Default
Dr. David A. Yeagley Says The Use of "Indian" To Describe "Hindu" People Is Inaccurate
Default author
October 01, 2007, 05:00 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON`T want your name and/or email address published when sending VDARE email.

09/30/07 - A Canadian Reader Thinks Steve Sailer Needs To Brush Up On His Ethiopian History

From: David A. Yeagley: (e-mail him)

Re: Professor J. Philippe Ruston`s Column: Indians Aren`t That Intelligent—On Average

I`m a great fan of Rushton. However, he should not use the word "Indian" in reference to Hindu people, but simply call them by their historical name—Hindu.

Rushton needs to be informed of this. People from India are properly called Hindu—referring not to a religion but to a people. That is a plain fact of history.

In the Western world, and particularly in the Western Hemisphere, the word "Indian" refers to the indigenous peoples of the North American continent.

Hindu people do not hold a place of more historical significance than that of the American Indian.  It is outrageous that their false name "Indian" should be touted in the Americas. 

They are Hindu, always have been, and should remain such.  If they object, let them take it up with the ACLU.  

I`ve written at least two different VDARE.Com articles that make this point: "Why I`m An Indian—Not `Native American`" and "Was Columbus An Indian? Are Asians Indians?"

Dr. David A. Yeagley is an enrolled member of the Comanche Nation, Elgin, Oklahoma. His articles appear in TheAmericanEnterprise.com, FrontPageMagazine.com, and on his own Web site BadEagle.com, and he is a regular speaker for Young America`s Foundation. Yeagley, is also the author of Bad Eagle: The Rantings of a Conservative Comanche.