|
sullat posted:I think we can cut you some slack with using the term because of the era you grew up in, but these days my kids scold me if I use the 'I' word when discussing Native Americans, so I am trying to eliminate that as a term from my vocabulary. Oh yeah I would never use the word Indian in spoken discourse either, the correct term up here would be First Nations (and there's building momentum behind using the actual specific endonyms), but I gather that's not a thing south of the border. I considered writing "Hull was scared to death of injuns" to conjure the stereotypes he no doubt held, but was worried that would be far more racist  After thinking about it Indigenous is probably the cross-border term that is far less likely to offend anybody. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Jul 16, 2021 |
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:17
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
it's funny - when I was living in the high Arctic in northeast Canada they strongly, strongly preferred Inuit rather than Eskimo. but even though it was treated kind of like a slur there were peoples in what is now Alaska who preferred the term, so it's not like it's retired? no idea if that's still true but personally yeah "indigenous" is a catchall that a lot of activists prefer as a general term.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
I've definitely heard multiple pieces about US indigineous people tending (obviously can't be more than a tendency) to prefer Indian, and tending to view "Native American" as another attempt for white people to define their identity. Language is hard and highly non-universal
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
CoolCab posted:it's funny - when I was living in the high Arctic in northeast Canada they strongly, strongly preferred Inuit rather than Eskimo. but even though it was treated kind of like a slur there were peoples in what is now Alaska who preferred the term, so it's not like it's retired? no idea if that's still true but personally yeah "indigenous" is a catchall that a lot of activists prefer as a general term. Inuit is just one specific ethnic grouping, isn’t it? I’ve heard the switch to terming all arctic peoples Inuit has been pretty bad in that a lot of the peoples it’s getting used to refer to aren’t Inuit. Having kind of overarching groupings is obviously kind of a necessity but i do think it would be good for people to learn specific ethnicities. For basically every region for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 20:54
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:I've definitely heard multiple pieces about US indigineous people tending (obviously can't be more than a tendency) to prefer Indian, and tending to view "Native American" as another attempt for white people to define their identity. Language is hard and highly non-universal It's similar to why you have like 5 different terms for Black on census stuff including some reaaaally outdated terms imo. But yeah thats why I said it varies depending where you are and who you are talking to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:05
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:I've definitely heard multiple pieces about US indigineous people tending (obviously can't be more than a tendency) to prefer Indian, and tending to view "Native American" as another attempt for white people to define their identity. Language is hard and highly non-universal
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:31
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Inuit is just one specific ethnic grouping, isn’t it? I’ve heard the switch to terming all arctic peoples Inuit has been pretty bad in that a lot of the peoples it’s getting used to refer to aren’t Inuit. Having kind of overarching groupings is obviously kind of a necessity but i do think it would be good for people to learn specific ethnicities. For basically every region for that matter. where i was was entirely inuit, but there were other ethnicities in nearby regions. there's the Innu in northern quebec, for example, and i want to say there's another in nunavut proper but it has been a few decades.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:I've definitely heard multiple pieces about US indigineous people tending (obviously can't be more than a tendency) to prefer Indian, and tending to view "Native American" as another attempt for white people to define their identity. Language is hard and highly non-universal This is also my understanding, though obviously it will vary by person and region, and basically everyone prefers you just use the actual name of their people if you know it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
I think I have some documentation from the Navajo Nation somewhere in my email inbox that goes over this and the usage in technical reports. Curious about what they say exactly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Yeah if you don't know someone's actual ethnic origin or are talking generally, then be as polite as possible and change your language if someone asks. Then you're good in my experience. Like for example, I spent a good bit of time in a rez in SE Ontario, and everyone their called themselves the i-word. Everyone in Canada that get shook by it is white. But that's not bad. It's better to lean to not being an rear end in a top hat than being one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Yeah if you don't know someone's actual ethnic origin or are talking generally, then be as polite as possible and change your language if someone asks. Then you're good in my experience. My experience is that it's like the n-word but perhaps a tier down in awfulness - fine to use it in narrow context, like "The Indian Act" etc, but definitely not something that a white mouth should be directing at an Indigenous person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Like for example, I spent a good bit of time in a rez in SE Ontario, and everyone their called themselves the i-word. Yeah I know a couple people who work with youth on some of the reserves, and I'm told they use Indian and Native to refer to each other all the time. It's one thing when it's being used by a minority group, it's a whole other thing when whitey is shouting it at you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/aRngl-zjUt0
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 01:30
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Most of the US government had no desire to conquer Canada. That's another canadian nationalist myth. And like I was a professional re-enactor in forts on the canadian border to the US for a bit, so I'm not exactly a screaching US ultranat. A quick glance at Wikipedia shows lots of quotes from American politicians suggesting they did? Not everyone no, it was controversial but its not, like, one maverick either. Regardless, as I said, the war started with an invasion by the US government.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 02:55
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Both the British and American perspectives on impressment were pretty reasonable IMO (though not the part where the British would impress people found in American ports, that's just so egregious). actually impressment was loving evil regardless of whose citizens they did it to
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 10:08
|
|
|
Yeah being in the British navy at the time sucked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 16:44
|
|
|
You wonder about the collective and individual survival rates of doing something as dangerous as that type of sailing in that type of area, crewed by unmotivated people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 16:55
|
|
|
Ola posted:You wonder about the collective and individual survival rates of doing something as dangerous as that type of sailing in that type of area, crewed by unmotivated people. Oh they were motivated alright. Motivated not to get the ever loving poo poo beat out of them
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:04
|
|
|
Rum sodomy and the lash, isn't that the expression?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:07
|
|
|
You could advertise that now and get lots of applicants
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:10
|
|
|
skasion posted:Oh they were motivated alright. Motivated not to get the ever loving poo poo beat out of them TBF, it wasn’t much different in the Army. quote:But, says Arthur, "I would not be proud of your clothes,
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:19
|
|
|
skasion posted:Oh they were motivated alright. Motivated not to get the ever loving poo poo beat out of them Yeah but there are different types of motivation. "Don't get in trouble" is very different from "I want to excel at this", particularly when it comes to covering up mistakes or warning when things seem off. But I guess they had extremely simple jobs anyway, one set of crew for each menial task.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 17:45
|
|
|
Country conscripting citizens in-country to the army - perfectly OK. Country conscripting citizens travelling to the navy - utterly disgusting. Like, I get you probably also hate conscription in general, but it's not like the state forcefully removing liberties from their able-bodied male citizens is that unusual, whether it be at sea into the navy or from farms into the army.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:12
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Country conscripting citizens in-country to the army - perfectly OK. There's a pretty big difference between conscripting your own citizens for your military and conscripting someone else's citizens for your military.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Yeah, more to the point, what Englishmen do to other Englishmen is less of a concern to another country, than what Englishmen do to the citizens of that country.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:56
|
|
|
There is also a fairly big difference between an organized and known draft, and the looming threat of being spontaneously kidnapped for being too close to a port.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Ola posted:Yeah but there are different types of motivation. "Don't get in trouble" is very different from "I want to excel at this", particularly when it comes to covering up mistakes or warning when things seem off. But I guess they had extremely simple jobs anyway, one set of crew for each menial task. Uh being a competent ordinary sailor was way more complicated and dangerous than almost any modern job. Only the lowest of the low did nothing more than heave a line and take up space.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Also, people who have never been to jail or prison cannot really grasp what it is like to be on a ship at sea. You are isolated on a small floating dictatorship. You are alone and the only people you're with are the same lovely faces you'll be seeing for the next X months/years with maybe a day here and there in a port. Your personal space is literally a small area where you sleep, and you're likely sharing that with someone else. There's a strict daily routine, and either you fall in line and be productive or your life is made to be hell. The lash is the least of your concerns. Your peers are going to make life worse than the lash ever could because they have to pick up your slack.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:02
|
|
|
There's a reason you're pretty much bribed with booze/ale to not go completely insane in those conditions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:02
|
|
|
Tragic fact - you will never sleep as well as you do underway with the right motion from the seas. You're just gently rocked in your sleep for hours. It's sublime. There is no substitute on land or in the air.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:06
