[Aztlan] Indian ?

Sat Sep 23 12:39:31 CDT 2006

> When Indigenous people of "Mexico" or "Central America" cross the political > border of the U.S.A, they are not considered "American" nor "North > American", in fact they are considered Immigrants to the land of their > relatives, they are considered Aliens in their homeland of Anahuac.

A person born in the United Mexican States is no more a citizen of the United States of America or Canada than I am a citizen of Prussia or Scotland.  My ancestors voluntarily left those places hundreds of years ago, so I will not be suprised to learn that the current inhabitants consider me an immigrant if I go there today.  Prussia no longer exists: my petition to the German government for restoration to me of lands my ancestors left centuries ago would be laughed at and thrown out.  I choose to work in the country of my birth and do my best to make it a good place to live for my descendants.

In 1125 or so the people who became the Mexica-Colhua voluntarily migrated southward, might have been in what is now the United States, might have been in Mexico, maybe both, wandered for 200 years.  They founded Tenochtitlan around 1325, made war on the established people there and subjected them to Mexica rule until 1521.  At that time, Cortes' allies including the Tlaxcalans (who were there before the Mexica) overthrew the Mexica and traded one imperial master for another.  Now 500 years later, The United Mexican States is an independent nation, as is the United States of America.

> This term "Indian" is inappropriate as well as naming Indigenous people > "American", a term generally and always used in reference to people residing > within the political borders of the United States of America.

Really?  The American Indian Movement is clearly not offended by it.  So which people are proud to call themselves Indians and which are only to be referred to as Native, but never to be called Indigenous, and definately not Aboriginal.  Who are only Sauk, or Lakota, or Lenni Lenape?  Who are, like Birgil Kills Straight, Oglala Lakota and American Indian and American citizen, and a citizen of the Oglala Lakota Nation?  Who are Americans?  Who are the Scots or Germans or Mexicans?

WHAT IS THE AMERICAN INDIAN MOVEMENT?
Things will never be same again and that is what the American Indian Movement is about ...
They are respected by many, hated by some, but they are never ignored ..
They are the catalyst for Indian Sovereignty ...
They intend to raise questions in the minds of all, questions that have gone to sleep in the minds of Indians and non-Indian alike ...
>From the outside, AIM people are tough people, they had to be ...
AIM was born out of the dark violence of police brutality and voiceless despair of Indian people in the courts of Minneapolis, Minnesota ...
AIM was born because a few knew that it was enough, enough to endure for themselves and all others like them who were people without power or rights ...
AIM people have known the insides of jails; the long wait; the no appeal of the courts for Indians, because many of them were there ...
>From the inside AIM people are cleansing themselves; many have returned to the old traditional religions of their tribes, away from the confused notions of a society that has made them slaves of their own unguided lives ...
AIM is first, a spiritual movement, a religious re-birth, and then the re-birth of dignity and pride in a people ...
AIM succeeds because they have beliefs to act upon ...
The American Indian Movement is attempting to connect the realities of the past with the promise of tomorrow ...
They are people in a hurry, because they know that the dignity of a person can be snuffed by despair and a belt in a cell of a city jail ...
They know that the deepest hopes of the old people could die with them ..
They know that the Indian way is not tolerated in White America, because it is not acknowledged as a decent way to be ...
Sovereignty, Land, and Culture cannot endure if a people is not left in peace ...
The American Indian Movement is then, the Warriors Class of this century, who are bound to the bond of the Drum, who vote with their bodies instead of their mouths ... THEIR BUSINESS IS HOPE.

Words and thoughts by Birgil Kills Straight, Oglala Lakota Nation.
Author, Richard LaCourse, Director, American Indian Press Association 1973
http://www.aimovement.org/ggc/index.html

Regards,

Greg

(614) 517-7204
greg at gregsandor.com
http://www.gregsandor.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Becraft" <david_becraft at hotmail.com>
To: <mayavase at verizon.net>
Cc: <Aztlan at lists.famsi.org>
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 10:46 PM
Subject: RE: [Aztlan] Indian ?

> Listeros:
> 
> This term "Indian" is inappropriate as well as naming Indigenous people 
> "American", a term generally and always used in reference to people residing 
> within the political borders of the United States of America.  Indigenous 
> people of "Mesoamerica" are Not Americans nor do they view themselves as 
> "American".  They are what they call themseves, the same can be said for 
> Natives living in the U.S.A.

> When Indigenous people of "Mexico" or "Central America" cross the political 
> border of the U.S.A, they are not considered "American" nor "North 
> American", in fact they are considered Immigrants to the land of their 
> relatives, they are considered Aliens in their homeland of Anahuac.
> 
> Mayans are as much "Asian/Indian" as the French are "Meshica/Aztec".
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Pancho Becraft
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: "Justin Kerr" <mayavase at verizon.net>
> >To: "'Michael Finley'" <mjfinley at shaw.ca>
> >CC: Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> >Subject: RE: [Aztlan] Indian ?
> >Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 22:44:16 -0400
> >
> >To all,
> >I scan the paragraph in question, it follows below:
> >
> >
> >Throughout this book, as the reader already will have noticed, I use the
> >term "Indian" to refer to the first inhabitants of the Americas. No 
> >question
> >about it, Indian is a confusing and historically inappropriate name.
> >Probably the most accurate descriptor for the original inhabitants of the
> >Americas is Americans. Actually using it, though, would be risking worse
> >confusion. In this book I try to refer to people by the names they call
> >themselves. The overwhelming majority of the indigenous peoples whom I have
> >met in both North and South America describe themselves as Indians. (For
> >more about nomenclature, see Appendix A, "Loaded Words.")
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: aztlan-bounces at lists.famsi.org 
> >[mailto:aztlan-bounces at lists.famsi.org]
> >On Behalf Of Michael Finley
> >Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:29 PM
> >Cc: Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> >Subject: Re: [Aztlan] Indian ?
> >
> >Justin Kerr wrote:
> >
> > >In the preface, page XI, 4th paragraph, Charles Mann explains his use of
> >the
> > >word "Indian".
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >Aztlan mailing list
> > >Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> > >http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >I've followed this thread with interest, but haven't had a chance to see
> >the book yet. I wonder if Justin or someone could  brief me  on Mann's
> >explanation.  Is it just convenience  since  "Indian" is the term used
> >in his sources?
> >
> >Michael Finley
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Aztlan mailing list
> >Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> >http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Aztlan mailing list
> >Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> >http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Aztlan mailing list
> Aztlan at lists.famsi.org
> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/aztlan
> 