For comparison, The New Republic ran this headline:
Trump’s Rally Just Went Full Nazi With Bloodthirsty Immigration Threat
Donald Trump drilled down on his racist, xenophobic vitriol during a rally.
Nativist is certainly a more neutral word, but I think it undercuts the danger in this rhetoric and is not a common enough word for the general public to recognize.
In short, this language helps Trump.
It’s also an unnecessary use of the passive voice. Did the nativist attacks fall out of the sky and land on the rally? No, Trump made them himself.
Heck, even Linus got testy over the use of passive voice in commit messages. Meanwhile, our press seems hellbent on using it wherever it benefits the demons the most.
Yeah, because trump and his pasty white, doughy fascists sure ain’t native. They just represent the first thieves. Screaming theft as their numbers and influence wain.
Did y’all not get taught about the nativism movement in school? My catholic school taught us about the know nothings and other nativists alongside the kkk
No, not as a Canadian in IB history anyway.
Ok, well down here nativism is a term deeply tied to an era of extreme anti immigrant sentiment, violent racism, and just generally a whole lot of bad behavior from our country folk.
Calling something nativist is like calling something fascist. It’s using their own term from a different era because it’s developed such a bad association thanks to their bad behavior and ideas.
My brain read that as “native attacks” and I got really excited
The only “natives” here are Mexicans and Native Americans
I don’t wanna start a shit storm, but I think Canada got it right calling them first nations.
For one it’s just more accurate, they’re more than tribes, they’re independent, sovereign, recognized nations, who were indeed here first. First nations, has a certain simplicity and forthrightness that’s hard to fuck up.
Secondly, as a giant ass white dude from the Midwest I consider myself native. I hate to be rude about it, but my ancestors have been here for centuries, I’m not from anywhere else. I’m willing to bet Europe doesn’t want me or any other American back.
according to the concept of settler colonialism, colonizers cannot simply “become natives” as the term “native” refers to the indigenous people who inhabited a land before colonization, and the act of colonization inherently dispossesses and marginalizes those populations, making it impossible for colonizers to truly integrate as “natives” without addressing the historical power imbalance and injustices committed.
Key points to consider:
Definition of “Native”: Indigenous peoples are considered “native” because they are the original inhabitants of a land, with deep cultural and historical ties to it.
Power Dynamics: Colonization involves the forceful takeover of land and subjugation of indigenous populations, making it impossible for colonizers to simply claim the identity of the people they displaced.
Cultural Appropriation: Attempting to fully assimilate into a native culture without acknowledging the historical context of colonization can be seen as cultural appropriation.
However, it’s important to note:
Individual Actions: While a colonizer cannot become “native” in the true sense, individuals can actively work towards reconciliation by learning about indigenous cultures, supporting indigenous rights, and acknowledging the history of colonization.
Complex Situations: In certain contexts, there might be cases of individuals with mixed heritage, where ancestry ties them to both colonizer and indigenous populations, creating complex identity issues.
Mexicans are native? The descendants of Spanish colonizers?
Considering they’re often largely mixed mestizo heritage. That they can clearly point to. 💯%
White Mexicans are clearly descendents of the conquistidors, and many are mixed race with the native mexicans but here is a link to get yaself informed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_evolution_of_Mexico
But yes Mexico originally extended into colarado
I’m from Arizona, I know this. I’m saying the mestizos who wouldn’t get pissed at being referred to as such are far less in number than you think. Most ID far more with the colonizers than the colonized
Nativist? Is he attacking Native American tribes? Are they attacking him? Or is he just making white christian nationalist remarks again? Hmm…
People love what I have to say. They believe in it. They just don’t like the word Nazi, that’s all
Like, this should surprise no one ever. Nativist is a really bad term also since only the Native Americans are truly native.
New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New York Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