|
|
|
Crab Dad posted:Uh being a competent ordinary sailor was way more complicated and dangerous than almost any modern job. Yeah that's exactly what I meant, these impressed guys being the lowest of the low. Not necessarily in skill. All of them obviously had more dangerous jobs than almost any modern one, but you could still make a good career and name for yourself coming from low means in the navy. Conscription in and of itself is fine as a legal concept, the point about impressment wasn't only that they shanghaied foreigners but also local people without warning, or through scams. At the same time, Norwegian farmers were getting letters that the Danish king wanted them to fight the Swedish king. It sucked for them, but it was the law in Denmark-Norway and the king did things by proper procedure, not just kidnap or scam them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Also, people who have never been to jail or prison cannot really grasp what it is like to be on a ship at sea. You are isolated on a small floating dictatorship. You are alone and the only people you're with are the same lovely faces you'll be seeing for the next X months/years with maybe a day here and there in a port. Your personal space is literally a small area where you sleep, and you're likely sharing that with someone else. There's a strict daily routine, and either you fall in line and be productive or your life is made to be hell. The lash is the least of your concerns. Your peers are going to make life worse than the lash ever could because they have to pick up your slack. The only military naval vessels I've been aboard would probably look like a Roman emperor's palace to a 1600s sailor, but it looked like a 1600s steel prison to my comfy rear end. But once everyone's poo poo and sweat smells the same, you are skilled, motivated and feel like part of a group pulling in the same direction, perhaps even led by someone inspiring, you might be in the best place of your life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:14
|
|
|
Lol what, legal frameworks and abstract concepts of sovereignty are irrelevant. Bumfuck farmer conscripted by his "rightful king" and random person in port A pressganged by the navy of of another country. It's all forced service you have no say in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:31
|
|
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:Lol what, legal frameworks and abstract concepts of sovereignty are irrelevant. Arbitrary rule is lawful rule folks, the pressgang c'est moi.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
Normal people: wow, it's pretty unambiguously heinous that a country would forcibly kidnap other countrys' citizens to act as slave labor in their wars. PittTheElder: ah, but what if we view it from the perspective of the kidnappers? We may find their point of view is quite reasonable! *puffs into bubble pipe*
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
How did the Romans man their navies? There’s a lot of stuff out there about how the Legions were called up in various eras but whenever naval warfare comes up literature is way more sparse.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 00:27
|
|
|
galagazombie posted:How did the Romans man their navies? There’s a lot of stuff out there about how the Legions were called up in various eras but whenever naval warfare comes up literature is way more sparse. I believe they generally recruited from the proletarii, at least in the middle republic. I.e., if you didn't have enough property to arm yourself as a legionary, you could at least man an oar. If that manpower pool was insufficient (as happened in the second punic war) they might resort to putting slaves on boats. The book I just read on the manpower of the Mediterranean powers actually turns this on its head to argue that the proletarii cannot have been that numerous--crossing known naval losses with the traditional counts of 50% proles would mean Rome was nowhere near running out when they resorted to desperate recruitment methods. He ends up concluding that in this period a number like 10% is more reasonable, and most free men owned enough property to qualify for the army in at least the lowest capacity, and thus be ineligible for the navy except as marines. I believe in less catastrophic times some of the socii (ones with strong naval traditions) paid their obligations in ships rather than soldiers, which, together with the Roman fleet proper, was enough to shuttle legions around under normal circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 00:38
|
|
|
By the time Rome needed a navy they had plenty of Greek client states that could supply sailors.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 00:50
|
|
|
Yeah the navy was recruited more or less like the legions. They were paid professionals with terms of service and all. The important thing is the old galley slave thing is not real (in the Roman world anyway), slaves were recruited occasionally in extraordinary circumstances, but part of that recruitment was they would be freed for their service.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 22:22 |
|
|
Impressment in the Royal Navy was complicated. It was technically illegal to impress non-British subjects, and if you were a citizen of another country, you could appeal the impressment (although while your case went through, you were still stuck on the ship), Part of what complicated things was that the British government didn't allow you to renounce your Britishness, even if you were a citizen of another country. So, British sailors would move to America, become American citizens, and then still later be impressed off American ships, because as far as the Navy was concerned, they were British.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2021 01:13
|
|