• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Indigenous self-ID/"Pretendians" (merged thread)

Being indigenous isn’t even always a blood thing either. I know people adopted by a native who then gained status despite ethnically not having that background. Legally they are a 6(2) Indian though.

Keep in mind most Reserves want to keep it pretty restrictive to be status. Having it too ‘diluted’ means that you will have people not closely tied to the band with a say and we can’t have that.
Yea when there is money involved and a pecking order based on bloodlines it can get nasty.
 
If pretty much everyone in North America is already at least 1/1024 Cherokee, what is the threshold?
 
If pretty much everyone in North America is already at least 1/1024 Cherokee, what is the threshold?
Well, since a big talking point is that we have either too many or too few immigrants, I would suggest that not everyone in North America is any part Indigenous…
 
whoops, I misspoke but I won't do it again
A wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.

And I’m not speaking of Mos Eisley

Star Wars Disney Plus GIF by Disney+
 
The truth will out...


Author of Inconvenient Indian discovers he has no indigenous roots​


An award-winning Canadian-American author whose career was tied to his apparent indigenous ancestry has recently learned that he has no Cherokee roots.

Thomas King revealed the findings on Monday in an opinion piece published in the Globe and Mail newspaper.

The announcement follows a mid-November meeting with King and members of the Tribal Alliance Against Frauds, a US-based group dedicated to exposing people who falsely claim American Indian heritage.

The 82-year-old said he accepts the findings of a genealogist with the organisation but writes in the essay: "I feel as though I've been ripped in half."


 
The truth will out...


Author of Inconvenient Indian discovers he has no indigenous roots​


An award-winning Canadian-American author whose career was tied to his apparent indigenous ancestry has recently learned that he has no Cherokee roots.

Thomas King revealed the findings on Monday in an opinion piece published in the Globe and Mail newspaper.

The announcement follows a mid-November meeting with King and members of the Tribal Alliance Against Frauds, a US-based group dedicated to exposing people who falsely claim American Indian heritage.

The 82-year-old said he accepts the findings of a genealogist with the organisation but writes in the essay: "I feel as though I've been ripped in half."



I think there are more Pretendians than walts at Remembrance day.
 
I think there are more Pretendians than walts at Remembrance day.

Possibly. But how many (such as this latest author to be de-indianized) base their tenuous grasp of aboriginal heritage on vague oral history from family who got it from even older vague oral history? I'm a Newfoundlander. I know this and can prove it because I have a birth certificate that indicates I was born there sometime in the 1950s to parents named such and such. Over the more than half century since I left the island, and especially during my time in the military, since I have a French sounding name I have often been called (or asked if I was) a "Jackatar". For those unfamiliar with the word, that is a (derogatory?) term for a person of mixed French and Mi'kmaq heritage who were primarily from the western part of the island (i.e., French Shore). I was/am not. I'm a "townie" of Irish heritage. The French surname of my father (who was from away) I was to discover only a few years ago came from Saskatchewan. When I was down home last year burying my brother, chatting with the priest at the graveside, I was asked about the origin of our surname. This time I wasn't asked if we were Jackatars but if we had Metis heritage. Don't know, don't care. But if one was to spin that one little detail in stories about a family over several generations, it evolves from "are we X" to "great-great-grandpappy rode with Gabriel Dumont".
 
Possibly. But how many (such as this latest author to be de-indianized) base their tenuous grasp of aboriginal heritage on vague oral history from family who got it from even older vague oral history? I'm a Newfoundlander. I know this and can prove it because I have a birth certificate that indicates I was born there sometime in the 1950s to parents named such and such. Over the more than half century since I left the island, and especially during my time in the military, since I have a French sounding name I have often been called (or asked if I was) a "Jackatar". For those unfamiliar with the word, that is a (derogatory?) term for a person of mixed French and Mi'kmaq heritage who were primarily from the western part of the island (i.e., French Shore). I was/am not. I'm a "townie" of Irish heritage. The French surname of my father (who was from away) I was to discover only a few years ago came from Saskatchewan. When I was down home last year burying my brother, chatting with the priest at the graveside, I was asked about the origin of our surname. This time I wasn't asked if we were Jackatars but if we had Metis heritage. Don't know, don't care. But if one was to spin that one little detail in stories about a family over several generations, it evolves from "are we X" to "great-great-grandpappy rode with Gabriel Dumont".
Fair, but if one is staking their professional credentials on being of a particular heritage, you'd think that if they were honest, they'd do a bit of genealogy first... Otherwise it appears that the intent is to spin the yarn, and hope nobody calls it out.
 
Fair, but if one is staking their professional credentials on being of a particular heritage, you'd think that if they were honest, they'd do a bit of genealogy first... Otherwise it appears that the intent is to spin the yarn, and hope nobody calls it out.

Like people who claim decent from Royalty?

 
daftandbarmy said:

The truth will out...

Author of Inconvenient Indian discovers he has no indigenous roots

Halifax Tar said:

I think there are more Pretendians than walts at Remembrance day.

Furniture said:

There are a lot more financial incentives to pretend to be native than to pretend to be a veteran.

For 15 years, the federal government has designated funding for specified groups, but not to others. This means these groups obviously have many opportunity for funding, jobs, or programs, while excluding others. One example is in 2024, Dr. Ted Hewitt, with SSHRC, told Parliament that these rules will not change until at least 2030. This systemic design demonstrates government officials plan to support this system for a long time.

When official policy rewards certain identities, people may feel pushed to fit into those groups, even if the story is not true. This does not happen by accident. It happens because the system encourages it.

The real problem is not only people who change their stories. It is the government policies that create strong reasons to do so.

Reference:
Canada, Parliament, House of Commons, Standing Committee on Science and Research (SRSR). (2024). The distribution of federal government funding among Canada’s post-secondary institutions. 44th Parl., 1st sess. Meeting 84. https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/SRSR/Evidence/EV13063007/SRSREV84-E.PDF
 
For 15 years, the federal government has designated funding for specified groups, but not to others. This means these groups obviously have many opportunity for funding, jobs, or programs, while excluding others. One example is in 2024, Dr. Ted Hewitt, with SSHRC, told Parliament that these rules will not change until at least 2030. This systemic design demonstrates government officials plan to support this system for a long time.

When official policy rewards certain identities, people may feel pushed to fit into those groups, even if the story is not true. This does not happen by accident. It happens because the system encourages it.

The real problem is not only people who change their stories. It is the government policies that create strong reasons to do so.

Reference:
Canada, Parliament, House of Commons, Standing Committee on Science and Research (SRSR). (2024). The distribution of federal government funding among Canada’s post-secondary institutions. 44th Parl., 1st sess. Meeting 84. https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/441/SRSR/Evidence/EV13063007/SRSREV84-E.PDF

And work continues to refine various definitions ...

 
I remember a few years ago there was a move (I forget which government) to put some kind of rules around who could be considered a FN band member and some bands put up a howl, claiming the government was being paternalistic and that only they should determine that.

Like FNT housing, sometimes democracy stops at the gate.

'Just give us the money'.
 
Back
Top