rues the fact that oppressive European powers have confused the indigenous populations with the concept of race and color and made them forget their ethnicity and tribal identity.
Towards the conclusion of the article I get the impression that the author seems to be confused as to what the future holds for him and his people. He also goes into a preachy mode and exhorts his tribal brethren to “cleanse our thinking of gross error” and apply themselves to appropriate systems and structures and support a healing process for affected tribal families (Pewewardy par. 61). It appears as if the author is trying to make an attempt to bring all the indigenous populations within one umbrella identity but loses his tracks along the way and towards the end tries to regain tracks again. I believe that this article’s strength lies in its effective delineation and discussion of a wide array of tribal issues with a clear focus towards the future. This article is a must read for the 1.6 million indigenous peoples in the United States (BIS par. 1). It could also prove to be a useful resource for researchers, students and faculty members of sociological and anthropological studies departments in universities and colleges.
The third journal article I studied for this paper is titled: Ethnic Identity and Aspirations among Rural Alaska Youth and has been written by four researchers Carole L. Seyfrit, Lawrence C. Hamilton, Cynthia M. Duncan, and Jody Grimes. This article is a result of “survey data from adolescents in 19 rural schools to explore relationships between ethnic identity and students' expectations about moving away or attending college” (Seyfrit 1). What I found unique about this article is that this not only speaks about the ethnic identity of the respondents but successfully links it to their perceptions of life, education and career. The authors of this article seem to view the people of Alaska as “Eskimo, Indian or Aleut” but the respondents define themselves as “mixed, native or non-native”.
The authors begin the article by giving an overview of the socio-geo-economic picture of the arctic state, explaining how difficult life is out there and facts about the sparse population of the region. The authors explain that “although Natives comprise less than 16% of the state's population, they make up 54% in communities having fewer than 1,000 people. Many villages are more than 90% Native” (Seyfrit 3). Here again the authors don’t even attempt to make a distinction between the different groups of indigenous peoples but include them under the umbrella of “Indians”.
In primitive labor-oriented societies it quite natural that native youth prefer to take on their ancestral family occupations and continue to live in the same area. It does not need special education or college degrees to learn their family trade; on the other hand descendents of non-natives would tend to be drawn towards white-dominated urban locales. “That is, ethnic identity might affect youths' image of where they belong and what they should do” (Seyfrit 4).
This article essentially focuses on the educational accomplishments of native versus non-native youth and provides tables and charts to present their findings. The most relevant section of the article to this study is titled Ethnic Identity. This section basically discusses how the construct of self-identity and ethnicity has come about in rural Alaska. “That is, ethnic identity might affect youths' image of where they belong and what they should do” (Seyfrit 9). Like in mainland United States, there exists a great deal of ethnic complexity in rural Alaska. The government has provided individuals with a set of mutually exclusive categories to arrive at their ethnic identity. “An individual might be identified, or asked to self-identify, as either an American Indian/Alaska Native or as a member of some other category such as Hispanic or white. Of course, many people actually have mixed ancestry” (Seyfrit 9). The authors discuss the fact that there have been so many mixed marriages that arriving at the correct ethnic identity of children born out of these unions are very difficult. According to the results of a 1995 survey presented in a well organized table 62% of the respondents identified themselves as Alaska Native (Aleut, Inupiat, Yupik, etc). These identity constructions are quite contrary to what is recorded in the US census records. The author cites instances where several students identified themselves as people of mixed heritage while the records classified them as “Native” (Seyfrit 10). This leads to a lot of confusion in the minds of these youth about who they really are.
The main strength of this article is the fact that the results of the survey conducted among the youth of rural Alaska are presented in a very reader-friendly and easy to understand manner. The authors employ charts, tables and graphs to present their findings and make their observations. The survey results are compared with the official records and the discrepancies in the ethnic identity are exposed to the reader. The title makes one feel that this article is a deliberation about the construct of ethnic identity and how it affects the aspirations about the future of youth of rural Alaska. The article is actually a quantitative study and analysis of the education, career and future aspirations of youth of rural Alaska. The question of ethnic identity is discussed in a very minor form in the article and as such doesn’t do justice to the title of the article.
Reading these three articles I came to the conclusion that the ethnic identity of the indigenous peoples of continental America is indeed a serious issue. The native or indigenous peoples are quite resentful about being branded as Indians, American Indians or any other blanket identity imposed upon them by colonizing Europeans and Americans. It is surprising that I didn’t come across any discordant voices of true Indian academics about the compromising of their ethnic identity. Towards the end of my reading and analysis I understand that both Indians from India and the indigenous peoples of America are unhappy with the fact that the European and American colonizers have held on to the erroneous ethnic identity while referring to the latter. Perhaps the small minority of academic voices is not enough to make the government and media listen and take action to let the indigenous peoples arrive at their own ethnic identity label.
Works Cited
Berkhofer Jr. Robert F., The White Man's Indian: Images of American Indians from Columbus to the Present. New York: Vintage, 1968.
Bird Michael Yellow, “What We Want to Be Called: Indigenous Peoples' Perspectives on Racial and Ethnic Identity Labels”. American Indian Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Spring, 1999), pp. 1-21
Pewewardy Cornel, “Renaming Ourselves On Our Own Terms: Race, Tribal Nations, and Representation in Education”. Indigenous Nations Studies Journal, volume 1 No. 1 (Spring 2000).
Seyfrit Carole L., Hamilton Lawrence C., Duncan Cynthia M., Grimes Jody, “Ethnic Identity and Aspirations among Rural Alaska Youth”. Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 41, No. 2 (1998), pp. 343-365.
Smith, L.T. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. New York: Zed Books 1999.
No comments:
Post a Comment