Cows are beasts of the field and not a nation. Therefore the comparison is not the same.

The Inuit living in North America were formerly classed together with other Native Americans, but they are now considered to be an entirely separate ethnic group who arrived in North America much later, after the disappearance of the Bering land bridge. Accordingly, in Canada the Inuit do not consider themselves and are not considered by others to be one of the First Nations. However, they, the Indians, and the Métis are collectively recognized by the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982 as Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Other synonyms include "First Peoples" and "Native Peoples".

http://www.crystalinks.com/inuit.html

---------------------

oooopsss does not matter they gotta leave to

You still haven't answered me. Does the renaming of a people, of a nation make it so that that is what they are?

it is a matter of language translation

Ignorance is one thing but blatantly ignoring facts is another. That would be no different than referring to African Americans with the N word.
Just trying to put it into relative terms.

That Kid is exactly right.



However if I have correctly followed the logic of adj (and he hasn't said different after being asked) then the renaming of a people, of a nation makes it so.

canadiense

canadense

canadese

kanadisch

canadien

Canadees

canadian

which one is correct

That is not the renaming of a nation but the same nation's name in different languages. Whereas the term Eskimo exists in the Inuit language and is derogatory.

Once more I ask if the renaming of a nation makes it fact, that the new name sticks?

i said that already kid

or certain asian decent as the c word

and so on

but the word eskimo was created to be a derogatory term

as the n word when first in the dictionary had nothing to do with race

it was a someone expecting something for nothing (or close to that)

the derogatory definitin was added in the last 40 years i think

Just as I thought; it is an Anglo Saxon translation.


They are a segment of one of the most legendary of all ethnic groups, a people almost universally admired for their ability to survive the harshest climate on Earth. In short, the Inuit are Eskimos.

((((Just don't call them that.))))

The official handbook of the 3-year-old Canadian Territory of Nunavut says, "A word of advice, please don't call Inuit here "Eskimos." They've always called themselves Inuit, or 'the people' in Inuktitut, their native tongue."

The confusion over "Eskimo" vs. "Inuit" illustrates the paradoxes that accompany the many attempts these days to change the names of ethnic groups.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, "Many Americans today either avoid this term (Eskimo) or feel uneasy using it." For example, a Web site of the University of Wisconsin School of Education advises teachers, "There are no 'Eskimo' people."

That would come as a surprise, however, to thousands of Yup'ik-speaking Eskimos in Western Alaska who much prefer to be called "Eskimo" instead of "Inuit."

Why? They aren't Inuit.

Steven A. Jacobson, a professor at the Alaska Native Language Center (of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks), told United Press International, "Yup'ik speakers say, 'We're Yup'ik Eskimos; our relatives in northern Alaska, Canada and Greenland are Inuit Eskimos; they aren't Yup'ik, and we aren't Inuit, but we're all Eskimos.' Yup'ik speakers prefer to be called 'Yup'iks' ... and -- in contrast to Inuit in Canada -- don't mind the word 'Eskimo,' but they do not like to be called 'Inuit.'"

"Eskimo" remains the only word that describes all the physically and culturally quite homogenous groups that extend from the Siberian side of the Bering Strait to Greenland. The American Heritage Dictionary sums up, "While use of these terms ('Inuit' and 'Yup'ik') is often preferable when speaking of the appropriate linguistic group, none of them can be used of the Eskimoan peoples as a whole; the only inclusive term remains Eskimo."

In the 1970s, activists in Canada's Far North announced that "Eskimo" was insulting. They claimed it was originally an Algonquin Indian word for "eaters of raw meat."

Many linguists dispute this, arguing that early European explorers actually got "Eskimo" from a Micmac Indian word having to do with snowshoes. And even if the Algonquin theory is correct, the traditional Eskimo diet did indeed include a lot of raw meat. It's an excellent way to get enough vitamin C to avoid scurvy in the Arctic, where fruits and vegetables were almost completely unavailable.

A prominent example of ethnic name-changing involves the preferred term for Americans of African descent: first "Negro," then "black," and most recently, "African-American."

This trend spread to other groups. "Orientals" became "Asians" (even though there are hundreds of millions of people native to Asia -- such as Armenians and Arabs -- who are not included in the grouping for "Asians").

The Gypsies are now to be called "Roma," and the reindeer-herding Lapps of Northern Scandinavia are the "Saami." Similarly, some now claim the Iroquois Indians should be called the "Haudenosaunee" and the Cherokee the "Tsalagi" (which, like so many tribal names, means "the true people").

Most of these name-changing groups, however, lack the public relations firepower of African-Americans. When Jesse Jackson announced that he wanted "African-American" used instead of "black," the world took notice.

When less-prominent ethnic groups try name changes, however, ignorance is at least as likely to ensue as enlightenment. Entire library shelves of books become obsolete.

Much of what little the 6 billion non-Eskimos know about Eskimos is what they learned in grade school: By being brave, hardy and clever, Eskimos could survive in a world of ice and snow. That's not much, but it's not bad, either.

((((It's generally assumed among up-to-date English-speakers that an ethnic group should be called by whatever it calls itself, not what outsiders call it.)))))

Yet, practically no one outside of the Anglosphere worries about this principle at all.

Considering how hard it is for English-speakers to correctly pronounce words even from other European languages that share our basic alphabet, asking Americans to accurately transliterate words from radically different phonetic structures would appear close to hopeless.

It's become common, for instance, for Western journalists to refer to the "Qu'ran" instead of the traditional spelling of "Koran," but virtually no American understands what sound the apostrophe in "Qu'ran" stands for. Nor could many even produce that sound properly.

Beyond the pronunciation difficulties, outsiders' names are actually often more useful than insiders' names for themselves.

Outsiders can enjoy a broader perspective that lets them see the similarities among ethnic subdivisions. In contrast, insiders can be so obsessed with small differences between themselves and their kin that they can't see the forest for the trees. That's why insiders' names -- like "Inuit" -- sometimes discriminate against smaller groups, such as the Yup'ik Eskimos.

Further, the word "Eskimo" is less ethnocentric than is "Inuit," which implicitly draws a distinction between "the people" (the Inuit) and all those non-Inuit. Ironically, the movement to change ethnic names to those used by the groups themselves frequently restores these kind of self-glorifying terms. For example, Comanche Indians are now supposed to called the "Numunuu," which means "the people."

Kat

show me a reputable website that states that

the word eskimo is derogatory

like i said about an hour ago

---------

A member of a group of Eskimoan peoples

thanks kat

oh by the way

are they indians

are any native americans indians

was that not a name given because at first it was thought

they landed in india

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Eskimo

—Usage note The name Inuit, by which the native people of the Arctic from northern Alaska to western Greenland call themselves, has largely supplanted Eskimo in Canada and is used officially by the Canadian government. Many Inuit consider Eskimo derogatory, in part because the word was, erroneously, long thought to mean literally “eater of raw meat.” Inuit has also come to be used in a wider sense, to name all people traditionally called Eskimo, regardless of local self-designations. Nonetheless, Eskimo continues in use in all parts of the world, especially in historical and archaeological contexts and in reference to the people as a cultural and linguistic unity. The term Native American is sometimes used to include Eskimo and Aleut peoples. See also Indian.
--------------------------------

your referance i presume

there are some americans (which i dislike) that feel american

is wrong as well but that does not change the facts

Then since The United States is in North America it is fine to call you North American?

expalnation of why i dislike american

american should be inclusive of

all people on any american continent

as is asian

europian

australian

african

as there is

north america

central america

south america

it matters not how i feel about this

the fact is i am considered american

and fact is fact

karms question

Then since The United States is in North America it is fine to call you North American?

----------------------

no because canada is part of north america

LONG BEFORE the white man set foot on American soil, the American Indians, or rather the Native Americans , had been living in America. When the Europeans came here, there were probably about 10 million Indians populating America north of present-day Mexico. And they had been living in America for quite some time. It is believed that the first Native Americans arrived during the last ice-age, approximately 20,000 - 30,000 years ago through a land-bridge across the Bering Sound, from northeastern Siberia into Alaska . The oldest documented Indian cultures in North America are Sandia (15000 BC), Clovis (12000 BC) and Folsom (8000 BC)

Although it is believed that the Indians originated in Asia, few if any of them came from India. The name "Indian" was first applied to them by Christopher Columbus , who believed mistakenly that the mainland and islands of America were part of the Indies, in Asia.

So, when the Europeans started to arrive in the 16th- and 17th-century they were met by Native Americans , and enthusiastically so. The Natives regarded their white-complexioned visitors as something of a marvel, not only for their outlandish dress and beards and winged ships but even more for their wonderful technology - steel knives and swords, fire-belching arquebus and cannon, mirrors, hawkbells and earrings, copper and brass kettles, and so on.

However, conflicts eventually arose. As a starter, the arriving Europeans seemed attuned to another world, they appeared to be oblivious to the rhythms and spirit of nature. Nature to the Europeans - and the Indians detected this - was something of an obstacle, even an enemy. It was also a commodity: A forest was so many board feet of timber, a beaver colony so many pelts, a herd of buffalo so many robes and tongues. Even the Indians themselves were a resource - souls ripe for the Jesuit, Dominican, or Puritan plucking.

It was the Europeans' cultural arrogance, coupled with their materialistic view of the land and its animal and plant beings, that the Indians found repellent. Europeans, in sum, were regarded as something mechanical - soulless creatures who wielded diabolically ingenious tools and weapons to accomplish mad ends.

The Europeans brought with them not only a desire and will to conquer the new continent for all its material richness, but they also brought with them diseases that hit the Indians hard. Conflicts developed between the Native Americans and the Invaders, the latter arriving in overwhelming numbers, as many "as the stars in heaven". The Europeans were accustomed to own land and laid claim to it while they considered the Indians to be nomads with no interest to claim land ownership. The conflicts led to the Indian Wars , the Indian Removal Act empowered by President Andrew Jackson in 1830 and other acts instituted by the Europeans in order to accomplish their objectives, as they viewed them at the time. In these wars the Indian tribes were at a great disadvantage because of their modest numbers, nomadic life, lack of advanced weapons, and unwillingness to cooperate, even in their own defense.

The end of the wars more or less coincided with the end of the 19th century. The last major war was not really a war, it was a massacre in 1890 where Indian warriors, women, and children were slaughtered by U.S. cavalrymen at Wounded Knee , South Dakota , in a final spasm of ferocity.

A stupefying record of greed and treachery, of heroism and pain, had come to an end, a record forever staining the immense history of the westward movement, which in its drama and tragedy is also distinctively and unforgettably American.

Kat