902
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca

Stuff like this and the "base" he has created give off pretty harsh trump vibes. Here is a link confirming for those wanting one. Sorry I did not include it originally. https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.712106

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] kemsat@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago

This man says hard work while looking like he wouldn’t last 3 days without all the technology that the natives used to survive without. Bruh, we know what hard work is & how to do it, we just don’t give much of a fuck about doing it on your behalf.

So long as you’re still calling them “aboriginals” instead of I dunno like “The First Canadians,” then you’re making it crystal clear that you don’t care about them & you’re just mad that they aren’t letting you use, abuse, or manipulate them.

[-] systemglitch@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Just to be clear it is "The First Canadians" now?

[-] neonspool@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

i've been raised as a Gen Z to learn "first nations", though aboriginal (from the root word aborigine) also means the exact same thing, so i personally don't comprehend how someone can find offense in using that word.

maybe they are used to seeing aboriginals to describe aussi natives? still, it essentially means "first of the region", or in other words, "first of the nation".

[-] Tarkcanis@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Yeah, it's not offensive, but technically "First Nations" is a subgroup; Inuit and Métis being the other two.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

How can the Métis be "first" anything? They're the product of intermarriage between native Canadians and European traders (mostly the French).

[-] Tarkcanis@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Yes, that's why First Nations refers to the folks directly decended from Native Canadians (culturally anyway), and not the Métis/Inuit.

Ad. Yes, the Inuit are Native Canadian but they prefer Inuit, and they're very culturally distinct. (Not that the array of first nations cultures aren't)

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Ah. I'd misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were including the Métis among the First Nations. My bad.

[-] kemsat@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

I just made that up but maybe? lol I dunno

[-] Ulrich_the_Old@lemmy.ca 6 points 11 months ago

He has never held a job outside politics so that is the reason he looks as though he has never done a days work.

[-] lazylion_ca@lemmy.ca 2 points 11 months ago

Is indigenous frowned upon too? I don't want to be rude, but I can't keep up.

[-] neonspool@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

indigenous, aboriginal, and aborigine, mean exactly the same thing. anyone getting offended at any of these word usages probably doesn't know the definiton.

[-] LostWon@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Aboriginal should be same as indigenous, but "aborigine" is a racist term (due to historical usage) for the original peoples of Australia. I've never heard of it being used for anyone outside Australia.

[-] iviattendurefort@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

The etymology or aboriginal is basically "comes from away"; kind of Eurocentric. Indigenous means "comes from within a place" etymologically so while it is kind of semantic it's obvious which one is the better choice. Many indigenous people however prefer 'Indian' because it's how First Nations people are referred to in the Indian Act.

[-] ttmrichter@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

"Aborigine" is not "comes from away". I don't know where you're getting your etymology from, but it comes from the Latin "ab origine" which means "from the source" or, in context, you know, THE ORIGINALS. (First used, incidentally, to refer to the people living in what is now Italy before the Romans took it all over.)

[-] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago

Aboriginal is "ab origio", literally "from/since the origin/beginning". Already the Romans used it in the sense of "there from the very beginning".

Indigenious is "indu gignere", "begot within". The "place" part is implicit. More of a "native" thing as in "natively born American" but the meaning shifted from the original Latin.

Practically, nowadays, they're synonymous. Over here we use "autochthon", literally "self earth/soil". Also used in geology and biology. The constitution speaks about "national minorities and ethnic groups", going by the last recent arrivals 600 years of living here as an ethnic group suffices for autochthone minority status. Though in our case there's no settler-colonials which of course changes the equation.

[-] silentwinged@lemmy.ca 5 points 11 months ago

Uh, no, many of us prefer to be called by the nation we belong to. Some of the younger ones would be really offended at being called Indian, especially by white people. Indigenous, First Nations, and native are fine - better than Indian at least.

this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
902 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7133 readers
348 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Regions


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS