Kind of interesting how “turtle island” became the defacto name for North America among some indigenous peoples and activists. Only a few tribes (out of literally 1,000s), the Lenape and Iroquois of the eastern woodlands on North America referred to it roughly as such with translations from the 16th and 17th centuries it’s difficult to know exactly what the context of this story was but it’s become so popular in some circles. If you had a Time Machine and were transported back to pre contact Pacific Northwest, nobody would know about Turtle Island. It’s literally putting indigenous peoples into a monolith.
I am unfamiliar with this topic, can someone explain to me what this person got wrong?
They're also acting like indigenous people have to treat their culture as undead. Existing, but not changing. The Navajo may have not used the term 'Turtle Island' before colonization, but it doesn't mean Navajo people post-colonisation can't adopt the word as part of a greater pan-indigenous movement of solidarity against the horrors of colonisation.
Undeath is an ideal of neoliberalism, they want everyone to be a mindless zombie or a soulless automaton because that's the only way their ideology works
yeah, i think they think maybe that 'turtle island' is bad, only the few bad apples of all indigenous peoples use it; then the rest must prefer the only alternative, i.e. the default, i.e. the status quo, i.e. what is in their material interest
why can't other indigenous groups prefer turtle island even if it isn't their ideal name? why would it be thought that an indigenous group/tribe/band would be spoken for by settler-colonials instead of engage in solidarity with one another, especially other's who share the same goals?
This is something every pan-racial (for lack of a better term) movement will run into. Every movement needs its foundational myths (in the folkloric sense, not the "stories that are false" sense) and common beliefs to function. When you're trying to unite disparate peoples whose main reason for joining together is to increase political/bargaining power, you're going to have to either choose to prioritize certain narratives over others or create new narratives whole cloth. Since legitimacy tends to come from either time or power and these movements lack power, most groups are going to pick the first option (in reality, a mix between the two options). Due to the relative prominence of the Eastern Woodlands in both American/Canadian history and members of tribes from that region in the creation of pan-Indianism, narratives from those tribes are going to be prioritized. And other people are going to go along with it, because joining with the movement is more beneficial than fighting it, especially for something as minor as this.
Even if they are right (and likewise I’m too ignorant on this to know) this comes across as concern trolling given the context. If they were making this criticism to the activists as another activist it could be a completely reasonable criticism but theyre making the comment in an r/neoliberal thread where theyre trying to make themselves feel better about being the beneficiaries of colonialism.
I am unfamiliar with this topic, can someone explain to me what this person got wrong?
I don't see how indigenous movements using a name that was originally used by only few peoples puts the whole of indigenous peoples in a monolith.
They're also acting like indigenous people have to treat their culture as undead. Existing, but not changing. The Navajo may have not used the term 'Turtle Island' before colonization, but it doesn't mean Navajo people post-colonisation can't adopt the word as part of a greater pan-indigenous movement of solidarity against the horrors of colonisation.
Undeath is an ideal of neoliberalism, they want everyone to be a mindless zombie or a soulless automaton because that's the only way their ideology works
yeah, i think they think maybe that 'turtle island' is bad, only the few bad apples of all indigenous peoples use it; then the rest must prefer the only alternative, i.e. the default, i.e. the status quo, i.e. what is in their material interest
why can't other indigenous groups prefer turtle island even if it isn't their ideal name? why would it be thought that an indigenous group/tribe/band would be spoken for by settler-colonials instead of engage in solidarity with one another, especially other's who share the same goals?
This reply was actually pretty good:
Fascinating stuff, thanks!
Even if they are right (and likewise I’m too ignorant on this to know) this comes across as concern trolling given the context. If they were making this criticism to the activists as another activist it could be a completely reasonable criticism but theyre making the comment in an r/neoliberal thread where theyre trying to make themselves feel better about being the beneficiaries of colonialism.
Oh yeah, it's 100% concern trolling, but it's useful to understand why it's wrong.