Indigenous vs Native American

[NoManchesGuey]

I just reviewed some of the English posts which went live especially Junipero Serra and Oñate.

Decolonizing the language again equals taking the "native Americans" out of the English posts.

Indigenous has universally accepted been accepted as the appropriate decolonized vocabulary. In the case, of a geographical context, it would be written something like:

Francisco Avila de la Sol, slaver, conquistador, killed 1000 Pima Indians who are native to AZ. In addition to this indigenous band, the Apache and Comanche were also decimated although the exact numbers are not known.

Francisco Ávila del Sol, esclavista, conquistador, mató a 1000 indios Pima que son nativos de AZ. Además de esta banda indígena, los apaches y comanches también fueron diezmados, aunque se desconocen los números exactos.

In my native MN, the bands of Lakota Sioux and Ogala Sioux in addition to the Indigenous nations in Minneapolis, have all informed me of this general rule of thumb, that generically saying Native Americans, whitewashes them and of course, allows the general discourse that, indigenous groups were nothing until they were saved by conquistadores and the religious via the doctrines of Divine Right. And in saying, Native Americans, also giving credit to Americus Vespucci and of course Columbus. Lots of Eurocentric and Americentric shit loaded into a word.

Anyway, if we could agree and change this. Thanks, Veronica

[Gorcenski]

Great idea

[amandavisconti]

I changed the existing use of this in the couple existing English-language posts using it. I left the words in place in one post (Christopher Columbus—St. Paul, MN, USA) because it appears in the phrase "American Indian Movement", which looks like the formal name of a movement?