Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

halfway_prince wrote (edited )

I find that this critique doesn't resonate with me since I can't find much evidence (or direct critiques from indigenous folks) that brings up the issue of anarchist usage of the term indigenous of as a major factor in erasing individual indigenous community identities.

I totally agree that the hypothetical scenario where if any time that indigenous anything comes up it's discussed only in broad sweeping terms that can lead to erasure and homogenization. However, in my experience, when the word "indigenous" is employed broadly, it's used to refer to shared experiences dealing with state oppression, racism, etc. which are inherently general experiences disconnected from the nuances of unique individual communities.

I guess I agree with what you're saying - that when referring to more niche behaviors or characteristics of specific communities use the specific name to identify them. But, honestly when you put language in your post like

my racism detector goes off

my woke-police radar goes off as well lol. I believe your underlying motivation here is well-intentioned and potentially on to something, I just question whether this is actual a problem that results in harm or just another iteration of the language that leftists develop to out-woke one another.

Anyway, I would like to acknowledge that what I'm putting out here follows the pattern of dissenting argument that comes up whenever anyone critiques language as problematic. As well, it's based on my personal experience and research that has failed to show any indication that this is an actual issue. I'm totally open to that being flawed or countered with other people's experiences.

tl;dr - is this really a problem? Idk...but i'm not convinced

2